On “Meet the Press” today, Romney surrogate Senator Marco Rubio confirmed a troubling fact: as President, Mitt Romney would sign a bill banning abortion.
GREGORY: On the question of abortion- true or untrue? Governor Romney has said that he would sign a bill that banned abortion, should that come to his desk.
RUBIO: And I think what he’s saying is–he’s laying out very clearly what his record is on and the exceptions that he supports. And there’s diversity on those in the Republican Party. But he has also clearly said he is pro-life. He has never run away from his record as a pro-life candidate or a pro-life governor before that. But he is setting clear what he believes the exceptions are that he stands for.
GREGORY: But that he would sign a bill if, it came to that, to ban abortion.
RUBIO: He is pro-life. And he has talked about how he is pro-life. He also believes in certain exceptions. And that ad you have just played, what it does is it identifies those exceptions that he believes in.
This segment was called “Gender politics” and the “women’s vote” so naturally David Gregory and Mark Rubio were talking and that’s why no one asked the question a woman would have asked.
The media doesn’t get it. Which bill? The bill Romney said he supported that made no exceptions — the Personhood Amendment? That bill, which is the only bill I’ve heard him support in the campaign, makes no exceptions for rape, incest or life of the mother. This means that the common occurrence of ectopic pregnancies, for example, could result in the death of the woman.
Rubio points to a Romney ad as his “policy” on what exceptions he would make, but Romney’s ads are not known for their veracity or even distant relationship to his actual policies. Governor Romney might be saying he is for these exceptions in an ad, but he has told his base something completely different and he said it on national TV.
You would think this would be something to follow up on, but Rubio is allowed to slide around with vague exceptions because it’s not David Gregory who might die due to Romney’s whims.
Romney tells the press he is proudly “pro-life” (what a joke — pro war, anti food and medical care for children, but “pro-life” because he wants to control a woman’s uterus) and says he would make exceptions but he tells his base that he supports personhood legislation that would establish the definition of life as conception. Which is it?
Romney wants to defund Planned Parenthood (access to contraception among other healthcare screening), his running mate wrote the “forcible rape” bill with Todd Akin (of “legitimate rape” infamy) and now Romney is dancing around which bill he’s going to sign to make abortion illegal.
Does anyone get the idea that Romney is mirroring the Congressional Republicans in that he has more plans for women’s bodies than he does for the economy?
Rubio also managed to slam the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in a desperate effort to smear the act in order to justify Romney’s failure to support it. He claimed it would enrich trial lawyers. Your 1950’s character for President is clear — we are going back to back alley abortions under Romney.