It Looks Like We’ve Discovered Gloria Allred’s Romney-Bashing October Surprise

The Gateway Pundit ^ | 10/21/12 | Jim Hoft

[xzins]

Sounds like Alred is trying to shore up Romney’s credentials with his pro-life, conservative base.

I didn’t know she was a Romney supporter.

:>)

[MNJohnnie]

nd he praises his mother for having the courage to be pro-abortion in 1970 as a Senate candidate

Another lie. Seems you do not have a single fact in your bag. Typical scum bag Leftist political tactics, just keep screaming a lie over and over in the hopes a certain % pf vpters will believe it.

[Tamzee]

Smearing any other member here as being a “pimp” for Romney is shameful.

Do you call these other individuals pimps, as well? These are just a few of the pro-life activists explaining Romney’s history working on our behalf.

---

Massachusetts Citizens For Life Executive Director Marie Sturgis: “Having Governor Romney in the corner office for the last four years has been one of the strongest assets the pro-life movement has had in Massachusetts.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/219687/early-massachusetts-primary/kathryn-jean-lopez

---

Massachusetts Citizens For Life Pioneer Valley Chapter Chairman Kevin Jourdain: “Mitt Romney was a great Governor, who served with honor and distinction. But most importantly, he was a pro-life Governor. He vetoed a number of pro-abortion pieces of legislation and made many pro-life appointments. He was always there for us.”

(Kevin Jourdain, Remarks at Massachusetts Citizens for Life Mother’s Day Pioneer Valley Dinner, Agawam, MA, 5/10/2007)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1913830/posts

---

“Unlike other candidates who only speak to the importance of confronting the major social issues of the day, Governor Romney has a record of action in defending life. Every decision he made as Governor was on the side of life.

Jack Willke, longtime pro-life activist and one of the founders of the National Right to Life Committee, 10/19/07

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1913830/posts

---

Massachusetts Citizens for Life recently gave Gov. Romney their 2007 Mullins Award for Outstanding Political Leadership

http://www.masslive.com/chicopeeholyoke/republican/index.ssf?/base/news-1/1178873537154670.xml&coll=1

[berdie]

Ansell..the point I was trying to make, if you read my posts, was that RR signed pro-abortion legislation when he was governor.

Was he sorry? Probably.

[MNJohnnie]

It would be justice if in trying to smear Romney, Allred gave Romney the last little bump to bring him across the finish line a winner

[ansel12]

My quote-"Planned Parenthood photo tells us that, he tells us that he became pro-abortion in 1963"

LOL, absolute truth, (you are lying in a very ugly and devious way), although here he is claiming that he became pro-abortion in 1970.

""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 U.S. Senate candidate,””” Romney said""

He has also told the passionate and heart rending tale of having become pro-abortion in 1963.

""Many, many years ago, I had a dear, close family relative that was very close to me who passed away from an illegal abortion. It is since that time [1963] that my mother and my family have been committed to the belief that we can believe as we want, but we will not force our beliefs on others on that matter. And you will not see me wavering on that."""

Mitt and Ann fundraising for Planned Parenthood

[xzins]

Some know, and perhaps you’re one of them, that my main issue has been “life” with Romney...with ANY candidate ever to run in any election. This is actually a positive story, if true, although Alred intends it to injure Romney.

I hope he did counsel the lady to preserve the life of the child. The only other voices she was hearing were telling her to abort.

[1035rep]

This is it? A 20 year old story about Mitt trying to save the life of a baby?

If true, Mitt just moved up another notch.

[1035rep]

Correction: Story is 30 years old.

[MNJohnnie]

Romney has vowed to revoke President Obama’s Executive Order authorizing US Taxpayer funds to be used for Overseas abortions.

By that action alone a President Romney would reduce the number of abortions.

In addition to his Executive Order, President Obama had a pro tax payer funed abotion on demand up to birth plank added, for the 1st time ever, to the 2012 Democrat platform.

Any true Christan can have no doubt which canidate to vote for.

Romney or Obama will be the next President. Sins of Omission are still sins. Not voting for Romney increases the number of abortions, voting for Romney may reduce it.

Demanding some politician be perfect before you vote for them is an act of moral cowardice. Such a impossible demand being impossible to be met by anyone, is merely a rationalization for inaction.

By refusing to confront the evil Obama is doing, the die hards around here are accessories before and after the fact to his evil acts.

They can explain themselves to God one day for their cowardice here, they will not be able to claim they did not know what they were doing now.

[ansel12]

Your point is the context in which you use it, and then leave it hanging, it is obvious what your purpose is.

Reagan regretted it immediately when he saw what was being done with the bill that he signed in 1966, in his first months in office.

A bill that was to the right of Mitt’s current position on abortion, the bill said “health” but with strict interpretation needing a medical committee, within months doctors were being called before the boards for violating the law.

The pro-life movement was in it’s infancy then, Mitt Romney is no infant, Romney has always been a passionate and dedicated pro-choicer, along with his Planned Parenthood supporting wife.

[Marcella]

“Geez. There's a big one born every day. Do you believe in Gaslands too? After you calm down I'm sure you will realize how totally unrealistic is the scenario you swallowed.”

I've already said I have no opinion one way or the other - I merely reported what the woman said. I also said I hoped the facts would come out if this goes big time public. Find someone else is dump on, you buzzard.

[4integrity]

Last evening, 3 former CIA or FBI men were on a Fox show and they detailed that the fight in Benghazi went on for 8 hours and how we could have sent help which sounded like we could have saved our people. Also, if I heard correctly, a drone was flying over the area where the attack was happening. This is infuriating!

During Congressional hearing, the State Dept woman said she was on the phone with people in Benghazi while the attack was taking place. WHO would not authorize sending help??

[rolling_stone]

...’Throwing one’s vote away’ would be defined by voting for someone who does not meet whatever criteria one uses. If you would be so kind as to investigate the intention of the founding fathers, you will find it has always been so....

I see your criteria as being idealistic but not realistic. Apparently you have not voted the Republican candidate since Reagan....Look what Ross Perot gave us...I suggest you take off your rose colored glasses and try living in the real world where ideals are things we strive for but reality is what we compromise for. By the time you find someone to meet your ideals, I am afraid you won't have a vote as the US will be like Cuba Venezuela, etc just a sham.

The liberals were winning because they used incramentalism to move the country,but now they got greedy and went for the whole banana. Is that your plan also?

Romney certainly is not my first choice but he is head and shoulders above the alternative. A journey of a thousand miles starts with the first step and this is a step forward not backwards. If you choose to help move the country backwards that's your choice, but I think its foolish and centered in liberal thought not conservative thought. Utopia is a fantasy and changing things overnight without a bloody revolution is also a fantasy.

best wishes for your fantasy ideals, let me know the next (electable) candidate who meets them for you.

[ansel12]

A lie? I said "he praises his mother for having the courage to be pro-abortion in 1970 as a Senate candidate", and you call that a lie??

Do you see the quote marks here??

"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 U.S. Senate candidate," Romney said

"My position has been the same throughout my political career, and it goes back to the days of 1970,” he said. “There was a woman who was running for political office, U.S. Senate. She took a very bold and courageous stand in 1970, and that was in a conservative state. That was that a woman should have the right to make her own choice as to whether or not to have an abortion. Her name was Lenore Romney, she was my mom. Even though she lost, she established a record of courage in that regard."

[ansel12]

Yes we do know that Romney was pro-abortion all of his life because he tells us that he became consciously pro-abortion in 1963, and then in 2005 he announced that he was now going to be pro-life.

When a politician trying to become a republican president states formally that he was pro-choice from age 16 through age 57, and then switches at the very time that he was starting his presidential campaign, then I think that counts as “”without question that Mitt spent his life being pro-abortion””.

[berdie]

I am flattered that you would think I have a “purpose”, I think.

The only purpose I had in answering your post at all is the phrases “always this” or “always that”. Let’s face it these people are politicians. They are not “always” anything. Please feel free to call me a cynic.

[Marcella]

I agree with your post. I did not vote for Romney as his liberal positions are not mine, nor, in my opinion, are some of his positions Christian.

[ansel12]

The only purpose I had in answering your post at all is the phrases “always this” or “always that”. Let’s face it these people are politicians. They are not “always” anything. Please feel free to call me a cynic.

You are worse than a cynic, you are a liar, you just implied again that Reagan was once pro-abortion and switched, by using that “always this” or “always that” remark, Reagan was "always" pro-life, just as Romney was "always" pro-abortion, his own words verify that from 1963 to 2005.

In August Mitt rejected the republican pro-life platform.

By the way, to correct my previous post, it was 1967, not 1966 when Reagan signed the bill, Mitt had only been committed to being pro-abortion for 4 years, and the abortion wars were only just starting with RoeVwade coming up and decades of battles and elections to go, Mitt was on the pro-abortion side for all of those decades.

[SoFloFreeper]

:)