Jason Bourne wrote:I mean really!!! I do not recall any such level of "The Mormon Factor" when Hatch ran. Oh yea a bit. But not like this.
You know why? People know Romney is a much more viable candidate and actually has a shot at winning. So, all holds are off and religous bigotry will reign free.
We see it here and we will see it more.
Hatch was a vanity candidate. I don't think think Mitt will get past the EV primary voters, but he's not in the same minor league as Hatch.
Jason Bourne wrote:I mean really!!! I do not recall any such level of "The Mormon Factor" when Hatch ran. Oh yea a bit. But not like this.
You know why? People know Romney is a much more viable candidate and actually has a shot at winning. So, all holds are off and religous bigotry will reign free.
We see it here and we will see it more.
Hatch was a vanity candidate. I don't think think Mitt will get past the EV primary voters, but he's not in the same minor league as Hatch.
EVs will support Mitt because he will be their best choice.
SatanWasSetUp wrote:Yes, Orrin wasn't a strong candidate. He ran in 2000, I think. Bush was the front runner that year, with McCain a strong second. I believe Hatch was even behind Keyes in most polls. Nobody cared about Hatch. The Republican nomination is wide open this year, and Romney has a decent shot at getting it. That's why his dirty laundry is being aired. You think it's bad now, imagine if he actually wins the republican nomination. That's when the mud will really start flying. This is nothing compared to what will be said about him in the fall of 2008.
Imagine if he does. Imagine if he runs against Hillary. We'll have millions of Republicans foaming at the mouth and voting for Hillary because they'd rather have her as president than a Mormon. Those are twisted, twisted priorities.
How's it twisted to prefer Hillary to a Mormon for President?
Is this a partisan political opinion or is there something behind it? Just curious.
I think he meant that it would be odd for conservative republicans to vote for Hillary over Mitt just cause Mitt is a Mormon.
maklelan wrote: Imagine if he runs against Hillary. We'll have millions of Republicans foaming at the mouth and voting for Hillary because they'd rather have her as president than a Mormon. Those are twisted, twisted priorities.
Don't think they will actually vote, I suspect they will merely burn crosses, in protest, instead.
by the way, The vitamin and fraudulent herbal and food supplements industries would have given heartily to Senator Hatch.
guy sajer wrote: How's it twisted to prefer Hillary to a Mormon for President?
Is this a partisan political opinion or is there something behind it? Just curious.
The intention of my enigmatic post was to point at the silliness of conservative republican Christians vehemently backing a Democrat like Hillary Clinton only because that option will seem better in their minds than giving the reigns to a Mormon. I understand that your perspective is far to objective and mature to have grasped the nuances and intricacies of the cascading complexities of riddles and contradictions that is my post, but if you try a little less passionately to automatically disagree with everything that Mormons say things will fall into much better order.
VegasRefugee wrote:Hatch was not a serious candidate, romney has more of a chance. Nuff said.
yes. You see we agree.
Romney has a chance. Thus the floodgates of religous bigotry are open. One woutl have thought that JFK and the Catholic issue over 45 years ago had put such nonesense to rest. Society really has not changed all the much sense then I guess.
the Romney/Kennedy comparison was old ten days before it was uttered from the church PR consultants lips when they spoke to Romney's exploratory committee.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
Jason Bourne wrote:I mean really!!! I do not recall any such level of "The Mormon Factor" when Hatch ran. Oh yea a bit. But not like this.
You know why? People know Romney is a much more viable candidate and actually has a shot at winning. So, all holds are off and religous bigotry will reign free.
We see it here and we will see it more.
Hatch was a vanity candidate. I don't think think Mitt will get past the EV primary voters, but he's not in the same minor league as Hatch.
EVs will support Mitt because he will be their best choice.
Well whooptefriggindoo. I've got 10 bucks, server space and bandwidth...i can whip up a site such as evangelicalsformitt.org in a day...half a day if im not interrupted.
Check this out:
Domain ID:D122544261-LROR Domain Name:EVANGELICALSFORMITT.ORG Created On:16-May-2006 01:59:12 UTC Last Updated On:03-Jan-2007 00:23:27 UTC Expiration Date:16-May-2008 01:59:12 UTC Sponsoring Registrar:FastDomain Inc. (R1455-LROR) Status:OK Registrant ID:FAST-12797272 Registrant Name:Charles Mitchell Registrant Street1:1618 Latimer St Registrant Street2: Registrant Street3: Registrant City:Philadelphia Registrant State/Province:Pennsylvania Registrant Postal Code:19103 Registrant Country:US Registrant Phone:+1.14844679395 Registrant Phone Ext.: Registrant FAX: Registrant FAX Ext.: Registrant Email:cmitch05@gmail.com Admin ID:FAST-12797273 Admin Name:Charles Mitchell Admin Street1:1618 Latimer St Admin Street2: Admin Street3: Admin City:Philadelphia Admin State/Province:Pennsylvania Admin Postal Code:19103 Admin Country:US Admin Phone:+1.14844679395 Admin Phone Ext.: Admin FAX: Admin FAX Ext.: Admin Email:cmitch05@gmail.com Tech ID:FAST-12785242 Tech Name:BlueHost.Com - ONLY 6.95 PER MONTH Tech Organization:BlueHost.Com, POWERFUL WEB HOSTING - 200GB Disc - 2000TB Transfer Tech Street1:** FREE DOMAIN REGISTRATION ** Tech Street2:1548 N Technology Way, #D13 Tech Street3:Whois Server:whois.bluehost.com Tech City:Orem Tech State/Province:Utah Tech Postal Code:84097 Tech Country:US Tech Phone:+1.8017659400 Tech Phone Ext.: Tech FAX:+1.8017651992 Tech FAX Ext.: Tech Email:whois@bluehost.com Name Server:NS3.HMDNSGROUP.COM Name Server:NS4.HMDNSGROUP.COM
OK, couple of things - Bluehost.com is Mormon owned, Mormon run and is patronized by Mormons...in Utah.
I use it.
Sooo...someone who is acquainted with Bluehost set up this site.
in a possible situation this could be smelling of front group behavior.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
Jason Bourne wrote:Romney has a chance. Thus the floodgates of religous bigotry are open. One woutl have thought that JFK and the Catholic issue over 45 years ago had put such nonesense to rest. Society really has not changed all the much sense then I guess.
I agree. So they guy's Mormon, who cares?
Personally, I'd welcome a businessman with a proven record of success into the White House rather than another lawyer or career politician.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
VegasRefugee wrote:Hatch was not a serious candidate, romney has more of a chance. Nuff said.
yes. You see we agree.
Romney has a chance. Thus the floodgates of religous bigotry are open. One woutl have thought that JFK and the Catholic issue over 45 years ago had put such nonesense to rest. Society really has not changed all the much sense then I guess.
the Romney/Kennedy comparison was old ten days before it was uttered from the church PR consultants lips when they spoke to Romney's exploratory committee.
No it was and is not dead and it worked quite well when JFKs brother attempted to play the religous bigotry card.
But Vegas, we know that you are quite fine with applying religous bigotry on a Mormon Candidate. Quite fine with it.
VegasRefugee wrote:Hatch was not a serious candidate, romney has more of a chance. Nuff said.
yes. You see we agree.
Romney has a chance. Thus the floodgates of religous bigotry are open. One woutl have thought that JFK and the Catholic issue over 45 years ago had put such nonesense to rest. Society really has not changed all the much sense then I guess.
the Romney/Kennedy comparison was old ten days before it was uttered from the church PR consultants lips when they spoke to Romney's exploratory committee.
No it was and is not dead and it worked quite well when JFKs brother attempted to play the religous bigotry card.
But Vegas, we know that you are quite fine with applying religous bigotry on a Mormon Candidate. Quite fine with it.
Woudl I be a religious bigot if I did not vote for David Duke?
The attempted comarrison by the way romney and kennedy just does not work. Catholicism and Mormonism are two different coins, not different sides of said coin.
Catholicism is respectable whereas Mormonism is a kooky NRM.
Hypothetical: Kennedy is asked by a reporter a question of catholic principals. In response to this qustion he states "catholics are just like other chrstians in that (insert doctrine here)".
This is a small example of why I do not see the two cantidates in the same frame. Romney is actively playing the religious card. The american public do not like Mormons and for good reason. It is not bigoted to dislike a cantidate based on religion just as it is not bigoted to dislike Tom Cruise because he is a scientologist.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning