Romney Reveals His Own Support for Homosexual Agenda

A homosexual rainbow flag flying over the Massachusetts State House (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

Phil Jensen


I’ve been pointing out for a long time that Mitt “RomneyCare” Romney is a liberal with an “R” after his name.  I’ve long pointed out that one of the proof of this is that, despite his slick talk during the campaign, he is really a great friend of the homosexual agenda–having laid out the red carpet for the counterfeiting of marriage in Massachusetts.

CNS News points out how admirably he makes the case for me.

From CNS News:

Rick Kriebel 2016


Mitt Romney, who is considered by many Republican leaders as the conservative candidate strong enough to beat liberal Barack Obama in the 2012 presidential race, says he opposes “gay marriage” but supports same-sex “domestic partnerships,” adoption of children by gay couples, homosexuals serving openly in the military, and does not think states should prohibit sodomy.

Romney is the typical liberal who tries to masquerade as a conservative. He wants to sound conservative because he is smart enough to realize Americans will reject his liberalism…but at the same time he wants liberals to know that he’s really one of them.

Romney’s two-faced, have-it-both-ways duplicity is laughably revealed in a 2002 interview with Bay Windows (cited in the CNS News article):

Bay Windows: “To you, what is the difference between civil unions between same-sex couples and gay marriage?”

Romney: “Very little, if any. For all intents and purposes, they are the same.”

Bay Windows: “Do you support civil unions?”

Romney: “ No, because I believe it’s virtually identical to marriage.”

Bay Windows: “Do you support gay marriage?”

Romney: “No.”

Bay Windows: “If you do not support gay marriage or civil unions, what keeps you from doing so?”

Romney: “I believe that marriage is a union between a man and a woman.” …

Bay Windows: “Do you support the Protection of Marriage Amendment?” [At that time, a proposed amendment to the State constitution in Massachusetts defining marriage as being between one man and one woman.]

Romney: “No, because it would outlaw domestic partner benefits for same-sex couples.”

Notice that Romney starts out acknowledging what anyone of even moderate intelligent can understand: that pseudo-marital categories (designed as an incremental step toward the full counterfeiting of marriage) are essentially “marriage” by another name (“I believe it’s virtually identical to marriage”) and should not be allowed.

Woodrow Wilcox


Yet he refuses to protect marriage from being counterfeited at the federal level because it would prevent homosexual from acting like they were married!

What a duplicitous cur!  And we’re supposed to believe this guy is a Republican, much less conservative? Sorry, I just can’t be that stupid even if I try.

Call it “civil unions,” “domestic partnership,” or whatever you’d like–it’s still just a notch on the dial on the way to boiling the frog of marriage.  It’s still a manufactured, quasi-marital status created to provide a facsimile of marriage even though one of two critical elements need to form a marriage is missing: a man or a woman.

Ironically, what he and RINOs like him (e.g. John McCain in 2008) fail to grasp is that no matter how many love notes he passes to the “mainstream” media and others on the Left, they will always go with the most liberal candidate–and that will always be the Democrat in any race.

If you’re a Republican who’s afraid the media won’t like you if you behave conservatively, you might as well stop worrying about it and be a genuine conservative because they’re never going to like you anyway.  And if you genuinely believe the liberal ideas you’re peddling to the “mainstream” media and other liberals under the table, then you’re in the wrong party and need to go join the Democrats where the Lefties will finally truly like you.

Mitt Romney has no business running for anything in the Republican Party.



This article is printed with the permission of the author(s). Opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the article’s author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of American Clarion or Dakota Voice LLC.

Comment Rules: Please confine comments to salient ones that add to the topic; Profanity is not allowed and will be deleted; Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will be deleted.

Similar Posts:

Bob Ellis has been the owner of media company Dakota Voice, LLC since 2005. He is a 10-year U.S. Air Force veteran, a political reporter and commentator for the past decade, and has been involved in numerous election and public policy campaigns for over 20 years. He was a founding member and board member of the Tea Party groups Citizens for Liberty and the South Dakota Tea Party Alliance. He lives in Rapid City, South Dakota with his wife and two children.
Bob Ellis
View all articles by Bob Ellis
Print Friendly
  • You’ll still vote for him if he’s the GOP nominee.

    • I will not.

    • Anonymous

      Neither will I.

      He’s much worse than even McCain.

  • Believe it. I will not vote for a liberal with an “R” after their name anymore.