RECENT POSTS
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
- White House State Dinner – Who Made the Exclusive Guest List?
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Mitt takes it on the chin
June 13, 2007 1:41 PM
As former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney soars in the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire, where he is the only Republican running TV ads, his competitors are attacking him with a new level of verve and gusto.
On Wednesday the campaign of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., issued a press release attacking him, for instance, for being a flip-flopper on abortion.
Romney has claimed that during a meeting with a researcher on embryonic stem cells, Dr. Douglas Melton, on Nov. 9, 2004, he was struck that society had devalued human life. (Melton disagrees with Romney's account of this meeting, you can read more about it HERE).
A new Youtube video Team McCain unleashed today (LINK), from May 27, 2005 -- six months after meeting with Melton -- where then-Gov. Romney says at a press conference that he wasn't going to push any anti-abortion legislation.
"I am absolutely committed to my promise to maintain the status quo with regards to laws relating to abortion and choice," Romney says. "And so far I've been able to successfully do that. And my personal philosophical views about this issue is not something that I think would do anything other than distract from what I think is a more critical agenda which relates to the topic we're talking about today but also jobs, education and health care."
Says McCain spokesman Matt David: "Mitt Romney's biggest challenge in this election will be convincing Republicans he has principled positions on important issues, especially now that it's known that he remained committed to pro-choice policies after his 'epiphany' on abortion in 2004. In stark contrast, John McCain has a consistent 24 year pro-life record."
When you probe a little deeper, though, it turns out on that same day, May 27, 2005, Romney was certainly acting like an anti-abortion governor.
That day he vetoed a state bill funding embryonic stem cell research because it allowed the cloning of human embryos. As the state legislature debated the bill, Romney requested that lawmakers include various amendments, all of which would then be considered anti-abortion: 1) defining life as beginning at the moment of conception; 2) banning embryo creation for other research; and 3) limiting how much women who donate their eggs can be paid. All the amendments were rejected.
More fireworks are expected in two days, Friday, in Kansas City, Mo., when the National Right to Life Convention (LINK) will be held.
Confirmed attendees include Romney and the candidate who seems most irked by Romney's conversion on abortion, Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas.
Most recently, Brownback has been trying to out-flank Romney by pressing him on whether or not he thinks abortion is "murder."
When asked if he thought abortion is murder at an "Ask Mitt Anything Town Meeting" at the Belknap Mill in Laconia, NH, at the end of May, Romney demurred, saying that the term "murder" "means different things to different people," but that in general he thought as a the moment of conception "it is alive and it is human."
Responded Martin Gillespie, political director of Brownback for President: (HERE) "Mitt Romney's flip-flops on abortion throughout the years make more sense now. Every different Romney flip-flop on abortion has coincided perfectly with the most politically expedient position of the campaign he was in. Romney says life begins at conception, but doesn't think abortion is murder and Romney says he's pro-life but he thinks states should be able to choose to allow abortion. Every time he tries to clarify, as he tried to do last week, it becomes more and more confusing."
What do you think?
-- jpt
June 13, 2007 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (69)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
A VOTE FOR MITT IS A VOTE FOR SATAN! BEWARE OF THE MORMON THEOCRACY. JESUS CHRIST WILL CONDEMN YOU TO HELL IF YOU VOTE FOR HIM. HE IS A LIAR, LIAR, LIAR! MORMONS ARE LIARS!!! HE CHANGES EVERY SECOND!!!! HE LIES! HE LIES! HE WILL TAKE AMERICA TO HELL!!!!
Posted by: Joe Chamblin | Jun 13, 2007 8:22:45 PM
The accusation above makes me sick! You are an example of people that lives on hatred and ignorance. You need to read and make some research before you condemn Mitt or anyone for that matter, or you'll be condemning yourself like an idiot whose house foundation is nothing but sand. Clean your house first, and remember, God is the Judge! Not You!
Posted by: Savea | Jun 14, 2007 1:03:34 AM
I think all parties to this debate are correct. Their opponents are all political opportunists. They are all supposed to be christians too but they all support Bush`s immoral war in Irag.
Posted by: A Viet Nam Vet | Jun 13, 2007 11:25:12 PM
This just shows McCain's DESPERATION!
Posted by: Amy | Jun 13, 2007 11:13:44 PM
authoring the immigration bill is enough to write McCain off for me. Of course that is compounded by his sycophantic licking of W's butt and absolute lack of representing the constituents! And Romney is a glorified used car salesman. RON PAUL!! VOTE FOR RON PAUL IN 2008! ALL THE OTHER CANDIDATES ARE FOR 1984!
Posted by: Bill Hicks | Jun 13, 2007 9:18:39 PM
Most of this thread is as silly as the empty attacks from Senator McCain's campaign. Mitt Romney has always stated publicly that he is personally against abortion. He has never flip-flopped in his personal conviction; however, he also stated that as governor of Massachusetts he would maintain the status quo on abortion, which was pro-choice. Does this make Romney a one-time pro-choice governor? McCain would certainly want you to see the issue that way. Personal convictions don't always need to reconcile with public policy decisions, even for someone who is a "man of convictions."
Mr. Romney knew when he made his commitment to the status quo that he was being elected as the governor of Massachusetts and was willing to "compromise" to support the overwhelming voice of those whom he governed in the liberal-leaning commonwealth. After all, he also asserted that the issue of abortion is best defined (and I will add limits initially tested) on a state level.
Political expediency? Absolutely. Compromising? Absolutely. Flip-flopping? No. He stated his personal beliefs on the record while also stating that he would maintain the status quo as governor.
I have a great respect for individuals who will listen to constituents and avoid certain battles when they have so much to offer in other areas. Picking battles carefully demonstrates certain maturity and wisdom. Choosing the right battlefronts also led to an incredibly effective governorship (despite what some Massachusetts citizens are posting here). Evidently, they forgot what was Romney's inheritance when taking office.
I have a hard time seeing anything wrong with the "perceived" change on a position or with the sincere struggles of a political candidate communicate his positions and rationale to those who are only too eager to take past statements out of their original context.
Romney's ability to put aside personal convictions in deference to the voice of the people in certain cases shows great intelligence and political acumen. Yes, politics requires a certain amount of . . . politics.
Posted by: Jim | Jun 13, 2007 9:02:55 PM
We know Romney flip flop on every issue. You should also flip flop on Immigration and Iraq, you might have a good showing during the primary but I'm sure you will not win. Session for President.
Posted by: marc | Jun 13, 2007 8:33:12 PM
What a disappointing article. Abortion is about as worthy of *political* consideration as slavery; in other words, the likelihood of "Roe v Wade" being repealed is about as likely as the Thirteenth Amendment being repealed.
If this is the character of the Republican "debate", in our modern context, then I am afraid the Democrats have little to worry about.
Oh where, oh where have intelligent third-party candidates gone??
Posted by: RationalAmerican | Jun 13, 2007 8:30:24 PM
A VOTE FOR MITT IS A VOTE FOR SATAN! BEWARE OF THE MORMON THEOCRACY. JESUS CHRIST WILL CONDEMN YOU TO HELL IF YOU VOTE FOR HIM. HE IS A LIAR, LIAR, LIAR! MORMONS ARE LIARS!!! HE CHANGES EVERY SECOND!!!! HE LIES! HE LIES! HE WILL TAKE AMERICA TO HELL!!!!
Posted by: Joe Chamblin | Jun 13, 2007 8:22:45 PM
Tumbleweed
You said "My thought is that life does NOT begin at conception but when the indivigual takes a useful place in the fabic of the society"
LOL! By this definition, we should be able to abort half the population as it exists today. Try again!
Posted by: Eric | Jun 13, 2007 8:21:56 PM
I say let the monkeys fight, it's the only thing that's good about politics.
Posted by: oobe | Jun 13, 2007 6:16:15 PM
Tumbleweedin: All you say is flip flop and go Ron Paul. THe real issue here is why when there are major issues in this country, they are debating this garbage? We don't need anymore "conservatives"-flip floppers or not. Leave your religious idiologies at home
Posted by: je po | Jun 13, 2007 5:29:52 PM
Can you say FLIP-FLOP?
Posted by: Tumbleweedin | Jun 13, 2007 5:22:19 PM
for Duck, you have it right. The repblicans' those that matter being the rich ones, will still get the abortions for their precious daughters. They will do it overseas or in Canada just like before. The poor women might get one, maybe in Mexico, and might live through it. Tell me which is just? My thought is that life does NOT begin at conception but when the indivigual takes a useful place in the fabic of the society, even just if it is as a loved infant. One major culture never gave the child a name until it was a year old to reduce grief based on traditional high infant mortality. Was John Wayne Gayce a human being? Not in my mind, he was an animal. It takes more than viable cell tissue. My motto, if you cannot feed them don't bred them. Pro-abortion. Prevent future Bush's.
Posted by: Eugene Elliott | Jun 13, 2007 5:13:42 PM
Mitt Romney is a spineless flip-flopper. Brownback is the only real pro-lifer in the race.
Posted by: Trey Anderson | Jun 13, 2007 5:00:38 PM
I don't agree with McCain often, but I do this time. If it's possible to call Romney "Slick Mitt", I'd do so. He'll say anything to get elected.
Posted by: Heidi L | Jun 13, 2007 4:58:42 PM
DEAD MAN WALKING: Stroll-Through-Baghdad, Loony McCain is so politically dead, he's not even conscious of it.
After showing his Amnesty-loving side, McCain now couldn't even be elected dog-catcher in his home state of Arizona. His mindless support for the endless neocon wars establishes his unelectability everywhere else in the country.
Will somebody please bury this rotting corpse before it stinks up the campaign even more!!!!!!
Posted by: ImpeachmentNOW | Jun 13, 2007 4:50:08 PM
Noone can expect the Republican nomination if there's even the slightest chance they're only pretending to be insane.
Posted by: Brix | Jun 13, 2007 4:44:53 PM
I find it laughable that the GOPers are so dead set against abortion and then so gung ho on capital punishment. Isn't a life a life regardless of how heinous it becomes and what depraved crimes it commits? If the GOPers had to choose only the blue-eyed blonds would be denied abortions and who cares if you're minority or an illegal alien, let them abort...or of the sexual orientation of babies could be determined before birth,then the Republicans would be pro-abortion then. It's all hypocrisy to suit their wretched agendas.
Posted by: huffyho | Jun 13, 2007 4:44:20 PM
As a Massachusetts resident, I agree with what Barney Frank says,
"The real Romney is clearly an extraordinarily ambitious man with no perceivable political principle whatsover. He is the most intellectually dishonest human being in the history of politics."
Off topic but I'd love to get your reaction to the new study ranking ABC News as 'Poor' on transparency:
Posted by: Other Ed | Jun 13, 2007 4:34:45 PM
What do I think?
That Mitt Romney is an arrogant wind-bag who needs to go back to Utah and obscurity. As a resident of Massachusetts, I was glad to be rid of him this past January, and I certainly am not looking forward to watching him posture on national television. He was a horrendous governor.
Posted by: Duck | Jun 13, 2007 4:33:21 PM
Post a comment


