Mitt Romney has had a convenient conversion, "on the way to Des Moines" as opposed to Damascus (to borrow from Presidential hopeful - or hopeless - candidate Tom Tancredo to being pro-life, anti-stem cell research, and anti gay rights.
It's fine to have political conversions as we see many candidates from Al Gore to being pro-choice from pro-life to Dick Gephardt who had a similar conversion during his time in the US House. How do you know however when the conversions become too much for the American populace to believe?
Take gay equality/rights/marriage. In 1994 Romney pledged that we can and must do better than his opponent in the area of "civil rights." His opponent at the time is the liberal Ted Kennedy. He said further, "If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern. My opponent cannot do this. I can and will." Romney went on to say he would co-sponsor the Federal Employment Non Discrimination Act (ENDA), "and if possible broaden to include housing and credit." He also says of Clinton's Don't ask Don't Tell policy that it was, "a step forward in the right direction" and that he looked forward to "gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation's military. That goal will only be reached when prevening discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern, which is a goal we share." http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2006/12/romney_spoke_of.html
On gay marriage he said it is, "a state issue ... the authorization of marriage on a same-sex basis falls under state jurisdiction." The statement, of course, is at odds with Romney's current support of a federal marriage ban, which he has testified in favor of before Congress.
On abortion and stem-cell, Romney points to a meeting with a Harvard researcher in November 2004 as the point where he switched to being anti stem-cell/abortion. WHy then did he mere months later appoint an openly pro-choice Democrat to a state judgeship and then in May 2005 support a US House bill lifting President Bush's ban on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research - a bill he says he now opposes?
Romney now? "While acknowledging that he held a functionally "pro-choice" position before December 2004, Romney has also claimed to have governed from a "pro-life" standpoint throughout his term as governor." http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=3279653&page=1
So Romney consistently runs as a moderate Republican before running as some sort of right-wing conservative. It's almost like Romney woke up one day and said, "Three things make me like JFK: 1) I look hot 2) I have a religion that is outside what most Americans believe 3) I'm from Massachussetts. How the hell can I get the Republican Nomination on the record I have. No problem! I'll change all my fucking positions." Anyone who brazenly changes their position on every issue of foundational importance (ie being pro-choice to being against embryonic stem cell research and for full gay integration into the 'mainstream' to being against all gay rights) is a complete wuss.
For all those politicians taking notes: If you say that you were "functionally" anything while "governing" from the exact opposite perspective, you're a complete wuss.
Nuk ka komente:
Posto një koment