Woman's right to choose under Romney: Yes, no or maybe? Again he changes position on abortion (video)

Fellow Republican candidate Jon Huntsman gave the best description I have heard to date of Mitt Romney, calling him “a well-lubricated weather vane.”

Well, the presidential nominee is certainly living up to that phrase, and his various directional turns seems to be increasing as the force of the 2012 election “winds” blow us closer to the big date of Nov. 6.

In yet another change—or should I say, flip-flopping Etch-a-Sketch moment—Romney has redefined his position on abortion. Speaking in Des Moines, Iowa, on Tuesday, he said he would not “pursue any abortion-related legislature if he became president. “There is no legislation in regards to abortion that I am familiar with that would become part of my agenda,” Romney said, according to the Associated Press.

It was only about a month ago that the GOP nominee vowed to appoint Supreme Court justices whom he will “prefer” reversed a woman’s right to choose. In response to this question by “Meet the Press” moderator David Gregory, “Would a President Romney fight to overturn Roe vs. Wade, and if so what will you do in your fight to achieve that goal?” Romney replied:

“Well, there are a number of things I think need to be said about preserving and protecting the life of the unborn child and I recognize there are two lives involved: the mom’s and the unborn child. I believe that people of good conscience have chosen different paths in this regard, but I have chosen pro-life and I will attempt as president to encourage pro-life policies.”

Here the host interjected—“encourage or fight for it to be overturned?” (Click here to see the video.)

Romney responded: “Well, I, I don’t actually make the decisions, the Supreme Court does and they will have to make their own decisions. But I will fight to reverse the president’s decision to use US funds to pay for abortions outside this country—also, the taxpayers here shouldn’t have to pay for abortions, and those things I think are consistent with my pro-life issues. I hope to appoint justices to the Supreme Court that will follow the law of the Constitution and it will be my preference that they will reverse Roe vs. Wade and therefore they return it to the people and their elected representatives.” (Emphasis added.)

This is not the only time Romney has switched positions on this very heated topic. Before, he had said he believed in a woman’s right to choose. Here is what he said in 1994 when he was running for Senate in Massachusetts: “I believe that since Roe vs. Wade has been the law for 20 years that we should sustain and support it—and I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice.”

Fast forward to 2007, and he has a change of convictions while running in the Republican presidential primary, saying, “That’s why as a pro-life Republican, I am in favor of having the Supreme Court overturn Roe vs. Wade.” (Click on the video above to see the flip-flopping "Etch-a-Sketch" in action. I didn't come up with the label; his fellow Republicans did.)

Then he changed to being anti-abortion for all cases except incest and rape. Like Huntsman said, the well-lubricated weather vane has pointed east, west, north, south and every which direction in between. No wonder many high-ranking Republicans have slammed him in the past for being untrustworthy and shifty. (See the priceless video here.)

If you like to write about U.S. politics and Campaign 2012, enter "The American Pundit" competition. Allvoices is awarding four $250 prizes each month between now and November. These monthly winners earn eligibility for the $5,000 grand prize, to be awarded after the November election.