Replies

He's a gun grabber, for one thing. And his unnecessary use of the phrase "woman's right to choose" (normal people don't talk that way) shows not only that he doesn't want to fight that battle, but that he has completely accepted the abortion lobby's ideology that abortion is a "right".

Also, though he's nominally opposed to same-sex marriage, he's in favor of "civil unions", which for amounts to the same thing for all intents and purposes, and which in fact will just be a gateway to the exact same thing formally.

He went on national cable TV (the O'Reilly Factor) and said he was opposed to civil unions. But since the proposed Massachusetts Constitutional Amendment defines marriage as between a man and a woman, he hopes it will pass even though it creates civil unions.

Uttering the phrase "woman's right to choose" was his open sesame to the governorship. Hey, Roe v. Wade created just that. It is clearly an extra-Constitutional "right" created by judicial activism but adherence to the rule of law right now requires respecting it. You'd have to virtually be a revolutionary as things stand to deny it. President Mitt Romney would nominate conservative judges. Take that to the bank.

Mitt reminds me of his old man, Governor yes, President no. My family goes way back in LDS history, though I am not a Mormon, I wouldn't vote for him for pres, no spine.

He went on national cable TV (the O'Reilly Factor) and said he was opposed to civil unions.

OK, I checked and you're right, his officially stated position is that he's opposed to "civil unions", but he's also said that he supports "some" same-sex "partner benefits". It all looks like semantic dancing to me.

Uttering the phrase "woman's right to choose" was his open sesame to the governorship.

I don't buy it. Even normal voters who are for abortion don't go around talking like that. That is purely a buzzphrase used by Planned Parenthood and organizations of their ilk (and the politicians who do their bidding). If he had simply said that he wouldn't attempt to restrict abortion for women, no one would have known the difference. Every time an alleged conservative uses that phrase, he scores a big propaganda victory for the abortion industry.

He went on national cable TV (the O'Reilly Factor) and said he was opposed to civil unions. But since the proposed Massachusetts Constitutional Amendment defines marriage as between a man and a woman, he hopes it will pass even though it creates civil unions.

Uttering the phrase "woman's right to choose" was his open sesame to the governorship. Hey, Roe v. Wade created just that. It is clearly an extra-Constitutional "right" created by judicial activism but adherence to the rule of law right now requires respecting it. You'd have to virtually be a revolutionary as things stand to deny it. President Mitt Romney would nominate conservative judges. Take that to the bank.

:thumbs up:

Thanks, said it better then I could.