Eating Dogs and Mormonism

Tom Donelson
April 26, 2012 Posted by Tom Donelson tomdonelson@aol.com

How Important will his religion be in the Race?

The goal in this election of the Democratic Party will be to portray Mitt Romney as being out of touch with the common folks or just simply; weird.  The left’s attack of his Mormon faith on MSNBC is just part of the strategy.  Democratic governor Brian Schweitzer mentioned that it is “Kind of ironic given that his family came from a polygamy commune in Mexico, but then he’d have to talk about his family coming from a polygamy commune in Mexico, given the gender discrepancy… Women are not great fans of polygamy, 86 percent were not great fans of polygamy.  I am not alleging by any stretch that Romney is a polygamist and approves of [the] polygamy lifestyle, but his father was born into [a] polygamy commune in Mexico.”

Yes, it is true that Mitt Romney’s father was born in Mexico but his grandparents were not polygamists even though it is true that that there are polygamists in the Romney family tree but that would be true for many Mormons since it wasn’t until 1890 that Mormonism outlawed polygamy as a condition of allowing Utah to become a state.  Guess who else had family members with a polygamist past? Oh yea, Barack Hussein Obama, whose father was polygamist.  New York Times Nicholas Kristof agonized on what to report after he visited Obama’s father’s hometown.  As he noticed, “Frankly, I worry that enemies of Obama will seize upon details like his grandfather’s Islamic faith or his father’s polygamy to portray him as an alien or a threat to American values. But snobbishness and paranoia ill-become a nation of immigrants, where one of our truest values is to judge people by their own merits, not their pedigrees.”  Unless that immigrant is a Republican, then it is all fair game.  If Romney’s family history with polygamy is fair game so is Obama’s family history with polygamy and Obama’s family history is more recent!

Of course there is the dog controversy where efforts made to shame Romney over his Clark Griswold treatment of his dog on a trip when he put the family pet on the top of the car.  This lasted as long as some smart pundit actually read Dreams of My Fathers and noted, Obama not only ate dog meat but even rated it.  So there was fun to be had by all at the President’s expense about Obama’s dog eating past in Indonesia.

The Mormon past on race will certainly be brought up but then didn’t Obama sit two decades in the pew of a noted black racist with views that are or should be out of the mainstream, one Pastor Wright?  You bring up Mormon history with blacks and I will read Jeremiah Wright’s sermons.

The attack by Hillary Rosen on Ann Romney pretty much derailed “the war on women” campaign for the time being as Ms. Rosen comment on Ms. Romney never working for a living fell apart as soon as Ms. Romney, cancer survivor and presently living with MS, simply reminded Ms. Rosen that being a mother can be hard work.

POTUS thought he was "tough"

So we have the Democrats using Romney’s Mormon past as a means to put him outside the American mainstream but then how weird is a dog eating President?  And yes, Romney is a wealthy man and maybe doesn’t have that deft touch to communicate with common folks, but just when did Obama become a man of the people; when he was not community organizing, he was involved in politics and when Obama was voting present in Illinois legislature, Romney was helping to create jobs for many of those blue collar folks.  Obama once stated that many blue collar workers cling to their guns and God, mocking the common man he supposedly loves to rich Democratic donors in San Francisco.  Romney created jobs for the common man that Obama derided.

Wall Street Journal’s Jim Taranto summed up both men when he said, “The truth is that Romney and Obama are both products of distinctively American subcultures–respectively, the Mormon Church and the academic left.  The difference is that whereas the Mormons, for more than a century, have aspired to join the American mainstream, the academic left is aggressively adversarial.  It’s true that there is much about Mormonism that seems odd to people of other faiths.  But a contest over whose opponent is weirder is one Obama cannot possibly win.”   And as Obama commented, dog meat can be tough so don’t forget maybe slow cooking Fido will make Fido a little more tender.

Tags: , , , ,

15 Responses to Eating Dogs and Mormonism

  1. Spaceghost on April 26, 2012 at 8:29 am

    Oh my freaking God, this is so horribly stupid, wrong and race-baiting, I wouldn’t even know where to start. Your very PREMISE is ridiculous and backwards. OBAMA is the one who the GOP has been so desperate for so long to portray as “The Other.” That’s all birtherism has ever been about. That’s all this whole dog-meat thing is about. The dog strapped to the top of the car thing isn’t to show how “weird” Romney is, it’s to show that he was cruel to an animal and remains oblivious to how cruel it is.

    Romney’s Mormonism has been mentioned, but it’s hardly the feature people are focusing on; that would be the fact that he’s in the top 1% of the top 1% of the wealthiest of Americans and is out of touch with how most people actually live and think. Do you even watch the news? Like actual news, not Fox News? Or the Daily Show, even?

    There’s a reason Fox News viewers are the most ignorant of facts in America. Thanks for proving the point.

  2. Spaceghost on April 26, 2012 at 11:16 pm

    Incidentally, do you think polygamy is the only objection people have to Mormonism? Do you even know anything ABOUT Mormonism?

    (Hint: No.)

    • Tom Donelson on April 29, 2012 at 2:07 pm

      MSNBC mentions Mr. Romney Morman faith quite a bit, in not in a positive light. You might want to pay attention to your networks that you supposedly listen. If some of the MSNBC slandered or talk about Islam in the same way that they talk about Mormonism, they be fired. As for the doggy comment, your boys on the Obama campaign team have been bringing this up for several months, check Axelrod own twitters or they did until we found out that Obama eat dogs. Bow wow and as Obama noted, the meat is tough so cook it slowly and use a crock pot!

      As usual, you missed the major points that I raised, but who is more in touch a rich businessman who create jobs or a Harvard Professor who disparaged blue collar Democrats in front of rich west coast donors during the Pennsyvania 2008 primary? That is a question that the voters will answer. Criticizing Obama is not racism any more your nasty comments about Herman Cain is racism. So who is guilty of race-baiting? Maybe you might want to review what you wrote about Cain in response to my piece on Cain Solutions before making accusations about race baiting. Obama is not above criticism and you might want to catch liberal comedian Jon Lovitz rant on Obama tax policy. Is he a racist?

      Yes, I do know something about Mormonism, more than you and I actually read and listen to plenty of left wing publications and TV, which is why I know what your side is doing and thinking. Obviously I pay more attention than you do.

      • spaceghost on April 29, 2012 at 9:12 pm

        >>MSNBC mentions Mr. Romney Morman faith quite a bit, in not in a positive light.

        Example? Can’t ONE SINGLE PERSON ON HERE ever back up ANYTHING THEY SAY WITH A SINGLE DAMN EXAMPLE?? WHY IS THAT SO HARD?

        >>You might want to pay attention to your networks that you supposedly listen.

        I never said I watch MSNBC. YOU are the one making claims like the above, so the onus is on YOU to back them up with examples. Cause see, it’s YOUR COLUMN. That’s how it works.

        >>If some of the MSNBC slandered or talk about Islam in the same way that they talk about Mormonism, they be fired.

        EXAMPLE?

        >>As for the doggy comment, your boys on the Obama campaign team have been bringing this up for several months, check Axelrod own twitters or they did until we found out that Obama eat dogs. Bow wow and as Obama noted, the meat is tough so cook it slowly and use a crock pot!

        I can barely even follow those sentences, they’re such gibberish. And since I didn’t even mention the thing about Obama eating dogs (which, by the way, no one actually gives a shit about), it’s irrelevant anyway. Do you have any idea how bad at this you are?

        >>As usual, you missed the major points that I raised, but who is more in touch a rich businessman who create jobs or a Harvard Professor who disparaged blue collar Democrats in front of rich west coast donors during the Pennsyvania 2008 primary?

        Another hard to follow sentence, but since Obama has spent the last three years CREATING jobs by the thousands…

        http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/01/07/137866/obama-more-jobs-bush/?mobile=nc

        (see what EVIDENCE looks like?)

        …while Romney became one of the richest .1% in America by FIRING PEOPLE, which he himself has said he LIKES doing, you probably don’t want to go down that road. Ya know?

        >>Criticizing Obama is not racism any more your nasty comments about Herman Cain is racism.

        I actually didn’t use the word “racism” above, but now that you mention it: Criticizing Obama is not racism, but BIRTHERISM is 100% racism. End of story.

        >>So who is guilty of race-baiting?

        I have no idea how your logic led you to this, but the answer is: Anyone who attempts to paint Obama as “The Other.” e.g. Birthers. e.g. #2: People who mention the dog-eating thing.

        >>Maybe you might want to review what you wrote about Cain in response to my piece on Cain Solutions before making accusations about race baiting.

        Um, okay. Done. No connection. Next?

        >>Obama is not above criticism and you might want to catch liberal comedian Jon Lovitz rant on Obama tax policy. Is he a racist?

        You’re an idiot. Where have I said that criticizing Obama is racist? Hint: NOWHERE. I’ve never said that. Ever. Anywhere. Again, since you’re slow: AMONG the GOP’S tactics is to paint Obama as “The Other.” As exotic and different and Not One Of Us. That is called race-baiting. Birtherism, one example. “He ate dogs”, another. Get it now?

        >>Yes, I do know something about Mormonism, more than you and I actually read and listen to plenty of left wing publications and TV, which is why I know what your side is doing and thinking. Obviously I pay more attention than you do.

        Uh, okay…Then why only mention polygamy above, as if that’s the whole story? There’s a lot more to Mormonism than that. It’s not “bigoted” to find certain aspects of a religion unusual.

        >>Obviously I pay more attention than you do.

        To stupid, race-baiting crap, perhaps.

  3. Tom Donelson on April 30, 2012 at 6:18 am

    You made my case that you can’t resist name calling and you may actually want to read what you wrote since you have twice accuse me of race baiting, either writng it or depending upon sources that engage in it.(How you come to that conclusion based on what I wrote is unclear but then it is typical of your side, to simply play the race card when you have nothing to left to say.) What I have written about Obama is far less insulting that what you wrote about Cain, so it could be easily said that you are race baiting and a racist for hating black conservatives.

    • Tom Donelson on April 30, 2012 at 7:27 am

      One last thing,most conservatives have long rejected birtherism and I will add I have never brought it up. To say birtherism is racism is wrong but to say it is crack pot is right Obviously you have forgotten the truther movement in which Bush was accused of treason by host of lefties since they accuse him of purposely killing 3000 people on 9/11. Not only that, Obama administration even hired a truther to a high profile job, Van Jones. One group of crack pot accuses a President of not really born in the USA and another group accuses a President of committing treason. I will think the latter is a far worse accusation.

      And I really tired of hearing how Obama being mistreated by us conservatives since Bush was routinely compared to Hitler and called a Nazis or fascist (By people whose own ideas were closer to some of the fsscist ideas than M.r Bush.) Obama has been well protected by the media despite his incompetence.

      Bottom line is this, Romney is a job creater, who have saved companies and created opportunities for other companies to succeed. I won’t go into creative destruction of capitalism since it is a concept over your head but there is no doubt that Romney have created opportunities for hundred of thousands. And you have a man who disparaged Clinton’s supporter during the 2008 primary which I pointed out that Obama has done, so which man will have the best interest of the voters? (I will add that many of those Clinton supporters voted Republican in 2010 and will again in 2012. Maybe when your standard bearer give you the middle finger, you might consider it a time to leave the Party.)

      Since you don’t watch supposedly MSNBC, you might want to pay attention since MSNBC is pretty much part of the left wing cabel along with Media Matters, Moveone.org and others. If you have been paying attention, you will know that Media Matters and NBC news cooperate very closely on what new stories to cover. Romney Mormonism is covered routinely and in a light that would get a one fired if they brought up Islam in a similar fashion. (Lawrence O’ Donnell has been dealing with this issue for the past year and Martin Bashir added his two cents recently.) As for polygamy, it was an issue brought up and yes, I am aware of other aspect of Mormonism. I noted by quoting James Taranto, “The truth is that Romney and Obama are both products of distinctively American subcultures–respectively, the Mormon Church and the academic left. The difference is that whereas the Mormons, for more than a century, have aspired to join the American mainstream, the academic left is aggressively adversarial. It’s true that there is much about Mormonism that seems odd to people of other faiths. But a contest over whose opponent is weirder is one Obama cannot possibly win.” So I have asked and I will let others readers decide, who is more weirder, Romney or Obama?

      As I mention before, you are totally clueless how you come off. When you call people idiots, use words like c*** and now play the race card, you simply admitted that you have nothing to add to the debate. It is a sign of your desperation, I find it amazing how easy you lose your cool. It is becoming more obvious that you really don’t care how you come off. That your problem, not mine.

    • spaceghost on April 30, 2012 at 1:09 pm

      >>What I have written about Obama is far less insulting that what you wrote about Cain, so it could be easily said that you are race baiting and a racist for hating black conservatives.

      You’re so incredibly bad at this. What I wrote about Cain, if I recall correctly, is that he’s silly, and his 9-9-9 plan is empty-headed. That’s quite possibly the least controversial thing ever typed, and it has nothing to do with race. So no, that really can’t be “easily said” at all.

      Whereas, again: Bringing up stuff that is deliberately designed to draw attention to Obama’s other-ness, his foreign-ness, his blackness, whatever you want to call it, yes indeed, that is race-baiting. It is in fact, dictionary definition race-baiting.

      That you can’t see that is sad, but about 10,000 miles from unexpected.

  4. spaceghost on April 30, 2012 at 1:14 pm

    >>When you call people idiots, use words like c*** and now play the race card,

    I haven’t used the word “c***”, if it’s what I assume you’re referring to. And calling out race-baiting isn’t “playing the race card” when there’s actual race-baiting to be called out. But yes, I’ll concede I have called many people idiots here. I call ‘em as I see ‘em. Don’t be such an idiot, and I won’t call you an idiot. How’s that?

    >>you simply admitted that you have nothing to add to the debate.

    Sorry, no. Maybe if ALL I was doing was name-calling, that’s what that would show, but I quite repeatedly DEMONSTRATE what an idiot you are before calling you one. And rather than respond to the points made, most of the time, you just focus on the fact that I called you an idiot. That you can’t defend your points is pretty indicative of how idiotic they really are.

    >>It is a sign of your desperation, I find it amazing how easy you lose your cool.

    I don’t lose my cool. You say something stupid and wrong, and I tell you how stupid and wrong it is. Doesn’t get much cooler.

    >>It is becoming more obvious that you really don’t care how you come off.

    In your eyes? That’s true. But when all is said and done, you’ll be the one who has written a bunch of stupid, empty-headed, race-baiting crap in permanent ink on the internet, and I’ll be the one who called you out for it.

    I can live with that.

  5. Tom Donelson on April 30, 2012 at 3:30 pm

    You did not disappoint, you are actually proud of being foul mouth, name calling left wing partisan hack. Like all Partisan hack you prefer to name call than deal with the question I raised and since you never really deal with issues raised nor did you deal with issues raised in the article; it is only because you have no answer. And the playing race card is typical of what you lefties do, if you can’t win a debate honestly, yell racism. If you can live with being a fout mouth name calling ignorant left wing partisan hack, who am I to deny you your pleasure?

  6. Spaceghost on April 30, 2012 at 10:19 pm

    >>You did not disappoint, you are actually proud of being foul mouth, name calling left wing partisan hack.

    Are you aware that you can barely form coherent sentences?

    >>Like all Partisan hack you prefer to name call than deal with the question I raised and since you never really deal with issues raised nor did you deal with issues raised in the article; it is only because you have no answer.

    Excuse me, learn to read. I pointed out where your article goes wrong in the first comment, and rather than respond to THOSE criticisms, you decided to focus on my “foul mouth.” So who’s off topic? Who has no answer? Who made a bunch of assertions but was too lazy to back them up with any evidence? (Hint: You.) I mean, seriously, it’s frightening. There’s barely a link to be found in ANY columns here, other than to other partisan hack websites or to your OWN columns. It’s just weird. And awful.

    >>And the playing race card is typical of what you lefties do, if you can’t win a debate honestly, yell racism.

    Race-BAITING is what I’ve been calling you out for. And rather than even bother to respond to it, you’d rather just focus on the words I used. Because you’re lazy and can’t back up your argument. That’s why I can’t take anyone here seriously. Each of you is sillier than the last; and you’re like the NEXT guy.

    >>If you can live with being a fout mouth name calling ignorant left wing partisan hack, who am I to deny you your pleasure?

    Dunno. But learn to form sentences first. The rest will come.

  7. Tom Donelson on April 30, 2012 at 10:49 pm

    I did respond to arguments very nicely and politely, you didn’t like the answer, nor did you really respond to them including names of broadcasters who have disparage Mr. Romney religious beliefs in a way that would have gotten them fired if they were made about a Muslim candidate or Jewish candidate. As for race baiting, you treat any criticism of Obama as race baiting. What I wrote about Obama is no more race baiting than what you stated about Cain. So while you claim that to criticize Obama is not racist, you are treating them as such. There is nothing in what I wwrote about Obama that is racist or race baiting, except in your imagination. Since you really have not responded to the arguments that I have made and merely state they are racist simply means you don’t have a real argument to counter them unless you consider name callinG and yelling race-baiting arguments. You really don’t have a clue how angry and desperate you sound. I won’t give you any more advice on how to behave yourself, obviously you don’t care. Like I say, if you want to be fout mouth, name calling ignorant partisan left wing hack, don’t let me deny your pleasures. You want the last word, so have at it. I have enough pieces in the future to entertain you further.

  8. Spaceghost on May 1, 2012 at 12:19 am

    >>I did respond to arguments very nicely and politely, you didn’t like the answer, nor did you really respond to them including names of broadcasters who have disparage Mr. Romney religious beliefs in a way that would have gotten them fired if they were made about a Muslim candidate or Jewish candidate.

    Because you neither linked nor quoted, so…I’m just supposed to take your word for it? You didn’t even PARAPHRASE. You just say THAT, and leave it at that, and you honestly think that makes a sufficient argument? I’m supposed to respond to you saying that they said something bad about Mormons? I’m supposed to just take your word for it? Do you understand why I get insulting? Because YOU ARE REALLY BAD AT THIS.

    >>As for race baiting, you treat any criticism of Obama as race baiting.

    No, I treat any effort to portray him as this foreign, exotic creature as race-baiting. But if you really think I treat ANY criticism of Obama as race baiting, you know what would back up a point like that?

    AN EXAMPLE.

    See how this is supposed to work? See how lazy you are?

    >>There is nothing in what I wwrote about Obama that is racist or race baiting, except in your imagination.

    That’s easy to say, and you may not even be aware of it, but YOU’RE WRONG. When you remind everyone that he came from this foreign land where they eat dogs, you know who that appeals to? You know who that stirs up? You know who responds to that with, “Well, hell, that’s right, he’s not even a REAL American!” RACISTS. Get it now?

    >>Since you really have not responded to the arguments that I have made and merely state they are racist simply means you don’t have a real argument to counter them unless you consider name callinG and yelling race-baiting arguments. You really don’t have a clue how angry and desperate you sound. I won’t give you any more advice on how to behave yourself, obviously you don’t care. Like I say, if you want to be fout mouth, name calling ignorant partisan left wing hack, don’t let me deny your pleasures. You want the last word, so have at it. I have enough pieces in the future to entertain you further.

    Yeah? Could you learn to write and edit before you post them? Seriously, man, it’s embarrassing.

  9. Tom Donelson on May 1, 2012 at 5:26 am

    So get me this straight, quoting Barack Obama from his book about his dog eating past is racism. Noting that he is disparaged Hillary Clinton’s blue supporters which originally appeared in the very leftist Huffington Post is racism. Noting that many of these blue collar workers have moved to Republican side in 2010 is racism.

    No, you still haven’t dented my arguments and your fake racism charges are signs of desperation.

    False charges of racism simply shows that how low you will go in name calling. You really haven’t address the central theme of the piece, and have to yell racism when I actually reference episode of Obama’s past by quoting Obama. By your own logic, Obama is a racist and race baiting himself by “making himself look foreign.” And I am the silly one? Your whole argument on racism is based on the following premise, criticize Obama and it is racism. Quote Obama and it is racism. So by your own logic, you are every bit of racist as I am for knocking Cain’s 9-9-9 plan. You don’t win debates by ignoring the central points and yelling racism. Since you hate black conservatives, you have condemn yourself to racism. See how it works?

  10. Spaceghost on May 1, 2012 at 7:47 am

    >>So get me this straight, quoting Barack Obama from his book about his dog eating past is racism.

    You keep saying “racism”, and I keep saying “race-baiting.” Is it that you don’t know the difference?

    And it’s not that quoting from his book is race-baiting, it’s the intention BEHIND it, which is to remind everyone that he’s “the Other”, that he’s grew up all weird and different and un-American. It’s a lot like when the right used to stress how his middle name is “Hussein.” Is saying his middle name inherently race-baiting? No. But is there any reason in the world that THOSE people had to stress what his middle name was (Ann Coulter would say “B. Hussein Obama”) other than to remind people that he has this foreign, middle-Eastern-sounding name with sinister connotations? NO. And that’s what’s known as “race-baiting.” Get it now?

    >>Noting that he is disparaged Hillary Clinton’s blue supporters which originally appeared in the very leftist Huffington Post is racism. Noting that many of these blue collar workers have moved to Republican side in 2010 is racism.

    I haven’t said any of that, you’re just Straw Manning now. I’ll make it real simple: Anything that HAS THE GOAL OF MAKING OBAMA SEEM EXOTIC, DIFFERENT, AND UN-AMERICAN SO AS TO TURN PEOPLE WITH RACIST STREAKS AGAINST HIM IS RACE-BAITING. Clear enough? It’s not the act itself, it’s the INTENT of the fact. Not that complicated.

    >>No, you still haven’t dented my arguments and your fake racism charges are signs of desperation.

    Keep telling yourself that. Meanwhile, YOU still haven’t linked to or quoted a single example of what you’re talking about. All that Mormon-bashing MSNBC is doing? Example? All that “Playing the race card” I’M doing? Example? Whenever you’re ready.

    >>False charges of racism simply shows that how low you will go in name calling.

    It’s weird. I know I’m typing “race-baiting” and I know that’s what appears in onscreen…Is it that you’re genuinely illiterate, or you just really don’t know the difference?

    >>You really haven’t address the central theme of the piece,

    Your piece, as usual, is all over the map, so it’s hard to find a central theme, but in fact, I did that right from the start, and you haven’t addressed THAT. Again: You’re drawing a false equivalence between why people bring up Romney’s Mormonism and his dog-on-car-roof story and Obama’s dog-eating. They don’t bring up Romney’s religion to show how “weird” he is, and in fact compared to his central problems – how wealthy and out of touch he is, and how much he flip-flops – they barely bring it up AT ALL. And when they DO bring it up, it’s because some Mormons actually believe some very troubling things, and we want to know if Romney believes them, which is an entirely reasonable to want to know about a potential President. If Romney believes that he gets literal “revelations” from God that mean he is compelled to follow the orders of these “messages” no matter what, that’s worth knowing, wouldn’t you say?

    But in any case, it really hasn’t come up as much as you’re claiming it is, so the whole piece is one big Strawman. Hell, it hasn’t even come up as much as Michelle Obama’s “Whitey” tape, and that DIDN’T EVEN EXIST. Damn liberal media!

    >>Your whole argument on racism is based on the following premise, criticize Obama and it is racism. Quote Obama and it is racism.

    It isn’t, I haven’t said that, or anything like it, see above, I keep correcting you on it, you keep saying that.

    Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you?

    >>n. You don’t win debates by ignoring the central points and yelling racism. Since you hate black conservatives, you have condemn yourself to racism. See how it works?

    You are a silly, stupid man. Good morning!

  11. Vertigo on June 16, 2012 at 11:32 am

    Ok, Obama eats dogs and Romney puts them on top of cars. Obama comes from a polygamist background and so does Romney.

    I may be race baiting (DOH!) :)

    But, Romney has never intentionally bombed American children at bbq’s with their cousins.

    …just sayin’…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Feature

Epilog C An Immoral Jihad

“Moral nihilists assert that morality does not inherently exist, and that any established moral values are abstractly contrived. Nihilism can also take epistemological or...

Obama’s Stunning Snub

By Selena Zito GETTYSBURG – He almost was not asked to speak. In October 1863, President Abraham Lincoln received the same plain envelope that...