SOUND OFF: Mitt Romney and the Republican Convention

What did you think of Romney's speech and the convention? Will you vote for him in November?

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney accepted the Republican nomination for President of the United States on Thursday night.

Romney gave a speech that included a more personal view of his life as well as focused on adding jobs, criticizing President Obama’s policies, repealing Obamacare and promoting his business background.

Romney did not discuss his experience as governor of Massachusetts during the nationally-televised speech.

We want to hear from you – what did you think of the former governor’s speech? What did you think of the convention? Were you swayed in either direction after watching the proceedings from Tampa? From his experience as governor of the commonwealth, are you more apt or less apt to vote for Romney?

Let us know in the comment section below. 

deb of see-attleboro September 14, 2012 at 02:20 PM
Tisi's mistake is understandable. Looks like this program is new. I haven't been a practicing Catholic for years. I don't recall much in the way of educational outreach regarding The Word. Anything the laity learned came to us through a very fine filter. Liberal Christian denominations are just as guilty of spoon feeding believers. Good to know that times have changed for the Roman Catholic Church!
Janet Sroczynski September 14, 2012 at 02:26 PM
What a breath of fresh air it will be, to have a president who understands venture capital and the free markets. Entrepreneurialism as it's core, and the fundamentals of what it takes to start a business, provide fresh working capital to that business, and watch that business grow. Teaching students around the world about financial markets, how they work, and terms like: Seed Capital, Angel Investors and IPO's. Looking forward to a much better tomorrow.
Kurt Buermann September 14, 2012 at 02:32 PM
Janet, You opine: "What a breath of fresh air it will be, to have a president who understands venture capital and the free markets." So, I take it you support President Obama then?
Tisiphone September 14, 2012 at 03:24 PM
Tim Long, I am sorry if my comments seemed derogatory of Catholics. I do not wish to seem critical of any religion which does not involve the handling of snakes. Making observations about the manner of their beliefs is not criticism. What you took as criticism, I thought was a defense of Catholics against the criticism of believers by Gretchen. Such facts as I recited are historical. Martin Luther's persecution was based on the fact he challenged dogma as not being in accord with scripture. At the time, the Pope made it clear that scripture was too complex to be understood by the laity. There are numerous historical references to the church taking that position. Are Popes not "infallible" in their declarations in matters of faith? Having spent some of my youth in the "Bible Belt", it is noticeable that scriptural references are lost on most Catholics. They have no idea of how old Methuselah was, or that Rehoboth is a biblical reference. If the Archdiocese is introducing "bible study", I think that is "new". Coming from an area where "Family Bibles" are common, I notice that they are rare among Catholics. Simply an observation. I do not think it critical to say that people who believe themselves to be members of "the one true faith" protest the dogma of that faith. Does such "protest" not make them "Protestants"? Are they any further removed from the Faith than the Cathars who the Church decided to kill for their non-violent protests?
Tisiphone September 14, 2012 at 03:35 PM
Tim, here is a question for you. There have reportedly been thousands of Marian Apparitions reported in Herzegovina over the past decade. Are Catholics who accept these Revelations better, or worse, Catholics than those who do not accept them. What amazes me is the number of Catholics who are unaware of those apparitions, if true, they would seem fundamental to the faith. If I understand correctly, the Church is studying them, but has taken no position on them
Janet Sroczynski September 14, 2012 at 03:55 PM
@ Sarek - I support Romney/Ryan 2012. Re-read my comments. The past (4) years of Obama administration have led to nearly $6 Trillion in DEBT. It's time to give someone else a try. And then we can look forward to the presidential race in 2016 too. On it goes.
Avon Barksdale September 14, 2012 at 04:37 PM
Clearly this election will hinge on which side's unsolicited internet commenters post the most clever replies on hyperlocal website message boards.
Gretchen Robinson September 14, 2012 at 05:09 PM
IMO people don't know how to read information in an unbiased way. There is a tendency to self-select what serves our pre-conceived notions. A good voter will consider a wide variety of opinions and bring reason and a sense of fairness to their thinking. Then there needs to be a process of reflection, whereby we ask what is best for this nation. Instead we get absolutism and voters who see in black and white, no execptions, no mercy even though it's part of their professed religion. Alas, the world is not black and white and we each have to find our way. Taking some pundit's viewpoint or one party's ideology is a recipe for political disaster. It's easy and it's lazy thinking (or no thinking is involved). We end up with the political wars with winner take all. So we bounce between extremes. With that said, though, I think the political and religious Right has distorted our whole political process far to the right. And it's father to the right than most Americans are willing to go. This is a recent phenomenon, meaning since the 70's and 80's and Evangelist in Chief Reagan.
Kirby September 14, 2012 at 05:20 PM
"...distorted our whole political process... " for example?
Mr. Ragman September 14, 2012 at 05:31 PM
she's a windbag - don't bother
deb of see-attleboro September 14, 2012 at 05:47 PM
There is also another theory, Gretchen. This one suggests that for the last decade or more, the Republican party has just been moving a little more slowly to the left than the Democrats. Perhaps this is why there has been a pull back beginning with the birth of the Tea Party and a growing interest in Libertarianism.
Gretchen Robinson September 14, 2012 at 05:51 PM
Kirby: I watched in horror last Spring as Rick Santorum dragged Romney/Republican Party to the extreme Right on birth control. That left Romney, the eventual nominee, having to run on those extremist positions. This has left many women and moderate Americans leery of the Republican party/its draconian policies. Then the Catholic bishops chimed in claiming that they had the "religious freedom" to determine US healthcare policy and not pay for birth control. In fact their outside agencies (employees in private religious schools, colleges, homeless shelters, soup kitchens, etc.), had to rewrite their guidelines to conform with this new mandate. These agencies receive federal funding in most cases. Some Catholic institutions had paid for comprehensive healthcare, including birth control, without a murmur--for years. So it was back to the 1950s and the extremism of Santorum who thought he could win by playing to the ultra-right in the Republican party. Romney himself, to his credit, floated a trial balloon on abortion last week, saying he might support exemptions on abortion (rape, incest). He had to rapidly reversed course when his backers told him to stay the course with Santorum's positions.
Gretchen Robinson September 14, 2012 at 05:53 PM
Moderator of Canton PATCH: Is it the policy to allow posters to call other people who post names like "windbag"?
Gretchen Robinson September 14, 2012 at 06:00 PM
so why do 96% of Catholics ignore On Human Vitae and use birth control??? Catholics I know think for themselves. We had a local priest say years ago, ultimately it's up to the individual Catholic's conscience. That's close to the Baptist position of "soul liberty."
Gretchen Robinson September 14, 2012 at 06:04 PM
I'm a democrat (though I'm not speaking for the party here). I am against the State having to pay for a sex change operation for Koselik. Also, Romney was extremely rash when he criticized the president. He politicized a volatile situations. One reason I like Obama is he's cool under pressure and continues to advocate for a balanced approach in the Middle East.
Gretchen Robinson September 14, 2012 at 06:08 PM
Janet, your figures are skewed. It's Bush II who got us into two unfunded wars who grossly increased the debt. Obama's contribution to the debt is modest considering we're still paying for those wars. Here it is from the Washington Post in graphic form. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/adding-to-the-deficit-bush-vs-obama/2012/01/31/gIQAQ0kFgQ_graphic.html
Gretchen Robinson September 14, 2012 at 06:17 PM
I like the Libertarian view on respect for individual rights. But this election cycle has so skewed the Right that Libertarians, who long supported women's access to birth control and abortion, have adopted the Right's ideology. This negates what libertarianism stands for: no one can tell an individual how to live their life. A classical libertarian wants more than anything to be free from any government coercion, whether it's paying taxes or what they do with their own body.
deb of see-attleboro September 14, 2012 at 06:18 PM
Gretchen: IMO, ALL religious organizations have left themselves defenseless for all the reasons you state and more. There is no separation of church and state and the losers are the faithful. Government is making further inroads by trying to work vouchers into the public school system. All religious schools would be wise to refuse to accept them Once these institutions start taking more taxpayer dollars, they will be subservient to Big Guv. Of course, the Athiest left would LOVE that, wouldn't they.
Tisiphone September 14, 2012 at 06:27 PM
Gretchen, "Kirby: I watched in horror last Spring as Rick Santorum dragged Romney/Republican Party to the extreme Right on birth control." "Horror" is an ineffectual, and not necessarily logical, emotion. Logical argument would better serve your position. That left Romney, the eventual nominee, having to run on those extremist positions. Memories are so short, it was not so long ago that being "pro abortion" was an extremist position. When I was a kid there was a doctor on Bank Street, in Attleboro, who was rumored to have performed an abortion. As kids,when we passed the office, we crossed the street for fear of being associated with it.. "Then the Catholic bishops chimed in claiming that they had the "religious freedom" to determine US healthcare policy and not pay for birth control." Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; (unless, of course, you doing that in Waco) ""so why do 96% of Catholics ignore On Human Vitae and use birth control??? Catholics I know think for themselves." By the quality of their actions and implicit protest (surely greater that translating the Bible into German) they have abandoned Catholicism. The simple fact of their "protest" makes them "Protestants".
Avon Barksdale September 14, 2012 at 06:29 PM
Because atheists are terrible people, right? Believing in whatever religion you were born into makes you more awesome than them, they have no souls and are already damned for eternity so why bother with their opinions here on earth? Rock on.
Avon Barksdale September 14, 2012 at 06:31 PM
And its hilarious that anyone would believe that vouchers for religious schools - an issue backed almost solely by the far evangelical right - is some kind of liberal leftist plot for government control. In other news, the Civil War was fought because black people were enslaving whites in the south.
Tisiphone September 14, 2012 at 07:07 PM
Avon Barksdale, Because atheists are terrible people, right? What atheists have to accept is that they voluntarily shoulder the necessity of proving non-existence, probably not possible and not an enviable position. For instance, how would I prove that not a single, precisely, half red/half green stone exists anywhere on the bottom of the world's seas. I would have to search every square inch of ocean. Atheists are called upon to search an entire spiritual universe. "the Civil War was fought because black people were enslaving whites in the south." Actually, the Civil War was fought because it was desired to conquer a sovereign nation, formerly a part of the United States which had lawfully seceded (in the sense that there was no law, or agreement, saying that they could not secede). When that idea lost its taste, we decided on "free the slaves". Observe older Civil War monuments. Prior to 1890 they refer to the "War to preserve the union". After that date, they begin to refer to freeing the slaves. (I am not opposed to freeing slaves, on the other hand we take little interest in it in places like the Sudan)
deb of see-attleboro September 14, 2012 at 07:35 PM
Avon: I don't know how to respond to your comments. I didn't say Athiests were terrible people anymore than Gretchen and others are saying Christians are terrible. Or maybe she and others are saying Christians ARE terrible? I'll have to think about that. I also did not say there was a "leftist plot for government control". I am suggesting that the religious communities can not have it both ways. They cannot accept taxpayer money without expecting government interference. It will be incremental. But it will happen. If they open the door, they have no one to blame but themselves.
Gretchen Robinson September 14, 2012 at 08:07 PM
Deb: As a retired interfaith hospice chaplain, I daily saw the good that religions do. I saw people die with equanimity due to their strong faith; and families accept their loved one's dying with courage and fortitude. I saw families with strong ties based on their shared Faith. In recent years the whole religious enterprise (I don't mean enterprise as a business, but as an undertaking), has been attacked by a few atheist writers who say "Religion" is bad thing for being violent. I haven't read "God is Not Great: Why Religion Spoils Everything" by Christopher Hitchens, nor am I likely to. Violent acts are committed by people for numerous reasons, religious, political, vendettas, hatred. A few Christian men bombed a Black church in Alabama years ago. Radical Muslims bombed the embassy in Libya. But it seems wrong to blame a whole religion or "Religion" as a whole for this. I admire the ordinary Christians, Muslims, etc. who just want to live and worship and care for one another. Most Democrats I know are good Catholics and good Protestants, the kind I saw in my work. Finally, why would atheists want to tear down the separation of church and state? Do you have statistics showing that "the Atheist left" runs the political Left. I've met many non-theists in my life and work, but all were peaceful, good ethical people. Many were Republicans. (PS. I wrote this before seeing your post above).
Gretchen Robinson September 14, 2012 at 08:21 PM
the question of "are you better off today?" is the wrong question. I watched the video and was inspired and hopeful all over again. You see I believe in the dream of a better America without the Koch Brothers, and Sidney Adelson buying election. I believe we can rid elections of PACs and billions given by the rich and powerful to ensure their power and dominate the lives of the rest of us.
Kirby September 14, 2012 at 09:18 PM
I think "extreme" and "draconian" are not good characterizations of someone who is "pro-life" - unless, of course, the same description is used for someone who is "pro-choice." It seems both are advocating positions that are not really anywhere in the middle (at least under the present societal construct). Some pro-lifers argue against abortion in ALL cases and I suspect many would label that position 'extreme.' The law presently allows for abortions to take place at ANY time of the pregnancy, even up to the moment of birth. I suspect many would also label that law 'extreme.' (if they knew about it).
Janet Sroczynski September 15, 2012 at 02:33 AM
My figures @Gretchen Robinson are not skewed. People are unemployed and need jobs. Google the U.S. Debt Clock.
Gretchen Robinson September 15, 2012 at 02:37 AM
oh but your figures are skewed. I agree that people are unemployed and need jobs. When then when the Republicans came into the House in 2010 promising jobs, did they only talk about debt and didn't take ANY action to create or support the creation of jobs??? They are too busy hating Obama and putting 90% of their attention and energy toward getting a Republican in the White House--the well being of the nation and its people is the last and least of their concerns!
Stoughton Fan September 15, 2012 at 08:11 AM
.....so the dozens of pieces of legislation, passed by the house since the 2010 elections, most of which are focused on job creation, dealing with the debt and health care are sitting in limbo because Harry Reid will not bring them to the Senate floor for a vote. Reid is afraid that a number of these bills have bi-partisan support and he could not allow the embarrassment of having any of them pass. The other reason he sits on them is that some of these bills would also put democrats on record as supporting the governments trampling of the the first amendmant rights for example. They hide behind executive fiat and now will need to stand up and be counted. Everything the liberasl due, in my opinion, seem to be based on political motivation and not what is the right thing to do.
Jerry Chase September 17, 2012 at 01:08 AM
Romney has mucho competence. He deserves all votes.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something