.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Born at the Crest of the Empire

Thursday, May 10, 2007

The Irony of Mitt Romney, Republican

How ironic is it that Mitt Romney's rise to prominence came about only because a liberal(Democratic) state was far more tolerant of his Mormonism than his own national party?

Try and convince me that Mitt Romney would've been elected a Mormon governor in South Carolina or Texas.

(Does anyone else find it offensive that in the discussion of Romney's "electability" as a Mormon in the Republican Party, there is no mention at all that such religious intolerance might be, you know, bigoted and wrong?)

Also: The Giuliani campaign decides to end the farce and come out as openly pro-choice.

posted by mikevotes at 7:56 AM

9 Comments:

  • Good observation on the religious irony.

    By Blogger -epm, at 9:17 AM  

  • Ditto what epm said, and congrats to Rudy for coming out of the closet, so to speak.

    It's refreshing to see a candidate (on either side of the fence) stick to their guns and what they believe in instead of pandering to what might be more popular to the fundamental core of their party.

    With the country as divided as it is right now with the far-right and far-left fighting for control, a voice of moderation is a breath of fresh air.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:43 AM  

  • I'm just struck by this as no one seems to be saying that the broad rejection of Romney the Mormon is wrong.

    Also, no one seems to point to the corallory that only a Christian can be elected president.

    ...

    Jeff I thought about using that "out of the closet" language, but it has such a meaning attached I didn't.

    And, I don't know how courageous he's really being. He can't get away from his past statements and positions, they're just too strong, so, this is really his best/only option.

    Mike

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 11:33 AM  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger Justin Hart, at 2:02 PM  

  • I'm struck by how ignorant you are of where the attacks on Romney are coming from.

    Can you cite a single serious conservative publication or author that has disqualified Romney because of this faith?

    I can cite you 5 on the left side of punditry. Bottom line... it's the left making waves about Mormonism not the right.

    - Jacob Weisberg of Slate
    - Woodward in the NY Times
    - Linker at TNR
    - South at Politico

    By Blogger Justin Hart, at 2:03 PM  

  • That's actually a somewhat valid point.

    The discussion is being driven more by the talking heads than the republican political groups, however, I would argue as to whether those promoting this are necessarily left.

    But, I would add that some of the religious right figures have asked public questions.

    But, great comment.

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 2:10 PM  

  • This brings up an interesting question: Is the Christian Conservative establishment really concerned with Christian dogma -- adherence to a particular creed --, or are they more concerned with public enforcement specific social issues?

    Romney hasn't changed his religious views, but he most definitely has changed is social policy views. Actually, it's unclear whether he's changed his publicly articulated religious views since in Massachusetts it wasn't really an issue. He always addressed it as a matter of personal faith and we Yankees traditionally don't wear our faith on our sleeves. Christ-talk just isn't part of our vernacular dialog, as it seems to be in the south and parts of the west.

    That said, Romney's political Christ-talk has been largely indistinguishable from the nominal language of Dobson/Robertson/Perkins. It starts with some pro forma veneration of Jesus ("my personal savior") then launches seamlessly into into the "anti" speech: anti-gay, anti-government, anti-regulation, anti-science, anti-tax, anti-choice, anti-immigrant...

    So, is the "Religious Right" really a religious movement, or is it really a political, social-control movement, cloaked in the guise of religion? Individual members aside, I think the power players in the movement are just pragmatic little Caesars looking for fame and power.

    By Blogger -epm, at 5:45 PM  

  • The answer to the last question is B, although I'm not as clear on the motivations.

    I personally feel it more likely that they're after power, but it is possible they seek more power so they have more prominence to convert more people.

    But, I lean towards it's use as a club through which to influence the Republican party.

    By using abortion as example, they can "deselect" candidates who aren't willing to bow to their influence.

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 6:05 PM  

  • "By using abortion as example, they can "deselect" candidates who aren't willing to bow to their influence."

    Sort of a toady litmus test?

    By Blogger -epm, at 6:19 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home