I don't understand what's 'Ironic' about that? They elected McCain 2008 even though the noise machine derided him as a 'RINO' and stumped hard for Romney early in the primaries.

also receives much heat

When the correct religion is the biggest problem for your party, your party doesn't deserve to be in power.

Given all the support evangelicals have given the GOP over the years, the Republicans really should honor them by nominating a Christian instead of Romney. It's just basic respect.

My dentist wanted to make a bet with me that Romney will get the nomination. I looked at him straight in the eye and told him that it would never happen - the evangelical nutbags running the Republican freakshow will never allow someone they don't consider to be a proper Christain to get the nomination. Jesus doesn't wear magic underwear. He looked at me funny as if he wasn't sure if I was serious. I probably should have taken his bet.

I know this isn't exactly the other shoe dropping, but this particular bit of nuttiness is finally coming into public view.

...at the 2011 Values Voter Summit...

I have always despised this characterization. You know what "values" are? Believing that a person is capable of being the president even though he or she doesn't share your specific faith. The recognition of gay people as actual human beings. The admission that America is not always right, no matter what. That diversity of opinion and race is one of America's chief strengths and not something to be reviled.

These are what decent values are, you assholes. These are the values I would want my children to share - not your exclusive definitions of family, love, and apparent disdain for anyone not believing as you do. Come to think of it, I'm going to start referring to myself as a "values voter." At least I have some.

These attitudes brought to you by the fine people who coined the term RINO (Republican In Name Only). Perhaps they will soon use the term CHINO (Christian In Name Only) to describe people who are either not Christian enough or are of the wrong brand of Christianity. I wonder what brand of Christianity would be officially sanctioned if these nutjobs ever gained sufficient power to make their dreams come true.

Guuberre: proper Christain to get the nomination. Jesus doesn't wear magic underwear. He looked at me funny as if he wasn't sure if I was

as someone wearing magic underwear i'm really getting a kick outta these replies.

Romney's religion, curiously enough, has nothing whatsoever to do with why I wouldn't vote for him. Nor does his flip-flopping. I just don't like his hair.

Guuberre: My dentist wanted to make a bet with me that Romney will get the nomination. I looked at him straight in the eye and told him that it would never happen - the evangelical nutbags running the Republican freakshow will never allow someone they don't consider to be a proper Christain to get the nomination. Jesus doesn't wear magic underwear. He looked at me funny as if he wasn't sure if I was serious. I probably should have taken his bet.

I know this isn't exactly the other shoe dropping, but this particular bit of nuttiness is finally coming into public view.

Well, that and a "proper Christian" doesn't believe the following: Jesus was the "spirit brother" of Lucifer (and first and second spirit children of God, respectively), there are three heavens and a hell (hell pretty much only consists of ex-Mormons), salvation for women is based on their husband deciding to bring them to their "heaven" to populate the new planet with their "spirit children," God was a god that became a god through complete obedience and performing rituals for another god (hence the magic underwear, temple ceremonies, and secret handshakes), and the list goes on...

Sure, some of the best people I've met have been Mormon and I don't doubt their sincerity and moral compass, but you're right...once the mainstream Right really starts sinking their teeth into some of these things, Romney will be toast.

dickfreckle: ...at the 2011 Values Voter Summit...

I have always despised this characterization. You know what "values" are? Believing that a person is capable of being the president even though he or she doesn't share your specific faith. The recognition of gay people as actual human beings. The admission that America is not always right, no matter what. That diversity of opinion and race is one of America's chief strengths and not something to be reviled.

These are what decent values are, you assholes. These are the values I would want my children to share - not your exclusive definitions of family, love, and apparent disdain for anyone not believing as you do. Come to think of it, I'm going to start referring to myself as a "values voter." At least I have some.

The real problem with it is that any policy preference a voter prefers is by definition a "value." That's right. Your preference for a state neutral to religion is a "value" just as much as is an evangelical's demand for a state that endorses his religion is a value. So it's sort of like trying to designate a group of people as the "food eaters." What exactly sets these people apart from the 6 billion other people on the planet who eat food? What sets people who vote their values apart from every other voter in the country?

Well, the real answer is that "values voters" are people who specifically vote their *religious* values. The negative connotation associated with "religious" is why the phrase "values voter" was coined, of course. Because they're trying to get by their negative branding as "religious conservatives" or "the religious right."

These same value voters I see ended up picking

RON PAUL

in their straw poll. Link (new window)

MFAWG: I don't understand what's 'Ironic' about that? They elected McCain 2008 even though the noise machine derided him as a 'RINO' and stumped hard for Romney early in the primaries.

The McCain who ran in 2008 was a lot farther to the Right than the McCain who ran in 2000. The McCain who barely held his senate seat in 2010 was so far to the right that zombie Barry Goldwater needed a telescope to see him.

FTA: Christians really need a Christian to lead them

Last I heard, it's not the President's job to lead Christians.

FloydA: Guuberre: Jesus doesn't wear magic underwear.

Mine aren't magic, but they are kind of holey. Does that count?

uh. no.

romney would've wonder over the crowd had he sung:

people are protesting in the streets
hasa diga eebowai
with a message that resonates with liberal elites
hasa diga eebowai

CavalierEternal: ♪ ♫ Hello
My name is Elder Romney
And I would like to share with you the most amazing book... ♪ ♫

HELLO WOULD YOU LIKE TO CHANGE RELIGIONS I GOT A FREE BOOK WRITTEN BY JESUS!

Romney's Black?

dude, floyd, jump into the nat geographic californian tar pit skull sizes thead.

ultraholland: also receives much heat
[4.bp.blogspot.com image 154x200]

The ideal Presidential candidate. He can take it:

This nation has a sad and deluded fixation on religion.

Lorelle: s2s2s2: Romney's Black?

No, silly, he's a Morslim.

Do we know where he was born? I think we are going to need to see some papers.

Dwight_Yeast: MFAWG: I don't understand what's 'Ironic' about that? They elected McCain 2008 even though the noise machine derided him as a 'RINO' and stumped hard for Romney early in the primaries.

The McCain who ran in 2008 was a lot farther to the Right than the McCain who ran in 2000. The McCain who barely held his senate seat in 2010 was so far to the right that zombie Barry Goldwater needed a telescope to see him.

I take your point, but the fact is that 2008 GOPPERS nominated a traitorous, filthy RINO rather than the Mormon that Hannity and Limbaugh were shilling for daily.

Now the party has moved even further right and become even more intransigent about it. There isn't any way Romney can overcome both his religion and the perception that he's some kind of NE Librul.

pissnmoan: These attitudes brought to you by the fine people who coined the term RINO (Republican In Name Only). Perhaps they will soon use the term CHINO (Christian In Name Only) to describe people who are either not Christian enough or are of the wrong brand of Christianity. I wonder what brand of Christianity would be officially sanctioned if these nutjobs ever gained sufficient power to make their dreams come true.

They already have a word for that; Heretic.

SurfaceTension: You know, sometimes I just have to wonder what John Smith was tripping on and where I could get some.

Schizophrenia is a helluva drug

Zombalupagus: FTA: Christians really need a Christian to lead them

Last I heard, it's not the President's job to lead Christians.

Someone should point out to them that their ostensible spiritual exemplar is a Jew. And not just any Jew; as the Gospels make clear he's a Super-Jew with a peerless understanding of the Torah and the Prophets, who's likely descended from David through Joseph (but wait, isn't God his father...).

MFAWG: Dwight_Yeast: MFAWG: I don't understand what's 'Ironic' about that? They elected McCain 2008 even though the noise machine derided him as a 'RINO' and stumped hard for Romney early in the primaries.

The McCain who ran in 2008 was a lot farther to the Right than the McCain who ran in 2000. The McCain who barely held his senate seat in 2010 was so far to the right that zombie Barry Goldwater needed a telescope to see him.

I take your point, but the fact is that 2008 GOPPERS nominated a traitorous, filthy RINO rather than the Mormon that Hannity and Limbaugh were shilling for daily.

Now the party has moved even further right and become even more intransigent about it. There isn't any way Romney can overcome both his religion and the perception that he's some kind of NE Librul.

At the same time, none of the other candidates really look ready for "prime-time". The R's need both their moderates and their crazies to win, and there just seems to be too big of a gap between the two at the moment. And as the media focuses more and more on how infuriated libs are with Obama, I suspect he may start looking to some moderate R's and R-leaning independents like he did in 2008 if a wing-nut candidate gets the nom.

Heron: Someone should point out to them that their ostensible spiritual exemplar is a Jew.

I've had it explained to me that Jesus wasn't really a Jew, at least not during the last half of his life. See, a Christian believes that Jesus is God-made-manifest and Savior of Humanity, and since Jesus himself was the first to understand this, that makes him the first Christian. Sure he was raised a Jew, but he got better. So don't be calling Jesus no Jew!

Someone really needs to make a Mormons vs. Muslims flash game.

AZombalupagus: FTA: Christians really need a Christian to lead them

Last I heard, it's not the President's job to lead Christians.

Funny... last I heard it's the President's job to lead regardless of religion.

Guuberre: My dentist wanted to make a bet with me that Romney will get the nomination. I looked at him straight in the eye and told him that it would never happen - the evangelical nutbags running the Republican freakshow will never allow someone they don't consider to be a proper Christain to get the nomination. Jesus doesn't wear magic underwear. He looked at me funny as if he wasn't sure if I was serious. I probably should have taken his bet.

I know this isn't exactly the other shoe dropping, but this particular bit of nuttiness is finally coming into public view.


The odds at Bodog favor Romney. (new window)

It's 2011 and somehow we have this. Terrible.

Saying that America is a Christian nation and needs a Christian to lead it .............
is as wrongheaded about America as to say that America is a White nation founded by Whites and must be led by a White.