Romney: You Gotta Have Faith

Mitt was right when he said that "Americans do not respect believers of convenience." Now if he would only admit he's describing himself.

From a related piece by the "New York Times" columnist Maureen Dowd: "Mitt's No J.F.K."
www.nytimes.com

Blogger Chris Kelly has some choice remarks about Romney's speech in "Mitt Romney's Jesus is Just as Good as the Leading Brand" (www.huffingtonpost.com)

"A lot of people think Mitt Romney chose to give his religion speech this week because he's afraid of the Rev. Mike Huckabee. (A man whose main qualifications for the Oval Office are a personal relationship with Jesus and the ability to lose weight.) Mike is breathing down Mitt's neck in Iowa, which can't be pleasant, because bulimics have terrible breath.

I think there's a simpler explanation and, touchingly, it has to do with faith. Mitt Romney made his religion speech during Hanukkah because he's the only candidate oily enough to burn for eight days.

If you missed the speech, it can be summed up pretty simply: He proclaimed the right of every American to freely and openly practice any religion, including his own, about which he won't divulge a single detail, even if you killed his children right in front of him, one after another.

And he doesn't care which of you atheist bastards and Islamic jihadists know it.

Now just give me your vote, and stop bothering me with all these questions. I've spent a lot of money."

Another Chris Kelly excerpt:

"Here's the difficult passage, the one Mitt raced through like the side effects of Nasonex:

There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church's beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance. Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree.
In other words: I'm glad you asked that question. I'm not going to answer it. As a tribute to this great land of ours.

Because here's the thing that Mitt Romney can't say: The Mormon Jesus has about as much in common with Jesus of Nazareth as the Los Angeles Kings have with King Tut. They have the same name, kind of, and that's it.

The Gospel Jesus lived in Galilee. The Mormon Jesus lived in Albany. (Where he fought the Indians. Because he wasn't just the Lamb of God, he was also the Last of the Mohicans.) Mormon Jesus? Three wives, a planetful of kids. Gospel Jesus? Living alone and loving it.

It doesn't even have the theological weight to be heresy; it's a simple case of mistaken identity.

And I know that sounds like I'm being flip, but that's only because I don't care. But if it matters to you, it really, really matters.

Mitt Romney wants Christians to think that Mormonism is just another "brand." (He called it a brand earlier this week, in Manchester. Which is how most really devoted people talk about their faith.) But most Christians are pretty brand loyal. It's kind of important to them. They didn't just choose their church for the parking. They like to think they've put some thought into it.

Evelyn Waugh thought that the difference between the real church (Roman Catholicism) and some fake-o crap (Anglicanism) was so obvious that if you couldn't figure it out, it was your problem. He said that trying to explain it was like trying to teach an Australian about architecture.

Mitt Romney doesn't want to explain anything. He just wants to blur the distinctions, change the subject, and make the sale.

Mitt Romney isn't proud of his faith. If he were, he wouldn't react to questions about it like he'd just been asked to describe his parents having sex.

He could put this whole thing to rest by answering one question about his Jesus, just so we know we've got the right guy: Was he Satan's brother? If the answer is "yes" -- and the Book of Mormon says it is -- Mitt and Pat Robertson are talking about two totally different Middle Eastern drifters."

Mitt Romney is an arrogant and intransigent man trying to buy the presidency with his own money.

Romney's trying to find a path to the White House that goes between the evangelicals and Mormons and between the religious cons and fiscal cons, keeping each group happy enough not to break off and support somebody else. I don't see how he can pull that off, no matter how much money he spends.

From the article: "There are many free, secular societies where this doesn't seem an exhaustive explanation."

Please list these societies along with their leaders and let's have a look see at just how secular they really are.

Someone get busy. I await your findings.

Mitt Romney wants Christians to think that Mormonism is just another "brand." (He called it a brand earlier this week, in Manchester.

As long as the brand is Christianity, then I guess Romney is hoping the difference between Mormons and other Christians is like the difference between Pepsi and Coke, but I doubt it's going to sell when evangelicals don't even believe the difference between Catholicism and Protestianism is like the difference between Coke and New Coke.

In approximately 75 years I'll vote for a Republican again, and having said that Rudy is starting to look real good by comparison.

Romney's trying to find a path to the White House that goes between the evangelicals and Mormons and between the religious cons and fiscal cons, keeping each group happy enough not to break off and support somebody else. I don't see how he can pull that off, no matter how much money he spends.
Posted by rcade at 2007-12-09 09:23 AM |

"These are the new leads. These are the Glengarry leads. And to you they're gold, and you don't get them. Why? Because to give them to you would be throwing them away. They're for closers."

The guy's a closer. Straight from Downtown. Right out of Mitch & Murray.

The sad part is, if he could only bring himself to shake a tambourine and dance with rattlers he'd have the GOP nominiation locked up by now, good and tight.

Note to Mitt: You, sir, are no John Kennedy.

Didn't we have a thread on this already?

"The Gospel Jesus lived in Galilee. The Mormon Jesus lived in Albany. (Where he fought the Indians. Because he wasn't just the Lamb of God, he was also the Last of the Mohicans.) Mormon Jesus? Three wives, a planetful of kids. Gospel Jesus? Living alone and loving it."

Manny, where on Earth did you hear this? I hope it's a joke. It's all categorically false.

You gotta have faith, and you gotta keep the dog strapped to the roof of your car when you travel with Romney.

Regards,
etc.

No, you don't. That's the whole point.

Why is it so difficult for regressives to grasp this simple concept?

from the article:

"The insurgent, Baptist minister Mike Huckabee, was subtly appealing to the overwhelmingly fundamentalist Christian voters of the Republican base. Hucka-bee ran a disgraceful ad touting himself as a "Christian leader", "defined" by his faith."

So how is that "disgraceful" and how is Huckabee an "insurgent?"

Some serious bias, no?

also from the article:
"Theodemocracy: the blending of government with a universally Christian populace in which faith is the prerequisite of public office. This is the vision of America that Romney is proposing. He has behind him the power brokers of the Protestant right, the theocons of the Catholic right, the Mormon church and the vested interests of a Republican party elite that, in the wake of George W Bush, wants to extend the theodemocratic principles of an antisecular movement. "

For those of you who are more scared of Christians "taking over" this country than my mother in law is of us all being microchipped, I say, "BOO!"

How do you think Christians will make our country "universally Christian?" If it's anything other than people willingly becoming Christians in a free-market of ideas, then you are dangerously approaching BuffaloBob's world of conspiracy theories.

1)"The Gospel Jesus lived in Galilee.
2)The Mormon Jesus lived in Albany.
3)(Where he fought the Indians. Because he wasn't just the Lamb of God, he was also the Last of the Mohicans.)
4)Mormon Jesus? Three wives, a planetful of kids. 5)Gospel Jesus? Living alone and loving it."

Manny, where on Earth did you hear this? I hope it's a joke. It's all categorically false.

Posted by Clumpy at 2007-12-09 12:47 PM | Reply

Clumpy, you need to go on record--which of these is false?

#1 and #5 are historically and verifiably true.
Please show us your extensive knowledge.

"There shouldn't be a religous litmus test for the prsidency" -Mitt

"You have to be a religious man to be president" -Mitt

"but don't judge me on my religion" -Mitt

WTF?

what mitt was trying to convey is that every person has faith in something - hence, we all need faith - if you say you have no faith, you are fooling no one but yourself and are quite probably a liar.

it's about YOUR agenda - do you have faith in it?

i like mitt, even though i disagree with his "religion".

p.s. - i'd vote for an athiest if HIS qualities aligned with my own.

why don't we leave "religion" out of this.

one thing for sure, i'll NEVER again vote for someone because they invoke the name of GOD.

for crying out loud, even hitlery wears a crucifix when it behooves her!

reaction to this is no surprise because we all know that when christian america decides to support a candidate, the rest of you HAVE NO CHANCE......so your being so scared of religion in the political world is not surprising at all...

this was one of the greatest speached of modern american politics.....up there with the first reagan acceptance speach and ....OH YEAH>....speached of george washington and john adams .....who SAID THE SAME THING in one way or another.......but of course if you have no use for anything said by the first pres in his first thanksgiving message, I am sure you will 'poo poo' it just like the liberal AND SCARED SHITLESS media.......

its REAL SIMPLE.........the left is SCARED out of thier GUCCI shoes to think that christian america might get behind one candidate......because again....
at that point.....ITS ALL OVER........

and before you talk about who rommny excluded, it might be good to read THE ENTIRE SPEACH......and not just the selected points put out by this SCARED media and liberals......he did not exclude anyone.....IF you heard the entire thing...

"this was one of the greatest speached of modern american politics.....up there with the first reagan acceptance speach and ....OH YEAH>....speached of george washington and john adams ....."

Posted by a confirmed liar who claims he's a retired teacher

Eat a speached?

Hans

BL2:
laughable. The right hasn't put up a viable candidate to be scared of. If McCain were 10 years younger, he'd be elected in a landslide. Other than that, Republics have a Baptist Preacher who out-Willie-Horten'd Dukakis, Romney, and Ghouliani, who we know now misappropriated funds for his (then) mistress.

Hans,
Educating a child may take a village.
Educating BLT would take a megalopolis.

"greatest speeches of American politics..."

uh-huhhh...heh..haha.bwaah-ha-
ha-ha...

"Hans,
"Educating a child may take a village.
"Educating BLT would take a megalopolis."

True, Doc. Very true.

Hans