Mitt camp fires back at critics: Romney foes claim threat by GOP brass

The Boston Herald ^ | 03/10/2007 | Jessica Heslam

[JohnSheppard]

Mitt Romney’s campaign blasted a pair of Massachusetts Republicans bent on “exposing” the ex-governor’s record in his race for the White House, while the duo said they were threatened by a top Bay State GOP official.

Romney campaign spokesman Kevin Madden lashed out at the founders of MassRepublicans for Truth - GOP strategists Holly Robichaud and Ron Vining - calling them “disgruntled political operatives.”

“I expect they’re going to peddle a bunch of distortions and anger in their efforts,” Madden said. “They may be entitled to their own opinion, but they are not entitled to their own set of facts. And the facts about Gov. Romney’s stellar record of fiscal conservatism and his pro-family advocacy are very clear.”

The Herald reported yesterday that Robichaud and Vining created the Web-based “truth” group to “educate” voters across the country,mostly about Romney.

Their Web site, www.MassRepublicansforTruth.com, goes live Monday, and they’re set to post “The Romney Report.” The report details Romney’s performance as Bay State governor and charges him with flip-flopping on key issues such as abortion and gay rights.

When the pair was toying with the idea, Robichaud sent an e-mail to Vining and copied it to several people, Vining said. The e-mail was passed along to Ron Kauffman, a key player in Romney’s presidential bid and a GOP national committeeman from Massachusetts.

At the Republican State Committee meeting in January, Vining said, Kaufman pulled him into the hall. Vining said he told him he wasn’t leading an effort against Romney.

“He said, ‘You are dead to me and as far as I’m concerned, you have no future in the Massachusetts Republican Party,’ ” Vining recalled. “He said something to the effect of, ‘If you’re looking to hurt Mitt, then we’ll see to it that you’re history.’ ”

[Neu Pragmatist]

Hmmm...Very interesting ...

[bw17]

I don't know that for fact, but it appears to be some kind of vendetta from Republicans that Romney crossed back in 2002.

[greyfoxx39]

Link and/or picture of quaker underwear?

[sevenbak]

Why woudl I? I have no desire to spew garbage about someone elses religion.

[greyfoxx39]

Then why bring up the underwear of Quakers? What's garbage about that? Seems pretty interesting to me.

[sevenbak]

I was answering peyton randolph in his hatchet post about Mitt and his Mormon beliefs. Post #4

Lots of religions have sacred clothing... big deal.

[greyfoxx39]

So, what is the Quaker underwear like? Never heard of it.

[California Patriot]

It may be that the anti-Romney group is substantively right -- I don't know. But I do like the fact that the Romney people are going after them. It's the kind of thing that's needed in a serious presidential campaign, and even more in a serious president.

[sevenbak]

I've given you my answer. If you want to continue in the same vein as post #4, you can find out yourself. I'm sure you are a big boy, with resourses at your fingertips.

[AmishDude]

These kinds of groups pop up all the time. The GOP has people like these two littering the ground. The MSM frequently inflates their credentials to sow division.

I guarantee there will be some sort of "Republicans for Hillary" group and Robichaud and Vining will be right there at the forefront.

[FethFiada]

There is no comparison. The mormon's "secret" underwear is actually part of the religion and part of a secret ceremony that one must be worthy of attending....but good luck in getting information on that ahead of time.

If and it's a big if - the quaker's have any special underwear it would be that of it's plain-ness, or simpleness. Not that they are any more worthy or any better of a quaker by wearing it.

[alarm rider]

Is this a magic underwear thread?

[peyton randolph]

Is this a magic underwear thread?

---

Yes, since Mitt is running for prez. Americans don't elect members of cults to the presidency.

The magic underwear is fair game.

So is the  the Book of Mormon's implication that dark skin is a curse by God.

And for the bonus round, let's throw in the planet Kolob. 

Check this out.

"There are three major differences between the Jesus of the Bible and the Jesus of the Mormon church. Here's what Mormon's believe:

1. Instead of the eternal Jesus co-equal with the Father, the Mormon Jesus was once a man who achieved godhood by his own virtuousness during a preincarnate existence. His spirit was then impregnated into the virgin Mary by the "Eternal Father" who came from the planet Kolob for the physical union with her.

2. Mormonism teaches that Jesus and Lucifer are brothers who competed for the opportunity to become the savior of planet earth. Jesus' plan won approval and Lucifer rebelled and became the tempter and deceiver of planet Earth.

3. Mormonism teaches that Jesus is only one of many saviors who are each responsible for the salvation of the population of other planets like Earth. Mormon men are working with the promise that they, too, will eventually become gods and be given a planet of their own to populate. This will be accomplished by their intercourse with many wives who will bear millions of spirit children to inhabit the bodies of the people on their planet." Source link.

Mitt is a electoral disaster waiting to happen.

 

[DanielLongo]

I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Are you really interested in what we believe? So far all of your sources are from "Anti-Mormons". For anyone reading your posts and looking for objectivity, it is analogous to asking MoveOn.org to expound the merits of conservatism. Should I post links to Al-Jazeera or Hamas for a proper understanding of why some Jews wear their hair in locks?

[DanielLongo]

Yes, worthiness is a prerequisite. Why did the Lord make Moses remove his sandals before entering into his presence on Sinai? Why in the New Testament when Christ gives the parable of the wedding feast does he have the man, who is not wearing the right garments, bound and expelled from the feast? Why did the Levites wear particular garments and caps before performing their temple rituals? It seems to me what is lacking here is not civility or an understanding of the practices and ordinances of the Church of Jesus Christ, but a lack of knowledge pertaining to holy scripture.

[FethFiada]

There's not a lack of understanding scripture. There's a lack of interest on my part of wanting to understand your ever changing "scripture" and truth. Truth remains and can stand on its own, not the whim of the prophet of the day and the desire to be more palatable to the general population.

[DanielLongo]

And yet the truth stands as the scriptures I cited. And as for your not wanting to understand I guess I'll have to quote Goethe this time, "There is nothing more frightening than ignorance in action."

[peyton randolph]

So far all of your sources are from "Anti-Mormons".

---

I wouldn't expect to find Xenu and Thetan info on the Scientology website either.

Kindly identify which parts of what I posted are false.

Simply saying that the sources are "anti-Mormon" doesn't cut it.

[DanielLongo]

Post a statement or quote from our scriptures, prophets, or apostles and I will be happy to have a conversation. That seems to me a fair request. But for argument's sake:

1. The New Testament writers say that Jesus did not receive a fullness at once but grew grace to grace. You are correct that we do not believe Jesus to be Heavenly Father, that they are two distinct personages. There is no doctrine, statement, or assumption that Heavenly father had a physical union with the "Virgin" Mary. We believe that it was a sacred act and that Jesus in his mortality was formed as are we all by a union of two individuals, i.e. half of his mother and half of his Father. We believe we are all spirit children of our Father in Heaven, but only Christ, as the scriptures testify, was the the only begotten of the Father in the flesh.

2. We do believe that Lucifer was as much spiritually begotten of our Father as was Jesus. However, there was no rivalry. The plan of salvation was authored by our Father in Heaven. Jesus supported and defended that plan of agency and accountability as did Michael the Archangel. Satan rebelled as did a third of the host of heaven. For this they were cast out of the presence of God. The scriptures are very clear about this.

3. We believe that there is only one Savior and one Atonement. Again, if you disagree with that statement, then site a scripture or statement by a prophet or apostle, who would be according to us (and me particularly)an authority. We do believe that God created many worlds by the power of his Word (Jesus Christ) and that they too are populated as ours is by His children. However, we believe Christ's atonement to be universal, ie his mercy covers them all. As for becoming gods, I will quote directly from the New Testament, which I assume you hold as authority:

John Chapter 10

31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
39 Therefore they sought again to take him: but he escaped out of their hand,

As for intercourse with multiple wives, again, you must site an authority. That we believe our marriage covenants are eternal under the New and Everlasting Covenant of marriage,yes. That we believe that our destiny is to continue our Father's work and that it is prized, yes. We believe that our Father's work and His glory is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man. We believe that the object of His happiness is to have us share in His joy. We believe that we have heavenly parents and that the joy we find in this life when living the gospel of Jesus Christ is a precursor, a taste, of the many wonders that await us beyond this probationary state. I read into the statement, perhaps wrongly, that you think we achieve godhood at the resurrection or in a moment. This is not the case. But it is his design. His joy is pronounced in the elevating of all. That is why he created us. That is why He loves us. Truly our Father. The very best.

[peyton randolph]

Thank you for the informative response.