Zogby: Romney Rockets! (NH poll shows Romney tied with McCain at 25%; Giuliani trails at 19%)

Zogby.com ^ | April 5, 2007 | John Zogby

[sevenbak]

So, you have exposed me as a complete liar by proposing that Joseph Smith spoke with more saints and Gods than Jesus himself. No, I posted that Joseph had multiple visits by ancient prophets restoring keys of the Pristhood, not you, so you proposed nothing of truth. I'm done.

[George W. Bush]

I would think you’d want Romney to address these questions now rather than when he is in the middle of the war in the middle east.

If he had ever made any issue of Mormonism or done anything favorable to it or been caught in some questionable action and tried to use Mormonism as a shield against being 'persecuted' as Reid has done, then I would grant your point.

Essentially, you're doing little other than constructing a test here that he can never pass.

Apparently, you think his policies and everything else about him are just fine. Well, I think we do need to look harder at him, his policies, consider how liberal MA really is, etc. I mean to take a good hard look. What is peculiar in this is that you say nothing about his somewhat liberal policies, whether conservatives can really trust him, it's all just about Mormonism to you. Personally, I get the impression that Romney likes Mormonism best because he's big on Boy Scouts and Mormons are very active in scouting. I heard him give a speech on it, from what I observed and later read, it's a subject that you can hardly get a cork in his mouth once started. On Mormon distinctives, he just says something about every church has its own peculiar doctrine and practices and isn't really very interested.

Sorry, I just don't perceive your depiction of Romney as some raging super-Mormon type.

[George W. Bush]

Have you considered the harm you have caused by calling for censorship? Especially censorship of verifiable facts? Just because the fact that Joseph Smith was a crystal gazing occultist obsessed with Masonic rights and misinterpreting hieroglyphics while marrying 40 women is disturbing to your candidate, makes those things no less true.

"Oh Lord, My God, is there no help for the widow's son?

Yeah, yeah. Perils of Mormonism.

If you can’t stand having these things see the light of day, that’s your problem.

I'm not sure why you've concluded that you're the only one who knows and understands the differences between Mormons and orthodox Christians.

In Nevada we just elected Gibbons as governor, he has been accused of molesting a cocktail waitress in a garage, and now the Wall Street Journal is playing a tap dance on his forehead over trips to Turkey with a no bid defense contractor who also employed his wife. I did vote for him, and have helped other Mormon candidates in the past.

What do you expect in a corrupt state dominated by gambling interests?

Gibbons has been given a pass on many issues because he is considered a “clean Mormon”, and no doubt got many votes that way, displacing a truly decent guy named Bob Beers in the primary. While some of the charges against Gibbons are typically trumped up, some are due to the cognitive disconnect that occurs in many Mormons between a rigid theology with strange beliefs and a clash with the real world. If those issues are not germane in the discussion of who should be president, I don’t know what issues are germane.

They are germane only if all Mormons behave this way. And there are no accusations against Romney on this. He was pretty squeaky clean of cronyism. In fact, one of the real criticisms of him as a conservative is that he was not enough of a crony and should have appointed more Republicans. His record is not without a fair number of Republican appointments but he was too bipartisan perhaps. OTOH, his record of appointments is nowhere near as bad as Giuliani's was.

[Religion Moderator]

Theological debates should be conducted on the Religion Forum which is generally my responsibility to moderate.

Guidelines for the Religion Forum are tougher than on the other forums simply because some posters are thin-skinned whereas others are contentious - some of them, as a matter of doctrine.

On the Religion Forum we offer closed threads (devotionals, prayer threads and caucuses) so that any confession can find a "safe harbor" from challenges to their beliefs. All the other threads are "open" like a town square and challenges, even ridicule, are tolerated as long as the poster is not "making it personal."

New Religion Forum posters quickly learn on the open threads that of course many Catholics consider Protestants to be heretics and of course many Protestants protest Catholic doctrine. Likewise they quickly learn that of course some Jewish posters resent some Christian posters’ replacement theology and of course some non-Mormon posters resent some Mormons’ replacement theology. Resentments should be expected in open debate especially on the Religion Forum.

Those who demand their theology be free of challenges will only find relief on the closed threads on the Religion Forum. Anywhere else – open threads in the Religion Forum, News Forum, Smoky Backroom, Chat, Blog – challenges will occur.

Posters who wish to engage in theological debate on open threads should be prepared to rebut challenges, respectfully and patiently. BTW, the Mormons in particular have consistently shown extraordinary grace under pressure on the open threads in the RF. And that is vitally important because Lurkers value the demeanor of the poster as much as the substance of the post itself.

Abuse reports used in lieu of a cogent rebuttal are widely ignored by the moderators no matter which forum is involved. Nevertheless, when a challenge is notoriously false or is obviously hate mongering – no matter where it occurred – hit the abuse button. We do not tolerate anti-Semitism or other forms of racism or hate mongering and their related sources, e.g. Christian Identity, KKK, Aryan Nations, National Alliance, V-Dare, Islamic extremism, false oath for the Knights of Columbus, Jack Chick, jesus-is-lord.com and so forth.

[FastCoyote]

“They are germane only if all Mormons behave this way. “

That is clearly a false statement. These issues are germane if the subset of Mormons who are in power positions behave this way. Since I have come across these attributes in heavily Mormon Nevada on many more than one occasion, I am arguing they are decidedly germane.

And your disdain for Nevada as corrupt supports my contention - Mormons have long been the enablers of the casino industry here as anyone with a sense of local history knows. Also, Utah tops the list for white collar crime. So please don’t trivialize my concerns since I have been up front and personal with these problems for quite a while. I work for a hedonist Jack Mormon, I helped start a $30 million business with a corrupt Temple Mormon who is being turned into the IRS, I am deep into the back story on the corrupt dealings of Harry Reid and his (jailed) Mormon convert Dario Herrera, I have been around two other multi millionaire Mormon concerns which also displayed these tendencies. And I have more personal stories than even this. So to act as though I am flying off the handle for no reason, is quite foolish.

[sevenbak]

Thanks. Good to know that we are still free to defend when it’s called for.

[George W. Bush]

Those who demand their theology be free of challenges will only find relief on the closed threads on the Religion Forum. Anywhere else – open threads in the Religion Forum, News Forum, Smoky Backroom, Chat, Blog – challenges will occur.

Yes, but will pro-Mormon or anti-Mormon debate on purely political threads that do not pertain to Mormonism or particularly to Romney's personal Mormonism be privileged over any other kind of ordinary discussion on the 'front pages'.

Now Mormonism may be germane to a news/politics thread. For instance, if Israel is discussed, it would be perfectly legitimate to ascertain if Romney held a Replacement Theology position as was once held by the R.C. (repeatedly exposed here at FR) and is currently held by some Protestants and the history of Mormon teachings indicates a certain...tendency toward that. What is important is not the theology of it but the actual impact such religious views might have on a candidate's foreign policy. Romney moved, perhaps preemptively, to quiet any concerns that he held any ideas out of the ordinary among the American conservative foreign policy establishment. He did quite well at that meeting.

In recent years, we rarely see any RC-vs-Prot or such threads tolerated on the 'front pages'. There is no reason why Mormons (and anti-Mormons) should receive some special privilege to have religious catfights on the election threads.

No special pro-Mormon privileges, no special anti-Mormon privileges. The same for everyone else. It's good forum policy for all conservatives. I like to read the Romney threads because I'm taking him seriously and want to know if he is as conservative and trustworthy to us as he claims. But eight to ten months of Mormon apologetics and Mormon-bashing makes him pretty unappealing even to follow as a candidate. And he certainly has not made Mormonism a prominent feature of his campaign or public record.

At any rate, thanks for your reply.

[sevenbak]

4 times in that reply you put pro mormon ahead of anti mormon as to reasons for postings. This is my main contention with what you are saying. The pro mormons here on FR are not pushing their agenda, but are responding and defending. BIG difference!

[George W. Bush]

Then assemble some evidence that Romney's own business was conducted this way. I would think the IRS and the SEC had watched anyone who made that much money that quickly but have at it.

So if we catch a half-dozen Italians in mob activity, does that mean all Italians are suspect?

Because his father was a mob enforcer for his uncle and because his protege Kerik is going to be tried for mob ties, does that make Giuliani a mafioso?

No, it doesn't. Find something factual that Romney has done and then post it. Better yet, post it here and send it anonymously to the SEC. They have a form you can fill out anonymously to blow the whistle on underhanded business deals in securities and stocks. Or find some evidence that he was corrupt as governor and post that.

[George W. Bush]

4 times in that reply you put pro mormon ahead of anti mormon as to reasons for postings. This is my main contention with what you are saying. The pro mormons here on FR are not pushing their agenda, but are responding and defending. BIG difference!

In my earlier posts, I mentioned anti-mormonism extensively, here and elsewhere, and leveled almost no remarks at the pro-Mormon side who have contributed to keeping the rancor going.

[Religion Moderator]

If Free Republic had been around when John F. Kennedy ran for office, I’m fairly certain most News threads would have sparked a theological sidebar debate.

My suggestion is to ask the correspondents in a theological sidebar on the News forum to please take it to the Religion Forum. If they don’t and it becomes a flame war or disruptive to the thread, then make an Abuse Report.

The Administrative Moderators on duty will consider the report and the parties involved and will take whatever action they believe is appropriate which might involve doing nothing, or moving the thread to the Religion Forum or the Smoky Backroom or identifying trolls or troublemakers.

But be careful not to spam the abuse button – it can backfire.

[sevenbak]

Yes, but your intentions to the moderatot claim so such equivalence, so it comes across as agenda driven, just FYI.

[George W. Bush]

The Administrative Moderators on duty will consider the report and the parties involved and will take whatever action they believe is appropriate which might involve doing nothing, or moving the thread to the Religion Forum or the Smoky Backroom or identifying trolls or troublemakers.

I agree with the policy. But after what we saw on the (pulled) keywords thread the other day, it seems to me that it's time to move the antimormon/pro-mormon (yep, alternated the order I listed the two factions) material off our main forum. Of course, I can sympathize with you because I'm not sure I'd want the increase in Mormon theology debates if I was the Religion Moderator. Can't be much fun to look forward to more of that.

But be careful not to spam the abuse button – it can backfire.

I haven't hit Abuse yet. And I am trying to persuade. I do think it's time for purely theological discussion on the religion of only one candidate (and who is pretty spotlessly secular in public policy) to be put in the Backroom. If Romney was some kind of super-Mormon, then I would say it does belong out front. It would be a shame to wait until it's become truly destructive to the forum. Certainly, those awful keyword attacks on Romney with words like ant_-chr_st and ch_ld_m_lest_r cannot have a very positive impact on our forum's reputation.

If Romney loses, let it be because he's too liberal or a bad candidate. Not this stuff.

[FastCoyote]

“So if we catch a half-dozen Italians in mob activity, does that mean all Italians are suspect?”

Yes it does. Just as dark swarthy turbanned males carrying Korans can garner further scrutiny. Now I’m being hyperbolic, but we are discussing bare logic here.

So, my prior experience gives me a heightened perception.

[sevenbak]

I do think it's time for purely theological discussion on the religion of only one candidate (and who is pretty spotlessly secular in public policy) to be put in the Backroom. If Romney was some kind of super-Mormon, then I would say it does belong out front. It would be a shame to wait until it's become truly destructive to the forum.

I agree completely with this portion of your post. If it was kept to politics, life would be better for all!

[George W. Bush]

Just as dark swarthy turbanned males carrying Korans can garner further scrutiny. Now I’m being hyperbolic, but we are discussing bare logic here.

The problem with your analogy in practice is that turbans are generally worn by Indians, not Arabs and those of the Middle East. And the substantial majority of Arabs in this country are actually Christians who are refugees from or were tired of oppressive Muslim regimes.

Be that as it may. I assume then that you have some evidence that Romney is corrupt or favors an establishment of Mormonism in policy from his public record?

[George W. Bush]

I agree completely with this portion of your post. If it was kept to politics, life would be better for all!

It comes down to who is our best reliable conservative candidate. And we should look for men (or women) of strong personal character and personal stability, those who can best represent our full conservative agenda and have the qualities, the organization to appeal to a majority, even better, a mandate-sized majority. Romney can probably qualify. So can Fred Thompson perhaps. The base could even support McStain, I think. But I see no reason to be distracted over religion in an essentially secular candidate when the goal is to stop blatant liberals and leftwingers (either Dim or GOP) from reaching the White House in '08.

[sevenbak]

Neither do I. I have NEVER initiated an Pro Mormon thread, but will not hesitate to stand up and defend that which is in my right to do when I or my faith is defamed.

Oh, and I like Thompson too!

[George W. Bush]

I'm just asking you consider whether letting these folks bait you and make Mormonism the issue is relevant to Romney's merits as a conservative candidate.

The rest of us want to know, not be distracted by this. Romney has already received some open-door remarks by the most conservative branch of the party, notably, many of the same movement conservatives who put the knife in the Harriet nomination. They aren't endorsing him yet. But they're giving him a good hard look and urging others to do the same. Richard Land, as fierce a Southern Baptist as you'll find, says Mormonism is not a dealbreaker for us. Others would be Ann Coulter, Mark Levin, etc.

The attacks you're more likely to face are, in my expectation, from Dobsons' crew and from Robertson, not coincidentally, allies of Harriet. Look especially at this thread and see how I debunk the "expert" in post 51.

Don't let them bait you into making Romney's campaign a referendum on Mormonism. Because that's exactly what they want.

In the battle of the conservative Harriets vs. the conservative Alitos, I suggest the Mormons should recognize they belong on the Alito side. I know you folks aren't used to being included in these shindigs but it's time to get with the program, eh? Time to recognize those who are open to being your political partners and those who aren't.

[sevenbak]

I have thought long and hard about it, and usually let most things go, but I feel it necessary to stand up for what I think is right when something particularly ugly just sits there as if it’s facts.

Republicans are often considered weak and not being helpful to their cause when they just let the Dems get away with lies and inaccuracies and not doing anything about it. What you are asking me to is no different than the Dems trying to get Talk Radio banned with the fairness doctrine. While not exactly the same, it is a similar thing, IMHO.