Posted on 08/17/2007 10:41:28 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
BOSTON - After a recent discovery by the press, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney appears to be pulling out his investments from two companies that use embryonic stem cell research. The discovery of his investments may have a negative effect on voters who already have doubts over the statesman's inconsistent record on life issues.
Members of the press and campaign opposition recently examined a federal financial statement and found that Romney owns stocks in Novo Nordisk and Millipore Corporation, two companies that use embryonic stem cells in their research, the Boston Herald Reports. Since the discovery was made public, Romney has stated that his investments will likely change to support his views.
"The trustee of the blind trust has said publicly that he will endeavour to make my investments conform with my positions, and I am confident that he will," said Romney. The former Massachusetts governor defended himself by saying that his investments were held in a blind trust which made him unable to specifically direct his funds. To some, however, this justification rings hollow in light of the fact that in 1994, he criticised Senator Edward M. Kennedy for the very same defense during the U.S. Senate campaign.
"The blind trust is an age-old ruse," Romney was quoted as saying at the time, the Herald reports. "You give a blind trust rules. You can say to a blind trust, don't invest in properties which would be in conflict of interest or where the seller might think they're going to get an advantage from me."
According to Romney's trust manager Brad Malt, of the law firm Ropes & Gray, the former governor took none of these precautions when the trust was established in 2002. Nevertheless, Malt also stated that it was impossible for Romney to predict where his money would go, for he "lost that ability once the trust was created."
According to the Herald, Romney owns between $190 and $250 million worth of assets. Out of this, he has between $100,000 and $250,000 invested in Novo Nordisk. On its official website, however, the company clearly states its support of embryonic stem cell research. (Read the Novo Nordisk statements on embryonic stem cell research: http://www.novonordisk.com/science/bioethics/stem_cell_ethic...).
Romney also invested in the Massachussetts-based Millipore Corporation, another company that uses embryonic stems cells for research. (See the Millipore website: http://www.millipore.com/corporate/pressroom.nsf/docs/73alx3).
Despite the fact that Romney appears to be pulling out of the problematic companies, the discovery of his these investments may shake the faith of conservative voters, especially since Romney's past record on life issues has been a slippery see-saw.
Ten years after declaring himself pro-choice, the former governor stated in 2004 that he had a pro-life conversion while discussing the very issue of embryonic stem cell research. He said, "It hit me very hard that we had so cheapened the value of human life in a Roe v. Wade environment that it was important to stand for the dignity of human life." Nevertheless, the recent discovery may once again have people questioning his motives and the reliability of such conservative claims during his run as presidential candidate.
Interestingly enough, however, it has also recently been discovered that the fiercely pro-life Senator Sam Brownback also had a much less sizeable amount of money invested in one of the same embryonic-stem-cell-using companies as Romney (Novo Nordisk), in the form of mutual funds. According to Brownback's financial disclosure records, he has between $1001 and $15000 invested in the mutual fund. Brownback's aides, however, have pointed out that in fact the fund is listed under one of Brownback's dependant children.
"The fund in question was not owned by Senator Brownback or his wife. It was owned by one of his children, who was unaware of the issue. The broker has already been contacted and instructed to sell the fund," said Brownback spokesman Brian Hart.
At first I was ready to give Romney the benefit of the doubt on his abortion flip flop, as people do change their minds.
But there are so many flip flops, on so many issues, that I’m afraid I don’t trust what he says about the life issue, either.
Al Gore was also desperate. hmmmmmm
“”You stated that Romney signed legislation banning assault weapons — still waiting for that proof (don’t exhaust yourself with the google, because he never did any such thing).””
This is from a pro Romney site:
In a move that will help keep the streets and neighborhoods of Massachusetts safe, Governor Mitt Romney today signed into law a permanent assault weapons ban that forever makes it harder for criminals to get their hands on these dangerous guns.
“Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts,” Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony with legislators, sportsmen’s groups and gun safety advocates. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”
Like the federal assault weapons ban, the state ban, put in place in 1998, was scheduled to expire in September. The new law ensures these deadly weapons, including AK-47s, UZIs and Mac-10 rifles, are permanently prohibited in Massachusetts no matter what happens on the federal level.
“Never before has there been such bi-partisan cooperation in the passage of gun safety legislation of this magnitude in this nation,” said John Rosenthal, co-founder and chair of Stop Handgun Violence. “I applaud the leadership of the Governor, Senate President, House Speaker and entire Legislature for passage of this assault weapons ban renewal. They have shown that Massachusetts can continue to lead the nation in protecting the public and law enforcement from military style assault weapons.”
http://myclob.pbwiki.com/07-01-2004
We agree. : ) Let us not forget to keep our eye on the ball.
Maybe Romney’s Blind Trust Trustees SET HIM UP! Nothing would surprise me.
Yes she would. And yes it is.
Yes, let us throw all our support behind a nice guy who agrees with us almost 100% on the issues and can’t win. That way, instead of living with a Mitt or a Fred as president for the next four to eight years, we can live with Hillary. : )
After all the discussion over his shift to the right, Romney is more locked into his positions than ANY of the candidates. He cannot turn back, and he knows it.
They couldn’t have known better, unless he had had the foresight to tell them which issues and companies he wanted to steer clear of. That was clearly within his power and he didn’t instruct the trust accordingly. Being a candidate who wants to use the pro-life issue as one of his platforms, he should have been smart enough to see that he could fall into the same trap that he had laid before Senator Kennedy.
This is reminiscent of his wife writing a check for Planned Parenthood. He can say it doesn’t affect his campaign, but the fact that the two of them didn’t realize such a check would irk the pro-life crowd shows how naive they are when it comes to public perceptions.
Once again, he doesn’t appear to be ready for primetime or playing hardball. This is a novice mistake.
Apparently his plan from the start of the champaign, the question remains whether the base will buy into it.
**************
No, Romney should have known better.
I wouldn't characterize it as a novice mistake. I would say Romney has made several missteps because unlike many of the other candidates, he isn't a life long politician.
I really don’t think it’s quite the way you see it. I do think however, unlike Guiliani, he understands the importance of the conservative base.
I completely disagree. Romney has had aspirations for power since he was young. His father’s influence is found at every turn. It is not surprising in the least that he would seek the White House, where is father failed. Like his father, he is making the same mistakes. The fruit doesn’t fall very far from the tree.
While I agree with your statement regarding Guiliani you see it your way and I see it mine.
Romney is my 2nd choice. I try to keep a balanced view and weigh electability/conservative positions.
Hunter is great but won't garner near enough votes to get the nomination.
Thompson has yet to announce but will, whether he has the ability to energize enough people to vote for him after waiting so long, only time will tell.
Freegards, Yankee.
“First, in 2004 he signed a bill which reformed some aspects of the extremely severe and arbitrary gun-licensing system in Massachusetts. This would be an impressive accomplishment if that were all the bill did. But the bill also made the Massachusetts ban on “assault weapons” permanent. (The previous ban was parasitic on the federal ban, which expired in September 2004.) The bill that Romney signed was a compromise bill, approved by both sides in the Massachusetts gun-control debate and widely supported by both parties in the legislature. The NRA considered the bill to be a net gain, but it’s hardly the unalloyed, pro-rights success that Romney now claims. As governor, Romney declared his support for banning so-called “assault weapons.”
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTMzYzZiNWMyNzYyMWRkYjIwNWU0NDEzNWJmMDU4MTk=
You mean this bill? All depends on context doesn’t it, which you obviously no very little about. This quote by the way is from an NRO article which attacks Romney on this issue.
Mitt worshipers? Give me a break ok with that crap. You lap this crap up without doing any fact checking and I have no desire to start pulling article after article on google to ascertain if these quotes are presented in context (of course you don’t question the absence of links at all do you?).
You are a headline reader and cannot defend you points. I asked your specific questions to which you have not responded. How about you do that and you can start with your abortion nonsense.
no = know
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.