Thursday, December 6, 2007

Romney and Huckabee

I saw the U-tube excerpt from the Republican debates-- where Huckabee was asked about evolution. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-BFEhkIujA

He answered beautifully.

I saw Romney on the issue of his faith today. It was a great speech. Huckabee would be smart to say it was a great speech. I would hope these two could avoid destroying one another as Obama and Clinton are trying to do.

I could back either man for the presidency, but I find Huckabee more spontaneously eloquent with a common touch --and I think that's needed. Romney has the same problem as pretty boy John Edwards --too slick and rich and frat boy confident. So smooth that their warmth seems put on. They have had a lifetime of being pretty boys and thus seem to have a veneer.

As for Hillary, she is just boring --the more I hear her, the more ordinary she seems--a boring policy wonk --and dyed in the wool liberal pretending to be "Christian" --though she has been hard core pro-abortion and she will make radical liberal change if elected--as fast as she can.

Obama? expedient. The question of his lavish home next door to mafia? type - bought under questionable circumstances --will come up. His Muslim upbringing --which is really more agnostic in result because his mother was not devout anything, as I understand it --and his membership in Church of Christ --all make him unappealing to me for the presidency. Church of Christ is a pro-gay denomination that denies being a denomination. I'm bothered by people claiming to be Christians whose churches don't believe the Bible's or Jesus's standards of righteousness. As He said, He didn't come to change the law --the standards of right and wrong. So I don't respect churches who do that.

Romney said a man's faith or lack of it shouldn't matter in the race for president. Had he gone further and said that his character and his policies DO matter, and that religions very often play a role in a man's character and in what he considers important for public policy, I would have appreciated it more.





"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible

15 comments:

mud_rake said...

...you'd follow a goat if it was dresesed up as a preacher. Who the hell do you think you are fooling with these pseudo-political comments?

Why don't you come right out and tell the 2 or 3 visitors to your blog that you are an old-time right-wing fundamentalist Christian with an agenda that smacks of homophobia and intolerance?

At least you wouldn't appear to be so righteous about the your political agenda.

Barb said...

You are so unhappy, Mudrake. Do you ever really have fun?

I know -it makes you bitter that there are so many like me and so few enlightened ones like yourself.

I am an old-time rightwing fundamentalist Christian with an agenda --that is BIble based --and not at all afraid of homosexuals per se --or intolerant of people who differ, such that I can't be friendly to them, such that I would wish them ill.

I didn't know I appeared righteous in my political agenda. Nice of you to think so.

mud_rake said...

Sorry to see that you are no longer posting on Pourquoi Pas? blog. Did they kick you out?

We don't miss you, sad to say, but you did add a good laugh now and again.

steve said...

Religion and Politics are immiscible, even Jesus knew that:

"Render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's, render unto God that which is God's."

In your post you mention Hillary "a policy wonk". I don't know about anyone else, but that is exactly what I'm looking for, someone who knows the issues in depth and can make a decision based on logic and analysis vs "gut feeling".

kooz said...

Mudrake...

Quite simply sir...you are a fool. What is wrong with an old time right wing fundamentalist Christian? Certainly, liberal, tolerant, stand for nothing ideology that you subscribe to hasn't done this country ANY good in the last forty years.

Barb, I banned mudrake from making comments on my blog. I have no problem allowing comments of those who disagree...but this guy just throws pot shots. He has no knowledge of anything he talks about...

Barb said...

Uh--mudrake, are you able to post on PP? Everyone was blocked, according to whynot and jeanette. He was having trouble with his server, I guess.

Kooz, you are right about Mudrake, but I don't censor him because I like to go over and take light into his darkness now and then.

Jeanette said...

Barb,

First, let me mention that everyone is blocked from Porquois Pas? right now as there is a severe problem with the host company, so Mudrake is pulling your leg about being banned.

Second: I respectfully disagree with you about Mitt Romney. Here's why: I have read some history of the Mormons and from reading about the Mountain Massacre I found out Brigham Young's adopted son (or so he thought of him that way) was the scapegoat in that butchery.

He wrote his story before he was executed and the thing that stood out to me is that when he was told to lead the massacre he questioned his orders. He was told the "prophet" (president of the "church" Brigham Young) spoke for God and if he was not obeyed the adopted son would not get to the "celestial kingdom" where his family would be and where he could work his way up to being a god.

So, what does this have to do with Mitt Romney? What if the modern day "prophet" or president of the church or his council deliver an order to bomb some country with a nuclear bomb? Hardly likely, but with older people who may have feeble minds it's not out of the question.

If Romney were president and refused to obey the "prophet" he would lose his right to the "celestial kingdom" and his right to become a god.

Would he give up what he believes to be eternal rewards and not commit an atrocity or would he opt for what he has been taught all his life?

That his faith is not Christian doesn't bother me so much as what his leaders of his faith might tell him to do and I know I used a very exaggerated example.

He lives a clean life that any Christian would envy. No one can doubt that. No, John Kennedy didn't let the Pope run the country and my fears may very well be unfounded with Romney, but I still have my doubts.

Add to that that he seems to be a bit slick and seems ready to change his position to anything he thinks the electorate wants to hear and he's not a strong candidate.

As for Huckabee, well if he was called to be a minister of the Gospel why in the world did he go into politics? Politics, by its very definition requires its participants to lie either deliberately to get votes or after assuming office to protect the office, the holder of the office or even the country. How can a Christian man do this in good conscience?

Truth be told, I can't find a decent candidate in either party to be our next president, but one of them will be.

Barb said...

About Romney and the church--I doubt if he's a terribly strong Mormon since he has a history of waffling a bit on the social issues as gov. of a very liberal state. I'm assuming Mormons would be strong on the social issues as a church. So I personally would be very surprised if he'd let the church dictate any national policy to him --anymore than JFK would have obeyed the pope--which was said of him at the time --that his allegiance was to the Vatican.

He does seem slick like Edwards --

As for Huckabee --I think it's possible to be called to preach for a season and to be called into government service later.

AS for the lying --I was a very low level politician on a school board and didn't feel I had to lie at any point, as a candidate or on the board. But we are expected not to tell all the truth to everyone --that is there are in schools executive sessions when personnel issues are discussed and when you don't hang out the dirty linens of a staff member in public--say one who is to be let go. You don't tell everything you know to just anybody in politics --but that's not lying. That's discretion and wisdom.

Steve, about Hillary--it's not that she KNOWS policies that's the issue for me; it's the STANDS she has taken historically. I don't like her speaking style --but Geo. W. isn't good at public speaking either--but I like his views better than hers --naturally--being a republican instead of a dyed in the wool liberal democrat.

Jeanette said...

When I said politicians by definition are liars I was thinking more in line of state and federal politicians and not local ones.

I do believe Romney is a strong Mormon as his wife converted to marry him. He was once a bishop, which isn't that unique in the cult, but has held other positions in the cult.

He was elected in a very liberal state, probably the most liberal along with Vermont.

He passed a state health care program that he bragged about but now downplays because it isn't conservative enough.

I guess if you toss out his religion you would have to say he is a moderate more than a conservative. You have to be a moderate or liberal to be elected anything in New England. I know because I grew up in the home state of Margaret Chase Smith and she proudly called herself a moderate.

If you're looking for a purely conservative candidate I guess Thompson fits the bill but he seems not to be too interested in whether or not he wins.

Huckabee is shown on YouTube telling the Arkansas legislature all the taxes he would sign into law if they passed them. I'm sure he was discussing funding a certain program and it is out of context, but I have read that he did sign a lot of tax increases while governor. Besides, do we really need another man from Hope?

Yes, I'm sure God can call someone to the ministry and then call them to politics. I have no doubt about Huckabee's faith, and I realize he would have times as president when he had to remain silent on an issue or even deliberately mislead for the sake of national security.

One thing I do know is I will never vote for Hillary and would crawl on broken glass on my hands and knees in a blinding blizzard to vote against her. But I'd much rather have someone I can vote for rather than someone to vote against and right now I'm not turned on by any candidate of either party.

By the way, I just spoke to WhyNot and right now his biggest problem is his server seems to be crashing and has 18 years' worth of data on it. The blog problem is secondary to him at the moment as he is waiting to hear from Anna as to which hosting companies would fill his needs.

Barb said...

As for church involvement and marrying into one's faith, it may be the Mormon church required it of Romney the way Catholicism requires it. Good Catholics want to be married in the church for their marriage to be considered valid --and then the spouse is obligated to put it in writing that the non-catholic spouse will raise the kids in Catholic schools. At least, this was so when my brother married a Catholic. Yet, adherence to these requirements doesn't necessarily predict that the Catholic is devout in all ways --and certainly doesn't predict that he would do the bidding of the pope on issues of national concern.

I would hope that our president would have enough faith to have a traditional view of morals and virtue --such that he couldn't be a Hitler or a Stalin or a Mussolini -or a Sadam or a Castro or a bin Laden --no matter how much he disapproved people of other religions and political views. AS for lifestyle/social issues, there really is every reason re: health--physical, emotional, educational and economic health --to promote and advantage traditional marriage and oppose abortion for the optimum rearing of children.

Mort Zuckerman of U.S. News and World Report said as much in an October editorial.

About the blog problem --if the server "crashes" --doesn't it do the same for all their subscribers? Or just for one user? Is it Whynot's computer issue or the server's if other Word press blogs are unaffected?

As for higher taxes --for me it depends on what they are for --I don't want to fund Planned Parenthood, embryonic stem cell research, liberal sex ed programs, condom education without a chastity and monogamy emphasis, various pork barrel projects of other states, higher salaries for liberal educators and liberal schools --and so on.

I would hope that not every politician has had to lie to get and stay in office. I suppose there are some difficult dilemmas that come up, but I don't really think of officials as lying just because they end up being unable to fulfill a promise --or because they had inaccurate info to pass along (as in WMD) or because they don't tell us everything they know.

Unfortunately, candor gets abused by the media --they over-blow minutia or mistakes or inaccuracies in info --as though the officials were being corrupt when they weren't.

mud_rake said...

Oh, Jeanette, you spoiled my fun.

mud_rake said...

By the way, barb, after reading this new article on Huckabee I can see why you are supporting him. The two of you share the same homophobia.

Yankee Doodle said...

Apparently, the liberals' favorite words are those end with "phobia."

Speaking of Romney, I feel that he is embarassed by his Mormon religion. He does not want to discuss his Mormonism in his speech.

Anyway, I'm writing endorsements for primary elections. I have already finished the Democrat endorsement, but I have not made up my mind on the Republican field. Do you have any suggestions?

Jeanette said...

WhyNot has a personal server in his apartment. That's what is falling apart on him and what is so important to him to get fixed or he will lose 18 years' worth of data.

WordPress is not a hosting service, but just a blogging program. He uses WordPress for his blog program but is hosted by Free. Free is a free service and provides no customer support. He is unable to log in as an administrator to fix the codes in his WordPress configuration, but told me the other day there was a whole new table in there he didn't put in.

It sounds like a host problem but since they won't fix it he'll probably have to go to a paid host when he gets a name of one from his designer.

In the meantime, his greatest concern is not to crash his personal server or all his computers will go down and he will lose the data on the server. It's limping along now and has been for awhile.

Two different issues and two different priorities.

Barb said...

I wondered about wordpress --I like how people who use it can show current conversations and it allows you to revive an old thread where all can see.

I've not seen that capability used on blogspot.