But it's just one more example of how vulnerable Romney's religious beliefs (and I THINK HE DOES BELIEVE THEM ALL) make him incredibly vulnerable. It will be interesting to see how the church leadership in SLC deals with damage control.
I note that Huckabee has apologized already. Of course, a cynic he apologized after h'd got the idea out there. I think though the episode hurt Huckabee hurt him more than Romney.
Here are three evangelical Huckabee supporters blogging about Romney and Huckabee:
Huckabee Was Wrong, But Then Did the Right Thing
John Mark Reynolds
Politics
12.12.2007
It was wrong of Huckabee to attack Romney over the details of Mormon theology.
It was (in some ways) worse for him to pretend that he did not know the details. His comment was too specific to be based on total ignorance (which his educational background argues against in any case) and too general to be worthy of a response.
It is the perfect low blow, but there is no moral low blow.
There is no “context” that would make such an attack better. If he said it, then he was wrong.
There is an easy way to fix this. Huckabee could apologize and get on with his campaign. He was an able Republican governor, is a decent man, and does not need this sort of tactic to advance his cause.
Without an apology, how can a decent person vote for Mike?
I know at least two very decent men (whom I admire greatly) who are voting for Huck and am curious about their reaction. If this is not a bad tactical and moral move, then what is?
Does Huckabee want to invite the Noah’s Ark retort? (”Oh. . . and do you believe Noah went a boat with a bunch of animals?”) Where will the “weirdness card” end?
Playing with people’s instinctive, irrational, emotional reactions to new ideas is neither prudent nor right.
(To be clear on my religious views:
Mormon theology is not traditional Christian theology.
I think Mormon theology wrong.
I also do not think it relevant in a vote for President.)
Addendum: Huckabee has made an apology.
It appears he apologized to Romney.
Well done.
scriptoriumdaily.com
...
Just so there's no confusion on my own position:
I'm supporting Mike Huckabee. But if Romney, Thompson, or McCain were the nominee, I would gladly vote for each of them in the general election. (Romney would be my second choice.)
I would probably hold my nose and vote for Giuliani, who is pro-choice.
(I don't mean to stir up the RonPaulians, but he has zero chance of being elected and I don't know that I could vote in good conscience for such extreme isolationism in foreign policy during the War on Terror. Christians should care about justice and safety not only for the unborn but for the born as well. Even if the Iraq war was a colossal mistake, it would be an even bigger mistake to withdraw all our troops immediately.)
I could not in good conscience vote for Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, or John Edwards.
.....
I believe the conservative worldview shares more presuppositions with the Christian worldview than does liberalism--especially concerning the sinfulness of man (and hence the need for the decentralization of power) and the objectivity and transcendence of moral values. Whether "conservatives" correctly put the worldview into practice is a story for another day. . . .
theologica.blogspot.com
And finally, Joe Carter. He royally attacks Romney ... on everything except his religion:
Here is the case against the endorsement:
....Romney's flip-flops on issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage are already so widely acknowledged that that there is no need to catalog them again. I believe that we should welcome converts, though, which is why I praise him for flopping on the right side of the issues. Still, it seems a bit early to believe as NR says that "we’re glad he is now on our side — and we trust him to stay there." I'm sure Planned Parenthood and the Log Cabin Republicans trusted him to stay where he was too.
Foreign-policy experience
Even NR can't overcome the fact that Romney has no more foreign policy experiences than the current front-runners, Huckabee and Giuliani. Instead they claim that "what matters most is which candidate has the skills to execute that vision." What skills would those be? They don't say.
Fiscal conservatism
Romney's fiscal conservatism is wildly overstated and based more on his resume and MBA than on his record. On free trade he takes the same position as Huckabee—a position that NR previously criticized. Unlike McCain, he supports farm subsidies. And he raised taxes—or as he prefers to call them "fees"—as much as any candidate in the race.
However, the most damning indictment against his fiscal conservatism is often touted as his greatest success: The 2002 Winter Olympics.
Romney is justly praised for turning around a failing venture. But what is often overlooked is how much of the taxpayer's money it took to accomplish the feat.
........
The most laughable line of the entire editorial, however, is that Romney has run a "tightly organized, disciplined campaign." Anyone who has dealt with the Romney campaign knows the truth. Romney has surrounded himself with dirt-peddling, rumor-whispering, truth-twisting, Machiavelli-wannabes. They are the absolute dirtiest group of campaigners on the GOP side of the race.
This is disconcerting because staffers on a Presidential campaign tend to become staffers in a Presidential administration. How they act when they have the pseudo-power of campaign is indicative of how they will act when they have their hands on real power. A staff that will leak dishonest opposition research to the media to smear a rival candidate will have no qualms about leaking classified information to smear a rival bureaucrat or legislator.
While I don’t want to denigrate the entire staff, Romney's camp is comprised of a number of people that can best be described as "men of low character." If he were to be elected his administration would be a failure of Nixonian proportions. (Prediction: His campaign staff will drag him down long before he reaches that stage.)
***
Romney may be a stalwart Republican but he is only a fair-weather conservative.
evangelicaloutpost.com
IMO, Romney's religous beliefs shouldn't be that big a deal politically. And in fact, I don't think they are. |
