Video: David Corn smears Mormons
posted at 10:43 am on February 7, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Greg Gutfeld’s new Fox show, Red Eye, comes on at 2 am Eastern. Thanks to Windows Media Center, though, I get to watch it whenever.
On this morning’s show, the foursome (Gut, Andrew Breitbart, Bill Schultz and Rachel Marsden) had David Corn on as a guest. While discussing Rudy Giuliani’s pic with wife Judi, the liberal Corn just couldn’t resist taking a gratuitous shot at a group of religious conservatives.
Mainstream Mormons haven’t condoned multiple marriages in more than 100 years. Muslims still condone big love, though. If he just had to take a shot at someone, why didn’t Corn take his shot at them…?
As for the “icky” part, for once I agree with David Corn.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Uhh.. because Mormons won’t behead him for insulting their religion? What do I win?
JasonG on February 7, 2007 at 10:47 AM
Dude, I’m a Mormon and I only have ONE wife.
One is enough headache for me.
I couldn’t fathom having more than one.
Maybe some holy person like Job would.
batperez on February 7, 2007 at 11:00 AM
What a perfect last name for David….
d1carter on February 7, 2007 at 11:01 AM
JasonG on February 7, 2007 at 10:47 AM,
LOL. Sad, but true.
amerpundit on February 7, 2007 at 11:05 AM
JasonG, you win the satisfaction that you’re more logical than the average lib. Then again, I think I can say that about my dog, so it’s not much satisfaction.
The Monster on February 7, 2007 at 11:07 AM
The ombudsman corrected what Corn said later in the show.
frankj on February 7, 2007 at 11:09 AM
In addition to the Mormon smear, did I just hear Mr. Cornhole suggest that Judi is nothing more than a beard to placate the Republican base? Is he suggesting that Rudy is latently ghey by association?
Please get Corn some prime-time air.
Kid from Brooklyn on February 7, 2007 at 11:15 AM
Mormonism is a peaceful cult. Certainly NOT “christian” in ANY sense of the word…
3. God. In Mormon theology, the god of our planet is believed to have once been a man on another planet, who through self-effort and the help of his own father-god, was appointed by a counsel of gods in the heavens to his high position as the god of planet Earth, and now has a physical, resurrected, glorified body. Mormonism teaches that through the atonement of Christ and by their good deeds and “holy” living, men can one day become gods, and with their multiplicity of “goddess wives,” populate their own planets.
NRA4Freedom on February 7, 2007 at 11:16 AM
Because Islam is now the official religion of the Dhimmicrat Party?
ReubenJCogburn on February 7, 2007 at 11:16 AM
The ombudsman is the best part of the show.
Bryan on February 7, 2007 at 11:24 AM
david corn is really locked into that one shirt/tie combo.
so the fake conservatives who think the bible is the founding text of the nation won’t vote for guliani. a portion of those won’t vote for romney because he’s a mormon as opposed to some other sub-brand of snake handler. and the white-knuckled, red-faced spazzout nationalists won’t vote for mccain.
there is no conservative movement and republicans deserve to lose.
jummy on February 7, 2007 at 11:25 AM
Corncob is just jealous that he wasn’t one of Rudys gay roomates. His Barney Frank lisp is a dead give away as to his leanings. (bent forward).
roninacreage on February 7, 2007 at 11:29 AM
If you ask muslims in the Arab World why they only have one wife instead of a whole bunch, the most common answer is that having more than one wife is expensive and impratical. The Koran states that you have to treat your wives equally. If you have five wives, and you give one a Lexus, you have to buy a Lexus each of them. If you want them in a separate house, then you have to have a equal sized house for all five of them. You see to them its impratical, and not, say, immoral.
BohicaTwentyTwo on February 7, 2007 at 11:32 AM
why is that nuttier than anything else theists believe?
jummy on February 7, 2007 at 11:33 AM
roninacreage, one more like that and you’re gone.
Bryan on February 7, 2007 at 11:34 AM
Heh. Good one, J.
Jaibones on February 7, 2007 at 11:38 AM
Did I say it was “nutty”? I said it wasn’t “christian”. Just like “Christian Scientists”, they believe that space people dropped the souls of their enemies into volcanos here on earth and man is the result. That’s not “christian” either.
NRA4Freedom on February 7, 2007 at 11:45 AM
“The Ombudsman” would also be an awesome name for a gun.
frankj on February 7, 2007 at 11:47 AM
NRA4Freedom, I am sorry but you are incorrect. No aliens in Mormonism. I think you are confusing them with Scientology.
Repectfully,
A former Mormon
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 7, 2007 at 11:48 AM
yea, but who cares if it is or not?
jummy on February 7, 2007 at 11:48 AM
An example of what Mormons like Romney really believe, you can find this short 13 point piece written by the church to be enlightening.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 7, 2007 at 11:53 AM
NRA4Freedom,
Dictionary.com: Christian
1. of, pertaining to, or derived from Jesus Christ or His teachings: a Christian faith.
2. of, pertaining to, believing in, or belonging to the religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ: Spain is a Christian country.
3. of or pertaining to Christians: many Christian deaths in the Crusades.
4. exhibiting a spirit proper to a follower of Jesus Christ; Christlike: She displayed true Christian charity.
Based on this definition, I would think that Mormons are “Christian.” After all, Mormons believe that Jesus it the Christ, the Savior of the world, and our beliefs are based on his teachings. I like to think that I follow Christ in my life and try to enrich the lives of others by doing so.
By the way, what is your definition of “Christian”?
Troy Rasmussen on February 7, 2007 at 11:55 AM
To be fair, we do have Mormons in the US who actively petition for the right to marry more than one woman. I’ve never heard of American Muslims doing that in this country.
And there is also the HBO show.
What you say is true though. Mormons condem polygamy.
The more appropriate comment would have been “more wives than a polygamist.”
Esthier on February 7, 2007 at 11:56 AM
Ironically, the Morman is one of the few candidates who has only had one wife!
shermacman on February 7, 2007 at 11:58 AM
As far as I am concerned, I think that bigamy would be it’s own punishment.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 7, 2007 at 11:59 AM
Although I am not a christian, I do beleive thet Christianity is a far more peacefull ewligeon then most. Granted, 1500 years ago it was not. The Christian church has been rife with scandal, but they do have a good handle on peace and morality. All their past shows is that the church is not perfect (perfection is not the job of man or the church, thats Gods job). For the most part the Christian theology has evolved and grown from its bloodier roots. Islam has not, and that is why it is dangerous.
David Corn is showing his intelectual dishonesty. He takes a pot shot at the harmless. its like Colbert making fun of Bush then crowing about “talking truth to power”. Neither he, nor Corn, have taken any chances. Want to impress me? Go to Cuba and talk out against Castro at one of his dinners. Or go to Venzuela and verbally attack Chavez. Now THATS talkign truth to power. Or as been said, let Corn talk out against the Muslims polygamy. Thats far more edgy and dangerouse then taking shots at those that won’t fight back.
Wyrd on February 7, 2007 at 12:00 PM
I don’t think debating the theology of Mormons is a great idea. There are too many misinformed arm-chair quarterbacks hanging around. I’m Catholic and have had to endure several misinformed jabs on this site.
All I can say is that Ghandi was a Hindu. Regardless of his faith, he was a good man whom many would benefit to immulate his charity and morals.
natesnake on February 7, 2007 at 12:01 PM
it’s rediculous. with all of the guliani bashing and romney bashing, you’d think we were electing the pope. its embarassing.
the secular right needs to figure out a way to disempower and marginalize christians from the conservative movement and the republican party NOW.
jummy on February 7, 2007 at 12:02 PM
“Appeared on national TV in a dress multiple times.” – For his sake I really hope that he has since had a change in political advisors.
Zetterson on February 7, 2007 at 12:07 PM
As a Mormon myself, I’d like to say that all these canards spewed about me not being “Christian” are rather insulting. See, I beleive that it’s through Christ I am saved. By saying I’m not Christian, you are in effect denying salvation to me. Now, I’m no judge of people, but it seems you seem to think you are set up as the Ultimate judge of deciding who is and who is not Christian, NRA4Freedom?
I’ll happily admit we aren’t the “standard Christian,” but that doesn’t mean we aren’t Christian. I note your quote is carefully calculated to twist our beliefs to sound as nutty as possible. Well, it’s very easy to do the exact same to any religion–including whatever sect of Christianity you claim to believe in. So, I’d respectfully ask you to stop spreading anti-Mormon FUD. That’s all it is, after all. No different than spreading anti-jewish stuff, or anti-Catholic. Presumably, you wouldn’t countenance that, would you?
Vanceone on February 7, 2007 at 12:08 PM
well said natesnake. though there are other ways to asses gahndi, india could and should be america’s greatest cultural and political ally. not just in the war on terror, but also as a bulwark against china’s dominance. but considering how these snake-handlers respond to someone who isn’t the same kind of christian they are, i shudder to think what would happen if a hindu was foolish enough to try to run on a republican ticket.
jummy on February 7, 2007 at 12:08 PM
Is Corn the unknown love child of George Bush, Sr.?
I thought this was a photo of the President until I read the blurb.
Something funny here…
profitsbeard on February 7, 2007 at 12:10 PM
Did I say there were “aliens” in Mormonism? No, don’t think so.
NRA4Freedom on February 7, 2007 at 12:19 PM
Sounds like Aliens to me…
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 7, 2007 at 12:20 PM
I’m thinking that the Bible would be holding the only “definition” of what is or is not “christian” that matters…
NRA4Freedom on February 7, 2007 at 12:25 PM
That is his middle name. His last name is Hoyle
Wade on February 7, 2007 at 12:28 PM
Really… and which chapter and verse can I find that “definition” of christian spelled out.
I also suppose it depends on if you like the King James English verses the more English-ised versions.
I don’t recall it acutally being defined in the Bible. And since Mormons both believe in the Bible, and in Jesus Christ as the son of God. I’d say that they have just as much right to claim to be Christian as anyone else.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 7, 2007 at 12:30 PM
Get ready for the impending deluge of anti-Mormon rhetoric. With a successful, prominent LDS politician making a run for the most powerful leadership position on Earth, it is a foregone conclusion that no stop will be left un-pulled in the effort to discredit him.
This promises to be an interesting presidential race. I don’t know the punch-lines yet, but the jokes will all begin, “A woman, a black, and a mormon walk into a bar…”
ztep86 on February 7, 2007 at 12:32 PM
The Mormon would be the designated driver… LOL
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 7, 2007 at 12:33 PM
Guys, perhaps getting bogged down into defining what a book says is not a good idea. Who and what you are and what you beleive is in your heart, not on paper. A book is just a guide line. if you want to go down a path that everything that is written on a piece of paper is the absolute truth then you are putting constrictions on your faith. Most people say God is boundless. Shouldn’t your faith be also?
We all know that their are umpteen thousands of derivations of the holy books and papers. Perhaps God is greater then anyone religeon and as such you should respect others viewpoints a little more. As long as they are not trying to saw off your head that is.
Wyrd on February 7, 2007 at 12:36 PM
Who does Corn’s makeup? Every time I see him on TV he looks a a corpse fresh out of a coffin.
.
GT on February 7, 2007 at 12:37 PM
While I certainly understand your concern, it might be best to use an analogy to demostrate the difference. In Catholocism, there is a catechism which clearly demonstrates everything that embodies being Catholic. People who align themselves with and adhere to those beliefs are what people would refer to as Catholics. Likewise, the Bible, being the book of Christianity, also demonstrates everything that embodies being Christian, and likewise those who align themselves and adhere to those beliefs would be caled Christians.
Now, people who hold to and confess beliefs that are at odds with the Catholic catechism could hardly be called Catholics just as those who hold to and confess beliefs that are at odds with the Bible can hardly be called Christians.
The Bible is either exactly what it claims to be, or it is a lie from the pits of Hell itself. Mormonism is little more than a mixture of words taken from the Bible, and that mixed with a fairly strange belief system invented by Smith and his followers. Biblically speaking, there is very little christianity about it once you actually get down in the dirty details of it.
The Bible is very clear on what Christianity is, and it is exactly the opposite of other religions. Virtually every other religion of man on this planet can be boiled down and outlined as mankind doing something, or working towards, the attempt to somehow “earn” favor with “God”, hoping to appease or be counted as “good enough” so as not to be cast off in the end. Conversely, Christianity is the exact opposite, it is God Himself doing for mankind, in and through Jesus Christ, what mankind can never do for himself, which is pay the price for his own sin or otherwise earn favor with a just and righteous God.
So in the end, no, Jesus and Satan were not brothers. And no, the God of the Bible never was a man like us on some other planet. And no, mankind will never turn into a “God” and be like the God of the Bible over some other planet of people in the future regardless of how good a Mormon he is. But if you want to believe that kind of stuff, then you have every right to do so and enjoy doing it. Just don’t try to pass yourselves off as “christians” as in Biblically Christianity please…
NRA4Freedom on February 7, 2007 at 12:51 PM
Why? Why? Why do we have to have these jerks on again!! Haven’t we had to watch these idiots long enough (12-15 yrs)?
sharinlite on February 7, 2007 at 12:52 PM
Cornhole is one of the pre-eminent idiots of the MSM. That anyone listens to this tool is amazing.
mcgilvra on February 7, 2007 at 12:52 PM
Where did Corn’s neck go?
armylawyer on February 7, 2007 at 12:53 PM
who gives a crap?
jummy on February 7, 2007 at 1:04 PM
LOL, I love how you know what i believe better than myself, NRA4Freedom. I also love how you’ve arrogated to yourself the only way to interpret the Bible. Based on YOUR interpretation of the Bible, you condemn ME and my faith and say “it’s not good enough.”
I’m rather amused by your rather pitiful attempts to say I don’t believe in Christ or His atoning sacrifice. I’m also amused by your claim that the Bible is so clear, if it was, then why do we have so many Christian sects? Shouldn’t it be obvious?
Look, I don’t want to argue theology here, HotAir is not the place for it. I can assure you, however, that we “Mormons” (more properly speaking, members of The Church of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints) fully believe in Christ, His atoning sacrifice and that we cannot “earn our way to heaven.” Now, if you want to go on inventing reasons why we aren’t Christian, you can. In fact, you will. But it’s really an excuse to wave around plain, old fashioned bigotry disguised as a desperate attempt to define what Mormons believe, and then attack it to make us look bad.
And what you are doing is EXACTLY what various liberals do to anyone who believes any form of Christianity, Mormon or no. Be careful in whom you claim belongs at the table, for the Anti-Christian types will use your logic and reasoning against you.
Vanceone on February 7, 2007 at 1:04 PM
I agree that Levy as Ombudsman is the best part of that show. Hey, RedEye is awesome. I’m glad Andrew ditched the tie for the Tuesday show even though the tie gave him gravitas on the first show–playing the role of fatherly straight man. Breibart has become the Mort Kondracke to Gutfeld’s John McLaughlin in only two shows.
Rachel’s fun, but I wish they’d dress her better; preferably in a white dress shirt, gray wool skirt, and black heels… yea-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-ahhhhh!
Wh–wha? What were we talking about? I kinda drifted off there for a minute…
ScottMcC on February 7, 2007 at 1:07 PM
NRA4Freedom,
Prove it.
csdeven on February 7, 2007 at 1:11 PM
I think his neck and lips are hiding out in the same place.
mattshu on February 7, 2007 at 1:57 PM
Beautifully (and logically) stated.
mattshu on February 7, 2007 at 1:59 PM
Am I the only one who has always thought David Corn is slightly retarded (seriously)? There’s something wrong there, I just can’t really put my finger on it.
As for this new show. I have to say, the whole thing is pretty awkward. I missed last night’s show, but saw the first night and the one thing that held it together was Rachel Marsden’s insanely short skirt.
RightWinged on February 7, 2007 at 2:01 PM
Oh I know I am going to regret this, but here goes anyway.
I think it is important to point out that what most Christians use as the basis of their religious beliefs, the Bible, in it’s current configuration was decided on by leaders of the Catholic religion in the Middle Ages. A panel of men were the sole deciders of which manuscripts were put in or which were left out.
I am not trying to invoke any Da Vinci code conspiracy rationale I am just saying tht to jump on another religion because of what is or isn’t in their source documents is not fair, with one notable exception.
It has been firmly established that the teachings of Islam and what they use for a owners manual can be used to judge them.
Okay I am turning my comments off and will go back to reading
Final word thanks for the link to Mormon beliefs from Sniper One
LakeRuins on February 7, 2007 at 2:02 PM
The whole debate over whether Mormons are Christian depends on how broad the one’s definition of “Christian” is. As a theologically conservative Christian (Independent Baptist), my definition does not even include a number of supposedly mainstream Christian denominations, and from what I understand of Mormon theology, they don’t either. That said, however, Mormons have been among the nicest people I have met, and I for one would not vote against a politician running for office merely because he was a Mormon.
On further thought, I would also include Mormons as part of our larger Judaeo-Christian heritage as opposed to Islam or other belief systems.
Lancer on February 7, 2007 at 2:18 PM
NRA4Freedom, Vanceone:
Relax and do some reading. At the very least you’ll be able to resume your argument from the same page, but hopefully you’ll both also find out that these arguments are old and boring and pointless.
ccwbass on February 7, 2007 at 2:43 PM
No doubt, it’s pointless to argue about it. People are going to believe whatever they like, regardless. If someone were interested in comparing Mormon doctrine to the Bible, they only need to Google the words “Mormon cult” and become informed.
NRA4Freedom on February 7, 2007 at 2:52 PM
Yeah, it is pointless. I could google “Christian error,” too, and find out all I want to know about how Christianity is evil and misguided from those who would tear it down and destroy it, NRA4Freedom.
But I see you’ve bought fullfledged into the “let’s bash Mormonism” thing. Indeed, what’s the difference between you and David Corn here, in intent if not the words?
Vanceone on February 7, 2007 at 3:25 PM
Haven’t you guys caught on jummy is a joke. He is posting to get people to rail against him. Read his posts, he does not make sense, they are just targeted to get a response. Bryan and AP will catch on, and he will be banned.
right2bright on February 7, 2007 at 3:27 PM
Well said!!! And when I want to know what conservative Republicans believe then I’m going to ask a communist liberal. Great advice!!!
Troy Rasmussen on February 7, 2007 at 3:34 PM
omg! it’s A CARBOMB! go defuse it!
jummy on February 7, 2007 at 3:39 PM
Why would anyone suggest a comparison between two equally unprovable religious beliefs?
csdeven on February 7, 2007 at 3:47 PM
I do hope you aren’t representing the NRA with your religious intolerance. I doubt that Wayne LaPierre would be pleased to have you representing the NRA with your words on this subject.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 7, 2007 at 3:48 PM
I live in SE Utah, The heart of Mormon country. The only people that still accept the multiple wives thing are the wack-jobs in the FLDS. A break-off sect of the LDS church. They caught their “leader” no to long ago in Las Vegas. He is currently on trial in, you guessed it, Utah.
I am not Morman and have no problems with Mormans. The only way one can identify a morman is they usually have a herd of kids.
Mormans do not believe they come from aliens, that is scientology. The “religion” that was started by a pedophile that lived out his last days on a yacht off the west coast of Mexico because he had warrents for his arrest in both Mexico and the U.S..
I have no problem with Mormans, they are generally very friendly. In fact I dated a girl once whose parents were Morman. One thing I learned is a Morman always has something to eat.
Sammy316 on February 7, 2007 at 3:50 PM
Donny Osmond owns you all.
ScottMcC on February 7, 2007 at 4:21 PM
My best friend is evangelical and I’m LDS (Mormon). At various times when people have made references to Mormons not being Christians, I’ve gotten very frustrated and asked him where people get off thinking that they have the right to say who is and isn’t a member of the ‘Christian’ club.
My friend (who has also studied a lot of philosophy – the real kind which looks more confusing than math, not philosophy-lite) had the following to say and I think it is very pertinent to the discussion taking place here:
“Getting upset about someone saying you’re not Christian is pointless. It’s all based around what their definition of “Christian” is. Perhaps they define it as someone that believes wholeheartedly in the trinity. Perhaps their definition is people who only have the Bible as a book of scripture. Perhaps it is more blantant, such as, the definition of Christian is ‘not Mormon’. You can never win that kind of argument because it’s based on a definition that they’ve decided on for themselves. The only definition you have to concern yourself with is God’s.”
That being said, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are in for a lot of anti-mormon rhetoric if Romney makes a good run for President.
JadeNYU on February 7, 2007 at 4:22 PM
I’ll never understand how you can be a member of “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” yet not be Christian.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 7, 2007 at 4:48 PM
E L – It’s because it’s that other Jesus. Jesus R. instead of Jesus H. It confuses some people, but most can see through the trickery. /sarc
JadeNYU on February 7, 2007 at 4:52 PM
Actually JadeNYU, sarcasm aside, you are exactly correct in that the Mormon “Jesus” is no more the Jesus Christ of which the Bible speaks than the Mormon “God” is the God of the Bible. That aside, there really isn’t anything wrong with the religion of Mormonism, as man made religions go there are a lot worse religions that someone could choose to be an active participant of. An interesting read is this,
http://www.irr.org/MIT/Is-Mormonism-Christian.html
perhaps some of the vocal Mormon flag wavers here would like to demonstrate where this is in error?
NRA4Freedom on February 7, 2007 at 5:14 PM
NRA4Freedom, you shouldn’t take the Mormon vote for the Republican party for granted. If enough people like you that call yourselves “conservative” keep up this bigoted crap, there are enough moderate Democrats in the West we can vote for and leave all you exclusionary so-and-so’s out in the cold in 2008.
WasatchMan on February 7, 2007 at 5:36 PM
Similarly to what I said above NRA4Freedom, define Him any way you see fit and then include or exclude who you see fit. It makes no difference to me since it’s not you I ultimately answer to.
JadeNYU on February 7, 2007 at 5:40 PM
LOL! IRR, NRA4Freedom? You have GOT to be kidding me! They never acknowledge they are wrong, or have been shot down numerous times.
In any case, I find it curious you are pressing so hard your definition that Mormons are cultists. And how is “mormonism” any more of a man made religion than, say, Lutherism? Or Calvinism?
Here’s a hint: Evangelical Protestantism is NOT the final word on what’s acceptable to God. Or can you point to a revelation saying so?
Also, here’s a link for you in return: Link If you still persist in linking to anti-mormon screeds and things, then you stand revealed as a basher, and someone who the Lib’s and others gleefully hold up as an intolerant type.
Vanceone on February 7, 2007 at 5:53 PM
It’s official: This is Hot Air’s Lamest Thread Ever. I post a little Red Eye, slam David Corn, thinking this is good stuff–Corn looks silly and cowardly, Red Eye is new and kind of cool, etc.
You guys go off on a debate about Mormons all day. Sheesh.
Bryan on February 7, 2007 at 6:06 PM
Sorry Bryan. Allah’s recent religion posts have us all fired up and ready to jump to the religious side of a post at the drop of a hat.
I would happily have made more fun of David Corn, but, other than his lame attempt at a joke in this clip, I’m not sure who he is. But, if you’re against him, I’m against him too. :)
By the way, it makes me feel better that this post only got Lamest Thread Ever and not Lamest. Thread. EVAR. That means there’s still hope.
JadeNYU on February 7, 2007 at 6:13 PM
So that explains why there’s only 1 Christian church in the world. Glad you cleared that up.
Hack Ptui on February 7, 2007 at 6:49 PM
LOL, I’m sorry Bryan. I DID try to say HotAir isn’t the place for a theology debate, but, well… ye old “defender of the faith” came out.
But in my defense, I didn’t start it. :)
Vanceone on February 7, 2007 at 6:50 PM
I have watched David Corn before when he sat in on FNC’s New Watch. That guy is so far left he has to circle around to go right! He’s just another “so-called” journalist who couldn’t find his own arse with both hands…
Zorro on February 7, 2007 at 6:54 PM
Rachel Marsden is a nut.
The movie “Swimfan” was (very) loosely based on her.
At Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, Canada (my province), Rachel Marsden falsely accused the swimming coach, Liam Donnelly, of severely sexually harrassing her over their 16-month romantic relationship. She caused Mr. Donnelly to be fired and his name to be dragged through the mud.
The movie, Swimfan, even used the name “Donnelly” for the first man the protagonist destroyed, just in case followers of the above case missed the reference.
In fact, this happily married man had never even dated her and did not harrass her (she had a thing for him, obviously), as her own obsessive emails later proved and she later admitted. She ruined the man’s life when he wouldn’t sleep with her, basically.
He was reinstated, she was disgraced, and for reasons that utterly escape me, Bill O’Reilly on FOX News, among others, and many Republicans believe that this woman is a great Canadian commentator. This is embarrassing to Canadian conservatives, in my humble opinion.
You want intelligent Canadian commentary? Try Andrew Coyne andrewcoyne.com, a brilliant political analyst whose 5-10 year ahead political predictions on Canadian electoral politics tend to work out. Or for the mainstream “(wo)man in the street” opinion, visit 2005/6 top Canadian blogger, Kate MacMillan of “Small Dead Animals” smalldeadanimals.com. Or even the perspicacious and well-travelled, Mark Steyn.
To consider Rachel Marsden an authority on something so subject to human emotion as politicals is farcical. I gather it has something to do with her looks.
Christoph on February 7, 2007 at 7:08 PM
Dear Bryan, we would love to join you in mocking the eminently mockable David Corn but this thread has attracted an anti-Mormon troll, and we can’t help but respond.
WasatchMan on February 7, 2007 at 7:30 PM
Let’s put this into proper perspective:
Dumb = Dumber,
David Corn = Keith Olbermann!!!
Enough said…
byteshredder on February 7, 2007 at 8:14 PM
You can “respond” all you like, but it won’t change the facts. Those facts are that many LDS doctrines and theology are in direct opposition to what God says in the Bible. If those opposing doctrines were on something minor, such as things that seperate some of the various christian denominations…something like, whether water baptism is sprinkling or dunking, then perhaps your arguments might be valid. Unfortunately, the differences are far from minor, and revolve around who God Himself is, where He came from, who Jesus Christ is, who Satan is, and on and on and on. IF the Bible is the book of christianity, then biblically speaking, Mormonism is NOT christian in any sense of the term. IF you intend to use something other than the Bible to try to define what “christianity” is, then depending on what you use, the whole world might be “christians”. End of story. Oh, and if it it makes me a “troll” to state the truth, then a troll I will have to be.
Honestly, I am not too concerned with who you vote for. In fact, the very idea that because I simply pointed out that some important Mormon doctines are wholly incompatable with the “Christian” Bible you are threatening to stop voting for conservatives, well, that’s very liberal of you, politically speaking of course. And by the way, the TRUTH is not and never is “bigotry”, it is simply the truth.
NRA4Freedom on February 7, 2007 at 8:29 PM
You are taking a very arrogant tone here……I have asked you twice now to prove your faith to be factual. THEN and ONLY THEN, can you demand your beliefs as the standard for others to be held to.
csdeven on February 7, 2007 at 8:31 PM
I would appreciate it if you would change your handle. As a former Mormon and a NRA member, I find your misrepresentation of the facts to be reprehensible. I doubt that anyone in the NRA would want you to represent them on this issue, and if they did want an “Anti-Mormon bigot” to be speaking about freedom of religion, I would drop my membership.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 7, 2007 at 8:45 PM
Actually I think God is the final arbiter of such things, and not your rather shakey and stupid interpretation of the Bible.
You see if you want to go on that, by your behavior here, by my opinion you are not a Christian no matter what you claim. The LDS most definately are.
You can “say” what you want.. but your “Saying” means nothing but your own rhetoric and hyoperbole. So what point do you grow up and quit being someone that owns something he doesn’t and start behaving like you claim you are?
Noelie on February 7, 2007 at 9:46 PM
Can’t you just feel the love in here? Gee, I’ve got a great idea – let’s all stop voting conservative because we don’t like like the other religions represented in this thread. Grow up people. This could almost be a thread on DU.
Jummy – yeah that’s right, let’s rid the conservative movement of all the Christians. We might be able to get as many votes in 08 as Ralph Nader did last time around. Loser.
MarkM on February 7, 2007 at 9:49 PM
It’s simple, NRA4Freedom. You have claimed that only YOU and your interpretation of the Bible is correct, and based on that claim, you thereby say that anyone who disagrees with you is “Unchristian.” You misrepresent what Mormons believe, and you also misrepresent what “Christians” believe. I assure you, you would be rather suprised what the Early Christians believed-one thing is for sure, it doesn’t resemble your claims of what Christianity means.
Before you go around saying I and the other 12 million members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints do not, in fact, believe in Christ, I recommend you read something not written by people who have an axe to grind. If you can’t be intellectually honest enough to do that, then just admit it. As it is, your tactics have been widely recognized as bigoted in nature. You can cry “wolf” all you want, but the link I gave earlier is more than adequate rebuttal to your claims we are not followers of Christ. So just shut up and go away, you ruined this thread for anyone else who wanted to mock Corn.
And kudos to everyone else who recognized him for what he was.
Vanceone on February 7, 2007 at 9:51 PM
LOL! First you guys are going to go vote for liberals, and now you are going to drop your membership(and join up with what,the ACLU maybe?), all because someone did nothing more than point out the undeniable fact that the main doctrines of the religion of Mormonism is in opposition to the Bible?
You all sound like the proverbial little boy who is going to just take their marbles home and quit playing if you can’t have your way.
Again, the truth is not bigotry, it is merely the truth. If you want to be Mormon, feel perfectly free to do so, it’s a free Country. But beating your fists on the ground and holding your breath because the easily determined facts don’t happen go your way is pretty strange, really it is.
You also obviously do not understand the meaning of my moniker, that’s too bad too.
NRA4Freedom on February 7, 2007 at 9:52 PM
I’m not going anywhere and I’m still waiting for you to prove your beliefs to be factual.
csdeven on February 7, 2007 at 10:17 PM
I am sure this is a stupid idea, but here goes anyway:
Let’s have a specific, point-by-point discussion of the differences between modern mainline (i.e., monogamous) Mormonism on the one hand and Catholic and Protestant Christianity on the other, instead of just trading barbs and hyperlinks. That way we get to hear what Mormons believe from Mormons themselves and their answers to the claims made by their critics. Isn’t that how a debate is supposed to go?
Lancer on February 7, 2007 at 11:14 PM
Many Mormons won’t vote for liberals; but I believe they will vote for moderate Democrats (who do exist here in the West) before they will support a Republican party dominated by narrow-minded, exclusionary little Napoleons who try to dictate who is and isn’t a Christian.
WasatchMan on February 7, 2007 at 11:56 PM
Is there really anybody left stupid enough to fall for that old “Mormons aren’t Christians myth?” Come ‘on guys, this is 2007, and we’re in the United States, not some third-world country where nobody has any access to any information.
Only a hardcore religious bigot, a person ignorant of Christianity, or a person ignorant of the true teaching of Mormonism would believe that hackneyed old myth.
Unfortunately, it’s usually a combination of all three.
(When a person becomes an anti-Mormon, God strikes him stupid.)
I don’t mind if somebody doesn’t believe Mormon doctrine. But if you’re going to reject something, reject what actually is official church doctrine. Some of the goofy things you guys are writing hear bring me to tears with laughter.
Just one example of something that somebody pulled out of his behind (or probably got from some poorly done anti-Mormon website).
>was appointed by a counsel of gods in the heavens to his high position as the god of planet Earth
Uh, no. Maybe you got that from an episode of Battlestar Galactica or something. God the Father is the creator of the universe. If anybody appointed him to the position of god of planet Earth, it was himself. He created the universe, and the Earth, and he appointed his Son Jesus Christ to come here as the Messiah to establish his church, teach his Gospel, die on the cross, and be resurrected, bringing the victory over physical death to all mankind. And his atonement brings forgiveness to all who repent.
Where’d all that come from? Oh, gee. I don’t know. Maybe…THE BIBLE?!
And I keep seeing that goofy thing about Mormons thinking that we can work ourselves into heaven. I’d like to smack the doofus that came up with that one, but that wouldn’t be too Christian of me, so I’ll leave that up to the pop-Christian religious bigots. We believe, as The Bible says (oh know, there it is again!), that “faith without works is dead,” but that doesn’t mean that we don’t believe in grace. A Mormon that actually knows and believes in Mormon doctrine knows that no matter how hard we work, it will never be enough to get us to heaven. The work that we do is to enter into and maintain a covenant relationship with Christ (we remember him and emulate him and obey him), and then all the vertical work (toward Heaven) is through the grace of Christ. We are saved by grace.
Again, where did all that come from? Oops, The Bible. Pretty mundane, huh.
Sorry that there aren’t any truly sordid details about the Mormon Church. No aliens, no harems, no magic or late-night sacrifices in the middle of the forest, no horns, no laser shows. (Oh, well, actually, I think the Osmonds do a laser show during their concerts.) We’re actually kind of boring, when you think about it. Maybe that’s why people keep making up stories. Our reality is just not interesting enough for the tabloids that seem to interest the trailer trash types so much…
Doghouse on February 8, 2007 at 12:05 AM
>the main doctrines of the religion of Mormonism is in opposition to the Bible
Wow. So you’re saying that the doctrine that God created the universe, that he loves us, that he sent his only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to teach his Gospel, die on the cross, and be resurrected, to atone for our sins, and be the example we are to follow, and that God still lives and does his work today, and that to be saved we have to believe in and follow Jesus Christ, and that ultimately it is his grace that saves us (and those are the central doctrines of the Mormon Church), is in opposition to the Bible? I have a feeling that there are one or two non-Mormon Christians that would take issue with that rather bizarre assertion. Even some pop-Christians would have a hard time believing that you have actually read the Bible, if you believe that those things are in opposition to the Bible.
If your brand of Christianity denies those things, then I have no problem with being marginalized. If hellenized (what is often misnamed as “traditional”) Christianity denies those things, then the pop-Christians can keep their clique. I don’t want to be a part of it. I’d rather have the glassy-eyed, frothing at the mouth, toothless religious bigots saying we’re a cult. Jesus knows I believe in him and am trying to follow him. Why should I care if some mortal ignoramus doesn’t believe it?
Doghouse on February 8, 2007 at 12:14 AM
Actually, it sounds like the anti-Mormon bigots are the ones who are going to change their vote because they can’t stand Mormonism. Not us Mormons.
Hack Ptui on February 8, 2007 at 12:19 AM
idiot.
One Angry Christian on February 8, 2007 at 10:34 AM
I see the art of deception is still hard at work in mainstream Mormon circles. Everyone doing their best to try to convince a lost world of something that only the most uninformed believer, or else an unbeliever, would believe, peddling nothing but counterfeit Christianity. Because we all know that the best “new” Mormon is the “christian” who knows nothing of their Bible other than the names contained in it that they have heard in passing from their “church” that didn’t bother to warn them about false christs. But the Bible speaks of Mormon like religions when it states,
“But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.”
and do you know just how easy it is to tell what this verse is talking about? It says “another Jesus…whom we have not preached”. So let’s compare the Mormon Jesus to the Jesus of the Bible. Is the Jesus of the Bible the brother of Lucifer like Mormon theology says? No, Lucifer was an angel, a creation OF God. Is the Bible Jesus merely a created being, the fist of many of the offspring or creations of God like Mormon theology says? No, the Bible Jesus IS God, and He existed forever with God. Was Christ conceived through a physical act, like Mormon theology says? No, the Bible Jesus was conceived in the womb of a virgin by the Holy Spirit, who is also God. Was the Jesus of the Bible a married polygamist with children? No, He was, and is, God. Did the Jesus of the Bible earn his own salvation on the Cross? No, salvation was never required of Jesus Christ, because He was perfect in all His ways from the beginning, unlike the teachings of Mormon which attempt to reveal Him as a once mortal and imperfect man.
No, you cannot merely attach someone’s name to your religion and then expect everyone to take for granted that the words mean what you say they do, no matter how much you WANT people to believe that they do. And interestingly enough, one of your own church Presidents actually told the truth in 1998, when he made a statement in Paris when
“In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ, President Hinckley spoke of those outside the Church who say Latter-day Saints ‘do not believe in the traditional Christ. No, I don’t. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times. He together with His Father, appeared to the boy Joseph smith in the year 1820, and when Joseph left the grove that day, he knew more of the nature of God than all the learned ministers of the gospel of the ages. (Church News, week ending June 20, 1998, page 7)
Of course, Mormons will ultimately deny that any of the teachings of the past leaders of the Mormon church are their doctrines and theology NOW, since there are SO many things recorded from what these people and the Mormon church has taught in the past, to attempt to argue their doctrinal positions would be impossible.
But in order to really bring into view the deceptive ways of the LDS church, maybe we should actually begin with discussing the curse of Cain. You know, that little doctrine that was a part of the LDS church for over a hundred years that pointed out that black folk are the color they are because they are the seed of Cain and under the curse. Oh wait, I forgot that for the last decade or so, the LDS church outrightly denies that it ever had any such teaching or theology. Imagine that. But since some people are old enough to remember such teachings, lots of people know the truth. Lots of young Mormons have no clue. I’m sure if you ask your bishop, they will tell you you not to worry about it though, that’s how deception works.
If you REALLY want to go there, and reveal all the teachings of the Mormon church and how they differ from what the Bible says, feel perfectly free. I’m not afraid of the truth, are you?
NRA4Freedom on February 8, 2007 at 10:43 AM
This would be a more accurate statement:
“Mainstream Mormons outside of Utah haven’t condoned multiple marriages in more than 100 years.”
I’m not talking about that nutball Warren Jeffs. I’m talking about little towns like Bluffdale tucked away between Draper and Riverton, which is south of Salt Lake City. This is one example of may such towns.
I’ve seen the big multi-family homes and 18th century wardrobes. The privacy of the sister-wives in these plural families is well protected from the prying eyes of the media, very often by the local media themselves.
Lawrence on February 8, 2007 at 10:52 AM
Or maybe we should talk about this news story today,
PARIS (Reuters) – Pope Benedict was baptized at birth and will most likely be baptized again one year after his death, not by his Roman Catholic Church but by a Mormon he never met…
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070205/lf_nm/religion_mormons_baptism_dc_2
Nothing biblical about this kind of goofiness.
NRA4Freedom on February 8, 2007 at 11:53 AM
Bah, let’s just stop it. NRA4Freedom, Hotair is not the place for a religious discussion. If you want to discuss how deranged and cultlike you belive Mormons are, go to a board that allows it. But before you do, I suggest you read that link I gave–I note you’ve completely ignored it. I read yours, and it’s full of inaccuracies, as is usual from anti-mormon screeds.
But here’s a question for you: Would you not vote for Mitt Romney only because he’s a Mormon? Or are you desperately trying to find some reason to not vote for him that’s more politically acceptable (i.e. so you don’t have to admit you are being bigoted)? It’s dealing with people like you that makes me have sympathy for the Dem’s hsyterical rantings about “Jesus land’–they are talking about people like you, unlike most true Christians (which so far, you’ve not demonstrated you are).
Vanceone on February 8, 2007 at 12:03 PM
Vanceone, the democrats Godlessness aside, you are asking whether or not a Mormon Presidential candidate would get my vote for President of the United States? I guess that would depend on the candidate himself. Romney has been a little hard to pin down on some issues, because some of his past doesn’t seem to be on par with some of his stands on the same issues now. In the mid 90’s, he caved on gun control issues. In 2002 he claimed to fully support Mass gun control laws. Now he says otherwise, so which Mitt are we to believe?
Also, traditionally, he has in effect been an abortion supporter, a gay “rights” supporter, and he appears to support embryonic stem-cell research to an extent. Frankly, he appears to me to be and issue “waffler” like Kerry was, and that’s going to be a pretty hard person to vote for. Maybe I am mistaken about him, but so far, that’s the way it looks to me.
NRA4Freedom on February 8, 2007 at 12:33 PM
I thought religion was all about “faith” not provable truth.
The provable truth is that life evolved and developed organically over unfathomable eons to peak with the creation of hairless apes who argue over which arcane deity is the coolest.
ronsfi on February 8, 2007 at 2:06 PM
Comment pages: