Advice to State Republicans

Far be it from me to offer unsolicited advice to people I disagree with almost habitually, but that seems to be all the rage these days with right-wing pundits all trying to tell the DNC who is best suited to run their organization. I won't comment on that particular situation as I'm trying to limit this blog to state matters, but I will say that I am cautiously optimistic.

Now, in an article on Tom Reilly's recent announcement that he is in favor of equal marriage rights, the Globe reported the following:

Tim O'Brien, the executive director of the state Republican Party, accused Reilly of having "completely flip-flopped" on the issue because he needs to answer to a special-interest group within the Democratic Party.

It seems to me that if Mr. O'Brien doesn't want the state GOP to slide into complete irrelevancy, he should probably avoid making the job of state Democrats to link Governor Romney with George W. Bush and the national Republican party any easier. While Bay Staters are relatively satisfied with the Governor, the President enjoys only a 35% approval rating here (2005 Bay State Poll - PDF). Grabbing on to one of his major campaign themes in support of Romney is, in all likelihood, going to be counter-productive.

The Democrats, by the way, are already showing signs of linking Mitt and W. In a statement commenting on Mitt's recent conversion to Republican stem-cell orthodoxy, State Democratic Party Chair Philip Johnston called the position the Bush/Romney stem cell research policy. Get used to hearing the phrase "Bush/Romney" so often in the next two years, you'll think Mitt changed his first name.

Speaking of stem cells and flip-flops, note what then-candidate Romney had to say in 2002:

"I am in favor of stem cell research. I will work and fight for stem cell research," [Romney] said, adding, "I'd be happy to talk to [President Bush] about this, though I don't know if I could budge him an inch."

Gosh, If I didn't know better, I'd think he was guilty of completely reversing his position for political expediency!

Compare that to what Tom Reilly wrote about the gay marriage ban in 2003:

The measure would also prohibit basic and humane benefits to same-sex couples, like the ability as a matter of right to visit a hospitalized sick or injured partner or to take bereavement leave of the same length as a married spouse in the event of that partner's death. It is unthinkable to me, that in defense of marriage, we would deny these basic and humane benefits to same-sex partners. Simply put, House 4840 sweeps broadly to deprive the children and dependents of same-sex relationships as less worthy of our protection, less worthy of our gratitude when their parents or partners are killed in service to us, and less worthy of our empathy in time of personal hardship and loss. House 4840, rather than strengthening the bonds of marriage, tears at the fabric of our community and divides us. For this reason alone, the measure should be rejected.

So, the Governor was in favor of stem-cell research in 2002, but he's against it now. Reilly was against the gay marriage amendment in '03 and he's against it today. Now, who's the flip-flopper again?