Romney, Looking Back

Mitt Romney at least gave two notable speeches, "Faith in America" and his withdrawal speech. That's two more notable speeches than any other candidate has produced thus far, and he'll undoubtedly get to make a prime-time speech at the convention as well. Romney's withdrawal seems to have spurred better commentary looking back than his candidacy did when live and kicking, for example "Romney, Mormons, and me" (Boston Globe), "Romney Bid Was a Crucible for Mormons" (AP), and several posts at Article VI (linking to the same articles I'm linking to and trying to find meaning for A6 without Romney in the race).

The most visible story is on today's front page of the Wall Street Journal, "Mormons Dismayed by Harsh Spotlight." It's just full of interesting observations and quotes. Here are a few of them, with my comments.

"Mitt Romney's campaign for the presidency brought more attention to the Mormon Church than it has had in years. What the church discovered was not heartening." Yes, I think many people both in and out of the Church were surprised by the persistence and grittiness of remarks directed not so much at Romney the candidate as at LDS doctrines and practices. The sort of commentary that would fall under the label "bigotry" if directed at other denominations was deemed fair comment when directed at the LDS Church. My point is that six months ago no one really expected that sort of discourse to be part of the mainstream media discussion.

Underscoring that point is this quote in the article from Armand Mauss, an LDS sociologist: "I don't think that any of us had any idea how much anti-Mormon stuff was out there. The Romney campaign has given the church a wake-up call. There is the equivalent of anti-Semitism still out there."

The writer interviewed Elder Ballard, who is quoted in this interesting paragraph:

That same month, M. Russell Ballard, one of the church's 12 apostles, or governors, urged students at a graduation at Church-owned Brigham Young University to use the Internet and "new media" to defend the faith. At least 150 new Mormon sites were created and registered with the site mormon-blogs.com. "People were haranguing us on the Internet," Mr. Ballard said in an interview. "I just felt we needed to unleash our own people."

Commenting on why Romney's candidacy was so exciting to many Mormons, LDS law prof Nate Oman is quoted as saying, "There's a member of the tribe that's up there. What happens to him is a test of whether or not our tribe gets included in the political universe." I think the fact that Romney was a serious candidate who received millions of votes and garnered a couple of hundred delegates means that we *are* in the presidential political universe in some sense.

At the same time, it's worth reminding everyone that that the vote for the presidency is our ONLY national election. Every other elected official represents a state or a district. Different informal rules apply to a national election. Politicians who are successful and respected in their states and in Congress often fail spectacularly when they take the national stage as presidential candidates. Romney and Mormonism are not unique in not playing well nationally — and Romney actually played pretty well, although Mormonism didn't. That might be different in 30 years. Might not. It certainly won't be different in four years. Romney 2012 won't happen. Personally, I think he'd make a fine Treasury Secretary. Until the IOC President spot opens up, that is.

Last quote, Armand Mauss again: "There will be a long-term consequence in the Mormon church. I think there is going to be a wholesale reconsideration with how Mormons should deal with the latent and overt anti-Mormon propaganda. I don't think the Mormons are ever again going to sorrowfully turn away and close the door and just keep out of the fray." I agree. One can debate whether all of the media attention directed at the LDS Church over the last year has been, on balance, beneficial or harmful to the image of the LDS Church, but things will never be quite the same. And this election cycle still has ten more months to run!

Comments

[Mike L. (fka Horebite)]

I think the withdrawl speach link is wrong. It should be http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1966721/posts. I didn't realize it was wrong until I got through the whole speech from last year (I kept wondering why he kept saying "If I'm president...", and thought it was a nice touch to leave the door open for 2012, or perhaps a way to say, "Here's what you could have had...")

[Mike L. (fka Horebite)]

Sorry, my link was McCain's speech. Here's the real link: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1966672/posts

[Mike L. (fka Horebite)]

Wow, I'm really messing up my links. It's there somewhere...

[Christopher]

That's two more notable speeches than any other candidate has produced thus far

One could counter that Barack Obama has made at least two notable speeches this year. His victory speeches in Iowa and South Carolina have received considerable praise and noteriety.

[Bill]

As did his speech on MLK day. Obama's speeches have been viewed on Youtube far more than those of any other candidate.

[Kim Estrada]

I am not LDS. I read the piece in the WSJ this morning and I was very upset by some of the bigoted things that have been said and are being said about Mormons. I apologize for their ignorance. My encounters with LDS members have always been positive including one life long friend who is my anchor. I was saddened to see Mr. Romney withdraw. Kim

[Mark D.]

Obama's Iowa and South Carolina speeches are fine victory speeches, but they are not remotely as substantial as the Romney speeches mentioned. Even Obama's speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention is rather on the fluffy side of the spectrum.

[Dave]

Thanks, Mike L., redirected my link to a different site that actually points to Romney's 2008 speech to CPAC (the withdrawal speech).

Thanks for the thought, Kim.

Obama has nice delivery and can hold an audience. I'm not sure he has made the sort of keynote speech yet that scores points for content. He'll have that chance at some point and will probably produce, he just hasn't had the occasion yet for a noteworthy speech. At least that I've seen or heard, but I'm no political junkie.

[Carlos]

It is sad to hear people make negative comments with respect to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Until Mitt Romney declared his candidancy for the Presidency of the United States, not much was said on the topic of "Mormons" outside of "Donny and Marie". But it has been truly disappointing and hurtful to hear some of the outright ridiculous things that have gone over the airwaves. And this is just but a small sample of what it must have been like in the days of Joseph Smith--when he faithfully preached the word of God and faced the constant harrassing and persecution that has been documented. It really strengthens my testimony of the great man that he was and the determination he displayed in following the Lord's counsel and instructions during those turbulent times when the church was in its infancy.

All of these negative comments by the so called "experts" of christianity, make me laugh at the idea that they profess to be people of tolerance. Heck, if this is "tolerance", I would hate to see what "intolerance" is like. The fact remains that society has a long way to go when it comes to accepting something that is not part of the norm. If people would take the time to really understand what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is all about, they would be amazed at all the wonderful things this church does for the world. Suffice it to say, ignorance is alive and well.

Well, what more can one say or do but to share the testimony I have about the Church. I have never been more proud to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. All the nay sayers may laugh at us, make negative and disparaging comments all they want. But just remember one thing; Our Leader, Our Brother, Our Friend, Our Savior, even Our God, JESUS CHRIST, was ridiculed, whipped, spit upon, brutalized like no other, and even crucified!! And all because he loves us so!

I stand tall and proud to be a "Mormon" today and anyday! The way of the Lord is "straight and narrow" but filled with joy and peace!

And I say these things in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen!

[Tom]

This quote from Mauss surprised me: "I don't think that any of us had any idea how much anti-Mormon stuff was out there."

I knew how much anti-Mormon stuff there was out there. I think it's probably a by-product of spending a lot of time talking and reading about religion online. None of the vitriol surprised me. I actually thought the Romney moment could have been worse than it was.

What did surprise me was that there were a lot of people sticking up for us in the face of the Lawrence O'Donnells and Mike Huckabee's.

[Wayne Watkins]

I am not a Mormon but would love to offer some advice. I heard Utah is going to vote Democrat because they feel that they have been discriminated against? Personaly I heard some comments about the church some good some bad. I do not believe they played a factor in this election. Mitt Romney ran many thousands of dollars worth of attack ads against the other canidates in a way he glued them together.The one thing that the other canidates had in common was they were all smeared by one. The other canidates teamed up on Mitt for that reason. Secondly Mitt's Flip on abortion for that reason he will never get the Evangelical vote sorry but it is true they will not vote for him for that reason not because he is Mormon. Thirdly I believe your cronyism has hurt your canidate also. I own a business and I like many others love the American Way of free enterprise. Mormons are all upset because they feel that they have been discriminated against but is this not what you do to us? Your cronyism and networks have made it so we can't compete.I have many Mormon friends and they are good people but I think you should look at these issues. I also want to say if Utah does back a democrat that will be the most selfish act I have ever seen think of the service men and women in Iraq. This will tell them that their sacrifice meant nothing to you Sincerely Wayne Watkins

[Ann]

As a Democrat, I have nothing but respect and admiration for the men and women of our armed forces, sent to Iraq based on trumped up evidence to fight an impotent enemy. The war in Iraq didn't fight terrorism, it bred terrorists. This is not the fault of our soldiers, but of their short-sighted commander-in-chief and his advisors.

Our soldiers did their duty honorably. They deserve and have our gratitude. Painting Democrats as "not supporting the troops" and "on the side of the terrorists" is a lie, one that does not become true with repetition.

Back on the topic of Mitt, that crack about helping the terrorists if Clinton or Obama win the election really ticked me off. I'm just sayin'.

[Guy Murray]

Ann, While Bro. Mitt may be part of the community of Saints . . .at the end of the day he is also a politician, and will say or do silly things if he thinks it will give him a political advantage. This was, in my view, the inherent weakness of his campaign. Romney was and is a manager. Obama, is a leader.

There is a difference.

[Matt W.]

two things awesome about Mitt Romney.

1. The missionaries here in San Antonio have had people come out to them while tracting showing them their Mitt Romney bumper stickers and talk nicely to them. That's not normal.

2. The Radio stations here have had all day discussions about how Mormons are great people since Romney dropped out and how they think it is unfair how the anti-mormons have treated Romney.

[Naismith]

"two more notable speeches than any other candidate "??

I'm stunned that anyone could think Mitt's fear-mongering suspension speech was more "notable" than Obama's New Hampshire concession speech or South Carolina victory oration. In New Hampshire, although he acknowledged and congratulated the Clinton victory, it was a wonderful statement of his (and my!) beliefs.

I go to bed early (early morning seminary) and missed it live, but when everyone was talking about the YES WE CAN video on YouTube, I wanted to go back and see the original.

Nobody has been excited enough to make a music video out of any of Romney's speeches.

There are a lot of good things that can be said about the Romney candidacy, but I don't think he gets the highest marks for "notable speeches" among all the candidates. Republican candidates, maybe so.

But Obama is doing some amazing things with rhetoric and inspiration. Especially interesting since his speech writer is a 26-year-old white kid.

[Dave]

Naismith, I'm sure Obama can deliver, he just hasn't had a defining moment yet. Romney has had two. The only other big opportunity so far was McCain's speech at CPAC, which generated boos at one point.

I updated the first paragraph to add links to a couple of other stories. And just the other day I noticed how the heads on the banner at A6 have been fading as candidates dropped out. Very slick.

[Seth R.]

Wayne, a few things,

1. I think the talk of Utah voting democrat is mostly just slightly liberal LDS bloggers fantasizing about what they'd like to see.

2. Yes, such an act would be selfish. But I also think it would be appropriate.

3. As for your comments on the war... I'm not willing to throw away more money, resources and lives on a bad job just so you and some of our hypothetical men in uniform can feel like it wasn't all a waste of time. Build your self-esteem on your own dollar.

[DW]

Seth R,

Certainly there is some liberal fantasy involved in Utah voting Democrat. However, with Obama, it is not completely fantasy. The Utah exit polls showed McCain winning a hypothetical McCain-Obama matchup by just 10 points: 55-45 percent. This is very remarkable in a state like Utah. Now, I would argue that between now and November, assuming we have a McCain-Obama matchup, that this percentage gets closer to even, because as more Mormons (and other Utahns) see that their friends are rooting for Obama, more will see it as a possibility and do so. Still a long shot, but not completely far-fetched.

Of course, if something like this happens, you will definitely see a right-wing backlash which will use coercive scare tactics to frighten some Mormons into voting for the Republican. Weapon #1: abortion. Weapon #2: terrorism. (Or perhaps vice-versa.) Both of these weapons are, in my opinion, the best ways that the Republican party retains voters. How else can they get people to support a party that is ultimately about keeping the wealthy in power at all costs? The less that Mormons refuse to be ruled by fear, the more likely that they will rally around a Democrat. This possibility is perhaps more likely because of the failed Bush administration.

On that note, everyone, see my blog post for why I think Mormons should consider backing Obama: denniswendt.blogspot.com/2008/02/why-mormons-should-back-obama.html

[Wayne Watkins]

I am just giving you my opinion you can take it or leave it. Fact of the matter is if you agree or disagree with the effort in Iraq many lives have been sacrificed.Both Democrats say they will pull troops out immediately.The war is pretty much over for the most part. I know this because I have a friend from Iraq his name is Gnamen Algarway. I know I can't pronounce it either he now owns a mini market in Phoenix,Az. Anyways he has family still in Iraq and speaks to them daily.He is very grateful to America and our service men and women.He will go back to Iraq soon to visit.If you believe this war was wrong I ask you to talk to him.His mini market is MJ mini market on hatcher rd in Phoenix,Az.If you live in the area stop in have a few words with him.If you disagree with the war you might want to tell him that his people are not worthy of freedom. Or that Bush made up evidence I don't know how he got Al Gore And Bill Clinton to say the same thing many years prior but he made it up.

[Wayne Watkins]

I am sure you have all heard a saying (The Course of Wisdom is the Course of Obedience) I am sure this could be true if you are not following an imbecile. I kind of like the saying (What Comes Around Goes Around) this tells me to treat all people with respect.

[Seth R.]

Wayne, one statement and then I'll leave off this threadjack. Next time you meet a refugee from Zimbabwe, try explaining to him why his people aren't worthy of freedom and why the US military is unwilling to invade and give it to him. Then go and talk to political asylum seekers from Uzbekistan or Kazakhstan. And then go and talk to a few Burmese refugees. Then Congo, then Sudan, then the Chechens. It goes on.

Whether the Iraqi people "deserve freedom" is utterly beside the point.

[Jiim Cobabe]

I have been trying to put my finger on why Armand Mauss' comments bothered me.

I must say that it seems a peculiar naivte to assert that anti-Mormon bigotry comes as any surprise to the Church. I doubt if any collective group in the world is more sensitive to public sentiment, especially of the antagonistic sort.

I also find the comment about "wholesale reconsideration" to be passing odd. From where I sit, such things are constantly being re-evaluated, by the Church, and by Church members.

While I doubt that his bit of a sound-bite is a perfect precise, in all, Mauss' comment left me with the impression that in particular, one who has sorrowfully turned away and pretended not to notice anti-Mormon bigotry is Mauss himself.

[Wayne Watkins]

I have to comment on the Zimbabwe comment. The United States will always fight for what is right unfortunatly we can't be everywhere at once.It seems to me since the middle east has the most resources=money=ability to do us harm this became our first priority.The people of Iraq are very greatful to us. If you do not believe me go talk to a few of them.Once they establish a functioning government they will become a very strong Ally.I do not know where Zimbabwe or countrys like Sudan are on list of importance. Like I said it is very unfortunate we can't be everywhere and there is a pecking order.

[Dave]

Wayne, I'm hoping there isn't an itemized list of countries the US will intervene in after we're done with Iraq. I'm not categorically opposed to intervention, but we aren't the world's policeman.

Jim, Armand Mauss is not the only one surprised at the amount and tone of criticism of LDS beliefs and practices that Romney's candidacy touched off. I've seen it from many different commentators. Elder Ballard's comments about "unleasing our own people" also suggest LDS leaders were a little surprised at amount of public criticism. They had the Newsroom at LDS.org up and running just in time.

[Wayne Watkins]

We may not be the world's police does that meen we turn our back on Evil or wrong doing. Or do we become the world leader that we should be? If you can't see it from your back yard does not make it right.

[Wayne Watkins]

Personally part of the problem with these third world dictators is no one has held them accountable.

[Dave]

Wayne, in the real world, each country is sovereign within its own borders, and "accountability" is rendered to whoever or whatever institution claims and exercises the sovereign power within that country. This is the case at least until we have a World Dictator or Global Federation that exercises global sovereignty — which may not be an improvement over the status quo.

Only when Country A commits an act of war or its equivalent against Country B is that second country justified in intervening within Country A's borders. Lately, crimes against humanity are often asserted as sufficient justification as well, but that's an awfully broad and ambiguous category. You can't just cry "Evil!" and send in the Marines.

[Wayne Watkins]

So basically Hitler had the right to extinguish the jews right on.What if the next president decides to extinguish another Religion? Right is right wrong is wrong hopefully this country will always stand on mankinds side. Borders or not.

[Dave]

Wayne, I'm a little offended you would read such an immoral position into my remarks. I think you've sort of left earth orbit on this topic. But thanks for dropping by and sharing your thoughts.

[john f.]

Dave,

GWB is a methodist so his invasions are Good.

[Christopher]

Jim Cobabe-

I doubt if any collective group in the world is more sensitive to public sentiment, especially of the antagonistic sort.

In American alone, the Jews, Black Americans, and Native American Indians come to mind as groups that are perhaps "more sensitive to public sentiment" than the Mormons (and rightfully so).

[Whitney Johnson]

Thank you for the mention of my Boston Globe op-ed piece "Romney, Mormons and Me."

You may find it interesting that I was initially reluctant to submit this piece, but was encourage by Elder Ballard's call to "join the conversation." Your kind mention further reinforces my decision.

Separately, glad to see you've highlighted Stephen Prothero's book; looks like an interesting scholar to watch.

My best,

Whitney Johnson
www.whitneyjohnson.com