Questions about Romney's ties to Marriott porn sales

Christian Broadcasting Network ^ | July 2, 2007 | David Brody

[Grunthor]

“So, if the Mormon Priest, Mitt Romney, owned stock in perhaps Planned Parenthood, that wouldn’t be duplicitous in your eyes since he wouldn’t be doing the abortions personally, just collecting profits from them. Is that about it?”

If George Bush still owned staock in a baseball team and that baseball team sucked, would that be his fault?

[donna]

So, if the Mormon Priest, Mitt Romney, owned stock in perhaps Planned Parenthood, that wouldn’t be duplicitous in your eyes since he wouldn’t be doing the abortions personally, just collecting profits from them. Is that about it?

Isn't that the difference between a pimp and a prostitute?

[ears_to_hear]

He wants to claim to be a “conservative leader” THAT is the problem, just like the LDS taking a tithe and other “offerings” from Porn, it says something about the “heart “

[Grunthor]

“He wants to claim to be a “conservative leader” THAT is the problem, just like the LDS taking a tithe and other “offerings” from Porn, it says something about the “heart “”

I don’t care one whit about his religion. I care wether or not he would be a good POTUS. From everything I have seen so far, I remain unconvinced. I just do not care that the Momons own Marriott and that Marriott offers adult films in their rooms.

Freedom of religion, free market and all that rot taken into account, your molehill remains exatly that.

[L.N. Smithee]

Why, you’re welcome, though there’s nothing “straw” about suggesting to Romney a course of action that would remove him from a posture of hypocrisy.

By your own reply, it's crystal clear it's a straw man argument! This is what you wrote:

---

Not worried that Romney might actually make any such donations. In fact, [I'm] certain he won’t.

---

There are several sources for multiple definitions of "straw man":

• Merriam-Webster Online: "A weak or imaginary opposition (as an argument or adversary) set up only to be easily confuted."
• American Heritage Dictionary: "An argument or opponent set up so as to be easily refuted or defeated."
• Barron's Law Dictionary: "A colloquial expression designating those arguments in briefs or opinions created solely for the purpose of debunking or "discovering" them. Arguments so created are like "straw men" because they are, by nature, insubstantial."
• WordNet: "A weak argument set up to be easily refuted."
• Wikipedia: "A straw man argument is a logical fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw-man argument" is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact a misleading fallacy, because the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted..."

The Wikipedia definition best described what you have done, because you

• Ignore Romney spokepeople's position on his activities as a director, choosing to suggest without evidence that he had a part in the in-room entertainment policy;
• Allege that Romney has "failed to even attempt to stop porn distribution" when the official position of the Marriott Corporation is that the issue would not have come up before the board of directors, and that if it did, and he had attempted to stop it, Marriott would not comment on it publicly;
• Allege -- without proof that only could be provided by either Romney or the Marriott Corporation -- that part of being "an active, hands-on...extraordinarily effective director" and "visionary leader" meant effecting policy on in-room entertainment choices;
• Openly admitted that you suggested that Romney be asked a question for which you are "certain" the reply would be "no," after which you could continue in attack mode.

THAT is a straw man argument.

Now, rather than engaging in unproven projections about YOUR motivation, I will put a question to you that can be answered "Yes" or "No."

Think of the person that, at present, you would like to see become the next President. Got it?

Now, suddenly, that person has converted to Mormonism.

Do you still want him/her to be President? Yes or No.

[restornu]

So, if the Mormon Priest, Mitt Romney, owned stock in perhaps Planned Parenthood, that wouldn’t be duplicitous in your eyes since he wouldn’t be doing the abortions personally, just collecting profits from them. Is that about it?

So are we going to hold this standard for all who are conservative that might profit from a hotel who is not on the clean hotel.com list?

What about the Hawthorn Hotel who is not on the Clean Hotel list?

This is a Hotel Rush Limbough endorses?

[restornu]

Hey smarty pant donna are also calling Rush Linbough a Pimp?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1859880/posts?page=286#286

[MHGinTN]

Resty, dear one, Rush Limbaugh is not running for President and his religious beliefs do not make the claim to be THE restored highest form of Christianity, nor does Rush claim to be a priest in Mormonism or even a godly man. Rush does claim to be a staunch conservative ... distinguishing him from moderate Mitt, by the way.

Apparently you Mormonism Apologists feel that somehow if your guy is questioned that dragging down others will elevate the Oven Mitt. Keep it up, you’re killing his chances.

[ears_to_hear]

A man that misrepresents his world view will never make a “good president” Look at Bush

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Dude, whatever. Go do something productive. Stop trying to ruin everyone else’s fun.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Meanwhile Fred Thompson has proudly hired an openly gay men to serve as a senior advisor to his campaign.

He's probably more conservative than Mitt ROFL

So what, he also worked on Santorum's campaign.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

You can either live in a godless amoral socialist liberal world, or a moral one that also happens to respect private property rights.

Reducing the size of gov't and reforming the tax system benefits the social conservative agenda more, not less. That's hardly aspiring to live in an "amoral socialist liberal" world.

If you prefer the democrat version, I'd recommend switching parties.

Bible-thumping busybodies are just as bad as left-wingers.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

I can not wait to see her hot body in her new bikini at the pool.

Uh, which hotel are you and the wife staying at? I may need to, uh, stop for directions....to visit my grandmother in case I get lost! Yeah, that's it, my grandmother! :-)

[GSWarrior]

You know, these types of hit pieces only convert the already-converted. Basically, you are preaching to the choir. No Romney supporter is going to abandon his camp over this. In fact, making a big deal over this is more likely to backfire on you, IMO...in effect raising Romney's "cool" factor, if you will.

i wonder how many Marriott properties Duncan Hunter has stayed in over the years?

[restornu]

Resty, dear one, Rush Limbaugh is not running for President and his religious beliefs do not make the claim to be THE restored highest form of Christianity, nor does Rush claim to be a priest in Mormonism or even a godly man. Rush does claim to be a staunch conservative ... distinguishing him from moderate Mitt, by the way.

Apparently you Mormonism Apologists feel that somehow if your guy is questioned that dragging down others will elevate the Oven Mitt. Keep it up, you’re killing his chances.

It matters not if Rush is not running for president he is very powerful voice almost as much as the president and some think he is!

I respect Rush and my point here is to show that those like you are a hypocrite!

Stop calling me dear one, when in the same breath you go out of your way to distort and use sites that made a life living out of peddling omi$$ion, di$tortion$, and outright lie$, against the LDS they were rebels in their faith all churches have them. It is disappointing when one wants to undermind one from a notorious hate site and don’t even inform the reader you let them think it came from an official site!

“The Tanners ULM!”

Say what ever you want as long as it is factual!

IT IS EVEDENT THAT THE DESIRE FOR THE TRUTH IS LACKING IN YOU AND NEITHER IS IT IN THE TANNER aka ULM, OR THEY WOULD HAVE THE CURRENT KNOWLEDGE LISTED! At leasted remove it from their site but they are banking on you not to do your homework and to put the LDS through hoops for sport!

I don’t see the LDS out beating the drum, endlessly campaigned to cast aspersions on other faith!

A practicing LDS spends their time building up the Lord Kingdom, and those like you spend time like Noah nemesis trying to obstruct the work.

Excerpt from Jeff Linday (LDS)
1998 Update: I have received multiple e-mails indicating the Smithsonian Institution has backed down after all, and that the 1996 Statement is no longer sent to people making inquiries.

Apparently, they are simply noting that the Book of Mormon is not a scientific guide and therefore not used by the Institution. Although the Institution apparently has reversed its former policy of issuing a critical document, the Smithsonian Statement in its various forms will continue to be circulated by anti-Mormon critics for many years.

Thus, there is still a need to deal with the document and the issues it raises. 2001 Update: Some critics have alleged that I am mistaken and that the Smithsonian has not changed the statement it send people. They are wrong. I called the Smithsonian on Feb. 7, 2001 and asked them to send me the standard statement that they send people concerning the Book of Mormon. Here is the letter that they sent me in return:

The Smithsonian Institution's 1996 "Statement Regarding the Book of Mormon" Response prepared by Jeff Lindsay, © 2001

[donna]

So, does this mean that you support porn in hotels like Mitt does?

[restornu]

Donna I asked you if you practic double standards and hold Rush responsible for endorsing Hawthron Hotel too, for a profits?

BTW NOT of all of the Marriott hotels offer this, just a few of those independant franchies?

[donna]

Is Rush running for office? I’ll never vote for him!

What about you? Are you going to vote for one of the porn-rich?

[AFA-Michigan]

“Now, suddenly, that person has converted to Mormonism. Do you still want him/her to be President? Yes or No.”

Don’t care, Smithee. Instead of straw men, you keep putting up softballs.

Unless you are one, I’ve helped elect more Mormons to public office than you’ve probably ever met.

[Salvation]

**Marriott hotel chain’s profits of pornography sales during his nearly ten years on the Board of Directors in the 1990’s.**

Hmmmm.