Mitt Romney made the following statement on the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade:

Today marks the 39th anniversary of one of the darkest moments in Supreme Court history, when the court in Roe v. Wade claimed authority over the fundamental question regarding the rights of the unborn. The result is millions of lives since that day have been tragically silenced. Since that day, the pro-life movement has been working tirelessly in an effort to change hearts and minds and protect the weakest and most vulnerable among us. Today, we recommit ourselves to reversing that decision, for in the quiet of conscience, people of both political parties know that more than a million abortions a year cannot be squared with the good heart of America.

The 39th March for Life begins tomorrow.

UPDATE: Mitt Romney today released the following statement on the March for Life:

In great number, men and women from across our country are gathered today on the Mall in Washington in the cause of defending the rights of the unborn. In their ranks are many who remember the day when Roe v. Wade was announced. Also among them are thousands of young Americans born after 1973 whose idealism and good hearts will continue to represent the passion and resolve of the pro-life movement. All of them are marching today in the spirit of compassion and mercy, and I share their commitment to laws that protect the innocent and uphold a culture of life. We take heart that we are winning this issue step by step, and I look forward to working arm and arm with the pro-life movement until the wrong of Roe v. Wade has been set right.”

Following this past Christmas, reports surfaced of a meeting by prominent national evangelical leaders to be held in Texas sometime in January. You will recall this meeting involved over 150 people at a ranch outside Houston, January 15th. The ostensible purpose of the meeting was to caucus and select one of the presidential candidates behind which all voters could unite — in effect, to choose the one “non-Romney” candidate that they thought could best defeat Romney. Fascinating!

As with any caucus, some were prepared to stand and persuade others to vote for the candidate they believed to be the best to select as the Republican nominee for President.

One of those leaders present that day, at the ranch outside Houston, was nationally known and highly respected Mark DeMoss, a prominent Evangelical. Mr. DeMoss stood for Governor Mitt Romney.

Though I have never met Mr. DeMoss and therefore do not know him, I can only imagine that his remarks to this body required a tremendous amount of courage, especially with the understanding that the vast majority of those present were intent on selecting a candidate they believed could best oppose, and therefore defeat Governor Romney! For this one act alone, I have tremendous admiration and respect for Mark DeMoss. I strongly believe that Mitt Romney will be the next President of the United States — if so, I believe that history will hold Mark DeMoss out as a true American patriot in the stature of any this nation’s finest patriots of the past and present.

I am most grateful that Mr. DeMoss granted MittRomneyCentral.com the privilege of publishing his remarks to the group of 150+ Evangelicals exactly one week ago today. When I requested “an editorial” from Mr. DeMoss through our friend, John Schroeder of Article VI Blog, I never dreamed I would receive his remarks to the other evangelical leaders at the ranch that day.

Mark DeMoss’s speech that day is published below in its entirety — unedited.

[Almost exactly one year ago, Nate Gunderson published this outstanding article by Mark DeMoss that received over 2,300 views and 33 comments]

Mark DeMoss founded The DeMoss Group in 1991, and since then he has served some of the world’s most prominent and effective Christian ministries and enterprises. Mark has been involved in shaping some of the largest Christian events and campaigns over the past decade while simultaneously overseeing the growth of his firm. He has extensive media relations experience with both religious and mainstream media and provides particular expertise to clients in crisis/issues management and communications. Mark provides primary public relations counsel and strategic planning for The DeMoss Group. His first book, The Little Red Book of Wisdom, was published in 2007.

Favorite DeMoss Group Core Value > We demonstrate uncommon integrity.

REMARKS to HOUSTON EVENT January 13-14, 2012

By Mark DeMoss

In the summer of 2006 I began a search for the perfect presidential candidate. I’m here to tell you: I still haven’t found him—or her.

But I would suggest, neither have you—because there simply is no such thing. Just as there’s no such thing as the perfect employee, teacher, or pastor. None of us can find another person—including a spouse—with whom we agree on everything.

However, I’ll tell you what I did find that summer of ‘06. I found one of the most remarkable men and families I have ever met or known in Mitt Romney, his wife Ann, and their five sons. Governor Romney was my choice for president in ’08, and he remains my choice today. I didn’t arrive at this decision lightly.

So how did I, as a conservative and an evangelical, land on Mitt Romney? After reading all I could find and talking to people who knew him, I went to see him and told him I’d like to help him. I also told him he couldn’t pay me—ever.

I have a three-part litmus test for choosing a presidential candidate:

1. He/she must share my values (not necessarily my faith or theology)

2. He/she must be competent to lead and govern should they actually get elected.

3. He/she must be capable of getting elected.

So let me talk for a few minutes about values, competence and electability.

VALUES

• First, while I am not interested in (nor worried about) giving platform to Mormon theology, I think this country would benefit from a good dose of Mormon values. Their overwhelming commitment to marriage, family, hard work, honesty, integrity, morality and character is something to be admired and modeled. Frankly, this church’s record in this area often outperforms ours in many ways. (I was reminded about this again just last weekend while watching one of our fallen evangelical leaders starring in ABC’s reality show Wife Swap.)

  I’ve been in the Romney home numerous times. I’ve been with Mitt in offices, holding rooms, hotel rooms, restaurants, cars and planes all across this country and everything about him is real. I’ve gotten to know dozens of his friends, colleagues and advisors. I’ve even attended his church.

  His marriage of 42 years is rock solid, and I’ll tell you this: I don’t worry about waking up one day to a headline about Mitt Romney like we have been saddened to hear about leaders among our own ranks like Gov. Mark Sanford, Sen. John Ensign, Sen. David Vitter, and countless pastors.

• Gov. Romney has fought hard for values we care deeply about. For example, he immediately condemned the November 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage in his state, and then lobbied hard for a constitutional amendment protecting traditional marriage.
• Keep in mind; Mitt had an 85% Democratic legislature in Massachusetts. This is an important point, which I think is either unknown or lost on many conservative critics. An 85% opposition legislature means bills and measures the governor proposed could be changed at will. It also means measures he vetoed could be overridden at will.

  (By the way, Mitt cast 800 vetoes as governor of Massachusetts—that’s one veto every day-and-a-half for four years.)

  Finally, it means he had to know how to work constructively with people on
  the other side, which is something we could use more of today.

  So when you hear Mitt Romney did something as governor you don’t like, take a minute to find out if he did it, or an 85% Democratic majority did it over his best efforts and objections. A fair and honest assessment of his record requires this.

• Under his leadership, Massachusetts’ public schools began offering middle school classroom programs on abstinence from a faith-based organization.
• As governor, Mitt Romney vetoed bills providing access to the “morning¬after pill” and for expansive, embryo-destroying stem cell research.
• He staunchly defended the right of the Catholic Charities of Boston to refuse to allow homosexual couples to adopt children in its care, and filed a bill to protect such religious liberty.
• National Review political reporter John Miller wrote that, “a good case can be made that Romney has fought harder for social conservatives than any other governor in America, and it is difficult to imagine his doing so in a more daunting environment.”
• Listen to what one notable Republican had to say about Mitt Romney.

  “In a few short days, Republicans from across this country will decide more than their party’s nominee. They will decide the very future of our party and the conservative coalition that Ronald Reagan built. Conservatives can no longer afford to stand on the sidelines in this election, and Governor Romney is the candidate who will stand up for the conservative principles that we hold dear. Governor Romney has a deep understanding of the important issues confronting our country today, and he is the clear conservative candidate that can go into the general election with a united Republican party.”

  Who said this? Rick Santorum did when he endorsed and campaigned for Mitt just four years ago. Nothing in Mitt Romney’s record, speech, or life has changed since Sen. Santorum offered that endorsement, which, knowing the senator, I believe was offered seriously, genuinely, and as a matter of real conviction.

• I have concluded that Mitt Romney’s values more closely resemble my own than any president in my lifetime.

Read more…

Thanks to John Schroeder of Article VI Blog for connecting Mitt Romney Central with Timothy Dalrymple. The following open letter is another outstanding endorsement of Governor Romney as the candidate best suited to represent conservative values as our President of the United States. Tim’s three main arguments below are compelling, especially regarding Governor Romney’s moral leadership.

Timothy Dalrymple is the Director of Content for Patheos.com, the largest religion website in the country, and the managing editor of its Evangelical Portal. He earned his Ph.D. in modern western religious thought at Harvard’s Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, and contributes to Evangelicals for Mitt. Raised in non-denominational evangelical churches in California, Dalrymple has ministry experience in youth ministry, college ministry, prison chaplaincy, teaching apologetics, and leading overseas missions. Formerly of Boston, he is now a member of Perimeter Church in Johns Creek, Georgia. You can follow him at Philosophical Fragments or Facebook.

See the just-released ebook from Evangelicals for Mitt for a comprehensive explanation of why Romney is the best positioned to represent evangelicals’ values in the White House.

By Timothy Dalrymple

Dear Mitt Romney skeptics, and especially my fellow evangelicals,

Do you remember how it felt when the economy began to implode in those anxious, waning months of 2008? We were coming down to the wire in the election contest, and the candidates we had to choose between were Barack Obama and John McCain. Given the choices, of course, I supported McCain. I still think he would have made a far better President than Obama has proven to be.

But as the very foundations of the American economy were shaking and falling away beneath our feet, and we faced the very real possibility of a Second Great Depression, how desperately I wished that Mitt Romney had emerged from the primary as the champion of the GOP. The presiding President and his party took the heat for the financial crisis, and McCain worsened the situation when his actions and statements inspired no confidence in his stability and expertise on economic matters. The election turned in Obama’s favor when he gave the impression of solidity and strength in the economic crisis.

Romney, however, had something Obama couldn’t even begin to claim: a brilliantly successful career in the private sector, and a world of experience specifically in the financial sector, where our most intractable problems lay. Between McCain and Romney, Romney was touted by the conservative commentariat as the conservative option, and I remember feeling as though the liberal media, independents and even some Democrats who were able to vote in primaries had shoehorned John McCain onto the GOP ticket. If Romney had been at the top of the ticket instead, I still believe we would have avoided the lamentable Obama Presidency; compared to a business titan, Obama would have looked like the inexperienced pretender that he was, and he could not have stood up to Romney’s economic expertise in the debates.

Well, we’re still in the midst of an incredible mess as a country. Our financial house is in shambles. Tax reform, regulatory reform, streamlining government, changes to our energy and immigration policies, will all help. But the character of the American people, the moral substructure that provides the necessary, nurturing environment for our democratic free market, has also disintegrated. Our problem is not merely political; it is also cultural. I am convinced of this with every bone in my body: We need to rediscover the virtues of the free market, and we also need to rediscover the economic virtues. On the one hand, we need a President who understands how companies grow and flourish, who understands how the economy works and what provides the predictability and clarity and the space for innovation that the market demands; Romney’s experience in venture capital, properly understood, is one of his truest strengths, because the venture capitalist learns a great deal about what kinds of ventures succeed and what kinds of capital they need. On the other hand, we need someone whose personal integrity and whose socio-political principles will strengthen the family, enrich the workforce, and restore our collective commitment to responsibility and initiative, stewardship and thrift, diligence and creativity.

I’ve written responses to some common misconceptions about Romney and his candidacy – and a long, specifically evangelical case for Mitt can be found in this ebook. The purpose of this letter is simply to set forth, in broad outlines, why I think Romney’s the right guy at the right time for this country. The Presidency is a position of enormously important economic, global and moral leadership. In all three of those areas, I firmly believe that Mitt Romney is the leader we need. He also, not coincidentally, stands the best chance of defeating Barack Obama — and if there’s one thing conservatives agree upon right now, it’s the profound importance of installing new leadership. As the country staggers toward decline, we need someone who can pick us up, rally the American people behind a positive and hopeful vision, and deploy all of his intelligence and experience and skill to move us toward a better future. That’s Mitt.

Economic and Global Leadership

Those who know him personally attest, without exception, that Romney is an extraordinarily intelligent, boundlessly competent, and thoroughly hard-working man. He built a towering reputation in the business world, accomplished a near-miraculous turnaround of the Salt Lake City Olympics (which was mired in scandal and red ink and on the verge of collapsing), and took an extremely liberal state (Massachusetts) that was deeply in debt and restored it to fiscal health and a budget surplus in the course of four years.

In the business world, Romney specialized in turning around failing companies, and he did so with great success. Sometimes, yes, that means eliminating jobs — but in most cases you’re eliminating jobs in order to avoid eliminating a company in its entirety. You make companies more profitable, more competitive, and thus more sustainable. You eliminate jobs now so that you can keep paying the salaries of those who remain, and ideally add more jobs again later. In other words, sometimes the most pro-jobs thing you can do is cut one job and save the company that employs ninety-nine more.

Read more…

Over the last 10 days or so, much as been reported about a meeting or conference of evangelical leaders to be held at the ranch of a judge in Texas. That meeting happened yesterday. There have been literally dozens of newspaper and online articles published leading up to the meeting, and afterward, with all of the accompanying speculation and anticipation. Their goal? To decide upon the “conservative alternative” to Mitt Romney. Really? They must think all Americans are completely ignorant.

Saturday in The Dallas Morning News, Robert Jeffress (yes, that one) was quoted:

“The fat lady hasn’t sung yet, but she’s in the green room warming up. It looks like Gov. Romney is going to win the nomination,” said Jeffress, who was not at the meeting but made headlines last year when he warned that Mormonism is a cult.

Jeffress cautioned that while some say evangelicals will have no choice but to vote for Romney, millions could stay home as they did in 2008 unless the former Massachusetts governor gives Christian conservatives a reason to turn out for him. He suggested that Romney, should he become the nominee, strongly promise that he will appoint anti-abortion judges to the U.S. Supreme Court.

From the many reports I read about the meeting of over 150 leaders, they cast votes (more than one time) to choose one of the “not-Mitt” candidates still remaining. Their selection was Rick Santorum, to the chagrin of Mr. Gingrich (I wonder why they decided against Newt? — a real head scratcher!).

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council says conservatives are looking for a candidate who will repeal the nation’s health care law, fight for pro family values and address the national debt.

Governor Romney was the first to declare he would seek to repeal ObamaCare — and forcefully. Which other candidate has better family values than Governor Romney?

This National Journal piece gives a good sense of the jockeying:

“We have been successful as the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney,” Santorum told reporters in Mount Pleasant, S.C. Later, he said in a statement that every candidate had “coveted” the endorsement. “It is time to coalesce behind the full spectrum conservative in this race who will fight for their values and won’t waiver when times get tough,” Santorum said. That was a reference to himself. The next sentence was a reference to Romney: “Now is the time to stop a moderate from becoming our party’s nominee.”

Newt Gingrich and his camp disputed Santorum’s interpretation of the results. Former congressman J.C. Watts, Gingrich’s national campaign co-chairman, said Santorum and Gingrich were separated by only nine votes on the first ballot. “It is clear that 100% of those attending are not for Governor Romney, but in fact are splintered in whether to support Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum,” Watts said in a statement. He called it “misleading” for the Santorum campaign to claim an endorsement from all 150 leaders at the meeting.

[emphasis added]

A SIMPLE TEST OF LOGIC:

Facts First: Any person that does a small amount of research, and dives below the soundbite images painted by Gingrich, Perry, and Santorum regarding Governor Romney, discovers that he governed as a conservative in every way. One of the best examples is regarding his pro-life record. In every decision he made or action he took as governor, was always on the side of life. Proof ——> HERE. There are many examples of Governor Romney’s proven conservatism, not least of which are the numerous Tea Party leaders and organizations that have enthusiastically endorsed him over all other presidential candidates.

Now the Logic: Ask yourself this question — If Mitt Romney were an Evangelical, would that meeting have been convened? Take your time as you contemplate your answer to this simple question. Remember, Mr. Newt Gingrich was included as a possible choice by these evangelical leaders — a serial adulterer whose last affair lasted in secret for six years during the time Gingrich publicly scolded President Clinton for his extramarital relations. In fact, Mr. Gingrich came in second in the voting at this ranch meeting!

Again, would that meeting have been convened at all by 150+ evangelical leaders had Mitt Romney’s religion been Evangelical? The obvious answer is clearly “no” it would not have even been considered.

What if Mitt Romney were Evangelical and had won both Iowa and New Hampshire? I can tell you this: Had Governor Romney been Evangelical, he would have won Iowa by tens of thousands more votes than the 8-vote margin he received. Santorum only came close because of the clarion call “to preach Santorum” from the pulpits the Sunday prior (ala Huckabee 2008 surprise). Interesting, is it not, that the IRS let those instances alone?

Conclusion: If GMR were Evangelical, he would have won Iowa by a HUGE margin. If GMR were Evangelical, the Texas ranch meeting of 150+ evangelical leaders would never have happened. If GMR were Evangelical, the primary race would be effectively sealed after his winning two unprecedented states.

If this logic is anywhere near the truth, then what was yesterday’s meeting all about? These “leaders” traveled from all over the nation to meet out at the ranch, spending an enormous amount of time and money. They all reported that the meeting made no mention of Mitt Romney or his religion. Right.

That meeting had nothing to do with conservatism.

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” — John Adams

,

Newt Gingrich is airing ads in South Carolina slamming Mitt Romney over his pro-life stance. As one who repeats ad nauseum that he is a “Reagan conservative” he would also have to slam the one he’s pompously self-identifying with. Ronald Reagan was once a pro-choicer and later flipped to a pro-life position. Besides his bludgeoning of the free-market, here’s another favorite Gingrich meme in the Palmetto State: “He [Romney] can’t defend his record; it’s too liberal for South Carolina.”

Not so, Newt.

Today, National Review’s Kathryn Jean Lopez penned an article titled Governor Romney Was a Great Friend to the Pro-Life Movement in Massachusetts. She features a new video which will be released this morning by the Romney campaign with a message from the former U.S. ambassador to the Holy See, Mary Ann Glendon. She is a founding member of Women Affirming Life. It is titled Shares Our Values – Mitt Romney Pro-Life Accomplishments. (Also a Harvard Law professor, Glendon co-chairs the 63 member Justice Advisory Team for Romney.)

Take a look:

I’m Mary Ann Glendon and I am a founding member of Women Affirming Life and I have been active in the pro-life movement in Massachusetts and nationally for three decades. [Internationally, too.] The pro-life movement is all about changing hearts and minds and it struck me as very unfortunate that Mitt Romney has been criticized by some people for coming to a pro-life position on the basis of information. That’s what the pro-life movement is all about. Governor Romney showed great political courage and expended much of his political capital in supporting pro-life measures when he was here in Massachusetts. It was a very difficult political environment. 85 percent of the state legislature is Democrat controlled.

Governor Romney in that environment vetoed legislation that would have permitted destructive embryonic research; he vetoed legislation that would have permitted the over the counter sale of the morning after pill; he supported abstinence education in the schools.

Governor Romney was a great friend to the pro-life movement in Massachusetts. In a very difficult political environment, when many doors of the State House were closed to us, we always were welcomed by Governor Romney and his staff. He was a great pro-life governor and he will be a great pro-life president.

(emphasis added)

This is the best video recommendation I’ve seen for Governor Romney’s support of ‘life’ in Massachusetts. Many thanks to Mary Ann Glendon.

Note: Professor Glendon is also a signatory on An Open Letter Regarding Mitt Romney (Dec 30, 2011) in which the statement is made that “[A] good case can be made that Romney has fought harder for social conservatives than any other governor in America, and it is difficult to imagine his doing so in a more daunting political environment.”

Given that religious leaders are holding a two-day meeting (yesterday and today) to decide which anti-Romney candidate they will lay their collective hands on, we Romney supporters really must do all within our power to share this article everywhere, along with this one and this one.

Southern Baptist Convention leader, Richard Land, was mentioned in the articles linked above as one who is attending the two-day meeting in Texas. If he stands by the favorable position he took on Gov Romney in 2007, I’m somewhat encouraged.

► Jayde Wyatt

While Southern Baptist leader Richard Land and other social conservatives are huddling in Texas next weekend to figure out how to stop Mitt Romney, nine conservative leaders from Massachusetts think so highly of Governor Mitt Romney that they’ve penned a letter on his behalf. They write about his record in the uber-liberal Bay State and praise him for protecting life, defending traditional marriage, and standing for religious freedom.

Uh… Newt, are you paying attention?

An Open Letter Regarding Governor Mitt Romney
December 30, 2011

Dear conservative friends:
We hail from a broad spectrum of organizations dedicated to fighting for the pro-family agenda in Massachusetts. As you know, Mitt Romney served as the governor of our state from January 2, 2003 to January 3, 2007. During that time, we worked closely with him and his excellent staff on that agenda.

Some press accounts and bloggers have described Governor Romney in terms we neither have observed nor can we accept. To the contrary, we, who have been fighting here for the values you also hold, are indebted to him and his responsive staff in demonstrating solid social conservative credentials by undertaking the following actions here in Massachusetts. The following is not an endorsement of Governor Romney but our account of the facts to set the record straight.

Staunchly defended traditional marriage. Governor Romney immediately and strongly condemned the November 18, 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) decision that legalized “same-sex marriage” in our state. More importantly, he followed up on that denunciation with action – action that saved our nation from a constitutional crisis over the definition of marriage. He and his staff identified and enforced a little-known 1913 law that allowed them to order local clerks not to issue marriage licenses to out-of-state couples. Absent this action, homosexual couples would surely have flooded into Massachusetts from other states to get “married” and then demanded that their home states recognize the “marriages,” putting the nation only one court decision away from nationalizing “same-sex marriage.”

We do not agree with the claims that Gov. Romney had bogus Party A and Party B marriage licenses printed and ordered Justices of the Peace and Town Clerks to perform same-sex “marriages” when asked or be fired. As May 17, 2004 (the SJC’s declaratory judgment date) approached, the Governor’s Office of Legal Counsel issued provisional advisory instructions to the justices of the peace and prepared revised license applications. These executive actions did not result in the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples before May 17. The new policies were carried out only after and as a direct result of the judiciary’s final action in Goodridge on May 17. They did not generate same-sex marriages; that responsibility falls squarely on the shoulders of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.

We do not agree with the claims that Gov. Romney issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The governor does not issue marriage licenses in Massachusetts. Only the town clerks can do that. But the governor can issue one-day justice of the peace authorizations to an individual who wants to perform a marriage ceremony but is not a licensed minister, town clerk or justice of the peace. The governor’s office issues thousands of those in a four year term with the only criteria being that the individual doing the ceremony is in good standing and the parties getting married have a valid marriage license.

Worked hard to overturn “same-sex marriage” in the Commonwealth with substantial results. In 2004 he lobbied hard, before a very hostile legislature, for a constitutional amendment protecting marriage – an amendment later changed by the legislature to include civil unions, which the Governor and many marriage amendment supporters opposed. Working with the Governor, we were successful in defeating this amendment.

Provided strong, active support for a record-setting citizen petition drive in 2005 to advance a clean constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The petition drive collected the largest number of signatures in Massachusetts history.

Rallied thousands of citizens around the state to focus public and media attention on the failure of legislators, through repeated delays, to perform their constitutional obligation and vote on the marriage amendment. In November of 2006, Gov. Romney held the largest State House rally in Massachusetts history with over 7000 supporters of traditional marriage.

Filed suit before the Supreme Judicial Court asking the court to clarify the legislators’ duty to vote and failing that, to place the amendment on the 2008 ballot. That lawsuit, perhaps more than any other single action, was by all accounts instrumental in bringing the ultimate pressure on the legislators to vote. The SJC unanimously ruled that the Legislature must vote and the historic vote was taken on January 2, 2007 winning legislative support. This cleared a major hurdle in the three year effort to restore traditional marriage in the Commonwealth.

Fought for abstinence education. In 2006, under Governor Romney’s leadership, Massachusetts’ public schools began to offer a classroom program on abstinence from the faith-based Boston group Healthy Futures to middle school students. Promoting the program, Governor Romney stated, “I’ve never had anyone complain to me that their kids are not learning enough about sex in school. However, a number of people have asked me why it is that we do not speak more about abstinence as a safe and preventative health practice.”

Affirmed the culture of life. Governor Romney vetoed bills to provide access to the so-called “morning-after pill,” which is an abortifacient, as well as a bill providing for expansive, embryo-destroying stem cell research. He vetoed the latter bill in 2005 because he could not “in good conscience allow this bill to become law.”

We do not agree with the claims that Gov. Romney is responsible for tax payer funded abortion under the Massachusetts health care system. That blame lies solely on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court who ruled in 1981 that the Massachusetts Constitution required payment for abortions for Medicaid-eligible women. In 1997, the Court reaffirmed its position that a state-subsidized plan must offer “medically necessary abortions.”

Stood for religious freedom. Governor Romney was stalwart in defense of the right of Catholic Charities of Boston to refuse to allow homosexual couples to adopt children in its care. Catholic Charities was loudly accused of “discrimination,” but Governor Romney correctly pointed out that it is unjust to force a religious agency to violate the tenets of its faith in order to placate a special-interest group.

Filed “An Act Protecting Religious Freedom” in the Massachusetts legislature to save Catholic Charities of Boston and other religious groups from being forced to violate their moral principles or stop doing important charitable work.

All of this may explain why John J. Miller, the national political reporter of National Review, wrote that “a good case can be made that Romney has fought harder for social conservatives than any other governor in America, and it is difficult to imagine his doing so in a more daunting political environment.”

We are aware of the 1994 comments of Senate candidate Romney, which have been the subject of much recent discussion. While they are, taken by themselves, obviously worrisome to social conservatives including ourselves, they do not dovetail with the actions of Governor Romney from 2003 until now – and those actions have positively and demonstrably impacted the social climate of Massachusetts.

Since well before 2003, we have been laboring in the trenches of Massachusetts, fighting for the family values you and we share. It is difficult work indeed – not for the faint of heart. In this challenging environment, Governor Romney has proven that he shares our values, as well as our determination to protect them.

Mitt and Ann Romney are pictured with their grandchildren (16 of them!). Dec 2011
Click on image to enlarge.

For four years, Governor Romney was right there beside us, providing leadership on key issues – whether it was politically expedient to do so or not. He has stood on principle, and we have benefited greatly from having him with us.

It is clear that Governor Romney has learned much since 1994 – to the benefit of our movement and our Commonwealth. In fact, the entire nation has benefited from his socially conservative, pro-family actions in office. As we explained earlier, his leadership on the marriage issue helped prevent our nation from being plunged into even worse legal turmoil following the court decision that forced “gay marriage” upon our Commonwealth.

For that our country ought to be thankful. We certainly are.

Sincerely,

Rita Covelle
President, Morality in Media Massachusetts

Gerald D. D’Avolio
Former Executive Director, Massachusetts Catholic Conference

Raymond L. Flynn
Former U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See

Professor Mary Ann Glendon
Harvard Law School
Former U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See

Kristian Mineau
President, Massachusetts Family Institute

Dr. Roberto Miranda
COPAHNI Fellowship of Hispanic Pastors of New England

James F. Morgan
Chairman, Institute for Family Development

Joseph Reilly
Former Chairman of the Board, Massachusetts Citizens for Life

Thomas A. Shields
Chairman, Coalition for Marriage and Family

(emphasis added)

Note: The signatories are all acting as individual citizens, and not as representatives of their respective organizations. Organizational affiliations appear for identification purposes only.

Hoping to slow/stop Romney in South Carolina, Gingrich is trumpeting false claims about Governor Romney’s record in MA. It’s up to each of us to spread this far and wide.

► Jayde Wyatt

Which of these do you think is the most informative and helpful?

Today during a business luncheon, a colleague asked me for details behind one of Governor Romney’s policies and what motivated him, etc. As I did a little research to provide the answers he sought, I discovered that all the answers were contained here at MittRomneyCentral.

Some of you may be arriving to this website for the first time to explore, “What makes this guy with the weird name ‘Mitt’ tick?” Or you may be a relatively new, but regular visitor that is still absorbing the depth of the man we at MRC esteem as the finest leader in decades to run for President of the United States. You may even be a supporter of another Republican candidate just dropping in to take a look under the hood.

THIS POST IS FOR YOU. In this one stop, you can explore one or all of the following articles to learn a tremendous amount of truth about the most principled, value based leader seeking to lead this nation back to “American Optimism.”

Each one of the following articles contains content that will both enlighten and inform you and is among the finest (based on number of reader views and recommendations) of the year 2011 ["FB"= Facebook Recommends]:

THE RISE OF OBAMAVILLES — BEST BUSINESSMAN VIDEO
Views: 4,800 / FB: 208 / Comments: Dozens

BAIN & COMPANY NAMED BEST EMPLOYER IN AMERICA
Views: 1,218 / FB: 602 / Comments: 14 (still open)

THINGS YOU MAY NOT KNOW ABOUT ROMNEY
Views: 965 / FB: 168 / Comments: 4

ROMNEYCARE MYTHS EXPOSED IN DETAIL (MD EXPERT)
Views: 853 / FB: 237 / Comments: Truncated

FACT CHECKERS SHOW “FLIP-FLOP” CHARGE EXAGGERATED
Views: 2,554 / FB: 754 / Comments: Dozens (still open)

EXPOSING ANTI-ROMNEY PROPAGANDA
Views: 2,110 / FB: 227 / Comments: Dozens

ARGUMENTS FOR EVANGELICAL SUPPORT OF ROMNEY
Views: 1,289 / FB: 114 / Comments: Dozens (still open)

SEE HOW MITT ROMNEY “MARRIED UP”
Views: 1,154 / FB: 72 / Comments: 20 (still open)

REVEALING GLIMPSE AS TO HOW ROMNEY IS LIKELY TO GOVERN AS PRESIDENT
Work Ethic, Drive, Determination, Intelligence, Intensity, Problem Solver…..
The New York Times — December 24, 2011

Mitt Romney for President of the United States of America Your Favorite?

“For without belittling the courage with which men have died, we should not forget those acts of courage with which men have lived.” — President John F. Kennedy

The race for Iowa is a dead heat at this point, but the man who won Iowa last time, Gov. Mike Huckabee, believes that the victor will most likely be Romney. In an interview this morning on Fox News Sunday, Huckabee said this:

“I would probably say Mitt Romney will end up winning it today. I think again, Ron Paul because of his organization could, and that’s where Mitt is really at a disadvantage. He doesn’t have the devotion. If the weather is good, Mitt Romney is in better shape. If the weather is bad and it’s real tough to get out, Ron Paul will win.”

That’s welcome news for camp Romney, especially considering the source.

I think the interesting development lately has been the noticeable thawing of relations between Huckabee and Romney. During the 2008 Republican Presidential race, Huckabee and Romney developed a very strained relationship with one another as they competed for much of the same conservative voting bloc in Iowa and elsewhere. The dislike between the two seemed palpable at times.

Recently, however, several gestures have been made by both men that indicates a warming between the two. For example, Huckabee invited Romney to appear as a guest on his Fox News show. In one interview, Huckabee also defended Romney’s credentials on being pro-life, and later went on to say that the Tea Party may need to get behind Romney because “lets face it, Romney may be the most electable candidate.”

Huckabee has said that he will most likely not endorse any candidate during this election cycle, but the kind words expressed by the two candidates represents a significant warming between the two men.

What do you think? Is Huckabee going to be an ally to the Romney camp, or will the two work together in some way in the future?

~Addendum from Ross

The videos referenced above are now posted below.

Last week Governor Romney was interviewed by Bret Baier of Fox News. In the interview, Baier said, “You have been on both sides of some issues. . . .There is video of you changing your position on a whole host of issues from climate change to immigration to abortion to gay rights to health care.” Romney replied “Well Bret, your list is just not accurate. So, one, we are going to have to be better informed about my views on issues and, two, it’s good to see the ads from the Democrats are being seen here at Fox.”

This testy exchange drew a lot of news coverage last week and so the “fact-checkers” at FactCheck.org, Politifact, and the Washington Post decided to do some research to find out who was right and who was wrong. For those who may not know, fact-checkers are organizations that are not affiliated with any political party or candidate. The goal of these fact-checkers is to provide the public with unbiased, independent research on claims being thrown around in the media. 

Well, the fact-checkers did their analysis of this interview and, even though I generally like Bret Baier, there is no other way to describe it but as a huge embarrassment for Mr. Baier. The fact-checkers found that Romney has been very consistent on the topics Baier listed. Lets look at the topics mentioned by Baier one by one and see what the fact-checkers concluded.

1) Climate Change - After the Democrats ran an ad last month showing a supposed change in Romney’s position on the cause of global warming, the fact-checkers at the Washington Post concluded there was “No Flip Flop” saying:
Read more…

Mitt Romney had a sit-down with the Portsmouth Herald editorial board in New Hampshire today. He covered a wide variety of topics including social issues, health care, capital punishment, energy policy, and more:

Romney presents presidential plans at Portsmouth meeting
SeaCoastOnline
By Deborah Mcdermott
November 3, 2011

PORTSMOUTH — Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said if he had the opportunity to appoint a Supreme Court justice he or she would be in the mold of Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts.

“Their approach is the approach I would encourage,” he said. “I would try to find those who would follow the Constitution.”

The U.S. Supreme Court should not create law through its rulings, but should confine itself to interpreting the Constitution, Romney told the Portsmouth Herald editorial board Thursday.

“There are two very different approaches to the Supreme Court. There are those who feel the Constitution is a starting point, with justices saying, ‘We should go here with that thinking.’ You see this in the activist courts,” he said. “Others say the Constitution is not a launching point, but a beginning and ending point. I follow the second camp.”

Romney said justices should not make their own determination about what is wrong with a law or with the Constitution. That should be left to lawmakers or to a Constitutional amendment.

Governor Romney was asked why he wanted to be President:

“On a personal basis, I wouldn’t,” he said, adding that at the end of the 2008 Primary election when he lost to Sen. John McCain, “my wife and I decided I would not run again.”

But after seeing what he said is “an exceptional nation headed in a direction that imperils our future,” his wife had a change of heart — “even before I did.”

“She said, ‘Mitt, you have to get in and do it again.’ And because I love this country, and I’m concerned about my kids and my grandkids, I said, OK,” he said.

For a synopsis of Romney’s take on federal debt, capital punishment, Social Security reform, health care, energy policy, social issues, and education, continue reading here.

Romney shares his views with the editorial board on Supreme Court justices:

ABC posted this next video portion of Romney’s interview. He references his book ‘No Apology’, defends his consistency on the issues, e.g., same-sex marriage and global warming. He knows it’s political season and that those playing the ‘gotcha’ game are looking for any little variance in the words he uses to explain policy:

The penchant of some who seek to take Romney’s words out of context, mis-quote him, and mischaracterize him is a great disservice to voters. We’re happy to help keep the record straight on Romney, along with the pro-Romney sites found on the right-hand side of this page.

By the way, have you read Romney’s No Apology?

It’s a treasure-trove of detailed Romney policy.

Every American who wants to restore our nation should dive into it.

► Jayde Wyatt