He’s against health care reform… except the health care reform (a government mandate) he signed into law.
Three years after the inception of Massachusetts’ landmark health reform legislation, which required every citizen to buy insurance, NewsCenter 5’s Ed Harding wondered what former Gov. Mitt Romney, a key political architect of the plan, thought of its progress.
Call it protecting his legacy, well-earned pride, or seeing the glass as half-full, but Romney says Massachusetts deserves an ‘A.’“It’s working like we had hoped it would work,” the one-time republic presidential candidate said. “We got nearly everybody in Massachusetts health insurance, which really, something people didn’t think was possible.”
One day all these Mitt Romneys are going to debate each other on the issues (he’s had every position), and its going to be awesome.
Feel free to ask him about his stand on abortion as well. He was for it before he was against it.
IMO, Mitt’s got the best shot at beating Obama in 2012. And he’s never going to get the nomination, because the fundies hate him and his Mormonism.
Good ol’ GOP, shooting itself in the foot for us.
Former Prime minister Jacques Parizeau has once been called on a contradiction in his statements a few years apart. He answered: “Yes, I think my former position was mistaken. I learned new facts since then. When I realised I was wrong, I changed my opinion.”
Would a US Republican have enough dignity to take responsability for their own opinions like this?
This is your brain on Aqua Net fumes
Yeah but the problem is, Mitt doesn’t change positions. He has opposite opinions at the same time.
Obviously this blog is for Mitt bashing but there are some things that should be noted:
First, before the healthcare act took place in Massachusetts, I heard Mr. Romney say that he knew that there were things that would have to be worked out AND that he wasn’t sure that something like it could be nationwide. Second, it is not government run healthcare though it is mandated by the government that all have healthcare insurance (sort of like mandated car insurance). The government subsidizes people who legitimately cannot afford a private healthcare, they help them pay for it. One benefit has been that emergency rooms are now used for emergencies rather than cold and flu visits. As for his position on abortion, he openly admitted that after listening to stem cell arguements he came to the realization that abortion is wrong – he admitted a change in opinion and there is nothing wrong with that. You want to talk about gay rights? He said he is for civil unions between gays but not for gay marriage. Civil unions offer the same protections but is not given the term marriage. Personally I think this protects churches from having to marry gay people when it is against their beliefs. Give it some honest thought – if a gay couple wanted to be married in a church that opposes homosexuality and were told no – the lawsuits wouldn’t stop. It would be a good thing to consider putting thought and research into your Romney bashing! The only truth I’ve seen on this blog is the one that said the Evangelicals hate Mitt for his Mormonism. Unfortunately this is true – hopefully they will come to realize that a Mormon who believes in Jesus Christ is better than a President who doesn’t believe in America!
As for his position on abortion, he openly admitted that after listening to stem cell arguements he came to the realization that abortion is wrong
Just in time for him jockeying for the GOP nomination, right when all his positions changed from moderate to conservative. Suckers.
Mormons don’t believe in abortion either – so much for the Evangelical arguement or fear that Romney would do whatever his church leaders tell him to, right?
In response to your assumption that Romney changed his mind for political reasons – maybe so, we’ll never know. That being said, what about all the promises that were made by our current President that have been broken in a very short amount of time? Are you okay with that? Is it okay for him to change his mind (and I support him on one or two of his changes) or will you charge him with lying to get elected? I’m just saying…
Mitt is a flip-flopper.
Like I said, he’s the GOP’s best chance in 2012. And he’ll never get the nomination. Not because Dems hate him, but because fundies do.
Jaim -
It would be great if when you make a claim against someone that you offer viable evidence to back it up. It’s okay for someone to change his mind if he offers evidence as to why the change. I think that Mitt Romney offered this in regard to his stance on abortion.
I agree with you about Evangelicals and hopefully they will educate themselves with the facts…I don’t hold out a lot of hope on that one. Personally I think (right now but it’s early) that Romney is the best chance for a free America in 2012. I know you disagree with me and that’s your right. I don’t like the socialist policies of the present government because this country was founded on principles of LESS government – check out a history book. The American Revolution was fought against England (a Socialist government) and it saddens me to think we’re going back…and it appears that we are.
The American Revolution was fought against England (a Socialist government) and it saddens me to think we’re going back…and it appears that we are.
Um, maybe you should check one of them there historic books yourself, son. King George was a socialist?!?
It just keeps getting better.
Personally I think this protects churches from having to marry gay people when it is against their beliefs. Give it some honest thought – if a gay couple wanted to be married in a church that opposes homosexuality and were told no – the lawsuits wouldn’t stop.
While you’re at it, check out the constitution. No one is going to force a church to marry homosexuals.
Idiot.
I agree with tjc here. There are two fundamental differences between the Health Care Program in Massachusetts and the Health Care the Democrats are pushing now:
1. Massachussetts Health Care was NOT government run. It simply mandated everyone to have PRIVATE health insurance, and used assistance for people to get it.
2. Massachussetts Health Care is a state program, NOT a federal program. Romney has consistently said that he believed some system SIMILAR to the system in Massachussetts would work in some other states. He has never proposed a “national” Health Care system, but allows for states to decide.
I am so sick of the Republican Base writing off Romney because of his Mormon faith. Romney has been the elephant in the room for the last 2 years and everyone continues to overlook him because of his religion. Every time the Republican leader goes down in flames, and Romney is left standing, the base starts looking for someone else. The leader of the Republican party is and has been Mitt Romney for a long time, people just don’t want to accept that.
Would a US Republican have enough dignity to take responsibility for their own opinions like this?
While I think that is a reasonable statement he made, it didn’t work for John Kerry in 2004.
Why are the evangelicals afraid of Romney? I can tell you. Years ago in Arizona an LDS man by the name of Darl Anderson took it upon himself to personally interact with ministers in Arizona to foster understanding. He took them to Utah, fostered discussions, etc. Finally several of them told him why they feel anger and bitterness towards the Mormons. They said that every minister respects another minister’s flock. In other words, you don’t try to steal another’s flock. The Mormons don’t respect that. Their ministers (missionaries) go helter skelter among everyone’s flock to get their converts.
It all boils down to protecting the pocketbook! The LDS church is an unpaid ministry. Ministers in other religions depend upon donations from their flock for their salary.
I am a college teacher. When I first began teaching TV courses just began. I can remember how excited we all were and the meetings I had to attend. We were afraid that TV courses were going to make our profession obsolete to a degree. Our livelihood was threatened. As upset as we all were at first I got a glimpse of how upset evangelicals would be who make their living preaching. What if everyone joined the Mormon church just because a President was Mormon? Of course that wouldn’t happen but the thought must send shivers down their spines.
And to make matters worse for the Evangelicals, I understand the Mormon church is the fastest growing church in the US. Time for them to panic I guess.
You’re right Southern Quaker, I misspoke. King George was a tyrannist, the colonies fought against taxation without represenatation…much like the people who are presently a party of the Tea Party movement of today. England is currently a socialist economy.
As for your assertion that ministers who don’t wish to marry a gay couple are protected by the constitution – that doesn’t mean that lawsuits won’t be filed. It doesn’t prevent the churches from having to hire attorneys or fight it in court. Eharmony considered itself a Christian dating service but the gay community filed a suit to force them to include same sex couples. You can’t be naive enough to believe that the same kind of thing would happen to churches. It seems that while some say we should be tolerant, they only mean to what they believe – not that they should be tolerant of what those who disagree with them believe. I think that the gay community hurts themselves with the “in your face” way many of them approach these thing, they prove themselves unwilling to compromise. I’m not homophobic, I am okay with civil unions but I believe marriage is between a man and a woman as it was instituted in the Bible. You decided that calling me an idiot was appropriate and I find that pathetic. I made a statement that you disagree with…and it is only a disagreement, you can’t call it fact due to the FACT that our constitution is ignored repeatedly and people either ignore it or simply don’t care.
Barbara, in defense of Mormons, all congregations compete for membership, it’s been going on since the beginning of Christianity. Mormons are better organized but they have no idea who is on the other side of the door they are knocking on – whether it be a member of a church or not. I do agree with you that the evangelical leaders are probably more afraid of the depletion of their pocketbooks than anything else.
“tjc”: “the colonies fought against taxation without represenatation…much like the people who are presently a party of the Tea Party movement of today.”
Misleading.
The colonist’s Boston Tea Party was a response to corporate tax-cuts.
Did you intend to be misleading?
“tjc” falsely claims “I believe marriage is between a man and a woman as it was instituted in the Bible.”
The Bible instituted polygamy and the selling of daughters into slavery.
You’ve falsely asserted a claim of what the Bible “instituted”.
What Bible are you using? Where does it state what you assert?
And if you are going to assert what the Bible “instituted”, why are you ignoring the other part of the Bible that ‘institute’ polygamous marriages and the selling of daughters into slavery?
“tjc”: “Barbara, in defense of Mormons, all congregations compete for membership, it’s been going on since the beginning of Christianity.”
False.
Mormonism didn’t “compete for membership” until the 19th Century, over 1,830 years after “the beginning of Christianity.”
Eharmony considered itself a Christian dating service but the gay community filed a suit to force them to include same sex couples.
That’s because eHarmony is a private business providing what is considered a public accommodation, and under California’s constitution, they cannot discriminate.
That is a completely different situation than a church, which is accorded special status by the U.S. Constitution. There is no way that a gay couple could force a denomination which was against gay marriage to marry them. Any such lawsuit would be frivolous and should be thrown out, with the plaintiff’s paying court costs.
I might also point out that some churches do perform same sex marriages, so it is not enough for you to say that ‘marriage’ is defined by the Bible to be a certain way. My denomination defines it in such a way as to include same sex couples. The government has no business telling either of our churches who they can and can’t marry.
If the government is going to recognize an institution called “marriage” and endow that institution with certain civil privileges, then said privileges must be available to all citizens of the United States. Religious marriage is entirely separate from civil marriage, and should be left to individual religious institutions to decide for themselves.
And I apologize for calling you an idiot. For the record, my snipe was not directed at your stance on gay marriage, but on your statement that churches would be sued if DOMA were lifted. The problem is that I have seen that interpretation used as a scare-tactic in campaigns against gay marriage. It rubs me the wrong way.
much like the people who are presently a party of the Tea Party movement of today.
You nut. The tea party people are protesting taxation with representation. Except for the ones that live in D.C.
No, Parthenon, the Tea Party people feel like most in Congress ARE NOT representing the best interest of our country! I am not a nut, I am worried about my country and the direction we are taking. I stand by what I said. I attended a Tea Party and in a small town where they expected 200 and over 1500 attended. BOTH parties were represented, it was not a “right” or “left” event.
Southern Quaker – the key word in your statement is “should” – the lawsuits “should” be considered frivolous and be thrown out. I agree but also still firmly believe that such lawsuits would ultimately occur anyway. I’m glad that you are happy with the definition of marriage of your denomination, I still believe that marriage was instituted by God to be between a man and a woman.
News Reference – Are you familiar with the first book of the Bible? The very first marriage occurred in Genesis 2:23-25. I’m not a bible scholar but as far as I’ve read in all of the scriptures referring to marriage, I’ve not read one that speaks of marriage between two people of the same sex. Perhaps you know of one.
Once again, I stand by what I said in regard to religious denominations – throughout history whenever a new church was created there was a leader vying for members. Does that clarify my statement for you?
This blog was about Mitt Romney and the healthcare system he put into force in Massachusetts. My initial post was to point out that there is a distinct difference between what he did and what our current administration has proposed. We have heard about healthcare reform for years and no one has ever achieved anything – until Mitt Romney. His plan is still in it’s early stages and will undoubtedly have difficulties – but he DID something and for that I believe he deserves repect. It is NOT government run, it allows choice. I’m in the healthcare field and if you have ever seen the idiocy behind the thought processes of medicare and medicaid you would understand that having the government involved in healthcare is a very bad idea! And by the way, how can people so adamantly against the Patriot Act (invasion of privacy) be so totally cool with having medical records online? Do you really think that only your doctors can view them? Again, this idea is not only bad – it’s scary!
“tjc”: “The very first marriage occurred in Genesis 2:23-25.”
You mean where Adam married the woman made of his flesh? Effectively marrying his sister? And they had children who effectively married each other?
So you are saying that incestuous marriages are ‘instituted’ by the Bible?
And you evade my earlier point.
Polygamous marriages are explicitly ‘instituted’ by the Bible. Where in the Bible does it say that practice is discontinued?
And the Bible explicitly discusses daughters being sold into slavery (the Bible ‘institutes’ selling daughters into sex slavery).
There is even an instance where a woman gives her female slave to her husband as a sex slave (ever read the Handmaiden’s Tale?).
It appears you have less familiarity with the Bible than you think you do.
And where does the Bible say that same-sex marriages are prohibited. Please point me to that scripture. I really need to bookmark that.
As you mention, this post was about Republican Mitt Romney and it was off-topic to bring up gay marriages.
But consider the history of the Mormon Church which both practiced polygamy as a core doctrine (and some “Fundamentalist” Mormons still practice polygamy) and also the Mormon Church practiced explicit racism right up to 1978.
Perhaps in 20 or 40 years there will be a Mormon prophet that receives a personal communication from God, and, as former Mormon Prophets reordered Mormon Church doctrine to discontinue polygamy and discontinue formal racism, perhaps the new Mormon Prophet will be told by God that same-sex marriages are okay.
Perhaps the same communication from God will even say that it’s okay for a woman to be a Prophet-Leader of the Mormon Church.
“tjc”: I’m in the healthcare field and if you have ever seen the idiocy behind the thought processes of medicare and medicaid you would understand that having the government involved in healthcare is a very bad idea!
The 18,000 people who die from lack of health insurance every year would likely say that the private corporate-medical-insurance industry is a really bad idea for them as well.
Many of the nearly 50 MILLION people that are uninsured under the current private corporate-medical-insurance industry think it’s a really bad idea for them as well.
And the 25 MILLION UNDERINSURED people that are one accident away from bankruptcy would probably think the current private corporate-medical-insurance industry is a really bad idea for them as well if they understood that at any moment a corporate-bureaucrat could rescind their health care.
And as I understand it, Republican Mitt Romney’s health care plain in Massachusetts was underfunded, has been having problems, and isn’t something he now supports (unless you can get past all of his caveats).
I don’t credit Republican Mitt Romney with anything except selling out American jobs to foreign interests to make his fortune with which he bought political office.
And from listening to Republican Mitt “French Vacation to Avoid Vietnam” Romney change his positions so frequently it’s clear that he doesn’t even know his own positions until it’s been poll tested or he received orders from the Mormon Prophet.
News Reference – it’s obvious that you have no use for the Bible. The word “wife” in the scripture I mentioned seems to escape you. You twist it the way you like and you are free to do so. As for the “explicit” reference you ask for regarding homosexuality, it’s doubtful that you’ll understand them but here they are: Genesis 19:4-6 speaks of men wishing to “know” the men visiting Lot and Lot shuts the door on them. Romans 1:27-32 is another. There is nothing said about marriage between same sexes but I would assume if the practice of lusting after a member of the same sex was considered “unseemly and wicked” marriage was probably ill advised. I don’t recall disagreeing with you regarding polygamous marriages in the Old Testament and would suggest that the practice seemed to have ended in New Testament times. Mormons believe the practice was instituted for some time during the 1800’s – many believe it was to preserve the land rights of women who’s husbands were murdered – I don’t know. The practice was stopped by the mainstream church when Utah became a state – Mormons believe in obeying the law. I can’t answer to your sex slave statements because you offered no reference. Apparently you misunderstood my statement that I am no Bible scholar – it means that I claim no supreme knowledge of the Bible so your statement regarding my unfamiliarity was impressive only to yourself. As far as “explicit” racism practiced by Mormons or calling Joseph Smith a racist – you show your ignorance once again. It is true the blacks did not hold Priesthood until 1978 but they were welcomed into the church. You might also research Joseph Smith a little better – he was against slavery. Obviously you don’t believe that prophets exist today so I see no reason to answer to your sarcastic rant regarding future prophets of the Mormon church.
News Reference – again, your ability to conveniently overlook the points I’ve acknowledged is truly inspiring! I previously stated that Mitt Romney himself agrees that there are some problems with the health care plan in Massachusetts. At least he has attempted something that people have only talked about for years.
I’m not certain where you get your numbers but I would bet that there are many that die waiting to get diagnostic testing or medications approved by their insurance companies as well. Have you ever dealt with an HMO – good times! What would possibly give you confidence that the government can do anything well – name just one thing! Yet you think they could handle healthcare? As for the number of people uninsured – how many of them are uninsured because they CHOOSE not to pay for it. I acknowledge it is expensive and as a single parent, there are a lot of things I would love to spend my money on but I don’t because I think it’s irresponsible not to have health insurance on my children. How many of those uninsured are illegals and why should my children and grandchildren have to foot the bill of someone who is here illegally? I live in a border state and I have seen emergency rooms filled with people who are there with routine ailments – that is a fact. They are there because they HAVE to be treated and I would be willing to bet that most never pay a dime. Yes, I know that there are many who cannot afford it and there are programs for those people…government funded programs.
If you think that good doctors are going to be willing to work for the government – think again. Why should they? They get paid less and less by Medicare and Medicaid programs but their costs continue to rise. They have to hire more people just to deal with referrals and insurances. They have to pay high premiums for malpractice insurance. They pay rent and buy equipment – I’m sick of doctors being villainized for making a good living – any idea how much it cost them to go to school or how many years it took? I work in a group practice and am worried about my job because my bosses have already said they will leave medicine.
You are angry because you say that Mitt Romney sold out American jobs to foreign interests…what do you think that taxing corporations more is going to do? Companies will leave the United States and open up shop overseas. California is bankrupt and I think I heard that New York is in trouble as well – both very liberal states. A recent report just released states that 70% of new businesses opened in the United States over the last year were in Texas, we are also the fasting growing population. Try and get your head around this if you can – do you think that not having a state income tax, not taxing business to the point of extinction has had something to do with that number? Hard to believe that our state government is operating with a surplus as well. You might have noticed that Texas was red in the last election – interesting isn’t it? Less tax means more money to spend (it’s economics 101) yet our federal government doesn’t get it – it’s all about power and there are a lot of gullible people out there willing to give it to them!
“tjc”: “News Reference – it’s obvious that you have no use for the Bible.”
If you really want to go there, “tjc”, the only appropriate response is to point out that you obviously have no use for Christianity.
You are a pretender. A public hypocrite.
You use the Old Testament selectively to support your own bigotries.
You cite Lot as a source for your bigotry without acknowledging that it was Lot that was willing to give his own daughters to a mob of angry men to save his own selfish self. [Genesis 19:8]
Lot protected Angels, sure, but his own daughters he was willing to hand over to the mob of angry men.
And since when did “Angels” become “men”?
When it was convenient for the right wing to selectively justify their bigotry with scripture apparently.
“tjc”, you asked about the Bible’s support of selling daughters as sex slaves:
Exodus 21:7-11
“tjc”, you citation of Romans 1:27-32 is more helpful.
It reveals you as a Paulian.
Paul was a hateful angry man who rejected many of Jesus Christ’s pronouncements.
Paul is often cited in lieu of the words of Jesus Christ by those pushing a bigoted, angry, and warped version of Christianity.
Paulians reject Jesus Christ.
The Mormon Church was explicitly racist all the way up to 1978.
“tjc”, your false witness to suggest otherwise is deceitful and would make Paul angry.
http://google.com/search?q=Mormon+racism
“tjc”: “What would possibly give you confidence that the government can do anything well”
Roads, the military, providing electricity, providing water, delivering the mail, the Police force, the Fire department, the Pure Food and Drug Act that keeps crap out of our food supply and medicines, holding fraudsters and thieves and criminals accountable…
… and that’s just off the top of my head.
“tjc”: “Yet you think they [the Federal Government] could handle healthcare?”
Yes. Especially when managed by people who aren’t trying to sabotage the government ({cough, Republicans}).
The VA used to have an awful reputation but under Democratic President Clinton it was overseen by a competent manager who completely turned it around.
Under Clinton the VA provided excellent services at a low price.
Read this BusinessWeek article: “The Best Medical Care In The U.S.: How Veterans Affairs transformed itself — and what it means for the rest of us,” from July 17, 2006.
Mind you, under Republican leadership you get the abysmal care of Walter Reed Medical Hospital, that substandard care was part of a larger betrayal by Republicans of our military veterans.
News Reference – your accusations are interesting. I think you put an interesting spin on scripture. You call my version of Christianity warped because you don’t like it. I’ve never heard it said that Paul rejected Jesus Christ. I’ve never seen any evidence of it either. I’m beginning to see what I’ve always heard about the liberal mindset. I’m not hateful and I’m not a bigot but if it feels good to call me names – go for it. Nothing I can do about it except for point out that most Christian denominations believe as I do and while you expect tolerance you show none for those who disagree with you. As for your comment about Mormon racism – you are dead wrong and finding websites that wish to do harm to the Mormon church doesn’t make your case any stronger. The truth is that Joseph Smith was anti slavery. Just for the record, Mormons don’t hate and are not against gay people – they are FOR traditional definition of marriage.
Many city, county and state governments do a good job, no arguement there. You know very well that I was speaking of the Federal government which does nothing well (except for the military and I worry that our President will tear it down very soon.) It was interesting that you mention the care at the VA hospitals – I deal with the VA and veterans a lot because my office is contracted to do certain examinations for them. The forms they require me to fill out were obviously composed by people with no medical knowledge and I get phone calls asking absolutely stupid questions. I’ve no doubt that the doctors and nurses are likely well qualified but those in the administration areas are seriously lacking….where do you think the start point will be when you want to see a doctor under nationalized healthcare? Not all veterans think they get great care through the VA – many of them choose to use their insurance benefits rather than wait to get an appointment at the VA. Sad to think that it’s possible that very soon we will have no choice….even more sad to see that so many think it’s a good idea not to have choice.
We have a difference in ideology – you think more government is good and I don’t. I think that America is a great country and I resent that our President felt the need to apologize for it – I resent it a lot. I don’t believe that the government has any business in telling companies what they can and cannot do. I believe that private is ALWAYS better than public in every aspect of life. I believe in capitalism, right to bear arms, freedom of speech…all of those things that Nancy Pelosi appears to be fighting against. I know that there are just as many that say climate change is a crock and believe that before we start charging for a carbon “footprint” to make Mr. Gore rich – more research should be done.
I am trying to be optimistic – I figure that if our President turns us into a completely socialist nation I’ll be able to sit back and relax rather than working my butt off everyday. There is no way in hell that I will work this hard so that someone else doesn’t have to!!! Do you think I’m alone in that assertion? I guarantee that I’m not. You hate the rich and you’ll be in heaven because there won’t be any anymore – why should they work hard to create companies so that they can pay 50 -60% of their “wealth” in taxes? Why should they hire people that they are taxed on or penalized for? Just something people might want to consider before going down the socialist or communist road were on. Any bets on what time the dems will present their bill? 2 or 3 am? So much for transparency – bills voted on in the middle of the night like the “stimulus package” -by the way, how’s that going in your neck of the woods? Then of course there is the cap and trade bill – another piece of sheer brilliance! I’m pretty sure we’ll wake up and find it passed one morning because judging from poll numbers – most Americans aren’t thinking socialized medicine is all that cool but it’s obvious that our “representatives” and our President aren’t all that concerned about what the majority of people want.
Have your last word, it’s been both fun.
and inspiring.
“tjc”, so far I’ve only gotten through the errors in your first paragraph, though this since this is more interesting than what the usual right wing troll offers I may get to more of your claims later.
I’m glad that it’s been a mutually rewarding discussion.
“tjc”: “I think you put an interesting spin on scripture.”
Coming from the person who can’t seem to remember Christ’s words and selectively chooses which parts of Bible to follow, to ignore, and to change the meaning of.
“tjc”: “I’m beginning to see what I’ve always heard about the liberal mindset.”
Jesus Christ was/is a Liberal.
Christ had/has a “liberal mindset.”
Perhaps if you’d read Christ’s words instead of selectively misinterpreting the rest of the Bible you might come to understand that.
“tjc” “while you expect tolerance you show none for those who disagree with you”
When bigoted Theocrats unnecessarily intrude their religion into my neighbors personal relationships and private life because of those Theocrats misinterpretation of their own religious scripture, the expectation of tolerance for such intolerance is itself intolerable.
Even Christ had his limits.
Much of the right wing movement that masquerades as “Christian” would have been driven from the temple by Christ himself.
“tjc”, your claim that the Mormon church wasn’t historically racist is both wrong on the facts but also wrong on the Theology. A central part of Mormon scripture was in asserting that dark skin was a sign of evil, literally.
Until 1978, when the then Mormon Prophet reversed the Mormon Church’s history of racism, the Mormon Church was explicitly racist.
That’s not inconsistent with being anti-slavery.
You also falsely assert that Mormon’s aren’t against gay people.
The Mormon Church coordinated out of state money, people, and resources to specifically work against gay people in California.
Though yes, now that the Mormon Prophet has repudiated the traditional Biblical practice of polygamy, only Fundamentalist Mormons practice polygamy.
Much of the right wing movement that masquerades as “Christian” would have been driven from the temple by Christ himself.
Amen, brother.
“tjc”: “You know very well that I was speaking of the Federal government which does nothing well (except for the military and I worry that our President will tear it down very soon.)”
First, it was Republican President Bush who failed to provide enough troops to accomplish their mission in an effective and timely way.
The current problems we have in Afghanistan started under Republican Bush and were a direct result of Republican Bush’s failures to provide enough troops and Bush’s failure to keep his eye on the ball (inf Afghanistan, where the terrorists were).
Republican President Bush failed to capture or kill Osama bin Laden throughout his eight years despite being warned of the threat immediately after taking office, after being warned of bin Laden’s intent to attack the US before the 9/11 attacks, and Republican Bush sat paralyzed the day of the 9/11 attacks just before he was ran hiding into his bunker.
Republican Bush subsequently lied US into the Iraq War using falsified intelligence, Republican Bush inadequately staffed troop levels in Iraq, Republican Bush failed to provide adequate body armor to the troops he sent in, Republican Bush failed to provide adequately armored vehicles to the troops, and for returning injured vets Republican Bush failed his responsibility in providing those troops with adequate medical facilities or PTSD treatment.
And in 2004 Republican President Bush, Republican leaders, and Republican voters systematically denigrated the service of a combat vet even while creating a fantasy surrounding Republican President Bush who evaded combat and was too drunk to even show up for his limited stateside duty.
Add to all of that the multi-trillions of debt that Republicans added while Republican Bush gave tax cuts to his elite wealthy “base” during a time of war and it shows that your concerns about our current President, who is trying to clean up the mess that Republican President Bush made, is misplaced, at best, and deeply offensive at worst.
I have to chime in – yes, the Mormon church did coordinate their resources but it’s sad that you can’t see it for what it was. They strongly believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and they were fighting for that belief. It wasn’t “against gay people.” I think it’s unfair to call someone hateful because they don’t agree with you. California is only 2% Mormon so since the prop passed with 52% of the vote it would indicate that 50% of those you call hateful were not Mormon.