Posted on 07/04/2012 4:33:47 PM PDT by kristinn
Caroline Horn@CNHorn
On @CBSEveningNews, @cbsjancrawford says Romney told her Roberts' opinion seemed political, not based on Constitution.
Isn’t this kind of like Michael Moore telling people that they ought to go on a diet?
But . . . but . . . I saw reports elsewhere on FR that Romney had declared a moratorium on discussions of the SCOTUS ruling.
As for a previous report that Chief Justice John Roberts changed his mind in the Supreme Court ruling, Romney was asked about that. He said it made it look like the decision wasn't based on the Constitution, that maybe it was political and that the Court was concerned about the Court and its relationship with the other branches. He said that's something that only the chief justice will know, and if and when he decides to tell us could be sometime way in the future.
See 5, with caption added.
Romney: the king of the 3 day later comment. The “let me see the way the wind is blowing” guy of all guys.
What a leader — What a Man; What a Mouse: Mighty Mitt!
Hopefully Mittens listened to Mark Levin dissect the insane Judas Roberts decision and could come to no other conclusion afterwords.
Are those ObamaBucks?
To say it was politics would be giving Roberts too much credit. It was PR, popularity ratings, legacy building before his epilepsy drives him from the court. Little did he know that his actions would forever equate his name with taking a dump.
I noticed that in the early debates, too. If someone got an applause line, when his turn came, he would always say, “Me too.”
He is such a follower.
He actually demonstrated that as gov of Massachusetts. The pic of him with Kennedy, et al, signing the RomneyCare bill is right on the money.
That’s Romney.
People don’t want to hear it, but that’s him.
While I agree that Mitt looks wishy-washy here, it WAS his idiotic spokesman who said it....and he should fire him because it’s not the first time the guy has screwed up...
that being said, he does back up his interpretation based on the reading of the decision about the difference between state powers and fed powers...it’s the only way he can play this . He’s got to do more though..he’s got to say what he is going to replace it with (insurance across state lines, HSAs, competition, etc)as well as point out that taxes and wasteful bureaucracy of this monstrosity
see post #13
I like it. Can somebody get it on the front page of the National Enquirer?
Romney and his campaign advisors are not ready for prime time.
Eric Fehrnstrom seems to enjoy making stupid statements on MSNBC and CNN on a regular basis.
Beth Myers is clueless and the only one (besides Ann Coulter) who thinks Chris Christie would be a winning running mate
Matt Rhoades, the former BFF of Matt Drudge has decided to get married to a woman and now there’s the whole betrayal thing going on
They really need to get their act together. You would think they were on the Jeb Bush 2016 payroll.
Finally. Romney clarifies his position. Hopefully this is his ONLY position. And his team’s.
Even though I personally don’t have too much faith in Romney, but we conservatives should hold his/their feet to it .......
I cannot believe this.
You people. Yes, you people.
Why aren’t you over on the Quix thread. Internecine warefare and dissing Romney seems to be all that really interests you.
Snarky. It’s a holiday week. Obama is off God knows where. Romney said something immediately. He says more 3 days later and there is nothing here.
Nothing but moaning and criticism.
I should have kept the promise to myself to stay on the doggy ping threads.
If Romney takes on “Roberts vs. The Constitution” as the central theme of his campaign, sells it, wins election, repeals ObamaCare, appoints Supreme Court Justices who, in their nomination hearings, all criticize the ruling in “Roberts vs. The Constitution” as at least questionable, then and only then will I give him props.
“Romney: the king of the 3 day later comment.”
Stop whining. This is not a game. Any reasonable person should at least take the time to read all the opinions and dissents before saying that the decision was political.
I have. And more: I've read all the referenced precedents, and all the legal definitions of relevant terms from the late 18th and early 19th century dictionaires.
The more I researched it, the more convinced I became that the decision was political--or worse.
Are you really suggesting Romney read the opinions and dissents?
It was political. Designed solely to help Romney. And then Romney promptly threw him under the bus.
These people are a moral and political train-wreck.
Well, at least he’s got his finger in the right wind, although I have next to zero faith that it will remain there for long.
I knew it instantly.
Bottom line: A “conservative” voting for massive, intrusive government.
What else is there to know? Only Flip Mitt and his ilk would be in the dark.
As if Romney ever cared a flying fig about the Constitution.
Ronmey got that finger in the wind. Yup, the Conservatives are pissed off.
I knew it instantly.
Bottom line: A “conservative” voting for massive, intrusive government.
What else is there to know? Only Flip Mitt and his ilk would be in the dark.
Yes. Are you assuming that he didn’t?
The severely conservative Romney has also become a severe constitutionalist it appears...
The RomneyCare mandate is political, not based on the Constitution, too!
Terrible. Better he should join the mob and shoot from the hip without even being asked, when every bleacher bum in the park is yelling and screeching, and look like an insipid internet ninny with impulse control problems.
Lord help us all.
I’m glad he has taken the stand, albeit belatedly. It is still important that he has called out Roberts.
BS. Respected conservatives saw Roberts’ decision for what it was within minutes.
Bottom line: Roberts voted in favor of massive, intrusive government.
Anyone even vaguely familiar with the US Constitution knows that isn’t in there. In fact, they know that’s what it was designed to avoid.
It takes no shooting from the hip, HB, to know that a ruling saying “The government can pursue and persecute you by taxing you over what you are NOT doing” is a ridiculous finding in the Constitution.
Well smell you. I'm sure you just gave the Romney team an anxiety attack.
That’s REALLY going to hurt!
Hey........Romney is actually obtaining some intestinal fortitude.........kewl.......
LOL, some of you seem to be blowing this tweet by the CBS reporter completely out of proportion.
Here is Romney’s full statement about the supreme court decision (from 6 days ago):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sp6d3JBLiAE
July 4, 2012 7:28 PM PrintText
Romney clarifies health care mandate position
Video and article at link above.
Romney responded well to this decision. I am pleasantly surprised.
Yes, I heard that at the time. He wouldn’t say that ObamaCare violated the Constitution, but would agree that it was bad policy.
That (of course) was the predesigned pubbie talking point. It was everywhere.
Then we got the meatheads that were trying to sell the crapola that John Roberts was a genius chess player and all of us were imbecils.
Then we got harumph and garumph and let’s turn back to the economy.
It’s not like we don’t follow this stuff, BC.
NOW, Romney is able to say that it’s “not based on the Constitution.”
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.