Why I think Mitt Romney is running for President.
He has no particularly strong policy positions.
He waffles on both sides.
He is not comfortable with celebrity who dislikes personal questions and hates to be interviewed. When off script he cringes and reveals that he doesn't really like 'the crowd'.
So why is Mitt Romney running for President, especially when he is so poor at it and it inflicts such painful criticism of him before his family.
There are two possible explanations. The first is that he is trying to exceed his father's legacy. His father was a very nice man who was at ease in public and had a pretty good chance of becoming President except for a single interview where he told the truth about the Vietnam war and his experience on a junket there.
The second is completely anecdotal and I have no proof, just speculation, it goes back 40 years to growing up with cousins of Mitt. In a nutshell I believe that Mitt Romney's drive has to do with becoming the 4th most important person in the history of the Mormon Church. There have been three important bridges in Mormon history. The bridge of revelation (Smith), the bridge to Mormon Migration and Mormon Territory (Young), the bridge to Modernity and Conformity (Grant). The fourth bridge will be the person that brings Mormonism into complete and total acceptance of the American Christian community.
In 1968 George Romney was ahead of Nixon in the polls and was much better liked. He had a warm personality and great success story as CEO and Governor of Michigan. He was candid and relaxed and that led to his stating that he was for the Vietnam war before and during a trip he made there but when he returned he began to realize that the diplomatic and military people in Vietnam were very insulated and that he had been 'brainwashed' by their briefings and enthusiasm for the war but upon reflection began to see the conflict differently. The use of the word 'brainwashed' a year before in an obscure radio interview was unearthed and played over and over again and effectively ended his political career.
At that time I was 14 years old and was the direct descendent of (along with hundreds of others including Senator Bennett of Utah http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wells-Bennett-Grant_Family#Jedediah_Morgan_Grant ) of Jedidiah Morgan Grant (the first mayor of Salt Lake City) and his son Heber J Grant (the second longest serving President of the Mormon Church 1919 - 1945). HJG had three major impact on the Church a) He started a 'Good Neighbor Pollicy' that removed revenge of anti Mormon 'persecution' and replaced it with a 'Good Neighbor' b) When the Depression hit the LDS church was seriously overleveraged and on the brink of insolvency he instituted internal reforms (see c) and went to New York and successfully negotiated refinance and kept the Church solvent and c) He moved the LDS Church from a wink and nod approach to polygamy (which he was found guilty of earlier) to starting to excommunicate Mormons that still practiced and pomoted it.
Heber J Grant was also the last living member of the Council of Fifty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Fifty)
The Council of Fifty was designed to take over the administration of government when in a post apocalyptic world all other governments collapsed. It was active in Joseph Smiths campaign for President in 1844.
With that background I had a number of interesting exchanges with one Rick Romney in the 8th grade. Rick was George's nephew and Mitt's first cousin. Even at that age I had a lot of interest in politics and would talk about the campaign with Rick. I also let it slip that I was a descendent of Heber J and Jedidiah Morgan Grant.
Rick was in absolute awe. He was more impressed with my distant relatives (with whom we had no real contact beyond the occassional Uncle visit). I would dribble out little tidbits from time to time. What was particularly fascinating was Ricks' reaction that we were no longer Mormons. It was incomprehensible to him. I explained that virtually no one in our immeidiate family bar one uncle that was a true insider, stayed up with it and I would dismissively mock the goofy things I had heard from my father about Mormon beliefs.
Rick wasn't surprised that we didn't buy it all but couldn't understand why we just didn't pass that stuff by and build on the fantastic network of relations that our family would have had.
I couldn't understand how he would accept the mumbo jumbo of Mormonism and he couldn't accept why I would be so concerned with any particular doctrine and turn away from such a vaulted family history.
He viewed my antecedents as being close to the Matthew, Mark or Luke and I viewed them as earlier forms of the three stooges.
Now I am also sure that Rick was a lot nicer about it than me and that I was probably pretty shitty about it way back then.
But seeing how Mormons see Smith/Young and Grant and how they still sting at being outside the realm of what is considered acceptable and respectable intellectual thought I see Mitt Romney's campaign as an effort to achieve what Joseph Smith attempted in 1844 but never achieved, election as President would put a permanent 'Good Housekeeping Seal of approval' on the LDS Church as being American as apple pie.
From their point of view even a successful nomination of a major party, even if it is defeated in a general election will provide massive and permanent 'certification' as Mormons being considered normal.
It would also explain why Romney always seems to be trying to get everyone's approval, he wants to be known as the fourth great Mormon, the one that finally brought Mormonism inside of the American establishment.
= new reply since forum marked as read
And his Christianity does not appeal to me any more than Islam would.
You have a better explanation for Romney pursuing a livelihood he is so bad at? 
And enjoy your stay! 
--imm
I hope you enjoyed your stay. Buh-bye, now.
I used that term to express to non Mormons how Mormons see the particular importance of their early leaders.
The identification of Heber J Grant as an important figure is not for us a matter of pride and we are stunned that he is seen as such a venerable figure, and many older Mormons have told me through the years that they consider him just below Brigham Young in their estimation of Mormon leaders (which I find ironic because of Young's involvement in the circumstances around the Meadow Mountain Massacre should be a matter of shame and not pride).
You are the naive one in Church history.
I did graduate work at Princeton Theological Seminary and know its history very well.
Mormons are "What befuddlbefuddled by "how other Christians can claim we are not followers of Christ" because their understanding of Church history is non-existent and their use of the Bible infantile. Mormons don't have professionally trained clergy and it is in the training of clergy that you learn that words matter. 'Christian' and 'followers of Christ' are two completely different things with explicit understandings. Mormons, or anyone, who claim to be inspired by the teachings of the 'Christ' can be considered followers of Christ.
1) The historical understanding of the word 'Christian'.
In the four centuries after the death of Jesus there was considerable confusion over what the future entailed. As Paul writes in many epistles many thought that the end of the world was near and that they need not prepare for a long future. Eventually the oral sayings were written down and used to interpet the events of Jesus life in Mark, Matthew, Luke and one other lost document. Other books were written like the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary and the Gospel of Philip. Literally dozens of 'gospels' were written about Jesus at about the same time.
Different schools of thought developed and they were based on two competing Christologies, the Trinitarians, and the Gnostics. These two schools competed for acceptance. Most 'followers of Christ' at the time found comfort in the Christology found in the Apostles Creed. Ultimately a line was drawn in the sand when a Council of Bishops gathered in 325 in Nicene, Bythnia (modern Turkey) and agreed on what has become the orthodox interpretation of the Holy Trinity in the Nicene Creed.
Supporters of the minority position were convinced or eventually wore down until there were only two Bishops that did not agree and eventually they too accepted the Nicene position.
The Emperor then enforced this decision and any who did not accept the Nicene Creed were excommunicated from the Church. Those that accepted the Nicene Creed were the orthodox Christians and those that did not were Gnostic Christians who eventually faded away.
So from 325 the word Christian has meant those that accept the specifically defined Christology and Holy Trinity that was universally accepted at that time. From that branch the Christian Church based on the Apostles Creed and defined in the Nicene Creed has diversified as follows;
Ninety-Five percent of the 'followers of Christ' in the world follow this understanding of orthodox Christianity by agreeing on a Christology that has been well established and universally agreed upon for 1700 years. Mormons have a completely different Christology that was 'discovered' in upstate New York in 1823 along with golden plates as well as other artifacts, including a breastplate and a set of silver spectacles with lenses composed of seer stones . Unfortunately while these important artifacts are no longer with us Smith's inventive Christology still is.
Here is an LDS writer who explains the divergence well from their point of view
http://lehislibrary.wordpress.com/2009/09/18/lds-christology-trinitarian-christology-a-comparison/
LDS of course disagree with that idea. We instead envision God and man to be the same essential “order of being.” We are two of the same species, but on different ends of a spectrum or continuum of maturity and glory.
Mormons believe that God was once a man just like us, Christians do not:
Joseph Smith apparently wanted to set his followers straight when he proclaimed the following at the Mormon Church's General Conference in April, 1844:
I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see. … It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the character of God and to know...that he was once a man like us.... (“King Follett Discourse,” Journal of Discourses 6:3-4, also in Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 345-346, and History of the Church, vol. 6, 305-307, emphasis added)
Joseph Smith completely renounced the fundamental Christian understanding of who God is, what man is and who Christ is.
They may or may not be followers of Christ. They, like the Gnostics, Adoptionist, Arianists, Psilathropost, Modalists, Docetists, and dozens of others don't follow the Christology that the Christian Church carefully defined 1700 years ago.
To use the word 'Christian' to mean every group that holds Jesus to be the Christ then the word would really have little meaning. For example Bahai believe the following about Jesus;
The Baha'i Faith upholds all claims of Jesus Christ as to His Station, and His Revelation. The Baha'i Writings are filled with references to the words of Jesus and praise of Him. In His time, His Holiness Christ was the greatest Messenger of God yet to have walked the earth. Baha'is believe that the promises of Jesus, as well as those of all the other religions are fulfilled in the Baha'i Faith. For more detail see the following question. Top
The only reason that Mormons are befuddled about why they aren't considered as 'Christians' by the rest of Christianity is that they don't understand the history of the Church and how radical their own peculiar Christology is.
2) Biblical Basis for Christian scepticism of things like 'Mormonism'.
37And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed out His life.
38And the curtain [of the Holy of Holies] of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.
39And when the centurion who stood facing Him saw Him expire this way, he said, [k]Really, this Man was God's Son!
Mark has spent his entire Gospel rushing to this point. It is the reason that he wrote the Gospel. Mark is setting an epistomological stage and he makes his point with two contrasting metaphors.
When Christ dies on the Christ all is revealed (in Mark's mind). He puts these two images together because he has an important point to make. For the Jew the essence of YHWH resided in the Holy of Holies where the High Priest would go once a year to commune.
Now, Mark is saying, history has brought the death of Jesus to the world stage. Both the Jew and the Roman (and everyone else) can look and see this was the Son of God. There will be no more secret revelations or anyone cut off from approaching Christ, even the Centurion who was part of the guard that enforced his murder is now able to see the truth.
This is the Biblical reason why Christianity has, for 2100 years walked by new revelations of Christianity, whether they be Joseph Smith or Rev. Moon.
I hope that you are a little less befuddled why Christians insist on a clear definition of terms between Christians and Mormons and other Christ oriented sects.
enjoy your stay
It's the other way around isn't it? Wouldn't the thread be the metaphorical flame?
I have no problems with individual Mormons.
I concede that many could well be better people than I am, better drivers, better chefs and even better parents. Statistically I am sure that its true.
Their epistomology (the HOW they acquired their metaphysical enlightment) remains an object of derision, much weirder than mainline Christianity and just south of Scientology, or in a technical Existential framework, they are "cuckoo as cocoa puffs" and they are about to get on the crazy train.
(But think about this - if a Jewish candidate was running for prez and religion was brought into it - even if what was being said was true - how would that sound?)of Germany.
In this case Joseph Smith not only invisioned a theocracy but he actually was an independent candidate for President in 1844.
Joseph Smith advocated for a system called Theodemocracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodemocracy
He instituted the Council of Fifty as the group that was responsible for implementing it.
The Council of Fifty (also known as the Living Constitution, the Kingdom of God, or its name by revelation, The Kingdom of God and His Laws with the Keys and Power thereof, and Judgment in the Hands of His Servants, Ahman Christ)[1] was a Latter Day Saint organization established by Joseph Smith, Jr. in 1844 to symbolize and represent a future theocratic or theodemocratic "Kingdom of God" on the earth.[2] Smith and his successor Brigham Young hoped to create this Kingdom in preparation for the Millennium and the Second Coming of Jesus. The political Kingdom of God, organized around the Council of Fifty, was meant to be a force of peace and order in the midst of this chaos. According to Mormon teachings, while Jesus himself would be king of this new world government, its structure was in fact to be quasi-republican and multi-denominational; therefore, the early Council of Fifty included both Mormons and non-Mormons.[3] Although the Council played a significant role during the last few months of Joseph Smith's life, particularly in his campaign for President of the United States, the Council's role was mostly symbolic throughout the 19th century within The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This was largely because the Council was primarily meant for a time when secular governments had ceased to function. Regular meetings of the Council ended in 1884, after the church publicly abandoned its theocratic aspirations. The organization was technically extinguished when its last member, Heber J. Grant, died in 1945.[4]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Fifty
My Great great great great grand uncle Heber J Grant was the last living member of that council.
Now do you still think that there are any real analogies to 'Jews' in Germany?
Do you still think that questions about how modern Mormons think about the political aspirations of their founder are beyond reasonable speculation.
The fact is that most people don't realize that from the begining the Mormon Church had a political agenda and arm.
If I had wanted to do a hit peace about Mormons I would have talked about their thugs, the Danites, and their involvment in mass murder at the Meadow Moutain Massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danite
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meadow_Mountain_Massacre
If it is unfair to ask Romney about his Mormon religion would it be fair to ask him about Joseph Smith's platform as President?
http://www.latterdayconservative.com/joseph-smith/general-smiths-views-of-the-power-and-policy-of-the-government/
Does he think that Congress should be reduced?
Does he think that all convicts should be pardoned "blessing them as they go, and saying to them, in the name of the Lord, go thy way and sin no more? . . Abolish the cruel custom of prisons (except in certain cases,) penitentiaries, and court martials for desertion."
Finally my ancestor quoting Joseph Smith
http://www.latterdayconservative.com/quote/tyler-350-quoted-by-jedediah-m-grant/
We are friendly to our country, and when we speak of the flag of our Union, we love it, and we love the rights the Constitution guarantees to every citizen. What did the Prophet Joseph say? When the Constitution shall be tottering we shall be the people to save it from the hand of the foe.
I think its fair to ask Romney if he thinks that HE is the one that Smith prophesized would be the one to save it from the hand of the foe.
Seems relevant to me, and not at all like anything from Mein Kempf.
If you don't think that the Mormons aren't aware of this and aren't talking about this among themselves then look at the very high views that this thread has gotten and the fact that at least three different Mormons have signed up for DU simply to get on this thread and try to label it as 'psycho babble'.
Most people just are not aware that political action has been at the core of Mormonism since Smith. Romney doesn't care about any of the policies that he happens to be quoting, he is trying to go down in Mormon history as the one that brought the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval to the Mormon Church.
