Just a few random thoughts today about some things
I like Jon Huntsman More Now
I have to admit, even though he is dead last in the polls, I have appreciated that Huntsman sounds like he knows what he is talking about and, more importantly, doesn’t need constant adult supervision every time he opens his mouth.
As a Mormon, (we’re not exactly sure how TBM he actually is) we can be pretty assured of his moral standing, as opposed to Herman Cain or Newt Gingrich. He does oddly admit, on his website, that he took a “2 year mission trip to Taiwan” where he became fluent in Mandarin. A Mission trip? Was he a Baptist at age 19? That’s how they refer to their charity work where their youth go and help in underdeveloped countries.
He sounds like he is left of most of the other Republican candidates. He is, frankly, a candidate that even Democrats could like as an Obama alternative.
And finally, he has daughters that are actively promoting his campaign on YouTube and Twitter in a fun way. I don’t see Mitt’s family out there with a rap song!
The End of Road for Herman Cain
Let’s see if I get this. Another woman, Ginger White comes forward, (that makes 4 now) and this time claims a 13-year affair with Herman Cain. He denies it vehemently. Does he know this one? Why, yes, she was a friend or, “at least I thought so….” Then we find out he has been paying her bills for some time. And then we find out that, surprise! His wife didn’t know about the payments. Then Lin Wood, Cain’s attack lawyer, says they will obtain her phone records to “test her credibility” that she talked or texted with Cain all the time as she claimed. But, Ms. White shows her phone bill to FOX TV 5 in Atlanta. And, lo and behold, 61 calls or texts from Herman Cain, from a number verified by FOX News, as late as September.
So, this weekend, Cain must go home to face the music, I mean, his wife. And decide if he is staying in the race. My guess is not. So, what is really going on here? A political sabotage or just your typical arrogant, self-absorbed man in power behaving badly and once again, getting caught.
Newt Gingrich, Seriously?
So are we to believe and stomach that the new and strongest anti-Romney candidate is Newt Gingrich, the most morally and ethically bankrupt person of all the other candidates combined? The man, who had multiple affairs, including one while his wife was being treated for cancer, and has taken millions of dollars from the most despised quasi-governmental agencies, most criticized by Republicans, to give them history lessons but not lobby Congress? The guy, whom one commentator characterized as “what a stupid person THINKS a smart person sounds like.” A guy who criticizes everyone as flip-floppers who has done more flopping than Nicolas Cage. This is the guy that the Republicans now want to put up against Obama and certainly assure a Democratic victory next November? Newt Gingrich, seriously?
And Finally, Likes and Dislikes
When we organized Wheat and Tares last year, we decided to use a feature of WordPress, an add-on I suppose, in which commenters would be able to rate each other’s comments, like or dislike. At the time, it seemed like a way of engaging our readers more than most other blogs. A way of preventing a thousand comments of either “Great Post! J,” or “Hated it!”
But, yet, it seems to have taken on a life of its own. It seems it is now being used either as a weapon of disdain for the commenter or a popularity contest for some bloggers and commenters. It seems that the content of the comment plays a very small role in the actual “up or down” vote. There also appears to be a direct correlation, (sorry, no hard data, here) with how one feels about and participates in the Church. Those who are favorable to the Church seem to cast less dislike votes than those who are less favorable. And those who are less favorable to the Church seem to cast more Like votes to those comments which best reflect their POV, regardless of what the comment says. For example, a comment which sincerely states a belief against Gay Marriage is likely to garner a ton of “dislikes” while a comment criticizing Church leadership is equally likely to get a considerable likes regardless of whether the comment is accurate or makes any sense at all.
I would ask you to consider how you use the like and dislike feature we enjoy here at W&T.
Wheat & Tares 
“Those who are favorable to the Church seem to cast less dislike votes than those who are less favorable.”
I’m game, if you’d like to test that hypothesis of yours (one more time, just for fun).
Met a Mormon missionary in a gay bar twenty years ago, joined his church, have lived with him ever since, but *not* gay!
Like or dislike?!?!?!?!?!
“As a Mormon, we can be pretty assured of his moral standing.”
come on jeff, you’re turning into self parody.
FWIW, I did like your comments on the lying post a few posts back. I usually don’t use the likes and dislikes, but am using them more often now. I usually disagree with you since you are fairly “progressive” in your views for politics at least, hence, how could I like that? Although, I don’t think I disliked those posts you wrote.
The main gripe that I don’t like about the likes and dislikes buttons is that people do tons of dislikes but never tell you why they disliked it, if someone is going to take the time to dislike the post they should take the time to discuss why those views are not liked in a civil and logical manner.
“A political sabotage or just your typical arrogant, self-absorbed man in power behaving badly and once again, getting caught” Could be a bit of both. Frankly, the self-proclaimed paramour’s track record doesn’t give her a lot of credibility. However, it seems obvious that Mr. Cain hasn’t handled things well. Even IF these women are brazen opportunists, there comes a point where you back off from anything with a questionable appearance. If Mr. Cain can’t deal with that, I would wonder about his ability to deal with those sharks at G-8.
Of course, it didn’t hurt Bill Clinton and his liaisons were more provable..and hey, the guy got something from Monica that most LDS guys wish their wives would give them!
This I will give BHO…he seems to have kept it in his pants as needed. Oh, an Obama-Romney contest next year is gonna be SO boring..
Douglas – why would obama romney be boring? which candidate would lead to a less boring race? i dont think it would be boring.
“As a Mormon, we can be pretty assured of his moral standing.”
Nice catch, me. We’re all Mormons now. God bless Jon Huntsman for that.
this article is more like a friday pooperie.
“come on jeff, you’re turning into self parody.”
Two words I enjoy greatly. Self and parody. I’ll accept that with pride, which I am not supposed to have, I guess.
But, its true, being a TBM doesn’t mean someone can’t put their hand in the wrong cookie jar….
I like the “like” and “dislike” buttons, and I’m not sure I agree that people are just pro and anti the church. It seems to me that people either think a comment is persuasive or not. But of course there are a few people who just don’t like certain other people. C’est la vie. Popularity contests are a staple of the internet.
I too have grown to like Huntsman more and more, but to no avail it would seem. He’s not that Mormon from what I have read(meaning he’s not likely to have a HT route or carry a TR or wear Gs – I’m speaking in code here – he might not follow the WoW or believe in the BOM). And Newt Gingrich? Seriously? I definitely do not see that happening. Even if he got the nomination, he would never beat Obama.
I agree with Hawkgrrrl here on all accounts. Although I would qualify the “persuasive” aspect — persuasiveness is a subjective matter…it’s not just about logos, but about pathos and ethos as well.
I guess as far as people liking/disliking and not commenting why…we have to ask: what would we prefer
a) contentless comments: (e.g., “liked this” “RAEBNC [read and enjoyed but no comment]”, “thanks for this” “this is more like a pooperie”)
b) People who don’t comment having no way to provide feedback (no likes/dislikes, or anything)
c) People having the choice to comment or not, but having a still visible alternative to express their sentiment.
I’m mostly frustrated by the lack of like/dislike buttons for POSTS.
What’s good for comments ought to be good for those, too, no?
Really good point.
It’s just not covered by the plugin we have for comments, so we’d have to look for a different plugin for posts.
Having Gingrich as the Republican leading candidate at this time is to me proof that its about anti-Mormonism and not just anti-Romney. He is a despicable human who has done things and holds many views that Romney is apparently rejected for as a candidate. At least the others were plausible alternatives for politically ideological reasons.
I’m happy to note that my “hard data” meme has taken root!
#5 – do you not recognise sarcasm, Monsieur? With an Obama-Romney match you don’t have any credible allegations of tomfoolery. The media will actually have to weigh the issues, unless the LEFT wants to make hay of Mitt being LDS. If the bible-thumpers get pissed off at a Romney nomination for the GOP ticket and take their marbles and go home, then they’ll only have themselves to blame for four more years of the Chicago Alderman being in over his head.
#9 – Hawk, just as I resent those who would otherwise accept Romney but reject him because he’s LDS, so I’m reluctant to judge Huntsman because he’s at best lukewarm about the Gospel. My concern is how effective a President would he make. He’d likely do better than the incumbent, fersure. And this keeping in mind that I’m still gunning for Ron Paul.
Douglas, #15,
I do think you are right that personal marital infidelity will probably be off the table, though I speculate that Joseph Smith’s polygamous exploits will get a new wave of interest. And somehow, Mitt will be held responsible for that.
However, I do disagree with you on your assessment of Obama. It appears that it is Congress are way of out their league these days.
Huntsman opposed water boarding which has my respect.
Hawk—really all we know about Jon from a religious standpoint is that he doesn’t give glib answers about the Church—and that his daughters are pistols. His church attendance is apparently more regular than Sen. Smoot’s was during his residence inthe nation’s captial. He has certainly tried to be the adult in the room—for all the good that has done him. With apologies to Adlai Stevenson who was hearing that he certainly was persuasive in terms of the intelligent voters, responded ” . . . the problem is I need a majority.”
its more than self parody, Jeff, its an incredibly stupid comment. You simply cannot predict the moral standing of someone based on how you categorize them within a church, and yet that’s what you used to base your logic on. Mormons are incredibly adept at separating Sunday worship from Monday-Saturday business exploits. I have never heard so many “I will never do business with a member…” comments until I moved to the morridor. Couple that with the church’s ability to turn out the best snake oil salesmen in the world. And most of these people would consider themselves TBMs who hold callings throughout the church. And, somehow we still come across folks like you who believe membership and categorization based on some subjective list of qualities is the method by which we can divine moral standing. Hah… that’s a laugher.
From what I’ve gathered of both Huntsman annd his daughters is that they mostly disavow their mormonism anyway. His daughters have been quite frank about how religion simply wasn’t a part of their upbringing, especially from Jon.
Perhaps we could lay off the titles (he’s a “Mormon”) and get some real substance.
As for likes/dislikes, you’re only uptight about it bc you lean on the side of generally not being able to appreciate, let alone understand and grasp, viewpoints that either oppose or diverge from your stance on any number of issues, and therefore are accorded numerous dislikes. Most of them, IMO, are well deserved if only bc of how well you come across as a dolt incapable of persuadng people to your side of the argument without resorting to demeaning dialogue (even if/when unintentional).
Bone up on your ability to persuade and dialogue and you might find the tides turning in your favor.
#16 – (jeff). Yerright. Mitt will take the heat for polygamy, lost boys, Mountain Meadows Massacre, and all the other baggage that we members of the “Evil Empire” are guilty of by association. If the Democrats do make that type of issue, it’ll be to marginalize him in the eyes of the ignorant. Those already hopelessly liberal won’t need any persuading.
As for CONgress, it’s been proven to be the opposite of PROGRESS, whether you’re a “Progressive” or NOT (and I am decidedly NOT). Six years of having both the WH and both houses controlled by the “Wasacally Webpubblicans” (2001-2007) proved that the party in charge makes little if any difference. My issue with BHO is that he’s patently not up to the job. I still say that Sen. McCain would have made a fantastic Democratic president. If he did switch aisles and run this time around, I’d consider voting for him…it’d be the first “donkey” that I’d voted for since Carter in ’80. Right now, the only “donkey” I consider fit for any office is the one that annoys Shrek.
#19 – If a member attempts to separate you from your money (esp. if pushing Pampered Chef, Nonni, Amway, or other MLM), grab your wallet tight and run…hey, I’m all for making a buck but the way that many members abuse the trust of their fellow saints is downright sickening.
Yanni,
Love ya, buddy, but hate your music. 🙂
“Huntsman opposed water boarding which has my respect”
Huntsman opposed water boarding which lost my respect
As to Huntsman’s Mormonism, I could care less what his religion is; I was just sharing what I have heard (which is more information than has been printed in the news). He accepts science and is moderate – that puts him far ahead of most others in the GOP. Honestly, I think being a lapsed Mormon helps his authenticity. He doesn’t feel burdened or conflicted by being a representative of the church. He’s handsome and competent. So’s Romney. But I think Huntsman’s more suave on foreign politics which are emergingly important, and he’s also much more comfortable in his own skin.
As to Gingrich, I’m not convinced it’s anti-Mormonism alone. I think it is partly that, but partly just name recognition and others having been ruled out. Even if what you know a person for is negative, knowing them is better than an unknown, to voters anyway.
#24 – agreed. I still can’t figure out WHY the “Gringrich that stole Xmas” is rising in the polls. Are GOPers that desperate to NOT nominate a Mormon? Sheesh. Get over it. We’re not content to merely be a supporting wing, especially as our numbers grow. Hence why some like myself have given up on the GOP and look to independent/third parties.
Besides, what’s so great about being a NEWT?
I don’t think Huntsman is really that liberal or even that centrist. On economic issues he’s pretty dang conservative. Admittedly he breaks from the social conservative dogma on a few issues like civil unions. The only other big issues I can think of are cap and trade (which he now has distanced himself from) and Afghanistan. But wanting out of Afghanistan isn’t, I think, that uncommon among conservatives.
I think Huntsman is the best of the pack although he’s run an unbelievably bad campaign in my opinion.
Hawk,
“Honestly, I think being a lapsed Mormon helps his authenticity. He doesn’t feel burdened or conflicted by being a representative of the church.”
I am not sure he is a lapse or whatever. i do agree that I don’t care. I think he has been a craftier in how he explains his faith, but in the end, I suspect he’s at least admitting he is a member!
Clark,
I think he has given himself a lot of breathing room in his views to allow him to swing more center, if necessary. Which it probably won’t be.
I think he doesn’t outright bash Obama like the others which will offend less people in the long run.
Stephen and Will’s Dislikes,
I dont understand the objection to waterboarding, I really don’t. 1) It is not that bad, I can think of a lot worse. 2) don’t we read in the good book, “it is better that one man should perish than a whole nation dwindle in unbelief”
Will:
Maybe the next time a “terrorist” is hiding the brass plates in some dark corner of the earth, maybe then your argument would make sense. But comparing waterboarding to that event is just plain ridiculous.
One fictional private Wladislaw, once a field-promoted Lieutenant for “three lousy days”, took the expedient in the field of shooting a panicky, deserting soldier that had the platoon’s medical supplies strapped to his back. So why was Wladislaw set up for a date with the hangman (in reality, a soldier convicted of offenses in the field, if sentenced to death, would face a firing squad so he could die “like a solider” instead of a criminal)…Major Reisman explained it succinctly..”You let someone see you do it!”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dirty_Dozen
Our intelligence operatives have to do things that offend polite society in order to keep out the impolite. Pure and simple. Part of the job description is to keep it discrete.
Voy,
I totally disagree and feel the analogy is perfect. Allow me to change the wording a bit to make my point “it is better that one terrorist is subjected to water-boarding (or worse), than millions die in a nuclear blast.