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

Skip to comments.

Romney website: ‘Mitt will nominate judges in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts’
Daily Caller ^ | June 28, 2012 | Jamie Weinstein

Posted on 06/28/2012 4:30:37 PM PDT by EternalVigilance

Conservatives around the country may be regretting Chief Justice John Roberts’ appointment to the Supreme Court after Thursday’s ruling upholding [Alleged] President Barack Obama’s health care law, but Mitt Romney‘s campaign website still holds him up as the paradigm of a Supreme Court justice.

“As president, Mitt will nominate judges in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts...

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: abortion; benedictarnold; benedictromney; deathpanels; johnroberts; judas; lies; obamacare; roberts4romneycare; romney; romney4johnroberts; romneycare; romneycare4ever; romneycare4u; zerocare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-87 next last
It's still there this evening.
1 posted on 06/28/2012 4:30:41 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: daisy mae for the usa; BlackElk; joanie-f; Steve Schulin; Gelato; Colonel_Flagg; wagglebee; ...

ping...


2 posted on 06/28/2012 4:32:29 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Liberty. What a concept. TomHoefling.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Good gawd.


3 posted on 06/28/2012 4:33:21 PM PDT by RushIsMyTeddyBear (Wings cannot be redistributed, they can only be broken. ~ Oleg Atbashian (People's Cube))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

And they wonder why Conservatives are not sold on Romney. Holy Hassenpfeffer


4 posted on 06/28/2012 4:35:21 PM PDT by SeminoleCounty (When I said "close the borders", I did not mean the bookstore chain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Doesn’t matter..its the commie or commie lite in 2012. Vote in conservatives in the lower offices!


5 posted on 06/28/2012 4:35:21 PM PDT by Leep (Enemy of the StatistI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance; All
Wow!

Even Mitt Romney manages to tell the truth sometimes!

6 posted on 06/28/2012 4:35:28 PM PDT by Colofornian (Saying Mitt would keep past political promises is like prophesying that Gumby won't bend anymore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RushIsMyTeddyBear

7 posted on 06/28/2012 4:36:03 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Liberty. What a concept. TomHoefling.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Yes. I’ve been posting about that.

Tom, I know you won’t appoint judges like Roberts!


8 posted on 06/28/2012 4:36:43 PM PDT by Tau Food (Tom Hoefling for President - 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

“As president, Mitt will nominate judges in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts...”

Why would the website change?

Mitt Romney will not change.


9 posted on 06/28/2012 4:37:28 PM PDT by Uncle Slayton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

No, I sure wouldn’t.

The question at this point is, where in the world do you find folks who have actually read the Constitution with comprehension and who are committed to keeping their sacred oath to support it?

The moral rot in our political and legal class is almost total.


10 posted on 06/28/2012 4:39:57 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Liberty. What a concept. TomHoefling.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Who knew? A couple of weeks ago, that group seemed solid conservative.


11 posted on 06/28/2012 4:39:57 PM PDT by Jane Long (Soli Deo Gloria!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

From somewhere other than the Ivy League.

My litmus test for political candidates above the office of dog catcher is this now:

“Do you have a degree from, or have you attended, any of the Ivy League schools, or done graduate work at a Ivy League school?”

If the answer is “yes,” then I don’t vote for that person.


12 posted on 06/28/2012 4:43:45 PM PDT by NVDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jane Long

What group?

I never mistook Roberts for a conservative.

He’s what he has always been: An inside the beltway Republican political hack lawyer.

He did this because the political calculation was that it would hurt Obama and help Romney. I completely convinced of that.


13 posted on 06/28/2012 4:43:54 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Liberty. What a concept. TomHoefling.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NVDave

Not a bad litmus test, among others.


14 posted on 06/28/2012 4:44:45 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Liberty. What a concept. TomHoefling.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

How about Scalia, Thomas or Alito?

Get the law-rewriter’s name off of there!


15 posted on 06/28/2012 4:45:41 PM PDT by LowTaxesEqualsProsperity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

We are soo F’ed


16 posted on 06/28/2012 4:46:11 PM PDT by dps.inspect (rage against the Obama machine...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Yeah as if anyone here was so sure Roberts would F-up like this before today. If he didnt, no one would even care about this.

But gotta get another slam in on Romney anyway you can.


17 posted on 06/28/2012 4:46:25 PM PDT by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Oh yeah...


18 posted on 06/28/2012 4:46:51 PM PDT by Tennessee Nana (Why should I vote for Bishop Romney when he hates me because I am a Christian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

“As president, Mitt will nominate judges in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts...”

Why would the website change?

Mitt Romney will not change.


19 posted on 06/28/2012 4:47:13 PM PDT by Uncle Slayton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
I seem to recall when Roberts was Nominated by President Bush there was happiness and joy throughout the FRingdom.

Now we are supposed to hold Robert's decision against Romney?

I supported Roberts Nomination at the time. Anybody here trying to find me to apply the Tar and Feathers?

Childish meme, nothing else. The damage is done.

20 posted on 06/28/2012 4:49:55 PM PDT by Kickass Conservative (The only good Zombie is a dead Zombie, oh wait...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
What group? The group he has listed on his site...Alito, Scalia, Thomas and (now, regretfully) Roberts.

I, for one, mistakenly believed Roberts would vote somewhat conservatively. Shame on me.

Hope he updates and retracts Robert's name.

21 posted on 06/28/2012 4:50:00 PM PDT by Jane Long (Soli Deo Gloria!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Who Knew until he did it.
General George Washington promoted Benedict Arnold to a General and then he turned on his countrymen.


22 posted on 06/28/2012 4:51:12 PM PDT by DeweyShootem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

To the headline: not surprised.


23 posted on 06/28/2012 4:51:35 PM PDT by svcw (If one living cell on another planet is life, why isn't it life in the womb?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

God help us!


24 posted on 06/28/2012 4:51:35 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
heh. Bet it won't be for long.
25 posted on 06/28/2012 4:52:52 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

For president I want Scott Walker, to hell with Romney.

and I want more USSC judges like Thomas. Hells yeah!!!


26 posted on 06/28/2012 4:53:37 PM PDT by History Repeats (If Obama had a son, he'd have his picture hanging on the wall of the Post office wanted board.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Regardless of today’s ruling, Roberts is far from being a liberal.


27 posted on 06/28/2012 4:54:46 PM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Gaa...they need to change that to Associate Justice Scalia.

The ruling?It’s ‘Robertscare’ now. He bought it. He owns it.


28 posted on 06/28/2012 4:55:56 PM PDT by citizen (Obomo blames:Arab Spring,Banks,Big Oil,Bush,Ceos,Coal,Euro Zone,FNC,Jpn Tsunami,T Party,Wall St,You)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Slayton; All
Why would the website change? Mitt Romney will not change.

Exactly.

We know Mitt is closer to "concrete" than "Gumby," right???

THE FLiP SIDE OF MITT

Multiple Choice Mitt not only "changes" his positions, but he does so multiple times, waffling back & forth. On the position of whether business owners should be forced to hire alternative sexual preference employees, what do you think the chances are of a given candidate having three (count 'em, 3) pre-Christmas positions over a 14-Christmas period? (Well, Mitt has managed to do that...and his latest position is have the states do the dirty work of pro-homosexual activists.)

Pre-Christmas 1994 (October): “We have discussed a number of important issues such as the Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which I have agreed to co-sponsor, and if possible broaden…” Oct. 6, 1994 Romney for U.S. Senate letter to Log Cabin Club of Massachusetts

Pre-Christmas 2006 Interview (mid-December): Lopez: And what about the 1994 letter to the Log Cabin Republicans where you indicated you would support the Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) and seemed open to changing the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the military? Are those your positions today? Gov. Romney: No. I don’t see the need for new or special legislation. My experience over the past several years as governor has convinced me that ENDA would be an overly broad law that would open a litigation floodgate and unfairly penalize employers at the hands of activist judges. Source: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmY1MTQyMTk0Yjk2ZDNmZmVmNmNkNjY4ODExMGM5NWE=

Pre-Christmas 2007 Interview (mid-December): December 16, 2007: The following is excerpted from Romney's "Meet the Press" interview December 16 with Tim Russert: MR. RUSSERT: You said [in 1994] that you would sponsor [Sen. Ted Kennedy's federal] Employment Nondiscrimination Act. Do you still support it? GOV. ROMNEY: At the state level. I think it makes sense at the state level for states to put in provision of this. MR. RUSSERT: Now, you said you would sponsor it at the federal level. GOV. ROMNEY: I would not support at the federal level, and I changed in that regard because I think that policy makes more sense to be evaluated or to be implemented at the state level. Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22273924/page/6/

29 posted on 06/28/2012 4:56:13 PM PDT by Colofornian (Saying Mitt would keep past political promises is like prophesying that Gumby won't bend anymore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Bet he’ll get that off by dawn.

Aww, come on, folks - give him the benefit of the doubt.


30 posted on 06/28/2012 4:57:02 PM PDT by EnquiringMind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RushIsMyTeddyBear

We are screwed!


31 posted on 06/28/2012 4:57:18 PM PDT by tennmountainman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: All; EternalVigilance
And it should STAY.

Are you stupid enough to want Romney to take it down and for that to become a news story?

Stay focused. Be smart about this.

32 posted on 06/28/2012 4:57:22 PM PDT by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Then why don’t WE ALL flood his website and TELL him to correct his error....REMOVE CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS’ name from his website.

It’ an uphill battle...we must keep vigilant and jump on Romney when he has a slip of the lip/brain. It’s politics, and that’s what we have to do. So, let’s get ‘er done.


33 posted on 06/28/2012 4:59:27 PM PDT by itssme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik
But gotta get another slam in on Romney anyway you can.

Yeah, I do, because I'm a conservative, and he's not.

That's kinda what FR is about. You never noticed?

Check out the homepage sometime.

Statement by the founder of Free Republic:

In our continuing fight for freedom, for America and our constitution and against totalitarianism, socialism, tyranny, terrorism, etc., Free Republic stands firmly on the side of right, i.e., the conservative side. Believing that the best defense is a strong offense, we (myself and those whom I'm trying to attract to FR) support the strategy of taking the fight to the enemy as opposed to allowing the enemy the luxury of conducting their attacks on us at home on their terms and on their schedule.

-----

As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America. We oppose all forms of liberalism, socialism, fascism, pacifism, totalitarianism, anarchism, government enforced atheism, abortionism, feminism, homosexualism, racism, wacko environmentalism, judicial activism, etc. ...

-----

... Free Republic is not a liberal debating society. We are conservative activists dedicated to defending our rights, defending our constitution, defending our republic and defending our traditional American way of life.

Our God-given liberty and freedoms are not negotiable.

-----

Jim Robinson


34 posted on 06/28/2012 4:59:35 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Liberty. What a concept. TomHoefling.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

“As president, Mitt will nominate judges in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts...

35 posted on 06/28/2012 5:00:51 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Slayton; All
Why would the website change? Mitt Romney will not change.

Exactly.

We know Mitt is closer to "concrete" than "Gumby," right???

Or, how about Mitt changing his mind three times in 5.5 years on the protective status of our pre-born offspring / embryos? Mitt went from...

...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 met 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!

Here's some exact quotes from December 4, 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." (Source: Candidates Reveal Their Biggest Mistakes)

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 a schizophrenic "candidate!"

36 posted on 06/28/2012 5:01:31 PM PDT by Colofornian (Saying Mitt would keep past political promises is like prophesying that Gumby won't bend anymore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Slayton; All
Why would the website change? Mitt Romney will not change.

Exactly.

We know Mitt is closer to "concrete" than "Gumby," right???

Or, try to follow Romney's meandering ways as he's weaved and bobbed on and off the campaign trail these past 18 years!

(1) Romney's on record saying his "pro-choice" opinions go back to when his mom ran for Senate (1970).
Assessment: [Pro-abortion, then, eh, Mitt?]

(2): "'He's been a pro-life Mormon faking it as a pro-choice friendly,'" Romney adviser Michael Murphy told the conservative National Review last year, says the Concord Monitor (Source: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061210/REPOSITORY/612100304/1217/NEWS98)
= Assessment: So I guess that made him a below-the-radar "flip" acting like a "flop?"

(3) Romney now invokes in this thread's article 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.

Well, what are the 1994 facts?

FACT a: Romney's wife gave a donation in 1994 to Planned Parenthood...
FACT b: On June 12, 1994, Romney himself attended a private Planned Parenthood event at the 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
FACT c: 1994 campaign in Massachusetts "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)
= Assessment: Mitt the flipster from what most LDS represent

(4): Fast forward to 2001, when Romney needs to reassure Utah Mormons that...he's not really "pro-choice," after all: "I do not wish to be labeled pro-choice." (Mitt Romney, Letter to the Editor, The Salt Lake Tribune, 7/12/01)
= Assessment: So he doesn't want to be known as a "flop" (so what is he?)

(5) “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)
= Assessment: Ah, back securely in the "flop" saddle again?

(6): In November of '04, he & his wife had simultaneous pro-life "conversions" where he links it to stem cell research
= Assessment: (So the pro-abortion-but-no-pro-choice-label-please-is-now-a-pro-life-convert?)

(7): On May 27 '05, he 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.")
= Assessment: OK, this is at least a flop from November '04!

(8): What about his gubernatorial record 2003-2006? Mitt later says his actions were ALL pro-life. So I assume somewhere in 2005 or so were so 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.")
= Assessment: So, then THESE ACTIONS were not only a reversal of his 2002 commitment, but his May 27, 2005 press conference commitment. So "flipping" is beginning to be routine

(9): 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. Assessment: (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).

(10): On January 29, 2007 during a visit to South Carolina, 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)
= Assessment: 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?

(11): Another South Carolina campaign stop has Romney uttering that "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)
= Assessment: Oh, of course as the above shows, he's always been pro-life!

(12) "I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro-choice." Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate 8/5/2007
= Assessment: OK...looking at the 1994 & 2002 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?"

(13): 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..."
= Assessment: That whatever he was from 1970 when his mom ran as a pro-abortion senator & he sided with 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?

(14): By December of 2007, you'd think after THREE supposed FULL years of being "pro-life," he'd have his talking points down by then...But no: December 4, 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." (Source: Candidates Reveal Their Biggest Mistakes) 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 a schizophrenic "candidate!"

(15): Now we come to the 2011-2012 campaign. The Romneys do an interesting Parade Magazine interview (Nov. 2011). Ann Romney is interviewed: 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: (Ann Romney Reveals Mitt's Softer Side)

What? Did you Romneybots & would-be Romney voters not get the Romney campaign memo issued late in 2011: Per Ann Romney, the Romneys have "ALWAYS been pro-life..." They personally "NEVER CHANGED."

Which all means you can't trust a damn word Romney says. He has no personal integrity -- no core values.

37 posted on 06/28/2012 5:03:18 PM PDT by Colofornian (Saying Mitt would keep past political promises is like prophesying that Gumby won't bend anymore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
hmm, epilepsy ~ and he's had a sudden change of heart on a major case this week?

That symptom suggests DEPAKOTE ~ which suggests a really serious problem spinning out of control.

So, maybe not depakote ~ but something else ~ maybe the stuff that gives you 'insect eye vision". Now that's a trip, or so I've been told by folks using it. The symptom eventually goes away UNTIL it comes back!

Maybe the Chief Justice gets together with the President and they swap psychoactives ~ and anticonvulsives.

Known folks who did that too ~ always looking for a new previously unknown "calming effect".

OOOOOwwwwwwwweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

38 posted on 06/28/2012 5:03:39 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mylife
Regardless of today’s ruling, Roberts is far from being a liberal.

(Yeah, just like somebody who promotes abortion is far from being a pro-abort, eh?)

39 posted on 06/28/2012 5:05:05 PM PDT by Colofornian (Saying Mitt would keep past political promises is like prophesying that Gumby won't bend anymore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Who’s promoting abortion?


40 posted on 06/28/2012 5:06:20 PM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Jane Long
Tony Wiener, the guy who wrote ObamaKKKare went crazy and sent pictures of his underwear to young women all over America. Now, the Chief Justice goes nuts.

Obama started out nuts when he came up with this nonsense.

Worse they seem to be self-medicating.

41 posted on 06/28/2012 5:06:20 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey
Stay focused. Be smart about this.

What, by supporting a socialist just because he's got an R by his name? Surely you jest.

42 posted on 06/28/2012 5:07:43 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Liberty. What a concept. TomHoefling.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

To be fair I am far more conservative than Mitt and I didn’t expect Roberts to be the swing vote.

Might be good to change that to Scalia, though, Mitt.


43 posted on 06/28/2012 5:09:47 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I can neither confirm or deny that; even if I could, I couldn't - it's classified.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Mittens could tap Mark Levin..

He’d fit the bill nicely.

It’d be fun to watch the heads of the libs on the court explode too.


44 posted on 06/28/2012 5:12:03 PM PDT by cableguymn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

SCOTUS should have a nice balance of Conservatives and Liberals.


45 posted on 06/28/2012 5:12:37 PM PDT by GSWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jane Long
We can't sit around and “hope” about anything....we must jump on each issue as it arises. Let’ all get on his website, contact him however we can, and tell Romney to correct his slip of the lip/brain/ and REMOVE ROBERTS’ NAME FROM HIS WEBSITE.

We must keep forever vigilant,and act on any and all issues that arise concering Romney. That's our job..we're the boots on the ground. Speak up and tell Romney! He wants to win, and WE THE PEOPLE have the power to make it happen....let's get to work

46 posted on 06/28/2012 5:14:05 PM PDT by itssme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: citizen

Still have to fit the “KKK” brand (For it’s implicit fascism and slavery for doctors). And that would be robertsKKKare instead of ObamaKKKare.


47 posted on 06/28/2012 5:14:40 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: itssme
Romney can't go 10 minutes without some serious lapse in judgment. Best bet for him is to STEP ASIDE to allow the regular Republican party find a better candididate.
48 posted on 06/28/2012 5:17:19 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: mylife
Who’s promoting abortion?

'Tis an analogy:

He who promotes abortion is a pro-abort;
He who promotes socialism & liberalism is a socialist-liberal.

49 posted on 06/28/2012 5:21:07 PM PDT by Colofornian (Saying Mitt would keep past political promises is like prophesying that Gumby won't bend anymore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance; All
“As president, Mitt will nominate judges in the mold of Chief Justice Roberts...

(That's because Chief Justice Roberts is in the mold of Mitt Romney...betrayal...compromiser...Quisling...)

And just look @ Mitt Romney-the-Pied-Piper who has now piped a new following of political devotees' away from principled political conservatism toward embracing a big govt, pro-abort socialist healthcare pioneer like Mitt!

50 posted on 06/28/2012 5:25:03 PM PDT by Colofornian (Saying Mitt would keep past political promises is like prophesying that Gumby won't bend anymore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-87 next last

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