Romney, Planned Parenthood, and That 1994 Photo (Update: 1994 Research — Romney Supported Abortion Rights EXPANSION)
Devastating (HT Life News). Can’t be “dismissed.” The picture’s worth 10,000 words.
The idea that Objectively Unfit Mitt Romney continues to claim that his alleged prolife “epiphany” is similar to that of Ronald Reagan and Henry Hyde (who were shown on Monday to have never been “effectively” or “adamantly” proabort) grows more repulsive with each passing day.
Though it would be nice if they would, many average voters won’t take the time to look at the detail behind Romney’s post-”epiphany” abortion betrayals (also see the first item at this link), or his extra-constitutional and oath-of-office violating unilateral imposition of same-sex marriage to keep a 2002 campaign promise in Massachusetts while he was governor.
But they will now surely understand the difference between Mitt Romney, Ronald Reagan, and Henry Hyde on life issues.
Just look at the picture.
_____________________________________
UPDATE, 11 a.m.: The ProQuest database is a truly beautiful thing. Here’s an article (opens in a new window; saved to BizzyBlog host for fair use and discussion purposes) from the September 8, 1994 Boston Globe –
Mass. antiabortion group backs Romney; [City Edition]
The leading antiabortion group in Massachusetts has endorsed Republican Mitt Romney for US senator even though Romney portrays himself as a strong supporter of abortion rights.
….. Charles Manning, a political consultant working for the Romney campaign, said Romney has accepted the endorsement. But he stressed that the endorsement contained several inaccurate statements about Romney’s position on abortion, perhaps because Romney never met with the group or answered its questionnaires.
For example, the endorsement says Romney would vote against any health care proposal that includes abortion and opposes a federal abortion rights bill and federal funding of abortions. It also notes he favors parental consent for teen-agers seeking abortions.
Manning said Citizens for Life characterized Romney’s position correctly only on the parental consent issue. Manning said Romney believes health care plans should be structured to leave it up to consumers whether to seek abortion coverage.
Translation of bolded text: Employers must be made to provide abortion coverage, so that all “consumers” can decide whether or not to utilize it.
Further:
Manning said Romney does support the so-called Freedom of Choice Act as long as it just codifies the US Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, but believes federal funding of abortions should not be mandated.
Here’s what I believe is a dirty little secret: The only reason Henry Hyde’s ban on federal funding of abortions withstood court challenge all the way up to the Supremes is that Roe v. Wade has never been made “the law of the land” through legislation (Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it, Chuckie Schumer; scroll down about 80% of the way at link). If a “Freedom of Choice Act” (FOCA) were ever passed, making abortion a codified “right,” I don’t see why federal funding of this “right” would not inevitably follow. Perhaps Mitt Romney (Harvard Law, 1975) didn’t realize it, but his position in this matter was incoherent.
If I’m wrong, why is there even a need for a FOCA, and why are there ongoing efforts to pass one?
The fact that FOCA or its equivalent has never made it into law makes you wonder how credible those polls we’re always fed on abortion are — y’know, the ones that tell us we’re evenly divided as a country, or slightly prolife, at most.
The point is that the 1994 Mitt Romney was not merely in favor of preserving abortion rights. He was in fact an advocate of expanding them — in one case explicitly, in another at least implicitly or ignorantly. It turns out that the already-incriminating video, “The Real Mitt Romney” (1994 abortion-related footage begins at about 1:00; related post is here) doesn’t portray the 1994 Mitt Romney harshly enough.
Perhaps Romney’s emphasis in the video that Roe v. Wade should be “sustained and supported” is his cryptic way of stating his support for FOCA. If so, 2007 viewers should know that.
