Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Wiki: Mitt Romney claims relative died from illegal abortion.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
MethuenProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-05-07 09:17 PM
Original message
Wiki: Mitt Romney claims relative died from illegal abortion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_Romney
As of 2007, Romney holds <[pro-life>] views, though in 1994 he supported <[abortion rights>] in Massachusetts because a relative died as the result of an illegal abortion.

This sounds a lot like his "lifetime hunter" claim to me.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
graywarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-05-07 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. Oily creep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-05-07 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. That Was When He Was Running to The LEFT of Ted Kennedy!
See for yourself, as he debated Kennedy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MethuenProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-05-07 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Oh, I don't doubt for a minute he said it. What I doubt is if it's true.
A mormon getting an illegal abortion?
Sorry, not buying it, Mitt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-06-07 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. His mother was a convert
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Olney Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-05-07 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
3. So he wants to change his mind and enable illegal abortions again?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-05-07 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Women and gays must die for the glory of GAWD!
That's what all of these patriarchal religions believe in and preach.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-05-07 09:31 PM
Response to Original message
4. I dunno. Don't most of us have a relative that died like that?
I do. Of course, it was called "a fall down the stairs."

Lotta women died falling down stairs back when.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-05-07 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. Exactly.
Edited on Sat May-05-07 11:28 PM by lolly
If we all look through our family trees, many of us will find a picture of some great-aunt who, as you said, "fell down stairs" or "off a ladder" when she was, oh, about 17 or so. Amazing how clumsy young women were in the pre-Rowe era. Mine "fell off a barn roof." She survived, but somehow the fall off the roof made her unable to have children.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-05-07 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Her name was Bessie.
She was my mother's favorite cousin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-05-07 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
7. I can believe it--I'm sure that sort of stuff happened pretty regularly
back in the bad old days. It's just a bit uncouth to blow off your poor dead relative for political opportunity, however. But Mittens is slick. He's getting all his goofups and flip-flops out there now, and they will eventually lose their impact and just become part of the narrative. Watch out for the Mittler, because he'll say or do anything to get elected, like McCain, but he's younger and better-looking. Dangerous and not to be underestimated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-06-07 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. If Mittens ever starts polling
better, instead of the distant 3rd he's at now, expect McCain's henchmen to use those flip-flops and goof-ups in his ads. Look for 527s to pop up too. A well put together ad filled with fear and hyperbole will just magnify Mitten's flip flops.

Mittens has given his opponents a wealth of gems to use against him. And they will if he ever gets close to them.

Mz Pip
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BearSquirrel2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-06-07 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. How did it come to this point ...

It used to be that all Republican front-runners were longtime knuckle dragging adherents to wing-nut philosophy. Now the Republican front-runners are reformed progressive who are setting speed records for backflipping all the way into the Carolinas. When they get to Mississippi, they'll have accomplished feats never dreamed of by any gymnast.

Seriously, if Republicans that that KERRY was a flip-flopper because he voted differently based on the riders attached to a war bill what are they going to think of:

a) Romney who was pro-choice and governor of the most liberal state in the union (so we've been told) Assachusetts.
b) Giuliani, the man who has no shame about bringing a mistress into the house of state and booting out his wife. The man who is fine if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, and just as peachy if they don't.
c) McCain, the man who railed against religious zealotry in 2000 until the zealots came out and voted against him. The man who railed against torture, then said nothing while George Bush promised that he will torture if he wants to.

Huckabee seemed to be the only sane one until he raised his hand the other night to count himself down into the pit of religious fundamentalism.

With the general mood of the country leaning against wing-nuttery, I can understand the Republicans wanting to run moderates. But sheesh, can they not apply 1/10 of the standards they apply to Democrats to Republicans. Why not just get rid of the primaries and hold a game of twister to decide the nominee.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-06-07 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. RIght now I think
name recognition has a lot to do with it. Everyone in the whole country knows who McCain and Guiliani are. Mittens may be polling third but it's like 9%. I think his popularity is the tax cut thing. Guiliani is running to the right since that's where the primary voters are. I think these guys will shread each other as the primary season moves along. Whoever compares himself to Ronald Reagan the most gets extra points.

Huckabee did seem sane. When he was on the Daily Show he seemed comfortable, likable and had a sense of humor. But you're right about the evolution thing. With the raising of that hand he showed himself to be just another fundy nutjob, a pleasant, likable one, but a nutjob none the less.

I wish Matthews had asked more forcefully about the flip-flops. Mittens answer that he decided he was against abortion because he came to the conclusion that cloning was bad was hardly a reasonable answer.

I hope someone is doing some serious opposition research on Thompson. He'll jump to the head of the pack IMHO if he decides to run. He's an actor and as a long time resident of California I can tell you folks sure do like actors.

Mz Pip
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-06-07 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #15
21. Assachussetts!
:rofl:

I live here and that's a new one on me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
splat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-05-07 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
8. Good interview/debate question: Is the relative real? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-05-07 11:15 PM
Response to Original message
9. He was for it before he was against it. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prophet 451 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-06-07 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
12. Might be true
Pre-Roe I'm sure a fair few women died of illegal, botched abortions (anyone got numbers?) but logically, they should make one pro-choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-06-07 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. OK, so I spelled it wrong.
Yeah, it's Roe, not Rowe.

I think the point was that, when Romney claimed to be against criminalizing abortion, he used his relative as his excuse, per Wikipedia.

Now, he says he's against it. Our inference is that, assuming he was telling the truth before, his attitude now is "To hell with her, she deserved to die for her sins."

I don't have the numbers on deaths from illegal abortion, and anything official is probably way undercounted (see the "Falling off a ladder" posts above) but I've heard that "maternity wards" of earlier eras, which now almost exclusively house new mothers, once had a substantial number of victims of illegal abortions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prophet 451 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-06-07 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. So, he's a hypocrite?
He's a hypocrite, he's a Republican presidential contender. But I repeat myself.

Given how weak the crop of Republican hopefuls is this time around (seriously, Tom frickin' Tancredo?) and given how in love with their own power teh R's are, we shouldn't be surprised at anything they pull between now and the election. Seriously, if I was Obama or Hillary, I'd stay off small aircraft.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AzDar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-06-07 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
16. Romney is nothing but a well-coiffed weasel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-06-07 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #16
22. Hey...easy on the weasels.
Even they're embarrassed by this guy. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-06-07 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
20. OK, on deaths from illegal abortion--
Edited on Sun May-06-07 08:31 PM by lolly
From "Lessons from Before Roe:"


One stark indication of the prevalence of illegal abortion was the death toll. In 1930, abortion was listed as the official cause of death for almost 2,700 women—nearly one-fifth (18%) of maternal deaths recorded in that year. The death toll had declined to just under 1,700 by 1940, and to just over 300 by 1950 (most likely because of the introduction of antibiotics in the 1940s, which permitted more effective treatment of the infections that frequently developed after illegal abortion). By 1965, the number of deaths due to illegal abortion had fallen to just under 200, but illegal abortion still accounted for 17% of all deaths attributed to pregnancy and childbirth that year. And these are just the number that were officially reported; the actual number was likely much higher.

Poor women and their families were disproportionately impacted. A study of low-income women in New York City in the 1960s found that almost one in 10 (8%) had ever attempted to terminate a pregnancy by illegal abortion; almost four in 10 (38%) said that a friend, relative or acquaintance had attempted to obtain an abortion. Of the low-income women in that study who said they had had an abortion, eight in 10 (77%) said that they had attempted a self-induced procedure, with only 2% saying that a physician had been involved in any way.

These women paid a steep price for illegal procedures. In 1962 alone, nearly 1,600 women were admitted to Harlem Hospital Center in New York City for incomplete abortions, which was one abortion-related hospital admission for every 42 deliveries at that hospital that year. In 1968, the University of Southern California Los Angeles County Medical Center, another large public facility serving primarily indigent patients, admitted 701 women with septic abortions, one admission for every 14 deliveries.


So, there you go.

If you want to prevent abortions, make birth control readily available, educate people in how to use it, de-stigmatize illegitimate birth, and provide support for mothers.

If you just want to kill and maim young women, then criminalize abortion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-06-07 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
23. Not a family member. A "close family friend"
In the 1994 Senate campaign, Romney said abortion should be safe and legal. He also voiced support for the controversial abortion pill RU-486. In a debate with Kennedy that year, he explained how his belief in abortion rights had been shaped by the death of a close family friend years before from an illegal abortion.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/politics/candidates/articles/2006/12/17/romneys_journey_to_the_right/?page=3
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-06-07 10:10 PM
Response to Original message
24. and he thinks abortion should be against the law because. . . ????
Romney. . .Romney. . .Romney. . . ??????


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 04:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC