Jude 2

What do you think of Mitt Romney's speech today? It reminded me of Thomas Jefferson's inaugural address. I thought it was brilliant.

Didn't get to watch it as I was at work. However here are some excerpts from his speech.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008 ... 924&page=1


TW

I didn't watch it.. but heard some great remarks about it.
I would love to watch it soon.

Thanks dolfan and TW for the link.....I read the comments by Romney. For any Christian not to vote would be beyond me. Between Romney and Huckabee we have been given some men of strong moral, ethical and christian values.

To fail to support these type of candidates because of some differences in Theology and defer to those we know are so set against our christian values would be a travesty. IMHO

The excerpts I think say a lot about him. He seems like a great person.

Huckabee has been rising too........... maybe God would pair them together

KB

dolfan wrote:What do you think of Mitt Romney's speech today? It reminded me of Thomas Jefferson's inaugural address. I thought it was brilliant.

It reminded me of Jefferson, too. It was a well-written and well-executed genuflection to Jefferson's deist god. Why should Romney's bowing to our civil religion make evangelicals excited?

forestwalker wrote:

dolfan wrote:What do you think of Mitt Romney's speech today? It reminded me of Thomas Jefferson's inaugural address. I thought it was brilliant.

It reminded me of Jefferson, too. It was a well-written and well-executed genuflection to Jefferson's deist god. Why should Romney's bowing to our civil religion make evangelicals excited?

I'm not sure it should excite evangelicals, per se. That assumes evangelicals all have the same attitude, dreams, hopes, vision of this country -- which may be pretty much true; but, it also assumes that evangelicals should vote as a bloc according to some sort of agreed upon must-have criteria for a president, obviously one of which you think is an evangelical view of Jesus Christ.

I'm very satisfied that Jefferson's deism was good for America, even if it was not so good for him. I'll leave that in the hands of The Judge. He was adamant that we acknowledge God, and he was equally adamant that we govern ourselves morally, with restraint and freedom of commerce and to pursue our own hopes without the weight of government on us. He insisted in his inaugural address that there be no religious test for public service, and that was already written into the Constitution (Art. VI) as much as the First Amendment was.

I didn't get to hear the entire thing...but I can say that he was articulate and forth coming in his remarks. He insists that he would not be influenced by his "elders" in the Mormon faith. I don't think that is entirely possible but, I appreciate that he is being willing to acknowledge that it could present a problem for the country.

However, the constitiution does provide that there be no test of religious affliiation for a candidate to hold public office. While I don't think he can make the grade, I do admire his courage and candor. I would vote for him much more quickly that Hilary, Obama, or any of those who are liberal. I still have some issues with Mit....when it comes to his foreign policies and especially his views on the ever growing problem with immigration.

I don't think it is reasonable for anyone to think that a man will not be influenced by his faith.....that is certainly why I could NEVER vote for a Muslim or Hindu or Atheist. It is common sense to know a man will govern from his sphere of influence.

I don't like the Kenndy connection to him in this area. Kennedy will be remembered as one of the absolute worst presidents ever in history. While the Pope didn't influence the president that much.....Marilyn Monroe and the mob did!!!!!

Dr. Ron wrote:While the Pope didn't influence the president that much.....Marilyn Monroe and the mob did!!!!!

True, True!!

dolfan wrote:

forestwalker wrote:

dolfan wrote:What do you think of Mitt Romney's speech today? It reminded me of Thomas Jefferson's inaugural address. I thought it was brilliant.

It reminded me of Jefferson, too. It was a well-written and well-executed genuflection to Jefferson's deist god. Why should Romney's bowing to our civil religion make evangelicals excited?

I'm not sure it should excite evangelicals, per se. That assumes evangelicals all have the same attitude, dreams, hopes, vision of this country -- which may be pretty much true; but, it also assumes that evangelicals should vote as a bloc according to some sort of agreed upon must-have criteria for a president, obviously one of which you think is an evangelical view of Jesus Christ.

Hardly.

My point (with which you seem to agree) is that Romney's speech does not really address evangelicals' trepidations about his otherness. Instead, it dismisses those concerns. The spin does not match the actual content.

forestwalker wrote:

dolfan wrote:

forestwalker wrote:

dolfan wrote:What do you think of Mitt Romney's speech today? It reminded me of Thomas Jefferson's inaugural address. I thought it was brilliant.

It reminded me of Jefferson, too. It was a well-written and well-executed genuflection to Jefferson's deist god. Why should Romney's bowing to our civil religion make evangelicals excited?

I'm not sure it should excite evangelicals, per se. That assumes evangelicals all have the same attitude, dreams, hopes, vision of this country -- which may be pretty much true; but, it also assumes that evangelicals should vote as a bloc according to some sort of agreed upon must-have criteria for a president, obviously one of which you think is an evangelical view of Jesus Christ.

Hardly.

My point (with which you seem to agree) is that Romney's speech does not really address evangelicals' trepidations about his otherness. Instead, it dismisses those concerns. The spin does not match the actual content.

I'll give you that, because I haven't watched the spin!

James K. A. Smith expresses very well why Romney's speech--and, especially, how we're told by our politicos that it allows Christians to embrace him--troubles me:

The God of Americanism: On Mitt Romney's "Faith in America"

Great link! And good observations, too. Note that I have no problem with the author's line drawn between "Americanism" and Christian faith. When Romney draws that line (except the faith is Mormon), when Jefferson draws that line (except that faith is deist), I applaud it. I am all FOR the national values of what the link's author describes as the "sacred writings" of the Constitution and DOI, of viewing the Founders as 'saints' of a sort in that regard. But, I am also for keeping that "faith", as it were, distinct from my life in Christ, inasmuch as my conduct as an American must NOT seek to make the way of Christ the way of American policy and government. Rather, the true American way, the way of the Founders, the way of small, restrained and limited government, provides the greatest natural environment of freedom in which I may live the way of Christ.

Now, I don't think Romney is a small-government guy. He may be a Mormon, but so is Harry Reid. He is also from Massachusetts, as is Ted Kennedy. But, when I survey the candidates on the Republican side, I presently find none (excepting Ron Paul, but let's get real) who offers the greatest leadership available at the least amount of danger to my views of what and who America should be (which is to say in other words, what America once was about 75 years ago and before).

Certainly, Huckabee is a big-government spendthrift. He never met a spending program he didn't like. And, he's a tax increaser. Like Alabama's Bob Riley, Huckabee attempted to push a huge tax increase onto his state's citizens in 2003.

And, he was dishonest about it. When confronted during his presidential campaign about his tax and spend record in Arkansas, he blamed the tax increase effort on the Arkansas Supreme Court's ruling that public education was inequitably funded. I know something of this as an Alabamian who lived during the horrible equitable funding litigation presided over by Circuit Judge Gene Reese in the 1990's and that served as the justification for the effort to launch a lottery in Alabama by now-Federal inmate, then Governor Don Siegelman.

But back to Huckabee.... Huckabee blamed the tax increase effort on the court ruling when confronted, but when he advocated for the tax increase in 2003 before his state's legislature, he specifically cited the general budget shortfall in revenues, cited Medicaid and health care costs and corrections expenses. He SPECIFICALLY said that education funding was NOT a reason for the tax increase and that business would "wait until the fall". Lesson: If Huckabee says "wait", run the other way with both hands over your wallet.

He also imposed a 6% "bed tax" on nursing home patients, which amounted to $5.35 per bed per day on every nursing home bed in the state of Arkansas in order to boost Medicaid funding. He refused to tax tobacco to achieve the same objective. (Not that he should have taxed either one, but if you had to choose one of the two.....)