Are anti-Mormons to blame for Romney's failure?

[_DonBradley]

Loran,

Why not expand the lyrics to include all the domains about which you don't know, then see if you can get through a single performance before the 22nd Century?

You are the prime example of worthless posting.

[_Coggins7]

Loran,

Why not expand the lyrics to include all the domains about which you don't know, then see if you can get through a single performance before the 22nd Century?

You are the prime example of worthless posting.

Really? You've apparently missed many of the intense discussions I've had here over the last year or so, at least, those that weren't derailed by the resident provocateurs here. I've been given over to goofyness and ribbing here, to a greater or lesser extent, because probably 90% of the posting that's ever gone on here is worthless.

Much of it has been little more than spleen venting and foam flecked invective. The songs and barbs help lighten up the atmosphere a bit, and I've aimed them not only at exmos's and anti's, but even at the Church and myself when asked to. I can be self effacing and send a joke my own way regarding my addiction, and I have. I can play both sides, because its all intended to make us laugh at ourselves a bit and stay centered regarding our positions. I find, however, some of the secularist liberals here, as outside the Church, to be essentially humorless. They don't take kindly to having their favorite shibboleths (or favorite anti-Mormon icons, like Qunn) dressed down in a satirical manner.

If you want to have a serious and worthwhile discussion, be my guest, I'd be glad to oblige. I make no pretense, however, after being here since the beginning, of only taking a few critics here seriously. Indeed, Shades himself, Rollo, and some of the other originals here set that tone and fermented that liquor at the very beginning, And those of us here, like myself, Charity, bc, Ray, and rc, who don't take the bizarre conspiratorial thinking, slander, character assassination, well poisoning, defecation upon other's sacred convictions, moonbattery, and dogmatic certitude regarding hypothetical assertions and speculative inferences in the scholarly realm seriously, do not and should not make any apology for that. That is not our doing.

[_Who Knows]

Huh. Huck takes kansas in a landslide. I thought no one would vote for him with romney out. Isn't that what they've been saying? That the anti-mormons are only voting for huckabee just to keep romney from winning?

That's not the case? Really?

[_Coggins7]

And by the way, yeah, I'd love to have some discussions in the Celestial Kingdom, but the Celestial Kingdom has been essentially dead for the last year or more. A post in that room won't move for months at a time, and even so, its still difficult to keep the exmo Moonbats out, with the profanity and denigration that comes with their presence.

Anyone who wants to open up the Celestial for business, let me know.

[_dartagnan]

"Persecution ridden" Mormons? You see, you can get away with that kind of anti-Mormon moonbattery at a place like this because there are, indeed, so many here who, in point of fact, have very little knowledge of internal LDS culture.

Actually, I think it has been repeatedly demonstrated that the average participant here is far more familiar, or at least honest about, LDS culture. At places like MAD you get denial and apologetics that try to turn every negative attribute of LDS culture into something sweet.

Mormons need to be persecuted. Time and time again they are taught it is a sign that they are the true Church. So don't pretend this isn't factual, because all you're doing is destroying whatever credibility that you might have had.

Among a message board populated with a more substantial company of active LDS, this torpedo would have turned right around and broadsided you.

Hogwash. Over at MAD the Mormons have the moderators to shoot down these kinds of comments, which is precisely what happened when I posted there. They deleted the post. If they were at all capable of "broadsiding" me with it, then they would have welcomed the post and used it as an opportunity to make themselves look good. But they didn't, because they can't. And neither can you. You haven't dealt with anything I have presented. The statistics prove Mormons are the bigots here and now they are trying their best to make Romney look like a victim. They are the ones who get together and vote along religious lines. They do it more than Evangelicals. This is a proven fact.

Your comparison between the Huckster and Romney is, of course, apples and oranges. Romney is essentially, despite some things he has said and positions he has ostensively taken in the past, a conservative. Huckabee is in all essentials, except for perhaps two core issues, a liberal.

You're dodging the point like a bad apologist. You can't give me this crap that Mormons don't vote for liberals because there are plenty here and over there who are voting for Hillary or Obama. Several were democrats who set aside tehir political principles for the sake of electing a fellow Mormon. Now that Mitt is out, they're back to rooting for their favorite democrat. So don't tell me they aren't voting for Huckabee because he is a liberal. That insults our intelligence.

Back in 2004 John Kerry obtained a quarter of the Utah vote, yet Huckabee can't manage 2%. And to make the reason more obvious, you got idiot Mormons all over the web coming right out with their biases on their sleeves, stating that they would never vote for an Evangelical minister.

[_dartagnan]

EAllusion, check out the thread at MAD called "Stick a Fork in Romney." It is in the politics forum pinned at the top of the discussion forum.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... 342&st=120

I was posting as sdrawkcab until Will Schryver cried to the moderators. Interestingly, they haven't banned me. Instead they permanently remove all my posting priviledges. I guess if it doesn't say "banned" under my name, people might think I'm not responding to Dan Peterson's posts because I can't deal with his arguments. The fact is I can't post anymore.

[_Mister Scratch]

EAllusion, check out the thread at MAD called "Stick a Fork in Romney." It is in the politics forum pinned at the top of the discussion forum.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... 342&st=120

I was posting as sdrawkcab until Will Schryver cried to the moderators. Interestingly, they haven't banned me. Instead they permanently remove all my posting priviledges. I guess if it doesn't say "banned" under my name, people might think I'm not responding to Dan Peterson's posts because I can't deal with his arguments. The fact is I can't post anymore.

Um, wow. Just read it. It deserves its own thread. Bokovoy screwed up big-time.

[_Enuma Elish]

Um, wow. Just read it. It deserves its own thread. Bokovoy screwed up big-time.

Hello Friends,

To clarify, I was in playful mood the other night on the board, writing posts about everything from the song "Nantucket Sleigh Ride," to the legalized status of peyote in Canada.

Though inappropriate, my comments were not intended to be taken seriously. In response to Rhinomelon's statement, "God sent the tornadoes to punish the states that supported Huckabee? Absolutely ridiculous, and worse than bigotry," I jokingly stated, "So are you saying that he didn't?"

This was solely because I found the assertion so ridiculous. Then when Rhino questioned the intended meaning of my sarcasm, I pushed him with the statement, "Well, seeing as I went down to shake Mitt's hand and cheer for him when he cast his vote and my wife sat on the stage of his final rally (with me cheering from the crowd), given my current emotional attachment, better for right now to plea the fifth."

I did not believe then, nor have I ever believed that the South had been punished for voting for Mike Huckabee over Mitt Romney. Admittedly not realizing the details of the calamities, my sarcasm was inappropriate.

In my next post, I corrected my mistake with the comment, "Though I am a bit emotional and upset over the fact that Romney dropped out of the race today and though I do believe that this is in part due to Anti-Mormon bigotry that runs throughout the South, I do not believe that the tragedy was a divine punishment sent against the Bible belt for casting a vote for the Anti-Christ."

I then immediately apologized to Hagoth who stated that he has family in Alabama with the comment, "And I sincerely hope that they are well and apologize if my comments have hurt your feelings."

Kevin is incorrect, I am not a Democrat. I am politically independent. I consider myself somewhat of a socialist and I hold a variety of leftist political views.

Notwithstanding my own political perspectives which obviously run counter to many conservative principles, I freely admit that I was quite emotionally tied to the Romney campaign. I've lived in the same town with Mitt on and off since 1998. I've home-taught with Matt Romney and had Tagg in my Bishopric.

They're truly wonderful people and I think very highly of them.

Knowing the family as I do, I felt confident in Mitt's ability to make some helpful changes in Washington and I greatly admire his integrity.

So while I admit that given this connection I have been a bit emotional over the campaign, I have never felt that the South was punished for rejecting Mitt Romney and was wrong to employ the use of sarcasm with such a serious subject.

Sincerely,

David Bokovoy

[_Mary]

All this is a blessing in disguise for the church in my honest opinion.

I don't think America is ready for a fully committed Mormon President right now, and
for what it's worth I don't think the church is ready for it either.

It would have brought the churches history, doctrines, culture under an intense spotlight..

(if it was getting bad now, think how it would have got if Romney had actually won the race)...

There 'would' be journalists writing about Joseph's colourful life (including marrying 14 year old girls and other mens' wives), polygamy in general, Brigham Young, Mountain Meadows, the 2nd anointing, the temple,..comparisons to Masonry,...the viability of the Book of Mormon, the Book of Abraham,...etc...etc...

All of this would have been up for Public grabs....

I can't think of anything 'worse' for the church..or Romney...

Mary

[_Trevor]

I wasn't aware how clearly in the anti-Mormon camp Huckabee was. But, having said that, I very much doubt that Huckabee stayed in the race in order to thwart Mitt Romney and hand the nomination to McCain. While such a quasi-conspiratorial scenario is possible, it is, like most such scenarios, unlikely.

I hold vast conspiracies to be unlikely to the point of unworthy of serious consideration. Limited conspiracies with specific goals I find altogether believable. They happen all the time. Huckabee still does not have a shot at the nomination. I would be surprised if there were not some talk of getting the two on a ticket together to make sure that conservative Christians get the sop that will bring them to the polls. I still think "conspiracy" is a viable theory.

What I did see of Huckabee was a surprisingly sincere and caring person with policies that didn't always toe the conservative line and that seem to aimed at helping real, ordinary people. Huckabee comes across as a conservative populist. After seven years of the Bush plutocracy, it's a wake up call to see that such an animal is even possible.

Fair enough, but I still consider him a nasty, gooey something on the bottom of my shoe, no matter what his campaign says about populist fervor in the Republican party.

McCain. While you've blasted McCain for pandering to the right, you don't seem to have done the same with Romney, who did so far more obsequiously (hence his endorsement by Fox News and the like). McCain has a long enough track record of unpopular but principled stances in the Senate that one actually knows where he stands--as the staunch conservatives obviously do. I didn't like his hawkishness in taking us into Iraq, and don't like a number of other policy stands he takes. But I would credit him with taking a moderate-realist stance on a number of important issues, such as global warming. And he has for some years been one of the only politicians who seems credible and serious on the issue of deep-cutting campaign finance reform.

I blast him for pandering to the RELIGIOUS Right, after he harshly (and appropriately, I think) criticized them in the past. I want religious extremism to lose power in any major political party. Period. I prefer to see bigots exert as little influence in mainstream politics as possible. Huckabee's candidacy may have a populist flair, and it seems that in this case it carries a pretty nasty price tag on it. So, I was more than discouraged to see McCain courting Christofascist pukes.

Addendum: since I have long criticized Romney, I have felt no need to compare his failings with those of John McCain. It is precisely because I once thought highly of McCain that I have found his pandering such a terrible disappointment.