Thursday, October 18, 2007
|
|
Dr. Albert Mohler On The Significance Of Bob Jones III's Endorsement Of Mitt Romney
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
1:01 AM
|
Dr. Albert Mohler was my guest in the first hour today. Dr. Mohler is the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY, and his influence among American evangelicals is enormous, and his incredible intellect widely regarded as among the finest at work in the Christian church today. I interviewed him about the significance of the endorsement of Mitt Romney by Bob Jones III. I have empjasized some of the most important statements, but read the whole thing:
HH: Joined now by the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, my colleague on the Salem Radio Network airwaves, and on their editorial board, Dr. Albert Mohler. Al, good to have you back, thanks for joining us.
AM: Hugh, it’s always great to be with you.
HH: Your reaction, Al, to the announcement yesterday first of Dean Robert Taylor of Bob Jones University, and then to Chancellor of Bob Jones University, Bob Jones III’s endorsement of Mitt Romney. Were you surprised?
AM: Well, I was surprised only perhaps in the timing, but in all, no, I’m really not surprised. I think this is what happens in a political context when the options get reduced. And I think especially the statement made by Bob Jones III is very clear. He saw his options reduced to one candidate who he really thought had an opportunity to further his social and cultural and moral concerns. And he was pretty up front about that.
HH: Do you expect that this is the first couple of stones that are going to roll down an Evangelical hill? Or is this an isolated group of activists in South Carolina who have been particularly wooed by Mitt Romney?
AM: Well, you know, the interesting thing is it’s very difficult to call South Carolina or Bob Jones University atypical in this. And you just think back to previous Republican nomination struggles, and you can remember how decisive some of these constituencies can be. I think this is really big. If I were in the Romney campaign, I would be extremely encouraged by this, because not only is Bob Jones III obviously a very well known conservative leader, but he is so well positioned on the spectrum, that this is likely to make it easier for other persons also to make very similar moves.
HH: And do you expect any of those to follow shortly? Have you heard of any in the offing?
AM: Well, I know that there’s a lot of conversation going on. As you know, Hugh, there’s just a lot of people right now concerned about exactly how the race might shape up, concerned about timing, and concerned about what might happen between now and when anyone actually gets the opportunity to vote.
HH: Now do you think that this effectively dissipates the Mormon issue that there’s been so much conversation about? You and I have talked about it in the past, and I interviewed you for the book, et cetera, but does this put that one to bed?
AM: You know, I don’t think it puts it to bed. I think it, though, gets it into some pajamas, perhaps. Let’s put it that way.
HH: (laughing)
AM: It’s moving it in that direction, because I think what’s taking place is that Evangelicals are having to rethink a lot of this whole political question. It’s been easy in recent election cycles. Evangelicals have basically known here is someone who looks like us, sounds like us, believes like us, goes to Church like us, who on the issues, is right where we want him. And so we’re going to be very clearly aligned behind this one candidate. We’ve had to grow up as an Evangelical movement. And one of the big questions we’ve been having to ask is what exactly do we expect from a candidate, and does that mean that we can’t vote for a candidate who in some life particular, and something as particular as worldview and religious commitment, is in a different place than we are, but will further the goals and protect the gains on moral and cultural issues that are central Evangelical concerns. I think that’s been a maturation process. I think we’re seeing it before our eyes.
HH: I’m talking with Dr. Albert Mohler, president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, one of the leading intellectual lights in the Protestant Church in America. Dr. Mohler, can you explain to the audience Bob Jones, and what that university is, and who Bob Jones III is in terms of the spectrum of American theological options?
AM: Yeah, if you talk about American Evangelicalism, or conservative Protestantism in America, you would certainly look at something like Bob Jones as, institutionally speaking, the far right bookend. And you’re talking about an institution…the motto of the university is The World’s Most Unusual University. It’s an incredible thing to see. It’s a massive educational complex, started by an Evangelist by the name of Bob Jones, then led by his son and his grandson, and now by his great-grandson. This is the grandson, Bob Jones III, pretty well known in the media. But to say the name Bob Jones and American conservative Protestantism is to speak of the brand of the reputation that is clearly understood to speak for independent fundamentalism, and without compromise or without fear.
HH: And how big are the numbers of independent fundamentalists in the country, Al Mohler?
AM: Well, I think in a state, first of all, like South Carolina, you’re talking about an extremely large portion, perhaps even a decisive percentage of the population, decisive in the sense that if they did not vote for a Republican candidate, that candidate can’t win. Nationwide, you’re talking about a considerable percentage of the population. But the other thing is, again, that what this really does politically is that it puts Bob Jones in the position of making it a lot easier for people in other Evangelical circles to make similar moves.
HH: And last question, Al Mohler, in the South Carolina primary, does Bob Jones III’s endorsement travel well?
AM: Well in the South Carolina primary, not only does it travel well, this is a huge signal. This is like a lighthouse going on, the light shining its beam on Mitt Romney. Not only that, but the argument made by Bob Jones III basically means that not only is he supporting Mitt Romney, he’s basically saying he is the only option so far as he sees it on the Republican side.
|
|
I noticed Ray's comment, similar to others I have seen before. If outsiders really understood Mormon temple promises and how the LDS view the advance of democratic governments in the world, they would expect Romney to be decidedly clear on separation of church and state, and decidedly clear on the positive role of religious and secular pluralism throughout the world. Why would LDS leaders "shoot themselves in the foot" by trying to influence a Mormon who happened to become president? They are firm supporters and advocates of the U.S. constitution and constitutional government, including separation of church and state.
Mormons sit on "both sides of the aisle", and this is viewed as a good thing, a necessary thing, with the ensuing dialogue and compromise process also a good thing. |
|
|
just look at the actual, concrete choice: Romney, or Hillary (with her 'mainline' liberal protestantism in which God is referred to as 'mother' oftentimes, and where the exclusivity of Jesus as savior is not boldly proclaimed).... I'll take Romney. |
|
175 years to explain and your still citing non LDS sources. You say that critics understand us all too well, and then you site a non LDS source to back up your understanding.
|
|
|
Notice how none of those evangelicals who have endorsed Romney had to denounce their religion to do it. Relax, do away with the theological mud slinging and get on board. He is a good candidate. |
|
richard 223 I doubt that the BJU endorsement had any impact on the latest Rasmussen poll in IA given that the dates of the polling largely preceed the announcement so to claim this endorsement somehow has resulted in Romney's -3 from their last poll is drawing a long bow.
Ray Your anti-Mormon sniping is boring and almost always wrong. I am a temple patron and no such pledge of loyalty to the Prophet is any part of the temple ceremonies. I'm still waiting for your answers to the 12 questions on the Book of Mormon by the way
The significance of the BJU endorsement is not in the impact of this one specific endorsement rather the ripple effect it is already having with other prominent evangelicals. Not all will support Romney and I doubt if Dobson will endorse any current Republican nominee. But critics have long maintained that the Mormon issue would hurt Romney with evangelicals and this is not the case. When you actually read their endorsements, they repudiate LDS doctrine (which you would expect) but say its not an issue - his values closely match those of other conservative Christians |
|
Van writes: Thursday, October, 18, 2007 4:16 AM Romeny should be encouraged because of endorsement of known racist and bigot? Well, Albert Mohler IS a southern baptist so to him racism is integral part of his religious beliefs.
But then bigots and racists in Bob Jones hate gays even more than they do hate n****rs, and Romney has promised to deliver a nationwide hate campaign and persecution campaign against gays to pander the votes or religious fundamentalist loonesy (like Mohler and Bob Jones).
Their hate unifies them. And in their dreams USA has been purified from all gays through "Final Solution". And after that attacking next minority in name of "values" will be easier and easier.
Mohler and Bob Jones are both repulsive racist bigots.
Foxfire:
You really have a problem getting over this hate issue.
Christians don't hate you!!
We don't approve of what you do, big difference.
Bob Jones didn't hate blacks, right or wrong, he didn't think that inter racial marriage was a taught in the bible. I didn't agree with him, but you can hardly say that he hated blacks, or that he was a bigot.
|
|
The facts are that no one outside of Giuliani, Romney stands a good chance of winning the primary. Conservatives were hoping for Thompson to be the man, but I haven’t been overly impressed.
The truth is, as much as I would like a good moral, socially and politically conservative Christian candidate, it’s not going to happen.
Huchabee is too well known as a conservative Christian, so I don’t know how he would fare with undecided and more moderate voters, who are equally necessary to win.
I don’t want Hillary or Obama, period. I’m just not willing to through my vote away and let the country suffer through 4-8 years of Hillary.
If you want to vote your conscience during the primaries, that’s what I think that you should do, but when the candidate is chosen, all of us need to insure that a Democrat is defeated.
You will have no reason to complain if you decide not to vote.
I think that Bob Jones III has approached this from a logical stand point.
I would not hesitate to vote for Romney if I was sure that I could trust him to select conservative judges, stand firm on pro life, stand firm on solving the immigration issue, protect 2nd amendment rights, and protect the US from attack.
I have no doubt that he will be a good fiscal conservative.
The Mormon issue should not stop you from voting for him.
|
|
|
al - Oh, you of little faith... (g) |
|
and it has zilch to do with his religion or Bob Jones. I couldn't care less about that. I care about policy and integrity, and I simply can't trust Mitt. Just look at controversial issues like abortion and gun control.
Dick Morris wrote yesterday about Mitt:
flip-flop-flip on abortion engendered have held down his vote share despite massive advertising. (He was pro-life before he ran against Sen. Edward Kennedy (D) in Massachusetts, at which point he discovered a relative who died after an illegal abortion, which, conveniently, induced a change of heart. He remained pro-choice as a governor of the most liberal state in America until, as he contemplated entering the GOP primary for president, he realized that abortion had cultivated a contempt for life and so decided to become pro-life — equally conveniently.)
Also, Mitt signed an inane "assault weapons ban" into law in Mass, then, as he began his presidential campaign, became a lifetime NRA member.
Sorry Mitt - I'm not buying it. Furthermore, I don't respect this "evolution of principles" or however you want to spin it. He's an unprincipled flip-flopper, plain and simple.
If Mitt gets the nomination, he'll sprint left, fleeing from everything he's saying now just as fast as he's currently sprinting right to flee from his record as governor. I need a candidate to show a little more integrity/consistency than that. |
|
Hewitt therefore carries water for the LDS church by parroting their standard arguments which serve to obscure their inner teachings. LDS apologists consistently argue that critics don't "understand" the LDS church (p. 246). Critics are viewed as prejudiced dunces who don't really "know" the Mormon people or their faith. The LDS church has had over 175 years to explain itself, however, and if anything, critics understand them all too well and this adds to my concerns about a Romney presidency. Of great concern is the Mormon Oath of Consecration, an oath of absolute loyalty to the President and Prophet of the Mormon church that Romney took in a sacred LDS temple ceremony. Romney clearly says in the book and in interviews that the oath of public office is the highest oath and first responsibility of the President (p. 222). What he leaves unanswered is what happened to his other "highest oath and first responsibility?" If he is disloyal to that oath, then how can he be trusted with another oath?
http://www.mormoninfo.org/news-info/discussion/hugh-hewitt- and-mitt-romney
|
|
|
Big G, good point I recall the radio interview, maybe we should see a little more of that side of him. |
|
|
All of the candidates in both parties claim to be Christian. The real question is which candidate will end the big lie of the hippies “we can’t impose our religion,” resulting in apostasy, anarchy, relativism, and tribalism? George Washington said don’t consider yourself a patriot if you give the finger to Christianity and the morality based on it. You can’t maintain morality without Christianity. You can’t maintain social order without Christianity and the morality based on it. Even with all your sophisticated college degrees the national morality can not be maintained without it. After two generations of hippie Christian leaders, who never once called Christians to arms, to defend the Christian traditions in families, in the churches, or in the country, while it was stripped by hippies. Now all the Dems and half the Reps still believe this lie. Who will fight for our right to display and impose the Ten Commandments? Ruth Ginsburg may be qualified to be on the Supreme Court but are we aware someone up there is keeping score, of how many of our babies end up in the Nile River? Maybe some Christians been racist but do we know the source was not our scriptures but was Darwinism? When someone shoots up another campus, we debate 2nd amendment rights, vs. gun control vs. gun free zones. Do we know the source of the defective thinking of the shooters was Darwinism? Will we stop imposing Darwinism? Hippies imposed apostasy until all our big cities became hell-holes full of blighted empty buildings, where good people are behind bars in their own house, brokenhearted parents who raised their kids right and have no clue why they are in trouble or dead, and street gangs rule the streets. Every good person who can gets out; so they need a flood of illegal immigrants a new group upon which to impose their apostasy. Charles J. Trask |
|
richard_223 "Evidence? I know of nothing in his background to indicate this."
I dont know anything of his background that would indicate it, its a hunch. I speak for me, its hard for me hold back and not tear someone a new one, so I put an uncomfortable smile on my face and bear it. I think that Romney is good at that. But after so many times, that smile goes away and the volcano lets off steam. I think that Mitt could tear someone a new one in more repectable terms than I could. I believe if it comes down to a face off between Romney and a Democratic opponent, he is quite capable of letting them know that they are on the wrong path for America. I get that from his denouncements of foreign dignitaries that support terrorists and want to speak on American universities. I get that from his denouncements of Iranian leaders aggression towards Israel. I get that from his denouncements of the failed UN. Remember when that Gallagher guy tried to ambush him into a corner on the radio about his religion, and videotaped it? Romney let Gallagher know what he thought of him. I know he's capable of holding his own. You dont become a CEO of any company or a governor by being a pushover. |
|
Big G wrote: 'I think there is a part of him that is holding back.'
Evidence? I know of nothing in his background to indicate this. |
|
|
I would agree with both of your perspectives if put it the following way. I agree with Big G that Romney needs to be nice to his fellow Republicans in the Primaries. However, in the generals, richard is correct. I agree that Mitt will need to take Hillary to the cleaners if he is the nominee. Give her no mercy. You certainly will get none in return from her. |
|
"He is too nice, a good thing to be, except in politics."
I think there is a part of him that is holding back. I think he gets accused of being plastic because he's got that smile on his face all the time. I think sometimes he wnts to let loose the lion. I think it shows his ability to control himself, which is a positive trait. I dont think he's been provoked enough yet. If the time comes, and Mitt drops the hammer, it will be spun against his favor. |
|
"It started when he flogged the hapless Harriet Myers. I used to like Hugh's show because of his good interviews, but now I turn it off as it has become mostly a Romney commercial. Big turn off for me, and that's just how I feel about it."
I see where you are coming from. I get frustrated with Hannity, Oreily, Malkin and Rush on occasion. Even though I share some core values with them, I think its dangerous to put anyone on a pedastal and agree with everything the say. |
|
Big G: Going on the attack is part of the game. I see Mitt opposite of you, he does not have instinct for the jugular; Hillary's machine would chew him up before breakfast. He is too nice, a good thing to be, except in politics.
Sad to say, negative campaiging works, that's why they spend so much money on it. |
|
|
I wish Romney would focus on his agenda and stick to discussing his agenda and not talking about how his differs from the other candidates. I wish he'd just ignore what the other candidates are saying and stick to his agenda. I hate it when any politician is constantly talking about the weaknesses of the other candidates. If you are the best, be it, let your record show, there is no need to point out other candidates weaknesses when it only brings focus on yours. Thats the major weakness I see in Romney. |
|
Big G:Not necessarily, I a explained, I just like providing counterpoint to Hugh. It started when he flogged the hapless Harriet Myers. I used to like Hugh's show because of his good interviews, but now I turn it off as it has become mostly a Romney commercial. Big turn off for me, and that's just how I feel about it.
Rufus - well, no one has actually voted yet, so we will see what happens. Huck had a little traction after the Iowa straw poll, let's see if he can increase it. |
|
"Actually, I kind of like Mitt, its Hugh's relentless shillig for him that has driven my away from his camp, so I am providing counterpoint to Hugh."
Are you saying that because Hugh Hewitt likes Mitt Romney you like Mitt Romney even less? Who cares what Hugh thinks, I mean, I like Hannity, who loves Rudy. Like someone because you like them,not because someone else tells you constantly why they like someone.
I dont like Romney because Hugh Hewitt endorses him anymore than I like Romney because anyone else endorses him. I like Romney because I think he's the best candidate for the Presidency, who is running.
|
|
a Big Problem, and it's name is "Huckabee." I think more, and more, religious Republicans are looking at Huckabee as the "alternative" to Mitt. He's going to get a lot of buzz by greatly beating "expectations" in Iowa. Rasmussen has him up to 9%, there.
Mitt's wins in Iowa, and NH, are of limited value unless it leads to "excitement." A bunch of talking heads "buzzing" about the Huck will greatly diminish that momentum.
I support Romney, but I'm becoming more, and more resigned to Rudy. |
|
i take your critique as a compliment. |
|
Tom Bevan: 'The poll, conducted Thursday night, made it clear that by calling attention to the former Massachusetts' governor's religion, the endorsement of Bob Jones III, chancellor of the fundamentalist Christian university in Greenville which bears his name, could have hurt Romney more than it helped him.
I don't tend to place a lot of stock in small sample polls like this, nor do I tend to think endorsements are nearly as significant as they're made out to be - as Hugh is doing with Jones. But one thing seems fairly certain: we're less than 100 days out from the vote in South Carolina - and less than that in Iowa and New Hampshire - and the questions surrounding Romney's religion are still out there swirling.'
As I was saying, Hugh flogging of the BJU endorsement just calls attention to Mitt's religon, and ditto, its not going away. Mitt should stick to his business and gov't success, courting religious groups is a big campaign mistake. |
|
|
|
|
The Truth: Indeed, blacks of African ancestry were not allowed to hold the priesthood in the LDS Church until 1978. However, they could be members of the Church in full standing and officiate in auxiliary organizations such as the Sunday School. Joseph Smith was not a bigot. Neither was Brigham Young. The quote given refers to people caught in the act of adultery, and was largely rhetorical. No one was ever executed for this reason. |
|
|
i agree with you. i'm for removing the "family values" facade from all of this. |
|
Big G: I have voted the GOP for President since Reagan 1980, but frankly, none of the current crop appeals to me. McCain on McCain Feingold and freedom of speech,or Rudy on abortion. I had hope for Fred, but I fall asleep every time I listen to him.
Actually, I kind of like Mitt, its Hugh's relentless shillig for him that has driven my away from his camp, so I am providing counterpoint to Hugh.
I will vote for the GOP nominee, unless it is Rudy, his abortion stance is non negotiable with me.
If you don't like my posts, skip over my username, I skip over all the stuff about LDS doctrine, just don't find it very edifying.
Rufus - Mitt is still ahead, but the gap is closing in both Iowa and New Hampshire. |
|
|
No, we don't know Jesus' current politics, but we get a clear look at His future rulership in Revelation 19-22 and it's not pretty for those who don't like to bow down to Him....... |
|
"was jesus ever as calculating as bju and hugh? "
I'll bet you that from the perspective of some, yes. Many seem to have this view that because they believe he is the perfect man (and I do), he must have necessarily appeared perfect to you, were you to have associated with him in this life. The bottom line is, we have no way of knowing what Jesus was like politically. All of the predicting of Jesus' political leanings, both on the left and the right, is purely conjecture and speculation in my book. I can take none of it seriously. |
|
|
if Huckabee scares Bugsy, shouldn't we all take a closer look!!! |
|
It's a well known fact that mormon doctrine claims black people are cursed. Black men were only allowed into the "Aaronic priesthood" after the US Government threatened the Utah cult with legal action. The BJU endoresement seems like a good fit for Mitt.
The false prophet Brigham Young, who led many of the Mormons to Salt Lake City, UT wrote:
"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African Race? If the White man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so."
"Cain slew his brother. . . and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin."
|
|
Not letting the brains of 2000 babies a year, be sucked out during birth, probably means something to each of them! Sometimes I wonder about the thinking capacity of my fellow pro-lifers! |
|
People who live in a religiously pluralistic republic are now endorsing a candidate of a different faith than their own for secular political office in a government that serves Protestants, Catholics, Orthodox, Mormons, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, unbelievers, etc.
How horrific! |
|
|
Instead of taking dumps on Romney and those who support him, you ought to be persuading people to have interest in the candidate you endorse. You win no ones hearts or minds here. Mitt rocks, has faults? Yes. You never talk about who you support, there is no one on earth that would meet all of your criteria for what a president should look like, talk like, act like, or what their policies ought to be. |
|
|
in their theology but at the least Bob Jones bashers get the facts straight. They outlawed interracial dating BECAUSE the school was sued by SOME parents, one child was Asian and one was white, for the school letting their child date another race. That's WHY they require permission from parents to date other races! I think the saying "damed if you do and damNed if you don't" applies! It sure is EASY to HATE Bible believers, HUH??? |
|
people have to make choices in elections; there's no perfect candidate. and who knows whether jesus would vote for romney. i'm just guessing that, if he voted at all, he wouldn't involve himself in the calculating that's going on here, skewing the conduct as a matter of family values.
i'm against abortion. but i really wish people would stop using it as a wedge issue. when bush leaves office, abortion will be as legal as it was on his inauguration day (despite the fact of republican control of the house and senate for most of his presidency). even his supreme court, the first chance they had to touch the issue, punted in favor of deciding the narrow question of one type of partial-birth abortion procedure. what good did that do any pro-life advocate? other partial-birth procedures remain legal. |
|
people who consider mormons to be blasphemes are now endorsing romney. was jesus ever as calculating as bju and hugh? |
|
Back in the spring of this year, "Human Events.com" an old and influential conservative organization did a survey of 28 conservative issues for conservative voters to determine the dominance of each issue, and list the top 10. Each voter listed his 10 issues in importance:
1. Illegal Immigration.........86% 2. War on Terror...............80% 3. Federal Spending............65% 4. Supreme Court Apt...........64% 5. Flat Tax / Tax Cuts.........61% 6. Size of Gvnt................61% 7. Iraq........................55% 8. Social Security.............45% 9. Entitlement Programs........38% 0. Abortion....................36%
Granted, this was done with the "Internet Conservatives" which may not include the elderly voter, yet the results were intresting.(3602 surveyed) "Gutted Our Principles" very well may be the meaning of the New GOP? |
|
|
No one is safe from criticism, everyone can be critized, lazy, biased, and opinionated criticism is all together too rampant in our society. We expect everyone to be on there game all the time, and want to crucify them if they make a mistake. Our society would rather just cast stones. |
|
"if Mitt is so strong in his faith, and the BJU folks insult and dismiss his faith, then why is he seeking their endorsement?"
Because they share the same values. There is no person on this earth with out a character flaw. Especially the presidential candidates, and Mitt Romney.
"The cult label would go away alot faster if y'all stopped acting like one."
Hypocrite. |
|
I was responding to 223's post (right above mine) in which he opines that the new Iowa poll showing Romney with a 27 - 13 lead is, somehow, "bad" news. |
|
|
|
has a few problems; but, I don't know if I can spin a 14 point lead as being one of them. |
|
RCP Averages today Republicans Romney 27 (-3 vs. last poll Sept 21-23) Giuliani 13 (-4) Huckabee 12 (+4) Thompson 10 (-3) McCain 5 (-1) Brownback 4 (+2) Paul 4 (+1) Undecided 22 (+9)
Looks like the BJ push is not doing Mitt a lot of good - and notice the bump in undecideds. |
|
Dobson looks like a Unitarian minister compared to BJU. BJU is Fred Phelps lite. Romney need not cater to this.
Mitt wants to run as a conservative but he also has to get the victory in the general. |
|
|
|
John Konop is on to something. Mitt says he is not running for Pastor in Chief, but surrogate Hugh keeps flogging Mitt's acceptance by the orthodox Christian right, to make him more acceptable I suppose.
This all makes the light shine on Mitt's Mormonism instead of his leadership skills. But if we criticize Mormanism, we are bigots - but Mitt wants us to vote for him anyway. A confusing message, to say the least.
And is Mohler endorsing Mitt. If not, why not? Why is Dobson not endorsing him? |
|
Romney already had the "BJ endorsement": he had Larry Craig on his team... Sorry, couldn't resist ;)
And hey, let's give credit where it is due. BJU has moved into the 1950's with its new, "more tolerant" policy on race relations: students can now date interracially, but ONLY WITH SIGNED PARENTAL PERMISSION. Yes, you read that right. I think it might even be worse than an outright ban. Also, a guy who applied and was already in an interracial marriage was told it was OK for him to come, but only because his wife was NOT a student. I guess that jungle fever is too contagious to keep a lid on ....
Scallywag has a point. It is not like I respect BJU anyway, so why care if they support a candidate I didn't support already? Of course, Hugh is making this out to be the Mega-millions jackpot prize of endorsements, so it is not like he isn't asking for it, scallywag. And as X-tian fundie nutjobs go, it is hard to top BJU: the only one I can think of is Fred "God hates our soldiers because they don't kill the gays on sight" Phelps. I guess the question to throw back is: if Mitt is so strong in his faith, and the BJU folks insult and dismiss his faith, then why is he seeking their endorsement? It suggests either a desparation or an unseemly calculation on his part, either of which throws his principles into (further) question.
Finally, BG, why is it you LDS guys all act like you are in Romney's inner circle? "No Romney was not behind the 3rd party rumble." Like Mitt is running his campaign stratedgy by you for approval. That, and your fawning inability to see ANY weakness in the Mittster, undermines your credibility. The cult label would go away alot faster if y'all stopped acting like one. |
|
The BJ endorsement is the type of endorsement that many in the press felt that Romney would never get. It suggests that Romney will be a player in the South and is a serious threat to the coronation of King Rudy.
No Romney was not behind the 3rd party rumble. That was a spontaneous result of Rudy trying to grab the nomination while keeping the social conservatives splintered. To suggest that Romney is behind the 3rd Party movement would be similar to suggesting that Rudy was behind Fred running. |
|
Does Romney want it both ways?
Politico-Mitt Romney wants you to look at him and think: strong leader, successful businessman, good father, faithful husband.
He does not want you to look at him and think: Mormon.
He is a Mormon, and he is proud of it. He says his faith has shaped his life and his values. But he doesn’t want religion to be the prism through which people view him.
“The people I speak with in crowds overwhelmingly tell me they want a person of faith to lead the country,” he told me earlier this year. “They don’t care what brand of faith that is, so long as we share values.
READ MORE
http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/romneys-religious- riddle |
|
I now suspect Romney campaign was behind the 3rd party threats.
I was originally firmly a Romney supporter, but the more I see, the more I think he lacks in comparison to what Rudy seems to have. |
|
thread! Only little grin I got was the thought that BJU,with its intolerance,is not dissimilar to mainstream U's and their intolerance.Cute and ironic. |
|
because of endorsement of known racist and bigot? Well, Albert Mohler IS a southern baptist so to him racism is integral part of his religious beliefs.
But then bigots and racists in Bob Jones hate gays even more than they do hate n****rs, and Romney has promised to deliver a nationwide hate campaign and persecution campaign against gays to pander the votes or religious fundamentalist loonesy (like Mohler and Bob Jones).
Their hate unifies them. And in their dreams USA has been purified from all gays through "Final Solution". And after that attacking next minority in name of "values" will be easier and easier.
Mohler and Bob Jones are both repulsive racist bigots. |
|
So your thought is that since the bigoted Bob Jones U. endorsed Romney, that makes Sampo and I bigots? Curious, that.
And despite your characterizations, I actually am disgusted any time a politician sucks up to odious racists, be they Al Sharpton or Bob Jones U.
What is terribly disappointing to me, however, is when self-professed Christians put earthly power over the teachings of Christ. Short-term political advantage over "minor issues" like racial equality.
If Romney does win the GOP nod, he will have a devil of a time trying to spin his way out of BJU's lovefest. And he'll deserve every infernal minute. Lie down with dogs... etc. |
|
|
Did Hugh even say "thank you" or "good luck" to Dean? Kind of a strange radio silence going on here... |
|
inkling, sampo it's already established that romney is quite opposite in his theology compared to bob jones and yourselves (which you choose to tout as a major deal breaker for you), but yet when it's convenient for you, you consider him to be in lock-step with certain evangelicals. just because some of his supporters think one way, doesn't mean also does. i'd be willing to bet my house that if romney obtained the endorsement of an evangelical leader you do respect, you conveniently find another way to say you don't support so you never have to divulge the ugly little feeling that envelopes your thoughts..bigotry. it's just easier for you to call yourself tolerant and claim to have an open-mind, isn't it? makes life simpler, and allows for people to think you're a fair and decent person. one day in the not so different future, secularism will ultimately prevail and evangelicals will be mocked and demeaned not unlike you treat mitt and mormons today. good luck coping with becoming a second-class citizen just because you're different. sucks to be mitt romney if he can't get succeed just because he's not evangelical. so much for the american dream. |
|
|
|
Bob Jones U. calls Billy Graham an "apostate" for allowing Catholics to attend his crusades. This is a place that until 2000 banned interracial dating. They aren't interested in "the best interest of the evangelical community."
Romney can have them. |
|
Bob Jones banned interracial dating just 7 years ago. At that time they forced biracial students to "choose" after which they could only date one particular race.
Sick. I prefer not to take my queue from such a backwards establishment. |
|
The first poll vindicates me. Believe it or not, more believe in Creation than Evolution.
"If a presidential candidate stated that he or she DID NOT believe in the theory of evolution, would that make you much more likely to vote for that candidate, a little more likely, not make a difference either way, would it make you a little less likely, or much less likely to vote for that candidate?"
Much More Likely/A Little More Likely /No Difference/ A Little Less Likely/Much Less Likely 8/7/54/13/15
http://www.pollingreport.com/science.htm |
|
There is a spectrum of Evangelicals. Bob Jones is on the hard shell right of that spectrum. Yes, he does openly say he thinks the Mormons are a cult. However, he also knows it is in the best interest of the Evangelical movement and the country to back Romney.
This is a political endorsement. It is based on practical politics and shared values. Bob Jones is not giving an inch on the doctrinal differences and he does not have to. |
|
The last thing I want is a presidential candidate aligned with Bob Jones III. I'm a conservative evangelical and if BJU endorses someone I am far less likely to support them.
It's an ugly, graceless, legalistic and intolerant institution. And apparently Mitt is thrilled about that fact. Utterly depressing.
Jon http://www.exurbanleague.com |
|
|
|