It’s pretty hard to have a core belief on an issue if you have no core:
…[Mitt] Romney, who has called Roe v. Wade “one of the darkest moments in Supreme Court history,” was forced to defend his anti-abortion position on Wednesday after he told the Des Moines Register on Tuesday, “There’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m familiar with that would become part of my agenda.” His campaign walked back his statement within two hours, saying that he would “of course” support legislation aimed at restricting access to abortion…
Yes or no, Mittens? T.S. Eliot had your number back in 1925, before you were even born: Shape without form, shade without colour/Paralysed force, gesture without motion…
Does anyone really want the lying shape-shifter Mitt Romney picking our Supreme Court justices? Or any other Republican? Vote a straight Democratic ticket in November.
Willard’s strategy is clear: say what the larger audience wants to hear, then have your staff quietly ‘fix’ the comment/position so you don’t screw with your base. Nice.
Romney will say anything that he thinks will persuade voters to give him their vote.
What he says has nothing to do with how he governs.
Obama actually gives lots of hints that he’s a corporatist conservative, altho’ he’s also into flim-flamming the electorate. Prepare for his offering to cut SocSec and Medicare to get a Grand Bargain — which will not be grand for us lower economic quintile peons.
Romney’s past actions are the best indicator of his actions as president. Prepare to be offshored in one way or another. New hot wars? Offer the poor work if they’ll agree to go overseas to some low wage country? Or sell their SocSec benefits for a job now? There will be some kind of deal which greatly enriches the rich and further impoverishes the lower 90% of Americans.