Vote Romney, Vote Fidelity
Has it already come to this? Mitt Romney told a crowd of New Hampshire supporters that, "One of the ways that you help instill, if you will, family values is by having [the] White House be a place that demonstrates family values... And, you know, I think during the last Clinton presidency, the White House did not demonstrate that in a way that was helpful to our nation's culture."
The message is clear, ladies: If you vote for Hillary Clinton, your husband will cheat on you. Also, apparently, the decline of western civilization was set off by Bill Clinton's blowjob, but there's really nothing we can do about that, now. True to form, Romney evaded the real underlying question: Whether or not he is prepared to promise that, as president, he will refrain from sleeping with your wife -- or mother. Perhaps it's best that he didn't, given his propensity for the about-face.
The resurrection of the "family values" cliché seems an odd choice for a Republican candidate at a time when more and more Americans are adjusting their definition of the term to more heavily weigh Democratic strengths like education, health care and the environment. But, that's assuming the target of Romney's rambling jab was actually a Democrat. And, we're a bit early in the game for that.
The apocalyptic Romney-Clinton showdown, should it happen, is still over a year away, so there's no need for Romney to risk alienating voters by blaming the victim for the misdeed. Or worse yet, to remind them that they're dealing with the same Republicans who've consistently let them down since the phrase entered our culture. No, as far as Clinton dalliances goes, until they drag out Bill's latest Last Call Lucy on election eve, Republican hopefuls are best off avoiding the subject altogether.
Sorry to state the obvious, but for the moment, Romney has bigger fish to fry. We have to assume at this point that Romney's real target isn't the Clintons, but rather the Giulianis. Romney's telling Republicans that he, his just-pretty-enough wife and five wholesomely hunky sons would just plain look better in the White House than the Clintons -- and more importantly, that Giuliani can make no such claim.
After all, it's a safe bet that we won't be seeing any touch football games or family picnics in Giuliani campaign ads. In fact, all Clinton has to do is say that she stuck out Bill's "imperfections" because of love for her husband, her daughter, her country and her God and suddenly she looks like parent of the year compared to Giuliani.
Just imagine, voters, the horror of a Republican White House campaign without soft lighting, tender family moments, and deep blue shadows walking solemnly down corridors. Well, maybe the last one, but the shadow will be bald. Without "family values," GOP style. It would be a sad day indeed for the GOP.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Fear is an enormously effective motivator. Just look at the post 9/11 diversion of our entire national budget to Bush and Cheney's corporations to wage never-ending war, the suspension or eradiction of the most fundamental constitutional rights of the citizens, the murder of an estimated 1.0 million Iraqis solely for the purpose of having the U.S. occupy and control their country and steal their oil. Let's not discount the role of fear in national politics.
I agree that many women will make life decisions, including voting decisions, based upon a fear of having their husbands leave them. That's because women do not earn enough money to be able to support themselves and their children, so if their husbands leave, they know their lives will be miserable. Many women use religion because of its assurances that the religious male will not stray. Ha! We know that the adultery and divorce rate among these groups is higher than in more liberal segments of society.
But many women will continue to embrace the neocon/right-wing religious world view until and unless someone offers them a safety net so that if their husbands do leave, they and their children will be okay. Our society does not help women or children, excludes women from good jobs, pays them 70% of what men earn, at most, devalues them, beats them up and murders them, tells them they are stupid and fat and ugly and too old, and ridicules and excludes them.
Is it any wonder women are afraid?
Now, using Romney's way of thinking, in the opposite direction: For the last two terms, there was more than enough family values in the White House. But, see what the family values in White House had done to the country and the world.
And, quite honestly if the President would care more about the country's values than his own family values, I wouldn't mind voting for that person. Also, if a person puts his family values way above his country's values, and try to impose that family values on the country, then we had already seen the result. And, it is not good...
Vote for Romney and you get a White House that will give new meaning to the phrase "flip floppers" and, yes, liars. You also get a White House full of able-bodied young men whose idea of public service is to get their dad elected, not serve their country in Iraq. Most importantly, you also hand the mormon church exactly what it wants: A mormon puppet in the White House to permeate our government in the Mormon agenda. I live in a Mormon community. It was founded by mormons and it's well known here that the church leaders covertly email the church's political agenda, both local and national, to its members consistently contrary to its many denials. The mormon "mission", which sends young men to foreign countries, is a recruitment mission. The mormons advocate large families so that they can take over by sheer numbers. I am also the mother of a young man who, while he was in college, once dated a young mormon woman. Her father, who was an elder in the church, actively and aggressively tried to recruit my son into the church and to renounce his non-mormon blood family. Happily for us, he saw the light and dumped her. She then got her tentacles into my son's roommate who married her. He was an only child and his family hasn't seen or heard from him in five years. They are heartbroken. So, Tiny 68300 (who posted above) pardon me but I don't need to read your "reliable" sources. I have personal experience on my side.
Anyone who wants to read a good reliable source should read "Under the Banner of Heaven: A Violent Faith" by Jon Krakauer, who is also the author of "Into the Wild", the inspiration of Sean Penn's excellent new movie.
I wouldn't call Jon Krakauer a "reliable source" in religious studies (although Into Thin Air is one of my favorite books). Your experience you related is unfortunate, but has nothing to do with Mitt Romney what sort of president he will be. All religions have rotten apples, strange histories, and require believers to have faith in the supernatural. This is true for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as well as ANY major religion. We should not descriminate based on religion, rather on what sort of presidential platform they have. When I look at Mitt's platform all I see is a continuation of rich-poor disparity, and a lacking in education, environment, healthcare. Those are the reasons that I am not planning on voting for him, not his religion.
Romney's tired family values BS really illustrates the difference between the Dems and the GOP
THe Dems hate Bush because they could never imagine themselves starting a war using doctored intelligence
And Cons hate Bill Clinton because they could never imagine getting a free BJ from a woman
that is a brilliant condesnation of the zeitgeist.
There are many reasons to not vote for Mitt Romney, but his association with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not one of them. It's obvious that neither he nor Harry Reid, nor any of the high-profile Mormon politicians checks with the Church before setting their agenda. C'mon, we're liberals, lets not discriminate because of religion. His showcase of his family just goes to show that only a small minority of Republicans are really eligible to speak of family values. Now if you want to criticize him, let's talk about his proposed "bombardment" of Iran, his calling the UN a "failure", wanting to "triple" Guantanamo, etc. He's a businessman, he'll run the country like he would a Wal'mart -- looking at the bottom line, not the individual. If he is elected, it will be Ronald Reagan all over again.
Romney defines the phrase "Empty Suit".
I see him as the eventual Repuke nominee. the reduced base of 24 percenters will go for him on looks alone. The Pukers will not vote for a cross dressing serial polygamist whose last name ends with a vowel.
This is good news for the Democrats, as beating Romney should be like shooting fish in a barrel.
What a NOB!
Why does this family values issue sound about as hollow as - with us or against us ?
Because Romney, like the other Republican candidates, simply spits out the words to get the attention of the few Republican morons who still think the Repugs believe in it. Nobody who listens to the news or surfs the web believes any of their nonsense, Democrats and Republicans alike. Romney (thankfully) is running a 2000 campaign, not a 2008 one. To run a 2008 one he'd have to talk sensibly about the economy, the war, lack of health insurance etc, things no Repub can do.
So rh654, standing by your first and only husband, forgiving him his faults, these are not 'family values'? In what way, pray?
They are, AFAIK, the prescribed way for wives to treat their wandering husbands according to the Catholic Church. Maybe Catholics aren't traditional values voters to you, huh?
On the "candidate's marriage score card", Hillary will get traction from the millions of enabling spouses who tolerate(d) extra curricular activity..
Rudy, seeing as his first of three wives was his cousin, that will likely resonate very well with the southern (cousin loving) vote.
Romney and the whole polygamy, magic underpants angle, will likely appeal to the insecure male and subservient female (you know republican women) vote.
What I worry about (and it is already happening) is that they will do to HC what Bushrovians did to Ann Richards..
It worked in Texas then, and they are sure it will work now. THAT is why they want HC to be the Democratic nominee...
The man-woman serial-marriage thing is obviously not going to work for them since all but Romney are serial-marriers. But the gay-bashing aspect is ready to go.
If HC is as smart as she seems to be, she will say now...befo
"They hold that there are more gospels than truly exist" -- "On the Gnostics" - Irenaeus.
They hold outlandish views, they hold that they are gods, that one may become like God" -- 'Against the Heresies', Tertullian.
"All of them are arrogant, all of them are wicked, all of them promise you 'gnosis'" - 'Against the heresies', Tertullian.
Does family values include multiple wives?
That's the true way of Mormon. Not even the virtuous pagans such as the Stoics, would covet and cage women with such abandon. They would have considered those who did, like Arabs and such, to be barbarians. The early Church would have been a source of scandal of shame, had it engaged in such practices, which the Hebrews had long abandoned, long before classical times. And if it had, it would have proven to the Romans and others of the classical world, just how wicked, orgiastic, impious and inhumane these 'Christian' were, just as the Emperors proclaimed them.
Let's be honest here from the front runners given cheating spouses and multiple marriages only Obama and Romney can speak about living family values.
The phrase "Family Values" while often snickered at - still has impact in some of the States that will really matter in 2008.
I think that Liberals scoff at the phrase "Family Values" at their own peril.
You just made me remember I meant to ask Hillary for a position paper on how her favorite the "Golden Rule" applies to Clintons: That do unto others as >>> does that mean (and as a liberal) that regular folk are authorized to use their state troopers to deliver Bill for personal purposes? Could you have gotten to White House without letting Bill do unto others?
This was discounted by David Brock who made up some of the Troopergate stories.
There are a lot of reasons not to want the Clintons back in the White House, but family values is not one of mine. Romney will not get much traction on this except with the repugs.
"If you vote for Hillary Clinton, your husband will cheat on you." Hmmmm... No, I think this message would definately give Hillary a boost amont white males.
Whatever happened to turn the other cheek?
Blaming Hillary for Bill's foibles? Let's hear Romney going off on his fellow Repuke CHEATERS and then watch the fur fly.
Family values. I can't believe that dog still hunts.
I'm a liberal and I still believe in family values. I thought Mr. Bill was a good president, but do I want 4 more years of the Clinton soap opera. Hell no - if the democrats run Hillary, than the republicans could get my vote with Huckabee. Romney's too smooth for me. But aren't elections all about looks? God forbid you have a brain and speak words of honesty, and not photograph well.
if you were really a "liberal" there wouyld be no way you would vote for Huckabee
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
