Mitt's Speech...and a rebuttal

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by skippy3481

While I'm not high on mitt as a candidate, I don't see what he did wrong. It's obviously a, as he put it, non-theist author attacking religion as a whole. I fail to see how his religion(mormon) was even under discussion. In fact the authors sole intent is knock any type of religion. I believe most if not all the candidates believe in god, or allah or whatever. I fail to see how his mormon faith came into context at all here, but maybe i'm missing something.

To me, these are two seperate discussions. You are right...Romney is trying to lump Mormons into every religious category there is so he can fly under the "I have faith" banner..I'm no different than Catholics etc. So..

1) Check out "Under the Banner of Heaven"...That will give you an idea of what Mormons were really about and where they came from. There are specific issues I have with the Mormon faith and they are very clear in this book.

2) DTS55 doesn't care about Mormons...it's about religion and how they try and stuff their beliefs down our throats because we are "One Nation Founded Under god" We are all free to worship whatever god we want...until it ain't the one we believe in. Then the fun begins

[hi_im_god]

Originally Posted by GBBob

To me, these are two seperate discussions. You are right...Romney is trying to lump Mormons into every religious category there is so he can fly under the "I have faith" banner..I'm no different than Catholics etc. So..

1) Check out "Under the Banner of Heaven"...That will give you an idea of what Mormons were really about and where they came from. There are specific issues I have with the Mormon faith and they are very clear in this book.

2) DTS55 doesn't care about Mormons...it's about religion and how they try and stuff their beliefs down our throats because we are "One Nation Founded Under god" We are all free to worship whatever god we want...until it ain't the one we believe in. Then the fun begins

better we all stand back and let them do what they do best.

(crunch) (crack!) chew. chew. chew.

it's a tribal thing. who knew republicans were so similar to arabs?

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

better we all stand back and let them do what they do best.
(crunch) (crack!) chew. chew. chew.

it's a tribal thing. who knew republicans were so similar to arabs?

at what risk?

never mind..

see dubya

[Downthestretch55]

GbBob,
You are correct. I have nothing against Mormons. They should be allowed the same freedoms granted in the First Amendment as EVERYONE else.
The Constitution is quite clear that there is to be NO state sponsored religion imposed on its citizens, and that includes those that do not wish to subscribe to any religion. Romney blurred that distinction in his speech.
Freedom should not have qualifications or interpretations but should be inclusive of ALL of the populace.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

better we all stand back and let them do what they do best.

(crunch) (crack!) chew. chew. chew.

it's a tribal thing. who knew republicans were so similar to arabs?

I don't get it. Are you saying most Arab-Americans are Republicans?

I will play political astrologer.
If Mitt happens to get the GOP
nomination, welcome a Democrat
back as president.

It is apparent ideas on solving major problems
have very little
to do with a candidate's popularity.
Name recognition through good speaking,
physical attributes, party association, and finally
major personal prefrences out
of the mainstream, seem to play
THE central role in who we back.

Mitt is a Mormon. He is cooked with the public...
with his own party.

Take McCain. He has to be considered a major
player but is not. He is not a good speaker.
He screwed around a whole lot as a pilot.
People will tell you he backs the war too much.
That, imo, is an excuse because he comes off so poorly
on TV. Huckabee comes across very well on TV.
If Huckabee had McCain's lack of persona, he would never
had a dime in contributions.

It is possible that a very good president to
be, could be a poor TV personality, ugly, have
a wife or husband that worships Thor, and...
we will never see this person as a president.

Image is everything. Substance... hell, we cant
even get to substance because WE dont want
substance.WE cant handle substance. Because if a candidate
says one thing we disagree with, cross em off.

So...
they dance around the issues, hoping not to hack
off anyone. WE WON'T let them tell us what they really
think. And we vote for those that dance around
the issues most deftly and then are able to convincingly
frame other candidates with specifics (that are usually
embellished).
WE cant handle specifics.

peegarden's rant cont...

Health care is a major issue.
The UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA already has health care, it just does not work
for what is becoming a larger portion of the population.
So any plan that is presented, is easily torn down as
the Worst possible scenario: Socialized Medicine...
God help us all...

"Why Rudi, your idea about so and so, is really Socialized
Medicine." We already have socialized medicine.
The Govt already plays a huge role
in health care.
But the Government does not own the vast majority of
hospitals, and the Doctors are not in the employ of the
Government. THIS IS SOCIALIZED MEDICINE.

"Why Mike, that last little section in your health care plan,
why MIke that is clearly Socialized Medicine."
So Mike will not put out a clear plan. No one will.
And folks who say we dont need a plan,
the government needs to stay out...
well open your eyes, the government already has a
plan firmly in place that is costing money.

By definition in this country (as presented
by politicians this country) we already
have socialized medicine because the
govt. IS deeply involved with health care AT PRESENT.

WE cant handle specifics. So politicians wont give em to us.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by pgardn

I will play political astrologer.
If Mitt happens to get the GOP
nomination, welcome a Democrat
back as president.

It is apparent ideas on solving major problems
have very little
to do with a candidate's popularity.
Name recognition through good speaking,
physical attributes, party association, and finally
major personal prefrences out
of the mainstream, seem to play
THE central role in who we back.

Mitt is a Mormon. He is cooked with the public...
with his own party.

Take McCain. He has to be considered a major
player but is not. He is not a good speaker.
He screwed around a whole lot as a pilot.
People will tell you he backs the war too much.
That, imo, is an excuse because he comes off so poorly
on TV. Huckabee comes across very well on TV.
If Huckabee had McCain's lack of persona, he would never
had a dime in contributions.

It is possible that a very good president to
be, could be a poor TV personality, ugly, have
a wife or husband that worships Thor, and...
we will never see this person as a president.

Image is everything. Substance... hell, we cant
even get to substance because WE dont want
substance.WE cant handle substance. Because if a candidate
says one thing we disagree with, cross em off.

So...
they dance around the issues, hoping not to hack
off anyone. WE WON'T let them tell us what they really
think. And we vote for those that dance around
the issues most deftly and then are able to convincingly
frame other candidates with specifics (that are usually
embellished).
WE cant handle specifics.

I don't think he is cooked with the public..I think he is cooked with the religous right wing of the Repub party. This is a big generalization/stretch, but if Romney was a Democrat and had a true Dem platform, I think he would be nominated, maybe even elected. But the extreme Christian right can't handle a Mormon, or anyone else for that matter getting the nomination and that's why he probably won't get nominated. Their numbers are very large and they vote.

Originally Posted by GBBob

I don't think he is cooked with the public..I think he is cooked with the religous right wing of the Repub party. This is a big generalization/stretch, but if Romney was a Democrat and had a true Dem platform, I think he would be nominated, maybe even elected. But the extreme Christian right can't handle a Mormon, or anyone else for that matter getting the nomination and that's why he probably won't get nominated. Their numbers are very large and they vote.

I went to church. (Was not struck by an electrical storm)
A Catholic church, mainly because I
am Catholic (supposed to be).

The older Catholics that want a Rep.
(pro-life) Dont want Mitt. My little world,
my little poll. JFK... hmmm. You think
they would realize the contradiction.

These older folks. They WILL vote.
In large numbers.

[Downthestretch55]

Pgardn my friend,
At issue is not "health care".
At issue is freedom of, or freedom from, religion.
In my humble view, Romney cooked himself in his pathetic speech. Huckabee, though quite appealing to the evangelicals, is also as scarey. His agenda, as a Southern Baptist preacher, will place the presidency in the hands of yet another "ordained" leader, as we have presently.
Damn the Constitution. Welcome to the American Taliban!
DTS

[IrishofNDMan]

Originally Posted by pgardn

I went to church. (Was not struck by an electrical storm)
A Catholic church, mainly because I
am Catholic (supposed to be).

The older Catholics that want a Rep.
(pro-life) Dont want Mitt. My little world,
my little poll. JFK... hmmm. You think
they would realize the contradiction.

These older folks. They WILL vote.
In large numbers.

I am a practicing Catholic who attends church every Sunday, and I am not really backing Mitt. I like him because he is from Michigan like me, but he is not my choice. Just thought I would clear that up.

[Danzig]

as for huckabee, he may have bigger issues to deal with:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316228,00.html

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GBBob

To me, these are two seperate discussions. You are right...Romney is trying to lump Mormons into every religious category there is so he can fly under the "I have faith" banner..I'm no different than Catholics etc. So..

1) Check out "Under the Banner of Heaven"...That will give you an idea of what Mormons were really about and where they came from. There are specific issues I have with the Mormon faith and they are very clear in this book.

2) DTS55 doesn't care about Mormons...it's about religion and how they try and stuff their beliefs down our throats because we are "One Nation Founded Under god" We are all free to worship whatever god we want...until it ain't the one we believe in. Then the fun begins

and it's funny that many christians take offense when a muslim suggests that their religion is the only true one, and then christians do the same thing. baptists sneer at catholics, catholics at mormons, mormons at scientologists.