The only white person I've ever seen is Anderson Cooper. Most of us are some shade of pink, brown or grey.

Apparently the best the Dems have got is that Romney is too good a man to be president. And they just might be right about that.

You're right about all the race baiting BS and the author although I'd say he's not so much smug as schizo. But...the Mormon Chruch has a strong racist history. Blacks were not 'people' according to its teachings until not long ago.

He's gaseous and it ain't unicorn gas..?

Ron Paul isn't white. He is invisible.

I checked out the photo and yup,Mitt Romney's family is all white. That's weird,but it gets stranger,Mitt Romney's real name is Willard,as in "Wach you talking bout Willard".

Stranger yet, Newt's middle name is Leroy,so he's not as white,also this statement, "Mr. Gingrich is hardly the standard-bearer for the invincible nuclear family.",seems to imply that he may be an even darker shade of pale because he chases or has chased some skirts. That sounds awfully demeaning to the non-white people.

Anyways,here's a great video talking about Mitt and Newt's names from some preacher dude that I found at BCF.

http://youtu.be/WQNB76s_8WQ

Its whachoo talking about Willis, not Willard.

In the postmodern world, colour, gender and race are not biological characteristics. They are political, as in "Corporations are oppressive; therefore they are white." See, for example, the deranged parents who want their child to choose its own gender. I say: Why stop at gender? Why not choose your own species? How 'bout all you enlightened pomos choose to be amoeba? Think how much quieter things would be.

Mitts father was born in Chihuahua Mexico. Mitt should play that card for the Mexican vote, but of course that would piss off a lot of whites. Maybe bring it up in casual conversation. More Mexican voters in California than Mormons in Utah.

So if Gingrich is a less desirable candidate and human being due to his poor record of familial fidelity what does that say about 75% of the Black males in the USA.Too many Afro-American children are raised in fatherless homes by mothers who don t have skills that allow them to get decent paying jobs.So where do they end up? on welfare of course being supported by the taxpayer not by the male who actually fathered the children.Most of these kids will repeat the cycle when they come of age and the viscious circle continues.
The Democrats have supported and promoted this as a way to guarantee that they will maintain the Afro-American vote in election after election.These people have no right to criticize Mitt Romney,Newt Gingrich or anyone else in politics.We have all seen the results of their choice for President.

Notice its always the left that bring up race?
Why? Frankly because the Democrats are the slave party & always have been.

Tea Party in Beverly Hills (best audio) Rev. Wayne Perryman "Blacks, Whites & Racist

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRE36Fxxx1w&feature=related

"Let's assume for a second that this is true, that holding moderate positions on immigration and having no personal history of divorce or adultery taints your whiteness and renders you less white."

This sentence doesn't make sense. In fact, the author argues -- ridiculously, I'll agree -- that Gingrich's history of divorce makes him "less white."

[Thanks, Lloyd. It was supposed to be *a* history of, not *no* history of. Fixed now. - EBD]

Should Romney get the nomination, and I have no strong feelings about whether he does or not, the media is going to go absolutely insane on the Mormon thing. It'll be a very difficult time indeed for Mormons (LDS church if you prefer) because the media are going to defame every aspect of Mormonism past or present, real or imagined. They aren't going to be constrained by any outmoded notions of truth or fairness, and they may very well go so far that it provokes a backlash -- but no matter, they won't be able to control themselves. It's going to be a frenzy.

Hey CJ,things wont be as bad for Mormons as the "UTAH WARS" were LOL!

It's just going to be a very ugly Presidential election.

What other problem could white Americans conceivably have with the disastrous presidency of this unqualified feckless, quasi-communist community organizer, other than that he's black
~EBD

For those who will vote for Obama one more time it isn't a contest of reason.
It is enough to know that America is still a majority white nation and that this majority white nation elected Obama in 2008.

I am so tired of this race talk.
Race is not going to be an issue with the white American vote this year as it was in 2008.

In2008 they all felt sorry for the poor black boy. Will they this time?

The New York Times' Board of Directors:

http://www.nytco.com/company/board_of_directors/index.html

LAS,

I've never heard the claim that mormons thought blacks weren't people. I know that they couldn't be clergy in the mormon church, but that's a different thing.

"Race is not going to be an issue with the white American vote this year as it was in 2008." - Oz

It may not be as much of an issue, but there are still an awful lot of white people - Democrats, prominent Democrat supporters, journos/pundits, celebrities, etc. - who insist, whether overtly or between the lines, that all opposition to Obama and his agenda is driven by racism.

It's about all they've got at this point.

Obama is the least black black man ever to run for president. He's not hip, he's got no game, he's got no style. He can't sing, he can't dance, he can't rhyme. If he weren't president, he'd get beaten up in Harlem. He's an embarrassment for two races.

But Michelle is 100% hood rat with a badonkadonk.

At the NYT site:
"Influence the WORLD Work for us". wtf.

More humility(always in fashion) AND credibility if prospects just wiped my arse.

http://www.nytco.com/careers/

Liberal extremists are incredible morons, exceeded only by the people who pay money to read such tripe

The bigger issue is going to be Romney's Mormonism, particularly as it pertains to evangelical voters. There are simply too many parallels between Mormonism and Islam for the average evangelical voter to feel comfortable voting for Romney. (Google "Nancy Mariah Winchester" or "Helen Mar Kimball" or "September 11" and "Mountain Meadow Massacre").

Ultimately, I think evangelicals will split between Rick Santorum and Ron Paul before rallying to Ron Paul as the only candidate who can stop Romney.

Ron Paul would get my vote. All of the rest are Progressives; including the demo 'present' President - actually the latter is closer to being a Communist.

Bains, Mitts 'success as a businessman company', owns the Conservative talk shows (Hannity, O'Rielly, Rush, Beck etc) for this reason they are all carrying water for Mitt: http://twitpic.com/86hxpn

Reminds me of the MSM in Canada lugging the buckets for the 'RED boys in Canada' - Turdo, Martin Jr., Crechin, and Mikey. I pray America enjoys the success of the only Man running who is fighting on the same side as the citizens - Dr. Ron Paul. Dr. Paul woould win the election for the American people - he would shred the 'present' President in every corner.

With Paul climbing to second place, Huntsman now backing Romney, and the neo-con vote splitting between Gingrich and Santorum, I really think conservatives ought to rally to Paul as the only conservative alternative to Romney.

His domestic policy is solid, and as for foreign policy, the U.S. won`t be able to afford continuing to be the world`s policeman if they go bankrupt because of out-of-control spending.

Also, I believe radical Islamists would be loathe to attack the U.S. under a Ron Paul presidency because they would see him kinda the same way that communists viewed Reagan - crazy enough (not to mention sufficiently detached from the Washington establishment) to drop the bomb if America were ever attacked.

You are correct, IMO, SoCon4Ron.

Fight fire with fire.
Romney/Palin 2012...=)

"It’s true that Mr. Romney’s opponents are all white as well. But each is tainted in his own way."

So... Lee Siegel equates non-whiteness with a "taint"? That seems pretty racist to me.

I hate this article more than life itself. Lee Siegel is the reason I will celebrate when this stupid, arrogant newspaper goes out of business, unspeakably condescending pr*ck that he is. "(Does he [Huntsman] really think it’s an asset, in the eyes of a Republican primary voter, to speak Mandarin?)"
"...the followers of George Wallace, a manic moment even most evangelicals would rather forget."
"Rick Santorum is an Italian-American Catholic..." Yeah, Italians are only kinda white. Those retards in flyover country are pretty darned bigoted if you ask Lee Siegel.
"But Mormonism is still imagined by its adherents as a religion founded by whites, for whites, rooted in a millenarian vision of an America destined to fulfill a white God’s plans for earth." - Well I'm sure Lee knows a lot of Mormons and has talked to them and stuff, so he's not just guessing here. Any generalizations about how Muslims view their religion, Lee? Or would that be deplorable? By the way, Mr. Smuggenheimer, the more Conservative Republicans can barely stand Romney. They think he's a Rino. They will hold their noses to vote for Mr. Whitey McWhitenson if they have to. They don't want to. The more conservative they are, the less they like him.
"By the time he intones the Puritans’ alabaster ideal of America as a “shining city on a hill,”..." - that's supposed to be clever, is it? Yeah, take that, Cotton Mather.

BTW, the NYT is worried that it might be too impartial.

Well at least Mitt, has managed more than a Lemon Aid Stand in Harlem, which is about the extend of Obama's work experience and knowledge of business. Obama is the result of Diversity Programs that he has benefitted from his whole life. Failed math again, that's OK let him pass he is black. Don't know how many states are in the USA, failed geography again, that's ok he's black let him pass...So far he has never released any of his school grades from Kindergarten to University. No body knows anything about his history other than he is half white and he has badly screwed up the US.

Jackie Mason on why Blacks can't get a cab in New York city. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFfLaIEpaWU

Jackie Mason Obama's Fraud http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZ5c6hxqXq4&feature=related

Black Mamba, I agree with every word you wrote. This is one of the most repellent articles ever in the NYT. Everything in it is entirely about who people are by race rather than anything about what they stand for or what they believe or say.

eh? wrote:

Mormons are weird?

The depth of your commentary leaves me humbled....

cgh@7:02:

Everything in it is entirely about who people are by race ...

... rather than anything about what they stand for or what they believe or say. [Emphasis added]

You have not plumbed the depths of the author's depravity. For him and his ilk, race is not biological (because not even the biological is biological). It is political: one's race is a function of one's politics (You know, 'cuz everything is political, right?). How else can you understand his claims that Romney is whiter that Gingrich; that he's the whitest candidate, etc. These are not claims about biological race. Nor were the left's claims that Clinton was the first black president (How soon they forget.), that Clarence Thomas and Herman Cain are not really black men, although presumably both are tainted by an overactive libido. (Whatever happened to the libido, anyway?) Nor is my particular favorite: "Corporations are oppressive; therefore they are white."

I remember how supporive the Democrats were of Cain and how upset they were to see a real black man out of the running for the president.

No, wait a minute, I don't.

Mormonism does seem to be extremely weird, but so what? "Doesn't subscribe to a weird but harmless religion" shouldn't be one of any sane person's presidential musts.

Paul - Nottingham - well as nick points out, he's not really black.

(I had a Mormon great-uncle. Apparently he wasn't allowed to drink coffee but he liked to take magic mushrooms.)

I just love these sories that break down what it takes to be a dogmatic lefty. Primarily it appears that some pathalogical neurosis or trauma is needed to produce the frail mental state that make a proper host for left wing dogma.

Again, this confirms that people who think in terms of race in social matters are, in fact and practice, "racists".

Personally, race and ethnicity never entred my thinking when engaging in politics, socializing or organizing at work. It wasn't until the onset of leftit race poitics (AKA multiculturalism) that we even put any value on such things as race quotas when making political or personal decisions - at least it was that way for me, and I'm sure I'm not alone on this issue. I guess we were too sevely normal for Lefty so he had to whip up racial friction where there was none with his obsessing over race - as I said earlier this is an indication of a deep neurosis - either the guy is uncomfortable in his skin or he has deep guilt fantacies crippling his thinking processes.

At any rate, I have no time to act as groupt therapy experiment for race obsessed leftards, If they ever accuse me of racism, I'll thank them to prove it in the legitimate common courts when I sue.

Kevin @ January 15 10:34 "Ron Paul isn't white. He is invisible."

You owe me a keyboard for that one! lol

"Race is not going to be an issue with the white American vote this year as it was in 2008."

I expressed myself poorly earlier, EBD.
What I meant is that race won't be a motive, not an issue per se.
Obama was an unknown, many called him a "stealth candidate" because so little was known of him or his positions on issues, which allowed him to be all things to all people.
Many voted for this unknown candidate precisely because he was black to get beyond the race issue personally.

I think that in this cycle, the only people who are going to vote for him because of his melanin content are going to be blacks and most everyone else are going to vote on the record of his first term as POTUS, especially the white majority.

So the people who are all concerned about Romney being a Mormon are quite willing to overlook the fact that Obama attended the church of Reverend Wright for 20 years.In fact he was married in that church and his children were baptized in that church.They want the rest of us to believe that Romneys religion should disqualify him for the Presidency while accepting that Obamas pastor of 20 years was a racist out of control lunatic.

It never ceases to amaze me how ignorance runs amok when religion and politics are mentioned in the same sentence.

I'm LDS. I guess I'm weird if you think not fooling around on your spouse is weird OR following the Word of Wisdom OR helping my neighbour OR attending church every Sunday OR paying tithing .....

Blacks were not generally given the preisthood until 1978 but there is a fab website, blacklds.org which details the Church's black history. LDS church members generally treated 'blacks' better (members were mostly from the north as well as some Canucks) than other religions. Remember racism ran amok thru the 1800's and first halfish of the 1900's throughout American society. Part of the problem the Church had was their fair treatment of black people.

While the LDS church has significant differences to other Christian religions (which some may characterize as weird because it is unknown or different) it does have many aspects the same. A more fair comparison would be to the church Christ established during his ministry - as this is what the LDS Church claims.

I realize many of you don't care what religion a person lives - but those of you who do It would be appreciated if you would find facts from the source. (lds.org)
I don't ask my atheist sister what a Catholic believes....

Andy, I don't think it's so much the issues you mention as other issues like the Planet Kobol, polygamous past, blood atonement (or "honour killings" in more popular parlance, which the LDS seems to have backed away from, but not many of their fundamentalist offshoots), eternal godhood progression, their founding prophet bedding 14-year-old girls, etc. And yeah, that ties into the LDS and their 200-year-old history, given that there are still plenty of fundamentalist offshoots that the LDS has not completely come to grips with (FLDS? Warren Jeffs?) which make evangelicals uncomfortable.

Quite frankly, if Romney were a non-Brighamite Mormon - either Communities of Christ (formerly known as the RLDS) or a Rigdonite/Bickertonite Mormon (for non-Mormons these are the second and third largest Mormon denominations respectively) - his Mormonism would probably not be an issue.

In the case of the CoC/RLDS, they reorganized under Smith's first wife, immediate family, and oldest son - all who rejected polygamy, polytheism, temple garments (often referred to in popular non-Mormon parlance as "magic underwear"), quasi-secretive temple rites, blood atonement, etc - and basically moved their branch of Mormonism closer to the evangelical Christian mainstream, albeit with the Book of Mormon.

The Rigdonite/Bickertonite Mormons (aka The Church of Jesus Christ) also went through a similar process of reformation and reconciliation to bring them closer to the mainstream of Christianity, after the death of Joseph Smith, Jr, and in fact were the first Mormon church to admit blacks to the priesthood and I believe the apostleship.

On the other hand, the Brighamite Mormons (aka, LDS, FLDS, Kingston Group, most fundamentalist and polygamous offshoots) made their way to Utah, where they further practiced and expanded the excesses of Joseph Smith, Jr., until forced to back down a bit as a condition for Utah's acceptance as statehood into the U.S.

What concerns evangelical voters is the hovering question mark over whether LDS leadership (including old families like the Romney's and the Huntsman's who descend from Joseph Smith, Jr's close friend Parley Pratt) has gone through a similar reformation, or whether they are practicing Mormon takya. For instance, the LDS still seem reluctant to own the social damage caused by polygamy - including that of their fundamentalist offshoots. Google "Tapestry against Polygamy" the book "God's Brothel" or "lost boys" and "Mormon" to get a sense of why evangelicals are concerned.

Heh, eh? Is Obama's "Black Liberation Theology" (Marxism with pews)" weird?

I'm old enough to remember the controversy over JFK's Catholicism: the fear was that he'd be working for the Vatican instead of America.
After this "controversy" was put to rest I had come to feel that we'd "come a long way baby", but maybe not, what?
OMG! The Pope did him in for not doing the Vatican's bidding. OMG!

But on a serious note, the right answer to these smears is to simply suggest that most religions seem weird to outsiders and that, besides, one's religion will have no bearing on public policy in a large complex republic like America. This is also basically what I say to people angry about Michele Bachman's views on homos. Romney should just say, look, I don't want to defend myself by countering with "weird" views and practices in other religions, including Islam. Let's drop this. It has no relevance whatsoever.

On a personal note, I was 11 in 1960. I can very vividly recall the nuns' announcement in my parochial school of the exciting news of a Catholic winning the presidency. Even at age 11, I thought it was weird that religion would be a factor.

The true weakness in Siegel's facile race argument is indeed Romney's Mormon faith, as a few folks here have observed.

Far from being the ideal "white American guy", Romney's Mormonism is a liability for him with evangelical Christians: the biggest single "white" political constituency in the US. That constituency only reluctantly accepts Catholics as Christians; they see Mormons as wacky cultists and heretics.

Now, if Romney were Pentecostalist or Baptist...

"Mormons are weird. Polite, but weird."

Was this a stray thought that occurred to you as you knelt down last Sunday chewing on the flesh and drinking the blood of your church's hero?

Jebus H baldheaded lamplightin' Cripes on a flaming pogo stick!

There is no problem with a black President!

A black President hasn't been elected yet!

A mixed-race minority, oreo, mulatto, half-breed or whatever?

Yes.

Black? Not unless you're counting Moochelle Antoinette as it.

bobby b: "Was this a stray thought that occurred to you as you knelt down last Sunday chewing on the flesh and drinking the blood of your church's hero?"

The discussion centred not on Mormonism's relative merits as a religion but its relevance to Romney's campaign; it should have been possible for both you and "eh?" to have discussed the pros and cons of that without being offensive about it.

And you stooped to being offensive to Catholics as well.

You must be doubly proud.

Hmmm. I'm sure the comment isn't entirely original, but wanting to vote Obama out of office in 2012 is because of his race, but voting him into office in 2008 was not.

And failed policies during Jimmah Carter's presidency was a valid reason for voting him out, but similar failed policies under Obama is not.

Democratic logic is fascinating.

If Obama was white he would simply be seen as incompetent and would be thrown out of office. The fact that he is black and incompetent seems to blind millions of lefties to the fact that they made a mistake, because suddenly it's a race issue. It isn't and never was. He is simply incompetent. No hope, No change.