1. jexer says

    If he were an Evangelical (like Huckabee) he certainly wouldn’t be trying to draw a line between politics and religion like that.

    While I want to say I admire his separation of church and state attitude… I think it’s entirely self-serving. He knows that his Mormon background counts against him with the GOP and he needs to show he stands apart from it to woo their support.

  2. Gus says

    So he is making an argument for separation of church and state (or politics) to diminish his LDS background while courting the Religious Right who want a biblical interpretation of the Constitution and all laws? Plus pissing off the Tea’s on Global Warming? Ain’t gonna work.

  3. Mark says

    I don’t think he’ll be the nominee. I don’t think the eventual Republican nominee is even in the race yet, and I do not mean Sarah Palin.
    I never read “Game Change” but I understand there’s a supposed true scene in there of a bathroom break during a Republican debate as recalled by an aide. Huckabee, McCain, Fred Thompson and some other guy all in there saying how they couldn’t stand the guy., when Mitt walks in to hear half of it.
    He’s like the guy in high school who’s father is a multi-millionaire and tries to be everybody’s friend but everybody knows he thinks he’s far superior to you.

  4. Dastius Krazitauc says

    So, to sum up, Romney thinks “gay” is an activity akin to adultery and murder, but he respects everyone, including adulterers, murderers and gays.

  5. princely54 says

    Actually, if Piers was a better interviewer he would have pivoted to exactly what the hell Romney thinks of Gay/Civil rights and make him defend his boneheaded stance of ‘I support the gays, but not their rights’. THAT’S the crux of the issue with him, and he’s not smooth enough to split that hair and remain attractive to anyone in the middle or middle-left. He doesn’t need the middle for the Rep nomination, but he’ll need them for the General election — make him say it NOW so he can’t try to weasel it later on. Empty suit, man, empty suit.

  6. Mark says

    This is exactly how a politician should answer when asked if something is a sin. I honestly don’t care what a politician’s religious views are provide he keeps them separate from state business. For example, I don’t care if someone thinks drinking alcohol is a horrible sin, but I do care if he wants to ban it.

    Anyway, I can’t get the clip to work for some reason, so maybe Morgan did ask this at some point, but the important question is Romney’s stance on gay rights issues.

  7. Russell says

    Remember that it was Mitt Romney as Massachusetts Governor who revived enforcement of the 1913 anti-miscegenation law for use on same-sex couples. (“We don’t want Massachusetts to become the Las Vegas of gay marriage.”) No matter what he says, Mitt Romney is filth.

  8. Danny says

    Sounds like ol’ Mitt’s being force-fed on something about the American body-politic that he pretends not to know when he’s in front of conservative audiences. May he choke on it.

  9. Sam says

    I expect his answer regarding gay marriage would sound a lot like President Obama’s.

    I wanted to be happy about this, in that I think it says something that a Republican candidate isn’t willing to just openly gay bash to pander for votes. Small victory?

    Out of the Republicans in the field, he’s the only sensible one. I don’t want him to win, but I’d rather have him than any of the others in the ring at the moment.

    And I think what he said there sounds more reasonable to people sitting in the middle of the political spectrum who are sick of being inundated with insane lunatics like Palin, Trump or Bachmann.

    The right wing candidate never gets the nomination. Mike Huckabee came out of the gates winning the first few primaries last election cycle and we see where that got him. Nowhere. Romney or Pawlenty are the only two legitimate candidates at the moment.

  10. Leslie says

    In favor of gay rights?
    @2:52 Romney: “What happened was the gay community changed their perspective as to what they wanted.”

    Gay rights included the right to marry in Massachusetts in 2003.

    No one “changed their perspective” and slipped in a demand for marriage.

    He endorsed a 2005 petition effort led by the Coalition for Marriage & Family that would have banned both same-sex marriage and made no provisions for civil unions in Massachusetts.

    If he thinks rights do not include family formation and recognition then he needs to be asked that directly and he needs to say so.

    If he thinks employment rights don’t include everything involved with employment – taxation, benefits, insurance, designating family – then he cannot possibly be elected, let alone nominated.

  11. Matt says

    You cannot be for equal rights but against marriage equality. It makes no sense. For if everyone was to have the rights, then gays should have the right to marry. It can’t be some equal rights for everybody but other rights for just a few. What I would have liked to see him answer was if the majority of the country favored gay marriage, would he put aside his personal and/or religious views and sign it into law?? He claims to want to represent everyone. That’s what Pierce should have asked him.

  12. Jim says

    I think Piers actually is a pretty good interviewer. I do wish he had specifically asked about ENDA when Mitt says he was in opposed job discrimination. Mitt is slimy.

Leave A Reply