They don't need to dip into anti-Catholic bigotry to attack Santorum - his record is awful enough that it makes such attacks unnecessary.

About the only time I've heard Santorum's religion brought up with respect to attacks on him has usually been in conjunction with some policy that he's advocated on the stump.

It would be inappropriate for any candidate to make Romney's Mormonism an issue in this campaign.

It would also be a bit unrealistic to expect average voters, particularly devout Christians, to entirely ignore some of Mormonism's more... esoteric... claims.

In regard to your last sentence:

Is there a religious minority for whom that is NOT true?

Perhaps, those which do not share Christianity's "main precept"?

He's seeking a second term, remember.

He still needs to pretend he's a Christian.

:)

(Psych!)

Unable to locate the link, but there was a fairly recent poll that suggests there is more potential anti-Mormon bias among liberal voters than among conservative Evangelicals. Think the hysteria over the Mormon church's involvement in Proposition 8 in California to get an idea.

Any time the anti-Mormon card is played, it should be countered with a clip of Jeremiah Wright. Although if people didn't care in 2008, they're not likely to care in 2012.

Mormonism is NOT one of my quarrels with Romney. And in fact the "I like to be able to fire people who provide me with bad service" line actually warmed my heart a little, while Perry's inept, populist, 'hail Mary' use of a prejudicial term like "vulture capitalism" to stigmatize perfectly legal and legitimate competitive activity was disheartening.

My problem with Romney is that I view him as a mild centrist weather-vane, who hates controversy enough, to quickly buckle under relatively minor pressure, and turn against his party's aims. I fear that it will take little more than a few mean spirited op-eds and Mitt will be calling his right wing critics 'crazy' and trying to shelter from the 'Tea Party madness' with the left who will just laugh and condemn him. Unfortunately he displayed this tendency to attack his own base very early in the debates, when he successfully tried to scuttle Rick Perry's social security reform rhetoric as 'scary' and 'outside the mainstream'. He still denies that in the first edition of his book he mentioned Romneycare was a model for the whole nation. But he did. He's creepy that way. Trying to get Anderson Cooper to pull Rick Perry off of him when he was telling Rick that essentially 'real presidents know when to shut up and let people talk' didn't help.

He governed Massachusetts as a slightly left of center moderate and was not all that popular when he left. (Indicating he fails to understand the great lesson that the left DOES hate us even when we kowtow to them and run interference for them when they are under pressure).

He created a statewide program that became the model for Obamacare and STILL hasn't really had a mea culpa moment over that, yet he claims to be a staunch enemy of Obamacare. Is he? Is he down for that fight? On the weather vane theme, I do not want to have to spend the next four years blowing harder than the press and an angry democratic base to keep him on course for big politically dangerous projects like repealing Obamacare.

What if he wins, and he doesn't like the inevitable opposition flak? What if he swings left and in the process condemns the tea party and tries to take us all back to the big tent, inoffensive, milquetoast, quiet, pre-shamed version of the GOP that talks about smothering evil social conservatism and redefining fiscal conservatism into 'compassionate conservatism' ? What if, in the long run he settles for only slowing down the democratic agenda a little as a compromise?Is that really much of a win for Republicans, conservatives, right-wingers, libertarians, and moderates who have abandoned Obama and want a real antidote to change ?

I think the answer is no.

If Romney wants more than a depressed tepid measure of "anyone but Obama" support from me this November and beyond, then his work is cut out for him.

The Mormonism I have no problem with. It's MItt himself. A tough, confident, fearless Mormon who was promising to make the Tea Party proud of him would be very EASY for me to support with great enthusiasm. Believe me.

"It is amazing how blind the fear of Mormonism makes you and others."
This is disgusting. You are blaming someone who criticized Romney on plainly non-religious grounds, and insisting that it is all about his religion. News flash: people can criticize Romney without being bigots. I would gladly vote for Huntsman, but I dislike Romney because I think he is a lying demagogue with no moral core. So am I an anti-mormon bigot too?

"Newt and Perry and Huntsman have forever disqualified themselves as Conservatives the same as though they came out for abortion."
And when Romney demagogues and lied about Perry's calls to reform Social Security, that didn't forever disqualify Romney?

I think it is obvious that you are blindly defending Romney BECAUSE of his religious beliefs. Just like many Catholics blindly defend Santorum because of his religious beliefs -- despite Santorum being the worst candidate in the field from a fiscal conservative standpoint.

You think Romney was lying when he ran for governor (because he had to pander to a left leaning audience), but telling the truth now (even though he is pandering to a right leaning audience). I think Romney is a liar now. His lies about the rest of the Republican field have revealed that he cares for nothing but raw power. And the shallow appeals to the religion card by his followers are signs that the man cannot be defended on the merits.

I don't find his religion suspect Petunia. I don't care about his religion.

I am a Lutheran and if Mitt was a Lutheran I'd still have the same complaints about him. He's an unreliable quasi-conservative who has favored big government approaches more often than not and is pretty unrepentant about it. He attacked Perry for saying that Social Security is a massively under financed ponzi scheme in need of being reformed or replaced.

Where's the Mormon problem in that?

I've already mentioned several times in the corner's comments that I'm angry at Perry's recent attacks on so called 'vulture capitalism' and I've said that attacking Mitt from the left is a horribly misguided strategy. I've also said that I LIKED hearing MItt say that it's good to be able to fire someone who gives you bad service instead of being stuck with them forever because they are an extension of he federal government. Again, where's the fear and hatred of Mormons in that ?

Your mind reading act is both lame and silly.