Posted on 12/03/2011 6:47:57 PM PST by Grig
Comparing and contrasting Newt and Mitt is a real eye-opener. The two men have taken very different paths in their personal and professional lives, and have wildly different personalities. Newt is a dreamer, Mitt a doer. Newt is reckless, Mitt is careful. Newt is famously undisciplined, Mitt is the epitome of self-discipline. Romney is a leader, Newt simply is not–according to those who worked most closely with him. Both men are intelligent, yet have chosen different ways to use their intelligence.
In education, Romney pursued business and law, while Newt chose modern European History. Romney earned his education quickly and entered the private sector, while Newt preferred academia.
Romney went on to a successful career in business, becoming wealthy helping businesses and creating jobs, while Newt made a career in government, becoming wealthy by exploiting his position of power and selling influence. Romney's skills were in high demand in the private sector, while Newt was removed from leadership in the House due to the chaos he created.
In matters of faith, Romney is a life-long member of his church and has a record of many years of service to it. Newt went from Lutheran to Baptist, to Catholic, with some speculation of political motive in making the conversions. I am not aware of service Newt may have given to his church. In their personal lives, they could not be more different. Mitt married his high school sweetheart after 4 years of courtship, and remains happily married. Newt also married his high school sweetheart - his geometry teacher whom he began dating at age 16. He has admitted that there is some truth in the notion that he hates women. He has a turbulent marital history due to selfishness and uncontrolled sexual appetites. While Romney helped Ann through both MS and cancer, Newt divorced Jackie, who had cancer–saying she was ‘not pretty enough or young enough to be a president’s wife–and besides she has cancer’. Newt divorced Marrianne, who was also diagnosed with MS. At the time, he asked Marrianne if she would please tolerate the six year affair with Callista, and remain married to him. She refused. He married Callista in 2000.
In matters of character, the contrast is keen. Romney has no hint of scandal–personal or professional. Newt has rumors of sexual scandals–including the infamous oral sex in a car with his neighbor's wife, while his little daughter was near. Newt also has a history of ethics violations, shady book deals, sham fundraising practices, and inconsistencies about whether he was hired as an ‘historian’ or as a lobbyist.
In the presidential campaign, they have also chosen very different paths. Romney is serious, organized, hardworking and prepared, while Newt has been flying by the seat of his pants. He now finds himself in the running, but unprepared, due to a severe lack of preparation and organization. While Romney has been mostly humble about his long term frontrunner status, Newt proclaimed himself the nominee after less than two weeks at the top of the polls.
There are many other differences--too many to list here. But we easily know enough to determine who is more worthy of support. We should not divorce the way a man lives in his personal life, from his actions in public life. Character is revealed in both professional and personal decisions. Romney has a solid record of being true to his word, family, and stewardships. Newt does not. While both men have significant accomplishments, only one has the background, character, leadership and temperament we need. That person is Mitt Romney.
svcw -
I have an idea TPPole, name one inaccuracy, just one that has ever been posted on FR, morons LOVE to make the claim YET never provide and example. It would be wonderful if just once a moromn would back up their bogus claims.
Heck, I don't even need to leave this thread to do that.
#71 by Tennessee Nana -
What was [Romney] doing even driving when Mormon boys on Evangalical trips are not allowed to drive ???
"Not allowed to drive" is a pretty clear statement. No qualifiers.
In #84 I requested a reference for this false statement.
In #88 Tennessee Nana posts -
Lets see if we can get someone to post us the list of do nots
I said “Mormon boys on Evangalical trips are not allowed to drive”
Lets see what number rule that one is...
And, in #184 svcw posts the so-called list of rules, and prefaces it with the following -
These are the rule for mormon missionaries.
Notice several references to not driving.
Here are the rules that deal with driving:
36. Do not go on road trips.
147. Do not drive without a license.
148. Drive only Church-owned vehicles.
149. Do not drive members’ cars.
150. Do not drive nonmembers’ cars.
151. Do not give rides to members or investigators in Church-owned cars. (A few investigators have asked me why the missionaries are reluctant to offer them a ride to church. The answer: giving rides is against the rules).
152. Use cars only on approved mission business.
153. Use cars only within the assigned geographical area.
154. Be conscious of safety at all times.
155. Drive defensively.
156. Wear your seat belt.
157. Pray for the Lord’s protection while driving.
158. If your companion is driving, assist him or her.
159. Do not tamper with the vehicle’s odometer.
Nope, don't see the "not allowed to drive" rule. I see that they are only allowed to drive mission cars on approved mission business. But clearly they are allowed to drive.
So, does this meet your qualifications, or are you going to move the goalposts?
More, you say?
Nope, that's not true. Although to be fair, when challenged a quote was provided, but it was not from the Doctrine and Covenants.
More?
Even more?
OK, this one might not be a "false statement." It could be that she hasn't looked. But it is in there - even in the Bible.
Out of respect for this poster's request, I am not pinging him to this response.
And countless others. Didn't bother looking for the "Mormons don't sing Christmas hymns" or "Mormons don't sing Easter hymns." And these are just the straight up false statements.
Then there are tons of innuendo and half-truths. Like the recent "Romney killed someone while he was driving just like Kennedy." Um, no, not really.
Your the first person to tell me LDS are pro-abortion, anti-marriage, socialist, and against religion in public life. Quite the opposite. Nancy Pelosi claims she is a conservative Catholic. I suppose you believe that too? Even Michael Moore goes to church every week.
What in my statement is false? hum
What in aMorePerfectUnion statement is false? hum
So Tennessee Nana they aren’t allowed to drive you disagree then post form my list all the reasons and times they can’t drive. huh?
YOU SAID: OK. In the case of Mormonism, the Book - Doctrines and Covenants, one of their prophets says that Jesus Christ only died for the sins of Adam, for everybody else he only shows the “way of salvation”. That is, that Christ did not die for anyone else.
Nope, that’s not true. Although to be fair, when challenged a quote was provided, but it was not from the Doctrine and Covenants.
I SAY*****Quotes provided from your leaders but they don’t Ok then.
YOU SAID: JS was escaping from jail, after guns were smuggled into him and he killed two people before escaping and then was shot because he refused to stop.
I SAY:**********Historical events says this is true.
YOU SAID:the RITUAL [baptism for the dead] that MORMONs perform in their Temples? I can NOT find that requirement in ANY of the MORMON scriptures.
I SAY: ********Absolutely true, so why do practice mormons baptism for the dead. Oh, yea that’s right you have said to ignore your leaders.
YOU SAID: There is no offering plate, at tax time you bring your 1040’s to the bishop, he calculates 10% of your income and you pay up. . .
I SAY:*******Demonstrated dozens and dozens of times to be true. You are fortunate that it’s never been required of you.
YOU SAID: There is no redemption for sin in the Mormon church, Christ serves as an example of a perfect man, not a divine deliverer.
I SAY: ******If you as lds have to work for your salvation there is then no redemptive gift from jesus. He is not sufficient.
Your articles of faith say and D&C say “after all we can do” which means in any words the lds god’s grace is not sufficient IE no redemption (unless all the rules are followed and you are a temple mormons)
YOU SAID: And countless others. Didn’t bother looking for the “Mormons don’t sing Christmas hymns” or “Mormons don’t sing Easter hymns.” And these are just the straight up false statements.
I SAY:*******Would those hymns be the “praise to the man” (Joseph Smith) And those little scenes of Smith’s birth but no Nativity. And whats an Easter hymn? My uncle sings with the MT Choir, a baritone. at Christmas time there is a fantastic public showing of traditional Christmas music but he will tell they don’t sing them in ward.
Which is pretty telling after all, a public front and practiced front....the twain are not the same.
TP,
I’ve tried composing an answer three times, but keep getting the service error and it wipes out my partial response.
AMPU.
In short, so far, you haven’t demonstrated a “false post about mormonism”. You tried. I give you partial credit.
svcw,
Thanks for taking time to demonstrate T. P. Pole’s failure to cite a “false statement about mormonism”.
I’m having a hard time getting longer posts to go through.
She tried. I give her credit for the attempt.
Interesting article about the Romney French connection.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/24/world/europe/24iht-24Romney.6300715.html?pagewanted=all
You must mean Mormon MISSIONARIES in MISSIONS?
Well, I know they were driving when on missions in the '60's, and 70's, and 80's, and 90's and right up to to today.
Just when were they not allowed to drive - before there were cars?
some areas, where the local church is just getting built up, the missionaries walk and/or ride bikes, until a car can be provided.
BTW, the Mormon Church always pays up front for everything. No mortages, no loans.
Anyway, the point is: You don't know what you're talking about.
BTW, the Mormon Church always pays up front for everything.
________________________________________________
Dont even try that
you know thats not true
The Mormon boys and their families pay for their Evangalistic trips
SPECIAL REPORT - Missionary Impossible: Mitt Romney’s French education
By Alexandria Sage
TALENCE, France | Tue Nov 8, 2011 12:57pm IST
From this article “Missionaries pay for their time abroad themselves,”
(Edited by Simon Robinson, Lee Aitken and Sara Ledwith)
http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/11/08/idINIndia-60385620111108
Not sure what you mean by that as the "missionaries" pay for their own "service".
Do mean the lds members pay cash for everything? Or that the corporate lds pays cash for everything?
Your a guy!?!?!!?
Demand from the ranting choir - "show me a false statement we made" - "one, just one."
Statement provide - one of you said Mormon missionaries aren't allow to drive.
"Proof" provided by ranting choir included the rule "Drive only Church-owned vehicles."
Further argument provided from the chorus that since there are some restriction on driving (but not a prohibition on all driving) the claim that "missionaries aren't allowed to drive" is thus a true statement. (So, does the existence of speed limits and stop signs mean that nobody can drive?)
Not sure which school you all went to, but that is not how logic works. Maybe that is the cause of your problem all along.
Or maybe the problem is that in your little echo chamber you have going here you cannot even approach the idea that sometimes a Mormon can actually tell the truth, and therefore your brain fractures on the idea and provides a cracked reasoning to prevent this discordance. They do have treatment for that, you know.
Well, TN. This is an interesting read. It explains much about the increased anti-Christian rhetoric from SLC and lds as they officially were aloud to use the internet a few years ago to “spread the word”.
http://www.parliamentofreligions.org/news/index.php/2010/07/
Osage! I know you’re a horse apple! And I have an Adam’s apple! We’ve been through a lot together! I am so disappointed ! :)
And now I find out you're a guy!!
Oy!! I've a headache....: )
You have stated this many times. THE END.
Light a fire like an arsonist...and run for the hills. LOL!!!
Hey you should read this...story. Wild!!
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/11/ff_dave_sanders/
Theres some interesting bits in that article you linked...
When Lil Willie Mitty was involved in that accident where the woman was killed, Big Daddy George Romney started calling from the US and throwing his weight around...
he sent a son-in-law to France to run things...
Until George got invoved nobody seems to have accused the other driver of drinking...
and the reason that he was not sued is because there was no proof he was at fault..
Because the other driver was a Catholic priest, a Christ and regarded as an apostated and a member of the “whore of Babylon, christianity, Mormons rushed to accuse him because George Romney did ...
a couple of things...
1. The so called witnesses who claimed Fr Masrie MAY have been drunk were all Mormons and were not present at the scene of the accident... (How convenient. Shades of the bom witnesses)
2. The only witnesses mentioned in the article were again ALL Mormons..
3. The mother of Fr Marie and the other passernger in his car were conveniently DEAD in 2007 and not available for comment 40 years later...”The priest was traveling with his mother, Marie-Antoinette Marie, and a 48-year-old woman, Marguerite Longué, neither of whom could be located.” Sounds like they were hiding but they were dead..Interesting that the (biased) authors of the article didnt explain that necessary info..
4. “but that assertion could not be confirmed” Exactly, there was no proof that Fr Marie had been drinking at all...all supposed “inebriated” info was supplied by the Mormons...and not the police..Dont you think the French police in 1968 would have known a driver was drunk ???
5. The fact that the so called witnesses felt they had to say that Lil Willie Mitty could not have been drinking BECAUSE HE WAS A MORMON speaks volumes. There is not proof he hadnt been. Again all the witnesses were Mormons...
6. Willie Mitty has confessed that he has drank in the past...he just didnt say WHEN.. Did he try a beer during his mispent youth in France ???
7. Until George Romney got involved it seems nobody had been blamed... Both could have been at fault..or just Willie Mitty ...AND THE OTHER DRIVER HAD NOT YET BEEN ACCUSED OF DRUNKEDNESS...
8. the overkill of explanations as to why Willie Mitty could not have been at fault at all ...the reason ??? ...Why he is and was a Mormon... is laughable at best ...and disgusting at a lessor degree..His current behavior and attitude speaks hugely for the worse...
George Romney was an expert at fixing things and damage control...didya really think he would let the son he was grooming for POTUS really take the fall for something he did wrong when he had the power to cover up the evidence and blame someone else ???
Dont worry
the Mormon and pro-mormon authors of this squishy Hollywood piece decided they couldnt find anything but innocence for Georges lil boychild...
But you wait IF Willie Mitty was to bulldoze his way into the GOP nomination...
Then it will be Katy-bar-the-door
and every girlfriend Willie Mitty ever had and every Mormon Evangalical rule he ever broke will be trotted out as proof hes a liar and cant be trusted and hes reckless and runs from trouble...
And you think Obama looks bad...
Obama has never killed anyone while he was driving...
or ran across the border to a cushy life in a mansion in France to dodge the draft...
Unborn babies ???
Well so has Romney...
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.