Romney: Chick-fil-a controversy not part of my campaign

Youtube ^ | August 3, 2012 | charliespiering

[Qbert]

"When your house is on fire you don’t worry about what’s in the shed out back and you don’t care what color the fire engines are....all you care about is putting out the fire because without the house nothing else counts."

We certainly wouldn't want to capitalize politically on an issue that's extremely important to an overwhelming majority of Americans. That's not the GOP-e way...

[what's up]

Generally, indies are considered those who don't identify themselves as liberal or conservative.

Independents swung the congressional election in '06 and won Pelosi the Speakership; they also went for Obama over McCain.

We don't want them swinging Obama's way again.

[wtc911]

I have known a number of C level executives. One of the traits they share is the ability to prioritize and focus.

This "controversy" is being played out by lower echelons.

[BlatherNaut]

You are making things up from whole cloth.

To the contrary, I am describing how this matter unfolded, having watched it very closely at the time.

Titus, a Harvard law graduate, was founding dean of Pat Robertson's Regent University Law School.

Deval Patrick, who helped place the final nail in the coffin of the proposed constitutional amendment, is also a Harvard law graduate, and his opinion is no more accurate or unbiased regarding this matter than Titus'.

"The only reasonable explanation is that the Legislature did not intend that same-sex couples be licensed to marry.

It is not the only reasonable conclusion. In fact, anyone who watched the debate could quite reasonably draw the opposite opinion. It was clear that a large number of legislators were totally opposed to allowing the citizens of Massachusetts to vote on a constitutional amendment defining marriage as being the union of a man and a woman.

The attempt was made to amend the Constitution because the Supreme Court determined that the law as it stands permits homosexual "marriage" (due to the fact that John Adams, et al never could have imagined the need to be explicit regarding the definition of marriage).

Goodrich v. Dept. of Public Health:

In a 50-page, 4–3 ruling on November 18, 2003,[3] the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court found that the state may not "deny the protections, benefits and obligations conferred by civil marriage to two individuals of the same sex who wish to marry."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodridge_v._Department_of_Public_Health

[Qbert]

"This "controversy" is being played out by lower echelons."

This controversy is the Constitution...

[miliantnutcase]

His answer would of been a disaster so he stayed clear. Not to mention it was a trap question as it was posed to him. We all know who he is... he’s just keeping his mouth shut which is probably best.

[presently no screen name]

Why is it best to keep his mouth shut - you don’t want to hear what he is all about?

Like the obama crew - they REFUSED to believe what was told them.

And it was NOT a trap - it is VERY easy to say if you are FOR TRADITIONAL marriage or not. HIS record PROVES HE IS NOT for Traditional marriage and his silence confirms it!

He’s filth right to the core - like his evil brother/Barry!

[presently no screen name]

he’s just keeping his mouth shut which is probably best.

You think NEWT would keep his mouth shut? No, he would blast them that they wouldn't know what hit them!

Newt would be coming from a clear conscientious and THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE.

THE LIAR and flip flopper has chosen to zip the lip - as those who DECEIVE do when there is something for them to get! If he fooled enough people, he doesn't need to say anymore. And his supporters don't care - they have no problem with the man being a deceiver and a known LIAR and who loves the same sex agenda!

[Diogenesis]

Mr. RomneyCARE violated the Mass. Constitution, RomneyBOT.
That is ok with you because you, like Mr. RomneyCARE,
HATE conservatives and Constitutions.

You lied out of whole cloth.

Milt Romney created BOTH ObamaCARE and gay Marriage.

[Diogenesis]

Mr. RomneyCARE is a COWARD except for his
attacks on women and children through surrogates.

[miliantnutcase]

Of course he’s a coward. But, most shrewd politicians are...

[Stentor]

Try being credible!

LMAO.

[Sea Parrot]

My choice for the 1 to 3 candidates who were running, Romney was not one. But it is what it is. So go to your corner and sulk beneath the blanket.

And I say this to those conservatives who do not vote for Romney. if Obama wins, IMO we will very likely lose the house and the senate will remain democrat.

So if such comes to pass, I will know who to thank for the continuing hellhole, those oh so PURIST ones, who chose to cut their noses off to spite their faces.

[MaxMax]

Yep, Mittens is showing his junk and there are no balls.
A-typical RINO response to important issues. Does he not realize
that the majority of American support the Family on this issue?

Good freekin grief.

[Just mythoughts]

My choice for the 1 to 3 candidates who were running, Romney was not one. But it is what it is. So go to your corner and sulk beneath the blanket. And I say this to those conservatives who do not vote for Romney. if Obama wins, IMO we will very likely lose the house and the senate will remain democrat. So if such comes to pass, I will know who to thank for the continuing hellhole, those oh so PURIST ones, who chose to cut their noses off to spite their faces.

We will get exactly who we deserve, whether it be BamBamKennedy or I ran my business just like BamBamKennedy bailed out the auto industry Romney. The TeaParty formed and reacted to the destroyer BamBamKennedy and gave control of the House to the Republicans in 2010... And we got a sniveling linguine spine Speaker. Wall Street bought BamBamKennedy's presidential ticket in 2008, and so called conservative still bend down in worship of that golden bull. By the way the derogatory term 'PURIST was divined up by the open borders crowd to spew upon US who were against the Bush/DickCheney amnesty plot.

[Sea Parrot]

Whatever you choose is your choice, so live with it.

Odd, my dictionary lists no relation to open borders, but shows purist as:”strict observance of or insistence on purity”

[BlatherNaut]

You lied out of whole cloth.

To the contrary.

But you're certainly entitled to believe that, if it pleases you.

It's time we agree to disagree.

[Kinder Gentler Machinegun Hand]

Where are these debates held? In a convention hall? Your living room? On the phone while you sit on the couch on your bath robe?

[Just mythoughts]

Whatever you choose is your choice, so live with it.

You are exactly correct, each person is responsible for their own actions. So go rag the high minded moderates that have no problem crawling around in the sewer with the liberals.

Odd, my dictionary lists no relation to open borders, but shows purist as:”strict observance of or insistence on purity”

But of course that is the correct meaning of the literal word purist. I guess you were out of touch when the high-minded social liberal moderates of the GOP-e decided to make it a pejorative for the conservatives they could no longer call 'single issue voters'. Social liberals are not and will never be fiscal conservatives. But they sure are first in line to jut out their chin and poke their fingers in the eyes of those they obviously despise more than liberals... the cough cough 'purists'... I am NOT impressed with their mushy minds and spines and smell to high Heaven after rolling in the sewer water of liberalism.

I will vote come election day.

[EternalVigilance]

Where are these debates held? In a convention hall? Your living room? On the phone while you sit on the couch on your bath robe?

We hold almost all of our meetings via phone conferencing, broadcast over the web. It's completely free for us, and involves no burdensome costs of any kind for any of the participants. Anyone in the world with an internet connection can listen in, and in many or most instances, join in.

Our people are just regular folks, using what resources they have to try and get their country back.

They aren't sucking on the teat of government, or begging the Republican-Democrat cartel for anything.

They don't receive tens of millions of dollars from the public treasury to run their conventions and buy their booze.

They haven't sold their souls to CNN, or Fox News, or NBC, or CBS, or ABC, or the New York Times.

And they are beholden to none of the money interests.

I would remind you that the founders of this free republic won our independence from Great Britain using hand-written letters, delivered via men on horseback.

I, for one, think we can preserve what they won, and generations before us have preserved, when we have access to communication resources such as cell phones, the internet, free websites, free social networks, free conferencing capabilities, free internet radio, free internet video conferencing, etc.

So, exactly which part of us exercising our God-given, unalienable rights as free Americans do you have a problem with?

Tom Hoefling for President 2012