GOP NOMINEE SOFTENS LANGUAGE ON DEFENDING THE UNBORN
Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney was for abortion before he was against it … before he was for it again. At least that’s what his latest rhetoric on the issue suggests. It’s all in a day’s work for the walking Etch A Sketch … who has yet to meet a political position that he can’t disavow and then re-embrace as expediency dictates.
The former Massachusetts governor – who emphatically declared his support for specific pro-life legislation during the 2012 Republican presidential primary – told the Des Moines Register this week that he will not push the issue as president.
“Do you intend to pursue any legislation specifically regarding abortion?” Romney was asked by the paper.
“There’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m familiar with that would become part of my agenda,” Romney replied.
That’s not true, though. Romney has previously included specific pro-life legislation as part of his “pro-life pledge” – a detailed statement of his support for the right to life.
“I am pro-life and believe that abortion should be limited to only instances of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother,” Romney wrote in his pledge. “I support the reversal of Roe v. Wade, because it is bad law and bad medicine. Roe was a misguided ruling that was a result of a small group of activist federal judges legislating from the bench.”
Romney added that “if I have the opportunity to serve as our nation’s next president, I commit to doing everything in my power to cultivate, promote, and support a culture of life in America.”
Not so much anymore, apparently.
Or maybe not …
Not long after Romney’s statements to the Register hit the press, liberals quickly pointed out that he was using “weasel words” in an effort to give the appearance of softening his stance on abortion – without actually softening it.
Romney’s campaign also issued a statement that vigorously maintained his pro-life credentials – which were first acquired in 2008 during his initial run for the Republican presidential nomination.
“Mitt Romney is proudly pro-life, and he will be a pro-life president,” Romney’s campaign spokesman told The Politico.
Again … we’re just not buying that.
This is yet another example of the fundamental problem with Mitt Romney: He simply cannot be trusted. Sure there are times he talks a great game – as he did during a command performance against Barack Obama during the first presidential debate – but can anything he says be taken seriously?
Seriously this guy has taken more positions than the Kama Sutra … and has reversed himself or substantially changed his views on virtually every single one of them.
FITS supports the right to life, incidentally, because we believe it is the most fundamental of all the liberties guaranteed under our Constitution. and while we don’t wear the issue on our sleeves (we’re fiscal conservatives, social libertarians) … we do weigh in when we believe it to be appropriate.