Romney Pulling a Kennedy on Religion
Mitt Romney is going to give a speech at former President George H. W. Bush Library in Texas to defend, define, explain or totally confuse the Christian right wing of his Republican Party.
In the words of former Senator Lloyd Bentsen of Texas…”You Sir are no Jack Kennedy”.
Let me first say that if someone in America thinks your personal religious practice and belief is a reason not to vote for you then you don’t want their vote. Religious faith is what most American’s have on Sunday when they put on the very best clothes that they have and attend whatever service they practice. You smile nice to the widows and widowers and of course pat the young children on the head that look so angelic in their Sunday best. All is well in the world and God is pleased.
Come Monday morning they revert back to being the jerk boss that eyes the nineteen year old receptionist with thoughts of lust, or the cranky garage mechanic owner that will overcharge you for labor and parts that never existed. God forbid they recognize one another in the liquor store or choose not to look one another in the eye. Come Monday the services are ended and it all becomes business as usual where everyone is trying to screw everyone else.
Mitt Romney explaining his religious belief as a Mormon is a bad decision and this one will cost him New Hampshire and Iowa. Why that is what will happen is simple, none of the other candidates are explaining their religion. They do not have to and neither should Mitt. The guy was elected in the bluest of the blue states of Massachusetts as Governor because he simply had the right message at the right time. Put another way, if there were a war in Massachusetts with Republican’s fighting Democrat’s, there would be three hundred Democrat troops and one Republican. Overwhelming odd’s and yet Mitt was elected Governor. Religion had no realistic play in the voters minds. Mike Huckabee is posting advertisements with bold print “Christian Leader”? He obviously is not running from his faith!
President Kennedy needed to defend and explain his religious stance if elected because of the direct link to a religious leader in the Vatican called the Pope. In the Catholic faith you can be excommunicated for failing to follow the Pope’s decree. American voters at that time were concerned about a President possibly bound by an outside influence from a foreign land and rightfully so. That was a risk for him personally and it was something that Kennedy was willing to face to serve our people if that was what the Pope ordered on any decision he made as President of our nation. Kennedy put his faith to the side but did not give it up entirely as he simply understood the Presidency of the United States of America was not about him or his faith as an individual but it was entirely about the greater good of the nation.
That is a huge difference when compared to what Mitt Romney is going to offer and he isn’t giving this speech to defend his personal faith. He’s doing it for votes from a base that he really does not want. That is the reality of what his speech will be about and the Christian Conservative Right will see right through it.
President Kennedy was almost fifty years ago in expressing his religious belief and the concerns of the separation of church and state issue. We as a people have a much larger tolerance for religion, race and sex of our political candidates these days and Mitt Romney just does not get that. Maybe all the trips out of the state he was supposed to be Governing didn’t have a chance to let reality reach him.
Here in New England some folks call us prudes when it comes to our religion or belief in God. Screw them! If someone questioned your faith no matter where you live, how many seconds would be on that time watch before you slugged the SOB? Big Mistake Mitt… HUGE!
American’s do not elect people based on where you go to church, we elect people to the highest office on what your ideas are to make our nation better.
I’m jumping in the shower. I just realized I’m offering advice to a Republican candidate for President. I feel dirty for some odd reason.
Papamoka
Feel free to link to this post…
Cross posted to Papamoka Straight Talk, Michael Linn Jones
December 4th, 2007 at 10:24 am
Quote:
We as a people have a much larger tolerance for religion, race and sex of our political candidates these days and Mitt Romney just does not get that.
Matt, ask people on the Right if they would vote for someone of the Islamic faith. Once you receive that answer, you may want to rethink your statement.
Please remember Mr. Keith Ellison and the issue illuminated in that situation.
I would say that about fifty percent of the voting citizenry is beyond religious “litmus tests” when deciding upon a candidate; unfortunately for Mr. Romney, the base of his party is not included in that fifty percent.
December 4th, 2007 at 11:18 am
Not only that Alex, but America is FAR more rightwing and theocratic today than it was in 1960. Romney is screwed. He just just keep is manicured trap shut. There’s nothing he can say that will fly with the GOP voters. They WANT more religion in the White House. They do NOT believe there is even such a thing as sepatation of church and state. They are ZEALOUSLY pro-Protestent, only recently accepting Catholics becauise of wedge social “issues,” let alone accepting Muslims are anyone else. Romney has gotten some rotten advice.
What’s he going to say? He can’t say that he believes in church/state separation but he can’t say that he will be informed by his Mormonism. It’s a catch-22. He should just shut up, or he will lose.
Eh. Who cares? He’s my least favorite of that bunch anyway.
JMJ
December 4th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
Jersey…
Huh?
Alex…
America hasn’t evolved enough. We can’t even elect an African American president let alone a woman… Unfortunately, I think we have the wrong woman running this time.
If Obama got the nomination (and I cannot believe I am saying this) and he was running against Guiliani, I might through my support for my party out the window. I think Obama would wield a different kind of power than other Democrats and Guiliani. I’d be tempted to check the box because he seems so different… And it’s not the color of his skin that makes him seem different then the rest of the white folks running… but it is part of character. I wish this man well.
I might have a hard time with Huckabee even though I am a conservative and support religious values. I have a hard time with over commitment to a particular religion. I mean… I can say I am a Lutheran and my wife is a Catholic but there isn’t some religious struggle in our belief system between our families. However a stern individual, committed to a certain way means that they are stubborn and can’t see the big picture that is America.
On the other hand, I don’t want a President that says they have religious values and don’t. Bill Clinton’s inaugural speech 1993 mentioned God more than any other President before him. Though ole Billy was an above average President, I believe he and his wife are morally conflicted people.
December 5th, 2007 at 3:10 am
steve,
Isn’t everyone? Anyone who isn’t morally conflicted is really, really dangerous. I’ll take morally conflicted over absolutely certain they’re right any day.
December 5th, 2007 at 12:26 pm
Steve,
Your points are very well taken. (Although I don’t believe that President Clinton does not have religous values.)
Paul,
Moral conflict is part of the human condition, so, I agree with you.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
Paul:
What would you know? You guys have a Parliament and the Sun and a whacky royal family. Then again your complete history of leadership revolves around a whacky royal family…
December 6th, 2007 at 11:47 am
refinancing loan home equity loan
blabbermouth Yellowknife aggressiveness