he had said to a utah paper, don't call me pro-choice. he came back to massachusetts and said, now call he pro-choice, or said, i will now support the pro-choice laws. so he had to win over the benefit of the doubt from those swing voters in massachusetts. he was able to do that then, and it seems like the same decision he's making now. i want to give these voters reassurance so they can vote for me on another issue. >> what strikes me, though, we've seen this pattern -- i get the romney campaign's motivation on this issue, for all those issues you just described. but what strikes me is they have tried to do this type of walkback on so many other issues they have succeeded at. the obama campaign seems determined to not them not walk back this one. is there anything you can see in terms of romney's past or other historical precedent on this in terms of whether or not the obama campaign might succeed in sort of holding him to this? not letting him etch a sketch on this? >> i really think it depends -- you know, it was tough in the first debate with obama and romney, for obama to bring up these issues, because jim laher didn't mention those issues. now they're going to try to bring it up in the next presidential debate. the question, though, is how specific is the attack? when it's biden tomorrow night, when it's obama against romney. are they pointing out, okay, this is what you have said about a human life amendment, this is