Video: Romney calls Pace’s comments “inappropriate for the public discourse”

posted at 4:27 pm on March 16, 2007 by Allahpundit

Audio of Pace is at the Trib. He told the editors he supports “don’t ask, don’t tell,” and yet –

“I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts,” Pace said in a wide-ranging discussion with Tribune editors and reporters in Chicago. “I do not believe the United States is well served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way.

Except “don’t ask, don’t tell” does implicitly say it’s okay to be “immoral” provided you keep it to yourself. I’m not sure how he’s squaring that circle, unless he isn’t and this is just him paying lip service to DADT so as not to have to revisit the policy right now.

Romney’s response is clever, essentially applying a “don’t ask, don’t tell” approach to public officials’ moral beliefs, although it won’t endear him to his target audience. Which is why Sam Brownback’s campaign is going right after him, to show who the “real” social conservative in the race is. Poor Mitt — he’s got Brownback zeroing in on him from the right and soon enough, I suspect, Giuliani and McCain from the left. Why? Because he’s probably closest to being what most Republicans traditionally want in a candidate. Best for everyone else to knock him out before he gains some traction, then take their chances with each other.



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

A lonesome Republican voter is accosted by a gunman in the dead of night. The gunman points his weapon at the hapless voter and asks: ‘Who will you vote for? Romney? McCain? Or Giuliani?’

The Republican thinks deeply, then shrugs and says: ‘OK. Go ahead and shoot me!’”

thirteen28 on March 16, 2007 at 4:36 PM

Silly RINOS,

JANE HAS ALREADY SPOKEN……Next…..

seejanemom on March 16, 2007 at 4:44 PM

Thanks for playing, Mitt.

MT on March 16, 2007 at 4:48 PM

Who would have thought a Mormon who wouldn’t stand for values…

Either way, I’m voting for Fred…write-in or check mark.

Tim Burton on March 16, 2007 at 4:50 PM

Yeah, how dare we suggest that we shouldn’t support something immoral. What’s the man thinking?!

Oh, right. I forgot about the memo instructing us that we’re not allowed to think it’s immoral.

My bad.

Because he’s probably closest to being what most Republicans traditionally want in a candidate.

Huh? Yeah, I guess. But only if you’re only counting the three stooges you mentioned in that suggestion.

Gregor on March 16, 2007 at 4:56 PM

I officially dubbed him The HelMitt at CPAC, and I can tell you…I think its sticking.

Like old hairspray.

seejanemom on March 16, 2007 at 5:04 PM

/shaking my head

Mitt, Mitt, Mitt. Already wobbly, eh?

Fred Thompson or bust for me.

Matticus Finch on March 16, 2007 at 5:06 PM

Eh, I’m witholding judgement. It’s good to have someone right of center to drive the debates closer to the right. And, with Independents forming a substantial voting block these days, he has to appear wishy-washy on some issues to appeal to them.

NTWR on March 16, 2007 at 5:08 PM

I’m still voting on the Thompson/Newt/Delay/Steele ticket

MirCat on March 16, 2007 at 5:14 PM

in whatever order of course.

- The Cat

MirCat on March 16, 2007 at 5:14 PM

Except “don’t ask, don’t tell” does implicitly say it’s okay to be “immoral” provided you keep it to yourself.

Not quite. The policy “tolerates” the “immorality” only to the extent that any prohibition does; i.e. until you get caught.

Once you get caught engaging in homosexual conduct (defined as a statement/act/marriage), then you can be discharged under the policy.

The “don’t tell” portion is only one aspect of the ban on homosexual conduct (AR 600-20, ch 14). What also can serve as a basis is more “traditional” homosexual conduct.

armylawyer on March 16, 2007 at 5:17 PM

“Don’t ask, don’t tell” is a statutory policy. Congress passed the law and Clinton signed it. The military is supposed to follow it — I should say, is required to follow it. Whether homosexual acts are immoral or not. So the general’s personal views are irrelevant; he should have kept them to himself. That said, the attacks on his statement are ridiculous. About half the country feels the way he does, and half disagrees. More important, as long as the statutory policy is in effect, why should we be upset that the people administering it think it’s a good idea?

By the way, Allah, it’s not really true that it’s “OK” to engage in that behavior under the statute if you don’t tell anyone; homosexual acts still violate the UCMJ. As I understand it, it’s just a question of how the enforcement mechanism gets revved up.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on March 16, 2007 at 5:18 PM

Except “don’t ask, don’t tell” does implicitly say it’s okay to be “immoral” provided you keep it to yourself. I’m not sure how he’s squaring that circle, unless he isn’t and this is just him paying lip service to DADT so as not to have to revisit the policy right now.

Maybe he’ll run for president some day and then he’ll have the square and the circle, like most who’re running now.

Entelechy on March 16, 2007 at 5:19 PM

OK, armylawyer confirms my understanding.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on March 16, 2007 at 5:19 PM

Mrs. Clinton was co-president, before she wasn’t.

This topic, or not, Mr. Romney doesn’t strike me like someone who could beat Obama/H. Clinton. Must get Thompson in. He’s smart not to waddle in yet.

Entelechy on March 16, 2007 at 5:31 PM

Except “don’t ask, don’t tell” does implicitly say it’s okay to be “immoral” provided you keep it to yourself.

Allah, the first article I read about this incident used the word “openly” before immoral, making his statement more against US support for people who are openly immoral.

WASHINGTON (AP) – The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said Monday he considers homosexuality to be immoral and the military should not condone it by allowing gay personnel to serve openly, the Chicago Tribune reported.

He also talked about learning of a man’s affair and taking no action.

It seems to me that the issue is precisely that if the government knows an immoral acting is occuring and does nothing that it implies consent, and that this was his object in regards to allowing homosexuals to serve openly gay.

Esthier on March 16, 2007 at 5:36 PM

Homosexuality (or more specifically sodomy, both hetero and homo) is prohibited under the UCMJ under Article 125.

Most cases of consensual homosexuality (nonconsensual is a diff matter) get dealt with administratively.

We generally don’t prosecute people for it (unless it’s part of some larger trend of criminal conduct which would require charging it). Rather, we administratively discharge those that engage in such conduct.

armylawyer on March 16, 2007 at 5:38 PM

Mitt is a wana be slick willy rhino period I wouldn’t trust him in any political setting after seeing him in Ma. He would never have made it as Govenor here in NH

bones47 on March 16, 2007 at 6:13 PM

Last week you guys had a hard on for Newt, this week it’s Thompson. You’re like 7th grade girls, a new crush every week…who will be next?

JaHerer22 on March 16, 2007 at 6:34 PM

Last week you guys had a hard on for Newt, this week it’s Thompson. You’re like 7th grade girls, a new crush every week…who will be next?

JaHerer22 on March 16, 2007 at 6:34 PM

Jeb Bush.

Nonfactor on March 16, 2007 at 6:40 PM

Last week you guys had a hard on for Newt, this week it’s Thompson. You’re like 7th grade girls, a new crush every week…who will be next?

JaHerer22 on March 16, 2007 at 6:34 PM

I don’t believe there’s been too many people excited about ANYONE until Thompson started being mentioned as a possibility.

Who’s your crush JaHerer22? David Hasselhoff?

Gregor on March 16, 2007 at 6:46 PM

You’re like 7th grade girls, a new crush every week…who will be next?

This from someone who belongs to a party that’s built a cult of personality around Al Gore?

Allahpundit on March 16, 2007 at 6:47 PM

I’m shocked at the responses to Romney on HA.

He just said he is in favor of maintaining the status quo (don’t ask don’t tell)

To many of you this shows he is a RINO and not concervative enough? This is political foolishness and suicide. If you think repealing it is going to result in gays being removed from the military you are not in step with reality. It means they would serve openly.

Romney talking about policy instead of his own feelinings is the responsible and adult thing to do which the vast number of our politicians cant even get right.

Resolute on March 16, 2007 at 7:29 PM

You’re like 7th grade girls, a new crush every week…who will be next?

JaHerer22 on March 16, 2007 at 6:34 PM

You had a crush on Messrs Howard Scream Dean and John Forbes Kerry…peep, peep, peep…and now probably one Mr. Silky Pony…Heh, Mr. Thompson, eye- and brain-candy, either way you wish to analyze it.

Entelechy on March 16, 2007 at 7:36 PM

It seems to me Mitt is saying not all things are matters of public discourse. How much does the federal government need to deal with the sexual escapades of its citizens? It’s arguably a more libertarian viewpoint. And that’s fine by me.

kmcguire on March 16, 2007 at 7:37 PM

That wasn’t a good question for Mitt to field. It isn’t a good question for any candidate to field because whoever wins this shootout is going to have to draw voters from a pretty vast and diverse political spectrum in 2008.

So at this point way out from the vote Mitt decided to snap a bit at Pace who made that question possible and ride down the middle of the road. Now Giuliani and McCain need to answer that exact same question but if they’re smart they take the same path. Giuliani actually might go left he’s been making a lot of socialist party talking points lately. McCain also might simply respond “I was a POW” like usual but also could second Obama’s assessment of Edwards as “kinda cute”. I’d pay good money to see that!

I’m not sure that anything posted here (now?) on the 2008 race indicates anything except folks are trying on candidates right now. Newt hanging just in sight of being a candidate but not really, Thompson coming out of the gloom and sounding real “could be President” right now, Hunter and Tancredo making inroads into Giuliani / McCain support has us all agitated and edgy. Brownback really hasn’t even popped up on my radar yet. He needs to get out more.

Buzzy on March 16, 2007 at 8:31 PM

McCain also might simply respond “I was a POW” like usual

MCCain would simply point out his ‘straight talk’ tour..

Why on earth Yanks get so hung up on ‘gays in teh military’ in the first place still boggles the mind, though..

Just thought I’d throw that one out there, since that’s what every topic should devolve into

Reaps on March 16, 2007 at 9:58 PM

I don’t believe there’s been too many people excited about ANYONE until Thompson started being mentioned as a possibility.

Gregor

They were excited about the idea of President Schwarzenegger but the talk of the constitutional amendment that would allow it went nowhere.

Thompson was the next one to come along who appeals to this oddly large community of star struck celebrity worshipping Republicans.

Perchant on March 16, 2007 at 11:09 PM

Romney talking about policy instead of his own feelinings is the responsible and adult thing to do which the vast number of our politicians cant even get right.

Resolute on March 16, 2007 at 7:29 PM

Good job! Way to cut through the knee-jerk BS.

I guess some conservatives here would disregard any policies/laws they don’t personally agree with. I don’t vote for a candidate because they totally agree with my personal beliefs. I consider all aspects of his experiences and track record and then vote for the best candidate. No republican is going to be perfect and we have to be wise enough to realize that all candidates have to appeal to the undecideds because without them, they cannot win elections.

csdeven on March 17, 2007 at 12:22 AM

Good for the General Pace telling it like it is. All this PC crap is really going to be the downfall of America.

ScottyDog on March 17, 2007 at 2:28 AM

Except “don’t ask, don’t tell” does implicitly say it’s okay to be “immoral” provided you keep it to yourself. I’m not sure how he’s squaring that circle —– Allahpundit

General Pace is clearly not a fan of the “Don’t ask Don’t tell” policy. It was Clinton that created that policy, not Pace … Pace is just the guy that has to live with it.

Maxx on March 17, 2007 at 2:28 AM

Barack Obama was saying, in response to Gen. Pace, that he thought homosexuality was moral. Somebody’s got to inform God that it’s okay ’cause he’s under the impression that it’s not.

From Leviticus 18
21 “Do not give any of your children as a sacrifice to Molech, for you must not profane the name of your God. I am the LORD.
22 “Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin.
23 “A man must never defile himself by having sexual intercourse with an animal, and a woman must never present herself to a male animal in order to have intercourse with it; this is a terrible perversion.
24 “Do not defile yourselves in any of these ways, because this is how the people I am expelling from the Promised Land have defiled themselves.
25 As a result, the entire land has become defiled. That is why I am punishing the people who live there, and the land will soon vomit them out.
26 You must strictly obey all of my laws and regulations, and you must not do any of these detestable things. This applies both to you who are Israelites by birth and to the foreigners living among you.
27 “All these detestable activities are practiced by the people of the land where I am taking you, and the land has become defiled.
28 Do not give the land a reason to vomit you out for defiling it, as it will vomit out the people who live there now.
29 Whoever does any of these detestable things will be cut off from the community of Israel.
30 So be careful to obey my laws, and do not practice any of these detestable activities. Do not defile yourselves by doing any of them, for I, the LORD, am your God.”

So three reasons that God wiped out or drove out the peoples in Canaan before the Jews arrived:
1. sacraficing their children
2. homosexuality
3. beastiality
In other words, it’s pretty much the Dhemocrat party platform. We’re playing with strange fire folks.

Mojave Mark on March 17, 2007 at 2:42 AM

Romney the RINO. That’s at least the second time in a month that he’s sold the good guys out on a culture challenge. If we elect this guy… the war on terror will be over very quickly, he will first apologize to the Islamofascist and then surrender to them.

Maxx on March 17, 2007 at 3:10 AM

Mitt jumped the shark.

He just kissed any chance of a REPUBLICAN nomination goodby.

georgej on March 17, 2007 at 6:48 AM

What General Pace said may be politically incorrect, but it is the truth. This was an opportunity to support a great American and outstanding Marine in General Pace. For myself, I don’t take kindly to General Pace not being supported 1000%.

Phil Byler on March 17, 2007 at 4:18 PM

Except “don’t ask, don’t tell” does implicitly say it’s okay to be “immoral” provided you keep it to yourself.

The DADT policy does no such thing. It punts the issue entirely. You can say that it allows for the existence of homosexuals in the military, but that is neither an implicit support nor condemnation of homosexuality itself. To forgo calling out a known bank robber in a crowd is not an implicit support for bank robbery, it’s a decision based on expediency (i.e. not getting shot).

spmat on March 18, 2007 at 9:56 AM

I live in MA and will never vote for Romney for President. He is no Conservative and ran scared from the Dhimmy dominated legislature.

I’m torn between Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter in ’08.

Mooseman

Mooseman on March 18, 2007 at 7:50 PM