Technically LDS is not a pro-life religion. It allows for abortion with permission of the Bishop and in cases of impact on the expectant mothers health including mental health...a VERY easy loophole. U.S. Army Retired |
Posted on 12/30/2007 2:55:00 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
Frankly, I’m a bit surprised that PowerLine has come out with this. It’s the first time I’ve disagreed with them about an important matter like this.
Yes, of course, AP lies every time they open their mouths or set their fingers to a computer keyboard.
But Romney has also repeatedly lied or misrepresented or covered up or shifted the blame or excused himself. It’s habitual. I don’t think it’s as intentional or malicious as AP by a long shot, but it does appear to be habitual. He never takes the blame or admits to anything. He constantly shuffles or shifts it off on somebody else.
What do we think of a man who belongs to a pro-life religion like the LDS, who when he is accused of having sold himself as being in favor of abortion when he ran for governor, proceeds to blame it on his mother?
Good grief.
And when he is accused of passing a univeral health bill that provides people with subsidized $50 abortions, he blames it on the Democrats. Sure, they helped, but it was his damned bill. And he’s the guy who signed off on putting a Planned Parenthood representative on the board, though no doubt he blames that on somebody else too.
| Technically LDS is not a pro-life religion. It allows for abortion with permission of the Bishop and in cases of impact on the expectant mothers health including mental health...a VERY easy loophole. U.S. Army Retired |
I’d like to point out that the article doesn’t mention the “I saw my dad march with Martin Luther King” issue at all. I assume that “John,” the author, didn’t have the ammo to deal with that.
| To be fair though...while the LDS Church has left a large loophole to allow abortion, most LDS are pro-life. U.S. Army Retired |
Interesting. I knew there were some exceptions, apparently, like fetal stem cell research, but didn’t realize the door was that wide open.
Do they pray for these aborted fetuses, the way they go out of their way to pray for all of the dead? Or do they not consider the aborted unborn to be human persons?
It's no secret that you're a rabid Romney supporter. And it's no big secret that Romney was pro AWB and is pro AWB2. Since the next president will will have AWB2 come across his desk, it's imperative that anti Second Amendment types like Romney and Giuliani are not elected president.
| I'm not specifically sure about that but I do believe that based on their beliefs an abortion would not be as sinful as in traditional Christian belief because they believe that we have a pre-existence as spirit children in heaven and are mated with an earthly body. My supposition is that upon being aborted said spirit child could be mated with another earthly body. That would be an interesting question to bring up with someone who is LDS. U.S. Army Retired |
Bush said he would sign the awb if it came across his desk.
Probably the single clearest example of Romney’s wilful, intentional attempt to mislead voters...
Sen. Brownback presented a factual recitation of Romney’s documentable record on abortion. George Stephanopolous put the text up on the screen and repeatedly asked Romney, tell us what isn’t true in the ad.
Romney continued to respond to that simple request with evasion and canned talking points, without answering the question.
“Virtually every part of that ad is inaccurate,” he said.
Well, which parts weren’t inaccurate, Mitt?
Then, he said: “So the ad is just COMPLETELY wrong.”
He clearly and wilfully intended — if he could get away with it — to leave the audience with the impression that it was Brownback who was lying, when in fact Brownback simply recited documentable fact.
Finally, when Brownback urged viewers to look it up for themselves on YouTube, Romney reacted by saying, “Ah, YouTube. Consider the source.”
As if there’s anything on YouTube OTHER than video of Mitt Romney’s own pro-abortion on demand words coming out of Mitt Romney’s own mouth, in living color.
Had Stephanopolous not pushed and pushed and pushed him into the corner, Romney was clearly intending to act as if, and leave the audience believing, that any allegation that he ever favored abortion on demand was false.
When he finally could evade no more, he then reverted to the “ancient history” angle, referring ONLY to the 1994 videos available on YouTube, once again trying to mislead voters to believe that his pro-abortion on demand rhetoric was so very, very old (only 13 years ago) as to be irrelevant and unfair to discuss.
Brownback vs. Romney:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9KGJlW72ZU
YouTube from 1994:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI
YouTube from 2002:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKwVNUz52vo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4
YouTube from 2005 — AFTER his alleged conversion to being pro-life — in which he clearly states his intention to maintain Massachusetts’ abortion on demand laws, which is what everyone else on the planet defines as a “pro-choice” position:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxV-QNXoRIc
As critical as I’ve been of Romney and his record, I don’t recall that I’ve ever flatly said what I concluded just yesterday watching that Romney-Brownback exchange.
The man, simply put, is either (1) a wilful, brazen liar who thinks he simply cannot be successfully “caught” in his lies and is beyond public accountability, or
(2) he’s got some kind of compulsive personality disorder by which he says — perhaps even delusionally believing they’re true — things that are provably, demonstrably false.
I’m not sure which would be worse in a president: a compulsive liar or someone suffering from a compulsive disorder.
It’s become starkly apparent in the last several weeks that the ongoing pattern of saying things that are FALSE, or failing to say things knowing it will mislead the listener, is not limited just to his stand on issues.
Next thing ya know, he’ll be telling us he played football at the University of Alabama, served in VietNam, made a fortune in the shrimpin’ business, invented jogging, the pet rock, and the smiley face, and he’s gonna select Lt. Dan as his running mate.
“Life,” his Mama told him — in the same fantasy in which he claims his devout Mormon mother campaigned for abortion on demand even before Roe v. Wade — “is like a box of chocolates.”
You’re reminding me of Henry Kissinger’s line: “90% of politicians give the other 10% a bad name”. No need to ask which group Mitt falls into.
That’s why I quit supporting him . I think he would sign AWB-2 in a heart beat .
Ah, let me think ... the AP! :-)
Just another political football like stem cell research and abortion.
For anyone who can’t decide between Thompson and Romney, just look at Fred’s leadership when he answers the moderator in the “No Hand Shows” video from his website. Watch how Romney scrambles to fall in line with Thompson.
http://www.fred08.com/FredCast/FredCastSummary.aspx#
Romney might be a reasonable choice for President Thompson’s cabinet, if Thompson chooses to give Romney the opportunity.
The really scary thing is that the gun issue is the one issue Mitt has not even attempted to pander to the Right on . Which is quite telling and very unnerving .
Be very worried about your gun rights if Mitt wins .
Your premise is faulty. There wasn’t a meeting where he sat down with pro-abortion legislators and hashed out the details on how much the co-pay would be for abortion services.
Services for abortions had to be covered under the law, which covers “necessary and appropriate” services (the entire medical insurance law, not just the abortion services).
People under the law can choose which coverage to buy. Several are HMO coverage plans, and they have various co-pays. You could buy a $100 co-pay, or a $50 co-pay, or get a POS that requires you to pay 20%.
The co-pays for abortion are in line with the co-pays in each insurance for covered medical procedures.
Bush has never pushed to change the federal law that requires medically necessary abortion coverage. Fred Thompson never tried to change that law either, and has not talked about changing that law, and he is pro-life enough to get the NRTL endorsement.
“$50-dollar copay” is another misleading soundbite that unfortunately is used as a substitute for rational discussion of the issues we face.
That is silly....I guess you didn’t bother to read this:
Romney on Guns
http://www.freerepublic.com/~unmarkedpackage/#guns
Governor Romney: “Americans should have the right to own and possess firearms as guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. I’m proud to be among the many decent, law-abiding men and women who safely use firearms.”
(Ted Novin, “Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney Visits Firearms Industry’s Trade Show,” National Shooting Sports Foundation, 1/12/2007)
Hasn’t Gov. Romney been against the right to bear arms?
No. Governor Romney has always supported the individual right to keep and bear arms. The firearms bills that Governor Romney signed into law (see below) were all endorsed by the National Rifle Association (NRA) and/or the Gun Owners’ Action League (GOAL), which bills itself as “The Official Firearms Association of Massachusetts.”
The NRA gave Mitt Romney a rating of ‘B’ in the 2002 election race for Governor of Massachusetts.
(Scott Helman, “Romney retreats on gun control,” The Boston Globe, 1/14/2007)
Craig Sandler, former Director of General Operations of the National Rifle Association and former Nashua Police Chief, endorses Governor Mitt Romney for President.
In endorsing Governor Romney, Craig Sandler said, “Throughout his career in both the public and private sectors, Mitt Romney has demonstrated exceptional leadership ability, integrity, and commitment to principle. As a New Hampshire resident, former law enforcement officer, and avid sportsman, I am supporting Governor Romney because he is the candidate who will protect our Constitutional rights and strengthen our nation.”
Governor Romney On Parker v. District of Columbia:
Governor Romney: “It is my hope that the Supreme Court will reaffirm the individual right to keep and bear arms as enshrined in the Bill of Rights and protect law abiding gun owners everywhere. To further guard this fundamental liberty, as President, I will take care to appoint judges who will not legislate from the bench but will instead strictly interpret the Constitution.”
(Romney for President, “Governor Romney On The U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision To Review Second Amendment Case,” Press Release, 11/21/2007)
More here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/~unmarkedpackage/#guns
Well, he grabbed his brother’s gun I guess the time he went hunting :-)
I should think the big NRA folks around here would love grabbing guns — those pansy brady folks are scared to death to get near them. :-)
I had to be funny, because as you know, Romney has never grabbed a gun, has never supported legislation that took away guns, and when Ma. was going to pass a new restrictive AWB he worked with the NRA to make the bill much better than they expected to achieve given the solidly anti-gun legislature.
Romney understands that the 2nd amendment is necessary to defend our liberty, although he does fall into the trap of believing that some guns should be kept from the general population.
Unfortunately, so do all of our candidates, at least the viable ones — none of them are calling for lifting the current ban on machine guns, for example, even though a lot of people would love to own them.
He’s also strong on the 1st amendment, and has vowed to work to repeal the McCain/Feingold CFR law. Unfortunately, that work is necessary to undo the hard work done by another Republican Presidential candidate, work that was instrumental in passing the law to begin with, work that continued with filing legal briefs to defend that law in court.
So while some of our candidates might be slightly stronger on the 2nd amendment, none are stronger on BOTH the 1st and 2nd amendments.
And Romney never took guns away, like another candidate took our right to free speech away — another right that is essential to preserve our liberty.
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.