Found it! Mitt Romney denies first vision

[MahonriMaster]

People had challenged me in a thread a while back about my assertion that Mitt Romney denied the First Vision in a TV interview while running for President. It was removed from the news website it was originally posted on, but I finally came across it on youtube.

[Shimdidlycaptain of 100]

Mitt is just calculating everything he says to appeal to as many people as possible, and being honest about his faith wasn't going to do that. I believe it's better to be honest than to say what you think the majority of people want to hear. This video, and quite a few other things I have seen, suggests that Romney panders to the Republican party and will say/do whatever it takes to get elected.

[MahonriMaster]

which is crazy since the head of the party is a rabid anti Mormon

[Koiapecaptain of 50]

Dang it! I thought we would see him say, "Come on, we all know Joseph never saw any God or Angel."

I wouldn't exactly say that that was an actual denial but simply Romney just answering off the top of his head without much thought going into the answer.

I mean, Romney stated that Moses was the last to actually talk to God, but there is countless of other prophets in the Bible that speak to God after Moses. Moses being the most recognizable prophet, it is obvious that the main objective in his response was to make absolutely sure that voters know that he is a not a religious kook.

Just a classic example of oversensitive viewers and the exaggerated media which is why the church wisely let this just fade away.

Now, don't get me wrong, I think Mitt Romney would be the worse choice for a republican president next to Sarah Palin. And if I HAD to choose Ron Paul would get my vote by default.

Mitt Romney is just another Hilary Rodham Clinton and that is not a good thing at all.

[Koiapecaptain of 50]

which is crazy since the head of the party is a rabid anti Mormon

The problem I have is that we give all the ammunition Bill Maher needs to believe, say and prove how religious people are morons.

If we, as christians, consciously tried to be more Christ-like and follow the teachings of the scriptures and modern revelations, Bill Maher would have probably been a fabulous and revered General Authority, lol.

I can't remember how many times I act in such a terrible way in front of non-believers knowing full well that if I had been more Christ-like, I would have opened their hearts to the truthfulness of the Gospel.

I have little doubt that Bill Maher's resentment and disgust towards religion was sparked and continuously fueled by hypocrisy from Christians, including ourselves.

[pjbrowniecaptain of 1,000]

People had challenged me in a thread a while back about my assertion that Mitt Romney denied the First Vision in a TV interview while running for President. It was removed from the news website it was originally posted on, but I finally came across it on youtube.

Yeah this is also typical Vanocour anti-Mormom claptrap. He and Rod Decker like to trade places every once in awhile.

[MahonriMaster]

Yeah this is also typical Vanocour anti-Mormom claptrap. He and Rod Decker like to trade places every once in awhile.

not sure what you mean by that. Are you saying Mitt didn't say what he did?

[pjbrowniecaptain of 1,000]

Dang it! I thought we would see him say, "Come on, we all know Joseph never saw any God or Angel."

I wouldn't exactly say that that was an actual denial but simply Romney just answering off the top of his head without much thought going into the answer.

I mean, Romney stated that Moses was the last to actually talk to God, but there is countless of other prophets in the Bible that speak to God after Moses. Moses being the most recognizable prophet, it is obvious that the main objective in his response was to make absolutely sure that voters know that he is a not a religious kook.

Just a classic example of oversensitive viewers and the exaggerated media which is why the church wisely let this just fade away.

Now, don't get me wrong, I think Mitt Romney would be the worse choice for a republican president next to Sarah Palin. And if I HAD to choose Ron Paul would get my vote by default.

Mitt Romney is just another Hilary Rodham Clinton and that is not a good thing at all.

He cuts off the quote. He says since Moses and begins to add IN SOME OTHER INSTANCES, but of course that wouldn't jive with gotcha Vanocour.

[MahonriMaster]

please PJ, you are smarter than that. "Perhaps some others" he was clearly trying to imply it would never happen by implying it hasn't happened in thousands of years.

This wasn't some "gotchya" piece. The guy (Mitt) is pure slime

[lundbaekcaptain of 1,000]

I have heard a number of LDSs claim that this is faked, others say that what he did say just slipped out wrong. Some members will decline to even watch this, and go on believing in Romney as our best hope for the nation.

If Romney were invited to speak at a fireside (as was Harry Reid) in your stake, how would you respond?

I consider this an unfortunate and cowardly mistake. But he has demonstrated his disdain for or ignorance of certain constitutional and moral principles in other situations before and since, most recently stumping for Senator McCain here in Arizona. Yet I am sure that if he runs again for President most LDS voters will vote for him. He serves as a means of showing how easily many LDS voters are deceived by not doing their homework before voting.

For the benefit of people new to this forum, there at least a couple of threads devoted to discussion of Mitt Romney.

[MahonriMaster]

If Romney were invited to speak at a fireside (as was Harry Reid) in your stake, how would you respond?

I would put this onto a DVD and print out his letter to the Log Cabin Republicans stating he is a bigger supporter of Gay rights than Ted Kennedy and get it to as many people in the Stake as I could. I would also print out his statement in support of YOUTH gay pride event that "there is nothing like youth pride"

Then for those more interested I would show his support for national health care, banning guns, gays in the Boy Scouts, big government, etc

[lundbaekcaptain of 1,000]

In addition to most of my teenage years, I lived about 10 years of my adult life (voting age and above) in Massachusetts, cut my teeth in the political arena there opposing certain efforts of Ted Kennedy, and got, I think, a good understanding of what it takes to get elected to political office in MA. So when I first learned that a Mormon was governor of Massachusetts, a red flag went up for me. Even though I was then living overseas ( a mission in DK), I did some research and was disappointed but not surprised at some of the things I learned about him, including what Mahonri mentioned.

I'm sure most LDS voters would much rather have a Mormon with a successful business career in the White House, even if he is "in" with the "establishment", than a constitutionalist in the tradition of the American Founders.

Romney has a divinely mandated responsibility, as do the rest of us here, to help prepare a remnant that will ultimately restore the principles of the U.S. Constitution as approved by the Lord to our government. And because of his experience in government he is probably the best person in the Church at this time to rally Latter-day Saints and lead the charge in preparation for that time when people will want to live under the principles of the U.S. Constitution that the American Founding Fathers and the Lord intended us to live under. It is almost heartbreaking that he and other LDSs in government are still failing in this divine calling.

[LikeMember]

If Romney were invited to speak at a fireside (as was Harry Reid) in your stake, how would you respond?

I know what Wiikwajio did with his family at the meet and greet with Harry Reid.

My family stood out front of the meet and greet with signs that said: Gadianton Robbers for Harry Reid enter here.

I am not always sure what to do with LDS members. I feel talking to most LDS members is like talking to a brick wall because they would rather debate their political views then side with the gospel when dealing with political Mormon figures like Romney.

My approach now is always teach pure doctrine and then let the person receive or reject what is being taught (I try to bite my tongue and not name names too often)but always try to have the Spirit with you. That’s the key. I am at peace with that effort for now.

[Tiger04Hi, I'm new.]

I think (from the context) Romney means that as far as he knows: Moses was the last time God talked to a prophet that had direct consequence to the law of the land.

It wasn't the most clear statement, but will give Romney the benefit of the doubt. This is from someone who has given multiple interviews in the past; and saw firsthand how reporters distort the overall direction of an interview.

We are looking at a news story, about a news story.

[lundbaekcaptain of 1,000]

Granted, Mitt Romney did ot actually deny Joseph Smith's first vision. But having watched the video X number of times, I think Mitt Romney didn't have the courage to tell it like it is, as missionaries do. Most members with whom I have discussed this incident seemed anxious to excuse it. But although he might have been the best person in the Church at this time to rally Latter-day Saints and lead the charge in preparation for that time when people will want to live under the principles of the U.S. Constitution that the Lord intended us to live under, he failed badly a number of times.

[AussieOicaptain of 1,000]

I think (from the context) Romney means that as far as he knows: Moses was the last time God talked to a prophet that had direct consequence to the law of the land.

It wasn't the most clear statement, but will give Romney the benefit of the doubt. This is from someone who has given multiple interviews in the past; and saw firsthand how reporters distort the overall direction of an interview.

We are looking at a news story, about a news story.

Tiger, I know you are new, but you are not intellectually handicapped...right?

Sadly, your post comes off as though you are.

Tell me, would you give Judas the benefit of the same doubt?

If you aren't LDS then I apologise. If you are, then you know that there are certain facets of our religion doctrine that are not open to ambiguity. The first vision is one of them, It is SO overwhelmingly pivotal in our faith, that it is impossible to make an error of this kind. You simply cannot accidentally forget this, or mis-express it

the guy is a lying dirty political rabid gadianton. i take that from his voting record alone. period

[lundbaekcaptain of 1,000]

I am very hard on Mitt Romney, not for any personal reason, but because much of his political career is an example of the failure of so many Mormons to honour the commandment that American LDS voters are under to stand for moral and constitutional principles in government.

I consider it very important that as many LDSs as possible become aware of their divinely mandated obligation to defend, uphold, and abide by the principles of the Constitution of the United States that the Lord and the American Founding Fathers intended us to live under. One way for this to happen would be for Congressman Ron Paul and perhaps a couple of others I’m not so well aware of to be somehow held up as an example of loyalty to those principles. But with the general ignorance among most LDS voters of these principles and ignorance of their divinely mandated obligation to honour freedom and the Constitution, another way must be found to awaken them to their responsibility to defend, uphold, and abide by the principles of the Constitution of the United States that the Lord intended us to live under. I find that occasionally when some members learn that a prominent member of the Church is under criticism for failing to abide by these teachings of the Church, they take some interest in finding out why. And some learn of their own obligations to freedom and the Constitution in that way. I find it works with a few people.

[iamse7encaptain of 1,000]

Yeah, I remember this interview. It bugged me then - it bugs me now. I know that Romney has a strong testimony of the Church (just trust me on this). He definitely believes in the 1st Vision, but this is an example of him trying so hard not to appear like a religious kook, that he blatantly contradicts the fundamental core of our church: modern revelation. In other words, he worries so much about his image (because he wants to be President so badly), that he's willing to use political-speak to hide his true beliefs. He knows full-well that God has spoken to man past Bible times. I want to believe that he regrets this interview - my guess would be that he does - but it's indicative of the larger problem that Romney wants so badly to be president, that he's willing to be disingenuous about his true beliefs and opinions.

[lundbaekcaptain of 1,000]

I hadn’t thought of it this way before, but Romney appears to have actually lied about his true beliefs and opinions. I once told a serious lie and 30 years later the Spirit directed me to contact those to whom I lied and acknowledge what I had lied about and apologize. I wonder if Mitt will ever receive a similar commandment.

As for his forthrightness, I received the following comment by email: “As for Mitt Romney, [her] cousin was a branch president in his stake in Boston when he was stake president and his only comment was that he tells you what you want to hear.”

[LukeAir2008captain of 1,000]

[lundbaekcaptain of 1,000]

IMO the best thing Mitt Romney could do would be to somehow publicly acknowledge the error of his statement, and perhaps at the same time start promoting adherence to the principles of the U.S. Constitution that the American Founding Fathers and the Lord intended us to live under. Following is a letter that I wrote and sent to him some weeks ago. I have written him 3 times now, with no replies.


As members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, you and I, and for that matter, all adult members, are under a divinely mandated obligation to defend, uphold, and abide by the principles of the Constitution of the United States. And since the Lord put His "stamp of approval" on our Constitution in 1833, I suggest that we are responsible to the Constitution as it stood in that year, which included the Bill of Rights and the 11th and 12th Amendments.

Many laws have been passed and many programs instituted by our government that are diametrically contrary to our Constitution, especially as the Lord and the American Founding Fathers intended that it should be understood. There has been an alarming increase in the abandoning of the ideals that constitute the foundation of that Constitution
.
In April 1966, Elder Marion G. Romney, speaking in the General Priesthood meeting, included the statement "When Zion is redeemed, as it most certainly shall be, it will be redeemed under a government and by a people strictly observing those ‘just and holy principles’ of the Constitution that accord to men their God-given moral agency, including the right to private property." Elder Romney further stated his prayer "That we will develop the understanding, the desire, and the courage born of the Spirit, to eschew socialism and to support and to sustain, in the manner revealed and as interpreted by the Lord, those just and holy principles embodied in the Constitution of the United States for the protection of all flesh, in the exercise of their God-given agency."

The Mormon people have, I believe, the most serious responsibility of any people to prepare a remnant that will ultimately restore the principles of the U.S. Constitution as approved by the Lord to our government. And because of your experience in government and your knowledge of these principles, you are probably the best person in the Church at this time to rally Latter-day Saints and lead the charge in preparation for that time when people will want to live under the principles of the U.S. Constitution that the American Founding Fathers and the Lord intended us to live under. Please keep these things in mind as you proceed in your future political plans.

[mchlwisecaptain of 100]

He either doesn't understand the Gospel, or he is willing to say whatever he feels like he needs to in order to get elected - in spite of the Gospel.

I'm not sure which is worse, but those are the only two options which I see, and both disqualify him from my suppor.

[lundbaekcaptain of 1,000]

After reading the letter on another thread that Capt. Joe Ferguson sent to Senator Reid, I realized that many, many LDS voters of my acquaintance and association are aware of Harry Reid's extreme political persuasions. He is a wolf in wolf's clothing. But Mitt Romney I consider far more dangerous. It seems he is still held in high esteem by many LDS voters. Instead of championing moral and constitutional principles in government, he may well be leading members down a wrong path.

[AussieOicaptain of 1,000]

I.....

The Mormon people have, I believe, the most serious responsibility of any people to prepare a remnant that will ultimately restore the principles of the U.S. Constitution as approved by the Lord to our government. And because of your experience in government and your knowledge of these principles, you are probably the best person in the Church at this time to rally Latter-day Saints and lead the charge in preparation for that time when people will want to live under the principles of the U.S. Constitution that the American Founding Fathers and the Lord intended us to live under. Please keep these things in mind as you proceed in your future political plans.

nice letter

im sure he's just waiting for his chance in congress and politics to do the right thing

any . minute. now.

waiting

20 years

any minute now

Alma is famous because he did (listen to Abinadi and wise up and get out of there). How many others could have been like Alma but chose not to be that day...just as Mutt Romney has time and time again

How is he related to Marion G? I bet some in that family are disappointed at how nothing he has become

All the opportunity in the world, lost in compromises and pride

you own him Lundbaek.

[Obiwancaptain of 100]

People had challenged me in a thread a while back about my assertion that Mitt Romney denied the First Vision in a TV interview while running for President. It was removed from the news website it was originally posted on, but I finally came across it on youtube.

I wonder about people sometimes why they so willingly bear false witness, even when the facts clearly tell otherwise.

1. Romney specifically states "Moses and the burning Bush, and perhaps some others".
This statement doesn't at all directly deny the first vision, nor does it even imply a denial. His comment of "perhaps some others" would most certainly include the First Vision, thus in fact proclaiming it rather than denying it as claimed.

2. I find it unfortunate that a TV Station would falsely represent a person in this way. I also find it unfortunate that Mahonri whom I'm assuming is a faithful LDS would also misrepresent Romney or anyone in such a way.

I call both to repentance.

[Obiwancaptain of 100]

Dang it! I thought we would see him say, "Come on, we all know Joseph never saw any God or Angel."

I wouldn't exactly say that that was an actual denial but simply Romney just answering off the top of his head without much thought going into the answer.

While I would agree that it was off the top of his head, he was stating something most people could acknowledge and identify with, not trying to be a mormon. So, there WAS "thought" in the answer, contrary to your claim.

I mean, Romney stated that Moses was the last to actually talk to God, but there is countless of other prophets in the Bible that speak to God after Moses. Moses being the most recognizable prophet, it is obvious that the main objective in his response was to make absolutely sure that voters know that he is a not a religious kook.

It is not true at all that he said Moses was the "last" to talk to God, he said "and perhaps some others". This is far from such a claim. I am glad however that you recognized he was not trying to sound like a "religious kook".

Just a classic example of oversensitive viewers and the exaggerated media which is why the church wisely let this just fade away.

Well, you got this correct at least.

Now, don't get me wrong, I think Mitt Romney would be the worse choice for a republican president next to Sarah Palin. And if I HAD to choose Ron Paul would get my vote by default.

I strongly disagree. I think he's one of our best choices, if not the best. He has the skills and the know-how of what needs to be done to fix things. I would agree that Palin is not the best choice, being far from ready. Romney however is the best man for the current job. Ron Paul would be a good adviser, but not President. He is simply to far wrong on a few of his views. Way good yes on Constitutional things etc., but wrong on others. I would rather his son be President rather than he.

Mitt Romney is just another Hilary Rodham Clinton and that is not a good thing at all.

I find this inflammatory false. Romney is NOTHING like any Clinton. Yes, Romney may be a little stiff, but that's basically all that is wrong with him. Everything else that is supposedly so terrible about him is nothing but bearing false witness just like the above video does. Shame shame.

[MahonriMaster]

People had challenged me in a thread a while back about my assertion that Mitt Romney denied the First Vision in a TV interview while running for President. It was removed from the news website it was originally posted on, but I finally came across it on youtube.

I wonder about people sometimes why they so willingly bear false witness, even when the facts clearly tell otherwise.

1. Romney specifically states "Moses and the burning Bush, and perhaps some others".
This statement doesn't at all directly deny the first vision, nor does it even imply a denial. His comment of "perhaps some others" would most certainly include the First Vision, thus in fact proclaiming it rather than denying it as claimed.

2. I find it unfortunate that a TV Station would falsely represent a person in this way. I also find it unfortunate that Mahonri whom I'm assuming is a faithful LDS would also misrepresent Romney or anyone in such a way.

I call both to repentance.

I wonder about people sometimes why they so willingly bear false witness, even when they admit the opposite is true.

"Perhaps" is a declaration?? Really? Seriously? You are going to go there? Perhaps? Come on.

Call me to repentence? You have to be right to be able to do that with any authority.

I find it unfortunate that one of my favorite Jedi Knights would not know the definition of such a simple word.

[Mummycaptain of 1,000]

I wonder about people sometimes why they so willingly bear false witness, even when the facts clearly tell otherwise.

1. Romney specifically states "Moses and the burning Bush, and perhaps some others".
This statement doesn't at all directly deny the first vision, nor does it even imply a denial. His comment of "perhaps some others" would most certainly include the First Vision, thus in fact proclaiming it rather than denying it as claimed.

2. I find it unfortunate that a TV Station would falsely represent a person in this way. I also find it unfortunate that Mahonri whom I'm assuming is a faithful LDS would also misrepresent Romney or anyone in such a way.

I call both to repentance.

I wonder about people sometimes why they so willingly bear false witness, even when they admit the opposite is true.

"Perhaps" is a declaration?? Really? Seriously? You are going to go there? Perhaps? Come on.

Call me to repentence? You have to be right to be able to do that with any authority.

I find it unfortunate that one of my favorite Jedi Knights would not know the definition of such a simple word.

Doesn't have a clue about Oliver North either.....

[MahonriMaster]

He has the skills and the know-how of what needs to be done to fix things.

give an example. The fascistic Olympics? Please.

(Ron Paul is) simply to far wrong on a few of his views. Way good yes on Constitutional things etc., but wrong on others.

This is so enlightening in how you think. What else besides "Constitutional" things would concern a President?

[Rosabellacaptain of 1,000]

It would be nice to hear all that Mitt Romney said, but they faded it out. He might not have said something as horrible as it appears. I am not a Mitt supporter but I will give him the benefit of the doubt on what he was trying to say. He was trying to brush off the question, but they way they edited it, it becomes quite different then what it looks like he was really saying. There is no way he could come out and say "Oh yeah I will do anything that the LDS Prophet tells me to do in office" even if he would do that. Not saying he would, just he could not say that and get elected. Politicians know how to deflect a question and I think he was trying but the editing makes him look worse than he was really.

I remember watching a whole show of Pat Robinson where he was interviewed by 60 minutes or one of those kind of shows. He said he would only agree to the interview IF his people filmed it at the same time. So he would have a full complete unedited copy of what was truly said. It was shocking to see the difference between the REAL interview and what ended up on the TV show. They would go as far as asking a completely different question and they have him give an answer he gave to another question. It was horrible. It was a complete false interview and he spent his whole show comparing what he really said and what they edited it to "look" like he said. It was soooo far from what was real it was clear it was complete utter lies and false reporting. I knew that the media did this all the time, but it was still an eye opener when you saw how far off and twisted they made his words. They litterally had his answer not come from the same question and also cut off at a point where the meaning gets totally changed. It is scary how easily editing can change what the person ment and even the question that was asked.

Picture if someone was interviewing you and they asked do you believe that homosexuality accepted in your Church and you say "no it is not". Then they say you know there are people out there that believe in killing homosexuals and you say "yes I have heard of that happening" and the they ask what stories have you heard about and you say "well some have been dragged behind a car till they die and that is a horrible death. It is so wrong to do that to anyone." Ok now you are on tape. Now they change the questions and it comes out as this: Do you believe that homosexuals should be killed? "yes" How would you suggest they be killed "dragged behind a card till they die" So you do not think that is wrong? "No it is not"

This is the kind of stuff they do. They did it to Pat Robinson. I cannot remember all the false questions they put in and the editing they did but it turned what he said into something completely different and had the opposite meaning of what he said. It is horrible what the media does.