Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mitt Takes the Gloves Off
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/f3863b1b-59be-4e66-be28-bd48562ec10e?comments=true#commentAnchor ^ | Friday, August 03, 2007 9:58 PM | Posted by Dean Barnett

Posted on 08/03/2007 9:36:12 PM PDT by bubman

Yesterday, Mitt Romney went into Iowa radio host Jan Mickelson’s studio for a conversation about politics. At least it should have been about politics. Instead, Mickelson decided he wanted to grill Romney on the Mormon church and Mormon theology. (I also thought Mickelson’s comments on politics, namely that the President should overrule the Supreme Court when in the President’s opinion the Court oversteps its bounds, were a tad on the screwy side as well.)

Mickelson’s station, WHO, had a video recorder on the governor that was recording his off-air comments, something that Romney was unaware of. On the air, Mickelson stated that according to Mormon theology, Romney should have been excommunicated from the Mormon Church because he was once pro-choice. Off the air, Romney tried to gently tell Mickelson that he didn’t know what he was talking about. Although I’ve never heard even a snippet of Mickelson’s show before today, I bet Mickelson holding forth on something he knows nothing about happens on a not infrequent basis. The off air exchange (that once again Romney didn’t know was being taped) was at times heated. WHO today posted the footage on its website.

(Excerpt) Read more at hughhewitt.townhall.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Iowa
KEYWORDS: elections; prolife; romney; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 361-369 next last
To: EternalVigilance
"But it was posted two or three months ago,, so it will take you some time. If you begin now, you might find it by sunrise. : )" TAdams

"Well, unlike you, I hardly consider that recent as you claimed, nor very persuasive." EV _____________________________________________________________________

It was posted just shy of TWO months ago, June 9, 2007.

I've learned TWO things about you this morning: You can't count to TWO, and you have a poor memory (either the latter or you did remember it but figured I wouldn't post it. But unlike your attitude to those who disagree with you and toward those you deem your enemies, like Mitt, I'll be nice and give you the benefit of the doubt.)

141 posted on 08/04/2007 2:33:41 AM PDT by TAdams8591 ( Guiliani is a Democrat in Republican drag. Mitt Romney for president in 2008! : ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377
The reason I think Thompson CAN win (not the same as why I think he SHOULD win) is that his personality can cut through a lot of the bull the MSM and DNC (but I repeat myself...) will toss at him. Romney just never impressed me during his tenure as my governor.

And yet Thompson was hardly noticed during his senate career. Now with Goldwater, he had a distinguished senate career and people were aware of his stands way before he ran for president. With Thompson, all the excitement is of a rather recent nature. When he was actually in office he was low profile. And with all the folks nit-picking about Romney's stands, WHO was a co-architect of one of the worst pieces of legislation ever (McCain-Feingold)?

142 posted on 08/04/2007 2:34:00 AM PDT by PJ-Comix (Join the DUmmie FUnnies PING List for the FUNNIEST Blog on the Web)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: ComeUpHigher
As I stated above, in the entire history of the United States from 1787 when the Constitution was ratified until today, there is not one single instance when the President declared that he would not follow a decision rendered by the Supreme Court. The obvious reason: Because he has no Constitutional authority to do so.

The Emancipation Proclamation

Proclamation issued by Abraham Lincoln on January 1, 1863, during the American Civil War, declaring all “slaves within any State, or designated part of a State ... then ... in rebellion, ... shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free.” The states affected were enumerated in the proclamation; specifically exempted were slaves in parts of the South then held by Union armies. Lincoln's issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation marked a radical change in his policy; historians regard it as one of the great state documents of the United States.

After the outbreak of the Civil War, the slavery issue was made acute by the flight to Union lines of large numbers of slaves who volunteered to fight for their freedom and that of their fellow slaves. In these circumstances, a strict application of established policy would have required return of fugitive slaves to their Confederate masters and would have alienated the staunchest supporters of the Union cause in the North and abroad.

Abolitionists had long been urging Lincoln to free all slaves, and public opinion seemed to support this view. Lincoln moved slowly and cautiously nonetheless; on March 13, 1862, the federal government forbade all Union army officers to return fugitive slaves, thus annulling in effect the fugitive slave laws. On April 10, on Lincoln's initiative, Congress declared the federal government would compensate slave owners who freed their slaves. All slaves in the District of Columbia were freed in this way on April 16, 1862. On June 19, 1862, Congress enacted a measure prohibiting slavery in United States territories, thus defying the Supreme Court decision in the Dred Scott case, which ruled that Congress was powerless to regulate slavery in the territories.

Finally, after the Union victory in the Battle of Antietam (September 17, 1862), Lincoln issued a preliminary proclamation on September 22, declaring his intention of promulgating another proclamation in 100 days, freeing the slaves in the states deemed in rebellion at that time. On January 1, 1863, he issued the Emancipation Proclamation, conferring liberty on about 3,120,000 slaves. With the enactment of the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in effect in 1865, slavery was completely abolished.

(You will note, I'm sure, that President Lincoln, and the Congress, took all of these actions in defiance of the Supreme Court, and before the passage of the 13th Amendment. Together, they checked the judiciary.)

143 posted on 08/04/2007 2:36:32 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: TAdams8591

You will notice that I didn’t address the issue you raised here in that post. I simply addressed a misrepresentation of Romney’s record similar to many that can be seen on this thread.


144 posted on 08/04/2007 2:39:34 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix

Gotta post and run, so apologies in advance if this point has been made but with Harry Reid being Mormon how can the Dems knock Romney for being Mormon? Not that they wouldn’t love to but would know it couldn’t fly.


145 posted on 08/04/2007 2:40:23 AM PDT by txrangerette (Congressman Duncan Hunter for POTUS...check him out!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
And yet Thompson was hardly noticed during his senate career. Now with Goldwater, he had a distinguished senate career and people were aware of his stands way before he ran for president.

Yet I don't recall a President Goldwater.

With Thompson, all the excitement is of a rather recent nature. When he was actually in office he was low profile.

I don't recall Romney lighting up the national media during his governorship.

And with all the folks nit-picking about Romney's stands,

Who's nit-picking?

WHO was a co-architect of one of the worst pieces of legislation ever (McCain-Feingold)?

So we can forgive Romney's support for gun control, we can forgive his flip-flop from his long-time abortion stand, but we can't forgive Thompson for co-sponsoring (architect's a bit strong) a piece of legislation a number of Republicans supported?

The WOT is far more important than this piddly stuff. I see nothing in Romney to convince me he has any idea of how to fight it.

146 posted on 08/04/2007 2:45:12 AM PDT by Darkwolf377 (PRO-FRED (Use all caps--it bugs the Fred-haters ;))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance; flaglady47
Anyway, he's already toast. Too many folks know his actual record now.

If you really believed that, you wouldn't be shoving him back into the toaster over and over and over again, would you?

147 posted on 08/04/2007 2:46:01 AM PDT by L.N. Smithee (Has George W. Bush been taking Carter's Little Pills?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: L.N. Smithee

Gotta make sure. He destroyed the GOP in Massachusetts, and implemented more of the radical Left’s agenda than has ever been implemented anywhere.

Not a good idea to let him do the same to the whole country, do you think?


148 posted on 08/04/2007 2:48:39 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377
So we can forgive Romney's support for gun control, we can forgive his flip-flop from his long-time abortion stand, but we can't forgive Thompson for co-sponsoring (architect's a bit strong) a piece of legislation a number of Republicans supported?

Okay, I won't nitpick Thompson on that legislation if the Romney bashers quit nitpicking his change of opinion.

149 posted on 08/04/2007 2:48:49 AM PDT by PJ-Comix (Join the DUmmie FUnnies PING List for the FUNNIEST Blog on the Web)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
"Jan Mickelson is the top conservative radio host in Iowa for a very good reason."

Iowa?

All the good states were taken?

Sorry, I really don't have anything against Iowa, but if you took a poll, you'd be real disappointed with the number of "who is Jan Mickelson?" responses.

150 posted on 08/04/2007 2:56:14 AM PDT by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
"...when was the last time you ever heard of Mormons cutting off people's heads or acting as suicide bombers? I've seen Mormons and although I can't figure out how they can refrain from coffee (typing this as I am sipping my Java) and alcohol, they cause no one any harm. So when you post that you would have a hard time supporting the candidacy of someone because of his Mormonism, ask yourself if you would turn down the services of a Mormon paramedic, cop, or refuse to be defended by Mormon soldiers and marines."

================================

I would vote for Mitt, but only if I had to and with reservations, but it is a giant Grand Canyon sized leap from that to where you just landed with all that other nonsense.

You best have a 2nd cup =)

151 posted on 08/04/2007 2:59:07 AM PDT by Manic_Episode (Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: bubman

Jan Mickelson: “I want a President who will tell the Supreme Court...to take a flying leap and meet me in the back and we’ll settle this like men.” What a jerk.


152 posted on 08/04/2007 3:00:20 AM PDT by L.N. Smithee (Has George W. Bush been taking Carter's Little Pills?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: norton

Believe me. The folks who are going to vote in the Ames straw poll next week, and in the Caucus’ in January, know who Jan is, and they listen to him.

He’s been the top conservative voice on WHO, the station Ronald Reagan got his start on, for many, many years. 50,000 watts of raw power that covers two-thirds of the state very effectively.

The fact that Romney would only give Jan ten minutes, and pretty much made it clear that he wasn’t coming back, speaks volumes.

Mickelson cuts through the crap with politicians better than just about anybody, and Romney knows it.


153 posted on 08/04/2007 3:01:19 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
Okay, I won't nitpick Thompson on that legislation if the Romney bashers quit nitpicking his change of opinion.

It's not a question of nitpicking. I just don't understand how people can see how Romney worked with a Democrat House and Senate AND see his flip-flops AND see how proud he is of Hillarycare, MA Version and defend him, yet are all over Thompson for something which, whatever I think about it, was meant to clean up our ridiculously corrupt politicians.

Thompson has repented on McCain-Feingold; I haven't heard Romney repent on his liberal healthcare plan which he boasts about whenever he can.

154 posted on 08/04/2007 3:03:32 AM PDT by Darkwolf377 (PRO-FRED (Use all caps--it bugs the Fred-haters ;))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: L.N. Smithee

I hope Jan Mickelson spends all next week eviscerating Romney politically.

And I bet he does, too.


155 posted on 08/04/2007 3:04:18 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Gotta make sure.

What? First you said, "He's already toast," and now you say you've "gotta make sure" he's toast.

You sound like a flip-flopper to me. You from Massachusetts?

156 posted on 08/04/2007 3:27:47 AM PDT by L.N. Smithee (Has George W. Bush been taking Carter's Little Pills?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
I hope Jan Mickelson spends all next week eviscerating Romney politically. And I bet he does, too.

Based on what? Mickelson's kooky idea that America is looking for a President who will blow off the Supreme Court? That's a winner of a campaign strategy! "I'll just do what I want if I think the Supreme Court votes the wrong way! Vote for ME!"

157 posted on 08/04/2007 3:51:34 AM PDT by L.N. Smithee (Has George W. Bush been taking Carter's Little Pills?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Savage Beast

Read Under the Banner of Heaven. The beginnings of the Mormon church are “interesting” to say the least.


158 posted on 08/04/2007 4:31:32 AM PDT by saganite (Billions and billions and billions----and that's just the NASA budget!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Austin1; bcbuster; beaversmom; bethtopaz; BlueAngel; Bluestateredman; borntoraisehogs; Bosco; ...
I am so proud of Mitt and have said all along that LDS would not imposed their believe on others but a true LDS would practiced their faith according the 11the Article of Faith

11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

VIDEO GO MITT GO BLESS YOU!:)

I think Jan Mickelson came off as a deciever becaue he knew the what he did was not Kosher, and Mitt Mitt came through like a shining star!

• Send FReep Mail to Unmarked Package to get [ON] or [OFF] the Mitt Romney Ping List


159 posted on 08/04/2007 4:47:57 AM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: saganite

All the LDS have to do is to continues in being honest in our dealing and all your anti Mormon banners mean nothing!


160 posted on 08/04/2007 4:55:36 AM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 361-369 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson