Posted on 09/27/2006 11:07:20 AM PDT by SDGOP
In his latest interview with RedState, Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney responds to a question about his abortion position by saying that he's never adopted the label "pro-choice."
That's all well and good. Mitt Romney wants to be called pro-life. I'd like to be the King of all Londinium and wear a shiny hat.
But let's not kid ourselves: there is no substantive difference between the position labeled "pro-choice," declaring your support for "the right to choose." And that is something that Mitt Romney has done repeatedly over the course of his political career. To say otherwise is to tell a lie.
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Okay, he's pro-"A woman's right to choose."
How is that different from being "pro-choice?"
I am a sometimes resident of Mass and many times resident of NH. Romney appears to me as very efficient, focussed, and somebody who knows how to administrate. I don't know how he'd do "feeling out pain." It's a joke that came from the Clinton years but sometimes very important. Bush had his moments, over 9/11 and with war widows and crippled vets. The question really is: Will Romney or Rudy or Allen or whoever we elect have the strength to send volunteers off to battle, console their families and tell the world why it is necessary? The next President will have to do that a lot I'm afraid.
So what miracle do you speak of? His (lack of) control of the Courts?
or perhaps his (lack of) control of the legislature?
Inquiring minds want to know. Thanks in advance.
I suppose. I wouldn't ever elect a cult member, like say a scientologist. I might vote for a Mormon who hadn't done a mission, but I don't think I could ever vote for one who had.
"I'm what ever you want me to be, babe." ;-)
You are right about the Socialized medicine....
The business of the Turnpike Authority is a whole nother matter.
The "Authority" angle is being played all over this state. The Legislature here is not going to allow ANY governor to undermine the great hackerama.
When the truth about the Massachusetts Port Authority gets out Senators and Congresscritters from all over will be compelled to get involved. The Mass. Bay Transporataion authority is another fiasco. (Workers retiring after only 23 years for example and getting pensions greater than average working people earn at real jobs.)
The last time that I looked there were over 200 Authorities in this state. Each of them is quasi-independent and completely protected by the political leadership on Be-A-Con Hill.
The Authorities are the bread and butter of the entrenched pols. Romney only got as much done as he did because of the story about the dead lady, and the looming federal investigations.
Dear Ronaldus Magnus,
Oh, but don't you see?? Mr. Romney is telling the truth!! Although he has been a pro-abort, by his own confession, for over 30 years, he has never used the words, "I am pro-choice."
Thus, he can truthfully say, "I've never called myself pro-choice."
ROTFLMAO!! I can't believe people are willing to eat this shi!t!!! Barnum had it pegged!!
sitetest
If Romney will admit he changed his mind, that would mean something.
People do change their mind, nothing wrong with that.
But he's not. His claim is that he was never "pro-choice" even though he stated ABORTION SHOULD REMAIN LEGAL!
It's a Clintonian claim of the worst sort.
I guess it all depends on what your definition of 'is' is.
[shudder]
"The Authorities are the bread and butter of the entrenched pols.
Romney only got as much done as he did because of the story about the dead lady, and the looming federal investigations."
Exactly. My point was that after the roof crushed the woman, he had the authority
but failed to move decisively.
Is it not ironic that if you live West or North of Boston you will pay for that through increased tolls.
On the other hand, if you are south of Boston (and actually USE the Big Dig)
you will probably get out of paying (no tolls).
Yeah, but he only said that to get elected THEN.
NOW, he's telling the truth.
(/sarc)
""I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country."
If it is going to be done, (and it is) then it should be done safely. It should not be done illegally.
I agree with that, and I am not pro-abortion.
Clearing my throat now -- you do realize you called Mormons who didn't serve missions BAD and Mormons who did GOOD. That's as twisted and offensive as judging a Mormon not worthy of a vote because he/she served a mission.
So "pro-lifers" in Mass should say "I believe abortion should be legal."
Was he lying then, or is he lying now?
And would he admit either?
He'll come out tomorrow and say "I never was 'anti-gun!'"
If you see a post start with "In other news..." be prepared that it is most likely a joke.
Romney is not perfect. But he is a better choice than McCain and he would be strong in the WOT, which is what people care about.
Another thing. Roe v. Wade isn't going to be overturned any time soon, certainly not under a Democratic administration, which is what we'd get if only the religious activists voted in the general election.
His father washed out in 1968 as Nelson Rockefeller's surrogate candidate and stalking horse after suddenly publicly proclaiming himself anti-war (unlike Nelson Rockefeller) and claiming to have been "brainwashed" when previously he was not anti-war. The Romneys are not graceful when trying to pirouette on a dime issue-wise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.