Will political reporters notice the sharp elbow in Bill Sammon's book excerpt on Mitt Romney in Thursday's Washington Examiner?
In a not-so-veiled swipe at Giuliani and McCain, both of whom fell for younger women while still married, Romney told The Examiner that “people who commit adultery or other practices of that nature are carrying out absolutely heinous acts.”
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Romney seems to be harping
December 13, 2007 - 12:32 ET by dscottRomney seems to be harping on this issue, which makes me think this is Projection on his part. Libs of all stripes play the Projection game in order to divert attention away from their own misdeeds. Romney is a RINO so it would be par for the course. So ladies, which of you carried on an affair with Romney in the past, speak up!
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
I hope, for his sake, he's
December 13, 2007 - 12:35 ET by Chris NormanI hope, for his sake, he's as pure as the clean driven snow. It's always dangerous to put one's self up on a pedestal, isn't it?
That's an odd question, Chris
December 13, 2007 - 13:24 ET by RJThe comment was pulled from a wide-ranging discussion of Romney's religious beliefs.
In any event, since when is affirming the importance of honoring marriage committment considered putting oneself on a pedestal? Has the country fallen so far that it's become self-aggrandizing to do so?
RJ,Why odd, RJ? The
December 13, 2007 - 13:37 ET by Chris NormanRJ,
Why odd, RJ? The landscape is littered with people who have held themselves up as paragons of virtue, only later to be found not quite as virtuous as advertised. It's much better quietly trying to lead a virtuous life than advertising it. Let he without sin cast the first stone and all that. Besides, I don't think his comment was made as a general belief. It was calculated as personal attack against his rivals without the honesty to criticize them directly - and I don't like that. If you find that odd, oh well.
Chris, you seem to miss my point
December 13, 2007 - 13:56 ET by RJYes, people do put themselves on pedestals and many are knocked off.
But the statement was isolated from a wide ranging discussion on the subject of his beliefs, where Romney seemed to be expressing the teaching of his church.
You've suggested that affirming the tenents of one's church is now considered to be putting oneself on a pedestal. To me, that's odd....
"In a not-so-veiled swipe at
December 13, 2007 - 14:07 ET by Chris Norman"In a not-so-veiled swipe at Giuliani and McCain..."
The original post suggested this was a swipe against Giuliani and McCain - not just a discussion of the teachings of his church. You may want to take this up with Tim if you think he's mistaken. I commented on the post as presented.
Sorry, Chris.
December 13, 2007 - 14:17 ET by RJYou misinterpret the source. Tim was quoting the author of the Examiner article.
But regardless of who it was, the statement was interpretative, and nothing in the article corroborates that it was a "veiled swipe." Perhaps it would have helped if you also read the article.
RJ, apparently you have a
December 13, 2007 - 14:25 ET by Chris NormanRJ, apparently you have a lot more interest invested in this than I do. I commented as I understood the post.
Gosh, Chris
December 13, 2007 - 14:28 ET by RJYou only "commented as you understood the post?" So when I pointed out that you had misread the post, it means I have more interest invested? It's better to make incorrect "uninterested" statements than correct ones?
Now, that really is odd, Chris... ;^)
There's a difference between
December 13, 2007 - 14:54 ET by Chris NormanThere's a difference between not as interested and uninterested. I'm not interested enough to appoint myself as the arbiter of posts.
Oh, fer goodness sake, Chris
December 13, 2007 - 15:05 ET by RJNothing was being "arbited." I pointed out that your had miseread the post.
Let's drop it.
Well, for my part, this
December 13, 2007 - 16:28 ET by dscottWell, for my part, this comment following on the heels of Romney's Obama criticism smacks of self righteousness. If you will remember Obama was criticized for admitting he did drugs while in high school and then telling kids he is making better choices now and so should they. This would be like saying Paul should be disqualified to be an Apostle because he stoned Christians to death prior to becoming a Christian himself. Or the example of Zaccheus the chief tax collector (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=19&version=49&context=chapter ) I certainly don't support the likes of liberals like Obama, but at least he had the decency to tell people he made a mistake and tell others they shouldn't make it either (which btw many lib/dems don't do but act as a cheering section to do more). I don't know about you but when someone starts lauding their righteousness, it throws up red flags to me. I think it's poor form to be talking that way.
I personally do think adultery is a rotten, vicious, selfish thing to do against one's spouse. If a person doesn't show remorse or contrition for their failings, that is a failure of character, not simply the sin itself. there must be some context. All have sinned and all have fallen short of the Glory of God.
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
Dscott, who is your choice if Mitt aint it?
December 13, 2007 - 13:13 ET by Six String SpiffI bet it's Huckabee...
Islamic Religious Services Will Be Held at the Firing Range At 0800 Daily.
Neither of the above SSS,
December 13, 2007 - 14:42 ET by dscottNeither of the above SSS, LOL I like Fred and Duncan and that's only because George Allen isn't a choice. Call me a purist.
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
Opportunity lost
December 13, 2007 - 15:06 ET by NCConservative"I like Fred and Duncan and that's only because George Allen isn't a choice."
Sigh. I pine for George Allen. He was my Senator and Governor when I lived up in VA, and I looked forward to his presidential run. How sad for our country that his career was effectively ruined (for now at least) over one word and the media circus that followed.
Imperfect
December 13, 2007 - 14:19 ET by BeanManI cannot imagine that Mitt Romney believes himself to be perfect. However we can be perfect at some things and he, just like me, is perfect at not comitting adultry.
I'm also pretty sure that if there were some women out there that had an affair with Mitt, we would have heard all about them long ago.
If someone is willing to break the most basic and sacred covenant between a man, a woman, and God then what else are they willing to break as well. It seems to me that it's all downhill from there.
I'm not their judge but I take these things into account when making decisions such as these.
Since government is coercion, politics is largely the exercise of deception regarding the intended use of coercion - George Orwell
oh geez
December 13, 2007 - 12:37 ET by candanceLook I believe adultery is bad and I would never do it...but when did this election turn into a Pharisee contest?
candance, to me it speaks
December 13, 2007 - 13:45 ET by Karmacandance, to me it speaks to a persons character. I would never support a remorseless adulterer and you look on it as "oh geez". We, as conservatives, may have different priorities, but I would hope we don't belittle each others' views. Let the liberals/socialists to do that for us, they're much better at it. I have no problem with anyone who supports an adulterer. However, I do have a problem with those who believe my position is baseless.
BTW, I am glad you are here and think you're a good addition to NB.
hey Karma
December 13, 2007 - 13:51 ET by candanceOh no no, don't get me wrong, I absolutely agree adultery is a sin. And yes, I agree moral character matters when it comes to choosing our leaders.
It's just that right now the air is so thick with religious bickering, I feel like Romney only brought that up as revenge for the Mormon bashing. Or maybe he was just talking and the media picked that out to hype it and keep the religious fight going.
Either way, I'm getting burned out on the "who is a better Christian" thing. I was a right wing evangelical extremist while all these guys were busy comprimising with libs in the 90s.
I agree candance, the
December 13, 2007 - 14:29 ET by KarmaI agree candance, the religious bickering is fruitless. Informed voters have, for the most part, made their minds up and have eliminated some candidates on character or religious issues and I wish everyone would just give it a rest. Learning more on where the remaining stand on the other issues will help me narrow the list even further.
And no, I didn't get you wrong. I knew you where not condoning adultery. I just had a little issue with the "oh geez" thing. No big deal.
Regardless of if he's
December 13, 2007 - 12:53 ET by DyneRegardless of if he's projecting or not, he is speaking the truth. Adultery/fornication is the 3rd worst sin to commit as listed in the scriptures.
"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Matthew 7:20
Sin is sin. I dont think
December 13, 2007 - 13:33 ET by misterbee241Sin is sin. I dont think there is any particular ranking order.
There is none so blind as they that won’t see. Jonathan Swift 1667-1745
That would be the case if
December 13, 2007 - 14:04 ET by DyneThat would be the case if Jesus's resurrection didn't make it possible for us to repent. But even with that, there are still sins that carry more weight than others (especially ones that tamper with life such as murder and fornication), just as the case with sentences of crimes.
"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Matthew 7:20
Can't wait until he lets
December 13, 2007 - 12:57 ET by islero47Can't wait until he lets loose on homosexuality. The MSM will pout and whine like a flamer.
Romney is a RINO? Are you high?
December 13, 2007 - 13:03 ET by Six String SpiffIslamic Religious Services Will Be Held at the Firing Range At 0800 Daily.
Romney is right (see the
December 13, 2007 - 13:09 ET by wiwfRomney is right (see the Bible), but this is no time for a God-off
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
"In a not-so-veiled swipe
December 13, 2007 - 13:59 ET by kg"In a not-so-veiled swipe at Giuliani and McCain..."
He got a whole bunch with that one,,,Clinton, Kennedy, might as well include another Kennedy too, Hart, Carter by magazine only, several mayors, many, many other congressmen and senators, newscasters of both sexes...the list is much too long.
Speaking of Omissions...
December 13, 2007 - 14:36 ET by sarcasmoI wonder why I just-happened to read about a major media takeover like Mitt's firm taking over Clear Channel over on the "obscure" Lew Rockwell blog??? One would think I'd have first seen it on more "mainstream" media outlets, but so-far, only silence...Hmmm...
Must be a fast or a slow or a something news-day, eh? And I agree with the anonymous email's conclusions regarding whether or not we'll ever see ANY disclosure of a conflict of interest...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
I don't see the conflict
December 13, 2007 - 15:24 ET by KarmaI don't see the conflict here sarcasmo. If the Clinton's or Soros or such were to buy Clear Channel, do you think Rush & Glen would change their tune? I guess there is always that slim possibility, but I can't vision anyone, including Mitt, persuading them to "step in line with ownership or else". In fact, I could see strongarmed tactics used against these two, backfiring in the face of any owner. If this story is correct, time will tell.
I can see things slowly-changing from this...
December 14, 2007 - 10:11 ET by sarcasmoThey know what side their bread's buttered-on so they're naturally likely to be gentle on the boss & hard on his opponents. While strongarm tactics would backfire, subtle stuff can and probably will eventually work, and that's how the influence would work. But I'll be honest, I do not trust Sean or Glenn all that much...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Obviously he's never tried
December 13, 2007 - 16:01 ET by mattmObviously he's never tried it...(heh heh heh) Maybe polygamy's better....(just a little jab)...(not that Mitt's a polygamist, but his religion allows it)
Seriously though, I don't see why the media would ignore this. One republican attacking another...is how they could play it. They could demagogue the 'theocracy' angle. They could spin it however they want...