2008 The Romney Speech
posted by on December 6 at 11:15 AM
I’ve listened to it. I’ve read it. I’ve watched a little bit of it, just to see if Mitt Romney looked better on television than John F. Kennedy did when delivering a similar address in 1960.
What do I think? Well, Romney is no JFK. He’s nice to look at, his elocution is decent, but to me his tone lacks… conviction. Subjective, sure, but watch the JFK speech and then watch the Romney speech. One man is defending himself and his faith in front of a hostile audience. The other man is defending his presidential bid in front of a sympathetic audience (and not taking any questions afterward).
Granted, Kennedy made his speech during a general election campaign and not before the first primaries. But still, one is hoping for the same things: Personal conviction over pandering, the elevation of good government above religious passions, and an absolutely un-hedged explanation of the candidate’s view on the separation of church and state.
Romney didn’t deliver those things today, or at least he didn’t deliver them in an unqualified manner. His agenda was to mollify religious conservatives and so he used the word “Jesus” more than he used the word “Mormon”; he offered a fuzzy boundary between church and state; and he suggested that “freedom requires religion” (a point on which many American atheists would disagree).
Why now? Well, look at the polls. Republican Mike Huckabee, a more typical Christian conservative, is surging. If today’s speech was supposed to be about “Religion in America,” and not about such earthly pursuits as winning elections at all costs, it sure didn’t come off that way.
Gee, Romney is having to overcome discrimination, because of his religion he not accepted by the mainstream. It makes his position on gay marriage ironic. Hah!
He can beat Hillary - after the lesbian affair video breaks in mid campaign.
By the way, the Western states are very Mormon, incl. Washington.
Stranger folks need to get out of town once in a while. Non believers are not content? Huh, do they vote their church?
I second that! Sloggers need to get out of Seattle more often. They would truely be suprised at how red state the rest of WESTERN WA is...
stop talking about the GOP. its just making them seem legitimate.
Yes, they'd be SHOCKED by how red the rest of Washington is. Because, after all, it's not like they ever wrote anything like this...
http://www.urbanarchipelago.com/
Actually, most of the state is Purple.
@2 and 3, The point of my post is that no matter how you cut it, Romney is facing discrimation due to his religion. He uses it against gays and it he is now having it used against himself. Also, I think most sloggers are well-aware of our state's demographics. Eastern Washington is well-known to have an agrarian and more conservative profile. We all know it is Red, it comes up every election. I think anyone who has thought about it also knows that there are a lot of Mormons in the Northwest, you can't go to a gay bar here without meeting several. What has that to do with fundies not accepting Mormons? The whole point of his speech is to attempt to counter the prejudice mainstream Christians have against Mormonism; the need for which, I find ironic and satisfying.
and yet he has the gall (balls?) to say:
"It's as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America - the religion of secularism. They are wrong."
i know! can you imagine some group of people in America establishing some new religion?! how dare they! why, my religion was founded...oh, nertz!
Mittler should spend the rest of his days deep-inhaling eco-friendly kangaroo farts.
@7 - oh, give it a rest. Republicants should be seen and not heard.
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).