Romney Changes Stance on Abortion

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 10, 2012 12:18 AM GMT
    "Mitt Romney said Tuesday he has no plans to push for legislation limiting abortion, a softer stance from a candidate who has said he would "get rid of" funding for Planned Parenthood and appoint Supreme Court who would overturn Roe v. Wade.

    “There’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m familiar with that would become part of my agenda,” the Republican presidential nominee told The Des Moines Register in an interview.

    His statement could put him at odds with congressional Republicans who have made limiting abortion central to their messages. His own running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), has introduced bills to restrict access to abortion. And the Republican Party platform toughened its anti-abortion stance earlier this year.

    Both Romney and Ryan oppose abortion, but the presidential candidate supports exemptions while his running mate does not. Romney told the Register he will restrict abortion in one way, through an executive order banning U.S. foreign aid money to be used for abortions.

    Romney has previously vowed to end taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood, one of the most common ways in which Republicans have tried to restrict access to abortion, even though the organization is already banned from using taxpayer dollars to fund the procedure. "Planned Parenthood, we're going to get rid of that," he said in March, referring to budget cuts he would make as president.

    Romney said in September that he would prefer to appoint justices to the Supreme Court that would oppose Roe v. Wade.

    "I hope to appoint justices for the Supreme Court that will follow the law and the constitution," he said at the time on NBC's "Meet the Press." "And it would be my preference that they reverse Roe V. Wade and therefore they return to the people and their elected representatives the decisions with regards to this important issue."


    Romney said Tuesday his legislation will be focused on jobs and education, when asked whether he would push for other bills on women's issues.

    "Women are frequently asking about the massive amount of debt we’re passing on to the next generation," he told the Register."

    By: Elise Foley for The Huffington Post

  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Oct 10, 2012 1:20 AM GMT
    He's moving to the middle --- sounds like a smart strategy to me icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 10, 2012 1:29 AM GMT
    This guy flip flops more then anyone I know. He knows many women are voting for Obama and that is part of what is giving Obama a lead so now all of a sudden after all this time being anti choice and promoting an anti choice agenda for his presidency he has a change of heart?

    Whoever came up with Mittens as the Etcha A Sketch president was right. He will say or do anything to win and holds no real solid view on anything. It changes with the wind.

    Romney knows he needs women in his corner since he already has a solid block against him with other minorities (gays, latino's, blacks, etc).

    He says this now but just like anything that comes out of his lying mouth it can change whenever he feels like it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 10, 2012 1:56 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidHe's moving to the middle --- sounds like a smart strategy to me icon_wink.gif



    There is no question that Mitt has a strategy for winning the election.

    What he lacks is a strategy for governing our country.

    THE FAR RIGHT OWNS HIM.......and they will not let him betray them.

    And there is no reason for Romney to attempt to appease Progressives and Moderates. WE DON'T TRUST HIM.

    And how can the business community feel confident with Mitt in charge?
    His policies could change at any moment.

    Mitt may indeed be able to SELL HIMSELF INTO OFFICE.....

    ...BUT WHAT A FUCKING DISASTER HE WOULD BE !
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 10, 2012 3:46 AM GMT
    A closet liberal !
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 10, 2012 3:51 AM GMT
    564025_358123814277087_124894553_n.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 10, 2012 3:53 AM GMT
    B787 said"Mitt Romney said Tuesday he has no plans to push for legislation limiting abortion, a softer stance from a candidate who has said he would "get rid of" funding for Planned Parenthood and appoint Supreme Court who would overturn Roe v. Wade.

    “There’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m familiar with that would become part of my agenda,” the Republican presidential nominee told The Des Moines Register in an interview.



    I don't see how his statement to not push for LEGISLATION limiting abortion contradicts his determination to appoint Supreme COURT justices who would overturn Roe vs. Wade. Where is the softer stance exactly?

    Regardless, as Newt Gingrich said: "Mitt Romney will do and say anything to become President. Anything."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 10, 2012 3:54 AM GMT
    David4985 said564025_358123814277087_124894553_n.jpg


    And that is the October Surprise.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 10, 2012 4:36 AM GMT
    sfbayguy said
    David4985 said564025_358123814277087_124894553_n.jpg


    And that is the October Surprise.


    Surprise? Hardly. Been going on for just about forever.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Oct 10, 2012 5:35 AM GMT
    JockTheVote said
    ...BUT WHAT A FUCKING DISASTER HE WOULD BE !



    You don't know that. Maybe, if it does happen, everyone should try and have an open mind and at least give him a chance. Calling his possible administration "a fucking disaster" before he's even been elected is not really fair.
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    Oct 10, 2012 5:41 AM GMT
    Romney is a liar with no integrity or core values, and he will take any position and tell any lie to get elected: what else is new.

    On the bright side, at this rate he should be supporting marriage equality by this time next week.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11525

    Oct 10, 2012 5:53 AM GMT
    shake shake that etch-a-sketch, Willard.



    icon_rolleyes.gif
  • rnch

    Posts: 11525

    Oct 10, 2012 12:44 PM GMT
    sfbayguy said...
    Regardless, as Newt Gingrich said: "Mitt Romney will do and say anything to become President. Anything."


    One of the few times "Newt" and I have agreed on anything icon_exclaim.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 10, 2012 12:58 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    JockTheVote said
    ...BUT WHAT A FUCKING DISASTER HE WOULD BE !

    You don't know that. Maybe, if it does happen, everyone should try and have an open mind and at least give him a chance. Calling his possible administration "a fucking disaster" before he's even been elected is not really fair.

    Oh, you mean the same chance was given to President Obama, by the likes of Rush Limbaugh following the 2008 election? And by some RJ members right here, who were declaring Obama a failure just a couple of months following his inauguration?

    Do you suggest we be more generous this time if he's elected, and give Romney a longer 3 months before we call his administration a disaster? But I presume it'll be OK to say we hope he'll fail right from the git-go, and also OK for Democratic leaders to copy the Republicans, holding strategy sessions to plan the sabotaging of Romney's administration before it's even begun?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 10, 2012 1:04 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidHe's moving to the middle --- sounds like a smart strategy to me icon_wink.gif

    One guys massive flip flop is another shallow conservatives move to the center...
  • rnch

    Posts: 11525

    Oct 10, 2012 1:32 PM GMT
    ART_DECO said
    CuriousJockAZ said
    JockTheVote said
    ...BUT WHAT A FUCKING DISASTER HE WOULD BE !

    You don't know that. Maybe, if it does happen, everyone should try and have an open mind and at least give him a chance. Calling his possible administration "a fucking disaster" before he's even been elected is not really fair.

    Oh, you mean the same chance was given to President Obama, by the likes of Rush Limbaugh following the 2008 election? And by some RJ members right here, who were declaring Obama a failure just a couple of months following his inauguration?

    Do you suggest we be more generous this time if he's elected, and give Romney a longer 3 months before we call his administration a disaster? But I presume it'll be OK to say we hope he'll fail right from the git-go, and also OK for Democratic leaders to copy the Republicans, holding strategy sessions to plan the sabotaging of Romney's administration before it's even begun?





    oh-but-that-would-be-DIFFERENT......


    icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 10, 2012 1:35 PM GMT
    If this recent Romney statement signals a move to the center on the abortion issue, then that's well and good--good for women and good for the country. However, the shift in his stance looks a bit transparent to me. The shift is too close to the election to be genuine. In any event, regardless of his intentions, the shift is a good short-term political strategy, but it's a strategy that could backfire, particularly if it becomes unequivocal to independent, thoughtful voters that the Romney camp is engaged in calculated deception to win the presidency.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11525

    Oct 10, 2012 1:37 PM GMT
    DOMINUS saidIf this recent Romney statement signals a move to the center on the abortion issue, then that's well and good--good for women and good for the country. However, the shift in his stance looks a bit transparent to me. The shift is too close to the election to be genuine. In any event, regardless of his intentions, the shift is a good short-term political strategy, but it's a strategy that could backfire, particularly if it becomes unequivocal to independent, thoughtful voters that the Romney camp is engaged in calculated deception.



    It would appear that just about everyone (except for the conversaposse on RJ and Fox Feaux News) would agree with Dominus.



    icon_idea.gif
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Oct 10, 2012 2:46 PM GMT
    ART_DECO said

    Do you suggest we be more generous this time if he's elected, and give Romney a longer 3 months before we call his administration a disaster? But I presume it'll be OK to say we hope he'll fail right from the git-go, and also OK for Democratic leaders to copy the Republicans, holding strategy sessions to plan the sabotaging of Romney's administration before it's even begun?


    I think any president, regardless of their party affiliation, should be judged on results -- nothing else. If some in the GOP played the "hope he fails" game on Obama, SHAME ON THEM! Should Romney get elected, let's see if Democrats are any better on that front. Regardless, Romney is a far more dynamic leader in terms of proven basic leadership skills. He will reach across the aisle and work to bring the two sides together and get things done. That's what a leader does. The status quo is not an option.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 10, 2012 5:09 PM GMT
    freedomisntfree said
    sfbayguy said
    David4985 said564025_358123814277087_124894553_n.jpg


    And that is the October Surprise.


    Surprise? Hardly. Been going on for just about forever.


    Romney has been saying one thing the ENTIRE CAMPAIGN, and then dumps it all in the debate and says another, and you say it's been going on for just about forever?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 10, 2012 5:14 PM GMT
    DOMINUS saidIf this recent Romney statement signals a move to the center on the abortion issue, then that's well and good--good for women and good for the country. However, the shift in his stance looks a bit transparent to me. The shift is too close to the election to be genuine. In any event, regardless of his intentions, the shift is a good short-term political strategy, but it's a strategy that could backfire, particularly if it becomes unequivocal to independent, thoughtful voters that the Romney camp is engaged in calculated deception to win the presidency.


    Again, I don't see how his statement to not push for LEGISLATION limiting abortion contradicts his determination to appoint Supreme COURT justices who would overturn Roe vs. Wade. How is it a shift in stance? It's more of a sneaky wording to make himself appear more moderate while not changing his stance at all. I agree, it's calculated deception to win the presidency.

    Remember, the next President will chose about 2 Supreme Court Justices, and we will have to live with those justices for at least a generation! And Romney is NO FRIEND TO US.