Romney Wrong That His Abortion Flip Flops Like Reagan's

Men's News Daily ^ | 8/20/07 | Warner Todd Huston

[Mobile Vulgus]

Former Massachusetts Governor and current GOP candidate for president Mitt Romney has been doing his level best to redefine in his favor his past stance on abortion and to push his newfound anti-abortion position as he continues his campaign. Romney appeared on the August 12th edition of Fox News Sunday to face host Chris Wallace who confronted the Governor with several video clips of Romney's professing far more support for abortion just 5 years ago than he now claims to have espoused then, or that he claims he currently espouses.

Romney has been desperately trying to distance himself from his past abortion stance and has been lately saying he was always "personally pro-life" and was mistaken to begrudgingly allow for pro-abortion support while he was Governor. Also, during the Sunday ABC Republican debates in August, Romney tried a mae culpa of sorts on his past stance calling it the "greatest mistake of his life." Romney told George Stephanopoulos, "My greatest mistake was when I first ran for office being deeply opposed to abortion but saying I'd support the current law, which was pro-choice and effectively a pro-choice position. That was just wrong."

But, Chris Wallace presented Romney with proof that pretty much devastates Romney's claim that he never supported abortion and that he only bowed to his Massachusetts constituency's desires. Wallace played two video clips where Romney went much further then any begrudging support, both of which in fact, seemed more like active advocacy than any perfunctory support. After the clips, Wallace reminded Romney that "for eight years" he had said that he would "protect and respect a woman's right to choose."

Video Clip One transcript:

M. ROMNEY: 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 sustain and support it.

Video Clip Two transcript:

M. ROMNEY: I will preserve and protect a woman's right to choose and am devoted and dedicated to honoring my word in that regard. I will not change any provisions of Massachusetts's pro-choice laws.

But as Romney's current explanation is that he was always "personally pro-life" but that he made a mistake not to say so in the past, he also said just last December that he has "grown" to his current position. This "grown" claim seems to make the lie to his more recent GOP debate claim of having "always personally opposed abortion."

What is plain is that the evidence shows that Romney evolved from being a qualified abortion supporter as governor, to become a possible candidate claiming that he viewed abortion as wrong but supported it because those who voted for him by and large supported it, to an official candidate that says that he was always anti-abortion and regrets that he seemed to support it as governor. Its all hardly believable, but it does show a candidate who will say what he thinks his constituency wants to hear, at least on the issue of abortion.

Of course, these claims are hard to assess as who really knows what is in someone's heart? Certainly his past statements seem much more as advocacy for abortion but who can really say what is in his heart today? We can quibble about the veracity and truth of those statements and still not be able to successfully arrive at the truth, granted. But, the most disingenuous claim Romney has made, and one that can be assessed for its truth, is his claim that he has grown in his abortion position just like Ronald Reagan did when Reagan was first confronted with the issue while Governor of California in 1967. Romney told Chris Wallace that as governor Reagan was "adamantly pro-choice," and that Reagan "became pro-life as he experienced life," and presumably as his governorship evolved.

Romney's claim, however, is just patently false. Reagan's most able biographer, Lou Cannon, has documented* that in contravention to Romney's claim that Reagan was "adamantly pro-choice" Governor Reagan had never really given the abortion issue much thought before he took office. Cannon demonstrates that when Reagan was first confronted with abortion in 1967 he was unusually indecisive and had a difficult time deciding what he should do with a liberal abortion bill winding its way through the state house in Sacramento.

Cannon documents that after the abortion bill passed the California Senate, Reagan was asked by reporters during a press conference about his stance on the bill. When asked if he would sign the bill, Reagan answered, "I haven't had time to really sit down and marshal my thoughts on that." Such a reply certainly does not reveal an "adamant" position on the issue, as Romney claims Reagan held. Further, such indecision was not in any way a hallmark of the Reagan mode of operation.

In fact, Cannon writes that in 1968, the year after the bill passed, Reagan said that "those were awful weeks," and that he would never have signed the bill if he had "been a more experienced governor."

In light of the evidence it cannot be said that Reagan was ever an "adamant" pro-abortion supporter who later "grew" into an anti-abortion advocate. For Romney to invoke the spirit of Ronald Reagan in this way is a disgraceful attempt to co-opt the reputation of the most famous and successful politician of his age and an icon of the conservative movement to the aid of a candidate floundering on an issue. Mitt Romney's abortion problem bears no resemblance at all to Ronald Reagan's views "grown" or not.

Much can be said of Romney and his abortion problem. You can take him at his word that he "grew" into a more staunch pro-lifer or not. But one thing is absolutely sure; Mitt Romney is not like Ronald Reagan in any way, shape, manner or form.

A Transcript of Romney's reply to Chris Wallace from Fox News Sunday, August 12th, 2007:

M. ROMNEY: Yes. Yeah, that's right. And then when I became governor — I don't know what's so unusual about this, but when I became governor and when legislation was brought to my desk that dealt with life, and I sat down and I said, "Am I going to sign this? Because I personally oppose abortion. Am I going to sign this?"

And I brought in theologians. I brought in scientists, took it apart — this related to embryonic cloning. And I said, "I simply have to come down on the side of life," and wrote an op-ed piece in the Boston Globe and said, "Look, here is why I am pro-life."

And I laid out in my view that a civilized society must respect the sanctity of life. And you know what? I'm following in some pretty good footsteps.

It's exactly what Ronald Reagan did. As governor, he was adamantly pro-choice. He became pro-life as he experienced life.

And the same thing happened with Henry Hyde and George Herbert Walker Bush. And so if there's some people who can't get over the fact that I've become pro-life, that's fine.

But I'm not going to apologize for the fact that I am pro-life and that I was wrong before, in my view, and that I've taken the right course.

*Governor Reagan, His Rise to Power, by Lou Cannon, published in 2003 by Public Affairs, New York. Reference Chapter 16, pages 208 through 214.

[redgirlinabluestate]

If only you could save those attacks for those that "flipped" in the other direction, e.g. Bill Clinton and Al Gore. Imagine that.

BREAKING NEWS! Absolutists cut off nose to spite face. Film at 11.

[EternalVigilance]

You are going nowhere unless we elect a conservative president committed to appointing strict constructionist judges who will overturn RvW.

Well, that certainly excludes Slick Willard.

[Petronski]

If only you could save those attacks for those that "flipped" in the other direction, e.g. Bill Clinton and Al Gore. Imagine that.

It's not an attack, it's a statement of fact. There is no shortage of fact out there, there are plenty of statements of fact to go around.

BREAKING NEWS! Willard Mitt Romney lied about Ronald Reagan's pro-life record to build up his sorry self.

[EternalVigilance]

Every person on that list should be ashamed of themselves. Their support for Romney is indefensible.

[Diamond]

Don't forget, too, that Ronald Reagan said he had no opinion on abortion one way or another when he became governor. He was 56 years old.

----->>Think about it. This is Ronald Reagan quoted above --- in his late 60's -- writing that he hadn't formed an opinion one way or another on abortion eight years earlier UNTIL HE WAS FORCED TO MAKE A DECISION ON IT WHEN IN OFFICE - when the issue of life was squarely placed before him ----> then it mattered.

That sounds VERY much like what happened to Romney.

If Rommey had been living in a cave the last thirty years the comparison might make sense. Comparing Rommey on abortion in 2005 with Reagan on abortion in 1968 as if the thirty plus years abortion war had never happened is not a comparison that is connected to reality. Even back then, Reagan did not disassemble on the subject or his history concerning it with convoluted, contradictory and tortured equivocations the way Rommey is doing right now, million upon millions of slaughtered human beings later.

Cordially,

[Sloth]

I’m more concerned about the honesty issue.

[EternalVigilance]

You are going nowhere unless we elect a conservative president committed to appointing strict constructionist judges who will overturn RvW.

Mitt Romney appointed many judges to the bench as Governor. More of them were non-Republicans than Republicans, and included radical gay activists.

Any promise he can make now means nothing when compared to that fact.

[EternalVigilance]

You are going nowhere unless we elect a conservative president committed to appointing strict constructionist judges who will overturn RvW.

Can you name me five conservatives that Mitt Romney appointed to the bench in Massachusetts?

Can you even name one?

[HitmanLV]

It doesn’t express my sentiment, but the women’s sentiment.

[restornu]

Dang it!

Now I know Romney is the Front Runner with all this rage....:)

[EternalVigilance]

The orderly can help you with that.

[redgirlinabluestate]

I don't agree at all. I know, personally, several very busy, high-flying business execs who consider themselves staunch conservatives who never even think about the abortion issue because it does not concern them, their family or their friends. It does not enter into their daily lives. It does not cross their desk. While they may be personally pro-life or opposed to abortion, they wouldn't think of infringing on another person's personal business or pre-judging a woman in that situation in a million years. That makes them "effectively" pro-choice.

However, if one of these execs suddenly became a politician and was elected and had bills crossing their desk that had the effect of saving or taking lives --- then their eyes might be pried wide open by the awesome responsibility placed in their hands on an issue they gave very minimal thought up until that moment.

I don't find it hard to understand at all. There is a big difference between career politicians who deal with legislation involving these life and death issues, life-long activists whose lives revolve around this issue and business execs completely removed from the situation who decide to serve their country.

[Reagan Man]

I'd say lying about Reagan's pro-life abortion record in order to hide Romney's life long support for abortion on demand and Roe v Wade, is something most conservatives would be outraged over hearing.

When Romney says that Reagan was "adamantly pro-choice" he's fabricated a whopper of a falsehood. A first class lie.

From what I can tell, the liberal Rooty Giuliani and the conservative Fred Thompson both are ahead of Romney in every national poll released so far.

[restornu]

Well see!

[redgirlinabluestate]

It is not out of context at all. He had no opinion late in life, and then became a staunch pro-life advocate. The point is people change and it can happen quickly.

I have never seen so many people fight against someone so hard that has converted, has acted on that conversion and now repeatedly asserts that he wants to be on our side. It truly is bordering on.....crazy.

[Reagan Man]

So roughly 30 minutes after I asked you to produce a page number where that Reagan quote can be found in the book, Reagan In His Own Hand, you have produced nothing. Must conclude you lifted it from one of my posts. That’s okay, but its totally out of context.

You Romney supporters aren’t helping your candidate with these attempts to obfuscate the truth about Romney`s 30+ years of support for abortion on demand. And lying about Reagan’s pro-life record is an outrage.

[EternalVigilance]

has converted, has acted on that conversion

What, by continuing to support the destruction of "unwanted" human embryos? By having fundraisers hosted by those who stand to profit from the destruction of human embryos? By supporting "altered nuclear transfer," which is actually the cloning, disabling and destruction of human embryos? By advocating against the Reagan GOP platform and taking the Gerald R. Ford position that states should be able to allow the killing of the innocent unborn if they want to?

What kind of a "conversion" is that?

[redgirlinabluestate]

That is laughable. He didn't support anything of the sort. Frankly, I think he could have cared less. He was not involved in politics. He was busy getting a combo MBA/JD, raising a family, building companies, making millions, saving the Olympics.

He was never on the frontline of this issue until now. And now he is on our side and is he the only own on our side who has the organizational skills, the stamina, the savvy, the money and the will to beat the Clinton machine. Go ahead eating our own. Yep, good luck with that.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>>That is laughable.

LMBO Ironic, isn't it. Your spinning of this issue and Romney's 30+ years of support for abortion on demand and Roe v Wade, its even getting me dizzy. You're hilarious!

"'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.'"

~~~ Mitt Romney

[hoosierpearl]

Reagan wrote extensively and the subject and there are several books in print, and he speaks of his thoughts on the subject. Reagan had to defend himself on the subject when he ran for president in 1976 and 1980, people were not sure because of that bad bill that he signed earlier.

He was never pro choice by his own words. What he actually said was he was opposed to abortion on demand, which is the terminology they used at that time. Not the same thing.

Romney should stand on his own feet on his own record without having to drag Reagan into this. I have a huge objection to what he said.