Reader comments
Mitt's 'JFK speech' called 'wild gamble'

I don't see this speech as a watershed in Romney's candidacy. The same percentages will be for and against after this speech.

While wanting to support his candidacy, I have not found him to be a compelling or convincing speaker or writer. If he wants to move off his current base of support, he needs to hit a home run.

It's going to take one heckuva speech to convince other christian denominations that Romney is their man. If he gets this one "wrong" his presidential bid is over. The bickering that went on between Romney and Giuliani in the last debate didn't help either.

I think that Romney deserves to be acknoweledged as a man with many leadership qualities more than a man of mormon faith. But if this talk will help eliminate misconceptions and make it clear where he stands I welcome it.

In a perfect world Religion and Politics
should be seperate issues not to co-mingle.
However, this is not a perfect world.

I agree that one's faith should not matter!!but in this case it matters very much.

Mitt is LDS, I rememer the days when the LDS were against the ERA amendment and gambling. These issues were discussed in every church meeting.
I believe these and other matters are of personal choice. I deeply believe Mitt will make decisions based on his faith and not what is best or what the majority of the great USA pop. wants.

I loved the Headline "Mitt's speach wild gamble".

Gamble? I loved it.

Mike Huckabee gave his baptist speech in recent advertising and routinely mixes politics and religion at Sunday worship services when invited as a guest speaker which is frequent.

I think the quote from the news article really says it all. . ."In some ways, the questions are really unfair. They're not asking a number of other candidates whether their religion is going to hurt them. . . Romney's people might want to be asking when Huckabee is going to be giving the Baptist speech."

There are no other candidates, and certainly no other party, is there?
Anyway, Mitt's 'coming out' party should be an interesting exercise in obfuscation. It's wrong to call it a 'jfk' speech, however. He, along with his fellow candiates, is not anywhere near the inspirational speaker that kennedy was.

Regardless of the outcome of this election, I think Romney would always regret not giving the speech. I hope this speech will detail the need to keep religion out of politics. Separation of church and state. No candidate should play up or down their own religion or the religion of another candidate, and this is what is happening in the race now.

I'm a Romney supporter in Iowa. I still think it's sad that 50-some percent of people won't vote for Romney because he is Mormon. I do not think the speech will matter one way or the other. I'm troubled that Americans can't seem to get over the "Mormon thing" and can't look at what he will bring to the country, regardless of religious persuasion. I'm confident he would lead the country in a positive way. I'm also confident that America is too infatuated with values that don't matter.

The Presidency is over-rated due to the quagmire that congress is in and the internal fighting that is partisan to the core. Until the country can unite behind good men and women who are elected to be our leaders, it won't work. The money it takes and the power it breeds is simply too overwhelming for people to see clearly anymore. I wish Mitt Romney the best but simply do not see him being elected based on blind biases that run too strong. Sad but true.

Mitt Romney is not a gambler. His speech will be relevant, clear, and a sound introduction to his faith and its affect on his work and decisions. His critics won't be pleased with anything he says, and they will slam it before he finishes it.

This fuss about Mormonism will likely resolve itself as the Salt Lake Olympics (led by Romney) did. Recall the whining that it was going to be the "Mormon Olympics." Cynics complained in advance of the absence of alcohol, Mormon missionaries attacking people on every corner, obsessive control from "the Church" and a puritanical, anti-party atmosphere.

Instead, visitors were astounded at the organization, and surprised with the most friendly greeting from the friendliest, most dedicated volunteer workers ever. Naysayers ate their words when Salt Lake hosted the most successful Olympics ever, which brings us to the real reason people oppose Mitt and Mormonism: Success.

People feel threatened by Mitt Romney's record of accomplishment, and the growth of Mormonism, so they resort to whisper campaigns to incite fear and suspicion rather than civil discussion of issues and beliefs.

Romney's speech will not vaporize criticism, but it will put common sense back into the discussion.

Mitt needs to be forthright regarding his beliefs and his position on the issues. Sometimes he comes across as being evasive in his answers to political questions. People see this and are turned off. Not everyone will agree with some of his positions, but he will gain respect for takng a stand and not trying to have it both ways and please everyone. This comes across as insincere waffling. Don't be wishy washy, Mitt, take a stand and stick to it. We will respect you for your willingness to do so.

Romney is doing better than I ever thought he would, but this speech may end up being better for the LDS church than for Mitt Romney.

People who are anti-Mormon (and therefore anti-Romney) will not likely change their deep seated bigotry after one speech.

For the LDS church, though, where else could it get such widely covered, high profile publicity putting the record straight about some of the things its enemies harp on the most?

Ultimately, Huckabee has evangelical Christians in his back pocket, and they won't be leaving him unless and until it is apparent that Huckabee won't survive the primaries, at which point these people will consider Romney as a more conservative alternative to Rudy.

This can't be good. During the YouTube debate, Mitt stumbled all over himself, trying to answer the "Bible question".

But it'll be good theater. I'm making popcorn.

Those who require a religious test for President of the United States do not honor the constitution of the United states that says in Article 6 section 3, ..."no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." So those in other religions or the LDS faith, as true americans, should honor that and hold it sacred.

Mitt, when you are in a deep hole, the best thing to do is quit digging. Digging faster won't get you out any better.

Humor:
Romney should then be interviewed and reprimanded by his bishop for gambling, not to mention �wildly�!

Oh and by the way, the word is �tenets� - not �tenants� (�...specific theological tenants or doctrines....�). Thanks.

I don't think it is much of a "Gamble". I don't think it will much matter what he says. Mitt Romney is a "Mormon" and there is nothing he can say that will change the hypocracy and bigotry so clearly evident in the evangelical mindset. The hard truth is that most evangelicals do not like or respect mormons or mormonism not withstanding the fact that most Mormons are also social conservatives.

Personlly, I think it is a waste of time. I think that he made a fundamental political mistake in trying to align himself with evangelicals. Guiliani is doing well without doing so. He should instead emphasize the principal of the Seperation of Church and State, a consititutional principal that I believe evangelicals are increasingly coming to despise.

what is the keystone to the mormon faith-

the book of mormon- romney must stress the divinity of this book or he is hiding what he proclaimed as a bishop and stake president-

what seperates mormons and mainline christians is this book! if mitt truly beleives the book of mormon to be the most pure and undefiled scripture oon the earth today- he should let all know in his speech that this is why others question mormomism-
it is tangible evidence of the roots of the mormon faith! i hope romney addresses the real issues of mormonism- if he truly beleives- he will!
we will see thursday?

Romney would be served to explain that he is a Christian. He would also be served to show that he has some compassion for the lower and middle economic class of citizens and doesn't just represent big business. Huckabee does this well and appears to be more people friendly. Thus the surge in Iowa.

Darned if he does, darned if he doesn't. Months of articles calling for a speech. I was waiting for an article like this when he finally decided to acquiesce. Funny, shows up a day or two after the announcement. Good stirring of the pot. Darned if he does, darned if he doesn't.