Posted on 08/04/2012 5:19:58 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Via the Examiner, I understand why he punted here. His retort to Reid's tax-evasion smear last night was that it's an obvious, grotesque attempt to hand the media a new distraction from Obama's record. He just got back from a foreign policy trip/photo op that was also submerged in distractions, most notably his Olympics comments in London and his aide's "kiss my ass" comments to the press in Poland. He's just begun pushing a more positive message keyed to his biography to convince undecideds that he's up to the job. The last thing he wants right now is another distraction wrapped around his ankles, particularly on a day when the news is about the latest disappointing jobs report.
Given that the Chick-fil-A question here was packaged with another question about Bachmann and the Muslim Brotherhood, he had two dilemmas. One: If he weighs in on either, that's a story and now suddenly he's being asked about gay marriage and Islamism instead of jobs for the middle class. If you want a candidate who's more interested in culture-war issues than economic growth, try Romney 2008. Two: If he weighs in only on Chick-fil-A, the easier of the two topics, then there'll be a separate story on why he specifically ducked the question about Bachmann and he'll hear it from her supporters and from the media for dodging. He probably figured he was better off playing it safe (as usual) and passing on both. Hey — if you wanted a nominee who'd inch out on the highwire to answer any question put to him, you should have nominated Newt.
Still, hurts to know that even a tool like Mike Bloomberg is capable of offering a righteous answer on CFA when called on to do so:
Critics trying to shut Chick-fil-A because its CEO opposes gay marriage are undermining the very essence of the Constitution, Mayor Bloomberg declared today in a stirring defense of the embattled fast food chain.
“It isn’t the right thing to do and it isn’t what America stands for,” Bloomberg said on his weekly WOR radio show. “And those people who don’t like (Chick-fil-A) don’t understand their rights were protected by people who took a difficult position in the past and stood by it. They stood up so everybody else would be free.”…
“What’s for sure is that government cannot in the United States, in America, under the Constitution, be run where you have a litmus test for the personal views of somebody when they want something in the commercial world.”
Barney Frank also managed to say a word against government discrimination towards Chick-fil-A. Ah well. Maybe Mitt will get another question about this tomorrow and say something about free speech even if he ends up avoiding the subject of gay marriage. Speaking of which, enjoy the second clip below. Not sure what’s gotten into Stewart lately, but this is a rare week during which most of his big hits have been at the expense of Democrats. Exit quotation via Mediaite: “Pretty sure you can’t outlaw a company with perfectly legal business practices because you find their CEO’s views repellant. Not sure which amendment covers that, but it’s probably in the top 1.”
Update: Evidently the “evolution” is over:
Obama, already in favor of gay marriage, has little to gain by weighing in against a private company that operates primarily in red states on an issue that has already inflamed social conservatives. He has treaded lightly on the issue on the campaign trail, touting the repeal of the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy but avoided new calls for legalizing gay marriage since announcing he supported it in May.
Several officials in Obama’s White House and campaign did not respond Friday to requests for comment about Chick-fil-A. And there’s reason for the president to keep the issues away from the center of his reelection campaign. Obama can’t afford to alienate religious conservatives in the black community or give blue-collar Democratic whites in Ohio and Virginia another reason to vote against him.
Not a word from the president of the United States in defense of a business owner’s right to hold the political views he prefers without fear of government retribution?
Or else you are a totally ignorant of the limits of the Federal government. I am surprised that people here or FreeRepublic think Romney should go there and that not going there proves he is a libtard. I think it is exactly the opposite.
Let's think people. Use out intelligence. Stop being reactionary. understand the importance of Chick Fil A is that the people took action.
WE DON"T REQUIRE GOVERNMENT AT ANY LEVEL TO GET INVOLVED IN THIS.
Chick-Fil-A was the number one story of the week.
You got to give up CNN.
So just saying “....but I’ll say this, a man has a 1st amendment right to expressing his views.....” and leave it at that if he didn’t want to get involved further is even too controversy? Mitt chicken out and this defense of Mitt around here is laughable and sad. Sarah smartly got involved and all she said was that she went to Chick-fil-a to support a 1st amendment rights and not allow bullies to run someone off for their beliefs...she never brought up gay marriage or any other social cause
Yep, Sarah got legs, great female legs, better then great political legs, and.....most of all....super great American legs!!! And.....Todd, my boy......you ain’t no slouch, either!!! The Palin family rocks!!!
The biggest and likely only change between a Romney WhiteHouse and an Obama WhiteHouse?
Far fewer teleprompters in the willard wing.
But dictating what size of soft drink a person can buy, denying them the right to defend themselves with a gun, telling them they can't smoke in their own home, and on and on and on IS OK?
If our Founding Fathers where around they would have already hung his ass.
JUST WHO THE HELL ARE WE SUPPOSED TO VOTE FOR THAT HAS A SNOWBALL’S CHANCE IN HELL?
Good GOD, you people are senseless.
I WILL HAPPILY VOTE FOR A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN.
Now which candidate does that describe?
Apparently you haven’t figured it out yet but Mitt Romney lost to John McCain in 08. LOL
Good! I’m sick and tired of Obama (or any other President) weighing in on every crack-pot leftist cause de jure. And make no mistake, this whole Chick-fil-a thing is just another leftist-press generated brouhaha. I applaud Romney for not becoming another Obama in this regard. Presidential attention to this kind of leftist BS is exactly what the leftists and leftist press are trying to gen up. Ignore this crap and it will go away. These issues exist only because the leftist press choose to make them exist in the first place. Romney doesn’t need to aid and abet them by getting sucked in to their need for attention.
Presidents should focus on the really big issues, like the economy, taxation, national defense, defense of our borders, and enforcing federal law, and not on the homosexual agenda.
Romney is smart in what he is doing, namely restoring gravitas to the Presidency and ignoring the leftist homosexual agenda.
He could say he is not going to let some extremist crackpots encroach on the civil rights of a legitimate business and leave it at that.
This is so easy! The clear majority of Americans were standing with the freedom of speech issue in the incident.
You’d think the term “freedom of speech” would ring a bell for even a libtard like Mittens. I guess freedom of speech and the rule of law is an “extreme right” Tea Party issue having nothing to do with GOPe. Who put the stupid in the stupid party?
It is you who is mistaken.
THIS heralds loudly THAT Mr. RomneyCARE cannot
win, and will bring the entire ticket down with him.
THAT is why he was chosen by the DNC and the MSM.
Here, here naps.
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.