Peterson Using Mopologetic Methods to Defend Romney

[_Ludd]

I have a confession to make. I actually check out Dan Peterson's blog from time to time. I know, I know. I should be embarassed. But I can't help being curious to see what kinds of things he is saying, especially during this very contentious election season.

I also have to confess that I will be "wasting" my vote this time around by voting for Gary Johnson, the libertarian candidate for president.

At any rate, I just noticed that Dan Peterson has blogged about Romney's geography gaffe in the recent debate where he said that Syria was Iran's "route to the sea". He actually quotes something that William Schryver wrote. It is all classic mopologetics, though. They are attempting to tell us what Romney "really meant" with his statement in the last debate, and that Romney is not really a geography flunkie, but that he was totally correct in what he said.

Here's the post: The Laughable Mitt Romney

The whole thing reminds me of how the mopologists defended Hinckley's gaffe about "we don't teach that".

[_Fence Sitter]

I don't see how a Prophet dissembling about the beliefs the Church he leads is comparable to Romney messing up geography.

[_Ludd]

I don't see how a Prophet dissembling about the beliefs the Church he leads is comparable to Romney messing up geography.

Nor am I suggesting that they are comparable. What is comparable is how the mopologists try to tell us what Hinckley (and now Romney) really meant to say.

[_Drifting]

I don't see how a Prophet dissembling about the beliefs the Church he leads is comparable to Romney messing up geography.

Nor am I suggesting that they are comparable. What is comparable is how the mopologists try to tell us what Hinckley (and now Romney) really meant to say.

This should be no surprise to anyone. They've been trying to tell us what Nephi et al, really meant for decades...

[_Ludd]

This should be no surprise to anyone. They've been trying to tell us what Nephi et al, really meant for decades...

You're right. It's no surprise to us. But what I'm driving at is that, since Peterson et al are now more or less unemployed, maybe (assuming Romney is elected) he could hire the whole old FARMS group of mopologists to work in a new government agency: Federal Administration for Rhetoric and Mittpologetic Strategies.

[_Harold Lee]

Not a waste of a vote at all to go third party. Every vote helps it gain momentum and hopefully a third party will become popular enough to represent the majority of the US (moderate independents) and help break the ridiculous power struggle of extremes a bit.

[_Kishkumen]

At any rate, I just noticed that Dan Peterson has blogged about Romney's geography gaffe in the recent debate where he said that Syria was Iran's "route to the sea". He actually quotes something that William Schryver wrote. It is all classic mopologetics, though. They are attempting to tell us what Romney "really meant" with his statement in the last debate, and that Romney is not really a geography flunkie, but that he was totally correct in what he said.

Here's the post: The Laughable Mitt Romney

The whole thing reminds me of how the mopologists defended Hinckley's gaffe about "we don't teach that".

Typical.

You know, Mitt can take his lumps just like every other politician out there. People poke at Obama for misspeaking, and they poke at Romney for the same.

Quit yer whinin' people!

For the love of Pete!

Mitt could have disarmed all criticism in advance had he only said 'Mediterranean Sea.' But he didn't, and there you have it.

We could go on about all of the many misinterpretations of Obama that have been deliberately proliferated by the Right concerning his religion, his place of birth, his patriotism, his politics, you name it.

And Peterson, who accuses Obama of being an anti-Christ, is bellyaching about this crap?