Should We Worry That Mitt Romney Hasn’t Been Fully Vetted?

It’s only in the last few weeks that people have started to examine Mitt Romney in detail, despite the fact that he has been running for president for five years.

For the first time, people are starting to discuss the specifics of what he did at Bain.

After 5 years of running for president, the question of why Mitt Romney has never released any of his tax returns has finally been raised. Releasing your tax returns is pro forma for most candidates–no big deal. Mitt Romney seems to be protecting his tax return information like a bulldog protecting a bone.

The GOP candidates have been debating constantly since May of 2011, yet it wasn’t until January of 2012 that someone asked specific, probing questions about Romney’s time as governor of Massachusetts. Other than RomneyCare, what does the average voter know about what Mitt Romney did as governor? Really, what? Name one thing you know Romney did as governor other than sign RomneyCare into law.

The main argument for nominating Mitt Romney is that he is the most electable candidate. But, part of being the most electable means there are no ticking time bombs in your past. In other words, you’ve been fully vetted.

One of Mitt Romney’s primary campaign strategies seems to be to avoid the vetting process at all cost. The phrase “Mittness Protection Program” is a joke, but it represents an underlying truth: Mitt Romney has tried to keep anyone from learning too much about him. He has refused to release his records, holds highly orchestrated public appearances that–like President Obama’s–seem to cross the line from orchestrated to scripted, and he has avoided interviews (at least the ones where he would receive tough questions) to the point that interviewers started to point out on their shows that they could get every GOP candidate but Mitt Romney to come on for an interview.

Whether there are any ticking time bombs in Romney’s past is unknown at this point, because his past hasn’t been fully vetted. One thing we do know for sure: we need to find out now, not wait until after he’s nominated. Because, you can rest assured that whatever Mitt Romney may be keeping undercover by hindering the vetting process now certainly will come out after he secures the GOP nomination, and it will be used by the Democrats to attack Mitt Romney in the general election.

I have a problem with ALL religions in some ways. They all contain people that have done bad stuff

Well, this statement here shows that you really don't know Christianity...or at least the Christ of Christianity.

Jesus levels the playing field before the cross by undercutting any spiritual pride that presumes anybody from any religion doesn’t need Him as our great physician ("It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick...For I have NOT COME to call the righteous, but sinners."--Matthew 9:12)

Our very sin qualifies us for reception of the cross and its substitutionary effect -- Jesus is for the person who understands their personal cancerous diagnosis of sin.

As you hinted in your previous post, we're all spiritually unhealthy and depraved -- including your "good"…
…Mormons
…Christians
…Hindus
…Muslims
…other religions.

Those born from above have been given a life goal other than having to do good works to try to convince God they're somebody else.

Mormons don't recognize that. And too many "cultural Christians" who have jettisoned their faith oft' fall into that same trap.

Well then it’s good that we are voting for President and not king.

The Bible shows that true successful leadership in public office is done by those who fear the true Lord & who do not worship false gods/idols. The OT is replete w/ such examples. The Israelites had secular kings, not presidents, but the leadership principles are oft' transferable.

And that doesn't mean that these kings' or tp leaders' ministrations were/are any less a "ministry." Romans 13 makes it clear that public office is also a "ministry." Those who contend against this are openly militating against this Scripture. It doesn't mean that public officeholders administrate in a parochial way; it just means that public office is a "ministry of service" just like the soup kitchen down the street. History (biblical & otherwise) shows that the more pagan or counterfeit god that a leader holds, the more trouble that leader's "exhaust" settles on the people-at-large. Kings & presidents need all the grace, mercy, & guidance possible, since God gets more credit for preserving & directing leaders than we care to give Him credit for. Therefore, one who worships a false god & has no true relationship w/the living God is stifling access to God's resources; & a nation may suffer for that.

FAVORITE BOOK: Romney Insisted L. Ron Hubbard’s “Battlefield Earth” Was His Favorite Novel, Then Said Mark Twain’s “Huckleberry Finn” Was His Favorite On Monday, Romney Said His Favorite Novel Is L. Ron Hubbard’s “Battlefield Earth.” ... MARTHA MCCALLUM: “And an interesting response to his favorite novel.” ROMNEY: “Actually the one by L. Ron Hubbard, I hate to think … I’m not in favor of his religion by any means, but he wrote a book called ‘Battlefield Earth’ that was a very fun science fiction book.” (Fox News’“Fox & Friends,” 4/30/07) Romney Later Reversed Himself, Saying “Huckleberry Finn” Was Favorite Fiction Book And “Battlefield Earth” Was Favorite Science Fiction Book. “Asked about his comments during a Fox News interview Monday that L. Ron Hubbard’s Battlefield Earth is his favorite novel, Romney said Huckleberry Finn is his favorite fiction and that the book by Hubbard, who founded Scientology, is his favorite science fiction reading.” (Mary Anne Ostrom,“Education Should Determine Immigrants’ Legal Status, Mitt Romney Says,” The [San Jose, CA] Mercury News , 5/1/07) Romney Incorrectly Claimed Hubbard Hadn’t Yet Founded Scientology When He Wrote “Battlefield Earth.”

Well, it'd make sense that a Scientology founder's book was Mitt's fave.

This thread drew over 400 replies:
Similarities between Mormonism and Scientology

L. Ron Hubbard could have easily substituted Kolob for Venus in his religion.

According to Scientology, when a person dies — or, in Scientology terms, when a thetan abandons its physical body — they go to a "landing station" on the planet Venus, where the thetan is re-implanted and told lies about its past life and its next life. The Venusians take the thetan, "capsule" it, and send it back to Earth to be dumped into the ocean off the coast of California. Source: Thetan (Wikipedia)

Seems to me that, per the Mormon myth narrative, when when an earthling is becoming "encapsuled" they leave from a "launching station" on the planet Kolob, where the Mormon spirit is implanted inside a human body, and once born with a Mormon family, the Mormon is told lies about its past life and its next life. The Mormon gods take the Mormon, "capsule" it in that body, and send it to Earth to be dumped at age 8 into the Mormon baptismal founts off of many international coasts. LDS (Mormonism) and Scientology: A Brief Theological Comparison Under one of the differences, I actually see more of a connection...#6 mentions Mormonism's "exaltation to godhood"...Scientologists a "return to Thetanhood" as its "final goal."

If there is a resemblance between the two founders, presumably it is because Hubbard looked at Joseph Smith and the LDS and decided it would provide him with a very useful model for a successful religion. He gave it an SF twist, because that was what he was good at, and it probably amused him.

Well, Hubbard did have to "twist" any sci-fi that Mormon leaders hadn't already done before him -- just a lot less detail.

For example:

* Lds "prophet" Brigham Young: Who can tell us of the inhabitants of this little planet that shines of an evening, called the moon? ...when you inquire about the inhabitants of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant in regard to them as the most ignorant of their fellows. So it is with regard to the inhabitants of the sun. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? No question of it; it was not made in vain.
Source: Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p. 271...1870 -- so keep in mind, Young had already been leading the Lds church for about 25 years or so when he made this comment.

Brigham Young's first counselor was "apostle" Heber C. Kimball: "Where did the earth come from? From its parents earths...The earth is alive. If it was not, it could not produce." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 36, 1857)

BTW, where did Brigham Young get his "source" re: the habitation of the moon?

Oliver B. Huntington: Nearly all the great discoveries of men in the last half century have, in one way or another, either directly or indirectly, contributed to prove Joseph Smith to be a prophet. As far back as 1837, I know that he said the moon was inhabited by men and women the same as this earth, and that they lived to a greater age than we do--that they live generally near the age of 1000 years. He described the men as averaging nearly six feet in height, and dressing quite uniformly in something near the Quaker style. In my Patriarchal blessing, given by the father of Joseph the Prophet in Kirtland, 1837, I was told that I should preach the gospel before I was 21 years of age; that I should preach the gospel to the inhabitants upon the islands of the sea, and--to the inhabitants of the moon, even the planet you can not behold with your eyes. The first two promises have been fulfilled, and the latter may be verified. From the verification of the two promises we may reasonably expect the third to be fulfilled also. (Source: Young Woman's Journal, Vol. 3, pp. 263-264, 1892)

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.