Meet Ed Snow: The "Fundraiser"

[_Daniel Peterson]

Dr. Peterson,

Have you ever read "The Old Cash Nexus" By Louis Midgley? It was published by FARMS.

http://farms.BYU.edu/display.php?table=review&id=282

I think you need to read it.

You appear to have missed the statement at the head of the article, which reads "The views expressed in this article are the views of the author and do not represent the position of the Maxwell Institute, Brigham Young University, or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."

And no, I don't have a job in the real world.

(just as you've never been paid for apologetics ;)

You're going to go on pummeling that straw man until it's in pieces, right? It must be remarkably gratifying, in some way that eludes me.

I never said that I had never been paid for apologetics. I've always said that my salary doesn't come from apologetics, and that it would be the same, if not slightly higher, if I never wrote an apologetic line. I've said this many times. I've repeated it many times. I'm saying it again. This is a repetition of earlier statements. It is precisely accurate.

I have never said that I haven't occasionally received fifty or a hundred bucks in royalties for some apologetic thing or other. In fact, I've explicitly said that I have. It's happened several times. I've said so several times. And repeated it several times. I'm saying it again here. This represents the latest repetition of my saying so.

As far as the semantic game over whether 150k should be rounded down or up, to singular or plural

What $150K are you talking about?

In consideration for providing fund raising services, FARMS took a $300,000 note from AG Marketing, Rulon W. Cluff, and ... The balance owed ... is $330,813

And just what, exactly, do you think this means? Can you explain the transaction?

[_Gadianton]

[quote= "Dr. Peterson"]You appear to have missed the statement at the head of the article, which reads "The views expressed [/quote]

LOL! Believe me when I say I caught that.

Do you agree with him, by the way?

Don't think I missed the strawman of yours, the inference I must not have a day job because I'm against I'm opposed to FARMS having an income. I'm not opposed to FARMS having an income. Or you.

And just what, exactly, do you think this means? Can you explain the transaction?

I think it's self-explanatory.

[_Mister Scratch]

Maybe I'm dense (okay, I probably am), but what's the big deal about an organization employing a point person for fundraising? Seems logical to me.

It is logical, but, after having read the many postings by apologists suggesting that the whole operation is a nearly 100% volunteer effort, it came as something of a surprise to learn that, in fact, FARMS employs an LDS Church-appointed professional fundraiser. I, for one---probably due to my naïvété and my trusting nature---would never even have thought to look at the FARMS website in search of a professional fundraiser, since I'd been led to believe that everything was all done on a "hobbyist," volunteer basis. Instead, the truth is that FARMS is throwing around literally millions of dollars.

[_Jason Bourne]

Once again, my PM box has practically been exploding with fascinating tidbits. This latest comes from one of my most reliable sources. Many here are no doubt familiar with the convoluted money trail which is used to finance LDS apologetics. Despite the reluctance of certain apologists to cop to the facts, a great deal of light has been shed on this fascinating subject. In the course of my discussions of this subject with DCP, it was revealed that apologetics is financed in part by a "fundraiser" who works in concert with The Good Professor in order to solicit funds from wealthy LDS. I was curious about this, and tried to dig a bit more deeply into the matter. Somewhat later, DCP (perhaps in a moment of weakness) admitted that the key "fundraiser" is a gentleman named Ed Snow.

It turns out that Ed Snow is apparently a crucial figure in terms of keeping LDS apologetics financially afloat. If you click on the "Subscribe" link on the FARMS main page, you will be taken to a form that tells you that you can contact Bro. Snow in order to donate sums in excess of $1,000---the peak membership sum for the "Liahona"-level of contribution. Donors, in fact, are instructed to telephone Mr. Snow in order to "discuss" their options vis-a-vis donations. One can only speculate as to what these conversations are like.

But, there is another layer to Snow's dealings with financing and LDS finagling. Perhaps not surprisingly, he once came dangerously close to implicating linking the LDS Church with political lobbying. During Mitt Romney's run for the presidency, Snow circulated what appears to be a bit of character assassination via BYU's email server:

Ed Snow, director of development for BYU's Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, sent an email to various people, including others at BYU, last week with an attached picture of 64-year-old potential candidate Fred Thompson and his wife who is 25 years his younger. The subject line was, "Fred Thompson’s trophy wife."

"From the attachment, you can see that Fred Thompson and his wife Jeri (25 years his junior) may not wear well on many conservatives," Snow said in the e-mail.

"When making their final decision before entering the voting booth, I think many conservatives will in their minds compare this attached picture with a mental picture of Mitt Romney with his lovely wife of 38 years, their five handsome sons, five beautiful [daughters]-in-law, and darling grandchildren. I hope so."

http://blogs.sltrib.com/utahpolitics/20 ... e-mail.htm

Apparently, Snow had to be scolded by a "supervisor" for this behavior.

But, the real question, as far as I am concerned, is this: If this is what Snow is willing to do in the realm of politics, then to what extent does he go in the realm of apologetics??? As we all know, presidential politics is pretty small potatoes compared to the kind of angst, bitterness, and outright hatred that runs through LDS apologetics. If this is the guy steering the financial ship.... Well, I'd probably do best to not speculate any further.

Now Scratch. This was not a bad post accept for this:

Donors, in fact, are instructed to telephone Mr. Snow in order to "discuss" their options vis-a-vis donations. One can only speculate as to what these conversations are like.

This is what makes you look like a hack. Why add some sort of sinister spin? It is not uncommon for NFPs to have someone there to talk to about making donations. But hey. you can find out if Snow will threaten to kill you if you do not donate. Call and discuss making a donation and see what happens.

But, the real question, as far as I am concerned, is this: If this is what Snow is willing to do in the realm of politics, then to what extent does he go in the realm of apologetics??? As we all know, presidential politics is pretty small potatoes compared to the kind of angst, bitterness, and outright hatred that runs through LDS apologetics. If this is the guy steering the financial ship.... Well, I'd probably do best to not speculate any further

And this gem as. Well. I mean come on man. Get real. My only response to this is I am sure if you call Snow, offer to donate and then change your mind the nest day your bank account will be cleaned out. Sheesh.

[_Jason Bourne]

Maybe I'm dense (okay, I probably am), but what's the big deal about an organization employing a point person for fundraising? Seems logical to me.

Not one thing at all. But we all know Snow is really a computer hacker with a gun. Deny him a contribution and he will clean your account out. And watch your back. Need a rolling eyes smiley here now.

[_skippy the dead]

Maybe I'm dense (okay, I probably am), but what's the big deal about an organization employing a point person for fundraising? Seems logical to me.

It is logical, but, after having read the many postings by apologists suggesting that the whole operation is a nearly 100% volunteer effort, it came as something of a surprise to learn that, in fact, FARMS employs an LDS Church-appointed professional fundraiser. I, for one---probably due to my naïveté and my trusting nature---would never even have thought to look at the FARMS website in search of a professional fundraiser, since I'd been led to believe that everything was all done on a "hobbyist," volunteer basis. Instead, the truth is that FARMS is throwing around literally millions of dollars.

The impression I have had is that FAIR is a "hobbyist, volunteer" organization, but FARMS was an organized and funded group affiliated with a large university. The fundraising makes sense to me in that context.

[_Mister Scratch]

Now Scratch. This was not a bad post accept for this:

Donors, in fact, are instructed to telephone Mr. Snow in order to "discuss" their options vis-a-vis donations. One can only speculate as to what these conversations are like.

This is what makes you look like a hack. Why add some sort of sinister spin? It is not uncommon for NFPs to have someone there to talk to about making donations. But hey. you can find out if Snow will threaten to kill you if you do not donate. Call and discuss making a donation and see what happens.

Huh. Well, thank you for this, Jason. But why do you see this as "sinister"? All I said is that we can only "speculate as to what these conversations are like"? Is that not a truthful and straightforward statement? Plus, given what Snow said in the email he got scolded over, is it really all that wrong to raise a curious eyebrow in the direction of fundraising efforts?

Really, Jason, I *am* genuinely curious as to why you felt this was an unfair "spin."

But, the real question, as far as I am concerned, is this: If this is what Snow is willing to do in the realm of politics, then to what extent does he go in the realm of apologetics??? As we all know, presidential politics is pretty small potatoes compared to the kind of angst, bitterness, and outright hatred that runs through LDS apologetics. If this is the guy steering the financial ship.... Well, I'd probably do best to not speculate any further

And this gem as. Well. I mean come on man. Get real. My only response to this is I am sure if you call Snow, offer to donate and then change your mind the nest day your bank account will be cleaned out. Sheesh.

Well, okay. I think you are going a bit over the top here, Jason. What, in particular, do you disagree with? Do you disagree that there is "angst, bitterness, and outright hatred" in LDS apologetics? Do you think that it was not right of me to draw any connection with Snow's political finagling and his activities within apologetics? What?

[_Jason Bourne]

Well saying one can only imagine what the conversations are like casts a dubious shadow over the whole process. Maybe I just read it that way so I can be corrected. And yes there is angst and bitterness in some of the LDS apologetic community. However I think it is a small group and over all most who do apologetics are decent and reasonable persons. As for Snow, I do not know the rest of his resume. I do not think it was wrong of you to bring up his politicking. But to assume that is why he is doing what he is doing for FARMS now seems a leap. That is it. See, I have no problem with you sharing facts and even commenting what you think about the facts. But I like objectivity better and often I don't find you objective not withstanding Gad's position that you are. That is about it.

[_Mister Scratch]

Well saying one can only imagine what the conversations are like casts a dubious shadow over the whole process. Maybe I just read it that way so I can be corrected. And yes there is angst and bitterness in some of the LDS apologetic community. However I think it is a small group and over all most who do apologetics are decent and reasonable persons. As for Snow, I do not know the rest of his resume. I do not think it was wrong of you to bring up his politicking. But to assume that is why he is doing what he is doing for FARMS now seems a leap. That is it. See, I have no problem with you sharing facts and even commenting what you think about the facts. But I like objectivity better and often I don't find you objective not withstanding Gad's position that you are. That is about it.

I would be the first to admit that my observations and analyses have been affected and colored by my past contact with apologetics and apologists. And I appreciate your fairness here, Jason. If you don't mind my asking: Why do you think it "a leap" to wonder if Snow's apologetic politicking (can we agree that's what it was? since it was about smearing an opponent of Mitt Romney's?) is in some way related to his other apologetic undertakings?

[_Jason Bourne]

I would be the first to admit that my observations and analyses have been affected and colored by my past contact with apologetics and apologists.

Well since I do not know what your personal experience is outside this board I cannnot detrmine whether your slant is valid. Me experience is they are mostly decent, honest and sincere individuals.

And I appreciate your fairness here, Jason. If you don't mind my asking: Why do you think it "a leap" to wonder if Snow's apologetic politicking (can we agree that's what it was? since it was about smearing an opponent of Mitt Romney's?) is in some way related to his other apologetic undertakings?

Well, It seems the one error, perhaps even bad error, does not mean that this is what his role is for apologetics. It seems that you are implying that he is in his FARMS role exactly because he is a good hatchet man.