The Washington Post yesterday ran a piece on Mitt Romney in Massachusetts and his efforts to re-assure liberals:
Mitt Romney was firm and direct with the abortion rights advocates sitting in his office nine years ago, assuring the group that if elected Massachusetts governor, he would protect the state’s abortion laws.
Then, as the meeting drew to a close, the businessman offered an intriguing suggestion — that he would rise to national prominence in the Republican Party as a victor in a liberal state and could use his influence to soften the GOP’s hard-line opposition to abortion.
He would be a “good voice in the party” for their cause, and his moderation on the issue would be “widely written about,” he said, according to detailed notes taken by an officer of the group, NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts.
“You need someone like me in Washington,” several participants recalled Romney saying that day in September 2002, an apparent reference to his future ambitions.
Romney made similar assurances to activists for gay rights and the environment, according to people familiar with the discussions, both as a candidate for governor and then in the early days of his term.
Within five years, Romney would be campaigning as an uber-prolifer and advocate of a Federal Marriage Amendment. In defense of Romney, this story was released in 2007, but due to the ADD nature of Americans, it’s not a revelations most people will remember.
It definitely calls into question, how much, if any, of Romney’s campaign rhetoric can be counted on. The fortunate thing for him is that everyone is that with the Cain story going on, the story by the Washington Post has gone virtually unnoticed.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:11 am
So convenient you always have a peice waiting in the file to trash Romney every time a little bit of good news comes out for him.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:18 am
EVERYONE. look at the previous thread of the washington post. ADAM posted this thread less than 20 minutes after the previous post to try and make it seem less important. i call that dirty underminding tactics. mitt romney is ahead of herman cain, and it shows that the sex scandal is starting to hurt cain
November 4th, 2011 at 7:21 am
Adam, are you trying to get Obama reelected, you sure seem to do everything in your power to destroy the conservative movement and the best candidate we have out there.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:24 am
Adam Graham, with all due respect, YAWN.
All the other candidates than Romney, especially Cain, are vastly unprepared to be president.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:25 am
Anything Romney said 9 years ago about Abortion is 7 years out of date. It was a hard-core flip, duly acknowledged by him and all and sundry, but IT’S ANCIENT HISTORY.
What Romney did in office, as we all know by now, was to prevent the pro-Choicers from gaining any additional ground. In Massachusetts, that was an accomplishment. Bringing it up again, for something like the 11 Thousandth time, is pathetic.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:26 am
#4:
It was not a flip. he said things to three groups about abortion, gay rights, and environment, and on all of them, he flipped.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:30 am
HA everyone look! ADAM post bad thing about mitt romney, then 5 minutes later trys to post something good about herman cain. SOMEONE NEEDS TO LIMIT HIS POST OF THREADS. hes a thread spammer and a bias 1
November 4th, 2011 at 7:33 am
I bet Adam’s point for posting this was to show why voters don’t trust Romney and are hesitant to get behind him.
The big question for voters is, If I pull the lever for Romney, which Romney will I get in the White House? Can I trust that what he is saying on the campaign trail is how he would govern in office?
As Romney supporters you do not see the quandary that voters are in because you have already given Romney the benefit of the doubt.
Some of us are not as trusting because we know in the end, that they are all politicians.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:33 am
6
Romney has never flipped on gay rights. What the Hell are you talking about? Supporting gay rights meant preventing workplace discrimination, not marriage. Show proof Romney EVER supported gay marriage, and then I’ll believe you. Because I haven’t seen it YET.
Romney has never flipped on the environment. Romney has always said that America should not adapt Cap and Trade because China never will.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:35 am
8
Well, I don’t trust any of them fully.
I trust we’ll get a smart and capable leader in the White House with Romney, so I’m voting for him again, and this will be the 4th time.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:35 am
6.
No, for the umpteenth time. He was always personally pro-life but he said his public position was not to force his opinions on those who disagreed as Roe was he law of he land. It was a politically expeditious position more than it was a hard flip.
He has never been for gay marriage no matter how many times people like you say he was. Never happened.
On the environment, he has said that he thinks the earth has gotten warmer and that people have contributed to it but there is not enough evidence to spend trillions of dollars to change our way of living to fix a problem that has not been definitively proved. This may not float your boat but it is the position that the vast majority of the public holds.
Talk about journalistic integrity. Using recycled lefty talking points on an issue that is years old to keep trying to kneecap a candidate other than your preferred one is pretty lame.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:38 am
11, he’s not a journalist, he’s just an self-promoting teavangelical who has appeared on a bajillion blogs trying to become famous.
Trouble is, no one gives a rat’s ass.
Adam is one of those people who blames gays and abortion doctors for 9/11.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:45 am
8.
Since you’re from Texas maybe you can help clear something up. Which Rick Perry are we going to get if he is the nominee? The one who rails against Romney’s healthcare plan of the one who went to Mexico to insist that there should be a pan Texas-Mexico healthcare plan? Are we going to get the Perry who says we are heatless if we don’t support spending tax dollars on illegal immigrants education? Are we going to get the Perry who rails against socialism or the Rick Perry who set up tax dollar funds at his disposal to funnel money his supporters companies?
We can play this game with all the contenders. Why only single out Romney? Oh yeah, it’s easy because thats the meme that conservative blogs love.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:53 am
Adam,
What you might not know is that since 1994, the context of the Gay Rights issue has changed. At the time, there was no controversy about Gay Marriage. It was totally off the table and wasn’t part of the public discourse, so Mitt could be pro-Gay Rights, following the Biblical admonition to love one another, and the Constitutional imperative of individual liberty.
As Governor, he fought against Gay Marriage on the grounds that Marriage is a sacred ordinance reserved, by God, for a man and a woman. And no, this was NOT a flip.
November 4th, 2011 at 8:03 am
Since Mitt has a track record that can be followed, why would anyone go back before he served as governor. It we do that Perry was a democrat, Cain was also, I guess it only applies to Mitt. This article is a problem. It’s the kind of media that gives a false read. It was before he became governor.
We’d be better served to say what did Mitt Romney do wrong to fix the Olympics?
Or What did Mitt Romney do wrong to balance his state’s budget.
Or the errors in his 59 point economic plan include…
Or maybe his policy on page … of his book leads me to believe such.
But like the media this article goes back to a time before he became a solid conservative. He’s demonstrated while he governed to be a very steady conservative.
November 4th, 2011 at 8:03 am
This was posted at Hotair, titled Core
“When Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, became a presidential candidate in 2008, his views on those issues had shifted dramatically to the right. Raw politics at work: A moderate record suited Romney’s needs in Democratic-leaning Massachusetts and conservative views are a necessity in national GOP primaries.
“Romney’s only hope of dodging the flip-flopping label is that journalists and their readers decide to give him a pass because his position shifts are old news. But they are not old news: That fact that Romney has an odds-on chance to become president in 2013 makes doubts about his core values more relevant than ever.”
http://decoded.nationaljournal.com/2011/11/mitt-romneys-everevolving-ideo.php
From the national journal article:
“Less than a decade later, voters will soon ask themselves whether they want somebody like Romney in Washington. Somebody whose core beliefs are so hard to pin down.”
**Note to Rombots-Stop the name calling just because we don’t trust Romney and question his core convictions. Trust takes time and has to be earned. Trust does not come about because one voter demands it of another.
This website is called race42012 right? And no one has voted yet right? We know that most of you here have selected Romney as your candidate. Thus the impression that this is Romney42012. But 2/3 of the voters are hesitant about Romney so its probably good that you know why.
Instead of the name calling, just add a brief supporting comment with a link so that we can determine for ourselves if Romney is trustworthy on that particular issue.
November 4th, 2011 at 8:09 am
16
I understand the criticism, it is mostly unfair, but Romney did indeed change his position on abortion.
But do you find it interesting how the RomNots have given up on RomneyCare (because it’s a dead horse) and have now switched their line of attack?
I find it a bit disingenuous, to go most of the year not being angry about age-old flip-flops, and now suddenly be outraged. It smells like people are just looking for ways to take him down, but the people doing the accusing don’t really feel as strongly about these issues as they let on.
November 4th, 2011 at 8:12 am
16.
Strawman. People have been answering this question repeatedly for months. You not Romney people just keep saying ‘Well I still don’t trust him because he became more conservative, more of what I say I want, throughout his career just like countless people before him.”
You either listen the the explanations and except them or you don’t. But constantly going over the same ground and saying you are still concerned is just a game at this point. If you don’t believe him, fine. But don’t say this issue hasn’t been addressed. It has. More times than I can count.
Now can you explain the positions I laid out in 13 that Perry has taken over the years and what we should expect from a President Perry. I’ve never seen anyone deal with those issues.
November 4th, 2011 at 8:14 am
La de freaking da. He has changed his position and is on the right side now. But Perry “pivoted” according to Graham. And Cain can’t articulate a pro life stance. Graham is a whited sepulcher.
November 4th, 2011 at 8:14 am
Another 10 year old story.
Another over-blown story. Its amazing what people read into a 10 year old rumor.
November 4th, 2011 at 8:29 am
8 & 16 I am not going to answer your question because I am not a Perry supporter. I wanted KBH for Texas governor. So if there is a Perry supporter who frequents this site, then they can feel free to answer you.
Voters are still talking about Romneycare as a reason to not vote for Romney. If you listen to talkradio, callers talk about it still. It is the pundits and journalists who have stopped talking/writing about it.
November 4th, 2011 at 8:36 am
Its funny.
In 2008, Romney ran as a prolife candidate. He has been consistent on the issue for over five years.
In 2008, Rick Perry endorsed the only social liberal and NARAL award winner Rudy.
In 2010, Rick Perry ran as a ‘tenther’ and promoted states rights positions on abortion and gay marriage.
In 2011, (ten short months later) Perry flip-flopped on his 2010 position to pander to social liberals and renounced his states rights position on abortion and gay marriage.
- All that happened in the last THREE years. But the Perry Hype Machine has people stressing over 10 year old closed door meetings.
November 4th, 2011 at 8:37 am
That should read:
In 2011, (ten short months later) Perry flip-flopped on his 2010 position to pander to social conservatives and renounced his states rights position on abortion and gay marriage.
November 4th, 2011 at 8:37 am
21.
I asked simply because you live in Texas and have seen Perry much more directly than I have. I, on the other hand, live in MA and have seen Romney before during and after his governorship.
It wasn’t a shot, it was a request to have someone, anyone, who knows Perry’s “core” try and define exactly what it means. The fact that you are a conservative and supported KBH over Perry says a lot.
November 4th, 2011 at 8:48 am
I am not the biggest Romney fan, but I try to be fair.
Geez,, this is just a case of a politician being a politician. I could even see Reagan doing this and gasp Rick Perry…5 years is an eternity in politics.
I wish there was someone I liked better than Romney, but there isn’t and frankly he does has some damn good qualities.
November 4th, 2011 at 9:06 am
As has been mentioned, Mitt has addressed all these issues time and time again in townhall after townhall and in interview after interview–extensively, including on Huck’s show, despite what Texas Conservative continuously tries to feed us.
Texas Conservative and Adam are two of the types that had already pre-determined they are against Romney regardless of what he says and does. As with any candidate, you can find things you don’t like and things you do. They’ve chosen, in advance, where they stand.
They have a strong bias against Mitt Romney. Nothing inherently wrong with that. But I wish they wouldn’t try to portray themselves are fair or objective, because it’s clear they are not.
November 4th, 2011 at 9:08 am
Your quotes are too truncated and too short to give this piece any credibility, for example, I’m against abortion, but there are issues that I think pro-lifers take too far. I don’t 100% agree with all of pro-life propaganda or methods or philosophies.
I suspect you’ve left parts out or the quote is taken out of context, at least somewhat.
November 4th, 2011 at 9:17 am
Romney is awesome. He’s also awesomely pro-life. Did you know Rick Perry worked for Global Warming Al’s re-election? How can you trust the liberal core of Perry?
November 4th, 2011 at 9:18 am
#25……….good for you……AND America!
I realize he’s not perfect…..and it BOILS down to having to run for office in a LIBERAL state. Had he run in TX or OK or UT, etc. he would’ve been much more “perfect”.
Romney has some excellent qualities and is THE BEST intellectually prepared to put the brakes on this downward slide and turn it around!
November 4th, 2011 at 9:33 am
Romney was right not to mess with Mass abortion laws. That’s not what the Mass folks elected him to do, and he gave them the assurance he wouldn’t be an ideologue that was going to remake their way of life as soon as they voted him in. That’s what I like about Romney – he does what his constituents want, not what his ideology or religion dictates. And he does it within the constructs of American values/capitalism, and the Constitution.
November 4th, 2011 at 9:33 am
I do think Mitt has a core, but I don’t think it involves social issues. Historically, he has used those as a prop so he can pursue the other issues he actually cares about.
November 4th, 2011 at 9:43 am
31, that is absolutely correct in my estimation.
And social issues are the things over which a president has essentially no authority, beyond setting a great example. Mitt does that.
And he’s the only guy that can win.
November 4th, 2011 at 9:57 am
That’s why it’s called a conversion, Adam. Richard Land–who unlike you, has spoken personally with Romney–had this to say about it:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67571.html
But nice try; you almost got me to think you’d objectively reached your conclusion about Romney’s integrity from a non-biased standpoint, while trying to deflect from the scrutiny of your own candidate.
Swing and a miss, brother
November 4th, 2011 at 10:13 am
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/mitt-romney-and-reorganizing-government/2011/11/03/gIQAzzo4jM_blog.html
You people doubting Romney’s fiscal Conservative bona-fides are in for a pleasant surprise once Romney is President. He’s got the hunger that Ron Paul has for fixing our Government, and the -precision- to go along with it.
November 4th, 2011 at 10:14 am
“how much, if any, of Romney’s campaign rhetoric can be counted on”
Main argument: Romney isn’t trustworthy. Fine, ignore everything he’s ever said. Let’s look at what he’s done. Turn around failing companies, a horribly managed Olympics, and a deep blue state deep in the red. He fought gay marriage and acted as a completely pro-life governor. Those are the things that actually happened. What, on God’s green earth, makes you think he would become POTUS and govern as a liberal when he didn’t do that in MA?!
Conservatives’ fear of Romney is rediculously irrational.
November 4th, 2011 at 10:31 am
I will have real trouble supporting Romney, although I probably could if I had to.
I will have real trouble supporting Cain, although I probably could if I had to.
I will NOT support Bachmann under any circumstance.
I will NOT support Perry under any circumstance.
Where does that leave me?
Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt! Newt!
November 4th, 2011 at 10:41 am
Ok, I think everyone here will acknowledge that Romney has changed his position on abortion and possibly on other issues of interest. I think the more important questions to resolve are:
(1) Why did/does Romney change his positions? Is it out of political convenience/opportunism, or some other reason?
(2) Why do we believe/not believe that Romney won’t change his position on abortion/climate change/ethanol subsidies/etc. again if he wins the nomination?
November 4th, 2011 at 10:51 am
36. Sticking with the Monty Python references -
“You’ll get better”.
November 4th, 2011 at 10:56 am
Nice. Funny how you always have some ancient story about Romney ready to crawl out from under a rock at a moment’s notice. I agree that Romney is not the most conservative dude in the race – but Cain isn’t looking so good right now either, or Perry, or Newt “that was my mandate idea” Gingrich, or . . . you see the problem.
November 4th, 2011 at 10:58 am
This is old news. EVERYONE knows that Mitt is a pro life convert. What’s the big deal here?
November 4th, 2011 at 11:21 am
40. “EVERYONE knows that Mitt is a pro life convert. What’s the big deal here?”
Why are you so certain that Mitt won’t change his position if he get nominated/elected?
November 4th, 2011 at 11:24 am
37 Ryan
You make a great point, I think I’ll reconsider. Should I vote for the lobotomized Perry or maybe the sexually challenged Cain???? I’ll have to think about that for awhile.
OK, I’ve thought long enough, I will vote for the man who can fix the economy and win in a general election against Obama, That would be Romney!!!
November 4th, 2011 at 11:27 am
41
how are you certain Perry wont get drunk again and give a mindless speech giving Obama four more years?
How are you certain that Cain is not the sexual pervert he is reported to be?
There is much uncertainty in this election, I’ll take the risk on the only one with a brain and a moral compass.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:03 pm
““You need someone like me in Washington,” several participants recalled Romney saying that day in September 2002″
So who are these people who are recalling Romney saying somthing nine years ago, Graham? Your columns over the past few days have assured us that you are above giving credence to second-hand stories and anonymous sources…
Except when Romney is the target.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:09 pm
44
Very true.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:39 pm
Why is this important? Haven’t we vetted this guy to death? Was he pro-choice? YES. Is he still pro-choice? No. He wants to end roe v wade, AND end all abortion funding and title x programs. Sounds like a good deal to me. I’m not the biggest romney fan, and so i hate HAVING to come to his defense at this point….after all the crap. But Adam, i really think you want obama re-elected….because it’s Ron Paul or Mitt Romney at this point…no one else has a prayer.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:41 pm
44,
Does it even MATTER? I mean, isn’t the question at this point….is romney pro-life NOW? I’m not saying we should throw everything in his past away. I’m saying that we already KNOW THIS. So why are we bringing it back up 10 million times? Why are we purposefully trying to screw the only guy that has a chance to beat obama?
November 4th, 2011 at 12:43 pm
This BS story is old news from the 2008 cycle.
It’s based entirely on the notes of one abortionist.
November 4th, 2011 at 12:54 pm
47 – I’m just having some fun with Adam and the great lengths to which he goes to ensure we all realize he has a jaw-dropping double standard when it comes to the candidates. Sure, plenty of people are easier on their preferred candidate, but I haven’t seen any of the other people with FPP status (other than Shedlock, but he doesn’t post very often) have so glaring an issue. I do admit I like Adam better than Shedlock, and have no problem with him personally.
Its just…LOOK at his posts over the last few days. He writes entire articles in defense of Cain lambasting journalists over using similar tactics to what he will then turn around and use on Romney in his following post.
I’m all for him defending Cain. I just find how he goes about attacking Romney and defending Cain to be very amusing.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:11 pm
48,
That’s exactly right. This is OLD news. Even if true…it is BEFORE his pro-life conversion. In 2008, i felt we had better candidates that could win….that were closer to me on the issues. In 2012, who is there? We have romney, paul, cain, perry, santorum, bachmann etc.
The only 2 that can even WIN a general election are Romney and Paul. And this is the most important election of our lifetime. Romney can win…and he will win the nomination. We all need to come to a place where we can support him as the nominee(once he is the nominee). We all need to be ready to support him, and to believe what he says. He wants to end roe, that’s GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME. He wants to end all abortion funding….hell yeah.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:13 pm
49,
I understand you were having fun with him. I was just saying that adam’s post was the most irrelevant thing…after it’s been posted 500 times already since like 2006.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:13 pm
50 – nicely said.
November 4th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
“So convenient you always have a peice waiting in the file to trash Romney every time a little bit of good news comes out for him”
So predictable that Rombots circle the wagons at first sign of criticism….no need to examine the findings objectively…..the goal has been pre-determined and now is the time to fix the intelligence around the goal. Sounds familiar.
November 4th, 2011 at 2:30 pm
“Ron Paul or Mitt Romney or we are doomed.”utter no
UTTER NONSENSE
November 4th, 2011 at 2:32 pm
53.
Bingo!
November 4th, 2011 at 2:37 pm
Adam Graham needs a day job!
November 4th, 2011 at 2:47 pm
Ryan (#37) and Adam:
1) I don’t read minds and hearts (only God can do that), so to speculate that Romney’s change could have been for political convenience is just that, speculation. Consider the following:
1.a) He has consistently said that he is and always has been personally pro-life. His faithful adherence to his religion and his past responsibility as a lay minister (where he counseled others against abortion) are very strong indicators that he has, in fact, always been personally pro-life.
Keep in mind that his personal beliefs against abortion were moderated by two countervailing issues: first, a close family relative died, prior to Roe v. Wade, from a botched, illegal abortion and second, as a faithful Mormon, he should (again, I’m not a mind reader) believe in “obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law”, even if he doesn’t agree with the law. (Indeed, his rule-of-law approach to some of his actions as governor could indicate his faithful observance to this Mormon tenet.) Given these two opposing forces to his personal belief against abortion, it is entirely possible that he simply deferred to the law of the land with regards to abortion rather than try to force his personal beliefs on others. I don’t know the pain his family felt from the loss of a loved one due to a botched abortion and how that would affect their opinion towards its legality. Personally, I would have be grieved over the initial choice to get an illegal abortion as well as the death of the relative. Further, since Roe v. Wade was, and unfortunately still is, the law of the land, both when he ran against Kennedy and when he ran for governor, he could voice his desire to obey and sustain the law while still being personally against abortion. When he stated that he would maintain the status quo as governor, do you think he believed that any pro-life bills would ever pass his desk as governor?
1.b) He has consistently pointed to a specific incident that caused his public policy position towards abortion to change. We know, in fact, that the meeting with the Harvard stem cell researcher did occur where he says that he fully realized the damaging effects that Roe v. Wade has towards the sanctity of life. We have record of the meeting, we know it happened. Romney has consistently stated that it was during that meeting that he changed his stance towards the government’s role in abortion. In Romney’s own words:
Yes, his change of heart was coincidental to his consideration for running for POTUS, but it is only circumstantial, it doesn’t imply motivation. Why not take him at his word about why he changed? How many other pro-life conversions (especially of those running for political office) can point to a specific reason for their change of heart?
1.c) He consistently came down on the side of life as governor–vetoing bills that would expand the access to or ease of getting an abortion.
2) We have good reason to believe that Romney won’t change his position on abortion for at least three reasons: First, his pro-life position on abortion is aligned with his personal and religious convictions. Second, as governor he very good at keeping his campaign promises–when he says he will do something, he tries very hard to keep his promises (as he did in maintaining the status quo on abortion in Massachusetts). Third, as noted earlier he consistently came down on the side of life as governor (even in a very liberal environment)–what indications do we have that he would not also come down on the side of life as president. Everything he has stated has indicated that he would be a pro-life president and his record as governor indicates that he keeps his promises.
Just my $0.02.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:03 pm
43. “how are you certain Perry wont get drunk again and give a mindless speech giving Obama four more years?”
I’m not. His past suggests that he will.
“How are you certain that Cain is not the sexual pervert he is reported to be?”
I’m not. His past suggests that he may be.
How am I certain that Romney won’t change his position to pander to whichever group with whom he would like to curry favor, due to his political opportunism?
I’m not. His past suggests he might.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:18 pm
57. Your response is probably the best and most logical reasoning that I have heard so far on this issue. I am closer to being convinced from your comments than from any others. Thank you.
November 4th, 2011 at 3:41 pm
#57 — SPOT ON!
Very well written.
November 4th, 2011 at 4:20 pm
“So predictable that Rombots circle the wagons at first sign of criticism….no need to examine the findings objectively…..the goal has been pre-determined and now is the time to fix the intelligence around the goal. Sounds familiar.”
You act as if this is exclusive to “Rombots.” Everyone does this.
As for objectivity–THIS very story has been posted on THIS blog before. It’s been hashed. It’s been analyzed. It’s old news. It didn’t matter then and it remains irrelevant now. So be objective. Why was it posted? Was it because its 9-year-old substance had special relevance to this moment? Or, could it be because Adam needed to get an anti-Romney, anonymous source, hit piece up 10 minutes after a positive Romney story?
November 4th, 2011 at 4:28 pm
58.
Add Newt: How are you certain that Newt isn’t currently boinking a woman that isn’t his 3rd wife and setting himself up to severely damage the conservative image nationally yet again?
Your point is solid. The problems of a candidate’s past is something to consider when voting. But Cain, Perry & Newt have also drastically shifted positions on some issues. You aren’t questioning them on the major policy reversals of their careers, but you view Romney’s as nearly unforgiveable.
On the other hand, there is no hint of sexual misconduct, public drunkenness or corruption involving taxpayer $ in Romney’s past.
November 4th, 2011 at 5:57 pm
58. Jon Steward had a funny line about that speech.
“Best case scenario is that’s Perry drunk, there. Worst case is that that’s Perry sober and he was drunk in all of his other speeches and debates!”
November 4th, 2011 at 5:58 pm
61. I hadn’t considered the TIMING of the post. That’s a very good observation and very likely was all or part of the motivation for the post.
November 4th, 2011 at 5:59 pm
62. Yes, a very blatant double standard. I think the reason is because Mitt Romney is EFFECTIVE.
November 4th, 2011 at 7:10 pm
“Massachusetts Conservative” ! is no conservative, or at least not an informed one.
Romney promised his Log Cabin Republican supporters in 2002 (as he was running for Gov.) that he would NOT fight the expected ruling FOR “gay marriage” from the state’s Supreme Judicial Court. And he was true to his promise.
Want proof? That info is from the NY Times. The rest of the proof is found in the new book, MITT ROMNEY’S DECEPTION.
(Amazon)
Romney called the ruling “law” and failed to uphold the Constitution, implementing “gay marriage” through his exec. offices without the Legislature ever changing the law (as the Court admitted it needed to do to make their wish come true). Gov. Romney’s Chief Legal Counsel was even THANKED in 2010 for his SUPPORT of the “gay marriage” ruling by the gay-transgender lobby!
Even Hugh Hewitt called on Romney to ignore the illegitimate Court ruling in 2003. Hmm.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwwcAa6nHm4
November 4th, 2011 at 7:53 pm
Gingrich 2012!!!!!!!
November 4th, 2011 at 8:06 pm
66 – No thanks, not really interested in reading the Mitt Romney smear book you wrote, but nice attempt at promotion.
November 4th, 2011 at 9:47 pm
Adam secretly thinks that Romney is great. He has pictures of Romney all over his house, and he pastes articles about Romney to his walls. He even sleeps with a Romney doll.
November 4th, 2011 at 9:53 pm
Mitt Romney stands for conservatism. He went along with things in the past that were not conservative, but after honing his perspective, he came to the conclusion that he can lead this country to greatness with his conservative views, his pragmatic business experience, and his outstanding leadership qualities.
November 5th, 2011 at 12:55 am
Adam, you are a scumbag.
November 5th, 2011 at 12:58 am
Where is this “story” coming from? Where is the evidence? You do realize that you are calling Romney a liar here, Adam. I hope you feel good about that.
November 5th, 2011 at 12:58 am
Is this all coming from NARAL? And you believe them? Who do you think they are trying to get elected? Do you think it is Romney? Are you taking the word of NARAL over Romney’s (who has a track record of being an honest man)?
November 5th, 2011 at 1:00 am
6 – LIES!!!!! He has never flipped on gay rights. Just because you are too stupid to understand the difference between gay rights and gay marriage doesn’t mean you have the right to make up lies.
November 5th, 2011 at 1:01 am
@8 – You will get the Romney that kept every promise he made when he ran to be governor of Massachusetts.
November 5th, 2011 at 1:07 am
The flip-flopper meme is absolutely disgusting to me. Romney should not be any more vulnerable on this than any other candidate.
November 5th, 2011 at 1:10 am
The character assassination is disgusting.
November 5th, 2011 at 7:13 am
This article is nine years old? (Rolling eyes)
November 5th, 2011 at 10:16 am
“SOMEONE NEEDS TO LIMIT HIS POST OF THREADS”
“Romney has never flipped on gay rights.”
I agree, he has always supported them, he told the Log Cabin Republicans so. How long will you tell bald-faced lies to protect your candidate?
“In 2008, Rick Perry endorsed the only social liberal and NARAL award winner Rudy.”
Let’s not forget that Romney endorsed Meg Whitman, who wants to finance child killing. (Shame on Perry for supporting, Giuliani, too)
“He’s also awesomely pro-life”
Except for the two percent he wants to see killed because their father’s were criminals.
November 5th, 2011 at 10:17 am
“Adam, you are a scumbag.”
Another Jax thoughtful comment.
November 5th, 2011 at 10:23 am
“said that he is and always has been personally pro-life.”
So what. So do John Kerry, Tom Harkin, and a host of other Catholic democrats, It is and was meaningless.
“his pro-life position on abortion is aligned with his personal and religious convictions”
So what, You just admitted that for years his position didn’t line up. He has never even admitted that he was ever pro-choice. You can’t have a conversion until you admit you were wrong.
November 5th, 2011 at 5:21 pm
81 – “You can’t have a conversion until you admit you were wrong.”
In one of the 2007/2008 debates, they asked the candidates what their greatest mistake had been. Most of them gave glib answers, or said things like “too many to mention” and wouldn’t give specific answers. Romney said it was being pro-choice.
November 7th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
[...] a September 2002 meeting with NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts Willard Romney made this implied promise, “You need someone [...]
January 23rd, 2012 at 1:08 pm
[...] you believe this is the same man who got an endorsement from NARAL in 2002, because he said the pro-choice organization needed “a friend like him” in office? Boy, [...]
February 23rd, 2012 at 12:17 pm
[...] you add the fact that in a September 2002 meeting with NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts Romney promised the ghouls in attendance that they would have a friend in [...]
February 23rd, 2012 at 1:11 pm
[...] you add the fact that in a September 2002 meeting with NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts Romney promised the ghouls in attendance that they would have a friend in [...]
February 23rd, 2012 at 1:46 pm
[...] [...]
February 23rd, 2012 at 1:46 pm
[...] you add the fact that in a September 2002 meeting with NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts Romney promised the ghouls in attendance that they would have a friend in [...]