Comments about ‘Romney's speech at Liberty University value-laden and heartfelt’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, May 12 2012 6:00 p.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Everett, WA

A well written article regarding what sounds like a well delivered speech by Mitt Romney. Thank you.

Clearfield, UT

That was a "heartfelt" speech pandering to the far right. It proves that Mitt tries to be all things to all people. Why am I not surprised.

Iowa City, IA

It should be obvious why Romney was so comfortable speaking with Christian ideas...BECAUSE HE'S A CHRISTIAN.

Obama tried to deliver a speech like that and he couldn't even contextually quote scriptures correctly. It was a mess. Romney has understanding across the spectrum. He is incredibly intelligent and proven, far more than Obama ever was 4 years ago.

Pullman, WA

It's nice to see Mitt get to talk from his heart about things he is truly experienced in. Who better to lead the nation in respect for the family and for Christian virtues than a good ole Mormon boy. We wrote the book on family.

South Jordan, UT

There seems to be a big distinction between being a Christian and being Christ-like.


I agree with the author of the article as these things Romney spoke about with pointing out the most important role of the family are the life blood of the LDS. Even Jesus in the NT puts us in a family relationship with him, to "my God and your God, My Father and your Father as he said after his resurrection that He needed to first go report in to, as he also taught us to pray, to Our Father in Heaven. We are all spirit children of the most high God and as such should act with love to one another in service to our brothers and sisters. I appreciate Romney and his family for their service and sacrifice in running again for the presidency to try to save our nation from the abiss we seem on the edge of falling into, not only economically but socially and culturally as the left seeks to cut us off from those roots that are supported in the constitution and our Judeo Christian culture. Good job Mitt! "that'll do."

Maricopa, Az

Furry. You have the right to vote for Obama. However, he is nothing to no one.


It sounds like Bro. Romney gave a good speech. Not surprising as I think he is a good man.

However, I cannot support him for President because, in spite of his goodness, he makes some "unwise" political decisions.

I wish that he would really study the Constitution and the principles behind it according to the thinking of the Founding Fathers. Supposedly he believes that it is "an inspired document."

Quote by J. Reuben Clark Jr.:

"This earth-wide conflict has taken the form of seizing without compensation from the man who has, and giving to the man who has not; of taking from the worker the fruits of his work, and giving to the idler who does not work. It has from its very nature become an economic, uncompensated leveling downward, not upwards of the whole mass. That this result may in one country be reached by confiscatory taxation, and in another by direct seizure, is a mere matter of method. The results is the same."

Now consider that in light of his support for RomneyCare. He certainly has taken from the haves and given it to the have nots.

Google Romney Obama the same.

Salt Lake City, UT

Re Macbillay and Furry1993: Did you actually hear the talk? It certainly wasn't "pandering," but an intelligent, almost classic speech emphasizing the importance of one taking responsibility for one's own actions and relying on our Creator for affirmation of one's self-worth rather than the vagaries of life and worldly accomplishments or failures. Despite Mitt's theological differences with evangelicals, he and the staff at Liberty University affirmed that mutual respect can be enjoyed by those sharing common values, such as a love for hard work, freedom, and a loving, supportive family.

It never ceases to amaze me that when any candidate tries to promote decent values or be conciliatory to voters, those with different political beliefs only look for the "negative," or try to ferret out some devious motive in his or her communication.

Hayden, ID

@ mcbilly and furry. Mark Twain said, “I would rather see a sermon than hear one.” Mitt Romney walks his talk while Obama talks much differently than he walks and that’s the difference. Steven Covey said, “All people see the world not as it really is but as they really are”. If you look, its easy to see the vast differences in what each man values, the differences of priority and what each man esteems to be important! Character, gentlemen! It’s a beautiful thing in a leader and we haven’t had that kind of leadership since Ronald Reagan and we see the moral, cultural and economic decline in America as a result!

Jonathan Eddy
Payson, UT

@ McBillay and Furry1993

It doesn't matter what Romney says, even if it's truly from the heart. You have already passed your critical judgment on this good man.

I too was a bit dubious in the beginning. I have since changed my mind. Mitt Romney is going to get my vote. I encourage everyone to give him a chance like we did with President Obama.

Bakersfield, CA

From all of us from the "abominable" churches and sects, we appreciate Mr. Romney's support of traditional marriage.

Boise, ID

Romney understands what makes America great. It is not about government, it is about individuals with the opportunity to acheive and succeed. Not all choices lead to a better life but we are free to make our own choices - that is what made America great and that is the hope for our future.

Dammam, Saudi Arabia

"He plays to whomever he is speaking to, doesn't he?"

If he had gotten up and talked about Sodom and Gomorrah and Adam and Eve vs Adam and Steve I would agree. But he took the position of traditional marriage as being a tool to fight poverty. He is using a liberal argument to promote marriage to a conservative audience. Maybe this will make them think that that Biblical morality is as much about social justice as it is about chastity.

American Fork, UT

Who better? Obama.

A voice of Reason
Salt Lake City, UT


You don't think Obama caters his talks to his audience?

Did you know that one of the first things you learn in any debate class, prior to understanding fallacies, prior to "If P, then Q", prior to all the ways we can examine and evaluate an argument- that one of the very first things everyone is taught is to "know your audience".

If you were making an argument regarding abortion in Massachusetts and in Utah, it only stands to reason that the arguments given would be very different. A largely LDS and even more conservative state, vs a largely liberal state. Even though the state knows Romney fairly well as their former governor, the arguments would be different for good reason.

I mean you no offense. It's just that most popular political criticisms have little to no logical merit whatsoever. There are real reasons to criticize someone, even Romney. While I mostly agree with Romney, even I disagree on what Romney has said on foreign policy and I'm not keen on how willing he is to justify business (Although I'm not at all anti-capitalist).

Everything political deserves consideration. Popular criticisms rarely offer that.


Romney gave a speech. To say it was "heartfelt" is dishonest. Romney's heart is a great mystery as he flips from position to position. To pretend to have some knowledge about what he is actually feeling is beneath the minimum standard of journalism.

Mcallen, TX


What are some of Obama's values? Is he honest, or truthful?? Give some examples.

Southwest Utah, UT

IdahoStranger: Just who do you intend to support for President?

A voice of Reason
Salt Lake City, UT


You're accused Eric Schulzke of being dishonest in claiming something subjective about Romney's feelings. However, Schulzke's claim is plausible while yours is far less reasonable.

1) If there is any possibility of examining the beliefs or thoughts of another- the only person who even has the ability to adequately represent them-self... is them-self. If you watched Romney's address as I did, you would know that Romney claimed how he felt. While he could have been lying- he is the only human being on the planet qualified to claim it! And FYI, Schulzke's honesty is equally subjective.

2) Schulzke could have simply referred to Romney's own claim- again, invalidating your criticism.

3) Romney did not give commentary on changing political positions- making Schulzke's representation of Romney's own claims, own words, own speech, more accurate and honest than your own.

4) You can't qualify the subjective because of the objective. A political position changed 100 times doesn't negate the possibility that each change could be completely heartfelt and honest. Subscribing to anything less is unwarranted judgement. Unlike your criticism, the quality of journalism here is untarnished.

to comment

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