Good morning Cactus Flower,
Well, of course, sort of... ;))
a snippet:
However, spokesperson Andrea Paul‘s statements following Romney’s comments to the editorial board did raise some questions among liberals.
“Mitt Romney is proudly pro-life and will be a pro-life president,” Paul said, going on to also claim that Romney ”would of course support legislation aimed at providing greater protections for life.” The Huffington Post is claiming that this is evidence that the campaign had to “walk back” Romney’s “surprise” comments. But — is this the case?
It’s important to note that Romney told The Des Moines Register that he wouldn’t be making any anti-abortion legislation part of his agenda. Paul’s comment merely states that he would support legislation that “provides greater protections for life.”
There’s not necessarily a conflict here, seeing as Romney, should he become president, may decide to sign pro-life legislation that comes his way. In his comments to the board, the Republican candidate might have been simply explaining that he will not be actively pushing such legislation himself.
Semantics or a flip-flop? You decide.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/romney-abortion-legislation-wont-be-part-of-my-agenda-plus-did-he-really-flip-flop-on-the-issue/
| 