I always say yes. I don't take that to mean I believe everything the Prophets say comes directly from God, do you.

I dont think it was a reflection of personal doubt...more than just a weak answer about what LDS really believe. He needs to continue to pander for votes, so these types of "I don't want to acknowledge this right now" responses will be more commonplace, not less, in the weeks to come.

Actually it's not such an incorrect answer, when one consideres that it is jehovah, not God, doing most of the talking.

Right on, Mitt.

I do not trust the Media especially since they have misquoted so many individuals..
 

over the past decade. Also the spin doctoring from major news networks is even worse than the that coming from the candidates themselves.

If Romney says something that can be used to portray ABC's perspective, than they will write accordingly. If Romney says something that no matter how they twist it becomes less than a negative piece, than it gets shelved.

Romney is the only candidate that has had to deal with more negatively slanted pieces in the media than all other candidates combined (that includes GOP and DEM) The stronger he gets the more this crap will surface.

Let us parse every word. Let us use microscopic viewing and than parse every aspect of his life. If he has a bad day and loses his temper and says something rude to somebody, let us find it, turn it into front page political news so we can wear him down.

I can understand Romney playing a high wire circus act in regards to religious questions. I would have preferred he refer all questions to his speech. "Sorry, but that is off limits.", "Why are you asking this?"

I would also tell all journalists that if they are going to interview me for a story, they have to offer full disclosure as to which candidate they personally support. If they claim to be undecided, refuse the interview.

If they are willing to disclose their own bias, than let them do the hack job. That way readers can at least read the articles with an understanding of the author behind them.

The Swine are rooting hard for any pearls to be found

You guys kill me ... How would you answer this loaded question:

"Should God speak to you and ask you to do something that might be in conflict with your duties as president or should he speak to your Prophet who would speak to you - how would you make that decision, how would you handle that?”

You've totally ignored the absurdity of it in favour of your rancour lol ... my goodness, I GUARENTEE EACH ONE OF YOU WOULD SAY THE EXACT SAME THING -if you have not already under different circumstances ;)

That is not at all what I would have said. I would have said, God has never spoken to me. The prophet, who I believe receives revelation for the church, has never approached me personally about any policy decision. Let me go on the record, once again, and make it clear that I am confident that no leader of the Mormon church would attempt to influence policy choices I make, but in the event they did, such efforts would be ignored. As a public official my views are ofcourse informed by my moral beliefs, but as President it would be my job to make difficult decisions and I would take directives from no one.

The answer he gave was a tap dance at best. I like Romney as well as any candidate, but that was an answer calculated to mislead.

I have to agree with this only if he was correctly quoted. This is where I have issues. I can no longer accept any article at face value given the how poorly people's comments are taken out of context, reworded (creative paraphrasing), or completely ignored (parsing out provisos, caveats, etc). The idea behind the article was clearly (at least IMO), to find a wedge between Romney and his LDS faith. Reason for doing so? Well it would not be hard to see a liberal journalist thinking that if they create a wedge between Romney and true blue Mormons, that his popularity will wane and he will no longer be a threat.

Again this has nothing to do with the issues of what our country needs. This is another hack piece. So if and I mean IF, Romney actually made that comment and was quote verbatim and the quote used in this article in the context it was given, than Mitt made a mistake on how he answered the question. Otherwise, I remain unconvinced that this was exactly how things transpired.

to be fair and balanced (if possible) let's ask a couple of probing questions shall we. From the linked article ...

"This interview between Romney and a Boston TV station aired in early December. His comments about the LDS Church didn't cause too much of a ripple back east. But here in Utah, they seem to raise questions about his view of how the LDS Church was founded. In a lengthy interview with one of Boston's most prominent journalists, Mitt Romney was asked the following: "

Questions:

What TV station?

When exactly did it occur?

What is the name of the prominant journalist?

If I want further clarification where do I search for the transcripts? For example if I want to know what Romney said in his Meet the Press interview then I go to:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22273924/

The ABC article linked by Cali includes a photo of that interview -leaving the reader of the suspect ABC article to believe that Romney supposadly said what he said to Tim Russert and not to some fictional Boston Reporter?

I just sent an email to Mr. Vancour asking him to explain his article.

Is it more important to most Mormon Romney supporters that he say things as a good faithful Mormon would, or that he say things most calculated to get him elected?

Of course these Mormons will give him a pass. He's "lying for the Lord".

Didn't he say that he couldn't imagine anything worse than polygamy?

I love the MOrmon suppoters who will say that he is just twisting and dancing on this issue, but not ON ALL THE OTHER ISSUES HE HAS CHANGED POSITONS AND TWISTED AND DANCED.

DRoss has little credibility in my book.