creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Susan Estrich
25 May 2012
The Next Education President

Mitt Romney is right about one thing: Too many American children do receive what he this week called a … Read More.

23 May 2012
Susan Mary Riley, We Will Miss You

It's her voice that I keep hearing in my head. "Susan," she would say, in that quiet, commanding … Read More.

18 May 2012
Boring

When my kids were young, about the worst thing they could say about something was that it was capital-b BORRRING.… Read More.

Mitt Romney's Other Problems

Share Comment

When asked in a recent Washington Post/Pew Research poll to offer one-word descriptions of the Republican presidential hopefuls, some 30 percent of the respondents said of Mitt Romney: "Mormon."

Troubling? Sure, and not just for Romney supporters. The extent of open, outspoken discrimination against Mormons — three years after the country elected its first African-American president — is, to me at least, a Democrat who would never vote for him, simply unacceptable. Yet in poll after poll, voters tell surveyors they would have more of a problem with a Mormon candidate, even one from their own party and with whom they agreed, than a Jew or a black, let alone a woman.

Of course it's wrong. Of course it's discriminatory. After, what, about six years of running for president, this is what almost one-third of us comes up with to describe Romney in a word? And how many more are politically correct enough to think it but not say it?

But what is so striking about discrimination against Romney's faith is how many people are absolutely unashamed of their prejudice. In my own informal survey, I've found two common explanations.

The first is strictly based on faith: the concern that Mormons hold themselves out as Christians, and yet do not accept the trinity. Neither do I, I said to one president of a religious university. Does that mean you wouldn't vote for me? He laughed and said not for that reason. "You don't hold yourself out as a Christian," he explained. In other words, he would have no occasion to judge me on that basis.

The second explanation, which is easier for me to understand but ultimately no less palatable, goes to what seems (to outsiders) the rather incredible history of Joseph Smith and Mormonism and what that says about someone who believes in it.

I'm asked all the time: Have you seen the "South Park" episode on Joseph Smith or the Broadway show? I haven't seen the Broadway show, but I did see the "South Park" episode, with the crawl at the bottom advising that the story it was telling, about the tablets and the rest, was not made up.

Real thing. Did I believe it all? No. But then I don't believe in resurrection, either, which hardly makes people who do unfit for office. I'm not so sure about the Dead Seas parting, or the burning bush, or the tablets Moses got on Mount Sinai, but I hardly expect to be judged politically by my views on religious faith. So why Mormons?

But "Mormon" is only one of Romney's problems.

There is also Bain and Company. Back in 1994, when Romney challenged the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, there was a Bain ad that was never used during the campaign. They didn't need it. But the ad, which has surfaced on YouTube and elsewhere, is a killer, particularly in this economy: "Mitt Romney says he saved Bain and Company, but he didn't tell you that on the day he took over, he had his predecessor fire hundreds of employees. Or that the way the company was rescued was with a federal bailout of $10 million." That's the beginning.

Then there's the ad — which I might have heard about or maybe I just made it up (although I can promise you his opponents will think of it) — that would feature regular people who once worked at Bain and also the working people who lost their jobs after Bain consultants came in and recommended major cutbacks. This is something consultants like Bain often do: They are brought in so management can blame them when the hatchet comes down.

Finally, there's Massachusetts. My father was a Massachusetts Republican. Massachusetts Republicans are not like other Republicans. Romney would not have been elected governor otherwise. Scott Brown would not have been elected to the Senate. My first campaign was for a Massachusetts Republican and an old friend of my father's: Ed Brooke. I'm proud of it. But the support of people like me is not what helps Republicans anywhere other than Massachusetts.

One other thing my father taught me: You can't beat a horse with no horse.

Right now, Romney appears to be the only horse Republicans have. That may be one of the reasons why Barack Obama is beating all of the Republicans combined in terms of fundraising.

To find out more about Susan Estrich and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM


Comments

5 Comments | Post Comment
Methinks thou dost protest too much. This whole column amounts to "I am not a religious bigot--but other people are! That's why Romney cannot be elected." Notice the unexamined assumption: the one word 30 per cent of the group would use to describe Romney is "Mormon", ("LDS" is the preferred term). Why is the word "Mormon" a negative thing? Ms. Estrich just assumes that it is. JUST ASSUMES THAT IT IS NEGATIVE. What one word would describe President Obama? Hillary Clinton? Now, ask yourself what one word would you use to describe the concept of Mormonism? Based on this answer you can determine your attitude towards his religion. California has the largest population of LDS of any state. Not being from the West Coast Ms. Estrich has had less experience with this community than many. Like earthquakes, it is an aspect of the region to which I am sure she will become acclimated.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Cowboy Jay
Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:31 PM
Assume I am running as a liberal , Democratic candidate for President. I stand for smaller government, lower taxes, original intent in interpreting the Constitution, rugged individualism, and repeal of Roe v. Wade. Ms Estrich, would you think it "unpalatable" to question my credentials as a liberal Democrat? Similar bases are why Christians question Mormonism: it holds few of the basic tenets of historical Christianity.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Motley Wisdom
Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:03 AM
Let's discuss our current President's religion, or lack thereof!
Comment: #3
Posted by: Early
Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:52 AM
Regarding the comment that LDS does not follow some of the tenets other Christian groups believe, SO WHAT? Since when does a candidate for President have to pass a religious test for office? I know that Pope John Paul II did not include LDS in the Christian community he recognized--even though he finally let in the Lutherans and the Anglicans--but why should the Pope's opinion on theology have any effect on an election? Can we REALLY be arguing about how Christians should accept THE TRINITY? I was in a little mid-western town once where the Lutheran minister was building a new house. One of the trucks on the construction site lost its brakes and rolled into a ditch. A Catholic friend of mine saw it and said, "See what happens when you don't transubstantiate." The Trinity? Seriously? Bad dogma, bad dogma.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Cowboy Jay
Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:00 AM
To Cowboy Jay, you are almost there. Estrich's piece although dressed up as a refutation of religious discrimination was and was always intended to be a passive aggressive encouragement to those who discriminate against Romney on the basis of his Mormon beliefs to continue to so and a passive aggressive inducement those who would consider discriminating against Romney on such grounds to go right ahead. Her own bigotry is crystallized in her short sentence “But Mormon is only one of Romney's problems” The whole article was a transparently hypocritical hit piece, typical of liberalism a disease which rots the soul and which preaches inclusiveness but which practices the opposite. To Motley Wisdom, the notion of Democrats or liberals who would have the ignorant beleive that they espouse freedom and sanctity of life, standing for smaller government, lower taxes, an original intent construction of the Constitution and repeal of Roe v Wade, any of which would advance freedom and protect life, truly caused me to laugh at the absurdity of the notion.
Comment: #5
Posted by: joseph wright
Thu Oct 27, 2011 4:28 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Susan Estrich
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

15 Jul 2011 The Pelican Bay Strikers

14 Aug 2009 Two Problems

15 Feb 2008 The Heat in the Kitchen