Why not Mitt Romney for Vice-President?
There has been a lot of talk about whom John McCain will or should choose as his running mate and if you have read my blog for very long, you will know I have hoped he would chose Mike Huckabee. I have written a couple of articles about why I believe Huckabee would be a good choice for McCain to make, although I am not sure Huckabee is even on the short list of names being considered for the job. That being said, there is one person that I believe would be the death toll for the McCain campaign. That man is Mitt Romney.
Much ado has also been made about Romney’s economic credentials and how they would help shore up the McCain campaign. Admittedly, Romney turned around the Olympics and he has been the head of a big corporation, but I am not sure how well those credentials enable him to understand what the normal American is going through in today’s economy. After all, most of us don’t have millions of dollars in the bank. I am not sure Romney can understand the difference between corporate America and the America most of us live in.
I am not intending to go full negative in this article, but there are so many negatives about Mitt Romney, that I can’t believe McCain would even consider choosing him as his running mate. The main thing about Romney is his willingness to change his position on any given topic, at any given time, during any given campaign. He doesn’t carry the nickname Flip-Flop Romney for no reason. Looking at his past record, it is clear that he is not a true social conservative, at least not until he started running for President and realized he would need the social conservative vote if he were to win the nomination. That was all the incentive he needed to start changing his position on social conservative issues to match the campaign he was running. If you don’t believe me, just ask the voters of Massachusetts. The man they voted into the Governor’s office is not the man they thought he was. It is very clear, Mitt Romney can not be trusted.
While John McCain goes through the process of choosing his running mate, it is becoming clear that a lot, if not most of Mike Huckabee’s supporters do not want Romney anywhere near the White House. Why, you ask? Let me explain. During the campaign, Mike Huckabee was blasted because he supposedly attacked Mitt Romney about his religion, even though the statement that was written was clearly not an attack, but rather a question to a reporter who was entirely more knowledgeable about the Mormon religion than was Huckabee. Not only that, but Mitt Romney saw Huckabee as his main rival in Iowa and he went on the full attack. Instead of trying to speak to the voters and tell them about his own record and why they should choose him as the Republican nominee, he spent most of his time attacking Huckabee and distorting his record. That tells me that he really doesn’t have much of a record, at least not one that he wants to share with the voters.
So, if John McCain were to read this article, what would I want him to get out of it? Just this one thing. He can not possibly hope to beat the Democrat candidate, unless he has the backing of every part of the Republican party. That includes social conservatives, such as myself and other Huckabee supporters. I am not saying I, or others, will not vote for McCain if he doesn’t choose Huckabee or another credible social conservative as his running mate. What I am saying is that there is one sure way to make sure he doesn’t win this Presidential election. Just choose Mitt Romney as his running mate and he will see droves of voters voting against him and Romney or just refusing to vote at all.
That’s my take!
Larry
K.R. Marabou,
Mike Huckabee represents us just fine, thank you very much. Since when is raising money for John McCain a requirement to be considered a candidate for VP? As for his work history, you need to look at it a bit more closely, it appears to me. Yes, he is a former minister, but he was Governor of Arkansas longer than he was a minister. If you will examine his record as Governor of Arkansas honestly, you will see the mess he inherited from the Clinton years and how he improved the state. It was certainly in better shape when he finished his 10.5 years as Governor than it was when he first took office.
Once more, I am sick of hearing how Romney lost the primaries because of his religion. He lost because of the way he conducted the campaign and because people examined his record and found him wanting. I know of people in Massachusetts that will tell you if you want your taxes raised, just vote for Romney. His state was glad to get rid of him and it didn’t have anything to do with his religion.
BigMeanUglyOgre,
You said, “The reality is that he flipped once, on abortion.”
Romney flip flopped on more than just abortion. What about his flip flop on 2nd amendment rights?
http://tinyurl.com/4cknjz
What about his flip flop on auto-emissions standards? (Not to mention the lousy job creations and manufacturing job loses in comparison to the rest of the country under his leadership in MA)
http://tinyurl.com/3dg5o6
You said, “What’s incorrect about fighting discrimination in the homosexual community? Although I may not agree with their choices, it is their choice to make.”
I don’t agree with their choices either OR having tax dollars spent to support it. (as in having significant others covered under government funded medical coverage)
I also do not agree that teaching the Bible should be classified as hate speech. (as it has been in other countries)
You said, “In Romney’s case he was running in an actual liberal state”
Huckabee didn’t compromise his values. Romney supporters make excuses for his actions because it was in a highly Democrat state. They imply Huckabee had it easy in Arkansas. Yet, Huckabee ran his campaign on his honest views in a state that was so Democratic that after he won the office of Lt. Gov. his door was NAILED SHUT.
It’s interesting to read both sides of this argument, including the intelligent comments that state neither Romney nor Huckabee should be the VP. Those that understand politics (and I don’t claim to be one of them) would know that using either of these two politicians as a VP candidate would only hurt McCain. He needs to find someone that doesn’t have haters/lovers. And unfortunately religion has become much too touchy of a subject. Sad isn’t it, when that is what our country was founded on.
There are some very funny comments here on the site. I especially love the ones like DB and Larry Perrault. You know big words don’t mean you are smart. (What a crack up!).
And yes, I hate to say it but the ability to raise money does matter. The individual who stated that should never be allowed to post another blog about politics…..ever!
I love this time, the time when the presidential election is coming close and people start hating each others candidates. It’s funny how similar it is to sports. I am a huge Dallas Cowboy’s fan and all I could do during the 80′s and 90′s was defend them during all their bad media attention. Let’s face it, our candidates do not really represent us. They all have money (if you don’t think that you are an idiot). They all have gone back and forth on issues depending on where the votes were. They all have decent backgrounds, seem to be somewhat intelligent, and have some things in their past that don’t seem quite so impressive. It’s all in how you look at it. Based on the definition of honesty, I think it would be tough to say any of them are honest. I guess unless you truly knew them personally, you couldn’t really speak for them.
Sort of like having a favorite NFL football team and when you watch them play, you can’t believe the refs aren’t being fair to them. It’s all in how you look at it!
I’m out!
P.S. I still don’t know who I’m going to vote for. This only helped me a little.
Fred, all candidates may “have money” (Don’t we all to some extent?). But there is an absolutely monumental difference between Romney’s wealth and Huckabee’s.
After reading the rebuttal comments from Donna and kingdom advancer, I for the most part remain unperturbed. Most of it is taken directly from newspapers and unsubstantiated by other sources. There is also quite a bit of innuendo which we are supposed to immediately accept as fact. I guess the best term I can apply to the links is ‘leading’. That aside it still didn’t bother me overly. I must admit that I disagree with his decision regarding the boyscouts (and one other thing that I can’t seem to recall at the moment) but I can understand the circumstances enough to avoid condemning him.
I personally found their attacks on his fiscal/economic prowess laughable. They harped on and on about the fees and then deliberately choose to avoid the fact that he did raise taxs. Atleast in the sense that he found and highlighted the loopholes in the tax system where rich individuals were taking the mick and he then closed them. This quite easily could be viewed as a tax rise but those seeking to libel him never really give it much notice or traction because he was sticking it to the rich people.
I also enjoyed all of the different comments (and they were incessant) that said that Romney did nothing during his term as Governor. If he did nothing, then where are all of these complaints coming from? He must have done something. Healthcare, Education, and roads jump immediately to mind. Or the legislation he fought for and enacted which changed the way insurance was brokered in Massachussetts (which was horrific until of course he left office and the democrats reinstated the legislation).
I seriously can’t understand how people can even remotely compare Arkansas to Massachussetts. But oh well. To each their own.
Sorry folks
It is all about the best qualified man…there is no doubt that is Romney. I am a catholic, and the did not appreciate the Mormon comment, nor the other comment “I will not say a negative comment about Romney, but if I did..this is it.” This does not speak well for a former preacher. But the choice is McCain”s. I hope he chooses well…We need to pray and ask our heavenly Father to guide Senator McCain in making the best choice to balance his ticket. It is about the future of our country and welfare of our families.
MarshallGill -
Actually, it’s usually Romney supporters who bring up Mormonism. Like other liberals, they ignore an entire critical argument and sum it up as, “You just don’t like Mormons.” Apparently, they insist on affirmative action for LDS Presidential candidates.
I might back Orrin Hatch, were he running, because of his consistent record. Romney flipped on abortion, a key issue for me, as well as gun control and gay marriage. He allowed the Commonwealth to put Catholic Charities out of the adoption business because of non-discrimination laws, and he directly repudiated “the days of Reagan/Bush” when discussing taxes.
While he sanctimoniously declares that he never raised taxes, he did “close loopholes” on NH residents working in MA (thus raising their taxes). While he claims to be a great foe of illegal immigration, he did nothing about the sanctuary cities in MA.
My reasons for opposing Romney have nothing to do with Mormonism. If you’d like to discuss doctrine, I’d be happy to do it. But it doesn’t factor into my opposition to Romney as a pol.
Greg said, [quote]“…Mike Huckabee, a college graduate with a THEOLOGY degree doesn’t know the basic doctrines of the country’s 4th largest Church? Seriously? If the voting public were to buy that, then it raises a lot of questions about what Gov. Huckabee really does know. On the contrary, I believe this was a calculated move meant to test the waters of religious and patriotic bigotry…”
I honestly don’t know whether or not Gov. Huckabee studied anything about the Mormon religion; much less that particular topic. Even if he did, is he REALLY expected to remember something he studied MANY years ago? Not to mention the fact that while he WAS in school his young bride had cancer AND he was working to support his family. Could that topic have been discussed at a time his mind was on something much more important than a religion he didn’t practice? Is knowing about someone else’s religion a requirement for being president? I never read that requirement in the Constitution. In fact it states: [quote] 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. http://tinyurl.com/7lmmx
Gov. Huckabee said the reporter “knew more about the Mormon faith than I did.” (From his interview with Larry King) http://tinyurl.com/3hzkzk
Huckabee goes into more detail in a news article. [quote] “Huckabee apologized Wednesday, saying he had asked an innocent question during a lengthy conversation and was shocked to see it taken out of context. “I was horrified when I read that, and I apologized to Mitt Romney, because first of all, I don’t think that his being a Mormon or not being a Mormon has a thing to do with his being president.” Huckabee said his discussion with the reporter, Zev Chafets, lasted several hours. “He was saying, ‘But there are some different things about Mormonism.’ He obviously knew more about it than I did. In the course of that conversation, honestly, I raised the question.”
Read more: http://tinyurl.com/4b5n7e
Greg’s comment caused me to post an article on my blog. You can read my article at http://tinyurl.com/4yvps7
@ Granny T
While I can fully understand that Huckabee might have been distracted during his degree because of the reasons you mentioned, I think we’re missing the whole story.
Huckabee has had a long history in the anti mormon propaganda machine during his ministry. This was one of the reasons why he was chosen as the keynote speaker at a baptist conference held in Salt Lake City (1998 if I’m not mistaken), which was arranged for the sole purpose of telling the Mormons just exactly how wrong they were.
I had friends who were confronted by baptists during this and other conferences. While some of the discourse was polite and some wasn’t, they all came fairly well educated on the Mormon faith. Atleast to the level that they would know the answer to Huckabee’s question.
That Huckabee then went on to try and cover it up, shows a distinct dishonesty.
BigMeanUglyOgre,
Okay, I am going to call you on this statement. You are saying Huckabee has had a long history of anti-Mormon propaganda? I ask you to show me proof that this is true. Just because he is a Baptist does not mean he is anti-Mormon. Just because he was chosen as the keynote speaker at a Baptist conference does not mean he is anti-Mormon. Just because your friends were confronted by Baptists during that conference does not mean Mike Huckabee is anti-Mormon. Nothing you have said proofs any so-called distinct dishonesty on Huckabee’s part.
Larry, I wouldn’t even bother asking for this proof. For one thing, you’ll never get it.
For another thing, the question isn’t even whether Huckabee differs with Mormon theology (which he does) — the question is whether we just hate Romney for being Mormon, which is a stupid thing to say.
Apparently, we can cite all the reasons we want for not having voted for Romney, they’re just going to accuse us of being bigots.
@ Larry
I would entirely agree with you if:
-The conference’s entire agenda wasn’t to convert the heathen Mormons.
-This conference wasn’t subsequently followed by all of those baptist ministers, et al going out and attempting to convert via proselyting. This is where the aforementioned conflicts/discussions regarding my friends occurred.
-Although, I don’t live in Salt Lake (I am currently living in Scotland but come from Missouri) I also happened to physically be there for their first conference when a purported 10,000 baptists swooped down upon Salt Lake for no other purpose than to convert the whole lot of Mormons. Having been there for this conference, I can attest that it was pretty darn anti-mormon. I have little reason to doubt that subsequent conferences changed tone.
-In a set of conferences in which in which I have first and second person experience as being anti-mormon, why would the keynote speaker know nothing about the Mormons?
-Living in Missouri as I did, I have many Baptist friends and many of them are very good people. But their actions are very telling. Most would avoid telling their friends, family, or church members that I was Mormon so as to avoid receiving the “lecture”. This was pretty much standard with all of my friends save one who happened to be rebelling against his father who was the minister. He of course enjoyed flaunting his friendship with me.
I can’t count the number of times I’ve been told I was going to go to hell. Sometimes it was because they found out I was Mormon. Other times, I was playing cards (solitaire). I was even told I was going to hell because I was reading a mild as milk fantasy book. Heck, I’ve even been physically attacked because someone found out I was Mormon (yes he was baptist).
All this aside, I could really care less. Nothing they ever did ever actually bothered me. But from my experience, it is highly unlikely to find a baptist who doesn’t know about the Mormons. Even less so if they were a preacher. Compound this even further by the fact that my experience was in Missouri and it was a 3-4 hours drive from my home to get to Arkansas. I can’t imagine the baptists being so different as we more or less resided in the same region.
Now, I could of course go back and look at the speeches given by Huckabee (they have to be available somewhere) but I really don’t care. Huckabee will have his big press conference in a couple of days and will let the world know that he’s got his own little tv or talk radio show and he’ll be out of my political hair.
@ Wickle
I didn’t bring up the Mormon argument nor did I call anyone a bigot. I was simply responding to Granny T’s comment to explain that things weren’t quite as plausible as she was making it seem.
For clarification purposes, I think those opposing Romney do so in shades of grey. Some because he’s Mormon. Some because of his political stands. Some because he’s seems like a snake oil salesman (don’t know where this comes from). Some because he has lots of money (how republican). I do however feel that a large porion view him more critically because of being Mormon.
Now let me clarify what I mean when I say view him critically. In any exchange of information, there has to be a certain measure of trust to view the information as real and honest. I feel many are looking at him without this trust because he’s Mormon. The natural result of this is of course viewing him critically as I mentioned. Just like I feel many view Huckabee with a positive eye and thus overlook his many faults (yes I’ve visited his site, viewed his statements/platform, and read everything that anyone ever asked me to read about the candidates. Except for there books as I’ll only go so far. I’m not buying books).
BigMeanUglyOgre,
I understand why you must think the way you do about Baptists, given your experience with them. Let me see if I can explain something to you.
Firs of all, I am not a Baptist, I am Pentecostal and we are more strict than the Baptist ever thought about being. That being said, I have seen some of our faith act in a way that I consider completely unChristian like. I know of some Pentecostal churches who would not welcome some people because of their lifestyles, actions or any given number of things. I can also tell you that the church I attend wouldn’t even dream of doing something like that. My Pastor, Brother Terry, has been given down the road by some of our faith because of it, but he figures we need to try to help everyone.
Following that line of reason, let’s look at Mike Huckabee. From resarching him myself, I have found that he is not your normal, everyday Baptist. He has intergrated one church himself and he had to stand against his own congregation to do so. He is very willing to go against his own denomination, when he deems it appropiate. I believe Huckabee is not anti-Mormon because he has not shown me to be so. Unless you can show me where he has been, I will not believe he is, just because some of the Baptist faith are so.
As for his announcement in a few days, I can’t begin to know what is on his mind and what he plans to do, but I somehow doubt it is going to be a TV or radio show and I suspect strongly that he will not “be out of your political life”. Mike Huckabee is going to be around for some time.
Yes, and LDS says that I still follow the Great Apostasy because I don’t think God lives near Kolob and I can become a god. Interesting how it never comes up that Mormons say we aren’t real Christians, isn’t it? The attacks only go one way.
Question – When Mormon missionaries show up at my door, hear that I’m a Baptist, and yet go on to try to convert me, does that mean that they’re bigots? Or does it mean simply that they think they have a message that I need to hear? Perhaps, that I’m missing the truth?
They don’t, by the way, have to know the differences in doctrine between Baptists and Mormons, and I don’t expect them to be experts on Baptist teaching. All they need to do is positively present their beliefs.
wickle,
I have looked into the whole mormons becoming gods thing and have found lots of evidence in the Bible about everyone who follows Christ becoming joint heirs to him. Mormons dont believe that they will ever become what Christ is, they will always be under him and worship him, they believe and will try and become more like him and they will have God like characteristics like eternal life. I think people think Mormons think they will become Christs equal and that is what really turns them off, but that is not the case.
@ Larry
I can completely understand where you’re coming from and there are indeed exceptional people who step outside of the molds which they find themselves in, doing so against the weight of the world.
But if Huckabee was such an individual, why did he accept and receive the position of keynote speaker of an Anti Mormon conference? Note, just because he did so doesn’t mean he’s an evil person. It does however mean that he does have enough knowledge to know what his comments to that journalist meant and what kind of response they would trigger in the masses opposed to the Mormon faith. Then he lied about it afterwards.
I can understand you not wanting Huckabee to get out of my/our political hair and go into entertainment. My big question is, why did he just sign with the largest entertainment agency in the states if not the world (Creative something or other, I can’t remember it all)? Although my guess isn’t founded in knowledge, it’s definitely a gut feeling that I have.
@ wickle
I completely agree that anyone should feel free to proselytize to whomever they feel. I did so on my mission to Italy. There is however a distinct difference to encountering whoever you meet in the street or in their homes irregardless of their beliefs or lack thereof and that of getting 10,000 baptist preachers to fly to Salt Lake City, home of the Mormon faith, for the express purpose of converting Mormons. If 10,000 preachers flew across the Atlantic to Vatican City for the sole purpose of proselyting amongst that population, you better believe that the catholics would be a bit cheesed off.
As for your first comment, Everyone believes that they’re right and that anyone else who doesn’t believe the same is wrong. Just like you think I’m wrong in my beliefs. Just like I’m certain that Larry believes he’s walking down the correct path and that ours is not quite right. Just cause you don’t believe that we have the potential to become like Heavenly Father doesn’t mean that you aren’t Christian. Just like my belief in the Godhead doesn’t preclude me from being Christian.
I guess the best way I can put it is this. I believe that you have many good beliefs. I just don’t believe that you have ALL good beliefs. In the words of the now past President’ Hinckley, “Bring all of good that you have and we’ll bring ours. Let’s see if we can become better people because of it.”
I used to be proud to be in the so-called Christian Conservative movement. Conservatives who were God fearing, Jesus following people who wanted to better this wonderful country by putting good people in office. But, since this whole Huckabee/Romney debate has started over who is the true Christian, I am now embarressed to be identified as a Christian Conservative.
The way I look at it, you shouldn’t have to go around telling everyone that your a Christian just to be recognized as such. I believe you can tell a true Christian by their actions. I work with a couple of Mormons and have a Mormon family as neighbors. There is no doubt in my mind that they are God fearing, Jesus following people. They are honest, hard working people. I have talked to them many times about their beliefs and they truely believe that it is only through Christ that they can be saved. That is all I need to know. Forget the rest, that is between them and God.
For those of you who dont like Romney for his positions, or question his sincerity, so be it. But those of you so called Christians who dont like Romney because of his Mormonism are in my mind a bigot and are un-American. I feel you have done more harm to the whole Christian Movement that you will ever know.
I think Romney may be McCain’s best choice for vice-pres. I’ve been following the news and especially the primaries closely for about a year. Romney does have deep support in several key states and would bring fine credentials to a republican ticket. Objectively, I think McCain Romney would seriously concern either democratic candidate. As of 2/08 McCain and Romney had already won about 24 states between the 2 of them. As a team, there would be vast support across America.
mccain will get my vote if he chooses romney for VP…if he doesn’t then i vote democrat in november
A McCain/anybody ticket it going to get trounced. The republicans screwed up as soon as they gave him the nomination. Dems are showing up 2-1 voters vs. the republicans. Dems actually want either Obama or Clinton. Republicans don’t want any one of their candidates. I’m a republican but it’s not hard to do the math. It will be a landslide victory for the democrats in November and this country will got to *&^& in a handbasket with either Obama or Clinton. Trouble is, it will with McCain too.
the writer of this artical is simply focusing through a narrow looking glass. the composition, organization, and cleaver delivery underscores the writer of this articals` abilities, but the bias content must widen the scope if truth is object.
McCain will be sick. Who answers the call?