Home / Articles / Today / National Today /  Romney announces he's pro-life — when he's not pro-choice
. . . . . . .
Give Through iGivefirst
Wednesday, October 10,2012

Romney announces he's pro-life — when he's not pro-choice

Maria Dryfhout / Shutterstock.com

Any good politician knows: The best way to capture those flighty, irrational, emotional female voters is to talk only about issues that directly affect women.

I'm kidding. But it's the trick these days: If you're polling poorly among women, as Republican candidate Mitt Romney is, act like you give a shit about women's issues.

That's most likely why Romney softened his stance on abortion, telling the Des Moines Register Oct. 9 that he didn't support any federal legislation that would limit abortions.

Then someone reminded Romney he's a Republican, and within 24 hours he was back on the anti-woman wagon, promising to defund Planned Parenthood. That's the Romney we know and love, and won't recognize by this time tomorrow because he'll believe something totally different.

See the stories at the Washington Post: Romney is pro-choice the day before he's pro-life.

  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
No Registration Required

Since CNN, ABC NBC etc don't know how to use a dictionary or Wikipedia, I submit the following:


"legislation" = is law which has been promulgated (or "enacted") by a legislature or other governing body, or the process of making it. IN AMERICA THIS IS CONGRESS


"executive order" = order or directive issued by the head of the executive branch IN AMERICA THIS IS DONE BY PRESIDENT


"I'm familiar" = that the speaker is aware of IMHO NOT PRESUMING TO KNOW EVERYTHING


Original article ... read it from the source not regurgitated through someone else lens.




Actual quotes: (My emphasis added)“There’s no legislation (legislation starts in Congress) with regards to abortion that I’m (Mitt is not presuming to know every piece of legislation being discussed in Congress) familiar with that would become part of my agenda. One thing I would change, however, which would be done by executive order (executive orders are president's pervue), not by legislation, is that I would reinstate the Mexico City policy, which is that foreign aid dollars from the United States would not be used to carry out abortion in other countries. It’s long been our practice here that taxpayer dollars are not to be used to fund abortion in this country. President Obama on the 10th day of his administration changed the Mexico City policy to say that abortion services were not prohibited in our foreign aid dollars. I would go back to the original so-called Mexico City policy."


In a September "Meet the Press" appearance, Romney said the he would "encourage pro-life policies." (policies are not legislation) As for any Supreme Court justices he would nominate, Romney said "it would be my preference that they (Supreme Court) reverse Roe v. Wade and therefore they return to the people and their elected representatives the decisions with regards to this important issue."


The appearance seemingly syncs with statements on the "Values" section of Romney's own website. In short, Romney's website states that the former governor:


– "believes that the right next step is for the Supreme Court (not the Presidenyt)to overturn Roe v. Wade."

– "supports the Hyde Amendment, which broadly bars the use of federal funds for abortions."(this is done by executive order)

– believes "this country should not be silent in the face of injustices like China’s One-Child policy. No one will ever hear a President Romney or his vice president tell the Chinese government that "I fully understand" and won’t “second guess” compulsory sterilization and forced abortion."

– "will ensure that American laws reflect America’s values of preserving life at home and abroad." (the executive order mentioned about Mexico).



I've been in the alternative news business for decades, having worked for some of the biggest and smallest in the nation. But I have never seen a more small-minded publication as The Boulder Weekly.

I am not a Romney supporter in the slightest, but your focus on social issues that are far more irrelivant than the big issues that you ignore (Drone warfare, botching the budget, lying to the American people and flip flopping on issues) that "your guy" represents is simply apalling. And on top of that, you give kudos to those who wish to support a third party, but endorse every democrat running for office with little more than a "because they are a democrat" reasoning, and that includes Mr. Obama. Real cutting edge, guys.

The Boulder Weekly is petty and (excuse my language) chicken-shit. Try free thought... it might do you some good, since you are supposed to be journalists.