Former Massachusetts governor and presidential aspirant Mitt Romney delivered a thoughtful, moving speech today at the George Bush Sr. Presidential Library and Museum in College Station, Texas.
Romney delivered points that no one could argue with--namely, that religious liberty is "fundamental to America's greatness." No kidding. Isn't that why the pilgrims came here in the first place?
Aside from a few "duh" moments, Romney delivered a solid speech with some quotable lines, particularly: "Americans do not respect believers of convenience. Americans tire of those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world." Romney's flippy-floppy record may not stand up to that statement, but it is an elegant sentiment.
Yet Romney walked a tightrope when it came to the separation of church and state. He went from "We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason" to "It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America--the religion of secularism. They are wrong."
The mere fact that he stayed away from explaining what it means to be a Mormon and what Mormons believe suggests what Romney truly believes--that his religious beliefs are a private matter.
In the final analysis, will this speech make a few non-Mormon religious conservatives feel better about voting for him? Maybe. And since that's what it was intended to do, then the speech was a success for Romney. But does it actually say anything relevant or meaningful about the role of religion in America today? Bostonist doesn't think so.
Kerry Skemp contributed to this post. The opinions stated belong solely to these Bostonists. Boston Daily has the full transcript of Romney's speech. Photo by David J. Phillip/AP.



But does it actually say anything relevant or meaningful about the role of religion in America today? Yes, and it's not a good thing.
We're not supposed to have a religious test for the presidency, which, based on Mitt's sermon today, seems to be just what we have. I thought conservatives were gung-ho strict constuctionists but I guess that doesn't extend to Article 6.
For all of the bashing Mass. gets for being the bastion of godless liberalism, we didn't raise a big stink about having what some people call a cult member being governor.
Mitt's speech probably won't matter to the GOP. The big-name pols (Rudy, McCain, possibly even Cheney) will give Mitt a pass but the ubiquitous base won't tag along.
Today on Chris Matthews, David Kuo said that the LDS Mormons aren't ''historically christians''. Whatever that means. Google Kuo for a full example of who he is. Basically, he's a former charter member of W's God squad.
If Mitt can't get Kuo to accept him, he's out of luck.
One other thing that occurred to me...Is H.W.'s presence at this event a subtle family endorsement of Mitt? He didn't have to be there.