ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



Romney and the 'lawyer test'

Posted: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 11:25 AM by Mark Murray

From NBC's Mark Murray and NBC/NJ's Erin McPike
Earlier this morning, we focused on Romney's response at yesterday's debate that he would consult attorneys before deciding whether to unilaterally go after Iran's nuclear facility. But his campaign today stresses that it's important to consider his full response -- in which he said that the president "has to do what's in the best interest of the United States to protect us against a potential threat."

MATTHEWS: Governor Romney, that raises the question, if you were president
of the United States, would you need to go to Congress to get authorization to take military action against Iran's nuclear facilities?

ROMNEY: You sit down with your attorneys and tell you want you have to do, but obviously the president of the United States has to do what's in the best interest of the United States to protect us against a potential threat. The president did that as he was planning on moving into Iraq and received the authorization of Congress...

But the full context of Romney's remarks isn't stopping his rivals from piling on. The Giuliani campaign just issued a press release highlighting Romney's "Lawyer's Test" for national security -- which the release compared to John Kerry's 2004 "Global Test" remark (which Democrats will point out was taken out of context in that election). “Going to war is the most serious decision a president can make. Lawyers should not debate while our national security is on the line. In these momentous decisions, we need leadership, not litigation,” retired Admiral Robert J. Natter, who is serving as a senior military adviser for the Giuliani campaign, said in the release.

Two minutes after Giuliani’s team circulated that press release, the Romney camp issued a lengthy release containing the candidate’s previous public statements on the Iranian threat.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

both of these guys suck----why bother making an opinion---the media will decide how great they are
I am really beginning to dislike the politics of Rudy G., as if I didn't before.  Everything is so gimmicky (the Hillary Bonds, the Lawyer Test for National Security--I can't wait to see what prop he pulls out for that).  This is equivalent to the Bush-Cheney politics that I disliked 7 years ago and again 3 years ago--come up with a negative but catchy term to use against your competitor.  Sadly, it appears that the American citizens are none-the-wiser and just don't learn.  Ditto to foreign policy.  You make me sick stupid people; maybe if our education system were better.
Mittster: "Bring lawyers, guns and money---get me outta here!" (Warren Zevon) At least he's hesitating---Bush would strike first, make up lies later, and only send the lawyers in to explain why the protesters are being sent to Eastern Europe to be tortured.
Right. Romney goes to lawyers to tell him what is best for the American people. oh man.

THANK YOU ADMIRAL NATTER!

What wrong with asking help from different people??? The more people the better, even if that includes lawyers.
The Constituition doesn't mention consulting with Presidential attorneys (Gonzales?) or the necessity of getting their approval before declaring war. The right to declare war rests with the Congress, not the president and a group of lawyers.  Romney's answer exemplfies the muddled minds of these Republican candidates.
I can't wait til its Clinton against Guiliani and the pictures of Rudy dressed up like a drag queen several times, surface again. OH MY its going to get dirty! The problem the repubs have is that the Clintons can fight just as dirty(or dirtier) as Mr Roves republican smear machine. It will be interesting.
Romney is more pathetic than most other politicians when they are on the defensive. Keep it up, Team Rudy, and get rid of this vapid nobody. A phonier and more marginal candidate from either party I cannot remember.
Oh, and don't worry Rudy, you're next.
Guiliani = Bush light.
nice that they're having a pi**ing contest about who's gonna take us to armageddon first.

self-righteous faux-man tools.
I recall his father's campaign collapsing after he announced that he's been brainwashed about Viet Nam.  It was a great loss to our country.  The press, as in the present matter, by sensationalizing bits and pieces from a statement contributes to this sort of loss.  Not that I think Mitt is on a par with his dad
I dont even know why they bother campaigning. Who in the hell would want to vote for a Republican after what this country has been through for the last eight years with a Republican????? All they want to do is opress us further with their version of family values ect. We dont need any moral lessons or more rights taken away. LET THEM ALL GO HOME!!!
Its kind of a moot point, we will already be at war with Iran by the time the next president takes office, assuming Bush doesn't cancel the election and declare himself president until the war on terror is over.
Prejudice aside, Romney is clearly the one candidate in the field with complete Presidential qualifications - its time we all recognized that like I now have.  
how about Ron Paul's statement:

"...open up the constitution..."
Terrific now Romney thinks it okay to consult with lawyers to invade Iran. Lets the neocons continue to riddle away at our constitution. CONGRESS IS THE ONLY BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT THAT CAN DECLARE WAR AND FUNDING. Granted both Democrats and Republicans have forgotten that with Korea, Vietnam, secret bombing of Cambodia/Laos, Granada, Panama, and now Iraq.
This is a summary of Romney's remarks last night? You've gotta be joking. Other than this remark by Romney he aced every question and in my opinion he is the only competent candidate on economic issues.
Re: "Going to war is the most serious decision a president can make."

WRONG! Going to war is NOT nor has ever been a decision the President can make. The President doesn't get to decide to go to war - period! What slip-n-slide interpretation of the constitution are we reading? Let me rephrase the above correctly:

"Going to war is the most important decision the president WISHES he could make, but can't since it's spelled out in the consitution. What to do with the troops after CONGRESS has decided to go to war is the most important post-decision decision the president CAN make."

Agreed, there support is from the media(their buddies ownership of these groups). Why would the middle class that decides this election elect a person who is a major investor, lead by foreign and elite investors groups to get rid of all the US operations of the big companies for the sake of the stock being high. Then why in their right mind would anyone choose a mayor that the true heroes of 911 teh firefighters didnt even get working radios from his office to protect(that killed more than a hundred since the had no way to know to get out in time), Second these guys were lied to with other rescue people about the dangers of the site and were never given proper protection. And this guy is the hero of 911? Sounds more like an incompotent boob, that was sitting in the office, when this tragedy took place and try to take credit for the real heroes efforts. Too much sounds like Gores claim he invented the internet or the congresses claim that tax plans somehow caused the year 2000 fear.

All i get from Rudy and Romney is the con game...

There is no way we in our right minds should ever support souch scoundrals when the other guys really care and actually have a pattern of doing stuff for the people instead of autocratic nonsense.
Somebody needs to tell "Saint Rudy of 911" that his schtick is getting as old as the recent poll shows on National Security and how the country feels about which party is the leader on it. Rudy is as arrogant as President Bush, and that is why he is leading the pack this early on.
Going to war is the most serious decision a President can make?  
Last time I looked, the power to declare war was vested in Congress.
But what the hell did the framers of the Constitution know?
The whole reason the Constitution says that Congress needs to declare war is to keep a single man from having too much power. These guys are far more dangerous to our country than the third world vagabonds that they're obviously terrified of. I"m just amazed that somehow all the candidates think that the President is the Supreme Leader. Did none of them pass 7th grade history?
Whats the point of all this anyway. Acording to the media its all over after Iowa anyway. The rest of the 49 states do not even count...
Giuliani's response that "Going to war is the most serious decision a president can make" is irritating.  The U.S. Constitution grants the power to declare war a power of the Legislative Branch of our government, not the President.  The Congress made a mistake allowing the President to make the decision to go to war, and they should not follow that example again.
Is there any particular reason you didn't post my comments from an hour ago?
I think the point that Romney was trying to make, and it is a much deeper and more valid point than he is being given credit for, is that Congress does not control the running of the Executive Branch, unless the Congress happens to have unhappy Democratic Party members, who if in the minority, will find corrupt Democratic Judges to rewrite the Law, or if in the majority will reinterpret the Constitution for the President.  Thus, the President, if he's a Republican, will need lawyers to know which way the wind is blowing with the Democratic Congress today ...
Matthews' question did not regard exigent circumstances; an attack on a nuclear plant is not an attack on a "fleeting" target.

Matthews' question dealt primarily with what branch of government under the Constitution has the power to declare war.  That power resides in the U.S. Congress.

Both Romney and Giuliani disqualified themselves last evening, with Giuliani now trying to outrace Romney in the unconstitutional sweepstakes.

The media hype over Fred Thompson's first appearance in a debate was answered resoundingly by Fred Thompson.  Unfortunately for the lamestream media, the ill-prepared Mr. Thompson was a resounding dud.

The most humorous point in the evening came not when Romney made a crack about "Law and Order"; it came when the economically illiterate John McCain commended the reading of "The Wealth of Nations" to Ron Paul.  Absolutely sidesplitting, that John McCain.
For McCain and Brownback to praise Federal Reserve chairmen Greenspan and Bernanke as economic sages is laughable.  Don't those two understand one word that Ron Paul is saying?  I guess not.

For their edification, they should read Dr. Paul's blog and the best book on the perniciousness of the Fed ever written, G. Edward Griffin's "The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at The Federal Reserve." http://www.realityzone.com/creature.html

I almost felt sorry for the utter ignorance displayed by McCain and Brownback on the subject of monetary theory.  Almost.

The central dichotomy faced by the Republicans is this: How can a party that espouses constitutional, limited government — and the limited expenditures implied by that core principle — call for an activist, interventionist foreign policy that implies unlimited, ever-increasing expenditures?  As the positions are mutually exclusive, simultaneously advocating for both policies is intellectually dishonest.

By espousing a non-interventionist foreign policy, Ron Paul is the only Republican to answer that question.

That is why the Ron Paul Revolution is a force to be reckoned with.  Its powerful message is gaining ground and supporters.

Maybe, just maybe, America is on the cusp of a restoration of our true heritage -- Liberty and Freedom.      
     

we have pre-law, pro-life, and now post-mortum...show me the table where the brief lay its life down.  Mark 13:23
The Romney answer was fine.
Congress must declare war but the Q was "military action".  Like for example Clinton's "mini cruise missle" attack on Iraq.  No congressional approval required.  It is appropriate to consult with congress if it is not too time sensitive actionable intel but the Prez has significant lattitude to act quickly when need be.  For good reason.

As for consulting lawyers..this is also fine.  To his credit, Romney is NOT a lawyer and the war powers act  are some complicated legal writings.  Makes sense to get a legal, military, NSA, CIA, FBI, senate intel etc. opinions. He made it clear his priority is to protect Americans so it is assumed in the response that this could superceed legal advice if required.        
Amy new jersey, You'd be surprized how many idiots there are in this world, and most of them do vote republican.
Rudy Giulani cites his position as a strict constructionist as though it were something to be proud of.  "I took Bill Clinton to the supreme court on the line-item veto and I won!"  Congratulations little man.  You've ensured that legislation that is well thought out and potentially effective will always bear the burden of "pork-belly" add-ons.  These clowns will do almost anything to do mostly nothing, and then trumpet their lack of achievment as though that sucking void were the spoils of a just and noble war.  I tip my hat to you gentlemen, and then set it afire.  
Dan N - how about this "sniff test?" If another state/nation launched even 1 cruise missle to a target they deem hostile/negative on American soil, let alone 75 cruise missles - would that be "a military action?" (Hey, USA, we're not going to "war" with you. Just doing a little "military action." No biggie.)

Or, would that, as any rational person would note, be an "act of war?"

Answer B? Hey, Congress, how 'bout that decision? Turns out launching missles is kinda "war-ish."
Since we are going to have to go to war with Iran, because we can't let them have nukes. Any of these republican candidates will be better than the whimpy liberal bleeding harts. Iran and nukes would be the end of Isreal and then the US.
Presently speaking, how far out there do we have to go to prove relativity.  Provision.  John 17:17
When will the American Sheep, called citizens wake up and stop being lead around each election by this political gimmick called Democrat vs Republican.
All politicians are lawyers and all have a stake in oil or big business. The propoganda they both spew out has and always will be designed to keep voters in a constant back and forth mode while they get fat and rich off the backs of the enslaved population. Thats right!! enslaved. The 16th Amendment to The Constitution ended any real true Freedom and Democracy of our great Republic the minute Congress illegally announced it to be so. Even without the proper 3/4 ratification (NOT 2/3 as some believe) but rather the 3/4 of the states ratifying it. The Federal Government in the middle of the night took it upon itself to dispense with participatory government and simply amend The Constitution of The United States thus making economic slaves of us all. This then required that they use the two party system to keep us voting back and forth, left to right and so on and so forth. How do we end this tyranny and ecomonomic terrorism inflicted by these government thugs? It is very simple, put a referendum on the November 2008 ballet calling for the repeal of The 16th Amendment and see how fast our tax and spend (blow your money recklessly) government shrinks to a managable size and then is required to live within it's means.
These career politicians would be in massive financial and power hungry withdrawls and suffer from political D.T's
Then let us elect, not Dumbacrats or Reflublicans to government positions, but real independent centrist Americans like the guy next door to run our country and live like the real free people our founding fathers envisioned for us. Face the truth American SHEEP!! We no longer have a government of the people, by the people or for the people. We have a GOVERNMENT OF THE GOVERNMENT, BY THE GOVERNMENT AND FOR THE GOVERNMENT.
Presently speaking, how far out there do we have to go to prove relativity.  Provision.  John 17:17
The point..."am I worthy today, to stand and fight".  Romans 3:19
...Give me death.....Patrick Henry "had" the idea,  where do I sign up.  Hebrews 6:19
Not one candidate mentioned any serious cuts in government spending.  The size of the government budget has doubled inthe last seven years.  You'd think they could come up with some cuts.  They are all, lacking true vision, just trying to buy votes...just like the Dems.  Only Ron Paul wants to cut the mammoth size of federal government.
"The Church declares that the concept of massive rtaliation should be rethought and be repudiated."
   
    "The Church's Attitude Toward Questions of War   and Peace," Report by Department of Christian Social Relation of Protestant Episcopal Church, October 1962

    "The World Treasury of Religious Quotations"
    Ralph L Woods
    1966   LC#66-15355
    Page 1046  bottom right hand column
I feel like I need a shower every time that slick used car salesman Mitt Romney talks.  What a phony.  
Too MANY LAWYER opinions now. Do Law schools and law books teach how to fight a war.
Prefer Mitt Romney.
He would do a great job.
None of the candidates are perfect. Each perspective above would indicate that along with every other voter and non-voter.
The issue is whom you would vote for and why.
I like romney capabilities and disposition in general.

I like some points and similar qualities in other candidates though romney has a better package in my opinion.
can't say I care for the media and some of the questions presented as there non-relevant questions. Questions designed to entertain rather then help us get to the point of selecting the next President. Atleast some attempted to get their message out.

I will say that people are mis-construing remarks of all these canidates to validate their own position. Thats normal of course but you may want to re-think that because your vote counts. Would like to get the best candidate into office.
I say that out of respect and courtesy to other countries as well.
The more unity we can create the better off we will be as a whole.
We really need more statesman type politicians. We have some selfish groups out their with some good intent but doing the right things for the wrong reasons.
All I can say is get a President into office that can do a good job and that cares. Mitt Romney has proven day in and out that he can get a job done extremely well wether business, church or personal. He cares more about those around him then he does himself.

Too many other candidates that are looking for power and represent their parties and investors before their country, consitition, and God or No-god.

As they say"nobody cares how much you know until they know how much you care"
Giuliani sounds more and more like George Bush every day. Both he and Romney seem to be trying to emulate Reagan with their whole "happy talk" campaign but after 5 years of "happy talk" on Iraq from the Bush administration I can't see how this tack will do anything but backfire.
The Puppeteer?....Nahum 2:13
Everytime I see Romney Im reminded of those guys in the old west who peddled snake oil and other cures out of the back of a wagon. He is just too slick for me to accept that Im not being sold something that under the surface is not what it seems.
We've had debates on economics, "values", and foreign policy. Why not one on the Constitution? After all, whoever becomes president will be swearing under oath to uphold it as America's highest law. Let's see if they know or even care what it says. Otherwise, we might find ourselves giving the car keys to someone who doesn't know how to drive or even care what the rules of the road are.

Rudy Giuliani thinks the line item veto is unconstitutional, but not the invasion and occuaption of another country without a congressional declaration of war. Mitt Romney would consult with his lawyers but not Congress, the lawmaking body of the land and the representatives of the people, before making such a decision... despite it not being his to make. If we are to follow the Constitution, Congress must declare war before the president can wage it.

Whatever their "disagreements", these candidates do seem to agree on this: the job of running this great republic should not be divided into branches or levels of government, but should be the province of one man. How far we've come since the birth of our nation.
Aye mate, this man has presidential timber and does not suffer fools lightly. The worst of our breed of humanity, life sucking, drink your blood, head scalping Lawyers!  Does Mitt not know any bound of human kindness!
All presidents (yes, even republicans) ANYWAY consult BOTH lawyers and foreign diplomats and tons of other people before going to war. Giuliani would do the same. He just wants votes from stupid people who have no idea how presidents work.
SO EVERYONE IS ATTACKING GOV. ROMNEY ON HIS STATEMENT "HE WOULD CONSULT HIS LAWYERS BEFORE HE CARRIED OUT AN ATTACK ON IRAN". OKAY HE CARRIES OUT THE ATTACK ON IRAN AND DOES NOT CONSLULT HIS LAWYERS, THERE WOULD BE HELL TO PAY. THE DEMOCRATS AND WEAK REPUBLICANS IN THE HOUSE & SENATE WOULD BE BESIDE THEMSELVES. AMY I AM PROUD TO VOTE REPUBLICAN, BLUE STATE BABY MUST BE AN EXPERT ON IDIOTS & J D CHASTAIN IN LAW SCHOOL YOU ARE TAUGHT HOW TO PICK OUT THE CORRECT ISSUE AND THE ISSUE THAT EVERYONE IS WRITING ABOUT IS NOT IF LAW SCHOOLS TEACHES HOW TO FIGHT WARS BUT IS IT LEGAL TO ATTACH ANOTHER COUNTRY. J D CHASTAIN I DON'T THINK YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN LAW SCHOOL.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=405241

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google