Ann Romney Reflecting on Motherhood

Every mother is told at the grocery store by a well-meaning older woman, “Enjoy these years.  They are fleeting.” Usually the younger mom has to scrape the gum off her face, stuff the toddler back into the grocery cart, and dodge the grapes that the youngest might be flailing from an unknown location, to muster out a “Thanks. I’ll keep that in mind.”

But now that my kids are thirteen, eleven, and four, I think I’m beginning to really understand what they’re talking about.  At dinner, every time I set out five plates, it warms my heart.  (Okay, not every time.  But close to it.)

That’s why I was intrigued to hear Ann Romney talk about a similar sensation, with her five boys.  (Make that six?)

 

You might also enjoy:

Jon Stewart Discusses Rick Santorum’s Future

How does Tim Tebow Do Easter?

What is up with this Easter sign?

Love, Marriage, Baby Carriage, Cancer?

If You’re an Evangelical, You Should be Outraged at MSNBC

Conservative Christian Parents Finally Say No to “The Bachelor”


 

A Poignant Moment for Me

 

My daughter Naomi didn’t begin life with many advantages. She was born in one of the poorest countries and was one of it’s most destitute members. She was as starved as one can be and still survive, weighing only 12 pounds as a two year old toddler. When we picked her up from the orphanage, she didn’t even own the clothes on her back.

But two years after her adoption, there she was… eating bacon wrapped scallop hors d’oeuvres and – I firmly believe — jumping into the arms of the next President of the United States.

America, the land of opportunity!

You might also enjoy:

Jon Stewart Discusses Rick Santorum’s Future

What is up with this Easter sign?

Love, Marriage, Baby Carriage, Cancer?

If You’re an Evangelical, You Should be Outraged at MSNBC

Conservative Christian Parents Finally Say No to “The Bachelor”

 

Jon Stewart Discusses Rick Santorum’s Plans Going Forward

You might also enjoy:

What is up with this Easter sign?

Love, Marriage, Baby Carriage, Cancer?

If You’re an Evangelical, You Should be Outraged at MSNBC

Conservative Christian Parents Finally Say No to “The Bachelor”

 

If You’re An Evangelical Who Doesn’t Like Mormons, You Should Still Be Outraged At This

Buckle your seat belts, evangelical friends. Noah Glyn points out that the mainstream media is suddenly very interested in religion. Last night, here’s some interesting footage from MSNBC. Noah writes:

MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell attacked Mitt Romney, Mormonism, and Joseph Smith. According to O’Donnell, Smith only created Mormonism to justify his lax sexual mores.

Watch the clip. And apparently, O’Donnell’s done it before. This second clip, apparently filmed after Gov. Romney’s excellent “Faith in America” speech, is from The McLaughlin Group in 2007. Notice that when O’Donnell is asked if he’s a Christian, he doesn’t respond and instead scathingly refers to Mormonism a “racist” and a “pro-slavery” religion.

But before you Christians start feeling smug about Mormonism finally getting its due, take a moment to consider what you’re doing. As Charles wrote once after the Washington Post ridiculed Michele Bachmann:

“… the mainstream media and the left – whoops, I repeat myself – see no difference between what many evangelicals regard as the Bible’s truth and the teachings of Mormonism. If we support the idea that you can paint some ‘conservative’ faith communities as simply beyond the pale, they’ll do the same to us before we even get out the first five words of our explanation of submission or sin offerings. That’s what they’re trying to do right now to Rep. Bachmann, and when we attack Mormons as too kooky to be president, we aid and abet them–not because there really is no difference between our beliefs and theirs, but because the soundbite war in the midst of a presidential campaign isn’t the right place to have that conversation.”

As more evangelicals are coming around to support Gov. Romney as the “ABO” candidate but still have hesitation about his religion, it bears repeating.

You do not have to hold hands with Mormons, sing kumbayah, and adapt a “we’re all the same” mentality to support Gov. Romney for President. You just don’t. You can maintain that they are wrong theologically. (Guess what? They think you’re wrong too, or they’d be Baptist.) However, here’s the part you must not miss.

If you are an evangelical who doesn’t like Mormons, then it turns out you’ve got a lot in common with Democrats. David unpacked this before pretty well:

At Commentary, Jonathan Tobin breaks down a recent Gallup Poll showing that 22 percent of Americans won’t vote for a Mormon:

Still, in an era when religious pluralism is an unquestioned element of American culture, it is somewhat baffling that Mormons remain the object of hate. Some may put it down to the rigid beliefs of conservative evangelicals who think Mormons are not Christians, but considering the rude treatment the Mormons have gotten on both Broadway and HBO, it must be considered that some sophisticated liberals may be among the prejudiced 22 percent Gallup has discovered. Indeed, the survey says 27 percent of Democrats said they would not vote for a Mormon as opposed to only 18 percent of Republicans and 19 percent of Independents. All of which goes to show when it comes to religious bias, so-called liberals may turn out to be less tolerant than conservatives.

This is unquestionably true. Secular leftists are often quite religious in their zeal to attack traditional values, and I’d say that they have Mormons in their crosshairs in large part because they’re quite effective in defending our culture. After all, there’s only 6 million Mormons in America, yet the media Left — from HBO to PBS to Broadway — has spent much of the last two election cycles flailing away at the LDS church.

 

 

 

 

 

In other words, the secular Left hates Mormons because they see the LDS church as a part of the same Judeo-Christian tradition we belong to; the same Judeo-Christian tradition they so despise. Noah rightly suggests on NRO not holding your breath for MSNBC’s O’Donnell to condemn any Democrats who profess Mormonism (like Harry Reid).

So what does this mean? It means that Republican people of faith are all in this together. So let’s lock arms… not to sing kumbayah in some sort of ecumenical fireside sing-a-long.

Rather, we need to lock arms as we walk, step-by-step together to reclaim our party, our culture, and The White House.

You might also enjoy:

This Easter, Don’t Settle for Bunnies and Cigarette Smoke

Love, Marriage, Baby Carriage, Cancer?

Conservative Christian Parents Finally Say No to “The Bachelor”

Rick Santorum’s Pro-Choice Past

On Tuesday morning, Rick Santorum’s spokesman Hogan Gidley was interviewed by MSNBC.  He said something that we’ve all gotten quite used to on the campaign trail – yet another slam against Gov. Romney for becoming pro-life.  In extolling his own candidate, he said:

“I mean, that’s who he is,” Gidley said. “He doesn’t have to tack to the right on social issues like Mitt Romney because he actually firmly believes those things.”

However, this morning, I came across this interesting Huffington Post article which shows that Santorum apparently was pro-choice until he ran for public office:

In a December 1995 Philadelphia Magazine article — which the Huffington Post pulled from Temple University archives — Santorum conceded that he “was basically pro-choice all my life, until I ran for Congress… But it had never been something I thought about.” Asked why he changed his mind, he said that he “sat down and read the literature. Scientific literature,” only to correct himself and note that religion was a part of it too.

So why does this matter?  Aren’t we glad when people change their minds?  Of course!  We have maintained for years that pro-lifers should be thrilled when we win converts from the pro-abortion mindset.  Is that why we’re having conversations across the country?  To convince people to change?  So why, when people do actually change their minds, do we wag our finger at them and say, “Well, that took you long enough.”

In other words, Santorum’s pride and arrogance towards Gov. Romney – a man much more qualified to run this country – is unjustified and offensive. You didn’t see this contempt towards Fred Thompson (who ran as a pro-choice candidate in 1994 in Tennessee) and you didn’t even see it towards Rick Perry (who endorsed the ONLY pro-choice candidate in 2008).

Gov. Romney had a pro-life conversion as did a lot of candidates – including Sen. Santorum. Let’s retire the condescension and be thankful that our message of life is resonating.

See also: Santorum is Running for Pastor-in-Chief

Santorum the Stingy?

When Rick Santorum released his income taxes, one thing became clear.

He gave only 2.2% of the more than $3.6 million in total income he earned since leaving the Senate.  Mark DeMoss is incredulous:

At best it shows political bad judgment and at worst it shows a lack of personal commitment to a principle that religious conservatives and political conservatives believe in, which is being generous with our money.”

“And so I just think it’s a mistake. And look, Santorum and (Newt) Gingrich, these two candidates, they’re not the first to appear on the low end of this spectrum. Every four years we see it. And im always surprised. I am always surprised that someone running for president or who actually becomes president doesn’t have a record of a higher percentage of giving.”

DeMoss stressed that he’s not brought up the topic of Santorum and Gingrich’s charitable giving with Romney headquarters. In his own life, DeMoss said he gives away 20 percent of his family income to charitable causes.

“This is just something I feel strongly about myself,” he said. “We’ve been blessed. I’ve been very fortunate in my life. And I’m not running for anything. But if I were running I’d make sure that number stayed up there because I think it looks good.”

For comparison,

Santorum gave just over 2 percent of his income to charity over the four years covered in the returns he released, reaching its lowest percentage in 2010 at 1.76 percent. For the same year, Romney gave 13.8 percent of his income to charity, and President Obama donated 14.2 percent. (Newt Gingrich, for comparison, gave away 2.6 percent)

Going Positive on Mitt and Negative on Newt

I’ve slowed down slightly on posting, but that doesn’t mean I’ve slowed down on writing.  Today in the Washington Post, Jordan Sekulow, Matt Clark, and I make the positive case that conservative Christians and Tea Partiers are moving to Mitt:

Buried in the exit polls from Romney’s more than 15 point win over Newt Gingrich is the fact that Romney won Protestants, Catholics, and virtually tied among evangelicals. Tea Partiers too broke for Romney.

With this, Romney has won the conservative Christian vote in half of the primary contests so far This critical group makes up a plurality of the Republican primary vote in Florida, over 40 percent.

There are several key factors that have led conservative Christians to rally around Romney.  First, Romney stands for the values that evangelicals and social conservatives hold dear.  He is strongly pro-life. In addition to winning an award from a major pro-life organization in Massachusetts as governor after vetoing expanded access to the morning-after pill and expanded fetal stem-cell research, Romney pro-family, pro-life values are now touted by Florida’s pro-life advocates as well as those in other states across the country.

He has been steadfast in his defense of marriage and religious liberty.  After the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court legalized same-sex marriage by judicial fiat, then-Gov. Romney went so far as to file a lawsuit to force the Massachusetts legislature to act on a citizen-initiated marriage amendment.  His defense of religious liberty earned him the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty’s coveted “Canterbury Medal,” an award given to leaders in the fight for freedom.

Yesterday on CNN.com, I made a strongly-worded case against Newt:

Many evangelicals are angry, and rightly so. They’re angry with a president who embraces abortion rights, who restricts religious liberty and who saddles their children and grandchildren with a mountain of debt. They understand the necessity of protecting life and the imperative of financial stewardship.

But they also understand that we don’t discard our core values for the sake of political victories. Fidelity, honesty, humility and charity matter.

No one doubts that God forgives, but only God knows Newt Gingrich’s heart.  We only know his actions, and we know that he has a history of deceiving even those who are closest to him.

Three other Republican candidates are anti-abortion. Three other Republican candidates have been faithful and honest in their personal and professional lives. With honest alternatives to choose from, evangelicals will soon abandon Gingrich.

I’ve gotten several messages from people who tell me that I’m too negative on Gingrich. Yet other Republican candidates have not only advanced the right values, they live them as well.  The values that Gingrich has lived have on many occasions been hypocritical and reprehensible, and I’m quite puzzled at the insistence of people who have never met him and will never meet him that he’s unquestionably sincere in his regrets.  You have no way of knowing that and many reasons not to trust him.

I have good friends who support Rick Santorum, and I understand why.  He’s a hero of the pro-life movement, a man with an exemplary personal reputation, and a person who is living the values we hold dear.  I simply don’t think he’s best-equipped to handle the economic crisis we face.  Mitt Romney is also a man with an exemplary personal reputation and is living the values we hold dear.  Why are so many people taking such a massive risk with Newt Gingrich?  Could it be that he channels the anger they feel and that anger is clouding their good judgment?

Why Newt’s Answer Was Wrong

Everyone says he “knocked it out of the ballpark.”  Really?

Evangelicals for Mitt: The Full Page Ad

With the South Carolina primary reaching levels of near-insanity, Nancy and I surveyed this scene and said, “This primary contesting is missing just one thing: A full-page ad from the co-founders of Evangelicals for Mitt.”

With the primary two days away — and with our new book out — we wanted to let South Carolinians know they could read the true story of Mitt and Ann’s faithfulness and integrity.  We took bought a full-page ad for our book in South Carolina’s largest-circulation newspaper.  This ad runs tomorrow, the day before the primary.  Tell us what you think.  (And buy the book here!)

 

Evangelicals for Mitt: The Book

Over the weekend, a group of evangelicals voted to endorse Rick Santorum over Newt Gingrich — without even seriously considering Mitt Romney.  These Christians apparently considered a even a thrice-divorced, ethically-challenged former Speaker of the House preferable to once-married, unquestionably ethical former governor.  The public justification for their vote was a quest to find a “true conservative” alternative to a man who is pro-life, pro-free market, and stands strong on national security.  Their “true conservative” alternative (Senator Santorum) is certainly an honorable man and a fine conservative leader, but it’s a stretch to claim he’s more conservative than Mitt.

By sheer coincidence (not really), Nancy and I are today releasing a Kindle book that is designed to directly and succinctly make the evangelical case for Mitt.  Called Why Evangelicals Should Support Mitt Romney (And Feel Good about It!), the book both tells a story and makes an argument.

Beginning with the fall of 2005 when I first mentioned Mitt to Nancy, the book describes her initial resistance and deals with the key arguments about Mitt.  The chapters examine all the major issues, including:

-Evangelical objections to voting for Mormons;

-Mitt’s pro-life and pro-family record as Governor of Massachusetts;

-The truth about Romneycare and its differences from Obamacare.

-Mitt’s record of engineering economic turnarounds in the private and public sectors.

-Mitt’s commitment to national defense and his understanding of the jihadist threat.

Crucially, the book closes with personal stories from Nancy describing the Mitt and Ann we know — their warmth, their character, and their help to friends in need.

Buy this book.  It’s cheap ($2.99), it’s a quick read, and it tells the truth about Mitt Romney.

In the coming days and weeks, we’ll be advertising this book far and wide.  Our primaries are moving South, and millions of evangelicals will be taking a closer look Mitt.  We’re convinced they’ll like what they see.