I live in Missouri - the 'Show-Me State' - and when it comes to the issue of Life, Mitt Romney really doesn't have much to show me at all. You see, here in the Midwest, we believe actions speak louder than words, and the only actions Mitt Romney has to show us is a 100% Pro-Abortion record.
Oh sure, anyone can change, and Mitt Romney claims he has. People in the Midwest are also about giving people a second chance too, especially if they admit they were wrong, and this is where Romney's rhetoric might have pulled a little weight, if it really had shown a significant change. Unfortunately, under close scrutiny, it doesn't. Romney's current position claims to be "Pro-Life," BUT with exceptions for rape, incest and health concerns. That means Mitt Romney believes it's okay to kill an innocent unborn child if his father is a rapist, or his mother is incestuous, or if some doctor said his mother has "health concerns" (whatever that means). So in the case of rape, Mitt Romney believes children should be punished for the crimes of their fathers. In the case of incest, Mitt Romney believes children should be punished for the crimes of their parents. In the case of "health concerns," Mitt Romney believes children should be made to die in order to reduce the alleged "suffering" of their mothers -- all based entirely on some doctor's subjective OPINION! But as if that were not enough, Mitt Romney also believes (according to his own words) that abortion laws should vary from state to state. So Mitt Romney believes it's okay to kill babies in Massachusetts, but not necessarily in Missouri. New Jersey is okay, but maybe not New Mexico.
So there you have it. Mitt Romney really hasn't changed that much at all. He is a very weak "Pro-Life" candidate, if you could call him that. Or maybe you could say he's a very weak "Pro-Choice" candidate. It's no wonder why most social-conservatives will not support him.
I'll leave you with this stirring video of Mitt Romney on the subject of abortion from just five years ago....