Posted on 05/20/2007 2:54:16 PM PDT by Reaganesque
They’re sourced, many with video. What more do you want?
Funny, I was called a Rudyite on another thread.
It’s funny how eager you jihadis are to declare everyone else an apostate.
I'll take "none of the above," ever.
Links. Links are fine. It took over 30 pagedowns to get past that post. Nobody’s ever going to read it. It’s a waste of time and electrons. Just send a link to wherever you cut and pasted it from. That’s all.
"Romney ran against Senator Edward M. Kennedy in 1994. During a debate, Romney declared: 'I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.'" - Boston Globe, 3/2/2006
Refute this one, and then we'll move on to the next item.
I won’t refute anything. That’s fine with me. And, look, it’s brief!
Of course, I am also both a realist and a firm believer in my tagline.
that’s why it will go down in flames in a popular vote that the new Gov and the gay legislature is trying to prevent?
“When [during their debate] Kennedy called him ‘multiple choice,’ Romney demanded an extra rebuttal. He revealed that a close relative died of an illegal abortion years ago and said, ‘Since that time, my mother and my family have been committed to the belief that we can believe as we want, but we will not force our beliefs on others on that matter, and you will not see my wavering on that.’ “
- Boston Globe, 3/2/2006
“On a questionnaire Planned Parenthood gave to the gubernatorial candidates in 2002, Romney answered ‘’yes” to the question, ‘Do you support the substance of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade?’ Romney also professed support for state funding of abortion services for low-income women, [Erin] Rowland [spokeswoman for the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts] said.”
- Boston Globe, 3/25/2005
“Marie Sturgis, legislative director of Massachusetts Citizens for Life, said she hasn’t detected any change in Romney’s stance. The group considers Romney to be an abortion-rights supporter, as do national antiabortion groups such as the Family Research Council.”
- Boston Globe, 3/25/2005
Romney is benefitting from the Illegal Invader issue which has thrown a spotlight on RINOS JulieAnnie and McClown.
I’m supporint Hunter or Fred Thompson or Huckabee in the primary.
If Julie Annie or McClwon get nominated, they don’t get my vote.
If ROmeny gets nominated, he gets my vote - in large part due to his stand on this illegal invader issue.
Name one.
See? Is that so hard?
Rudy, Precious, McF*ck, they’re all the same to me. Completely and totally unacceptable. We’re here to make sure the truth gets out as to why they are unacceptable.
Jihadis ? Using rhetoric like that doesn’t make you look particularly stable.
A little slow on the uptake, eh?
I think using the term jihadis is brilliant and quite apropos in this case.
I am curious as to your use of the term “unacceptable”. Is Hillary acceptable?
And I really wouldn’t complain my rhetoric when you use the F-bomb as a part of a man’s name, despite the lame attempt to obscure it.
If the people were truly against it, the legislature would be too scared to do anything. At best, they are apathetic about gay marriage.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/03/16/romneys_words_grow_hard_on_immigration/
McCain-Kennedy isn’t the answer,” Romney said in a well-received speech to conservatives in Washington this month, describing it as an amnesty plan that would reward people for breaking the law and cost taxpayers millions to provide them benefits.
But that is markedly different from how Romney once characterized McCain’s bill, elements of which are receiving new attention in Congress and from President Bush. Indeed, Romney’s past comments on illegal immigration suggest his views have hardened as he has ramped up his campaign for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination.
In a November 2005 interview with the Globe, Romney described immigration proposals by McCain and others as “quite different” from amnesty, because they required illegal immigrants to register with the government, work for years, pay taxes, not take public benefits, and pay a fine before applying for citizenship.
“That’s very different than amnesty, where you literally say, ‘OK, everybody here gets to stay,’ “ Romney said in the interview. “It’s saying you could work your way into becoming a legal resident of the country by working here without taking benefits and then applying and then paying a fine.”
Romney did not specifically endorse McCain’s bill, saying he had not yet formulated a full position on immigration. But he did speak approvingly of efforts by McCain and Bush to solve the nation’s immigration crisis, calling them “reasonable proposals.”
Romney also said in the interview that it was not “practical or economic for the country” to deport the estimated 12 million immigrants living in the US illegally. “These people contribute in many cases to our economy and to our society,” he said. “In some cases, they do not. But that’s a whole group we’re going to have to determine how to deal with.”
Yes. I don’t know if it’s correct, but the discrepancies between the Presidential candidate Romney and Gov. Romney are already alarming.
Can you debate EV’s post?
You said there were 457 factual mistakes. All I asked you to do is point out one.
Huckabee is pro amnesty.
I too thought he was a viable candidate at one time. No longer.
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.