Posted on 12/31/2007 8:52:38 PM PST by Spiff
LOL!!
Which is why the RomneyCare socialized medicine scheme includes taxpayer-funded abortions, right? /s
And he is pro-life now.
Anyone who claims that is either extremely ignorant or is a bald-faced liar like Mitt Romney. Which are you?
FACT: Gov. Romney is pro-life
... well, except that he didn’t ever vote that a way
FACT: Gov. Romney has been a hunter all his life
... well, except that he only hunted twice.
FACT: Gov. Romney is against stem cell research
... well, maybe not
FACT: Gov. Romney is a real Reagan man
...well, except that he said he isn’t in the 1990’s
FACT: Gov. Romney is going to say ANYTHING you want to hear to get the nomination even if he never voted that way!
Ah, now THAT one really IS a fact.
That's not the "actual record." It's his spinner's lies.
I see a lot of stuff on the 2nd that makes it pretty obvious Romney thinks the 2nd amendment applies to hunting and sporting purposes.
It also doesn’t mention that Governor Romney signed one of the most restrictive State gun legislations in the Nation.
Spin it but no matter where the bottle lands Romney is not a supporter of the real 2nd amendment...the right OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
If you think that EternalVigilance is going to some guys home page to click on an endless list of meaningless links to silence him, then you don’t know EV very well.
You got it.
Mitt Romney is an extreme liberal corporate raider who is trying, through the most extreme form of deception, to perform a leveraged buyout of the GOP.
He did it in Massachusetts, and the GOP there may never recover.
Wow, you respond to things that are actually important with trivialities. You have one line, and I’m tired of reading it. This forum deserves better.
Well, there is a $50 co-pay, unless you are "poor", then it's waived.
Folks need to reflect deeply on the horror of the evil that is abortion, the abominable practice that Mitt Romney supported publicly for 35 years - virtually his entire adult life. Until he decided that he wanted to be President, of course...
It doesn’t get any clearer than your video link in #20.
THE FLoP SIDE OF MITT
Has Mitt really converted, pro-life wise? Let's first just examine, in two summary statements, a comparison of what he has said in 2007.
Mitt on the 2007 campaign trail:
(Summary Statements: Example A)
Jan 28, 2007 in South Carolina: “Over the last multiple years, as you know, I have been effectively pro-choice.". A little over 6 months later: Aug. 12, 2007 in Fox interview: "I never called myself pro-choice...I wasn't pro-choice..."
(Summary Statements: Example B)
June 15, 2007 (National Review article he wrote): "Some advocates told me that only the creation of human embryos for purposes of experimentation, otherwise known as cloning, could help them better understand and perhaps someday treat a series of dreaded diseases. But they ignored the importance of protecting human equality, dignity, and life. Almost 6 months later: December 5, 2007 Romney is interviewed by CBS' Katie Couric: ...surplus embryos...Those embryos, I hope, could be available for adoption for people who would like to adopt embryos. But if a parent decides they would want to donate one of those embryos for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable. It should not be made against the law."
A vocal pro-life nurse named Jill Stanek, up until this last quote from Romney, "was trying hard to give this pro-life convert the benefit of the doubt." Stanek's assessment of Romney's conclusion? "No. A parent cannot authorize killing a child. A parent cannot donate his/her living child for scientific experimentation. Romney understood this when discussing abortion earlier in the interview. He just need to apply that logic to human embryo experimentation...I don't get Romney's disconnect, but he has disconnected. And he has disqualified himself...Turns out he's not completely converted." Source: http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/12/mitt_romney_just.html
As Deal W. Hudson has said in his blog, Romney has a "lingering problem" in being only opposed to creating clones for stem cell research--not opposed to using "discarded" or "donated" frozen embryos: "...frozen embryos have been the primary source of embryonic tissue for stem cell research. How can you declare yourself opposed to this research when you are not opposed to the way it is actually carried out?...My question is this: How can you consider a frozen embryo a moral entity capable of being adopted, while at the same time support the scientist who wants to cut the embryonic being into pieces?,/b> Even more, if Romney's conversion was about the 'cheapened value of human life,' how can he abide the thought of a parent donating 'one of those embryos' to be destroyed?" Source: http://dealwhudson.typepad.com/deal_w_hudson/2007/12/the-problem-wit.html
So, just on embryonic research, we go from a...
...Mid-2002 Romney singing the praises of embryonic research: June 13, 2002, where he: ...spoke at a bioethics forum at Brandeis University. In a Boston Globe story filed the next day, he was quoted as saying that he endorsed embryonic stem cell research, hoping it would one day cure his wife's multiple sclerosis. And he went on to say: "I am in favor of stem cell research. I will work and fight for stem cell research," before adding, "I'd be happy to talk to [President Bush] about this, though I don't know if I could budge him an inch." When pressed, however, Romney and his aides declined to offer an opinion on "therapeutic" or embryonic cloning. Source: weekly standard http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/013/222htyos.asp?pg=1
...To a...
...Late-2004 Romney undergoing his pro-life "conversion" due to this very issue: Nov. 9, 2004: Romney meet with Dr. Douglas Melton from the Harvard Stem Cell Institute: He recalls that it happened in a single revelatory moment, during a Nov. 9, 2004, meeting with an embryonic-stem-cell researcher who said he didn't believe therapeutic cloning presented a moral issue because the embryos were destroyed at 14 days. "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," Romney says. Source: Time Mag, March 9, 2007 http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1619536-2,00.html
...To a...
...Late-2007 Romney who doesn't mind frozen embryonic life being "cheapened" or doesn't mind if they are excluded from his so-called "importance of protecting human equality, dignity, and life"...well that is, with this caveat: As long as Mom & Pop say it's OK for them to be sacrificed in such an experimental research manner!
That cooks his goose as far as I'm concerned. I don't see "assault weapons are not needed in the public" in the 2A.
Willard won't get my vote, period.
This is a kind of war where I am hoping both sides end up losing. Though of all the liberal GOP candidates, I guess I like Romney the best but he’s nothing to be excited about.
For a record of slithering Romney's marks in the sand, see post #11 of: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1945874/posts
Nope. Sure doesn’t.
Mitt 2.0’s worst enemy is Mitt 1.0.
Very good post.
Very well put, and at the heart of the growing Romney problem for the GOP.
Romney is on VIDEO passionately defending Roe v. Wade in promising to preserve and protect it.
He has stated publicly that his gun control position would “not make him popular with the NRA.” ironically, he falsely claimed to be a life long member when he only joined within the last year.
Romney’s moving (barf alert) letter to the Log Cabin Republicans supporting the homosexual agenda is available on line.
I would post links to all the above, but as many times as they have been posted here, I’m sure you don’t actually doubt that the smoking gun evidence proving Romney is a liar is readily available via google and you tube.
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.