Video: Romney tears up
posted at 3:43 pm on December 16, 2007 by Michelle
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Here’s the vid of Gov. Mitt Romney getting misty-eyed on MTP this morning:
Background here.
A few other reasons to reach for the Kleenex here.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « 1 2 3 [4]
Why is that in quotes? Is this an example of original writing on your part or did you lift if from the website of another race-baiting simpleton?
Buy Danish on December 18, 2007 at 1:36 PM
Form a sham Cayman Island entity and avoid it?
You keep rehashing the irrelevant and refusing to address the relevant. I agree with you Mitt did not avoid taxes for his own income derived from these schemes — If my prior comment was ambiguous, I apologize. However, the millions in profit that went to Mitt should have been tax revenue. So, the money in Mitt’s pocket rightly belongs in the government coffers. Thus, my comment that Mitt avoided taxes for personal gain — which he did. Mitt made millions of dollars helping other avoid taxes by setting up a sham off shore corporation. Thus, Mitt profited by cheating the government out of tax revenue. It was the law. Mitt enabled other to avoid the law. Mitt made millions. It is of questionable legality and is certainly unethical. Let’s make him POTUS!
tommylotto on December 18, 2007 at 1:48 PM
Sounds to me like an opportunity for Mitt to promote his background in business to turn a potential liability into an asset. He understands the regulations and taxes that continually force American companies to move their “business” over seas. My understanding of his positions is he wants to reduce the burden on American companies so they keep their workers and headquarters here. I think he would be in favor or removing these regulations that cause companies to put up post office boxes in the Caymans.
I worked for a very successful software company with hundreds of employees that moved it’s headquarters from the United States to Ireland for tax purposes. We had 2-3 people in an Ireland office as localization translators. I was embarrassed.
We need to seriously look at how Federal regulation and tax law affect American businesses. And while it may be sort of a fox-in-the-hen-house, Mitt is probably the most experienced in what needs to happen.
Sebastian on December 18, 2007 at 2:20 PM
Oh, I see if it doesn’t support the Romneys, it must be race baiting. How is this race baiting? If it is true, who is baiting whom?
Look it up, this is where Romney marched, through an upscale suburb…probably singing “we have overcome, why haven’t you”.
If it isn’t true, then correct me.
I can’t keep giving you dispensation, unless God tells me to…
Link
That doggone race baiting Miami Herald…HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
right2bright on December 18, 2007 at 2:22 PM
It wasn’t just ambiguous, it was completely false.
tommylotto on December 18, 2007 at 1:48 PM
What on earth are you talking about?? It doesn’t work that way. Mitt pays taxes on income and capital gains, so the government receives revenue from his profitable business ventures. If there was no investment in his company the government would have received nothing.
If it is illegal, the government has had plenty of time to pursue this case and the thousands of other companies who structure their companies like this.
If you want to change it, call your congressmen. You told me that that’s how the process works, so go ahead and do it!
Sheesh.
Buy Danish on December 18, 2007 at 2:32 PM
Actually, it’s a reprint of the David Broder article in the Washington Post “Like Father, Like Son” which ends with:
Almost sounds like an endorsement.
Sebastian on December 18, 2007 at 2:37 PM
What the h*^$# is the matter with you?
You accused me of being a racist because I made a statement of historical fact. I NEVER said that I agreed with what the LDS Church did. You are now twisting what I said and rewriting it so it does not resemble what I said in the least in its original form. That is an example of what I mean when I said that you are rewriting history.
Now you’ve decided that because the Romney’s didn’t march in Selma with Dr. King, it didn’t count. Is this WALK good enough for you?
That is exactly the sort of race-baiting tactics that the Justice Brothers employ. Like this:
White students go to Duke. White students on Lacrosse Team hire stripper. Students are upper middle class. Stripper is black. Stripper accuses white students of rape. White students are guilty!
Buy Danish on December 18, 2007 at 3:20 PM
I hope it is, imagine a “race baiting” paper…
It wasn’t a dig, so much as setting the record straight. He makes it sound like he was the great civil rights defender, but he just marched (as most everyone alleges) through the streets of a white neighborhood.
Just setting the record straight.
right2bright on December 18, 2007 at 4:44 PM
My advice is don’t argue for something you don’t believe in. If you don’t think what the LDS was correct, don’t defend them, if you think it is correct, defend them (as you did).
You can’t have it both ways. Defend them, you get attacked, then you whine about it because you don’t really support what they did…
Funny, I missed your comment when presented with this fact. You seem to not respond to real history.
But you did argue the point that they were allowed to join the church (you just forgot to mention that they were not allowed what the white members were allowed).
Guilty of omission is the crime.
I quote respected Mormon scholars and you whine and call names.
Let it go, I already allowed you more “passes” then you deserve.
right2bright on December 18, 2007 at 4:54 PM
My advice is don’t argue for something you don’t believe in. If you don’t think what the LDS was correct, don’t defend them, if you think it is correct, defend them (as you did).
My advice to you is…unprintable.
I am defending Mitt Romney, and the Romney family, against your unhinged, vicious attacks. There is clearly nothing that Romney can do short of tie himself to a cross that will satisfy your sick compulsion to smear him.
I never defended what the church did, so stop lying about that. The Romney’s themselves never defended what they did and George Romney publicly stated as much.
I made a point on semantics about the use of the word “segregation” by another commenter; that was not an endorsement of their policies. You inserted yourself into that conversation and proceeded to call it a racist comment, rewrite what I said, tell me what I think, and employ all sorts of tactics which are typical of the ugly and fraudulent way you operate.
I don’t doubt that you are serious here. The phrase “delusions of grandeur” comes to mind.
Buy Danish on December 18, 2007 at 5:50 PM
Right2bright–seriously, you are unhinged.
Seriously, you are. As far as I understand Christianity, pretty much no version of it says, “attack another faith with the tenacity of a bulldog, never, ever, ever finding anything they do good.”
You apply standards to the LDS church that logically mean you must reject the Bible. You refuse to notice the hypocrisy evident in your posts.
Whatever brand of “Christianity” you endorse, I don’t want any part of it. Because it’s not Christian. Jesus stood for “love one another.” If there’s anything dealing with you has shown, you do not love much of anything.
It is literally impossible for anyone who is LDS to do anything right in your eyes. I could donate a billion dollars to the LDS church to help end poverty in Ethiopia or somewhere else, and you would attack it as some diabolical plot, because the LDS church cannot in your opinion ever do anything good.
It’s like a 9-11 truther. You are unhinged, and suffer from Mormon Derangement syndrome. I don’t know what else to call it–no one sane spends this much time, tenacity, and effort to bash a system of belief that doesn’t personally impact them. I don’t know what your beef is with the LDS church, but you are clearly emotionally disturbed about these issues.
For your own sake, I advise you to just step away from the internet. Or you’ll end up dead from some apoplectic fit you throw over yet another offense those evil Mormons, and Mitt in particular, commit by breathing the same air that you do.
Buy Danish, I’m sure that even if Right2bright personally nailed Romney to a cross, he’d accuse Romney of blasphemy for having the gall to be crucified–that’s something only “Christians” should be. That’s how insane and filled with hatred Right2bright and some of the other “Mormon haters” are.
Vanceone on December 18, 2007 at 7:31 PM
But you dodged the question…would you give up your 14 yr. old daughter to your prophet, like Heber C. Kimball did with his daughter Helen Mar? Would you have given up your wife? To a man who came to you saying “God told him to marry your wife” and then “God told him to marry your 14 yr. old daughter”. Probable someone he watched grow up.
*
And Jesus, glad you can speak for him, he hated false prophets. Do you think he wanted someone to give up his child daughter to Smith, Smith who married 33 or more woman, who sought marriage with woman already married? Do you think Jesus stayed quite about false religions?
Listen, young man, I don’t dislike Mormons, as you try to paint me, I despise people of power preying on innocent people (and yes, children), you feel empowered by Smith’s predatory ways. Evil actions, should be attacked, not embraced. And if you think taking child brides, is a measure of honor, than that separates you from me. It is the doctrine, it is the holding up of “prophets” who married, married women and children, and calling that “gods spoken word”.
Meanwhile, my hatred for Mitt goes this far, I think he is good for a cabinet position, until he becomes a real conservative…..ooooooh that is really biased thinking, search my posts, I would prefer he stay at powerful low level government appointment, until he can “work” his conservative magic.
*
You can’t separate people from doctrine. People can and do great things in your church. I have quoted some great scholars, but it is built on a doctrine of deceit, lies, and unfortunately, abuse of children. A 40 year old man (your founding prophet), marrying a 14 and 16 yr. old girl (and read some history, it was not the norm as your apologists try to exclaim) is dispicable. Maybe 2,000 yrs ago, but not 150 years ago.
The irony? I have quoted history and the truth, even the LDS sites, and you still rebuke not only history but your own historians. And you have never found my quotes to be wrong (maybe didn’t like them) but you know they are accurate…ouch.
right2bright on December 18, 2007 at 8:04 PM
right2bright: They may be accurate insofar as they go, but almost inevitably they are taken out of context, or exculpatory evidence or sayings are totally ignored by you, as usual for you anti-mormons.
For your question about giving up my 14 year old daughter, blah blah blah… apparently, you are not aware that the LDS church teaches that each member should pray and find out for himself if what the prophet is saying is the word of God. If, in your very highly unlikely scenario, that happened, I would pray most fervently. And if I was convinced that indeed, it was God’s will, then who am I to resist God? Who are you, for that matter?
Btw–for your own knowledge, O mighty scholar of all Mormonism, Joseph Smith was murdered at age 38 at the hands of “Christians”–he never made it to 40, like you said.
And while you may think that I’m shocked to hear about “marriages to 14, 16 year olds” in fact I know about them, and I’m not bothered. See, unlike you, I happen to know that there is this concept called “sealing” and the vast majority of the marriages you allege Joseph Smith to have had were not consummated, or even treated as marriages at all as most people would think of the word. They were more sealings to bind people together throughout eternity in family relationships. Of course, you don’t believe that families will exist beyond the grave (I hope your spouse knows that you don’t want him or her once they croak), but I happen to think that is one of the most beautiful doctrines restored in this day.
Still, you haven’t answered why you care so much to be so dedicated and persistant in bashing the LDS church. If there’s one thing I can count on, it’s right2bright going on about how evil the LDS church is. No matter the post, thread, or time of day. Right2bright is here to save the day from evil Mormonism!
Besides, are you saying that I was wrong about Jesus wanting us to love one another? Guess you believe in a Jesus who doesn’t love. You keep that Jesus, I’ll keep mine.
Vanceone on December 18, 2007 at 9:28 PM
I like that, the vast majority, as if…and did I miss him by a couple of years, he was in his mid thirties?…well okay then that’s all right here have my daughter. Ha!
*Now on to the real body of your post, it took my breath away.
Giving up your 14 year old daughter…man o man, what can I say. I don’t think hate is involved in this…it is pity, sorrowful pity.
I really, really pray for you…willing to give up your daughter to a man who says he is talking to God. My God, what more can be said then that.
What would turn a man to that…unbelievable, absolutely unbelievable.
God, through the death of Jesus Christ, has unconditional love for us, he would never put us to that challenge…yet you would be willing to sacrifice your blood, for a promise from a man…it gives me the shivers, honestly goosebumps, it is really scary. You poor lonely man, for the promise from a “living prophet” a man, you give God’s most valuable gift, his children. It is sickening, and you wonder why people look at the Mormon religion as being out of step. I would fight any man to the death to protect my children, they were given to me to care and nurture…not as chattel.
Please, rethink your faith, look what it has already made you think is normal and right…please pray about that tonight…my God!
right2bright on December 19, 2007 at 12:21 AM
Give it a rest, r2b. You are harassing Vanceone and it is contemptible.
Buy Danish on December 19, 2007 at 10:32 AM
Sticking your nose in? Do you have a 14 year old daughter that you want to give to man talking to God?
How lovely, how kind, how sweet…that is what you think is faith? You don’t find that chilling?
Listen, these are people who are willing to give up their children (and they have in the past) to a man who claims God wants him to marry that girl…and you defend that as normal, you want that in society…ever hear of Jim Jones?
right2bright on December 19, 2007 at 10:38 AM
I know this may come as a shock to you, but this is a political blog and it is inappropriate for you to use this blog in this manner.
My advice to you? If Vanceone asks for your advice and counsel, you are free to give it. Barring that unlikely occurrence, you should keep your outrage to yourself.
Indeed, if you want to
harassevangelize to Mormons, why don’t you pack a bag and go to Utah? I hear it’s lovely there this time of year.Buy Danish on December 19, 2007 at 10:55 AM
Well, right2bright–God asked Abraham to kill his promised child. Who am I to think that God wouldn’t ask me to do a lesser sacrifice?
Note, too, that Issac went willingly–ready to be sacrificed by his father, the prophet. I’d be in Issac’s position in your scenario–listening to a man speaking for God. Abraham was an old man, Issac probably could have gotten away, if he’d wanted to.
God asked Ezekiel, I think it was, to not mourn when God took away his wife. Why should I complain if God asks me to do something?
But I’m glad to see you don’t believe you should sacrifice for God. I personally think you are mocking God with that attitude, but that’s between you and Him.
Vanceone on December 19, 2007 at 3:28 PM
Oh, and right2bright: mayhap you should reread your Bible: Especially Luke, chapter 14. Start in verse 25. Christ explicitly says that a man must forsake all, including his children, to follow him.
I hope I could do it. Christ says we must.
Good thing you wouldn’t, though. As a “True Christian”, no less. I will follow Christ’s teachings, if He asks me to. You, apparently, wouldn’t. Who’s the real Christian?
And thanks, Buy Danish–I appreciate your help in dealing with this bitter, hate-filled individual.
Vanceone on December 19, 2007 at 3:35 PM
I think God can handle my mocking, he has blessed me for 60+ years.
If you read my post, I was talking about post Christ, not old testament…the rules changed with Christ, I would think you know that.
To bad you can’t read Luke 14 in the proper context, but then your BOM won’t allow you.
Go ahead and give your daughter to a man speaking with God, the world is full of men like that, and girls like that.
Justify it, anyway you want…it gives me, and I think most fathers, the creeps.
But then if you thought that, your two most important “prophets” would be villains (or pedophiles).
and thanks buydanish, it is nice to know he is not the only one willing to give up a daughter for a man speaking to God, I guess he isn’t so lonely after all. You might want to try ebay, you can find a man/God and make a few bucks.
And now we come full circle…you all criticized me when I was apprehensive about Mitt because I felt his allegiance to his church (and prophets that speak for God) was so strong, I was almost convinced that he could separate the two. But now that I know an everyday Mormon would give up his child to a man who God talks to, I think Mitt may have some explaining to do. Imagine the most powerful man on earth (politically), giving up his most precious possession because a man who talks to God, told him to. What else would he sacrifice? Let’s hope that if Mitt gets elected, his prophets are sane, or not a
pedophilechild stalkera man who like young girls like their predecessors.Looks like we may be voting for more than just a man…
right2bright on December 19, 2007 at 5:29 PM
P.S., there is your political tie-in buydanish…kiss your daughter goodnight, and tell her you love her; even more than any prophet (you hope).
right2bright on December 19, 2007 at 5:31 PM
right2bright–lay off the meds, your anger is making you incoherent.
I’m truly baffled, though. You believe in the Bible now…. or so you say, but you couldn’t have lived during those times when God did have a prophet. You reject the concept of a prophet entirely.
And you are a Christian? I think not.
Vanceone on December 19, 2007 at 5:57 PM
But please, come demonstrate outside our temples, so people can see how much you love Mormons, enough that you stomp on sacred things, spit on us, and all the other things I am sure you want to do physically (since you do that metaphorically right here).
Let the anger flow man! Just so we can see how much of a true Christian you really are!
Vanceone on December 19, 2007 at 5:59 PM
I have opted to print the unprintable this time around:
Up yours, r2b.
You don’t know anything about my thoughts on this topic. My one and only point was that this is not the place for you to be haranguing Vanceone about his religious faith.
right2bright on December 19, 2007 at 5:29 PM
Speak for yourself r2b. I am voting for a man, and if it happens to be Mitt it will because of his character and abilities. Your attempts to portray him in this manner is nothing short of disgusting.
You know I have noticed how you like to write about vaguely pornographic scenarios, like the time you talked about “spanking me”, or how you imagined that I secretly lusted after Mitt. Why do you write this bizarre stuff, I wonder? Is your obsession with pedophiles, spanking, and lust a projection of your own base desires?
I don’t have a daughter, I have a son. Not that it is any of your business, and I certainly don’t need your advice on how to express my love and affection for him.
Buy Danish on December 19, 2007 at 6:11 PM
I haven’t personally attacked you (and only buydanish a couple of times when she crossed the line, she needs to slow down, she is way too far into this), it is interesting how you think I want to do physical harm. Never mentioned it, even linked a Mormon scholar and the paper he wrote on the bias against Mormon’s. I don’t attack individuals (unless they attack first, and cross the line), but I don’t hesitate in attacking doctrine. You can’t grasp that, look back and see how many times I called you names, and then count your obsessive name calling towards me. Even when I agreed with your most noted scholars, LDS award winning historical scholars, you attacked me (and thus them, which I found amusing, but again a bit strange).
I would never protest outside or anywhere near your temple (never on holy ground), the inside of you San Diego (never went in your Los Angeles one) temple is beautiful, the mural of Jesus with all of the planets revolving is spectacular. The stairways, the oxen carrying the baptismal bath with the ramps are awesome (baptismal regeneration is not my thing), strange with the stadium seating, feels like you are at a football game. The sealing room (what, I do know about that ritual?), where do you keep the fig leaves?
Anyway, it is the doctrine, not the people, the doctrine. And when they carry that doctrine to harm people (like Smith and Young), then it is open season. You may admire these people, I find them…a bit strange, I mean going after a wife, and when refused taking the young daughter…you may feel blessed living with that, it gives me the creeps. But it does make me sad that you would give up your precious possession to someone (once again Jim Jones) that could convince you he speaks to God. It has happened many times in the name of Joseph Smith, he set the tone…how many have been harmed by protecting Smiths (and Young) right to do what he did.
buy danish (my comments are called shock therapy), teach your son to say he is God, and he will score. You jump in to defend someone, and then when called out on it, you run like a rabbit…”You don’t know anything about my thoughts on this topic”, you state… then stay out of the argument. Although, Vanceone did appreciate you coming to his defense…I guess he felt alone.
Let’s hope that Mitt, if elected, doesn’t take advice from his prophets…oh yeah, he doesn’t have any daughters so it doesn’t matter. But if Mitt sticks his head in a hat at inauguration, I am movin outta here.
right2bright on December 19, 2007 at 8:40 PM
Did r2b just promise to leave the country if Mitt is elected, or is he just going to stop writing rants.
Sounds like a win, win to me. Go Mitt!
Buy Danish on December 19, 2007 at 10:01 PM
That’s a repost for those who can’t read…you know, like his prophet who stuck his head in a hat with “seer” stones and found the word of God.
You go to sleep thinking about me (last post of the evening), and you wake up thinking about me (first post yesterday morning)…you have a great life. Maybe God brought you to me. I think I will ask him sometime today, if he says it’s a go, we’ll hook up…I mean if God says so, well who are you to argue with God? (don’t get jealous vanceone, it’s God speaking…not me but God).
BTW, I talked to God last night, and he said…don’t vote for Mitt. Just sayin, I am only a conduit.
*
He also said you misunderstood him…he said “a little wine is good for the soul” not “a little whine”. But he still loves you…you have that going for you (thank you Bill…Caddy Shack).
right2bright on December 20, 2007 at 9:52 AM
David S. Bernstein’s exposes Mitt’s family’s civil rights march with MLK to be a fabricated total lie, a fable created to convert the meek. The fashion in which Mitt Romney revised historical fact for political gain is a lesson well learned over generations, a documented practice of his church. THAT revisionism is dishonest. Furthermore, to alter historical record is not to honor those lives of sacrifice from history; on the contrary, at best, the revision displaces honor from the historical figure to the usurper. In practice, Romney and Clinton share that in common.
Considering the ’60’s TIME magazine report that George Romney’s campaign for president was smooth sailing until Romney said he had suffered political “brainwashing”, you’d have thought his son, Mitt, would have steered clear of fabricating legends for public consumption. From this, we see his character for what it is under the mask. Not to say that Mitt is a completely abhorent human, but to say that Mitt resorts to falsification of records.
maverick muse on December 20, 2007 at 10:24 AM
I’m really beginning to worry about right2bright here. Are you sure you are okay? Normally, you sound at least rational, but your last few posts show an increased deterioration of even basic english skills, and the comprehension level has gone down.
Vanceone on December 20, 2007 at 1:18 PM
As to maverick muse–he or she never answered my question: Do you or do you not think that the driving out of the LDS church by violence from the United States as it currently existed in the 1800’s was a justified or a good thing?
Vanceone on December 20, 2007 at 1:19 PM
Vanceone, buy danish, I admire your tenacity in the face of evil.
sulla on December 20, 2007 at 1:58 PM
Yep.
Buy Danish on December 20, 2007 at 2:07 PM
Attack the messenger, not the message when you are losing the argument…
right2bright on December 20, 2007 at 3:57 PM
Unbelieveable. Clearly you don’t even understand what the phrase “attack the messenger” means!
Buy Danish on December 20, 2007 at 6:05 PM
You would like to spank me wouldn’t you? Take my postings, tape them to your pillow tonight. Spank that pillow, tell that pillow he is a bad boy…like I said, you woke up thinking of me, you will go to bed thinking of me. Tomorrow I will tell you what God wants me to do with our relationship. We had a long talk about you.
Now get some tape, print my postings, and get ready for bed.
right2bright on December 20, 2007 at 6:31 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2007/12/20/politics/fromtheroad/entry3636089.shtml
Remember when Bill Clinton parsed the word “is” and then faked tears… sounds like Romney graduated from the Clinton School of Campaigns.
Dhornertx on December 20, 2007 at 7:40 PM
Ewwwwww. There you go with your soft porn routine/talking to God routine again. I really hate nightmares, so you can rest assured that I don’t go to bed thinking of you.
By the way, you may want to look up what the expression “shoot the messenger” means when you’ve finished your nightly delusionals, er, devotionals.
Hint: The person who delivers the message is not the same person who frames it in the first place.
Buy Danish on December 20, 2007 at 10:58 PM
Comment pages: « 1 2 3 [4]