The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Drip, Drip, Drip: ‘Mormon Mitt’ Meme Keeps Popping Up in Mainstream Media

Posted on | April 20, 2012 | 153 Comments

OK, maybe it’s stretching the definition of “mainstream” to include the Daily Beast and MSNBC, but the predicted eruptions of the “Mormon Mitt” meme keep occurring with increasing frequency.

Notice how Newsweek/Daily Beast reporter Ben Jacobs hands a cue to Montana’s Democrat Gov. Brian Schweitzer:

While discussing swing states, Schweitzer said Romney would have a “tall order to position Hispanics to vote for him,” and I replied that was mildly ironic since Mitt’s father was born in Mexico, giving the clan a nominal claim to being Hispanic. Schweitzer replied that it is “kinda ironic given that his family came from a polygamy commune in Mexico, but then he’d have to talk about his family coming from a polygamy commune in Mexico, given the gender discrepancy.” Women, he said, are “not great fans of polygamy, 86 percent were not great fans of polygamy. I am not alleging by any stretch that Romney is a polygamist and approves of [the] polygamy lifestyle, but his father was born into [a] polygamy commune in Mexico.”
Romney’s father, George — who served as governor of Michigan and was a member of the Nixon cabinet and also a presidential candidate — was born in Mexico in 1907 to a family of American Mormons who fled to Mexico when the United States government cracked down on the practice of polygamy. George Romney’s parents were in a monogamous marriage, but Mexico was the last bastion for the practice of plural marriage in the Church of Latter Day Saints.

Jacobs just casually mentions — oh, by the way, how ironic! — Romney’s father being born in Mexico, and this automatically triggers Schweitzer to start in on a rant about a “polygamy commune,” and to then further contextualize this in terms of what percentage of women voters disapprove of polygamy. This rant then provides an excuse for Jacobs to relate the biographical/historical facts.

Completely coincidental, you see. Just a reporter doing his job.

Meanwhile, on MSNBC, Martin Bashir delivered a sermon Thursday:

It’s now time to clear the air and on Wednesday’s broadcast we brought you a spirited discussion about Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith and one pastor’s view that Mormonism is both theologically heretical and a cult.
Today, we wanted to focus on what Mormonism says about lying and the reason is quite simple — Mr. Romney seems to be having some trouble telling the truth . . .
Which brings us to the moral codes of Mormonism that Mr. Romney claims to live by. In section 63 and verse 17 of the Doctrine and Covenants of the Mormon Church we find this: “All liars, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie, and the whoremonger, and the sorcerer, shall have their part in that lake which burneth with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
And from the Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 2:34, we find this: “Woe unto the liar, for he shall be thrust down to hell.” Given what the Book of Mormon is clearly saying, Mr. Romney has but two choices — he can either keep lying and potentially win the White House but bring eternal damnation upon himself, or he can start telling the truth.

Now, the video:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

As you can see, Bashir calls Romney “Mitt the Mendacious” three times. The crudeness of Bashir’s rhetorical method is enough to make Allahpundit pine for “the relative subtlety and understated good taste of Keith Olbermann.” Bashir also reminds MSNBC viewers that on Wednesday, he interviewed Pastor Robert Jeffress, the Southern Baptist who endorsed Romney despite Jeffress’s continued insistence that Mormonism is a heretical cult.

What Bashir is doing is something I explained two weeks ago: Using evangelicals as a “hook” to bring up Romney’s Mormonism. This is a familiar theme that mainstream reporters have been working on ever since the 2008 campaign. The supposed anti-Mormon prejudices of evangelical Christians that were much talked about in terms of Romney’s difficulties in GOP primaries will now be reinterpreted as an excuse to talk about Mitt’s Mormonism for the general election campaign.

It’s a great two-birds-with-one-stone-stone trick for liberals: “Look how bigoted these holy rollers are and — hey, by the way — did you notice that Romney’s religion is kinda weird and has a history of polygamy, violence and racism? Also, coming up next, we have an exclusive interview with an ex-Mormon woman who has written a book that says the church is horribly sexist . . .”

There will be no end to this, and those who are sanguine about Romney’s election chances — Ace seems positively giddy these days — may be naive in thinking the media’s steady drip, drip, drip about Mormonism will not hurt Mitt with independents.

Three words: “Low-information voters.”

The kind of people who never vote in primaries and seldom vote in mid-terms, but who feel it their patriotic duty to vote in presidential elections, are notoriously disengaged from politics on a day-to-day basis. They don’t pay much attention to the news, and have only a superificial knowledge of issues and ideologies. They usually show up in poll data as “don’t know/don’t care/undecided.”

What will these voters know about Mitt Romney by Nov. 6? They’ll know he’s rich, and they’ll know he’s Mormon.

What the media are doing now is establishing a pretext for future in-depth coverage of the history, beliefs and practices of LDS. When the “low-information voters” start paying attention, what they will learn about Mormonism from the media will be . . .

Well, it won’t be anything that makes independent “swing” voters want to go storming to the polls to vote for Romney, that’s for sure.

Remember George Allen’s 2006 campaign? Liberals spent months laying down the background of Allen’s alleged “neo-Confederate” connections, with articles in the New Republic and other outlets, so that when he said “macaca,” it was like he had hit a trip-wire that exploded a mine and set off a massive ambush.

They’re now doing the same to Romney with the “Mormon Mitt” meme: Establishing the map-grid coordinates, as it were, so that when the signal flare goes up, everybody is aiming at the same target and Romney is helplessly trapped in the media kill-zone. They’ve got Romney zeroed in already: When he attempts to “distance” himself from whatever out-of-the-mainstream Mormon belief he’s accused of holding, his denial will then be used as evidence that he is just an insincere panderer with no core principles. If Mitt complains that he is the victim of religious bigotry, they’ll mock him as a whining crybaby.

All of this is perfectly predictable, you see: It is foreshadowed already, and the fact that they held back until after they were sure Romney had the nomination locked up — once Mitt won Wisconsin — was a clear clue of their ultimate intention. Yesterday, it was announced that Mitt would give the commencement address at Liberty University. Look how the New York Times played it:

Mitt Romney will deliver the commencement address at Liberty University, the evangelical institution founded by the Rev. Jerry Falwell in Lynchburg, Va.
Mr. Romney’s campaign said the university invited him to speak to the approximately 48,000 people expected to attend the graduation ceremony on May 12.
Virginia is a swing state, but for Mr. Romney, this invitation offers a chance to shore up one of his weaknesses within his base, as many evangelicals remain wary of his Mormon faith.
Jerry Falwell Jr., the university’s chancellor, said in a statement that “we are delighted” that Mr. Romney would be speaking, and he compared the visit to those of Ronald Reagan in 1980 and the elder George Bush in 1990. However, the decision has already sparked controversy among students and alumni of Liberty University, with nearly 300 people commenting on the institution’s Facebook announcement within two hours of its posting.
“I am so disappointed in my university for their choice in commencement speaker Romney. You have lost a potential grad student,” wrote Paige Farmer. “It is shameful that you would allow him a stage for political gain. What could a Mormon possibly have to share with Christians?”

You can see it coming a mile away, folks. Don’t say you weren’t warned.

UPDATE (Wombat-socho): INSTALANCHE!

UPDATE II: Linked by Bob Belvedere at the Camp of the Saints, Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing, The Conservatory, Andrew J. Patrick, Daley Gator, Da Tech Guy, John Schroeder, The Crawdad Hole and by His Vorpal Sword, who awards me the “Golden Buttplug.” Uh, thanks, I guess.

 

 

RECENTLY:


Category: Election 2012, Mitt Romney, MSNBC, Newsweek, Religion

Comments

153 Responses to “Drip, Drip, Drip: ‘Mormon Mitt’ Meme Keeps Popping Up in Mainstream Media”

  1. Adobe_Walls
    April 20th, 2012 @ 7:46 pm

    The only slack he deserves is the difference between a long drop or short one.

  2. Adobe_Walls
    April 20th, 2012 @ 7:48 pm

    Couldn’t hurt is image either tho not as good as stabbing David Gregory in the eye with a pencil.

  3. Adobe_Walls
    April 20th, 2012 @ 7:50 pm

    The best way for conservatives to pick a conservative nominee would be to have a conservative party.

  4. Adobe_Walls
    April 20th, 2012 @ 7:51 pm

    Hold that unhappy thought, that’s where we’re headed.

  5. Adobe_Walls
    April 20th, 2012 @ 7:54 pm

    @beddd0ebf1f1d7f0c1561106bdcdfb31:disqus 
    Your on a roll that’s three ideas in a row that work for me.

  6. Adobe_Walls
    April 20th, 2012 @ 7:57 pm

    No the “Tea Party’ won’t at least not the best of them.

  7. Adobe_Walls
    April 20th, 2012 @ 7:57 pm

    So what did you do with the other wives?

  8. Dlmldm
    April 20th, 2012 @ 7:58 pm

    Liberals bash Romney for being Mormon – yet he was born into the faith, Reid converted to Mormonism as an adult but thats fine with Dems.  How does that make any sense?

  9. Adobe_Walls
    April 20th, 2012 @ 7:59 pm

    Who are you calling a Republican?!!

  10. Dlmldm
    April 20th, 2012 @ 8:10 pm

    “bizarre,” Mormon beliefs are actually biblical and profoundly Christian.  Here is proof

    http://www.thoughts.com/dlmlds/actual-mormon-beliefs-are-biblical-and-profoundly-christian

  11. Banjo12
    April 20th, 2012 @ 8:22 pm

     Say, wasn’t Obama’s pa a polygamist? Or just a bigamist.

  12. Pathfinder's wife
    April 20th, 2012 @ 8:23 pm

    Well, maybe we should fight the inevitable?

  13. ThePaganTemple
    April 20th, 2012 @ 8:42 pm

    @Pathfinder’s wife

    Have fun.

  14. Pathfinder's wife
    April 20th, 2012 @ 8:42 pm

    Ah, your own prejudices betray and blind you PT.  

    I would prefer to see someone who will respect the Constitution and espouse small government principles.  I’m willing to compromise a bit as nobody gets their way all the way, but I’d like to see a general trend towards this. Whether it’s Santorum or someone else, I could care less (I’ve voiced support for other canidates in the past, so I’m not stuck on one person).

    And I’m not the one running around saying the equivalent of darling Mitty-poo on a daily basis, so there’s that.

  15. Bob Belvedere
    April 20th, 2012 @ 8:46 pm

    But, the fact remains: THEY HAVE AND CONTINUE TO BE SECRETIVE. Face the reality that such behavior doesn’t help their case that they’re just like every other religion in America. By refusing to open their practices and beliefs up, they’re allowing non-Mormons to use their imaginations – and we know how dangerous that can be and how it can be exploited. People naturally will ask ‘What are they trying to hide?’ Being good neighbors and outstanding citizens will only go so far.

    In the 19th Century, the Know Nothings were able to exploit to great effect the fact that many people in America were ignorant of The
    Roman Catholic Church. It wasn’t until a concerted effort was made by the Cardinals and Bishops and priests to be open about The Church’s doings and practices that the bigotry began to start fading [helped along by Hollywood in the 1930’s and 1940’s].

  16. ThePaganTemple
    April 20th, 2012 @ 8:49 pm

     They already have and they will again. The Tea Party cares about restoring fiscal discipline and sanity over and above anything else. They won’t sit idly by while Obama takes a second term. Remember, for a while their favored candidate was Gingrich. Mitt not be their preferred candidate, but he’ll do.

  17. ThePaganTemple
    April 20th, 2012 @ 8:50 pm

     Me.

  18. ThePaganTemple
    April 20th, 2012 @ 8:59 pm

     It would be hilarious if anyone was to say that to me, because if Mitt was to lose the nomination I wouldn’t be storming off in a huff threatening to vote third party or promoting a floor fight at a brokered convention.

    But beyond that-MY prejudices are betraying and blinding ME? Not hardly. I’ve made it crystal clear I will support the GOP nominee, whoever that happens to be, and that includes-well, included at one time, Santorum.

    But its not going to be Santorum. It’s not going to be Paul. It’s not going to be Newt, who of the four I would actually prefer, despite his obvious flaws.

    It’s going to be Mitt. Do I have to go into another long schpiel about how he wasn’t my first choice? How in fact he wasn’t even my second or third choice? How in fact at one time I actually preferred Santorum to him?

    No, if anything I’ve moved on from my prejudices. I’ve left them far, far behind, and frankly I feel good about it.

  19. Wombat_socho
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:03 pm

     Well, the early signs are promising. Both the “War On Women” and “Dog Torturer” memes have exploded in the face of the Obama crew  rather nicely, and I daresay based on the GOP primaries we’re going to see a lot of that “nice doggie” smiling from Mitt while everybody else on the Right is putting a little extra moxie into the rock throwing.

  20. Quartermaster
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:18 pm

    It was a change in religion. The Reformation saw to that.

  21. Quartermaster
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:23 pm

    The essay at that link is little more than obfuscation. Mormons deny the biblical fact that God is not a created being, but is “from everlasting, to everlasting.” 

    While you have a right to your opinion, you don’t have the right to make up facts. The Mormon God is a created being, as is the Mormon Christ. Christianity denies, strongly, that God is a created being. The Nicene council was called to settle that issue permanently.

  22. Quartermaster
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:27 pm

    TPT, there will not be a next time. The stage has already been set for a collapse and the US will end when the collapse takes place. The collapse takes place with Mittens or the Kenyan. Neither can stop it because they are constitutionally unable to do what is necessary.

  23. Quartermaster
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:28 pm

    You sure won’t get it with teh DC ruling party running the GOP.

  24. Quartermaster
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:30 pm

    There is also the very real concern that a Mormon WILL take orders from the Mormon general authorities. In fact, he’s obligated to do so.

  25. Adobe_Walls
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:30 pm

    Actually he’ll do very little.

  26. Quartermaster
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:32 pm

    Don’t bet on it. There isn’t going to be much enthusiasm for Mittens among conservatives. They may support him when the time comes for a vote, but that’s about as far as it going to go.

  27. Quartermaster
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:34 pm

    I have to say you don’t control yourself well. Your language marks you as one of marginal thinking skill. One who is unable to express himself with the constant resort to profanity is much of an intellect.

  28. Quartermaster
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:34 pm

    Very, very little.

  29. Pathfinder's wife
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:41 pm

    The question should more correctly be: do I want 4 more years of progressive political agenda?  The answer is “no”.

    But I will amend that to “no, but I don’t believe Superman himself could pull this country out of the nosedive its in…certainly no politician is going to be our all mighty savior, but there are some that may be better than others; principles will be the most important thing to vote for in this election, imhao”.

  30. Pathfinder's wife
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:44 pm

    ..and PT, I’m not the one getting huffy…I’ve merely stated what I think, my opinions, and have refrained from teasing anyone (although, if you want, I can play along)

    Who loves ya baby? 😉

  31. Quartermaster
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:45 pm

    We already have the disappointment with Mittens. You think he’s electable, many of think quite differently. There really isn’t enough of a difference between Mittens and the Kenyan to matter. We might get lucky, but that’s not the way to bet given Mitten’s actions as MassGov.

    We saw this same nonsense with Dubya and we got burned badly.

    And you misunderstand McCain’s reasons for the post, as has been pointed out previously. all you are doing now is acting the idiot. So, seriously this time, get your head out of your fourth point of contact.

  32. Quartermaster
    April 20th, 2012 @ 9:47 pm

    Perzactly!

  33. ThePaganTemple
    April 20th, 2012 @ 10:01 pm

     @Quartermaster    
     @98746a1a064f1c4277481aba76601300:disqus

      Would this be his reason for the post-

    You can see it coming a mile away, folks. Don’t say you weren’t warned.

    Because I don’t see any difference in what he’s warning us about and in all the similar tactics the libs used against Santorum, Newt, Bachmann, Perry, and Cain. Name me one that was treated with kid gloves, except for Paul, and maybe Pawlenty who wasn’t in the race long enough to draw their attention anyway.

    It’s good that someone points all this stuff out, but I get the idea that, no matter what Stacy might be intending, a good many others are using it as an excuse to promote a floor fight at a brokered convention in the hopes of somehow getting Santorum the nomination.

    And this “idiot” is telling you flat out, if that’s what you’re hoping to accomplish, you’re in for a great big old let down. But hey, don’t let me spoil your fun. Just don’t be too awful disappointed when it doesn’t come about.

  34. ThePaganTemple
    April 20th, 2012 @ 10:08 pm

    Pathfinder’s wife

    No, you might not be threatening to storm off in a huff, but you know there are plenty of others who are trying to leave that impression if not outright saying so. And if they do, that’s certainly their right.

    I just don’t understand it. Mitt is far from perfect, but he has stated his intention to respect the constitution, the tenth amendment, and federalist principles. I think I believe him, and in fact I trust him more than I would Santorum on those terms.

    I think their problem is the idea that Mitt isn’t going to take a blowtorch to the federal government. The dirty little secret is, neither would Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, or anybody else. Ron Paul might arguably do that, but hey, guess what, most of them don’t like him either.

    So there you go.

  35. Mitt the Mormon and You | his vorpal sword
    April 20th, 2012 @ 10:21 pm

    […] fair, I doubt that he knows a damn thing about them. He’s only interested in playing defense. Check out the endless stream of bashing-perceived-Mormon-bashing and mind-reading that he’s in… Share this:StumbleUponDiggRedditTwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this […]

  36. teapartydoc
    April 20th, 2012 @ 10:52 pm

    I’m starting the Campbell-Stone Movement to Elect the Mormon Robot.  A little esoteric, but we’ll make a difference, I can assure you.  Go Mitt.

  37. Pathfinder's wife
    April 20th, 2012 @ 11:00 pm

    This also works as a response to PT up above, with the addendum: Mitt states, Mitt states — what has he done?  From the past it seems Mitt is very good at stating anything you’d like to hear, and then doing something else once he thinks he has your confidence (and vote).

    People don’t have a right to get mad at that, even hufffy?
    Remember: there has been “huffiness” here before concerning other canidates (in fact, there’s been some flagrant nastiness…Sanitorium, St. Sweater  Vest…oh, let’s not forget some of the charming things said about his wife; and the statements made about Paul could be pretty brutal too; and Cain, he didn’t get off too easily, nor Bachman, nor Perry).  Granted, there wasn’t as much here as at other sites (which was nice) but there isn’t much “huffiness” here now with Romney (nobody is really getting nasty about him, just criticisms — when did those become foul territory? he isn’t the nominee yet, so in a sense he’s fair game for Repubs still, and probably conservatives for good, as he isn’t one no matter what he says).

  38. robertstacymccain
    April 20th, 2012 @ 11:05 pm

    Would you, or would you not, agree that what I have warned about since March 6 is now, in fact, occurring?

    Therefore, having seen this coming seven weeks ago, am I not entitled to some credit for my accuracy in predicting how the media operates? If I deserve such credit, and now repeat the warnings, describing what the media will do and how they will do it in the future, don’t you think it is rather foolish to scoff at my predictions?

  39. ThePaganTemple
    April 20th, 2012 @ 11:19 pm

     I’ve had more than my fair share of disappointments this election cycle, so I understand and empathize up to a point with where all of this is coming from.

    And I’ve also made more than my share of nasty remarks, not just about Santorum, but Perry, and Pawlenty, and I even criticized Bachmann, who I think I would have got out of my death bed to vote for.

    And then there’s Herman Cain, whose woman problems I could never resist the urge to joke about at the slightest opportunity (but who I would have also gladly voted for).

    And lest I forget-OHMIGOD, I even used to criticize Mitt, who at one time I could not disparage enough.

    But enough is enough. I don’t want to criticize Santorum anymore. I want to forget about him. I come here not to disparage Ricky Poo, but to bury him. But every time he tries to get away-they puuuuuul him back in.

    I’m tired of this living in the past, this constant drama about brokered conventions, the continuous forebodings and negativity.

    It’s over. That’s spelled O-V-E-R. Mitt is the nominee. I’ve come to terms and made my peace with that. I’m even happy about it.

  40. Campaign 2012: Polygamy And Dogs - The POH Diaries
    April 20th, 2012 @ 11:32 pm

    […] Mormonism is fair game in the press. But we knew that was coming, didn’t we?  RSM goes deeper into the latest attempt by the Dems and the media to paint Romney as if he came right out of Big […]

  41. RW
    April 21st, 2012 @ 12:01 am

    The  media is invested in seeing Obama re-elected.  That is why this will be the nastiest campaign we have ever seen.  ANY Republican nominee would havehad  to suffer the Democratic operatives and the MSM.  I think Romney is smart enough to fight back.

    The best defense against the Mormon attacks is to remind them of what Colin Powell said concerning then Sen. Obama.  He was defending Obama against false claims of he being a Muslim.  What difference would it make even if it were true?  Well, what difference should it make than Romney is a Mormon?  Is it a problem being a Mormon in this country?

    I have stated all season – let the people vote and in the end, I will support the Republican nominee.  We have arrived at that time.  I will support Mitt Romney.  This as much a vote against the MSM as it is against Obama.

  42. RW
    April 21st, 2012 @ 12:20 am

    I agree with you. For the first time in my life, I am pessimistic about the future of this country. Possibly many Americans have seen what the Democrats have wanted for years – a progressive/socialist in the White House. And remember, Van Jones is working to get Obama re-elected so he can further implement progressivism.

  43. Confutus
    April 21st, 2012 @ 4:41 am

    I don’t disagree that it’s happening, just as you said. It’s not your knowledge of how the media operates or foresight in seeing the innuendo and bigotry coming that I scoff at. 

    What I disagree with is the air of gloom-and-doom, judging an anti Mormonism campaign  successful already when it’s only beginning, that I think premature. When the attacks on Mormon faith shift from private to public, so will their defenses.  They aren’t going to roll over and play dead.

  44. Pathfinder's wife
    April 21st, 2012 @ 8:35 am

    Problem is: Mitt appears to want many of the same things Obama does — outside of Romneycare we have cap and trade (which could actually be even more damaging than the health care), gun control, “tweaking” entitlements, raising minimum wage (instead of hitting the real problem: rising prices due to dollar devaluation), and the banks…Romney certainly loves helping out banks.
    But he’ll maybe throw some red meat to conservatives to appease them, just like Obama does to his base.  He can talk a good game during speeches.

    He’s just progressivism wrapped up in a Republican robe — this is acceptable?

  45. Pathfinder's wife
    April 21st, 2012 @ 8:53 am

    The problem is, as Mr. Belvedere alluded to above: some of the criticisms are going to contain a grain of truth.
    Mormonism, like every religion, has a fair number of nasty little skeletons in its closet.  The problem is, that unlike the older, established religions, there hasn’t been time to air them out and the history is fairly recent (Peter is nearly a mythical person, he happened so long ago, same with Mohammed — Abraham most definitely; time has even worn down some of the rough edges on Luther and Calvin, but Joseph Smith happened no so long ago). Mormons don’t exactly help things along by being so secretive either.And there more than a few people who have had to deal with Mormons claiming to be victims of religious bigotry and oppression all the while engaging in not a small amount of religious bigotry themselves.  A lot of the negative stuff will come out, ant it will strike a chord.

    It also doesn’t help that foot in mouth Romney appears to have been more than happy to use his own religion for personal gain and advancement. 

  46. FMJRA 2.0: Picking Up The Signal : The Other McCain
    April 21st, 2012 @ 12:01 pm

    […] (typeof(addthis_share) == "undefined"){ addthis_share = [];}– compiled by Wombat-sochoDrip, Drip, Drip: “Mormon Mitt” Meme Keeps Popping Up In Mainstream MediaThe Camp Of The SaintsWolves In Sheep’s ClothingThe ConservatoryAndrew J. PatrickThe Daley […]

  47. ThePaganTemple
    April 21st, 2012 @ 2:50 pm

     Mitt was born into a wealthy family to start out with, but made the bulk of his personal fortune the old fashioned way, through hard work and determination. That’s just the facts. Did he have help along the way? Of course. Who in this world who is successful hasn’t had help from somebody at some time? And yes, that includes contacts within ones religious circles.

    How many people have you known that got job referrals or recommendations from somebody at their church, or even a job with a good paying salary, and/or a promotion, from somebody at their church. It just sticks out more with Mitt because he’s a politician and because he’s so much more wealthy than the average person you might know at your church.

    And while the Mormons might well have their faults, their secrecy might well be based in part on the simple fact that for a very long time they were an oppressed minority religion subject to abuse and discrimination.

    Still, I would suggest they are no more secretive than the Masons, so should we start digging deeper into George Washington’s possible skeletons based on his membership in that group?

  48. Pathfinder's wife
    April 21st, 2012 @ 4:32 pm

    I wasn’t talking about business success, but politics — he uses his religion when he wants to appear a certain way.
    But the business side of things possibly works too.

    Pagan, oppressed minority they may be (and a lot of them certainly like to claim it) — but this same oppressed minority did some not so nice things to “gentiles” themselves, and there are some that aren’t “nice folks”, especially when the “gentile” in question isn’t necessarily interested in converting to the “one, true religion” — then some of them can get downright nasty (to be fair, some stay decent, but it only takes a few as they say).

  49. alwaysfiredup
    April 21st, 2012 @ 5:28 pm

    because they’re not emphasizing the Mormonism for the benefit of Democrats/liberals, or even independents.  They do it to peel away the christian conservative vote from Romney.

  50. ThePaganTemple
    April 21st, 2012 @ 5:56 pm

     @Pathfinder’s wife    
      
    Well he certainly wouldn’t be the only person that used his religion to get ahead in politics now, would he?

    And I wasn’t meaning to say the Mormons are oppressed now, I’m talking about back in the past what they went through might have made them inclined towards secrecy. Or maybe not. Some religions are just naturally secretive. That doesn’t bother me, if anything it adds to the mystique. Though frankly there’s nothing about Mormonism I find attractive.

    And unfortunately, there are enough bad people in any religion to give them all a bad name.