« Newt says Romney is too conservative??? | Main | No link between junk food in schools and obesity »

January 25, 2012

Comments

Mitt's Mormonism is a actually a big plus for me. It's an indicator of a belief system that is aligned with traditional American values.

That is, if he takes it seriously at least to some degree.

My big concern is Goldman Sachs funding his campaign. Would Mitt let them go bankrupt and not bail them out if things went wrong?

We knew you'd come around.


It's too late. You tore him down and now it's Obama 2012!

Of course Romney takes his Mormonism seriously -- See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_romney#Local_church_leadership

His Mormonism is a plus for me as well, since Mormonism seems to produce successful, well-adjusted individuals at a much higher rate than other religions.

As for Goldman Sachs donating to his campaign, GS will donate to anyone's campaign if they think that candidate has a chance of winning. It's part of their "Government Sachs" M.O. But Romney would probably be less in thrall to them for a couple of reasons:

1) From his decades in business, he knows plenty of qualified non-GS candidates he could nominate for key government positions. Without that network, Obama just tapped into the existing GS-Dem network (e.g., Rubin's protoge Geithner).

2) Because he has more money than he'll ever need, Romney won't have to butter anyone up for post-White House buck-raking.

Ren,

You missed this part of the article:

"With all due respect to Sen. Coleman, he's wrong," campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul said via e-mail. "Gov. Romney can and will repeal Obamacare and is committed to doing so."

Most of the Mormons I've known have been brainwashed pr*cks who milked the "we're such good people" line for all it's worth. I would vote for a Muslim over a Mormon.

Without knowing anything else about them, Peter, who would you rather have as neighbors, Mormons or Muslims?

"Most of the Mormons I've known have been brainwashed pr*cks who milked the "we're such good people" line for all it's worth"

As with all things, YMMV. My experience has been pretty the same as Dave's - notwithstanding their (in my view) bizarre religious beliefs, the Mormons I know are, with few exceptions, good people I'd trust to run pretty much anything. Though I don't know any of the multiple teenage wives/living in militia compound weirdos. Perhaps you do.

Ann Coulter's latest on Romney v. Newt: http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2012-01-25.html

Coulter makes the case for Romney better than Romney does.

Sigma: The Web 2.0 widgets you've added to each post are slow as fuck to load. Do something!

[HS: I removed some of them, does this help? Does anyone know which of those widgets are the most important to have?]

Mormons were the adults in charge, when I worked in Las Vegas. They ran things for the mob, too; they didn't care. They kept to themselves, stayed sober, even eschewed caffeine. They were all business. Yeah plenty of them drove down from Utah on weekends to cheat, I guess, but that could have been as much for the gambling and shows as anything else.

They're terribly square, but I don't mind having a square president.

Newt is unelectable.

And if elected he would be unable to govern. Newt (Nation Merit Finalist) is more interested in being an outsized outre figure than he is in the day to day business of actually running things. Obama is more interested in giving speeches and being a transformation figure than he is in the actual compromise, give and take of government.

I wonder if Newt has actually deluded himself into thinking he has the capacity to run the executive branch?

Mormons tend to be very well-behaved and well-mannered folks who have very good self-control. They've got a tiny few kooky extremists, but most are very wholesome folks. Southern evangelicals have more kooky extremists who have poor self-control and violent tendencies.

"[HS: I removed some of them, does this help? Does anyone know which of those widgets are the most important to have?]"

Seems to help a bit but it's still sluggish.
There are websites that have these without the slowdown, perhaps you're doing something wrong.

[HS: That would be SixApart the parent company of Typepad who's doing that wrong. But I will continue paying them: I don't trust a free Google-owned blogging site to not ban me for being "racist."]

Who would I rather have as neighbors? Muslims. No contest.

[HS: Mormon neighbors are polite and don't bother you, although if you don't like children, they are bad because they have lots of children. But overall, they are good neighbors as long as you don't expect to be close friends with them, because the religious Mormons tend to keep the "gentiles" at a distance.]

"Newt (Nation Merit Finalist) is more interested in being an outsized outre figure than he is in the day to day business of actually running things. Obama is more interested in giving speeches and being a transformation figure than he is in the actual compromise, give and take of government."

What would Mitt be interested in doing if elected? There is no reason he'd be interested in doing what needs doing, i.e. radically changing the system. What Mitt would do is tinker at the margins and try to make a broken system run a little more smoothly.

"Who would I rather have as neighbors? Muslims. No contest."

We have Mormon neighbors. I wouldn't have known they were Mormons except someone told me, because they are impossible to distinguish from other normal, polite, well-behaved white folks.

I wonder if Newt has actually deluded himself into thinking he has the capacity to run the executive branch?

"But overall, they are good neighbors as long as you don't expect to be close friends with them, because the religious Mormons tend to keep the 'gentiles' at a distance."

There's certainly some truth to this, but the isolation really isn't intentional. It's a byproduct of the fact that our values are so different from most other people (other than evangelicals, ironically). When I bring my wife to work parties, she tries to make conversation with all these single thirty-something women, but it's nearly impossible. She cares about her kids and family and books, and all they can talk about is fancy restaurants and TV shows. It's a crude stereotype, but it's mostly true.

I've only known one Mormon family, and all I have to say is I went to their house and in their family photos they had their "aunt" and all of the "aunts kids" in the picture with the family I was aware of. Presumably the aunt didn't even live there. Even if it wasn't polygamy with the father being head of two separate families who lived in different locations (my suspicion), it's pretty weird that they include an aunt's family (and there was no husband for the "aunt" either I noted) in photos with the nuclear family. Also of interest was that the father was only home for short periods...he had a job that required him to travel a lot, supposedly.

I think a pretty decent percentage of Mormons practice soft polygamy on the sly. Maybe around 10-15 percent of them.

"I think a pretty decent percentage of Mormons practice soft polygamy on the sly. Maybe around 10-15 percent of them."

You are an idiot.

During my years in the military, I came across a number of Mormons (surprisingly, none of them were from Utah). They were, without exception, well-put-together, kind, patriotic, intelligent, hard-working people.

Mormons have always been pretty easy to make fun of but difficult to truly, deeply deride. While I might not want to hang out with them on the weekend, I'd hire a Mormon to work for me in a heartbeat.

The comments to this entry are closed.