Romney opposes ‘special laws’

February 9, 2007

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney is generating plenty of headlines this afternoon. For example, the former Massachusetts governor believes Bush is right about the war, but was wrong in how the war has been managed. Romney is for tax cuts, but doesn’t think we can afford any new ones.

But for my money, the real fun was hearing Romney explain his position on gay rights, which he used to support, during a National Journal interview published today.

NJ: In 1994, during the Kennedy debate, you presented yourself as an advocate for gay rights. Would you say that you are advocate for gay rights now?

MR: I am an advocate for treating all people with respect and dignity, and for the absence of discrimination…. What that means is, in my administration, I didn’t discriminate against someone on the basis of their being homosexual. And I think that it is appropriate for private citizens and government entities to take their personal care to ensure that we do not discriminate in housing or in employment against people who are gay.

NJ: So, employers should not be allowed to fire someone…

MR: Wait, wait. You have to go back and listen to what I just said, and not say something I didn’t say. I didn’t say there should be a law… I said that employers should take care… this is not a law. I’m not proposing a law. I am not proposing a federal mandate, or I’m not proposing that there is an act of Congress of this nature. I’m saying that as a society, I think it is appropriate for us to avoid discrimination and denial of equality to people who make different choices and decisions including gay people. I do not support creating a special law or a special status…. What I do favor is people doing what I did, or what I tried to do, and not discriminate against people who are gay.

First, I have no idea what a “special law” is. Maybe Romney could explain it to us.

Second, did you notice the panic set in when National Journal suggested Romney might support some kind of legal protection for gays against employment discrimination?

And third, based on his comments, Romney seems to support some kind of voluntary anti-discrimination policy. The state wouldn’t prohibit discrimination, but it would, under Romney’s vision, apparently encourage employers to “avoid” discrimination.

The poor guy is in quite a spot, isn’t he? A decade of rhetorical tolerance has now become two years of a rhetoric that appeals to Dobson & Co. It’s quite a challenge.

So far, I’d say he’s failing badly.

Are we compiling a list of Romney’s flop-flops anywhere??

  • Let’s put this guy on the spot about abortion, too. It’d be like watching Gumby play “Twister”.

  • geez, mitt…..if you don’t have a fucking law, how are you going to be sure people don’t discriminate? i mean, we all know these bigots are so fair and equitable toward all people. idiot!

  • I’m saying that as a society, I think it is appropriate for…

    people not to steal or beat each senseless. And according to Romney’s Rule ™ we need not make it against the law though. We should just expect people not to steal. And, oh yeah, I’d like a pony with that. Romney’s only hope now is that he gets all these gaffs out of the way in the next few months and that no one remembers them.

  • And another thing,

    Romney is for tax cuts, but doesn’t think we can afford any new ones.

    Can the Dem candidates do this too? How about they say:

    “I’m for tax cuts, but we can’t afford any now, so we’ll have to raise some taxes. As soon as we can afford them, though, you bet I’ll cut taxes. You see, I’m a tax cutter.”

  • Second, did you notice the panic set in when National Journal suggested

    It’s like he was trying real hard to be- what’s the word?- dishonest or something with language, to not say what he actually meant, and then when he was asked precisely what he meant, he had to back out of his own ambiguous language to make sure the haters wouldn’t interpret him as being for anti-discrimination in anything more than a bullshit way (sounded like the real gist was “You can be against discrimination if you want to; we won’t make a law requiring you to discriminate…”).

  • people not to steal or beat each senseless.

    each other senseless. (and I previewed several times to get that ™ right…arggg)

  • Romney wants to use the bully pulpit to discourage bullying. Maybe we could make taxes voluntary too.

    The interviewer was about to ask the right question and Romney panicked.

    I think this Romney is going to about as important in presidential politics as his dear old ineffectual dad was.

  • Somehow I don’t think that little dance helped him very much. The poor guy knows he’s dead meat, he just doesn’t know which day he’s going to step on the wrong wire and get attacked by the rabid animals he’s trying to con into voting for him.

    LOL

  • It’s a pity that Missouri (I think) finally repealed a law back in the ’70s, if I remember right. Until that time, it was perfectly legal in that state to shoot a mormon on sight.

    Ah, those were the days.

  • Can I fire one of my employees for being a Christian?

    If not then I shouldn’t be able to fire a gay person. The law should apply across the board.

  • “First, I have no idea what a “special law” is.”

    Really? A special law to protect “the gays” perhaps? I bet we can google it on the internets.

  • As the Christofascists drift further and further from the mainstream of public opinion, every Republican with hope of winning a national race will have to perform this kind of political contortionism. These psychos exercise, at the least, veto power over the Republican nomination, and they also comprise the unmoving rump of the once-large Cult of Bush. I’m almost inclined to think that any pol who can finesse this–who can service the Dobsonites during the primaries, then come across as sane and sensible for the general–might be an okay president. Almost.

  • Mitt, every law is special, just like every sperm is special and every embryo is special. We have “special” laws to attack terrorists, we have special laws that grant the government special privilieges to spy on us, we even have special laws that say we can’t kill people even if they’re Mormon.

    And another thing, polygamy is a lifestyle, gayness is a characteristic, like eye color, skin color and genetics. Don’t be saying we’re passing laws to give rights to lifestyles, Constitutionally gays have the same rights as you, but for some reason we have to pass laws to remind “special” people that they can’t take those rights away from others, like gays, women or minorities.

  • I think it is appropriate for us to avoid discrimination and denial of equality to people who make different choices and decisions including gay people.

    Different CHOICES? Oh yeah, people decide to put up with shit from rabid members of De Base and shameless wanksmiths like Romney. Being chucked out of your house by your parents, beat up by insecure thugs and other fun-filled activities are very amusing and before that, being sent off to mental institutions for a spot of ECT was just SUCH a gas. And speaking of gas, what about all those people who chose to annoy the Nazis by choosing to be gay? And I won’t get into the origins of the use of the word f*ggot to describe gay men. After all, it was their choice.

    Mitt, please fuck off and die in a messy, prolonged and embarrasing manner.

    However, I happen think religion is a choice. People switch religions all of the time. Ergo, we can toss out those “special laws” that would, for example stop an apartment owner from refusing to rent to a Mormon. Then we can go to work on race. With plastic surgery what it is now surely we can say that looking like anything but a caucasian is a “choice.” After that we’ll see what we can do about the ladies. “Hey you chose to have those breasts!”

    Or we can toss Willard Mitt Romney off the tallest building in Boston. Hmm…

  • Such a shame. MittRomney1994 was my choice for the GOP nomination. He was such an open minded, even liberal, guy on social issues, as seen in this video.
    Unfortunately instead of MittRomey1994 we are stuck with MultipleChoiceRomney2006, who isn’t worth supporting.

    I also liked CompassionateConcervativeGeorgeBush better than RightWingExtremistGeorgeBush, and liked StraightTalkerJohnMcCain better than Hugs&KissesForGeorgeBushMcCain. Why is it that whenever a Republican sounds half way decent, their evil ulterego soon emerges?

  • TIAO is absolutely right. Considering everything the mormon church suffered in this country, he should be even more concerned about discrimination and civil rights. (I was raised mormon, BTW, but outgrew it.)

    This human (and I use the term loosely) is a hypocrite, and should be treated as such.

  • Personally I thought Romney’s answer was nuanced, but only to a point. It was an attempt — albeit more convoluted than clear — not to alienate voters who believe equal rights apply to everyone. However he basically told those who believe in amending the Constitution banning gay marriage he would not do so.

    Insofar as the reference to “special laws” he probably meant neither marriage between a man and a woman nor equal rights and non-discrimination legislation will be considered. But had he directly said that, it would carry political consequences, notwithstanding.

    Granted the “base” will more than likely not vote for him anyhow. While it takes courage, tenacity and mettle to stand on one’s beliefs despite unwarranted criticism, had he done so — or chose to do so — he would attract moderate republicans, moderate conservatives, libertarians and independents which would more than likely make up for losing the extreme right-wing voters known as the republican “base.” Apparently, too insecure, Romney hurt his chances, but that could change…

    It would be irresponsible to vote for someone who lacks the courage of his/her convictions. Character matters. So do integrity, honesty and wisdom — characteristics unfortunately missing from the current administration for the past 6 years. We cannot afford another.

    • Comments are closed.