Posted on 11/17/2007 6:27:48 PM PST by Nathan_Hale76
Mitt Romney called attempts to undermine him by questioning his Mormon faith "un-American" as he spoke to reporters in Nevada yesterday. Romney was specifically responding to reported "push-poll" phone calls being made in Iowa and New Hampshire, in which the calls reportedly begin as opinion polls but turn into statements and questions designed to highlight and cast doubt on Romney's Mormon faith. Here is what Romney had to say.....(Video)
(Excerpt) Read more at rightviewsusa.com ...
“GROW UP.”
NO, YOU GROW UP!
NO, I SAID YOU GROW UP FIRST!
BUT I SAID YOU GROW UP BETTER!
NO YOU DIDN’T!
YES I DID!
NO TOUCH BACKS!
Cute. Anything else?
Cute. Anything else? Can we get back to the original topic of push polls please?
What I notice about this poll is that there are dozens of more outlandish doctrines that could have been mentioned..the first vision and the "need to "restore" the priesthood authority, the "as man is God once was, as God is man may become", the Kolob foolishness etc. You would think, that with the Warren Jeff's trial just being in the news that polygamy would have been mentioned.
I thought the subjects that were addressed were quite benign. a "testing of the waters" along with a "Mitt the underdog" ploy to gain sympathy and possibly votes.
ditto #199,..I haven’t been able to link to any such push-poll nor the original referenced link. Why do you think there was a push-poll and what was it’s content to justify that assessment?
No you didn't get that I was making an analogy, not accusing you of insults. I was substituting one wrong action for another to show you that nobody is saying you don't have the right, but we are saying it's low-brow, immoral, or inappropriate. We can't stop you from using your freedom of speech in whatever way we want you. But WE have the freedom of speech to tell you and others that we think your speech is irrelevant and not appropriate.
Have you ever been to a party and had someone say something really inappropriate to the occasion? They had the right to say it, but they were in effect peeing in the pool.
Just because you have freedom of speech doesn't mean everything that follows out of your mouth is good.
“Can we get back to the original topic of push polls please?”
The topic really isn’t push polls, it is Romney trying to eliminate Free Speech:
“Mitt Romney called attempts to undermine him by questioning his Mormon faith “un-American””
No one has so far presented any evidence that the poll questions were invalid, only that they didn’t like the questions. What I find even more dangerous is this attempt to play both sides “Romney will govern as a great religious family man, but don’t question his religion”.
Sorry, but you are not correct on this one. Using push polls to BASH SOMEONE or THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS IS UNAMERICAN. That is the point. That is what Mr. Romney is saying, and he is absolutely correct.
You do have a point in that we should keep ‘true believers’ as far away from public office as possible. These ‘nuts’ belong in the church, not in positions of public power. I guess I’m just niave enough to believe that most of the presidents we’ve had have been mature and worldly enough not to introduce kooky mythology and dogma into U.S. public policy.
FC:I notice you don’t quote any of my “insults”, is this because they aren’t really insults but logical statements that merely hit too close to the mark?
SF: No you didn’t get that I was making an analogy, not accusing you of insults.
Oh come now, you can’t quote any insults, though you imply insults, and then claim it’s all a vaporous “analogy”. Get a spine man.
SF:”I was substituting one wrong action for another to show you that nobody is saying you don’t have the right, but we are saying it’s low-brow, immoral, or inappropriate.”
I guess what you are trying to say is that anyone who shows your logic is a Swiss Cheese of Holes is low-brow, immoral or inappropriate (thank Kolob you are incapable of insults, but I digress).
SF:”We can’t stop you from using your freedom of speech in whatever way we want you. But WE have the freedom of speech to tell you and others that we think your speech is irrelevant and not appropriate.”
Otay, I get it. Your speech is “relevant and appropriate” while mine is “irrelevant and inappropriate” because you say so, though you never present a criticism of what I said, only an appeal to me to go elsewhere. Using your technique, I ought to just parrot you and say you are shouting irrelevant and inappropriate insults - making me a genius in your sight.
And who the hell is “WE”??? Are you part of some powerful Cabal of whom I am unaware?
Yeah, now you get it. And you can claim the reverse is true. It is all opinion and therefore it is up to society to determine whose opinions are more valid or appropriate.
Most here on FR agree that push-polling and scaremongering about religion is wrong...so I'm sure the general population doesn't approve of it in large number.
Therefore you are in the minority and since the majority determines what is appropriate or not, you are wrong as well.
“Using push polls to BASH SOMEONE or THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS IS UNAMERICAN. “
Says who?
1) Do you believe in being able to receive revelations through peep stones?
2) Do you believe God lives on a planet near the Star Kolob?
3) Do you wear special underwear that protects you from evil?
4) Do you believe you are on a path to becomming a God of a planet with multiple Celestial wives?
5) Do you believe someone with those beliefs should be president?
Are you saying it is illegal to ask those questions? Are you saying Mr. Penn, Hillary’s pollster, will not ask those questions in the general election? Are you saying it is UNAMERICAN to have beliefs different than the above? Are you saying someone on a man-God path would not have a fundamentally different view of life and death situations?
Just what are you saying? That everyone who disagrees with you is UNAMERICAN? I think maybe you took some scary pills this morning.
“You do have a point in that we should keep ‘true believers’ as far away from public office as possible. These ‘nuts’ belong in the church, not in positions of public power. I guess I’m just niave enough to believe that most of the presidents we’ve had have been mature and worldly enough not to introduce kooky mythology and dogma into U.S. public policy.”
And that is why I’m quite a thorn on this subject, because my experiences in heavily Mormon Nevada have convinced me that this kookiness factor will be sucked into the presidency if Mitt is elected. Mitt is a Bishop/Stake President from one of the premier Mormon families, not just Joe Mormon. I use Harry Reid as an obvious example of someone with the “I got my planet early” philosophy. But I have met others, some much worse.
It is Mitt’s appointees that will be even more worrisome, because Mormons are very nepotistic. On this website we have two posters who are on the God path, and one who is an “enforcer” who is in the ex-communication command hierarchy. They reject standard chains of evidentiary logic and often claim to act by a “burning in the bossom”. Think of Mitt as a RINO Harry Reid with multiple true believer appointees and you will begin to get my drift.
“It is all opinion and therefore it is up to society to determine whose opinions are more valid or appropriate.
Most here on FR agree that push-polling and scaremongering about religion is wrong...so I’m sure the general population doesn’t approve of it in large number.
Therefore you are in the minority and since the majority determines what is appropriate or not, you are wrong as well.”
That is a Democrat view - mob rule. That’s why our founders made us a Republic not a Democracy (though we have democratic institutions), and why some of us are Republicans. I don’t Give a hoot what the mob thinks is appropriate, I go by what I believe is right. This may make me as agreeable as a porcupine, but I sleep tight every night.
And no, it is not “all opinion”. I document as I go, reality is reality, logic is logic, so deal with it.
Did he actually say “Wahhhhhh, no fair,” or was it just implied?
My challenge: substitute “worldview” or “way of thinking” or “fundamental beliefs” for “faith,” and try to make sense of his whine.
I don’t think you get a “pass” on examining your fundamental beliefs just because you’re a cultist.
“...I heard ZERO discussion of Kerry’s Catholicism versus Bush’s Presbeteryianism or whatever he is.” Because both are based in Christianity. Momronism is not.
You want to know, until it surfaces that the Romney camp is behind this polling and not to make it push polling but to set up and manipulate the political scene. What will be your reaction if you find that this is from the Romney camp? What will be the spin you employ then?
I don't think this wish will be granted.
Elsie, I don't want to give you the freedom to talk about religion in THIS thread.
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.