Forget JFK, Romney aims even higher

You can’t poo yourself and brag about it, Mitt. It doesn’t work like that.

I myself heard the implied threat “freedom requires religion”.

Sounded to my atheist ears like – no religion no freedom

This is the entire Gettysburg Address:

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Every word is well-chosen, resonant with the Bible-aware and war-weary audience. Every sentence has a noble and dignified cadence. JFK’s speeches had some of that, too. The entire speech is easily memorized by grammar-school children.

Romney’s pathetic effort was none of that. It wasn’t effect effective at telling the rest of us what Mormonism is about or why any thinking person should accept such harebrained notions. Magic underwear? The “peep stones”, Urim and Thumim? Posthumous, involuntary baptism? Polygamy and salvation only through the paterfamilias? Sorry … all that’s secret. That may make it Republican (these days), but it’s hardly Lincolnesque, is it?

“It was like George Washington, It was the Gettysburg Address”? —Really?
Well, I certainly agree that it was “unbelievable” and reading the text sure does move me to tears. 😉

I think Randi Rhodes of Air America had it right. Mitt Romney basically said he was going to be as intolerant of people like secularists as some of the far Right Wing. This not withstanding that he believes Jesus was in Missouri. Mitt has it all wrong about most things, you can just watch a few minutes of him and know he would be a lousy President. What kind of message is that; you have to be religious to even be thought of as a citizen?

That’s why a man from Texas will take a loooooonngg look for a second at another man when he sees him- he’s “sizing him up,” thinking over whether or not he wants to have relations with him.

I hear that in the cattle states, there is a very large gay population- something like 1 gay man to every 4 straight.

That’s not counting the African American population, and the Mexican population, though, both of which tend to be less homosexual in that state.

Ann Romney is a Stepford-wife. So, of course, she doesn’t have a single brain cell in her head.

“and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth”. Sorry Abe, it’s long gone, and it was your chicken shit party that killed it.

Brother Romney’s speech was superior to the well known speech of gratitude presented by Golden Grigg which he gave in 1954 when given the award for Best Fast Food of the Year for inventing Tater Tots. That will bring tears to your eyes.

However, Brother Romney’s speech wasn’t as good as the one given in 1928 by Hennrietta Winkler at the American Homing Pigeon Society which expressed appreciation for the courage and difficulties faced by Homing Pigeons in WW I. Not even close really.

Sister Romney needs to get a grip on herself.

Many people of all faiths and walks of life have publicly acknowledged this speech moved them to tears. It also moved them to a higher level of a vision for America. You may not share the same view point; you may not have even seen or heard the speech. However that does not change the sincere effect it had on many others.

Why do you feel a need to be disrespectful to people who don’t agree with you?

Because, Open Mind, I am sick and fucking tired of these types of numbnuts running the country. Anyone inspired by the Mittster’s speech is someone I hope to keep far, far away from power.

This speech will be studied for years by political science students along side Kennedy’s speech. Romney exposed the fallacy of Kennedy’s absolute wall extremism.

Romney did not say he would be intolerant of secularists, just that he DISAGREED with unbelievers bent on intolerantly secularizing all aspects of American culture. Disagreeing is not oppression, folks. In fact he said, “Tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if we only tolerate those we agreed with.” Don’t worry, just because Romney disagrees with secularists doesn’t meant he is breaking out the rack.

If you want to argue the freedom religion interdependence, take it up with Samuel Adams.

Mormon and mainstream Christian theologians have repeatedly plowed the field of doctrinal differences for 150 years and no one has “won” the debate. Romney’s trying to address this theologicial debate would be like taking a an icepick to this already well plowed field.

This speech is intellectually unassailable. Efforts to do so are easily knocked down.