Comments about ‘Mitt Romney seeks to reach South Carolina voters with shared values’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, Jan. 7 2012 3:55 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Hutterite
American Fork, UT

Values. The most overused term in politics. Because everybody thinks they corner the market on them, but we all have 'em.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

@ Hutterite. It depends on what you value. If a person values self reliance, family,personal responsibility, freedom and financial responsibility, he could not support Obama who values big government, wealth redistibution and socialism. That's why he will lose the next election! Romney is being smart to talk about the vast differences between himself and Obama so voters can see the differences.

The_Kaiser
Holladay, UT

Romney is a "pro-life conservative" who "believe that life begins at conception," that he is "pro-marriage" and that he is "pro-family."

Too bad he is "Pro-War", "Pro-Federal Reserve", "Pro-Patriot Act" and has proven that he doesn't understand the Constitution enough to uphold it.

There is a better conservative candidate out there.

no fit in SG
St.George, Utah

Voters would greatly value Mr. Romney being truthful and forthright in discussing his finances and releasing his tax records.
Why does he refuse to do so?

Cats
Somewhere in Time, UT

Romney's tax records are no one's business but his own. So are his finances.

shaun_
SAINT GEORGE, UT

@Mounatain man. Do you even know the definition of socialism? Because Obama is not a socialist.

As far as wealth distribution goes you are right that it is happening except it is the wealthy who are benefiting.

And Obama is going to win the next election. Mitt doesn't have a chance and none of the current republicans have a chance.

peter
Alpine, UT

The battle between individual rights and the powers alotted governments rages on. Obama doesn't act under the rule of law, except his own. This offends me and goes against everything the Founding Fathers did when establishing the Constitution. But this nation will stand on the principles of Constitutional law. It may falter because of the attempts of some, but it will never fail.

Mountanman
Hayden, ID

@Shaun, Of course I know what socialism is! It is communism light. Its wealth redistribution and Maxism. When the government robs Peter to pay Paul, Paul is happy and that is socialism! But when the Pauls out number the Peters, as they always will over time, that is result of socialism, as per Greece, Spain, France and England.
As far as you hating the "wealthy", do you realize that nearly 80% of all federal income taxes are paid by the wealthiest Americans while almost 50% of Americans pay no income taxes at all? Of all people, you should be grateful to the wealthy for paying for nearly all your entitlments (socialism)!

don17
Temecula, CA

Mountanman: Your right on as usual!

The_Kaiser: So Mitt Romney does not understand the Constitution? Who told you that? Where is the Proof?

I do believe Mitt Romney has a degree in Finance from BYU(definitely taught there). A MBA from Harvard and a Law Degree from Harvard! I know they teach all aspects of the Constitution there as well. Trying to make the point he doesn't know something without proof is just plain, well, not correct thinking! Hoping he doesn't is not a valid fact. In all my dealings with the candidate I am confident he understands it! As do all the republican candidates!

No Republican Candidate is "Pro War"! But they are pro-defense of America and her true allies! Just because a candidate would use the military to defend America does not make them pro war. Just pro America and smart thinking!

sergio
Phoenix, AZ

What shared values does Romney share with most Americans: he was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, he has never worked at a real job, he dodged military service, etc. He shares the values of privileged aristocratic plutocrats at the top one percent; unfortunately that is not representative of American values.

weightless skittles
Hewitt, Texas

I see many of you do not know the history of the Romney family. His father demanded that his children work for their own way. Democrats and Republicans,including unions endorse Mitt Romney' s father as governor of Michigan. John Broder of the New York Times considered his father one of the most respected politicians of the 1970s and 1980s. There was no silver spoon in the mouths of the Romney family.

MiamiJazzFan
Coral Springs, FL

Sergio, what do you consider a real job? Just because he was born into a family, who's father was successful, gave him the opportunity to receive a good education, opened doors to work with other successful individuals, does not mean that he does not have similar values as some Americans. Some Americans value hard work, being self-reliant. Some Americans would rather not work hard and depend on the government to support them. Which of these American values is he not representing?

RanchHand
Huntsville, UT

"A man of deep and abiding faith, Mitt ...he is "pro-marriage" and that he is "pro-family."

Unless you are part of a GLBT family. Mitt wants to automatically divorce all the GLBT couples across the USA who have been married, breaking up their families, at least that's what he said on the debate the other night.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is not "pro-family" or "pro-marriage". It is anti-marriage and anti-family.
@don17;

Attacking another country, without first being attacked or having absolute proof that the country is going to attack us is Pro-War. Romney has said he will ATTACK Iran - even if they don't plan to attack us.

Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

Values.

When Mitt Romney was supporting abortion, then was against it.

When:

**'Mitt Romney steers clear of Ohio health, union issues' - By Dan Sewell - AP - Published by DSNews - 10/25/11

Then:

**'Mitt Romney reverses himself, supports anti-union law' - By Philip Elliott - AP - Published by DSNews - 10/26/11

'FAIRFAX, Va. A day after he refused to endorse an Ohio ballot measure that limits public employee union rights, Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney said Wednesday that he is "110 percent" behind the effort.'

When:

**'Mitt Romney pledges opposition to gay marriage' - CBS News - 08/04/11

Then:

'It's also notable because Romney was not always such a strong opponent of gay rights. In 1994, he sent a letter to a gay Republican group saying he would be a stronger advocate for gay rights...' - Same Article

These are the 'values' of Mitt Romney.

Ever changing...

Axe-man
OREM, UT

Apples and oranges, Pagan: as is your wont, you've selectively compared and only chosen "facts" that support your point of view. (Remember the poll numbers vis-a-vis removal of DADT and my assertion about boots-on-the-ground versus support personnel poll results?)

In 1994, Catholic Sen. Ted Kennedy and most of the rest of the world had no intention of allowing gay marriage. Gay marriage is a very recent concept Harvey Milk couldn't have dreamed of, introduced as a possibility by the ever-increasing rights that the GLBT community has gained in the last 20-30 years. The push in Salt Lake City by business and community leaders, including the LDS Church, to common-sense rights such as housing and employment security, would have seemed radical for Utah 20 years ago, and while not radical there, would have been a stretch even for Massachusetts.

There is no disagreement between being "a stronger advocate for gay rights" and yet opposing gay marriage. Mitt can pledge his intent to provide more rights for gays in 1994 and still be opposed to gay marriage in 2002 (governor's election) or 2011 (your cited headline).

Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

'(Remember the poll numbers vis-a-vis removal of DADT and my assertion about boots-on-the-ground versus support personnel poll results?)' - Axe-man | 12:08 p.m. Jan. 9, 2012

Not sure why this is being denied. It addresses a concern that you brought up Axe-man.

Poll numbers about DADT in the general public:

**"In U.S., 67% Support Repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" - Lymari Morales - Gallup - 12/09/10

vs. Poll numbers from the military directly:

**'Pentagon study dismisses risk of openly gay troops' - By Anne Flaherty - AP - Published by DSNews - 11/30/10

Even:

**'AMA meeting: "Don't ask, don't tell" said to hurt patient care; repeal urged' - By Kevin B. O'Reilly, amednews staff. Posted Nov. 23, 2009.

- America Medical Association

Your justification for switching stances is...time. (20-30 years)

So then, I would like you to explain your support, for Mitt Romney.

**'Mitt Romney steers clear of Ohio health, union issues' - By Dan Sewell - AP - Published by DSNews - 10/25/11

Then:

**'Mitt Romney reverses himself, supports anti-union law' - By Philip Elliott - AP - Published by DSNews - 10/26/11

When it's 24 HOURS.

Andermart
Pullman, WA

I really hate the process where the Republicans all get to throw manure on their fellow Republicans, but that is America. I sure couldn't do it.

But I love that in it all we are finally starting to see information trickle out about Romney's ability to take educated risks and to be victorious. I know some Americans are shallow enough to think America can be fixed without government workers losing jobs, but job loss is going to happen so that a stronger job groth environment can be fostered. Romney knows how to rebuild it. That is what I like.

RanchHand
Huntsville, UT

Axe-man says:

"Gay marriage is a very recent concept Harvey Milk couldn't have dreamed of..."
"Mitt can pledge his intent to provide more rights for gays in 1994 and still be opposed to gay marriage in 2002 ..."
---

No, we dreamed Axe, we just never imagined we'd see the day when we could actually marry the person we love though. Having grown up in an era when gays were relegated to the outer reaches of the solar system, I can tell you that the dream has always been there.

If I recall the stories about Mitt's father, he actually marched with blacks in their quest for equality. Mitt doesn't even begin to fill his father's shoes. All Americans of whatever stripe MUST be treated equally under the law or we are not a country that values justice and liberty.

Mitt, can believe whatever he wants; that is his right. It is also the right of FREE Americans to marry the person they love. Romney, and the other Republican candidates would automatically divorce married GLBT Americans. How would you feel if the government came to you and said: "your divorced because someone else doesn't like your choice of mate"?

Axe-man
OREM, UT

Wrong again, Pagan.

I am not justifying Mitt's switching stances. I asserted that he DIDN'T switch stances on that issue. Time (20-30 yrs) was the catalyst for the GLBT community demanding more - Mitt's promise to advocate more for them in 1994 never included gay marriage because NOBODY sought that then. Remember, DADT was still new (1993) allowing gay servicemembers to serve as long as no one asked and no one told (your experience notwithstanding - someone asked, you told, breaking both sides of that agreement). GLBT demands have expanded with time to include gay marriage.

And you wrongly reported results of last July's discussion about DADT between us: you (then and now) cited headlines, and I showed the incorrectness of the headlines from actual survey results.

Military support personnel (supply truck drivers, translators/ office workers, MWR folks in food-services, etc.) comprise most respondents who said "serving with a gay person won't bother me." Actual boots-on-the-ground - folks with lives on the line, Marines, combat Army infantry, sailors on submarines - were still against serving with gays. And the Pentagon moved ahead with the decision anyway. Google "DADT repeal survey results" - media headlines conceal the actual findings.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments