ronald_reagan

I once had an economics professor who had a plan for how to get Congress to stop passing all of those awful laws. When they took their oath of office, they'd be supplied with cash, drugs and prostitutes. This, he figured, would keep them too busy to muck up our country.

I thought of that when reading this New York Times column by Timothy Egan that worries about Mitt Romney's religious opposition to drinking. Now, it's probably true that what we have here is just the latest mainstream media attempt to remind voters that Romney is Mormon. What do you think of this argument?

Jimmy Carter was a teetotaler, and he earned his one-term status. Were the two connected? Can’t say. But his temperance (though he now drinks wine) was much harder on White House visitors than the White House occupant.

“You’d arrive at 6 or 6:30 p.m., and the first thing you would be reminded of, in case you needed reminding, was that he and Rosalynn had removed all the liquor from the White House,” Teddy Kennedy lamented in his memoir, “True Compass.”

Carter’s arid receptions give Romney something to consider. Would guests be more inclined to listen while he droned on about the European debt crisis, knowing that the presidential liquor cabinet held hope of a promising end to the evening?

Doctrinally, I disagree with Mormonism's ban on alcohol. But of all the things in the world to worry about with a given candidate, I can't get worked up much about whether their religion permits a glass of wine or a beer at the ballpark. But this does sort of damage Romney's chances on the whole presidential litmus test question of  "Who would you rather have a beer with?"

How should that question be rebranded for the coming months?

Comments:


Mollie Hemingway, Ed.

James Of England

Duane's kind words are justified in this instance; I've got a pretty good idea how Mitt deals with this, because Mitt has repeatedly bought me beers. Also, coke, and also coffee; the campaign that told people repeatedly (lots of people asked) that it was the campaign, on Mitt's instructions, buying booze/ caffeine. There was also wine, twice, but that might have been a supporter being generous, rather than the campaign.

Not in a small, intimate setting (I've never had a small, intimate meeting with Mitt), but for 40-200 people in various campaign only and open to the public "parties" or "celebrations". Mormon friendly beverages were also offered. · 52 minutes ago

Edited 25 minutes ago

What would we do without you?


Joined
Apr '11
Viator

For many decades, possibly centuries, the US Congress ran on whiskey.  It was the lubricant of the wheels of politics. People tell me that many of those famous nooks and watering holes that existed in the US Capitol Building have disappeared. However, I suspect some may still exist if you know how to gain entry.


Joined
Apr '11
Viator

Canadian Parliament’s Speaker selects official house whisky

"In a “tradition” recently imported from the UK, the Speaker of Canada’s House of Commons has selected an offical whisky for his post.

Speyside’s Glenmorangie Distillery will provide the “Speaker’s Select” Scotch for new Speaker Andrew Scheer, reports the Ottawa Citizen.

In an e-mail, Scheer said: “I wanted to continue this tradition as it is rooted in the traditions of this office and in the Speaker’s office in Westminster.”

His predecessor Peter Milliken had the first Speaker’s Select bottled in 2003, following a gift of a bottle from the UK’s Michael Martin.

The whisky is often used as gifts for visiting dignitaries, or can be bought by sitting MPs."

http://www.whisky-drinker.com/2012/01/12/canadian-parliaments-speaker-selects-official-house-whisky/

Are conservatives (and tories - who may not be consratives) whiskey drinkers?

Larry Koler
Joined
Jun '10
Larry Koler

James, are you saying that as long as it's the campaign that is buying booze that it's OK for a Mormon to be involved in signing the check for its purchase? But, Mitt wouldn't spend his own money in this manner? Is this where they draw the line?

I don't drink but I don't think that alcohol in itself is evil. That's why I can purchase it in the scenario I described above (comment 28). I think GWB would view alcohol similarly because he wouldn't want to be a buzz-kill. 

People can be too preachy sometimes. Yet, on the other hand, perhaps Mormons have learned that it's a slippery slope with alcohol and one must take a strong stand against it -- even to the extent of being inhospitable, if that's what it takes.

Let me restate things: beer to construction workers in America at the end of the day is the perfect and appropriate way to 1) complement them, 2) invite them to sit back and enjoy our mutual friendship, and 3) enjoy life. What's bad about that? This is our shared culture.

Are Mormons going to be preachy?

Edited on April 26, 2012 at 1:25am
Frozen Chosen
Joined
Aug '10
Frozen Chosen

Larry Koler: James, are you saying that as long as it's the campaign that is buying booze that it's OK for a Mormon to be involved in signing the check for its purchase? But, Mitt wouldn't spend his own money in this manner? Is this where they draw the line?

Are Mormons going to be preachy? · 23 minutes ago

Edited 8 minutes ago

I think that James' point is that Romney is going out of his way to show that his is not a Mormon campaign per se, which is as it should be.

I don't think you have to worry about Mitt preaching Mormonism as president...

Larry Koler
Joined
Jun '10
Larry Koler

Thanks, Frozen -- I think you are right. And this evidence from James shows clearly that Mitt knows how to handle America very well. 

But, do you think that a regular Mormon would not want to be the one who signed the check or the credit receipt?

If not, then is this squeamishness? Or is it based on a solid principle. 

Do you see what I mean here? I gave my example because I don't drink but -- in that particular example -- I thought it was ungenerous of my former partner. It brought out a bad side of him which I had never seen before.

One thing I do know is that Americans are generally very wary of being condescended to. Mormons have a superior culture -- there's simply no doubt that on the whole it's superior and we could all learn from it, especially around families.

But, I don't want to see this damage Mitt's chance to win and I don't want Mormons to overplay their hand.

I think discussions like this can help. I hope Mitt can show how to thread this needle.

tabula rasa
Joined
Jun '10
tabula rasa

One more random thought:  if Mitt wins we won't have to lay awake at night worrying that he'll get tipsy and sell Alaska back to the Russians or worse agree to some silly nuclear weapons treaty.

James Of England
Joined
Apr '11
James Of England
Larry Koler: James, are you saying that as long as it's the campaign that is buying booze that it's OK for a Mormon to be involved in signing the check for its purchase? But, Mitt wouldn't spend his own money in this manner?

The reason Mitt spent campaign money on the beers he bought me that were not purchased in his capacity as my buddy. When he organized corporate hospitality for the Olympics, at which he also had alcohol, he spent Olympics money on it (he made a big deal about dramatically reducing hospitality spending, but it didn't go away entirely). As President, he would fund state dinners, etc., out of taxpayer's money.

I honestly have no idea about whether he would buy me a beer if we became friends and went riding together in Montana, just him and Ann and me, but I see no reason to think he wouldn't.

To bring the conversation to a more serious place; this was essentially his "not pro-choice or pro-life" position before 2003. Passionately pro-life within his church, but not wanting to demand that outsiders share that morality.

Edited on April 26, 2012 at 2:36am
James Of England
Joined
Apr '11
James Of England

Larry Koler: Thanks, Frozen -- I think you are right. And this evidence from James shows clearly that Mitt knows how to handle America very well. 

But, do you think that a regular Mormon would not want to be the one who signed the check or the credit receipt?

If not, then is this squeamishness? Or is it based on a solid principle. 

Do you see what I mean here? I gave my example because I don't drink but -- in that particular example -- I thought it was ungenerous of my former partner.

I'd appreciate correction from Mormons here, but I get the impression that your partner had his own issues with alcohol, much like many Christians have issues with homosexuality. Thus, scripture tells me not to screw another dude, while being silent on the penumbra; if someone gets upset about dudes holding hands and making lovey dovey eyes at each other, they're extrapolating unnecessarily, albeit understandably if they have not really considered the issue.

Amongst those who have, it seems Marriott draw the definitive line, partly with Mitt's guidance. They will sell you alcohol, and sometimes give it away, but will not sell you porn.

10 cents
Joined
Dec '11
10 cents

Larry Koler

I am with you that we should show appreciation in suitable ways. Your generous spirit to treat the workers to a small party is commendable. It is sad that your partner was such a "small party" not to show any appreciation.

I grew up eating fish sticks on Friday at school.  It never occurred to me that someone was trying to push their religion down my throat.  Nothing was said about it. I survived. :)  Our republic also survived non-drinking Abe Lincoln and W and might even survive non-drinking Biden. 

So let us raise our glasses to one another and not worry too much what is in the glass.

Thanks for the discussion.

Edited on April 26, 2012 at 3:48am
Frozen Chosen
Joined
Aug '10
Frozen Chosen

Larry Koler:

One thing I do know is that Americans are generally very wary of being condescended to. Mormons have a superior culture -- there's simply no doubt that on the whole it's superior and we could all learn from it, especially around families.

But, I don't want to see this damage Mitt's chance to winand I don't want Mormons to overplay their hand.

I think discussions like this can help. I hope Mitt can show how to thread this needle. · 3 hours ago

I think many people - including myself - have to be careful to avoid the "holier than thou" attitude which can be present in some members of the Mormon church as well as members of other churches so I think your concerns are legit, Larry.

The good news is that I think Mitt Romney is just the guy to avoid projecting that attitude.  He may be a little stiff, but I don't think Mitt feels he is better than anyone else.

Larry Koler
Joined
Jun '10
Larry Koler

Frozen Chosen

... I don't think Mitt feels he is better than anyone else.

Mitt is a prince. I have no worries about his character and these are character issues.

My only serious worry about him is whether he is tough enough to handle the Obama-Democratic-Media bullying machine. But, I've mentioned that before and we're soon going to find out. 

May God bless him and his family. And protect them.

Foxfier
Joined
Apr '12
Foxfier
Foxman: This is a little off-topic, but I think relevant.  In old movies, old being those made before say 1960, there would often be a scene where a man reached into his jacket and pulled out a flask.  My question is: Was it once common for men to walk around with a flask of liquor handy or was that just Hollywood? · 13 hours ago

Men?  Half the little old ladies when I was small enough to not be seen noticing (late 80s) had their little silver flasks in their purse. 

I grew up in a very oldstyle area, so I'd place it as...oh... about as common as someone with a cigar habit plus the folks who actually use cigarette cases? 

Took a big hit with the "open container" laws.

CandE
Joined
Jul '11
CandE

Frozen Chosen

You can be a Mormon and drink alcohol or smoke, you just can't hold a temple recommend, which is the higher standard that most active members follow. (a temple recommend is required for access to the temple and to serve in most lay positions).

I should also point out that our beliefs in these matters are not dictated by science but by revelation through the Prophet. · 21 hours ago

I think that you're slightly misrepresenting Church doctrine in your first sentence.   In order to be baptized, converts  must be living the Word of Wisdom [Mormon health code].  Likewise, in order to perform priesthood ordinances, men should comply.  While the Church hardly ever imposes disciplinary measures for breaking the commandment, it certainly does limit privileges.

-E

CandE
Joined
Jul '11
CandE

Larry Koler:

But, do you think that a regular Mormon would not want to be the one who signed the check or the credit receipt?

If not, then is this squeamishness? Or is it based on a solid principle.

In an official capacity, I don't think many Mormons, including Mitt, would avoid signing a check just because it included booze.  More would be uncomfortable with paying for someone else's drink in a casual setting. Everyone has their limits based on their own squeamishness, which is how I would describe your friend's reaction.

I would like to note that the original revelation concerning our health code is actually pretty subtle; it doesn't come out and say that alcohol is evil.  Rather it's a warning against certain substances (including alcohol, tabacco, tea and coffee) due to "evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days".  It includes promises of temporal salvation, health, wisdom and knowledge, energy, and protection to those who obey.  It's a fascinating document, and all the more so considering it was received in the 1830s.

-E

Joseph Eagar
Joined
Oct '10
Joseph Eagar

James Of England

I'd appreciate correction from Mormons here, but I get the impression that your partner had his own issues with alcohol, much like many Christians have issues with homosexuality. Thus, scripture tells me not to screw another dude, while being silent on the penumbra; if someone gets upset about dudes holding hands and making lovey dovey eyes at each other, they're extrapolating unnecessarily, albeit understandably if they have not really considered the issue.

Amongst those who have, it seems Marriott draw the definitive line, partly with Mitt's guidance. They will sell you alcohol, and sometimes give it away, but will not sell you porn. · 19 hours ago

That's not quite true.  Marriott is a franchise business, and the central corporation has no control over whether or not hotels provide porn (and most of the ones I've seen do, unfortunately).

James Of England
Joined
Apr '11
James Of England

Joseph Eagar

That's not quite true.  Marriott is a franchise business, and the central corporation has no control over whether or not hotels provide porn (and most of the ones I've seen do, unfortunately). · 2 hours ago

Part of what the central corporation provides franchisees is the software for their entertainment provision. That software has been being de-pornified. Neither of the Marriotts I've stayed in in the last month have had porn.

Larry Koler
Joined
Jun '10
Larry Koler

CandE

Larry Koler:

But, do you think that a regular Mormon would not want to be the one who signed the check or the credit receipt?

If not, then is this squeamishness? Or is it based on a solid principle.

In an official capacity, I don't think many Mormons, including Mitt, would avoid signing a check just because it included booze.  More would be uncomfortable with paying for someone else's drink in a casual setting. Everyone has their limits based on their own squeamishness, which is how I would describe your friend's reaction.

I would like to note that the original revelation concerning our health code is actually pretty subtle; it doesn't come out and say that alcohol is evil.  Rather it's a warning against certain substances (including alcohol, tabacco, tea and coffee) due to "evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days".  It includes promises of temporal salvation, health, wisdom and knowledge, energy, and protection to those who obey.  It's a fascinating document, and all the more so considering it was received in the 1830s.

-E

Thanks for the info. Very interesting.

Joseph Eagar
Joined
Oct '10
Joseph Eagar

James Of England

Joseph Eagar

That's not quite true.  Marriott is a franchise business, and the central corporation has no control over whether or not hotels provide porn (and most of the ones I've seen do, unfortunately). · 2 hours ago

Part of what the central corporation provides franchisees is the software for their entertainment provision. That software has been being de-pornified. Neither of the Marriotts I've stayed in in the last month have had porn. · 13 hours ago

Oh, I didn't know that.  I've not turned on a hotel's TV for years, mostly because of the aggressive way they advertised porn five years ago. 

Douglas Wingate
Joined
Sep '10
Douglas Wingate

But this does sort of damage Romney's chances on the whole presidential litmus test question of "Who would you rather have a beer with?"

How should that question be rebranded for the coming months?

Who can you possibly have a country with?


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Start your shopping here!

Help support Ricochet by making your purchases through our Amazon links.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In