8 Comments

• 1. sleepygene  |  December 6th, 2007 at 1:47 pm

  I read the speech, am at work and can’t view it. In my reading of it it seemed like an excellent speech for the people he was talking to, fundis who think Mormonism is a cult. This line made me chuckle though when I read it.

  “Americans tire of those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world.”

  Couldn’t he have left that out and still made his point:? I think it helped him, but I think the Mormon question is not the biggest question for Mitt, it is authenticity.

• 2. Ed Fairbairn  |  December 6th, 2007 at 4:19 pm

  I think the speech was excellent - and I agree with it, no matter what his faith is. He said things that should be said by any good candidate about faith and the origins of this country. I also like the fact that he is not apologetic towards radical Islam, calling it for what it is. I was on sitting on the sidelines, but now am close to choosing a candidate in the primary named Mitt Romney.

• 3. Kahn  |  December 6th, 2007 at 4:41 pm

  Harry Reid, Democrat Nevada Senator and Senate majority leader is also Mormon.

• 4. sleepygene  |  December 6th, 2007 at 4:49 pm

  Kahn-

  That is true but apparently Harry doesn’t have to disabuse his constituents of the notion that Mormonsim is a cult. Harry just has to show the good folks in the Silver State that he isn’t a total wet noodle weenie, which I find improbable.

• 5. Joe  |  December 6th, 2007 at 5:26 pm

  Ed Fairbairn,
  How do you feel about Mitt’s flip-flops?
  How did feel about everyone blasting Kerry for his flip-flops in 2004?

• 6. LiberalNitemare  |  December 6th, 2007 at 10:12 pm

  Mitt’s speech impressed me today.

  I liked the way he addressed the issue, refusing to step away or apologize for his religion.

  I havnt really made up my mind which republican I want to win the nomination, but Mitt got himself a second look today

• 7. Kahn  |  December 7th, 2007 at 2:14 am

  Joe - fair question.

  But I saw some posts in this blog the other day that cravenly attacked the Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints - their actual name. Funny, since the leading Senate Dem is also “Mormon”. Clearly he needed to adress this, mostly to point out the vileness of attacks like this.

  But as to his “flip-flop-flip” on abortion or any other issue, any question is fair game. I’m still firmly undecided.

• 8. coulterfan  |  December 7th, 2007 at 9:34 am

  But what about his bigoted assertion that “freedom requires religion”? What about all the famous American atheists, Diests, and Agnostics (like Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Ernest Hemingway, Andrew Carnegie, John Adams, Kurt Vonnegut, Mark Twain, etc, etc)? Weren’t these ‘free Americans’? Isn’t it hypocritical to ask for religious tolerance while at the same railing against the “religion of secularism”?

  I agree that him having to give this speech was SAD. However, those who want to impose their religion on others (Ten Commandments in public buildings, prayer in public school, etc) are the REASON he had to give this speech. He had to assure all the religious evangelicals that Mormonism is not “weird”.

  Despite the comparisons, this WAS NOT like JFK’s speech. Kennedy clearly stated that there should be an “absolute separation between Church and state”- Romney said nothing of the sort. In fact, he said that “freedom REQUIRES religion”. Is bigotry against atheists and agnostics acceptable to Romney? He seems to be implying that there SHOULD BE a “religious test” for office- namely that officeholders ARE religious.

Matt Margolis on Twitter