One presidential candidate has a father who was a bigamist(four marriages). Another has a great-grandfather who was a polygamist.
Guess which story is getting more attention?
Do I think either story is relevant to the type of president they would be? Not really, although Obama’s history is closer to affecting him personally and perhaps affecting the types of decisions he would make as president.
But none of this is relevant in the relentless campaign by the media to make Mormons look “weird.”
I agree with Powerline’s take on the media attack:
Why, then, this interest in Romney’s great- and great-great grandfathers? It gives the press an opportunity to take a pot shot at Romney’s religion. He is a Mormon, and Mormons are Weird; the best evidence of this proposition is their former practice of polygamy. (Yet to come are articles on how the Mormons once discriminated against African-Americans. Watch for it: “While Mitt Romney insists that he himself is not a racist, … “)
There is something odd, though, about trying to hang the polygamy albatross around Romney’s neck. One of the obvious differences between Romney and his Republican rivals is that Mitt is the only one who has been married just once. So isn’t the polygamy rap a bit unfair?
I’m old enough to remember when it was commonly believed that a man who had been divorced couldn’t be elected President. (I believe Ronald Reagan was the first.) In today’s world, though, it’s Romney’s life-long monogamy that is a bit Weird, especially given the fact that the Romneys have five children. Polygamy a hundred years ago, monogamy today: that Romney character is a little Weird all the way around.