GOP debate: Mitt Romney grows foggy on contraception

[maximusveritas]

I was struck by this major display of ignorance by Romney when he showed no knowledge or understanding of the landmark Griswold vs Connecticut case. Additionally, it was another example of Romney dodging questions since he didn't want to give a straight answer.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-mitt-romney-grows-foggy-on-contraception-question-20120107,0,3685593.story

“I am asking you, do you believe states have that right or not?”

Romney seemed perplexed, and annoyed: “George, I don’t know whether the state has the right to ban contraception. No state wants to. The idea of you putting forward things that states might want to do that no state wants to do is kind of a silly thing, I think.”

At that point, as the audience applauded, things got a little strained.

“You went to Harvard Law School,” admonished Stephanopoulos. “You know very well …”

“Has the Supreme Court decided that the states do not have the right to ban contraception?” asked Romney.

“Yes, they have,” replied Stephanopoulos. “1965. Griswold vs Connecticut.”

Romney seemed frustrated.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. I am just amazed that Romney wasn't familiar with Griswold v. Connecticut.

That's first-year con law stuff. Everybody reads Griswold; it's one of the landmark cases interpreting the 14th Amendment as creating a right to privacy, and it was the basis for Roe v. Wade and Lawrence v. Texas. How can you be a guy with a law degree from Harvard, and running for President, and not know this???

[elleng]

3. Can't.

His non-answer completely obliterated 'fact' of his law degree.

[mr_liberal]

13. No it didnt.

He just didn't want to answer. see my other posts in this thread.

[elleng]

14. You're probably correct.

I meant, obliterated in MY mind. If you're correct, reconfirms conclusion of how unsuited for role of POTUS he is.

[coalition_unwilling]

4. It was an amazing display of ignorance but probably will play

well to the Repuke Yahoo base.

Since Roe v. Wade rests on the 'right to privacy' established in Griswold, if you say that there's no right to privacy (as Santorum does), you're not simply overturning Roe but also Griswold. Romney missed an opportunity to dispose of Santorum for all practical purposes by failing to expose the reductio ad absurdum of Santorum's position.

[elleng]

5. or of discussing this important issue in an informative way.

Santorum at least mentioned 'penumbra.' These were real and serious issues in the past, and surely could be discussed today.
IMAGINE how PrezO would discuss it???!!!

[cthulu2016]

9. I wouldn't bet money he isn't. Or is.

I never know what game he's playing. Was he unfamiliar with Griswold or was he unsure whether he was supposed to be familiar or unfamiliar with it?

If he was familiar with it then he would have to have an opinion of it...

And so on.

[mr_liberal]

12. He knows the case

he didnt want to answer the question.

Either way he loses votes. Pro Griswold he loses conservatives, anti Griswold he loses mainstream voters.

He clearly was avoiding answering the question.

[elleng]

2. Too much 'strategy' on his mind to allow simple fact to show through?

Tired? Clearly not capable of taking on the huge task of POTUS, if couldn't address this reasonably.

[bluestate10]

6. Ignorance plays well to the crowd that jackass is trying to get to nominate him. nt

[Tx4obama]

7. Here a link to the video for the folks that haven't seen it yet

the link to the "Mitt Romney Trips On Contraception Question" video is
posted within the OP here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10175382

[Blue Owl]

8. More contraception = Less Santorum

n/t

[jenmito]

10. He probably just didn't want to take a position on it. n/t

[mr_liberal]

11. It wasnt ignorance

he understood the question.

He didn't want to answer, because if he said he agreed with Griswold that would hurt him with conservatives.

But if he said he opposes Griswold that would create a huge contorversy ("Romney thinks states can ban birth control&quot that would hurt him with mainstream voters.

so he just ducked the question.

This is something he needs to be asked over and over. He needs to be forced to answer the question: Do you think Griswold v Conn should be overturned?

[elleng]

15. If he wanted to, he could open a discussion on privacy/penumbra, etc.,

and if he fails even to do that, we can clearly call him "CHICKEN."

[CTyankee]

16. I would love to see these candidates dogged on the contraceptive question, but it's not

going to happen unless NARAL and Planned Parenthood Federation come out fighting and I don't see any evidence of that so far. Perhaps this will embolden them. I hope so...