Obama campaign manager: I fear Jon Huntsman the most in 2012
posted at 5:10 pm on May 5, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Jon Huntsman, the Utah governor who’s positioned himself as the moderate GOP alternative in 2012 by coming out in favor of civil unions? The RINO-in-chief, in other words?
While no republican presidential candidate yet makes Obama’s team “shake in {their} shoes…,” President Obama’s campaign manager, David Plouffe, now says Governor Jon Huntsman makes him, a “wee bit queasy…I think he’s really out there speaking a lot of truth about the direction of the party.”
To which Kirk Jowers of the University of Utah’s Hinckley Institute of Politics says, “Huntsman has positioned himself in a great place right now because he is the only presidential candidate really running in the middle right now.”
Huntsman spent the weekend in Michigan which is a key G.O.P. primary state.
And Jowers – who has advised three republican presidential candidates – says Huntsman has now, “…become a top five candidate for 2012.”
Reportedly he’s also being advised by former McCain guru John Weaver. Three possible motives for Plouffe to say what he said:
1. It’s true: Huntsman really does make him nervous.
2. Reverse psychology: Huntsman doesn’t make him nervous, but if enough dopey Republicans think he does, maybe they’ll nominate him and it’ll be an easy kill for The One.
3. Reverse reverse psychology: Huntsman does make him nervous, in which case it’s important to kneecap him as soon as possible. Plouffe, being no dummy, knows that Rush et al. will simply assume that he’s practicing briar-patch reverse psychology and will immediately start to tear Huntsman down as a scarecrow whom the Dems would love to face, thereby demonizing him among the Republican base and ruining his chances before the campaign even begins.
Which is it? Also, how does Huntsman hope to capture the nomination with the base favoring a return to Reaganism as the solution to Hopenchange? Presumably his strategy is 2008 redux: Count on Palin, Romney, Huck, and maybe Sanford splitting the social cons amongst themselves while winning all the Brooksian center-rightists for himself. I hope he does run; I’m curious to see just how many of those Brooksians there are.
Update: Ambinder thinks Plouffe is on the level and that Huntsman’s for real, given the early primaries in moderate-leaning states like New Hampshire and Florida. That’s super, but how does Huntsman challenge Obama in the general with who knows how many Christian conservatives staying home out of objection to a nominee who supports civil unions (and who happens to be Mormon)? Are we sure Plouffe doesn’t want to face him?
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: « Previous 1 2 3 4
Romney’s governorship isn’t too encoiuraging in that regard.
Urban Democrats are hopeless anyway.
ddrintn on May 5, 2009 at 11:29 PM
It’s definitely #2. I rarely believe anything O says, unless it’s “spread the wealth around”, you know, one of those rare moments when his Commie mask slips.
-Aslan’s Girl
Aslans Girl on May 5, 2009 at 11:29 PM
They know — as apparently you don’t — that this is flawed logic. To win, Palin doesn’t have to catch on with “the Dems” — far from it, in fact; all she really needs is to generate HUGE, RECORD turnouts of the nation’s conservative voters, and she will win the White House in a landslide.
It is this — and not the level of Dem support — that has them worried. It has them worried that the Couric and Gibson interviews haven’t dented her popularity in the slightest among the throngs of Palin supporters. It may be difficult to “talk when you’re tea-bagging”, but apparently it ain’t so hard to show up (at a Palin rally) and listen. And vote.
A good bet for what? It’s 2009.
Anyhow, Christina D, I believe this is the first time I’ve seen your post(s). Who knows, if The Wall manages not to get himself banned real soon, perhaps we’ll be treated to more rapid-fire corkscrew volleys between you, Conservative Voice and The Wall in the future.
RD on May 5, 2009 at 11:32 PM
Absolutely true. A fired-up Republican base is what gives the DNC cold sweats, and right now Palin is about the only one who can pull that off.
ddrintn on May 5, 2009 at 11:39 PM
And leave it to The Wall to overextend a valid point to the point that it’s invalid. Good job, grammarian. “Can not” is not preferred style, but it is legal English. (Or do you disagree?)
RD on May 5, 2009 at 11:40 PM
To answer the author’s question: Huntsman is a distraction. If they were worried about him they wouldn’t even bring him up. If they get people talking about him, then those people aren’t talking about other potential candidates. IMHO their hope is to have the opposition and their base consume and/or disperse political oxygen. The choice of Huntsman is not important per se, except to the extent that he’s a plausible foil.
Not that he’ll remain a foil forever. But at the moment, that’s what he is. The bet is, there’s some weakness there that overshadows his ostensible good qualities — a weakness that actually matters in a hypothetical election/match-up — and this gives the Dems sufficient peace of mind.
RD on May 5, 2009 at 11:46 PM
That’s the sort of thing The Wall does in lieu of a substantial argument.
ddrintn on May 5, 2009 at 11:56 PM
Vanceone: yeah what he said. (good to read your comments again, Vanceone).
Huntsman was johnny on the spot supporting mccain, where his intelligent, brilliant father supported Romney. Huntsman was also, as some have said, best friends with aunold of kalifornia. Don’t need him.
By the way, vanocur(?) who wrote the article is Sander Vanocur’s son and is a big dem, so of course he wants obama to stay in office.
Bambi on May 6, 2009 at 12:21 AM
Excellent, excellent point.
Allow me to retort:
THHHHHHHPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Wall on May 6, 2009 at 12:56 AM
As a Utah resident I can tell you that Huntsman has more in common with McCain than campaign advisors. Bottom line – if you liked John McCain, you’ll love Gov. Huntsman.
Mormon Doc on May 6, 2009 at 1:13 AM
Incidently, this guy can’t run away from being Mormon fast enough. If you are looking for a candidate that hates Mormonism (and upchuckabee isn’t your cup of decaffeinated soda) you are in luck. Nothing beats a child of priviledge who looks down on traditional values than a child of priviledge who looks down on traditional values while giving lip service to support them. Jon Huntsman is essentially Mitt Romney with slighly less hair gel.
Mormon Doc on May 6, 2009 at 1:23 AM
I dont like Huntsman either, but I disagree with your assessment of Romney. You must not be aware of how he went to the matt fighting gay marriage in Massach.
The Wall on May 6, 2009 at 1:36 AM
One issue doth not a man make.
Romney violated precepts that are sacred with his pro-abortion stance. While I’m glad that he has allegedly changed his mind you must understand that all the time he was pro choice he was violating an important precept of our faith. I would not trust a man who held high office in the church and publicly espoused ideas that contradict the very concepts he promised to obey.
Mormon Doc on May 6, 2009 at 1:45 AM
Mormon Doc on May 6, 2009 at 1:45 AM
Fair enough, though you do believe in the principles of forgiveness and repentance right? Of all the things to knock Mitt for, abortion is not it, though you hinted at the real issue…trust. My biggest draw back on Mitt is he doesn’t understand the constitution with regards to Guns, which is amazing to me, because he claims to be a Cleon Skousen fan. The second draw back is he was quick to play with the socialism…namely health care. When the lady in the restaurant gave her sob story…he was quick to remind her of universal health care. Wrong answer. The right answer is, I have empathy for what you are going through, but looking to the government to solve your issue will only create more problems. So I will work to limit the size of government, so that you have more take home pay and more opportunities in the free market.
Don’t get me wrong, between McCain, Huckabee and Romney…I was hoping Romney would win. But then again, between McCain and Huckabee, I was thinking Hillary looked good ( now excuse me while I vomit again )
Presidents have little to no power over the abortion issue. Though, as a conservative, I want someone who understands the constitution and the declaration of independence…specifically the part about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ( which means capitalism ) and that means all life…including the innocent in the womb. A person on life support is still a person. A person without limbs is still a person…etc. A person who happens to be swimming in the womb, is still a person…his life should be protected by the government…I am pro choice, but in my mind the choice was made when you decided to have sex. In the case of rape and incest or life of the mother, then I can understand having an abortion….don’t necessary agree with it, but can understand it.
The reason why Romney lost was because people had a hard time trusting the guy. Which is a real shame, because we ended up with President Obama who loves to tell people what they want to hear, then does whatever he wants.
Conservative Voice on May 6, 2009 at 2:58 AM
Join me on the Mark Sanford bandwagon.
He doesn’t need a poll to tell him what he believes.
therightwinger on May 6, 2009 at 3:08 AM
Anyone with a brain can see this is to distract us from…well everything. Sarah Palin can, and will win in a landslide.
Palin will rally enough people to demand a conservative gov’t.
I’m sick of these spineless fools thinking our side has to somehow reach out to these so called moderates!
What did Obama do to rally anyone other than his supporters?!?
Palin/Levin ‘12
hiphopconservative on May 6, 2009 at 7:48 AM
I’m bored w/ RINOs.
Stay in Utah, Huntsman.
bluelightbrigade on May 6, 2009 at 8:27 AM
Any comment, Wall?
cs89 on May 6, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Wow did I miss the fireworks or what? Reading through the posts this morning I can so tell who are common variety Mormon haters and who I would avoid out of fear for my life in the real world!
And although the Wall gets pretty in your face… I often agree. Which is scary since so many want him banned. I guess they consider disagreement a reason to ban.
Although I’m still confused over the correct spelling of cannot.
Politics and religion the two no-nos of polite conversation. Good thing this is anonymous isn’t it so true bigotry can shine through loud and clear.
Once again I’m am disappointed in several of my fellow Americans. Maverick Muse the most I think. I’ve enjoyed some of his posts before. Too bad he hates my guts. Pretty hard to care what someone thinks when they hate your guts.
But Allah certainly knows how to push the buttons of Mormon haters! And he claims to be an atheist!
(I don’t believe in Atheists by the way. It is totally illogical and can’t be proved.)
Huntsman? Red herring. Going nowhere.
petunia on May 6, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Oh and if Huntsman is really the grandson of David B. Haight… That explains why his father is such a good and honest man. He was raised by a good good man. I admire Huntsman’s father I would never even begin to worship him. May he RIP.
I know nothing at all about Huntsman the younger other than he is Governer of Utah. And a politicain doing what politicans do.
petunia on May 6, 2009 at 11:21 AM
This is the rope-a-dope strategy.
They lure some weak RINO after anointing him as the GOP standard bearer, then they easily destroy him.
The Drive-bys are currently running a campaign to define the GOP as “too Conservative”, even thought the evidence points to the opposite. History means nothing to their agenda.
Bleed_thelizard on May 6, 2009 at 11:23 AM
The Wall is a dishonest hack, who throws out ridiculous comments as close to the line as he can get. He tries to put down others as “dumb,” but gets defensive and dismissive when his own errors are pointed out.
A classic example of the dishonesty is him saying “oh, we were just joking and everybody knew it” on the Green Room issue. I brought one of his comments (there were quite a few) up here to highlight his lying, but he hasn’t responded so far.
Huntsman can run if he wants to. Don’t know a lot about him, but getting his name from the Obama camp gets alarm bells ringing all over the place for me.
cs89 on May 6, 2009 at 11:50 AM
cs89 on May 6, 2009 at 11:50 AM
I know how The Wall gets. Very overbearing. But he isn’t always wrong. I like Sarah Palin and may vote for her is she is the nominee. But some of her supporters are just as bad as The Wall.
I think it very dangerous to be so blind to Sarah’s weaknesses at this point. She doesn’t seem to be that clearly conservative in her governance.
She does have a strong and almost religious-like following and that turns me off. Not the candidate but her supporters. Just because the left haters her doesn’t mean she is the perfect candidate! I’d like someone that didn’t polarize the country.
So I have sympathy for The Wall’s point of view.
petunia on May 6, 2009 at 12:10 PM
Yeah, we all know how well running with the middle worked in 2008.
Aronne on May 6, 2009 at 12:11 PM
Oh please. The answer is as plain as the nose on Sara Palins face.
Really…. DUH!!! moment there huh?
44Magnum on May 6, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Not to mention that I just found out about this dude. I guess dozens of thousands in the US don’t either.
ProudPalinFan on May 6, 2009 at 12:53 PM
petunia on May 6, 2009 at 12:10 PM
+1
Conservative Voice on May 6, 2009 at 12:57 PM
petunia on May 6, 2009 at 12:10 PM
Of course Palin has flaws, and there are posters here who are blind in their support. Some might count me among them, don’t know. Don’t really care.
When she gets attacked in the media, etc. it does provoke a response in some of us of “there they go again.” Same with some of AP’s posts on the topic. He can post what he wants, but if it seems consistently biased it appears to me the commenters have the right to call it as we see it.
As to Wally, not sure if we’re reading the same posts. I think I’ve made my opinion of his intellectual honesty pretty clear. You’re of course welcome to your opinion as well.
cs89 on May 6, 2009 at 1:48 PM
That will never happen because the whole movement for same sex marriage is not about rights. All the rights they claim to be fighting for are available through a contract and power of attorney. Same sex mariage is about legislating thought, forcing acceptance of a severe nuerotic condition as a third (and fourth, and fifth and sixth, I guess, for those who chose to medically mutilate themselves) natural, biological state. If homosexuals got same sex marriage in every state tomorrow they would find another grievance. They would be calling for prison sentences for anyone who states the obvious. The only thing anyone needs to know about same sex marriage is what we all knew, including homosexuals, when we were six years old; a man marrying a man or woman marrying a woman is silly. Plain and simple.
peacenprosperity on May 6, 2009 at 1:56 PM
When you find the “perfect” candidate, one whom both Democrats and Republicans love (not polarizing), please tell The Wall so he can ridicule and deride you as an idiot.
littleguy on May 6, 2009 at 2:26 PM
littleguy on May 6, 2009 at 2:26 PM
The Wall apparently likes Mitt, so apparently there are candidates that he won’t attack your intelligence for. But in the defense of the Wall, I like Palin, she seems promising. But I don’t idolize her, I reserve judgment until she actually runs and defines her platform. Is she as conservative as her supporters claim she is, or are they projecting? She took the stimulus money. She said she agreed with cap and trade. These should give you pause.
Conservative Voice on May 6, 2009 at 2:53 PM
During the primary they said the same about McCain, it was tactical not a real fear. That is when the McCain surge began. Have two progresives on the ticket. The trashing of Palin is evidence of who the real threat is.
sweetcake on May 6, 2009 at 3:19 PM
The Wall is a one-trick pony who hates Palin — the polar opposite of idolizing her. Personally, I admire the woman, but that doesn’t mean I think she’s perfect. When you pause over Palin, be sure to check out those positions taken by Mitt and all the rest. I don’t think it makes sense to savage one conservative to promote another, or for simple-minded amusement like The Wall for that matter. When 2012 rolls around, I will consider who trashed whom along the way and make that part of my thought process as well.
littleguy on May 6, 2009 at 4:12 PM
littleguy on May 6, 2009 at 4:12 PM
That is my position as well. I don’t trust any politician. When it comes to voting I consider three things. How conservative they are, how honest they are, and how passionate they are. Palin scores great with the latter two, just haven’t been convinced that she is the poster child for conservatism. However, she is certainly a step in the right direction, and I like her more than Romney. Romney beats her with experience with how the economy works and all…but he has CEO mentality, instead of small business mentality. That is, he is comfortable with socialism instead of freedom. Romney would make a better RNC chair than a President.
Conservative Voice on May 6, 2009 at 4:42 PM
Please please please don’t
throw meh in that briar patchrun Sarah Palin massah AllahP.It won’t be good for you’ all…..you know she can’t win.
She no good for you.
;)
strangelet on May 6, 2009 at 10:48 PM
The only way that Huntsman is apparently supporting same-sex marriage is that the LDS Church’s (Mormon) Elders have decided that they have footbulleted themselves over opposition to Proposition 8 in California that would have allowed same-sex marriage contracts.
The Mormon Elders have a habit of changing the theology of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints when, and only when, it is politically expedient for them to do so.
The senior Elder has a “vision from God” that presents the opportunity for a change in theology to conform with public opinion or political necessity. The denial of polygamy required for the admission of Utah as a state, and the admission that they had “misinterpreted” Joseph Smith’s blatant racism in the 1960’s are two of the politically expedient changes resulting from the “visions” of the senior Elders at those times.
The Mormon Church (LDS) has, since its inception, had a prophesy that a Mormon would become President of the United States, in order that Joseph Smith’s theology would lead to an LDS theocracy in the US.
Now that Huntsman is in the running for President, the LDS Elders are in a position to sacrifice their public hatefullness of gays and lesbians in order to make Huntsman acceptable to the majority of Americans as a candidate for President.
My only problem with a Mormon President is that the Mormon Church has posited a Mormon President so that a Mormon theocracy will be established in the US. Of course, to most people, the idea of a theocratic Mormon government would be as despicable as is the current theocratic Islamic government in Iran.
Since government agencies like the FBI and CIA are highly populated by Mormons, the idea that the establishment of a Mormon theocracy is outside of reality is not correct if these Mormon believers were true believers in a Mormon theocracy and helped to subvert the government. It takes only a select few, in the right places.
At this juncture, I will not support a Mormon for President. Not Huntsman, not any of the Mormon Congressmen and Senators (no woman can be a Mormon leader!) or state governors. Ever.
Quaoar on May 6, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Quaoar on May 6, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Wow, there are levels of insanity, and then you come along…good job.
Conservative Voice on May 6, 2009 at 11:20 PM
Quaoar: Wow what a piece of work you are!
Beware the Mormon “acorn” because we all know they have goons in the FBI, Secret Service, etc. Did you ever think they are honorable people with language skills that are valuable and they don’t do drugs or alcohol, and are hard workers?
So because of people like you we had mccain and now we have the great messiah – obama…. Congratulations on your bigotry.
No, I don’t want huntsman, but Romney is another matter. And no for all you who mentioned it, huntsman does not have the great hair that Romney has.
Bambi on May 6, 2009 at 11:36 PM
yeah if you’re in to used car salesmen being president… this guy has a total cheese look.
Kaptain Amerika on May 6, 2009 at 11:40 PM
That “perfect candidate” just means a Democrat winner. Any successful candidate is going to be polarizing. It means taking well-defined positions on the issues and having core beliefs.
ddrintn on May 7, 2009 at 12:18 AM
I guess I sort of long for Reagan… even though Jeb Bush says not to…
After all the stuff Obama is pulling just about any sane person will do….
Not that “Quaoar” poster above however. That is just the kind of person I hope I never meet on the street while wearing a CTR ring!
Geez I’ve heard that kind of stuff about Jews…. they want to rule the world… they control everything…. I guess I should be flattered that the same type of people hate us too. My family history is full of what happens when guys like that have guns and fire and know where you live.
Sigh. I wish Quaoar was a Democrat.
petunia on May 7, 2009 at 12:59 AM
Sooooooooooooo, what are you saying here? Reading between the lines it sounds like you have a bit of a problem with them mormons.
Gotcha. One of em got the last promotion at your work. I understand. Relax now. McDonalds opens early tomorrow and you are pancake shift.
The Wall on May 7, 2009 at 1:59 AM
Well, he voted for Huckabee and now supports Palin so he is as close to a democrat as a republican can be.
OK, maybe a retarded democrat.
The Wall on May 7, 2009 at 2:00 AM
OK, maybe a retarded democrat.
The Wall on May 7, 2009 at 2:00 AM
Huckabee I can understand, but Palin is pretty much a Republican. But I am pretty sure Palin isn’t as anti-Mormon as Huckabee is, I could be wrong…just haven’t seen any evidence of it.
Conservative Voice on May 7, 2009 at 2:46 AM
petunia on May 7, 2009 at 12:59 AM
Reagan was pretty polarizing in his day. It’s only through the glow of historical perspective, as many of his policies have been shown to make a positive difference, that the popular perception of him has become more widely one of appreciation.
He did win convincing elections, but the “minority” sure didn’t like what he had to say.
cs89 on May 7, 2009 at 8:44 AM
Possibility 4). Obama 2012 has something real juicy opposition research already on Huntsman to hold until a Sept/Oct 2012 timeframe and then spoonfeed it to the Times or Post if Huntsman is the nominee. If he’s not then it’ll keep until Jan/Feb 2012
curved space on May 7, 2009 at 1:19 PM
What’s this hoo-haa about Mormons worshipping the Quorum of the 12? I thought that they just had authority to expound and define doctrinal matters?
Anyway, there are more interesting things to look at in Mormon history than that, including the temple “blood oaths”:
http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=%2Fdialogue&CISOPTR=20301&REC=0&CISOBOX=blood+oath
and the continual Orwellian revision of doctrine for political purposes, cf. polyandry in 1890 [to get Utah's statehood] and the priesthoods for African-Americans in 1977. [for Brazilian expansion, if memory serves me correctly]
ebrown2 on May 7, 2009 at 2:05 PM
For some reason, the link above only goes to page 42. The relevant discussion can be followed on the left hand frame links and takes place from pages 52-55 of the article
ebrown2 on May 7, 2009 at 2:09 PM
ebrown2 on May 7, 2009 at 2:09 PM
what does attacking my religion do for you sir? Are people leaving your church? Somehow proving my religion as false ( especially when you use half truths or all out lies ) doesn’t make your religion more true.
And what does any of this really have to do with Huntsman? I won’t vote for him…he is McCain. That is a legitimate reason. Because he happens to go to a church you disagree with…is dumb. There are over 12 million members in the LDS religion, and there is 12 million different personalities and 12 million different ways they practice their faith. Sure we have our standard, doesn’t mean people struggle trying to reach that standard…go figure.
Conservative Voice on May 7, 2009 at 2:38 PM
Conservative Voice on May 7, 2009 at 2:38 PM
Further more, instead of posting a link, where the authors don’t even provide an about…please explain how a certain belief Jon Huntsman holds somehow dictates how he will govern…which is what we vote for. If Mormons were so homogenized, why are there active practicing Mormons who are liberal and some who are conservative and some in between?
Or are you in the same insane camp as the drive by Quaoar and think we are all boogy men out to get you as soon as you vote us in.
Conservative Voice on May 7, 2009 at 2:58 PM
“Further more, instead of posting a link, where the authors don’t even provide an about…”
The article is from DIALOGUE: A JOURNAL OF MORMON THOUGHT, and is fully sourced and notated in standard academic form. I’m puzzled to understand how either the author or the publication could be understood to have an “anti-Mormon” bias.
“please explain how a certain belief Jon Huntsman holds somehow dictates how he will govern”
Does he believe that the President of the LDS Church is a “prophet, seer, and revelator?”
ebrown2 on May 7, 2009 at 3:46 PM
Does he believe that the President of the LDS Church is a “prophet, seer, and revelator?”
ebrown2 on May 7, 2009 at 3:46 PM
How is that relevant? Do you believe in Jesus Christ? Did Clinton? Carter? Were the British during the Revolutionary War any less Christian than the Americans they were fighting?
publication could be understood to have an “anti-Mormon” bias.
Knowing who the author is and what their agenda goes along way to understanding how the publication is skewed. For example Al Gore…he used facts found from Scientists, fully sourced and notated in standard academic form. I am puzzled to understand how either Al Gore or the publications he has written, could be considered to have an “anti-capitalism” bias.
Conservative Voice on May 7, 2009 at 4:08 PM
So, you’re saying that the bias of DIALOGUE is anti-LDS.
That’s really amazing.
ebrown2 on May 7, 2009 at 4:15 PM
ebrown2 on May 7, 2009 at 4:15 PM
I am saying I don’t know who the authors are…hence I don’t know their angle. What I do know however is your angle, and you are anti-LDS. So again answer my questions:
How is that relevant? Do you believe in Jesus Christ? Did Clinton? Carter? Were the British during the Revolutionary War any less Christian than the Americans they were fighting?
explain how a certain belief Jon Huntsman holds somehow dictates how he will govern
what does attacking my religion do for you sir?
Conservative Voice on May 7, 2009 at 4:20 PM
ebrown2 on May 7, 2009 at 4:15 PM
Oh and do you believe Moses was a “prophet, seer, and revelator?”…what about Clinton? Carter?
Conservative Voice on May 7, 2009 at 4:24 PM
ebrown2 on May 7, 2009 at 4:15 PM
I am also saying that unless I trust the authors, there is no reason for me to read your link. I know my religion, and I know the history of my religion. Can you say you know your religion as well as you claim to know mine? Or is your religion’s foundation is proving my religion to be false? Because again…the I-Hate-Mormons religion is built on sand.
Conservative Voice on May 7, 2009 at 4:27 PM
Mormon hatred? About as logical as your “white trailer trash” hatred, isn’t it?
ddrintn on May 7, 2009 at 4:36 PM
“I am also saying that unless I trust the authors, there is no reason for me to read your link. I know my religion, and I know the history of my religion.”
Yet you apparently don’t know the premier journal of Mormon studies/history, founded and run by Mormons, carrying an article by a Mormon sensitive to the concerns of other LDS members [p. 34]. Curious.
“Oh and do you believe Moses was a “prophet, seer, and revelator?”…what about Clinton? Carter?”
Mr. James Earl Carter, Jr. believes that the canon of revelation is closed, and thus no one on Earth has the theoretical theocratic authority over him that the President of the LDS Church would have over Huntsman or Romney. I am not prepared to answer for what Mr. Clinton does or does not believe.
ebrown2 on May 7, 2009 at 4:58 PM
ebrown2 on May 7, 2009 at 4:58 PM
In case you missed it, I didn’t read your link. The first thing I did was look for the who. As I do with any reading…I want to know who the author is. Something stuck in the middle of page 34…I could really care less….I am sure some of the facts Al Gore cited was based on real science.
As far as your beliefs and interpretations of the Bible…with regards that God is on vacation with regards to prophets…and I won’t get into a Bible debate on who is right or wrong…that still doesn’t answer the question on if Moses is a prophet and how that effects you with how you govern…or how Clinton governed or how Carter governed.
You have yet to prove to me that Mr Jon Huntsman is unfit for office because he believes in a living prophet seer and revelator. You have also yet to prove, beyond a shadow of doubt that all Christians are locked step and govern the same. History would prove otherwise. Hence, how does Clinton and Carter’s faith reflect in the way they ran their Presidency? Were the British more or less Christian than Americans in the Revolutionary War?
Conservative Voice on May 7, 2009 at 5:27 PM
Conservative Voice on May 7, 2009 at 5:27 PM
That is…when I couldn’t find the who the author was, the whole link became untrustworthy and therefore not worth my time to read or dissect.
Conservative Voice on May 7, 2009 at 5:29 PM
This person does not have a clue what he is talking about… just in case anyone cares.
What paranoids these Mormon haters are.
People use your own judgement. Look at our lives and our culture do we look like people who follow blindly without using our heads? I hope not.
We are very well educated group! One of the best educated of all religious groups I think. And our education is mostly secular in nature. Studying, thinking, science, art, all aspects of truth and reason, whereever we can find it, what ever is good–these are part of the gospel of Jesus Christ as we know it and practice it.
Our Apostles and Prophets counsel and advise us with love and understanding, and patience. There is no need to fear old men grown wise with age!
They don’t use much money, they wear out their lives in service to their fellow men. Why would you fear them?
Meet them. They to a man have wonderful senses of humor and good solid marriages that have lasted lifetimes. Their children and grandchildren and great grandchildren revere them. Why do you fear goodness?
We are no threat to you. We want to live in understanding with you. We appreciate you! You add so much to our lives! Don’t fear us.
petunia on May 7, 2009 at 5:48 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4