I think you are way off the mark with this post and the op. I believe the point of the post was to try to use big words and play the role of Nostradamus to make yourself sound smart while stating you do not like the idea of a Mitt in the White Home. Didn't work this time for me.
I look forward to your next attempt eagerly.
active, decent, card-carrying Mormons will not be the avant-garde activists decrying the follies of LDS leaders high or low.
your place in the show is the loyal apologists who will spin ever-more creative apologetics and faithful fairy tales.
I'm surprized Colton or Jason haven't put me out to pasture, yet.
I know when I'm being an ***. And when being right just sounds like that.
This topic has no connection to the truthfulness or virtue of God, or His willingness to love and sustain Mormons in their efforts to build the family of God. Catholics and Protestants have already had their day in the political sun, with the same result for their faiths as what I'm saying the LDS will experience. A whole lot of folks realizing that a religious man in politics is just oxymoronic. Maybe more succinctly put as "moronic on steroids."
But my point is Mitt isn't any more representative of Mormonism than Harry Reid, and certainly no better as a politician. And just exactly why can I say that without any caveat or humble little expression that maybe I'm just wrong for all I know???? For the same reason I didn't think Obama was "real change". . . . . because of the people standing in the background in support of his run. George Bush maybe instead of Bill Clinton, but the same corporates including pharmaceutic cartelists and military suppliers and wall street bankers and a whole pack of eager beaver schemers doing an end-run around Constitutional principles and hoping to manage the world without actually honoring human rights.
If Mormons get linked to Mitt in the public mind, the time will come when it will be a huge problem for LDS missionary credibility.