Either Mitt Romney was lying back in 1994 when, while running for the senate against Ted Kennedy, he said this in support of full equality for gays and lesbians:
"For some voters, it might be enough to simply match my opponent's record in this area. But I believe we can and must do better. If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern. My opponent cannot do this. I can and will."
Or he's lying now as he woos hard-right social conservatives by proclaiming his opposition to gay equality and his support for traditional family values, especially as regards marriage.
Most likely: whatever is politically expedient at the moment becomes Mitt's truth.
9 Comments for “Say Anything.”
posted by Tom Scharbach on
“Most likely: whatever is politically expeditious at the moment becomes Mitt’s truth.”
Maybe he wears flip flops. Maybe hardening of the cardiac arteries has hardened his attitudes toward us queer folk. Maybe he’s listened to Tony Perkins so long he’s found Buddy Jesus, despite his Mormon roots. Who knows?
More to the point, who cares?
It looks to me like Mitt is blowing smoke up his own behind, and he isn’t worth our attention.
Polls consistently show that more than 50% of evangelical Christians won’t vote for a Mormon.
If that’s true, Mitt won’t make it through the primaries because he can’t win the Republican base, no matter how much he tries to sound like a true-blue, born-again fag-basher.
When Brownback enters the race, Romney will be history.
posted by Craig2 on
Granted, fundamentalist Protestants may not look likely to vote for a conservative Mormon now, but they used to harbour similar animosities against conservative Catholics, and now look at them.
It also doesn’t stop them using the Moonie-
owned Washington Times when they need to. I suspect if Romney does firm up as a candidate, watch for debate in the US fundie media about the need for co-belligerency regardless of religious inclination due to shared conservative social values.
Craig2
Wellington, New Zealand
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
Democratic and Republican politicians without principles who say whatever it takes to get votes and win power for themselves? Wake me up when you find a few who *don’t* do that — on gay issues or any other issue.
posted by raj on
Romney wasn’t just touting gay rights in 1994. He was also doing so as recently as 2002, when he was running for governor here in Massachusetts, and even at his inaugural in 2003, after he had been elected. Boston’s BayWindows has done several articles on this matter recently–some of which served as the basis for a Boston Globe article, which probably gave rise to the NYTimes and WaPo articles. See here, here and here.
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
NL, why don’t you stop posing long enough to suggest an alternative? Then explain how mockery and scorn have any chance of advancing it.
Your persistent political oversimplification and refusal to acknowledge any meaningful difference between the two major parties – based on the fallacy that the lack of every difference proves the lack of any difference – is all too common on web-based discussion boards: the triumph of posturing over serious argument. How is it superior for someone to do nothing but take potshots while making no constructive contribution whatsoever?
Getting back to the subject at hand, I am proud to be associated with Bay Windows, which has done fine work in documenting Romney’s flip-flopping.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
why don’t you stop posing long enough to suggest an alternative
I have suggested an alternative, while you desperately insist that my approach doesn’t work.
I propose a way towards equal treatment with work. You argue that the work required is too hard, so we should vote for the Romneys, Clintons, McCains and Obamas of the world who view our human rights as something to be “triangulated” on the latest month’s poll results.
persistent political oversimplification
You seem to be confusing your bad habit of obfuscating the basic truth about the records of Republican and Democratic “top runners” with sophistication — when it’s really just sophistry.
I am proud to be associated with Bay Windows, which has done fine work in documenting Romney’s flip-flopping
And, of course, we’ve gotta get in a bit of preening and “see, I’m a connected part of the elite” too. Typical, typical. 😉
posted by Tim on
Romeny has recanted all his previous positions on gay rights.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmY1MTQyMTk0Yjk2ZDNmZmVmNmNkNjY4ODExMGM5NWE=
posted by Mark on
Seems like Romney’s position is the same as John Kerry’s position: I support equal rights for gays—just not marriage.
posted by Northeast Libertarian on
Except he goes on about “sexual preference,” which is another right-wing cliche.
He’s good at triangulating — there’s nothing between his position-du-jour and that of any other triangulating position like Bill “I will fight for you (by signing DOMA)” Clinton, or John “I voted for it before I voted against it” Kerry, or John “I oppose anti-gay amendments but now I support this one” McCain.
Now, cue Richard to huff in with one of his “it’s nuance and I’m making a difference by supporting these guys, by the way, I am affiliated with the National Review who broke this story, I’m a real powerbroker” posts. . . 😉