Posted by
Phil E. on Saturday, February 10, 2007 4:41:15 AM
A shill for Mitt Romney?
Yes, that's a doctored photo of Hugh Hewitt, complete with a Romney campaign button. It's called "satire."
On his radio show yesterday, Hugh Hewitt interviewed Mitt Romney. (Friday, February 9) As if there were any doubt (there isn't any — Mr. Hewitt has written a book about his "good friend" Mitt Romney. He keeps referring to him as "Governor," although Mitt Romney is no longer governor. And he keeps saying Mitt Romney is from the "great state of Massachusetts. What's so great about Massachusetts? The state that's given us Kennedy, Kerry and Frank and homosexual 'marriage?')... as if there were any doubt, Mr. Hewitt seems to confirm he's a shill for Mitt Romney. Did you catch it? (1st hour, 1st segment)
At the end of the interview, Mr. Hewitt said, "Look forward to talking to you after your BIG announcement next week in Michigan."Whoops.
Mitt Romney didn't say anything about a "Big Announcement." Apparently Mitt Romney is leaking information to Mr. Hewitt. And Mr. Hewitt, like Senator Leaky Leahy, is leaking too.
Cross examination, counselor?
This typifies the relationship between Mr. Hewitt and Mormon Mitt Romney. When he wants to grill someone, Mr. Hewitt, a lawyer, is very good at it. Did you hear him grill the Liberal professor the other day as to what kind of music constitutes torture? (
Self proclaimed Ethnomusicologist with respect to Muslim terrorists combatants.)
But why doesn't he cross examine Mitt Romney? It should go like this:
HH: Mr. Romney, I know quite a lot about the Mormon religion. Did you or did you not
swear a secret oath that "you do consecrate yourselves, your time, talents, and everything with
which the Lord has blessed you, or with which he may bless you,
to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, for the building up of the Kingdom of God on the earth
and for the establishment of Zion?"
MR: Well... I... you know, John Kennedy...
HH: YES OR NO, MR. ROMNEY! This is
not the same as John Kennedy. He did not swear a blood oath to his church.
DID you swear an oath to your church?MR: Abraham Lincoln talked about American's political religion. When I
take the oath of office, THAT oath is my promise to [my] god...
HH: So then you're saying you won't keep your temple oath to [your] god? No man can serve two masters, Mr. Romney. Which will it be? And if you won't keep your oath to your god, how can we believe you will keep your oath before god to our county?
HH: And couldn't such an oath compromise your oath of office when it comes to matters of faith or your church, no matter how remote they might be? Say, on murdering the unborn or on Israel, since
you think you are your god's chosen people instead of the Jews?
MR: I refuse to answer any questions about what goes on in the temple.
[Remember, Mitt Romney is under the old, pre-1990 temple oath, where the penalty for revealing the secrets in the temple
"is executed by placing the right thumb under the left ear, palm down, fingers close together. The thumb is drawn quickly across the throat to the right ear and the hand dropped to the side. This signifies having your throat slitfrom ear to ear and your tongue torn out by its roots."
As if that wasn't enough, a second penalty "is executed by placing the right hand on the left breast, and drawing the hand quickly across the chest, then dropping both hands to the sides. This signifies having your chest ripped open and your heart and vitals torn out and fed to the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air."
There's a third penalty too.
It's all documented. It is assumed your fellow brothers would execute this oath for you. They were known as
Danites.]
HH: Mr. Romney, as a minimum, doesn't this oath give the appearance of impropriety, which
Justice Scalia said was grounds for recusal of a federal judge? Until you renounce Mormonism, shouldn't you recuse yourself and pull yourself out of this race? Wouldn't that be Choosing the Right?
But he didn't do that. He hasn't done that. I don't expect he did that in his book about Mitt Romney. One wonders if there's a quid pro quo here? Is Mr. Hewitt vying for a job in a Mormon White House?
Old Media propagandists and quid pro quo?
Mr. Hewitt is a darling of the Salem Radio network. Both he and Michael Medved are obvious supporters of Mitt Romney and, like the Old Media, are using their bully pulpits on Salem Radio (and Townhall) to broadcast their one sided view. And like Old Media, there appears to be some collusion here. While I don't suspect Mr. Medved is expecting anything from Mitt Romney, I suspect Mr. Hewitt is.
There's clearly been advanced notice given to Mr. Hewitt. How deep it goes beyond that is anyone's guess. Mr. Hewitt admits to having long personal interviews with Mitt Romney. Who knows what promises might have been proffered or hinted at? Same comment about Mr. Hewitt's co-blogger, Dean Barnett, who once worked for Mitt Romney. Is he hoping for a gig in a Mormon White House after his Townhall days are over?
If there's a quid pro quo, this would go beyond simply biased reporting. Would it be a Townhall scandal?
Remember this as Mr. Hewitt makes the rounds in March plugging his book about Mitt Romney. He might be fleshing out his résumé for a job in the White House. As the Mormons say, he might be in it for the filthy lucre.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Please help me get the Word out and fight the Old Media bias. Please copy and paste the following to your friends:
Check this out:
http://romneyforpresident.townhall.com/
Like Mormonism, the blog isn't what it seems.