The following information is from the Romney fundraising invitation on March 16th which is being circulated via email to certain Republican Party members and other GOP insiders:

Host Committee
Friday, March 16, 2007
Manchester Grand Hyatt
America’s Cup Room
One Market Place, San Diego, California 92101
VIP Photo Reception 12:00 noon
Contribution: $2,300 per person
Luncheon 12:30 p.m.
Contribution: $1,000 per person
Save the Date: Friday, March 16, 2007
Paid for by Romney for President, Inc.
Host Committee
Daryl and Bob Allen * Linda and John Alexander, M.D.
Kim and Troy Romero
Laurie and Matt Romney * Valerie and Gary Sabin
Candy and Ken Satterlee * Jan and John Smoot, M.D.
Monetta and Wendell Smoot M.D. * Senator Mark Wyland
Julie and Jonathan Bullen * Roberta and Malin Burnham
Laurie and Kelly Burt * Silvija and Brian Devine
Marilyn and Kim Fletcher * Dr. Dieter Kuster
Betsy and Papa Doug Manchester * Margaret and John Ord
Randie and Leon Reinhart * Meg and Eric Roach

Major Embryonic Stem Cell Research Financier
Part of Host Committee
For “Pro-Life” Mitt Romney Fundraiser in San Diego, California

In a shocking display of repugnant hypocrisy, the San Diego hosting committee for Romney’s March 16, 2007 campaign fundraiser includes one of the biggest financiers for the embryonic stem cell industry. 
Enter Malin Burnham: Host Committee member for the San Diego Romney fundraiser; major financier for the California embryonic stem cell industry.

One of the individuals hosting Romney in San Diego has been one of the most dedicated financial contributors to embryonic stem cell research in California.  This individual is wealthy San Diego businessman Malin Burnham.  Malin Burnham gave $50,000 to Prop. 71, the 2004 California initiative that authorized spending $6 billion in public funds for a state embryonic stem cell research enterprise that will eventually kill multiple thousands of growing human babies during unproven and wasteful medical experiments.

Take a look at the documentation for the Prop. 71 initiative contributions from Malin Burnham:
Committee Name: YES ON 71: COALITION FOR STEM CELL RESEARCH AND CURES

BURNHAM MALIN, BURNHAM REAL ESTATE SERVICES, CHAIRMAN, SAN DIEGO, CA 92106 $50,000.00 9/9/2004

Malin Burnham is one of the most fanatical supporters of exterminating human embryos for embryonic stem cell experimentation.  Burnham further demonstrated his commitment to the destruction of human embryos for medical experimentation purposes during a 2005 meeting with the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM).  CIRM was established by the passage of Prop. 71 to administrate for the state the taxpayer-funded embryonic stem cell organization.  The following transcript from that meeting in 2005 details Malin Burnham’s comments on embryonic stem cell research:

http://www.cirm.ca.gov/transcripts/pdf/2005/05-06-05.pdf
“MR. BURNHAM: MY NAME IS MALIN BURNHAM. I’M A NATIVE OF SAN DIEGO. I’M GOING TO TALK FAST BECAUSE I DON’T HAVE MUCH TIME.  I’M SIMPLY A REAL ESTATE GUY. I’VE ALSO BEEN INVOLVED
WITH THE BURNHAM INSTITUTE FOR OVER 20 YEARS AS ITS CHIEF CHEERLEADER. SOME PEOPLE TODAY HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE. AT THE BURNHAM INSTITUTE, BEFORE LAST NOVEMBER’S ELECTION, WE HAD OVER A HUNDRED FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT PEOPLE WORKING IN STEM CELL RESEARCH. WE’RE DOING IT NOW.  ONE THING THAT WE NEED TO CONCENTRATE ON IS WHAT’S BEST FOR YOUR STAFF. IN 40 YEARS OF COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE WORK, MY COLLEAGUES AND I HAVE PUT TENANTS INTO MILLIONS AND MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF SQUARE FEET, AND NEVER HAVE USED A SCORECARD TO DO IT. I BELIEVE THAT’S BOGUS, AND YOU SHOULDN’T DO IT. WE ARE—WE ARE SUGGESTING YOU PUT YOUR STAFF IN THE EPICENTER OF THE STRONGEST, DEEPEST, CLOSEST KNIT CLUSTER OF BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH FACILITIES AND PEOPLE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD, NOT JUST SAN DIEGO. I REST MY CASE.”

I can’t get past the big con of Mormonism.
You may say other religous beliefs are irrational or fraudlent but Mormonism is different because it is based on such a transparent and recent fraud (the religion is only about 170 yrs. old).

I don’t want somebody running the country that believes the whoppers of Mormonism such as we all can become gods and rulers of our own planets where polygamy will once again be allowed. 

I will do all I can to support any candidate besides Romney.

Comment #54089 by James Hartline on 2/16 at 9:17 pm

“… repackage this liberal Massachusetts governor...”

That’s a hoot!  Romney a liberal!!

Only a person unfamiliar with Massachusett’s politics could believe that…

I’m still laughing!

I notice that whenever a report is published
showing the hypocrisy or dark agendas of Romney, this propaganda, pro-Romney website link shows up entitled Mitt Report.  The Mitt Report is nothing more than a manipulative project to sell acceptance of Romney’s Mormonism and repackage this liberal Massachusetts governor despite his
very newly lost homosexual and abortion beliefs.

Comment #53615 by Mark Law on 2/14 at 2:30 pm

says”

“Your Brother in Christ,”

Got a brother in New York City and he’s not named Mark!

My problem with “Evangicals” stems from their utter disregard for the belief system of folks who do not subscribe to xtian dogma.

To Whom it May Concern:

First of all, as a traditional Baptist, I was stunned after viewing a movie called “States of Grace.” A friend of mine from Utah sent it to me for Christmas.  In spite of everything I have come to learn about Mormonism, here is a movie – a Mormon movie nonetheless – that demonstrates a deep understanding of—and longing for—unconditional grace and forgiveness through a personal relationship with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 

In my opinion, it movingly depicts the power of God’s healing love and redemptive grace that comes after a fall and repentance. It not only shows the heart of Christianity, but it convincingly challenges the stereotypes that many of us traditional Christians have of Mormons and their belief in only conditional grace.

Second of all, I love my country and the constitution it was founded upon. The only person I believe will stand up for those beliefs is Mitt Romney – a.k.a. The “Mormon Candidate.” I will say that it would have been hard to pull the lever for a Mormon until I had a few questions cleared up for me. I believe this movie can be a landmark film in presenting a view of the Mormon church and Mormon life that has never before made it to the big screen – answering simple questions such as polygamy (by far the funniest scene in the movie), interfaith relationships and Mormon beliefs concerning grace. 

Many, and I do mean many, of the Mormon beliefs and doctrines I disagree with, but I don’t want a country ran by Pres. Clinton II, Obama, McCain or even Giuliani. I believe Gov. Romney is a Christian who shares my most important values. Now more than ever, we Christians need to pull together and I believe States of Grace can be that elusive element that brings us together. The movie is extremely thought-provoking and very educational for many in America who don’t know much beyond popular rumor about the faith of the man who just might be the next president.  In short, this little film has the potential to actually shift and mold public opinion in a presidential campaign without being a political hatchet job like Fahrenheit 911. It should be required viewing for the entire Christian community.

My question is this – With all the stereotypes and misinformation out there about his beliefs, why hasn’t anyone put this movie out there to help him? I would have to say I have never felt closer to Mormonism, and Christ’s message of love, redemption, and hope, than after viewing States of Grace.  You have a tool to answer the questions that would help me pull the lever for Gov. Romney, and you’re not using it.

I emailed “Evangelicals for Mitt” and they’ve never heard of the movie. I emailed a website called MittRunMitt.org and they dismissed me. I found more information on this movie at http://www.StatesofGrace.net

I hope you care enough to do something about this – or I’ll find a way to do it myself.

Your Brother in Christ,

Mark L.

Rommney has about as much chance of being the R candidate for president as he has of being the Pope.

Why waste a perfectly good space in truthdig on a loser!

There is really good volume of information on Governor Romney here:

http://www.mittreport.com

Hmmm.
Seems to me a few days back the Mormon Church Presidency came out with a statement to the effect they were not endorsing Romney.

Course they can’t or wont endorse any candidate for president or any other political office. At least not in an official capacity. That would kind of challenge the whole separation of Church and State thing and last time I checked, the Mormon Church believes in that philosophy. I think they also believe in free agency.

When Mike Leavitt encountered opposition, it was because of his ties to the Insurance Industry, I think.

Like the man said, “Mormons have served quietly and honorably in the House, Senate, Armed Forces, Judiciary, every federal agency, and most Presidential Administrations for 100 years.  Those who would try to impute any disloyalty, dishonor or ineptitude to them for their religious beliefs degrade us all.”

One of the few times the president has said something I actually agree with! (Probably had a writer)

I’ll add, most folks didn’t know they were Mormons.

That’s the thing about Mormonism, unless you have occasion to ask, get a glimpse of the funny underwear, or encounter a missionary, you don’t know. Mormons don’t wear their religion on their sleeves like Evangelicals.

I had a Mormon friend who worked for the government tell me the following story. They were stationed in Thailand and the only preschool available to them was being run by an Evangelical group. “It took us all Summer to de-program her!” They lamented.

I guess that’s why I am surprised by Romney’s flip-flop, and that is what it is. While most Mormons I know are against abortion, they are far more against forcing someone to do something against their own free agency. In other words, they don’t condone the action, but will defend the woman’s right to make the choice. And most Mormons are well educated and have a healthy respect for the Sciences and advances in Medical Science, seeing every new discovery as just one more example of “All things being revealed.”

At least that has been my experience, so I tend to think Romney’s performance is for the benefit of the Christianalists who have managed to twist the gospel and their savior into a shallow imitation of good, in exchange for huge piles of money from those who would control. He wants the REPUBLICAN PARTY nomination. And those numbers and that money and the masses of delusional bible thumpers who have maneuvered themselves into a level of control over that party far outnumber the members of the Mormon Church. I’m sure because most Mormons are traditionally conservative, he just assumes he has their vote.

So in my book, he’s not a good candidate, just tiresomely typical.

Hopefully, before too much longer the Mormons will stop doing their Church work long enough to take a good look at what’s going on in their world. Because if they do, they’ll realize their conservative party has been hijacked and do something about it!

A quick look at McCain’s record reveals that he’s no stranger to “policy evolutions” himself:

1. McCain in 2006 on Campaign Finance Reform (his signature issue):

On Wednesday, Senator Feingold, a Democrat of Wisconsin, Rep. Martin Meehan, a Democrat of Massachusetts, and Rep. Christopher Shays, a Republican of Connecticut, introduced a bill to revive the crumbling system for public financing of presidential campaigns. The bill is largely identical to a measure all four men introduced in 2003, but this time around Mr. McCain is not on board.

A longtime advocate for campaign finance restrictions, Meredith McGehee, said she believed Mr. McCain’s decision stemmed from a desire to avoid criticism if he decides to forgo public financing during the Republican nominating contest.
New York Sun

2. McCain in 1999 on Abortion:

“I’d love to see a point where it is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.”

2. McCain in 2006 on Abortion:

“I don’t think a constitutional amendment is probably going to take place, but I do believe that it’s very likely or possible that the Supreme Court should — could overturn Roe v. Wade, which would then return these decisions to the states, which I support.”
Washington Post

3. McCain in 2001 on The Bush Tax Cuts:

“I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who need tax relief.”

3. McCain in 2008 on The Bush Tax Cuts:

“American businesses and investors need a stable and predictable tax policy to continue contributing to the growth of our economy. These considerations lead me to the conclusion that we should not reverse course by letting the higher tax rates take effect.”
Washington Times

4. McCain in 2003 on Ethanol:

“Ethanol is a product that would not exist if Congress didn’t create an artificial market for it. No one would be willing to buy it. Yet thanks to agricultural subsidies and ethanol producer subsidies, it is now a very big business - tens of billions of dollars that have enriched a handful of corporate interests - primarily one big corporation, ADM. Ethanol does nothing to reduce fuel consumption, nothing to increase our energy independence, nothing to improve air quality.”

4. McCain in 2006 on Ethanol:

“I support ethanol and I think it is a vital, a vital alternative energy source not only because of our dependency on foreign oil but its greenhouse gas reduction effects”
CNN Money

Grover Norquist goes into some detail on McCain’s changing positions and concludes:

“What McCain has done is flip-flopped on the gun issue [and] on the tax issue,” Norquist told ABC’s “This Week.” “He used to be a Reagan Republican on taxes. He’s voted against every one of President Bush’s tax cuts.”

“He used to be a critic of [the] Kyoto [Accord], then he became a champion of Kyoto,” Norquist told “This Week.” “He used to have the correct policy opposing campaign finance reform before the Keating 5 scandal and then he became a champion of restricting First Amendment rights.”

The influential GOP’er accused McCain of pandering for publicity, saying, “He’s flip-flopped back and forth not because of where the American people are, but because of where the cameras are.”
Newsmax

#50953 Steven, I don’t know why O’Malley called Mitt “a better friend to the Catholic church than another MA gov. in decades” but I am suspect of the reasons for him saying such a thing.  No gov. or any publicly elected official has any business being, as that official, a friend to any church and especially one which covered up rampant child abuse by its priests and ultimately forced its cardinal to step down.  Any sensible, reasonable person, as gov. of MA, wouldn’t have touched that church with a ten-foot pole.  I wouldn’t have touched it with an eleven-foot one.

He must be a good boot-licking man in the world !

Oh how I love to be in Massachusetts, to cheer our intrepid presidental hopeful. Not one hair out of place, a testament to aerosols and evangelicals.

There’s something about a man who needs to have not a hair out of place. Can’t quite put my finger on it? but I’m certain I wouldn’t want too anyway.

That beautiful new underground highway system we paid so many, many cost over run billions on?

The sky is falling.

Sorry er,roof. But never fear, it was under much Mitt’s stewardship (management) that the ceiling phase was constructed, inspected, and approved. Given the Romney seal.

“Seal of approval”.

“Romney is the former CEO of Bain & Company, a management consulting firm, and the co-founder of Bain Capital, a private equity investment firm.” -Wikipedia

^Yes, his management skills come with great provenance. Impresses me.

Coward that I am , I don’t think I’ll be traveling Mr. Romney’s highways to oblivion.

Best that road not taken.

Ellen,

A charlatan though Romney may be, how likely is it that Ellen Goodman would be apt to settle for a war flip-flop and vote for Hillary Clinton? Pretty likey, I’d guess. Phoney is as phoney does.

John Lowell

Listen, the truth of the matter is that Mitt changed his mind… that’s flipping not flip flopping.  Heaven help us if moving from one political opinion to another is seen as hypocritical. 

In short, watch the video of Romney’s conversion story, it’s pretty plausible in my book.

I wholly agree with Ellen’s take on Mitt except, I’m concerned that, if he also waffles or flip-flops on his “core” Mormanism, that’s really going to piss off an awful lot of people.  I always regarded Mitt as a “suit” but held out hope he might, at least, have some religious substance to him.  I’d vote against him, however, for that reason alone.  I don’t care what “core” value it is; if it’s religious, our cup ran over long ago.

Ellen,

It’s all old news.  Most GOP caucus goers know the views Mitt held then and what he stands for now.  None of us thought of him as conservative as Governor.  He even claims that to be the case.  He did not harp on Massachusetts; he harped on the liberals there, which includes the Boston Globe for whom you work.  Mitt did not flip flop like John Kerry, he flipped like Bush (41) did with abortion.  You are to represent your constituents, rightly Mitt has moved more to the right as he chooses to represent a more conservative base. 

As a “Venture Capitalist” Governor, Mitt balanced your budget four years starting with a $2+ billion dollar deficit!  Now Gov. Patrick whines like a baby when he cannot balance the budget with a $1 billion dollar deficit which we created by revoking near $400 million in spending cuts.  It’s all supply and demand, even for politicians.  The question is do we trust him to keep his campaign promises?  Looking at his record and the straw polls online the answer is yes.  We’ll find out the GOP’s primary answer in 2008.

Why is everyone questioning Romney’s commitment to the GOP based on things he said while running for office in the most liberal state in the union years ago and in spite of the fact that he was the most conservative governor MA has had in 40 years while McCain has repeatedly betrayed the GOP, made deragatory comments about Christians, and once told a staffer (rumor has it) that he would consider running as Hillary’s VP if the Republicans deny him the nomination again.  Cardinal O’Malley in Boston has said that Romney was a better friend to the Cathollic church than any other MA governor in decades, and he was about the only one that wasn’t Catholic.  I’d like to see the press pointing these things out.  Nobody is talking about the economy and Romney’s qualifications there either.  Will Christians and the GOP really support McCain?  I think a lot of it is a thin disguise for anti-Mormon bigotry, and that the Republican party risks shooting itself in the foot if it embraces it.  The weight of the logic behind different theologies is not an issue that matter in picking a nominee.  Words worth thinking about:  “Mormons have served quietly and honorably in the House, Senate, Armed Forces, Judiciary, every federal agency, and most Presidential Administrations for 100 years.  Those who would try to impute any disloyalty, dishonor or ineptitude to them for their religious beliefs degrade us all.”—President Bush on criticism of Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt’s appointment to the EPA.