From John Haskins:
So even libertarians are in on the open secret: Mitt Romney is the Father of sodomy-based "marriage".
Rich Aucoin has posted an excellent article -- a very revealing one, in the bizarre context of sycophantic "social conservatives" covering up for the politician who single-handedly imposed "homosexual marriage." In Massachusetts many libertarians disdain social conservatives as lepers. But apparently some are willing to say publicly what is now uncomfortably obvious: Mitt Romney trashed the Massachusetts constitution and the form of government he swore to uphold.
Aucoin is a Libertarian, in a state where many libertarians are homosexuals or pro-homosexuality. He was the Libertarian candidate for Lt. Governor in 2002 against Romney/Healey (see his bio "About Rich").
His article shatters the Romney staff's amateurish attempt on their campaign website to convince everyone that Brian Camenker and anyone else who reads state constitutions must be hateful, religious right "extremists."
How then, to dismiss prominent Massachusetts libertarian Rich Aucoin? Also as an intolerant "Religious Right" bogeyman? Could such a "hater" have gotten the nomination of the socially hyper-liberal Massachusetts Libertarian Party?
Apparently, the state constitution and decades of previous court rulings have the same clear meaning when a libertarian reads them as when I do.
Bottom line: all you have to do to pass this civics exam is ... well, read the homework assignment. This exam is a very important one, but it has only one question on it. The correct answer: "He is the governor who illegally imposed sodomy-based 'marriage' while blaming four winking judges for making him do it." The question: "Who is Mitt Romney?"
Romney's boast, "I will be a more effective advocate for gay rights than my opponent," made while debating Ted Kennedy was a promise he kept ten years later -- in 2004 when he sidestepped the American form of government and issued illegal homosexual "marriage" licenses.
Propaganda has a way of fading away as "news" gives way to facts. Here's a historical fact that will endure long after all the slick lawyers and spinmeisters have gone home: No American ever, Republican or Democrat, has done more to kick the homosexual revolution into overdrive than Mitt Romney. Ted Kennedy can eat his heart out.
--John Haskins
Parents' Rights Coalition
john@ParentsRightsCoalition.org
Excerpts from the article by Rich Aucoin:
"Mitt Romney swings both ways on same-sex marriage: How the Massachusetts GOP, not the Democrats, changed the definition of marriage...and what America can do about it"
In November of 2003, the mostly Republican-appointed Massachusetts Supreme Court "ordered" an overwhelmingly Democratic state legislature to legalize same-sex marriage, and to do so no later than May 17, 2004. In response, the Democrat legislature - which, by law, answers to the people, not the courts - ignored the court's demand. It simply refused to act.
As the GOP court's "deadline" loomed, it appeared that a constitutional crisis would be inevitable. But then, five weeks before the court's May 17th diktat, Republican Governor Mitt Romney saved the day, unilaterally issuing the following alteration to the state’s marriage license application: "Bride" and "Groom" were to be replaced by "Party A" and "Party B."
Thanks to Mitt, homosexual couples in Massachusetts immediately began planning their weddings, while equality advocates from across America rejoiced!
King Romney then issued an ultimatum to the commonwealth's justices of the peace, telling them to either begin marrying same-sex couples or else resign. Then, to mollify outraged "traditional marriage" advocates, Romney began citing an antiquated 1913 law (designed to forbid interracial couples from marrying in Massachusetts if their home states wouldn't recognize their unions) as a way of denying marriage licenses to out-of-state homosexuals.
This political back flip, predictably, turned homosexuals' joy into anger, sparking accusations of discrimination against the Romney administration - which, conveniently for Mitt, obscured the fact that he was the one who had implemented same-sex marriage across Massachusetts in the first place.
Read more...
