Cross-posted over at Conservative Culture
Lifenews.com has an interesting article on the preparations of three candidates for the 2008 Iowa Presidential caucus: George Pataki, Mike Huckabee, and Mitt Romney.
Pro-choicer George Pataki is assembling a coalition “to help him appear more conservative to voters there.” He even got a board member of Iowa Right to Life to join his team.
Mike Huckabee hired Eric Woolson to handle his legislative and grassroots effort in the state. Woolson was a press coordinator for Governor George W. Bush’s successful 2000 primary. Huckabee recently spoke at the meeting of the Iowa Christian Coalition.
Meanwhile, Mitt Romney (who, as Lifenews put it, “recently declared himself pro-life”) established a PAC and is beginning to lay the framework for a probable run.
I like Lifenews’s apt description of Romney’s shifting stances. As I mentioned in an earlier post over at Conservative Culture, Romney told NARAL in 2003: “I respect and will protect a woman’s right to choose.” He’s been trying to paint himself as pro-life since, positioning himself for a national race. His supporters argue that his statements when running for Governor should be ignored since he had to say that to win a pro-choice state. So what? If what he said then was just to get ahead politically, maybe what he’s saying now is also just to get ahead politically.
The last time I said that Romney is a RINO, one of his supporters called me a religious bigot. I’m not. He’s a Mormon and I’m a Protestant Christian, but that’s not why I oppose Romney’s candidacy. I oppose Romney because he’s a RINO.
But maybe that term is too harsh. After all, Romney might not really believe the liberal political views he espoused when running for governor. He might have run as a liberal then because it was popular and he might be running as a conservative now because it’s popular now. Maybe Romney isn’t a RINO. Maybe he’s just another Taft.