I predicted this last year and last election and it has started and will
continue. Romney need to grow a spine and stop slip flopping so he can
concentrate on the the South where he will get bogged down again in the
primaries, just like last time. Yes, people are more accepting of
an LDS candidate but religious bigotry still exists and it is powerful.Anywhere you find anti Muslim, Jewish, etc type people you will find they are
also anti LDS and close minded. That is why when I see and hear fellow LDS
making bigoted religious comments I have to shake my head. There is a line
froma song, "If they hated me they will hate you too". Watch the phantom robo calls and campaigning by fellow Republicans get ugly on
Mitt and the LDS Church. Then you will see the true colors of the close minded
Republican party I chose to no longer be a part of. You really think the
hateful comments by Bachmann, Perry and other loudmouths who are open to
religious bigotry use the LDS Church as a reason not to vote for Romeny, just
you watch because they will get desperate.
I think perhaps the main problem for Mitt is he did not appeal to nor respect
the Tea Party and conservative republicans, taking their vote for granted. His
endorsement of McCain for Senate in 2010 cemented him as an establishment
Republican in minds of conservatives. Add To that his tepid attacks on Obama
reinforced him as too moderate. He errored by not respecting conservative's
importance to the Primary process.
Conservatives don't like him? I do. What government survey did you take? This
entire article reeks of opinion and mighty poor "journalism."
I have a hunch why. It is the same reason why Lieberman never had a chance. I
think Hagle is wrong.
I think the religion is more a factor than Time Magazine makes it out to be.
"Add To that his tepid attacks on Obama"I think Informed
Voter has it.The base wants frothing attacks. For the GOP, anyone
who believes that Obama is a decent human being, is the enemy.Additionally, one can not even entertain the possibility of MM global
warming.The tent is very small, and becoming smaller.Reagan would not be allowed in todays GOP tent.
JohnJacobJingleHeimerSchmidt | 7:12 p.m. Dec. 1, 2011 Anywhere you find
anti Muslim, Jewish, etc type people you will find they are also anti LDS and
close minded. That is why when I see and hear fellow LDS making bigoted
religious comments I have to shake my head. @John: Exactly. What
goes around comes around and let the consequences follow.
Religion. Why we love him. Why they don't.
I just don't think he knows how to relate to people or can appreciate what
people are facing right now. One example was when he joked about being
unemployed--not really endearing to all those unemployed or underemployed right
now. Saying corporations are people didn't really seem to make sense either.
Saying that we shouldn't intervene and let the foreclosures run their course and
let the market fix the housing crisis, while in Nevada--which has the highest
foreclosure rate wasn't exactly smart (funny, he didn't seem to share this view
with the Wall Street Bailout). You have to appear like you care
about the average citizen even to get them to vote for you.
I like Romney. Of all Candidates I think he is the best qualified to
be President.And I believe that he has the best chance to defeat
If a Republican gets my vote it will have to be Huntsman. Every one of the
others is more than my conscience can tolerate.
You are seeing, for now, why Republicans don't like him. I think the GOP is too
fickle, hypocritical and single issued to worry about them. The Democrats don't
dislike Harry Reid so that negates the Mormon question for them. Conservative
evangelicals, for the most part, are too self righteous in their religious
views. Mitt Romney will have problems with blue collar Democrats for obvious
reasons. And he has sent the message that he really doesn't care what they
think. I have a cousin the same age as Mitt Romney. He was drafted into the
Marines and spent 15 months as a grunt wading around the Vietnam jungle to draw
out enemy locations. He is a blue collar union man. He won't like Mitt Romney if
he makes it through the primary. So there are plenty negatives waiting to be
expressed. Mitt Romney neeed to show appreciation for those voters but instead
he caters to the Norquest elite.
Romney is a chameleon, pure and simple. How do you know which are his true
colors?But Gingrich is a loathsome, bloviating hypocrite.What a predicament, huh?
"Romney's... a Mormon 'which usually goes unspoken but is a matter of real
mistrust for many Evangelical Christian voters.'"This looks bad
for Evangelical Christians making them hypocrites since the US Constitution
clearly states that religion is not to be used as a condition of public office.
Apparently they don't hold the Constitution in much esteem."But
Romney's real problem, according to the article, is "his brazen
flip-floppery on issues large and small..."And what about the
flip-flopping of his opponent, Newty? There's the real flip-flopper. Why does
he get a pass? He even flop-flops on marriages and fidelity promises in
Does Time magazine matter anymore? Does anyone read it? Who is Joe Klein??
I read Time 15 years ago, but does anyone read it anymore?? Who hasn't flip
flopped?? In this free country, we all can change our mind from time to
time----I think it is David Brooks who said he respects Mr. Romney a lot because
he IS willing to change his mind. The person we should fear the most is
someone who isn't flexible, reasonable and understanding. Unfortunately, many
in our country get bored really easily and need someone to always be
entertaining them. One of the reasons for the push to change the institution
of marriage is boredom, people just want something new. Look at our former
mayor of Salt Lake who is pondering a run for the White House----he is a member
of one political party on Monday, then another on Tuesday, then another on
Wednesday-----we can't keep our attention on one thing anymore.
Romney has changed or adapted positions no more than Gingrich. I think the
media--Time and esp. Newsweek--have to take a good hard look at themselves, on
why they are so much more determined to drill down on Romney in this respect
than any other candidate. What is it about Romney, Time Magazine, that makes
you want to undercut him? Newt Gingrich is enthralled with a sense
of his own intelligence . . . he will not beat Obama. Obama knows that, and thus
the urgency to beat Mitt now, because he knows he can beat Newt in the general
election. Newt will fall, carrying his horrendous baggage with him.Why won't the party embrace Mitt? It's partly Romney's money; partly his
"perfection"; partly his LDS faith; partly his political changes . . .
but I think most of all, those who esteem themselves to be his enemies, many of
whom write for the press, are more comfortable with cantankerous adulterers than
with what Romney is and represents. So they go for the juggler.
Romney has never flip flopped on abortion rights----he has always personally
been opposed to it and at the same time doesn't think a lady should go to jail
for it---guess what--that is where 99 percent of our country is at!!! He never
said it is a good idea and even today doesn't say a woman should be
criminalized---he has never changed one iota---it is the media and ignorant,
bored people who can't see that this subject is a tricky one--- evil and legal.
Joe Klein represents the journalistic elite who are in control of major news
magazines by their adherance to the socialist Marxist philosophy which is
atheistic. Atheists are extremely vulnerable to the philisophical appeal of
Marx's dialectic materialism where Marx gives a persuasive but fallacious
argument of how everything came into existence without the necessity of there
having to be a God or any kind of intelligent force directing it. Obviously Joe is one of those who can think in terms of focusing on a
candidates strong belief in God as being a negative to his fellow atheistic
@John Jacob"so he can concentrate on the the South where he will get
bogged down again "The south is a lost cause. I think Obama
outlined the map Romney has to go for. He's gotta get those blue states but he's
losing to Gingrich badly in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.@Heidi
T."Conservatives don't like him?"Many don't. That's
why Palin, Huckabee, Trump, Bachmann, Perry, Cain, and now Gingrich keep spiking
in polls as the "anyone but Mitt" people are searching.@Mr. Bean"This looks bad for Evangelical Christians making them
hypocrites since the US Constitution clearly states that religion is not to be
used as a condition of public office."The Constitution bans the
prevention of letting someone run due to religion. It doesn't stop people from
using religion in their votes (that goes both ways, voting for or against
someone due to religion). Now of course I think using religion in your voting
process is wrong unless the candidate's religion includes ritualistic human
sacrifice in volcanoes. The thing is you can't directly tell which evangelicals
are using religion and which just don't like Romneycare, or flip-flopping.
@christoph"Romney has never flip flopped on abortion rights----he has
always personally been opposed to it "In Massachusetts he said
he didn't oppose Roe vs. Wade and wouldn't work to overturn it. He lied, or
changed his view."that is where 99 percent of our country is
at!!! "I guess Romney is where 99% of the country is at in that
he's taken every single stance on the issue.1. In Massachusetts he
said he wouldn't oppose abortion rights.2. Running for the president he
now wants to get rid of Roe vs. Wade.3. He told Huckabee he supported the
personhood amendment, something so radical that even Mississippi voters rejected
it. That would have banned abortion in all circumstances (including all those
standard things people allow abortions for like life of the mother). It would
ban many forms of birth control and shut down in-vitro fertilization (since
they'd have to guarantee each fertilized egg is allowed to develop). Also, like
utah's bill last year, it could launch felony manslaughter investigations into
miscarriages if the miscarriage was deemed to be due to negligence.Romney's been all over the map on abortion.
Jobs, jobs and more jobs! That is what is needed at this juncture.
Whoever can deliver jobs, jobs and more jobs will/should be voted as the next
president. Romney is the best candidate to deliver jobs to the American people.
What is the Newt appeal? Lets look at him- Very intelligent-
no experience (executive or business)- morally questionable- Married
3 times with affairs- changed positions on some hot button issues-
an academic - lobbyistBut, most of all he is theULTIMATE Washington insider.Again, I ask - What is the Newt
If we nominate Newt, we will probably lose to Obama. If Obama wins, we will
sink inevitably into the abyss. He can't change is ideology and seems to be
completely crippled by it. Also, Newt doesn't have any executive experience
either. That puts us right back where we are with Obama. If Newt
is nominated, he will probably self destruct before the election. The Democrats
want to run against Newt. That is clear. They are hoping to take Romney out
before he can be nominated. I think Mitt's religion is a much bigger
factor than anyone is willing to admit.
Mitt is the chosen candidate by the large media (ABC, CBS, NBC, New York Times,
AP, UPS, etc.) If he doesn't make it out of the convention they will have backed
a loser. The media will either ignore, or castigate, all other candidates in
the long run. Give them some dirt, real or not, and they will make it an issue
(Cain);if someone makes a verbal blunder it will be widely aired (Perry);and, if
someone places high in the polls that they don't like (but have no dirt on) they
will just ignore him (Paul).Yes, it will be difficult, but I pray that the
electorate will choose a candidate that is Honest, Principled, Morally straight,
and will honor an Oath to support the Constitution Prtect, and Defend this
His refusal to denounce his own healthcare law while claiming his first act as
president will be to repeal Obamacare cause many to question his judgement. The
media seems to more then willing to help him self-destruct. The video's of his
Flip Flopping are the most condemning.
I was relieved to see that add showing Newts MAJOR flip flops put out by Ron
Paul. Don't we need to hold people to the same standards? I think most
people do not know probably because they have not personally researched? They
just accept what they see/read in the news? I researched on both the abortion
and gay marriage issues on Mitt as I was not comfortable yet when I saw that
Mitt had reasons (his aunt died of a botched abortion? before politics) for his
change to a better informed opinion on abortion, but he KEPT his word to not
change the law in Mass- but still he didn't sign bills to experiment on embryos
etc-- . He HAS always personally been against abortion and that has not changed
as he still supports that it MAY be right for incest, rape or dire threat to
mothers healthy/life as I understand is the LDS stance? On Gay rights, I
understand he thought to allow civil marriage and equal housing but has never
been for gay marriage or changing marriage. Those are not flip flops in my view.
We need to look for causes, and let them explain.
I personally hope Mitt gets the nomination, gets right to the very end, and then
loses the election by an incredibly small margin.Then he'll go on to
have a lovely, aggravation-free life, while the country will continue its
downward spiral. But it sure won't be HIS fault--it will be all the
whining people who didn't step up and get behind him when they had the chance.
I wouldn't wish being the President, with its legions of naysayers
he already has to put up with, the partyline gridlock, the corruption, the
lobbyists, and the totally complex, mostly unsolvable problems on a nice guy
Newt also is rich, but how did HE get his money? (see the Ron Paul add about
Newt?)It seems ironic that one man can be accused of being "too
perfect" then the people "flip flop" to harpoon Mitt for showing
discomfort in a Fox interview?People say they do not know what he
believes. Have they gone to the source? He did a whole page article way back in
his governorship about his improved view on abortion. How about we let people
speak for themselves? When his father regretted a position he had had on Viet
Nam, and shared why-- his one word (brainwashed) was taken out of context and
given more emphasis and used to sabotage him. No wonder Mitt might be extra
careful with his words? I would rather have THAT carefulness than someone who
flies off the handle spouting arrogant abuse to be in charge of representing the
USA! Any candidate needs to look at the end GOAL- beat Obama, and I
believe he must also be "true to himself and it follows as night follows
day that he can then not be untrue to anyone else" (paraphrasing the quote
as I don't remember exactly.
Mitt's religion matters more than the Time's article let on. I don't think it's
the only reason why people aren't supporting Romney, but it's definitely a
factor (and likely the tipping point).
Just because Romney is a member of the predominant Utah religious community
doesn't mean he would make a good president. He comes across as an arrogant,
pompous know it all to that has no connection with the common man. Were he
running for a position in charge of all the wealthy and their concerns he's be
on top of the list.
" that he's "either furtive or phony"---Phony. Mechanical. Smug. Arrogant. Too many negative descriptive words fit
Who is Joe Klein? Is he reliable, a man of character, a man who understands
others? Why is his opinion worth listening to? Why is TIME magazine's opinion
worth reading or believing? Why doesn't Joe Klein and TIME look into Barack
Obama's past, his radical upbringing and associations, his failed policies, his
inability to govern, his closed door dealings, why his poll ratings have tanked,
why his wife gets booed at Nascar, why he places a moritorium on domestic
drilling but gives money to Brazil to explore for their oil after George Soros
purchases Brazil's oil stocks, who his campaign contributors are, etc., etc.,
etc.I don't read TIME magazine because of biased, uninformed articles
published by writers like Joe Klein. I would read this magazine if it were
reliable. Does that make me a flipflopper?
FDRfan says:"Conservative evangelicals, for the most part, are too
self righteous in their religious views."---As are
Mormons. Self-righteousness is a fairly common trait among those who call
themselves religious; the two terms are apparent synonyms.Mitt
belongs to a church that calls itself "the ONLY true church on the
earth". That's a pretty big hurdle to overcome with the Evangelicals and
smacks of extreme arrogance.Personally, I don't care that he's
Mormon (I would probably vote for Huntsman). I do care greatly that the
candidates are religious and wear it on their sleeves. Anybody who would use
their religious values to discriminate against other Americans, and this does
include Romney, (they all signed a pledge to discriminate against glbt
Americans) is not fit to be President imho.Regardless of party, the
president leads ALL Americans, not just those on his side of the aisle. That is
one of the big problems in Washington today. Party loyalty supercedes Country
loyalty.@christoph; I believe Romney's mother was very big on
Pro-Choice. I'd imagine his views were certainly influenced by her.
The elephant in the room is the Romney is a Latter-day Saint and religious bias
is alive and well in the United States. No one would dare bring up that
religious bias as a reason to not vote for a Muslim. LDS is another matter.
Here in Connecticut (home of Senator Lieberman who is Jewish) there is a
conservative radio station that features local talk shows (AM & PM) who are
quick to jump on everyone's bandwagon but Mitt Romney's. then their ideal
candidates fall by the wayside. and their responses are, "well if Romney
is the nominee, I will vote for him". But they will not support him now.
Sheesh. of course they will never mention that their bias is because he is LDS.
they will mention Massachusetts Health Care system, and a guest comes on and
highlights the differences between Obamacare and the Massachusetts plan, but
then the talk show host ignores the major differences. New Jersey's Christie
I can think of two reasons right off the bat...the first would be that people
are biggots by nature, for the natural man is an enemy to God and will be until
he becomes a saint. Second, their are a large percent of people in the US who
have, through their ignorance, wealth envy. They actually think that
redistribution of wealth, marxism, is necessary and good for our country. Its
the us verses them mentality that is preached from the pulpit in the church of
Nobody know what this guy really believes. He reaks of Globalism. He has the
most contributions by wallstreet than any other candidate. There is also no
mention of the constitution anywhere on his website.
Some of these comments are interesting, to say the least. The "persecution
complex" is still part of LDS culture. On the big picture, if Romney gets
the nomination, his religion will be irrelevant for 99% of all the voters.
There will be virtually no decisions made on that basis except on the crazy
religious right. It won't matter. But Mitt's problem is no one knows what he
stands for, he is thin-skinned when it comes to criticism, and he is wooden. He
will be worse than George H. W. Bush on relating to the issues of the middle
class. He is an elitist and a Wall Street guy, and this will hurt him in this
environment. If he wins, the abuses that led to the 2008 crash will worsen.
Wall Street and the banks will have completely taken over.
Other than religion? He would be accepted in the Democratic party.
I like Mitt, it's Time that I don't like. What a ridiculous thing to put on the
front of Time.
With Romney you get that impression that there is someone in there you haven't
met yet. He comes across as someone who would fly into a rage at the drop of the
hat. Most people just back away from someone who can't be authentic. To get
people to like and believe in you, you have to like and believe in people. Mitt
doesn't seem to like people. At this stage in his life, I don't think there is
any way for him to learn to do so. You don't have to like people to be
good at your job, but people won't hire you if they think you're going to be an
WildcatI dont you and many others understand his points. Corporations are made up of what? PEOPLE. And what do those people do? provide
JOBS. punishing the corporations in reality punishes everyone who works for that
corporation in causing fewer jobs.He said we need to let the foreclosures
run their course. Is that really a bad Idea? We have had many programs trying to
help people get out of the trouble they are in but they do not solve the
problems. They only push the pain down the road. Most people that have gone
through these programs still end up in foreclosure. Why? Because they took out
loans they could never afford thinking that they could just turn around and sell
the house for more than they bought it for. When the bubble burst they were
caught holding it. The only way to fix it for them is to force the banks to
reduce the loan amount to what they can afford to pay. That however rewards
their bad judgement and teaches people that your actions have no consequences.
It also hurts our legal system as contracts then mean nothing.
As with any candidate, it comes back to Romneys lack of integrity. To say that
all good candidates evolve, is true but, that doesnt excuse the fact that
Romney is all the things that Klein pointed out. In these serious troubled
times were experiencing, like the rest, Romney has offered nothing of substance.
He is uninspiring. He is an elitist and flip-flops on nearly everything.
Kleins question is fair to ask. Does anyone besides Romney himself, really know
who he is and what his core beliefs are? When youre not in
politics, these character defects would be labeled as lying, misleading,
deceptive, or dishonest. With many Church members, Romney gets a pass. Its
just politics. In view of the LDS Churchs teachings and values, we should hold
him to a higher standard. The only person Ive observed who has
the integrity to truthfully state what is and is not right in this nation, and
who is willing to DO WHAT IS NEEDED, is Ron Paul. The other candidates and the
media, as usual, have aligned themselves with the same people and failed
programs of a nation that is dying.
The sad thing is that many LDS have blinders on -- they support Romney BECAUSE
he is LDS. I see the excuses are already in the making if he does not become
the next President: because Americans won't vote for a mormon. People really
need to take off their blinders and realize that if he is not elected there are
a variety of reasons that each American who choses to not vote for him may use.
Many of these reasons are listed in these posts.
The inperfect candidates on the Republican ticket should all to be admired in
their desire to repalace the Obama regime. Non of us, as well as non of the
Republican Candidates are perfect. Quit looking for this people and get to work
and get the ruination of Obama behind us...vote him out. the primaries will
decide on who is "most perfect". Get behind the ticket and push this
little Chicago trained dictator out for good. Quit downgrading these good people
running on the Republican ticket.
Anybody that says they don't know what Romney really believes or who he really
is just shows they haven't done their homework. They just read what others say
about him. I've read his book and his website. I watch speeches he's made and
anything else I can find coming directly from him in context. I feel like I
know him and where he stands. The media and other candidates will
take snipets of things he's said out of context to make him look like a
flip-flopper. They harp on that because it's the only thing they can do against
him. They won't find any personal dirt on him. He is a good man of integrity.
Any changes he's made in policy issues have come because of serious efforts to
find the best options for America. I respect someone who isn't so set in their
ways that they can't consider new ideas and concepts in this ever changing
world.I challenge everyone to check out Romney's website and google
whyromney if you dare to open your mind. I am LDS, but my support for him has
nothing to do with that.
poor kami, the selfappointed conscience of the LDS church. kami, if you don't
want a candidate that is a mormon, fine, don't vote for him. he is by far the
most qualified, but if you want second rate actors, feel free to vote for them,
with your blinders on and all.
Plain and simple, Mitt Romney does not ring true or just. He comes accross as a
rich self serving politician; and not what the nation needs: a patriot and
Americans don't care about a candidate's religion and they don't like
shallowness.The last time a presidential candidate from
Massachusetts ran, he was a flip-flopper with perfect hair. Romney is even
worse than Kerry! The Party of Conservatives should field a candidate who is a
veteran, frugal, person-of-the-middle with real convictions.Romney
should have served during Vietnam, but he was a draft dodger who never wore a
uniform. He never went to a public school a single day! He was raised with a
silver spoon. He has never balanced a checkbook, repaired his car, made a piece
of furniture. He has never worried about making ends meet. Romney
has no idea what we in the middle are concerned about. He's a shallow
flip-flopper chasing after power and prestege. Where has the GOP gone wrong?
LDS readers of the Deseret news are increasingly becoming analytical of Time
magazine and writers such as Joe Klein. Jewish members of the Mormon church
have explained how some of their kinsmen such as Joe Klein have lined up on the
side of Marxist Socialism. Their response is interesting. And I'll tell you
later when I get home from work.
As a minority in the LDS Church (a Dem) I quite agree with utahboni - will the
real Mitt Romney please stand up? Personally I like Huntsman and
many of the things he says - but he is a quitter.
"The Mormon stuff always gets mentioned and I just hate that, because I
don't think it's a factor," - Article It is not.
*'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.' Zero to 110% in 24 hours. Another example: *'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! It has always been Romney's
factual ACTIONS that make me... vote for Obama.
Also, let's got into some of Romney's claims. Job creator: Mitt Romney on Job creation: From 2003-2007 job growth....0.9%.
In rankings with the rest of the country...MA was 47th in Job creation when Mitt
Romney was there. - Think Progress Travis Waldron 06/02/11
*'Mitt Romney as job creator clashes with Bain record of job cuts' - By Lisa
Lerer, Bloomberg News - Published by DSNews - 07/20/11 'Employees
who lost jobs at Bain-controlled companies more than a decade ago say they still
hold Romney responsible."I would not vote for him for anything,"
said Phyllis Detro, 68, who lost her job...' *'Let Detroit Go
Bankrupt' - By Mitt Romney - NY Times - 11/18/08 Predicted
result: *'How Many Jobs Depend on the Big Three?' - By CATHERINE
RAMPELL - NY Times - 11/17/08 'In both cases, there would be major
short-term shocks to employment; depending on which scenario you use, a
contraction of the Detroit Three would result in direct and indirect job losses
of 2.5 million to 3 million in 2009.' 3 million American jobs... lost.
Mitt is a flip flopper-so are all politicians. Mitt is rich-so are all
politicians. Mitt is a Mormon-So is Jon Huntsman and look how he is doing in
the polls. It is time to face the facts religion does matter. Being LDS is not
going to help you get to the White House even if it is the party most members of
the LDS church support blindly.
Also: *'GOP contenders argue on Iran' - By Kasie Hunt - AP -
Published by DSNews - 11/12/11 "If we re-elect Barack Obama,
Iran will have a nuclear weapon. And if you elect Mitt Romney, Iran will not
have a nuclear weapon," vowed the former Massachusetts governor.' Sound familiar? It should. Cause:
"The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological
weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons.' - George W. Bush - Ohio Speech
10/7/2002 *'US gives up search for Iraq WMD' - BBC News -
01/12/05 'Mr Duelfer reported last year that Iraq had no stockpiles
of chemical or biological weapons at the time of the US-led invasion nearly two
years ago.' Effect: *'U.S. Military deaths in
Iraq war at 4,485 - AP - Published by the DSNews - 11/22/2011 I do
NOT support yet ANOTHER war that might cost America $3 trillion dollars
and... over 4,000 American lives. Based on the lie, of
At least Romney is in touch with economic realities! Obama never has been, and
never will be. Inspite of Romney's short comings (real or imagined), he will be
a much better leader than what we have in the White House today! Come to think
of it, who wouldn't be?
Mc | 8:23 a.m. Dec. 2, 2011 West Jordan, UT "The media and
other candidates will take snipets of things he's said out of context to make
him look like a flip-flopper. "You mean like the ad Romney has
run about Obama and Romney refuses to retract the ad saying that those were
Obamas words (even though the context wasn't provided in the ad). What goes
around comes around.
Esquire: "The "persecution complex" is still part of LDS
culture. On the big picture, if Romney gets the nomination, his religion will be
irrelevant for 99% of all the voters."Maybe. But if
Mitt ever manages to pull off the election and win, you can bet somehow the LDS
Church will get some blame and mention for any problem, every misstep, and
anything that ever goes wrong.(remember Prop 8, where there were many factors
and groups involved, but who gets the "blame"?) Its hard
to imagine every downturn and problem, every disappointment-the economy doesn't
turn around, not enough new jobs, wall street and banking woes, wars, oil
shortages, high prices, national disasters etc etc won't all be portrayed
and spoken of somehow, in public and in private, because "we were stupid
enough to be duped into believing and choosing a Mormon" or "God is
punishing the country for allowing a Mormon to be President", or
"Mitt's church leaders have a strangle hold on him and make him do whatever
they say"... You can hear it all already.
Prediction:Rubeuplicans will nominate a candidate that can't be elected
and then will pat them selves on the back for being true to their convictions.
Meanwhile the congress keeps giving and the president keeps spending.
Romney is not on the Sunday morning talk shows because he is probably in a
Mormon church worshipping as most active Mormons do on Sunday. The evangelical
christians should be in church on Sunday as well and they should respect Romney
for obeying the sabbath day.
About any candidates religion or opinion on anything how about we go to the
bestsources? (hint, it is not the media. Shouldn't we go to the person,
let themexplain or let them choose who to represent them? Mitt
has given a speech on how his religion will not be any issue in his politicalservice, and we can see from his service as governor too.--- To
consider that Obamacare was modeled after Mitts specific states (mediated
with those concerned in that state), and then changed by others,
means it is not the same! The monster in Frankenstein was modeled after
humans but changes can make big differences. I understand people who
want to know about his Mormon religion are told to ask other Morons (not running
for office?) or go to Mormon.org or LDS.org where there are FAQ and even live
chat. I understand they will NOT promote any candidate. I think that is good!
Let us look at the past record/actions of and reasons for actions
given byany candidate being considered. Isn't that how you want to be
treated? That is how I want to be treated.
I'm not sure we want a big flashy candidate. Does anyone live that way? Romney's
"steady eddie" approach is absolutely crucial for electability. And
Romney's willingness to bring conservatives to all citizens, not just the
extreme right, is refreshing for a national election (not just for the
Primaries). I also don't see flip-flopping as that big a deal if there's
evidence that the change in positions is based upon an attempt to better
understand the issues from all sides. As for courage... how much
courage does it take to cheat on your wife? Yet the other front-runners are
repeat offenders when it comes to the character issue...
@windsor"(remember Prop 8, where there were many factors and groups
involved, but who gets the "blame"?) "LDS members are
2% of californians but contributed 50% of the pro-prop 8 donations and about 3/4
of the volunteer hours. The reason the LDS church gets the blame for Prop 8 is
because of their disproportionate involvement.
@atl134I doubt that Romney would comment to Huckabee that he supported a
specific amendment like you say-- as Mitt seems careful to do no such a thing.
I think maybe someone has misrepresented him?I totally see him
agreeing that embryos should not be used for stem cell experiments as they have
personhood (he voted against that) but I doubt he would deny all abortions (ones
for incest, rape or where the mothers live/health was in grave danger).Please, let us go to the source (person) and let them speak in their own
words, without spin.
To attack Times magazine, calling them 'Marxist, Socialist' is NOT doing the LDS
church any favors. And promotes Mormons trying to be victims, rather being able
to stand against criticism. OTHER than: 1) Mitt chaning in stance on
EVERY issues, 2) having a poor job creator history 3) Promoting yet ANOTHER war
4) Romneycare 5) Proven LIES in Romney's adds... let's talk about
religion. Since everyone HAS too. # 1: Prop 8. Romney
can FACTUALLY marry his spouse. He supported a religious effort to DENY that, to
lgbt persons. Invasive & factually affecting persons who do NOT
adhere to that faith. # 2: *'Fox News host: Romney not
Christian' - By Hal Boyd, Deseret News - 07/17/11 Sound familiar? *'Trump on Obama's Birth Certificate: 'Maybe It Says He's a Muslim' -
Fox Nation - 03/30/11 Fox news has attempted to 'discredit' the
Christianity of BOTH Romney AND Obama! So, the claim of 'religious'
persecution is not SELECTIVE, according to Fox News. Since EVERYONE
was implying Obama was a Muslim... x9 months ago. And
for all those that claim I will not vote for Romney due to his faith... I have a long history of support of John Huntsman. Good day.
Romney is:Pro-torturePro-warRomney wants to:Cut spending but NOT governmentPut a carrier in the gulf outside
Iran (as if we don't have enough war already)Romney has flipped
on:TARP bailouts of wall-street, banks, and other corporationsAbortionFederal HealthcareRomney has been called out on
Constutional procedures that he doesn't understand in debates. The Constitution
should be foremost followed, though most of the U.S. public know nothing about
the Constitution except it lets us have "liberty". Red
flags, all around.Ron Paul is anti-war, anti-torture, and the
Champion of the Constitution. Anyone who scoffs at Ron Paul should read
Revolution: A Manifesto before casting judgment on the man who has stood more
with our Constitution than anyone since our Framers molded our Constitution.
Dutchman | 8:59 a.m. Dec. 2, 2011 Murray, UT Romney is not on the
Sunday morning talk shows because he is probably in a Mormon church worshipping
as most active Mormons do on Sunday. The evangelical christians should be in
church on Sunday as well and they should respect Romney for obeying the sabbath
day. @Dutchman, are you saying that if Romney is elected President
that the citizens of this nation are going to have to expect that their
President will be "obeying the sabbath day" and taking Sundays off in
running this country? Perhaps that should be a question that should be asked of
him and asked soon.
Look, here's the thing. I'm a social conservative Mormon Republican-- and
I don't like him as a candidate. I like him as a person, but Idon't like
him on the issues. That's not a personal thing -- that'sthe choices he's
been making as a candidate.When I get a chance to read the actual
article (I didn't see it linkedhere) I'll be anxious to see if Time
magazine tackles things likeRomney's inexplicable hawkishness on war or
his many big centralgovernment stances. It sounds like Klein might touch
on the bigFederal program thing with the comments about "Tea Party
support" butas a Mormon my largest concern with Mitt the Presidential
candidate ishis penchant for hiring up the most thoughtless warhawks in
thebusiness to advise him on whether we ought to break up families andsend our volunteer defense forces overseas on objectiveless missions.In 2006 Mitt talked to the AP about his Father's (George, '68) failedcandidacy. In that interview Mitt admitted that -- though it unfairlycost George the candidacy -- that his Dad was right to finallyquestion
our policies in Vietnam. I'm looking for a Presidentialcandidate willing
to do that now
If this flip flopping moniker is so bothersome to folks, they should be kicking
Obama out of the whitehouse right now. Please show me a politician
who hasn't changed their stance on an issue or become more clear during their
career, anyone?Go to Romney's site and read about his stances and
how he see's things. You'll be running to the voting booth to get him elected.
However, if it's the Mormon thing you're hung up about, you're the
last person that should be judging Mitt. You've got some bigotry issues to deal
Romney has shown the most character too me. And while Newt seems very level
headed, I won't vote for someone who's about as chaste as Bill Clinton. Perry
makes a fool of himself, Cain is sketchy and his staff seem incompetent.
Everyone else running doesn't have a chance. I guess that leaves Romney..
Romney is the best person to bring both sides together and create a strong
economy bases on conservative principles. It's not even close. This
article speculates on so many things, it's yellow journalism at it's best.
Reporters have long ago lost the priviledge of being the sentinals of truth.
They position themselves in an influential market to promote personal
interests.If the Time is so concerned about the lack of
"courage" they need to look no further than the white house.
"Romney is the best person to bring both sides together and create a strong
economy bases on conservative principles."Agreed. And that is why the GOP base is leery of him."bringing both
sides together" can ONLY be done through compromise.A
reasonable approach, by most measures. One that Romney is smart enough to
recognize.But, the GOP no longer wants compromise. They demand 100%
of what they want and are willing to give NOTHING in return.They are
afraid that Romney will work with the other side.And they want none
Careful, alt134. Remember, LBGT are a lower percentage of the
population than their "disproportionate involvement" would indicate is
Mitt would make a great president. The BIG problem here is the Tea Party, Rush
Limbaugh, Shawn Hannity etc... These people all have BIG influence and BIG
voices and what they say most conservatives just follow along. Rush says Mitt
isn't a true conservative - what ever that means and the Tea Party is looking
for the second coming of Ronald Reagan...which doesn't exist. What I FEAR is
that independent voters will not go for Newt and thus Obama will get another 4
years. So in effect - the Tea Party, Rush and Hannity may be unwittingly helping
Barack Obama win re-election. Mitt is HUGE with independents and and Newt is
ClarkKent | 8:52 a.mRomney's ad was accompanied by a press release
saying the clip of Obama was actually him quoting McCain. No deception there.
They were just pointing out that Obama is in the same position now: if they
talk about the economy he will lose. Most media outlets neglected to include
the press release along with the ad, letting it appear that Romney was being
deceptive or outright accusing him of deception.It doesn't seem to
matter how many times Romney explains his positions in regard to the
"flip-flops" he is accused of. It is never enough or it is ignored or
they just say he isn't sincere. When other candidates make explanations of any
of their changes in policy, the media, including Fox, accepts it on face value.
With Romney they say "but which Romney will we end up with"?There is a double standard for candidates depending on who the media outlet
favors. For example, why should Cain's campaign be doomed over unsubstantiated
accusations while Gingrich's poll numbers skyrocket when he admitted to worse
than the Cain accusations? Gingrich cheated on two wives, the last whiloe in
Congress. Why does he get a pass?
Two main reasons. First, he doesn't know what he stands for and changes with the
crowd. Second, he is LDS and his allegiance is to this Church and not to the
Constitution of the United States. No LDS person should hold public office as
their loyalty to the government and people is always suspect.
There is no such thing as the perfect candidate. So Romney has some warts that
people find hard to swallow (LDS, Romney-care, flip-flopping on some issues,
etc., etc.). Once he is made the republican nominee, people will vote for him,
because we all know Obama HAS to go, for the sake of saving this country.
Romney is the only one competent and experienced enough to save our economy from
what the damage that the marxists have done, and when it really comes down to
it, that's what counts to most Americans.
"Romney's ad was accompanied by a press release saying the clip of Obama
was actually him quoting McCain. No deception there""Most
media outlets neglected to include the press release along with the ad"The ad was certainly meant to stand alone. It is a paid advertisement.
Are you saying that it is the "media outlets"
responsibility to also reference a press release?It was deceptive.
It was meant to be deceptive. And you know it was deceptive."There is a double standard for candidates depending on who the media
outlet favors"Uh, are you aware that it was the FOX affiliate
in Atlanta who first broke the story?
I support Mitt Romney. If Republicans continue to pursue the "anybody but
Romney" path, they will end up with Obama. Mitt has wisdom with his
knowledge, stability in his respect for states rights, success in business and
bringing together deeply divided people: A divided Massachusetts legislature and
the failing Olympics. He knows finance: balanced budget (and a surplus) in
Mass. and a "clean-up" of corruption and ending with a surplus in the
Olympics. He is faithful and loyal to this nation and to his family. I am not
concerned about his religious beliefs as I am interested in electing a President
- not a guide in my beliefs. I am not bigoted nor do I wish to apply a test to
the candidates forbidden under our US Constitution. We need his abilities to
get this special nation back on track. I do not envy him in such a challenge
but I fully suport him.
I firmly believe Mitt is the most qualified candidate. He is a little socially
awkward, which seems odd due to the many social situations he has always had to
be in, but that doesn't take away from the intelligence and ability that he has,
especially in the financial arena, which is where his expertise is badly needed
right now. He was raised to be a nice guy, and I think it is hard for him to
personally attack other people. Unfortunately, that seems to be the way it is
when running for office. He is also a man I respect.
As most of you already know, the President's campaign is spending lots of money
on negative campaign tactics and advertisements. Time Magazines editor, Richard
Stengel made Barack Obama as Person of the Year in December 2008, right after
the election and minutes away from the announcement of the Nobel Peace Prize as
a brand new President. Time has been in love with Mr. Obama since 1980 when
they did a photo op on him. Time never wants to show unbiased journalism in
their magazine so why should they change now. Flip-flopping is the buzz word of
today for political rhetoric. When you become President and have the media on
your side 100 percent, the changes in the President's thought processes and
decisions are never called flip-flopping as that is a negative term and is very
selective for Governor Romney. Governor Romney was elected Governor in a very
liberal state and did a good job in that state working with mostly Democrats in
their legislature, especially as a laboratory for what Massachusetts thought was
a good plan for state healthcare. We can always second guess decisions of
legislative and executive officer bills and they know better now
Dektol | 11:02 a.mYou couldn't be more wrong about the LDS Church
and it's allegiance to the Constitution of the United States. I can only assume
that your opinion comes from pure ignorance of LDS beliefs or total
misunderstanding of them.If you think Romney doesn't know what he
stands for then you haven't read anything he actually wrote or listened to a
full speech by him. You have only read headlines or articles written by others.
You are showing your lack of research and willingness to believe whatever you
read in the newspaper.
"Jowers said voters understand that "all good candidates evolve with
the world around them, and with the new positions they're seeking,"
including Rommey."Which explains perfectly why we have a
boatload of politicians without principles running our government supposedly of,
by, and for the people. Instead of considering candidates whose morals, ideals,
and beliefs change with the direction of the wind, shouldn't we be looking for
consistency, predictability, integrity, and honesty? What Jowers is describing
here is a recipe for disaster and not at all what I'm looking for.
At least some admit they are bigots on religious grounds. Many other
excuses simply don't make sense. I still don't know if I'll vote for
Mitt, but, as an LDS I understand that his Church teaches that the Constitution
is inspired, and that leaders are not to dictate rules and laws against the will
of the People. As Gov of Massachusetts he was elected to represent the people
there and he did a good job of that. If he simply went with what his Church
teaches on abortion etc he would be suspect. What he has done though, is
represent. America is not a monarchy or a dictatorship, it is government by the
people. I think he has shown backbone in representing people that disagreed with
him on certain moral principles. There are many excuses for hatred.
I've seen evangelicals justify it simply for religion, or saying Mitt's Church
changes and they don't know what his Church will dictate to him. This is silly.
Yes Christ's Church progresses and changes. Jesus made many changes while on
earth, then through Peter and etc (Peter was racist,wouldn't share the gospel
etc) but change is good sometimes...hating is bad : )
......Bachman and Romney and Paul are loose cannons, and would be difficult to
manage from the left......hence all the "gotcha" journalism and
"are you a flake" questions.........What do you expect from TIME
magazine??????.........This however is an important part of the vetting process,
is it not?
KC MormonLet me respectfully disagree with you. I understand what
Mitt meant by his poorly-phrased Corporations are people, I just don't agree
with it. Corporations are comprised of people, but aren't people--a very
important distinction. They have rights and benefits that people don't have,
and now thanks so the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling also enjoy the
rights of an individual. How as I as one person can compete with Halliburton, a
conglamoration of people? I can't. Corporations should be treated differently.
CEOs and corporations don't create jobs, consumer demand does.I
would submit to you that going back to Clinton tax rates is not punishing
corporations. Since the tax cuts didn't spur the economy, the tax cuts should
expire. If I were to rob someone, I would be punished, but GE paid no taxes
along with several other corporations, they are in fact robbing us without
penalty.If Mitt believes in people being responsible for their
actions, why did he support the Wall Street TARP? The difference is that some
people were preyed upon by predatory banks while Wall Street was the predator.
Mitt wants to punish the victim instead of the predator.
@Gramajane"I doubt that Romney would comment to Huckabee that he
supported a specific amendment like you say-- as Mitt seems careful to do no
such a thing. "That's why it was so surprising. He usually
doesn't do that kind of thing. Under politifacts analysis of
Wasserman-Shultz's claim that Romney supports the personhood amendment (which
they graded "mostly true")"In an Oct. 2, 2011,
interview with former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee -- a onetime Republican
presidential candidate who now hosts a talk show on Fox News -- Huckabee asked
Romney, "Would you have supported the constitutional amendment that would
have established the definition of life at conception?" Romney answered,
"Absolutely.""With later remarks Romney seems to not
be entirely aware of what such an amendment would mean; it's like he agreed to
it without knowing he doesn't quite actually support such a thing given the
usual definition of such an amendment. I'm pretty sure his position allows for
the standard three things the LDS church allows for... but an amendment that
defines life at conception would allow for no exceptions.
........you're picture on the cover of TIME magazine......Pretty good exposure
for you Mitt.........Who would ever have thought of it?
If changing your views makes you a flip-flopper, then the best President of the
20th century was also the greatest flip-flopper. Ronald Reagan was a liberal
Democrat in his early years. Tthere is nothing wrong with changing one's views,
esecially when you explain the reasons why you changed as Romney has done and
don't flip back and forth between the two views. It would be very arrogant
for anyone to say they will never change views - that would imply believing that
you are automatically right on every issue and not capable of being wrong. Or
not capable of learning.
Sorry about the typos. This is corrected:If changing your views makes you
a flip-flopper, then the best President of the 20th century was also the
greatest flip-flopper. Ronald Reagan was a liberal Democrat in his early years.
There is nothing wrong with changing one's views, especially when you explain
the reasons why you changed as Romney has done and don't flip back and forth
between the two views. It would be very arrogant for anyone to say they will
never change views - that would imply believing that you are automatically right
on every issue and not capable of being wrong. Or not capable of learning.
Never has the phrase "Divided We Fall" meant more. Romney is far more
qualified than anyone in the GOP and 10 times more qualified that anyone on the
Democrat side. And yet, the right will resurrect a polarizing figure like
Gingrich, who is the purest politician there is because someone told them it
ought to be that way. What a joke.
As I told some relatives at Thanksgiving this election is critically important
to our future. The 2012 election is way too important to allow religious
prejudice to keep us from ousting Obama. Romney is the best man for the job. The
so-called flip-flopping is a stupid argument. Have you ever changed an opinion
after getting better information? So has Mitt Romney. If so YOU are a
"flip-flopper" and if you haven't you are brain dead. The next
election is the most important referendum on freedom in my lifetime. If Obama is
re-elected, even with a Republican Majority, he will continue to try to destroy
this country. Right now the powers that be want Newt to be our nominee. When
Gringrich assumes that mantle the war to stop him will begin. Newt has more
awful marital and political baggage to sink an ocean liner and Obama will use it
to sink America. Now is the time to Stand with Mitt and stop this foolishness.
God Bless America and all the people who fight for it.
"Klein wrote that despite Romney's strong debate performances and the
diversion created by the troubles of his GOP opponents, 'the question always
remains: Who is he really? Do we have any clues as to what he actually
believes?'" Too bad these same liberal journos couldn't bring
themselves to ask the same question of Obama...his campaign was nothing but
generalities and platitudes and anyone who dared ask him for specifics or
questioned his positions was automatically labeled a racist, even to include
Bill Clinton.Having said that, Romney's problems are his Romneycare
and other "previously held" liberal positions. A majority of Americans
were shocked at how quickly and blatantly Obama promoted socialism once elected,
shocked at his Chavez-like actions, etc and want to stay as far from that as
possible (Thus 2010 midterms). Romney can't bring himself to accept
conservatives see him as the inventor of Obamacare. Conservatives are looking
for TRUE, rock-solid conservatism in their candidate and don't see that in Mitt.
It's no more complicated than that. In the end though, if Mitt gets the
nomination, most will rally to him because ANY GOP candidate is better than
WildcatDo you understand how business works? When you take a business and
tax it with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world you drive them
to take business over seas. When you say yes you made this money in country X
and paid taxes there we are going to tax you again to bring that money back here
what is going to happen to that money? it stays over seas. Because of this
companies like GE can make make billions yet pay no tax because they made a loss
in the U.S. and a profit over seas. They simply keep the money over seas. This
causes them to intentionally loos money in the U.S.As for bank Tarp verses
reducing loan amounts Tarp was a loan that the banks had to pay back or loos
everything what you are asking for is the right for people to take out loans and
then say well I can not pay so you must reduce my loan. As for predatory loans
the regulations placed on banks required them to offer those loans but people
still should use common sense when taking out loans.
Don't let journalists do your thinking.Vote intelligent!
Something to consider when comparing Newt and Mitt. Newts biological father
died at age 47, his mother at 78. Newt is 68 and significantly overweight.
Mitts father died at age 88, his mother at 89. Mitt is 64, trim, and runs an
hour every day.
@Wildcat:"Corporations are comprised of people, but aren't
people--a very important distinction."Corporations are
creatures created by state law with certain rights, powers, and
responsibilities. They are a special kind of 'person' entity. They can sue and
be sued. They can hire and fire. The biggest difference is, people eat food,
drink water, and make love. Corporations can't, don't... and have no need
to.CEO's, et. al., are merely employees working for the corporate
'person.' The owners of corporations are the stockholders. The corporation is
one of three business organizations. The other two are sole proprietorships and
partnerships. The latter two are real people 'persons.' The corporation is the
created 'person.'"How as I as one person can compete with
Halliburton, a conglomeration of people? I can't."How did Bill
Gates compete? He and his friends started Microsoft in a garage. If he can
compete, and did, anyone can."CEOs and corporations don't
create jobs, consumer demand does."Too funny!Corporations meet consumer demands by creating products/services the consumer
wants/demands. And they hire people to help. Much of the success of our
economy is the direct result of the creation of the corporate entity.
Time Magazine ask Why voters don't like Mitt? Wrong question. The question at this moment should be: Why Republicans don't like
Mitt?If the Republicans are not able to support him. Why the voters
at large should?It seems that 2012 will give a second term to
Folks don't trust Romney for his flip/flops? We didn't need a Time article to
tell us this.
Who is paying Time to come up with negative campaigning? Who pays for the
President to go around performing his "Presidential Duties" which is
not campaigning as he campaigns? With the media out to get the Republicans, who
are eating themselves or have eaten themselves, there still should be a level
playing field, which I don't think there is. Romney is the TARGET for the
President Obama. The President see Newt as a danger if he gets the nomination,
if it comes to that. If Newt is so smart why does he carry so much excess
baggage with him. He sort of reminds me of what Ross Perot did in 1992,
entering in to see what chaos he can cause for the Republican party. The media
is portraying Newt as the new Bachman, Cain, Perry, etc. In the an operation
you want to split and divide if you want to conquer. In December 2007, 4 years
ago, that is when Senator McCain basically got the nomination as the front
runner due to debates, not from primaries, etc. The Convention only solidified
it and the Vice-Presidential running mate was a surprise to many. The field is
narrowing to beat Obama.
WRZI think you missed my point, the consumer demand drives the jobs.
Innovative products can be made that spur consumer demand, but without the
demand the job will not be solvent.I can make an innovative product,
but can I pay millions of dollars to get Congress to give me legislation for
competitive advantage like a corporation? No.KC MormonWe will never see all the TARP money repaid in full--trust me. The auto
industry however is paying back their loans. If we change the tax code and
enforce regulation then a company that holds their money overseas should not
have access to the US market with product. We enforce the tax code and get ride
of the loopholes and charge them for profit they make regardless if they move
the money overseas. They are just evading taxes in a fancy business-like term
by moving it off shore. You try it and see if the IRS looks the other way.
Have a nice day.
@AnH:"Folks don't trust Romney for his flip/flops? We didn't
need a Time article to tell us this."If you don't like
flop-flips you certainly won't like Newties. He's got myriads of flip-flops,
zigzags, and mind changes...Climate change, immigration, health-care
mandate, cap-and-trade, Libya, shifting stands on Freddie Mac (while taking
almost $2 million for strategic advice as an history professor), individual
mandate (in exchange for $37 million in cash), universal private insurance, end
of life care (that he now opposes).And some flip flops are ugly...
adultery, marriage promises, and fidelity.--------------------Governor Chris Christie, come quick! We need you! Can't you see that
you will zoom right to the top? Get cracking.
Three words to explain it: Republican. Flip. Flop.
20 years ago this would be story, but nobody reads Time anymore.
A person that doesn't change his view when given additional information is
closed-minded and stiff-necked.I've changed my mind a few times myself but
never called a flip-flopper.I liked Mitt's response in the debates,
as I recall it. "I've been married to the same woman for 40 years and
belonged to the same church my whole life. Is that a flip-flopper?"
I used to read Time, now I don't. Guess I'm a flip-flopper.
Voters were fooled into thinking that Barack H. Obama was their man and that
(foolish element) hasn't changed much. A growing horde of
conservatives seek revenge for what happened in 2008. They thoughlessly drool
over seeing a republican candidate (Gingerich) verbally assault Obama in a
debate. Do they realize they have placed pride over nation? Meanwhile, Rome (America) burns and the economy takes it toll on more and more
American lives. The solution to America's problems is found in a candidate
(Romney) that they don't like for the pettiest and most unfounded paranoid
reasons. They will probably get what they want....deserve. Let us
not forget that they shunned conservative and honorable candidates: Bachman,
Santorum, and Perry because of their debate performances, and are now
salivating over a reformed womanizing adulterer, a deeply ingrained Washington
insider, who is a good debater. Go figure.
Sayin' it again, hope it puts some out of their pain. I will only vote Mitt if
he's the nominee. The libs are destroying our republic, so any of the current
contenders would be better, marital histories aside. How hideous was Clinton to
live through, but he knew how to compromise and he eventually saved the entire
Balkans from implosion by rescuing Kosovo. All Mitt's negatives mentioned in
the article and in these comments add up to a trust issue. I would campaign for
Huntsman if he would get more dynamic and urgent in his delivery. I wish
Huntsman would replace Romney, at least flipping would be a non- issue.I'm not sure Utah Mormons can view MR objectively, as per these comments. But
I can tell the whiners here that Mitt's religion IS the deal breaker for my
evangelical camp. We are not saying anything about a candidate's right to
religious affiliation. We are saying exactly what Jeffress and other pastors
say from their pulpit: Do your LDS homework and you will know where a staunch
Mormon's allegiance lies, (which excludes Huntsman). He is ultimately held to
the dictates of his prophet.Own your own theology, please.
PT Barnum is credited with the phrase "There's a succor born every
minute." He actually never said it, but what the heck. Nevertheless, it
seems to be true, because there are a lot of succors out there getting led down
a path of outright lies and half truths, and the ones doing the leading are the
very enemy we're trying to defeat. What's amazing are the completely transparent
so called comical "proofs" out on the web to show Romney's
"flip-flopping." And the majority are buying into it! It's sad if
we're that stupid. Example:@atl134"He told Huckabee he
supported the personhood amendment..." Are you kidding? No, he
did not! Do you actually know what he agreed to, "Absolutely?" You're
either one of the agendized liars, or you're one of those "bobbing
heads" biting the bait because it's "oh so shiny."Mitt did admittedly alter his stance on Roe v Wade (but not his personal view
on abortion), and he explained himself. So what?! Now he's a flip-flopper on
everything, and the Pied Piper keeps playing his pipe. Are we really going to
throw our best hope under the bus because we're so easily played? Really?
Romney would be a good president because of his ability to learn and progress.
Flip-flopping is a national media term that they themselves have saddled him
with. I appreciate his ability to have an opinion, study the situation and make
changes. EVERY SINGLE PERSON ON EARTH has done that. There is no bad-mouthing
someone else who does that. The continual harrassment in that arena is to keep
negative things in front of the American people. You've said it, now drop it
and allow the average American to make a decision. Nobody has
"flip-flopped" more than Barak and yet....no criticism from the media.
@Shazandra:"But I can tell the whiners here that Mitt's
religion IS the deal breaker for my evangelical camp."You
better look closely at your evangelical camp, then. Because the Mormon camp and
your evangelical camp are close to 95 percent alike."We are not
saying anything about a candidate's right to religious affiliation."You certainly are saying something. Because, if Romney was not LDS you
sound like you'd vote for him. You're coming across two-faced."We are saying exactly what Jeffress and other pastors say from their
pulpit: Do your LDS homework and you will know where a staunch Mormon's
allegiance lies."Jeffress and other pastors are should research
their own origins."He is ultimately held to the dictates of his
prophet."That's probably true... and his prophet says this
country is choice above all other lands, that the Founding Fathers were inspired
as they penned the US Constitution which should be defended at all costs."Own your own theology, please."Stop modifying
Romney's theology, please. He tells us he believes Jesus Christ, born in the
meridian of time, is the Son of God and Savior of mankind. All else is
Why not start asking the question about why Mormon Republicans and Mormon
Independents don't like him?Because we don't like his policies.
Couple of additional thoughts:1. Statistically, the Mormon vote
simply won't matter in this election.2. This is shaping up like
2004, where the Democrats simply couldn't believe that they couldn't beat a weak
incumbent, then had to reinvent themselves. 2012 is the GOP's moment.3. Those of us Mormon independents who would rather have four more years of
Obama than one year of Romney, simply can't believe the (maybe) good fortune
that maybe Newt will blow up the GOP with a nomination!
WildcatYou said the auto companies paid back their bailout money. Question, were
did the money they used to pay that money back come from? yet another
government loan. So they simply took out a loan from the government to pay back
a loan. What will they do when the time comes to pay that loan back? Take out
yet another government loan. the money never really gets paid back. As for
businesses do I understand correctly that you see no problem with double
taxation? If that is the case how about we take away your deduction for your
state income tax. After all it is the same principle you have already paid the
tax on it but lets tax you again. Also your idea of not letting any
business into the American market that does not bring their money back to the
us, how many companies do you think would do business in America? About 10%. Do
you really want to see the US drop to third world status fast? You seem to
forget that companies have branches all over the world. Big difference between
them making money over seas and you sending it over seas.
Time Magazine is part of the liberal left's machine. Time photoshop photos and
contrive provocative and pejorative titles which tend to be negative on
republicans all the while ignoring democrat problems and glamorizing Obama,
Hilary, and all the others."Why Don't Voters Like Me?"
C'mon. VOTERS have liked Mitt plenty in Massachussetts...they elected him
Governor. Mitt hasn't been placed to an official vote since then. And he's got
a solid basis of support among Repulbicans and Independents.And he
CAN beat Barack Obama. Which is why the left-wing media machine is in
overdrive."When did you stop beating your wife?" Same
approach. Get it?
Alfred, I didn't mean to sound do strident. Hope you're not always so
mean-spirited. Don't know where the 2-faced part came in, so I'll try to be
clear and see if the censors back off.Clearly religion alone is not
the sole issue, or I wouldn't back Mitt or John, which I stated I would. What I
meant about religion being the deal-breaker, is the history of Mormon doctrinal
reversals on socially controversial issues (1890, 1978, 1991). This makes many
voters nervous about whether Mitt would do a 180 on a particular issue or
policy, should the factors mitigate or SLC leaders insist.For me, I
am happy that thoughtful persons can re-evaluate issues and change positions
based on conscience. Every article written on Mitt's record questions his
motives. I am 7th generation LDS, fully committed for the first 35 years of my
life, so I know the incumbancy on following the prophet. I believe that Mitt is
a man of integrity and would also be obedient to his prophet. I have been a
committed Biblical Christian for the past 25 years, so now I understand their
concern of "what if" Mitt reversals.Capish?
Romney is potentially an outstanding candidate, but he is frustrating me this
time around the way he did last time. He comes off as an opportunist. He needs
to show more political courage and fire in the belly. Everyone was
wringing their hands when Newt violated the base's orthodoxy and announced there
should be a path to legal status for some illegals. Mitt jumped on the
bandwagon to condemn the position. Instead of plummeting Newt has surged. Voters
are attracted to boldness. They love the Chris Christie type of fearlessness.
Whether they agree with Newts position on immigration or not (I do), they like a
candidate who is not afraid to say it like it is and take the heat.I
tend to think Mitt would be the best general election candidate but part of me
wonders if he would be another Meg Whitman.
Romney:- Valedictorian at BYU - Baker's scholar at
Harvard (go look it up)- Master's degrees in business AND law- enormously successful in private business, now worth between $200-$300
million (compare this to many of Obama's closest advisers who never had to turn
a profit or go hungry)- previous executive leadership experience as
a state governor, including Massachusetts' Commander In Chief of state military
forces- put aside partisanship prejudices/trash-talk by successfully
campaigning/winning the governor's seat as a Republican in a heavily
Democrat-controlled state LONG before Scott Brown- turned a loss
into one of the few profit-earning Olympics (Salt Lake) in 2002 -
turned Massachusetts' budget from red to black while governor-
volunteer service to community as a church leader for well over 5 years (Bishop
and Stake President)- would give ALL his Presidential salary ($1.6
million total) back to the American taxpayers if elected (yes, he's on record as
committing to this)- looks, talks and acts
"Presidential"- understands committment (never
divorced)- understands morality (never had an affair)-
understands family (5 kids)- willing to let all of America see his
birth/school records without a fightNope, nothing there that America
needs at all.....Romney 2012
"Massachusetts' Commander In Chief of state military forces".... I
love this one. Kind of like Palin being command and chief of Alaska's military
forces. Brain - how many men did Mit have to send into combat? How many wars
did he have to manage? "- turned Massachusetts' budget from
red to black while governor" .. and exactly how did he do that? By
himself? By taking pledges to vote against the other party at all cost? Don't
think so."- turned Massachusetts' budget from red to black
while governor" Are you kidding me? Well then, why doesn't he
proactively do this? Why not release his grades from Stanford? Or even high
school.All you have done is highlight that the President and Mitt
really aren't that much different.
Time and other media publications that seem to make the most noise in this
country are anti-any Republican or conservative....they know Mitt is the one
they have to discredit for another Obama (finish destroying America) victory.Therefore, people who only listen to the noise and the sound-bites are
told they don't like Mitt, or shouldn't like Mitt, and consequently, they say
they don't, like sheep who are too busy eating and socializing to really
care...Mitt is the only one I see who can save, turn around this
country, and we must support him all we can, if we care at all for our nation,
DRay - you are just silly. Look at the first of any group getting into office
and you will see like coverage. When Kennedy ran for office, there were all
kids of questions about can a Catholic be President. You have seen it with
women being the first in any of their offices as well.As an LDS, I
think we need to stop looking for reasons to feel self persecuted. How many
times has old Al Gore, failed twice to become President graced covers of
magazines talking about his failure to reach the ultimate office. Quit
believing the constant cry baby howlings of the radio heads that some how
Republicans are persecuted. They aren't. They reach the highest office just as
often as do the others in the other party.It is only that we stand
up and take notice when people like us have the light of the media shown on
them. We don't remember all the times when other groups have same treatment.
It is human nature.But don't start creating your own reality just to
match what you think others must be thinking.
I do not like Mitt Romney because of his religion.Will you post that
Vanka - what a silly reason to like or dislike someone. But at least you are
consistent in your thought processes. Why be object when you have everything
already figured out.