Mitt Romney Campaign Disavows Pro-Gay Rights Flyer From 2002

CONCORD, NH -- Mitt Romney's presidential campaign on Sunday disavowed a flyer that claimed he supported "equal rights" for gay citizens and has long been reported to have been distributed by the Massachusetts Republican during his 2002 campaign for governor.

Eric Fehrnstrom, Romney's chief spokesman, told The Huffington Post that the flyers were not official literature from Romney's 2002 run, despite the fact that they include the tag line "Paid for by the Romney for Governor Committee," on the bottom.

"I don't know where those pink flyers came from. I was the communications director on the 2002 campaign. I don't know who distributed them ... I never saw them and I was the communications director," Fehrnstrom said in the spin room after Sunday morning's GOP presidential debate here.

Fehrnstrom said he had no idea who had distributed the flyers. "I never saw them and I never approved them. I'm not quite sure where they came from."

Romney's critics have pointed to the flyer, reportedly disseminated during a gay pride parade in 2002, as evidence that he once presented himself to voters as tolerant of gay rights, on some level. It was referenced repeatedly during Romney's first run for president in 2008 and was again raised on Sunday, when Romney was asked during the debate to clarify his position on same-sex marriage.

"As you know, I don't discriminate," Romney said. "And in the appointments that I made -- when I was governor of Massachusetts, a member of my cabinet was gay. I appointed people to the bench, regardless of their sexual orientation. Made it very clear that, in my view, we should not discriminate in hiring policies, in legal policies.

"At the same time, from the very beginning, in 1994, I said to the gay community, 'I do not favor same-sex marriage,'" Romney added. "I oppose same-sex marriage. And that has been my, my view. But, but if, if people are looking for someone who -- who will discriminate against gays or will in any way -- try and suggest that people, that, that have different sexual orientation don't have full rights in this country, they won't find that in me."

As the New Hampshire primary election has drawn near, the focus has somewhat unexpectedly shifted to cultural issues, with candidates being pressed on everything from marriage rights to contraception during two consecutive debates. All oppose same-sex marriage -- though some object on more moral grounds than others -- and only former Utah Gov. John Huntsman has said he supports civil unions. But Romney, owing to his time in Massachusetts, has found his position more difficult to explain than most.

"[H]e has not been in favor of civil unions, if by civil unions you mean the equivalency to marriage but without the name marriage," Fehrnstrom said. "What he has favored, and he talked about this, I believe, last night, was a form of domestic partnership or a contractual relationship with reciprocal benefits."

Comments

[Raejeanowl]

12:32 AM on 10/16/2012

Check their campaign reports. See if such flyers were expensed. Might not be a big deal to prove or disprove.

[coreypaul]

08:49 PM on 10/25/2012

he only became anti-pink flyer because he spent the last two yrs as gov in mass, running for president....again....and again.

[Ioan Lightoller]

08:04 PM on 05/17/2012

Another Romney fip-flop "I was fer it before I was agin it".

[neiltheblaze]

11:21 AM on 05/12/2012

The great thing about having no principles is that there's never a principle to betray.

[Doug Watson]

12:48 PM on 01/10/2012

Sorry Willard, the Supreme Court ruled a long time ago that "separate, but equal" is not equal!

[MassManny]

12:36 PM on 01/10/2012

A Romney campaign intern who takes credit for designing the flyer said, "I had just turned 19 when I was interning for Mitt. He had a ton of gay people on his campaign in senior positions so I figured it would be an acceptable thing to do." See Bay Windows, Laura Kiritsy, “The gay behind Romney’s 2002 Pride flier,” Bay Windows, October 1, 2007; http://www.baywindows.com/​index.php?ch=news&sc=glbt&s​c2=news&sc3=&id=48768.

[dblshell]

11:58 AM on 01/10/2012

Romney:
"I oppose same-sex marriage..."

"But... if people are looking for someone who will discriminate against gays or will in any way -- try and suggest that people, ...that have different sexual orientation don't have full rights in this country, they won't find that in me."

The Art of "Speaking Out of Both Sides of Your Mouth"

Declare that Gays and Lesbian couples cannot marry. Then ask where they are being denied their rights. Okay...

The right to spousal health insurance.

The right to spousal tax deductions.

The right to make health and living will decisions.

The list of "The devil is in the details" rights that get trampled in these "LGTBs are 2/5ths of a human" practice are nearly endless. Without marriage rights, a partner of 30 or 40 years has no more rights to decide the fate of a partner no longer able to care for themselves than anyone walking the sidewalk.

This is just the latest chapter in our struggle for civil rights. Since our founding, we have struggled against one group of citizens trying to exclude another group of citizens their full rights of citizenship.

The reason Romney equivocates is that he knows his position is on the wrong side of history. He knows that every group has won their place at the table they set and paid for. But he is seeking the nomination from the GOP, the party most often on the wrong side of these debates.

[RhynoH]

11:16 AM on 01/10/2012

How does Mittens not have whiplash from changing directions so often? Who is this guy? Does HE even know what he stands for? Sounds like he's just wh**ing himself out for votes.

[kedajae]

10:26 AM on 01/10/2012

I find Mitt's choice of campaign music (well the artist mainly), kind of condescending to conservitive beliefs. Kid Rock is a known dater of porn stars and convinced his stripper girlfriend back in '95 to get an abortion, because he didn't want the child.

[kedajae]

10:42 AM on 01/10/2012

*conservative -I haven't had coffee yet, please forgive me

[mikeottnet]

05:28 AM on 01/10/2012

Read the following in reverse order...I'm new at this.

[mikeottnet]

05:27 AM on 01/10/2012

when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading "white" and "colored"; when your first name becomes "nigger," your middle name becomes "boy" (however old you are) and your last name becomes "John," and your wife and mother are never given the respected title "Mrs."; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you go forever fighting a degenerating sense of "nobodiness"–then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait."

When I was a pre-teen/teen, calling someone "fag" or "packer" was the choice insult. I also owned MC Hammer's CDs, thought Saved By the Bell was legit, well acted. Once semi-educated, post college, I met a gay man—a hair-flipping, Britney Spears adorer. He had the sweetest heart I've known.

Turns out I failed to follow the Atticus Finch's advice: "You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view - until you climb into his skin and walk around in it." The wisest words, in my opinion.

Anyway, rare is it to find a leader who labors to understand the "enemy" first. And so homosexuals, in some political circles, Romney's circle, are still viewed as niggers.

[mikeottnet]

05:27 AM on 01/10/2012

MLK wrote this from a Birmingham prison—in reply to the question (sometimes asked by his colleagues during the heat of the movement) "Why don't you wait a while and hold back on the sit-ins and marches?"

"... when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate-filled policemen curse, kick and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six-year-old daughter why she can't go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five-year-old son who is asking: "Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?"; when you take a cross-country drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you;

[Robbert Bricker]

09:01 AM on 01/10/2012

"Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood."

"Gays and lesbians stood up for civil rights in Montgomery, Selma, in Albany, Ga. and St. Augustine, Fla., and many other campaigns of the Civil Rights Movement. Many of these courageous men and women were fighting for my freedom at a time when they could find few voices for their own, and I salute their contributions."

Coretta Scott King

[TheForceReport]

01:44 AM on 01/10/2012

Mitt Romney has no CORE Values - he has been on 3 sides of every issue depending on Political Expediency at the time - This is the Best the GOP can offer as "better" that our current president?

[builderman55]

09:51 PM on 01/09/2012

Mittens: I'm "right now" Romney on gay rights, but this is after I was "right then" on gay rights back then and I was other things on gay rights awhile ago in between "right then" and "right now" like "maybe NOT right now" back then. Is that perfectly clear?

[tripas de leche]

11:10 PM on 01/09/2012

Actually, it is. Romney will say whatever it takes to win. That's one of his problems. His words cannot be trusted.

[joyz41]

08:55 PM on 01/09/2012

To Dennybop:
1. It is important that Huff Post exists as a forum where people of all leanings can express themselves. My comments were not inflammatory because I am trying to achieve a respectful coexistence of two groups, and I care for both groups of people.
2. While gay people should be free to express themselves, non-gay people should likewise be free to express their position without suggestions and accusations of being homophobic and mentally or intellectually deficient. I have argued and will argue for gay rights and protection. My daughter even put a proposed bill before the governor to provide education in schools so as to stop bullying against gay children.
3. The term "marriage" has significance for Christians, so it is not a matter of semantics. It is wrong to make this an issue where one group's right to freedom of religion and expression has to be sacrificed for another group's right to have freedom of expression, especially when both groups can respectfully coexist with the domestic partnership laws in place.
4. The Bible does permit divorce in cases of infidelity. Domestic partners can also dissolve the relationship. That is equal rights.

[Okoge]

09:55 PM on 01/09/2012

You are forgetting that gays are also christians and there are a significant number of Christian/Islamic/Jewish/etc gays who also believe in marriage.

The only equal rights I will accept will be that the government makes ALL unions "civil unions" and that marriage is a word reserved for ceremonies which have no significance in government. Then each religion can have their "marriage" and every person would have to register as "civilly partnered" When that happens, then it will be EQUAL rights.

And what of religions which are not Christian/Muslim/Judasim etc and which do not adhere to marriage being one man and one woman. Are they not equal under the law for their beliefs?

[Raejeanowl]

12:34 AM on 10/16/2012

Now, that sounds like an idea I could live with.

[AdamWest1313]

10:40 PM on 01/09/2012

I do not understand your third point. In this country, marriage is a right (loving v. virginia) as well as a secular contract with the state. That means that Christian's freedom of religion would not be harmed by homosexual marriage. At all.

Mind you that would be different if we changed it to domestic partnerships for all, with marriages being strictly religious.

[blytzd]

07:58 PM on 01/09/2012

"Made it very clear that, in my view, we should not discriminate in hiring policies, in legal policies."

So issues of marriage have nothing to do with law?