Posted on 08/20/2007 9:18:44 AM PDT by mojito
Even though Mitt Romney can't seem to dislodge Rudy Giuliani atop the national GOP polls, and can't even draw as much poll support as Fred Thompson, who isn't even running yet, there is an understandable anticipatory buzz about him.
He may well be the eventual choice of his party if the Thompson phenomenon fizzles or if Giuliani supporters simply grow weary of navigating the obstacles posed by his past and his politics.
In an appearance in Texas last week, I saw Romney energize a crowd with just the kind of speech a GOP nominee should give-- strong and unapologetic on the war, upbeat and resolute about the future. This is a typical Romney performance, and it earns him speculation that he has nowhere to go but up.
This is wholly deserved. But the issue of his religion, which some say has been overplayed, has in fact not been addressed with nearly the thoroughness and honesty that will be necessary to satisfy some in the Republican voting base.
It has not been addressed well by the candidate, and it has not been handled honestly by pundits. Until it is, it lurks as a torpedo that could spell the doom of his promising candidacy.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
re; # 258
Glad you enjoyed it. Let me know when you graduate from pre-K.
LOL...you must be tightly wound, friend. Can't laugh at yourself?
I end up laughing at myself daily....You should try it.
Geesh!
Relax and take comfort in the amount of class that has normally been shown by members of your faith on these boards.
Luke 18
10. "Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.
11. The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: `God, I thank you that I am not like other men--robbers, evildoers, adulterers--or even like this tax collector.
12. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.'
Why is it that it seems to be the LDS sympathizers that are the ones that go ballistic and DEMAND that someone NEVER ping them again, using nasty language in the process??
Thasnks for the advice. Now how about telling me who those are of my faith. Maybe you know. I don't.
On this thread, I don’t know. But it seems like every Romney thread devolves into mudslinging, and I recall a few in particular where LDS members publicly stated their beliefs.
Maybe you should address that to the disgusting, hypocritical, arrogant twerps who try to impress us with their Christian purity, but who are so completely obsessed with proving that they are superior to the LDS folks that they have forgotten almost everything Jesus was talking about and died for. What a pathetic lot.
It could be that those >i?someones so richly deserve to be told to STFU.
I would ask that this post stand....as posted.
On this thread, I don’t know. But it seems like every Romney thread devolves into mudslinging ....
And at whom is the mudslinging initially aimed -- and who slings it first?
... and I recall a few in particular where LDS members publicly stated their beliefs.
Is there any reason why they shouldn't?
Based on your conversations on this thread, I’m sure you’ve got a good idea who tends to sling it first.
Based on your conversations on this thread, I’m sure you’ve got a good idea who tends to sling it first.
Yep, sure have. Here's the one that started it on this thread:
TO: bigcat32
'I wouldn’t necessarily constrain that to “Christian Conservatives”.ANY Christian who took a good, deep look at the foundations and doctrine of the Mormon church would walk away wondering why this cult is given any creedence whatsoever in the minds of intelligent, thinking people.'
5 posted on 08/20/2007 9:34:22 AM PDT by nesnah
(We all know that Jesus didn't die for disgusting, hypocritical, arrogant twerps who constitute a pathetic lot, now don't we? Maybe if they rose up to whatever higher ground you have, since I'm sure your post had nothing to do impress[ing] us with your Christian purity & thereby proving that you're superior to these twerp[y], pathethic folks, then maybe, just maybe, Jesus' blood wouldn't have to cover them, eh?).
OK, maybe it's just the Midwest rains that makes me think this way, but where there is mud, and plenty of it, it does tend to get on everything...cars, shoes, clothing, etc. Politics is already a muddy environment; now when you add candidates whose broader baggage (not necessarily personal baggage) has plenty of mud, then it's going to get slopped around a bit.
So, say, Fred Thompson declares in September. And in his declaration speech he says he's runnin' cause it's a good "career move" on his way to becoming a god. And the press asks him to elaborate. And he says, "Well, I'm going to run my own planet one day; and runnin' a country is a good prepatory stepping stone toward that objective."
But that comment would only draw many follow-up MSM questions & queries & speculations. Columnists would wonder, "What kind of power trip is Fred on?"
Now ya know. What's interesting is that many LDS (and Mitt is likely one of them) believe they can become a god. And yet we have no MSM fury. We have no MSM follow-up queries or even initial questions along those lines.
And that's why your very statement doesn't address the full context of "religion." If a POTUS Candidate believes his ultimate eventual bully pulpit will be a throne on his own planet, ya better believe that it's a relevant issue!
See post #277 for a similar response to this assessment I gave to another poster.
It's even stronger than this. Hypothetical: Say that in Fred Thompson's declaration speech around whatever-corner-that-is, he adds to the end of it one of those 100-mph mumbled disclaimers we hear at the end of some radio (& TV) ads. Upon replaying the tape by slowing it down to something that's decipherable, we hear Fred say: "My faith & my 'scripture' tells me that every other church than my own is an apostate one. All your creeds are an abomination before God. Your leaders are corrupt. Your church is of the devil whereas mine is of the Lamb. Now, I'm speaking directly to you historic Christians out there. Now that I've properly inspired you, vote for Fred, the one who will represent you best in the White House."
[Now for those who don't know that I've just incorporated parts of LDS "scripture" into the above, just read Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History, v. 19 + 3 Nephi for reference to "church of the devil" being only one of 2 churches]
Very good pt
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.