Sunday, February 04, 2007

Romney Never was a "Liberal" . . . No, not even close.

Hat tip to Charles Mitchell over at Evangelicals for Mitt for linking to this report from "The Politico" blog where they astutely point out that Romney was far from "a liberal" in his 1994 race against Teddy Kennedy.

Check out his campaign flyers from '94 . . . Front and Back

Below is a portion of the flyer with some of the specific issue stances:

Looks like he ran a pretty conservative campaign back then to me!

Basically, I agree with Charles about how more and more news stories and blog entries flat out say that Romney ran in '94 as "a liberal". Well, if you run acrossed that, point folks to these flyers as it helps clear up that common misconception.

I like to divide conservative credentials into three distinct areas:

1) Fiscal Conservatism
2) Social Conservatism
3) "Toughness" Conservatism (i.e. militarily or "tough on crime")

Romney has had a consistant and flawless record as a "Fiscal Conservative" AND as a "Thoughness Conservative." Those points are solid and there has been no "movement" by Romney in those areas.

Romney did not run in Mass as a "social conservative" but saying that he was a "social liberal" is not really correct either. His social stances put him as a solid "moderate" in this senatorial bid as Kennedy was to his left as the real and bonafide liberal in the race.

So, to sum up . . . Romney was never close to being a "liberal."

To even say that he was a "moderate" is missing two huge pieces of the conservative pie. Romney may have run as a "social moderate" but that's as far as the allegations should go.

In reality, Romney's "move to the right" hasn't really been all that far.

7 comments:

Mittreport.com said...

Jeff,

Nice work, good to see someone doing some digging into the was really being said back in 1994 about Romney and his views. I just posted two articles written back in 1994 by the Boston Globe (hardly a supporter of Romney).

Anti-abortion group endorses Romney bid
http://www.mittreport.com/Anti-abortiongroupendorsesRomney.html

Abortion-rights group rips Romney
http://www.mittreport.com/abortion-rightsgroupripsromney.html

Both pieces show a long and constant stance and further support where the Governor stands today. Romney has never been a 'pro-choice' candidate.

-MR

Jeff Fuller said...

Great stuff from the Mitt Report again! Keep it up!

Big Jay said...

My contacts in the GOP primary watch say that Romney's recent dip in the polls have a lot to do with the Weekly Standard semi- hit piece done last week. A lot of the pro-life movement won't even concede to a rape or incest exception to their anti-abortion views. Seriously, look at the story (you can find the link at realclearpolitics.com) and you'll see that the writer quotes members of NARAL and other pro-abortion groups outright. Think about it, last year the WS wrote a glowing piece on Romney, and a year later they publish about as damning of an indictment on Romney as it gets. These people are totally offended that Romney even ever worked with any pro-choice republican group, or asked for their vote.

The majority of Americans are at least somewhat ambiguous on the abortion issue (rape and incest exclusion) but not the hard core pro life movement. To them it's like an ongoing holocaust. It isn't about building consensus and getting together a permanent republican majority. To them it isn't time for calm. It's time to hide jews in your basement whether its against the law or not. Anything short of going over the cliff with your flags blazing isn't good enough for them.

Chief among the despised to he hard core pro life coalition (which I thought I was part of until some recent conversations I've had with some people who are REALLY pro-life) are people like David Souter. The nod nod, wink wink 'conservatives' who fake it, but when push comes to shove they won't overturn roe v wade.

That's the worry with Romney - (but seriously - how could it be a worry? Even if Giuliani were nominated he coudn't get away with nominating the wrong Supreme Court justices. No way!) The worry is that Romney is a fair weather friend to the pro-life movement and that when the moment of truth comes he will abandon them.

Romney's strategy should be to argue that because he changed his mind he can argue for the pro-life cause BETTER. Maybe a long, sophisticated, intellectually rigorous article in the atlantic monthly (or some other publication) about why he changed his mind on abortion, and the rest of the country should change their mind too. Something where he goes through some of the old arguments in favor of abortion and makes the case for the culture of life. Something to get the publicity off whether he 'flip flopped' on abortion, and get the debate back on the issues where the debate belongs. Frankly I don't know what is inside Romney's head. When it comes down to times he has taken action, I can't see anything in the record where I can find fault.

Jeff Fuller said...

Thanks for your comments Jay. I do think Romney needs to face things head on. The acquisition of Jay Bopp Jr. was HUGE and he carrys tons of weight in these circles. I bet that he'll be able to "put out fires" (like the WS piece) before they even get started.

He says he's convinced that Romney's in the Pro-Life camp for real. I think Romney's dip in this area reached it's nadir over the last few weeks, but he's on the way back up already!

Goat said...

By your count, Goat is a 3-1-2 conservative, without security the other two mean little and I can bring it together.

Anonymous said...

I like your 3 categories of Conservative Credentials, but I think there needs to be one more- Domestic Policy Conservatism. Here is where McCain has been doing his dimwitted bipartisan deals with Democrats on Campaign Finance, Education, Immigration, etc. These are the ares in which he has most distinctly been anything other than a conservative.

Jeff Fuller said...

Great point anon 2:51.

However, I'd put immigration in with "tough on crime" conservatism.

You're right though that my classification doesn't encompass much of the domestic issues which definitely have their conservative an liberal spectrums. Romney seems to be solidly on the "right" side of these issues too (English immersion, school vouchers, campaign finance, etc . . .