Newsweek ran an cover article on Mitt Romney for the October 8 issue. Don't let the title fool you. It doesn't have anything to do with Mitt's missionary service in the LDS church. However, the article effectively becomes a collection of "shock topic" words written into a poli-religious mash-up, all in an effort to tear down Mitt Romney's credibility as a presidential candidate. From the beginning of the article, the authors attack Mitt simply because he did not immediately express a perfect love and a perfect memory of a church building where he attended as a young child. He has probably attended scores of church buildings for religious services in his life, and yet he is expected to have a perfect memory of the one in Pontiac, MI.
Elise Soukup and Daniel McGinn combined forces to write some of the most biased opinion piece on Romney that I have seen in a long time. I have been waiting for an article like this to come out. Basically, they throw a bunch of random info about Mitt Romney, as well as interview tid bits, and bind it together with a lot of "data" that can't be verified in any way to end up with this article.
As for the random info about Mitt, they forgot to mention how he does in states where people DO get to know him, AND his history. Let's take IOWA for example. See chart here of Romney's polling in Iowa: http://iowansforromney.blogspot.com/2007/09/romney-still-polling-at-head-of-pack-in.html Look at the graph that shows Romney's polling in Iowa.
Romney's lead in Iowa has steadily risen since he started spending a lot of time in the state hosting luncheons, "Ask Mitt Anything" evens, etc. It is this simple: the more people see and hear Mitt, the more they want to vote for him. That's what the media DOES NOT WANT AMERICA TO KNOW. So Newsweek, which could also be renamed "Opinion Week", takes one for the liberal left media team and runs a story like this. And why not?? No one will get too upset. No one will get fired over it. It is a typical "Trash and Run" tactic of the media where they make biased or false claims against someone, and then by the time the story is determined to be biased or false, the magazine has moved on to bigger and better dirt, and has conveniently run out of time to write a correction piece. My big complaint: IS there anything sacred anymore? The author basically brags about how they asked Mitt "uncomfortable" questions, and then watched him "squirm". Let me translate that into English rather than the author's own angle on it: " They asked Mitt inappropriate questions about specific, sacred parts of his religion, and then watched as he made an effort to keep the interview on track, and not allow the interviewer to make the interview into a Mormon Bashing Party." Does that sound better? Or rather more realistic? Even the caption under the first photo is over the line. They love to take mis-understood aspects of the LDS faith, and throw them into the wind to see where they will fall. No explanation, no background, no attempt at all to maintain any level of sacredness for the LDS religion. All in the name of shock values. "Trash and Run" folks. Need I say more?
As for the interview tidbits, we only get to see the interviewers selected parts of the interviews. That's why print media is becoming a thing of the past, because we can see entire interviews, body language, and FULL CONTEXT by watching interviews on YouTube. A picture is worth 1000 words, but a video on YouTube is worth a novel!
As for the data, the authors tried to make some major "generalizations" about the LDS church while trying to re-educate us on Mitt and his religion. My favorite line is "Mindful of the sway of evangelical Christians over the GOP base, he has positioned himself as the candidate with conservative principles and strong faith, even adopting evangelical language in calling Jesus Christ his "personal savior" (vernacular not generally used by members of the Mormon Church) ". Um, where did they get their info on this one? I know plenty of LDS believers who openly say that Jesus is their personal savior. After all, it's what they believe as a religion. Who did they ask to determine what "general vernacular" is for members of the "Mormon" church? Maybe Elise Soukup and Daniel McGinn need to take 10 minutes to talk to actual LDS leaders to find out that the church is found all over the world, and to say that the church has "general vernacular" is almost impossible due to the size and multi-cultural nature of the church.
Overall this article was a disappointment to Romney supporters, as well as LDS believers. Both are attacked in this article. I am a little surprised that Newsweek would run this considering who owns Newsweek. They spent a lot of money to maintain republican interests over the years, so why the slander against the one man who can actually beat Hillary in an election?