Thursday, December 13, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
12:07 AM
More low blows...
John Schroeder has resorted to now accusing me of being on the Huckabee campaign team. But what's new - one of my good friends and colleagues labeled me untrustworthy only days ago...
For the record... I'm not bought and sold by ANY campaign. I didn't write any books for any of the candidates. I have no prayer of being anyone's Press Secretary or setting up an office in the White House. I don't attack people unjustly for having disagreements with my positions. I don't imply candidates said things they didn't say. (Full disclosure here - I did once say an actor said something he didn't say - but corrected it as soon as possible.) I'm not beholding to any single candidate... and on this blog there are numerous disclosures, dozens of times, over the last weeks and beyond that I have not yet made up my mind upon who I will cast my vote for.
My blogging philosophy is to actually let you transparently SEE what I'm thinking and how I'm wrestling with the individual strengths AND weaknesses of these men.
Previously I implied some support for Mitt, then Fred, and back to Mitt most recently... and I have the anti-Mitt hate-mail in my inbox to prove it.
I will also say candidly that the concern that the knee-jerk supporters of Romney are demonstrating, the hysteria that they are practicing, the bigotry that they are leveling against Christians - while pretending not to - SO FAR - has not sullied my opinion of Mitt nor his family. Which is a Miracle given the type of treatment these thugs are employing.
The Governor has been welcomed on my show, has received fair treatment, has performed well, and has left my listeners with a favorable impression of his policies, personality, and proposals.
But hear this scorched-earthers - you are killing the appeal of your candidate. Your crying of wolf at religious bigotry where it does not exist, your willingness to buy Drudge and go nuclear, your willingness to slander and smear is not going unnoticed.
YOU're character is detracting from the candidate you support - and doing so - in all honestly unjustly.
And I might add - he is the same candidate that I have been highly inclined to vote for.
Do you not see nor hear what you look and sound like?
30 days from now - Iowa will be in the rear view mirror. 120 days from now it is likely the nominee will be identified. 180 days from now we will begin preparing to defeat the Godless, liberal scum that will begin attacking without mercy.
It is my prayer - that you are able to focus as much vehemence at the real enemy as you are at those of us who simply stand for what we believe in - and will not be marginalized to the sidelines over it.
"ANYONE BUT RUDY - an idea whose time has come!"
Kevin:
The context comment from the Huckabee campaign was a press release, something I would expect someone in your business to get. Heck, I'm just a blogger and I got the darn thing. I did not accuse you of being part of the campaign, merely said that you, in this instance. parroted the campaign line. |
|
Hi Kevin. You and I have correponded in the past; I'm John Schroeder's Mormon co-blogger at http://www.Article6blog.com. I'll leave it to John to respond to your post above, but I will raise just one quibble: Why on earth would you insert a photo of the "Big Love" cast in a post about Mitt Romney? You cannot nhave intended to associate him with the modern-day polygamists in that TV series? You might want to delete that, lest you end up sending the wrong signal.
Best,
Lowell Brown |
|
Almost all of the time we agree with you. Thanks for running the full text of the Huckabee article for NYT Mag. Before that post all I had was the comments from other articles by the MSM and alternative media.
|
|
I don't read your blog a ton, but I've got nothing against you. You seem like an evenheaded guy.
Why the picture of Big Love though? Are you implying that Romney is a poligamist, or just that you like the show? How is that picture really relevant dude? It'd be sorta like putting a white guy wearing a sheet and pointy hat at the top of a post about Huckabee.
Huckabee has about as much to do with the KKK as Romney does with Bill Paxton and a mediocre HBO drama. Which is to say - nothing.
It's totally irrelevant and doesn't do you a service in having it. Sort of like digging through old doctrines of a church during a presidential election, ya know? |
|
Lets see an actual statement of bigotry against Evangelicals. So far on hugh's blog, I haven't seen a single statement, and I've been in the thick of the discussion.
What everyone is objecting to is Huckabee playing the religion card. It isn't stating that there's something wrong with Evangelicals across the board, or Evangelicals are spooky. We are stating that one particular evangelical crossed the line. And you know what, he agrees with us, since he apologized for his statement!
Besides, when discussing Romney, as everyone else noted, you put up the Big love thing. i.e. mormons are all polygamists. If you don't want to get attacked for displaying anti-mormon prejudice, don't display anti-mormon prejudice! |
|
|
I couldn't agree more. Although I'm technically a west coaster, I have to say that East Side is the best side in this conflict. |
|
|
Nice to have a place to visit and get the truth - fair and balanced - since my former favorite News Channel has decided to abandon "fair and balanced". |
|
|
I am also a West Coaster that does not get to listen to Kevin. Hey any of you East Coasters want to trade Hugh for Kevin??? We will even throw in a Starbucks or two to close the deal. Thanks for speaking the truth Kevin!!! |
|
Is the equvalent the multiple low blows that Hewitt and Drudge have pulled in the last few days. The big love pic is captioned "more low blows" for just such this illustration!
By the way it is NO reflection on Mitt whatsoever...
|
|
|
This guy actually reads these comments, whereas Hugh just ignores those of us who disagree with him. Thanks Kevin for making this an actual Town Hall!!! |
|
You feel that people are engaging in dirty tricks, so you stoop to them yourselves?
Forgive me, I thought all of us were adults here. |
|
Excerpts of Michael Novak endorsement:
National Review beat me to it, alas, but I have been deciding to come out publicly for Mitt Romney for some days now. I have been supporting him privately for weeks, though I was trying to avoid supporting anybody publicly.
But the attacks upon Romney's religion have been a last straw. They are just not fair.
These days, though, it has become imperative for some Christians to come out publicly for Mitt, now that his religion has come under unfair attack.
And last night and today I was too sick at heart at Mike Huckabee's low and dirty dig at the Mormon faith, along disgustingly false lines.
In any case, that's the last straw. Someone has to protest, in the name of Christianity itself, that spreading bigotry and hatred for the sake of winning a political campaign is wrong. I for one don't want to let this issue of bigotry and suspicion pass by without protest
Romney is a good, executive-keen man, and without this mud he would earn the respect and love of the American people on his own.
|
|
Huckabee strategiests are gloating over what they feel is a brilliant move by Huck on the Devil and Jesus are Brothers comment.
First they feel Huck is positioned well in just innocently asking the question.
Second they feel they gain by the national media asking the question.
Third Romney will not clarify and the nobody will see the clarification offered by the LDS Church, which answers it well.
Fourth the public will go look for info online and get a boat load of anti Mormon info.
However, I would make the following points
Huck runs a severe risk. He claims he does not know much if anything about the Mormon Church.
However, he has a Ph.D in theology. He was the state head of the AR SBC. He was pastor of more than one church during a time when just about every Evangelical Church in the South showed or promoted the God Makers, Ankerberg's productions and anti Mormon books. Further, most large SBC Churches have active anti Mormon cells in them.
Huck's statements concerning his level of knowledge are not very believable so far. If he gets linked to anti Mormon activity he character is in question.
|
|
Hardly. You people will pull the Rudy lever in a second on election day to stop Hillary.
Must be fun to pretend that you stand on principle. |
|
|
It's really a breath of air to be able to hear a voice of reason. I'm just about sick of the garbage that Hugh Hewitt has been posting lately. The constant Huckabee bashing and shilling for Romney is getting old. |
|
|
...but do you honestly not recognize the religious fear mongering going on within the evangelical wing of the anti-Mitt crowd? Huckabee is no political novice. He has been seeking elected office since 1992, making him as much of a politician as Mitt is. He knew what he was doing when he made the "brothers" comment to NYTMag, and he did it with the intent of making Romney look bad and getting people online to uncover some unorthodox and unflattering Mormon beliefs. I happen to be one of the people you criticize in your article above. You can read my stuff at http://russandfriends.blogspot.com |
|
I think this word has been used enough in this election cycle that it has lost most of its meaning. There is simple disagreement, and then there is bigotry. But it seems more and more that the term is used to define both scenarios.
Seriously, I say we all drop the bigot term from our vocabulary, hold hands, and together go vote for Romney. Who's in?
Good blog, strange and awkward picture. |
|
I am a Mormon. I don't care who thinks who is a bigot. I have prayed for family members of my Evangelical friends in the Temple. They have prayed for my family in their worship services.
We share many common moral values.
I promise to vote for which ever Republican candidate comes through the nominating process, be he Baptist Minister, NYC Mayor, TV Actor, Former POW or Former Mormon Bishop.
Will you all promise to do the same.
The consequences of failure are way too scary. |
|
"Stop and slowly step back from the dark side!
Take a deep breath!
...
Finally, I AM a Christian, as is every faithful LDS. We believe in Jesus Christ, we DO worship Him and honor him as our Redeemer, we bear His holy name and do all we can to be His disciples. We may believe we have additional light and knowledge into His nature and desires for us, which we share freely with the world, but we would NEVER say you are not Christians if you believe in Christ. That is why we get so bent out of shape when people who claim to be Christians arrogantly proclaim we LDS are not. We ARE, and will defend our faith in Jesus Christ to our last breath - and beyond.
The author of discord is Satan, and he is trying mightily to divide those who should be standing shoulder to shoulder in the fight against him."
The reason I reposted this is to reiterate (and agree with daddy o above): We have common cause - let's stop fighting each other so we can fight who we SHOULD be fighting - whomever the Democrats nominate for President.
(P.S.: Attaching that "Big Love" picture was a terribly disappointing cheap shot...)
|
|
Kevin since you posted the Big Love picture I though I would bring the following to your attention.
I can understand your concerns over the establishment of plural marriage in the early history of the Mormon Religion.
However, Mormonism is not the only religion to have polygamy in it's back ground. The official doctrine of the Anglicans allow polygamy (see bottom).
Solomon, David and many of the Jews were polygamous. Not to mention Abraham and several old testament prophets.
Both the Catholic and Lutheran Churches allowed men to have up to 12 wives at the end of the War of the Roses in SouthWestern Germany. The justification was to repopulate the area rapidly. That is the same justification that is given in the Book of Mormon where monogamy is the rule and under special circumstances polygamy is allowed.
Luther had the same policy and the same reasoning. He and other reformers wrote and allowed polygamy as an alternative to divorce in special situations.
The Anti Baptists in Munster Germany created a polygamous society in fulfillment of old Bible prophecies that had to happen prior to the Second Coming. At least that was their interpretation and the primary reason they set up the society.
Various Popes prior to The Council of Trent (I think it is Trent) about 1280 allowed polygamy on a case by case basis. Some Popes did and some did not.
During the 1800s and early 1900s All of the major modern denominations have allowed polygamy in some limited form, at least for a while in Africa and other missions, where polygamous families have converted to Christianity. Most denominations have changed policies now.
In 1988 the Anglican Church at the Council of Lambeth adopted a policy of giving communion to practicing polygamous individuals. In plain English the Anglican Church currently allows the practice of polygamy.
|
|
|
Isn't it interesting that one of the few people not getting all worked up over Huckabee's comments is Mitt? |
|
Interesting article......and the picture was especially telling.
"I am not bought and sold by any campaign...."
"I didn't imply candidates said things they didn't say."
Imply means...to hint at, to involve or indicate by inference, association or necessary consequence rather than by DIRECT
STATEMENT.
"...let you transparently see what I'm thinking....."
The picture speaks a thousand words and it is apparent. |
|
“Because of the iconic quality of the presidency, many Americans will feel discomfort with the mainstreaming of a marginal faith that a Romney presidency would represent. It's one thing to listen to the Mormon Tabernacle Choir or to elect Harry Reid or Orrin Hatch. It is quite something else to elect a Mormon President.
"Mormonism's history as a secret religion compounds the problem. Historic Christianity has prided itself on being an open religion. When the early Christian fathers were fighting the Gnostic heretics, they contrasted the public nature of their faith and practice with the secret knowledge and covert rites of their adversaries. Because Mormonism continues to practice secret rites, it is a religion not well adapted to a society that thrives on transparency." David Neff - Christianity Today.
Mitt Romney continues to dig a deeper hole regarding his Mormonism. Be assured, Mormonism is a cult...and has always been a cult, by reason of their radical unorthodox position on the nature of God and the Person of Jesus Christ. Contra Hugh Hewitt, strongly held opinions based on broad research is never "bigotry."
Based on my forty years of living around and interacting with numerous Mormons, they are adept at parroting evangelical (biblical) language so as to mislead and deceive their audience and thereby securing an unmerited level of acceptance within Christendom. Criticism is most often deflected by redirecting attention away from doctrine and toward "family values." They prey on the naive and religiously illiterate.
Over the past century, dozens of books have been written documenting the heterodox, polytheistic beliefs of Mormonism. However, it's their ability to look the public square in the face and lie about what they believe that should be of concern to the electorate. If they'll lie about their religion, which they esteem so highly, what else are they willing to lie about? |
|
"Isn't it interesting that one of the few people not getting all worked up over Huckabee's comments is Mitt?"
Why would he get worked up over Huck shooting himself in the foot every day?
I'm sure he doesn't appreciate the personal smears and attacks on his religion, but he doesn't have to do anything about theme - the decent people of America are taking Huck to task, so Mitt doesn't need to.
Stick a fork in Huck. He's done.
Next up? The dismantling of Huckanomics.
Do you local block watch a favor and help to Chuck Huck. |
|
Kevin,
We're electing a Commander in Chief, NOT a Theologian in Chief.
It's really disingenous of you to assert that Romney supporters are engaging in bigotry toward Christians.
You know that isn't true.
But why did you decide to run a picture of "Big Love" with your post ?
What was your objective in doing that ?
|
|
Kevin McCullough is doing his best to fan the flames of a religious war.
Someone please inform him that the crusades are over.
Can we please just move on, Kevin?
You sure seem to have a bee up your bum a lot these days. |
|
You know, when everything else fails, call the opposition a Nazi.
Earth to Kevin, we'd like you back down here with us. |
|
You and Hugh can decide who gets this one.....
To get to the heart of the matter…..
Why the sudden surge of Huckabee in Iowa after
anti-Mormon phone calls were made from Utah?
Didn’t Governor Huckabee speak at a Baptist convention held in SLC in 1998? Did he not promote ex-Mormon, Sandra Tanner’s books, thoughts and lies?
Is intolerance and downright castigation of any religion an
acceptable attribute for an aspiring POTUS? Do respectable
Governor’s act this way?
Robert Redford, do you have any thoughts on this since you
once were…”All the President’s Men?”
Does a link exist between the 1998 conference/book profits/
phone calls made – to a family set on coming closer to Christ by
denigrating Joseph Smith?
Someone has read the bible incorrectly if they believe tearing down another Christian faith brings them closer to Christ and His teachings - at least no acceptable or legitimate 'Ministry For Christ' would do such a thing.
Was it payback time for Huckabee? I don’t know the legal repercussions here…but I do feel that honest Christians would far rather walk the walk than subscribe to blasphemous talk.
The Baptist Press writes about LDS beliefs on their website. There are factual details they fail to acknowledge - misleading readers by not showing all the biblical references that imperfect Mormons adhere to in their ‘interpretation’ of The Holy Bible.
Scholars love first-hand witnesses and they love sincerity. Their
reputation is on the line for examining all data, trusting their instincts and verifying facts to attempt to take fair and qualified positions on any given topic.
Oh, that the U.S. public and especially those of a religious nature, would do the same!
|
|
|