Make Way for the Fred Heads

Transforming Debate for Inclusive and Impactful Participation Objective: To empower thousands—or even millions—to contribute meaningfully to debates by leveraging structured organization and robust evaluation criteria. Together, we can ensure every voice is heard and every idea is thoughtfully considered.
By Michael Luo
By Jeff Zeleny
AMES, Iowa – The outcome of the Republican Straw Poll was announced here tonight, with Mitt Romney easily claiming the first prize of the presidential campaign. He was followed by Mike Huckabee and Sam Brownback.
There are, of course, many asterisks on this scorecard and the true significance is an open question. Neither Rudolph Giuliani, John McCain nor Fred Thompson actively participated in the event, but their names were still on the ballot here.
Here are the quick results:
1. Mitt Romney –32 percent
2. Mike Huckabee – 18 percent
3. Sam Brownback – 15 percent
4. Tom Tancredo – 14 percent
5. Ron Paul – 9 percent
6. Tommy Thompson — 7 percent
7. Fred Thompson – 1 percent
8. Rudolph W. Giuliani – 1 percent
9. Duncan Hunter – 1 percent
10. John McCain (less than 1 percent)
11. John Cox (less than 1 percent)
The vote totals for the top three: Mr. Romney — 4,516 votes; Mr. Huckabee — 2,587; Mr. Brownback – 2,192.
In Praise of Retail Politics [Kathryn Jean Lopez]
Mitt-supporting D.C. mom in Ames for the straw poll e-mails:
Overall, I have to say, I was impressed with the quality of the "retail politics" — lots of people were out in force in the 90-degree sun touting their candidates and their ideas - intelligently, passionately, and politely. The kind of crowd where, even if your kid gets lost, you aren't thinking "Amber Alert," but rather, "I just need to get the PA system to tell whoever finds him to bring him to the Mittmobile." While in line for the Fair Tax Ferris Wheel, a Ron Paul supporter calls out, "Ron Paul has been pro-life his whole life." The response of some Mitt Romney supporters: "God Bless him!". Paul supporter: "Mitt Romney hasn't!" Romney supporter: "I know. But he is now, and he is the only one who can beat Hillary Clinton, and she has never been pro-life."
Giuliani Links
Social Conservatives for Rudy and Catholics Against Rudy have both recently launched. AP is running a story about how Giuliani rules questions about his faith about of bounds, except when he doesn't. (Don't they all do that?) Via Jonathan Chait, I see the Village Voice is questioning Giuliani's record on terrorism. (I haven't read it yet.)
(ME: No. Some questions are in bounds, and some are not)
Last month, factcheck.org cast doubt on his claims about his record on adoption.
Finally, recent poll data sheds some light on the question of how Giuliani's stance on abortion will play among Republican primary voters. Supporters and opponents alike have something to seize upon. On the one hand,"Barely four-in-ten (41%) Republican voters, including independents who lean Republican, can identify Giuliani as the GOP candidate who supports a woman's right to choose when it comes to abortion, while the rest either incorrectly named another GOP candidate (12%) or say they do not know (47%)." That suggests that pro-life opponents of Giuliani might be able to make headway by further publicizing his position. Except that: "Conservative Republicans who know Giuliani's position are about as likely to support him as those who are unaware of his position."
P.S. The Pew abortion question isn't great: It asks people to identify which GOP candidate supports legal abortion, instead of simply asking what Giuliani's position on abortion is. But it's what we've got.
![]() |
ABC'S GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: "National security, you're a management consultant again. You've come into the United States looking at the commander-in-chief. Do you keep him or let him go?"
GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Well, you have to look at Iraq and Iraq was superbly executed in terms of taking down Saddam Hussein's government. But I think everybody recognizes, from the president to Tony Blair to Secretary Rumsfeld that post the period of major conflict, we had major problems in the way we've managed the war in Iraq, and that has contributed to much of the difficulty we have today. It was under-planned, under-prepared, under-staffed, too low a level of troops, under-managed."
STEPHANOPOULOS: "But how do you explain why all that planning wasn't done? President Bush is a Harvard MBA, too."
GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Well, everybody has their own management style and their own approach and I respect enormously the approach other people. Mine is just different. And if you read "Cobra II" and "Assassins' Gate" and "Looming Tower" and some of the reports of the events leading up not only to 9/11, but to the conflict itself, there's a sense that we really weren't ready for the post major conflict period. And that has resulted in a blossoming of the sectarian violence, of insurgents within the country and from without, and a setting which is a very troubled, difficult position."
STEPHANOPOULOS: "Yet, you support the president's decision to send more troops right now."
GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Yeah."
STEPHANOPOULOS: "How much time do you give it to work?"
GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Well, it's not years. I think you're going to know within months."
STEPHANOPOULOS: "Mayor Giuliani said the other night he's not confident it's going to work. Are you?"
GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Well, you know, I think it's hard to predict whether this troop surge will work, but I'm absolutely confident it's the right thing to do."
"I agree with the President: Our strategy in Iraq must change. Our military mission, for the first time, must include securing the civilian population from violence and terror. It is impossible to defeat the insurgency without first providing security for the Iraqi people. Civilian security is the precondition for any political and economic reconstruction.
"In consultation with Generals, military experts and troops who have served on the ground in Iraq, I believe securing Iraqi civilians requires additional troops. I support adding five brigades in Baghdad and two regiments in Al-Anbar province. Success will require rapid deployment.
"This effort should be combined with clear objectives and milestones for U.S. and Iraqi leaders.
"The road ahead will be difficult but success is still possible in Iraq. I believe it is in America's national security interest to achieve it."
Executive Mansion,
Washington, Nov. 21, 1864.
Dear Madam,--
I have been shown in the files of the War Department a statement of the Adjutant General of Massachusetts that you are the mother of five sons who have died gloriously on the field of battle.
I feel how weak and fruitless must be any word of mine which should attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming. But I cannot refrain from tendering you the consolation that may be found in the thanks of the Republic they died to save.
I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom.
Yours, very sincerely and respectfully,
A. Lincoln
Peter Gelzinis, in trying to say that Mitt Romney is not a member of humanity, and has betrayed his own membership in this exclusive bunch of animals. Hitler tried to say, just like peter, that Jews weren't really humans. It is Peter who says of Romney, " why couldn't Mitt Romney chose to scrape up a bit of humanity? The answer is obvious: There is none."Romney pigs out at Iowa State Fair
By: Roger Simon
Aug 11, 2007 08:19 AM EST
Ron Paul's supporters are actively encouraging Iowa voters to take advantage of Mitt Romney's offers of free transportation to the Iowa Straw Poll in Ames on Saturday and then, once they are there, to vote for Mr. Paul.
"Some say if Mitt is willing to bus Iowans to Ames for the straw poll, they should take him up on his offer!" says a flier in Iowa and on the Internet in advance of the straw poll for the Republican presidential candidates. The flier says that after riding the Romney bus to Ames, and allowing the Romney campaign to pay one's $35 entry fee, Iowans should then carefully weigh their options and "they may decide to vote for Ron Paul."
The flier is topped with a banner that says "2008 Ron Paul News," but Jesse Benton, a campaign spokesman, said it was the handiwork of independent supporters over whom the campaign had no control. "We can't tell our supporters what to do or not do," Mr. Benton said, adding that the campaign did not want to get "entangled" with federal finance regulations involving potential in-kind contributions.
But he conceded that infiltrating the Romney bus could certainly help Mr. Paul. It is his first visible attempt at converting his popularity online into success offline, which, alas, is where it counts.
Mr. Paul, a relatively obscure Congressman from Texas who caught fire online after appearing on the televised presidential debates, has only just started campaigning in Iowa. Mr. Benton said the fact that Mr. Paul was a full-time member of Congress prevented him from campaigning in Iowa sooner, although other candidates have been swarming over the state for months.
"This is his third trip to Iowa, but his first chance to really get out there," Mr. Benton said. He just opened a campaign office in downtown Des Moines and started to advertise his anti-tax, anti-abortion rights, Libertarian message on radio, television and in the newspapers.
Mr. Benton said that regardless of how Mr. Paul did in the straw poll, he would stay in the race at least until voters started going to the polls in the primaries and caucuses, which could start in late December or early January.
While Mr. Romney is pouring thousands of dollars into winning the Ames straw poll, it is not clear what role Mr. Paul might play in cutting into Mr. Romney's lead or jumbling the outcome for the other candidates.
Red and white "Paul" signs have sprouted up in cities across Iowa, at street corners and in front lawns, signaling at least some level of interest.
"He's kind of a wild-card candidate," said Chuck Laudner, executive director of the state's Republican Party. "We don't know what to expect. We're sure he'll have a big turnout, but we don't know how many votes that will be."
Mr. Laudner said that the Paul campaign appeared to be "bringing in a lot of folks from out of state" to help organize Iowans, who are the only ones allowed to vote. He said it was hard to read what the campaign was doing because it had made no contact with the state party. "They've moved outside the whole campaign community," he said. "They don't come by. They do their own thing."
The Romney campaign is bracing for a larger-than-expected showing from Paul supporters, according to Gentry Collins, who is overseeing Mr. Romney's Iowa operations, although his saying that may be part of a broader attempt to lower expectations for Mr. Romney.
While Mr. Collins said he was confident of the Romney straw poll organization, he said it was carefully watching the excitement that seemed to be building for Mr. Paul.
The Paul campaign has bought the minimum of 800 tickets to give to Iowans to vote. Other campaigns have bought thousands. Simple math would suggest that to do passably well, the Paul campaign is relying on Iowans who buy tickets from other candidates to vote for Mr. Paul. The suggestion that Paul supporters catch Romney buses and vote for Mr. Paul is being widely debated on the Internet ; some see it as smart while others see it as dishonest.
Mr. Benton would not speculate where Mr. Paul might finish, but said he expected most of the candidates to receive between 1,500 and 3,000 votes. "If we can be somewhere in the middle of that pack, that would be a big success for us," he said. "Our goal is to prove that we can translate our online support into bodies in Ames and prove we can run with the pack. We feel we have a lot of room to grow, while other campaigns might have reached their peak."
Jeff Zeleny contributed to this post.
Thank goodness! The actual voting will likely begin weeks earlier than planned, putting us out of our misery far earlier than we would have dared hope. That's good news, and it will probably imbue all the campaigns with an extra sense of urgency, excluding the Thompson campaign which seems unable to show interest let alone urgency.
We have a fresh new batch of poll numbers to dive into. The latest Rasmussen national numbers show Rudy at 25%, Fred at 21%, Romney at 14% and McCain at 9%. If you've sensed (as I have) that Fred has been losing momentum while his campaign temporizes, the Rasmussen trends bear that out. Fred has gone from a peak position of a 5 point lead to a 4 point deficit in the past three weeks. If he wants to win, Fred has to get into the game and play well.
There are also some fresh numbers out of Iowa. The latest Des Moines Register poll shows Romney holding a commanding lead pulling 27%, Rudy at 11% and Fred at 6.5%. You need a ground game to do well in Iowa, and the dilatory nature of the Fred campaign means he doesn't have one. For what it's worth, John McCain has drifted into Ron Paul/Pasadena Phil territory, drawing a ridiculous 3% of the vote. With the date of the Iowa caucuses drawing nearer, so too does McCain's decision that he's needed in the Senate on a full-time basis. When it finally happens, some lucky reader here will receive a signed copy of a "Mormon in the White House?" Unlike many politicians, Hugh and I never forget our promises.
One additional note about the Iowa polls: Click over now to Real Clear Politics' summary of all the recent Iowa numbers. You'll see three polling outfits with results more or less in line with one another. And then you'll see ARG which has numbers wildly out of whack with everyone else's. Hear me now, and know what the pros know – no one who knows about these things trusts the results of an ARG poll. Please, when an ARG poll comes out that casts a favorable light on your candidate of choice, don't send me a crowing email demanding that I link to it. I won't.
SPEAKING OF CANDIDATES OF CHOICE, it's been an interesting week for mine, Mitt Romney. Last Thursday, he went into talk show host Jan Mickelson's studio and engaged in a heated discussion over "the Mormon issue." I thought Romney came across great in that exchange, and so did most other bloggers and commentators. The YouTube has been viewed over 170,000 times, something that probably makes the Romney campaign very happy.
On a less sunny note, yesterday, at an "Ask Mitt Anything" session, Romney was asked to defend his five sons against the charge that they're chickenhawks. Romney started out extremely well by saluting our volunteer army and mentioning his niece's Reservist husband who had just been activated, and then concluded rather clumsily by saying his sons are serving the country by trying to help him get elected president. Generally speaking, volunteering and sacrificing for political campaigns is a noble thing and shows a level of civic involvement that most people respect. But there was something a little off about Mitt saying his sons were serving the country by serving his campaign, especially in the context of discussing military service. Listening to the tape, it seems Romney intended it as a joke and the crowd did laugh. But it wasn't a particularly good joke, and it definitely was an ill-advised one. It was exactly the kind of comment that the press would replay as a "Gotcha!" moment. (Here's the entire clip if you're interested.)
Obviously this isn't a big deal. The chickenhawk thing is a Democrat obsession, not a Republican one. And family members, even if they're involved in the principal's campaign, are widely considered civilians by everyone except the left-wing blogging community and sometimes Mike Wallace. I've never heard a single Republican complain that the Bush twins aren't in Iraq. Or that Chelsea Clinton isn't in Afghanistan. During the 2004 election, I don't think a single Republican made a talking point out of the fact that Senator Kerry's daughters and stepson (the one who did all those hilarious impersonations on the campaign trail) opted for the civilian lifestyle.
What's more, I doubt the Romney campaign would mind if the media collectively decided that the candidates' lives at home should be a pressing issue. I think the Romneys would happily put themselves up against the Clintons in that regard. Lastly, I don't think anyone has suggested that Romney supports the troops with insufficient vigor.
But yesterday's happenings should provide a teachable moment for all our candidates. In this day of YouTubes and cell phone video recorders, now more than ever presidential candidates are one Macaca away from history's ashbin. Hillary Clinton is at a huge advantage in this regard. She's been under this kind of glare for 16 years now, and it shows. She hasn't made a single gaffe this entire campaign. No botched jokes, no clumsy TV interviews, not a single misstep that has sent her campaign into crisis management mode. She has proven herself the master of every circumstance and situation. The woman's got game. It's why she'll be the Democratic nominee.
It works out well for the Republicans that the campaign got so intense so early. Right now, by my estimation, Rudy and Mitt are the two most likely nominees. I like Fred, too, but the train is leaving the station and Fred's not yet aboard. He has reduced his margin of error down to zero, and both Romney and Rudy (like Obama) made a bunch of missteps when they first hit the hustings. It's a new game out there, a lot different from the last time Thompson ran for Senate.
Mitt and Rudy have both gotten better, a lot better, since the campaign started. They'll have to keep improving to defeat Hillary.
Compliments? Complaints? Contact me at Soxblog@aol.com
BETTENDORF, Iowa, Aug. 8, 2007 —
In one of the strongest conflicts yet between Republican presidential front-runners, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney attacked rival Rudy Giuliani Wednesday, implying that Giuliani supported illegal immigration when he was mayor of New York.
"If you look at lists compiled on Web sites of sanctuary cities, New York is at the top of the list when Mayor Giuliani was mayor," Romney said at the Abbey Hotel here. "He instructed city workers not to provide information to the federal government that would allow them to enforce the law. New York City was the poster child for sanctuary cities in the country."
The Giuliani campaign issued a statement rejecting the charge. Campaign communications director Katie Levinson said, "I am not even sure we should weigh in on this, given Mitt Romney may change his mind later today about it. Mitt Romney is as wrong about Mayor Giuliani's position on illegal immigration as he was when he last mischaracterized the mayor's record and later had to apologize. New York is the safest large city in America since Mayor Giuliani turned it around -- it is not a haven for illegality of any kind. The mayor's record speaks for itself."
New York became a sanctuary city, where illegal immigrants enjoy some measure of protection, through an executive order signed by Mayor Ed Koch in 1989, five years before Giuliani became mayor in January 1994.
But if Giuliani inherited the policy, he reissued it and seemed to embrace it.
At a June 1994 press conference, Giuliani decried anti-illegal immigration policies as unfair and hostile.
"Some of the hardest-working and most productive people in this city are undocumented aliens," Giuliani said at the time. "If you come here and you work hard and you happen to be in an undocumented status, you're one of the people who we want in this city. You're somebody that we want to protect, and we want you to get out from under what is often a life of being like a fugitive, which is really unfair."
At a speech in Minneapolis in 1996, Giuliani defended Koch's executive order, that, in his words "protects undocumented immigrants in New York City from being reported to the INS while they are using city services that are critical for their health and safety, and for the health and safety of the entire city."
"There are times when undocumented immigrants must have a substantial degree of protection," Giuliani said.
Giuliani leads in national polls of the Republican candidates, but Romney is the current front-runner in Iowa polls of likely Republican caucus-goers, and is favored to win this weekend's straw poll in Ames.
Cracking down on illegal immigration is a compelling issue for conservative Republicans.
"You have to follow the law, and honor and respect the law," Romney said Wednesday. "And if you don't do that and create the perception that we welcome people coming into our cities or communities that are here illegally & you attract people into this country to come illegally. That's why we went from 3 million illegal aliens to 12 million illegal aliens."
Romney described Giuliani as having an "open door policy that said, 'Come on in, we want you if you're undocumented and this will be a zone of protection. You don't have to worry about city officials providing information to the federal government.'"
Romney first leveled the "sanctuary city" charge last week, trying to contrast Giuliani's policy as mayor with his own as governor, saying he'd denied driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.
Monday in Clear Lake, Giuliani protested, saying, "Frankly, that designation would not apply to New York City. What you got to look at in fairness to is the overall results -- and no city in terms of crime, safety, dealing with illegality of all different kinds has done a better job than New York City."
Earlier this year, Giuliani came out against the immigration reform compromise that failed in the Senate, saying he opposed "amnesty." He emphasizes increasing the number of border guards, building a high-tech fence and a national tamperproof ID card for immigrants.
But as he tries to appeal to conservative voters, Giuliani is often competing with his own past views.
Giuliani has long faulted the federal government for not doing enough to secure the borders. But liberal immigrants' rights groups generally give him high marks during his tenure for sensitivity to their issues.
In 1996, Giuliani compared "the anti-immigration issue that's now sweeping the country" to "the Chinese Exclusionary Act, or the Know-Nothing movement -- these were movements that encouraged Americans to fear foreigners, to fear something that is different and to stop immigration."
That same year he sued the federal government for new provisions in federal immigration laws that would encourage government employees to turn in illegal immigrants seeking benefits from the city.
He said educating the children of illegal immigrants made sense.
"The reality is that they are here, and they're going to remain here. The choice becomes for a city what do you do? Allow them to stay on the streets or allow them to be educated? The preferred choice from the point of view of New York City is to be educated," Giuliani claimed.
For his part, Romney also seems to have had a much more lenient view of illegal immigrants than his current rhetoric would suggest. And while Giuliani may be placing a different emphasis on his immigration views, Romney seems to have changed his in some cases.
For 10 years, Romney used the services of a landscaping company for his Belmont, Mass., estate that hired illegal workers from Guatemala, workers who told the Boston Globe that Romney never inquired about their legal status.
While Romney was governor, the commonwealth of Massachusetts became one of the six states with the largest growth in unauthorized migrant population, from 2002 to 2004, according to the Pew Hispanic Center, with somewhere between 200,000-250,000 new illegal immigrants. Romney was governor from January 2003 until 2007.
Romney in the past voiced support for immigration reform bills far more liberal than the 2007 bill.
In 2005, he called immigration reform efforts by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and President Bush that provided a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants "reasonable proposals" that were "very different than amnesty. & It's saying you could work your way into becoming a legal resident of the country by working here without taking benefits and then applying and then paying a fine."
In 2006, Romney said "those that are here paying taxes and not taking government benefits should begin a process toward application for citizenship, as they would from their home country."
McCain's 2007 efforts at an immigration reform compromise are seen as one of the main reasons for his recent woes in the polls.
Jan Simmonds and Matt Stuart contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2007 ABC News Internet Ventures
Who cares what Mark thinks about what happened. I think it is more important that we first nail down the facts of what happened, so please watch the video, one more time and help me correct any mistakes in the transcript.
It will be a good use of your time.
(see previous post if you don't know what I'm talking about)That's because Romney's argument with the Iowa talk-radio host starts with the two discussing their shared affinity for W. Cleon Skousen. "You and I share a common affection for the late Cleon Skousen," the radio host says. The former governor agrees, affirming Skousen was his professor and when the radio host professes his fondness for Skousen's book The Making of America, while he acknowledges he hasn't read it, Mitt quickly says "That's worth reading."
Back to my transcript:
Governor Mitt Romney: Mmm.
That is why it is important to have a good transcript of the interview. Because it is such a big deal, and people are watching it so much, we need to be ready for all the spin people are going to give it with the facts of what it does and does not say.Jan Mickelson: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAM, Good morning Sir, Welcome aboard.
MR: Thank you good to be with you this morning. Marshaltown, is one of my favorite places. I used to work in marshal town.
Jan Mickelson: As a what?
MR: I worked there as a consultant to fisher controls. It was one of my first assignments as a young consultant and I made the treck, gosh it was a long period of time, back and forth from Dimoin to Marshaltown. I worked for a guy named Larry Sully who was head of that division. He told me I was going to come to love the people of Iowa and he was right.
Jan Mickelson: You have a photographic memory.
MR: Not Really. But there are a few things you can remember such as at Rubs, there is a place called Rubs, in Monture and I sued to go there…
Jan Mickelson: Did you cook your own
MR: I did cook my own.
Jan Mickelson: Are you any good?
Jan Mickelson: No now and then..I had to keep taking my…I got these real think filet menoins, cause that's what I wanted, you know you cook it and cook it and it looked like charcoal on the outside, and I got back to my table and it was too raw, and you had to go back, this was…
Jan Mickelson: You made your own stake go back?
MR: Of course. This…
Jan Mickelson: You probably didn't even tip yourself.
MR: This was when Rubs had about 10 tables. It is now a much bigger interprise, but this was back, oh gosh, probably in the late 70s.
Jan Mickelson: OK. They have wonderful soccer field up there too, Ed Fisher built for the community. They are a progressive community in one sense, but they, uh, anyway that's a different story, because you have talked about immigration before (who hasn't) and immigration has had a huge effect on marshaltown and a lot of rural Iowa communities. Well, welcome abourd sir,
MR: Thank You
Jan Mickelson: You've been on an ask me anything tour.
MR: Yeah
Jan Mickelson: Does that apply to me?
MR: You can ask whatever you like but I will dodge some of your questions
Jan Mickelson: Because our time is extraordinarily limited can I just dispense with the rest of the niceties…
MR: Absolutely.
Jan Mickelson: and go right to the tough questions.
MR: Yeah.
Jan Mickelson: At the, ah, um, because you are right now, ah, according to recent public opinion polls running number one in the republican side here, ah, you are the candidate to beat here in Iowa.
MR: You know I hope I'm doing well here. I think we've counted and I've been at over 200 events in Iowa and I've met a lot of great people. We've got a great team, doing our best, and hopefully making progress.
Jan Mickelson: You and I share a common affection for the late Cleon Skouson.
MR: Mmm.
Jan Mickelson: The last I talked to you you said he was one of your instructors (does that mean Romney has an effecting for him?)
MR: Exactly
Jan Mickelson: He was also one of my instructors, via a book he wrote on the making of America. It was a wonderful commentary on the US constitution. It combines Madison's notes with every codicil in the constitution. It tells you exactly what original intent is.
(First of all Jan, there wasn't one real intent. The constitution was agreed apon by many different people with many different intents)
MR: Isn't that something? That is a book I had not read, and it's worth reading?
Jan Mickelson: Oh Absolutely.
Jan Mickelson: You can never be a hustled by a politician again (ooh, magic! You have the keys to knowledge, Jan! You have politician's kryptonite.) If you've actually read the original intent of the framers (Jan seems to think that he is the only one who has ever done this. Mitt Romney graduated with honors from Harvard Law school. Do you think politicians like Mitt Romney, have never read the founding fathers? Here is a news flash for you Jan. Most politicians have probably read the founding fathers more than you have.)
MR: Wouldn't it be nice if our supreme court followed the intent of the constitution and the framers, instead of using the constitution as a springboard as some attempt to do.
Jan Mickelson: Is Rowe vs. Wade the law of the land?
MR: It is now. It is…
Jan Mickelson: You just flunked Cleon Skousan's test
(What an arrogant prick. Let's play stupid games with semantics)
MR: It was improperly decided, I'm sorry to…
Jan Mickelson: Cleon is spinning in his grave SIR.
MR: I'm sorry to violate the Cleon Scouson test, I'm not familiar with it.
Jan Mickelson: Well no the point is the Supreme Court doesn't make law, it can't make law. There are only 3 sources of law and the court is not one of them.
(A lot of people have spoken of Jan Mickelson's arrogance, in telling Mitt Romney what HIS religion believes. I think Jan's arrogance manifest itself most because Jan is not a lawyer, and he has in front of him someone Mitt Romney who graduated at the top of class from Harvard Law school, and Jan think that he can teach mitt Romney about how Law is made? Look you now name 3rd rate talk show host, have some humility. This "I know everything act" is pretty lame.)
MR: We obviously apply what the Supreme Court tells us me must do, and in my opinion…
(Here is where Mitt Romney starts getting interrupted with every sentence he tries to speak)
Jan Mickelson: Even if it's unconstitutional? Even if they just make it up?
MR: That, unfortunately, is a decision that the court has the first choice of making… And then
(Back to Cleon)
Jan Mickelson: You flunked the 2nd Cleon Skousan test.
MR: And then you have redress. This is what happened in my state. The court said that people of the same gender, under the constitution, are entitled to marry…
Jan Mickelson: They were wrong.
MR: My constitution was written by John Adams in Massachusetts…
Jan Mickelson: Yes
MR: …and John
Jan Mickelson: which excluded legislating from the bench
MR: exactly
Jan Mickelson: … and so your duty and obligation at that point was to say thank you for sharing, its not law.
MR: And the redress at..
Jan Mickelson: that's cleaon Skouson's opinion.
(As though just because Mitt Romney and Cleon are both Mormon, they should both agree?)
(Being incredible deferential)
MR: That's Cleaon's option… Our redress at that stage is open to us because the constitution does lay out how to overtern a court decision. In our case its through ballet initiatives and an amendment to our state constitution, which is a process we began and are still fighting for in my state. There are ways of having the people step above the court... what was interesting…
Jan Mickelson: But if the court was lawless… if its assuming legislative authority…you don't even have to invoke the redresses you mentioned you just say that is null and void on the face because they are out of their legal jurisdictions…and you don't have to sign anything overwhich they have legal jurisdiction.
(Does Jan think saying the word "jurisdiction" over and over makes him a lawyer?
This is MassResistance propaganda, and it is completely stupid. It is embarrassing that Jan Mickelson got a hold of it (probably from Brownback) and even more embarrassing that he believes it.)
MR: Its not a circumstance I would look forward to…
Jan Mickelson: Oh I would
MR: … having to confront.
Jan Mickelson: I would LOVE to…
(And here it is that we get to the real point of the interview. Jan Mickelson gets real loud and pompous here, because he day dreams of being in power.)
Jan Mickelson: I'm only speaking for myself here, Mr. Governor, but I want a president who will tell the supreme court when it leaves its constitutional boundaries, to go take a Flying leap, and meet me in the back and we'll settle this like men. Because that is what this country is crying for, and we don't have to amend the constitution aberrant supreme court rulings, if the guy at top, and the political class…
(You can tell this guy has psychological problems. He hates "the political class", he daydreams about what he would do if he was in power. He gets very flippant sounding when he says, "sir" or "Governor". He has problems.
Jan Mickelson: will assume their constitutional authority, according to Cleon Skouson.
MR: I hear what Cleon is saying, I would worry about a circumstance where a president would decide which court decisions…
Jan Mickelson: You mean like Adams, and Washingtons, and Jefferson
MR: No. Clinton. Alright? I worry about a Hillary Clinton saying, "I don't like that court decision, and I disagree with it, and they've gone on the wrong side, and I've decided I'm going to take a different course…
Jan Mickelson: Well there is a different branch of Government too.
MR: I understand. I'm not terribly enthused about Harry Reid either. And so what I tell you in my view the right course for Rowe v. Wade, is to have it overturned, and to have it overturned by a court which includes additional justices like Roberts and Alito, and that is the way to have the states finally have the authority that states were intended to have, which is this should be a matter of state decisions not federal decision.
Jan Mickelson: What would you do then… On a personal basis you have made a transistion. I'm not going to play the sound bites, but you have been on the record a couple of times in favor of abortion…