Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney was either not always the ultra-right-wing demagogue he professes to be today, or he has absolutely no principles at all. Could it be that both are true? Watch this video of a 1994 debate with Ted Kennedy where Romney expresses unfailing support for gay rights, abortion rights, and affirmative action, all while disassociating himself from Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr. (via Towleroad)
And make sure to watch his quick rebuttal after the jump.
I just discovered this blog and have been perusing the entries.
As an independent voter and resident of Massachusetts I feel compelled to refute the prior campaign pitch for former Governor Mitt Romney.
Never in my time in Massachusetts have I observed a more incompetent and corrupt administration built on lies and misdirection and absolute fiscal irresponsibility.
But first to correct some statements made by the Romney campaign worker:
1. The Olympics were saved because of a Congressional financial bailout paid for by the US taxpayers. Romney nearly bankrupted the Olympics yet continues to congratulate himself years later.
2. Romney’s time at Bain Capital was very profitable for Romney and his cronies as many Americans lost their jobs so the vultures could bleed companies dry for their fun and profit.
Typical of the Romney lies and misdirection is the campaign of Romney grandstanding about pension plans divesting from any investment in Iran while his Bain Capital is involved in several shady deals with appliance makers and oil companies through Bain shell companies in Iran. Consorting with the enemy for profit? That is Romney.
3. Campaign promises kept? I would be hard pressed to recall one Romney campaign promise he actually kept. He campaigned as a republican moderate but once elected changed his stripes to position himself on the national stage. He is a very ambitious man; one who will do or say anything to win.
4. As Governor, Romney left the state nearly bankrupt. Self-aggrandizing himself as an anti-tax conservative he never saw a fee he could not raise costing residents substantially more without improvement in services.
For 4 years Romney postponed, deferred, and stonewalled infrastructure maintenance statewide as roads, bridges, dams, tunnels collapse around him. Each time destruction occurred there was another photo op so he could look concerned and pretend to be in charge.
He fiddled and diddled the Big Dig into an even greater miasma and even had the gall to hire one of the construction companies to inspect itself. Of course that was after a sizeable contribution to the republican party. The republicans continued the patronage gravy train for many years after inspectors warned in writing and on record that the ceiling bonds were not secure. Romney saw no need to stop the cash flow.
The state is the only one in the nation that allows gay marriage despite Romney’s media whoring efforts to thwart those unions. It is funny how he ran as a friend to gay people and campaigned on issues of equality but when elected abandoned those positions reversing his pretense.
The fact is that Romney was an overwhelmingly poor governor. Had he been foolish enough to run for reelection he would have lost by an unprecedented margin.
As it was his lieutenant governor stooge, known derisively as Muffy by even the republicans, lost by a huge margin and dragged just about every other non-incumbent republican to defeat in the November election. It was a complete repudiation of the Romney debacle.
Beware, America, Romney wants our country and will do anything to control it.
I’m not sure I see the problem here and I disagree with the premise that Romney changed his views for purely political reasons. Romney’s views have changed (although not so recently as you claim), and he readily admits that in his response to the YouTube clip (see: http://blog.electromneyin2008.com/index.php?title=governor_romney_responds_to_the_1994_deb&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1). Unlike some flip-floppers who refuse to admit that they have changed positions with some ridiculously convoluted explanation, Romney is clear and concise about why he has changed over time.
Reagan, Kennedy, and even Lincoln made major policy changes during their political careers as well. When you are a private citizen you have the luxury of taking any stand you wish without regard for the policy impact that it will have on the nation. As a Governor Romney saw how a few social issues are eroding our moral fabric, so he evolved his position – good for him – welcome to the RIGHT side of the issue Mitt!
The question is really did Romney stick to his campaign promises as Governor (YES), did he follow through effectively as an Olympic organizer (YES), and did he distinguish himself as an executive at Bain (YES). He was one of the most fastidious politicians in recent history to make sure that he followed through on all of his campaign promises. The fact that Romney now believes that his positions 12 years ago have evolved has little bearing on his qualifications for President.
Most of the professed outrage surrounding Romney’s policy changes have come not from the right, but from the left, looking to knock a strong candidate out of the box. Republicans believe that a person can change course when they see that they were wrong, we don’t want ideologues or beauty contest winners — we want people who have experience outside of the D.C. and can look at tough issue analytically not politically. We want someone who can work with the Democrats, and above all we want someone who has proven that they can get things done!