On Thursday Governor Mitt Romney will give a speech titled “Faith in America” at the George Bush Presidential Library in College Station, Texas.  The Library and Romney have both stated that the venue should not be seen as an endorsement, per se.  However, it is surmised that having the speech originate from the Bush Library will give the appearance that Romney has the unofficial backing of the Bush clan.

On Monday, Rush Limbaugh had a great monologue about the Liberals looking for someone to run against.  They have invested so much time and effort into running against George W. Bush and he isn’t on the ballot.  This means they need a suitable substitute to be on the ballot in November.

Rush further theorized that they have found that candidate in Mike Huckabee.  Like Bush, Huckabee wears his Christianity on his sleeve and refers often to the positive influence it has had in his life.  The Liberals, right or wrong, believe that this will allow them to paint him as an extension of Bush and persuade people that he will not bring “change” to Washington.

Most conservative Republicans, however, are drawn to the message of faith and see it as a great plus in a candidate.  Consequently, Huckabee’s numbers are shooting up as he and groups supporting him focus on his religion and his conservative social record.  (In fact, Huckabee is so certain of the reception the religion angle will get him, he plays it nearly every chance he gets.  He has worked so hard to ingrain it into his public persona that it has almost become a farce.)

Romney is also a man of deeply held faith.  However, he seems to be barred from expressing it in part by the political implications of being misunderstood.  But also, I think, because of the respect that Governor Romney has for his own and other’s religious convictions.  Unlike Huckabee, Romney is unwilling to make God the butt of his jokes and the tag line for his presidential campaign.

Into this supercharged atmosphere comes the Romney speech.  On Religion.  At the Bush Library.  It would seem that Romney is going to play his trump.  In one morning he could take the place of Huckabee as the “most Bush-like” and of caring most about religious sanctity in the nation.

The tricky thing about politics is that any asset is also a liability.  Anything that can be used to build you up in the eyes of your supporters can also be used to tear you down by your enemies.  Is having the Bush seal of approval going to help or hurt him in the general election?  And what about being openly religious?

Personally, I think that overall it will be an advantage.  I also think that Romney is less concerned with the politics of these questions than he is with being disingenuous.  Don’t get me wrong, Romney’s campaign is definitely calculating the political ramifications of every move he makes.  That said, he will not abandon his values or character simply for political gain.  And this, ultimately, will make him a stronger candidate than what the Democrats will produce.

There seems to be some “conventional wisdom” in the media that says Mitt Romney will HAVE to give a speech addressing the issue of his faith to win over the Christian Right.  A panel of media experts was even convened to discuss the idea in depth.  (See Mormonism threatens Romney’s presidential nomination, panel says)   The consensus is that to win the presidency he must make a speech to allay the fears of evangelicals.

To back up this opinion, is the various polls conducted that suggest that a large portion of Americans would be “less likely” to vote for a candidate who was Mormon.  (See The Mormon Speech No More)  Then there are a vocal few, like Senator McCain’s mother, who publicly express their doubts about the Mormon faith and its members.

Romney has been open about his intentions concerning “the speech.”  He is happy to answer any questions about his faith as they come up.  At this time his political advisors do not think a speech focusing on his faith would be wise.  However, there may be a time when it is necessary to address the issue at length and he is prepared for that eventuality.

There is speculation, again from the learned media types, that Romney is simply angling for the time when the speech will make the biggest splash.  Waiting for excitement about the race to build to get the maximum coverage but in time to influence the outcome of the primary races.

What the elite media analysts haven’t thought about, is the fact that there has been no indication that a “JFK-type” speech about Mormonism would change any minds.  Polls may say that people would be “less likely” to vote for a Mormon candidate but they don’t say “less likely” than what.  To me, all this says is that all else being equal, the persons polled would base their decision on the issue of candidate’s religion.

In this race, however, very little is equal among the candidates.  There are huge political and idealogical differences even among the Republican candidates.  In the general election, the Democrat nominee can be expected to be virtually a polar opposite to Romney.  At this point, the issue of Religion will diminish in significance.

Religion has not stopped Romney from developing prominent leads in early Primary states where he has campaigned heavily.  There is little reason to think that if he is able to win these states that he will have to materially alter his message to attract voters in other states.  Even in South Carolina, where they are known to have heavy religious prejudice, Romney has managed to tie for the lead in recent polls. 

It seems that the only ones who are waiting for a Mormon speech are the liberal political analysts who are waiting for the Republicans to crash and burn.  The speech would bring religion to the forefront and give them material to twist and use against him.  To give the speech at this point would be to provide opponents with ammunition without answering the concerns of potential voters.

Romney has a carefully and intelligently run campaign.  There is no need to explain a religion that most voters are not really anxious about.  But like a good Boy Scout, Romney is prepared, just in case.

In this race for president there has been a lot of focus on what conservatives don’t want.  First on the list is another Clinton presidency.  Most of us agree that any of the Republican candidates would be far better for the country than the electing the first female president.

With that conviction comes a number of questions, however.  Looking at the past, we can see that it is better to get behind one Republican candidate rather than splitting the vote between several conservative candidates which leaving the liberal with a single, solid base.  That said, should we nominate a candidate simply because at the moment he seems to be doing better in the polls than the Democratic leader.

Unfortunately, this is all far from hypothetical.  Sean Hannity has dubbed his radio show the “Stop Hillary Express,” and vowed to support whichever candidate wins the Republican nomination.  Jim Dobson has commented that he would either not vote or vote for a third party candidate if the Republican nominee is not a social conservative.  Many feel inclined to support Rudy Giuliani simply because in current national polls he is ahead of Hillary Clinton.

At this point, the focus should be on choosing the best candidate for the job.  Polls can be manipulated or misleading.  Public opinion can also change.  Once we have a nominee we can focus on closing any gap in the national polls.

Mitt Romney is the more socially conservative than either Rudy Giuliani or Fred Thompson.  He has shown in-site and leadership on such issues as health care and security.  He has been successful in many endeavors both professional, political, and personal throughout his life.  He has a plan for the future.

Many will argue that he is not “ideal.”  Well, I have yet to find an ideal politician.  What I have found, in Mitt Romney, is the person who best fits my idea of good government who is running for President in 2008.

South Carolina has been a tough spot for the Romney campaign to get off the ground and it seemed fairly obvious why.  South Carolinians are known for being anti-Mormon and distrustful of Yankees in general.

Over the last couple of months, though, Governor Romeny has risen dramatically in the polls.  And it makes me smile to see bloggers and reporters scratching their heads over why this is so.  You see, I lived and worked in South Carolina for 9 months and I know exactly what happened.

The people I met in South Carolina were honest, church-going folks who lived the golden rule.  If their preacher preached against Mormons they mostly assumed he knew what he was talking about.  But it didn’t change the way they treated thier Mormon neighbors.  For the most part, it didn’t change the way that they thought about their Mormon neighbors.

Many of the people I met didn’t like Yankees.  They would talk harshly about “the Yankees up North” but they would always welcome any New Englanders who moved into town.  Some fought for years to keep the Confederate flag flying over the state capital even though it was offensive to black citizens.  Yet these same people had countless black friends and co-workers whom they respected and admired.

For these people, any bigoted beliefs they held were meant to apply to some distant group of people that they did not know.  Anyone they knew that did not fit these stereotypes was obviously an exception to the rule.

That’s the key.  As long as the people of South Carolina did not know Mitt Romney, he was just a Mormon Yankee.  And, as far as they were concerned, he could have the vote of all the Mormon Yankees living in South Carolina.  But then they got to know him.  They saw his family.  He became a neighbor; a friend.  Then they could judge him on his own merits rather than stick him into a pre-determined catergory.

In my 9 months as a South Carolina citizen, I never did meet anyone who was as bigoted as the average South Carolinian is reported to be.  Of course, that doesn’t mean they weren’t there.  I heard plenty of stories from people who knew them or were related to them.  And Mitt Romney will probably never win the support of those people.

But the majority of South Carolinians are simply waiting for him to convince them that he is not just a good guy but a good guy with the right qualifications to be president.

By Jennifer Barrett
Newsweek
Updated: 11:41 a.m. ET June 7, 2006

June 6, 2006 - Earlier this year, Massachusetts became the first state to pass legislation aimed at achieving near universal health-care coverage for its residents. The bill would help about 90 to 95 percent of the state’s estimated 500,000 uninsured residents gain coverage over the next three years by subsidizing the costs for low-income residents with state and federal funds. It’s a plan that has been held up as a nationwide model for health-care reform—and also a triumph for the state’s Republican governor, Mitt Romney.

Romney says that the plan can be achieved without imposing new taxes or borrowing money because financing would come largely from funds now being used for other health-care expenses, such as reimbursing hospitals for care they provide to uninsured residents. Its passage has also renewed speculation that Romney—who worked with the Democratic leadership of the Massachusetts legislature to create the bipartisan legislation—is setting the stage for a presidential run in 2008. The governor has been increasingly vocal on national issues, speaking out for widespread health-care reform and sending a letter to senators on June 2 in support of a gay-marriage ban, which will be considered this week. Romney supporters have already set up an “Americans for Mitt” Web site urging him to run. The governor has said that he won’t seek re-election this fall, but he has not announced yet whether he’ll seek the Republican nomination for president. NEWSWEEK’s Jennifer Barrett spoke with Romney about universal health-care coverage, gay marriage and whether he is planning to run for the nation’s highest office. Excerpts:…Read More

Tomorrow I will link to another faith based initiatives story from last week here.

By Frank Phillips, Globe Staff | June 29, 2005

Governor Mitt Romney said yesterday he has created a special office to help faith-based groups in Massachusetts land more federal money, and he appointed his wife, Ann, to lead it.

Romney, flanked by his wife and Jim Towey, head of the White House office of faith-based initiatives, endorsed faith-based programs yesterday as a means to provide social services and said he wanted to step up the state’s efforts to help religious groups and charities attract federal help.

Some 44 groups in Massachusetts received $21 million in federal funding last year, ranking Massachusetts 16th in the nation among states receiving federal faith-based initiative grants. The state has received $60 million over the last two years. Massachusetts becomes the 27th state to create a special office for the program.…Read More