So it begins.  Looks like the conservatives will put him through the buzz saw.  Just wait until someone starts writing about cookey mormon practices.  I hate to say I told you so but I think Romney is going to have a really difficult time.  The media is going to slam him every chance they get and some in the evangelical movement will help him do it.  DOA?

It's way to early to write Mitt Romney's political obituary.  Every politician has difficult issues to contend with, and yet, someone eventually gets elected.

Do conservatives really feel that it is important to discriminate against gays?  Perhaps for some, but by no means all.  I don't believe that principled conservatives will advocate job, housing, and commercial discrimination against gays, nor advocate violence against gays.  Gay marriage was not even on the horizon when Romney made those statements, and we now now that he is totally against it, both by word and by deeds.  His recent actions will speak far louder than his decades-old words.

-- Edited by Randy at 13:29, 2006-12-11

-- Edited by Randy at 13:30, 2006-12-11

I didn't get what you were saying at first, but figured it out.

-- Edited by Randy at 15:15, 2006-12-11

He's a politician who has gotten where he is playing the political game.  He can just say his position has evolved (people can change their minds).  This issue isn't big enough to derail his efforts.

Romney is a manufactured candidate.  He is to politics what Britney Spears or The Monkees are to music. 

I hope the evangelicals savage him early and often so the Republicans can get an intelligent candidate in there.  I wish Rick Santorum would run.  He has zero chance, but that's not stopping Dennis Kucinich.

Here is my opinion of Romney's purported "saving" of the Salt Lake Olympics:

He was a  pretty boy figurehead who got to receive all the kudos for the hard work of a whole slew of people.  If it hadn't been him, it would have been some other Ken Doll.

The men who were vilified for bribery did EXACTLY what every other successful olympic committee had done for at least the prior 20 years.  The IOC was corrupt, and the Salt Lake Olympic committee gave them what it had to to get the olympics.  The filthy IOC was exposed, and everyone was SHOCKED AND APPALLED  that there was quid pro quo going on around here.

Welch and others were convenient scapegoats, but none were convicted.

If those who paid bribes hadn't done what they did, Salt Lake would have never got the olympics.

Romney got to ride in on his pretty horsey, be propped up by the smart people, and take credit for "saving the troubled Salt Lake Olympics."  Baaah!

Romney is a very engaging person, with very little mental horsepower.  He doesn't have what it takes to be a good president, and the Republican party will be much better off if we kick his lightweight butt to the curb ASAP.

What is it with all these Mormon lightweights?  Our performers, our politicians, MOST of our authors, are all just as plastic and insignificant as they can possibly be.

-- Edited by Hoss Cartwright at 14:19, 2006-12-12

Hoss-

You are correct in your assessment of the unfairness that was heaped on the original organizers of the Salt Lake City Olympics.  On that we agree completely.

However, after looking at Romney's record of accomplishment, not just being in charge of the Salt Lake City Olympics but also in business and as governor, it really baffles me how he can fairly be reduced to being a Ken doll.

I used to have great respect for Santorum, but he spent a great deal of that when he decided to throw Pat Toomey under the bus in favor of keeping a liberal senator in office.

-R

I wish Mitt Romney could be prevailed upon to explain why he promoted a socialist welfare program as he did, and perhaps also explain the stance he took on abortion.

Because of Mitt's promotion of the socialist mandatory health insurance program in Massachusetts, he's in trouble with many Latter Day Saints, and especially the over 20,000 Utah voters who voted for Constitution Party candidates. He may have the most integrity, sensitivity, leadership and values that we will see in any candidate who makes the final cut in this election cycle, but that is only because the powers, and that includes the media, who control who makes the final cut, will as usual crucify anyone of the calibre of previous presidential or VP candidates Ron Paul, Michael Peroutka, Chuck Baldwin, Alan Keyes, and any other candidate who would dare demonstrate intention to adhere to constitutional principles. It is a shame that we cannot find an LDS of the calibre of the above 4. Instead, we turn out the likes of Reid, Cannon, Hatch and a few others who continually ignore the Constitution like all the rest.

The late 70, H. Verlan Andersen put it this way in his book "Many Are Called But Few Are Chosen", Ch. 12:  "Every Latter-day Saint should thoroughly understand the fact that Satan's great weapon today is political in nature. The religion which he is effectively espousing is the destruction of free agency by destroying the right and control of property; it is robbery by government. We should know from what our prophets have told us that Communism, Socialism, and Welfare Statism are each a part of this satanic doctrine."      "I warn you that government subsidies are not the Lord's way; and if we begin to accept, we are on our way to becoming subsidized politically as well as financially." (Harold B. Lee, The Teachings of Harold B. Lee, [1996], p. 314-315)

In 12 years living and working in European countries (Germany, England, Italy, & Denmark) I discovered that many church members, especially in leadership positons, had heard and accepted the teachings of Prophets, Apostles, and other General Authorities, especially David O. McKay, Harold B. Lee, Ezra Taft Benson, Spencer W. Kimball, and H. Verlan Andersen, about the evils of socialist government, and they recognized they had to live where they were placed and work within the system, but not foster or promote it. 

 

 

 

 

Roper wrote:

---

Well, this is a major derail, but I've often wondered about this:

Socialism, at its most basic, is the distribution of wealth and property determined by social control. One of it's worthy goals is the elimination of poverty.

Our Law of Consecration, as envisioned and for a while implemented by Jospeh Smith is remarkably similar:  The distribution of wealth and property based on ecclesiastical control.  Again, one of the worthy goals is the elimination of poverty.

The shining example of a government that fully implemented it is the City of Enoch.

Why do we, as Latter-day Saints, have such a problem with Socialism?  Is it that we agree with the principles but not with the implementation?

---

Roper, both the Lord's and Lucifer's plans had the stated goal of bringing everyone back to Heavenly Father. It was a very laudable goal. But the plans differed drastically in their details. The United Order and communism may both have the stated goal of eliminating poverty, but they are as different as the Lord's and Lucifer's plans, and for the same reasons. In fact, Communism is an earthly attempt to implement Lucifer's plan. Communism is based off of force; the United Order is based off of choices and stewarship.
Pres. Benson wrote about this very subject; unfortunately I can't find it at the moment.
But suffice it to say that the United Order and communism are starkly different in both principles and implementation.
I have seen first hand the ravages of communism on the people of Ukraine. Not only was their infrastructure wrecked by that evil system, but their whole outlook on life. The older generation will have to grow old and die before that country can truly embrace capitalism because of the way communism poisoned the mind. In fact, I was constantly reminded while there of the children of Israel spending 40 years in the desert before the Lord allowed them to enter the promised land. Their older generation had been slaves too, just as the citizens of the Soviet Union were slaves to the state.

National health care is evil, but I guess that's a subject for another thread, so as not to totally derail this one.
But communism, in all it's forms, everywhere it's practiced, is evil. It is based off of force, just like the devil's plan. Not every form of communal living is communism (or socialism, I do realize there's a difference, even though I may use them interchangeably). In the Israeli kibbutz, for example, you enter into the community willingly. You leave willingly. Everyone has responsibility for various aspects of the community, so they feel that they are a part of it, and not ruled over by it. Communism, for all its propoganda that it makes everyone equal, and everyone owns everything, is really just an oligarchy in every country that it's been practiced.
You will note that in my post I did not argue for our current system, because many people are poor and deprived. But our system is that way precisely because of a move towards socialism.
God's plan differs drastically from the devil's, even though at first glance they may look similar.

I have watched him perform in front of many venues and he is not stupid.  I loved his remarks in Israel last week regarding Iran.

If he can make it past McCain, he will be our next president.  The only Democrat that has a chance against him is perhaps Edwards.

Check this site out:

http://mittromney.permissiontv.com/index.html

It could take a while to get through it.

I also saw a site called Evangelicals for Mitt.

There is even a "mormons against mitt" site.

He's in the running and he's got more money garnered than most at present.

m


-- Edited by Mahonri at 20:16, 2007-02-02