or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Cheney to deliver commencement address at BYU
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Cheney to deliver commencement address at BYU

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 
I haven't seen a thread about this and it's interesting stuff around these parts. Here's the skinny: Cheney has been asked to deliver the commencement address at BYU, and lots and lots of people are unhappy with it. There have been protests by current and former BYU students. Here's a link to a fascinating discussion about it on our local (and most excellent) NPR program, RadioWest. Here's a SLTrib piece about the protests.

The sentiment among the protesters seems to be that Cheney and this administration do not reflect Mormon values. The scuttlebutt (revealed by a BYU professor on the RadioWest broadcast) is that the White House approached BYU and asked them to invite Cheney to speak. Now, certainly, this is about setting up Romney as the heir apparent, but this kind of reaction resembles the Michael Moore speech at UVSC a couple of years ago.

So here's the question:

1) What is the point of having Cheney speak at BYU? How does it actually help Romney?

2) What does it say about this administration when not even BYU is safe ground? Are things actually much worse for them than we might think?

And, just to make things fair and balanced,

3) How is this bad for Democrats?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #2 of 26
Let me just pause for a moment to remark on the utter coolness of you providing a link that opens my iTunes and plays a podcast of a debate on the topic at hand. I am hearting me some future, gotta say.

So let me tackle #3: It hurts Democrats because any evidence of an effort to keep Cheney from speaking is evidence of liberal fascism, group thing, political correctness run amok, and hatred for the troops. Which is to say, the Democratic party is a party to all of that.

Although how the narrative will account for such doings at freaking BYU is beyond my powers of precognition. All I know is that said narrative will definitely be aggressively asserted.

If he does speak, and there are protests, I would expect to hear a lot of talk of "brownshirts".

As for #1, I think the White House is pretty much reduced to taking what it can get, sympathetic hearing-wise (although in this case they appear to overreached, although who can blame them?).

I can't see how it helps Romney, and, speaking of which, is he the heir apparent? Seems like a pretty frazzled basket to be putting ones eggs into.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #3 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I haven't seen a thread about this and it's interesting stuff around these parts. Here's the skinny: Cheney has been asked to deliver the commencement address at BYU, and lots and lots of people are unhappy with it. There have been protests by current and former BYU students. Here's a link to a fascinating discussion about it on our local (and most excellent) NPR program, RadioWest. Here's a SLTrib piece about the protests.

The sentiment among the protesters seems to be that Cheney and this administration do not reflect Mormon values. The scuttlebutt (revealed by a BYU professor on the RadioWest broadcast) is that the White House approached BYU and asked them to invite Cheney to speak. Now, certainly, this is about setting up Romney as the heir apparent, but this kind of reaction resembles the Michael Moore speech at UVSC a couple of years ago.

So here's the question:

1) What is the point of having Cheney speak at BYU? How does it actually help Romney?

2) What does it say about this administration when not even BYU is safe ground? Are things actually much worse for them than we might think?

And, just to make things fair and balanced,

3) How is this bad for Democrats?



OMG! Mormons...even the Mormons are protesting Cheney! I have to laugh at the way you posted this, but in all seriousness:

1. I think it is an attempt to bring the issue of Romney's mormonism front and center, to show that these folks are niot the backwards cult that the Democrats want to portray them as. That doesn't mean Democrats actually believe it...no, no. It's more of a Republican vote surpression tactic. How many times have we heard that conservative Christians won't vote for Romney because of the Mormon issue? I wonder how much of that is actually true and how much is just spin.

2. I reject your characterization of BYU not being "safe ground." 200 students? There are 33,000 students at BYU. They have twice as many people in their choral program than showed up in opposition to Cheney. The rally was also organized by the college Democrats. Huge surprise. Huge. Oh, and a Republican was interviewd there! Wow!

3. I don't think it really matters in and of itself. That said, I'm going to go on record here with a feeling I've had for some time now. With McCain's meltdown and Guilani's personal problems and problems with conservatives, I think Romney is going to be the nominee. I also think that if he gets the nomination, he's going to win. He'll do well with evangelicals as the only real "candidate of faith" in the race. Fiscal conservatives will like him, and he'll be enough of an outside to carry some moderates along the way. Hillary's negatives will remain too high, if she even gets the nomination to begin with.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #4 of 26
*Edit. Nevermind.
post #5 of 26
If Mitt Romney is the Republican nominee for President, the Republicans are in big trouble. He is the former Governor of Massachusetts and owns a house in New Hampshire, yet when he came to *my town* and went to the local pharmacy to give a speech, he talked about how delighted he was to be in Hollis, Massachusetts. Needless to say, it didn't go over very well.

Mitt Romney was a train wreck as Governor of Massachusetts. But of course, every Governor of Masachusetts has been a train wreck dating back to Dukakis. Ultimately, he ended up spending much more time out of the state than he did on the job. He earned the nickname of 'absentee Governor'. Kerry Healy, the Lt. Governor was pretty much running things when Romney was away but when it came time for her shot at being Governor, Romney did very little campaigning for her. In fact, he stayed in the shadows because he wanted to be portrayed as the only one who could 'take on Massachusetts Democrats'.

Republicans in 2004 made a huge deal about John Kerry being a flip flopper on a couple of issues. But guess what? Mitt Romney has been on every side of every issue at one point in his life or another. For gay marriage, then against it. For gun control, then against it. Pro choice, then pro life. Against big government and spending, then oversaw record spending in Massachusetts. Pro education and then he cut funding to schools and colleges. He also refused to sign pledges to not raise taxes when he ran for Governor.

Romney has also made a fool of himself on the campaign trail. First, he uses one of Castro's slogans while speaking to a Cuban American group in Miami. Then there's the hunting issue over the past few days. He comes out and says he's been a lifelong hunter but then his campaign says he's only been hunting twice in his life. He joins the NRA just a few months ago but still doesn't own a gun according to all of the states where he has residences despite the fact that he insists he has a firearm. The best part was when he said, "I'm more like Jed Clampett than Teddy Roosevelt". He was referring to the game that he was hunting but it was amusing to see a Presidential candidate say something like that.

The fact that Mitt Romney is a Mormon shouldn't be a factor in the primaries at all. Mitt's given Republicans enough to chew over without bringing Religion in to the mix.
post #6 of 26
So what you're saying is that the republicans may run a "new england liberal" for president?
post #7 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

1. I think it is an attempt to bring the issue of Romney's mormonism front and center, to show that these folks are niot the backwards cult that the Democrats want to portray them as. That doesn't mean Democrats actually believe it...no, no. It's more of a Republican vote surpression tactic. How many times have we heard that conservative Christians won't vote for Romney because of the Mormon issue? I wonder how much of that is actually true and how much is just spin.

Yeah. The Democrats are hell-bent on portraying Mormons as a backwards cult. Harry Reid is probably behind it, too. And I don't know how many times we've heard that conservative Christians won't vote for Romney because he's a mormon. But to pretend that it's not an issue is just plain silly. The GOP has hung its hat on religion and moral issues, and now they've got a front-runner and presumptive heir apparent who is a member of a religion that many people in the GOP base consider a non-Christian cult full of whackos. It's gonna be an issue.

But I agree with you that this is an attempt to give Romney the WH imprimatur.

Quote:
2. I reject your characterization of BYU not being "safe ground." 200 students? There are 33,000 students at BYU. They have twice as many people in their choral program than showed up in opposition to Cheney. The rally was also organized by the college Democrats. Huge surprise. Huge. Oh, and a Republican was interviewd there! Wow!

Fair enough. But part of my point was that BYU doesn't seem to have wanted this. One caller to the radio show I linked expressed the feelings of some lots of folks pretty clearly: any other VP and this would be an incredible honor. Personally, I think it's pretty cool that a sitting VP is going to deliver the commencement address.

Quote:
3. I don't think it really matters in and of itself. That said, I'm going to go on record here with a feeling I've had for some time now. With McCain's meltdown and Guilani's personal problems and problems with conservatives, I think Romney is going to be the nominee. I also think that if he gets the nomination, he's going to win. He'll do well with evangelicals as the only real "candidate of faith" in the race. Fiscal conservatives will like him, and he'll be enough of an outside to carry some moderates along the way. Hillary's negatives will remain too high, if she even gets the nomination to begin with.

I find it very, very difficult to believe that the evangelicals will vote for a mormon. Maybe it's just me, but I think that for mainstream Christians, there are some faiths that are acceptable and some that are not. I'd wager that a Southern Baptist, for instance, isn't going to vote for someone who believes that another testament of Jesus was revealed to a 19 year-old kid in Palmyra, NY and that its translation reveals that God is just one of many Gods and that, when we die, we become the God of our own planet, just like YAWEH.

I just don't see it happening.

And yeah, McCain has clearly gone insane, which is beyond sad now. Rudy's got too many skeletons in his closet, although I suspect he appeals to a lot of centrist Dems and a LOT of New Yorkers. I'm still watching Huckabee.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #8 of 26
Here be the Mormon temple in the Oakland hills above where I live.



Even better, the interior features these sort of Frank Franzetta looking "John Carter of Mars" murals depicting, um, I'm a little vague on the actual belief here, Christ administering to the Aztecs?

Anyway, I find it hard to feel any animosity for a religion that has temples and murals of this sort.

Also, the whole "angel appears to some dude and has him dig up gold plates with mystery language"? Awesome.

I guess what I'm saying is that I may need to vote for Romney because I want to see vast public works projects in the Mormon style.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #9 of 26
Quote:
Christ administering to the Aztecs?

Not the Aztecs, specifically, but close enough.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #10 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I guess what I'm saying is that I may need to vote for Romney because I want to see vast public works projects in the Mormon style.

The church is capable of some remarkable things, indeed. It's particularly interesting to me how they deal with outreach. They have "wards" that are analogous to parishes. You're in them whether you're a mormon or not. My ward was just recently redrawn because it had grown "too rich," so they gerrywarded it to include the less affluent neighborhoods west of us. Mandatory tithing of 10% means that they have lots and lots of funds to distribute, as well.

Don't get me wrong. In the GOP field, I kind of like Romney. I just don't think Mississippi, Alabama, and Arkansas will be so kind to him.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #11 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

The church is capable of some remarkable things, indeed. It's particularly interesting to me how they deal with outreach. They have "wards" that are analogous to parishes. You're in them whether you're a mormon or not. My ward was just recently redrawn because it had grown "too rich," so they gerrywarded it to include the less affluent neighborhoods west of us. Mandatory tithing of 10% means that they have lots and lots of funds to distribute, as well.

Don't get me wrong. In the GOP field, I kind of like Romney. I just don't think Mississippi, Alabama, and Arkansas will be so kind to him.

Oh, I have no doubt that Romney would considered some kind of heathen cultist by a lot of the Baptists.

LIve by the base, die by the base, I guess.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #12 of 26
That Mormon temple is very Vegasy. You sure they're not running a casino in there?
post #13 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilsch View Post

That Mormon temple is very Vegasy. You sure they're not running a casino in there?

Yeah, isn't it? And it sits up in the hills, lit up like Tomorrow Land with all these multi-colored lights and you can see it for miles around.

And at Christmas? You don't even want to know.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #14 of 26
Oh, hell, sure you do:



And this picture doesn't really do it justice, there are half a billion little lights on pretty much everything.

Which rules, as far as I'm concerned.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #15 of 26
Quote:
Yeah. The Democrats are hell-bent on portraying Mormons as a backwards cult. Harry Reid is probably behind it, too. And I don't know how many times we've heard that conservative Christians won't vote for Romney because he's a mormon. But to pretend that it's not an issue is just plain silly. The GOP has hung its hat on religion and moral issues, and now they've got a front-runner and presumptive heir apparent who is a member of a religion that many people in the GOP base consider a non-Christian cult full of whackos. It's gonna be an issue.

But I agree with you that this is an attempt to give Romney the WH imprimatur.

It could be an issue..I don't know. I have some extended family who are very conservatively christian (sounds like some sort of advertising slogan doesn't it?). I should put out the feelers and get some anecdotal evidence so to speak. I just don't think it's the issue it's made out to be, though that is just a gut feeling. Obviously Harry Reid has nothing to do with it. That's silly.

Quote:
Fair enough. But part of my point was that BYU doesn't seem to have wanted this. One caller to the radio show I linked expressed the feelings of some lots of folks pretty clearly: any other VP and this would be an incredible honor. Personally, I think it's pretty cool that a sitting VP is going to deliver the commencement address.

And I think it's not really possible to tell whether or not they "wanted" it.

Quote:
I find it very, very difficult to believe that the evangelicals will vote for a mormon. Maybe it's just me, but I think that for mainstream Christians, there are some faiths that are acceptable and some that are not. I'd wager that a Southern Baptist, for instance, isn't going to vote for someone who believes that another testament of Jesus was revealed to a 19 year-old kid in Palmyra, NY and that its translation reveals that God is just one of many Gods and that, when we die, we become the God of our own planet, just like YAWEH.

I just don't see it happening.

And yeah, McCain has clearly gone insane, which is beyond sad now. Rudy's got too many skeletons in his closet, although I suspect he appeals to a lot of centrist Dems and a LOT of New Yorkers. I'm still watching Huckabee.

I don't know. That seems reasonable on the surface, but it may come down to what I said: Who is the candidate of faith, and who isn't? Will a Southern Baptist go for Hillary over Romney? Or are you saying they'll just sit out the election, like many did in 2000?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #16 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Oh, hell, sure you do:



And this picture doesn't really do it justice, there are half a billion little lights on pretty much everything.

Which rules, as far as I'm concerned.

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #17 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fran441 View Post

If Mitt Romney is the Republican nominee for President, the Republicans are in big trouble. He is the former Governor of Massachusetts and owns a house in New Hampshire, yet when he came to *my town* and went to the local pharmacy to give a speech, he talked about how delighted he was to be in Hollis, Massachusetts. Needless to say, it didn't go over very well.

Mitt Romney was a train wreck as Governor of Massachusetts. But of course, every Governor of Masachusetts has been a train wreck dating back to Dukakis. Ultimately, he ended up spending much more time out of the state than he did on the job. He earned the nickname of 'absentee Governor'. Kerry Healy, the Lt. Governor was pretty much running things when Romney was away but when it came time for her shot at being Governor, Romney did very little campaigning for her. In fact, he stayed in the shadows because he wanted to be portrayed as the only one who could 'take on Massachusetts Democrats'.

Republicans in 2004 made a huge deal about John Kerry being a flip flopper on a couple of issues. But guess what? Mitt Romney has been on every side of every issue at one point in his life or another. For gay marriage, then against it. For gun control, then against it. Pro choice, then pro life. Against big government and spending, then oversaw record spending in Massachusetts. Pro education and then he cut funding to schools and colleges. He also refused to sign pledges to not raise taxes when he ran for Governor.

Romney has also made a fool of himself on the campaign trail. First, he uses one of Castro's slogans while speaking to a Cuban American group in Miami. Then there's the hunting issue over the past few days. He comes out and says he's been a lifelong hunter but then his campaign says he's only been hunting twice in his life. He joins the NRA just a few months ago but still doesn't own a gun according to all of the states where he has residences despite the fact that he insists he has a firearm. The best part was when he said, "I'm more like Jed Clampett than Teddy Roosevelt". He was referring to the game that he was hunting but it was amusing to see a Presidential candidate say something like that.

The fact that Mitt Romney is a Mormon shouldn't be a factor in the primaries at all. Mitt's given Republicans enough to chew over without bringing Religion in to the mix.

Tell us how you really feel. It's clear you won't vote for any Republican, not that I disagree with a lot of what you posted.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #18 of 26
Quote:
Tell us how you really feel. It's clear you won't vote for any Republican, not that I disagree with a lot of what you posted.

I don't post on PoliticalOutsider as much as I used to. In fact, I rarely post here at all now because I know that at the end of the day, the Republicans are going to vote for Republicans, the Democrats are going to vote for Democrats, and the Independents are going to read something else.

But when I do post, it's mainly about stuff that affects me and Mitt Romney's decisions have directly impacted me which is why I decided to post.

I lived in Massachusetts until July of 2001 when I moved to New Hampshire. I worked and went to college in Massachusetts until last year. My Mom is a teacher in Massachusetts and my Dad worked in Massachusetts until last September. Not only that, but most of our local TV comes from Boston, so I know a lot about Mitt Romney.

He was responsible for raising my income taxes, raising my college tuition, increasing my class sizes in my senior year in college from what should have been 20 people at max to over 50 people because of his cuts in higher education, and he vetoed a bill which would have allowed my mother to collect her state retirement and social security. Instead, when my mother retires, she cannot collect social security at all and my father can only get 65% of his benefits.

So yeah, I'm not a fan of Mitt Romney. But to be honest, I'm not thrilled with any candidate running for President in 2008, Republican or Democrat. Mitt just happened to be the one that directly impacted my wallet and life so that's why he got the angry post.
post #19 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fran441 View Post

I don't post on PoliticalOutsider as much as I used to. In fact, I rarely post here at all now because I know that at the end of the day, the Republicans are going to vote for Republicans, the Democrats are going to vote for Democrats, and the Independents are going to read something else.

But when I do post, it's mainly about stuff that affects me and Mitt Romney's decisions have directly impacted me which is why I decided to post.

I lived in Massachusetts until July of 2001 when I moved to New Hampshire. I worked and went to college in Massachusetts until last year. My Mom is a teacher in Massachusetts and my Dad worked in Massachusetts until last September. Not only that, but most of our local TV comes from Boston, so I know a lot about Mitt Romney.

He was responsible for raising my income taxes, raising my college tuition, increasing my class sizes in my senior year in college from what should have been 20 people at max to over 50 people because of his cuts in higher education, and he vetoed a bill which would have allowed my mother to collect her state retirement and social security. Instead, when my mother retires, she cannot collect social security at all and my father can only get 65% of his benefits.

So yeah, I'm not a fan of Mitt Romney. But to be honest, I'm not thrilled with any candidate running for President in 2008, Republican or Democrat. Mitt just happened to be the one that directly impacted my wallet and life so that's why he got the angry post.

Somehow I don't think it's a balanced perspective you have. What is this bill he vetoed that you speak of? Could you illustrate the "cuts" that were made to higher education? Often these events are subject to perception and personal impact as opposed to being solid reasons not to vote for someone. I realize he's changed his position on several issues, but I'm not even going there at the moment. Can you provide some more details?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #20 of 26
Perhaps the embattled Cheney needs a feel-good visit to Weird Central to tint his glasses a little rosier. For those who give credibility to one of the more outandish "Big Foot/UFO"-like tales of recent times, as seen in the Weekly World News, then Cheney has a chance, albeit a dimished one, of coming across as " legitimate".
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #21 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Perhaps the embattled Cheney needs a feel-good visit to Weird Central to tint his glasses a little rosier. For those who give credibility to one of the more outandish "Big Foot/UFO"-like tales of recent times, as seen in the Weekly World News, then Cheney has a chance, albeit a dimished one, of coming across as " legitimate".



SDW to Bizzaro World. Come in Sammi. Come in.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #22 of 26
Hmmm, apparently my Oakland Temple Christmas pic was being hosted on the slowest server in all of Christendom, so I've changed the link to another, not quite as cool one.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #23 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I'm a little vague on the actual belief here, Christ administering to the Aztecs?

What is he supposed to have been administering?
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #24 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

What is he supposed to have been administering?


DUH! Chocolate bunnies!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #25 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

DUH! Chocolate bunnies!

Bet they just bit the heads off.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #26 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Bet they just bit the heads off.

Um, Adda? You having a bad day? OBVIOUSLY THEY SHOOT THE BUNNIES IN THE FACE!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Cheney to deliver commencement address at BYU