"On social issues, Romney embraces all of the right’s litmus tests."

Writes Katrina vanden Heuvel in The Nation:

He pledges to repeal President Obama’s health-care reform, even though it was modeled on the plan Romney signed as Massachusetts governor.

Obamacare is a "social issue"? Am I a right-winger if I think it's an economic issue?

He favors repealing Roe v. Wade, outlawing women’s right to choose.

You don't "repeal" a Supreme Court case. You get it overturned. And a "right" can't be "outlawed." The Court would need to decide that the right doesn't exist as a matter of constitutional law, and then there would need to be a statute "outlawing," not the right, but the procedure. There's something highly spurious about the way vanden Heuvel writes about these things.

... Advised on legal matters by the reactionary crank Robert Bork, he repeatedly calls for more judges in the activist right-wing tradition of the gang of four—Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito.

Bork is advising Romney? Okay, I learned something here. I had not noticed that before. Whatever Bork is doing, Romney must at least intend to send the message that he's planning to appoint Scalia/Thomas/Roberts/Alito-type judges. I have no idea whether that means he will, but I certainly understand why he wants to send that message.