“If you have courage and convictions, your new soulmate will be Steve Deace. He delivers.” —Mike Huckabee
Steve Deace > News > National Politics > Morning Briefing: October 19th, 2012

Radio shows

Morning Briefing: October 19th, 2012

By Steve Deace

The Many Faces of Mitt

History made this week by Mitt Romney — of the wrong kind.

I believe he is the first Republican nominee for president to ever run a pro-abortion television ad in a general election campaign. This one is targeted specifically at the key swing state of Virginia.

In it, Romney is essentially saying he’s okay with the killing of children conceived in the so-called “exceptions” like my own family line, or maybe someone that is close to you. If what this Romney commercial is saying came true, than the Republican presidential candidate would essentially erase my three children from the planet, because they would’ve never been born.

Sad, but not surprising when you consider his record:

1) Romney is pro-choice in 1994 U.S. Senate race because he says he lost a loved one to a back alley abortion.

2) In 2002, Romney says he’s neither pro-choice or pro-life in running for governor of Massachusetts, and that he will not threaten any of the state’s pro-abortion laws.

3) In 2005, Governor Romney vetoes a controversial contraception bill. He says studying what it would actually do led to a change of heart on the issue. In an op-ed to the Boston Globe about the matter, Romney now says he is pro-life.

4) Later in 2006 despite his self-proclaimed pro-life conversion, Romney signs into law Romneycare which includes taxpayer funded elective abortions for just $50 a kill (abortion-on-demand) and gave Planned Parenthood a permanent seat on a board overseeing the legislation, without providing a similar seat for pro-lifers.

5) As governor of Massachusetts, Romney forced Catholic hospitals to issue the so-called “Morning After” abortifacient, which is similar to the contraception mandate in Obamacare he is criticizing the president for. During the 2012 GOP primary debates, Romney lied when he said he didn’t after he was confronted by Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum on the matter.

6) During the 2008 campaign, Romney said he was for the Human Life Amendment proposed in the Republican Party platform, which enshrine the right to life of the unborn in the U.S. Constitution. Later, Romney walked back that stance and said he favored a states’ rights position on child killing, which most pro-lifers oppose.

6) In 2011 Romney seems to tell Mike Huckabee he favored the Mississippi personhood initiative at a time it was a hot topic, but then the campaign later said the governor had no position on the initiative and it was each individual state’s decision.

7) During the 2012 campaign, Romney was the only Republican presidential candidate who refused to sign either the Personhood USA pledge or the Susan B. Anthony pledge.

8) Romney nominates a 100% pro-life running mate, and then the two issue a statement chastising 100% pro-life U.S. Senate candidate Todd Akin and saying they’re pro-choice in certain situations.

9) Romney gives an interview with CBS News prior to the Republican Convention in which he says he’s for child killing in cases of “health of the mother,” which is essentially abortion-on-demand.

9) In July, a letter from Romney to a pro-life activist is published at Life News laying out his pro-life agenda if he were elected president. Later, in October Romney tells the Des Moines Register he won’t do anything on the life issue if he’s president.

10) A day after saying that to the Iowa newspaper, Romney tells an audience in the crucial swing state of Ohio he’ll “be a pro-life president.”

11) This week, Romney starts running an ad in favor of killing children conceived via rape or incest, like pro-life warrior Rebecca Kiessling.

If you’re keeping score of that breathtaking evolution, that means Romney has essentially taken every conceivable position on the most defining moral debate of this age. Every single one, and some of them more than once.

I understand the priority to defeat the most pro-abortion president ever in the heat of an election, but in exchange for that we in the pro-life movement are literally letting Romney get away with murder. Which doesn’t leave me much confidence we’ll “hold him accountable after the election” as many of our “leaders” have promised us.

You can friend “Steve Deace” on Facebook or follow him on Twitter @SteveDeaceShow. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1390841482 Ken Crow

    Steve: I go back to my original argument with you on this subject. We have 2 Candidates, that TWO, not 4 or 5 or 500, two candidates! One seeks the destruction of America and one is actually a pretty good one, just not as conservative as we like. Now my question for you is this. Why do you keep wanting to bash him? Why do you insisting on denegrating the guy that might very save your nation for to live to fight another day? My friend, honestly, you are not on the right side on this.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1372296666 Don Andersen

      Ken, because he has a Talk Show audience to satisfy, and “they” understand and largely agree with him on this. In the larger scheme on a National basis, it is, as you correctly point out, a moot point! Personally I would like to see a 50 % reduction in the abortion deaths. Steve will only accept 100%, and he doesn’t care if it takes 100 years to actually get legislation to do that, and can apparently accept the millions that will die during the 100 years it takes to accomplish this, but it is 100% or nothing. Really to save the life of the mother and rape cases are a small fraction of 1% of all abortions, so why must we force everyone to disregard this being allowed?

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1177763492 Monte Goodyk

        I did the math yesterday based on 1996 abortion numbers. Your mere 1% is actually over 137,000 murders YEARLY JUST IN THE US!!!

    • Mark

      Ken, if you really research Romney’s record, he’s arguably more liberal than Obama.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1390841482 Ken Crow

    Should have edited above, but you get the idea.

  • Ryan

    There are actually 6 certified candidates running for president.

  • CincyMom

    So pointing out the record of an elected official who wants to be President, which is what we do to BO, equals “bashing” him/her?
    The only thing worse than being deceived is being the deceiver, and nothing will hasten the political pendulum shift like unrealistic expectations. For too long we’ve crawled back to the abusive spouse (Progressive Republican establishment) only to be blamed when they lose and forsaken when they win, which is the only consistent part of their platform.
    As such, it is irresponsible to tell everyone that Mitt Romney is the end-all-be-all answer to our prayers, when anyone who can read may look @ his record and find out otherwise. The only thing his decade-long quest for the WH reveals is that we get the gov’t we deserve, especially given that he layed the groundwork for many of BO’s policies.
    BO must be defeated, there is no doubt. But in the process, let us not be guilty of the very things for which we criticize Dems: deceiving and/or deifying a candidate simply b/c they procured the nomination. Only honest conversations about elected officials – who are ultimately reflections of the electorate – will yield credibility and effectiveness.
    Love, mom.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003334633536 Chris Downey

    Jeremiah advised Zedekiah to submit to the Babylonians because the Davidic throne had earned captivity, but it didn’t have to be a siege and slaughter; Zedekiah refused for fear of his many hard-line counselors and all Jerusalem paid the price. Conservatism was served in this cycle by many competing egos and enablers who held on to the bitter end. Now, Babylonians will rule over us one way or another, but we can have some say in the terms.

    I confess I have always been up for a cathartic Romney bashing, and I’ve been willing at times in my life to let enterprises collapse rather than compromise on principle. Still I will most likely vote for Romney. My moment of truth came with the Benghazi attack and cover up. (This is another point where Steve is struggling in terms of his assessment of the impact and the implications.)

    “Pro-life” also applies to our forward deployed personnel and ensuring they have the necessary rules of engagement and force protection posture to survive these next four years. It is wiser to shoot the 25-meter threat before the aiming at the 300-meter target.

    Up until Benghazi, I thought the conservative movement would best be served by a Romney (and GOP establishment) defeat and I wasn’t buying any of the woof-tickets about a second Obama term destroying the United States. The Benghazi incident revealed that Obama is, perhaps purposefully, letting Al Qaeda, et al, off the mat and wants Islamic terrorism to feed as a parasite on the carcass of the First Amendment.

    Add Benghazi to Fast and Furious, and a host of other evil designs, and I have reached the tipping point. The Republican Party, even under the Romney candidacy, is the best top-cover conservatism can have at this moment. We had better take advantage of it. I’m not saying roll over for the Party, but it appears best to roll with the Party through 6 November.

  • TD

    How is this different from any other Republican president in recent memory? Romney supports access to contraception. And he would not support an effort to make abortion illegal in the cases of rape and incest.

    Steve, the rhetoric you’re using here is so over-the-top, so misleading, and runs so roughshod over any meaningful distinctions, that it’s ridiculous. We are not “literally letting Romney get away with murder.” Literally? And having a platform that allows for abortions in cases of rape and incest — which has been a mainstream Republican position for quite some time — is a long way from “essentially saying he’s okay with the killing of children conceived” in these ways. The ad is not “in favor of killing children.” To think that we ought not to have a law compelling women to give birth to children they did nothing to conceive is not the same as “favoring killing children” born in those ways. There are any number of reasons why we might think such a law would be a bad idea right now, or that proposing such a law right now does no favors to the pro-life movement.

    A lot of the things you list above are just pure nonsense, and you can get better information by going to http://www.evangelicalsformitt.org or http://www.romneycentral.com.

  • Mark

    In 2007, Romney also approved a $5 million dollar tax exempt bond to fund Planned Parenthood and a new abortion clinic and in his 2002 campaign for Governor sought the much coveted Planned Parenthood endorsement. And let’s not forget the Romney baby burning business Stericycle from which Mitt made $50 million burning aborted children in furnaces. This is why Mitt won’t release his pre-2010 tax returns.

  • Mark

    The most conservative pro-life organization, American Right to Life, has compared the records of Romney and Obama and declared Obama the lesser of two evils. Go to their website and see… RepublicansAgainstRomney.

Deace on TV