Contact Me

Friday, June 1, 2012

Romney up in the polls? Really?

I can't believe the lack of questioning of Romney that's going on. There doesn't seem to be a lot of serious campaigning going on in general. It just seems like petty, not very well thought out attacks and no one's aiming to convince or dig deep. Maybe it's still early.

Aside from politics (but of course I won't avoid them...), there are some things that just don't sit right with me with Romney... and the politics in the church thing... again.


Here are my 2008 and 2010 posts about politics and the pulpit in which I've probably expanded on this a bit better than I have here:
http://www.notanotherpoliticalblog-j.blogspot.com/2008/07/politics-and-pulpit.html
http://www.notanotherpoliticalblog-j.blogspot.com/2010/02/church-and-state.html


Romney and Trump- a question of integrity?

So it is said Romney was upstaged on his big day when he officially got the Republican nomination by appearing with Trump at a fundraiser that same day. (Why would you do that?)

It is true that Romney quietly affirmed that he believes Obama was born here, but he's willing to accept Trump's big bucks and let him spout his birther and whatever other crazy propaganda without doing a thing to publicly distance himself from this nonsense. Why, besides the money, can't he stand up for what's right- not just that, but known facts? What does this say about Romney who would rather accept the money than set the record straight and get elected on real issues. I guess in business, only the bottom line matters, not how far you bend the rules.

“You know, I don’t agree with all the people who support me, and my guess is they don’t all agree with everything I believe in,” he told reporters. “But I need to get 50.1 percent or more, and I’m appreciative to have the help of a lot of good people.”
Yikes.


Romney's staffers paid to heckle? Another question of integrity?


There are always hecklers at the opposing side's event, but not usually the actual campaign staffers that the Romney campaign sent (or decided to do on their own?). At least McCain had the decency to respond to an anti-Obama heckler, calling them off (unfortunately he in so doing mistakenly insinuated that Arabs aren't good citizens...but I guess he did his best...). Romney's response to his paid staffers doing this was that Obama supporters heckle him and what's good for the goose is good for the gander. What about taking the high road? Integrity? Not to mention his paid staffers did this, not just supporters who don't represent him. What do they teach in his church- to do unto others as they do unto you (rather than as you would have them do unto you)? Maybe someone should get the appropriate sermons and soundbytes...

The integrity issue is a recurring theme with Romney...as he showed the same bad judgment in rather enjoying support from particular people than standing up for what's right when crazy accusations are leveled: didn't deny the supporter who said Obama should be tried for treason and didn't say anything publicly about Limbaugh's rank porno/prostitute/slut comments about Sandra Fluke.


And then there are the Freudian slips or poor choices of words...or both that he has had to explain: etch-a-sketch, that he likes firing people, that's he' unemployed, $10, 000 bet with Perry over heatlhcare, he follows NASCAR in that he knows some owners, etc...

*** *** *** *** ***

On Facebook, I pondered, "Obama has had to answer for many things he isn't (minor, tangential issues that were overblown); when will Romney have to answer for what he is?"

I mean, if people were worried about how Islam (not relevant to Obama) was going to factor into Obama's policy, why aren't they concerned about The Book of Mormon (which is integral to Romney's beliefs) and how that will affect Romney's worldview/policy? Four years ago, I heard Christians say Romney and Mormons aren't smart enough to be President due to their beliefs. How has that changed I wonder? Can you really buy everything? Romney apparently can.

There has been much talk again already this election year about the abortion and gay marriage issues being THE issues that are the only Biblical considerations and the things that should decide the election. If you vote Democrat, you sin. Or more positively, vote your values, be a Christian in and out of the voting booth. The implications are the same. I have long had an issue with this traditional belief in the church. Are we electing a person to govern or be an elder in the church (or leader of the state church, as I have put it in a sarcastic moment). They are different jobs to fill, with different requirements and goals. And each issue to me (not just 2) involves moral choices. Whatever we do, we are faced with a question of right and wrong, doing it in a way that glorifies God or not. Not to mention whoever makes the case that because Romney is pro-life and anti-gay marriage, he is more godly or will rule in a more godly way despite the fact that he embraces an entire book of false doctrine is going to have a hard time proving that. (some scriptures for the false doctrine Matt 15:9, 1 Tim 4:16, and maybe Col 2:22 as well)

If people are going to use Romans 1:32 to say that Christians who vote Democrat are approving of homosexuality, why are Christians who are Republicans not approving of an entire book of false doctrine (Romney's Book of Mormon, other testament of Jesus Christ)? They often shrug off my point that these 2 issues don't factor into governing much except to appeal to the base and get votes, so saying that book won't factor into governing isn't going to hold water. If we're talking in principle for Democrats, let's do the same for Republicans.


Romneycare

Republicans make a big deal about Obama and socialism and "Obamacare," but why isn't anyone talking about the similarities between Romney's Massachusetts healthcare bill and Obamacare? If they are ok with Romneycare, why not Obamacare? Is it only the federal vs. state thing that people have their panties in a bunch over? If so, why not talk about that instead of clinging to the socialism nonsense?


Republican Christians often cite 2 Thessalonians 3:10 - If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat- as their opposition to socialism and hence "Obamcare" and Obama.  I do think they work in socialist countries, so I don't know that that would even apply if we did "turn socialist," which is an irrational, manufactured fear and NOT going to happen anyway. It would be convenient to have direct scriptural proof (which may be why the socialism thing is so popular despite being 100% false), but this just doesn't fit, I'm afraid.


He's apparently got a lot of Bush people on tap and given his lack of prowess on the issues, you're going to be electing these characters, too. Beware. Or better, yet, don't do it. Been there. Done that. We are still recovering from it.


McCain's campaign's assessment of Romney in 2008 was: “Romney’s foreign affairs resume is extremely thin, leading to credibility problems.”


I wonder if his foreign affairs resume has thickened any since 2008? His choice of advisers is troubling and lack of knowledge is worrisome (because he will rely to heavily on said advisers). Better hope there are no foreign policy issues to contend with (or that some won't be invented) in a Romney Presidency...

Powell is worried about Romney's war cabinet and having been in the middle of one of the biggest deceptions or blunders with the Iraq invasion, I trust his judgment.




Everyone says this whole thing is going to be about the economy, though. That could be a real mistake, people. 


The foreign policy stuff on the false, mostly false and pants on fire sections is pretty scary:
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/mitt-romney/
And in the previous article he says Russia's our biggest threat.


What should we be comparing current times with anyway? Pre-crash bubbles and the false sense of financial security or the 2008 crash Obama inherited? There are so many ways to spin the economic issues- what are we comparing, temporary fixes and immediate results vs long term reform, etc. 


That's scary that people would ditch the foreign policy issue so quickly after Iraq. I still remember how absolutely dumbfounded I was that A) we were actually attacking and B) no one was asking questions (in the post 9/11 atmosphere of revenge in place of justice, dissent is unpatriotic).


Romney's touting his business success and experience as governor as proof he's the best choice. The Obama campaign made a good point that Romney's experience in maximizing profit isn't necessarily going to translate to expertise in running the country. And then there are the fairly reckless promises Romney's already made...


http://www.factcheck.org/2012/01/romneys-shaky-job-claims/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker

If I'm President, You'll Have a Job After College
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/23/mitt-romney-jobs_n_1167525.html

Romney promises 6% unemployment,  shockingly in line with the current economic forecast after stating anything over 4% was not worth celebrating (not a promise, but certainly a line, hastily redrawn, much like an etch-a-sketch)
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/23/romney-promises-to-bring-unemployment-down-to-6/

It seems there was also a promise of an insane number of jobs Romney would create as president that was blown apart the next day by commentators and compared with Presidents in good times and bad, but I can't find it. Maybe I'm thinking about the unemployment at thing 4% thing...