Mitt Takes the Gloves Off

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/f3863b1b-59be-4e66-be28-bd48562ec10e?comments=true#commentAnchor ^ | Friday, August 03, 2007 9:58 PM | Posted by Dean Barnett

[bubman]

Yesterday, Mitt Romney went into Iowa radio host Jan Mickelson’s studio for a conversation about politics. At least it should have been about politics. Instead, Mickelson decided he wanted to grill Romney on the Mormon church and Mormon theology. (I also thought Mickelson’s comments on politics, namely that the President should overrule the Supreme Court when in the President’s opinion the Court oversteps its bounds, were a tad on the screwy side as well.)

Mickelson’s station, WHO, had a video recorder on the governor that was recording his off-air comments, something that Romney was unaware of. On the air, Mickelson stated that according to Mormon theology, Romney should have been excommunicated from the Mormon Church because he was once pro-choice. Off the air, Romney tried to gently tell Mickelson that he didn’t know what he was talking about. Although I’ve never heard even a snippet of Mickelson’s show before today, I bet Mickelson holding forth on something he knows nothing about happens on a not infrequent basis. The off air exchange (that once again Romney didn’t know was being taped) was at times heated. WHO today posted the footage on its website.

[Rameumptom]

>>>I found it very informative. Sorry you’re experience was different.

Well I'm sorry that you believe the liberal lies.

In her book “Godless: The Church of Liberalism” Pages 16-17 Ann Coulter writes “In the book Under the Banner of Heaven: A Story of Violent Faith, Jon Krakauer wrotes of the Bush administration, “This, after all, is a country led by a born-again Christian.... who characterizes international relations as a biblical clash between forces of good and evil. The highest officer in the land, Attorney General John Ashcroft, is a dyed-in-the-wool follower of a fundamentalist Christian sect- The Pentecostal Assemblies of God of America... and subscribes to a vividly apocalyptic worldview that has much in common with key millenarian beliefs held by the Lafferty brothers and the residents of Colorado City”.

So it’s Ok for Krakauer to slam “Mormons” but tell me does he go too far in including born agains?

He’s a Godless Humanist Secularist Liberal. Do you seriously believe his lies or do you want me to quote you some more?

[Rameumptom]

>>I found it very informative.

Under theBanner of Heaven is not accurate about Mormons or "Christian Fundamentalists". How about this next quote? Is it "informative".

“There is a dark side to religious devotion that is too often ignored or denied,.. As a means of motivating people to be cruel and inhumane—as a means of motivating people to be evil, to borrow the vocabulary of the devout—there may in fact be nothing more effective than religion.” Referring to the “Islamic fundamentalism” that resulted in the killings of 11 September 2001, he goes on to say that “men have been committing heinous acts in the name of God ever since mankind began believing in deities, and extremists exist within all religions.” He finds that “history has not lacked” for Muslims, “Christians, Jews, Sikhs, and even Buddhists who have been motivated by scripture to butcher innocents. Faith-based violence was present long before Osama bin Laden, and it will be with us long after his demise”

His book came out in 2003 and joins in the liberal chorus that Faith religion is bad. In other words he is part of the larger movement to try to discredit and bash religion. You shouldn’t be promoting stuff like this on FR.

Soon after 9/11 liberals and their ilk started blaming fundemental religion and then progressivly bit by bit Christian Funadementalism for such things as 9/11. The message the MSM promoted was a hit on Christians not on Muslims. This book fits into that larger political context of what is going on post 9/11.

The author picks two murderers (so called "fundamentalists") to bash so called "mormon fundamentalism". But he doesn't stop there. He tries to link the murders in 1984 to the Lee Murder in 1877. He’s digging deep. For his thesis to prove that "mormon fundamentalists" are murderers he comes up with a few examples in the course of over 100 years. Then of course he tries to portray the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in that way. Not much of a trend.

He also talks about “relgious extremism” Of course all religious people are extremists in the Liberal worldview. Which he treis to prove also. using a few murderes to prove all mormons are “extremists”. Of course you know the next step or anything Chirstian worth there salt does. He tries to show this unscientific "trend" of his applies to all of Christianity. It's all BS. Most of your politically related comments on FR are truly conservative. So why the blind spot when it comes to mormonism?

The MSM did this earlier also with Timothy Mcveigh and the OKC bombing. Even though he claimed to be an atheist the media soon labeled him the “Christian Terrorist”. They still refer to him as such as a way to bash all Christians.

[curiosity]

Sorry, but there's nothing in the oath saying the president has a right to overrule SCOTUS.

But in President Jackson’s message announcing his veto of the act renewing the Bank of the United States there is language which suggests that the President has the right to refuse to enforce both statutes and judicial decisions on his own independent decision that they were unwarranted by the Constitution.

President Jackson didn't defy any SCOTUS decision with that veto.

The best you can do is point to "suggestive language" in his statement. Forgive me if I'm not impressed.

The idea next turned up in a message by President Lincoln justifying his suspension of the writ of habeas corpus without obtaining congressional authorization.

What court decision did this defy?

103 And counsel to President Johnson during his impeachment trial adverted to the theory but only in passing.

Okay, so to support your theory, you have "suggestive" language by President Jackson, as well as the counsel of President Johnson's adverting to it "in passing."

Yeah, that's really solid evidence. /sarcasm. On the other side, we have the language of the Constitution itself, plus 230 years of SCOTUS precedent.

I think it's obvious to any objective observer who wins this argument.

SCOTUS can act to guarantee a Republican form of government under the Constitution, so it can grab jurisdiction if it wants to if a claim is made that the courts are legislating in a State. Doubt they would in this environment, but they could, and it would have been interesting. Can’t think of a better test case actually.

Yes, it would have made for an interesting failure.

[saganite]

Actually I pretty much agree with Krakaeur so you can save your breath. Two World leaders, one here and one in Iran who believe they are bringing about a second coming are frightening.

[speekinout]

Orrin Hatch? Let me just say that I am glad he didn’t get very far when he ran for President!!!

Well, me too. But it wasn't because he's a Mormon, and it wasn't because I don't often appreciate his service in the Senate.

[speekinout]

OK, so you’re a bigot. Just admit it.

You hate Mormons - that’s clear. How do you feel about atheists and Wiccans? Although I suppose you’ve already made it clear about atheists - most Communists are.

But you aren’t judging Mormons on morality. In my religion (not Mormon), family values, faithfulness to one’s spouse, working for a living, and charitable acts are considered moral. I’m much more in favor of a moral man of any religion than I am of one like Teddy Kennedy or billy clintoon, no matter that they both profess to follow mainstream religions.

[epow]

I know he joined the NRA..... last year

Was that before or after he signed a batch of new MA gun laws into effect?

[Greg F]

Well, I’ve made the points I have to make. I don’t think you can deny the President’s duty to defend the Constitution or that there could be a circumstance when this places him in opposition to the Court. As Justice Jackson wrote, “the Constitution is not a suicide pact” echoing Lincoln regarding the suspension of Habeus Corpus when criticized by the Chief Justice, “Are all the laws, but one, to go unexecuted, and the government itself go to pieces, lest that one be violated?”

Anyway, you know the Constitutional basis for Presidential defense of the Constitution itself, the ability of Congress to limit the Court and who decides Constitutionality if jurisdiction is removed, the types of circumstances where Presidents have suspended Constitutional protections in wartime, a situation where the President has not enforced a ruling of the Court outside of a time of war, and the reasoning of those who say this can in extreme circumstances be exactly the right thing to do . . . That’s all I’ve got for you. ; )

[epow]

As to whether he is a flip flopper or not. You will make that decision at the ballot box.

Already made it. Mitt flips and flops like a MA codfish on dry land, and he is anything but a conservative.

The only way I will ever cast a vote for Mitt would be if he wins the GOP nomination, and then I'll be holding my nose so tight I may pass out before I get to the booth. I have had it up to my eyeballs with RINOs.

[epow]

Mitt Romney is the biggest deceiver in American politics today,

I have to disagree with you on that point. I don't think any of the other GOP candidates can match Juliannie when it comes to slick deception and half truths. The proof of that is that he has actually conned some otherwise sensible FReepers into thinking he's a conservative Republican of some sort instead of the most socially liberal RINO in the party. If he is nominated, IMHO that would split the Republican party for at least the next two or three national election cycles, and possibly forever.

[Radix]

"I think Mitt’s impressive. I know next to nothing about the Mormon Church."

About 160 years ago (give or take) Joseph Smith claimed to have received certain golden tablets from the Angel Moroni which were later buried later on some hill in upstate New York.

Later certain of his witnesses recanted certain testimonies that they made and disavowed Smith's claims.

Joseph Smith was later killed after some confrontation in Missouri.

Followers of the nascent cult guided by Brigham Young moved on to modern day Utah and some seagulls ate a bunch of locusts, and that was a miracle.

If I had time I could explain also why millionaires go out of their way to don absurd attire and then spend boatloads of cash wearing silly shoes, carry metal clubs, whacking little white balls as far as they can, and then go looking for the very same balls in the woods in order to repeat the same experience over and over.

I might even delve into why rational folks put on silly shirts and spend a weeks pay to watch grown men toss and catch a ball around large pieces of real estate.

Mitt Romney's ridiculous religion has got nothing to do with nothing when it comes to obtaining the Office of President.

[Elsie]

I reach this conclusion because of the repeated phrases he used that have been coming out for the past three months at FR by the Mormonism apologists seeding the FR ground.

Well, for ME, I'm getting TIRED of folks constantly bring that subject up!

--MormonDude(If I explain it just ONE MORE TIME I'll burst!)

[Elsie]

22 Posted on 07/02/2001 08:38:45 PDT by EternalVigilance [ Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | Top | Last ]
			Archivist saves and squirrels away each and every discussion forum message. Do you remember having a bad day back in 1996 when in one of your messages you may have said a few things that were...well, perhaps a little...hasty? Don't worry, Archivist still has it and will post it to the forum if you begin to get the upper hand in battle. Archivist can be a very effective and fearsome Warrior.

[Elsie]

OK, so you’re a bigot. Just admit it.

You hate Mormons - that’s clear.

Hateful Bigot alert!

[FastCoyote]

“OK, so you’re a bigot. Just admit it.”

Pretty fine words coming from a Mormon bigot who believes all other Christians are an abomination. Be careful who you call a bigot, unless you want to expose your own nasty secrets.

“You hate Mormons - that’s clear.”

No it’s not clear. I do think the documentary proof of Joseph Smith being a charlatan are incontrovertible. If Joseph Smith was a grifter, then he hated the Mormons, not I , because he led countless generations astray.

But why don’t you check your own hate meter, because most other Christian denominations consider Joseph Smith a heretic. Therefore, to be internally inconsistant, you must hate all other Christian denominations because they reject crystal gazing, the Book of Mormon, multiple gods, spirit children, celestial wives.

But go ahead and call me a bigot, it’s much easier than learning the truth and only takes two syllabels.

“How do you feel about atheists and Wiccans? Although I suppose you’ve already made it clear about atheists - most Communists are.”

I get along with everyone, believe it or not. I just won’t vote for some religions at the presidential level (unlike you, who would presumable vote for Anton LeVey).

“But you aren’t judging Mormons on morality.”

Sure I am, you just are judging on superficial morality of good works (which when you live in a Mormon community can become quite twisted, and counterproductive, as when apostates are economically shunned)

“In my religion (not Mormon), family values, faithfulness to one’s spouse, working for a living, and charitable acts are considered moral.”

Every law abiding citizen pretty much fits that bill, including Satanists and Wiccans and Jihadi Muslims. I won’t vote for any Presidential candidate who A) believes they are on a path to becoming God and B) validates a charlatan fornicator seccessionist like Joseph Smith.

“I’m much more in favor of a moral man of any religion than I am of one like Teddy Kennedy or billy clintoon, no matter that they both profess to follow mainstream religions.”

Well great, all power to you. But I think it perverse for you to try and FORCE me give up my religious values (which oppose the promotion of False Prophets) and require me to ignore Bishop Romney’s religious background. Freedom of religion for you, but not for me, is the way you want it. Well that just isn’t the way it works.

[TAdams8591]

That may well be.

[JoinJuniorAchievement]

-he said our foreign policy was responsible

Yes, I find no argument with that.

Are you willing to kill 1 billion Muslims? Because that is your other choice.

[greyfoxx39]

The host tried to play gotcha and had it shoved right back down his smarmy throat!

Ahhh...BUT, in a preview of what will happen in the general election if Mitt is the nominee, both CNN and MSNBC played Mitt's performance as a hissy fit at being questioned about his religion, and both played the "I'm not running as a mormon" quote.

This served the dual purpose of highlighting Mitt's unusual religion and portraying him to loyal mormons as denying the faith.

The host's agenda was validated by these clips, and be ready for the same treatment by the networks in the campaign for the general election.

[Rameumptom]

>>>Actually I pretty much agree with Krakaeur. Two World leaders, one here and one in Iran who believe they are bringing about a second coming are frightening.

Fair enough, while you are home quaking in your boots over that prospect, may I suggest you start an account here at http://www.dailykos.com/ where everyone else agrees with the lying liberal Krakaeur?

It is discussed on their "Literature for Kossacks" list.

Fri Jul 27, 2007 at 04:02:37 AM PDT Last week and this, I'd like to talk about favorite non-fiction. Non-fiction is a big category. So, I'd like to divide it up. Last week, we covered science, philosophy, math, psychology, and related subjects This week: History, biography, politics and closely related. pico just started a series on Literature for Kossacks

[sevenbak]

How many motivated voters who care about politics have viewed the entire video online I wonder? It’s on several sites, and the blogs associated with it are overwhelmingly pro Mitt, at least on this video, people are coming around to him. the lazy TV viewers don’t always vote anyway. This was nothing but good PR for the Romney camp.