Power Line News

Here’s a pretty funny rip on Mitt:
http://tinyurl.com/2q4l27

DeeperThought - 24 September 2007 11:48 PM

IronDioPriest - 24 September 2007 09:17 PM

I can easily imagine Mitt Romney sitting across the coffee table from my wife and I, telling us about the many great reasons why we should up our insurance coverage.

I can imagine him sitting in the office of the car dealership, having a fake conversation with the salesperson, glancing my way through the window and smiling, just before the salesperson comes back out to tell me that their manager approves my offer.

I can imagine him sitting at the local news desk, a talented and articulate anchor, ensconced in local culture and charity in seeming perpetuity.

I can imagine him as my favorite doctor.

Or as the CEO of a major local corporation.

Or as the father of a little pageant girl.

But for the life of me, no matter how much I like what the guy says or does, I just cannot imagine Mitt Romney as President of the United States.

It is as simple as that, for me.

That’s a pretty low blow, especially considering that his actual accomplishments are already greater than all the things you have listed.

I’m only talking about the impression he leaves on me; on the way he makes me feel when I hear him speak. I am well aware of his credentials, and if he is the nominee, I would vote for him in a heartbeat. But according to the poll numbers, I do not think I am alone in my impression that there is something about Mitt Romney that thwarts complete trust in his genuineness.

Sheryl - 24 September 2007 05:46 AM

trapeze - 24 September 2007 01:05 AM

richard_223 - 24 September 2007 12:49 AM

Since Mitt wants to be Commander in Chief, I think it is a legitimate question.

Since Mitt is running for president the whole Mormon theology is a legitimate subject.  This is political reality whether one likes it or not.

And again, like it or not, Mormon theology is very, very strange.

Sorry if this bothers all of the Romney supporters out there but you had better face this now or you will regret it later.

______________________________________________

As a side note:  I have been a political junkie for a very long time and this is, by far, the weakest field of nominees that I have ever seen.  No matter who is eventually nominated it will come down to holding one’s nose and pulling the anti-Hillary lever.

This whole post makes me wish there was some sort of IQ test and a screening for religious bigotry before one could pull the lever.

This is by far one of the weakest posts I’ve ever read by a political junkie.

You certainly are a wit, Sheryl. 

But perhaps I am giving you twice the credit you deserve.

trapeze - 24 September 2007 01:05 AM

Since Mitt is running for president the whole Mormon theology is a legitimate subject.  This is political reality whether one likes it or not.

And again, like it or not, Mormon theology is very, very strange.

Sorry if this bothers all of the Romney supporters out there but you had better face this now or you will regret it later.

Hmmm, the very, very strange Mormon theology is a matter of public record. In fact 3,500 pages of senatorial committee record from 100 witnesses for 4 years.

But in the end, 100 years ago, the Senate allowed the first Mormon Senator, Reed Smoot, to take his seat.

Are we planning on putting Romney through something similar? Or do you think we can learn something from the past?

Sebastian - 25 September 2007 03:33 AM

trapeze - 24 September 2007 01:05 AM

Since Mitt is running for president the whole Mormon theology is a legitimate subject.  This is political reality whether one likes it or not.

And again, like it or not, Mormon theology is very, very strange.

Sorry if this bothers all of the Romney supporters out there but you had better face this now or you will regret it later.

Hmmm, the very, very strange Mormon theology is a matter of public record. In fact 3,500 pages of senatorial committee record from 100 witnesses for 4 years.

Yes...and almost all of that testimony was related to polygamy and the question of whether or not the senator’s oath of office to uphold the US constitution was credible.  All of that nonsense took place after he was elected and sworn in.  A stupid spectacle.

Sebastian - 25 September 2007 03:33 AM

But in the end, 100 years ago, the Senate allowed the first Mormon Senator, Reed Smoot, to take his seat.

Are we planning on putting Romney through something similar? Or do you think we can learn something from the past?

Oh, please...don’t be ridiculous.

“We” won’t have any say in the matter at all.

Should he get the nomination, Romney will be tried in the extremely unfair court of public opinion during the general election campaign.  And that public opinion will be thoroughly shaped by whatever the MSM says and prints.  The MSM will orchestrate their coverage to maximize the impact against any Republican candidate.  Use your head.  Which Republican is the easiest target? (Don’t say McCain...he hasn’t a prayer after the immigration fiasco)

Could it be the candidate whose religion includes the end goal of becoming a god?  The ruler of his own planet?  Do ya think?

When was the last time the MSM cheered a Republican presidential candidate into office?  Don’t strain yourself on that one.  Republicans have to win despite the MSM propaganda and that means picking the candidate with the least amount of controversy in his resume. 

None of these guys are even close to the image of conservative perfection.  Know what the enemy will do and then choose wisely.

BTW, heck of an example there...the author of the Smoot-Hawley Tarrif Act.  You really want to compare Smoot to Romney?  Really?

Ya know...I will vote for him if he is the nominee...but if the MSM is successful it won’t matter how many thinking Republicans don’t sit on their hands.  The damage will already be done.

IronDioPriest - 24 September 2007 09:17 PM

I can easily imagine Mitt Romney sitting across the coffee table from my wife and I, telling us about the many great reasons why we should up our insurance coverage.

I can imagine him sitting in the office of the car dealership, having a fake conversation with the salesperson, glancing my way through the window and smiling, just before the salesperson comes back out to tell me that their manager approves my offer.

I can imagine him sitting at the local news desk, a talented and articulate anchor, ensconced in local culture and charity in seeming perpetuity.

I can imagine him as my favorite doctor.

Or as the CEO of a major local corporation.

Or as the father of a little pageant girl.

But for the life of me, no matter how much I like what the guy says or does, I just cannot imagine Mitt Romney as President of the United States.

It is as simple as that, for me.

Very well said, IDP!

.

trapeze - 25 September 2007 06:42 AM

Should he get the nomination, Romney will be tried in the extremely unfair court of public opinion during the general election campaign.  And that public opinion will be thoroughly shaped by whatever the MSM says and prints.  The MSM will orchestrate their coverage to maximize the impact against any Republican candidate.  Use your head.  Which Republican is the easiest target? (Don’t say McCain...he hasn’t a prayer after the immigration fiasco)

Could it be the candidate whose religion includes the end goal of becoming a god?  The ruler of his own planet?  Do ya think?

When was the last time the MSM cheered a Republican presidential candidate into office?  Don’t strain yourself on that one.  Republicans have to win despite the MSM propaganda and that means picking the candidate with the least amount of controversy in his resume. 

None of these guys are even close to the image of conservative perfection.  Know what the enemy will do and then choose wisely.

Ya know...I will vote for him if he is the nominee...but if the MSM is successful it won’t matter how many thinking Republicans don’t sit on their hands.  The damage will already be done.

The point is that this isn’t anything new to Mormons. The media and bloggers are running around like the sky is falling that a Mormon is running for office and Mormons are this “new” thing. They’re not. We’re old news, but everything is new again, I guess.

Mormons have held all sorts of poliitical offices, all over the country. Everyone pretty much has a high opinion of us as neighbors, friends, and professionals. The Mormon church has a fantastic reputation with world leaders all around the globe.

We’ve heard all the “respectful” doctrinal queries before and we have answers for all of them regardless of whether you like our answers. You want to disagree with Mormon theology? Fine. I don’t care. Mainstream Christianity looks pretty weird to me.

But when you cry wolf over strange doctrines, it’s you doing the damage and not the MSM. Mitt knew that his religion could become an issue in the campaign and he’s handling it pretty good by not letting it become an issue from him. He’s handled it twice before in past elections.

I don’t believe the Democrats are going to make an issue of Mitt’s religion, at least not directly. The MSM has already been running religious articles of various qualities. They did that during the Olympics. They all made predictions of how things would be in Salt Lake City, and they were all wrong. I don’t think the general electorate cares.

It’ll be the Republicans who make him damaged goods or not on the issue of religion. If the Republicans show they don’t care, then story will be about the intolerate Left. The MSM is just wanting to make the story about the intolerant Right, esp Evangelicals, and these sort of comments just make the case for them.

And if Mitt gets damaged because of religion, that will set the pattern for the next religious conservative who runs for office.

This is old news, but here’s a video of Romney going toe-to-toe with the host of a radio talk show.  The host is extremely annoying, and at one point Romney almost loses his temper.  The fireworks start about 8 minutes into the video.  I bring this up because it shows him without his usual veneer, which may be more appealing to some people.

Sebastian - 25 September 2007 09:02 PM

The point is that this isn’t anything new to Mormons. The media and bloggers are running around like the sky is falling that a Mormon is running for office and Mormons are this “new” thing. They’re not. We’re old news, but everything is new again, I guess.

You had better believe everything old will be new again...like never before.  This is the big leagues...hardball.  The Democrats and the MSM play for keeps at this level...Dan Rather pushed all his chips into the pot in the last cycle and came up short one career and one legacy.

Sebastian - 25 September 2007 09:02 PM

Mormons have held all sorts of poliitical offices, all over the country. Everyone pretty much has a high opinion of us as neighbors, friends, and professionals. The Mormon church has a fantastic reputation with world leaders all around the globe.

That won’t earn Romney a pass when the rubber meets the road.

Sebastian - 25 September 2007 09:02 PM

We’ve heard all the “respectful” doctrinal queries before and we have answers for all of them regardless of whether you like our answers. You want to disagree with Mormon theology? Fine. I don’t care. Mainstream Christianity looks pretty weird to me.

Again, that isn’t the point.  Christianity has been under the microscope countless times in the past.  For all of your examples, Mormonism hasn’t.  Not at this level of politics.

Sebastian - 25 September 2007 09:02 PM

But when you cry wolf over strange doctrines, it’s you doing the damage and not the MSM. Mitt knew that his religion could become an issue in the campaign and he’s handling it pretty good by not letting it become an issue from him. He’s handled it twice before in past elections.

It won’t be for him to “handle” because he won’t be directly targeted.  Mormonism (and its doctrine) will be targeted in order to paint Romney as “fill in the blank/take your pick.” Do you remember the infamous, so-called “whispering campaigns” of elections past?  Same thing in the case.  The strategy will only need to pull off enough fundamentalist Christians (persuade them to not vote at all) and independent voters to allow the general election to go to HC by default. 

Sebastian - 25 September 2007 09:02 PM

I don’t believe the Democrats are going to make an issue of Mitt’s religion, at least not directly.

Of they are going to make an issue of Mitt’s religion and of course it will be through an indirect attack...by proxy.  HC will never get her hands dirty, especially when it would backfire on her and make her look intolerant.  The work will be done by the usual suspects.  The MSM will do the subtle stuff and the real dirty work will be done by Democrat operatives.  Push polls.  Whispering campaigns.  And countless other little attacks.

Sebastian - 25 September 2007 09:02 PM

The MSM has already been running religious articles of various qualities. They did that during the Olympics. They all made predictions of how things would be in Salt Lake City, and they were all wrong. I don’t think the general electorate cares.

Welcome to the big leagues.  This isn’t the Olympics and the real game hasn’t even started yet.  The “general” electorate isn’t even awake yet.  When they do start paying attention they will already have been force fed subtle negative images without even realizing it.  You said it yourself, the MSM has already started.  The bias against Mormonism will already have been put in place by the time the general electorate awakens.

Sebastian - 25 September 2007 09:02 PM

It’ll be the Republicans who make him damaged goods or not on the issue of religion. If the Republicans show they don’t care, then story will be about the intolerate Left. The MSM is just wanting to make the story about the intolerant Right, esp Evangelicals, and these sort of comments just make the case for them.

My comments mean nothing in the big scheme of things.  This is merely political conjecture.  If you want to read religious intolerance into it that is your priviledge but it is misplaced.

Sebastian - 25 September 2007 09:02 PM

And if Mitt gets damaged because of religion, that will set the pattern for the next religious conservative who runs for office.

If you don’t think that a candidate’s religion has not been fair game before now then you aren’t thinking this through.  Kennedy’s Catholicism was.  Jimmy Carter’s “born again” status was.  (Clinton claimed to have faith and got a pass from the MSM) GW Bush’s Christianity was.  Anyone who runs for president and has anything approaching a serious religious conviction or heritage is open to this attack.

Mitt will suffer at the hands of Republicans in the primaries just like any other primary candidate.  That’s how it works, unfortunately, in an open primary.  That is why an incumbent is so hard to unseat...no infighting. 

So don’t be dense about the point I am making.  It won’t be Republicans who will attack Mitt over Mormonism.  If he gets the nomination he will be supported by the party and by party loyalists, yes, even Christians.  Thinking Christians, anyway.  To sit out the vote is a fabulously stupid statement of so-called principle.  Allowing HC to win by default would be a shameful event that the country would suffer through for 4 - 8 years.  The damage would be incalculable.

Sebastian - 25 September 2007 09:02 PM

...But when you cry wolf over strange doctrines, it’s you doing the damage and not the MSM. Mitt knew that his religion could become an issue in the campaign and he’s handling it pretty good by not letting it become an issue from him. He’s handled it twice before in past elections.

… The MSM is just wanting to make the story about the intolerant Right, esp Evangelicals, and these sort of comments just make the case for them.

Spot on, Sebastian.

Which Republican is the easiest target? (Don’t say McCain...he hasn’t a prayer after the immigration fiasco)

Could it be the candidate whose religion includes the end goal of becoming a god?  The ruler of his own planet?  Do ya think?

Well, according to polls, 25% of the folks who are likely voters won’t vote for someone who is a Mormon.

Then again, according to those very same polls 33% say they won’t vote for someone who is twice divorced.

I’d say Mitt Romney is looking better and better. Do ya think?

Trapeze,

Your prophecies are very entertaining! And your phrasing is a crack up too: “old will be new again like never before”, “force fed subtle negative images”, “religious bias will have been put in place”, “when the rubber meets the road”....you’re hilarious!!

Maybe you’re right and the MSM and ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, the Sundance Film Channel, IFC will force feed broadcasts of “September Dawn” over and over again right before the election. Or Big Love will get special double airings on HBO around the November 2008 vote as well.

Hopefully, Mitt will ignore the majority of it as he’s doing now. As he should too. Debating ancient theological doctrines & religious tenets is a huge subject...too vast for a political campaign. Mitt’s been running what a seperation of church and state campaign should be. So smart and good for him.

Anyway, Mitt isn’t the only one who’s going to get hit hard.

All the old Hillary news will be new again like never before too. If she gets the nomination, her many flaws will be under a microscope by her political enemies. And she can only squash so many “Paths to 9/11” from being released on DVD so it doesn’t hurt her campaign. And she can only cry “vast right-wing conspiracy” so many times.

And Bill too, all of his old crap will be brought up again and made an issue. We’ll see his finger pointing “I did not have sex with that woman”, his “is” definition, cigars & blue dresses....all of it.

It’s going to be a rough season that’s for sure.

You know, I expect the majority of “conservative christians” or “values voters” or “right-wing evangelicals” will vote for Mitt if he wins the nomination, but there will be a very loud and very vocal minority of the hard-cores who will make his very, very life difficult as we move toward November.

Old School - 26 September 2007 03:47 PM

You know, I expect the majority of “conservative christians” or “values voters” or “right-wing evangelicals” will vote for Mitt if he wins the nomination, but there will be a very loud and very vocal minority of the hard-cores who will make his very, very life difficult as we move toward November.

I’m not so sure this is true of Rudy, specially after Hillary Clinton starts running commercials showing him in drag, showing his children speaking out against him, showing his support for homosexuals and showing that he had an affair while he was married.

This is the weakest field of Republican presidential candidates that I have seen in recent history. The only silver lining is that HC’s negatives are what the are. She is shrill. She is a shrew. She is an absolutely atrocious orator. Her policies are socialist at best and outright Marxist at worst.  And she is dominating in the polls for Democrat nominees...which speaks volumes about how bad their lineup is, too.