Too bad that because of Romney you would have helped to elect Obama, at least I get to sleep at night knowing that I would have never done that. My country is more important then me. It was supposed to be “Country First?” Wasn’t it? How can you say that Obama would have been better then Romney? Why? What did Romney do that was so terrible? Oh, I know, he used to support abortion, but then was converted to be pro-life. Yes, I can understand your reasoning. We will not, I repeat, not accept any people who have converted to being pro-life! No, we will not. And how do you expect to grow the conservative base with this line of thinking? Please tell me, I am very interested in finding out. I don’t like Palin, not one bit, but I voted for her anyways. That’s the way it should be. No one should ever stand by and have a temper tantrum and allow someone like Obama to be elected without trying to stop it.
RomneyCare was a complete betrayal of conservative principles I hold dear. His flip-flops on abortion are less of a concern to me because there is a chance (which becomes slighter the more you actually honestly appraise Romney the man) that his conversion was genuine. But this was the final straw, rodeo-mamma, and you who claim to love children so much and are so indignant that Palin is "neglecting her baby," should be outraged against Romney and completely reject him forever more. That was his official endorsement while governor of a "Gay Youth Pride" event at a MIDDLE SCHOOL!!! A junior high school! As if the government has any business at all dealing with the declared sexual orientation of minors, let alone endorsing it, endorsing sexual activity -- PERVERTED SEXUAL ACTIVITY -- of children!!! These poor, confused, messed-up kids who aren't even old enough to drive, who because of popular pressures or troubled homes or confused messages or whatever it may be, decide that they're homosexual -- AND YOUR GUY ROMNEY IN ESSENCE SAID OFFICIALLY: I THINK IT'S JUST GREAT THAT YOU KIDS ARE DOING THIS.
You had better think seriously before you again prattle on about how Sarah Palin is "neglecting her baby" when the man you are so hot to advocate has done something ten million times worse to children. His doing so was wholly wicked and craven.
Like a fish out of water, like a RINO in a conservative Republican lake, Mitt never knew how to stop flipping when it came to the pre-born.
(1): "'He's been a pro-life Mormon faking it as a pro-choice friendly,'" Romney adviser Michael Murphy told the conservative National Review in 2006 says the Concord Monitor(Source: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061210/REPOSITORY/612100304/1217/NEWS98) = So I guess that made him a below-the-radar "flip" acting like a "flop?"
(2): 1994 campaign in Massachusetts "I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time when my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice." (October, 1994 Senatorial debate vs. Ted Kennedy) = Mitt the flipster from what most LDS represent...and, BTW, "sustain" is the strongest word a Mormon could use to support someone or something--because grassroots LDS are asked to "sustain" each new LDS "prophet"
(3): Fast forward to 2001, when Romney needs to reassure Utah Mormons that...he's not really "pro-choice," after all: "I do not wish to be labeled pro-choice." (Mitt Romney, Letter to the Editor, The Salt Lake Tribune, 7/12/01) = So he doesn't want to be known as a "flop" (so what is he?)
(4): But by 2002, guess what? He was pro-abortion again! "I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one … Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government's." (Stephanie Ebbert, "Clarity Sought On Romney's Abortion Stance," The Boston Globe, 7/3/05) = Ah, back securely in the "flop" saddle again? ...He ensured he went out of his way to fill out three pro-abortion organizations' candidate surveys
(5): In November of '04, he & his wife had simultaneous pro-life "conversions" where he links it to stem cell research = (So the pro-abortion-but-no-pro-choice-label-please-is-now-a-pro-life-convert? )
(6): On May 27 '05, he affirms his commitment to being "pro-choice" at a press conference. ("I am absolutely committed to my promise to maintain the status quo with regards to laws relating to abortion and choice.") = OK, this is at least a flop from November '04!
(7): What about his gubernatorial record 2003-2006? Mitt THEN says his actions were ALL “pro-life.” So I assume somewhere in 2005 or so were so pro-life decisions. ("As governor, I’ve had several pieces of legislation reach my desk, which would have expanded abortion rights in Massachusetts. Each of those I vetoed. Every action I’ve taken as the governor that relates to the sanctity of human life, I have stood on the side of life.") = So, then THESE ACTIONS were not only a reversal of his 2002 commitment, but his May 27, 2005 press conference commitment. So "flipping" is beginning to be routine
(8): April 12, 2006--Mitt signs his "Commonwealth Care" into existence, thereby expanding abortion access/taxpayer funded abortions for women--including almost 2% of the females of his state who earn $75,000 or more. (Wait a minute, I thought he told us post-'06 that ALL of his actions were "pro-life?"). Also, not only this, but as governor, Romney could exercise veto power to portions of Commonwealth Care. Did Romney exercise this power? (Yes, he vetoed Sections 5, 27, 29, 47, 112, 113, 134 & 137). What prominent section dealing with Planned Parenthood as part of the "payment policy advisory board" did Romney choose NOT to veto? (Section 3) That section mandates that one member of MassHealth Payment Policy Board must be appointed by Planned Parenthood League of MA. (See chapter 58 of the Acts of 2006, section 3 for details).
(9): On January 29, 2007 during a visit to South Carolina, Romney stated: “Over the last multiple years, as you know, I have been effectively pro-choice." (Bruce Smith, "Romney Campaigns in SC with Sen. DeMint," The Associated Press, 1/29/07) = OK how could "every action I've taken as the governor that relates to the sanctity of human life..." AND this statement BOTH be true?
(10): Another South Carolina campaign stop has Romney uttering that "I was always for life”: "I am firmly pro-life… I was always for life." (Jim Davenport, "Romney Affirms Opposition to Abortion," The Associated Press, 2/9/2007) = Oh, of course as the above shows, he's always been pro-life!
(11): "I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro-choice." Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate 8/5/2007 = OK...looking at the 1994 & 2002 campaigns, how could he say he "never said" he was "pro-choice?"
(12): Then comes his 8/12/07 interview with Chris Wallace of Fox: "I never called myself pro-choice. I never allowed myself to use the word pro-choice because I didn't FEEL I was pro-choice. I would protect the law, I said, as it was, but I wasn't pro-choice, and so..." = That whatever he was from 1970 when his mom ran as a pro-abortion senator & he sided with her, to 5/27/05, w/whatever interruption he had due to a pro-life altar call in Nov of '04, whatever that was...well, he assures us it wasn't a pro-abortion inlook or outlook 'cause he didn't ”feel...pro-choice..." = So does that make him a life-long pro-lifer?
So, by now, you'd think we might be done with the twisty, windy road of Mitt Romney's “sanctity of life” quote track record. But, no, 'cause we gotta look at the very issue that Romney said converted him to a “pro-life” position – embryonic stem cell research. And on that, he took three positions over 5.5 years. He was for it in a June, '02 speech. He supposedly "converted" to the entire pro-life cause over this issue in Nov of '04. By Dec of '07 he was telling Katie Couric that he was pro-choice on parents of such embryos exercising either the choice to give up their surplus embryo(s) for adoption, or to "donate" them to "research" (dissection).
In that Dec 07 interview with Couric, in two back-to-back sentences, he uses the terms "parent" and "adoption" to apply to embryos – which sounds very “pro-life”and commendable....only in the next sentence he uses the following terms without seeing any contradiction:
"parent"
"donate"
"research"
He actually said parents of these adoptable embryos who “donated” them to “research” (dissection) was "acceptable."