12/21/2007
Warming up to Mitt again
So I have been pretty down on Mitt Romney. I really disagree with him on a number of issues. However, for the strangest reason I am starting to like him again, and here it is. I don't think he is telling the truth about where he stands on a number of issues. I really think that he is more liberal than he is letting on. And with the piss poor republican field this year, that is all it really takes for me. Who else is there? Guiliani- he is the definition of unqualified. McCain- He is the definition of keeping a bad thing going. Huckabee- He is a bigot. Thompson- Is he even still alive?? Romney- good for economy (probably), short sighted on immigration (probably), flip-flopper (definately), did good things in Mass. (definately). So while I freely admit that I am probably biased by that fact that we share the same religion and so I tend to relate to him more, I think he is the republican that I support. Not the (hopefully) forceful endorsement that I give to Obama on the Dem. side, but right now that is where I stand, though open to reasoned argument to change my mind.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Though I disagree with Romney on basically every issue there is, I agree that he's probably the strongest candidate in a pretty amazingly dismal Republican field. (Which of course means that I hope someone else wins in the primary so that my one of my Democratic peeps--ideally Obama--will be more likely to retake the White House).
For what it's worth, my boyfriend, who's pretty nonpartisan and lived in Massachusetts during a good part of Mitt's tenure there, thinks he's a pretty capable guy.
Huckabee's a bigot?
I went back and looked up the definition of bigot to make sure. There were two definitions.
1-a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.
I think this one is a little strong. I don't think he is "utterly intolerant"
2-One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
This one I think fits.
Interesting discussion. Arfanser, I'm assuming you think Huckabee is bigoted because of his anti-Mormon statements and insinuations (though correct me if I'm wrong). I tend to agree. But where do we draw the line between disagreement and intolerance?
Surely someone can disagree pretty forcefully with your politics or religion, say so, and not be a intolerant. If someone says, "Mormons are mistaken in their views, and we must convince them to return to traditional Christianity or they will not be saved," that might be offensive, but is it intolerant? I kind of don't think so--most people in one religion think people in other religions are wrong. If someone is insulting and snide about it ("Mormonism is an insane cult!"), I think that sounds intolerant, but is he really that different from the first person? Is intolerance just a matter of tone?
Maybe it becomes intolerance when you suggest curtailing people's rights and privileges? If you don't think a Mormon (or a gay person or an atheist) should be president, should be a public school teacher, should get married, etc., are you being intolerant? Probably. It sort of seems like Huckabee is insinuating that Mormons are weird and thus Christians shouldn't elect Romney, which is maybe intolerant. (Though if it's intolerant, it's no more intolerant than Romney's and many others' insinuations about non-believers.)
I'm not making any arguments here, just spewing random thoughts.
I have no qualms about the definition of "bigot," I was only wondering what Huckabee did that cause you to think he's a bigot. I haven't really been following the republican race very closely, so I'm genuinely curious what he said. I saw him on the daily show a few years ago when he was promoting his weight-loss book, so I've always kind of liked him. But if he's pandering to bigots, then I'm not going to like him very much any more.
Post a Comment