Thursday, November 29, 2007

Mitt Romney: "It's the Lack of Integrity, Stupid!"

Part 2 of "Mitt Romney is Perfect":

Remember Bob Jones III?  He is the chancellor of the Christian University that bears his and his father and grandfather’s name (BJU) and has, in the past, caused an uproar with some of his Christian fundamentalist points of view.

In the past he has opposed inter-racial dating, and by extension, marriage.  According to Wikipedia, “In May 1975, as it prepared to allow unmarried blacks to enroll, BJU adopted more detailed rules prohibiting interracial dating and marriage—threatening expulsion for any student who dated or married interracially, who advocated interracial marriage, who was "affiliated with any group or organization which holds as one of its goals or advocates interracial marriage," or "who espouse, promote, or encourage others to violate the University's dating rules and regulations (taken from a Court case, go to http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=461&invol=574 ).

To solidify his anti-Catholic credentials, in 1966, BJU awarded an honorary doctorate to the Rev. Ian Paisley, future British MP, leader of the Democratic Unionist Party, and Moderator of the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster, who has referred to the Pope as an Antichrist.

Reportedly he also has even slammed Mormonism, Mitt Romney’s religion: "The diminution of evangelistic enterprise to cults which call themselves Christian, including Catholicism and Mormonism, is frightening."  (Associated Press, 3/16/00)

So, is the following a surprise?

USA Today reports in October 2007 that “Dr. Bob Jones III, chancellor of the fundamentalist Christian university in Greenville that bears his name, is looking past his religious differences with Gov. Mitt Romney and endorsing the Mormon for the Republican nomination for president, he told The Greenville News Tuesday…

Asked whether Romney's religion was a stumbling block for him, Jones replied, "What is the alternative, Hillary's lack of religion or an erroneous religion?"

Terry Sullivan, Mitt Romney's South Carolina campaign manager said, "We're proud to have the support of Dr. Jones and look forward to his help in delivering Gov. Romney's conservative message to the voters."

Wait a minute!  Aren’t there other candidates whose Christian credentials are beyond doubt?  Why not support one of them?  Isn’t it surprising that Bob Jones III picks Romney out of the pack?  Isn’t it surprising that Romney welcomes this support even though he was Governor of one of the nation’s most liberal states where support from a Bob Jones III would have been unthinkable?

No, of course this is not surprising to readers of the INQUIRER.  From the September 2007 issue of the INQUIRER: Ever wonder why the Religious Right seems to be gravitating towards Mitt Romney, the Mormon candidate for president?  I know I have!

Well, I have the answer: It’s because of all the candidates running, Gov. Romney has displayed the LEAST integrity, and it’s a lack of integrity that the Religious Right cherishes above all else.”

He’s perfect.

Part 3 of "Mitt Romney is Perfect":

As noted before in this newsletter, Mitt Romney is the perfect presidential candidate for the Religious Right (RR), even though he is a Mormon.  Why?  Because he is willing to do and/or say anything that RR might want to hear!

While it should matter that what a candidate believes to be true and accurate is in fact reasonable to believe, supernatural beliefs are generally deemed excluded from this standard, while at the same time, failing to have some supernatural beliefs is not excluded from consideration!  Ahhhh!

In other words, it’s ok if Dennis Kucinich is ridiculed for claiming to having seen a UFO (which does not mean he thinks he’s seen an alien spaceship) while Romney’s belief in a North American Jesus is never even mentioned in mainstream media, even by so-called “liberals.”

Romney has learned that these days, it’s not “it’s the economy, stupid”; no, Romney has learned “it’s the lack of integrity, stupid.”

Even Christian minister Mike Huckabee cannot compete with Romney in this regard.  Huckabee, on some issues, exhibits compassion where typically the RR prefers dogma.  The reason that the RR has not yet anointed Huckabee is their detection of a semblance of conscience in Huckabee’s makeup.

So Romney’s past positions on abortion, gay rights, immigration, sex education, health care and so on are not the disadvantages that one might expect; his flip-flopping on these items are evidence of his malleable character.

The latest display of a vacant conscience ironically has to do with Romney’s opinion of some other religious minority, Muslims.

According to a Muslim businessman, Mansoor Ijaz, Romney said in November 2007 that it was unlikely that he would name a Muslim to his cabinet because they made up such a small part of the American population.

What?  Since when have cabinets or other appointed posts been doled out in any regard to religious affiliation?  If they were, one might ask, “Where are the non-believing judges and cabinet ministers?  They certainly should outnumber Jewish, Muslim and even Mormons in government – but do not.”

So Romney’s alleged answer was ignorant and biased; there is absolutely no reason why a Muslim could not be the top fellow for some cabinet position.  To rule them out because they are so few is simply bigotry; have Mormons been ruled out for this reason as well?  Oh yes, and such a religious test is un-constitutional.

But it gets worse; Romney, in defending himself from this charge, denied ever making the comment and said instead that he would have no such religious test for his appointees.

So that’s where it was expected to end; Romney simply denying the Muslim’s claim.

Who would Religious Right believe?  Answer: It doesn’t matter.  They probably would prefer that Romney said it and then deny it!

Well, Mr. Perfect’s record is in tact.

TPM, a news/blog site, found two Republicans in Nevada who reported being present at a meeting where Romney made similar statements as described by Mr. Ijaz.  One of them described the statements as “racist.”

Of course, this verification could be dismissed as coming from biased Republicans who are not Romney supporters.  After all, a lack of integrity is a common trait.

But wait!  In the September 2007 issue of Liberty Watch Magazine is the following account:

“When Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney recently addressed a group of a prominent local conservatives at a Las Vegas fundraiser, (Liberty Watch columnist) George (Harris) lobbed the first question: “If you are elected President,” he asked, “will you include any Muslim members in your cabinet?”

In the seconds beforeformer Massachusetts Governor Romney responded, you could have heard a pin drop.

His (admittedly, very smooth) answer in a nutshell? “Not likely.”

Now, my fellow Nevada conservatives are not stupid.  The reason a hush fell over the room was not so much due to the boldness of George’s question.  They think the same way he does, and they worry about the consequences of an expanded war in the Middle East, which will inevitably lead to increased taxes, increased fuel prices and an even higher deficit that, sooner or later, American taxpayers will be forced to pay.  More significantly, we wonder: “How can we claim to be fighting a war solely against violent Islamofacism and not the entire Arab world if the White House doesn’t contain a single member of the Arab-American or Muslim community?”  (Go to http://www.liberty-watch.com/volume03/issue06/fromtheeditor.php.)

This article, which pre-dates the current controversy, pretty much seals the deal: Romney said what he is now denying he said.

The Religious Right is loving it.  Romney remains their perfect candidate.

Post a Comment