Was Romney pro-life before he was kinda sorta pro-choice before he was pro-life?

posted at 8:33 pm on February 13, 2012 by Allahpundit

Thanks to an NYT story this weekend, this bit of old news has been resurrected, showcased yesterday in a Peter Robinson post at Ricochet and then picked up by Rush Limbaugh this afternoon. The key quote is six years old and appeared in a story in National Review so it’s been on the right’s radar since well before Romney’s first presidential run. And yet, much like the mandate, somehow he didn’t get much grief over it last time when he was running as the conservative in the race.

Mr. Romney’s transformation on abortion is, in some respects, the story of a man who entered public life in a state whose politics did not match his own. [Story of his life. -- AP] People close to Mr. Romney say they have no doubt that he opposes terminating a pregnancy. Critics and even some supporters say there is also little question that he did what he had to do to get elected as governor.

“He was always uncomfortable on the issue, but he was penned in by having run as a pro-choice candidate in 1994 and by the political realities of Massachusetts in 2002,” said Rob Gray, a senior adviser to Mr. Romney’s campaign for governor. “It was made clear to him by advisers early on in his gubernatorial race that he had to be pro-choice, and he could not show any hesitation.”…

In 2002, as a candidate for governor, Mr. Romney filled out a questionnaire for Planned Parenthood declaring that he supported “the substance” of the Supreme Court’s 1973 landmark abortion rights decision, Roe v. Wade. Six weeks before he was elected, he sat for an hourlong interview with state officials of the advocacy group now known as Naral Pro-Choice America…

By 2005, with Mr. Romney eyeing a possible presidential bid, he began to distance himself from his abortion rights platform. “My political philosophy is pro-life,” he told National Review, a conservative magazine, in an article that June. That same article quoted his top strategist at the time, Mike Murphy, as saying Mr. Romney had been “a pro-life Mormon faking it as a pro-choice friendly.”

I get the sense sometimes from Romney’s critics that they think he was pro-choice his whole life and then cynically flipped to pro-life in 2005 once he had decided to run for president. Nuh uh. Revisit this Times piece from last October describing his days as a Mormon leader in Boston in the 1980s and 1990s. Allegedly he once advised a woman against having an abortion even though her doctors had recommended it after discovering a dangerous blood clot. Assuming that’s true, he obviously took life in the womb very, very seriously. But … that only makes his “pro-choice friendly” attitude as governor worse, doesn’t it? Conservatives can, I think, happily accept former pro-choicers who’ve had a moral awakening about abortion. People do change their minds. I think they’d also tolerate (but not embrace) someone whom they suspected of being secretly pro-choice so long as he/she is committed to governing as pro-life. Romney falls into that category for many of his critics, I suspect. Even if you think he’s telling you what you want to hear on this issue, it’s inconceivable to me that he’d flip on the issue once in office. The betrayal would be cataclysmic, and he knows it. He’d be true blue pro-life to preserve his political viability, if nothing else.

But what about someone who’s been secretly pro-life all along yet who … tolerated abortion in the name of getting elected? Where does that person fall on the moral spectrum? This isn’t any ordinary issue that can be triangulated as necessary. To devout pro-lifers like Huckabee, abortion is a moral evil on the order of slavery. You can’t be “slavery-friendly” or “personally anti-slavery but politically pro-choice.” If you believe the practice is irredeemably, grievously wrong, you’re obliged morally to try to change the policy that enables it. So I wonder: Would it be better if Mitt had briefly but sincerely become pro-choice — or “pro-choice friendly” — while running in Massachusetts and then flipped, or if he’d never been pro-choice but had been willing to look the other way at abortion in the interest of his own political viability? It’s the difference between losing your moral bearings and selling them out. Which is worse?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

You will find out after you vote for him.

Roy Rogers on February 13, 2012 at 8:35 PM

He’s whatever you want him to be. He should just put a poll up on his web site and let people vote for whatever they want his positions on each issue to be.

Armin Tamzarian on February 13, 2012 at 8:36 PM

He’ll end up compromising and say he’s pro-lifechoice.

Flange on February 13, 2012 at 8:37 PM

Anybody who thinks Romney was ever pro choice is nuts. He’s a devout Mormon, and they’re not exactly rabid abortionists.

He was running for office in Massafreakinchusetts. Not like the law was going to be changed there anyway.

therightwinger on February 13, 2012 at 8:37 PM

He’s definitely not a dead fish….
He is still flip flopping around.

Electrongod on February 13, 2012 at 8:37 PM

But … that only makes his “pro-choice friendly” attitude as governor worse, doesn’t it?

Oooooohhhhhh! I know this one! Call on me, Allah!

cynccook on February 13, 2012 at 8:38 PM

HE’S CONFUSED!

KOOLAID2 on February 13, 2012 at 8:38 PM

A lot of us who are pro-life are not 100% against abortion. I think women can “choose” to have an abortion but it should not be on a tax payers dime.

I don;t see any triangulation here, I see a guy who had to blur his position somehow to win in MA where abortion on demand is the norm.

dmnari on February 13, 2012 at 8:38 PM

No, really? I’ll still have to consider the source.

Bmore on February 13, 2012 at 8:38 PM

How do you hold a moon beam in your hand…….

WryTrvllr on February 13, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Ah crud…I thought this election was gonna be all about the U.S. Economy.

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on February 13, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Oooooohhhhhh! I know this one! Call on me, Allah!

cynccook on February 13, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Evening cynccook, LOL.

Bmore on February 13, 2012 at 8:39 PM

Well, there are pretty much two things a president can ever do when it comes to abortion. Restrict funding, and appoint pro-life judges.

Romney says he’s going to reinstate Mexico City. And his chief judicial adviser is Robert Bork, who has asserted that had he been confirmed, he would have voted to overrule Roe v. Wade.

I don’t see what the problem is here, besides True Conservatives not trusting him, which was always going to be the case anyway. He’s from one of those Hated Liberal States that have no conservatives at all, dontcha know.

KingGold on February 13, 2012 at 8:39 PM

He’s definitely not a dead fish….
He is still flip flopping around.

Electrongod on February 13, 2012 at 8:37 PM

Thanks! Now bluegill will show up!
You had to talk about fish!

KOOLAID2 on February 13, 2012 at 8:40 PM

We have to elect the Mitt to find out what is in the Mitt.

amerpundit on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 PM

It’s the “lying” about it to get elected that gets me. So I’m suppose to trust him on Obamacare and repealing it because he says so? Yea right…He was for Obamacare/Romneycare before he was against it and that’s exactly why he’s not getting the support he thinks he deserves.

noneoftheabove on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 PM

You don’t become a LDS Bishop if you are pro choice. He never actually was pro choice. He just said he wouldn’t do anything to change the law as governor.

BobScuba on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 PM

dmnari on February 13, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Someone choosing abortion, can be pro life, Okay, there it is then.

Bmore on February 13, 2012 at 8:42 PM

The whole problem is that he is willing to sell out to get what he wants. He obviously has no core values that he is willing to stand for.

Southernblogger on February 13, 2012 at 8:42 PM

How do you hold a moon beam in your hand…….

WryTrvllr on February 13, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Is Jerry Brown still alive?

Roy Rogers on February 13, 2012 at 8:42 PM

But what about someone who’s been secretly pro-life all along yet who … tolerated abortion in the name of getting elected? Where does that person fall on the moral spectrum? This isn’t any ordinary issue that can be triangulated as necessary. To devout pro-lifers like Huckabee, abortion is a moral evil on the order of slavery. You can’t be “slavery-friendly” or “personally anti-slavery but politically pro-choice.”

On the moral spectrum, it would make that person on a parrallel with those who collaborated with the Nazis, and those who betrayed their friends and neighbors to them. Actually it would make that person worse because they would have done it all for mere personal gain and for political power; they wouldn’t even have the excuse that they feared for their own lives or the lives of their loved ones. Gee, when I come to think of it, it kind of makes that person more on a par with the Nazis themselves, doesn’t it? Good old Godwin’s Law.

cynccook on February 13, 2012 at 8:42 PM

Brokered convention please.

IR-MN on February 13, 2012 at 8:42 PM

We all know he is a baby killer. To believe otherwise is foolish.

jdun on February 13, 2012 at 8:43 PM

Romney is Zelig. Not only is he what you want him to be, he is sincerely what you want him to be, until his social circumstances change, and then he sincerely advocates the opposite position.

Hollow man.

BCrago66 on February 13, 2012 at 8:43 PM

Allahpundit,

How many abortions performed in your state last year?

How many abortions did your governor stop.

The hypocritical governors in Red States can be all pro-life-
because they know they don’t have to do anything aboout it-its legal.

In blue states the dominant liberals go into a tizzy about pro-life candidates especially in Mass.

gerrym51 on February 13, 2012 at 8:44 PM

But what about someone who’s been secretly pro-life all along yet who … tolerated abortion in the name of getting elected? Where does that person fall on the moral spectrum?

At the lower end.

Being “secretly pro-life” is like being secretly against the Holocaust or slavery–it doesn’t mean much.

Reminds me of being “personally against abortion” but wanting it to remain legal and taxpayer-subsidized (see John Kerry, for example).

“Hey, I’m personally against owning other human beings, but I don’t think it’s the government’s role to tell people what to do with their property, see. And I’m against anti-Semitism personally, of course, but don’t think it should be illegal to kill Jews.”

Got it.

jazz_piano on February 13, 2012 at 8:44 PM

“It’s the economy, stupid” is much too difficult for Republicans to wrap their head around. They’ve never been able to step back and see the forest from the trees.

jan3 on February 13, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Revisit this Times piece from last October describing his days as a Mormon leader in Boston in the 1980s and 1990s. Allegedly he once advised a woman against having an abortion even though her doctors had recommended it after discovering a dangerous blood clot.

I lived in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts in 1994 and he was slammed hard during that election for advising women to NOT have an abortion.

The Opinionator on February 13, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Evening cynccook, LOL.

Bmore on February 13, 2012 at 8:39 PM

Hey SuperB :-)

cynccook on February 13, 2012 at 8:45 PM

cynccook on February 13, 2012 at 8:42 PM

cynccook, little early for Nazis, no?

Bmore on February 13, 2012 at 8:45 PM

You don’t become a LDS Bishop if you are pro choice. He never actually was pro choice. He just said he wouldn’t do anything to change the law as governor.

BobScuba on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 PM

“I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I believe that, since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years, that we should support and sustain it. And I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that decision.”

– Mitt Romney, 1994

Video here.

amerpundit on February 13, 2012 at 8:45 PM

We have to elect the Mitt to find out what is in the Mitt.

amerpundit on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 PM

Beat me to it!

Shay on February 13, 2012 at 8:45 PM

amerpundit on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 PM

Channeling Nan, poor soul./ Funny though.

Bmore on February 13, 2012 at 8:46 PM

How do you hold a moon beam in your hand…….

WryTrvllr on February 13, 2012 at 8:38 PM
Is Jerry Brown still alive?

Roy Rogers on February 13, 2012 at 8:42 PM

EXCELLENT!!!!!!

WryTrvllr on February 13, 2012 at 8:47 PM

And yet, much like the mandate, somehow he didn’t get much grief over it last time when he was running as the conservative in the race.

Hypocrites abound among our opinion leaders, it seems.

It’s never about conservatism. It’s about tribalism.

KingGold on February 13, 2012 at 8:47 PM

Lots of words to say he’s a liar.

Y-not on February 13, 2012 at 8:47 PM

Well lets see as Governor he vetoed the State Legislature when they tried to force contraception on the Catholic Church. His veto was over ridden. So unless there are any other examples he did follow a pro-life stance as Governor.

Zaggs on February 13, 2012 at 8:48 PM

“It’s the economy, stupid” is much too difficult for Republicans to wrap their head around. They’ve never been able to step back and see the forest from the trees.

jan3 on February 13, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Obozo’s plan. Not the GOP’s

WryTrvllr on February 13, 2012 at 8:49 PM

Mittens buys Neapolitan ice cream so you can see him eating whatever flavor you like.

Raquel Pinkbullet on February 13, 2012 at 8:50 PM

Was Romney pro-life before he was kinda sorta pro-choice before he was pro-life?

Definitely, maybe!

Roy Rogers on February 13, 2012 at 8:50 PM

But what about someone who’s been secretly pro-life all along yet who … tolerated abortion in the name of getting elected? Where does that person fall on the moral spectrum?

All the way to the bottom. Bye mitt!

tinkerthinker on February 13, 2012 at 8:50 PM

He looks good and has money so we should vote for him. He is a flexible construct manipulated as needed by the powers that be.

Grunt on February 13, 2012 at 8:50 PM

Please change the name of this pathetic site to:

All Hail Obama

What a F’n joke!

dmann on February 13, 2012 at 8:50 PM

Allahpundit,

How many abortions performed in your state last year?

How many abortions did your governor stop.

The hypocritical governors in Red States can be all pro-life-
because they know they don’t have to do anything aboout it-its legal.

In blue states the dominant liberals go into a tizzy about pro-life candidates especially in Mass.

gerrym51 on February 13, 2012 at 8:44 PM

It’s deja vu all over again, gerry. I could have sworn that you and I have covered this before….Our red-state governor has been pretty busy, in fact. In fact, I guess he’d be surprised to learn that since he’s such a hypocrite he doesn’t “have to do anything about” abortion.

cynccook on February 13, 2012 at 8:51 PM

“It’s the economy, stupid” is much too difficult for Republicans to wrap their head around. They’ve never been able to step back and see the forest from the trees.

jan3 on February 13, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Maybe because we are in the weeds.

Bmore on February 13, 2012 at 8:51 PM

Please change the name of this pathetic site to:

All Hail Obama

What a F’n joke!

dmann on February 13, 2012 at 8:50 PM

Okay, you’re right. I’m sorry.

HAIL, ROMNEY! IGNORE ALL YOUR DOUBTS. ALL WILL BE WELL.

Allahpundit on February 13, 2012 at 8:52 PM

The problem with abortion as a political issue is that there simply is no middle ground.

If a fetus/baby isn’t a human being until it’s completely outside the mother, then abortion is simply a minor procedure that the government has no business regulating.

But if life isn’t defined geographically (inside mother = fetus, outside mother = baby), then abortion is murder of the most helpless in the very place they should be most protected, at the hands of those who should be most committed to their protection. If it isn’t the place of government to outlaw this kind of atrocity, then government has no role at all.

jazz_piano on February 13, 2012 at 8:52 PM

Pol takes politically expedient position to win election. News at 11.

changer1701 on February 13, 2012 at 8:52 PM

cynccook, little early for Nazis, no?

Bmore on February 13, 2012 at 8:45 PM

I don’t know about that — abortion, eugenics, genocide, the cheapening of human life — really is there ever a better time?

cynccook on February 13, 2012 at 8:53 PM

why are we talking about abortions and contraceptives?

anyone notice the sh!tty economy and four dollar gas?

DHChron on February 13, 2012 at 8:53 PM

Lots of words to say he’s a liar.

Y-not on February 13, 2012 at 8:47 PM

Yep.

MadDogF on February 13, 2012 at 8:54 PM

But what about someone who’s been secretly pro-life all along yet who … tolerated abortion in the name of getting elected? Where does that person fall on the moral spectrum? This isn’t any ordinary issue that can be triangulated as necessary.

Someone who is despicable.

And someone who’s not pro-life in my book.

This is worse than all his rampant hypocrisy over all the other issues–and that pretty much runs the gamut–just pick your issue.

This is gaming the pro-life vote over life and death, and trying to gamble that you can pull the wool over their eyes. This dodge is decades old and fewer and fewer pro-lifers are taken in by it.

INC on February 13, 2012 at 8:54 PM

We have to elect the Mitt to find out what is in the Mitt.

amerpundit on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 PM

DHChron on February 13, 2012 at 8:55 PM

And yet, much like the mandate, somehow he didn’t get much grief over it last time when he was running as the conservative in the race.

Allahpundit, the last time Romney was running he was against McCain. Yes, today still I would support Romney over McCain. We’re fortunate to have Santorum though.

jarodea on February 13, 2012 at 8:55 PM

Okay, you’re right. I’m sorry.

HAIL, ROMNEY! IGNORE ALL YOUR DOUBTS. ALL WILL BE WELL.

Allahpundit on February 13, 2012 at 8:52 PM

You’re so cute when you’re being bitingly sarcastic!

cynccook on February 13, 2012 at 8:55 PM

I don’t know about that — abortion, eugenics, genocide, the cheapening of human life — really is there ever a better time?

cynccook on February 13, 2012 at 8:53 PM

cynccook, you have point there. Carry on.

Bmore on February 13, 2012 at 8:55 PM

Maybe he used to be pro-choice
…but not severely.

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on February 13, 2012 at 8:55 PM

He looks good and has money so we should vote for him. He is a flexible construct manipulated as needed by the powers that be.

Grunt on February 13, 2012 at 8:50 PM

True. But for the next 4 years HE would be up for re-election!!!

WryTrvllr on February 13, 2012 at 8:55 PM

why are we talking about abortions and contraceptives?

anyone notice the sh!tty economy and four dollar gas?

DHChron on February 13, 2012 at 8:53 PM

For the same reasons ordinary Germans were talking about everything but the Holocaust as it unfolded around them. We’re selfish, fallen human beings.

jazz_piano on February 13, 2012 at 8:56 PM

Okay, you’re right. I’m sorry.

HAIL, ROMNEY! IGNORE ALL YOUR DOUBTS. ALL WILL BE WELL.

Allahpundit on February 13, 2012 at 8:52 PM

Wasn’t that Kevin Bacon’s line?

Roy Rogers on February 13, 2012 at 8:56 PM

Okay, you’re right. I’m sorry.

HAIL, ROMNEY! IGNORE ALL YOUR DOUBTS. ALL WILL BE WELL.

Allahpundit on February 13, 2012 at 8:52 PM

Allah fight’s like a girl..:)

idesign on February 13, 2012 at 8:56 PM

Allahpundit on February 13, 2012 at 8:52 PM

Oh wise one, show me one post critical of Santorum! All we get is the next attack on Romney, the next cheap shot, the next anyone but…….which will only result in Obama getting re-elected!

dmann on February 13, 2012 at 8:56 PM

Can’t wait to start a national conversation on the eeeeevils of contraception with Father Santorum.

http://drewmusings.wordpress.com/2012/02/13/sorry-social-conservatives-america-isnt-going-to-elect-someone-president-who-wants-to-talk-about-how-sex-out-of-wedlock-is-bad/

Woohoo!

Good Lt on February 13, 2012 at 8:56 PM

Lots of words to say he’s a liar.

Y-not on February 13, 2012 at 8:47 PM

I know it! It’s almost like they’ve got some kind of crazy pay-for-words scheme going on around this place…

cynccook on February 13, 2012 at 8:57 PM

Allegedly he once advised a woman against having an abortion even though her doctors had recommended it after discovering a dangerous blood clot. Assuming that’s true, he obviously took life in the womb very, very seriously. But … that only makes his “pro-choice friendly” attitude as governor worse, doesn’t it?

This is my “severely conservative” view, but I think the man is compartmentalized with his concepts of right and wrong. As a Mormon he must say that, as a politician he can game it because, hey, he, himself is not personally telling anyone to have an abortion, is he?////

INC on February 13, 2012 at 8:57 PM

Can’t wait to start a national conversation on the eeeeevils of contraception with Father Santorum.

http://drewmusings.wordpress.com/2012/02/13/sorry-social-conservatives-america-isnt-going-to-elect-someone-president-who-wants-to-talk-about-how-sex-out-of-wedlock-is-bad/

Woohoo!

Good Lt

First you have to have a talk with Father Santorum over what types of sex he’ll allow.

Zaggs on February 13, 2012 at 8:57 PM

OT
Any one else noticing a double, triple flicker kind of thing on the refresh?

Bmore on February 13, 2012 at 8:58 PM

Kevin Bacon is severely talented

DHChron on February 13, 2012 at 8:58 PM

dmann on February 13, 2012 at 8:56 PM

Rombots UNITE!

LOL!!!

Roy Rogers on February 13, 2012 at 8:58 PM

If he had to do what he did to be elected as Governor, then he’ll do what he has to do to be elected as President, but a man whose personal ethics on the issue twists in the wind this way is not reliable. He’ll do what he needs to do to remain President in the second term, even if that violates his personal strictures — which, on examination, don’t seem to be very strong.

Of course, he’s a Mormon. Here’s the official Mormon position on abortion:

In today’s society, abortion has become a common practice, defended by deceptive arguments. Latter-day prophets have denounced abortion, referring to the Lord’s declaration, “Thou shalt not . . . kill, nor do anything like unto it” (D&C 59:6). Their counsel on the matter is clear: Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must not submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for an abortion. Church members who encourage an abortion in any way may be subject to Church discipline.

Church leaders have said that some exceptional circumstances may justify an abortion, such as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. But even these circumstances do not automatically justify an abortion. Those who face such circumstances should consider abortion only after consulting with their local Church leaders and receiving a confirmation through earnest prayer.

When a child is conceived out of wedlock, the best option is for the mother and father of the child to marry and work toward establishing an eternal family relationship. If a successful marriage is unlikely, they should place the child for adoption, preferably through LDS Family Services (see “Adoption”).

http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?locale=0&sourceId=63c139b439c98010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=bbd508f54922d010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

I read the above as “pro-choice if the Church and the Lord approve — anti-abortion otherwise”

unclesmrgol on February 13, 2012 at 8:58 PM

[Story of his life. -- AP]

Heh. You’d think that winning election in the Democratic Republic of the Bay State would mollify the haters.

‘Course, where I come from, there’s a name for people who run as full-spectrum conservatives in navy-blue states. And it’s not “victors.”

KingGold on February 13, 2012 at 8:58 PM

A conservative, a moderate, & a liberal walk into a bar. The bartender looks up and says, “Hi, Mitt!”

HeckOnWheels on February 13, 2012 at 8:59 PM

If he was pro-life, then pro-choice and then pro-life, he is not fit for office.

I can see you changing your mind either way and explain it but this just shows that he’ll do anything and say anything to get elected. How can you trust someone who is willing to let children die for his election?

How can you know what he believes in and therefore what he is likely to do with the power of the Presidency? If he’srunning against Obama that’s different because we know for sure what Obama will do.

Vince on February 13, 2012 at 8:59 PM

First you have to have a talk with Father Santorum over what types of sex he’ll allow.

Zaggs on February 13, 2012 at 8:57 PM

If you have to ask, maybe just skip it.

cynccook on February 13, 2012 at 9:00 PM

“Hey, I’m personally against owning other human beings, but I don’t think it’s the government’s role to tell people what to do with their property, see…(snip)

jazz_piano on February 13, 2012 at 8:44 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doughface

ebrown2 on February 13, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Kevin Bacon is severely talented

DHChron on February 13, 2012 at 8:58 PM

He deserved an Oscar in Tremors…

Roy Rogers on February 13, 2012 at 9:00 PM

why are we talking about abortions and contraceptives?

anyone notice the sh!tty economy and four dollar gas?

DHChron on February 13, 2012 at 8:53 PM

Quite. And that goes double for Santorum.

CorporatePiggy on February 13, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Well I guess you can go with AP’s take on what was said. Or you can find out what he actually did. I would say the later is far more important than what AP has.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290073/mitt-romney-defended-rights-conscience-massachusetts-david-french

Zaggs on February 13, 2012 at 9:00 PM

We have to elect the Mitt to find out what is in the Mitt.

amerpundit on February 13, 2012 at 8:41 PM

Except I can tell you in his own words, someone who can work with Democrats.

INC on February 13, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Except didn’t Romney and his wife contribute to Planned Parenthood in 1994 and it was only reported in 2007 by the Boston Globe?

If they were only giving the cash to look good in the 94 campaign then why didn’t they use it as part of their campaign material at the time?

sharrukin on February 13, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Oh wise one, show me one post critical of Santorum! All we get is the next attack on Romney, the next cheap shot, the next anyone but…….which will only result in Obama getting re-elected!

dmann on February 13, 2012 at 8:56 PM

I’m a Romney supporter, but there have been negative posts on the other candidates, too.

changer1701 on February 13, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Roy Rogers on February 13, 2012 at 8:58 PM

We are all someones bot……..your a tool!

dmann on February 13, 2012 at 9:01 PM

‘Course, where I come from, there’s a name for people who run as full-spectrum conservatives in navy-blue states. And it’s not “victors.”

KingGold on February 13, 2012 at 8:58 PM

Move to another state like Hillary did. At least she didn’t have to compromise her “principles.”

Vince on February 13, 2012 at 9:01 PM

Romney was for it before he was against this then he was against it again before he was for it so that he can be against it and for it at the same time in case he wasn’t for it when he was against it. It could also mean he was for it before he was against it then was against it after it came out he was for it.

Got it?

liberal4life on February 13, 2012 at 9:01 PM

You gotta vote for Romney to find out what he really stands for.

Mahdi on February 13, 2012 at 9:01 PM

In blue states the dominant liberals go into a tizzy about pro-life candidates especially in Mass.

gerrym51 on February 13, 2012 at 8:44 PM

That’s the big problem with cafeteria Catholics.

unclesmrgol on February 13, 2012 at 9:02 PM

First you have to have a talk with Father Santorum over what types of sex he’ll allow.

Zaggs on February 13, 2012 at 8:57 PM

Of course. Of course.

Good Lt on February 13, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Mittens buys Neapolitan ice cream so you can see him eating whatever flavor you like.

Raquel Pinkbullet on February 13, 2012 at 8:50 PM

That’s almost as good as the bar joke!

INC on February 13, 2012 at 9:02 PM

A conservative, a moderate, & a liberal walk into a bar. The bartender looks up and says, “Hi, Mitt!”

HeckOnWheels on February 13, 2012 at 8:59 PM

A Marxist, a narcissist, and a Kenyan walk into a bar…

LOL!

Roy Rogers on February 13, 2012 at 9:02 PM

leave muffins alone you mean cons

rik on February 13, 2012 at 9:02 PM

liberal4life on February 13, 2012 at 9:01 PM

Stuck on stupid

Roy Rogers on February 13, 2012 at 9:03 PM

OT
Any one else noticing a double, triple flicker kind of thing on the refresh?

Bmore on February 13, 2012 at 8:58 PM

Yeah, its strange.

sharrukin on February 13, 2012 at 9:03 PM

The whole problem is that he is willing to sell out to get what he wants. He obviously has no core values that he is willing to stand for.

Southernblogger on February 13, 2012 at 8:42 PM

yep.

MontanaMmmm on February 13, 2012 at 9:03 PM

Romney is pro-abortion; he’s not fooling anyone with his recent “pro-life” claims.

Pork-Chop on February 13, 2012 at 9:03 PM

First you have to have a talk with Father Santorum over what types of sex he’ll allow.

Zaggs on February 13, 2012 at 8:57 PM

I hear putin don’t care. The people in his marxist utopia have given up on kids altogether. Let’s go there….shall we…

WryTrvllr on February 13, 2012 at 9:03 PM

Well lets see as Governor he vetoed the State Legislature when they tried to force contraception on the Catholic Church. His veto was over ridden. So unless there are any other examples he did follow a pro-life stance as Governor.

Zaggs on February 13, 2012 at 8:48 PM

Except his record indicates otherwise:

Romney Health Care Plan Expanded Access To Abortion, Required Planned Parenthood Representative On State Policy Panel
“Commonwealth Care is run by the Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority and funded by the state. … Commonwealth Care health plans include: outpatient medical care (doctor’s visits, surgery, radiology and lab, abortion, community health center visits) …” (www.massresources.org)

And let’s not forget this:

In October 2005, Romney Signed Bill Expanding Family Planning Services, Including Abortion Counseling And Morning-After Pill. “Governor Mitt Romney has signed a bill that could expand the number of people who get family-planning services, including the morning-after pill, confusing some abortion and contraception foes who had been heartened by his earlier veto of an emergency contraception bill. … The services include the distribution of condoms, abortion counseling, and the distribution of emergency contraception, or morning after pills, by
prescription …”
(Stephanie Ebbert, “Romney Signs Bill On Family Planning,” The Boston Globe, 10/15/05)

And this assault on Religious Freedom:

In December 2005, Romney “Abruptly Ordered His Administration To Reverse Course … And Require Catholic Hospitals To Provide Emergency Contraception To Rape Victims.” “Gov. Mitt Romney abruptly ordered his administration to reverse course yesterday and require Catholic hospitals to provide emergency contraception medication to rape victims. In a turnaround that foes derided as politically motivated, Romney directed his Department of Public Health to scrap rules that exempted the Catholic institutions from a new law governing the medicine.” (Kimberly Atkins, “Romney Flip Nixes Hospital Exception On Post-Rape Drug,” Boston Herald, 12/9/05)

Romney Had Initially Supported State Ruling Allowing Hospitals To Opt Out On Moral Grounds. “The decision overturns a ruling made public this week by the state Department of Public Health that privately run hospitals could opt out of the requirement if they objected on moral or religious grounds.

So his record shows he governed as a pro-choice governor.

Raquel Pinkbullet on February 13, 2012 at 9:04 PM

We are all someones bot……..your a tool!

dmann on February 13, 2012 at 9:01 PM

“Your a tool…”

LOL!!!

Roy Rogers on February 13, 2012 at 9:04 PM

OT
Any one else noticing a double, triple flicker kind of thing on the refresh?

Bmore on February 13, 2012 at 8:58 PM

I have. So it’s not just my computer!

INC on February 13, 2012 at 9:04 PM

He deserved an Oscar in Tremors…

Roy Rogers on February 13, 2012 at 9:00 PM

I have all of them…there’s 17 Tremors sequels I believe

DHChron on February 13, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Not terribly schooled on Mormons, but have read they are supposed to go forth and multiply. Actions speak louder than words.

jeanie on February 13, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4