Support Gerald Bradford

[_Tobin]

I feel sorry for anyone in Utah who is stuck having the name, Peterson. It's pretty much like having the name, Hitler.

Not only is that utterly false, but it's blatantly over-the-top as well.

Can we keep things in their proper perspective?

That's like asking water not to be wet.

[_Shulem]

I feel sorry for anyone in Utah who is stuck having the name, Peterson. It's pretty much like having the name, Hitler.

Not only is that utterly false, but it's blatantly over-the-top as well.

Can we keep things in their proper perspective?

OK. I was out of line.

But how about the idea of Gerald Bradford becoming elder Gerald Bradford? I like the ring of that!

What are the odds?

Paul O

[_Analytics]

This is from Facebook:

New hero = Gerald Bradford. I'm sure he's getting beat up plenty by old skool LDS apologists. If you support his decision to turn away from LDS apologist ad hominem thuggery, please consider sending him some love and support. I'm sure he could use it about now.

bradfordmg@aol.com

A friend of mine knows a VP of BYU, and is amazed at how SLC micro-manages BYU.

If that's true and SLC has tight control over BYU, then clearly, Bradford and the other directors that were installed by BYU were put there for very specific reasons, and were following the directives they were given. Bradford might be a terrible administrator, but he is a fiercely loyal Latter-day Saint who is taking this course on the explicit orders of BYU and SLC.

He's being quiet because he's being loyal and taking the heat that should be directed at his superiors. He doesn't need support from us because he has plenty of support from them.

[_sock puppet]

Bradford might be a terrible administrator, but ...

then again, he might be rather sly.

Bradford might have wanted a leak. NAMIRS/BYU/COB know of DCP's style. He writes prolifically, he's responded to numerous situations over the last 25 years, and there are consistent threads in his style of responding. In sacking DCP, would NAMIRS/BYU/COB want to get their version (Bradford's e-mail) out their first, before DCP could spin it sideways? Perhaps.

Even if Bradford did not want a leak, he may have anticipated one--what with NAMIRS being known inside as a leaking sieve. Bradford's email wreaks of equanimity and even keel, and offering DCP several 'consolation prizes'. If Bradford at least anticipated leaking and DCP's histrionic response, to outsiders not already hopelessly devoted to DCP viewing the two e-mail together, Bradford/NAMIRS/BYU/COB come off looking much, much better than DCP who looks like a petulant child in his response.

Orchestrating leaking is one of the first tools savvy PR experts learn to use.

Best guess is that DCP got it half right. He was checkmated, but I think he knew very well that they were playing chess. DCP simply got outplayed by Bradford/NAMIRS/BYU/COB.

[_lulu]

This is from Facebook:

New hero = Gerald Bradford. I'm sure he's getting beat up plenty by old skool LDS apologists. If you support his decision to turn away from LDS apologist ad hominem thuggery, please consider sending him some love and support. I'm sure he could use it about now.

bradfordmg@aol.com

Send money.
http://maxwellinstitute.BYU.edu/subscribe/

[_Ceeboo]

Hey Kevin

Exmormons should support Bradford for the same reasons you should. Because he stood up for decency

This strikes me to the very core!

I have always tried (and continue to try) to not take a side concerning all of these, in my opinion, bizarre LDS apologetic related divisions (Imagine that, something LDS related being divisive ).

While I prefer remaining mostly silent with respect to this personal and divisive topic...DCP vs Bradford (that's just how I roll), I do believe that your suggested "standing up for decency" is worthy of extreme consideration, great pause, and much relection by all.

in my opinion, you have introduced one of the most (If not the most) important and critical topics for us human beings to discuss, engage, and reflect upon.

Just my take!

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Bhodi]

I largely ignore this forum, and the MAD board, this is my first post of any kind on either, for the simple reason that I see both as the unpleasant opposite of the other. I largely agree with Kevin Graham that this might be a way to move in a more reasoned and less antagonistic direction, but shouldn't this be a clarion call for moderation on all sides? The glee over the downfall of Daniel Peterson is just symptomatic of the same problem, just from another POV.

I can see plenty of reasons to support Gerald Bradford, but supporting him may require putting aside similar prejudices. If the Capulets are changing direction shouldn't the Montagues follow suit, not gloat over the change?

[_MCB]

Ignore, for those who are irritated by radical sentiments, is highly recommended.

[_malkie]

This is from Facebook:

New hero = Gerald Bradford. I'm sure he's getting beat up plenty by old skool LDS apologists. If you support his decision to turn away from LDS apologist ad hominem thuggery, please consider sending him some love and support. I'm sure he could use it about now.

bradfordmg@aol.com

A friend of mine knows a VP of BYU, and is amazed at how Salt Lake City micro-manages BYU.

If that's true and Salt Lake City has tight control over BYU, then clearly, Bradford and the other directors that were installed by BYU were put there for very specific reasons, and were following the directives they were given. Bradford might be a terrible administrator, but he is a fiercely loyal Latter-day Saint who is taking this course on the explicit orders of BYU and Salt Lake City.

He's being quiet because he's being loyal and taking the heat that should be directed at his superiors. He doesn't need support from us because he has plenty of support from them.

I guess that it has not occurred to those who are calling for Bradford's head, for demonstrations, etc., that Bradford may well have been told/asked/advised by those above him not to add fuel to the fire by publicly engaging the people who have thrown their support (in what they see as a battle between two factions!!) behind their friend. It's also quite possible that this is evidence that Bradford is a more sensible administrator than his attackers are willing to admit.

Support of a friend, of course, is laudable. Publicly attacking someone that your friend attacks, just because he attacks that someone, is not always so smart. Especially when you may not know who is supporting the side that you are attacking.

OTOH, Bradford's lack of response in this matter is giving his attackers plenty of scope to identify themselves, and, perhaps, plenty of rope to hang themselves.

[_why me]

Why me, get this through your thick head. You and your ilk over at the Morg are an embarrassment to your Church the way you're attacking Bradford when you are only listening to Dan's closest friends (Schryver/Hamblin), both of whom are acting like total fools. What you don't understand is that Gerald Bradford is supported by a host of LDS scholars who don't spend all their time pandering to internet idiots like you. I've spoken to several scholars in the Religious Education dept at BYU who have said this has been a change in the works for quite some time, and it has absolutely NOTHING to do with ex-Mormon influence. John Dehlin's hit piece was just the latest example that broke the camel's back.

Nonsense. Now here is something for you to consider. The Review can change direction. No problem. MI can change direction. No problem. But to fire Dan by email is the problem. Not just fire him by email but wait until he is out of the country and then dismiss the board. That is the problem. And because you condone this kind of treatment, it shows just what kind of person you are: not very nice.