AmeriChussetts? Romney's "Evolving Consenus" on Key Issues

In a few days we will elect a new President of the United States. If things go as the polls are predicting right now, that man will be Mitt Romney though election fraud and an out and out coup by Obama forces cannot be ruled out. But, if Romney is elected, American Christians will praise God and go back to their lives without thinking twice about what they have done.

The ultra liberal Des Moines Register just endorsed Romney and in so doing probably prophesied what a Romney presidency will be all about ... in a word compromise. So, looking back objectively, where did Romney the governor stand on the issues before he became Romney the Presidential candidate:

On abortion and the right to life (source ABC NEWS which calls him an "abortion moderate"):

2002: 'I Will Preserve and Protect a Woman's Right to Choose' While running for Massachusetts governor eight years later, Romney assured voters in the moderate state that he was "not going to change our pro-choice laws in Massachusetts in any way."

2005: 'I Am Pro-Life' but, he also said he would uphold his campaign promise not to change Massachusetts' abortion laws." 

2007: 'We Should Overturn Roe v. Wade' During his first presidential bid in 2007, Romney explained that he had "changed my mind" on abortion while serving his one term as Massachusetts governor. 

2011: 'I Will Support Efforts to Prohibit Federal Funding for Any Organization Like Planned Parenthood' While Romney said repeatedly that abortion laws should be left up to the states, he told Fox's Mike Huckabee in October 2011 that he "absolutely" supports a Constitutional amendment banning abortion. 

2012: 'There's No Legislation With Regards to Abortion That I'm Familiar With That Would Become Part of My Agenda' Less than two months after accepting the GOP nomination, Romney seemed to tack back toward the center on his abortion stance, telling the Des Moines Register this week that he would not make abortion legislation part of his agenda.

So, it appears that on the issue of abortion Romney pretty well says whatever he needs to to get elected.

On the Second Amendment right to own and bear arms (source Politico:)

1.1994 “I don’t line up with the NRA.”, During his 1994 Senate campaign, Romney came out in support of the Brady Bill and a ban on certain types of assault weapons. 

2. 2002 “We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts — I support them. I won’t chip away at them. I believe they help protect us, and provide for our safety.” — Sept. 24, 2002, at a debate during the Massachusetts gubernatorial race. 

3. 2004 Signed a permanent assault-weapons ban as governor of the Bay State. “Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts,” Romney said at the July 1, 2004, signing ceremony. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”  

5. 2006 Signed up for a lifetime NRA membership. 

6. 2007 “I support the Second Amendment as one of the most basic and fundamental rights of every American.” — Sept. 24, 2007, in a video address at an NRA conference. 

7. 2012 "I will enforce the laws already on the books and punish, to the fullest extent of the law, criminals who misuse firearms to commit crimes." But he does not support adding more laws and regulations that do nothing more than burden law-abiding citizens while being ignored by criminals. Mitt will also provide law enforcement with the proper and effective resources they need to deter, apprehend, and punish criminals.”

So, again it appears that on the issue of gun control and gun ownership Romney's position is to say whatever he needs to say to gain consensus and get elected.

On HealthCare Mandates and Socialized Medicine: (source Slate):

June 21, 2005. In a Boston Herald op-ed, Romney outlines his vision:  "Everyone must either become insured or maintain adequate savings to cover their medical expenses. We cannot expect some citizens to pay for others who can afford to pay some or all of their own way." 

April 3, 2006. At a press conference, A reporter ask whether an “assessment” in the bill, which would charge companies $295 per worker for failing to insure their employees, violates Romney’s pledge not to raise taxes. Romney replies: "It’s not a tax hike. It is a fee. It’s an assessment. … " 

April 11, 2006. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, Romney writes:  "Every uninsured citizen in Massachusetts will soon have affordable health insurance and the costs of health care will be reduced. And we will need no new taxes, no employer mandate and no government takeover to make this happen. …" 

April 12, 2006. Romney signs the bill into law. In the first paragraph of his press release, he proclaims: “Today, Massachusetts is leading the way with health insurance for everyone, without a government takeover and without raising taxes.” He notes that “failure by individuals to purchase health insurance will result in the loss of their state tax refund equal to 50 percent of an affordable health insurance premium.” But he describes this sanction as “penalties,” not taxation.

Aug. 24, 2007. In a speech to the Florida Medical Association, Romney says his “enforcement mechanism” for people earning more than three times the poverty level is that “when they get their tax bill … they’re charged $100 a month for not having bought insurance.” He calls the Massachusetts system universal coverage without “needing new taxes.” 

Jan. 5, 2008. In a Republican presidential debate, moderator Charlie Gibson tells Romney, “You imposed tax penalties in Massachusetts.” Romney replies: “Yes. We said, ‘Look, if people can afford to buy it, either buy the insurance or pay your own way. Don't be free riders and pass on the cost to your health care to everybody else.’” 

July 30, 2009. In a USA Today op-ed, Romney touts the Massachusetts law: "First, we established incentives for those who were uninsured to buy insurance. Using tax penalties, as we did, or tax credits, as others have proposed, encourages "free riders" to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medical costs on to others. This doesn't cost the government a single dollar." 

2009. In a CNN interview, Romney frames the tax penalty as an inverted tax credit: “It's a kind of mandate. It's a requirement. In order to get a tax exemption that you'd normally get, you’ve got to have health insurance, because we want everybody in the system. No more free riders.” 

March 7, 2010. On Fox News Sunday, Romney says “we didn't raise taxes” in enacting the Massachusetts law. When Chris Wallace objects that “you have an individual mandate,” Romney replies that the Massachusetts law, unlike Obamacare, entails “no new taxes,” even though residents of Massachusetts who “don't buy insurance” will “find that their taxes are higher.” 

April 15, 2010. In a speech at Claremont McKenna College, Romney repeats what he told Wallace: “If you don’t buy it, you’re going to get penalized with a higher tax rate for not having gotten insurance.” 

June 28, 2012. The U.S. Supreme Court rules that Obama’s individual mandate is unconstitutional as regulation of commerce but is constitutional if interpreted as a tax. Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Senate minority leader, quickly declares, “The Supreme Court has spoken. This law is a tax.” But Romney, speaking a few minutes later, doesn’t bite. He confines his comments about taxation in the law to provisions other than the mandate. 

July 2, 2012. On MSNBC, Eric Fehrnstrom, Romney’s senior adviser and spokesman, tells Chuck Todd, “The governor disagreed with the ruling of the court. He agreed with the dissent that was written by Justice Scalia, which very clearly stated that the mandate was not a tax.” He continues:
Fehrnstrom: The governor believes that what we put in place in Massachusetts was a penalty, and he disagrees with the court’s ruling that the mandate was a tax. But again—
Todd: So he agrees with the president … and he believes that you shouldn’t call the tax penalty a tax, you should call it a penalty or a fee or a fine?
Fehrnstrom: That’s correct. But the president also needs to be held accountable for his hypocritical and contradictory statements. But he’s described it variously as a penalty and as a tax.  

July 2, 2012. Lest anyone mistake Fehrnstrom's comments as a spontaneous rogue error, the Romney campaign issues a press release quoting spokeswoman Andrea Saul:
The Supreme Court left President Obama with two choices: the federal individual mandate in Obamacare is either a constitutional tax or an unconstitutional penalty. Governor Romney thinks it is an unconstitutional penalty. What is President Obama’s position: is his federal mandate unconstitutional or is it a tax?” 

July 4, 2012. In an interview with Jan Crawford of CBS News—six days after the Supreme Court ruling, six days after declaring his disagreement with the ruling, and two days after his campaign issued a press release reaffirming that the mandate was a penalty, not a tax—Romney announces that the court’s ruling has changed his view on that question.
Romney: The Supreme Court has the final word. And their final word is that Obamacare is a tax. So it's a tax. …
Crawford: Have you changed your views on this? Do you now believe that it is a tax at the federal level—that the Supreme Court has said it's a tax, so it is a tax?
Romney: Well, I said that I agreed with the dissent, and the dissent made it very clear that they felt it was unconstitutional. But the dissent lost. It's in the minority. And so now the Supreme Court has spoken. … They concluded it was a tax. That's what it is. And the American people know that President Obama has broken the pledge he made. He said he wouldn't raise taxes on middle-income Americans. Not only did he raise the $500 billion that was already in the bill, it's now clear that his mandate, as described by the Supreme Court, is a tax.
Crawford: But does that mean the mandate in the state of Massachusetts under your health care law also is a tax, and that you raised taxes as governor?
Romney: Actually the chief justice, in his opinion, made it very clear that at the state level, states have the power to put in place mandates. They don't need to require them to be called taxes in order for them to be constitutional. And, as a result, Massachusetts' mandate was a mandate, was a penalty, was described that way by the legislature and by me. And so it stays as it was.
Romney also tells CNN: "The Supreme Court is the final word, right? Isn’t that the highest court in the land? And they said it was a tax, didn't they? So it's a tax, of course.”

Romney's Massachusetts State socialized health care plan was the model for Obama Care.  Do you seriously think that Romeny the "moderate consensus candidate" will have the cojones to overturn it? He has already telegraphed his position, "The Supreme Court is the final word."

And the list could go on to other issues like immigration.  For example, see "Romney Softens Stance On Immigration" from the Latino version of Fox News.

James 1:8 tells us that, "A double minded man is unstable in all his ways."  Mitt Romney is more than double minded on these key issues.  He is double tongued, literally two faced.  I Timothy 3:8 (ESV) tells us that our leaders must be: "dignified, not double-tongued ..." The amplified Bible takes this concept further saying they must, "not (be) shifty and double-talkers but sincere in what they say." Romney is shifty on the issues and full of double talk. From the record of his own words the only thing he is really sincere about is wanting your vote.  The only predictable thing that you can say about his position on any issue is that it will be what is required to gain the necessary consensus to get elected.  And while I agree with most of my friends that Romney is less dangerous than Obama, I cannot support him for President.