Gov. Romney Will Say Anything

Today, Blue Mass. Group links to a Herald Article wherein Governor Mitt Romney claims he would sign South Dakota's abortion ban into law. His spokesperson says it's because "The governor believes that states should have the right to be pro-life if that is the will of the people," although David points out that if Romney really wanted the will of the people represented, then why has he been so quick to use his own veto power? Don't forget that some of Romney's vetoes were overruled unanimously.

But that's not even the part of this that bothers me the most. It's clear now, if it wasn't before, that Governor Mitt Romney will say absolutely anything if he thinks it will help him get elected. In 1994, he was pro-choice when running against Ted Kennedy. In 2002 there "wasn't a dime's worth of difference" (Kerry Healey's own words) between his position on reproductive rights and that of Shannon O'Brien. And now, even though last year he denied he was "faking" his position as pro-choice, he now says that if an abortion ban -- one with no exceptions for rape, incest, or the health of the mother, mind you -- appeared on his desk, he'd sign it. He'd do this again despite his reassurances last year that he promised to "maintain the laws as they exist in Massachusetts". In fact, if I recall correctly, this promise to maintain these laws was one of the reasons he gave in vetoing the stem cell bill. He was more concerned about keeping his promise to keep the abortion status quo that he vetoed a bill that had nothing to do with abortion, despite the "will of the people" clearly being against him.

Check out this post from Romney is a Fraud from last year that has a fully annotated collection of Mitt Romney's rhetoric on choice up until that point. It's stunning how brazenly he's turned around on this.