To my surprise, judging from the comments in headlines some HA readers think this matters. We’ve known for years that he was pro-choice in ’94, we’ve known for months that his wife once cut PP a check. Who cares if he popped in to gladhand while he was running for Senate?
Or is this a case of the cover-up being worse than the crime?
Mitt Romney attended a fund-raising reception for Planned Parenthood in 1994 in conjunction with a $150 donation his wife made to the organization — notwithstanding Romney’s contention that he had “no recollection” of the circumstances under which his wife made gave money to the abortion-rights group.
In the photograph obtained by ABC News, Romney and his wife, Ann, are shown in a yellow-and-white tent chatting with local political activists, including Nicki Nichols Gamble, who was then president and CEO of the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts…
“They were both there, and I remember very well chatting with both of them, and talking about his support for the pro-choice agenda,” she said. “We talked about the fact that he was taking a pro-choice position on the issues, and we were very pleased about that.”…
“I can understand that he might not remember the check — it’s surprising to me that he would not remember the event,” she said. “His main motivation for being there was a political motivation.”
I guess the “crime” here, as it was when Rudy’s donations to PP were revealed, is that it calls into question the sincerity of the straddle Mitt had in 1994. While supportive of abortion rights, he claims he personally opposed the practice even at the time. It’s hard to take that seriously after seeing him share hors d’oeuvres with providers. Still doesn’t matter, though, for two reasons: (1) if you believe his conversion to the pro-life side is sincere, this story is easily assimilated into the narrative of him having seen the light, and (2) even if you don’t believe it’s sincere, he’s still preferable to Huck in most ways and stands to reap the backlash windfall. Just hold your nose a little tighter when you pull that lever.
It’ll be fun watching Hugh spin this later. Have a look at the comments to this post if you’re in the mood to laugh. Exit question: How much can Mitt be trusted? And before you answer, read this. Not sure why that’s circulating today but from Bryan’s inbox to my post to your eyes.
Update: I’ve imported the comments to the headlines item into this post.
Update: “What’s disturbing in Mitt Romney’s case is that he makes the switch at exactly the most politically opportune time. That is what is worrisome.”
Update: Never let it be said that Townhall doesn’t allow for diversity of opinion.
[T]he fact that I’d be glad to vote for a Mormon, doesn’t mean that I want to vote for this Mormon —and.Governor Romney looks less and less like a viable candidate to me. Part of the problem is the arrogance behind the current posture of the Romney camp. His backers suggest that their guy is so obviously qualified and brilliant and charismatic and wonderful that the only possible reason anyone could fail to endorse him must have something to do with his religious faith…
It’s troubling that it was Mitt Romney, not Mike Huckabee, who gave the campaign’s biggest address on religion and politics, and it’s the Romney rooters, not the Huck-a-Nuts, who seem most eager for every opportunity to discuss the role of faith in the campaign.
Update: According to Politico, Fred’s campaign is already circulating the photo of Mitt at the fundraiser.