Romney: Empty Suit Pandering

It is most unfortunate for The Lion that Willard ‘The Mitten’ Romney just had to get up and shoot off his mouth for some twenty minutes yesterday, because frankly The Lion is still ill. Nonetheless, The Lion does feel an obligation to pursue the little twit as he panders and hypocritizes his way through the electorate. The Lion will make the sacrifice of time and energy, seeking to defend true liberty and genuine godlessness in America by wading through the treacle of a Romney speech.

Be warned that this piece goes on and on. If The Lion, ill, feverish, weakened, must suffer through reading Romney, he feels it only fair to similarly torture his readers, though hopefully with more wit, intelligence, and panache.

Rather than summarize the lengthy balderdash that Willard presented yesterday, The Lion here includes the entire speech, from the Romney campaign website, and comments it on the fly.

But before doing so, The Lion would note the following remark by Willard on November 17, in Las Vegas, at a $100 a person fundraiser. In answer to a question about whether he would include a qualified Muslim in his cabinet, little Willard said:

“Based on the numbers of American Muslims who live in our population, I cannot see that a cabinet position would be justified. But of course, I would imagine that Muslim advisers could serve at lower levels of my administration.”

Keep that in mind.

The Speech was given at the Daddy Bush library down in Texas. One might suspect that Daddy Bush has been taken in by the huckster, as DB was never the brightest bulb to ride in a Presidential limousine. Or perhaps DB plans to adopt The Mitten to make up for the disappointment of the psychopath now skulking about the White House. The Lion cannot always fathom the motives of the rich and the stupid.

The Speech and The Lion:

“Thank you, Mr. President, for your kind introduction.

It would be fair to ask why The Mitten was given free airtime to make a political speech that was frankly of little import other than to allow Willard to pander nationally to right-wing evangelicals and Christian conservatives. Will the other candidates get free air time to pander as they will, or does little Willard have an exclusive arrangement with CNN? Perhaps such largesse by the network is available only to the rich and the smug?

“It is an honor to be here today. This is an inspiring place because of you and the First Lady and because of the film exhibited across the way in the Presidential library. For those who have not seen it, it shows the President as a young pilot, shot down during the Second World War, being rescued from his life-raft by the crew of an American submarine. It is a moving reminder that when America has faced challenge and peril, Americans rise to the occasion, willing to risk their very lives to defend freedom and preserve our nation. We are in your debt. Thank you, Mr. President.

Yeah, thanks George. At least you had to guts to stand up and fight in World War II. Too bad your kid got one of the gutless genes you and Barbara pumped out.

“Mr. President, your generation rose to the occasion, first to defeat Fascism and then to vanquish the Soviet Union. You left us, your children, a free and strong America. It is why we call yours the greatest generation. It is now my generation’s turn. How we respond to today’s challenges will define our generation. And it will determine what kind of America we will leave our children, and theirs.

Oops. The Mitten fails history. Daddy Bush’s generation did not vanquish the Soviet Union. Hardly. Never even fought them, except in some back alley skirmishes now and then. The USSR fell of its own weight and foolhardiness. Wasn’t Ronnie Raygun either. As for defeating Fascism, in case Willard didn’t notice, the current Republican regime is well on the way to installing a theocratic fascism here. Too bad, Daddy Bush. ‘Twas all for nought.

“America faces a new generation of challenges. Radical violent Islam seeks to destroy us. An emerging China endeavors to surpass our economic leadership. And we are troubled at home by government overspending, overuse of foreign oil, and the breakdown of the family.

Now, see, Willard, your hysteria has overcome the facts in your desperate effort to pander to everyone to the right of Dick Cheney and Pat Robertson. A few thousand terrorists aren’t going to destroy us. What, they’re going to send their fleets of ships and warplanes to invade our coasts? Hell, they don’t need armies. They have George Bush, the Republicans, and the Neocons to do the dirty work of destroying us.

As for China, hell, they can’t manufacture anything that won’t poison us or cripple our children. Of course if the Republicans hadn’t crippled the FDA and other regulatory agencies that are supposed to keep us safe from unscrupulous manufacturers everywhere, we might not have to worry about such things. Perhaps we should build more coal plants to keep up with the Chinese, too, ya think, Willard?

And government overspending? Yeah, Mitt, that’s the Republican thing. You are aware of that bogus war your leader lied us into in Iraq, aren’t you? The one that costs twelve billion dollars a month, has killed hundreds of thousands of people, and is crippling America financially.

Overuse of oil? Sure, we overuse oil. We have Republicans who refuse to lift a finger to call for conservation, for renewable energy sources, or even for peaceful resolution to differences we might have with oil producing countries in the Middle East.

Breakdown of the family? That’s a Republican priority too, Willard. Breaking down families. All over the country the number of homeless families has risen under Republican rule. And guess what, Willard, the Republican oh-so-moral abstinence only sex ed programs? Got more teenage girls knocked up now than before.

“Over the last year, we have embarked on a national debate on how best to preserve American leadership. Today, I wish to address a topic which I believe is fundamental to America’s greatness: our religious liberty. I will also offer perspectives on how my own faith would inform my Presidency, if I were elected.

Well, no, Willard, the debate is not about preserving American leadership. The debate is about getting that little sot and his friends out of the White House and regaining at least some of the credibility and respect the Republicans have completely trashed for the last six years in the world community. And the religious beliefs of so-called Christians have had a lot to do with driving this country down into the trash heap of immorality and illegality.

“There are some who may feel that religion is not a matter to be seriously considered in the context of the weighty threats that face us. If so, they are at odds with the nation’s founders, for they, when our nation faced its greatest peril, sought the blessings of the Creator. And further, they discovered the essential connection between the survival of a free land and the protection of religious freedom. In John Adams’ words: ‘We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion… Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people.’

Did religion stop the murders on 9/11? Has religion stopped the slaughter in Iraq? No, Willard, religion is at the root of the weighty threats. In fact it wouldn’t be too far fetched to say that religion lies at the root of most intra-human horrors. And it is unfortunate that Willard and his friends focus so much on protecting religious freedom that they forget that the survival of a free land requires the protection of freedom, for everyone. And that our Constitution, which the Republicans are so intent on wrecking, was made for a free people, not a religious people.

“Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone.

Oh my! What crap! Freedom does not require religion, and religion has flourished among the free and the unfree throughout history. Little Willard has made a nice little rhetorical flourish there, but it is as empty of content and intelligence as his well-groomed skull. Americans are, or were, a free people despite religion. Free people bow to no one, and certainly not to some superstitious fantasy dreamed up by fanatics who spent too much time under a hot sun.

“Given our grand tradition of religious tolerance and liberty, some wonder whether there are any questions regarding an aspiring candidate’s religion that are appropriate. I believe there are. And I will answer them today.

If we had a genuinely grand tradition of religious tolerance and liberty, you wouldn’t have to make this insipid speech, would you, Willard?

“Almost 50 years ago another candidate from Massachusetts explained that he was an American running for President, not a Catholic running for President. Like him, I am an American running for President. I do not define my candidacy by my religion. A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith.

First off, you are no John F. Kennedy. The Lion may be forgiven for stating the obvious. It’s the fever.

Second off, you aren’t even running for President, Willie. You’re running for the Republican nomination to run for President.

Third off, about that elected and rejected bit? Please see Willie’s comment on Muslims at the beginning of this unending piece. Just to be obnoxious about the point, Willard is rejecting Muslims in his cabinet because of their faith. The Lion would suppose he would reject a Muslim as a political candidate because of the Muslim’s religion.

“Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin.

We used to be able to assume that of our candidates until you religious people got hold of some political power and began to corrupt the government and shred the Constitution. No longer. And here’s Willie parading his faith, trumpeting it on national television, and asking us to believe that it will have nothing to do with his actions in office.

“As Governor, I tried to do the right as best I knew it, serving the law and answering to the Constitution. I did not confuse the particular teachings of my church with the obligations of the office and of the Constitution – and of course, I would not do so as President. I will put no doctrine of any church above the plain duties of the office and the sovereign authority of the law.

As Governor of Massachusetts, Willard wasn’t around most of the time. He was out pandering for votes to get his butt nominated into the White House. The Invisible and Immaterial Governor, that’s what he was.

And we’ve seen how Republicans respect the sovereign authority of the law. We’ve had six years of the Republican version of the rule of law. They don’t believe in it, and we’ve no reason to think Willard will either. He’s already made clear that he wants to expand America’s favorite hellhole, Guantanamo, and that he favors torture, a violation of American law, international law, and the Geneva Conventions. The Lion supposes that might be what he means when he says he won’t let his religion influence his duties, yada yada yada.

“As a young man, Lincoln described what he called America’s ‘political religion’ – the commitment to defend the rule of law and the Constitution. When I place my hand on the Bible and take the oath of office, that oath becomes my highest promise to God. If I am fortunate to become your President, I will serve no one religion, no one group, no one cause, and no one interest. A President must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States.

Promise to God? Hey, Mitten, how about you make some promises to us, to the people, to Americans, and never mind the religious delusion. And if your religion isn’t to play a part in the execution of your duties, why are you promising to a religious phantasm, your religious phantasm? That oath is to the Constitution and to the laws of the land, not to your god.

“There are some for whom these commitments are not enough. They would prefer it if I would simply distance myself from my religion, say that it is more a tradition than my personal conviction, or disavow one or another of its precepts. That I will not do. I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers – I will be true to them and to my beliefs.

Willie’s trying to have it both ways. He says on the one hand he won’t serve one religion, and now he says he’s serving his religion. What’s it gonna be, Mitten?

“Some believe that such a confession of my faith will sink my candidacy. If they are right, so be it. But I think they underestimate the American people. Americans do not respect believers of convenience. Americans tire of those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world.

Mitten, The Lion is sorry to break the news to you, but there are a good many of us out here in reality land who sincerely hope your candidacy sinks like a stone. And here you are pandering to the religious right and saying that Americans don’t respect hypocrites.

“There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church’s beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance. Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree.

Willie’s already established that he’s intolerant of Muslims. Perhaps it wouldn’t be fair to note that the Mormon religion is goofier than mainstream Christianity. A sincere case could be made that it’s based on a failed novel, which would put it in a class with Scientology, another made-up religion. Let’s be clear here. The Lion is profoundly and democratically intolerant of all religions, so he is not singling out Mormonism for its silliness. And The Lion would note that so-called religious tolerance is indeed, historically and currently, a shallow principle, given up at the drop of a suggestion that any religion lies on the spectrum between ridiculous and ludicrous. Or given up at the mere suggestion that a different religion claims to be more truthful than one’s own.

“There are some who would have a presidential candidate describe and explain his church’s distinctive doctrines. To do so would enable the very religious test the founders prohibited in the Constitution. No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith. For if he becomes President he will need the prayers of the people of all faiths.

No, it would not enable a religious test. The founders sought to prohibit enshrining religious tests in law. What America has is a religious test in public relations spin, which explains why all the candidates are out there spewing their religion all over us, like the vomitus brought on by a bad meal.

And by the way, how about those of us, and there are tens of millions of us, who accept no religion, believe in no gods, and do not pray? Perhaps in lieu of prayers we can send the President a fruit basket? Or perhaps an offering of burnt hamsters or guinea pigs, postal rates being what they are making the sending of a burnt ox or goat prohibitive?

“I believe that every faith I have encountered draws its adherents closer to God. And in every faith I have come to know, there are features I wish were in my own: I love the profound ceremony of the Catholic Mass, the approachability of God in the prayers of the Evangelicals, the tenderness of spirit among the Pentecostals, the confident independence of the Lutherans, the ancient traditions of the Jews, unchanged through the ages, and the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims. As I travel across the country and see our towns and cities, I am always moved by the many houses of worship with their steeples, all pointing to heaven, reminding us of the source of life’s blessings.

Apparently Willie’s vast experience is limited to Christians, Jews, and Muslims. How about some Hindu tenets, Willie? Or maybe something from the Buddhists? Or the animists? And what, he never met a Satanist? And how all those thousands of little Christian sects with their customized delusions and practices?

And those steeples, Willard? You’re moved by phallic symbols?

“It is important to recognize that while differences in theology exist between the churches in America, we share a common creed of moral convictions. And where the affairs of our nation are concerned, it’s usually a sound rule to focus on the latter – on the great moral principles that urge us all on a common course. Whether it was the cause of abolition, or civil rights, or the right to life itself, no movement of conscience can succeed in America that cannot speak to the convictions of religious people.

There’s a huge assumption here that only religious people can have conscience or morals. One need only point out that the vast majority of crimes, of robberies, rapes, murders and so on, have been and are committed by people who believe in god. Just like ninety percent of pedophilic crimes are committed by heterosexuals – which is most inconvenient for gay bashers, just as religious criminals are inconvenient to Willie and the Evangelicals and the rest who claim that religious people have a lock on morals and conscience.

And whose moral convictions does Willie speak of? This sect? That sect? That religion? This religion? There is no common creed, not even within the same religion. Sunnis kill Shia. Shia kill Sunnis. And if the religious element gains any more power here, the Christians will sooner or later go on a blood spree, as they have been wont to do throughout their history.

“We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong.

No, Mittsie, you are wrong. Again. Secularism is not a religion. Religions are based in the supernatural, in the irrational. Secularism is eminently rational, even to the point of including religious people who aren’t deadhead ideologues.

And separation of church and state exists to keep religious busybodies, ideologues, and fanatics from forcing their religion on the rest of us. That includes keeping sectarian nonsense like the Ten Commandments out of the public square and enforcing prayer in public schools. You want to believe the commandment doohickey, go ahead, but don’t demand that everyone accept them. You want to pray, go ahead, nobody says you can’t, certainly not the law, but you can’t force others to pray with you, you can’t drag others into your delusion. The State won’t deny you the right to practice religion, but it rightfully denies you the right to push your religion on anyone else.

“The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation ‘Under God’ and in God, we do indeed trust.

Gee, Mitten, guess that shoots your argument about the United States being some kind of religious nation from the get go, since the ‘Under God’ nonsense was only adopted in 1954. Guess the heathens were in charge before that, eh? And Willie? There’s a whole bunch of us who do not trust in supernatural fantasies like yours, nor do we trust people like you who stand up in the public square seeking approval as you pander to the fanatics.

“We should acknowledge the Creator as did the Founders – in ceremony and word. He should remain on our currency, in our pledge, in the teaching of our history, and during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places. Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our constitution rests. I will take care to separate the affairs of government from any religion, but I will not separate us from ‘the God who gave us liberty.’

That’s pathetic. The Founders did not spend a lot of time doing the equivalent of rain dances.

As for nativity scenes and menorahs, how about some Islamic displays? Some Hindu displays? Buddhist? If you’re going to let in one, you have to let them all in, all year, in all public places. Otherwise you demonstrate conclusively that all your talk about tolerance is a load of bullcrap. Which, of course, it is.

But let’s get to that last phrase. God did not give anyone liberty. You can’t even provide the smallest shred of evidence that god exists, much less that he gave out liberty.

Liberty in America was bought with the blood of people who fought despotism, religious and political. Liberty was earned, here, on earth, in blood. To say otherwise is to demean and pervert the sacrifices willingly made by men and women who died so Willie could stand up there in Texas and spew his nonsense.

And the Founders created not a religious nation, certainly not a Christian nation, but birthed a rational nation, a secular nation that protected religion but did not wrap itself in it. They tried to create a nation of laws and reason, not a nation of superstition and bigotry and ignorance. They did a pretty good job, too, until they ran into the religious freaks of today’s right and the arrogant ideologues of today’s Republican party.

“Nor would I separate us from our religious heritage. Perhaps the most important question to ask a person of faith who seeks a political office, is this: does he share these American values: the equality of human kind, the obligation to serve one another, and a steadfast commitment to liberty?

The Lion would be remiss if he failed to point out that equality, service, and liberty have nothing to do with religion. They are available to anyone who wants to practice them for any reason. They are matters of choice.

“They are not unique to any one denomination. They belong to the great moral inheritance we hold in common. They are the firm ground on which Americans of different faiths meet and stand as a nation, united.

As noted, they are not unique to religion, any religion. And once again, Willie fails to include those who believe in no god.

“We believe that every single human being is a child of God – we are all part of the human family. The conviction of the inherent and inalienable worth of every life is still the most revolutionary political proposition ever advanced. John Adams put it that we are ‘thrown into the world all equal and alike.’

No, Willard, we are not all children of god. Of any god. Again, tens of millions, yada yada yada.

As for the inherent and inalienable worth of all those lives, perhaps Willie might speak to the Iraqis being slaughtered by a Christian army led by a Christian drunkard and drug addict.

Equal and alike, eh? Seems that The Lion remembers something about people who weren’t white or pink got only two-thirds of their humanity recognized in the Constitution. Maybe John Adams and friends weren’t quite so advanced, eh? And didn’t old John preside over the Alien and Sedition Acts, an even more heinous set of laws than their modern counterparts like the Patriot Act, so beloved by Republicans.

“The consequence of our common humanity is our responsibility to one another, to our fellow Americans foremost, but also to every child of God. It is an obligation which is fulfilled by Americans every day, here and across the globe, without regard to creed or race or nationality.

And if they don’t like it we’ll just bomb them back to some preliterate age, and maybe throw in some torture, a few dozen endless years in Gitmo or some other American hellhole.

“Americans acknowledge that liberty is a gift of God, not an indulgence of government. No people in the history of the world have sacrificed as much for liberty. The lives of hundreds of thousands of America’s sons and daughters were laid down during the last century to preserve freedom, for us and for freedom loving people throughout the world. America took nothing from that Century’s terrible wars – no land from Germany or Japan or Korea; no treasure; no oath of fealty. America’s resolve in the defense of liberty has been tested time and again. It has not been found wanting, nor must it ever be. America must never falter in holding high the banner of freedom.

No, and again, no, and again no. No god, no gift. The people agree to government as a means of sustaining liberty, which is neither gift nor indulgence. Liberty is the duty of government, and if government fails its duty, then the people have the right to remove the government and replace it.

And it is the height of arrogance to claim that no people have sacrificed so much for liberty as Americans. That’s an insult to the Europeans who fought for it in Europe in two world wars, and who fought for it in Continental wars in centuries past. It’s demeaning to people like the Vietnamese, who fought for decades to remove invaders from their land, and were slaughtered by the millions by Americans. America didn’t save the world. They did fight alongside others who were fighting for their freedom. But it is utterly sickening to hear this pathetic little twit, who, like so many other Republicans, couldn’t be bothered to put on a uniform during Vietnam, to hear this clown make liberty an American product.

And America took a lot from other countries. Okinawa in Japan is practically an American province, covered with military bases. Americans are based all over the world, needlessly for the most part. Still in Germany. Still in Korea. Building permanent bases in the bloody sands of Iraq. Carving out unfair trade agreements. Supporting the destruction of third world economies through the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

The United States, while it’s done some good things, is far from an angel of liberty, far far from that. It has been found wanting over and over again. In Central America. In South America. In Asia. In the Middle East. Fortunately the world is wising up somewhat. Apparently the Mitten was too busy at Harvard learning to gouge money from the system to bother studying history.

“These American values, this great moral heritage, is shared and lived in my religion as it is in yours. I was taught in my home to honor God and love my neighbor. I saw my father march with Martin Luther King. I saw my parents provide compassionate care to others, in personal ways to people nearby, and in just as consequential ways in leading national volunteer movements. I am moved by the Lord’s words: ‘For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me…’

That’s nice, Willie. Glad you had a nice home. You are going to do something about the growing number of homeless families created by Republican policies, aren’t you?

And this Lord comment? The all powerful god? Can’t feed himself? Can’t get hold of some clothes? Is this the same guy that’s supposed to have given us liberty?

“My faith is grounded on these truths. You can witness them in Ann and my marriage and in our family. We are a long way from perfect and we have surely stumbled along the way, but our aspirations, our values, are the self-same as those from the other faiths that stand upon this common foundation. And these convictions will indeed inform my presidency.

Stumbled? Who’d you sleep with, Willie?

And how come Willie and the Christians always assume that their aspirations and values are shared by everyone? He’s already claimed, one way and another, that everyone worth knowing has religious faith, therefore they’ve all got the same values. So he must have the same values as that little religious Christian sect that shows up at the funerals of American soldiers and curses them, right? Goes both ways, Willie. You really ought to get out more.

“Today’s generations of Americans have always known religious liberty. Perhaps we forget the long and arduous path our nation’s forbearers took to achieve it. They came here from England to seek freedom of religion. But upon finding it for themselves, they at first denied it to others. Because of their diverse beliefs, Ann Hutchinson was exiled from Massachusetts Bay, a banished Roger Williams founded Rhode Island, and two centuries later, Brigham Young set out for the West. Americans were unable to accommodate their commitment to their own faith with an appreciation for the convictions of others to different faiths. In this, they were very much like those of the European nations they had left.

Well, some have known religious liberty. As long as they’re white and Christian, or if otherwise, as long as they don’t get too noisy and uppity about their beliefs. Or if they don’t believe the nonsense at all maybe they really don’t belong here. There’s a lot of that sort of anti-liberty going around, Willie, promulgated by the people you’re pandering to in this tedious speech.

“It was in Philadelphia that our founding fathers defined a revolutionary vision of liberty, grounded on self evident truths about the equality of all, and the inalienable rights with which each is endowed by his Creator.

Those rights have been shown to be not so inalienable by the Republicans under Bush, now have they? No habeas corpus. Indefinite detention. Secret and illegal wiretaps. Torture. A government of lies and deceit. Suppression of free speech.

“We cherish these sacred rights, and secure them in our Constitutional order. Foremost do we protect religious liberty, not as a matter of policy but as a matter of right. There will be no established church, and we are guaranteed the free exercise of our religion.

Since when did religious liberty become foremost? It’s right in there alongside freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom to peaceably assemble and petition for redress. There’s no primacy of religion. Interesting too that the others could thrive just fine without religion, and religion with its authoritarian soul could thrive best without the others.

“I’m not sure that we fully appreciate the profound implications of our tradition of religious liberty. I have visited many of the magnificent cathedrals in Europe. They are so inspired … so grand … so empty. Raised up over generations, long ago, so many of the cathedrals now stand as the postcard backdrop to societies just too busy or too ‘enlightened’ to venture inside and kneel in prayer. The establishment of state religions in Europe did no favor to Europe’s churches. And though you will find many people of strong faith there, the churches themselves seem to be withering away.

Actually what the Mitten fails to see is that the Europeans are considerably more advanced than the Americans. Having actually been through centuries of bloodshed and destruction and other foulnesses created by religious believers, a high percentage of them have seen through the sham of religion, and choose not to kneel before superstition and ignorance. Thus the empty, if pretty, cathedrals. Reason works out a whole hell of a lot better in the real world than the ignorance necessitated by faith.

“Infinitely worse is the other extreme, the creed of conversion by conquest: violent Jihad, murder as martyrdom… killing Christians, Jews, and Muslims with equal indifference. These radical Islamists do their preaching not by reason or example, but in the coercion of minds and the shedding of blood. We face no greater danger today than theocratic tyranny, and the boundless suffering these states and groups could inflict if given the chance.

And the American invasion of Iraq isn’t conversion by conquest and violence? Converting an ancient culture to George Bush’s version of democracy (which by the way is not a liberal American democracy) by bombing, killing, imprisoning, torturing? The Lion doubts very much whether American bombs dropped by Christians distinguish between Muslims, Jews, and Christians. And let’s not forget that old Georgie claims to be acting from Christian compassion.

“The diversity of our cultural expression, and the vibrancy of our religious dialogue, has kept America in the forefront of civilized nations even as others regard religious freedom as something to be destroyed.

Ummm, about the lack of Muslims in your cabinet, Willie?

“In such a world, we can be deeply thankful that we live in a land where reason and religion are friends and allies in the cause of liberty, joined against the evils and dangers of the day. And you can be certain of this: Any believer in religious freedom, any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me. And so it is for hundreds of millions of our countrymen: we do not insist on a single strain of religion – rather, we welcome our nation’s symphony of faith.

Never mind that religion is no friend of liberty. Never mind the hysteria over evils of the day. What about all that kneeling nonsense? Is Willard saying that anyone who doesn’t kneel and pray will be treated as his enemy? Or will be shut out from the society he lusts to run? Are those who don’t believe his religious nonsense to be denied a place in the symphony of America? Why, Willard, The Lion does declare, you’re a bigot.

“Recall the early days of the First Continental Congress in Philadelphia, during the fall of 1774. With Boston occupied by British troops, there were rumors of imminent hostilities and fears of an impending war. In this time of peril, someone suggested that they pray. But there were objections. ‘They were too divided in religious sentiments’, what with Episcopalians and Quakers, Anabaptists and Congregationalists, Presbyterians and Catholics.

“Then Sam Adams rose, and said he would hear a prayer from anyone of piety and good character, as long as they were a patriot.

“And so together they prayed, and together they fought, and together, by the grace of God … they founded this great nation.

“In that spirit, let us give thanks to the divine ‘author of liberty.’ And together, let us pray that this land may always be blessed, ‘with freedom’s holy light.’

“God bless the United States of America.””

Yeah, sure. Well, The Lion supposes good ol’ god can’t do much worse than the damned Republicans have done in the blessings they’ve crapped upon America.

As for the Mitten, The Lion suspects a goodly number of Americans have seen through his pandering, his lying, his hypocrisy, his predilection for torturing animals and humans, and that he may well be ushered off the scene, to be replaced by another great white religious hope, that oh-so-religious Huckabee fella who likes to turn rapists and killers loose upon the public.

The Lion is collecting data now.

 

Advertisements

10 Responses

  1. Wow! This commentary on Mitzi’s speech is a Herculean feat.
    Nicely done, every word of it.

    I’d urge you to be careful about your characterization of the religious right’s politics, though. The Democrats are pandering pretty strongly to those same nutballs. Let’s not smugly assume that the Constitution is threatened only by Republicans. Remember: William Jennings Bryan was a three-time Democratic nominee.

    Like

  2. True, but the Reps are the ones who have done the damage these past few years and are the ones still controlling the levers and strings, even without the Congressional majorities.

    Thanks for the compliment.

    Like

  3. Outstanding analysis. What a nauseating speech!

    While it’s true that Repugnants and Demowimps alike are pandering to religious nuts, I’m pretty sure that the Dems are basically pragmatic, realistic panderers who won’t let their “faith” impede reasoned judgment. Repugs like Romney and Huckabee are “true believers,” and consequently infinitely more frightening.

    Like

  4. chappy, you said: I’m pretty sure that the Dems are basically pragmatic, realistic panderers who won’t let their “faith” impede reasoned judgment.

    Now, you see, to me that sounds like a statement of blind faith. Because I’ve seen no evidence that it’s true for this particular field of candidates.

    Like

  5. Exterminator:
    You may be right, it may be mere wishful thinking on my part. Nevertheless, of the two parties, I think the Dems are less likely to install a theocracy. The Repubs honestly scare me.

    Like

  6. So. Does that mean you liked the speech? I couldn’t tell.

    Like

  7. Actually, as written, it was a good speech for what it intended and for the audience it sought to reach. I didn’t watch it delivered because I can’t stand the s.o.b. To an uncritical audience, the speech would be one thing. Since all intended audiences accept his premises (that god exists; that religion is good and necessary; that good people kneel before god and people who don’t are not worthy) their reactions won’t be tempered by any thought critical of religion, so they can’t really attack it intelligently.

    But once subjected to critical grumpalysis, the speech falls apart, and loses both intellectual and emotional appeal. Under the warm, shining light of ingrumptellect, Romney’s careful structure of rhetoric melts into an amorphous little puddle of poo.

    (Hmmmm, this could be fun…)

    Like

  8. I wonder how Mittler would have reacted to a comment by one of his competitors along these lines:

    “Based on the numbers of Mormons who live in our population, I cannot see that a cabinet position would be justified. But of course, I would imagine that Mormon advisers could serve at lower levels of my administration.”

    Oh, and as long as we’re talking about proportions, it’s even worse than you remembered; slaves were counted as 3/5 of a person, not 2/3, until 1868. (Technically, there were no slaves after 1865, but there was still some dithering about whether African-Americans were “free persons” for purposes of representation.)

    Of course, anyone with “the least particle of Negro blood” wasn’t considered worthy of becoming an LDS priest until 1978*, so Mittler’s actually being hypocritical with respect to even more recent and pertinent history than that!

    * They could get to Heaven, if baptized, though only as a “servant unto others” – pickin’ HIGH cotton, I guess.

    Like

  9. I remember thinking ‘was it 2/3 or 3/5’ and deciding to look it up later. Fever, you know? 🙂

    Love the comment on Mormons in the cabinet. Wish I’d thought of it at the time.

    Considered mentioning the Black thing, but thought maybe that would be piling on to the poor twit. More bad judgment on my part. Sigh. More Nyquil, please!

    Like

  10. Hey, when you put this much thought and work in to a post (when SICK no less), you deserve your Stermie! I know you are focused on the Mitten since he’s a home-boy, but I really don’t see him getting the nomination. I am content to just let the Right do their little nomination thing. Once it’s a done-deal, ANYONE they put up is going to be fresh meat for the tigers of the Atheosphere.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: