Mitt Romney Speech

[DiogenesDog]

If Mitt were a Lutheran, he would be a walk over above the rest of that field. He is the least nauseous theist among those contenders. Still and all, he is a theist with an inner agenda that would tinge everything he touches. To leave any part of a Republican administration intact that has done the deeds of the past 7 years or so would be a major mistake for the voting public whether they are party stalwarts, independents or crafty swing voters.

John Kennedy to his credit, made common cause with the American religist of the waning Eisenhower years. His religious expression was quite orthodox for his day and had a long history of accommodation within the body of mainstream churches. It was the time of the John Roncalli Papacy which brought my mother the reforms of Vatican II. She was little changed or affected in her ways of piety, just as John Kennedy was. The Kennedy's were an American family of Irish descent. They were Irish Catholics. As such they were not submissive to the crown or the Church of England. They were outcast in the British Isles.

Mitt and his immediate ancestors were outcasts in their own country. They have a history of being a little strange. They are essentially a sect that has parallels with the development of Islam in that their patriarch had visions, received new scripture and condoned polygamist unions. Their way and abrasiveness had them driven out of many towns of the Eastern states and they continued to be driven until they arrived in the vicinity of the great inland Salt Lake and they establish their new Galilee.

Mitt could be the savior of the reformed Republic. I am put off by his high flown visions of the strength of the nation being in its ability to coerce the world by way of our big bombs and willingness to use them. All the while there is an internal erosion of justice and shared benefits of nationhood among the people in the United States and its feeder nations in non-US America. We are still driving off indigenous peoples from forests, mountains and basins in the Americas that contain vital substances that we (the US) wants, no DEMANDS. Mitt will continue to be part of that.

The Kennedy clan came to wealth and power despite, no in spite of their theism of choice. The result was that Joseph P. sent two sons to war. One was vaporized at the controls of a bomber and the other returned a hero of the Pacific. Mitt, sends his sons to the Mormon Mission field in relatively safe places.

The whole ruling elite of the US has become very much like the situation that prevailed among the pre-Columbian civilizations of the Americas. Those elites needed and need now, blood sacrifices of other peoples kids. They are the temple elite. They are the remnants of a powerful but weakening Temple/Tabernacle Culture.

Mitt made a good case and said the right things about the freedom of religion and the religion of freedom. Still, my senses that were developed in my military training and my meat hunting youth, are stimulating the follicles on the back of my neck. Politicians are the remnant of the hunter mentality. I remain wary. I will not be hunted. I will continue to hide in the brush and tree lines as my fellows are lured into the killing fields for their votes.

I love hyperbole. Especially if I may turn it on those with whom I must contend.

I AM

 

[RetiredGySgt]

If Mitt were a Lutheran, he would be a walk over above the rest of that field. He is the least nauseous theist among those contenders. Still and all, he is a theist with an inner agenda that would tinge everything he touches. To leave any part of a Republican administration intact that has done the deeds of the past 7 years or so would be a major mistake for the voting public whether they are party stalwarts, independents or crafty swing voters.

John Kennedy to his credit, made common cause with the American religist of the waning Eisenhower years. His religious expression was quite orthodox for his day and had a long history of accommodation within the body of mainstream churches. It was the time of the John Roncalli Papacy which brought my mother the reforms of Vatican II. She was little changed or affected in her ways of piety, just as John Kennedy was. The Kennedy's were an American family of Irish descent. They were Irish Catholics. As such they were not submissive to the crown or the Church of England. They were outcast in the British Isles.

Mitt and his immediate ancestors were outcasts in their own country. They have a history of being a little strange. They are essentially a sect that has parallels with the development of Islam in that their patriarch had visions, received new scripture and condoned polygamist unions. Their way and abrasiveness had them driven out of many towns of the Eastern states and they continued to be driven until they arrived in the vicinity of the great inland Salt Lake and they establish their new Galilee.

Mitt could be the savior of the reformed Republic. I am put off by his high flown visions of the strength of the nation being in its ability to coerce the world by way of our big bombs and willingness to use them. All the while there is an internal erosion of justice and shared benefits of nationhood among the people in the United States and its feeder nations in non-US America. We are still driving off indigenous peoples from forests, mountains and basins in the Americas that contain vital substances that we (the US) wants, no DEMANDS. Mitt will continue to be part of that.

The Kennedy clan came to wealth and power despite, no in spite of their theism of choice. The result was that Joseph P. sent two sons to war. One was vaporized at the controls of a bomber and the other returned a hero of the Pacific. Mitt, sends his sons to the Mormon Mission field in relatively safe places.

The whole ruling elite of the US has become very much like the situation that prevailed among the pre-Columbian civilizations of the Americas. Those elites needed and need now, blood sacrifices of other peoples kids. They are the temple elite. They are the remnants of a powerful but weakening Temple/Tabernacle Culture.

Mitt made a good case and said the right things about the freedom of religion and the religion of freedom. Still, my senses that were developed in my military training and my meat hunting youth, are stimulating the follicles on the back of my neck. Politicians are the remnant of the hunter mentality. I remain wary. I will not be hunted. I will continue to hide in the brush and tree lines as my fellows are lured into the killing fields for their votes.

I love hyperbole. Especially if I may turn it on those with whom I must contend.

I AM

So this is no speech by Romney but YOU making a speech ABOUT him. How quaint.

 

[jillian]

Actually, Romney didn't bring his religious views into play as governor of Massachusetts or he wouldn't have been elected there. It was only when he decided to move right to appeal to primary voters and abandoned his prior positions that it became an issue at all.

But it is kind of interesting that the godless "libs" in Massachusetts thought he was okay, but the religious right has issues with the fact he's a Mormon.

Says a lot about where the religious tolerance really is in this country, IMO.

 

[William Joyce]

How in the hell did a Mormon get elected governor of Massachussetts, anyway?

 

[DiogenesDog]

The (Mormon) church has walked a fine line for years between emphasizing what it has in common with traditional Christianity and not shying away from its distinctions. (The church’s own explanations of its beliefs, of course, differ from those of its detractors.) Realizing that having a Mormon run for president would raise questions, the headquarters in Salt Lake City posted explanations of church history and doctrine on its Web site. The church does not endorse candidates.

I have made a choice of dismissing all supernatural, personal visions, found scripture, and quirky idiosyncrasies of Temple Culture and cultic qualities of revealed theology.

What then do I believe? I believe that in opposition to the natural world where galaxies crash into each other, planets form and wear away by natural, processes, where the natural world is bloody in tooth and claw, that there arises a species of self aware bipedal beings that are able to have thoughts of morality that are based in doing no harm, taking in and caring for strangers, and caring for the ill and deceased in loving ways.

Complicated theologies and religious establishments have come and gone in history and will continue to rise and fall. Unless it can be seen that the teaching of the itinerate north Judean rebbi, Yeshua, was a message of simple moral behavior that began with "do no harm". In the first 300 years or so of the existence of the teaching in the reformed synagogues and new centers of worship in the northern Levant, Asia minor, Persia, and Arabia the message was simple. Live today like there is no tomorrow and do it day by day. Live in the moment and do no harm.

I have given a great deal of study to this. I have incidentally had contact with religists in those areas mentioned above. I was doing other work but I found those primitive "proto" Christians to be purer in intention, action and outcome that any crimsoned, mitered, or well tailored churchman of the Orthodox type.

The most innocent of reasons for crimson and mitres is to hold the attention of the prospects until they will accept the "do no harm" routine and become moral agents in that vein.

The more complicated versions arose from the needs of empire, Constantine, and the fine crudgel that pomp and ceremony and temple undies would be. Complicated constructs do not reveal truth. Dense myth and gold tablets of script do not reveal truth. Truth is revealed in the quiet receptive mind of the human expression, one mind at a time.

Religion has become an industrial process. It is operated in a factory of smoke and mirrors and a fine sound system.

There is more a sense of morality and expectation of good in a mountain gorilla sitting on the eastern slopes of a central African mountain waiting for the sunrise than I have recently witnessed in some super church that host multiples of services in its multiples of sanctuaries and chapels and prayer grottoes.

A sunrise over the salt Sea of Galilee will put a whole new start on your day.

Popular religion today is not a sanctuary. It is an entertainment venue working for numbers of butts in the pew and dollars in the coffers. All of which I stand and publicly rebuke.

Popular religion is a tool of politics and state - all of which I stand and rebuke.

Feed the hungry! Tend the sick! Wash and bury the dead? Do no harm! Resist those who resist all the above by withdrawing from their presence, their system and their dust that has settled on your feet. You may do this by physically removing yourself or you may resist by not participating in your behaviors or in your mind. All else is moonshine.

I AM

 

[Nevadamedic]

If Mitt were a Lutheran, he would be a walk over above the rest of that field. He is the least nauseous theist among those contenders. Still and all, he is a theist with an inner agenda that would tinge everything he touches. To leave any part of a Republican administration intact that has done the deeds of the past 7 years or so would be a major mistake for the voting public whether they are party stalwarts, independents or crafty swing voters.

John Kennedy to his credit, made common cause with the American religist of the waning Eisenhower years. His religious expression was quite orthodox for his day and had a long history of accommodation within the body of mainstream churches. It was the time of the John Roncalli Papacy which brought my mother the reforms of Vatican II. She was little changed or affected in her ways of piety, just as John Kennedy was. The Kennedy's were an American family of Irish descent. They were Irish Catholics. As such they were not submissive to the crown or the Church of England. They were outcast in the British Isles.

Mitt and his immediate ancestors were outcasts in their own country. They have a history of being a little strange. They are essentially a sect that has parallels with the development of Islam in that their patriarch had visions, received new scripture and condoned polygamist unions. Their way and abrasiveness had them driven out of many towns of the Eastern states and they continued to be driven until they arrived in the vicinity of the great inland Salt Lake and they establish their new Galilee.

Mitt could be the savior of the reformed Republic. I am put off by his high flown visions of the strength of the nation being in its ability to coerce the world by way of our big bombs and willingness to use them. All the while there is an internal erosion of justice and shared benefits of nationhood among the people in the United States and its feeder nations in non-US America. We are still driving off indigenous peoples from forests, mountains and basins in the Americas that contain vital substances that we (the US) wants, no DEMANDS. Mitt will continue to be part of that.

The Kennedy clan came to wealth and power despite, no in spite of their theism of choice. The result was that Joseph P. sent two sons to war. One was vaporized at the controls of a bomber and the other returned a hero of the Pacific. Mitt, sends his sons to the Mormon Mission field in relatively safe places.

The whole ruling elite of the US has become very much like the situation that prevailed among the pre-Columbian civilizations of the Americas. Those elites needed and need now, blood sacrifices of other peoples kids. They are the temple elite. They are the remnants of a powerful but weakening Temple/Tabernacle Culture.

Mitt made a good case and said the right things about the freedom of religion and the religion of freedom. Still, my senses that were developed in my military training and my meat hunting youth, are stimulating the follicles on the back of my neck. Politicians are the remnant of the hunter mentality. I remain wary. I will not be hunted. I will continue to hide in the brush and tree lines as my fellows are lured into the killing fields for their votes.

I love hyperbole. Especially if I may turn it on those with whom I must contend.

I AM

Romney's a tool period.

 

[midcan5]

How in the hell did a Mormon get elected governor of Massachussetts, anyway?

Massachusetts is a liberal state, religious tolerance needs to be practiced not just preached.

 

[jillian]

How in the hell did a Mormon get elected governor of Massachussetts, anyway?

Romney was elected for his fiscal management skills. He didn't shove his religion down anyone's throat or attempt in any way to impose religious belief by way of legislation.

And the people of Mass could care less what someone is if they don't hurt anyone else.

But that's too "liberal" for you, I suppose.

 

[William Joyce]

Romney was elected for his fiscal management skills. He didn't shove his religion down anyone's throat or attempt in any way to impose religious belief by way of legislation.

And the people of Mass could care less what someone is if they don't hurt anyone else.

But that's too "liberal" for you, I suppose.

1. Actually, my point was along the lines of the likes of YOU asking, "How in the hell did a fundamentalist Christian get elected mayor of NYC"? You'd surely ask that question if Jerry Falwell did that, no?

2. I chuckle at your speaking for the entire population of Massachussetts and explaining to me their political philosophy. Which probably isn't true. Assuming a population of 100 percent liberals, I'm sure they WOULD care "what someone is" in any number of ways. Liberals... always "tolerant," except for the things they don't tolerate. Which is a lot of stuff.

Probably, he got through as you suggest, by keeping his religious ID very quiet and stressing his management skills. I still just think that's funny. I mean, I suppose the media up there could have made something of it, but for whatever reason didn't. As religions go, Mormonism isn't exactly super-mainstream Christianity. It's got some weird ideas. I'm not bashing them here, just noting that. I actually don't think most Mormons buy completely the whole kit and kaboodle, and probably Mitt is one of those.

 

[Gunny]

If Mitt were a Lutheran, he would be a walk over above the rest of that field. He is the least nauseous theist among those contenders. Still and all, he is a theist with an inner agenda that would tinge everything he touches. To leave any part of a Republican administration intact that has done the deeds of the past 7 years or so would be a major mistake for the voting public whether they are party stalwarts, independents or crafty swing voters.

John Kennedy to his credit, made common cause with the American religist of the waning Eisenhower years. His religious expression was quite orthodox for his day and had a long history of accommodation within the body of mainstream churches. It was the time of the John Roncalli Papacy which brought my mother the reforms of Vatican II. She was little changed or affected in her ways of piety, just as John Kennedy was. The Kennedy's were an American family of Irish descent. They were Irish Catholics. As such they were not submissive to the crown or the Church of England. They were outcast in the British Isles.

Mitt and his immediate ancestors were outcasts in their own country. They have a history of being a little strange. They are essentially a sect that has parallels with the development of Islam in that their patriarch had visions, received new scripture and condoned polygamist unions. Their way and abrasiveness had them driven out of many towns of the Eastern states and they continued to be driven until they arrived in the vicinity of the great inland Salt Lake and they establish their new Galilee.

Mitt could be the savior of the reformed Republic. I am put off by his high flown visions of the strength of the nation being in its ability to coerce the world by way of our big bombs and willingness to use them. All the while there is an internal erosion of justice and shared benefits of nationhood among the people in the United States and its feeder nations in non-US America. We are still driving off indigenous peoples from forests, mountains and basins in the Americas that contain vital substances that we (the US) wants, no DEMANDS. Mitt will continue to be part of that.

The Kennedy clan came to wealth and power despite, no in spite of their theism of choice. The result was that Joseph P. sent two sons to war. One was vaporized at the controls of a bomber and the other returned a hero of the Pacific. Mitt, sends his sons to the Mormon Mission field in relatively safe places.

The whole ruling elite of the US has become very much like the situation that prevailed among the pre-Columbian civilizations of the Americas. Those elites needed and need now, blood sacrifices of other peoples kids. They are the temple elite. They are the remnants of a powerful but weakening Temple/Tabernacle Culture.

Mitt made a good case and said the right things about the freedom of religion and the religion of freedom. Still, my senses that were developed in my military training and my meat hunting youth, are stimulating the follicles on the back of my neck. Politicians are the remnant of the hunter mentality. I remain wary. I will not be hunted. I will continue to hide in the brush and tree lines as my fellows are lured into the killing fields for their votes.

I love hyperbole. Especially if I may turn it on those with whom I must contend.

I AM

Question: Does Romney's record as Gov of MA reflect a pulpit-driven agenda? Or is this merely an attempt to disparage him simply because he is in fact a religious person in his personal life?

Of the top 3 Dem candidates ... Hillary, Obama and Edwards ... which ones do not believe in a religion?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Question: Does Romney's record as Gov of MA reflect a pulpit-driven agenda? Or is this merely an attempt to disparage him simply because he is in fact a religious person in his personal life?

Of the top 3 Dem candidates ... Hillary, Obama and Edwards ... which ones do not believe in a religion?

I wonder about Obama's "religion"...whoever heard of "black liberation theology"?

“Wright’s [Obama's pastor] preaching does promote a sort of racial exclusivity,” said Michael Cromartie, vice president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington.

“Statements that suggest you cannot truly understand God unless you are black or poor are exclusive.”

Remarks attributed to Wright that were posted on audio files on the Internet and cited in press accounts earlier this year may have prompted the criticism.

“Fact number one: We’ve got more black men in prison than there are in college.

"Fact number two: Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run.

"We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns and the training of professional killers. ... We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God. ... We conducted radiation experiments on our own people. ... We care nothing about human life if the ends justify the means.

"And ... And ... And! God! Has got! To be sick! Of this s***!"

.......
For his part, Obama has said he does not agree with Wright on every issue, religious or political. But that doesn’t sit well with some.

“If Barack Obama has really submitted himself to his church like he’s claimed, why does he have a different expression of faith from his own pastor?” asks Anthony Bradley, theologian and research fellow at the Acton Institute in Grand Rapids, Mich.

Meanwhile, in a statement on his church’s Web site, Wright defends the principles of his theology:

“To have a church whose theological perspective starts from the vantage point of Black liberation theology being its center, is not to say that African or African American people are superior to any one else. …There is more than one center from which to view the world. In the words of Dr. Janice Hale, ‘Difference does not mean deficience’ [sic]. It is from this vantage point that Black liberation theology speaks.”


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,300135,00.html

 

[jillian]

1. Actually, my point was along the lines of the likes of YOU asking, "How in the hell did a fundamentalist Christian get elected mayor of NYC"? You'd surely ask that question if Jerry Falwell did that, no?

2. I chuckle at your speaking for the entire population of Massachussetts and explaining to me their political philosophy. Which probably isn't true. Assuming a population of 100 percent liberals, I'm sure they WOULD care "what someone is" in any number of ways. Liberals... always "tolerant," except for the things they don't tolerate. Which is a lot of stuff.

Probably, he got through as you suggest, by keeping his religious ID very quiet and stressing his management skills. I still just think that's funny. I mean, I suppose the media up there could have made something of it, but for whatever reason didn't. As religions go, Mormonism isn't exactly super-mainstream Christianity. It's got some weird ideas. I'm not bashing them here, just noting that. I actually don't think most Mormons buy completely the whole kit and kaboodle, and probably Mitt is one of those.

I know what your point was. He ran as a pro-choice, socially moderate, fiscal conservative. His religious views only would have come into play if he wanted them legislated by asserting THEN that he was anti-choice, anti-gay, etc.

There wasn't any reason to make a thing of it. Of course, he's using the fact that he ran Massachusettes as his springboard to running for president, but he's disclaiming everything he used to get elected there.

Hence why there are more questions now.... he shouldn't have moved right for the primary. He might have gotten a lot of crossover eventually if he made it through. Now he's not going to make it through in any event because the relgious right thinks he's a member of a cult. He should have just said F'em and gone for the center.

 

[Gem]

Wait....Jillian seems to be flipping here a bit. She first says:

Romney was elected for his fiscal management skills. He didn't shove his religion down anyone's throat or attempt in any way to impose religious belief by way of legislation.

And the people of Mass could care less what someone is if they don't hurt anyone else.

But that's too "liberal" for you, I suppose.

She implies that he was or may have been just as religious as he is claiming to be now...but that MA didn't care because they are just SO open-minded that they would have elected a anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, Mormon as long as he just didn't talk about it and was good with their money.

Ok...forgetting for a second that the "open-minded" Democratic party won't even allow popular Democrats to speak at their convention if they don't tow the party line EXACTLY...I'm willing to suspend disbelief and go with the notion that MA elected Mitt and respected his devout religious nature...as long as he didn't force it on them....

But then...she comes back a few posts later with:

He ran as a pro-choice, socially moderate, fiscal conservative. His religious views only would have come into play if he wanted them legislated by asserting THEN that he was anti-choice, anti-gay, etc.

Wait, wait, wait....

Either he ran as a religious Mormon...but the wonderful, open-minded liberals of MA didn't care cause they're just so great and because he didn't talk about it too much...

OR

Romney ran as a social liberal and a fiscal conservative and totally downplayed his religion which worked with MA because he convinced them that he wasn't all that religious to begin with.

It can't be both.

I, personally, think that the reason Mitt hasn't been doing better in the polls has much less to do with people being scared about the Mormonism and much more fed up with politicians who will say whatever they need to in front of whatever audience they happen to be in front of at the moment.

 

[Annie]

Wait....Jillian seems to be flipping here a bit. She first says:



She implies that he was or may have been just as religious as he is claiming to be now...but that MA didn't care because they are just SO open-minded that they would have elected a anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, Mormon as long as he just didn't talk about it and was good with their money.

Ok...forgetting for a second that the "open-minded" Democratic party won't even allow popular Democrats to speak at their convention if they don't tow the party line EXACTLY...I'm willing to suspend disbelief and go with the notion that MA elected Mitt and respected his devout religious nature...as long as he didn't force it on them....
G
But then...she comes back a few posts later with:


Wait, wait, wait....

Either he ran as a religious Mormon...but the wonderful, open-minded liberals of MA didn't care cause they're just so great and because he didn't talk about it too much...

OR

Romney ran as a social liberal and a fiscal conservative and totally downplayed his religion which worked with MA because he convinced them that he wasn't all that religious to begin with.

It can't be both.

I, personally, think that the reason Mitt hasn't been doing better in the polls has much less to do with people being scared about the Mormonism and much more fed up with politicians who will say whatever they need to in front of whatever audience they happen to be in front of at the moment.

Gem, for me you nailed it. I truly loved his Thursday speech, I thought it great, much better than Kennedy's in 1960. On the other hand, I don't trust him and not for religion, he's too slick by more than half. He's Brillcreme personified.

 

[DiogenesDog]

So this is no speech by Romney but YOU making a speech ABOUT him. How quaint.

Well, Gunny, I believe that quaint may reside with you. I am determined to do my best to bring original content and analysis to this here-to-fore "Hermit Kingdom of Jars".

Quaint is that fantastic constructs of revealed theology remain powerful in an age of unlimited information and fantastic views of galaxies passing through each other. I have a point of admiration for the Romney's. It is that George Romney took his sons to civil rights events. I believe that Mormon outreach is light years ahead of some other expressions of piety. When I managed one project or another over the years, I hired any Mormon that came through the door. I liked their manners, their work ethic and their genuine smiles. I told them as much. I also find that there are many Scientolgist learning technologies that are state of the art and worthy of incorporation into traditional systems. I do not wish to criticize either expression and I choose to bless them on their way when it comes to proselytizing and gentle joshing indoctrination. I am the same with Witnesses.

I reaffirm with you that the teaching is this, do no harm, feed the sick, comfort the oppressed, tend the dead and give solace to the bereaved. Do not fear death, it is part of life. Human is a spiritual expression of a gathering of infinite intelligence from a source that is God like. That was the entire teaching of the Rebbi, Iesu.

All else is moonshine.

jillian sez

Romney was elected for his fiscal management skills. He didn't shove his religion down anyone's throat or attempt in any way to impose religious belief by way of legislation.

A fine strategy.

The trouble is that the people demand a High Priest and a phantasm yet to return. They thought they had both in Bush but his expression is Judas Priest.

Quaint indeed. I toss back anachronism.

I AM

 

[Gunny]

Well, Gunny, I believe that quaint may reside with you. I am determined to do my best to bring original content and analysis to this here-to-fore "Hermit Kingdom of Jars".

Quaint is that fantastic constructs of revealed theology remain powerful in an age of unlimited information and fantastic views of galaxies passing through each other. I have a point of admiration for the Romney's. It is that George Romney took his sons to civil rights events. I believe that Mormon outreach is light years ahead of some other expressions of piety. When I managed one project or another over the years, I hired any Mormon that came through the door. I liked their manners, their work ethic and their genuine smiles. I told them as much. I also find that there are many Scientolgist learning technologies that are state of the art and worthy of incorporation into traditional systems. I do not wish to criticize either expression and I choose to bless them on their way when it comes to proselytizing and gentle joshing indoctrination. I am the same with Witnesses.

I reaffirm with you that the teaching is this, do no harm, feed the sick, comfort the oppressed, tend the dead and give solace to the bereaved. Do not fear death, it is part of life. Human is a spiritual expression of a gathering of infinite intelligence from a source that is God like. That was the entire teaching of the Rebbi, Iesu.

All else is moonshine.

jillian sez


A fine strategy.

The trouble is that the people demand a High Priest and a phantasm yet to return. They thought they had both in Bush but his expression is Judas Priest.

Quaint indeed. I toss back anachronism.

I AM

Really now ... you don't think saying that "the people" believed Bush to be either a high priest or phantasm to be going just bit to the extreme?

Much can also be made of that portion of Mankind that believes Man's intellect is supreme.

 

[jillian]

Wait....Jillian seems to be flipping here a bit. She first says:



She implies that he was or may have been just as religious as he is claiming to be now...but that MA didn't care because they are just SO open-minded that they would have elected a anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, Mormon as long as he just didn't talk about it and was good with their money.

Ok...forgetting for a second that the "open-minded" Democratic party won't even allow popular Democrats to speak at their convention if they don't tow the party line EXACTLY...I'm willing to suspend disbelief and go with the notion that MA elected Mitt and respected his devout religious nature...as long as he didn't force it on them....

But then...she comes back a few posts later with:


Wait, wait, wait....

Either he ran as a religious Mormon...but the wonderful, open-minded liberals of MA didn't care cause they're just so great and because he didn't talk about it too much...

OR

Romney ran as a social liberal and a fiscal conservative and totally downplayed his religion which worked with MA because he convinced them that he wasn't all that religious to begin with.

It can't be both.

I, personally, think that the reason Mitt hasn't been doing better in the polls has much less to do with people being scared about the Mormonism and much more fed up with politicians who will say whatever they need to in front of whatever audience they happen to be in front of at the moment.

No. Jillian did not flip-flop. He ran a secular campaign in Massachusetts. That has nothing to do with his personal beliefs. I believe he is no more or less religious now than he was then. It's his willingness to set forth a right-wing Christian agenda now that he's going for the republican nomination that has changed.

I thought that was pretty clear. It's why I said he should have gone for the middle. He at least wouldn't have come off as saying whatever is required by the moment. So on that we agree.

 

[DiogenesDog]

d

Really now ... you don't think saying that "the people" believe Bush to be either a high priest or phantasm to be going just bit to the extreme?

It's a line in the sand for me. Will he cross over.

He certainly used the imagery of having an elevated level of connection with a "smiting God".

I have gone back and read a great deal of what he uttered as Governor of Texas, as a Presidential candidate and as the "war president". There is a line that he has approached but he has not put into words. He is a being. There was a time (several times) that he nearly expressed a thought that he may be special in his role. So special that he is anointed by the Infinite to claim a special title.

We know him by his works. It wasn't public opinion that thwarted him. It wasn't for lack of funds that he was thwarted. He had it all. He had his hand on the bundle of reeds surrounding an ax head. He had established his certitude. What held him back? What was it that held him in check more than Dick Cheney could move him ahead?

Much can also be made of that portion of Mankind that believes Man's intellect is supreme.

I do believe that mankind is an expression, in this place and time, of something that is God like. To argue that man is not extraordinarily linked to something that rises above much that may seem mundane is to say that God is imperfect because his creation is imperfect or that his bipedal creation has imperfect capacities. Some like to affirm that all that is is a construct of intelligent design. I must counter by saying that all that is is a process of intelligence coming into a state of organization that appears as a design. Still, one needs to pay attention to the imagery of galaxies passing through each other.

It then is my good pleasure and comfort to seek all that is Good outside the confines of Constantine's vehicle of state control.

You find comfort and certitude where you stand. I have no argument with what is yours.

We, you and I Gunny, have a different point of view and a different way of processing.

"We all have gifts: powers to varying degrees - and everyone has at least one gift - that is your particular piece of power. Acknowledging that you do have power is a major energy of change."

Dr. Lee Pulos

Back to Mitt next.

 

[Gunny]

d

It's a line in the sand for me. Will he cross over.

He certainly used the imagery of having an elevated level of connection with a "smiting God".

I have gone back and read a great deal of what he uttered as Governor of Texas, as a Presidential candidate and as the "war president". There is a line that he has approached but he has not put into words. He is a being. There was a time (several times) that he nearly expressed a thought that he may be special in his role. So special that he is anointed by the Infinite to claim a special title.

We know him by his works. It wasn't public opinion that thwarted him. It wasn't for lack of funds that he was thwarted. He had it all. He had his hand on the bundle of reeds surrounding an ax head. He had established his certitude. What held him back? What was it that held him in check more than Dick Cheney could move him ahead?
.

I am aware of Bush's comments concerning his Christian mandate. His comments however, do not equate to "the people" believing he is "mandated by God."

"The people" may very-well be smart enough to understand that "mandate from God or no," no President is going to get very far with a religious-based agenda no matter how hard he tries.

Even with a majority control of Congress, he didn't get far with his Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage.

I do believe that mankind is an expression, in this place and time, of something that is God like. To argue that man is not extraordinarily linked to something that rises above much that may seem mundane is to say that God is imperfect because his creation is imperfect or that his bipedal creation has imperfect capacities. Some like to affirm that all that is is a construct of intelligent design. I must counter by saying that all that is is a process of intelligence coming into a state of organization that appears as a design. Still, one needs to pay attention to the imagery of galaxies passing through each other.

It then is my good pleasure and comfort to seek all that is Good outside the confines of Constantine's vehicle of state control.

You find comfort and certitude where you stand. I have no argument with what is yours.

We, you and I Gunny, have a different point of view and a different way of processing.

"We all have gifts: powers to varying degrees - and everyone has at least one gift - that is your particular piece of power. Acknowledging that you do have power is a major energy of change."

Dr. Lee Pulos

Back to Mitt next.

Word.

 

[Avatar4321]

Romney was elected for his fiscal management skills. He didn't shove his religion down anyone's throat or attempt in any way to impose religious belief by way of legislation.

And the people of Mass could care less what someone is if they don't hurt anyone else.

But that's too "liberal" for you, I suppose.

He isnt shoving hsi religion down anyone's throat now either. He actually has a rather decent platform fixing immigration, streamlining the government, energy independence, family focus, and winning the WoT.