Romney, anti-Mormon sentiment and political games.

[_chonguey]

For those with linkability:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php?s=ed5848e62aa237bf275e0215f3092b6e&showtopic=30580

Thread titled: Larry O' Donnell And Outrageous Mormon Slam, on McLaughlin Group

http://newsbusters.org/static/2007/12/2007-12-07PBSMG.wmv

Thanks for those links. It looks like the video in the the link I posted isn't at that location any more.

[_richardMdBorn]

Yeah, Go Obama.

HAHAHAHAHAHA ... snort ... giggle ...

Oh wait, you're serious, aren't you?

There's no way Obama is going to win the presidency. Regardless of his "Oprahization", he is even further to the left than Hillary is. More than likely, Hillary will win the Democrat nomination.

Like it or not, this is a middle-of-the-road country, and the further to either extreme you go, the less chance you have being elected in the general election. Look at McGovern in '72, Carter in '80, and Mondale in '84. And, just to make it even, Goldwater didn't win in '64, either. Or George Wallace in '68. Those are probably, in my opinion, the most recent examples of the most extreme candidates getting the nomination of their respective parties.

Obama is generating a lot of press now and gone up in the polls precisely because primary voters are the more extreme and more likely to get involved. Most of the country will not even pay attention until the middle of next year.

If Obama is the nominee of the Democrats, count on a BIG republican win.

And what pray-tell is going to motivate these fired up Republican voters to deliver a win to the GOP in 08? Openly racist sentiment against Obama? Open Anti-feminism against Hillary? Anti-mormonism against Mitt? A love of everything great and wonderful that has happened in the U.S. since Bush's election 2000?

The things that "energize" so called value voters is plain old bigotry and a love of the status quo.

Who on the Republican side is going to be able to bring a message of change or hope that will mobilize these voters to their "cause"? Elections aren't won or lost on which side you think is right and no matter what, the GOP lost the message years ago. Most Americans, including myself from a conservative background, wouldn't cast a vote for another Bush or his ideological buddies to save my life. You undersetimate the number of people who feel the exact same way for a variety of reason.

Keep telling yourself Obama can't win. It will make your shattering disappointment all so much sweeter to me in 08.

The problem Hillary has is that Obama and Edwards (and the fact that the race is tightening) is forcing her to tack left. Her stands on issues such as licenses for illegals will hurt her if she wins the nomination. Many Democratic leaders say that Obama is not ready yet for the presidency. Note that no sitting senator has become president since JFK. He benefited from the Kennedy machine. Hillary benefits from the Clinton machine. Obama does not have this benefit. He has no executive experience and that hurts when you're running for President. I live in Illinois and thus naturally follow Obama. He's a lightweight.

[_mledbetter]

Interesting.

I'm a white man from the old south, and I could care less about the color of his skin.

I think he's divisive, inexperienced, and way too socialistic.

I look for what the candidate's position's are, not the color of his, or her, skin.

No patriotic American could hope for any more when others enter the ballot box. If you believe that way about Obama, I don't regret your lack of support. Policy is the driving force in politics, not race or other superficial issues.

You say Obama is divisive but seem to deny the possibility that this "divisiveness" might have anything to do with White Racism in the GOP strongholds of the south. It is true that he might be divisive in many ways. I'm just saying any idiot who allows his divisness opinion to be driven by Obama's skin is the true bigot in all this. If you are implying that millions of whites won't vote for blacks or vice a versa and only support their own skin tone is an idea as outdated as slavery or segregation.

I'm just not sure how committed conservatives really are to the vision of the civil-rights movement when a large bit of anti-Obama rhetoric plays on the race issue, both subtly and overtly. I'd like to hear a conservative voice the opinion that it IS possible for an African American to win the presidency, that there is nothing about Obama as a man that should stop him from gaining the political support he so clearly is gaining.

If you don't think that's possible, then you don't share Obama's vision of the 21st Century, or mine either for that point.

The only person who's been so bent out of shape about race in this thread is you. Go back and read your posts. You're trying to accuse every conservative and people in this thread of racism where there is nothing said that would give you a reason to make such accusations. Where are you from? Have you ever been to the South? I would guess that you haven't

If I were to guess your age-from your posts-I'd have to say that you are still young. Don't believe everything you hear and read. Get out there and see the world for yourself. Study a bit more about history. Study up a bit more about demagoguery in the last century and how it's been used by different politicians to gain power. Study a bit more about socialism and countries who have adopted it. See how they have faired. The reasons behind the current food shortages in Venezuela and starvation in North Korea and Zimbabwe are good places to start reading up on. Take a look at Yugoslavia, which by the way is one of the most moderate forms of old style socialism which failed, but took many years. Read up on how NHC is fairing in Europe and their unemployment rates compared to the U.S. Find out why the British people are pulling their own teeth, for instance.

We're not that bad off in this country, so you need to start being very critical of the politician who comes along promising you that he/she is going to fix all of your problems. You need to especially be critical of the politician who comes along inventing problems, or blowing them out of proportion, such as the race issue. I've lived in the South most of my life, and the place I saw and experienced more racism than anywhere else I lived was in Tacoma Washington. I had people call my best friend's mother a n*gg*r lover because she was married to a black man. There was always race fights in my middle school between hispanics and blacks and sometimes the whites. The South has been very mild from what I've seen, but I'm not denying that problems exists. I'm just not sure that the average black guy in the South is really going to give a crap that you are a white boy from out west whose heart is bleeding for them and their cause. My boss and the Director of my area-both black-at the company I worked for here in Atlanta certainly wouldn't give a crap about your bleeding heart and your white guilt. Neither would any of my black coworkers. Nor would any of the blacks I go to Church with. They'd probably all tell you to lighten up. Seriously young man, lighten up. Socialism is the cause for which Obama lacks my support, not race. If you want to keep assuming that, then there's no point in arguing with you further.

[_ozemc]

Interesting.

I'm a white man from the old south, and I could care less about the color of his skin.

I think he's divisive, inexperienced, and way too socialistic.

I look for what the candidate's position's are, not the color of his, or her, skin.

No patriotic American could hope for any more when others enter the ballot box. If you believe that way about Obama, I don't regret your lack of support. Policy is the driving force in politics, not race or other superficial issues.

You say Obama is divisive but seem to deny the possibility that this "divisiveness" might have anything to do with White Racism in the GOP strongholds of the south. It is true that he might be divisive in many ways. I'm just saying any idiot who allows his divisness opinion to be driven by Obama's skin is the true bigot in all this. If you are implying that millions of whites won't vote for blacks or vice a versa and only support their own skin tone is an idea as outdated as slavery or segregation.

Of course, racism exists. Always has, always will. Hopefully, people get past their own race issues and vote on the issues.

I'm just not sure how committed conservatives really are to the vision of the civil-rights movement when a large bit of anti-Obama rhetoric plays on the race issue, both subtly and overtly. I'd like to hear a conservative voice the opinion that it IS possible for an African American to win the presidency, that there is nothing about Obama as a man that should stop him from gaining the political support he so clearly is gaining.

Apparently, you didn't read the part of my post where it was the Democrats that voted against the civil-rights legislation. It wouldn't have passed without Republican votes.

It was Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, that freed the slaves.

It was George Bush, a Republican, that appointed the 1st 2 black Secretaries of State.

It's really hard sometimes, I guess, when history doesn't fit your worldview.

If you don't think that's possible, then you don't share Obama's vision of the 21st Century, or mine either for that point.

No, I don't share his vision. I think it is bad for America.

From the Chicago Tribune a while back:

"U.S. Senate candidate Barack Obama suggested Friday that the United States one day might have to launch surgical missile strikes into Iran and Pakistan to keep extremists from getting control of nuclear bombs."

Does he not realize that Pakistan is an ally? And they have their own nuclear bombs?

That was the move of a very inexperienced one-term Senator.

As far as the race issue from a conservative standpoint, I think it is extremely possible and, hopefully probable, that a black man (or woman) can win the Presidency.

In my particular case, I would vote for any of the following:

Colin Powell
Clarence Thomas
Condoleezza Rice

Of course, I would not vote for any of these:

Cynthia McKinney
Jesse Jackson
Al Sharpton

It has nothing to do with race, it is idealogy and issues.

EDITED TO ADD:

for what it's worth, I voted for Alan Keys in the last two elections, and probably will again, at least while I can, in the primaries. in my opinion, he is the smartest, most articulate, experienced candidate for President out there. Why don't the media say anything about the fact that the Republicans are running a black candidate?

Would YOU vote for this black man for President?

[_Abinadi's Fire]

Would YOU vote for this black man for President?

I would. Unless he turned out to be a black Mormon.

Just kidding.

[_krose]

Apparently, you didn't read the part of my post where it was the Democrats that voted against the civil-rights legislation. It wouldn't have passed without Republican votes.
It was Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, that freed the slaves.

You can't rely on the party names of the past to paint anyone now. Democrats used to be the conservative, pro-slavery party. Lincoln's Republican party was very progressive (anti-slavery, anti-polygamy).

for what it's worth, I voted for Alan Keys in the last two elections, and probably will again, at least while I can, in the primaries. in my opinion, he is the smartest, most articulate, experienced candidate for President out there. Why don't the media say anything about the fact that the Republicans are running a black candidate?

For the same reason that nobody talked about Orrin Hatch's Mormonism when he ran. He never rose above 1% or so, so was never considered a serious candidate.

[/quote]

[_ozemc]

Apparently, you didn't read the part of my post where it was the Democrats that voted against the civil-rights legislation. It wouldn't have passed without Republican votes.
It was Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, that freed the slaves.

You can't rely on the party names of the past to paint anyone now. Democrats used to be the conservative, pro-slavery party. Lincoln's Republican party was very progressive (anti-slavery, anti-polygamy).

Democrats are still the pro-slavery party. They do all they can to keep blacks on the liberal "plantation".

I don't think that I would characterize the Democrat party of the last 50-75 years as conservative.

Republicans are still the ones that see beyond race to the qualifications of a person. No quotas, no affirmative action, hire only the best qualified, etc.

Truly that is where MLK Jr.'s dream lives.

for what it's worth, I voted for Alan Keys in the last two elections, and probably will again, at least while I can, in the primaries. in my opinion, he is the smartest, most articulate, experienced candidate for President out there. Why don't the media say anything about the fact that the Republicans are running a black candidate?

For the same reason that nobody talked about Orrin Hatch's Mormonism when he ran. He never rose above 1% or so, so was never considered a serious candidate.

I know, it's sad, because he truly is a remarkable thinker.

Is the reason he's not considered serious because he's a black conservative, instead of a black liberal, like Obama? The media play their own favorites.

[_Dr. Shades]

for what it's worth, I voted for Alan Keys in the last two elections, and probably will again, at least while I can, in the primaries. in my opinion, he is the smartest, most articulate, experienced candidate for President out there. Why don't the media say anything about the fact that the Republicans are running a black candidate?

For the same reason that nobody talked about Orrin Hatch's Mormonism when he ran. He never rose above 1% or so, so was never considered a serious candidate.

I know, it's sad, because he truly is a remarkable thinker.

Huh? Orrin Hatch is a remarkable thinker?

You're the first person I've heard say that.

[_ozemc]

for what it's worth, I voted for Alan Keys in the last two elections, and probably will again, at least while I can, in the primaries. in my opinion, he is the smartest, most articulate, experienced candidate for President out there. Why don't the media say anything about the fact that the Republicans are running a black candidate?

For the same reason that nobody talked about Orrin Hatch's Mormonism when he ran. He never rose above 1% or so, so was never considered a serious candidate.

I know, it's sad, because he truly is a remarkable thinker.

Huh? Orrin Hatch is a remarkable thinker?

You're the first person I've heard say that.

OOPS, Sorry!

I was refering to Alan Keyes.

I guess my mind was just wondering out there again. Happens more the older I get!

[_harmony]

for what it's worth, I voted for Alan Keys in the last two elections, and probably will again, at least while I can, in the primaries. in my opinion, he is the smartest, most articulate, experienced candidate for President out there. Why don't the media say anything about the fact that the Republicans are running a black candidate?

For the same reason that nobody talked about Orrin Hatch's Mormonism when he ran. He never rose above 1% or so, so was never considered a serious candidate.

I know, it's sad, because he truly is a remarkable thinker.

Huh? Orrin Hatch is a remarkable thinker?

You're the first person I've heard say that.

He's talking about Keyes, Shades. At least, I think that's who he's talking about. When people use pronouns improperly sometimes it's hard to follow.