Romney on Chick-fil-A: That’s not something that’s part of my campaign; Update: Obama ducks too

posted at 6:07 pm on August 3, 2012 by Allahpundit

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?


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

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Yep

spectator.org/archives/2008/10/27/post-defeat-planners

ebrown2 on August 3, 2012 at 7:54 PM

N

ope… nothing there but anonymous 3rd party sources.

Next you’ll be claiming that some guy told you Romney hasn’t paid any taxes.

Alberta_Patriot on August 3, 2012 at 8:09 PM

LOL, what Alberta_Patriot wrote there: excellent!

Lourdes on August 3, 2012 at 8:14 PM

You people are detestable.

First you make out like you have no idea what the American Spectator is. Then you make out like this could not have happened and compare the American Spectator to Harry Reid as if it was the Daily Kos or something.

Fine you are such big fans of Romney. You tell me which Conservative Republicans Mitt helped in 2008.

All of this information was well known in 2008 this is hardly the only article talking about Romney not helping others get elected in 2008.

Steveangell on August 3, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Bullshit. He knows better than to play into the LSM’s traps. Geeze, you’re quite the dumbass, aren’t you?

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:18 PM

You mean every situation in which Romney might be called upon to show he has some conservative gonads is a “trap”?

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Seriously! What part of a slow pitch over the plate to be driven into the stands for the home crowd doesn’t Mittoast understand? The Chic-fil-A dust-up is exactly the sort of thing he could have used to win over some of us “I’ll vote for him but I’m holding my nose” crowd. He could have crushed that ‘slow pitch’ of an issue. Instead … [a disaster]. Everyday I get a worsening feeling about November.

Tarnsman on August 3, 2012 at 8:28 PM

Tarnsman, you’ve nailed it. This issue was a winner for Romney, as huge numbers of Republicans and independents, and even Dems, support Chick-Fil-A. For Mitt to be dismissive of these conservative Tea Party style protestors, when this has been perhaps the headline issue of the day for many days running, is puzzling. Now, instead of standing firm on a point of ideology that could of helped allay real questions about whether Romney is a coreless panderer who takes both sides of every issue, he has just exacerbated the problem. And ticked off the base to boot. Take a stand. Walk it back.

anotherJoe on August 3, 2012 at 9:30 PM

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 9:21 PM

No, I think it meant quite a bit…which is why I am not panicking like an…

…I not going there so as not to be banned, but I do not think Wednesday meant nothing. Like I said earlier, I have been to CFA 3 times this week and tomorrow will most likely be 4 days. Too bad you don’t read all comments.

BYE!!!

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:33 PM

^ By the way, I’m trying to figure out exactly how Romney could’ve been “trapped” in this. I thought he’s already against same-sex marriage. What “trap” is there in coming out against thuggish Dem pols trying to throttle a business based on the beliefs of its CEO…especially in light of the massive public support that company’s gotten over the past few days?

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:34 PM

I am not reducing this to a chicken sammich…

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:28 PM

Yeah, you did:

If you choose not to vote for him because he didn’t defend a chicken sandwich to your personal liking, then so be it

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 8:40 PM

No one’s asking him to “defend a chicken sandwich”.

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:36 PM

You mean every situation in which Romney might be called upon to show he has some conservative gonads is a “trap”?

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:30 PM

So, your personal plan is to either 1) vote obaka or 2) stay home and not vote for Romney, which is in effect, a vote for obaka?

Which is it, idiot?

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:38 PM

Frankly, I think those who “want more” have already decided to stay home and, thus, re-elect obaka, out of protest!!!! *stomping my feet!!!!!!!* because Romney doesn’t kiss my ass as I’d like!!!!

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:28 PM

No, those who will be voting for Obama will be re-electing Obama.

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:38 PM

I think Romney should have made a statement on this. He did not need to answer this according to the narrative that was taken out of context. This was and is a First Amendment Right. It was only made a “gay” issue by those that want to stifle Free Speech when it disagrees with their views.

What is Romney going to do the next time Free Speech is attacked because some other group disagrees with the content?

What about attacking people that contribute to various Political Candidates that others disagree with?

There is a time to speak and a time to be silent. In my opinion, this issue was a time to speak.

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 9:38 PM

^ By the way, I’m trying to figure out exactly how Romney could’ve been “trapped” in this. I thought he’s already against same-sex marriage. What “trap” is there in coming out against thuggish Dem pols trying to throttle a business based on the beliefs of its CEO…especially in light of the massive public support that company’s gotten over the past few days?

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:34 PM

The trap of being a person of political integrity.

Tragic, really.

ebrown2 on August 3, 2012 at 9:40 PM

No one’s asking him to “defend a chicken sandwich”.

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:36 PM

So, your personal plan is to either 1) vote obaka or 2) stay home and not vote for Romney, which is in effect, a vote for obaka?

Which is it, idiot?

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:38 PM

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:40 PM

So, your personal plan is to either 1) vote obaka or 2) stay home and not vote for Romney, which is in effect, a vote for obaka?

Which is it, idiot?

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:38 PM

In effect, it’s no such thing. This tired blackmail argument has been demolished umpteen hundred times, but yet since Romney’s such a squish not much else can be said to sell people on him.

A vote for Obama is a vote for Obama. A vote for Romney is a vote for Romney. A vote for neither is a vote for neither. Period. End of story.

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:40 PM

No, I think it meant quite a bit…

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:33 PM

So it meant a lot, but Romney runs away because its above his pay grade and that means he’s super-clever? I don’t recall Scott Walker, or Reagan, using this clever strategy of quickly run away to achieve victory.

I guess that just shows how smart Romney is. /

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 9:41 PM

I think Romney should have made a statement on this.

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 9:38 PM

The bottom line is that Romney is showing why he’s only won one election in his career, and that with less than 50% of the vote. He has LOUSY political instincts. LOUSY.

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:42 PM

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 9:38 PM

Please. As soon as Romney made any comment, it would become a gay rights issue. He was smart enough to understand that.

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:42 PM

He has LOUSY political instincts. LOUSY.

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:42 PM

Please, by all means, stay home in November. This election could come down to one vote…

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:43 PM

No, those who will be voting for Obama will be re-electing Obama.

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:38 PM

“Sigh,” isn’t it tiresome to have to continually repeat basic Aristotelian logic to the willfully uninformed?

ebrown2 on August 3, 2012 at 9:44 PM

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:42 PM

Even The View thought it was a 1st Amendment issue.

INC on August 3, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Please. As soon as Romney made any comment, it would become a gay rights issue. He was smart enough to understand that.

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:42 PM

So what? He’s said in the past he’s against SSM. Is he afraid to reiterate that? And it really isn’t a gay-rights issue. It’s a freedom of expression issue. If hje doesn’t have the guts to think of that as something other than a trap, he’s more pathetic than I thought. Did he think he’d just cruise through the whole campaign talking ONLY about the economy?

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:45 PM

A vote for Obama is a vote for Obama. A vote for Romney is a vote for Romney. A vote for neither is a vote for neither. Period. End of story.

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:40 PM

You’re quote stupid, aren’t you? A nonvote is a vote for obaka because of his status…I think most thinking persons realize this.

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:46 PM

Even The View thought it was a 1st Amendment issue.

INC on August 3, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Yeah, but those ladies are probably much too conservative for Mittens. /

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 9:46 PM

Please, by all means, stay home in November. This election could come down to one vote…

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:43 PM

I’m not staying home. There are lots of important down-ticket races which will be of more import than a choice between Dem and Dem Lite at the top of the ballot.

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:47 PM

You’re quote stupid, aren’t you? A nonvote is a vote for obaka because of his status…I think most thinking persons realize this.

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:46PM

Uhhhhhhh….yeah. A conservative not voting for Romney is a vote the GOP lost, not one Obama has gained. Obama’s vote total stays the same. How often does basic logic have to be pointed out?

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Even The View thought it was a 1st Amendment issue.

INC on August 3, 2012 at 9:44 PM

It is a 1st Amendment issue, but Mitt is wise enough to realize that the lame stream media would have made it a gay hating issue.

The lefty View bitches don’t have to worry about that.

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Even The View thought it was a 1st Amendment issue.

INC on August 3, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Yeah, but those ladies are probably much too conservative for Mittens. /

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 9:46 PM

They fell into The Trap. They took The Bait. They’re not smart and wily like ol’ Mitt, nosiree.

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:50 PM

I don’t recall Scott Walker, or Reagan, using this clever strategy of quickly run away to achieve victory.

I guess that just shows how smart Romney is. /

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Have either Scott Walker or Reagan issued a statement on gay rights, including marriage?

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Have either Scott Walker or Reagan issued a statement on gay rights, including marriage?

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Did Reagan duck the abortion issue?

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:51 PM

One could turn this reasoning right back on them.

A vote for Romney is a vote for the Muslim Brotherhood; as he’s openly called for the ouster of Assad. Now he’s refusing to defend a fellow party member who endorsed him and who is now under assault by Brotherhood enablers on the Left and from within her own party.

A vote for Romney is a vote for Embryonic Stem Cell Research, as he’s stated his support for the donation of, in his very words, “surplus embryos” for medical research.

A vote for Romney is a vote to uphold Obamacare as it’s absurd to think that the guy who instituted the Statist Masscare would ever lead the fight to repeal Obamacare.

sartana on August 3, 2012 at 9:53 PM

Have either Scott Walker or Reagan issued a statement on gay rights, including marriage?

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Not recently for Reagan, but in his defense he’s dead.

1984…

Reagan on gay rights: “Society has always regarded marital love as a sacred expression of the bond between a man and a woman. It is the means by which families are created and society itself is extended into the future. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, it is the means by which husband and wife participate with God in the creation of a new human life. It is for these reasons, among others, that our society has always sought to protect this unique relationship. In part the erosion of these values has given way to a celebration of forms of expression most reject. We will resist the efforts of some to obtain government endorsement of homosexuality.”

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 9:53 PM

Have either Scott Walker or Reagan issued a statement on gay rights, including marriage?

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Did Reagan duck the abortion issue?

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:51 PM

Answer my question first, and then I’ll answer yours. ;)

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM

You mean every situation in which Romney might be called upon to show he has some conservative gonads is a “trap”?

ddrintn on August 3, 2012 at 9:30 PM

Actually, if you want to be completely honest, every single question or situation is a trap.

He could talk about his breakfast and some dishonest POS would turn it into something else. Lord forbid he actually makes a mistake. FEEDING FRENZY!!!

And if that doesn’t work, they’ll make something up. Usually I’d expect a bimbo parade in about two months, but that might be hard in Romney’s case. So what else is there? Hmmmm……

kim roy on August 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Even The View thought it was a 1st Amendment issue.

INC on August 3, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Yeah, but those ladies are probably much too conservative for Mittens. /

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 9:46 PM

One would hope that that leftist coffee klatch made the point that it became a 1st Amendment issue when Rahmbo and the Boston mayor made their threats, not just because disagreement=suppression (the left fallacy about “censorship”) In that case, they’d merely merit a polite golf clap for not being hypocritical in the application of their own false principle.

ebrown2 on August 3, 2012 at 9:55 PM

Not recently for Reagan, but in his defense he’s dead.

1984…

Reagan on gay rights: “Society has always regarded marital love as a sacred expression of the bond between a man and a woman. It is the means by which families are created and society itself is extended into the future. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, it is the means by which husband and wife participate with God in the creation of a new human life. It is for these reasons, among others, that our society has always sought to protect this unique relationship. In part the erosion of these values has given way to a celebration of forms of expression most reject. We will resist the efforts of some to obtain government endorsement of homosexuality.”

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 9:53 PM

Thank you…

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:56 PM

Thank you…

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:56 PM

You’re welcome.

May 13, 2011: Governor Scott Walker asked to withdraw the state’s defense of the domestic partnership registry

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 9:58 PM

My weenie dog has more sack than Mitt.

wheelgun on August 3, 2012 at 9:58 PM

Now, instead of standing firm on a point of ideology that could of helped allay real questions about whether Romney is a coreless panderer who takes both sides of every issue, he has just exacerbated the problem. And ticked off the base to boot. Take a stand. Walk it back.

anotherJoe on August 3, 2012 at 9:30 PM

I think what we have learned during the last few days is that politicians should stay out of these culture fights. That’s what grassroots organizations are for.

We really don’t need another president who blurts out things like “the police acted stupidly” or “if I had a son he would look like Trayvon”. That’s the reason Obama became one of the most divisive presidents in history.

Gelsomina on August 3, 2012 at 10:00 PM

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 9:38 PM

Please. As soon as Romney made any comment, it would become a gay rights issue. He was smart enough to understand that.

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:42 PM

This issue didn’t need Romney to say anything; it already was a “gay” issue and it was they that made it so. The CEO didn’t attack anyone or anything. He simply expressed his Christian Faith.

It was NOT a “gay” rights issue. Anyone with half a brain could have realized that.

Those that hate Free Speech and Christian Beliefs that are expressed are the problem.

Whether Romney speaks to this issue or not does not change anything; however it does reflect poorly on him.

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Actually, if you want to be completely honest, every single question or situation is a trap.

He could talk about his breakfast and some dishonest POS would turn it into something else. Lord forbid he actually makes a mistake. FEEDING FRENZY!!!

And if that doesn’t work, they’ll make something up. Usually I’d expect a bimbo parade in about two months, but that might be hard in Romney’s case. So what else is there? Hmmmm……

kim roy on August 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Precisely, that’s all the more reason for him to make a straight-from-the-shoulder defense of free speech. Heck, even Mike Gantrybee is capable of that.

ebrown2 on August 3, 2012 at 10:01 PM

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 9:56 PM

Scott Walker…

Statement from Scott Walker: Marriage is to be Between One
Man and One Woman

Current law in Wisconsin already defines marriage as between a husband and a wife. Because the courts in other states have broaden the definition of marriage, the constitutional amendment makes it clear that the only marriages recognized in Wisconsin are between one man and one woman.

State law in Wisconsin also prohibits marriage if either person has a living husband or wife or if the people attempting to get married are related or if either party is under a particular age. In other words, state law already regulates who can and who cannot get married in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin’s values are my values, and I look forward to leading our great state in the right direction.

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Even The View thought it was a 1st Amendment issue.
INC on August 3, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Good grief. Even them? It’s not even a reach across the aisle moment. Just about everyone has met in the aisle in support of CFA. What a waste of an opportunity for Romney to agree with…..everyone. Obama would have been left out of the loop looking lamer than usual.

Dongemaharu on August 3, 2012 at 10:04 PM

I really hate to say this, but the religious right’s fight againt civil union is what made this happen. You can’t argue, with intelligence, against that.

I am divorced, so I really can’t “stand” for traditional marriage as expressed by Biblical Christians, but y’all should move on. Y’all had your chance with agreeing with “civil union” but you have now lost the argument.

How in the hell can you say differently after SCOTUS gave obakaTAX approval?

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Good grief. Even them? It’s not even a reach across the aisle moment. Just about everyone has met in the aisle in support of CFA. What a waste of an opportunity for Romney to agree with…..everyone. Obama would have been left out of the loop looking lamer than usual.

Dongemaharu on August 3, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Yep, how is he going to stand up for the budget cuts and REAL economic austerity this country needs if he can’t even take a stand with John Stewart and Behar & Co. on something like this?

Pure political gutlessness.

ebrown2 on August 3, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Whether Romney speaks to this issue or not does not change anything; however it does reflect poorly on him.

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Please, then, vote for obaka!!!

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:11 PM

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 9:53 PM

Thank you. Good find:-)

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Pure political gutlessness.

ebrown2 on August 3, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Please, then, vote for obaka!

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:13 PM

One would hope that that leftist coffee klatch made the point that it became a 1st Amendment issue when Rahmbo and the Boston mayor made their threats, not just because disagreement=suppression (the left fallacy about “censorship”) In that case, they’d merely merit a polite golf clap for not being hypocritical in the application of their own false principle.

ebrown2 on August 3, 2012 at 9:55 PM

I honestly would have thought than even the ever timid Romney would have realized that there is no real downside to supporting CFA on this issue. I suspect however that he and his team are so disconnected from conservatives and the average voter that they automatically go with the inside of the beltway view of the world.

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 10:14 PM

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 10:01 PM

That is a statement from 2005. Can you quote one from the past week or so?

I’m not saying there isn’t one, but why not quote the more recent one?

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Please, then, vote for obaka!!!

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Please, then, vote for obaka!

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:13 PM

What exactly are you trying to convince people of here?

They may just take you up on your offer.

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 10:17 PM

Wisconsin’s values are my values, and I look forward to leading our great state in the right direction.

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 10:01 PM

I would think that on Social Issues most Conservatives would agree with those values. Gov. Scott Walker is not only a great Gov., but walks his talk!!

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 10:17 PM

I think Romney is a chicken.

shar61 on August 3, 2012 at 10:18 PM

I really hate to say this, but the religious right’s fight againt civil union is what made this happen. You can’t argue, with intelligence, against that.

I am divorced, so I really can’t “stand” for traditional marriage as expressed by Biblical Christians, but y’all should move on. Y’all had your chance with agreeing with “civil union” but you have now lost the argument.

How in the hell can you say differently after SCOTUS gave obakaTAX approval?

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Religious Right? Traditional Marriage? Biblical Christians?

You aren’t the first person to disagree with God, nor will you be the last. But He will have the last Word.

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 10:25 PM

Can you quote one from the past week or so?

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Beats me. I know Sarah Palin made a statement as have many others. I mean hell, if Lindsey Graham can find the guts to stand up what does that say about Romney?

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 10:26 PM

I think Romney is a chicken.

shar61 on August 3, 2012 at 10:18 PM

You have accurately summed it up. One is unfortunately obliged to vote for a clucking chicken to get rid of a hissing rat. Nobler species like eagles and lions are not to be found on the ballot. There are a few hyenas.

spiritof61 on August 3, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Several officials in Obama’s White House and campaign did not respond Friday to requests for comment about Chick-fil-A.

Obama is waiting for Valerie “Rasputin” Jarrett to tell him where he stands.

BuckeyeSam on August 3, 2012 at 10:26 PM

What exactly are you trying to convince people of here?

They may just take you up on your offer.

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 10:17 PM

People here know me.

Exept trolls and noobs. Which are you?

If you want to defeat obaka, you do it. You do everything you can to undermine him, rally the troops to oppose him, and you will do everything you can to defeat him.

If you can’t agree with that, including you having to “hold your nose and vote for Romney” than you are, quite frankly, an obaka voter. Sheesh. I don’t really understand WHY that is so hard to grasp!!!!

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:28 PM

I really hate to say this, but the religious right’s fight againt civil union is what made this happen.

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Do you agree with homosexual marriage?

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 10:28 PM

Whether Romney speaks to this issue or not does not change anything; however it does reflect poorly on him.

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Please, then, vote for obaka!!!

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:11 PM

Is that the only answer you can come up with? Why didn’t you dispute what I said with an opinion or fact? Changing the subject of my comments is something anyone can do, especially when they can’t dispute facts:-)

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 10:30 PM

I think Romney is a chicken.

shar61 on August 3, 2012 at 10:18 PM

He reminds me of a running back who runs out of bounds at the one-foot line to avoid contact.

BuckeyeSam on August 3, 2012 at 10:30 PM

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 10:25 PM

Judgmental people like you are have cost me my faith in Jesus. Go talk to the woman at the well in John 4…Jesus never judged her…

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:31 PM

Scott Walker…

Statement from Scott Walker: Marriage is to be Between One
Man and One Woman

Current law in Wisconsin already defines marriage as between a husband and a wife. Because the courts in other states have broaden the definition of marriage, the constitutional amendment makes it clear that the only marriages recognized in Wisconsin are between one man and one woman.

State law in Wisconsin also prohibits marriage if either person has a living husband or wife or if the people attempting to get married are related or if either party is under a particular age. In other words, state law already regulates who can and who cannot get married in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin’s values are my values, and I look forward to leading our great state in the right direction.

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Nice find. And well stated by Walker. The guy has a spine, that’s for sure. Aaaargh, I wish he was running.

Dongemaharu on August 3, 2012 at 10:32 PM

Judgmental people like you are have cost me my faith in Jesus. Go talk to the woman at the well in John 4…Jesus never judged her…

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:31 PM

That’s irrational. What others say or judge has nothing to do with Jesus. What has He done to you to cause you to abandon him? I’m sorry but that’s kind of cowardly – or maybe just a rationalization to abandon Christian morality.

dukecitygirl on August 3, 2012 at 10:33 PM

If you can’t agree with that, including you having to “hold your nose and vote for Romney” than you are, quite frankly, an obaka voter.

You sound like a member of the Republican Inquisition. The GOP doesn’t own anyone’s vote, and the idea that just because the Democrat running is a louse doesn’t mean the Republican running is worth voting for.

People can vote for whom they please and that doesn’t make them Obama voters, nor traitors, nor liberal.

Sheesh. I don’t really understand WHY that is so hard to grasp!!!!

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:28 PM

You put a self-described progressive on the GOP ticket and call anyone who won’t vote for him a filthy progressive.

It’s beyond bizarre.

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 10:34 PM

Judgmental people like you are have cost me my faith in Jesus. Go talk to the woman at the well in John 4…Jesus never judged her…

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:31 PM

That’s one hell of a stupid comment, in my judgment.

spiritof61 on August 3, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Really? Honoring, protecting and defending Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion is not part of the Romney campaign?

He could have used the question to slam politicians who abuse their power to shut down a business, shaming the Mayor’s of Boston and Chicago for abusing Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion.

To be honest I am not surprised. At times the Romney campaign’s myopic focus is smothering.

Interesting when Palin appeared at the Ted Cruz GOTV rally, she got a big round of applause when she told the audience that she wanted to stop at the Chick-fil-A on the way to the airport.

Earlier today, when Palin spoke at the Steelman surge rally, near the end of the speech she mentioned that she was going to be stopping at a Chick-fil-A around midnight. She got a big round of applause. She then went to suggest that feeding people Chick-fil-A should be a part of everyone’s campaign and the applause continued.

The political attacks on Chick-fil-A because the CEO has the courage of his religious convictions and is willing to state his views, along with the over the top rhetoric of the militant gay and lesbian activists in their campaign against Chick-fil-A has offended Americans.

Yes, how we define marriage is an issue, but that is only part of the reason why so many Americans are offended

Glenn Greenwald: Rahm Emanuel’s dangerous free speech attack
Chicago blocks a business from expanding because its president opposes same-sex marriage
http://www.salon.com/2012/07/26/rahm_emanuels_free_speech_attack/

Ross Douthat: Defining Religious Liberty Down
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/29/opinion/sunday/douthat-defining-religious-liberty-down.html

Mark Steyn: The Tolerance Enforcers
They’re ever more intolerant of anything less than total ideological homogeneity.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/312542/tolerance-enforcers-mark-steyn

Star Parker: Is Christianity now un-American?
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0712/star.php3

Gay Patriot: I bought Chick-fil-A’s product; I didn’t buy its owner’s politics
I bought Chick-fil-A’s product; I didn’t buy its owner’s politics

john.frank on August 3, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Evening all!

I see the Thread Spinning Machine is in fine working order tonite…lol

BlaxPac on August 3, 2012 at 10:38 PM

Nice find. And well stated by Walker. The guy has a spine, that’s for sure. Aaaargh, I wish he was running.

Dongemaharu on August 3, 2012 at 10:32 PM

I would have liked Sarah Palin running and Scott Walker as VP…or perhaps Rand Paul/Paul Ryan.

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 10:42 PM

Romney believes in economic freedom?

The statements by Chicago’s Mayor have been slammed by people on both sides of the marriage debate as being wrong.

Freedom of Speech and Religious Liberty.

Romney had a perfect opportunity to solidify his support with not only social conservatives, but also constitutional conservatives and conservative leaning libertarians.

Romney’s myopic focus is smothering at times.

john.frank on August 3, 2012 at 10:44 PM

Romney believes in economic freedom?

The statements by Chicago’s Mayor have been slammed by people on both sides of the marriage debate as being wrong.

Freedom of Speech and Religious Liberty.

Romney had a perfect opportunity to solidify his support with not only social conservatives, but also constitutional conservatives and conservative leaning libertarians.

Romney’s myopic focus is smothering at times.

john.frank on August 3, 2012 at 10:44 PM

Well said. He missed a great opportunity to solidify the base and even garner more support from independents and moderates who value the free market and freedom of speech. I can’t believe he missed this one. I thought he had better campaign managers than this.

dukecitygirl on August 3, 2012 at 10:47 PM

Mitt the grade A stupid candidate. did he miss the lines the record breaking sale sof chick fil-a he didn’t have to weigh in on gay marriage but he should have affirmmed free speech and free association. when bloomberg upstages you in freedom loving you were wrong. snatching defeat from the jaws of victory its the CINO way

unseen on August 3, 2012 at 10:51 PM

I’m going to get to the heart of it. Conservatives had begun to warm up to the NEastern Romney. You saw it at free republic. And now, this flap by Mitt is kind of a major insult to an injury that hadn’t healed quite completly. At free republic, you hear the outrage: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2914357/posts
Conservatives didn’t want Romney, and kicking and screaming we accepted him only after one after another of the alternatives failed spectacularly. This is heading toward a point where there may sharp conservative angst and anger about Mitt being our nominee, and the fires may burn as a big fraction of conservatives find Mitt simply not acceptable. Seriously, this is what we are facing today, with Mitt’s response to question that had for days been in the forefront of the minds of conservatives. This is not about practical politics or a median voter theory of the electorate, because if conservatives reject the candidate and can’t muster even minimal enthusiasm, the election is almost certainly lost regardless of other factors.
The issue surrounding Chick-Fil-A has taken on pivotal importance to conservatives. That’s why Mitt’s response to that specific particular question has raised ire. Mitt has an opportunity to walk his non-response back and remedy the situation. I predict failure to do this could spell disaster.

anotherJoe on August 3, 2012 at 10:51 PM

While Americans have been taking a stand this week against the tyranny of the Minority, what have the leaders of the Republican Party (which we will be dragging across the goal line) been giving us?

Bread and circuses.

kingsjester on August 3, 2012 at 10:52 PM

I thought he had better campaign managers than this.

dukecitygirl on August 3, 2012 at 10:47 PM

tha tis Mitt’s entire problem in a nutshell. he is the sum of his campaign managers. there is no thinking person behind the curtain. He simply repeats what his campaign mangers and poll testing tells him too.

unseen on August 3, 2012 at 10:53 PM

anotherJoe on August 3, 2012 at 10:51 PM

You have perfectly described how I feel. I’m very conservative and I didn’t want Romney. But I have been warming up to him and will vote for him because he’s all we’ve got.

I’m deeply disappointed in this misstep. It shows cowardice, superficiality and a lack of understanding of the real issue at stake. I have no enthusiasm for him and while I was thinking about sending him money and maybe volunteering for his campaign, I’ve decided to wait after this mistake.

I’ll still vote for him because he’s better than Obama, but my estimation of the man has dropped considerably.

dukecitygirl on August 3, 2012 at 10:54 PM

what have the leaders of the Republican Party (which we will be dragging across the goal line) been giving us?

Bread and circuses.

kingsjester on August 3, 2012 at 10:52 PM

some have. some like Huck, Palin Tom corburn have joined in the stand and while Cruz isn’t a leader yet his first decisions to stand with us is a good sign.

unseen on August 3, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Since the Chick-fil-A controversy has blown up, Palin has:

- Called Emanuel’s remarks Chicago style thuggery, standing on Freedom of Speech,

- Referenced the she wanted to stop in at the Chick-fil-A on the way back to the airport at the Ted Cruz GOTV rally to significant applause

- Went on Greta van Susteren’s show the other night and when asked about Chick-fil-A and the photo she had posted on her FB page, gave a strong defense of traditional marriage, set out the coalition that exists in support of defining marriage as between a man and a woman and said that her concern with the political attacks was the trampling on Free Spech. Van Susteren noted that while Whoopi Goldberg and Sarah Palin disagreed on the marriage question, they agreed that the political attacks were wrong.

- Spoke at a rally for Sarah Steelman earlier today. Near the end of her speech, she mentioned that she was going to be stopping at Chick-fil-A around midnight and then went on to suggest that serving Chick-fil-A should be part of everyone’s campaign to sustained and loud applause.

The point is that the political attacks on Chick-fil-A have struck a chord with a large segment of the American public as being dangerously wrong.

Romney needs to put some real “oomph” in his campaign. His ducking the question was a missed opportunity.

john.frank on August 3, 2012 at 10:55 PM

john.frank on August 3, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Sarah Palin is fearless. She means what she says and no one can question her authenticity. I wish Romney would learn from her.

dukecitygirl on August 3, 2012 at 10:57 PM

The issue surrounding Chick-Fil-A has taken on pivotal importance to conservatives. That’s why Mitt’s response to that specific particular question has raised ire. Mitt has an opportunity to walk his non-response back and remedy the situation. I predict failure to do this could spell disaster.

anotherJoe on August 3, 2012 at 10:51 PM

I rejected Mitt before the first vote was cas tin the primary and nothing I have seen with the exception of his promise to repeal obamacare has made me stop to question that decision. when mitt’s campaign came out the same day as the SCOTUS decisiona dn talked about replacing it that exception went away. I can’t in good concience vote for him. maybe the next 2 months will change my views but atm I’m hoping gridlock will stop the progressive train and make either Obama or mitt a lameduck from day one of the new term

unseen on August 3, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Eh. I don’t personally think that, rising to the level of Nation politics, this was that much more important issue than jobs.

As a culture issue, yes, it can be inspiring to hear him support CFA on Free Speech & opinion on gay marriage, but is this more important than us a stalled economy and hostile nations like Iran on the move?

This close to the Election day, hit the Administration where it hurts ALL of us the most: money.

The whole CFA thing can still be important down the road, the die hard political wonks will keep it going, but its the economy and the dollar ‘going to hold peoples attention for now.

BlaxPac on August 3, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Lourdes on August 3, 2012 at 8:12 PM

At least part of your comment is incorrect. Palin didn’t campaign in 2007 or until Aug 2008 for or against McCain or Romney. And, then certainly not against a guy who finished 3rd in the primaries…

Gohawgs on August 3, 2012 at 11:01 PM

unseen on August 3, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Come on. Don’t expect gridlock to stop Obama. He’ll just use executive orders and also appoint more horrible Supreme Court justices.

I know how you feel, but if you’re on a sinking ship and all you’ve got is a leaky boat and a bucket, you better get on that boat and start bailing out the water. Romney is all we’ve got. We should vote for him and then hold his feet to the fire for the next four years. It’ll be hard work and require diligence, but if that’s what it takes to save our Republic, we have to do it.

dukecitygirl on August 3, 2012 at 11:02 PM

You need something.

Lourdes on August 3, 2012 at 8:26 PM

Yep, for you to head down to your local pharmacy and get a refill…

Gohawgs on August 3, 2012 at 11:04 PM

Gohawgs on August 3, 2012 at 11:04 PM

Preach, brother, preach.

kingsjester on August 3, 2012 at 11:06 PM

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 10:25 PM

Judgmental people like you are have cost me my faith in Jesus. Go talk to the woman at the well in John 4…Jesus never judged her…

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:31 PM

I was not judging you, nor your Faith. I was simply remarking on your reply to my previous comments on this issue. Christians from the beginning have been misjudged and I agree it is not pleasant and can cause hurt feelings. If one knows the truth about a particular situation, then correct it if possible. If not, then forgive. When people misjudge others, then understand it was a lack of Truth that they did so. Perhaps they were following someone or something other than Biblical Doctrine. That is easy to do nowadays. John 8:32 is a starting point for many and the Truth is learned in God’s Word, not man’s. (unless man agrees with God:-)

I wish you Truth, Love and Peace.

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 11:06 PM

Not a word from the president of the United States in defense of a business owner’

Stop right there.

Obama hates private business.

faraway on August 3, 2012 at 11:07 PM

The whole CFA thing can still be important down the road, the die hard political wonks will keep it going, but its the economy and the dollar ‘going to hold peoples attention for now.

BlaxPac on August 3, 2012 at 11:00 PM

I have to disagree. Protecting the First Amendment and the free market is always important. And the fact that so many people voted for Chick Fil A with their wallets means that their attention is also focused on those freedoms.

I think people can divide their attention among various issues. No one is just a one issue person (unless you’re a feminazi who worships abortion). Romney could have made a coup d’etat with the freedom of speech and free market issues – he missed the boat on that one.

dukecitygirl on August 3, 2012 at 11:07 PM

This close to the Election day, hit the Administration where it hurts ALL of us the most: money.

The whole CFA thing can still be important down the road, the die hard political wonks will keep it going, but its the economy and the dollar ‘going to hold peoples attention for now.

BlaxPac on August 3, 2012 at 11:00 PM

The problem with that approach is that Romney doesn’t have a particularity good record on jobs and economic growth in Massachusetts. He has to focus on his Bain experience and that is a two edged sword as we have seen.

That business experience is being demagogued by the left and now we have Harry Reid attacking his tax record in that business. Romney is attempting to present himself as a business manager and the Democrats are hitting him with moral arguments. He needs to hit back on that same front and this issue was made to order for him and he dropped the ball.

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 11:09 PM

You people are detestable.

Steveangell on August 3, 2012 at 9:30 PM

No… what’s detestable is a band of hate-filled bigots who would rather see Obama get reelected and finish off the United States by digging a 100 trillion dollar debt hole that it could never climb out of instead of seeing the country saved but carry the taint of having had a Mormon president.

The whole damn bunch of you are no better than the architects of Auschwitz.

Alberta_Patriot on August 3, 2012 at 11:09 PM

The whole CFA thing can still be important down the road, the die hard political wonks will keep it going, but its the economy and the dollar ‘going to hold peoples attention for now.

BlaxPac on August 3, 2012 at 11:00 PM

hmmm the lef tthreatens to put thousands of americans out of work for the simple reason they don’t agree with the view of the compnaies CEO. And mit tthe businessman doesn’t find that frightening and could slip in how time after time the lef tbuts ideology ahead of economic common sense? It’s easy to make the chick-fil-a issue and economic one and stand for freedom of speech freedom of religion and freedom of association at the same time. this belief that you can seperate the two culture form economic is follhardy and stupid. How many people has the left put out of work due to its environmental policies based on an ideology? how many people have the left stop credit too because of their belief in “fairness” and equal outcomes? How many woman hav ethe left sentenced to a life of pverty with welfare and foodstamps and wix and out of wedlock births and how many workers hav ethe left murdered in 30 years because of abortion. workers that could be working today paying taxes, making a living, building wealth…..

but you know Mitt should keep his ey eon the “economic” ball. If he isn’t lucky Mitt is going to miss the entire forest because he never took his eye off that one tree…..

unseen on August 3, 2012 at 11:09 PM

He could have broken down his answer into two parts:

- Respond to the Chick-Fil-A question by saying that elected officials should not be telling a businessman that he cannot expand his business, or encouraging others to shut down a business because they disagree with his religious views. That is a dangerous attack on Freedom of Speech and Religious Liberty which is not acceptable in America.

- Respond to the Bachmann question by saying that he was not going to tell people in his party what to say or not to say, as that issue is not part of my campaign.

Yes, the first question would have likely lead to a follow up question on where he stands on marriage, and he could have answered that as everyone knows he supports the definition of marriage as being between a man and woman. He could then have gone on to state that how to define marriage and what legal rights if any gay and lesbian couples should or should not have are issues to be sorted out at the state level; and not something that I intend to dwell on any further. Next question.

john.frank on August 3, 2012 at 11:09 PM

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 11:06 PM

You have been more charitable to her than she was to you.

dukecitygirl on August 3, 2012 at 11:09 PM

The whole damn bunch of you are no better than the architects of Auschwitz.

Alberta_Patriot on August 3, 2012 at 11:09 PM

Well as long as nobody is getting hysterical. /

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 11:12 PM

The whole damn bunch of you are no better than the architects of Auschwitz.

Alberta_Patriot on August 3, 2012 at 11:09 PM

Well as long as nobody is getting hysterical. /

sharrukin on August 3, 2012 at 11:12 PM

LOL!

dukecitygirl on August 3, 2012 at 11:13 PM

Come on. Don’t expect gridlock to stop Obama. He’ll just use executive orders and also appoint more horrible Supreme Court justices.

I know how you feel, but if you’re on a sinking ship and all you’ve got is a leaky boat and a bucket, you better get on that boat and start bailing out the water. Romney is all we’ve got. We should vote for him and then hold his feet to the fire for the next four years. It’ll be hard work and require diligence, but if that’s what it takes to save our Republic, we have to do it.

dukecitygirl on August 3, 2012 at 11:02 PM

no SC justice can be appointed without senate confirmation. Gridlock stops the entir e ? of SC judges. EO can be re[pealed by Congress who cuts off the funds for it. Congress has as much power as the POTUS. and its itme they use it to stop this man. If the speaker believes anything he says he has a duty to stop Obama. If Mitt goes progressive once /if elected the speaker again from his own words and stated ideology has a duty to cut the funds to Mitt. It’s call compromise gridlock etc. Until the GOp uses the power it has why should we expect them to do anything different if given more.

unseen on August 3, 2012 at 11:13 PM

tha tis Mitt’s entire problem in a nutshell. he is the sum of his campaign managers. there is no thinking person behind the curtain. He simply repeats what his campaign mangers and poll testing tells him too.

unseen on August 3, 2012 at 10:53 PM

That was part of Gov. Perry’s problem.

Nothing stands out so starkly as Sarah Palin with McCain’s Campaign Managers and Sarah Palin unplugged!!

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 11:14 PM

no SC justice can be appointed without senate confirmation. Gridlock stops the entir e ? of SC judges. EO can be re[pealed by Congress who cuts off the funds for it. Congress has as much power as the POTUS. and its itme they use it to stop this man. If the speaker believes anything he says he has a duty to stop Obama. If Mitt goes progressive once /if elected the speaker again from his own words and stated ideology has a duty to cut the funds to Mitt. It’s call compromise gridlock etc. Until the GOp uses the power it has why should we expect them to do anything different if given more.

unseen on August 3, 2012 at 11:13 PM

What if we don’t win the Senate? Then we have what we have now: a progressive leftwing President and a progressive leftwing-dominated Senate. Which gave us Kagan and Sotomayor.

We can’t take that risk. We have to work to get more conservatives in Congress, PLUS win the White House to reverse the terrible policies and put this country back on the right course. That means voting for the lesser of two evils, sometimes, and also fighting with them to do what we want. I remember Newt saying that it’s better to have to fight with someone you disagree with 30% of the time than to have to fight with someone you disagree with 70% of the time.

dukecitygirl on August 3, 2012 at 11:17 PM

hmm chick fil-a has record rev when they stand up for God’s word. Meanwhile Carbonite has a record rev FALL when they back put of wedlock sex and Sandra Fluke…..

http://www.therightscoop.com/carbonite-ceo-admits-dropping-rush-has-hurt-the-business/

Seems like its more profitable if you are a believer and God rewards those who honor him and his works and words.

unseen on August 3, 2012 at 11:19 PM

ladyingray on August 3, 2012 at 10:31 PM

I’m sorry to learn of your divorce. But to blame others for your loss of faith, well…

Gohawgs on August 3, 2012 at 11:20 PM

john.frank on August 3, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Sarah is a naturally born leader and a fighter!!!

Thanks for the update on Steelman. Hope it went well.

bluefox on August 3, 2012 at 11:20 PM

dukecitygirl on August 3, 2012 at 11:17 PM

The GOp has a filibuster proof senate NOW. nothing that they don’t want to go through can go through. nothing. The only thing the GOP doesn’t have atm is the ability to get their own oideas through without a couple dems votes. I.e what we have is Gridlock. Which is fine by me. the big problems with Obama atm is that some of his stuff was already passed in 2009 and 2010 and they are on auto pilot now. It would be nice to repeal those things. But I doubt Mitt will repeal much of it. And its very doubtful the GOp will gain enough votes to have a vetoproof congress. girdlock is the goal and a slow takeover of the government by conservatives.

unseen on August 3, 2012 at 11:22 PM

What if we don’t win the Senate?
dukecitygirl on August 3, 2012 at 11:17 PM

I agree

I know we got 100% Rs against OCare last time but I think , as far as full repeal, we will lose at least 5 centrist R votes if we don’t beat Obama. The tide will shift left the first year of an Obama 2cnd term.

BoxHead1 on August 3, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6