Jake Tapper’s article got me thinking about Smith calling himself the second Muhammad,

Let’s remember that Brigham Young said that Joseph Smith would judge mankind along with Christ.

Brigham Young said: “If I can pass brother Joseph, I shall stand a good chance for passing Peter, Jesus, the Prophets, Moses, Abraham, and all back to Father Adam, and be pretty sure of receiving his approbation…. If we can pass the sentinel Joseph the Prophet, we shall go into the celestial kingdom, and not a man can injure us. If he says, ‘God bless you, come along here’; if we will live so that Joseph will justify us, and say, ‘Here am I, brethren,’ we shall pass every sentinel.” – Journal of Discourses, Vol.4, p.271-272

He declares further: “No man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith. From the day that the Priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding-up scene of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are – I with you and you with me. I cannot go there without his consent. He holds the keys of that kingdom for the last dispensation – the keys to rule in the spirit world.” – Journal of Discourses, Vol.7, p.289

There’s faith in the Jesus of the Bible but Mormonism is something else altogether. Call it what you will, it’s not Christianity by any stretch.

The Fred team posts all over the place and there are 100s of blogs. I guess we just don’t have any scandals that draw the same attention as those who do. Maybe we should create one or two? /s

By the way, we have a new FredHead.

Official post supporting Fred Thompson for President

As far as Huck & Mitt go, Huck is becoming nauseating, and whereas yesterday I knew nothing, really, about Mormonism, Jake Tapper’s article got me thinking about Smith calling himself the second Muhammad, so now I wonder if Romney would actually be able to discern moderate Muslims from domestic political jihadists.

I’m beginning to think that both Huckabee and Romney have religious issues that could, as Fred warned, impact the way they would do their job as president.

ThackerAgency:

“Who would have thought that claiming to be ‘Christian’ is a negative thing in a campaign race. . . “

Yeah, it’s just killing Obama isn’t it? Oh wait… who is claiming to be the non-Christian candidate?

“I am the only real Christian running for office, and I believe in second chances and forgiveness. I granted more clemencies than six neighboring states combined. No one is perfect and all have sinned. How can any of you just sit there and let people rot in jail? What kind of person would do that? Well, I didn’t. Vote me ME!”

and even if Huck gets the nomination, he will get eaten alive by Hillary.

true dat

nailinmyeye on December 7, 2007 at 11:16 AM

It would come close to the Nixon/McGovern landslide.

Which would be kind of fitting as Hillary does remind some people of Nixon.

Mitt has to win despite his religous beliefs, while Huck is getting a large % of his support b/c of his religious beliefs. WTF is up with that?

RW Wacko on December 7, 2007 at 10:53 AM

Further deterioration in America from the founding fathers and their principles.

A lot of people are sounding just like Lindsay Graham.

jaime on December 7, 2007 at 10:32 AM

That’s funny…

By the way, I don’t see anything wrong with Huck’s ad and I don’t see it as baiting anyone. It simply is an ad that helps Huck to define who he is to the voters. Krauthammer’s really reaching here, and engaging in his own baiting.

bnelson44 on December 7, 2007 at 10:07 AM

Krauthamer’s right.

JiangxiDad on December 7, 2007 at 10:18 AM

And the winner is… … … JiangxiDad by a country mile!

Now imagine yourself trying to persuade our perfectly rational robot that the following statement is true:

Everything was created by an all-powerful and all-knowing being who exists outside of space and time. This being impregnated a human woman through non-physical means and was born as her offspring. Within space and time, the being was executed as a criminal and spent three days in a tomb. But then it came back to life and went up to a place called Heaven, which we cannot detect or observe. We eat this being’s body once a week. By doing this — and sundry other things, such as getting sprinkled with water by a man in a robe who utters an incantation, or telling the man in the robe all the bad things we do — by doing this, we too can go to Heaven after our own bodies come up out of their graves.

What will you tell the robot? Can you marshal empirical evidence demonstrating that these claims are true? Can you show their truth by logic alone?

Let’s have a campaign already!

It’s a testament to his own immense personal charm and aggressive blog outreach effort that I feel guilty piling on Huck so much this week.

Your sure it isn’t just to generate comments? :)

bnelson44 on December 7, 2007 at 9:59 AM

Of course it’s about “generating comments.” To be more specific, it’s about generating anti-Christian and Christian vs. Christian comments. The Apostle Paul said “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; …” 1 Corinthians 1:10. And, this is why. “Divisions” among Christians are used by the spiritually dead to create havoc and dissent among those who believe. This is an ongoing effort to create such havoc. And, also, to instigate the ridicule of Christians, by the spiritually dead.

This effort will continue.

Social conservatives declared Giuliani, McCain and Romney unacceptable for their liberalism and many threatened to bolt the party if they didn’t find the perfect candidate. And yet they’re supporting a guy who is just as, if not more, liberal than any of those three on many issues.

Yes, that’s exactly why I’m feeling pretty steamed about the big deal they are making about Romney’s faith. As far as fiscal and social issues go, even McCain would be better than Huck on almost every issue. If Huck gets the nomination, I will be hard-pressed not to think he got it just because he’s supposedly more Christian than the others. And in that case, we’re screwed whether he or Shrillary get elected. Hello nanny state and higher taxes, good-bye Dunkin’ Donuts.

I would define the issues differently for them:

1) Choosing a President

2) Allowing the LDS to have a platform for showcasing their religion (aka to them as “cult”) as Christian, which they don’t think it is.

Before anyone bashes me, I am not saying this is good or bad, just what I am hearing in my little corner of the world.

Yeah, how dare those Mormons be allowed to talk about their religion as they define it–anywhere! What do those evangelicals think this is–America?

Seriously,this exclusion of Mormons as Christian based on their own definition of what a Christian should be is just ridiculous.

I think Romney’s campaign played the blogsphere elegantly yesterday. Tons of blogs posted the pre-speech hype and pre-speech talking points then posted the live stream. Hopefully we will see more of that.

bnelson44 on December 7, 2007 at 10:02 AM

Yeah. Too bad Hugh cast a shadow over it.

Social conservatives declared Giuliani, McCain and Romney unacceptable for their liberalism and many threatened to bolt the party if they didn’t find the perfect candidate. And yet they’re supporting a guy who is just as, if not more, liberal than any of those three on many issues.

Focusing on your strengths and not your weaknesses or mistakes is not pandering its smart politics.

If this were truly a matter of strengths versus weaknesses, Huckabee should be able to point out where he’s different from the other candidates on issues. He can’t, because his record is actually worse than that of a few of the candidates considered too liberal to get the nomination by the people supporting Huckabee.

A tip of the BFFT hat to Allahpundit over at Hot Air;

Charles Krauthammer’s latest article deals with Huckabee’s exploitation of religion in the Republican Primary process. Here are some excerpts;

…The appealing aspects of Huckabee’s politics a…

and even if Huck gets the nomination, he will get eaten alive by Hillary.

true dat

Christians and pro-life matters.

ThackerAgency on December 7, 2007 at 10:58 AM

I don’t doubt that at all, but I know a lot of people who wish it were not so, I will give you that. McCain is pro-life. As is Thompson. They are both more conservative than Huck, in my opinion. If evangelicals came out in force for a Mitt of a Fred, their importance would not be overlooked, in my opinion, and it would probably decide the nominee. Now the vote is fractured, and even if Huck gets the nomination, he will get eaten alive by Hillary.

How does one vote their conscience without voting according to their religion?

What you are asking me to do is ignore my faith-based views while choosing who to vote for president. From an evangelical perspective, this makes no sense.

Lawrence on December 7, 2007 at 10:33 AM

This is a good point Lawrence. And, as I believe that Christianity is not merely a belief system, or a set of propositional truths, but a life and a living process, and that one’s faith permeates every aspect of his or her living process, I agree with you.

On the other hand – the fact that Romney holds to a different faith system than I do does not, in my opinion, disqualify him from receiving my vote. I vote my faith/conscience as well – issues of life are especially important to me. That is something that I and Romney share under our respective faiths.

I just think that if there is a conflict for the sole reason that he is a Mormon, then that might not be a good enough reason.

If he’s a proven leader, then why doesn’t he talk about how he led his state? Why doesn’t he talk about his time as governor of Arkansas in detail and the policies he proposed and passed there?

That’s what makes it a pander.
Slublog on December 7, 2007 at 10:43 AM

Focusing on your strengths and not your weaknesses or mistakes is not pandering its smart politics. And I’m sure as time goes by we will hear more about specific policies in Arkansas that he is proud of. He is just rising in recognition and has a shoe string budget and staff. Romney and Giuliani don’t focus on their more liberal positions in the past because that would be suicide also.