The EFM Feature

I yelled across the house to David, “Hey, are you ready to go jog?”

“Just a second!” he replied.

When he arrived at the door, I laughed.  We had on the same hat, back from 2006 SRLC Conference hat — the word ROMNEY that had the “O” as the Tennessee flag.

Do you think any cars driving by noticed our Romney hats and decided to vote for “the Yankee governor with Southern values?”

Comments and Discussion

Evangelicals for Mitt provides comments as a way to engage in a public and respectiful discussion about articles and issues. Any comment may be removed by the editors for violating common decency or tempting flames.

10 Responses to What We Looked Like Today Before Our Jog

  1. Terry says:

    I doubt that the hats will get any direct voters for Mitt, just some big thumbs up from those who have already decided to vote for him, and maybe some good conversation from people you meet along the way. If you wore the hats every time that they would not look totally out of place, they might generate more conversation than you think. (I’ve read your book, by the way. Very entertaining. I enjoyed it.)

    • Terry says:

      Actually, I can. I laughed my butt off! Afterwards, I thought it was so like the Romneys to handle the situation the way they did. A class family.

      Happy New Year by the way!

  2. Terry says:

    Humm…not much activity on this page, so I’m going to re-post something that somehow ended up as a solo performance on Charles “Have Faith in Massachusetts Men?” page.


    Several times I’ve heard talk show hosts describe Romney as “boring”, “plain”, “not very exciting”, and other similar labels–as if those supposed traits render him unfit for the title of Commander-in-Chief. Had I access to a phone at the time, I would have called and asked the label assigners what they want in a Commander-in-Chief. Let’s face it—the next president should be elected on his abilities lead the way in pulling this country out of the mess it’s in right now. However, if the talk show hosts want something different than that, then I have a few ”in-Chief” nominations for them.

    If what they are really looking for is an Ego-in-Chief, then Newt Gingrich fits that bill (he’s already declared that he will be the GOP nominee).

    If they want a Blamer-in-Chief, or a Cry-Baby-in-Chief Rick Perry’s the man, in my opinion (he’s suing the state of Virginia, supposedly because their tough rules kept him from getting his name on the primary ballot there).

    The Who’s-He-in-Chief goes hands-down to NM Gov. Gary Johnson (who withdrew from the race on Dec 28th. I was barely aware that the man was running).

    Rabid-Following-in-Chief would have to be Ron Paul. He’s held that spot for decades now.

    For Yo-Yo-in-Chief, my vote goes to Rick Santorum (he shot up in the polls very quickly, and fell just as quickly).

    Nice-Try-in-Chief is a three way tie between Rep. Michele Bachmann, former Gov Jon Huntsman, Jr., and former Gov. Tim Pawlenty (one has to admire their confidence in the face of the no-way-in-hades landscape they currently find themselves standing on). If I were them, I’d drop out, take the money, throw a big party for the staffers, then call a press conference and endorse Mitt Romney.

    And who could forget Herman Cain, who seemed to be running for Shallow-in-Chief, or perhaps Not-Much-Substance-in-Chief (he had a lot of good sounding talk, but little knowledge in a majority of the areas the next president will need to deal with).

    The soon to be Commander-in-Chief honor belongs to Mitt Romney of course ( and if Nancy’s “An Honest Letter to Iowa Evangelicals” doesn’t convert a good share of the Romney hold-outs, well, then, *mutter, mutter*…)

    Oh…and there’s one more “in-Chief” title–the one Barack Obama currently holds: Disaster-in-Chief.

  3. Rodney says:

    I have tried more than any other election to have an open mind this election. I was for Romney in ’08 but wanted to make sure to be open and teachable as I listened to every debate and researched the candidates. I visit your site regularly to receive insight. I listened closely to Perry, loved Newt in the debates, considered Cain’s 9-9-9, love Bachmann’s conservative Constitutionalism, but I still lean heavily for Romney. There is, however, something that continues to nag, and nag, and nag at me. There is little question he stands the greatest chance of ousting Obama. Why then does it seem that the conservative talk show hosts lean anti-Romney (i.e., Rush, Hannity, and Beck)? Your insight would be GREATLY appreciated!

  4. americanfirst says:

    Good question Rodney.

    Would like some legitimate insight towards that as well. Hard for me to believe that people with such persuasive ability really don’t feel a deep sense of responsibility to do the due diligence on Mitt Romney.
    Established distinctions…
    a) Mormon
    b) considerably less secular by wordly standards (too much of a chasm?)
    c) not a career politician
    d) above normal degree of selflessness (literally not getting paid in many instances)
    e) literally too much of a potential threat to the establishment to have someone of his caliber in office?
    f)a real adult
    g) Mormon?!

    Michael Berry Houston conservative talk radio personality is also staunchly against Mitt never mind he being, obviously, the better more principled man. Literally, if Mitt was a Souther Baptist in Texas this contest would be over!!
    I really have to believe that people feel legitimately threathened by the potential steroid shot to the Mormon church. After all, the prospect of most Christians actually doing their own thinking about Mormons has to be a scary proposition for many mainstreamers. Since the truth about them doesn’t really square up with the anti-Mormon rhetoric.
    Mormons are arguably either Christians by definition or perhaps even a better brand of Christians than the conventional. If that is the case, then the point may not be w/out merit. Just saying…
    Notwithstanding, if vied on resume, record or personal accomplishments you’d think people would arrive at Mitt pretty simplistically – so I have to conclude that the expected degree of objectivity is hindered by a more selfish pursuit.

    Also, Terry – funny stuff! Don’t know what book you and Nancy are talking about so can you pls post? Thx!

    • Rodney says:

      Thank you for your comment! I am completely sincere in trying to find the answer to this question. As you said, with their power of influence and specialization on the topic I am guessing that they HAVE done some due diligence. It seems hard to believe that the Mormon issue would carry much weight with them – but perhaps I am ignorant. Given that I do not believe the Mormon issue is that important to them, it makes me wonder what I have missed. Most claim he is hard core moderate but this website paints a different picture. Does it really come down to the Mormon issue?

    • Rodney says:

      Glenn Beck seems the most anti-Romney of the 3 but he is a Mormon so that kind of throws out the Mormon argument in his case. (I am not sure who Michael Berry Houston is but there is another one we can add to the list). I just want to reconcile things within myself as to why the hosts are so against him. That has been my single biggest obstacle to giving Romney my 100% support, money, vote and time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>