You know Obama supporters are getting desperate about their candidate’s electoral prospects when they start to play the anti-Mormon card.
In an October 23 opinion piece in the Washington Post , Barbara Reynolds launched a broadside against Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith, arguing that he has become the “face of Mormonism” in America and complaining “I find it strange that the media are not opening up a dialogue concerning Romney and his faith.”
Reynolds complained that Mitt Romney did not face the same media scrutiny that John F. Kennedy did for his faith: “I find it strange that the media are not opening up a dialogue concerning Romney and his faith with the same dedication as they scrutinized John F. Kennedy on whether his first loyalty would be to the pope or the presidency, or Jimmy Carter, who as a Southern Baptist, was grilled about what it meant to be born again.”
Perhaps Ms. Reynolds should follow the news more carefully. “The media” has certainly opened up a “dialogue” about Mormonism – or more accurately, a diatribe against the Mormon faith . (The liberal definition of “dialogue” appears to be an infomercial in favor of liberal policies.)
Reynolds also asserted: “I believe it is necessary, imperative even, to ask our politicians how their faith, if at all, will affect their decisions in office.” But Romney has already answered these questions.”
But what Reynolds really means is that Mormonism should be used by the media as a stick to bash Romney, because it’s an article of faith on the left that Mormonism is weird . Reynolds suggested bizarre questions about how the Mormon faith would relate to governmental policy, including: “Mormons reportedly believe that after the resurrection of Jesus, He appeared in Jackson County, Mo., where He will one day return and rule from a temple there and in Jerusalem. If this is correct, how does it affect your policy toward Israel?”
More cogent would be to ask how it affects his policy toward religious construction projects in western Missouri?
Reynolds argued that she is simply asking questions in a spirit of understanding, declaring “I suggest these questions as a [sic] ordained minister who is genuinely curious about the nexus of faith and politics. I welcome answers and comments in the spirit of open dialogue and understanding.”
It isn’t surprising when Obama supporters launch veiled attacks on Romney. It is depressing, however, that supporters of the president have become so desperate to re-elect their secular messiah that they have turned to religious bigotry to scare voters.
It is even more depressing that the Washington Post would publish veiled religious attacks. But this is the same newspaper that published a piece  about a Mormon massacre that happened over 150 years ago – in 1857. This massacre is still being talked about  in liberal circles – solely for historical interest, of course (although Romney’s name somehow finds its way into these articles).