It is a popular thing on Race42012 to slam the folks at Huck’s Army, representing the grassroots supporters of Governor Mike Huckabee. It gets tiresome, particularly the classless whining by the Romney camp about how Governor Huckabee’s supporters had stirred up anti-Mormon hatred and that’s how they won the Iowa Caucuses and set Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign on its road to ruin.
I do not address everyone who voted for Mitt Romney. Most Romney supporters have moved on, and I have yet to meet a Romney person in real life whose conduct matches some of the behavior of the real bad actors we see among political insiders, as well as most of the Romney supporters on this site.
We’ve had lies and inneudeno thrown about attacking the integrity of good people from the political establishment figures in Washington and across America that writes Mike Huckabee’s presidential campaign success off as merely anti-Mormon bigotry.
This is not an assault on Mike Huckabee’s integrity and that of his campaign. Rather, it is spoil sport slander of hardworking folks who came from all over the country because they were concerned about its future.
Huckabee said it well at the Iowa Strawpoll, “I can’t buy you, I can’t even rent you.” He didn’t have an unlimited budget with which he could rent an unlimited number of yuppy yes-men. His success came entirely from folks who sacrificed and worked hard for no pay. They made the difference.
The question is why? The wounded Romneyites will have you believe that they came for one reason: To get the Mormon. They infer that the Huck’s Army folks are little different than the KKK, except they were less violent. They infer that Huckabee supporters came to Iowa only for a political lynching.
They didn’t come with concern for their country. They didn’t come because they were concerned with right to life or the Fair Tax, just because they hated Mormons. That is the narrative from Washington, DC, that is the narrative of the Romneyites. To them, Mike Huckabee was just a grinning modern-day Father Coughlin, and the Huckabee supporters, his drooling inbred followers.
Of course, the Romney supporters who make this attack deny that they’re inferring any such thing when they allege that anti-Mormon bigotry won Huckabee the Iowa Caucuses and the seven other contests he won, but that is exactly what they imply. It is a brutal assault on the character and reputation of good people who wanted nothing more than to help their country.
I’ve been a member of Huck’s Army for a year and a half and I can’t even recall reading any anti-Mormon statements on that site. The biggest concerns has been whether Romney can be trusted and the conclusion has been that he can’t be.
For my part, I’ve been clear that Romney’s religion isn’t an issue and shouldn’t be an issue. I admit some people made it an issue, just as some people made race an issue for President Obama.
President Obama’s supporters accused Sarah Palin of stoking the fires of racism. We had President Obama’s supporters compare John McCain to George Wallace. And they infer that if we deign to disagree with President Obama it’s racism.
And Mr. Romney’s supporters who suggest that to support Mike Huckabee and not be behind Mr. Romney is a sign of anti-Mormonism are no better.
There are Black Candidates that I’ve supported and given money to. There are Mormon candidates I’ve supported and given money to. I’m an American citizen and I’m entitled to support who I like. And the attempt to say, “This person is a racial or religious minority, you must support them or you’re not a good person” is as unAmerican as saying, “This person is a racial or religious minority, you shouldn’t support them for that reason.”
I’m an American citizen and I’ll support who I like.
There are folks who love to bring up, Huckabee asking the question to the New York Times reporter as to whether Mormons believed that Jesus and the Devil were brothers. However, they fail to note that Governor Huckabee apologized for this and Mitt Romney accepted the apology:
On CNN, Huckabee said he told Romney “face to face” after today’s debate in Iowa that he was sorry for the quote from an article to be published in Sunday’s New York Times Magazine.
Huckabee told CNN that he had asked if Mormons believe Jesus and the devil are brothers because it was something he had heard, adding that he never thought his query would appear in the story. On NBC’s “Today” show, Romney said “attacking someone’s religion is really going too far.”
Huckabee says he told Romney today that he would never make an issue of any point of Mormon doctrine, adding that the former Massachusetts governor’s response “was gracious.”
Of course, this hasn’t been enough for Romney’s most virulent supporters. They’ve wanted Huckabee to apologize for what they imagined he meant or “what he must have meant.” We’ve seen innuendo and rumors stated as facts with no links or substantiation, like the neighborhood gossips spreading rumors. And where that have been links, the arguments have been as coherent as Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories. All of this is aimed at discrediting the grassroots supporters of Huckabee and what they really did.
The fair question that must be asked about Iowa is this. If Mitt Romney were the exact same person except instead of being a Mormon, he was a Lutheran, would he have won the Iowa Caucuses? I have to conclude no, he wouldn’t have. To believe Mitt Romney would have won, if only he were a Lutheran, we’d have to conclude that 1 in 11 voters (and 1 in 4 Huckabee voters) who cast a vote in the Iowa Caucuses were doing so out of malice to over come the 9 point margin by which Romney lost Iowa. However, given the money that Romney spent, if all Huckabee had going for him was hate, then in reality, it would require more like 20% of the electorate voting based on religious bigotry.
But that’s where the establishment apologists and Romney’s most virulent supporters get it wrong. The story of Iowa wasn’t one of hate, but of love for one’s country. It was the political equivalent of the miracle on ice, where outnumbered and outspent, with everything against them, a group of ordinary Americans beat the establishment in a state where organization was everything.
Of course, these forces will do anything to diminish the work of Huckabee’s grassroots volunteers. Why? For two reasons. First, if Romney didn’t lose because of religious bigotry, he had to lose because of something else. They could blame McCain being “the next in line.” But the real explanation is the Republican voters in their heart of hearts couldn’t trust Romney because he didn’t seem real to them.
The challenge for Romney is illustated by the response, Huckabee suggested Governor-Elect Chris Christie give to Governor Jon Corzine’s attack on Christie’s weight. “I’m fat, I can go on a diet. He’s incompetent, what he’s going to do?”
With the Romney-Huckabee contast, it’s the same thing. Huckabee was underfunded, he can raise more money. Romney wasn’t viewed as standing for anything, what’s he going to do?
The second reason is that the GOP political establishment and Romney’s virulent supporters doesn’t want it to be known who these people are and what they really did is that the lesson it teaches us is immistakable. Huckabee supporters proved Chapter 12 of Johnny Tremain right, “A man can stand up.”
The political establishment in Washington cares not for our issues or concerns. We are there political pawns, to be manipulated, and moved according to their will, to advance the aims of their career. But what Huckabee’s supporters showed in 2008 in Iowa was that against a phalanx of well-paid professionals, people could stand up and even win a little.
It is far more convenient to the establishment and its apologists to have us believe that rather than being a grassroots reaction, it was all a nefarious anti-Mormon conspiracy. It protects their power for us not to learn the real lesson of that campaign.
People can stand up.
November 22nd, 2009 at 4:51 pm
I can only speak for one Rombot but I have conceded on about 10 different occasions that Huck won Iowa fair and square.
November 22nd, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Eloquent, dignified, thorough, and to be perfectly honest, totally reminds me of the Pat Robertson candidacy of 1988.
Is the Huck-army a positive, legitimate, movement in its own right? Of course, it is. Not every Huck soldier woke one morning and decided “Done with Mitt. Gotta take him out and….I like Mike.” Positive foot soldier campaigning for a worthy, substantive cause.
But to be completely honest, I dont see that cause has any ultimate drive or goal except the furthering of Mike Huckabee. As one who was a Mitt Guy, I was and am constantly frustrated by the appeal I find in Fred Thompson ‘08, Pawlenty ‘12, and now Mitch Daniels, my latest “Is he the guy?” fixation.
The reason for this appeal is simple. I am a three stool center right conservative looking for that balance of Reaganite leadership and independance with a modern “today” voice and 21st century syntax and character to cut through the claptrap, get ideas accomplished, and win 50+% majorities in a country where not everyone thinks like me.
This whole Mitt-Huck thing will end sometime and I got no beef with Adam’s text. Its simply this
1) Huck isnt “that guy” and wont ever be
2) His positives are terrific but will be marginalized when “that guy” shows up and wins the mind share
3) The Huck army will dissipate as an exclusive cause when “that guy” clearly positively and forthrightly lays out and wins the mind share
4) Until “that moment” approaches (either before 2012 or after) when Obama-ism becomes a spent force in the body politic of this country (its just happening faster than any of us thought, seriously) then the Huck army will survive and thrive out there
The Robertson/Buchanan causes and armies dissipated with the rise of George W Bush when the man, ideas, and the moment came. The exclusive causes faded away and people essentially united because they could see the finish line, taste it and realized they would never cross it seperately. We are not at that point yet but when we do crazy back and forths like this one will continue to occupy a great blog like race42012.com.
Just my 2 cents here. enjoy your weekend
November 22nd, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Heath Says:
October 17th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Whilst I don’t think Huck can beat Obama (even at say 40%) it’s time that the Rombots move on from Iowa.
FACE FACTS HUCK WON EASILY AND WON FAIR AND SQUARE.
Heath Says:
November 17th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
Huck is entitled to his opinion. He beat Mittens fair and square in the South.
Bad form by Mitt not congratulating Huck.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:04 pm
This will the only comment I make on this thread (Lord, give me strength) because given the length of this post, no one’s going to read down to the 200-post
#1:
If Mitt Romney legitimately lost Iowa, then all of the complaining about “religious bigotry” is sideshow, simply sour grapes because it has little to do with the outcome of the election.
#2:
I appreciate your overall tone. That said, to compare Huckabee to Robertson and Buchanan is slightly off-base. They never won any office, number one. Number two, Robertson won four caucuses, Buchanan won 1 Primary and 2 Caucuses. Huckabee won 2 Caucuses, 1 State Convention, and five Primaries.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:09 pm
PS (to #2 above)
Another example of my world view. I watch Bob McDonnell’s campaign and acceptance speech on election night and think “holy crap, that looks like a President of the United States. He’s ready. Why do we gotta wait for ‘16 for him to be viable”. That just my inner political child talkin. But I’ll never have that feeling watching Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul, Alan Keyes, Rudy Guiliani, or Duncan Hunter.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:10 pm
#4.
Thanks Adam, you’re a great writer. Keep it up.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:19 pm
“The story of Iowa wasn’t one of hate, but of love for one’s country. It was the political equivalent of the miracle on ice, where outnumbered and outspent, with everything against them, a group of ordinary Americans beat the establishment in a state where organization was everything.”
Then these great patriots, led by Steve Deace, went and voted for Obama. What a bunch of patriots.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Great piece, Adam.
Hopefully we can move on and defeat a still powerful but definitely now more beatable Obama.
C’mon, good folks.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Romney lost Iowa because he couldn’t fill whatever void was there. Rudy and McCain were too moderate, Thompson got in too late, and Romney didn’t convince Iowans. That left Huckabee. The man came across as a funny, likeable guy in the debates, which won people over. Also, his line about “being like the guy you work with, not like the guy who laid you off” hurt Romney. Huckabee’s people were just superior organizers in Iowa than Romney’s people. If Romney and his camp are as smart as his supporters claim, then he will have learned from his mistakes in 08 and either skip Iowa, or have a better organization next time.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:37 pm
I guess I shouldn’t trust my lying eyes.
It wasn’t Huckabee you ran as the “Christian Leader”, it wasn’t Huckabee who try to leak to the Press that Mormon’s believe Jesus and Satan were brothers (apologized only after being caught). It wasn’t Huckabee who used Christian churches to rally Evenagilicals against Romney.
It wasn’t Huckabee supporters who threaten McCain against picking Romney as VP. It wasn’t Huckabee who used his book to bash Romney and try to settle scores.
It wasn’t Huckabee supporters who threatened other Christian leaders about supporting Romney. Nor has Huckabee ever denounced any of his supporters for their actions.
No, Huckabee is pure as the wind driven snow. In a pigs eye. What you have written here doesn’t pass the smell test.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Huckabee 2012! Let’s expand some more people… Let’s not focus on smears by other camps. Huckabee all the way!
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Right on Adam. Next June, when Bov Vander Plaats beats the establishment guy, Terry Branstad, we’ll see another example of where the grassroots stood up and said “No” to the establishment.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Heath . . . I agree that Huckabee won Iowa fair and square, but the tactics of rousing anti-Mormon sentiment and defamatory and false abortion claims against Romney were hardly winning “with class.”
I have always taken issue with Huck’s official campaign website and HucksArmy websites where anti-Mormonims is tolerated . . . if not encouraged . . . for political gain.
As a test I submitted VERY inappropriate comments to those websites/message boards about Blacks, Evangelicals, Mormons, and Jews under different names and from different URLs back just before Super Tuesday. Any guesses which was the only group of comments that made it through their filters/moderators (either human or electronic)? Yeah, the opinion that Mormons were “devil-worshipping cultists who shouldn’t even be called Americans” was deemed appropriate enough for them, but any hint of racist or slanted opinions against the other groups were deemed inappropriate. Interesting, eh? I’ve got all the screen shots to prove it . . . but it all seems too petty and small to me to address and publicize now. I’d personally feel like I was becoming the small, petty and vindictive Huckabee myself and would rather stay above the fray like Romney has.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Romney lost Iowa not because he was a Mormon, but because he didn’t give off the right cultural cues in a caucus where cultural cues are everything. He was patently unpersuasive as a “true social conservative” and he didn’t have the history or background necessary to let his social positions emerge more naturally. Yes, the failure to give off the right cultural cues had a lot to do with the fact that he was a Massachusetts Mormon, but it was more a matter of behavior than intrinsic identity.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:51 pm
I’m from Iowa, and Romney’s religions wasn’t even brought up when anyone discussed politics. There is an anti-establishment sentiment in Iowa going on for the past 2 years. The grassroots ousted 21 yr. party leadership in the councilmen/women race last July. They are also united behind the candidacy of Bob Vander Plaats for Gov. and not our former Gov. Terry Branstad. The establishment is falling apart in Iowa. The establishment endorsed Romney in 2007-8. Romney was just the first victim in Iowa of this anti-establishment mode among the Iowa GOP. That is why he lost. The Tea Parties around the nation is also a reflection of this. I’m no tea-partier, but I’m just sayin’ the establishment’s days are numbered. I think the GOP will have less political insiders and life politicians in the future and more grassroots leaders.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:53 pm
Agreed with #14.
PS
Why are we talking about this? honestly. I could frustrated as teh next guy about the “Christian Leader” ads and the under the radar shots at Romney’s faith, But what do they buy us at this point? Lets give the people of Iowa some credit, let Romney be Romney and let Huck be Huck and see how it plays out. The first anti-morman spiel will be pounced on.
Seriously there is only one way for Romney to win in 2012 Iowa (be it an actual or moral victory), and thats simply to be his best self, put it all out there, enjoy it, and move forward. I was and am a Romney supporter, but lets move on. Even if the hucksters dont want to.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:53 pm
Don’t you think Argentinian-tanned Sanford should be removed over there? Yuck!
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:54 pm
For what it is worth, in my “opinion” Iowa had more to do with one of their own than anything else. The built in social environment that many of the churches have, resulted in members talking to each other about one of their own and getting a TON of people excited. That is simply called grassroots marketing through word of mouth. The vehicle happened to be friends and families meeting together alot and resulted in Huckabee’s rise. I would make a guess that about 8 in 10 Huckabee supporters in Iowa are born again or evangelical. There is nothing wrong with this.
It is very common for all candidates to have places that are built naturally for them.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:55 pm
“I think the GOP will have less political insiders and life politicians in the future and more grassroots leaders.”
Until the grassroots leaders get elected, then they will be insiders. Don’t kid yourself, they will fold like a cheap suit.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:55 pm
Adam,
Surely, you jest. Were you hibernating during the Iowa primary? Because, if you weren’t, you know full well that there was a virulent “stop the Mormon” movement among Evangelicals that was more than just aided and abetted by the Huckabee campaign. The Huckster was leading the charge with force and enthusiasm.
Why revisit this now? Are you trying to rewrite history by a gratuitous insertion of wild-eyed fantasy? What’s the point?? The McCain nomination, and his ignominious defeat, was a direct and inevitable result of Huckabee’s machinations in Iowa. All delusions to the contrary can’t change that.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Adam . . . your point about so many people’s votes needing to be changed for Romney to beat out Huck in Iowa has a big flaw in it. You’re not accounting for the influential opinions of pastors/evangelical leaders. I was at the Iowa caucuses and spoke with several people there to vote for Huckabee. It was their first time every voting in the caucuses, they were from rural areas, and they lived “by every word and breath” that came out of their pastors mouth. It’s legal and fair and square, but I still see it as “we have a religious duty to halt the Mormons” from a larger percentage of folks that you seem to be willing to admit. Look at the exit polls and there is a huge demographic of middle-aged women that voted for Huckabee and that hadn’t been caucusing in years prior. That, of course, does not represent every Huck voter or even close to a majority . . . but there were enough of them and Huck’s people got them organized and mobilized enough to carry the day.
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:58 pm
13,
What screenshots? I remember during the caucuses that Romney supporters signed up for Huck’s army and posted those comments to make Huck’s Army folks look bad. They even said it was them on a grassroots site for Mitt Romney (I can’t remember the name it was Mittsomething). The top organizers for Huck’s Army kicked them off the site. There are strict rules at Huck’s Army and if anyone made a comment that is inappropriate, they would be kicked out or deleted. My relatives are Mormons and I respect and love them. I don’t agree with their views, but I don’t hound them or hate them because of it. They were disappointed in Romney because he wasn’t a strong pro-life person and Mormons are strongly pro-life. Like Adam said, it had nothing to do with Mitt’s religion, it had to do with his Kerryesque flip-flop likeness.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:04 pm
HEY EVERYONE, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, THE DESMOINES REGISTER IS HAVING THEIR 2012 PREZ. POLL OUT TOMORROW. I BET PALIN AND HUCK WILL HAVE THE LEAD. IT WILL BE INTERESTING IF ROMNEY WENT UP OR DOWN, AND IF PAWLENTY GETS ABOVE 5%.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:06 pm
Funny SuzieQ . . . but whoever “ousts the Establishment” will thereby become the new Establishment. Antidisestablishmentarianism (the longest word in the English language BTW) is a short-lived and cannibalistic by nature. And it didn’t work too well in NY-23.
I’ve met and spoken with Bob Vanderplaats on a few occasions and think he’s a solid guy with a great family. But Branstad “coming out of retirement” is a major god-send for the Iowa GOP. If they don’t have the sense to nominate him they will have made their own bed to sleep in (I no longer live in IA) and risk getting back that Governership that Branstad will surely win. “Party Purging Purists” is not what we need now when Dems are so vulnerable and weak. Consolidate, focus, mobilize and get back power. Good principles won’t be applied by the Dems . . . nor by unelected candidates (however well they fit the conservative platform).
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:12 pm
If you keep repeating this lie it might become true, right?
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:14 pm
If Iowa Republicans want to win, for a change, Branstadt is the one guy who can re-claim the governorship.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:15 pm
SuzieQ and Adam: “They were disappointed in Romney because he wasn’t a strong pro-life person” ????
. . . just like they still can’t seem to accept Reagan or the Bushes as pro-lifers as well, eh?
Come on . . . the abortion issue is just a convenient excuse for underlying bigotry for many people (not saying that’s your reason
)
I guess we’ll see next time around. If after 7 years of being pro-life and supporting pro-life causes/candidates as well as never making one political ACTION/POLICY that furthered the pro-choice cause/agenda and they STILL are harping about Romney’s pro-life status then the gig will be up, eh? Romney had pro-choice statements in campaigns (some closing in on 2 decades ago). . . but his pro-life RECORD is immaculate.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Huckabee definitely appealed to the mob somewhat even though I don’t think he’s one of them himself, nor were most of his supporters. But there’s just a certain element that hates people who are different culturally even if they are identical in terms of values for the most part – Obama identified them as ‘bitter’. They hate outsiders, be they urban folks, blacks, Mexicans, Mormons, Catholics, etc. And Huckabee played to those tastes some.
Most of his people, though, were less motivated by hate than by fear, I think. Cultural conservatism works that way, and Huckabee was one of them – they could trust him. Romney was a foreigner comparatively.
Everyone reacted differently to Republican failures. Some of us saw the flaws in our party and our thinking – we overwhelmingly went McCain, who had never been afraid to criticize them in years past. Some looked for that strong leader persona, they went Romney. And others felt there were serious cultural issues in America, they went Huckabee. In culturally homogenous states like Iowa it shouldn’t be suprising that Huckabee did well.
-”The McCain nomination, and his ignominious defeat, was a direct and inevitable result of Huckabee’s machinations in Iowa.”
Romney folks, you should drop this one immediately, it’s a losing argument. It’s been thoroughly argued elsewhere that Romney had tons of negatives going in to the generals and I’d love to prove once more why he’d have been cleaned worse than McCain if you care.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:20 pm
Romney lost Iowa because he was Romney. Romney spent US$11m on the ground over 6 months, was the first to organize at a precinct level, and he attended over 200 town hall meetings. He further enriched every local political operative, consultant, and GOP activist that would accept his cheques.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:23 pm
What % of the Mormon vote does Mitt count on? What % of the Black vote does Obama count on?
(And there’s nothing wrong with that, right?)
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:26 pm
MPC,
Still fighting mental health, I see.
Romney would have cleaned Obama’s clock in the debates, and wouldn’t have made the strategic errors McCain made during the heart of the campaign. This isn’t controversial. It’s history.
Huckabee never had a prayer of winning the nomination himself, but managed successfully to play the role of spoiler. Obama was the beneficiary.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:35 pm
LOL
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:36 pm
While I don’t entirely agree with your argument only because there was not even close to enough Mormons in Iowa to make a difference, however, you logic is somewhat sound.
I realize a certain percentage of voters for Huckabee will vote for him because he is Evangelical, and that’s perfectly fine. Identity politics have been around for a very long time. Its the distortions and dis-honest and below the belt attacks that are the problem. Honestly, had Huckabee been above board, he would be in a very good position politically. However, since he decided to use under hand tactics as has already been well documented, he has hurt his chances in 2012 so badly that has little chance of winning the nomination, and ever less chance of winning the presidency.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Dave,
It’s crazy. The year was, to begin with, stacked against Republicans. I don’t think there’s ever been a case of the party in power keeping the White House with an approval as low as George W Bush’s. That’s why McCain lost. His favorabilities indicate in a better year he could have easily become President.
Now, based on the way Romney campaigned (ultra-conservative in a not conservative year) his unfavorables went through the roof. McCain never at any point last year went into negative territory. Furthermore, while McCain DID make an error in the suspending of his campaign, in reality he was already losing ground before this as the Palin nomination started to implode in becoming a media tabloid affair. And McCain, as a Senator, was going to get away far cleaner than Romney the investment banker, who still supported TARP, was. On the debates, Romney did post decent performances in the primaries, but they inevitably failed to raise his standings. McCain on the other hand, partially through the debates, was able to remind Republicans just why he’s our best choice and a good consensus candidate. And far too often, when attacked, Romney would come out overbearing and disdainful, which just built up his elitist image further.
Based on who he is (rich banker), how he did in the primaries (finished with massive negatives), and the campaign he ran (archconservative), he was destined to lose worse than McCain did. Oh, and Romney’s Mormon. Since that prevented him from getting the nomination in Iowa supposedly, I can only assume he’d be losing points compared to McCain on that one as well, right?
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:46 pm
I certainly think that had Mitt been a protestant he would have won Iowa. And if not Mitt winning it certainly would not have been Huckabee. Why? Because Huckabee never would been a thought in anyone’s mind. Huck filled a gap that no other candidate was satisfactorily filling, that of a candidate for the Christian Conservative Right. The fact that was a hole that no candidate fit was evident by the fact that it was a hole that Mitt himself tried to fill it himself; considering he was the most religious person of the front-runners.
Huckabee certainly recognized this and shot the gap and filled the hole. There a reason he subtly focused on Mitt’s religion and gave “sermon’s” in various Iowa churches. The only chance Huck had to get notoriety and get into the first tier was to fill the religion gap. He played on that like no other and drove it to winning Iowa.
Had Mitt been a protestant, especially an active one like he is in the Mormon Church, there would have been no room for Huckabee and he never would have had that gap to fill. Mitt would have easily won the backing of all the religionists he was courting and would have won Iowa in a blow-out and probably onto the nomination. Huckabee never would have had the chance to even get known in Iowa, let alone win it.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:48 pm
I don’t think Huckabee is as damaged as the Romney folks think he is, really. Huckabee has never been tied to bigoted ideas himself, it’s always been a few loose cannons some distance off. I personally think Huckabee ought to be made to cut them loose, but realize he won’t because even if he doesn’t agree with them, he benefits from them.
That’s why I won’t vote for him, in part. But they aren’t *Huckabee’s* cannons on his orders, so most voters aren’t going to care to much about that specifically. More likely they will turn down Huckabee because he’s all cultural appeal and that doesn’t work for most of the Republican electorate.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Very well written! You took the words right out of my mouth. My wife’s family is Mormon and I love them very much. I’ve voted for Mormons many times locally, but I just didn’t trust Romney.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Swint,
You forget Huckabee’s cultural appeal. That is what wins in Iowa. Guys like Romney, McCain, Rudy, Thompson, etc are all going to show up weak there. Romney could have been a Methodist Massachusetts former moderate rich investment banker. Sure, he’s Methodist, that’ll be worth 1%, but he’s still a Massachusetts former moderate rich investment banker. That’s not Iowa.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:52 pm
35. Please give me the same Iowa scenario if Huckabee was Mormon?
It’s kinda amusing to me, my friend. : )
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:54 pm
# SarahToHuckInIowa Says:
What % of the Mormon vote does Mitt count on? What % of the Black vote does Obama count on?
(And there’s nothing wrong with that, right?)
Identity politics are going to hit a percentage of voters. There is nothing wrong with people voting for who they want, and everyone has their own reasons.
One danger though that I think could hamper the republicans in 2012 is that one “group” CANNOT win a nomination alone. As much as conservatives want to win without moderates and independants, if they close the door to the middle and the middle feels pushed out, Obama gets his second term. Huckabee fans need to do a better job of promoting their guy without burning bridges with certain parties, and Romney fans the same. Also, a third party candidate that siphons Republican votes gives Obama that second term too.
Obama is making such poor decisions, that Republicans can gain that middle back. Can people step back from their “candidate” long enough to make sure they don’t burn those bridges?
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:55 pm
40. I agree, Case. : )
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:02 pm
Dear Adam Graham……I’m sick of this back and forth argument,but if the Huckabee Campaign was as sincere as you claim and not playing any religion cards, please explain to me Huckabee’s “Christain Leader” political TV ad he ran in Iowa prior to the caucus…..
And why the Huckabee campaign felt it was necessary to remove the “Christian leader” statement from the same ad when running it in New Hampshire…..
Also, you have only been at HucksArmy for 1.5 years? Well, that was long after the primaries were over and after the site was sanitized. You should have seen it during the primaries, as well as the Huckabee for President site, but anyway, time to move on….
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:05 pm
42. “… but anyway, time to move on….”
Amen to that, Brother. : )
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:06 pm
MPC,
Romney has never been a banker in any meaningful sense. He bought businesses, determined what changes needed to be made, and turned them around, subsequently selling them for far more than he paid for them. He started out as a management consultant. In both capacities he saved a lot of companies from closing their doors.
BTW, more than 20,000 media pieces questioned whether a Mormon could win the nomination or the presidency. This started long before the first contest in the Primary. Huckabee played into this. It worked tactically in Iowa, but was a poor strategic decision. At the time Mitt dropped out right after Super Tuesday, McCain had 4,700,000 votes and Mitt had 4,100,000 votes. The Huckster had something like 2 and a half million.
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:10 pm
MPC,
Yes, that cultural appeal was to the Christian right. That was the “culture” he was targeting. That was the pretty much the only group he appealed to.
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:13 pm
44. “The Mittster had 4,100,000 votes. Mike had something like 2 and a half million.”
Then what are you worried about, Davester?
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:19 pm
39, if Huck we’re Mormon he would have had even a less chance than Mitt, and certainly a less chance than he had in the first place. First of all there would have been no room for 2 Mormons in the race. 2nd, Huck was never taken seriously anyway until late November 2007, and it really wasn’t until the end of December where people thought he actually might win. In November Huck started playing the Jesus card and really played up his pastoralship (or whatever it was called) and really targeted the Christian conservatives. Had he been Mormon he would have had no hole to fill and never could have matched Mitt on competence, experience and success. Thus, he always would have stayed unknown and irrelevant.
My question is, do you actually believe that Huck didn’t play the to the Christian part in order to contrast his religiosity with Mitt’s? If you do, you were in a hole during the primary.
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:36 pm
47. Both Mike and Mitt are Christians.
Mike was the better communicator with a message that the Iowa voters obviously liked more.
If they both (which I kinda doubt) battle it out again, it will come out the nearly the same I believe.
But, good luck to your candidate, my friend. He has a lot of excellent qualities, too.
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:38 pm
…come out nearly the same…
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Dave,
You and I both know that’s going to sound to the public like “Wall Street rich banker dude”
When technically only “rich” and “dude” apply to Romney. Even then it won’t work well
Swint,
Don’t you remember, Romney was the guy that takes the skin off of his fried chicken. And I’ll tell you personally, there is no reason whatsoever that anyone should take the skin off of fried chicken. It was that whole air that Huckabee had, that of a down-to-earth nice guy, that people liked. He was also on their page religiously, sure. Romney on the other hand is nice, but in a more “respectable gentleman” kind of way.
What mattered is that Huckabee was much more like those caucus voters than Romney was.
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:43 pm
In the comments here at Race42012, I see a great deal of opinion, with a generous helping of ad hominem and a side order of good old-fashioned name calling. Reminds me of a high school lunch table.
Where are the facts? Links? Legitimate sources? Let’s elevate the discussion, everyone. Otherwise we’re just pooling ignorance and chasing our own tails.
As the old saying goes, “My opinion, plus your opinion, and fifty cents will buy you a Coke.”
Also, let’s not judge any of the candidates by the way a few of their supporters may (or may NOT) have behaved. Otherwise, Romney is dead in the water. I was highly involved in Election 2008, both on the campaign trail and in the blogosphere. Romney’s supporters were, by FAR, the rudest. Their tone was consistently one of supercilious condescension, snide sarcasm, unsourced attacks, and unfounded smears. It was a terrible reflection on the candidate and, from what I heard on the road, it unfortunately turned off a LOT of folks.
Why don’t we quit wasting each other’s time, forcing one another to read ad hominem attacks on the candidates or on each other?
Instead, let’s judge the candidates based on their actual records: what did they accomplish while in office? What kinds of legislation were they able to get passed with the legislatures they had to work with? Let’s have some direct quotes from their books, debates, and transcripts of speeches.
What was the tax burden in their state when they began office, and what was the tax burden when their term ended? All the major candidates CLAIM that they turned a deficit into a surplus. Let’s get some facts on exactly HOW each candidate did that.
All the candidates (except Giuliani) SAY they are pro-life. Well, what kind of judges did they appoint in their state while they had the chance to REALLY make a difference? What is the candidates’ published position on a Human Life Amendment? Embyronic stem-cell research?
What specific issues did they support with their gubernatorial proclamations? How long did each candidate spend in elected office, and when they left office, what was their approval rating? During Election 2008, what percentage of their OWN state did they carry? (either in the primaries, or in Palin’s case, in the general election)
Let’s make the discussion more profitable for all concerned, by dealing in verfiable facts, not just e-shouting at one another.
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:45 pm
Hogwash, Adam Graham. I simply can’t believe you write this with a straight face.
You continue to have an adversarial relationship with the truth. Everyone knows what happened, everyone knows what Huck did and who he is. Saying the truth isn’t the truth doesn’t change a thing.
Until you acknowledge the truth, you have zero credibility on this subject.
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:54 pm
52. Cranky much? “who he is”
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:54 pm
51. Megan, there are verifiable facts about Huck’s campaign in 07-08. It’s documented. What he did was unAmerican, according to every one but his fans.
Romney supporters were no worse than any othe group of supporters. “supercilious condescension, snide sarcasm, unsourced attacks, and unfounded smears”? Yeah, we saw plenty of that from Huck supporters, except you’d need to add to it some lies and misrepresentations about the LDS church, and some anti-Mormon sentiment.
Megan, I also paid very close attention to the 08 campaign. I saw what Huck did, and the things his supporters did and said. You can’t whitewash it or pretend it didn’t happen.
But if you want to talk records, Huck’s is a doosie. That’s why it’s a mystery how he made it this far. The pardons alone ought to disqualify him. Oh wait, I forget, he’s “one of us!”. I guess that somehow covers a multitude of sins.
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:59 pm
54. Describing your primary opponent as “unAmerican”?
Trying to get banned from this site, aren’t you? You better watch your tone.
November 22nd, 2009 at 7:59 pm
53. You know what this all boils down to Sarah? it boils down to character, and Huck ain’t got none.
Even without his nefarious actions with the whole anti-Mormon ball of wax, Huck simply doesn’t meet the basic minimum standards of honesty, integrity, and good judgment.
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:00 pm
55. Krauthammers words, not mine. He was exactly right, however.
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Thank you, Adam Graham, for an excellent article.
As a Republican and conservative, I want to preserve freedom in our country. At first, I supported Mitt Romney for what I believed to be his pro-life and pro-marriage views. I do think he is a fine family man, etc.
I did not even know who Mike Huckabee was at the Iowa Caucuses. And I probably would not have voted for him at that point, because he was just not someone on my radar screen. (I am not from Iowa.) It was not until later, when I heard that Huckabee had won in Iowa with almost no finances but lots of grassroots support, that I became curious. It amazed me how he was getting criticized for everything from being a fiscal liberal to unqualified for the job to being ignorant on foreign policy. He surely seemed to be unfairly targeted, but that’s politics. And yet, the few times he got to speak in the debates, he was very articulate and said things I agreed with. He had gotten my attention.
Also, I wondered why if he was the darling of the evangelical(as those critical of him said) they did not rush to endorse Huckabee. Many of the evangelicals, including I believe Phyllis Schlafley, thought Romney was the best candidate because he would be most able to win the Republican primary and the general election.
Yet I became more curious, because lots of really good people I admired were talking of this new leader named Governor Mike Huckabee. Why were so many people starting to listen to him, and why was there such a loyal group of supporters who believed in the talents and ideas of this man? I decided to study his record and try to decipher what was just jealousy and anger from other candidate’s supporters and what the true facts were.
There were three things that changed my viewpoint of Mike Huckabee. I hope and pray each of you here would lay aside all prejudices and find out about him, also.
The first thing that happened was our Kansas Caucus. I went to learn, not knowing who I would vote for. But when I heard person after person stand up and tell stories of Mike Huckabee and how they loved him, I knew he was who I would support. Kansas voted for Huckabee by about 70%. I do not remember what Romney got, but the McCain people were getting very few votes.
The next thing that happened was that I went online and found Huck’s Army. This has been one of the best experiences for me, because it is a wonderful site that is well-moderated. Any hateful comments toward any other candidate are monitored and deleted. Also, I love it because the members often support and pray for one another and show real concern. We try very hard not to run Conservatives down. Mike believes in vertical politics, which means, yes, the Golden Rule…treat others how you would like to be treated. And fight for the “people,” not against each other.
The third thing I did was to begin reading Huckabee’s books. He has written seven, and I have read three. In his book, From Hope to Higher Ground, I read about his ideas to restore America’s greatness. There are 12 stops along the road to greatness, including stopping high taxation, stopping the loss of liberty, and stopping the loss of good jobs. This was written while he was still the very successful and loved Republican governor in a very Democrat state of Arkansas. The next book, Do the Right Thing, helped me find answers to all the accusations against him. Most of the criticisms, I could see, were based on lies of his opponents and/or misinformation. And he answered them all to my satisfaction.
As you say, Adam, Romney’s religion is not an issue. His conservative beliefs are what we want to hear about. Phyllis Schlafley has welcomed the Mormons as conservatives, and she says that 97% of them have conservative values. The idea that Huckabee is anti-Mormon is not true, either. He and we support Senator Hatch from Utah for his anti-abortion stance.
Thanks for letting me share these thoughts. I wish you all well. I would like to invite you to share the good things about the candidates you like, not tear down others. That would be helpful to many. And I hope each of you read Huckabee’s latest inspiring book, A Simple Christmas. Happy Thanksgiving and Merry Christmas.
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:01 pm
Facts? Here are the facts.
Fact 1 – I love Oreos
Fact 2 – I love Vanilla Ice Cream
Fact 3 – I love Oreo shakes
Fact 4 – Not everyone loves Oreo shakes (I can’t understand why not)
Thus, no matter what “facts” are said, there will always be people who disagree. Because facts are still “interpreted”, thus making “facts” facts based on which approach you look at it.
So before we waste time blogging facts about 2012 which is 3 years away, lets talk about favorite ice cream flavors. Then I can go and try someone elses favorite and enjoy it today!
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:07 pm
Huckabee still has to answer for that “arrogant bunker mentality” quote of his in my book.
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:12 pm
Again, the more anti-Palin, anti-Huckabee and anti-Romney garbage…
the more Obama smiles.
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Adam G., that’s some pretty inspiring stuff you’ve put together there. Congrats. And I say that as a non-Huckanut.
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:23 pm
JustGrace,
“It amazed me how he was getting criticized for everything from being a fiscal liberal to unqualified for the job to being ignorant on foreign policy. He surely seemed to be unfairly targeted, but that’s politics.”
It was politics, and it was also true. He was a fiscal liberal, and he was not only ignorant on FP, but many of the things he said were downright liberal.
The people who were supporting Romney were not doing so because he was seen as the most electable, but because he was seen as the most conservative choice, and the most competent.
Schafely did not like Romney.
Many religious right leaders refused to endorse Huck because they knew better than most what kind if guy he is.
Why was there such a loyal group of supporters for Huck? Why indeed. For many it was as simple as his being the “one of us” candidate. No more, no less, it didn’t matter what his record was, or what kind of tactics he used.
How do you know that Huckabee is not anti-Mormon? I don’t think anyone can really know, but we can make an educated guess by looking at what he’s actually done. The weight of evidence would fall closer to is than isn’t.
I’ve seen the stuff from Hucksarmy. People keep saying it’s a hunky dory clean site. But we have evidence to the contrary. Too many of us have seen for ourselves the kind of comments that were allowed to remain there and even on Huck’s own blog.
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:27 pm
#54….Martha….I think we should drop this Huckabee election ‘08 history rehash….the people who are in denial are determined to remain that way and it is just creating more bad blood for Mitt.
We are gaining neither sympathy, understanding, or friends, so it’s in our best interest to drop it…..those in denial will rewrite the history in their heads, but there is nothing that can be done about that. It’s just part of the political landscape….the same landscape on which Huckabee has to convince the rest of us that he is worthy…..
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:27 pm
Bono from U2 said it well:
One man come in the name of love…What more?…In the name of love!
Mike Huckabee came in the name of love, to help lift America back up to higher ground. Mike Huckabee is truly an amazing American Hero. I’ve never met Mitt Romney in person, but I have met Mike Huckabee on several occasions. On every occasion, Mike Huckabee displays a truly sincere and humble respect to each individual he meets. Mike Huckabee is amazingly kind, he is a super great role model for society. He’s funny, witty and he is so easy to talk with. His superior communication skills like the great Ronald Reagan is Mike Huckabee’s trademark speciality.
I wish Mitt Romney well in his endeavors, but me personally I am a huge Mike Huckabee Fan. Mike has won me over and over with his consistent kindness towards everyone he meets, and of course his decade of service as one of the best Governors in America (voted by Time Magazine). Both Mike Huckabee and Ronald Reagan share so many similiar attributes for example:
1. Both successful Governor’s of their home state for more than a decade.
2. Both are superior communicators, witty and funny.
3. Both are TV and Radio Celebrities.
4. Both are strong conservatives for Pro-Life and Limited Government.
5. Both are extremelly intelligent and well liked both both parties.
Mike Huckabee’s popularity continues to skyrocket to new levels everyday. He is a Rock Star, he can jam on his bass guitar with the best out there too. Mike Huckabee knows how to energize his Fans, in fact he has thousands of Fans all across the nation in 50 States that span 427 Counties in America that is expanding daily. His gigantic network of Huckabee Fans keep multiplying night and day. Huckabee Fans are extremelly energized and ready to go the distance with Mike leading up to his 2012 Presidential victory.
Again, I wish Mitt the best. But for me, I am a gigantic Huckabee Fan and I’m ready to give it all I have.
Check it out for yourself, just google the words: Huckabee Fan Club
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:38 pm
Is Romney getting his garmies in a wedgie again? Romney is a slick used car sales man, one no one in their right mind wants in the White House. He is a spoiled brat who cannot stand not getting his way, and has not ethics or moral value to him. Romney is a hopeless, flip flopper. He is only jealous of Huck because Huck won Iowa, Romney is jealous of Obama because Obama is in the White House. Romney is a jealous louse.
November 22nd, 2009 at 8:58 pm
64. I know you are right, along with Mark and DanL who try to rein me in with some common sense.
It’s just so darn frustrating to have the truth mangled beyond recognition. I fear that we’re going to get a repeat of 08. That old line about the Democrats being the evil party, and the Republicans being the stupid party is unfortunately true. Otherwise, how on God’s green earth could Huck ever be in the top 3?
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:20 pm
When Romney was grilling steaks in Iowa, he called the five second rule when he dropped one on the ground…and put it back on the grill. How much more down to earth can you get than that? lol
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Based on what? Romney underperformed his rivals by orders of magnitude in the GOP debates. He famously tried to tell McCain that he never described McCain’s immigration plan as amnesty right before his ad ran which called McCain’s immigration plan–wait for it, wait for it–amnesty.
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:26 pm
Prophetic. Romney’s whole operation crashed to the ground in Iowa which forced him to eat a lot of dirt.
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:27 pm
Yeah and Ann told him to get real
.
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:29 pm
yeah, she threw it away.
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:30 pm
She was always the sensible one that Ann
.
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:50 pm
67 Martha, yes it is frustrating. I have already made my determination to not vote for Huck. At this point all I can do is wait for the primaries to start and hope that a good candidate can run a good campaign and beat Huck. Luckily there are more than a few who would be better than Huck. I only fear that if this populism crap is still strong in two years that Huck may well win anyway.
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Indeed, what a rehash of 2008.
I liked the analysis of a “that guy” coming along that is going to save the day for the Republican party. We don’t know what “that guy” is going to encompass as a candidate, and the Reagan standard shouldn’t even be brought up as a comparison. Leaders are defined by the events of the day, not the past, and even in their time, leaders had warts and blemishes of character but their response to the events of the day gave them their place in time. This is not a beauty contest to be won, this is the stewardship of a country described as greatest defender of freedom and liberty in our time in recent years, and the current officeholder is well underway to unravel that description.
Myself, I voted for Huckabee in Georgia. I’m not a member of Huck’s Army, but I still like him today. There is but one cause that settled the issue for me, and that is Mike’s support of the FairTax. Aside from Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo, the other Republican candidates were rehashes of the same vein of Washington politics that would only perpetuate the existing tax code that is responsible directly and indirectly to the conduct of business in America that has eliminated jobs or driven them out of our borders. All our other social and economic issues are tied to taxation in one form or another, and Republicans who compromise in Congress with Democrats in allowing perpetual manipulation of the existing code or adding to it with additional bureaucracy are only furthering along our eventual demise.
Who are we going to get in 2012? No one knows, but if Mike Huckabee is there in the running again, and enough co-sponsors of HR 25 are there in Congress, then Mike is “the guy”. At this point, his claim to support the Constitution is as strong as anyone else’s not in the White House, and he can make as many faux pas’ as anyone else so long as he will take the necessary steps to put this country back on the right track in the right direction.
November 22nd, 2009 at 9:58 pm
#67….Martha, I understand, but trying to reason with the unreasonable is a losing proposition. The only winning strategy is to ignore the anti-Mitt folks and other people who judge Palin, or Pawlenty, or even Huckabee for unreasonable reasons and get Mitt’s message out.
Personally, I don’t want to waste another minute of my own life “discussing” things with people who are in no mood to discuss things fairly.
As for a repeat of ‘08 assuming that Mitt even runs, I’m hoping Mitt just sticks to his message and proposals for solutions and leaves the other candidates alone. If that’s not good enough for the GOP voters, then they can enjoy the consequences of their selection.
I’m going to hedge my bets in case we end up putting the same or another inept person in the White House.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:00 pm
Isn’t this REAL REAL OLD NEWS? Why does Huck and Company keep this story alive. Sarah Palin now has most of the Huck crowd anyway.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:00 pm
I did not read this article, and barly glanced over the comments.
But it displease me when I go to Mitt Romney’s website I see as many Huckabee articles as Romney. Huckabee is buying space on Romney’s website. If I wanted to see Huckabee I’d go there. However I have no interest in anything Huckabee does or says. He was dishonest in the campaign, and is dishonest with ad’s on Romney’s website. I do not watch his show, turn off the TV when he comes on. In my openion he hangs around Fox so someone may want him to comment on events in the news. In the campaign he hung in there to get up with Romney before he would pull out. He is so jelious of Romney and his envy showed through. The awful things he said about Romney in his book tells you what a creep he is. He will never be the equal to Romney, so he wants to bring Romney to his level. Am I bitter? I guess I am. Do you see where our country is heading because Huckabee would rather see a Muslim rther than a Mormon in the WH. Huckabee you are disgusting. This is not a Christain attitude, but Huckabee you said Mormon’s were not Christain’s. Right? I am saying things that Romney is too good a man to say.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:23 pm
I don’t want to rehash this stuff but I have to say a few things to balance what those guys from HucksArmy are saying here. Even when Romney was 20% points ahead in Iowa, it was well known that there was a huge amount of Mormon hating going on with the 527 groups, and I’m still wondering why Huckabee surged in the Iowa polls about the middle of November 2007. He jumped 15% in the polls in about a week. Just curious.
For the Romney and Huckabee supporters who followed the 08′ primaries from March 07′ to the time Romney dropped out, it’s hard to believe that Huckabee supporters did not know what was going on. The Mormon haters were out in force spamming online blogs and comment sections…The most vile trash was being said for no reason other than Romney was a Mormon, and this hatred was being said by Huckabee supporters, and for them to deny where it was coming from is not honest. As a Romney supporter, I knew where it was coming from and so did the other Romney supporters who followed their trail.
After a almost two years, some of the stuff can still be found on Google search, but a lot of it is hard to find now. Huckabee was careful not to get dirty by always having an alibi.. he gave these people a forum to build their hate.
If Huckabee runs again he’s going to have to deal with with the way he ran his campaign of 2008.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:25 pm
” Romney would have cleaned Obama’s clock in the debates”
“Based on what?” This is based on Romney’s delusional thinking.
It is correct Romney underperformed, and to think he would win a debate with Obama more than the other candidates is plain silly, delusional thinking.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:27 pm
I read through all of that and am left wondering what exactly the point is.
The described scenario played out nearly two years ago. I think Huck and his legion of fans are no doubt guilty of playing up the anti-Mormon bias and shamelessly promoting Huck as the alternative who was a ‘Christian leader’ but that wasn’t Romney’s whole problem in Iowa circa ‘08. He obviously did not connect personally with voters and opted for a message that didn’t match the man. Honestly though, it is all past tense and I don’t see the point in re-hashing it now.
I find it far more interesting to evaluate how Huckabee and Romney have conducted themselves since the ‘08 primary and to evaluate who’s strategy is likely to be more successful.
Huckabee has a daily radio commentary and his TV show plus numerous Fox News appearances and a new book and book tour. His book, I believe, is not political in nature. Huckabee keeps himself in the public eye and has been very visible but does he now seem less ‘Presidential’ from it all.
Romney keeps a lower profile, writes op-eds on select subjects and isn’t on TV as often. He instead concentrates on making appearances on behalf of other Republicans and raises money for their campaigns. He too has a book coming out that appears to be policy driven. But is he still failing to ‘connect’ with voters.
Romney’s actions appear to me to be more traditional. He is building political relationships and earning favors while Huckabee’s is more a 21st Century media driven effort; he is in the American people’s living rooms regularly and perhaps winning their trust.
Who wins?
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:32 pm
IRV — Romneys are not good honest people. There is more dirt and hate which comes from the Romney camps than the good people in the US realize.
Mormon hating? No, some people don’t buy, and some people don’t bend to blackmail, or abuse, in fact it makes some of them determined to hold the culprits responsible.
Romneys clock needs to be cleaned, Romney is going to have to deal with the abuses their group have been involved in.
Mormon hating, PHEW — when people, innocent people are harmed, your darn right they don’t like you. If Rommney’s faith was true, or even the least bit decent, they would barr the Romneys from going to the temple and taking sacrament.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:36 pm
Those polls were never real; that the Romney people too stock in them suggests hubris, stupidity, or both. For most of the 6 months before the contest Romney was the only candidate on the air in Iowa. I would run high in the polls too had I that level of exposure. But the moment a more viable candidate appeared my numbers would collapse. Hence, Romney’s nose-bleed roller-coaster plummet, a pattern that would repeat itself in SC, FL, NH, and CA. Not so curious, eh what?
Romney kept repeating this same stupid mistake. He would outspend his rivals by orders of magnitude only to set himself up for another crash. And the crash always came. Had he spent less money, had he been served by a competent campaign organization (Romney had the least effective campaign organization in human history; they were sublimely effective at bilking Romney of his millions and nothing else), and had he been a far more disciplined communicator, he still would have lost miserably, but his losses would not been so lopsided and humiliating.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Corrected.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:49 pm
bpb
#82
Please tell me what Romney sites the dirt and hate are coming from.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:53 pm
Romney supporters slinging dirt?
Never!
; )
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:53 pm
#82
bpb:
Wow,I believe that last paragraph made my case…..what did you mean by that?
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:55 pm
86:
What your calling slinging the dirt I call dealing with the facts.
November 22nd, 2009 at 10:58 pm
bpb:
Well, I’m waiting for a list of those dirt slinging Romney sites.
November 22nd, 2009 at 11:05 pm
To Ikv- ; )
The cold hard facts of Iowa:
2008 – MIKE HUCKABEE (34%), Mitt Romney (25%), Fred Thompson (13%), John McCain (13%), Ron Paul (10%), Rudy Giuliani (4%), and Duncan Hunter (1%)
November 22nd, 2009 at 11:11 pm
#89..Ikv….you’re trying to squeeze blood from a turnip.
The type of people you are addressing in this case peddle their opinions hoping to find soul mates.
Best not to waste too much time on them. They just interpret the attention as self-importance and peddle more of their “opinions”.
November 22nd, 2009 at 11:22 pm
Jerald;#91
Yeah I know, thanks.
November 22nd, 2009 at 11:52 pm
History does not lie. We are paying now for the dishonest candidate’s of McCain and Huckabee’s dirty tricks in running a campaign in ‘08. They conived to derail Romney in West Virginia. Beside being a bigot Huckabee played dirty politics. I am wondering if this writer was hired to bring up this unfortunate campaign of McCain and Huckabee plots to detail Romney to see if the American people have forgotten how dishonest these two campaigns were and if the voters may hold a grudge against Huckabee. Perhaps he wants to get all this squared away with the voters and wants to fill them out to see where he stands with another run. Believe me we have not forgotten. If Huckabee were running against Obama, I would vote for Obama.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:41 am
93. The Daily Kos will welcome you then. You can give them all the dirt you’ve got on Mike. As a matter of fact, they’re smearing Mike right now! You’ll be right at home.
P.S. Take Martha and Thunder, too.
Markos Moulitsas will love you all. ; )
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:53 am
Adam,
I share your fatigue with the arguing. As a Mormon watching from Kansas, here’s my two cents:
Mike Huckabee is a great, folksy campaigner and communicator who could have won without introducing religion into the Iowa campaign. When Mitt Romney went negative on him, Huckabee could have focused on Romney’s record, inability to come across as regular, or soft conservative credentials–there was plenty of opportunity to address real and perceived weaknesses. He had very effective quips on the Leno show, and was closing the gap, in spite of Romney’s organization and funding.
Huckabee CHOSE to introduce religion into the campaign. He filmed an ad portraying himself as the “christian” candidate, then pointedly gave non-answers to questions from campaign reporters as to whether Romney was christian also. Mormons rightly recognized this as a page out of the Southern Baptist Convention playbook for dealing with the LDS faith–something we had been seeing and experiencing for decades. Lay minister Huckabee’s catty question to the NY Times reporter at the end of that interview, about Satan and Christ being brothers, was another deliberate religious jab,performed on a national stage. After hurling his religious mud, Huckabee apologized, but would have shown far more character not to have gone there in the first place. My opinion is that he is a bright guy, and knew exactly what he was doing–and why–when he did it. His apology seemed political.
I do not believe that bigotry was the difference in the Iowa election. That notion disrespects Mr. Huckabee’s talents, and the voters of Iowa, and disregards weaknesses that were already present in Mr. Romney’s presentation.
I think it is clear that Mike Huckabee deliberately appealed to religious prejudice in an attempt to secure victory. He has not acknowledged or apologized for that. What religion he smeared really doesn’t matter.
He owns the consequences of those decisions,including the damage he inflicted on his own reputation,just like Mitt Romney owns the consequences of switching positions on abortion.
Huckabee may yet win, and serve effectively in, a national office. He was deceitful in this instance, and has not come completely clean.
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:00 am
Adam, this was an excellent article! And it is just typical that a Huckabee supporter writes an article with quotes & references – while those with Huckabee-derangement-syndrome respond with “I think” and “I believe” and “I just know it’s true” – in addition to a bunch of flat out statements assuring us that they have the facts while providing *nothing* to back it up. It is tempting to counter this baloney with a similar National Enquirer approach to Romney and how underhanded & conniving he really is (especially when there has been given so much to work with!), but who wants to wrestle in the gutter with them?
@63, Most people would figure that the posts are no longer at HucksArmy because they were deleted as soon as they were reported to the board’s moderators so how can you turn that into something sinister? Oh yeah, by insinuating that it wasn’t done until they were caught NOT deleting it. And we should take your word for it because…? Oh, right, because you hate Huckabee and his supporters and would do anything to damage him and us. Okay, sure, it is clear that we can trust your word now.
For those who are more rational, I have been a member of Huck’sArmy for 2 years and I have always seen the moderators delete bigoted &/or offensive posts as well as blocking the instigators reasonably quickly. We have had many trolls try to goad people there into saying stuff that could be used against us – it has been futile & the members frequently jump on them before the mods even get to them. Take just a little time to look at how the particular Romney supporters here who are making these allegations speak to & about people, and discernment will be no labor…
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:08 am
@95, This “Christian Leader” hang up some of you have is something that really boggles my mind.
The ad specifically said he was “A” Christian Leader not “THE” Christian Leader. Someone with little national recognition wants to run in an area with strong Christian values, they’re going to sit down with their campaign managers and try to figure out – what is on our candidate’s resume that will appeal to this particular segment of voters? It’s like “DUH!”
Romney has been a leader in the business community so he & his campaign people tout his business experience – would you have a similar hangup if he ran ads that said “A business leader” (which he probably did)? But Huckabee is not supposed to run utilizing the aspects of his resume that will get the attention of the voters whose attention he is trying to get? That is just ludicrous.
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:09 am
Oh, the poor befuddled man-child from Bain Capital! Did the hapless and hopeless Romney ever consider that politics might happen in a political campaign?
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:22 am
#97,
You may be right. Huckabee would have been right to play to his strengths with those voters.
But why could he not acknowledge Romney’s christianity, when asked? Or even give Romney the benefit of the doubt as a person, no matter what he thought of Mormonism? Why did he follow up with an attack on Romney’s religion in a nationally published interview? If he was just playing to his strength, why slander someone else’s religion?
Again, it really doesn’t matter what religion he smeared. If he were only playing to his strengths, he wouldn’t have bagged on anyone else.
Kind of gives his motives away, doesn’t it?
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:44 am
Let’s face it folks, if we as a party nominate Mike Huckabee … we will have to put up with four more years of Barak Obama. You can quote me on it.
Mike is a nice guy but way too far to the right and seen as a pastor more than as a national leader. That will not change.
It didn’t ever sit right with me what happened in West Virginia in ‘08. Shifty business if you ask me. Anyone who claims Huckabee’s innocence on “don’t they believe satan and jesus were brothers?” comment is laughable. He said over and over again,”You know . . . I don’t know that much about the Mormon church . . . . duhhhh”.
It’s important to consider that about seven years earlier there was a huge contemporary christian rally in Salt Lake City to “reclaim American for Christ”. Most of the addresses were focused on distinctions between modern christian and LDS theology. Who was the keynote speaker? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Mike Huckabee? Playin’ dumb can work sometimes, but a lot of times you just end up lookin’ . . . . dumb. I’ll vote libertarian thanks!
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:56 am
@99, Are you unaware that a substantial number of Christians do not consider Mormons to be Christian? I believe there is a theological issue with whether one believes Jesus to be the ONLY Son of God or simply the first among many. (Nate or any of the other well-mannered Mormons on this site please correct me if I am wrong here. Martha, you – as always – are welcome to stay out of it)
Does that make one a bigot? Of course not. Having theological differences doesn’t make one a bigot. I am a Catholic because I believe that it is the True Church of Jesus Christ. I think Baptists are mistaken in some of their beliefs. I am not an anti-Baptist. Knowing that Huckabee is, it certainly occurred to my DH & I that he may well hold some anti-Catholic beliefs – still we are on the same political page, Huckabee never was anti-anything as a statesman, & since this is politics not church, that’s what matters.
So, it is possible (I would surmise highly probable) that Huckabee was avoiding a theological hot potato that had absolutely nothing to do with politics and the only reason it was being asked him was to generate sparks. Huckabee had all the right & reason to try to shut down such questioning rather than play into it.
Huckabee did NOT attack Romney’s religion in a nationally published interview. The reporter told Huckabee that it was done. Then he began a conversation about Mormonism (though he would not reveal what he was saying) and in the course of that conversation Huckabee asked that question.
So it was supposed to be after the interview by the reporter’s own words, & it was made in the course of what would reasonably be considered an informal conversation, the reporter refuses to provide the context of the conversation in which the question was asked (& of all the points that could have been brought up about Mormonism, it was hardly a theologically hair-raising one).
Meanwhile, Huckabee is at least a savvy enough campaigner to recognize that a deliberate attempt to manipulate people the way you propose would be far more likely to work against him than for him (as the allegations certainly did) – which makes the claim that he did it purposely to sway opinion in his favor even more ridiculous.
If he was the kind of calculating *-hole that y’all want to believe, then how come you are unwilling to recognize that such a calculation would have factored the much greater potential RISKS of such an underhanded act over any possible benefits.
Personally I have known enough Mormons to have a very good opinion of them as God-ly people despite my problems with much of their theology. Like the majority, it is Romney for whom I have the low opinion.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:00 am
@100, Rob, since you want to look smart, look up the speech that Huckabee gave at that particular convention & just how much time he spent there.
Then take a look at the recent polls. Check out Huckabee’s favorables vs. unfavorables over the other potential candidates. Check out how well Huckabee does with those all important independent voters.
Playing smart can sometimes be more risky than playing dumb – education never stops!
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:03 am
Oh, and Rob, what happened in West Virginia was pure & simple & very legal POLITICS – while you’re googling the other stuff, you can look up the political process there as well. It’s the way the game is played & Romney’s camp was just ticked off because they were out-manuevered by the Ron Paul people (largely because they had offended the Paulites – along with pretty much every other group there. There’s a very real reason why Romney was left standing by himself on stage at the debates while the rest of the candidates were shaking hands & making small talk, etc)
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:11 am
“Had Mitt been a protestant”
If Mitt thought that he could win by becoming a protestant, he’d be a protestant.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:13 am
101.
“Huckabee did NOT attack Romney’s religion in a nationally published interview. The reporter told Huckabee that it was done. Then he began a conversation about Mormonism (though he would not reveal what he was saying) and in the course of that conversation Huckabee asked that question.
So it was supposed to be after the interview by the reporter’s own words, & it was made in the course of what would reasonably be considered an informal conversation, the reporter refuses to provide the context of the conversation in which the question was asked (& of all the points that could have been brought up about Mormonism, it was hardly a theologically hair-raising one).
Meanwhile, Huckabee is at least a savvy enough campaigner to recognize that a deliberate attempt to manipulate people the way you propose would be far more likely to work against him than for him (as the allegations certainly did) – which makes the claim that he did it purposely to sway opinion in his favor even more ridiculous.”
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:15 am
102. Doesn’t matter. He was there, he spoke, he left. He knew the agenda. He participated.
You like twisting yourself into all kinds of contortions defending Huck. It’s your choice, but it sure must be tiring.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:16 am
@105, That’s why you’re so persuasive Martha! You are an asset to our cause – please don’t ever change!
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:18 am
104. If what some of you think about Romney is true, why didn’t he leave his church when he decided to run for POTUS? If he’s really the rotten flip-flopping monster you guys make him out to be, then he would have had no problem jettisoning his single biggest obstacle to the presidency.
Your arguments just don’t wash.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:18 am
@106, The only thing that gets tiring is hearing your propaganda over & over again while you go into all kinds of contortions to avoid dealing with others using reason & rationality…
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:19 am
107. Do you want me to interpret? Your excuses for Huckabee are pathetic. Do you really have such little regard for your guy’s intelligence?
You are asking us to believe that Huck was that stupid?
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:22 am
@108, How come Mitt was supposed to be a converted ultra-conservative with solid conservative principles last year & this year he is posing as McCain-lite?
It’s called marketing — & you wonder why he has problems projecting sincerity? Plastic man…
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:26 am
@110, I don’t need your interpretation – your venomous disdain is ever transparent which is why I expressed my appreciation!
No, it is you who are trying to make others believe that Huckabee was that stupid. I am pointing out – to those with the ability to reason – that Huckabee was not so stupid as to believe that he could manipulate a NYT reporter into printing something that would benefit him more than it would hurt him.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:28 am
QVA,
I’m just glad that the man I support is a man of integrity and character. He has never once stooped to Huck’s level, and never will. He rises above, has been gracious to Huck from day one, and has never returned one drop of the garbage Huck has thrown at him.
Romney is a man of integrity, and has never had the slightest accusation of impropriety, ethical troubles, or family issues. He’s never named anything after himself, never registered for wedding gifts after 24 years of marriage, never pardoned 1000 criminals, never destroyed hard drives after leaving office.
He doesn’t produce campaign ads, then call press conferences to say he’s not running the ad, and then show it the press! I’d love to see your excuse for that one. LOL
Actually, Huck is quite a character, isn’t he? Just not a man of character.
I’ll tell you what, QVA. I don’t think he can or will, but Huck may win over Romney. If so, I’ll at at least be able to sleep at night knowing I supported a man I can respect, and a man I do not need to make a million excuses for.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:30 am
111. Please name for me one position Romney has changed since 08? Do you have an example of Romney posing as McCain-lite, or is this just wishful thinking on your part.
Well, not surprising. You make up your own reality a lot.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:32 am
112. Now your asking me to believe that you are that stupid.
Hm. Huck is talking to a NYT reporter, and he honestly thinks his stink-bomb is going to be off the record?
Seriously, how do you type that with a straight face.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:37 am
Don’t worry Martha the simple fact is that if Mitt’s competition is Mike and Sarah he wins. Not 90%, 100% chance. So just suck up the abuse and we will explode in glory when he wins and they will all come sucking back on hands and knees!
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:42 am
Mike will be at least be great for the lols.
From memory in just one week in December 2007 he gave us the Xmas (“it was just a co-incidence I swear to god”) Cross and best of all on NYE his famous I just have to show you all this anti Mitt ad to prove I’m not going to show this anti Mitt ad! Apparently it was the first time in history that the press actually laughed at a candidate’s face! The fact that he still won Iowa AFTER those fiascos means that I really couldn’t care who wins Iowa next time as it’s a joke.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:43 am
QuoVadisAnima:
#101;
This is why religion and politics don’t mix….Either Huckabee is a Preacher or he’s a Politician…He should pick one.
He’s a snake for even saying anything about another candidates Religion.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:45 am
Whateverz. Here’s but one, where Romney the Risible bends himself into a perfect pretzel over the tarp issue: http://www.brendan-nyhan.com/blog/2009/09/tarp-and-2012-positioning.html He was for it before he was against it, the buffoon. I remember the mittwits scrambling to defend the bailout on this very site. Now their lord and master has changed his tiny mind and left them twisting in the wind, again.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:48 am
116. Yes, it’s going to be a heck of a good time!
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:48 am
When Huckabee made the big apology at the debate, he made sure the press saw him talking to Mitt so they would ask what he said to him…..He was able to bring it up again….It was a headline story for a week, Huckabee made sure of that.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:50 am
“but Huckabee you said Mormon’s were not Christain’s. Right?”
Apparently, if Huckabee does not say that Mormons are Christians then he is a bigot. This is what torqued Glen Beck off about Huckabee. That Huckabee wouldn’t look in him in the eye and call him a Christian.
What about the fact that Mormonism was created because Joseph Smith was supposedly told by God that all the other churches were abominations, as the LDS site says:
As soon as Joseph gained possession of himself, he asked the Lord which of all the religious sects was right and which he should join. The Lord answered that he must join “none of them, for they were all wrong” and “all their creeds were an abomination in his sight.” He said that they had a “form of godliness,” but they denied “the power thereof” (JS—H 1:19). He also told Joseph many more things.
http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Curriculum/sunday%20school.htm/our%20heritage.htm?fn=default.htm$f=templates$3.0
The point is not to fight here about which religion is correct, but to determine whether Huckabee is a bigot while somehow Joseph Smith is a prophet. Is this a double standard by which Romney supporters judge Huckabee?
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:51 am
A telling fantasy. You should share it in a warm, caring, therapeutic environment.
Only a mittwit would dream of swelling up like a cartoon balloon only to “explode in glory,” whatever the hell that could possibly mean.
Even were Romney to secure the nomination–stop laughing!–it could happen!–a terrorist could release a neuro-toxin into our water supply that renders many super-stupid and suicidal–no one would be on their hands and knees, weirdo. We just wouldn’t vote that time around.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:53 am
You want to swell up and explode too? What does Romney put in your food dispenser? It’s affecting your higher brain functions. I hope you don’t drive.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:58 am
What rock do you live under? Did you spend the last round of GOP primaries in a coma?
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:03 am
Lee and Thunder. Two who would support Obama over Huckabee?
Any other takers? This ought to be fun.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:04 am
@Martha,
Ah yes, when you are uncomfortable with the current subject, begin lobbing more tennis balls in hopes of burying it under an avalanche. Saying Mitt is a man of character & integrity doesn’t make it so and convinces no one of anything other than your own willingness to believe it.
No, I have not asked you to believe anything – I’m not that stupid, either!
See, you have already pre-determined that Huckabee’s question was sinister & calculated (because you were already pre-determined to find any & all reasons to justify your hating him). But for the *vast* majority of Americans, his question was not a “stink-bomb” and it would not have gotten ANY traction at all if it had not been marketed as an anti-Mormon attack. You cannot come up with anything to show that it hurt Romney – meanwhile the polls showed that the anti-Mormon attack accusation did hurt Huckabee. So, hmm, who benefited from making a mountain out of a molehill? The NYT & Romney.
It IS actually possible for a non-Mormon to ask a question about Mormonism based on stuff they’ve been told without realizing that some Mormons will consider it an anti-Mormon attack. I’ve had people ask me why we Catholics worship Mary and statues without a clue that those are anti-Catholic caricatures. There are tons of non-Catholic Christians who believe it to be true.
I can say with complete honesty that if the situation had been over Romney’s Catholicism rather than Mormonism & Huckabee had said “Don’t Catholics worship Mary?”, I would not have responded to that situation as you have. I would have measured the man’s well established track record against his claims of asking in ignorance and finding nothing to convict him, would have been pleased with & accepted his apology and moved on. Tis a shame that you are unable to demonstrate that traditional standard of Christian charity & move on…
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:04 am
dotan #123
So what bell do you ring for Kool-aid?
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:07 am
I don’t support Romney. What could possibly give you that idea?
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:14 am
David Shedlock: #126
Yes, the Republican party is in quite a mess…..It’s a circus, just look who have become our leaders…Limbaugh, Beck, Ingraham, Levine, Hannity and FOX news…They are the one calling the shots now…. As for me I wouldn’t vote.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:14 am
Dotan, you take yourself way too seriously.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:15 am
Love this reminiscing!
Mitt could be dorky at times!
Who could forget “who let the dogs out” and “null set”.
And that fake video about going around to everyone in his extended family and asking them whether he should run!
About 12 months to wait!
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:18 am
Hey, waktard, just how botched did your civic education have to be to leave you incapable of making distinctions between entertainers, news-casters, opinion-makers, and party officials whether state, local, or national. No offense. Only curious. But I gotta say it frightens me no end that goofballs like you are allowed to vote at all. No wonder we’re in such a mess.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:19 am
That was my fave, effendi.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:19 am
By the way I don’t blame Mike for not liking the LDS faith. That’s his perogative, especially as a southern bapist.
No offence to LDS’ers on here but it’s a pretty out there religion! I saw a South Park episcode on mormons once and it did show it to be pretty weird (IM0) I have to say.
What we called him on was the sneaky way he went about it.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:20 am
I don’t remember mentioning myself. What did I write, precisely?
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:22 am
He’s a sneaky one. But he’s got game. It’s just really sneaky game.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:22 am
127. Give an instance where Romney has been shown to be as lacking in character, as Huck has been. You just simply can’t. The two records cannot be more opposite. I’m not making anything up about Huck, it’s all documents. You can find nothing on Romney.
If you don’t believe Huck benefited from the stink bomb, then I can’t help you. But it’s simply contemptible to claim that Romney benefited, and extremely callous. That one well-placed question hurt Romney enormously, as Huck knew it would. The apology was convenient, though. Kinda hard to un-ring a bell, though isn’t it?
QVA, you can go on all night with your contortions about the question. The longer you do, the more foolish you appear. Might be better for Huck and his followers to own it, and to chalk it up to dirty politics.
Also, QVA, Huck was not running against a Catholic, in case you didn’t notice.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:22 am
Mitt certainly had his problems but people forget he had matured as a candidate and was at his peak right before Florida where I honestly believe if he won he would have won the nomination. He was even fav in Florida for a couple of days. But Crist and timetables killed him
.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:24 am
135. Southpark? There is that one really funny clip on who gets to heaven – the Mormons. But don’t judge us by Southpark! :0(
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:30 am
You know, just repeating something doesn’t make it true. Let google be your friend and stop asking others to do your homework for you.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:37 am
@118, Ikv, what baffles me is why do those who profess to be so outraged about this off the record (per the reporter’s own story) QUESTION – not a comment & not a statement – seem to have no problem with the press’s blatant effort to highlight & make an issue of Romney’s religion?
All of Huckabee’s statements prior to that were to the effect that Romney’s religion was Romney’s business not his and that he would prefer to talk about the issues. So in an article of tens of thousands of words, what was the media’s focus? An off the record QUESTION of 8 words.
And you can’t see the attempt to hype something out of that? And you can’t see that someone as calculatedly conscious of the negativity of that question as is being alleged about Huckabee, wouldn’t also recognize that the negativity with which such an act would be received by a much larger number of voters than would be swayed by it?
@121, That’s just more of the damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t line. Had Huckabee apologized to Romney in complete privacy, he would have been criticized for not doing so publicly since he had offended all Mormons. Had Huckabee apologized at a press conference, he would have been criticized for making a publicity stunt out of it. As he said a short while ago, he could walk on water and these same people would say it was because he can’t swim. (And now I’m just waiting for someone to peg that as more religious “code” language
)
@138, You’re right, Martha – you are unable to show anything that supports your claims against Huckabee or that he benefitted in any way from it. And yet you then go on to again assert it to be true. How amusingly contradictory. However, after all the marketing of the “anti-Mormon attack question” in the press, Huckabee’s poll numbers did drop – but of course, THAT should not be seen as a benefit to Romney even though Huckabee was his closest competitor there…
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:51 am
I certainly don’t judge you Martha
.
I’d call being on Southpark a badge of honor.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:56 am
142. Ha ha. You use the same lingo as Huck – 8 words – except he says 8 words out of 11,000 or some such nonsense. Who cares how many words it is?
Huck was doing one of the most important interviews of his life – or at least the campaign. Apparently the reporter had ALREADY tried to get him to take a jab at Romney’s faith.
Why, oh why do you believe that Huck is so stupid/naive to think those “8 words” would not be the biggest news of his campaign so far?
He DID KNOW!
You are just completely clueless, lady. Huck is NOT THAT STUPID.
He also knew perfectly well that the ‘Jesus and Satan are brothers’ question is an old familiar ding anti-Mormons use against Mormons. Being a SB preacher, Huck would obviously know it well. Perhaps being Catholic, you were not previously aware of this. But after 2 years of this being re-hashed, you might have let it sink in.
Huck knew exactly what he was doing, and there probably isn’t a better ‘question’ he could have posed.
My heavens. You are either being dishonest, or you are incredibly willfully blind.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:57 am
143. I’ve heard that the Mormon stuff on there is really funny. I’ve only seen the one clip.
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:14 am
Whateverz. Do Mormons believe in forgiveness? Or is to nurse a soul-killing grudge a part of your doctrine? Get over yourself and move on, weirdo. No one can help you with this but you.
Curious: Does Romney have any non-Mormon supporters on this site? Or is only a Mormon phenomenon? Reason: The Mormon Mormon Mormon Mormon Mormon drumbeat has gotten really tiresome. Did this site ever used to be about, you know, POLITICS? and not Mormonism?
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:15 am
@144, You are either being dishonest, or you are incredibly willfully blind. Precisely what I was thinking about you, but then you probably picked up on that despite my subtlety.
I supported my view of the situation with reason – you, as usual, support yours with further assaults on Huckabee’s character based on your ability to read his mind & your crystal ball insights into his religious ed, rounding it all off by shaking some fluffy pompoms for Romney and another good dose of insults for anyone who declines your pep rally. Now we all just know that Romney’s team is going to win, win, win! cause Martha can do cartwheels…
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:32 am
I for one am not a mormon and I would be very surprised if the millions of people who voted for Mittens in 2008 (and will again soon) were mostly LDS.
November 23rd, 2009 at 6:42 am
Huckabee is the GOP’s Bill Clinton, as slimy as they come and not to be trusted. The only reason McCain got the nod in was because Huckabee was attacking Romney every two seconds.
2012 will be different though. Huckabee is wholly of incapable of taking Romney on all by himself.
Huckabee should be doing subway commericals with Jared instead of running for president.
I’m a fiscally and socially conservative northeast republican. Being from New England I am much more familiar with Romney than those of you from other parts of the country. Romney is a good man it’s obvious that Huckabee is a religious bigot. Mike should just come out and admit that he hates Mormons.
Romney 2012
November 23rd, 2009 at 6:47 am
C-Republican -”When Romney was grilling steaks in Iowa, he called the five second rule when he dropped one on the ground…and put it back on the grill. How much more down to earth can you get than that?” lol
AS long as Romney was the ONE who ate it, otherwise he made a decision for someone who may not believe in the five second rule.
November 23rd, 2009 at 7:27 am
@63
Martha said: “It was politics, and it was also true. He was a fiscal liberal, and he was not only ignorant on FP, but many of the things he said were downright liberal.
The people who were supporting Romney were not doing so because he was seen as the most electable, but because he was seen as the most conservative choice, and the most competent.
Schafely did not like Romney.”
Thank you, Martha, for pointing out where you disagree with me and why. As far as Schlafley supporting Romney, I do not know politically who she endorsed. (My sense is that she would have supported Huckabee, but that she believed some of the early misinformation about his record being fiscally liberal.) But on her radio program last weekend she featured a topic of how Mormons vote 97% conservative. The guest also talked about how there has been a traditional Mormon/Evangelical divide, but that work is being done and progress made to unite us politically. We actually probably believe in the same conservative values but get hung up on such things as religious differences. As a whole, Mormons have a life-style that supports conservative, traditional values. My husband and I enjoy hearing the musical programs from BYU, even while we recognize that many of our religious beliefs are probably different. We appreciate the hymns, the traditional gospel songs, and the patriotic songs. This is America, and we can disagree on religion, while still sharing many important values across religious lines. God will be the judge of our faith, not us.
To his credit, Governor Huckabee has often said that he is not anti-Mormon and that he appreciates very much Senator Hatch from Utah, for instance. I think there was a personality clash between Huckabee and Romney for reasons unknown that were stronger than any religious differences.
One of the statements that I appreciated from early in my journey to decide who I supported for the Republican candidate in 2008 was Huckabee’s statement: “I’m a Conservative; I’m just not mad.” I did find Huckabee to be a “different kind of conservative,” and that was why I was drawn to him. He used lots of self-deprecating humor. He didn’t seem to hate all Democrats, but realized that “the people” were more interested in their freedoms and relief from heavy taxation than party. He was heavy on family values. He wasn’t afraid to acknowledge his faith in Jesus Christ, but neither did he use his political opportunity as a pulpit of religion. He found common, shared values of conservatives and even was, and is, able to talk to an atheist with great respect and compassion. His love of people shows in his smile and hand-shake and kind words. (I have met him twice and he seems very genuine.)
When I read of Huckabee’s so-called fiscal liberalism, I realized that I liked it better than the stark, purist view of a few, that “no tax is ever legitimate.” In Arkansas, he supported (and his legislature passed with approval of the people) a mere 1/8
% sales tax to fund the improvement of the interstate road system that was one of the worst in the nation. The trucker’s magazine, Overdrive, later rated Arkansas’ interstate roads as one of the best in the nation, helping industry and travel to come to Arkansas. When taxes were needed for legitimate state mandates, they were refunded or overturned as soon as possible under Governor Huckabee. He believes that any excess should not be spent but returned to the people. He believes in the Fair Tax, which I think is a great solution to IRS overreach. Most important in convincing me that Huckabee was a fiscal conservative was the fact that he left his state with an $800 million surplus.
Now that is hard to argue with.
November 23rd, 2009 at 7:29 am
Decisions made by Mitt in his life has earned him his reputation as a Big Gov. Corporate in whom the RNC in 2005 annointed him their Statist. Baine Capital, Romney’s company made it’s fortune closing down American business after the free trade policy went into effect without consideration of the production tax structure. This slip of truth was ot unseen by Romney. Now Romney’s company is all over China creating jobs. As a Detroit worker spoke of Romney, he is the one person I would never ever vote for. He has cost this Nation and knew it. Other then that, I like the guy, his Family and his Religion.
November 23rd, 2009 at 8:05 am
Firstly let me say I am a British citizen and do not have the right to vote in your great country .
Having spoken to hundreds of evangelical pastors in Iowa during the time of the Iowa Caucases who I found to be men of integrity and patriotism and loyal to the United States . I am happy to confirm that they and thousands of other Christians were concerned about the terrible prospect of a man ie Mitt Romney who says the most awful things about their Saviour and who participated in secret Mormon Temple rituals which depicted Christian ministers as being in the ” hire and pay of Satan ” The Republican establishment have got to get it that a significant number of Americans would never vote for a man who traduces and besmirches the Lord Jesus Christ . The Republacan Party must realise that they cannot take Christians for granted . Many Christians will always put their Saviour before party politics .
Lastly I should point out that in the Utah Republican Primary Mitt Romney polled approximately 90% which is a staggering figure . If Mormons can vote for one of their own then please can Christians exercise their right to make a political judgement without being abused by the supporters of Mitt Romney and others .
November 23rd, 2009 at 10:45 am
152. Hooey.
153. Kavon, here’s another one.
November 23rd, 2009 at 10:48 am
Just an observation, but has anyone else noticed the anti-Mormon/JW comments begining to crop up since we started talking about Huck? We’ve got bpb, Ellen, and now Andrew Price.
November 23rd, 2009 at 10:56 am
Andrew,
#153. Do you have any support for those outrageous accusations?
November 23rd, 2009 at 11:06 am
This dialogue is exhausting and pointless to read.
Romney is a Mormon
Huckabee is a Baptist
Palin is a Pentecostal
Guilani is a Catholic
McCain is Episcopalian/Baptist
But does any of that really matter?
Didn’t our founders warn us against imposing a religious test? Didn’t they have the wisdom to know that we should select our Presidents based on ability and experience and education and integrity and not on whether they share the faith of the majority of the electorate?
In light of our current challenges, we should debate the merits of the men, not their respective religions. Our Nation is skating on thin ice now and we absolutely must make the most prudent decisions ever about who will lead us in the future. In my opinion, the stakes are far too high for another trivial battle over religion in the GOP.
I am not a Mormon but I support Romney. I actually share Huckabee’s religion but I think Romney is an extremely intelligent man who possesses the unique skills and abilities that America needs to face the impending economic calamity ahead. America needs to be re-structured and America needs a massive turnaround. At the moment, I believe Romney is the only one who even stands a chance of being able to deliver that.
2008 is over. Whatever happened is history and cannot be altered. We only have the ability to influence the future and we must focus on saving this great nation. That’s where our energies should be expended. In a unique arrangement, our founders entrusted this great land to ‘We, the people’. They gave all the power to the masses. We owe our founders and all those who came before us and sacrificed for this land nothing less than our full attention and diligence in solving the crisis we face and to that end, we must elect leaders of the utmost intelligence and capability. Instead of petty fights about the past, all Republicans should engage in an honest debate about who can defeat Obama in 2012 and who can begin the process of rebuilding America. Can we debate that issue?
November 23rd, 2009 at 11:33 am
I agree with Ci2Eye: there is no litmus test. I am LDS and voted for Huck because he was the
best one still in the race when I voted. 2010 will be a different set of folks. I might vote
for him and I might not. BTW, I don’t believe for a second the part abouot Huck explaining
why he asked about Jesus and Satan being brothers. If he hadn’t heard that one before I’m a
monkey’s uncle.
November 23rd, 2009 at 11:35 am
Yes, Martha, it’s obvious and soooooooooo sickening!
November 23rd, 2009 at 11:38 am
Martha, you must have been hiding under a rock to say Romney has integrity.
Is this a form of mass brain washing which is going on, with the same string of unsubstantiated nonsense describing Romney as a man of in-teg-rity etc. etc. etc.?
This is truly not the case. No honor or integrity there. Only if flip flopping is a badge of honor, stuffing straw votes ballots, pulling up other candidate’s signs, and other unethical conduct is the standard one goes by.
No. 89 IVK asked about number 82. Mormon hating, PHEW — when people, innocent people are harmed, you’re darn right they don’t like you. If Romney’s faith was true, or even the least bit decent, they would bar the Romney’s from going to the temple and taking sacrament.
This paragraph did not prove IVKs case; it proved Romney’s are a fraud. Let’s look at what the paragraph says, first it knock Mitts continual blathering about Mormon hating, it states, ‘when you hurt people (and children) they do not like you”… that should be clear enough. Do you like people who harm you or your family, especially snakes in the grass? The last sentence should be self explanatory.
‘
‘Maraha said name one opinion Romney changed since 08. ROTFL — try the bailouts.
Our founders came to from the reformation. You know little your history No. 157, if accepting LDS is the litmus test of being progressive or all embracing and not questioning — if the movement started in the founders time, the founder’s response to LDS might shock you. The movement was an affront to the majority of decedents of most of the founders, going against the teaching of their fathers and fathers’ father.
Romney ranting, and smears – grow up Romney because a hissy fit is thrown, people have a right to question Romney’s background, lack of ethics, and where his views stem from.
Otherwise, ‘we come in peace’ — V
see accepting all people say it can be unwise and deadly.
November 23rd, 2009 at 11:42 am
MVS – Mormon Apostle Orson Pratt wrote in ‘ The Seer ‘p61-62
” The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father . Therefore , the Father and Mother of Jesus according to the flesh , must have been associated together in the capacity of Huband and Wife ; hence the Virgin Mary must have been for the time being . the lawful wife of God the Father …” This is but one of thousands of statements by leading Mormons past and present which strike against the Christian faith .
With respect to the mocking ceremony of the Christian minister which every Temple Mormon participated in including Mitt Romney prior to 1990 when it was dropped , if you google Mormon Temple Ceremony or speak to one of the numerous ex Mormons such as Sandra Tanner [herself a direct descendent of Brigham Young ] of the Utah Lighthouse Ministry you will get a verbatim description
November 23rd, 2009 at 11:49 am
“If Romney’s faith was true, or even the least bit decent, they would bar the Romney’s from going to the temple and taking sacrament.”
Not being a Mormon, I for one do not know what talking about. However, whatever problem you have with Mr. Romney, I respectfully suggest that you leave the LDS out of it. What is next? Is the Pope responsible for all Catholic candidates and so on and so forth? I for one do not know of any ethical problem that Mr. Romney has, but even if he does, don’t blame the LDS. Again, I am neither a Romneyite nor a Mormon, but I think that you appear to be shakey ground.
November 23rd, 2009 at 11:57 am
Only 2% of the USA is LDS, so when Mitt was getting approximately 35% in polling and votes when he dropped out, a very small percentage of them were coming from LDS voters.
BTW Shedlock, did you purposely lie, or just phrase it wrong? As your quotes indicate, the abominations are what is contained in the creeds, not the churches or people in those churches….big difference friend.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Andrew, do you not believe that Jesus Christ is the ONLY BEGOTTEN son of God the Father? That’s what the Bible teaches beyond any opportunity for refute. Exactly in what manner that was accomplished is not know, but he is very literally the Father of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Orson Pratt was not the Prophet, and only one person on earth at a time has the rights to receive revelation for the church and earth as a whole. So, what he said is not much different than if I specualated on the same subject matter.
Yes Sandra Tanner is an exremely hateful anti-Mormon. Sorry to see that’s where you get your information. I would appreciate if you refrain from belittling our solemn temple ceremony. The temples are Holy places for us. We wouldn’t belittle your religion.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:06 pm
I would suggest Kavon, that you not allow the continuation of this extreme anti-Mormonism on this site. Force them to other sites please.. thank you. Some of the newcomers brought with them the attitude that they can slam other relgions at will.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:09 pm
I considered voting for Huckabee in 2008 until I saw how he played religion with politics during the campaign. One must question his reasoning for asking the Satan and Jesus question…it was a load of crock. This is the same reverend that showed up at an anti-mormon convention in Salt Lake City of 2008. I doubt he was that uninformed about the matter to ask that question. But the damage was already done. The fact that his book still sought opportunity to bash Romney, his “fan club” website doesn’t even include Romney as a candidate in the online voting polls, and he consistently plays the low hand by not having Romney on his “Huckabee” show on Fox reveals his true character. Make no doubt about it….Huckabee is one bitter man that can’t drop it. I consistently hear him play the envy politics card also against Romney and his money. That populist attitude doesn’t get solutions for me….it creates problems and divisions.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Mitt can come on Mike’s show. Sure!
Of course, he would have to apologize for Martha and her motley crew’s smears and outlandishness first.
Just kidding. C’mon on…
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Sarah, Are you Mike/Rubio 2012!/Mike/Pawlenty 2012! Guy? Sure seems like it.
Anyway, Huck would never in a million years invite Romney on. He can’t. But I don’t think Romney’s losing any sleep over it.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Flash back to Romney on Sandy Rios show. Have men waiting in the wings to stand between Romney — when his temper flares.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Sandra Tanner is a decedent of Brigham Young for people who do not know.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:47 pm
Andrew,
I know very little about Mormonism, but I do not know of any religion with any substantial number of adherents that intentionally mocks other faiths in their sacred rites. You simply saying so is not enough. As to other websites, I’m also extremely skeptical. As a Catholic, I know our theology is often grossly misrepresented, often intentionaly.
I honestly don’t care enough about the issue to try to dig to the heart of it all, but suffice to say that I complete dismiss your claims about Romney and Mormonism. Stick to political issues.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:53 pm
The problem, as I see it, is the constant slander — Martha (and her group) calling Mike Huckabee a “Mormon-Hater” in as many clever and underhand ways as they can ON THIS SITE.
Over and over and over and over…
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Who in the heck cares that Sandra Tanner is a descendant of Brigham Young? What is that supposed to prove? He has a few thousand descendants…if one of them is now anti-Mormon, is that supposed to mean something?????
Thanks MWS.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:58 pm
To the lieing SarahTOHuck lady…. can you show where Martha called Huckabee a Mormon-Hater? She has rightfully called him on using religious bias to gain him politically; that’s not the same as her calling him a Mormon-Hater.
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:01 pm
174. LOL LOL LOL
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:13 pm
What’s so funny, you liar?
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:15 pm
174. You people need to simply move on and quit baiting Mike’s supporters by calling Huck a bigot over and over every single day ON THIS SITE…
Fair enough?
Can you do that? : )
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:17 pm
176. I’m sure Mitt would be soooo proud of you as his supporter with that mouth of yours. Not. :0
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Sarah, if you were not truly a liar, but just made a mistake, the proper thing to do would be to apologize to Martha. I don’t like calling people that, but when people lie, that is the proper term for them. If you merely mde a mistake, then I’ll retract my terminology.
There is not place for religious bigotry in America, let alone on this site. Kavon has kept it down to a minimum, but in the last few days some of you newcomers have come marching in thinking you can post whatever smears toward the Mormon religion that you want.
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Conservative Republican – assuming you are over 38 years and you were raised Mormon can you kindly do us all a favour and confirm that in the Mormon Temple Ceremony prior to 1990 the Christian pastor was mocked as being a dupe of Satan . I doubt that you will as you made an oath on pain that your throat would be slit if you speak about the secrets of the Temple – as indeed did Mitt Romney
MWS – THE REASON WHY IT MATTERS that Mitt Romney knowingly participated in a ceremony which traduced the Christian minister is that it speaks volumes about the integrity of the man . Romney was going around the country seeking endorsements from leading evangelical ministers knowing that he participated in a ceremony which portrayed the same ministers as hirelings of Satan There are three words to descibe such behaviour ‘wickedness’ , ‘hypocrisy’ and ‘dishonesty’ These are traits which are not consistent with a woodbe President of the United States .
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Yet more about LDS than I ever wanted to know. We should rename this site race42012.com for Mormons, because no one else is welcome here.
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Andrew – I’ll not discuss the temple ceremony with you. Our religion does not look down on people of other religions. We love them, consider them God’s children, and hope for the very best for them.
I was not raised Mormon btw, but have been a member 32 years. I was raised Methodist, went to the Desciples of Christ Christian for a few years also. When I joined, there were 2.8 million members world wide. Today, there are over 13 million, and we’re the 4th largest Christian religion in the United States. So, you shouldn’t presume that most people have been raised in the LDS faith.
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:48 pm
The Bible says that many in the last days will be teaching the doctrines of men, and not of God. Are you going to lambast the writers of the Bible for saying that, or are you just attempting to hurt the LDS church with your slander?
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Translation: Rah Rah Mormon Rah Rah!
So tedious, all this Mormon boosterism. Just come out with it: race42012.com is a stealth proselytizing vehicle that backfired miserably.
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:56 pm
dotan, you are soooooooo wrong…I would be tickled to death if we never had to discuss religion again. You, and many others in recent days have been forcing the issue. I hate it….Article 6 of our great USA Constitution says there will be no religious test, but some of those on here are apparently not familiar with it.
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:57 pm
I missed a lot by not getting on the computer very much yesterday! Since we’re rehashing ‘08…One of my pet peeves about Romney was how hard he tried to buy the election. Although, he has the right to do what he wants with his money; not all votes are for sale. I read about this after the primaries were over:
“In 2006, Christian public-relations guru and Romney backer Mark DeMoss had his candidate meet with about 15 conservative activists. In a gesture that—like much of Romney’s campaign—was both opulent and desperate, Romney sent everyone in attendance an expensive office chair, along with a note that read, “You’ll always have a seat at our table.” http://www.worldmag.com/articles/13894
Isn’t that pretty much the “pay to play” type of politics we complain so much about here in Illinois and the current Obama administration in Washington? How many “conservative activists” sold out for a “seat” at the rich man’s “table”?
Gov. Huckabee was a pastor for 12 years and president of the Southern Baptist Convention during two of those years.
During the 2008 primaries; many of the Evangelical Christian leaders believed that Huckabee was another “unelectable” former pastor like Robertson/Buchanan. I guess they forgot the part that Huckabee proved his electability by actually being elected to political offices 4 times, twice as Lt. Gov. and twice as Gov.
From what I’ve read that the majority of the Evangelical vote was split fairly evenly among the top tier candidates during the 2008 primaries. Can the same be true about the Mormon vote? I wish I could say, “You betcha!”
I’m kind of curious…Why doesn’t anyone ever mention that Romney was a bishop for 3 years and served “nine years as “stake” president, overseeing about a dozen Boston-area parishes”? (Especially since it appears that both Huckabee and Romney spent 12 years of their lives as religious leaders)
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:05 pm
“Why doesn’t anyone ever mention that Romney was a bishop for 3 years and served “nine years as “stake” president, overseeing about a dozen Boston-area parishes”?”
That is mentioned quite often..are you that new here?
I’m glad he served in those capacities, and I have no problem with the fact that Mike was a pastor.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Andrew,
Go pound sand. I have no idea if you are even giving a remotely accurate representation, but I don’t have a problem with a religion thinking it is exclusively right. That’s pretty much the point of religion.
Now can we stop with talk about secret handshakes, door knocks, and underwear?
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:27 pm
ConservativeRepublican,
Yes, I am fairly new here; although I may have read a few articles and such among the way. I see a lot of similarities in Huckabee’s and Romney’s leadership records. Although, Romney has more education background (probably due from better ability to fund it)
Huckabee has returned to the bushiness he started in, media…much like Reagan did when he finished as Gov. Both Reagan and Huckabee were re-elected and finished their terms with pretty decent approval records. If memory serves me correctly, this is one of the places Huckabee’s and Romney’s records differ. Huckabee couldn’t be re-elected for a 3rd term and Romney couldn’t have been re-elected because of approval ratings. (Although both still had equally high approval ratings among their Republican constituents…it takes approval among the indies and more “conservative” leaning dems to win elections. Even Dems will vote for a consistently social conservative Republican for national office if the dem is a social liberal. Which is why Reagan and Bush won and McCain lost. I agree with Huckabee that McCain would have lost by a landslide is he wouldn’t have chosen Sarah to excite the Evangelical base. I don’t believe that Huckabee will lose very many of that base in a fair match between him and Sarah. Yes, she has a fairly good record in the Republican majority state of Alaska. But, Huckabee has a very good record when people realize what a super majority Democrat controlled state Arkansas really was when he served there.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:44 pm
189. Very well said, Granny T.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:46 pm
182, “When I joined, there were 2.8 million members world wide. Today, there are over 13 million, and we’re the 4th largest Christian religion in the United States.”
YOU wanna medal. Here… O
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:47 pm
I left a comment earlier, and it hasn’t appeared. Have I been banned already?
But I just joined the fun!
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:48 pm
What happenen to 192.?
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:51 pm
No medal wanted, I was trying to dissuade people from assuming that most adults in the LDS church had grown up in it.
I was very afraid that this would happen when Schmidt was allowed to be a FFP. We predicted that he would invite his friends over and we would see an surge of anti-Mormon commentary. He behaved for a while, but recently, he has been once vehicle for incitement of the bigoted idiots that show they know nothing about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:14 pm
(sigh)
This is so ugly…
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:16 pm
194. and 195.
And calling Mike and his supporters HERE bigots helps how??????
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:18 pm
I know a lot about the LDS church, like the membership is often quoted more than it is, they include people who left the church, and they are having to consolidate ward and stakes due to loss of membership.
ConservativeRepublican, it sounds like a conspiracy theory Schmidt ‘invited’ people over to incitement…. a bit too paranoid for my taste.
I have posted here for awhile, on Mitt being a flip flopper, only began to post on two threads, correcting mis-statements because I could not stand the fibs, and out to out revision of history being done to make LDSers look like victims, and to get away with calling people bigots, when they have a right to question Romney.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:19 pm
SarahToHuckInIowa: With respect, I do not think that FredsFighter called Mike a bigot. He and I have gotten mixed up in some nasty contests in the months of old, but he is a fair-minded person.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Ohio, I admitted to Sarah in another post that I do in fact view Mike that way. However, I have not ever made other comments saying so.
I appreciate your defense, but I felt guilty
Maybe my admission was unnecessary, but I just didn’t put much time into the comment.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:28 pm
That is OK Fred, you feel the way that you feel. Nevertheless, I stand by the part of my statement that you are fair-minded.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Well thanks; sometimes my frustrations do get the best of me, but I usually try to avoid my keyboard at those times
For example, a part of me feels the desire to respond to a couple of those commenters who are busy vilifying my religion, but I’d much rather just see this site get on to discussing politics instead of misrepresenting someone else’s personal religious beliefs.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Calling Mike Huckabee a bigot is NOT fair-minded, with all due respect.
Talk about issues and qualifications, good folks. : )
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:48 pm
THIS THREAD:
“Huck’s Army Keeps on Marching Against the Smears
It is a popular thing on Race42012 to slam the folks at Huck’s Army, representing the grassroots supporters of Governor Mike Huckabee.”
Over 200 Comments!
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:14 pm
Sarah, I think that there is a big difference between someone:
A) personally believing that Huck is bigoted, and
B) posting endless comments on a political site condemning Huck for being bigoted
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Conservative Republican – Those caught up in the Mormon cult are so often masters of evasion – the point I wish to come back to which you and other apologists for Mitt Romney have evaded is his participation in secret ceremonies which lampoons the Christian minister as a lackey of Satan . Voters are entitled to know what he did and what he assented to when he went through the Mormon Temple .
You say your religion does not look down on others whatever that means .
Since you are so free in using the ephithet ‘liar’ in your previous postings you yourself are not being honest given the fact you and Romney were involved in a mocking ceremony .
Mormon Prophet John Taylor in Journal of Discourses vol13 p225 said ” What are Christians ignorant ? Yes , as ignorant of the things of God as the brute beasts ” So there we have it , Mitt Romney believes vile things about the Lord Jesus , mocks the Christian pastors and believes we are ignorant about the the things of God and he expects Christians to vote for him !
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:27 pm
204. Fred meet Martha. Martha meet Fred.
Both see a doctor or a pastor. Get help, please.
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:48 pm
From what I’ve read; LDS hold many of the same stands on abortion and marriage that most religions do. I admire how many of them have been champions in those fights. If memory serves me correctly; Gov. Huckabee voiced (on his show) his admiration of how Mormons helped with Prop 8 in CA. I KNOW Huckabee endorsed a Mormon in the special election for the 10th Congressional District of California.
I like Mike better than Mitt because of their records NOT their religions. Reading someone saying things comparing voting for Mitt as being the same as voting for Satan is indefensible. Is there any religion out there that hasn’t been termed a “cult” by others? I’m sure every one of us could tell horror stories regarding religious “bigotry”. But, will that help the GOP win any seats in the “Race for 2012″? NO!
I wish the whole religion issue could be put to rest. Things would be so much better on this site if we could post more positives and less negatives about all the prospective GOP candidates. I’m sure we all have left comments we wish we could erase. (I’d hate for any of my words to end up as ammunition against a GOP candidate in a general election)
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:55 pm
@Andrew Price.
Are you serious? Voters have the rite to know “what [Romney] assented to when he went through the Mormon temple”? So you believe that what he does at church on Sunday makes him qualified or unqualified for the presidency? As for personal and private matters, are voters entitled to know the intimate, sacred relationships between a husband and wife? I certainly hope you don’t consider yourself a conservative with the attitude that everyone is entitled to know the intimate details of everyone’s personal life.
As for the John Taylor quote, try reading three paragraphs before, and four paragraphs after to get the true understanding of his comment, rather than taking it out of context to use as a smear. Also, exactly what “vile things about the Lord Jesus” does Romney believe?
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:56 pm
Andrew, I’m going to consider the possibility that you’re open to learning new information about the LDS Church (I doubt it, but…).
At lds.org, regarding “What constitutes doctrine?”:
Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church.
John Taylor believed that mainstream Christianity had gone astray. That was his personal opinion. So what? Most Christian religions believe that the Christian chapel next door teaches some things that are incorrect.
I’m not saying that there haven’t been Mormon leaders that have looked down upon other religions or that there aren’t Mormons that do so today. But the Church has been making great efforts over the last decades to build ecumenical bridges, and you won’t hear that rhetoric in any conference nowadays.
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:58 pm
GrandmaT, a voice of reason. I think most people here agree with you. Unfortunately, it only takes a few bad apples to make the entire conversation ugly.
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:10 pm
OK…I know I said I’d rather put the religion discussion to rest; but I can’t keep from commenting on this: “What are Christians ignorant ? Yes, as ignorant of the things of God as the brute beasts ”
It looks like I found something else I agree with Mormons on; because I think most of us Christians are pretty ignorant “of the things of God”. I’ve read my Bible through many times over the years and still find something new every time I read it through again.
Are there any sites that would be better fits for those wanting to argue and comment on religion rather than politics?
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Are there any sites that would be better fits for those wanting to argue and comment on religion rather than politics?
Lol, I think nba.com is a more appropriate place
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Conservative Republican – Your dishonesty is shocking . So called Mormon Prophet Joe Smith claimed that God had told him that all Churches and their creeds are an “abhomination” . Can you cite one contempory Mormon leader who would publicly repudiate what Smith said ? Given the fact that Romney was a Bishop and a Stake President and you are his apologist can you kindly cite any occasion where Romney has repudiated Smith’s statements and claims ?
I ask again concerning Romney’s participation of mocking the Christian pastor in the Mormon Temple .
Mormons bleat about a religious test unfairly applied to their man Romney – may we ask what Religious test is required to be elected to high office in Utah ie State Governor and Senators . Suprise , suprise the only requirement is to be a Mormon .
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:51 pm
GO HUCK YOURSELF!!!!
GO HUCK YOURSELF!!!!
GO HUCK YOURSELF!!!!
GO HUCK YOURSELF!!!!
GO HUCK YOURSELF!!!!
GO HUCK YOURSELF!!!!
GO HUCK YOURSELF!!!!
GO HUCK YOURSELF!!!!
November 23rd, 2009 at 6:05 pm
Andrew, you get hung up on weird stuff don’t you. If you are really interested in the Church’s current position regarding other faiths, see their official statement:
It is important to note that interfaith cooperation does not require doctrinal compromise… It is necessary to maintain a separation between charitable efforts and doctrinal tenets, while at the same time sharing a mutual concern for those in need.
People of good faith do not need to have the exact same beliefs in order to accomplish great things in the service of their fellow human beings.
Religious requirement in Utah? That’s just rich.
It’s obvious you’re not interested in hearing any of this, so I’ll just consider this conversation over. I’ve wasted enough time already.
November 23rd, 2009 at 6:09 pm
214’s comment pretty much sums up all the political arguments in this thread
November 23rd, 2009 at 7:06 pm
We are all still awaiting an explanation as to Mitt Romney’s involvement in a Mormon Temple ceremony which mocked the Christian pastor – all you apologists for Mitt Romney you seem to be strangely silent .
All you Mormons trying to throw dust in our eyes about wanting this to be a political discussion and not religious as if the two in US politics do not overlap . May I simply point out that Romney laid his cards clearly on the table – he said that America needs a President who is ” a man of faith ” We have every right to examine Romney’s religion not least by Romney’s own invitation . Christians will never accept that it is a small matter for a man to believe that Jesus is Satan’s brother . Jewish poeple will never accept it is a small matter for Mitt Romney to support the secret , vicarious baptism of dead Jewish Holocaust victims in the Mormon Temples . Black people will never accept it is a small matter for Mitt Romney to have gone along with the Mormon view that the mark of Cain is black skin .
As has been already most ably establshed by several previous bloggers Romney is an unprincipled politician who will be a liberal in Massachusetts inorder to get elected and a conservative in the Republican primaries to try and get elected – and to top it all he belongs to a most awful and absurd cult . It would be a catastrophe for the Republican Party and for the USA if he were to win the 2012 nomination .Thank God for Mike Huckabee’s army and for that matter Sarah Palin’s army etc
November 23rd, 2009 at 7:23 pm
“It is important to note that interfaith cooperation does not require doctrinal compromise… It is necessary to maintain a separation between charitable efforts and doctrinal tenets, while at the same time sharing a mutual concern for those in need.
People of good faith do not need to have the exact same beliefs in order to accomplish great things in the service of their fellow human beings.” —
It sounds so very “V”, “We come in Peace” “Trust us and put Mitt In” It sounds so very “V”
November 23rd, 2009 at 7:30 pm
“Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church.” says Fredfighter
I am so happy you said that, I was worried, since David Pattons visit to Tennessee when he saw and talked with Big Foot down that dusty Tennessee road, Big Foot, who told Patton that he was the ancestor of the black race and was doomed to roam the earth forever and not die, to steal the hearts of man. Did you ever take a load of worry off my mind in your statement. Of course, Prophet Spencer Kimball has it in his book “Miracle of Forgiveness” and the most noted Big Foot expert is also LDS, I thought you guys actually believed that, and people don’t have to ‘follow the prophet’. Glad you cleared that up Fredfighter.
Any other hedging Fredfighter?
November 23rd, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Kavon,
Are you leaving these guys here to prove a point?
This is disgusting.
November 23rd, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Andrew,
How do you mean they “mock” Christian pastors? By supposedly calling Christian theology an “abomination?” If so, that’s just kind of a strong way of saying “we’re right and they’re wrong,” which any religion worth it’s salt is going to believe.
At Good Friday services in the Catholic Church, we pray for the conversion of heathens, Jews, and Protestants.
Don’t you pray for the conversation of people?
This is all kind of interesting on a theological level, and a candidate’s faith (or lack thereof) does inform their worldview, and hence their politics, but the specific issues you’ve brought up have no bearing on politics. You may as well oppose a candidate because he believes in transubstantiation, as opposed to consubstatiation.
At any rate, as one of the earliest Huckanuts on this site- and one who is not particularly fond of Romney- and one who fought many lonely battles during the Primaries, I’m telling you to shove off.
November 23rd, 2009 at 9:48 pm
Thanks MWS,
We should all learn the important distinction between esoteric beliefs that don’t have real bearing on public policy and the straightjacketing of minds by forcing one’s belief system arbitrarilly on people through political means. Americans have always been led by somewhat eccentric, independent, leaders, but to unless you want to live in a place like Iran or Cuba where they torture people who don’t profess their everlasting faithfulness to an ideology, then stop with this witchhunt smear campaign against Romney.
All your old tired arguments about temple rites, etc., were settled in court by the seating of Sen. Smoot over a century ago. Come’on Hucknuts, let’s discuss stuff that is actually relevant–instead of continually rehashing stuff that has about as much relevance as the building of the Panama Canal!!!
November 23rd, 2009 at 9:50 pm
I suppose I should rephrase:
Stop the smear campaign against the Latter-day Saints (not Romney so much).
November 24th, 2009 at 1:08 am
There is disembowelment, and throat cutting in the temple ceremony also. Although there are many faiths which may feel they are the only faith, as Dallon Oaks said follow the prophet even when he is wrong. It relevant to have a discussion on the topic, after all the Panama Canal was only a lease.
And above all Romney is a flipper flopper.
November 24th, 2009 at 1:26 am
bpb,
You’re a sicko.
Get off this site.
November 24th, 2009 at 2:02 am
I have found that discussing religions is not a productive activity on a political site. I am an avid Huckabee supporter, and I have never heard negative comments about Romney’s religion on the Huck’s Army website. We dislike Romney because he has no principles and is not trustworthy.
Andrew, as far as I know, you have never been on Huck’s Army and I wish you would discontinue your discussion about the Mormon religion because the Rombots believe that is all the Huck supporters care about, and that is NOT true. If you wish to discuss religion, please don’t associate with Mike Huckabee because it makes HIM look like he is a bigot, which he definitely is not.
As OJ said, we can find many things about all religions that are wierd to other religions, but last I looked we all have freedom of religion, so we shouldn’t be “casting the first stone.”
November 24th, 2009 at 6:15 am
Vote for Truth – I am not a member of Huck’s army and I have never claimed to have been . I am puzzled by your contribution which seems implausible . Having often blogged with Mormons I know they do impersonate , anyway be that as it may , lets assume you are bone fide it would be good if you declared who you are . Why dont you deal with the issues . Are you seriously suggesting that a man ie Mitt Romney who was involved in secret ceremonies which mocked and denigrated the Christian Minister is fit for high office ?
Religion may not bother you , thats fine you have made it clear that in theory you would be happy to vote for a Muslim Fundementalist or a Satanist so long as his policies are good however for a significant number of American voters religion is an important matter and they wish to examine the claims of a man like Romney .
For the umpteenth time I ask again a straight forward question – A man ie Mitt Romney was in a SECRET CEREMONY (do I need to repeat the emphasis )which mocked the Christian Pastor ie every single minister of the Christian faith , leaving aside the issue of an attack on the Christian ministry , is it consistent with integrity to be asking for endorsements from Christian pastors knowing he had done that? For those who are looking at this debate and have a feigned and I fear deceptive notion that religion should not be discussed in politics you will note that at the heart of my question is not even so much the religious issue but the issue of INTEGRITY .
Is the subject of INTEGRITY ALSO OUT OF BOUNDS FOR THE ROMNEY SUPPORTERS ?
November 24th, 2009 at 6:57 am
MWS – why should bpb get of the site when he is being completely truthful in describing the penalty in the Mormon Temple(prior to 1990) for disclosing secrets ie throat slitting and disenbowlment gestures .
May we all ask you a simple straight forward question – If bpb is a sicko for simply telling the truth as to what happened in the Mormon Temple what does that make Mitt Romney who actually participated in the ceremony ?
If you are a Mormon your dishonesty is reprehensible because you know that is what went on in the Mormon Temple . If you are not now you know and you have pronounced the verdict yourself – it is SICK
November 24th, 2009 at 7:54 am
ConservativeRepublican Says:
Before you call me a liar you should read the LDS quote and what I said. Unless you want to suggest that when Joseph Smith said “sects” he didn’t mean churches. Smith was supposedly told that the churches were wrong, their creeds were an abomination, and they only had a form of godliness not the real thing. I believe the creeds that he said are an abomination. Uou are quibbling over meaningless distinctions. Joseph Smith believed that the Church had been apostate since the early days and that only Mormonism represented truth. It is false to suggest otherwise and to act like Huckabee is wrong for believing the opposite. Which is it, bigotry or difference in religion? You can’t have it both ways.
November 24th, 2009 at 7:58 am
Conservative Said: We wouldn’t belittle your religion.
But Joseph Smith didn’t hesitate to.
November 24th, 2009 at 8:51 am
Andrew,
1. bpb didn’t write ” the penalty in the Mormon Temple(prior to 1990) for disclosing secrets ie throat slitting and disenbowlment gestures ” even if that is true. He wrote “There is disembowelment, and throat cutting in the temple ceremony also.” which asserts that there is ritual sacrifice- actual murder- in Mormon ceremonies.
2. It isn’t even relevant.
You and bpb are an embarrassment to Republicans, Huckabee suppoters, conservatives, and whatever religion you come from. For as little as I know about Mormonism, it is obvious to me that many of your assertions range between misrepresentations and outright lies. Quit embarrassing yourself and the cause you profess to represent- whether political or religious. You do not help either when you don’t deal with others honestly.
November 24th, 2009 at 8:53 am
David Shedlock,
“Conservative Said: We wouldn’t belittle your religion.
But Joseph Smith didn’t hesitate to.”
Man up. Gird your loins. If you can’t take someone rejecting or even belittling your religion (especially when he’s long dead) you need to get out of the debate business. St. Paul didn’t whine.
November 24th, 2009 at 9:25 am
“You and bpb are an embarrassment to Republicans, Huckabee suppoters, conservatives, and whatever religion you come from.” With respect MWS, Andrew is from England (I thought) so while he may be an embarrassment, he is neither a Republican nor a Huckabeeite.
November 24th, 2009 at 9:34 am
Isn’t this post and it’s comments just highly enlightening. It’s manifestly clear that the title “Huck’s Army Keeps on Marching Against the Smears”, is demonstrably false from these comments; far from it, the supposed “grassroots of compassionate conservatism” march along with pleanty of smears and LDS-Deranged hatred.
Anyways, Thanks Adam and David Schmidt for exposing Huck’s Army ‘grassroots’ to be the ignorant, hateful fools that they are. That is, unless you want to disavow yourselves from such comments.
November 24th, 2009 at 9:42 am
Hey folks, for all you people denying the anti-Mormon currents behind much of the anti-Romney crowd…….here is a link to just one blog where the FPP was just a normal post, but the posters are having a free-for-all on Romney’s religion. This is happening now, not 2 years ago.
http://firstthings.com/blogs/evangel/2009/11/as-a-romney-guy/
November 24th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Jerald,
I read through the comments in your link. I saw 2 comments that were disparaging, I think. Most of the commentators were either supportive of Romney, or made clear his religion is not an issue.
Guys like Andrew and bpb are a very small (but sometimes vocal) minority. I’ve petitioned that those two get banned here.
November 24th, 2009 at 10:31 am
MWS – you knew what bpb meant as I did and you are just playing dishonest games . Do you deny that when Mitt Romney received his Mormon Temple endowments that he was dressed with a fig leaf apron and that he made gestures to the effect that disclosure of the secrets or to use Mormon lingo sacred things of the Temple would entail penalties ? And that those penalties were demonstrated graphically by hand gestures across the throat and the torso ?
I ask again concerning Romney’s lampooning of the Christian pastor – will one of you Mormons summon up an ounce of candour and acknowledge what he did .
Since you are so keen to tarnish Mike Huckabee perhaps you can comprehend from a human level how he should feel if he faces Romney in a debate ( it is obvious that Romney will stand in 2012 and Huntsman in 2016 ) that according to Romney and Mormonism , he when he was a pastor was infact in the ‘hire and pay of Satan’.
November 24th, 2009 at 10:31 am
MWS.
Google Andrew Price. He’s all over the place. He lives and breathes anti-Mormonism. I doubt he cares a whit about politics at all. He just looks for any forum he can find to do his dirty work.
As for bpb – he sounds very much like a character on the TownHall blog from 2 years ago. He was the same way – just looking to knock Mormons 24/7.
Idiots. These guys have no place here, I agree with you.
November 24th, 2009 at 10:32 am
237. Nobody here cares, Andrew.
November 24th, 2009 at 10:32 am
I think that this thread should be retitled to Huck’s Army Exposes Itself.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:02 am
Martha,
It isn’t very often that this Huckabee supporter will agree with you…but; in your post above I agree those “guys have no place here” and “nobody here cares” about their bigoted comments. Should we write that down in the record books?
And for the record; here is the last paragraph of Article VI of the Constitution of the United States:
[quote]The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.[/quote]
So, for those of you out there that want to put forth anyone’s religion as a reason not to vote for them; PLEASE move to a country where a “religious Test” is NOT against the law! America doesn’t need you!
November 24th, 2009 at 11:08 am
DanL,
That is a totally unfair statement. Huck’s Army has had NOTHING to do with anti-Mormonism. We totally support Mike Huckabee, and totally do not support Romney for his lack of values or principles. If you think it is Huckabee supporters who are the only ones who think this way, think again. Romney is being bashed for his support of Romneycare, which is a very liberal program with a mandate for the people of Mass to have state sponsored healthcare (gov’t).
Mike Huckabee has mentioned many times on his show that he has supported the Mormons for how they had the courage in the CA vote referendum. He also has supported (endorsed)Harmer, in CA who is a Mormon. The decisions he makes are about the person, not their religion. That is how we all ought to be making our decisions, based on the record and accomplishments of our candidate. So please stop blaming Mike Huckabee supporters for the Mormon bashing. You don’t hear that on that website. I found it disgusting that a Mormon adminitted to coming on Huckabee’s websites to bash Mormons to see if it was banished or published. Personally, I have never read any Mormon bashing over on Huckabee websites. DanL it seems obvious that you only WANT that to be the case to justify your horrible comments.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:11 am
Andrew,
” Do you deny that when Mitt Romney received his Mormon Temple endowments that he was dressed with a fig leaf apron and that he made gestures to the effect that disclosure of the secrets or to use Mormon lingo sacred things of the Temple would entail penalties ? And that those penalties were demonstrated graphically by hand gestures across the throat and the torso ?”
First off, I’ve never set foot in a temple (but was in a Mormon church once looking for directions), so I have no idea how their rituals work. Secondly, I’m a member of fraternity, so such symbolic gestures don’t scandalize me a whole bunhc. Thirdly, bpb didn’t just imply, but asserted that murder takes place in these rituals.
Finally, you’re a jerk. I think evangelization is a good and noble thing, but the way you go about it is dispicable.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:12 am
“He also has supported (endorsed)Harmer, in CA who is a Mormon.” That is at least than we can say about some in our party.
“So, for those of you out there that want to put forth anyone’s religion as a reason not to vote for them; PLEASE move to a country where a “religious Test” is NOT against the law! America doesn’t need you!” Well, it is a good thing that one of our posters live in Canada, there is already two different people pictured up there that said person cannot support on religious grounds.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:13 am
Dan,
It’s unfair to tar an entire group based on the actions of a handful.
I’ve always acknowledged that there are a few that have a serious problem with Romney’s Mormonism. Naturally, these handful of people would gravitate to Huckabee, since he was (is?) a Baptist minister who is a solid SoCon. But they are the exception to the rule. You don’t find comments like these from any of the other Huckanuts here.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:14 am
“I’m a member of fraternity” Haha, shhhhhh quit bad mouthing our fraternity MWS.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:15 am
Huck caught the FairTax lightning and Mitt got burned by it in Iowa. Social conservatives and FairTaxers carried the day for Huckabee at the Straw Poll because Iowa is more about face-to-face politics than TV ads. Anyone at the Straw Poll remembers the “Fairest Wheel”, the big FairTax tent and nearly everyone there wearing a FairTax lapel sticker (even Mitt’s troops). The Iowa Republican Party even made it their top issue.
The FairTax campaign heavily organized in grassroots Iowa but never told anyone who to vote for. Instead, the campaign said that the FairTax was the real “candidate” of change. Huck caught it and Mitt missed it. That simple.
The FairTax is about hometown America rolling over the political elite in DC who profit manipulating the corrupted tax system. It’s about a better, job creating, economic boom idea consistently rejected by insiders in Washington who have much to lose. That, along with Huck’s positive personality and everyman common sense resonated in Iowa and elsewhere but in the end Huck didn’t have enough cash to go the distance.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:19 am
On the contrary Martha – a good proportion of the American people do care remember thousands of people turned out on a freezing cold day to support a man who had a shoe string budget starting from nowhere and defeated a man who had spent a fortune . Millions of Christians including thousands saved out of the Mormon cult will never vote for a man who believes that Jesus is Satan’s brother as well as a host of other problems . With respect to my politics I am a true Conservative unlike Mitt Romney – but this forum is not about me but rather the 2012 Presidential race .
November 24th, 2009 at 11:21 am
“DanL it seems obvious that you only WANT that to be the case to justify your horrible comments.”
My horrible comments huh. That’s funny. I was one of the people demanding that Lorelli be removed as an FPP for his smears against Huck.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:24 am
Andrew,
“a good proportion of the American people do care remember thousands of people turned out on a freezing cold day to support a man who had a shoe string budget starting from nowhere and defeated a man who had spent a fortune . ”
Right. And for the overwhelming majority, it had nothing to do with Mormonism.
And you’re right as well that this forum isn’t about you. Nor is it about misrepresenting esoteric theology.
Please
go
away.
And ask yourself, when you find time to reflect, how St. Paul went about evangelizing. He didn’t lie to the Jews or the pagans and others about their beliefs. He spoke the truths of the Christian faith, in Christian charity and love.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:24 am
248. Oh, so you do support the Huckster. Ha.
BTW – I must remind folks that there were many – too many to count – anti-Mormon comments on Huck’s own blog, and on many affiliated sites – including HUCKSARMY. I saw them with my own eyes, so it’s no use in denying.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:30 am
MWS,
I’m guessing, but I think Kavon has a purpose in leaving these clowns up. I think/hope that he wants to avoid a repeat of what happened in 08, in relation to Romney’s faith. In the past, haven’t these kind of comments been deleted?
Maybe it’s better to get this out now. Unfortunately, a lot of it was on Huck sites. Huck is in a little bit of a pickle, in trying to deal with this.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:35 am
MWS – since you say you are not a Mormon and you claim ignorance as to what goes on in the Temple what is your take on Mitt Romney who is a Mormon and his involvement in a ceremony which denigrated the Christian minister? Further and what in your humble , honest and objective opinion should people think of Romney’s integrity when he was seeking endorsments from leading evangelical pastors knowing that he had secretly traduced them ?
November 24th, 2009 at 11:36 am
Martha,
I saw some of those anti-Mormon comments, too. Many times I responded pretty much the way I do here. As a Huck’s Army moderator; I KNOW we delete posts that were over the top and LOCK threads like this one that get off topic with religious bigotry. I even asked one Mormon to send me personal messages to answer some of my questions and ask me some of his/hers. We had a very good discussion about when Huckabee was in Utah as the guest speaker. From the research I did; (if memory serves me correctly) I found that Huckabee was very busy during that time and just stopped in to give his speech and leave. I can’t seem to find the link for the transcript; but I KNOW Huckabee didn’t make ANY negative Mormon comments!)
IMO the NY Times reporter wanted to sow discord among the Republican Party to further their far left agenda. Who knows; maybe some of those bigots on this site are really far left dems fanning the flames???
Despite the differences in our religions; the Mormons and Baptist have many of the same stands on the issues. If Romney would have been consistent with those issues; I wouldn’t have as big of a problem with him.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:39 am
There was that PPP poll that Aron posted a month or more ago that showed that about 1/3 of republicans had an unfavorable view of Mormons. I don’t agree with Catholicism, but I would say that I view it favorably. That goes for just about all Christian denominations. I can only interpret the high disapproval numbers as being based, in most part, on bigotry. I think that it is fair to assume that those disapproval numbers would be significantly higher amonst Huck supporters. It is reasonable to disagree with the tenets of a religion without viewing it unfavorably.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:41 am
Great news, mittwits. Shout it from the rooftops.
Poll: Romney’s favorables now below 50% among Republicans?
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/11/23/poll-romneys-favorables-now-below-50-among-republicans/
Money quote:
November 24th, 2009 at 11:43 am
Martha – I dont know that Mike Huckabee is in a pickle given the fact in the first Iowa opinion poll with reference to 2012 which came out yesterday he has a solid lead . Perhaps you might just think Romney has more problems
November 24th, 2009 at 11:51 am
DanL,
I disagree with Mormon doctrine (1 of those being that I believe Jesus is the Creator of the angels and “all things” as I just read in my personal Bible study this morning: “1 Corinthians 8:6 (KJV) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.”)
Despite our doctrinal differences; I admire the Mormons on many other things and I personally, welcome them in the Republican Party; because politically we stand the same on most issues. To be totally honest; if Huckabee were a candidate as pastor in my church…I would not vote for him. But, his political views are closest to mine than any other candidate.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:52 am
Granny T – we are all sure you are a true and genuine Huckabee supporter – none of us would think otherwise, we would not think for one moment you are a plant . Here is a test for your honesty I ask the question yet again – what do think of a man ie Mitt Romney who secretly participated in a ceremony which denigrated the Christian minister as being in the hire and pay of Satan ?
November 24th, 2009 at 11:53 am
254. Granny T, I appreciate your honesty in saying that anti-Mormon comments were/are a problem on Hucksarmy. Unfortunately, Huck’s very own blog had a problem as well, and the comments were not deleted.
The very fact that Huck did not show any leadership on this, leads people to conclude he feels the same way as these anti-Mormons. Do you see how he encouraged it, by not removing the comments, or even asking his other Huck sites to do so?
The NYT reporter may very well have been looking for a way to sow discord. But he claims that Huck brought up the question out of the blue, after the interview. Why would Huck do that? I’ve never heard a good reason, only lame excuses. Huck is not stupid. I believe Huck has stated that the reporter was fishing for some religious stuff against Romney. Well then, if so, WHY did Huck hand him the stink bomb? Doesn’t make a bit of sense. Huck supporters need to face the fact that Huck wanted the religious war. Almost everything he did was around that theme.
Granny, Romney is no more a flip-flopper than Huckabee. Romney changed his position on life, and was 100% pro-life as governor. Huck’s biggest flip-flops are on fiscal matters, defense, and immigration. Yes, he was consistent on life.
But it just seems to look as though the people who don’t like Romney because of his faith, use the flip-flopping as a convenient excuse. They don’t really care how much Huck flipped. Do you see what I mean?
November 24th, 2009 at 11:54 am
This is a political website and my opinion does not belong on this site AND neither does your bigotry!
November 24th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Andrew,
“since you say you are not a Mormon and you claim ignorance as to what goes on in the Temple what is your take on Mitt Romney who is a Mormon and his involvement in a ceremony which denigrated the Christian minister?”
I haven’t read any evidence that they do “denigrate” Chrisitan ministers (and why do you keep referring to “the Christian minister”?), and quite honestly, you have zero credibility with me, so I won’t take it on your word.
(Andrew) “Further and what in your humble , honest and objective opinion should people think of Romney’s integrity when he was seeking endorsments from leading evangelical pastors knowing that he had secretly traduced them ?”
Again, I reject the premise that he traduced them. I doubt Romney’s sincerity for other reasons. I think he is a political chamelean, but that has nothing to do with his religion.
As a Catholic, I strongly reject Protestant theology. I think many of their ministers are in enormous error. But that would not stop me from accepting help from them in a common cause. Romney is not running for Ayatollah, he was (is) running for President.
November 24th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
Martha,
AS I have said MANY times…I vote my Bible on the “social issues” and let God take care of my pocket book. IMO Huckabee has been fairly consistent on defense and has explained himself on the immigration issues. Arkansas is too close to the border to not have to deal with illegals in the most fiscally way possible until our borders are sealed. Huckabee felt it was less expensive to educate them so they could work rather than being on welfare or incarcerated. If they were working; they were contributing to rather than taking from. (Which is also why he granted many of those pardons…so they could get jobs)
I’ll look for the link to the explanation I thought explained Huckabee’s question the best; unless you are willing to accept my paraphrase. He said something about the reporter being more familiar with the Mormon religion than he was. I know that might be hard for some to believe; but do they remember that when he was in seminary he was a newlywed with his new bride battling cancer. AND he was working as well as going to school so he could support them.
November 24th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Martha,
“But it just seems to look as though the people who don’t like Romney because of his faith, use the flip-flopping as a convenient excuse. They don’t really care how much Huck flipped. Do you see what I mean?”
Since life is the #1 issue for me (and nothing else even comes close- though I’m passionate about many things), the flip flop on life is far worse than Huck’s flips on immigration or fiscal issues. I was actually very disappointed in Huck’s flip on immigration, and liked his position as governor better, but it pales in importance to be next to defending unborn life.
November 24th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Granny T – it is strange you are now a shrinking violet when it comes to offering your opinion , hey dont be coy , between you and me what do you think of Romney and his denigration of the Christian minister or if it makes it easier for you what do think in the political arena among ordinary voters would they think of a Presidential nominee involved in a secret ceremony deigrating the Christian minster ?
November 24th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
I kind of agree with MWS, I don’t trust you much either. I don’t know a whole lot about the Mormon religion. I do know that my Bible backs up my Baptist beliefs so why should I look elsewhere? Why should I take the word of some stranger about what goes on in secret anyway? I don’t want to be involved with any part of your bigoted attitude. Quit trying to fan the flames! Leave us all alone!
November 24th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Andrew,
Who the hell is “the Chrisitan minister” you keep referring to? Is he a particular person? Is it a reference to ALL Christian ministers? Those of a particular theology or demonination?
November 24th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Andrew,
Are you this Andrew Price?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1477855/Preacher-barred-from-going-near-Mormons.html
November 24th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
MWS – Either you are being dishonest or forgetful I hope it is the latter – I have made it plain I am refering to ceremonies which took place prior to 1990 . So you are saying you know nothing of Mormon Temple ceremonies past or present ?
November 24th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
Andrew,
“So you are saying you know nothing of Mormon Temple ceremonies past or present ?”
Ummmm…. pretty much.
But what I asked you is who YOU are referring to when you keep saying “the Christian minister?”
November 24th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Andrew,
I want an answer to MWS’s 2nd question in post #269: “Are you this Andrew Price?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1477855/Preacher-barred-from-going-near-Mormons.html ”
Can you even LEGALLY vote in the US?
Can anyone ban Andrew Price from this site for spreading his illegal religious test bigotry?
November 24th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
#269
Andrew Price,
I suggest you watch this video by Reagan: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOp8fpfBa2o
I am a member of the Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter Day Saints and I have no idea what you are talking about. When I was in the states I attended the temple frequently and I can testify that you are way off base.
It doesn’t matter anyway because this is not a places for religious (especially religiously bigoted) discussion. We live in America not in Iran! I believe that the majority of Christians are not bigoted fundementalist wackos bent on bringing down other faiths. We live in a good society of trying to love ones neighbor as himself, not in trying to justify bigotry through Christianity.
So please keep your comments to the issues or you most likely will get banned.
November 24th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Andrew and others,
1) The whole ‘oath of vengence’ thing was settled in 1907 when Senator Smoot was seated in Congress. All those tired arguments were made and miles of letters/documents are compiled in the Library of Congress on the matter, and it is settled.
2) I can’t comment on the LDS Temple ritual, but what you describe sound strikingly familiar to the same masonic rites that Benjamin Franklin and George Washington passed through (e.g., drinking red wine out of a human skull, symbolic signs of death for violating oaths, etc.). I can’t comment on the LDS Temple ceremony, but those kinds of rites are not new to Men and Women who hold high place in society and politics.
3) Unlike your country (Andrew) In the U.S., we have the right to peacable assembly guarenteed in the U.S. Constitution, as well as a prohibition on a religious test. You can’t bar churches from being built if you disagree with that theology, and you can’t force politicians to all tow the same ideological line (unless that ideology violates the Bill of Rights of course).
November 24th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Andrew,
Look at it this way, is there ANYTHING in Romney’s past behavior or statements that would suggest he would do whatever Mormony things you fear? If anything, Romney has the OPPOSITE problem, widely perceived as someone who isn’t firm enough in his convictions. That’s my problem anyway.
But I think Martha’s right. This has nothing to do with politics 3000 miles away for you. This is simply another extension of your mission.
Quite candidly, you’re really bad at it.
November 24th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Joseph:
The narrative framework for the temple rituals is in certain ways similar to masonic rites. Joseph Smith and many many others in his time were masons and he adopted certain instructional methods from masonry to teach gospel principles to those going to the temple. Today, masonry isn’t understood by the global LDS community and so the teaching constructs have been adapted to fit the times.
Anyway, what Andrew doesn’t understand is that it is all allegorical symbolism.
November 24th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
MWS – Fine you were completely ignorant of what I am speaking about concerning the denigration of the Christian minister – now you know . There are plenty of exmormons who will confirm what I have said . I now pass onto the issue of the Mormon practice of baptizing dead Jewish Holocaust victims which has quite correctly offended many Jewish people – if you google the subject you will find plenty of information about it . I take it you will accept from a purely human perspective their upset .
With respect to myself you can add to the list an interview on a Christian TV show I did in Utah with Jason Wallace and a Radio show in Idaho with Matt Slick . I believe these are on youtube etc
November 24th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Andrew, I’m shooting straight with you. When you are so notoriously obnoxious that a google search for “Andrew Price” brings up the kinds of results it does, it means you’re not doing the work of God. All you are doing is pissing people off. Nobody ever listens to someone who attacks them viciously, even if the attacker had all the truth in the world. You’ve shot yourself in the foot so many times that you don’t have an ounce of credibility. The gospel truth is shared with love and compassion, and your method is the polar opposite of that.
November 24th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Andrew,
I know you were addressing this to MWS “With respect to myself you can add to the list an interview on a Christian TV show I did in Utah with Jason Wallace and a Radio show in Idaho with Matt Slick . I believe these are on youtube etc”
But, I wouldn’t want to warp my mind with any of your bigotry…so I’ll pass. But, I’m still waiting for the answers to both of my first two questions in post #271…I thought maybe you didn’t answer because some one had answered my 3rd question…but you’re obviously still allowed on this site
November 24th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
Amen, FredsFighter!
November 24th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Competent Conservative – As I have said the traducing of the Christian pastor and the throat slitting gestures took place prior to 1990 . The crucial point and relevence to this forum is that Mitt Romney participated in them .
November 24th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Andrew,
As I’ve said before, Benjamin Franklin and George Washington also participated in them. Thomas Jefferson said stuff that was far worse against the “Priest” of his day.
If Romney, (or me as a Latter-day Saint) is thoughlessly lumped in together with such men then I’ll count myself fortunate. By the way, I can show you plenty of posts from evangelicals that are critical of certain generic forms of pastoring. That’s not news either.
November 24th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Martha,
I didn’t have to do a lot of research to find that link. It was on my own blog that I haven’t been active in for quite a while. If interested; you can read my whole article “Are Jesus and Satan Brothers?” at http://grannyt53.wordpress.com/2008/04/11/are-jesus-and-satan-brothers/
I have the link for the whole interview following this short paragraph:
“Gov. Huckabee said the reporter “knew more about the Mormon faith than I did.” (From his interview with Larry King)”
November 24th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Fredfirefighter – I am an evangelical Christian with a ministry to Mormons and I have nothing to hide and you will note I am one of the few on this forum who uses his real name . I have had death threats , obscene phone calls , I have been kicked , punched and spat on by Mormons and the Mormon organisation has instigated legal actions against me – one they were successful and two they lost . Cults such as the Mormons and the Scientoligists always resort to litigation – they have the money I do not have money to pay expensive lawyers .
I have many Mormon friends and unsuprisingly friends who were Mormons who have escaped the cult and who have become Christians .
A Mormon can be excommunicated for speaking to people such as myself , but that does not stop literally hundreds if not thousands from speaking with me , writing to me and meeting me . Thank God many Mormons over the years have escaped the Cult.
Now then I am not standing for President of the USA , this forum is about the 2012 race , not about Andrew Price . I care about your country and certainly I am entitled to speak about your political process . The fact is a Mormon is probably going to stand and whether you like it or not there are huge issues concerning Romney , and there are millions and millions of Americans who are deeply concerned about him .It is sad commentary on the generality of supporters of Romney that they refuse to deal with the issues but lie , evade and turn to abuse .
November 24th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Andrew,
“Fine you were completely ignorant of what I am speaking about concerning the denigration of the Christian minister – now you know .”
I still am. I’ve asked you three times now who “the Christian minister” is you are referring to, with no response. You’ve also never really explained HOW “the Christian minister” (whoever that is) is “denigrated”.
November 24th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Andrew,
“I have been kicked , punched and spat on by Mormons”
I could see that……..
If you approached Catholicism the same way, I’d want to punch you in the teeth.
November 24th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Andrew,
And you never answered this:
Is there ANYTHING in Romney’s past behavior or statements that would suggest he would do whatever “Mormony” things you fear?
November 24th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
No, the church wants us to speak with boldness and charity towards you. We may only be excommunicated if we start preaching the vile vitriol that you spew.
I’ve seen you people protesting at General Conference. Do you also join in with the Westboro Baptist Church in protesting military funerals, etc.. It’s not suprising that after instigating hatred against the LDS that there have been scuffles, but thankfully, the Church has started putting sister missionaries to shield your vitrol during conference by singing the Hymns of Zion.
Hopefully more Huckabee supporters realize that this kind of “lies, evasion, and abuse” (which is comming from your Westboro evangelism–not the LDS church or Romney’s supporters) has no place in American life and Politics. Then we will be able to build the republican party much more constructively.
November 24th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
Joseph,
I agree with your last paragraph; which is one of the reasons I will continue doing my best to “march against the smears”
Huck’s Army does not condone or promote the hatred and bigotry.
For the record:
Although I am Baptist; I DO NOT agree with the hatred promoted by Westboro Baptist Church. That type of “evangelism” not only hurts our cause; it also goes against Scripture.
November 24th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
MWS – Let me spell it out to you again , the Mormon Cult believes it is ‘ the only true Church on the face of the earth ‘ as Mormon prophet Brigham Young said ” The Christian world so called are heathens as to the knowledge of the salvation of God ” Journal of Discourse vol 6 p176 and as Prophet Joe Smith claimed God had told him that ” all their creeds are an abhomination ” The assault on the Christian faith in Mormonism has also taken the form of attacking the office of ministry in Christ’s Church . In the Mormon Temple prior to 1990 the theatrical performance which forms part of the ritual includes a scene where the Christian pastor is portrayed as a dupe of Satan and being in his ‘ hire and pay ‘
When Romney received his endownments he would have sat through this presentation along with other ‘patrons’ , he also made covenants which were enforced by penalties demonstrated by drawing the hand across the throat and vital parts .
The lampooning concerns all ministers
Mormons are not allowed to speak of these secret things . You may not care a jot . but I assure you many Americans do care and are repulsed by these and a host of other teachings and practices in Mormonism .I now wish to revisit the subject of the Mormon practice of baptizing dead Jewish Holocaust victims …..
November 24th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Mr Walsh – have you seen me at General Conference? – I must have a double because I have NEVER witnessed outside the Hanging Gardens of Babylon during General Conference time but I am sure it will come mabe next year.
November 24th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Andrew,
You obviously view the Mormon church as an abomination and likewise Mormon’s as a dupe of Satan.
A little hypocrisy maybe?
November 24th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Jared,
Like all fascist thought policemen, Andrew seems to be incapable of considering his own hypocrisy. His aparent social ideal doesn’t seem much different from the homosexual pink police state, or the nationalistic xenophobic anti-semetic Iranian regime.
His continual assertion that mormons slit the throats of their enemies is not much different than the communist I met in Nicaragua who asserted that the Catholic church archbishops regularly execulte their political opponents–and that Pope John Paul had a concentration slavery camp full of communists.
November 24th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
So Andrew, how much money have you made in your attacks against the Latter-day Saints?
November 24th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
See also:
November 24th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
#280
“the traducing of the Christian pastor”
Is this term they use in Europe, please, help us understand!!?? It is the first time I have heard it in America. You kinda remind of the character played by Paul Bettany in “The Divinci Code”
What a religious nutcase he was! Do you whip yourself. Any concerns you are trying to invoke into people’s minds regarding Mormonism are completely overshadowed by the wreaking spirit in which, as MWS pointed out, you go about trying to proclaim that which you term to the Christianity. The only problem is that your actions and your spirit DO NOT reflect a Disciple of Jesus Christ.
My advise to you would be to take a step back and say “even if I think Mormonism is of the devil, how can I find a more effective approach (perhaps a more loving one?) to save their souls? Your attitude is sort of like being a Christian Osama Bin Laden or something. Why do you feel in inseccent need to bring down Mormons? It’s almost as if you are possessed with it or something…give it a rest.
November 24th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Jared – I most certainly do regard Mormonism as a most awful , vile heresy – however the last I checked I am not running for the Presidency approaching Mormons to support me and all the while hiding my real views concerning them . Jared I have a number of Mormon friends who I usually try and meet up with when I am in Utah And Idaho . Recently I had a letter from a Missionary in one of the mid west states to whom I sent a Bible , here is some of what he said :-
“I sure do miss talking to you…thank you so much for the Bible …I was reading in 1Timothy Ch1v15 it hit me and I just loved it …I look forward hearing from you…”
He is now just returned back to St George Utah and I hope to see him early next year . Every Mormon who knows me knows where I stand concering the cult but I wish to assure you I desire the very best for you and for Mitt Romney namely salvation in the true Jesus.
November 24th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
#289
“I now wish to revisit the subject of the Mormon practice of baptizing dead Jewish Holocaust victims …..”
First of all, if you don’t believe Mormon baptism means anything, then why are you bothered that Mormons are baptized for and in behalf of those who haven’t received the opportunity in this life? They are dead, so what does it matter to you if the baptism doesn’t mean anything, and same as to the Jewish people?
If someone tried to baptize one of my relatives after they passed I would say, “so what, I don’t believe they have the authority to baptize in the first place, so who cares, it won’t work”!!
It’s a gracious work done to give those Jewish people, now passed on, a chance to accept Christ. It reflects the great expansion of God’s mercy that those people are not immediately “cast off”, as many denominations assume, because they haven’t accepted Christ through baptism.
That being said, the moment there was a request to stop, the church did, although it didn’t have to.
November 24th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Mr Walch – where do I make the ” continual assertion that Mormons slit the throats of their enemies ..”? Each posting is conveniently numbered so please do just give the posting number/numbers
November 24th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
#296
If I were to start calling your religion a cult what would that make of me Andrew? The thing is, I don’t believe your religion is a cult and I am actually grateful that you have something that keeps you on the strait and narrow. Even if I did believe your religion is a cult, I would be a bigot if I went around trying to convince everyone and their dog that it was!
Not a good use of energy and a waste of time. If you are so sure that your faith is truly Christian, then why aren’t you out trying to convince Muslims that their’s is wrong? Why have you targeted Mormons?
November 24th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Competent Conservative – thank you for making the Mormon position concerning baptizing dead Jewish Holocaust victims so clear – We must assume that Mitt Romney has and still does accept this practice in the absence of any public statement to the contrary .
The attitude and concerns of Jewish groups to this horrible practice are to be found on the web
November 24th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
#300
You are evasive and dishonest. Tell me Andrew, what happens to liars oh so holy man of God? You haven’t answered any of my questions. Both #297 and in #299
I think these are questions everyone who reads your cult like language wants to know.
November 24th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
Competent Conservative – leaving aside your abuse towards me , Can we safely say that Mitt Romney is a good , obedient Mormon ?
November 24th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Andrew,
The Catholic Church- from which your brand of heresy split for the sake of a king’s predilections- teaches that she is the one true Church, founded by Christ himself.
You think the big scandal is that Mormons emphatically believe they are right?
Are you serious?
November 24th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
#302 “leaving aside your abuse towards me”
Whoa! You are both evasive and cunning. MY abuse toward YOU?? You really are void of a conscience aren’t you? If anyone has sought to inflict abuse to any degree here today, it is you sir. You can attack my faith all you want. I don’t take it personal. I understand that it has more to do with you than anything else you have spouted out.
The folks here that aren’t Mormons think you behavior is abhorently bigoted. Granny is obviously one that doesn’t agree with Mormon doctrines, but she derides your divisive and un-Christian behavior. Do you see Jesus acting like you?
November 24th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Competent Conservative – Concerning Mitt Romney as a good obedient Mormon and as a mature young man let us say when he has finished his mission – is there any record that he dissented from the Mormon leadership concerning race ? For example Mormon Apostle Mark Peterson said ” Our Negro breathren …notwithstanding their black covering emblamatical of eternal darkness “The Way of Perfection 1935 Edition pp101-2
November 24th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
#305
You still haven’t answered any of my questions(evading them). I have a few more for you, and lets see if you are capable of answering.
1. Did you use to be a Member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the real name of the church?
2. Did you go on a mission?
3. Are you a homosexual who extremely dislikes the church due to it’s stance on the definition of marraige?
4. Did you get excommunicated from the church for adultery or some other serious sin?
The reason I ask -and you probably wouldn’t let me know anyway- is because there are hidden hostilities inside of you that you make obvious.
November 24th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
Competent Conservative – this forum is about the 2012 race , not about me in answer to all the above questions the answer is no – why dont you ask me if I have murdered my Grandmother? Now enough of this nonsense and back to the subject of Mitt Romney . Can you give one instance of Mitt Romney dissenting from the position of the leadership of the Mormon organisation ? This question strikes at the heart of what sort of man is Romney and his relationship to the Mormon leadership . Coz you better believe it there is huge concern at the prospect of a man occupying the White House whose first allegiance is to the Mormon prophet and organisation .
November 24th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Did you hear about the illuminati and Opus Dei? You know, Bobby Jindal needs to answer some questions about their control of a one-world government through the Bilderberg society–as well as the doctrine of the ‘red flag’ where bishops can assassinate people.
Also, we really need Huckabee to disavow his church’s pro-slavery stance. Is Huckabee pro-slavery?
And what about Bush’s participation in the “Skull & Bones” society where he swore life and limb in loyalty to the secrets he was divulged?
Three words:
Total Bull Crap.
November 24th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
I’m done with this thread. It’s an assault on my intellectual sensibilities. At this point, I’d rather eat Bull Crap than keep on reading it.
November 24th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
#307
Mitt Romney supposedly went “rogue” from LDS, and all other Christian teachings when he took a pro-life position didn’t he? Even if your concerns were substantiated, which they are not, the American people have the power to “impeach” a President if he is doing things contrary to the will of the people.
You like as if Romney would have all the powers of a King with some sort of tyrannical disposition. And even if the Church did dictate to Mitt(Mitt said he would not let any church dictate to him) what would be so bad and different than if Huckabee adhered to the teachings of his church?? Appoint pro-life justices, fight to defend marriage, promote sexual purity before marriage…I mean how bad do you think it could be???
I know my faith, tons better than you do, believe me, and I voted for Bush because I thought that his Christian values, as well as his conservative values, were very much in alignment with my beliefs. All this psychopathic fear mongering you are doing is very deceptive and unfortunate.
I hope you can dig down deep within yourself and find and better human being. I know it is there but you have allowed yourself to become possessed with hating Latter Day Saints and in trying to get everyone else to do so as well.
Look at the fruits of what the church does in the world and it just doesn’t add up to the accusations you are making. The church is usually on of the first on the scene of calamity. The church recently donated 1 million dollars to the Catholic church. These are just small examples.
November 24th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
#309
True. There’s nothing that can be done for Andrew. I’ve come across folks like him before and they just aren’t normal.
November 24th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
MWS in post #303 is right. The Baptist believe we were the first church founded by Christ, too. (the Baptist never were part of the Catholic church) My former neighbors belonged to a Catholic church and called our Baptist Church a “cult”; I’m a brat and replied that at least our church was “named” in the Bible unless they think John the Baptist’s middle name was “the”
If several different religions; each one believing ours is the true church is wrong; then looks like you really have a problem. I firmly believe in following the teaching in Acts 17:11 to test whether or not your preacher is telling you the truth. “These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” My son always said the word BIBLE is an acronym for Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth. I honestly feel sorry for anyone in a religion that their leaders try telling them they can’t understand the Bible without their help. I trust God more than any man!
November 24th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Andrew,
In 1833 the English parliament voted for compensation for former slave owners but not the slaves themselves. The head of YOUR church at that time received a tidy sum, because he was a slave owner.
Based on your logic, you support slavery and the compensation of former slave owners for the loss of their “property.”
November 25th, 2009 at 1:05 am
I respect Mitt Romney for being human and willing to change. He seems more humble to me than many candidates. People are interesting judges.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:21 am
#312
It gets a little confusing being that there are over 100o Christian churches which all believe differently. And, as God is no a God of confusion, which one is right, or are they all wrong together? And how shall a person know. You can’t tell him to test it with the bible because that is why there are so many different religions. They all interpret the same passage of scripture so different so as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the bible.
Furhermore, which of these ministers of religion actually have the authority to interpret the scriptures ad then establish it’s meaning as doctrine?
So much confusion.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:24 am
#315,
We should cease with a religious dialogue as this is not the forum for it.
November 25th, 2009 at 6:45 am
MWS Says: David Shedlock,
“Conservative Said: We wouldn’t belittle your religion.
But Joseph Smith didn’t hesitate to.”
Man up. Gird your loins. If you can’t take someone rejecting or even belittling your religion (especially when he’s long dead) you need to get out of the debate business. St. Paul didn’t whine.
You are either confused or deliberately missing the point. You should direct your fatherly advice to the Romney folks who think every opposition to Romney is religion-based and therefore “bigoted”. The point, is clear, if your eyes are open. To claim that Huckabee is wrong for not agreeing that Romney is a Christian is hypocrisy unless you disown your own founder who suggested that all previous Christian doctrine was “an abomination” and “wrong”. You are in essence suggesting that any Christian who believes and professes that Mormonism isn’t Christian is ineligible to be a candidate for president, while a candidate whose church believes the same thing about Protestants can be a candidate as long as he goes against his religion.
November 25th, 2009 at 9:38 am
Competent Conservative – Mike Huckabee when he was a pastor of a congregation in Arkansas put his postion absolutely on the line when he fought agaist opposition to allowing a black man who had become a Christian becoming a member of the congregation .
I wish to probe the matter concerning Mitt Romney’s attitude to the awful teachings of the Mormon Cult on the subject of race . I would like to ask a simple direct question of you and any other Romney supporters – are there any public utterences , statements – anything which indicted that Romney disagreed with his organisation’s stance on race prior to 1978? To this day the Mormons have an unspocken belief that the mark of Cain is a black skin . Further in the Book of Mormon (which the LDS leadership changed as a cover up in 1980)it spoke of ‘ a white and delightsome people ‘. It is certainly worth mentioning that not one single Mormon Prophet or Apostle has been from that race which has been ‘cursed ‘ with a black skin – no they are all from that racial group which they classify as ‘white and delightsome’ Leaving aside the issue of the Mormon heresy of modern day prophets such as Joe Smith , the Mormons would want us to believe that God only speaks today to ‘white and delightsome ‘people.
The fact of the matter is that Romney has and always will be ( unless he is saved ) a good obedient Mormon . He has made solemn oaths to that effect .Your point about abortion is irrelevent {I assume you meant pro choice when you said pro life )because the Mormon organisation itself is feeble on this subject and the related issue of stem cell research .
However his pro choice stance in Massachusetts and his subsequent flip flop exposes him as totally unprincipled . Anyone with a half a brain can see what he is up to – he sells himself as a moderate liberal Republican to get elected in the most liberal state in the Union and now he positions himself as an uber conservatve because he knows that is the only way he can secure the Republican nomination.
November 25th, 2009 at 9:45 am
Competent Conservative,
“They all interpret the same passage of scripture so different so as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the bible.”
That is the one thing that I really can’t understand. Why do “they all interpret the same passage of scripture so different[ly]“; when the Bible says: “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” 2 Peter 1:20-21
My guess is they are going to the wrong teacher. “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.” James 1:5
Jesus Christ said, “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” John 14:26
IF it goes against what the Bible says, “…let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written…” Romans 3:4
November 25th, 2009 at 10:17 am
#319
Granny, thanks for you understanding and I actually believe and agree with all that. There is one whole that needs to be filled. The Holy Ghost reveals truth, got it. It is an individuals responsibility to seek out the comforter to know the truth.
But there is a pattern that God has ALWAYS, and will continue to have, for revealing truth to his children. Amos 3:7 “Surely the Lord God will do nothing but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.
People might say, “well, we have the prophets teachings in the bible”, but now we are have a new dilemma. Who is it on the Earth that now has the authority to interpret the scriptures correctly and where did his authority come from?
I am not so confident that God would abandon his children to all this confusion, searching to and fro, tossed upon the waves of “every wind of doctrine.” Who on this Earth is God’s mouthpiece (prophet) that the Lord only speaks to him for the purpose of guiding his children? Is is Joel Osteen, who I really like by the way, is it Pat Robertson, Billy Graham, Thomas S. Monson, Bill Keller…which one??
The pattern God has followed since the beginning of time for revealing truth has not ceased. Because he is perfect he doesn’t need to change. He is consistently “the same yesterday, today and forever.” If he called prophets in times of old, and He still cares to guide us today, He would still follow this pattern. The question is, which one is it and how shall a person know it?
I believe that a sincere prayer, supplemented with real intent, is the only way to find out. Simply because I am not qualified to interpret the scriptures with the exact interpretation on my own.
November 25th, 2009 at 10:45 am
Competent Conservative — Mitt Romney was sent to France on his mission because France did not like Mormons, it was to raise the level of Frances views of Mormons. France’s low view of Mormons had to due with the placement of Mormon male missionaries with female Sister Missionaries as living companions, and the LDS Church became known as a ‘party church’, also a splinter cult grew out of this group.
Acompetent conservative, there are many active church members who have committed crimes which were covered up by their local and regional church leadership, due to friendships AND not wanting the public to know of the crimes which were committed, victims were emotionally battered, harassed, and battered into silence. To ask someone if they were excommunicated is only an attempt to try to discredit someone. I for one was NOT excommunicated, but know many who should be, but are protected by their peers in church, because they are all involved in wrong doing.
This is seen over and over again, as it is also seen in the many cases which are surfacing on the sexual abuse of boys within Boy Scout troops sponsored by the LDS church, where people are ‘called to serve’. Since people in the Romney family have served on high level boards of the Boy Scouts, it is sad the abuses are covered.
Mitt will kneel to the wishes of SLC, or find the same consequences which Jeff Foli found, when as a holder of political office, he refused to go long with SLC.
Conservative Republican too much defense to what should not have defense.
November 25th, 2009 at 11:01 am
http://blogs4brownback.wordpress.com/2008/02/19/jeff-foli-update/
Here’s a link to Jeff Foli’s story, it appeared on Blogs for Brownback.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
With respect bpb, in short you and one or two others have done suggesting that a few Mormons are throat-slashers, abusers and what not all. Look, I get the fact that a few Mormons are bad actors. However, the vast majority or Mormons are basically good patriotic hard-working honest Americans? Are they perfect? No, but like everyone else, I for one am not perfect either. As a non-Romneyite, I understand that Mr. Romney is not your favorite person. However, it is wrong of you to falsely accuse him of very bad stuff just because he is a Mormon Bishop. I really think you would do well to take your non-sense elsewhere because you have failed to prove that Mr. Romney has done all this bad stuff. Do you not think he would be in jail if he were that bad an actor?
November 25th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
So, I take it you have lived in the same Stakes and regions the Romney family have presided over Ohio Joe?
November 25th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
“Do you not think he would be in jail if he were that bad an actor?”
He was handcuff and taken to the police department.
Do you think the Bishops, Stake Presidents, Regional Reps who hide abuse are sitting in jail?
November 25th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
“So, I take it you have lived in the same Stakes and regions the Romney family have presided over Ohio Joe?
” No, but I find it hard to believe he would do such a thing. When was he taken to the police department?
November 25th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
#326
Ohio, these guys bpb, Andrew (MWS requested they be banned, and I don’t understand why they haven’t yet) are blatant liars.
One of them shares a story from a “bitter” ex-Mormon. That’s like taking a person’s ranting and bitter opinion of his employer after the employer has fired him for not performing well.
Nonsense!! Pure lying nonsense.
November 25th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Granny T – have you heard of F.A.R.M.S and F.A.I.R ?
November 25th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Huckabee’s populist rhetoric during the 2008 primary was enough to make me puke. We can do far better after having a communist in the White House. Besides, Mike Huckabee is a KNAVE! I must admit that if he wins the nomination of the GOP I may have to support him. In the mean time this conservative will do everything in his power to make sure that he doesn’t get the nomination including flying to Iowa to knock on doors in frigid temperatures like I did in January, 2008. (Will someone get Mike a years morning delivery of fresh doughnuts so he balloons back up to around 400 lbs and can’t move!!!)
November 25th, 2009 at 11:41 pm
” No, but I find it hard to believe he would do such a thing. When was he taken to the police department>:
When Romney went out of control with a officer, used the f* word (not the only time for Romney), the boy got angry because his boat was not licensed, and Romney was stopped, and being a spoiled brat started using the f* word, Romney got handcuffed, put in a car and taken to the station.
Other times were in Utah when Romney went out of control and began using the f* word with officers who stopped him, and also at people working the Olympics. He also does not like waiting a red lights, and has been stopped driving recklessly, and not stopping at lights.
November 25th, 2009 at 11:46 pm
A bitter ex mormon? how do you know ‘bitter’, another word used to discredit. I am not a bitter person, so you must be talking about Competent conservative.
So, when someone fires the church, I take it the church is bitter and tires to discredit the person? You’re probably right on that
one.
have you heard of F.A.R.M.S and F.A.I.R ? They scour the internet and try to deflect and discredit anyone who says something they feel is in anyway shape or form negative about the LDS church, or drum roll….. golden boy Romney.
November 25th, 2009 at 11:47 pm
Happy Thanksgiving to all! Have a blessed day
November 26th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Competent Conservative,
I agree. We also must follow Scripture to search the Scriptures to see if what they are teaching is correct and test those prophets to be sure they aren’t “false prophets” that Jesus Christ warned us about in verses such as: Matthew 24:24 “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.”
We have to test “prophets”, teachers, and leaders to protect ourselves and our loved ones. “For the leaders of this people cause them to err; and they that are led of them are destroyed.” – Isaiah 9:16
We are supposed to put “prophets” through the test described by the prophets 1 Corinthians 14:32-33 “And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.”
What is that test?
Deuteronomy 18:21-22 “And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.”
God even warned us that some false prophets will still be able to predict some things that come true. We are not supposed to follow them if they are trying to get us to worship other gods as in Deuteronomy 13:1-4 “If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him.”
More tests I use are the ones in Revelation 22, Romans 16, and 2nd John:
Revelation 22:18-19 “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” Romans 16:17 “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.” 2 John 1:10 “If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:”
In other words, if someone teaches something that goes against what was written in the Bible; I consider them to be a “false prophet” and/or “false teacher”.
November 26th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
Happy Thanksgiving! God bless America!