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.
So the "things" Mormons "do at Christmas and Easter" are "indistinguishable from any orthodox Christian recognition/celebration" except for the "little fact" that you also mention -- that being that they don't "actually recogniz[e] the two holidays"... [unless, of course, they happen to fall on the Sabbath day]
Hmmmm.........
You're utterly hilarious.
I suppose what Muslims "do" at "Christmas and Easter" are also "indistinguishable from any orthodox Christian recognition/celebration" except they also don't "actually recogniz[e] the two holidays", either, eh?
Wanna explain T.P. how it is that exactly 190 of the 358 hymns in the Mormon hymnal [53%] were written by non-Mormons -- most of whom are Christians deemed apostates by your leaders (including Charles Wesley)?
So which is it? Your "first vision" scripture -- Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith History vv. 18-19 claimed "all" from the various "sects" were "corrupt." Was Charles Wesley and the other Christian hymn writers in the Mormon hymnal "corrupt" as your "scripture" says and "apostate" as your doctrine states...or not?
Or does the Mormon church just grab the lyrics & tunes of Gentile heretical "apostates" willy-nilly and import them into your hymnal never mind what they believe?
Everything Newt touches turns to doo doo? Like what?
I won’t be scared if Newt wins or Romney! I will be very scared if Zero wins. We are toast!
By their standards Catholics don't recognize Christmas or Easter. But judging from some other threads, we already knew they felt that way.
Because, unlike others, Mormons are willing to acknowledge the good in others? We accept truth even if it comes from an imperfect source.
That we’re down to Gingrich or Romney v. the Worst President of America Ever is what really disgusts me. I don’t have any passion for either candidate. What I fear most is a 2nd Obama term. Gingrich won’t be a good candidate and an even less effective executive if he does win. His history of running things poorly.
On the Contract with America, Newt was an outsider with a fingertip feel for the American electorate and conservative politics. He’s since lost that and every time he’s put his finger to the wind he’s gotten it wrong. Now he wants to be POTUS... so does every Senator. He’s not exciting at all.
I saw someone claim the “Il est mort” story is really Romney claiming he was dead and lives again - his own resurrection story. The lengths these folks go to. . .
Please tell me that I am the one you are talking about. Because if not, you now have two.
Of course, at the moment I am uncommitted. I was favoring Cain. . .
There is a 94% chance you are a Romney support, as that is the support Romney gets from lds members.
Will you provide a link to your claim?
I am intrigued by that answer.
The people on FR have posted hundreds of links to lds sites that are current online newspapers, lds.org, and the multitude of other lds owned and operated sites, plus the dozens of sites that have been encouraged by SLC lds to “counter” anti- mormonISM YET you (lds) members disregard this information as attacks on mormons and no not see them as exposing mormnISM.
I for one would like to see mormons willing to acknowledge that mormonISM is not Christianity. I would provide links to recent statements and older statements by lds leaders stating just that but we have already established you disregard their words.
Returning to the theme of the orginal post. Romney is a liberal and that is the reason I will not vote for him - period. Politically he is no different that BHO.
The only positive quality I see in Romney is the fact that he has business/leadership skills, which I think is important. Which is why I was favoring Cain up until his departure. And why I was favoring Palin, up until her departure (well, non-elistment). Not sure who I support now. I am tending toward Ginrich. Paul is half-right about so many things, and all wrong about too many. Perry worries me with the vaccine thing and the illegals thing (much in the way that Romney worries me with the Romneycare thing). Haven't really looked at the second tier.
Labeling people as "apostates" part of the "universal apostasy" is "acknowledg[ing] the good in others?"
(I suppose then when Muslims label us Christians as "infidels," we should throw a celebration party for receiving such a worldwide-applied "compliment," eh?)
If these are Mormon "compliments," I'd hate to see their critiques!
"So an honest and moving story about a car crash becomes a ressurection story."
"So Romney has turned an accident where he was unconcious for a little bit and broke his arm into a resurrection tale."
Harsh? A little.
I don’t know how much of the scurrilous stuff is true, but it’s on the nail about Newt’s other flaws.
But Mitt ain’t all that either.
I would make the contrast with Rick Perry, who has all the family virtues attributed to Mitt but also has a history of genuine conservatism proven by many, many years of public service (by the way be very careful when typing public service— I almost made a horrible mistake)
Eleven years as governor of a large state with large problems. In spite of having to deal with huge numbers of illegals which, by the way, he did not personally let in or throw a welcome wagon party for, Rick Perry has Texas on the right track financially.
Thanks. I thought you were saying someone on FR stated that.
The dog, the dog. I still have pictures in my head of the dog in the luggage rack.
You say narcisstic personality disorder with Newt? You may be right. All I know is that he’s become so full of himself since he got the lead, he looks like he’s expecting twins.
PETA for Romney
NOT
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.