When asked to comment on both the Chick Fil A first amendments rights controversy, and Michelle Bachmann’s concern about Muslim Brotherhood influence in the Obama administration, this is what he had to say:
“I’m not going to tell other people what things they talk about. Those things are not part of my campaign.”
Given his speech to the NAACP, I thought Romney had more courage than that. If not a lack of courage, three more possibilities come to mind:
1) He sees both issues as “no-win” political lightening rods – his application of pure political motive to avoid discussion,
2) He was ignorant of both issues, though not likely, or
3) For this event he wanted to stay focused on his “jobs” message.
The reasons for his silence might be better diagnosed if the issues were separated.
I can understand his avoiding discussion of Bachmann’s concern about Muslim Brotherhood influence. His ignorance of Islam and their front groups causes his lack of concern; he is naively more in tune with Obama than those like Bachmann who see a problem. And, like most politicians, he fears Muslim/main stream media accusations of “Islamophobia”, or worse, “McCarthyism”, although as it turns out, McCarthy was right.
On the Chick Fil A controversy, I am sincerely puzzled why he did not overtly take sides on this one. It could be he is excessively concerned that he might be too closely associated with the views and actions of his Mormon church - their pumping millions of dollars into California’s anti-gay marriage legislation.
Could he be afraid of losing the gay vote? He never had it.
Contrast this non-feasance with Allen West’s comments on Chick Fil A: