Well, I have (defended isn’t the right word – how to put it?) suggested possible ways to view Romney’s shifting political views in a more charitable light. Mainly, this was because I was offended by the knee-jerk partisan attacking that didn’t do much beyond view Romney’s rhetoric in the most uncharitable and worst possible light. (I think Charity, if a true principle, undergoes its greatest test when politics are involved).
But that doesn’t mean the criticisms aren’t valid.
Well, the very partisan Weekly Standard has done some digging, and found the following (behind a firewall, but JPod over at the Corner pointed me to this article that covers a lot of the same ground) from 2002:
“I respect and will protect a woman’s right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government’s. The truth is no candidate in the governor’s race in either party would deny women abortion rights. So let’s end an argument that does not exist and stop these cynical and divisive attacks that are made only for political gain.”
Romney also stated that he agreed with Roe v. Wade, that Medicaid should fund abortion, and a few other things troubling to many conservatives.
Now, when the initial attacks on Romney came out, they relied on quotes 10+ years old – and I really saw no problem with that, since I have (in some cases radically, in others not so much) changed my own views over the last 10+ years. But these 2002 quotes show that his political views did not change all that much over the preceding decade – not until he became a serious possible presidential candidate.
Now, Romney has a narrative to explain this, and I can actually see myself as fine with it, since there have been times I’ve changed views over a short period of time due to a striking experience. And since Rudy Giuliani shows that there’s at least some chance for a somewhat liberal Republican to take the national stage, Romeny didn’t have to necessarily change his views to become viable as a presidential candidate, though it would have been a much tougher sell.
But the timing still bugs me, and the 2002 quotes show it’s not just changes over a 10+ year period anymore. But my mind isn’t yet made up on this issue. So, I’m not going to claim Romney really is just pandering to the conservative base. But still —
(Romney supporters are more than welcome to defend him. Romney detractors can attack him as well, but both sides: please try and add to the conversation in some small way. I tire of the constant parroting of the standard talking points taken from political pundits).
For some balance, I will also link to a blog post about an LA Times article on Harry Reid’s success at becoming a Land Baron.
Oh, and New Hampshire polls the following way: “Giuliani gets 33% of likely Republican primary votes today, McCain 32%. Mitt Romney follows with 21%. 11% would vote for some other Republican.”