Sunday, November 26, 2006

Heard in the Echo Chamber - Romney's Footwear, Etc.

The Boston Globe had an interesting column this morning on the "evolution" of Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's so-called social conservatism.

If you want the nickel tour, the column explores how the governor from central casting supported both abortion and gay marriage so he could get elected in liberal Massachusetts, but now opposes both practices because he wants to win the more conservatively-oriented South Carolina Republican Presidential Primary.

The Globe columnist actually took it fairly easy on Romney.

Shockingly, we would have been a bit more aggressive in our language.

We don't care that Romney is for or against abortion. Nor do we particularly care whether he's for or against gay marriage.

We happen to oppose both, but minus some extraordinary circumstances we have a hard time getting excited about government involving itself one way or the other, especially on the gay marriage issue (with the exception of Heather S., we're all lesbians here).

What we do care about is yet another politician saying or doing anything to get elected, holding the voters in such low esteem that he or she would rather lie than trust their ability to handle the truth.

Sadly, we wrote recently that the number one reason Karen Floyd lost the State Superintendent's race was that she had previously lost her ability to "look 'em in the eye" after flip-flopping on the school choice issue.

We call it 'Electoraphobia' - the fear of speaking plainly on hot-button issues. Its symptons include contortions where there were once strong convictions and evasions where there were once earnestly-held beliefs. Unless treated preventatively, there is no cure.


It would be nice to have a Republican Party Chairman who spoke of having a "high-minded debate of the issues" or an "honest, spirited exhange of ideas" in the upcoming 2008 Presidential Primary.

Of course it would also be nice to have a Party Chairman who kept his word, whether on his term limit pledge or his promise to stay neutral in GOP primaries.

Alas, we have auto parts salesman Katon Dawson, who in addition to violating his pledge on both those counts is now suggesting the title "Slugfest 2" for the pending Presidential Primary (see this morning's column by Lee Bandy).

Apparently thinking that Presidential politics should remain on par with a Playstation video game, Dawson added that 2008 campaign would be "blood sport" in South Carolina.


Dawson's affinity for the English language we knew we could count on during the 2008 cycle, but what about the tattered remains of his "pledge of primary neutrality?"

Stay tuned ...


We wrote extensively last week on the University of Miami's not-so-super-secret courtship of South Carolina head football coach Steve Spurrier. We're still not 100% convinced that Spurrier is 100% committed to staying in Columbia, but we're certainly feeling a lot better about it today than we were this time last week.

Funny how finally beating Moo U. does that to us ...

We have learned, however, that Sic Willie himself has now made Miami's short list thanks to this season's superb performance from his No Corn No Nuts fantasy football squad.

Folks' Nuts are 8-4 this season, following a disastrous 1-12 record last season.

"I don't know any other way to describe it save for pure brilliance," said Miami President Donna Shalala. "He picked up LT in the offseason, signed Tony Romo as a free agent, knew when to cut the Giants' defense and special teams and most impressively, he's done it all without leaving his couch. If he's having this kind of success in the pros, imagine what he could do at the college level."

Sic Willie could not be reached for comment on the Miami opening, but a spokesman for his Nuts said he had no intention of parting with them.


Anonymous Anonymous said...


9:42 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Will you like to say "Seriously" all the time so Seriously, Seriously dude. No one gives a damn about your stupid fantasy football.

10:03 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Keep in mind the Boston Media hates Mitt Romney. They always have and will continue.

11:31 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I care about your fantasy football!!

11:46 AM

Anonymous SC Conservative said...

OK, so we know that you aren't a fan of Mitt Romney--now please share with the rest of us what your bias is.

It's obviously not due to his stance on the issues or we would have seen a gradual increase in the level of animosity as you learned more about him. It must be due to the fact that you have another dog in the hunt--likely John McCain.

Bias isn't a problem as long as you admit it before attempting to present "the facts" as a neutral voice.

Yes, Romney has changed his stance on the abortion issue, but there is a difference between running on a platform, and taking a side on an issue. Romney never "campaigned" as a pro-choice candidate, he merely took a stand on the issue when questioned about the subject and that stance was more Libertarian, than pro-choice.

What's the difference you ask? A candidate's administration typically reflects those he or she campaign on, while the stances one takes are usually issues a candidtate will only act on if presented with the issue by someone else--like the legislature. In the case of abortion, Romney who has always been personally pro-life, knew that the Massachusetts legislature was never going to present a bill to him to eliminate abortions so it was a political stance he could stomach. If you look at the record, you will notice that he promised not to change the abortion laws in Mass. and when the legislature attempted to relax the limits on abortions, he vetoed them.

Taking a somewhat "Pro Choice" stance is admittedly not a perfect conservative record, but there is no doubt where he stands on the subject now. He's not just taking a pro-life stance nowadays, he's actually campaigning on the issue. You can expect his administration to act that way.

As for gay marriage, he has never supported gay marriage--though he supports civil unions as an alternative (as this doesn't weaken the sanctity of marriage) and he runs on a decidedly anti-descrimination platform with regard to homosexuals. His approach reflects a "hate the sin, love the sinner" ideaology.

There is no reason why any conservative couldn't support where Mitt Romney stands on the issues.

3:50 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mitt Romney: For legal abortions before he was against them.

**“Romney ran against Senator Edward M. Kennedy in 1994. During a debate, Romney declared: ‘I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a US Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.’ "

- Boston Globe, 3/2/2006

**In 2002, Romney responded to the National Abortion Rights Action League's candidate survey: ''I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government's. The truth is, no candidate in the governor's race in either party would deny women abortion rights." Notably, Romney refused to answer the candidate questionnaire sent to him by Massachusetts Citizens for Life.

- Boston Globe, 7/3/2005

4:59 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can't believe anyone in South Carolina is supporting Romney. Check out the 27 page shocking report about Romney at www.massresistance.org This is a must read for anyone even thinking about supporting this fraud. He has sold out conservatives for years in that state. Why does anyone believe anything he says?


10:31 PM


Post a Comment

<< Home