Mitt’s Character, and Presidential Virtue
Every single incident of kindness has been brought up by someone else, usually by a beneficiary of Mr. Romney’s time, efforts, and financial resources. This is a man who has repeatedly gone out of his way to help others in whatever way seems most appropriate at the time, and who doesn’t believe in trumpeting it.
As for Mr. Romney’s wealth: he’s earned it. Yes, he had advantages. So do celebrity dropouts like Paris Hilton, but all she’s managed to do with her advantages is become a high-maintenance tramp. Mr. Romney worked for his money, saved, and yes, lived lean. This is all publicly available information. Yet it isn’t something the Romneys tell people, any more than they tell people about the time they invest in various charitable organizations (which, unlike the money, does not appear in tax returns). Those who object to this are being petty: you don’t get to be wealthy without a lot of hard work and a bit of luck. I don’t begrudge those who have done the hard work their bit of luck, although I do wish some of it would come my way once or twice.
Yes, he’s screwed up. No one gets to adulthood without a few messes and mistakes. As far as I can tell from the public record, Mr. Romney has done his best to remedy the mistakes he has made, all of which seem to be pretty minor in the scheme of things. He’s never supported mass-murdering tyrants for a start, and so far shows no sign of wanting to adopt the methods used by mass-murdering tyrants.
It’s a refreshing change to see someone who appears to be looking at the presidency as a responsibility and a difficult job that someone needs to step up and do, humbly.
I’ll take that over the ideologues any day.
Please note that not all Australians find US politics so odd, and quite a few of us—even if we’ve never lived anywhere else—have actually studied some US history and politics.
Also, please note that very few political prisoners were sent to Australia, and the criminality of the convicts of early settlement has had less influence on modern Australia than the bizarre opinion above might make you think.
Furthermore, please note that many Australians attend US-style evangelical churches.
It is true that Australians who rely on the mainstream media for information about US politics are ill-served by an even more anti-Republican bias than that which US residents love and enjoy, and many Australians, consequently, delight in having quite bizarre misconceptions about the US. For example, very many Australians (at least in the media) appear to consider Pres. Obama a clever, charming and competent fellow! Many Australians like to think that Americans are largely ill-informed and constantly dining inappropriately or shooting each other—in other words, many Australians look down on the majority of Americans rather similarly to the way élitists in your media look down on the majority of Americans.
Ms Paulk, of course, is entitled to her opinions but they have little connection, I suspect, with her odd perception of what her compatriots tend to believe.
Deadman,
It looks like I accidentally hit some of your hot buttons, for which I apologize.
Please note that not all Australians find US politics so odd, and quite a few of us—even if we’ve never lived anywhere else—have actually studied some US history and politics.
Actually, I’ve found that studying US history and politics (although I readily admit that what I knew when I came here was probably a lot less than you know now) isn’t enough. Nor is studying US culture from the outside. You actually have to live in another country because without that you never uncover the blind spots that every culture has. Living in America showed me that many of the things that were simply how things worked in Australia weren’t universal, from the simple (where powdered milk can be found in the supermarket) to the complex.
Also, please note that very few political prisoners were sent to Australia, and the criminality of the convicts of early settlement has had less influence on modern Australia than the bizarre opinion above might make you think.
A lot depends on how you classify the Irish convicts. I see them as primarily political because even though most were convicted of criminal offenses, those offenses were handy bludgeons for the politics. The convict influence on modern Australia is subtle, and not something I realized until after I’d lived in the US for some years. It has to do with the founding myths of the country and how they underlie some of the base assumptions that most people never realize exist because they’re invisible unless you do what I did and live in more than one country.
The shorter version? I would have agreed with you before I came to America and lived in a completely different culture.
Furthermore, please note that many Australians attend US-style evangelical churches.
Indeed they do. And the Australians I know and knew (for the most part middle-class, the kind that get tagged as “average”) consider those churches as a bit dubious – but typically don’t ever say so as long as the people they’re dealing with are decent people.
I do tend to work in broad generalities to which I know there are large number of exceptions. It simplifies digging out trends.
Your comment has almost nothing at all to do with the THESIS of the article, however.
Incidentally, the thing Mrs. Paulk found strange about American politics was the assumption that the president should be a paragon of virtue. She stated this explicitly. Studying US history and politics does NOT clarify this view… in fact, between Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and even, G*d help us, FDR, it would really just make it more mystifying. The former members tended to be frank about and weary of their personality flaws and the last… the last is the reason why people who haven’t studied the great depression in detail think that Keynsianism works and one of the most egregious advocates of centralized government in US history. Nor does Mrs. Paulk say anything to suggest she has not studied US history and politics. Between these two things, your implicit accusation is unfounded.
On the base stock of Australia… we can argue with proportions all night and day, but there were certainly English monarchs who were in the habit of disposing of vagrants via sending the local guards through the streets, picking up said vagrants, and putting them on a mass boat for Oz, the same way we give them bus tickets now. To that stock was added otherwise useless or unacceptably evil sons of the English gentry, some good old-fashioned colonists who (as was the case with several AMERICAN colonists) often had a few ethically questionable concerns which were greatly improved by putting half a world between them and the questioners, English soldiers and… much more on the fringes… the aborigines. And, of course, the exiles, because Australia was a penal colony as well. Australian accents consequently bear much in common with lower-class British, that being MOST OF THE STOCK. Australian culture bears recognizable influence of lower-class Brits as well… which is why it’s traditionally less emotionally reserved (if equally understated), and less concerned with caste and class ( being mostly lower class and disgraced or suspect upper class). So, is Australian culture derived from criminals in the sense that all Australians are lying, homocidal, kleptomaniacs with strange fetishes? No, of course not.”The Moon is a Harsh Mistress” showed why… that sort of person in a penal colony is, paradoxically, among the shortest lived, because they do not establish the kind of friendships they need to survive and attract the kind of attention that gets you killed. But it IS related to Australian culture’s major divergences of manner from traditional British culture.
Many Australians may attend Evangelical churches, just as many Americans attended services at Jonestown under Jim Jones. Every population will always contain SOME people who’ll go for anything. The claim is these things are considered less mainstream or socially acceptable, while the major religious groups she mentioned are MORE mainstream and MORE socially acceptable.
And finally, none of the above are IN ANY WAY presented as the result of the media Mrs. Paulk partakes of. Since she’s… I think we can safely assume… aware of PJMedia, it seems like an awful stretch to imagine that Australian news outlets would be her primary source of news. And even if they were, how does this address her professed perplexity at the American attitude towards presidents? There are people who whine about the Republican candidate not being perfect a stone’s throw away on THIS VERY SITE. There are people on the other side of American politics who have spent four years trying to make a canonization case for Obama. The liberal nature of American or Australian media is in fact separate from the UNIFORM desire for a president to be perfect. Which, once again, was the actual FOCUS of the article.
To sum up the above: you utterly missed the point of the article, then went off on four meaningless tangents which you badly distorted, oversimplified and/or misrepresented. Now, does Mrs. Paulk have differences in opinion from the average Australian? Perhaps. Does it matter? In a country the size of Australia, “average” might be as meaningless as the “average American”. You cannot add a Californian neo-hippie, an Oregon Environmental Libertarian, an Oklahoma farmer, a New York fashion designer, and a Southern good old boy, divide by 5 and get anything meaningful.
But I’ll tell you one aspect of Australian culture I’m beginning to change my mind about. MY perception was that her compatriots believed in reading comprehension.
I wasn’t upset, but thanks for the apology.
I realise that my remarks had little—but by no means nothing—to do with the thesis of the article, which is why I asked readers unfamiliar with Australia to note that generalisations, such as “Anyone who gets up and talks about how their faith says they should do this or that is an automatic target for ridicule in Australia”, were indeed generalisations.
Considering how many people who clearly don’t lack reading-comprehension skills but who, nonetheless, were convinced that a man of small accomplishment was an oratorical genius who should be awarded a Peace Prize not for what he’d done but for what he might do if he weren’t such a lazy-arse, I thought it wasn’t such a crime to remind readers of the broadness of the sweeping statements.
Well, that was my point, but I accidentally hit some hot buttons, wherefore I apologise.
Deadman,
It’s always something of a damned if you do, damned if you don’t thing. If I acknowledge all the generalizations, the piece bloats and the point I’m making gets lost. If I don’t, I run the risk of people thinking that I mean all when I’m leaving out the many exceptions for convenience.
Fair enough, and I thank you for your response.
As an Australian, I have to agree with deadman. It is refreshing to hear an Australian talk sensibly about America and Australia for a change. To be sure, Romney, like many of those hard-nosed business types is much nicer than the humanitarian humanities academic he opposes.
It is never a good idea to paint with a broad brush. All, every, or just the name of the group, country or entity with out a qualifier is opening oneself up for offense. For example not all conservatives liked Ronald Reagan (I did but some didn’t), not all liberals like Obama (some think he hasn’t been liberal enough?), some Muslims don’t like the religious jihadists hard as that is to believe.
So qualifiers are needed. Most, some, a majority, a minority or words like these can go along way to keeping offenses to a minimum while presenting one’s ideas clearly. It would be nice if we all could back up and stop being offended over every little comment but in these days of hyper sensitivity about everything it’s not surprising that these kerphuffles happen.
Heh.
Enough with the Moron, I’ll take the Mormon
A Mormon for president? Yes, thank you.
I would tend to rank Mormons high on the scale of human decency. Whatever weird beliefs they may hold, somehow the church cultivates a lot of genuinely good people.
I’m a Mormon as well as a jerk, but I’m the exception. Most Mormons are nice.
Nice. I’m going to… ahem, appropriate that.
Good cop,Bad cop,this election is a NO BRAINER!
Oh, the irony.
Mitt Romney prays to God everyday. I notice a change in his voice the past few days and perhaps this come from repentance in his prayer closet and he may now have the ability to get more people on his side.
That said if his dogma is corrupt where does it get the people? What if mitt romney’s austerity plan brings a great depression on his people as we see happening in Europe from their austerity plan and europe affects the world. Yet USA being lead to austerity and great depression has 1000 times more power to bring the world into a great depression.We know what happened to the world from the great depression that began in 1929.
This change in Mitt Romney’s voice does not last . Demons are trying to invade him as they do with all those men and women seeking great power as we see in Lord of The Rings. Is hethe worthy one to carry this Ring of Great Power? Angels know to stay away from it yet if Mitt Romeny Loves his nation as a father loves his children he will correct his wayward dogma and use his pray closet to cast out his demons or a great depression could lead to a leader that resembles Hitler and Mitt romney would weep weep weep that he as a amn of god brought this to his nation
You definitely need to cut back on those little blue pills.
explain please
I have been supporting Mitt Romney for years. Who were you supporting ? If you are not aware of the pitfalls this is not my problem but yours
I think what the person meant was that your argument seems to be a little…weird.
‘A little wierd’, yes, like the sun is ‘a little hot’.
The problem your argument has, waxwing, is that it actually ignores the evidence for the ONLY test of validity that Jesus Christ actually gave: by their fruits ye shall know them. In opposition to visible fruits that the author of this article has laid out, you found your argument on a “change in tone” of Mitt’s voice, pile one assumption on another, ask one question after another, answer your own questions one after another, to arrive at the conclusion that SUGGESTS he’s in danger of being possessed by the devil.
I point out that the key argument you make is: “USA being lead to austerity and great depression has 1000 times more power to bring the world into a great depression.” Sorry, I don’t SWALLOW the ASSUMPTION that austerity would do that, while continuing to TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND would NOT: what brought on Hitler was the suffering caused by the rampant inflation brought on by the Wiemar government monetizing their war reparations THE SAME WAY the Fed is monetizing the deficit.
I share the concern about Mitt’s belief in a pseudo-Christian religion, but what is telling about your entire post is your non-belief in the power of God to lead the kind of man this article describes into greater truth. I suggest you repent of your unbelief, pray for the working of the Holy Spirit in his life, and repent of the sin of partiality, where you apply one set of rules to one Candidate but not the other. Of course, this assumes you ARE the christian and Romney supporter you CLAIM to be, but the Church is full of hypocrites, no? And the essence of Hypocrisy is living a lie, no?
“I share the concern about Mitt’s belief in a pseudo-Christian religion”
Huh?
There is nothing “pseudo-christian” about mormonism. Mormons are Christians.
“I share the concern about Mitt’s belief in a pseudo-Christian religion”
Huh?
There is nothing “pseudo-christian” about mormonism. Mormons are Christians.
Frankly, I am an atheist – an outside observer – and, while I respect the Mormon ways (I like how they make the constitution holy), I must say that I do not think it is Christian. Actually, I would say it is to Christianity what Christianity was to Judaism. It has a basis in Christianity, but has grown out from it, rather than remained a part of it.
Simply put…if it uses another religious text, it is not the same religion. This is not a bad thing, from my point of view. It is growth.
Atheists are not qualified to comment on Christianity, who is and who isn’t. Because atheists are blind and wouldn’t know God if He walked in with his hat on.
An atheist reading the bible is like a child trying to read a college chemistry book with no prior instruction. The bible can only be understood by the light of God’s spirit and you can’t get the light unless you are ready to receive it. That takes some preparation which many, like atheists, refuse. They won’t humble themselves and like Reagan said about democrats: “Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.”
Romney does not talk about his good deeds because he is storing his treasure in heaven. He got that from the bible and he had some teaching and instruction in the way of the truth along the way and he humbled himself.
“…I must say that I do not think it is Christian.”
I don’t consider myself a particularly religious man, myself. But, I have to completely disagree with you here. A Christian, if I understand correctly, is someone who considers Jesus of Nazareth to be the only begotten Son of God. Now, the proper name for the Mormon church is the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter Day Saints. That sounds pretty much like it fits the bill.
Mormons are *not* Christian.
This does not make them “bad people”. It does not make them insincere in their beliefs. It does not make them bad neighbors, or unfit for public office.
It just makes them something other than “Christian”.
From a Orthodox Christian perspective, Mormonism embraces the “Gnostic Heresy”, which was condemned by one of the early Nicene Councils. According to this, one cannot hold these beliefs and be considered a “Christian”.
One cannot be defined as “Christian” if one embraces the concept of post-Biblical “revelation”, such as “The Book of Mormon”.
One cannot be defined as “Christian” if one’s beliefs fall outside of the Nicene Creed:
I believe in one God, Father Almighty, Creator of
heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of
God, begotten of the Father before all ages;
Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten,
not created, of one essence with the Father
through Whom all things were made.
Who for us men and for our salvation
came down from heaven and was incarnate
of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man.
He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate,
and suffered and was buried;
And He rose on the third day,
according to the Scriptures.
He ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father;
And He will come again with glory to judge the living
and dead. His kingdom shall have no end.
And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life,
Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the
Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, Who
spoke through the prophets.
In one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.
I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
I look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the age to come.
Amen.
Now. There are a couple of subtle differences between the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Creed, and I am not totally clear on the say, Baptist version. But these are small doctrinal differences.
The fundamentals are all the same.
The Church of Latter Day Saints takes a different view.
They are *not* a Christian church.
I greatly admire Mitt Romney. I will vote for him, and am sure he will be a fine President. I sincerely wish more Christians would behave more as he has in his personal life, in terms of his generosity, his commitment to his family, his work ethic, etc.
But I do not see him as “a fellow Christian” and never will.
I notice that unlike 2008, when he *did* refer to himself as “Christian”, this election cycle, he has not made that mistake. And I will guarantee that between now and November, you will not hear Mitt Romney refer to himself, or the Church of LDS as “Christian”.
He knows that Christian churches – Catholic, Orthodox, Baptist, etc., etc., do not accept that, and have not accepted that as true – right back to *before* “The Great Sc ism”.
Mormonism may be “an off-shoot” of Christianity, but is not, and never will be, “Christian”".
Just to sum up your argument:
1. Mormons aren’t christian because they accept writings outside of the text of the Bible (the Book of Mormon).
2. Mormons aren’t christian because they don’t accept writings outside of the text of the Bible (Nicene Creed).
Makes sense to me.
This Moroni angel and then this Nephi angel and calling the Arch Angel Gabriel Noah I can not help but wonder if Joesph Smith was in contact with the fallen angels spoken of in Genesis 6 which brought on God’s judgement upon them by water then they become demons as written of in the book of Enoch they pretending to be angels of light misleading man into bad places in the future
Brett –
Your reply indicates a lack of understanding of what the Nicene Councils were.
It was the Nicene Council that determined what Books went into the Bible.
It was the Nicene Councils that determined the basics of faith that define Christianity.
So, yes, The body that all Christian sects recognize as defining Christianity, produced “The Nicene Creed” as a definition of faith and of Christianity.
Sorry if you don’t like the answer, but it is what it is. Mormons are not Christians.
I am plenty familiar with the circumstances regarding how those creeds came about. It was a bunch of self-appointed “experts” (though well-meaning) that did the best they could to reconcile all of the arguments of what Christ’s doctrine was. Unlike any of the apostles and prophets of God, these men were not called of God. The very fact that they had to resolve all of these disputes and had to debate, argue, and vote on establishing doctrine is foreign to the pattern of establishing doctrine as demonstrated in the Bible. God has always called prophets and revealed His will to them (Amos 3:7). All throughout the Bible, God specifically calls men, and they are given authority to teach and administer the ordinances of the gospel. This responsibility is not given to someone simply because one has studied the scriptures enough.
For that reason, I do not recognize the binding authority of the Nicene Creed (even though I agree with most of the principles of the creed you wrote). The wording of that creed has changed multiple times over the course of its history as well. As for the biblical canon, that was a work in progress for a long time. And it was decided by the same process as everything else at the Nicene Council, by debate and vote.
Mormons believe and accept the doctrine taught in the Bible. There are some details where points of our doctrine differ from other churches, but there is biblical support for those points of our doctrine. You may disagree with the interpretation, but considering the bible has passed through many different languages and translators over the centuries, it’s no surprise that there are different interpretations out there. But you have no authority, other than your own opinion and tradition, to call us wrong in our interpretation. I don’t believe tradition is strong enough to be the sole reason for believing or acting a certain way. We believe that God has called prophets and apostles again in our day, just as He always has over the history of His interaction with the human race, and that is where our authority for teaching and administering the gospel comes from. So while what we teach is compliant with the Bible, we don’t depend on a personal interpretation of an isolated verse to shape our doctrine either.
The reason Mormons dislike not being called Christian, is probably two-fold. One, it seems to denote that we are “unchristian” in our behavior, i.e. bad people, a charge which has been leveled at mormons throughout our history. Two, it seems to imply that Christ is not the center of our worship, or that we do not believe in Christ’s role in our salvation. It comes off as an attempt to separate us from Christ, which obviously rubs us the wrong way.
If you want to say that participation in the mormon church is not interchangeable with participation in another church, then you would be correct. We don’t object to being viewed as separate from “orthodox christianity”, and you would probably find few mormons who would object to not being called “orthodox christians”. We do, however, object to wording that implies something false or misleading regarding our worship of the Lord Jesus Christ or the centrality of His role in the mormon church.
It all comes down to how you define the word “christian”. We define it simply as one who believes in Christ as their Savior and the Savior of all mankind, and chooses to worship and follow Him. With that in mind, yes, we embrace and respect our fellow christians, orthodox or otherwise, and hope to at least have the respect of our fellow christians. You can quibble over the definition if you like, but you just need to realize how we interpret those definitions to understand why we react the way we do.
I am just started to learn more about Mormonism. The atheist and the secure view all religion in the same way But what if someone did come to Joesph Smith on Sept 21? Sept 21st is an important day for me. After being mislead I was snatched out of the hands of a deceiving”angel” and put into the hands of Holy mary Mother of God who saved my life.
Who is this Moroni?
from wikipedia
“Moroni is thought by Latter Day Saints to be the same person as a Book of Mormon prophet-warrior named Moroni, who was the last to write in the golden plates. The book states that Moroni buried them before he died after a great battle between two pre-Columbian civilizations. After he died, he became an angel, and was tasked with guarding the golden plates, and with eventually directing Joseph Smith to their location in the 1820s. According to Smith, he returned the golden plates to Moroni after they were translated and as of 1838 the angel Moroni still had the plates in his possession.”
“I point out that the key argument you make is: “USA being lead to austerity and great depression has 1000 times more power to bring the world into a great depression.” Sorry, I don’t SWALLOW the ASSUMPTION that austerity would do that, while continuing to TAX TAX TAX, SPEND SPEND SPEND would NOT: what brought on Hitler was the suffering caused by the rampant inflation brought on by the Wiemar government monetizing their war reparations THE SAME WAY the Fed is monetizing the deficit.”
My support on the road with Mitt Romney became a hurdle on the road and stop signs when I began to carefully read Paul Krugman
“My support on the road with Mitt Romney became a hurdle on the road and stop signs when I began to carefully read Paul Krugman”
Interesting. Your earlier post about your “support” for Romney was missing this caveat. AND your understanding of the economic crisis comes from Paul Krugman, who won fame in one area of economics, and thus presumes himself to be an expert in other areas?
My support for Romney began in the same way as my support for Jimmy Carter in 1976 when he say he was a born again Christian . I’m older now. what I see now is how faith in God is harmed when a good man is elected and fails his nation. If austerity brings failure to our nation as it is doing to Europe (Paul Krugman’s theme) and Romney is the one who brings this type austerity to our nation causing a greater crisis as we see in Europe NOW the atheists have another reason to hate christians for their ‘worship” of “ignornace” as they will say
Lately what I like about Romney is his changing his mind on certain issues as he did with his old pro choice views and not faithful to a dogma that can do us harm and Austerity a dogma do us great harm when we are still in a financial crisis making it much harder to dig out of the hole austerity would create, Paul Krugman believes.
In God’s word the Bible Cain set up his own religion and God rejected it. Why would that cause him to murder Abel the Shepard.? Did God reject Cain for having the wrong religion? No ! Cain had very strong feelings toward the religion he created. The sign that man worships himself by way of what he creates and when is he ready to destroy another human in that worship of himself through his own creation from his own hands created in his own image from the fallen nature of man when the serpent seduced Eve
“My support on the road with Mitt Romney became a hurdle on the road and stop signs when I began to carefully read Paul Krugman”
And what makes you at all certain that Krugman isn’t an agent of the devil, waxwing? It strikes me that Mr. Krugman’s public commentary has been far more contemptuous of the faithful than anything I’ve ever heard from Mr. Romney. It also strikes me that Mr. Krugman has been far more inclined to replace religion with worship of the state.
You do realize that Europe’s “austerity” plans usually come in the form of tax increases, right?
“You do realize that Europe’s “austerity” plans usually come in the form of tax increases, right?”
What I know is how angel of light deception is based on a tribe pride cult and they keep an appearnace of being the authority and can never admit they are wrong , repentance is the most evil word they have ever heard spoken
“comes from repentance in his prayer closet” “use his pray closet to cast out his demons”
So you know what Romney does or does not pray about. Wow.
“comes from repentance in his prayer closet” “use his pray closet to cast out his demons”
“So you know what Romney does or does not pray about. Wow.”
You would have to experience God’s deliverence through prayer to understand the change that takes place within when the poop of the demons is removed hate lust jealousy envy doubt hate fear and replaced by love and caring but their are demons who pretend to be angel’s of light ,the one that deceived me on Sept 21st and Holy Mary Mother of God saved me from and the demon pretending to be an angel of light gave me the name and taht is why I got concerned when Romney began to talk about the big bird and this struck me as this deception angel speaking through him because his wings were caught off and he has been forced to remain on our earth and he hates THE BIG BIRD figure of speech who did this to him and Mitt Romney has no idea how this deceptive angel used him because he does not understand that this moroni is in connection with the one whose name shall not be uttered
obama is a christian and had to disown his paster because his paster was filled with hate for USA the poop of the demons
Romney is in a religion started by Moroni who said he was an angel
BS! Obama had to ditch his pastor for political expediency-period. He may say he’s a Christian, yet I see nothing but a secular humanist narcissist (no need for any god) with a profound fondness for all things islamic.
How do you know where he prays? Has Romney ever said anything about that? What the h3%% are you talking about with his voice? He’s been speaking a lot and the voice tends to rebel! Man, I guess i didn’t get the point of your post!
Government austerity shouldn’t lead to depression. Rather over a broad range of conditions it frees up capital, labor, and stock to meet new market conditions.
True over the long haul, Don, but when a country’s very fabric has been warped, stretched, and torn by socialism, it will take a while for things to return to normal. The transition process will be painful.
In fact, for countries like Greece, few of the populace even know what “normal” is. Like drug addicts going through withdrawal, they will not enjoy the process.
And, like drug addicts, once physically free of the drugs, they are not necessarily mentally free of them, and may want to return.
Nice article. The more I see Mitt Romney and the more I find out about his past and moral compass the better I like him. No man (or woman) is perfect and those that say they are are probably far from perfection as can be. Mitt appears to be a good God fearing man with a wonderful family and I hope he wins in November and is able to help right the ship of America. Even if he wins it won’t come fast or easily as the country is close to being another Titanic.
If you have to tell everyone how good you are, you aren’t.
I find those that feel the need to question his Christianity unchristian; and this as a practicing Presbyterian. There is only one person who can make that destination and, guess what, it ain’t you. All I see is a good man who does good things and feel no need to brag about them, and going deep into the weeds to try to find reasons to call him unchristian is .. As I said … Rather unchristian.
Rdm,
Was this addressed to me or to one of the other commenters? If it was addressed to me, then no, I wasn’t questioning Mr. Romney’s faith. It may have come out somewhat sideways, but what I see in Mr. Romney is someone who acts according to his beliefs as I understand them (which is probably not all that well, given my history).
My upbringing is one of being somewhat cynical about anyone who makes a loud noise about their faith, particularly when the actions don’t match the words, so someone like Mr. Romney – who doesn’t play up his faith, and acts according to it – is a refreshing change. By their fruits shall you know them, as it were.
Thank you for Gov Romney and all Mormons who with stand the worst beating about being Christian! He does live his religion and does not make a big deal of it. I think poor old flint has tried and tried to get a scandal on him and just can’t get any woman to perjure themselves.
Also thanks for a fair column about a good man.
“Mr. Romney’s so-called “wooden” manner is also a factor here, and yes, in my view it’s admirable.”
In the old days, people with a “wooden” manner were sometimes called stoics. They would bear their burden without saying anything about it, they would do things without asking (let alone getting) any recognition for it, and they would make whatever sacrifices were necessary in order to get the job done. Hmmm, where else have I seen qualities like this? Oh, that’s right, in my parents and people from what was called the Greatest Generation.
Those people lived through a depression, World War II, the Cold War, Vietnam, and even saw the horrors of 9/11 and its aftermath, and they just kept on going. Adversity was just something that needed to be overcome and not talked to death. And when something went wrong, people used to take responsibility for things and then tried to resolve the problem. Perhaps its time for a new Greatest Generation. And I think Romney is the type of guy to lead it.
Every sunday Mitt Romney and Barack Obama get on their knees. Mitt to pray to God and Barack to line up a putt.
The more I learn about Mitt the more I like him. I was always going to vote for him over President Kardashian and since the debate, I am 100% behind Romney. He is the right man at the right time for our country.
Heh. I’d love to see his face when someone calls him that.
I’m not a mormon, but the Mormon went all Jihad on Obomber. 8) Case closed.
I have noticed that this weekend both the NY Times and the Washington Post are discovering Mitt’s humanity. The guy has been running for president for what – 6 years? – and the nation’s crack reporters are only just now discovering these qualities? They apparently read their own reports and believe them real, while ignoring the reality in front of their faces.
Republicans come off stiff for the same reason Romney doesn’t talk about his Faith: when you are surrounded by people “not your friends” you tend to be slow to drop shields.
As for outsiders observing American Culture – it works both ways. Sometimes you are more aware of where the furniture sits because you keep barking your shins on it, generally you are unaware of the reasons for it being there.
MITT ROMNEY WORSHIPS “THE GOD OF OUR FATHERS”
IT IS SUNDAY IN AMERICA, AND IN WISCONSIN AND ALL OF “OBAMA’S 57 STATES” PATRIOTS WORSHIP “THE GOD OF OUR FATHERS”
* Who is this God? Evidences of Deity’s importance and power are EVERYWHERE:
+ “In God We Trust” – it’s on our MONEY (to use the phrase “for heaven’s sake”
seems outré)
+ “One Nation Under God” (Pledge of Allegiance)
+ “…are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” (Declaration of Independence)
+ THE BIBLE safe kept in the Washington Monument Corner Stone
+ The WASHINGTON, JEFFERSON, LINCOLN MEMORIALS; the Rotunda of the Capitol
Building and more all bear testimony and evidence of OUR RELIANCE ON THIS GOD
+ Battle Hymn of the Republic; America the Beautiful, Star Spangled Banner, God
Bless America, My Country Tis of Thee and more
* Who worships this God?
+ Every language
+ Every color
+ Every race
+ Every creed [Except those whose worship is FORCED or who are taught by "preachers" saying "G@d D#mn America" or something like that--they have a ...different deity...who does not have power to save, and whose acceptance is not based on love or the Rule of Law].
* Where is the “God of Our Fathers” worshipped, praised, and petitioned?
+ In chapels of infinite description and persuasion
+ In synagogues
+ In cathedrals great and small
+ In nature’s sublime settings “from sea to shining sea”
+ In the hearts and homes of innumerable “believers”
* What has the “God of our Fathers” done for us?
+ Starting about 1776, a pitiful band of farmer/soldiers DEFEATED THE GREATES
MILITARY POWER the world had ever known to DO SOMETHING UNIQUE–achieve their
own Freedoms “with Liberty and Justice for All”
+ Since then, through scores of conflicts, attacks upon our freedoms, and threats of tyrants, traitors, and despots, the God of Our Fathers has kept America safe and Americans free.
+ Despite any number of catastrophes, calamities, and tests of our individual and National will, the God of our Fathers has rallied us; led us; strengthened us; and given us FAITH we will overcome adversity and challenge
* What is the God of Our Fathers doing for us NOW?
+ The hidden plans of evil men against our FREEDOMS are being revealed
+ The incompetence and fecklessness of our “leaders” has been shown to all the world
+ MASSES OF PATRIOTS, the majority of AMERICANS, now support NEW LEADERS and a
New Vision of America Freedom of Speech and Worship
+ The standard and flag of LIBERTY, HONOR, AND DECENCY IN GOVERNMENT has again
been unfurled
+ The evils of Freedom’s enemies are now clearly desplayed
+ The HEARTS of myriad PATRIOTS ARE CONFIRMED IN FAITH AND DETERMINATION–WE PROCEED WITH PERFECT PEACE, ABSOLUTE CONVICTION, AND OVERWHELMING POWER…TO THE BALLOT BOX where we shall re-establish the America we knew before, and improve it “SO HELP US GOD”
* WHAT WILL THE GOD OFOUR FATHERS DO IN…ONE MONTH
+ The Constitution, Bill of Rights, and our FREEDOMS OF SPEECH AND RELIGION shall be RE-ESTABLISHED; AND OUR DEEP DESIRE TO WORK, PRODUCE, SUPPORT OUR FAMILIES, AND BE THE LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD WILL BEGIN TO BE FULFILLED
+ The threat of subversion of our way of life by Sharia shall be repulsed
+ The White House shall be cleansed of unconstitutional “Czars”; treasonous “public servants”; and incompetent and fraudulent “elected leaders” in Washington and throughout our land
WORSHIP WITH US; PRAY WITH US; PRAISE WITH US; PLEAD WITH US
ROMNEY & RYAN WIN BIG IN…ONE MONTH
And then we shall CONTINUE to worship, and praise, and plead with the God of Our Fathers to further cleanse, and refine*, and preserve our Land, our Freedoms, and Our People.
GOD BLESS AMERICA
*”May God thy gold refine, till all success be nobleness, and every gain divine” from America the Beautiful — READ EVERY VERSE TODAY.
There are two issues with Romney, but they both may be instructive, particularly now. The first issue is his apparent lack of core political principles. This one is rather strange because he seems to have rock solid personal principles, as evidenced by the author’s article and many other expositions. The second is his campaign style, which, until this race, can best be described as character assassination on steroids. Personally, I find that unacceptable.
But the case I am making is that both of those flaws may be indicative of another important positive for Mr. Romney, which is that he seems to have the ability to learn and adapt. a) It is rather hard to believe that he lacks core political principles, so it may well be that he has subverted them and continually “tweaked” them based on the necessity of attracting a winning coalition. This has been exasperated by the need to win elections in a very liberal state and then move onto the national stage in a party that is in the process of becoming more conservative. It’s a characteristic I don’t find attractive, but I can live with it, as apparently can many on the right. b) As far as death star campaigning goes, I struggle with it, particularly since he doesn’t do it against the most dangerous man on the planet. But again, it may be some evidence of his ability to learn and change. I don’t agree with the style against the Liar, but you have to at least leave open the possibility that he has made the right decision about it.
But the main point is this: Romney, with abundant evidence, has succeeded in his life, not just because of his genetic advantages (which are substantial) but also through hard work and adaptation. THAT is why he crushed the Con Man in the debate. Romney worked his ass off and found a winning formula of overwhelming knowledge and forceful but unthreatening confidence. The Con Man assumed that he would be handed an affirmative action victory, just as he has in every other episode of his life. The reason that Conservatives are so thrilled about it is because, at last, the Affirmative Action Skater finally faced somebody who wasn’t going to defer to him any longer.
And here is what I think is the even better news about it. The assumption on the Left is that Mr. Affirmative Action is going to ramp his game up several notches, because of course they all seem to believe that he is actually exceptional rather than a con artist who has preyed on the guilt of others his entire life. Personally, I just don’t see it. I don’t see any evidence of high intelligence and superior adaptability. On the contrary, I see a rigid ideologue of average intelligence with a galactic ego who is INCAPABLE of making the kind of effort necessary to beat Romney in the next two debates. His “got game” is 100% based on other people putting the words in his mouth, a certain glib ability to lie when unchallenged, and the unearned admiration of the sycophantic media. And based on an abundance of evidence about Romney, the very strong odds are that he won’t rest on his laurels, will continue to work his ass of, will anticipate at least some of the gambits the marxists will try in the next debates, and will beat the shit out of the Mr. Affirmative Action again and again. I think it’s a lock.
As many people are going to be tuned in to the next debate out of curiosity to see if the supposed genius of the ages will be able to slap down the only person who has challenged him in his entire life. It’s going to be a slaughter again.
Character assassination on steroids? What on earth are you talking about?
The primaries, Rick. The primaries. It’s an accurate description.
I have to disagree with you here. I’m no fan of Mitt Romney, but I think what you saw wasn’t just excellent adaptation, or finding a winning formula.
I think what you saw was the real Mitt Romney. That’s what he does, because that’s who he is.
His lack of core political principles may be a result of his religion. Mormons are not automatically conservative. That’s a myth. If it were not, the Democrats couldn’t win any election in Utah. But they do. Regularly.
Thank you Miss Paulk for the insights of one from the outside and I, for one, hope you stay and continue writing your observations of us while you live among us and become a citizen of the U.S., America needs more like you. The Aussies somewhat suspicious view of those who seek power is refreshing. I doubt the the self-proclaimed healer of the planet we now have for President would have gotten very far in politics in your country. Your assessement of our next President is by far one of the most revealing of why the man is who he seems to be. As I was reading your analysis I could not help but contrast everything you pointed out about Romney with Obama. It appears the two are polar opposites, it’s strange and it’s scary, because it shows this nation has developed a Jekyll and Hyde personality. I hope this time the selfless Doctor prevails over the selfish Mr. Hyde, this was a change most did not see coming.
Spread this, it is going to be a problem for Obama and his pals.
As Obama’s cover story comes down, the curtain goes up on the USAO’s cover-up of J.J., Jr.’s role in the Blago story
http://illinoispaytoplay.com/2012/10/05/as-obamas-cover-story-comes-down-the-curtain-goes-up-on-the-usaos-cover-up-of-j-j-jr-s-role-in-the-blago-story/
Romney belongs to an endangered species in the 21st century. He is a gentleman.
Yes. A lot of people don’t seem to appreciate or understand basic good manners and decency. They think it must be phony, or at least unhip and less admirable than always sounding off about social justice and accusing some people of unfairly having more than others.
This is the result of cultural corruption. The Media and their anti-conservatism, Hollywood and their anti-heroism, Academia and their anti-Americanism. This President represents everything dirty about Chicago, which was once a great city, it is nothing more than the stereotype of everything Democrat, faulty leadership, fiscal incompendence, failing public education and the rise of frightening violence because of all the above. Obama brought this to Washington. Thank God the rest of America is not as easily led as those poor souls in the windy city. The wind is blowing in another direction and I hope it blows all these people back to that Hellhole they made, that would be Karma. Let us see if they can create the Utopia out of the chaos they created, but don’t hold your breath, you might turn blue to lack of air and become one of them. Stay red with anger, for what he has done to this country, and vote. May all states be red and Liberalism be dead.
Character counts. If America can’t see past obamaphones,obamacare, obamamoney, and all the money you can spread around while borrowing 40 billion a day, then America doesn’t deserve freedom. Let China be the future.
I ask myself what if Obama is like this Joesph in the Bible in God’s eyes judging by the extreme hate for Obama I read here in this place. Then what happens if he wins the election as a decree from God as we read in Isaiah 43 or is it 45 about the coming of Cyrus to rain down righteous from heaven for the sake of the chosen ones. This could be Romney winning too but what if it is Obama and what will you do with all this hate in your hearts you have toward Obama?
Peter Leithat blog
Joseph is often described as a snotty little upstart, a gossip and tattletale who brings an evil report about his brothers back to his father. I think that misses the whole tone of the story. Joseph is the “foreman” of his brothers (at the age of 17!), a younger son elevated above his brothers. He is, as one of my students put it, “chief shepherd.”
If Joseph is a tattletale, we also miss just how crude and violent his brothers were. Think about their track record: They envy their father’s favorite, intend to kill him, sell him into slavery, and then lie to their father for years about it. This is not merely a sin against Joseph but a horrible sin against their father. Reuben, we discover later, sleeps with his father’s concubine, and Simeon and Levi slaughter the peaceable, circumcised people of Shechem.
This is a violent, deceptive, cruel bunch. Yet commentators spend their time criticizing Joseph?
you claim to be a conservative and a christian, yet compare obamao to josephhahahahahahaha. you over-reached and exposed your true self.
you claim to be a conservative, a romney supporter, and a christian, yet compare obamao to joseph? hahahahahahaha. you over-reached and exposed your true self.
The exact formulation of the winning question from Mitt Romney to the US voters is ;” Shall we tolerate four more years like the four last ones ? ”
The logical answer is a resounding NO
The second formulation by Mitt Romney which follows the NO answer is :
” If we say it, we’ ll do it ”
That’s how an achiever should lead the debate.
Please forward to Romney ‘s staff.
In 2008, the citizens of our great country, were hood-winked and badly!!
What was sold to so many was selling Obama as a “rock star” and “savior”!!
Please, this time, vote sanely, vote for your future, vote for what is
morally right, so that your children and grandchildren can be proud!!
Please listen to your hearts, vote Romney/Ryan!! DO NOT vote for the
snake-oil salesman, vote for the decency that defines us, for a good and
caring man who truly loves our country and will up-hole the Constitution!!
TO: BABY GLOCK and to WEO,
Wonderful, Thoughtful, Comments from you Both!!
BRAVO!!
Great article.
I am still in wonderment at how this street corner hustler got to be president of the United States in the first place. It’s beyond belief it has gone on this long without an uprising.
Having had business dealing in the States I really understand your comment Kate about institutionalized corruption. My experiences have left me to believe that you are far better off to do business in a corrupt Country known to be corrupt than in the US with its sanctimonious holier than thou attitude. I love Americans, they are the most caring generous people in the world, but how they put up with and tolerate this imposter to western values is beyond me.
This guy reminds me of some street corner pimp parading around in a new suit preaching to the faithful how great and smart he is and them squealing in agreement. Shocking, simply shocking. The media for one should be hung from light posts for their compliance in the complete collapse of public trust that they have squander like an adolescent liar.
The difference between these two men is also shocking, one with values, morals and ethics that states his position in life and his intentions in life and one that will say whatever he has to to please and stay in power. From what I see of the both of them, Mr. Romney is the future of America, Mr. Obama, the has been of America.
Glass, the United States was founded with two deeply contradictory principles: 1) All men are created equal with certain God-given rights… and 2) the institution of slavery. In trying to correct for slavery and past racial discrimination, we created the institution of affirmative action which gave present day blacks lower standards to compensate for racial discrimination from people who are now dead or at least retired. Barack Obama, with no connection to slavery or past racial discrimination except for extra melanin inherited from his absent East African father, got the benefit of these lower standards. His non-black speech patterns, post-partisan rhetoric, and calm demeanor were non-threatening. Voting for Barack Obama made the voter a part of a historic event plus the Obama voter earned “I’m not a racist” bonus points.
2012 is not 2008. In 2008 there were many people wearing Obama t-shirts, there were lots of Obama yard signs, and lots of cars had Obama bumper stickers. Young men had to at least pretend to like Obama to have a shot with all the female Obama supporters. That is all gone in 2012. What we have now is roughly $5,000,000,000,000 in new debt, fewer people working, even more expensive healthcare, lots of new regulations, a less stable world, and no reason to expect the trajectory to change in the next 4 years. The thrill is gone and the Obama Girl is no longer dancing. There is no financial or social upside for voting for Barack Obama a second time. He’s so 2008.
Listen waxman I am a catholic but I never judge another fellow man by catholic standards.I see all men as God Creation. Endowed with different kind of gifts and when looking for leaders I look for the ones who practice what they preach.You can preach from the pulpit all the austerity you will want.But if later you lavish yourself with a million dollar vacation, well waxman doesn’t that sound to you a little too much. Politician are similar to pastors. Decency and qualifications are what is important regardless of religion affiliation or political party. I looked at Romney and concluded that the Democratic Party and the MSM prepackage and manufacture an image of Romney who was a total distorsion of his persona and of course any religion or secular institution will consider that a sin .
As a member of one of those “funny not-quite-a-cult” things (Baptist) who has been married to a former Mormon for over 30 years I probably know a little more about Mormonism than the average man on the street. While I am no fan of Mormon theology and religious doctrine, I am comfortable accepting Mormons as members of the Christian community. One thing I don’t think anyone can seriously question is the general patriotism and devotion to country of the Mormons for more than a century.
Like Ms Paulk, I find Mr. Romney’s personal conduct refreshing compared most American politicians and more in line with my beliefs than those of President Obama. No one is perfect, but some do seem to try harder than others to “do the right thing.”
Romney doesn’t say anything about how he personally helps other through his personal efforts and money while Obama’s favorite word is “I”, especially as it relates to his days as a “community organizer” spending other people’s tax money. I can’t help but wonder how many of his cronies and political supporters were enriched by his community organizer activities.
I would not be surprised if history doesn’t someday portray the Obama administration as one of the most corrupt and inept in US history. Mitt Romney is undoubtedly a flawed human like the rest of us but he’s a breath of fresh air compared to what we are used to. I reserve the right to change my mind, but for now I’m voting for Romney. Let’s pick this discussion up again 4 years from now.
I am at a bit of a loss for words. I tried to post a comment how I find Mitt Romney’s character one of his most appealing traits and I will certainly vote for him and Ryan. When I clicked “submit”, I got the message I was posting too fast? First post in at least 12 hours….. what’s going on?
I’ve had this happen from time to time. In fact, it just happened when I tried to reply to you. It is annoying. Perhaps the software thought we clicked on the “Submit Comment” button twice instead of once. Don’t take it personal – the software is just a bit flaky. I recommend you copy your text before trying to post.
This entire conversation is bizarre. Which religious institution one chooses to associate with or not is irrevelant. You judge a person on their words and actions. If you want to spout scripture and champion your particular sect, enrol in a seminary. The biblical references are moronic. Waxwing would more aptly be called cuckoo.
You’re right (on both counts). Plus, the Constitution expressly prohibits any form of religious test. (Article VI)
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Larry, perhaps it has escaped your notice that the Constitution limits what the government may do, not what the citizens may do.
Citizens are free to apply a religious test to any and every office. They are free to apply a philosophical test. They are even free to apply a skin color test or a hair color test or any other test they choose.
Oddly enough, they are also free to discuss such tests, and how they apply to individual candidates.
And, horror of horrors! They are even free to attempt to persuade other citizens of the validity and usefulness of such tests!
You’re right, of course. People can and will make their decisions based on any number of factors.
thank you all for your generally favourable comments vis mr. romney, if i had not already cast my vote for him you would have convinced me to do so. “fiat accompli”, my ballot was handed in to my town clerk’s office the day after the debate. i am not a christian, but my beliefs were founded in the roman republic and its legions before its decadence, and christians might be surprised how many ideals we share from the time we co-existed with you. i do not share mr. roomney’s beliefs either, but i am quite confortable with the idea of him as our next president, as well as sharing this judeo-christian based society with you all.
Although I am not a Mormon, I have admired most Mormons I have known. They really seem to live their faith and act in admirable ways. Their values seem to echo the values most of us would really like. Their emphasis on family seems to shape their lives in good ways. As a group, they tend to be seriously industrious. After admiring them, I’d be tempted to become one if I could get past the beliefs that are almost certainly incorrect regarding pre-columbian civilizations. I think Mr Romney’s religion makes him the ideal U.S. president even though I don’t agree with some parts of that religion.
My wife spent twenty years rotting away and dying from progressive MS. I didn’t consider the Romney’s family issues my business, and was not a Romney fan. As more details of the man emerge, I admire him more and more.
no, not THAT Glenn,
My deepest sympathies for you and your wife.
Like you, I initially didn’t find Mr. Romney a particularly appealing choice, but the more I learn, the more I respect the man.
KP,
Thanks for writing what I was thinking. Sorry for all the nitpickers who seem not to nitpick for “HOPE”. I too have had experience with MS, equine therapy as they fancily call it now, and Mormons, and politicians-specifically those from Chicago.. How interesting you hit all the nails on the head. Although not from Australia, I must be an “average Australian”. Go ahead fans of the manchurian candidate…pick away at what I have said.. checkmy spelling.. maybe you can pick on that.
Lisa,
If the worst I get is nitpickers and fruitcakes, I’m doing pretty well.
Sometimes it’s easier to see things if you can get an outside perspective: it’s very easy to get caught up with the details when you’re intimately familiar with something and miss the bigger picture – and I’m glad I’m not the only person who’s seeing this. I was starting to wonder, when something that seemed so obvious to me never seemed to get any kind of mention anywhere.
Good article. And you are quite right. Romneys actual actions are generally much better than his public image, while Obama are much worse.