A Kinder, Gentler Booty Call

Mitt Romney, everybody:

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.

Oh for fuck’s sake. Just take a position and stick with it. Own your evil. I have more respect for movement pro-lifers at this point because at least they’re being consistent in their contempt for women and their placing slogans above substance. At least you know where they’re at, even if it’s on the street corner holding pictures of dismembered baby dolls in ketchup.

A.

5 thoughts on “A Kinder, Gentler Booty Call

  1. Warren Rempel says:

    “There’s no legislation with regards to abortion *that I’m familiar with* that would become part of my agenda,…” The man speaks in ‘weasel clauses’…

  2. MapleStreet says:

    OK, I get that a candidate running for the primaries has to appear to be more extreme and then, for the election has to appear more middle of the road in order to pick up the voters in the middle. But Romney has appeared so extreme to get the primaries that he is totally flip flopping to appear anywhere near the center. (And remember how the repubs thought it was a searing indictment to carry around plastic footwear to insult Kerry because he did his duty in Nam but came back to denounce the attrocities of war?)
    This on Abortion is just the last in a long string of readily verifiable, dogmatically stated positions. Not to mention that ProLife / Anti-abortion is a deeply held, heartfelt, religious belief among many. The Pro-Life position has been a major factor of steering those in the middle towards voting repub. This is not a policy to play around with. If Romney throws the Pro-Life under the bus he has announced a willingness to court a host of voting blocs only to throw them under the bus without notice and without reason.
    As another example, although an area that is not as deeply held by the American public, Democratic Undergound and One Million Strong Against Romney recently posted an image with text comparing Romney’s recent words saying that we would work to build a prosperous Palestinian State living in peace with Israel – compared to the infamous 47 % video including Romney saying the Palestinians have no interest in peace…we will kick the ball down the field and hope something resolves it.http://www.democraticunderground.com/101765727

  3. MapleStreet says:

    To state the obvious. Remembering:
    1) The repub tactic for confirmation hearings under Bush where the nominee would tell the Senate soothing words and then, once in their position, do what they planned to do all the time (shorter version, nominee just had to lie to the Senate. Once in their position, there was no responsibility to act according to what they told the Senate / there was no authority the Senate could exert to call them on their lying.
    2) Even if there were some sort of authority to hold the candidate responsible for what they said on the campaign trail, Romney has talked all over the chart.
    The obvious question is that while alway a part of political campaigns, does the new campaign method include a previously unknown extreme of making campaign statements stating one thing with the intention of doing the opposite?

  4. MapleStreet says:

    Well, driving to supper I just heard it on the car radio (npr).
    Romney campaigners have walked back on Romney’s statement.
    Color me surprised /snark

  5. pansypoo says:

    say anything indeed.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: