Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Was Romney pro-life before he was kinda sorta pro-choice before he was pro-life?
Hotair ^ | 02/14/2012 | Allahpundit

Posted on 02/14/2012 10:55:19 AM PST by SeekAndFind

Thanks to an NYT story this weekend, this bit of old news has been resurrected, showcased yesterday in a Peter Robinson post at Ricochet and then picked up by Rush Limbaugh this afternoon. The key quote is six years old and appeared in a story in National Review so it’s been on the right’s radar since well before Romney’s first presidential run. And yet, much like the mandate, somehow he didn’t get much grief over it last time when he was running as the conservative in the race.

Mr. Romney’s transformation on abortion is, in some respects, the story of a man who entered public life in a state whose politics did not match his own. [Story of his life. -- AP] People close to Mr. Romney say they have no doubt that he opposes terminating a pregnancy. Critics and even some supporters say there is also little question that he did what he had to do to get elected as governor.

“He was always uncomfortable on the issue, but he was penned in by having run as a pro-choice candidate in 1994 and by the political realities of Massachusetts in 2002,” said Rob Gray, a senior adviser to Mr. Romney’s campaign for governor. “It was made clear to him by advisers early on in his gubernatorial race that he had to be pro-choice, and he could not show any hesitation.”…

In 2002, as a candidate for governor, Mr. Romney filled out a questionnaire for Planned Parenthood declaring that he supported “the substance” of the Supreme Court’s 1973 landmark abortion rights decision, Roe v. Wade. Six weeks before he was elected, he sat for an hourlong interview with state officials of the advocacy group now known as Naral Pro-Choice America…

By 2005, with Mr. Romney eyeing a possible presidential bid, he began to distance himself from his abortion rights platform. “My political philosophy is pro-life,” he told National Review, a conservative magazine, in an article that June. That same article quoted his top strategist at the time, Mike Murphy, as saying Mr. Romney had been “a pro-life Mormon faking it as a pro-choice friendly.”

I get the sense sometimes from Romney’s critics that they think he was pro-choice his whole life and then cynically flipped to pro-life in 2005 once he had decided to run for president. Nuh uh. Revisit this Times piece from last October describing his days as a Mormon leader in Boston in the 1980s and 1990s. Allegedly he once advised a woman against having an abortion even though her doctors had recommended it after discovering a dangerous blood clot. Assuming that’s true, he obviously took life in the womb very, very seriously. But … that only makes his “pro-choice friendly” attitude as governor worse, doesn’t it? Conservatives can, I think, happily accept former pro-choicers who’ve had a moral awakening about abortion. People do change their minds. I think they’d also tolerate (but not embrace) someone whom they suspected of being secretly pro-choice so long as he/she is committed to governing as pro-life. Romney falls into that category for many of his critics, I suspect. Even if you think he’s telling you what you want to hear on this issue, it’s inconceivable to me that he’d flip on the issue once in office. The betrayal would be cataclysmic, and he knows it. He’d be true blue pro-life to preserve his political viability, if nothing else.

But what about someone who’s been secretly pro-life all along yet who … tolerated abortion in the name of getting elected? Where does that person fall on the moral spectrum? This isn’t any ordinary issue that can be triangulated as necessary. To devout pro-lifers like Huckabee, abortion is a moral evil on the order of slavery. You can’t be “slavery-friendly” or “personally anti-slavery but politically pro-choice.” If you believe the practice is irredeemably, grievously wrong, you’re obliged morally to try to change the policy that enables it. So I wonder: Would it be better if Mitt had briefly but sincerely become pro-choice — or “pro-choice friendly” — while running in Massachusetts and then flipped, or if he’d never been pro-choice but had been willing to look the other way at abortion in the interest of his own political viability? It’s the difference between losing your moral bearings and selling them out. Which is worse?


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: abortion; backstabberromney; prochoice; prolife; romney

1 posted on 02/14/2012 10:55:27 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“But what about someone who’s been secretly pro-life all along yet who … tolerated abortion in the name of getting elected? Where does that person fall on the moral spectrum?”

Falls on the spectrum somewhere around “lying, deceiving politically motivated, non-backbone personage”?


2 posted on 02/14/2012 11:01:19 AM PST by MiddleEarth (With hope or without hope we'll follow the trail of our enemies. Woe to them, if we prove the faster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
ROMNEY FLIPPER, SWIMMING WITH FLIPPER
3 posted on 02/14/2012 11:07:32 AM PST by FrankR (You are only enslaved to the extent of the entitlements you receive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Romney’s Motto “ Say whatever it takes.”


4 posted on 02/14/2012 11:09:56 AM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
But what about someone who’s been secretly pro-life all along yet who … tolerated abortion in the name of getting elected? Where does that person fall on the moral spectrum?

“First of all, it's not worth getting angry about.”
- Mitt Romney

Mr. niteowl77

5 posted on 02/14/2012 11:21:18 AM PST by niteowl77 (Mitt Romney: the horse the GOP intends to ride into the abyss. Or is it the other way around?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I have been perfectly consistent - that is I have consistently been a politician.

6 posted on 02/14/2012 11:23:26 AM PST by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
All of this plus the fact that Mitt's wife financially supported Planned Parenthood and openly campaigned for their platform.

It could be that Mitt just rolled over on this issue to keep the peace at home. If that is the case though, we don't want to elect his wife by proxy.....we've been there - done that with the Clintons.

7 posted on 02/14/2012 11:26:51 AM PST by Retired COB (Still mad about Campaign Finance Reform)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Willard Mitt Romney has been pro-abortion since he was a teenager when his aunt died during an illegal abortion...

In 1970 he supported his mother Lenore Romney when she ran for US senate from MI on a pro-abortion platform...THREE years before Roe V Wade...

In 2008 he announced during a debate that he was “proud” of his mother for her pro-abortion stance...

In 1994 he ran left of Teddy Kennedy demanding to be recognized as the more pro-abortion candidate during the US Senate race from MASS

In 2002 her ran for MASS Gov demanding to be recognized as the more pro-abortion candidate...

Life long pro-abortion...


8 posted on 02/14/2012 11:29:59 AM PST by Tennessee Nana (Happy Valentine's Day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
It's an interesting point. To me, I don't really care what he did in the past -- I care about how he'd actually govern now. The problem is that in predicting how he'd actually govern, you can't help but look at what he did in the past, and that's Romney's problem.

If I could be assured that his stance on all the issues would be "right", then I'd vote for him even if he was a slimy flip-flopper who said whatever it took to get elected. The problem is obtaining that degree of assurance is impossible.

Well, because of that, I can't support him in the primary. However (and I've said it before), the chance of him undoing ObamaCare, appointing conservative justices, etc., is surely better than that of Obama doing the same. Romney is a "may screw us over", but Obama is "definitely will screw us over."

9 posted on 02/14/2012 11:52:19 AM PST by Bruce Campbells Chin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It is difficult to tell what Romney’s true belief is. Regardless, Santorum is a better candidate. Santorum 2012


10 posted on 02/14/2012 11:53:48 AM PST by FutureRocketMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Allegedly he once advised a woman against having an abortion

That was a Mormon woman, he was a Mormon Bishop.

Romney as a politician is pro-abortion for society at large, he is not pro-abortion for the females within his cult.

11 posted on 02/14/2012 12:13:49 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

It’s kinda like the mainstream Mormon position against polygamy. They started out firmly against it, then embraced it, and now are kinda against it for political reasons, but still admit the principle which they believe will be practiced in their afterlife, while praising through faint dams Mormon fundamentalists who still practice polygamy. Thus Romney’s flip-flop over abortion makes sense in this context.


12 posted on 02/14/2012 12:22:22 PM PST by NorthernCrunchyCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: All
Santorum supporters need to demand an answer to his vote to confirm Clinton's nomination of Sotomayor for the Circuit Court which everyone knew would fast track her to SCOTUS where she now sits.

Even John McCain voted her down.

If Obama's first Supreme Court pick is who Santorum believed was fit for our high courts, what's that say about his true values?

13 posted on 02/14/2012 12:50:17 PM PST by newzjunkey (Santorum has baggage too. Demand an inspection!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

14 posted on 02/14/2012 2:23:04 PM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FutureRocketMan

Although no man can read another’s mind, I believe that it’s a mistake to try and understand Romney’s beliefs in terms of pro-life, pro-choice or pro-abortion. To truly understand Romney, I believe, one has to look at the one cornerstone in Romney’s life, the one thing that has remained consistent despite his many political adventures and flip-flops. That’s his Mormonism.

In other words, Romney’s guiding force seems to be the belief he’s the fulfillment of Joseph Smith Jr’s so-called “White Horse Prophecy”.


15 posted on 02/14/2012 5:37:02 PM PST by NorthernCrunchyCon (The cylons were right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ansel12; Colofornian

P.S. Joseph Smith Jr’s so-called White Horse Prophecy is also the reason I believe the Romney camp has been unable to provide the conservative base with a compelling reason for Romney’s presidential campaign. There has reportedly been speculation of Romney being the fulfillment of this prophecy since his student days at BYU. But of course, if this were ever disseminated to the general public....


16 posted on 02/14/2012 5:37:16 PM PST by NorthernCrunchyCon (The cylons were right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NorthernCrunchyCon

The WHITE Horse Prophecy discussion should fit in just fine on the Sunday talk shows as they are discussing this.

I wonder if at some opportune point in Romney’s campaigning, that black leaders might come up with an organized demand for Mormons to cease baptizing dead blacks, a very public, national campaign, which might lead to some interesting TV discussions and questioning?

Remember that Romney is a Mormon Bishop, and was performing this sick ritual on dead blacks, and even dead black Muslims while teaching that blacks were inferior, Martin Luther King Mormon? Malcolm X, Rosa Parks, Harriet Tubman?

At least I’m assuming that they baptized dead black people.


17 posted on 02/14/2012 5:53:27 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ansel12; Colofornian

I think this is a question for Colofornian. Would LDS baptize dead black people?

I thought blacks were considered the descendants of those souls that remained neutral during the war in heaven between warring spirits, and thus blacks were barred from the highest levels of heaven, which is why they were barred from the Mormon priesthood for so long. So would they need proxy baptism?

But then again, that all changed through sudden revelation.


18 posted on 02/14/2012 6:39:41 PM PST by NorthernCrunchyCon (Go cylons!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NorthernCrunchyCon

what’s your point; Harry Reid’s Mormon. That doesn’t say much.


19 posted on 02/14/2012 7:27:23 PM PST by FutureRocketMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NorthernCrunchyCon; All
It’s kinda like the mainstream Mormon position against polygamy. They started out firmly against it, then embraced it, and now are kinda against it for political reasons, but still admit the principle which they believe will be practiced in their afterlife, while praising through faint dams Mormon fundamentalists who still practice polygamy. Thus Romney’s flip-flop over abortion makes sense in this context.

Very appropo comparison...well stated.

20 posted on 02/14/2012 8:06:07 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: FutureRocketMan

I think that Harry Reid is a Temple Mormon, that would place him with the same small percentage of the most devout and secretive Mormons, as Bishop Romney, the inner circle people.


21 posted on 02/14/2012 10:39:24 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; All
YEAR Obvious Pro-Abortion Romney Romney Feigning 'Pro-Life'
Bottom-Line Summary: ANN Romney Lies Thru Her Teeth Ann Romney, 1994: Romney's wife gives donation to Planned Parenthood (a href=”http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/05/09/ann-romneys-planned-parenthood-donation/”>Ann Romney’s Planned Parenthood Donation Ann Romney, 2011: In the past you’ve said he’s changed positions only once, on abortion. Was that your doing? No, no, I never talked to Mitt about that. Our personal opinions have never changed; we’ve always been pro-life (a href=”http://www.parade.com/news/2011/12/4-ann-romney-profile.html”>Ann Romney Reveals Mitt's Softer Side)
Bottom-Line Summary: Mitt Romney Lies Thru His Teeth “Over the last multiple years, as you know, I have been effectively pro-choice." (Bruce Smith, "Romney Campaigns in SC with Sen. DeMint," The Associated Press, 1/29/07) + ...”my position was effectively pro-choice." (Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate 8/5/2007) So, not only does Ann Romney tell Parade Magazine November 2011 that they've “never changed” re: abortion and that they've “always been pro-life,” but Mitt Romney told Chris Wallace part-way through their 2007 campaign that: “I never allowed myself to use the word pro-choice because I didn't FEEL I was pro-choice. I would protect the law, I said, as it was, but I wasn't pro-choice”...This was seven months after he said in January 2007 that he was “always for life.”
Romney, goin' back to 1970 when Romney's Mom ran for Senate "I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time when my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. (October, 1994 Senatorial debate vs. Ted Kennedy) "'He's been a pro-life Mormon faking it as a pro-choice friendly,'" Romney adviser Michael Murphy told the conservative National Review..., says the Concord Monitor = So I guess that made him a below-the-radar "flip" acting like a "flop?"
1994 (Campaign) "I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time when my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice." (October, 1994 Senatorial debate vs. Ted Kennedy) = Mitt the flipster from what most LDS represent their faith as being...BTW, Romney uses the strongest word possible for support – “sustain” ...Note for non-Mormons: Lds use the word “sustain” for support for their own “prophet” Romney has since invoked a "nuanced stance" about what he was in 1994: He says "Look, I was pro-choice. I am pro-life. You can go back to YouTube and look at what I said in 1994. I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro-choice. (Source: Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate Aug 5, 2007)
1994 (Planned Parenthood ties) → 2001 (a) Romney's wife gives donation to Planned Parenthood (a href=”http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/05/09/ann-romneys-planned-parenthood-donation/”>Ann Romney’s Planned Parenthood Donation (b) On June 12, 1994, Romney himself attends private Planned Parenthood event at home of a sister-in-law of a Planned Parenthood board member where the president of Planned Parenthood recalls talking to Romney: "Nicki Nichols Gamble, a former president and chief executive of Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, said today that the photo shows Mitt and Ann Romney at a private home in Cohasset in June 1994." Source: See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1941932/posts; "Gamble said the pic was snapped at an event at GOP activist Eleanor Bleakie’s house and that she “clearly” remembered speaking with Romney at the event." Source: See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1941627/posts; "In fact Romney personally attended the Planned Parenthood event in question on June 12, 1994. Gamble, the President of Massachusuetts Planned Parenthood in 1994, also attended the event at the home of a Republican, Eleanor Bleakie, the sister-in-law of a Planned Parenthood Board member. Both Romney and Michael Kennedy, who appeared on behalf of nephew of Ted Kennedy, attended the event." Source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1941240/posts 2001: "I do not wish to be labeled pro-choice." (Mitt Romney, Letter to the Editor, The Salt Lake Tribune, 7/12/01) = So he doesn't want to be known as a "flop" (so what is he?)
2002-2004 “I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose, and have devoted and am dedicated to honoring my word in that regard…(Nov. 2, 2002) = Well, now guess what? He's solidly pro-abortion AGAIN! See also: "I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one … Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government's." (Stephanie Ebbert, "Clarity Sought On Romney's Abortion Stance," The Boston Globe, 7/3/05) = Ah, back securely in the "flop" saddle again? Nov. '04: Romney & his wife had simultaneous pro-life "conversions" linked to stem cell research: Romney met w/Dr. Douglas Melton from 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 = (So the pro-abortion-but-no-pro-choice-label-please-is-now-a-pro-life-convert?)
2005 May 27 2005: Romney affirms his commitment to being "pro-choice" at a press conference. ("I am absolutely committed to my promise to maintain the status quo with regards to laws relating to abortion and choice.") = OK, this is at least a flop from November '04! What about his gubernatorial record '03-'06? Mitt later says his actions were ALL pro-life. I assume somewhere in '05 some 'pro-life' decisions. "As governor, I’ve had several pieces of legislation reach my desk, which would have expanded abortion rights in Massachusetts. Each of those I vetoed. Every action I’ve taken as the governor that relates to the sanctity of human life, I have stood on the side of life." = So, THESE ACTIONS were not only an '02 commitment reversal, but his May 27, '05 press conference commitment as well. So "flipping" is beginning to be routine
2006 April 12, 2006--Mitt signs his "Commonwealth Care" into existence, thereby expanding abortion access/taxpayer funded abortions for women--including almost 2% of the females of his state who earn $75,000 or more. (Wait a minute, I thought he told us post-'06 that ALL of his actions were "pro-life?"). Also, not only this, but as governor, Romney could exercise veto power to portions of Commonwealth Care. Did Romney exercise this power? (Yes, he vetoed Sections 5, 27, 29, 47, 112, 113, 134 & 137). What prominent section dealing with Planned Parenthood as part of the "payment policy advisory board" did Romney choose NOT to veto? (Section 3) That section mandates that one member of MassHealth Payment Policy Board must be appointed by Planned Parenthood League of MA. (See chapter 58 of the Acts of 2006, section 3 for details). "As governor, I’ve had several pieces of legislation reach my desk, which would have expanded abortion rights in Massachusetts. Each of those I vetoed. Every action I’ve taken as the governor that relates
Early 2007 On January 29, 2007 during South Carolina visit, Romney stated: “Over the last multiple years, as you know, I have been effectively pro-choice." (Bruce Smith, "Romney Campaigns in SC with Sen. DeMint," The Associated Press, 1/29/07) = OK how could "every action I've taken as the governor that relates to the sanctity of human life..." AND this statement BOTH be true? Another South Carolina campaign stop has Romney uttering "I was always for life”: "I am firmly pro-life… I was always for life." (Jim Davenport, "Romney Affirms Opposition to Abortion," The Associated Press, 2/9/2007) = Oh, of course as the above shows, he's always been pro-life!
Summer 2007 "I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro-choice." Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate 8/5/2007 = OK...looking at '94 & '02 campaigns, both his public statements, his 2002 voter guide responses, & his actions (which are a major form of expression, ya know!) how could he say he "never said" he was "pro-choice?" Then comes his 8/12/07 interview with Chris Wallace of Fox: "I never called myself pro-choice. I never allowed myself to use the word pro-choice because I didn't FEEL I was pro-choice. I would protect the law, I said, as it was, but I wasn't pro-choice, and so..." = Whatever he was from '70 when his mom ran as pro-abortion senator & he sided w/ her, to 5/27/05, w/whatever interruption he had due to a pro-life altar call in Nov of '04, whatever that was...well, he assures us it wasn't a pro-abortion 'inlook' or outlook 'cause he didn't feel "pro-choice..." = So does that make him a life-long pro-lifer?
December 2007 vs. November 2011 (Pro-treating offspring as research refuse late in previous POTUS campaign vs. now claiming 'never changed...always pro-life' December 5, 2007: Romney: ...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." Any "inquiring minds" want to try wrapping their minds around how a politician in one sentence mentions "adopting" embryos out (yes, a great thing to mention!) -- but then in the very NEXT breath says if a "PARENT" wants to be "pro-choice" (Mitt used the word "decides" which is what "pro-choicers" say they want) "to donate one of those embryos for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable." Say what???? How about 8-month gestationally-aged infants in the womb, Mitt? Or already-born infants, too, Mitt? If a "parent decides they would want to donate one of those...for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable..." No??? What's the 'pro-life' difference, Mitt? Here you call an embryo's mom&dad "parents" -- but "parents" w/ "research" give-away rights? How bizarre we have such schizophrenic "candidate!" In the past you’ve said he’s changed positions only once, on abortion. Was that your doing? No, no, I never talked to Mitt about that. Our personal opinions have never changed; we’ve always been pro-life (a href=”http://www.parade.com/news/2011/12/4-ann-romney-profile.html”>Ann Romney Reveals Mitt's Softer Side)

22 posted on 02/15/2012 6:15:05 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson