Students who swim in the deep end of the physics pool are well aware of the concept of antimatter. For each element of the “normal” universe which we take for granted, there is an equal and opposite dark sister lurking out there somewhere. The electron has its positron and the proton has the anti-proton hiding out in the depths of space and time. Analogies being a cheap commodity in the political silly season, it makes sense that the dead-ender Clinton PUMA crowd would have their equal and opposite component skulking about someplace in the electoral arena. Today TMV’s political research scientists may have located this rare element in the form of Hugh Hewitt.

McCain counters with… Romney, of course. The same factors in Romney’s favor — pull in Michigan, Nevada, Colorado and New Hampshire, the energy brought by his organization– are still there, but the pick of Biden calls for a very experienced debater as the only thing Slow Joe has going for him is the thousand or so primary season debates he has under his belt. Romney has the same sort of experience in the one setting where the veep nominees get the nation’s undivided attention.

Hugh’s position is more than understandable, of course. Having wagered life, limb and reputation on a push for the various Right wing talk radio mavens’ marching orders that the GOP faithful reject the completely unacceptable John McCain in favor of Romney, only to see the rank and file kick him to the curb, one could see how Hewitt may have been left feeling like the bridesmaid trying to return that ugly dress after the groom jilted the prospective bride for a sportier model. But the talk radio star should have a care that he doesn’t wind up shoving a poison pen in his own eye.

All across the heartland, GOP rank and file voters were given ample opportunity to evaluate Mitt and found him wanting. Some may have been turned off by his Mormon faith, while others were perhaps unconvinced by his sudden and all-too-convenient transmutation from Nor’eastern RINO to Reagan-era conservative stalwart. In any event, as I wrote in my column on Mitt being the Kiss of Death for John McCain, the register rang up a big No Sale sign on Romney.

You have to be careful when go messing about with antimatter, lest it meet the genuine article and blow your candidate into the next dimension. McCain has any number of salable choices for the number-two slot and, with Obama’s decision to take Biden along, he may find the opportunity he’s been seeking. Recent polls indicate that he is at least within striking-distance of grabbing a seat in the Oval Office. Bowing to the talk radio crowd’s demands at this point could bring it all crashing back down.

On a side note, I’d like to find out who Hewitt is picking for the Super Bowl this year so I can get some early money in on their opponents. I’m willing to bet he took New England last January.

Over 400 children were recently transported by bus away from the isolated Texas commune built by Warren Jeffs (currently in prison for forcing a child to marry an older man) and his brother (currently in charge of all the wives and children back at the ranch)…the brotherly duo being self-acclaimed polygamists and self-anointed heads of their own renegade LDS (Church of the Latter Day Saints– Mormon) temple.

The State of Texas will seek to show, provided one or more of the seeming spellbound and vapid acting women from the renegade group, will testify that the commune is dedicated to bringing children into the world yes, but it appears part of the motive of the commune’s hyper fecundity, is to supply young girls to pedophilic adults, and to supply the Jeffs’ construction companies with free labor of their young boys so the Jeffs can continue to lowball contracts, including contracts with the government.

There may also be misuse of Federal Food Stamp program by the commune to support the high percentage of the commune who appear to live under the poverty line… even though the self-appointed male leaders live in jaw-dropping luxury.

There may be a basis for racketeering charges as well if the Jeffs’ construction company is suspected of kiting and defrauding others in a discernable pattern.

The Two Sides of the Legal Argument Pro and Con, Are Likely to Go Something Like This:

Read the rest of this entry »

What role should religion play in politics?

That question has suggested itself for many reasons during the already too-long 2008 presidential campaign.

It’s a question of particular interest to me because I’m a lifetime political junkie, a student of history, and a Lutheran pastor.

There are, it seems to me, three main reasons we’re asking the question in a major way this year.

The first is the candidacy of former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, a Mormon. Personally, while I have the same disagreements with Mormonism as those advanced by evangelical Christians, I’ve never felt that Romney’s religion should preclude him from consideration for the presidency.

Article 6 of the Constitution says that there should be no religious test for holding federal office. As an American, I believe in the rightness of that provision.

But I also believe in it because I’m a Christian. Jesus’ command to love my neighbor entails appreciating the abilities and skills of all people, even those who don’t share my faith.

While polls show that there are some Christians who simply would not vote for a Mormon for president, I don’t think that this is anything like a majority view.

And frankly, I think that the question of whether a Mormon would be accepted in a position of political importance was answered in 1953. It was then that Ezra Taft Benson, a high official in the Mormon religion, was confirmed as Secretary of Agriculture in the Eisenhower Administration. In those days, the post was a lot more important and highly visible than it is today.

In 1968, Mitt Romney’s father, Michigan governor George Romney ran for the Republican presidential nomination. His bid came to grief over what I thought was a vicious misrepresentation of something he told a New Hampshire radio interviewer about the Johnson Administration’s attempts to, as he saw it, brainwash him regarding the War in Vietnam. The media and Romney’s opponents, Richard Nixon among them, portrayed the former auto executive as susceptible to brainwashing, not strong enough to be president. It’s a tragedy that George Romney’s candidacy was brought to an end in that way. Despite the exaggerations of his son, the elder Romney was deeply committed to civil rights. He was a can-do guy. But it wasn’t because of his Mormon religion that Romney, who later served as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development in the Nixon Administration, failed to become president. His Mormonism wasn’t even considered. Nor should it have been.

Two factors have made Mitt Romney’s Mormon affiliation significant this year. One is the importance of the Religious Right in the Republican coalition. Frankly, I dislike the Religious Right. (And the Religious Left, for that matter.) There is simply no way to draw a straight line from faith in Jesus Christ or the Bible as the Word of God to a consistent political philosophy. As a Christian leader, it deeply disturbs me when pastors or other Christian leaders presume to say that Jesus is a Republican or a Democrat. Or that God is a liberal or a conservative. Christians who make such claims subordinate the Deity, the One I believe to be Lord and Creator of heaven and earth, to temporary, temporal philosophies and preferences. In effect, they shove God aside and instead, worship their parties or platforms. Nonetheless, the Religious Right has put a premium on candidates conforming not just to their political views, but also their claimed religious doctrines.

Romney’s Mormonism also became important because, quite frankly, he made it that way. Over a year ago, Romney supporter Hugh Hewitt asked Christian pastor-bloggers to say whether they felt that Romney’s religion should preclude his being considered for president by Christians. Mine was the first reply Hewitt published, I believe. Simply, I said that, no, Christians should not dismiss a Romney candidacy because he was a Mormon.

But clearly, the Romney campaign felt something like paranoia on this issue. The prime campaign biography, written by my friend Hewitt, is called A Mormon in the White House? It was one of many elements of an effort on the part of the Romney campaign to earn the support of the Religious Right.

Every politician, of course, wants to gain support with important constituencies by demonstrating that they hold common beliefs and values. But Romney has appeared to attempt to appeal to the Religious Right by blurring the very real differences that exist between Christian beliefs and Mormon teachings.

This, it seems to me, was an incredibly stupid thing to do, politically speaking. That’s because the Religious Right has changed. For all my criticism of it, the Christian conservative political movement has attained a certain maturity. One characteristic of that maturity is that voters who identify with the movement no longer move in lockstep with their so-called “leaders.” Another is that neither its leaders or its rank and file voters expect that politicians are going to agree with them on every issue. Pat Robertson, after all, has endorsed Rudy Giuliani. The movement is also wary of pols who give lip service to all their issues yet, like many Republicans for the past twenty-five years, have done nothing to change what they see as wrong in Washington and the United States.

Mitt Romney would have done better at appealing to the Religious Right if he had, instead of trying to appear to be a kind of Baptist Mormon, simply said, as John Kennedy did of his Catholicism in 1960, “I’m not a Mormon running for president. I’m an American running for president who happens to be a Mormon.” He could have then taken his own religious affiliation off the table and simply demonstrated common political cause with those to whom he’s been trying to appeal.

Romney, in his “Faith in America” speech, delivered at the presidential library of George H.W. Bush, seemed, in part, to deliver such a message. But then, he said that freedom needs religion and religion needs freedom. While I personally believe that the Judeo-Christian tradition fosters the kind of civility and respect for neighbor that allows for the functioning of democracy, Christian faith, in particular, hasn’t needed freedom of religion to grow. Indeed, it seems to grow best and strongest when its natural inclination for subversiveness is given full vent. Historically, Christian faith has always grown strongest under the threat and persecution of repressive regimes. Freedom, then, isn’t a necessary prerequisite for religious belief. Nor is it impossible for freedom to develop without religion.

Be that as it may, after seeming to want to take religion off the table, Romney put it back, appearing to arrogantly tell those who have no faith that their participation in the political process was unwelcome.

Read the rest of this entry »

This is a Guest Voice column by Michael Reagan, Ronald Reagan’s oldest son, who is also a popular radio talk show host. Guest Voice columns do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Moderate Voice or its writers.

Smart Strategy is No Accident

Making Sense, by Michael Reagan

In addition to seeing Mike Huckabee suddenly surge in the polls, the nation is also witnessing some of the smartest campaign strategies any candidate has displayed in a long time. The former Arkansas governor has shown he can play the game with the best of them, and better than most.

Let’s start with the Huckabee Christmas commercial, obviously aimed at evangelical Christians who constitute more than 40 percent of Iowa voters. Huckabee not only preached a sermon to that choir of Iowa voters, he spoke in front of what appeared to be a cross that appeared prominently in the background above his shoulder.

It’s important to keep in mind that this TV ad did not occur in isolation — it was an obvious response to Mitt Romney’s brilliant speech on his faith given the week before — a speech that won almost-universal praise. If the Rev. Mike Huckabee wanted to be seen as the Christian candidate, it required a response.

That’s what the latest Huckabee Iowa TV ad was — a 28-second answer to Romney’s speech.

That ad, one of the most brilliantly conceived and executed commercials ever seen, attracted worldwide attention. And no matter how many denials he and his supporters offer, that was a cross in the background and it was no accident it was highly visible. Remember that nothing happens by accident in politics. When it comes to such campaign gimmicks as TV commercials, everything is planned, down to the last detail.

That is not in the background because it is a bookcase — it was there because part of it forms a cross, plain and simple — the rest of the bookcase simply fades from view. And you have only 28 seconds to discern the fact that the cross that looms so prominently is merely part of a larger object.

It was a subliminal message, just as it was a subtle way of telling voters, “I’m the Christian, Romney is the Mormon.”

While it may have been part of a bookcase shelf or, as some say, a window, it was there because Huckabee and his advisors wanted it there to remind voters in Iowa that the candidate is a real Christian candidate running for the Republican nomination — one who is not afraid to display his Christianity boldly in this secular age which scoffs at all religious beliefs.

There’s no doubt in my mind that Ed Rollins, his top campaign advisor, planned that ad. Ed Rollins is a political genius when it comes to those kinds of issues and he proved that when he worked so effectively to put my father in the White House.

Mike Huckabee won’t admit it, but that ad was carefully crafted, it was effective, and it was his answer to Mitt Romney’s speech,

It’s interesting to note how those in mainstream media, who have so much trouble dealing with the birth of Christ, went absolutely bonkers over someone saying that he is a Christian, that what we are celebrating on December 25 is the birth of Jesus Christ, and daring to wish his fellow Americans “Merry Christmas” instead of some innocuous muttering such as “happy holidays.”

In his ad, Huckabee was also challenging the media by rubbing his faith in their faces.

Huckabee did in 28 seconds what it took Mitt Romney much longer. That’s political genius at work.

Mike Reagan, the eldest son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is heard on more than 200 talk radio stations nationally as part of the Radio America Network. ©2007 Mike Reagan. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc.

TMV Editor’s Note: Here is the actual ad:

The 2008 election campaign is certainly proving to be The Campaign Of Faith.

First, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney had to try and deal with anti-Mormon sentiments within the GOP and general electorate that have check-mated his Presidential hopes.

Now, Barack Obama has had to stress his faith amid false rumors quickly (and at times gleefully) spread on the Internet, on talk radio and — it has emerged — by someone connected to Senator Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

What next? Will Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman soon be under pressure to prove he really had a bris?

But today Obama — again showing a flair for overcoming objections and battling the growing American cottage industry (talk radio, some blogs, commentators and political operatives) of driving up a foe’s negatives by spreading half-truths or exaggerating truths — took on the rumors that have dogged him and made some voters balk:

Democrat Barack Obama on Sunday confronted one of the persistent falsehoods circulating about him on the Internet.

He went to church.

His attendance here at the First Congregational United Church of Christ, with the news media in tow, was as much an observation of faith as it was a rejoinder to baseless e-mailed rumors that he is a Muslim and poses a threat to the security of the United States.

Obama did not address the rumors, but described how he joined Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago two decades ago while working as a community organizer.

What’s notable in this story is that he didn’t decide to confront it by lashing out and whipping up anger against people who had whipped up anger against him. Some still mockingly call him “Osama.” Others note pointedly that his middle name is Hussein. And — brace yourself, now — his step-father was (GASP!) Muslim.

The underlying — and at times blatant — assertion is that a Muslim should never be allowed to hold high elective office…even though Obama is not a Muslim (facts, schmacts what does it matter if it undermines someone you don’t like?).

Obama’s way of handing this is a sign that perhaps he is from a different generation that wants to conduct campaigns a bit differently.

The baby boomers (I’m one of them) seem less stuck “on stupid” than fixated on Vietnam War-derived divisions and influenced by the Lee Atwater/Karl Rove school of political knife-em-in-the-gut battle. Other people have said it and I agree: American politics may never get out of polarization mode until the Baby Boomers’ influence on the levers of power begins to wane.

“What I found during the course of this work was, one, that ordinary people can do extraordinary things when they come together and find common ground,” he told the congregation. “The other thing I discovered was that values of honesty, hard work, empathy, compassion were values that were spoken about in church …. I realized that Scripture and the words of God fit into the values I was raised in.”

Obama regularly attends church while on the campaign trail, but seldom with reporters watching. He is known to invoke religious references in his speeches and has said he has a “personal relationship” with Jesus Christ. He often has said that religion has a place in public life and that faith and politics are not exclusively the domain of conservatives.

“During this holiday season and during this political season I’m continually reminded that the values that I learned at Trinity and as part of the UCC community are values that can’t just stay in church but have to be applied outside of church,” he said.

Obama staffers and volunteers say they periodically encounter voters who say they cannot support Obama because they’ve heard he is Muslim, a claim that has been making its way through Internet sites and blogs since he announced his candidacy for president.

The issue gained prominence earlier this month when Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign forced the resignation of two Iowa volunteer coordinators who had forwarded e-mails that falsely tried to tie him to Islamic jihadists.

So now you have TWO candidates who have had to “prove” to voters that their religious backgrounds don’t make them somehow dangerous to the existence of The Republic As We Know It if they make it into the Oval Office.

Get ready, Joe Lieberman…

On 6 December, Mitt Romney delivered a speech, “Faith in America,” in which he tried to allay certain qualms some may have with his Mormon faith and to lay out his own views on the proper roles of religion and religious expression in American public life. He presented what seemed to me an incorrect and frankly dangerous interpretation of those roles, and trotted out selective readings of our country’s founders to bolster his arguments. And he’s not the only one.

Romney said

We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong.

The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation ‘Under God’ and in God, we do indeed trust.

We should acknowledge the Creator as did the Founders – in ceremony and word. He should remain on our currency, in our pledge, in the teaching of our history, and during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places. Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our constitution rests. I will take care to separate the affairs of government from any religion, but I will not separate us from ‘the God who gave us liberty.’

The founders of our nation did not put God on our currency (that didn’t happen until the 1860s), or in our pledge (that was 1954). Their religion was a personal matter, not to be worn on the sleeve, but to be practiced as they saw fit within the context of their own lives (witness Jefferson’s sincere grapplings with his faith, or Franklin’s, or Adams’). They understood the moral underpinnings that can be offered by religious faith, but they did not shove their religion in the faces of others, as so many in America today seem entirely set on doing.

Read the rest of this entry »

I don’t care because I don’t “believe in” either one. This kind of thing is WAY out-of-bounds for a political race. If I can put up with a Christian president, these evangelicals can get over themselves.

TIME Magazine: Huckabee Asks if Mormons Believe Jesus, Devil Are Brothers

Republican presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee, an ordained Southern Baptist minister, asks in an upcoming article, ”Don’t Mormons believe that Jesus and the devil are brothers?”

The article, to be published in Sunday’s New York Times Magazine, says Huckabee asked the question after saying he believes Mormonism is a religion but doesn’t know much about it. His rival Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, is a member of the Mormon church, which is known officially as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The authoritative Encyclopedia of Mormonism, published in 1992, does not refer to Jesus and Satan as brothers. It speaks of Jesus as the son of God and of Satan as a fallen angel, which is a Biblical account.

A spokeswoman for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints said Huckabee’s question is usually raised by those who wish to smear the Mormon faith rather than clarify doctrine.

We’ve seen it every election year: the talking heads (which these days includes us bloggers) make all kinds of supposedly-learned predictions and then something funny happens. The voters make all these oh-so-smugly-certain predictions seem silly (so those who make them then move on and pretend they never made them at all).

Is a big upset of the 2008 Presidential nomination sweepstakes now brewing?

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee has vaulted over his major GOP challengers to take a commanding lead in the race to win the Iowa caucuses, while Barack Obama continues to edge ahead of Hillary Clinton among Democrats likely to participate, a new NEWSWEEK poll shows.

The most dramatic result to come out of the poll, which is based on telephone interviews with 1,408 registered Iowa voters on Dec. 5 and 6, is Huckabee’s emergence from the shadows of the GOP race into the front runner’s spot in just two months. The ordained Southern Baptist minister now leads Romney by a two-to-one margin, 39 percent to 17 percent, among likely GOP caucus-goers. In the last NEWSWEEK survey, conducted Sept. 26-27, Huckabee polled a mere 6 percent to Romney’s 25 percent, which then led the field.

This is MAJOR news. Because as news spreads that it looks like Huckabee’s candidacy is on fire (and that other candidates could be fired) his “free media” coverage increases and more voters get to sample his political wares. Media stories lead to more media stories. And there tends to be a bandwagon effect as some pundits begin to adopt the line that, by golly, he may actually get the nomination. The Newsweek poll has to be good news for Huckabee’s camp:

Huckabee has also opened up a wide margin over the next three leading candidates, who all show signs of fading in Iowa: Rudy Giuliani, who dropped from 15 percent in the last survey to 9 percent in the current one; Fred Thompson, who fell from 16 percent to 10 percent; and John McCain, who slipped from 7 percent to 6 percent. “You rarely see anything like [Huckabee’s surge],” says Larry Hugick, who directed the polling for Princeton Survey Research Associates. Hugick added that the reason has as much to do with a leeriness of the other candidates among Republican voters as Huckabee’s folksy success on the stump. “He’s filling a vacuum,” Hugick said. “Nobody on the Republican side was getting strong support.”

Newsweek notes that YES Romney is indeed being hurt by his Mormon religion — just as Huckabee is being helped by his:

The survey was completed on the day of the former Massachusetts governor’s much-heralded speech in College Station, Texas, addressing his religion, though most respondents probably had not heard it. Still, only a small number of the 540 Republican voters surveyed in Iowa (10 percent) said they wanted to hear more from Romney about that issue, and close to half (46 percent) said at least some Iowa Republican voters will not consider supporting Romney because of his Mormon faith. More than a quarter (27 percent) said they don’t consider Mormons to be Christians, and one in six (16 percent) said they are less likely to support Romney because he is a Mormon.

Huckabee’s religious credibility, by the same token, appears to be a key factor behind his surge. Huckabee has opened up a huge lead among evangelicals, who are likely to make up about 40 percent of GOP caucus-goers on Jan. 3, the survey found. Among all Republican voters who identify themselves as evangelicals, 47 percent support Huckabee while only 14 percent back Romney. Among nonevangelicals, the two candidates are dead even at 24 percent apiece. Even so, a majority of Republican voters indicated that other issues, such as abortion, same-sex marriage, immigration, health care and Iraq, are more important than religion.

It is a bit of an irony: Huckabee performs well on the stump, but the reality is that he is getting a chunk of his support from people who would not vote for Romney if Ronald Reagan himself rose from the grave and personally bestowed his blessing on him and if Rush Limbaugh embraced Romney and kissed him on Hannity and Colmes.

So there are several factors here: Huckabee’s skill as a campaigner (he has charisma) and good, old-fashioned bigoted feelings towards Mormons. JFK clearly had better luck with 1960s voters than Romney has had with 2000-era voters.

But, then, in these days of polarization where many people only want to hear and read views they already agree with, making inroads to change hearts and minds isn’t as easy as it used to be.

Pat Bagley, Salt Lake Tribune

Just saw part of his speech HERE. Now he is being congratulated by George H. W. and Barbara Bush.

Earlier this morning, I read excerpts from the speech he planned to give and concluded that Romney does not sufficiently respect the necessary separation of Church and State. MSNBC First Read comments on the excerpts.

According to Political Wire, Robert Novak says Romney’s advisers opposed giving this speech at this time.

As a religious Jew, it is obvious to me that religion (yours, mine, anybody else’s) does not belong in the public square. Romney would have us keep the nefarious 1954 interpolation “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance and fill public property with Nativity scenes and menorahs (but probably not Muslim crescents or Wiccan ceremonies). Oh, “The legend, “In God We Trust,” became a part of the design of United States currency in 1957 and has appeared on all currency since 1963.”

So, Romney would have us restore a faux-1950s generic Protestant Christianity to American citizenship.

Romney “stresses that Americans are bound by moral convictions that transcend any single denomination or faith and says those beliefs are what should guide a president.” There is little that transcends denominations or religions - that’s why we have different religions. When it comes to moral convictions, Americans do NOT agree.

AP Coverage of Romney’s Speech

CNN - Romney: ‘Freedom requires religion’

For a Round-Up, read my full post continuing below…

Read the rest of this entry »

read more on this subject re Governor Romney and religiousity, at Pam’s House Blend “Romney Hits Religion Panic Button” here, and the shiny new Poligazette and Michael van der Galien re Romny to Give Religion Speech here… and our own Joe Gandelman’s recent piece on Gov Romney, especially Joe’s observation from speaking to a fellow entertainer who happens to be Mormon and his take on matters:

There’s a lot of suspicion about Mormonism,

that is, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

Many point to the least of what some Mormons have put into practice over the years. Just like the least many within other religions have put into practice over the eons, also.

Most all religions are guilty of something; matters of conduct that were looked at differently long ago than they are now.

Which is not to diminish the suffering such failures in acting humanely caused others who were the targets of exclusion, cruel treatment, dismissal, marginalization, condemnation of their very souls, exploitation, invasion, misappropriation of land, torture, and withholding of basic resources.

Regarding Mormons, others point to odd ritualistic clothing or to a Mormon’s seemingly strange beliefs.

True also of most all religions; every religion has some kind of belief in ‘other worlds,’ a belief in homunculi of one sort or another. Every religion has beliefs and certainties that are based on the invisible. Most every religion has developed ritualistic objects and clothing, like the alb, the rosary, the prayer beads, the prayer wheel, the robe, the scapular, and so on.

It is true that Mormons once practiced polygamy as a tenet of faith introduced by their prophet Joseph Smith, and that some current Mormons, in disobedience to the tenets of the first and second Manifestos of the Mormons which forbade such, continue to practice multiple ’sealings’ with women…

It was recently revealed in the Warren Jeffs trial that support for the literally hundreds of children in his polygamous communities relied on food stamps and other welfare programs from the Federal and State governments. However, that’s a renegade group.

However, having a criminal who is also a Mormon is no indictment of other Mormons, including Governor Willard Mitt Romney, any more that the pedophile priest intrusions in the Catholic churches, or the sexual exploitation of children in the Indian Schools in Canada by certain Anglicans, or the intrusion of a rabbi on an underage student, has anything to do with Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, or Joe Lieberman.

A man who is a believer is not separate from his understanding of Messiah, but rather, as well as he can, fashions his ethics for conduct from that relationship… ever mindful that he is running for secular, not apostolic office in the USA…

reaching not to a coterie, but to all the people, who are made of all different kinds of religious affiliations, as well as no religious affiliation at all.

Yet, as per Mitt Romney, there are many thoughtful questions and ideas within Mormonism and from one of Mormonism’s most prominent leaders, Brigham Young, that can actually only help Mitt Romney, were he to cleave to them, teach from them, put himself forward as a leader with those Mormon ideas as his basis.

(Addendum: To pretend that those running for office are not affected or are disaffected by powerful influences rising from their belief systems, would seem naive, when one considers that the psyche is not a bunch of hotel rooms strung together with doors. The psyche is an eco system where many matters are dependent and interwoven with many others facets.

… A tenet of psychology is that early exposure to religious ideals is imbedded in the core of the developing personality. Religiousity, or a secular set of principles for life conduct, are root stock that the psyche consciously and unconsciously draws upon as outrigger and anchor, for life. One cannot ‘part out’ a person’s psychological development as though it is an automobile; spiritual outlook over here, civic duty over there.

….The line betrween discrete parts of the psyche is far more watery and overlapping than drawn as a straight deep line of demarcation that is unmoving. This includes, abreactions to early religious principles which can cause as much mayhem in the psyche, as can over-identifications that automatically de-value other persons who are not similar to oneself.)

I only know about Mormonism from Mormons, some disenchanted ones who feel they have been shunned by the community after the fact, and some who though they question and even reject some of the old premises that seem made more by man than by God, they hang in there, trying to faithfully find their way in the Mormon Church.

Most of all, I know about Mormonism from selling magazines door to door in the rural outback where I grew up. I was 13. Far down one road was an old woman who invited me in. First she told me about the small rocks sitting in a murky creek fluid in a Mason jar on her fireplace hearth. Her gallstones. Then she told me about the angel Moroni.

She did buy one of my magazines. And, I came away with a Book of Mormon she’d given me. In my world, a real book was like gold. I read it. And it was filled with wondrous magical ideas that are literally or figuratively meant to speak to the spirit.

And inside the book was a pamphlet with quotes from Brigham Young, some of which I found again searching today. And though Joseph Smith was a mystic with all the oddities that most mystics carry about … Brigham Young was a different kind of man.

Read the rest of this entry »

Pray Tell by Jonathan Chait in The New Republic
The wrong reason to hate Mitt Romney.

The secularism that has generally prevailed since World War II is precisely what has allowed a Catholic to be elected president and a Jew to be nominated as vice president, among other ways that religious tolerance has expanded.

Latter-Day Skeptics by Josh Patashnik in The New Republic
Mormons against Romney.

Ever since they made their peace with the federal government and won statehood for Utah more than a century ago, Mormons have strained to overcome their status as outsiders. And Romney’s run for president could represent a major step forward in that quest, accomplishing for Mormons what John F. Kennedy’s 1960 presidential campaign did for Catholics: signaling that they are finally legitimate players in American life. “There’s a feeling that this signifies, in some sense, that we’ve arrived,” says Mormon historian Richard Lyman Bushman.

There’s just one catch.

It’s a different era, right?

Comedian Michael Richards career imploded when he used the “N” word in a comedy club. So has A&E’s “The Bounty Hunter’s when the tape of a private conversation showing his racism hit the tabloids. Don Imus got pulled for comments condemned as bigoted. Even Santa is under scrutiny for saying the word “ho” now that it has a new meaning (so when he says “ho, ho, ho” some people seem to feel kiddies will think Santa’s clamoring for a “foursome.”).

Meanwhile, in politics, racism and bigotry periodically raise their ugly heads in the form of “push” polls — the most infamous one having come in 2000 when Karl Rove and company are credited with having devised a push poll that asked South Carolina voters “Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?” McCain was campaigning with his dark-skinned, adopted Bangladeshi daughter — and some feel it cost him the state and destroyed his momentum.

So you’d think we’re in a new era right? WRONG.

It seems PC doesn’t exist when it comes to Mormons.

The push poll with the seeming stench of bigotry is alive and stinkingly well — and this time seemingly being used to plant anti-Mormon seeds in voters’ heads via push poll calls in Iowa and New Hampshire. It’s increasingly becoming clear in terms of how the issue is coming up (Romney having to defend his faith on the air to a conservative talk radio show host, the issue repeatedly being hinted at in the campaign and now the push poll calls) that anti-Mormonism is the overt political bigotry residue of the 21st century.

The poll (done by a company accused of doing push polling before) has raised eyebrows and not only among Romney supporters but among political pundits — and officials in New Hampshire [ERROR CORRECTION: This corrects our earlier version which incorrectly said Iowa), who are now investigating the matter:

The state attorney general is investigating phone calls to New Hampshire voters that pretend to be opinion polls but then undercut presidential contender Mitt Romney and his Mormon faith - and make favorable statements about Republican rival John McCain.

The questions then become:

(1) Were the calls made to disparage Romney? (They certainly didn’t seem designed to win him votes).

(2) Was the McCain camp behind it? (They deny it).

(3) Could another political camp (accusations aimed at Rudy Giuliani supporters… who are also trying to change the traditional winner-take-all distribution of California’s electoral votes in time for the 2008 elections) possibly have arranged these to hurt Romney and discredit McCain? (Denied).

The whole matter is ugly and messy and reveals that American politics still has a septic tank with a seemingly bottomless pit. To wit: Read the rest of this entry »

Brian Fairrington, Cagle Cartoons

Senator John McCain’s mother is 95 and quickly apologized so she’ll probably be spared a media and blogosphere pile-on — but this would create huge trouble for a candidate and their relative otherwise:

John McCain’s 95-year-old mother, in a swipe at her son’s rival Mitt Romney, said Friday that Mormons were to blame for the scandal that rocked the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics.

During an appearance on MSNBC, Roberta McCain laid out why her son, John, deserves to win the Republican presidential nomination. But in evaluating McCain’s primary rivals, she criticized Romney’s Mormon faith and his time in Salt Lake City.

“As far as the Salt Lake City thing, he’s a Mormon and the Mormons of Salt Lake City had caused that scandal. And to clean that up, again, it’s not a subject,” Roberta McCain said.

John McCain quickly stepped in: “The views of my mothers are not necessarily the views of mine.”

“Well, that’s my view and you asked me,” Roberta answered.

The issue of religion correctly remains one of the uglier factors in the 2008 race. Two days ago I sat in a hotel room in Billings, Montana, talking to an entertainer who was a Mormon and we agreed that there is indeed a chunk of bigotry out there in politics that has hampered Romney’s chances. His stands….the actual issues…his reported flip-flops….those are separate areas. But there is a segment of the Republican Party and most likely in the United States electorate at large that remains as resistant to him as some Americans were when Catholic JFK ran for President in 1960.

Mrs. McCain’s comment is a particularly ticklish one. The Romney camp can’t ignore it, yet they are dealing with a 95-year-old woman who later apologized. So what happened next?

The Salt Lake Organizing Committee had enticed International Olympics officials with lavish gifts and accusations of bribery mired the Games in scandal while resignations sullied the region’s reputation.

Utah officials tapped Romney to lead the effort and as president and CEO of the organizing committee he pared the budget, boosted revenues and worked to repair the committee’s reputation.

A Romney campaign spokesman said the McCains made a mistake.

“I would disagree with any candidate or any campaign surrogate that chooses to disparage someone based on the faith that they hold, and instead implore other candidates and their campaigns to make a case to voters based on the important issues facing the nation,” said Kevin Madden.

That’s as fair, controlled and classy a statement as any political camp has made this year — not seizing on the statement to trying and demonize the other side.

And, indeed, Mrs. McCain quickly had regrets:

Roberta McCain immediately apologized to her son.

“I didn’t mean to say it,” she said as they stepped away from the cameras.

So this can’t be described as a calculated effort by McCain to get the issue out there.

Meanwhile, John McCain — who as his chances to actually become President dissipate seems to be running a better, wittier and more solid campaign — hit just the right note, too:

“Mormons are great people and the fact that Mitt Romney is a Mormon should play no role whatsoever in people’s decision,” McCain said.

“What she meant was the Olympics were screwed up by the people in Salt Lake when Romney came in and fixed the problems there. But I know my 95-year-old mother is certainly in favor of Mormons.”

Still, the “issue” lingers out there and it’s just one more thing that Romney as a political realist (and professional) needs to be on his guard to confront. But a few nice, top placings in the primaries, and strong debate showings, and partisan political pragmatism (and needs) will trump lingering doubts.

Even so, every time the religioius “issue” is raised by a politico or a politico’s family member — even if it is later retracted — the issue has been thrown out there. The irony is that in 2000 McCain was slimed by the Bush camp that used bigotry to try and chase votes away from him.

If the rotten red meat is thrown out there it can be later removed but the stink remains…and some can still smell it.

And some like the smell.

One unusual function of presidential elections is to allow us to confront our own prejudices. The 2008 contest already guarantees us more opportunities to do that than any other in American history.

The nation’s performance in this regard is both ugly and inspiring. New York Governor Al Smith, the first Roman Catholic nominated by a major party for the White House, endured withering volleys of pure hate in 1928, losing even solidly Democratic states in the heavily Protestant South to Republican Herbert Hoover. But by 1960, Americans were able (barely) to get beyond their fears of “papist rule from the Vatican” to elect John F. Kennedy. Still, 80 percent of Catholics voted for JFK while 69 percent of Protestants cast a ballot for Richard M. Nixon. Religious affiliation was the single greatest predictor of an individual’s vote in that remarkable year. No other Catholic has since won the Presidency, but several candidates in both parties are affiliated with this religion–and it is highly doubtful that it will be much of an issue.

Another religion will be an issue, owing to GOP candidate Mitt Romney. One of the most discouraging surprises from the 2008 campaign so far has been how virulent the strain of anti-Mormonism is in our nation. Several surveys have shown that more Americans openly admit that they would not vote for a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS) than would rule out voting for a woman or an African-American.

MORE

The independent thinking conservative writer Josh Trevino has some thoughts HERE.

My first review for Monsters and Critics has been published: the book I reviewed is A Mormon in the White House by Hugh Hewitt.

Nice, religious bigotry in action:

While some evangelical Christians are defending the presidential candidacy of Mormon Mitt Romney from an attack by Al Sharpton, another prominent pastor is going further in his condemnation – saying a vote for the former Massachusetts governor is a vote for Satan.

That’s the word from Bill Keller, host of the Florida-based Live Prayer TV program as well as LivePrayer.com.

“If you vote for Mitt Romney, you are voting for Satan!” he writes in his daily devotional to be sent out to 2.4 million e-mail subscribers tomorrow.

O great, the idiots speak out.

Religious fundamentalists unite! A Mormon running for the White House, o no! Send e-mails, write letters, the Mormon must be stopped! Lord knows that only good, fundamentalist, born again Christians can be good presidents!

Those Christians who worry about Romney’s Mormon faith should, in my opinion, just take a closer look at how Romney behaves: how he lives. What moral values he adheres to, the relationship between him and his wife, the way they brought up their sons, etc. etc.

More importantly, though, they should take a look at what policies he favors: pro-life, anti-stem cell research, fiscally conservative, aggressive stance in the war on terrorism but not overly aggressive, etc.

They should take a closer look at his resumé, they should look at his political credentials; how he saved the Olympic Games of Salt Lake City, how he became Governor of Massachusetts as a Republican and the type of Governor he was. They should look at the so-called Bain-way: no positive affirmation with Romney.

The election is not about who is the best Christian, but about who will make the best president.

This would almost make me endorse Romney.

If I were American that is.

More at The Nation, Preemptive Karma and NewDonkey.com.

Cross posted at my own blog.