Posted on 01/10/2008 1:53:15 PM PST by JRochelle
If it hasn't been written already, it will be before next Tuesday: Michigan is, in the famous words of Rich Bond, "the Beirut of Republican politics."
In a state riven by factions and ancient hatreds, Gary Glenn stands out.
He runs Michigan's American Family Association, but recently he's focused his efforts on taking down Mitt Romney.
Given the events of the past few weeks, that now translates into supporting Huck.
Romney's camp shares this email, passed along by a supporter, in which Glenn explains at considerable length how to maximize the church's for Huck and to do so without crossing legal boundaries.
It makes one key element of the Huck strategy fairly clear.
And note which churches to hit and which to avoid.
The focus groups, the pundits, my opinion, reporters - EVERYONE - is saying Fred stood up and stood out last night.
Huckabee was an embarrassment on all but the marriage question.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1951892/posts?page=18#18
Do you see anything wrong with advising Huckabee supporters that asking permission from a church to hand out literature will likely lead to denial?
Why is that sentence in there and the bit about the legality of doing such if not but to imply that it really shouldn’t matter how churches wish to use the parking lot they own and care for? Better to be sneaky and ethically-challenged than to be denied, eh?
The pro-Christian candidate who doesn’t really care what churches think.
They’re trying to avoid a legal conflict with the endorsement of candidates by religious leaders. They aren’t allowed to do that.
I don’t think it’s any worse to hand out pamphlets in a church parking lot than a grocery parking lot. There’s nothing illegal about it that I know of.
They’re simply looking for ways to ID their target audience.
I imagine the liberals will do the same at liberal churches.
He is the only viable conservative who supports the Federal Marriage Amendment and the Human Life Amendment. I can't imagine any pro-life Catholic NOT supporting him.
Both the former and current Ambassadors to the Vatican (both Catholics, of course) support Mitt. Most of his top advisers are also Catholics.
Many prominent Catholic lawyers, including Mary Ann Glendon, recently nominated by the White House to serve as U.S ambassador to the Vatican, have joined up with the Romney effort because of the candidate's anti-abortion stance.
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/01/dominos_pizza_founder_delivers.html
Governor Mitt Romney issued the following statement on the nomination of Mary Ann Glendon, the Harvard University Learned Hand Professor of Law and Co-Chair of the Romney for President Advisory Committee on the Constitution and the Courts, to be the next Ambassador to the Holy See:
"I commend the President for nominating such a distinguished American to be our next Ambassador to the Holy See. She will serve our country with the honor and dignity we expect from those who represent our country's values abroad. While I may have lost her trusted counsel to our campaign, our country has gained an extremely gifted Ambassador. I wish her the best as she prepares for her confirmation and service in the Vatican."
Romney has a consistent, pro-abortion record.
I can only conclude that Catholics who support him are either lacking in insight or not truly Catholics.
If you support him, then I guess you fit one of my above categories.
I guess I'll just stay in the group lacking insight with other Catholics like brainless Mary Ann Glendon, the Harvard educated Ambassador to the Vatican. She can't possibly be very well-informed or a true Catholic either.
“They’re trying to avoid a legal conflict with the endorsement of candidates by religious leaders.”
Do you honestly expect anyone to believe that this is why they’re waltzing around instructomg their goons not to ask for permission first?
If the Huckster's people don't ask the church and distribute fliers on their own, the church can plausibly deny that it had anything to do with it.
A tax-exempt charitable organization cannot use its resources to aid a political campaign. That's because contributions to a church are tax deductible, whereas contributions to campaigns are not. If churches were allowed to directly aid candidates, then they would provide a back door for people to deduct political contributions from their taxes.
Wrong. And it is sad that you would smear Romney like that. Romney’s record as Governor was as pro-life as he could be without getting impeached...
“Abortion Is The Wrong Choice.” - Mitt Romney, July 2005.
* Governor Romney Vetoed Legislation That Would Have Provided For The “Morning After Pill” Without A Prescription. (Governor Mitt Romney, Op-Ed, “Why I Vetoed The Contraception Bill,” The Boston Globe, 7/26/05)
* Governor Romney Promoted Abstinence Education In The Classroom. (Office Of Governor Mitt Romney, “Romney Announces Award Of Abstinence Education Contract,” Press Release, 4/20/06)
* Governor Romney Vetoed Legislation That Would Have Changed The Longstanding Definition Of The Beginning Of Human Life From Fertilization To Implantation. (Governor Mitt Romney, Letter To The Massachusetts State Senate And House Of Representatives, 5/12/05)
* Governor Romney Supports Parental Notification Laws And Opposed Efforts To Weaken Parental Involvement. (John McElhenny, “O’Brien And Romney Spar In Last Debate Before Election,” The Associated Press, 10/29/02)
* Governor Romney Supports Adult Stem Cell Research But Has Opposed Efforts To Advance Embryo-Destructive Research In Massachusetts. (Theo Emery, “Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney Vetoes Stem Cell Bill,” The Associated Press, 5/27/05)
Governor Romney Has Been Recognized For His Pro-Life Leadership In Massachusetts. “Mitt Romney was a great Governor, who served with honor and distinction. But most importantly, he was a pro-life Governor. He vetoed a number of pro-abortion pieces of legislation and made many pro-life appointments. He was always there for us. He’s a busy man these days and we are extra fortunate that he and his wife Ann could be with us. Governor, you have been an inspirational leader in many ways. And if I may say so, Mitt, you’re looking very presidential. Ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming our friend, Governor Mitt Romney, to the podium as our 2007 Mullins Award Winner for Outstanding Political Leadership.” (Kevin Jourdain, Remarks, Agawam, MA, 5/10/07)
Massachusetts Citizens For Life Executive Director Marie Sturgis: “Having Governor Romney in the corner office for the last four years has been one of the strongest assets the pro-life movement has had in Massachusetts.” (Kathryn Jean Lopez, “An Early Massachusetts Primary,” National Review, 1/10/07)
You do your side no favors when you hint that the reason he opposes Romney is because of his religion.
Go read the comments at the politico link.
No, I believe that is EXACTLY why they are not asking.
“I guess I’ll just stay in the group lacking insight with other Catholics like brainless Mary Ann Glendon, the Harvard educated Ambassador to the Vatican. She can’t possibly be very well-informed or a true Catholic either.”
or prominent Catholic Tom Monaghan, who endorsed Romney last week:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1951512/posts
“Monaghan is a Catholic’s Catholic, the founder of Ave Maria University and Law School, and one of the forces behind Legatus, an organization of senior Catholic business leaders. He is an ardent pro-lifer, and a man deeply concerned with rescuing the culture.”
I have no doubt it's one of the reasons. Some fundie pastors would love to use their church's resources to help out the Huckster, but they are afraid of losing their tax exemption, so they'd rather not be asked for permission and are happy to wink and then look away as the Hucksters canvas their parking lot.
There are also others, I am sure, who genuinely would like to remain neutral and would not grant permission for this reason.
Is Mitt Romney Conservative? (Gov Romney Supported Abortion & Gay Agenda with Judges & Boy Scouts)
CP.com ^ | 29Aug06 | Gary Glenn
Posted on 01/07/2008 9:18:49 AM EST by xzins
Is Mitt Romney Conservative?
by Gary Glenn Chairman, Campaign for Michigan Families
The Washington, D.C. conservative weekly Human Events last year listed Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in its Top Ten list of RINOs (Republicans in Name Only), ranking him at number 8 in the nation with the following entry:
“Has said, ’I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country.’ Supports (homosexual) civil unions and stringent gun laws. After visiting Houston, he criticized the city’s aesthetics, saying, ’This is what happens when you don’t have zoning.’” (Human Events)
Romney should have ranked even higher on the list of RINOs. He famously likes to tell conservative audiences in Iowa and South Carolina that being a conservative Republican in Massachusetts is like being a cattle rancher at a vegetarian convention.
I attended last fall’s GOP conference in Michigan, where Romney continued his masquerade as a “conservative,” even daring to tell the assembled activists: “I am pro-life” — knowing full well that he does not mean by that term what those listening would think he meant.
Romney’s ten-year political career has occurred from his late 40s to his late 50s, yet he asks pro-family conservatives to naively believe that he’s just now figuring out his core beliefs.
During that decade, he has insistently supported legal abortion-on-demand. In a televised 1994 campaign debate, Romney said: “I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time when my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice. ...Since that time, my mother and my family have been committed to the belief that we can believe as we want, but we will not force our beliefs on others on that matter, and you will not see my wavering on that.” (Boston Globe)
His 2002 gubernatorial campaign web site stated: “As Governor, Mitt Romney would protect the current pro-choice status quo in Massachusetts. No law would change. The choice to have an abortion is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not the government’s.” (Archive)
Romney’s response to the National Abortion Rights Action League’s 2002 candidate survery: ’’I respect and will protect a woman’s right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government’s. The truth is, no candidate in the governor’s race in either party would deny women abortion rights.” (Notably, Romney refused to answer Massachusetts Citizens for Life’s candidate questionnaire.) (Boston Globe)
Not surprisingly, Romney’s clearly stated support for Roe and “a woman’s right to choose” — i.e., abortion on demand — earned him the endorsement of the pro-abortion Republican Majority for Choice PAC.
He was also endorsed, twice, by the homosexual “Log Cabin Republicans,” the same group that in 2004 spent $1 million attacking President Bush for his support of a Marriage Protection Amendment.
Romney believes the Boy Scouts should allow openly homosexual Scoutmasters: “I feel that all people should be allowed to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation.” (Web today)
He endorses Ted Kennedy’s federal “gay rights” legislation. He endorses taxpayer-financed same-sex benefits for the homosexual partners of state employees, and even attacked some Democratic legislators for not supporting such government benefits.
According to the Associated Press, he has appointed at least two openly homosexual lawyers to state judgeships, one a board member of the Lesbian & Gay Bar Association. Imagine how that will fly in Republican presidential primaries in the South, the prospect of a president with a record of appointing homosexual activists to the bench. (See copy of gubernatorial news release below.)
In 2002, before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court legalized so-called homosexual “marriage,” Romney denounced a preemptive state Marriage Protection Amendment prohibiting homosexual “marriage,” civil unions, or same-sex public employee benefits as “too extreme,” even after being advised by the media that his own wife and son had just signed a petition to place it on the ballot. (Boston Phoenix)
Now, as he postures to run for president, Romney travels to Iowa and Michigan and South Carolina to claim he’s “pro-life” and brag about fighting homosexual “marriage,” saying that at age 59, his position on such issues has “evolved.”
(No flip-flop so far, however, on his stated support for homosexual Scoutmasters, forcing taxpayers to fund spousal benefits for the “partners” of state employees involved in homosexual relationships, or Kennedy’s federal “gay rights” legislation.)
Regardless, most pro-family voters don’t believe in the theory of evolution — including as it applies to politicians, and especially when the alleged “evolution” seems so conveniently timed to produce political benefit.
Gov. Romney can tell all the cattle-rancher-at-a-vegetarian-convention jokes he wants about Massachusetts. But they’re going to fall flat when social conservatives learn — and they will — that his long-term record on abortion and elements of homosexual activists’ political agenda has been that of Vegetarian in Chief.
I was looking for those comments, but couldnt .... maybe you can post the link or explain.
I did find this comment, which is certainly apropos:
” Daniel Allott’s piece on Gov. Romney’s abortion record disregards the truth in a seeming effort to do as much damage to Romney as possible.
“$50 abortions” is a canard commonly used by those who know better to confuse those who are uninformed.
Romney had nothing to do with establishing that component of the health care plan. The state supreme court has held for nearly 30 years that any state-supported healthcare plan - including the state’s own Medicaid plan that preceded the state’s recent healthcare reforms - subsidize abortion. Nothing changed with the new healthcare plan.
The state’s liberal, veto-proofed legislature could have passed any healthcare plan they wanted. Romney did his best to improve the plan and has used the better, pro-market elements to construct his national healthcare reform strategy.
Allott erroneously suggests that Romney willfully decided to not exempt Catholic hospitals from requirements to provide abortive drugs.
It was the state legislature that overwhelmingly passed a law removing the exemption for Catholic hospitals ? and Romney fought against removing this exemption to the end.
Allott also ignores several of Romney’s pro-life positions: specifically, his successful opposition to law creating a 35 foot protest buffer around abortion clinics and his support for abstinence education in the state schools.”
GG responds in the comments. Some vile Romney supporter posted his phone number and some of those idiots called him. Not to compliment him.
Running some numbers on the Iowa caucuses, Philip Klinkner finds that Huckabee has a serious Catholic problem. Despite his statewide victory, he ran into serious trouble in Catholic counties, who went strongly for Romney.
http://dsadevil.blogspot.com/2008/01/huckabees-catholic-problem.html
Once upon a time, I respected xzins.
Now his opinion is worthless to me, sorry to say.
“I’m glad that FredHeads are realizing that a Romney win in Michigan is a good thing for Fred. I happen to think that wins by Romney and Thompson in South Carolina would both be very good things for conservatives, as well.”
Yes they would be ...
McCain and Huck winning = death of Reagan coalition
Romney and Thompson winning = conservatives okay and Reagan coalition still alive
Phony robocalls (these guys had calls purportedly from gay groups to social consrevatives ‘endorsing Romney’ in NH to try to smear Romney on those issues), pushpolling, pushing the boundaries of law wrt church tax exemptions, abusing property rights of church parking lots, etc.
... doncha love it when Clinton/Arkansas ethics are used in a campaign? Feels like old times, eh?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.