Flipping and flopping all over the place, Romney debates himself on issue of abortion

As the standard-bearer of the party that’s generally skeptical of theories of evolution, Mitt Romney sure does a lot of evolving — and devolving — on the issue of abortion.

He was at it again yesterday, as we see HERE:

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.

The Romney campaign walked back the remark within two hours of the Register posting its story. Spokeswoman Andrea Saul told the National Review Online’s Katrina Trinko that Romney “would of course support legislation aimed at providing greater protections for life.”

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.

And, of course, let’s not forget that as governor of Massachusetts, Romney was avowedly in favor of a woman’s right to choose with regard to abortion, as this video shows:





  1. I know its wrong to openly question someone’s beliefs, but I can’t help think the following is true:

    Romney is pro-choice. Always has been. But you’re never winning the support of the far-right evangelicals (and even some moderate Democrats) by supporting abortion. Thus, his pro-life stance. He did what needed to be done to win the nomination. Unethical? Yes. A winning strategy? Also Yes.

    Abortion is a tricky subject. 52% of people think it should remain an option in certain circumstances, yet only 41% identify themselves as openly pro-choice.


    Now that he has the nomination, its time to let the true moderate Romney come out and win over the undecided and moderate voters. In other words, put abortion on the back burner. If he listens to the far-right and makes the end of abortion a central campaign issue, he probably loses the election. Yet, at the same time he still needs to rally the base to actually go out and vote for him. This is why he said he will support any pro-life related legislation. Would he actually sign such legislation? Difficult to tell. He probably just hopes he doesn’t ever have to be put in that situation.

    Its a very difficult tight rope to be on, but so far he hasn’t fallen off.

  2. Weathervane Willard cannot stick to an issue without consulting with his money.

  3. No one can seriously accuse him of lying because he changes what he says so often no one really knows where he stands. No matter what he says now, the 47% tape, and his opinions about Roe v. Wade and the environment are scary. Since he put such a pretty face on last week, who cares what he really thinks as long as he gets elected, right? Let’s just say, I believe he is about as sleazy as they come.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *