Romney’s profile in …. something

Romney refuses either to support Bachmann or defend Abedin. Too bad ducking isn’t an Olympic event. Unlike the tax-deductible Ratfalca, Romney might have brought back some gold.

Below is the full text of a story in Politico, reported by Ginger Gibson:

Mitt Romney refused to comment on two culture fights being waged by members of his own party.

At a news conference in Las Vegas, Romney wouldn’t weigh in on either the fight over comments by the president of the fast food restaurant Chick-fil-A over gay marriage or an effort spearheaded by Michele Bachmann calling for an investigation into Huma Abedin and alleged Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the federal government.

“Those are not things that are part of my campaign,” Romney said. He also wouldn’t say whether he thinks members of his party talking about those issues are a distraction.

“I’m not going to tell other people what to talk about,” Romney said.

Too bad ducking isn’t an Olympic event. Unlike the tax-deductible Rafalca, Romney might have brought back some gold.

Author: Mark Kleiman

Professor of Public Policy at the NYU Marron Institute for Urban Management and editor of the Journal of Drug Policy Analysis. Teaches about the methods of policy analysis about drug abuse control and crime control policy, working out the implications of two principles: that swift and certain sanctions don't have to be severe to be effective, and that well-designed threats usually don't have to be carried out. Books: Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know (with Jonathan Caulkins and Angela Hawken) When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment (Princeton, 2009; named one of the "books of the year" by The Economist Against Excess: Drug Policy for Results (Basic, 1993) Marijuana: Costs of Abuse, Costs of Control (Greenwood, 1989) UCLA Homepage Curriculum Vitae Contact:

9 thoughts on “Romney’s profile in …. something”

  1. Ahem. Bad HTML tag in aisle three, also, misspelling of Rafalca in aisle seven. And you destroyed my brilliant comment by yanking your post in and out of cyber-reality.

    1. Thanks. Fixed. I’d been wondering what a Republican candidate was doing with a horse named “ratfucka,” and I guess it slipped out.

  2. Perhaps the president of Chick-fil-A should make some more controversial comments. The chain had it’s single best day ever Wednesday.

    1. I don’t think even “the base” can suffer eating that crap too often.
      But then again, perhaps I overestimate their palettes and wallets and underestimate their gullets…

      Which is all to suggest:

      They have their own online encyclopedia…
      Their own tevee news…
      Their own version of AARP…
      Why shouldn’t they have their own fastfood chain too?

  3. How did a wuss like Mitt Romney sire five children? He doesn’t appear to be qualified in that department.

    1. Since Mormons are only permitted to have sex when the woman is ovulating, the Romneys probably did it five times (fewer if they have twins).

  4. “Too bad ducking isn’t an Olympic event…” Mark, has Obama or his campaign weighed in on Chick-fil-A? Here’s a link to another Politico article that suggests that, like Romney, the Obama campaign has decided to steer clear:

    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.

Comments are closed.