Your Vote Counts, But Does It Matter?
I’ll have to admit. When it came down to it, on election
night, a part of me wanted Mitt Romney to win over Barack Obama. Does that mean
I would have voted for him? No. There’s a big difference. I feel that I am
accountable for who I vote for, so I never would vote for someone who doesn’t
adhere to certain principles. At the same time, I recognized that perhaps the
only thing our country had going for us was a change.
It was interesting to read all the early morning, early
afternoon comments from people on Election Day, declaring their pride in the
democratic process of each citizen having the ability to cast a vote. Most of
them had just returned from the polls, or were waiting in line and felt the
need to declare to the world through social media that they were performing
their civic duty. There is a sense of accomplishment when one does something
even this simple, when there is an understanding of the collective impact in
can have on a city, state, and nation.
Read more »Labels: election, Obama, president, Romney, voter fraud
The Mormon Mourning
I'll be honest, I have been completely shocked this past week to hear the reactions from the outcome of the presidential election. A large number of my Facebook friends are of the Mormon faith, and they seem to be in mourning. These same people, who a day earlier were singing the praises of a free land where every voice is heard, and every vote counts, now curse the fraudulent nature of the voting system that has apparently been manipulate by men with dirty hands.
Let me clear up a few things to try and ease the pain and suffering I've witnessed among those who supported Mitt. This is also done in an attempt to inform those who are not Mormon, that not all Mormons are in mourning. The way I look at it, Obama and Romney were pretty much the same. They like a war-based foreign policy, showed no commitment to cut spending, supported government run healthcare, and have an agenda of "security for America" (aka less freedom).
Here are some things to consider before you lose all hope in the future of our country:
1. I don't believe Mitt Romney was God's choice. I have no doubt he is a wonderful caring man, so I'm going to chalk up his political platform to ignorance. I have a hard time understanding how someone who supports the Patriot Act, the Federal Reserve, detaining US citizens indefinitely without a trial, and an aggressive, military minded foreign policy - I have a hard time understanding how he was the hope of a people who follow the Prince of Peace.
2. Mitt Romney was not going to save the Constitution. Ron Paul was. Mitt even acknowledged
(see here) that Paul was the expert on the matter. One one occasion, Romney was asked if it was constitutional to declare war without a declaration of war, Romney said "I'd have to consult my attorneys".
3. I have not lost faith in my religion. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is still true. To clarify again for those not familiar with the Mormon Church, here is our church's statement on
political neutrality. Our church as a whole was not backing Romney. I don't consider this a defeat for Mormonism. I wonder how many Mormons would have voted for Romney if he wasn't Mormon, and actually understood his policies on war, the federal reserve, civil liberties, etc. I also wonder who they would have voted for if Obama was the Mormon. I understand that many did know his policies and still supported him, but I also know of many who didn't listen to one debate, have no idea what he stood for, and voted heavily based on his religious persuasion.
4. I didn't vote for Romney, and not all Mormons did. I've always said, "The only thing more disturbing than not voting for someone because of their religion, is voting FOR someone BECAUSE of their religion." Again, this is not to say that all who voted for him did so based on religion, but it's just to reinforce that I don't understand how so many people can be SO devastated that he lost, when his record in Massachusetts and his platform is so disturbing.
I've played this over in my mind countless times. My wife has even asked me if I think I'm clouded. I've thought that many times through this whole election process. I keep having this one thought come into my mind: It's the actions that count. It's not what a man says in politics, but it's how he votes and it's the policies that he puts in place that is the measure of who he is.
Thus concludes my one and only Election 2012 post. Good night all.
Labels: election, mormon, mormons, Obama, presidential, Romney
Your Only Two Choices
Tomorrow we will find out who wins the Presidential Election, Barack Obama or Mitt Romney. We only have two possible results. The interesting thing is on my mail in ballot there are five other candidates that are listed. Of course, I've never heard of these people, and they have no shot of winning, but nonetheless, they are on the ballot. Ron Paul will probably end up with more votes than any of those five other no-names, and he'll only be a write-in. This got me thinking, what if all of our options in life were limited to two?
What if there were only two possible women you could marry, and you weren't attracted to either of them?
What if there were only two movies to watch at the theater?
What if you only had two occupational choices out of college?
What if there were only two kinds of ice cream?
Labels: Obama, presidential debate, Romney
"We ask you to contribute just a little more"
In watching the replay of the Presidential Debate that was held in Denver a few months back I'm getting really annoyed with President Obama's sly suggestion that in order to increase revenue he is "asking that those of us who have done very well in this country contribute a little bit more to reduce the deficit". Seriously, this makes me want to throw up. What he really means is: "We want to steal more of your money to make up for corrupt decisions that include endless war, the federal reserve, and foreign aid."
A recurring theme in
The Book of Mormon is that wicked kings loved to tax people heavily to be "supported in their laziness, and in their idolatry, and in their whoredoms, by the taxes which (the king) had put upon his people; thus did the people labor exceedingly to support iniquity."
Mosiah 11:6
King Benjamin said: "And even I, myself, have labored with mine own hands that I might serve you, and that ye should not be laden with taxes, and that there should nothing come upon you which was grievous to be borne..."
Mosiah 2:14.
King Noah did: "And he laid a tax of one fifth part of all they possessed, a fifth part of their gold and of their silver, and a fifth part of their ziff, and of their copper, and of their brass and their iron; and a fifth part of their fatlings; and also a fifth part of all their grain."
Mosiah 11:3
King Noah is known as the most wicked king in
The Book of Mormon and he only taxed 20%. Add up all
the taxes we pay in different forms today and many pay over 50% in tax. (This is not even addressing corporate income tax rates and estate taxes)
The federal income tax is used to pay off debt to the
Federal Reserve Banking system, which is not affiliated with the government at all. It is a private bank that literally prints money out of thin air, lends this worthless paper to the US government, who then pays back the money with interest. They get the money to pay back interest from federal income tax.
All the government services that we depend on such as Social Security, Medicare, schools, construction of roads, etc. are paid for with other taxes (gasoline tax, sales tax, property taxes, etc, etc). The federal income tax started in 1913 at 1%, and now????
My question to those who read this is: Do you feel a sense of pride paying taxes? Do you think it is your civic duty to pay federal income tax? Or do you feel that our tax code is corrupt and something that we should be more aggressively trying to amend through proper channels? Let me know your thoughts.
Labels: corruption, debate, federal reserve, Obama, Romney, taxes
The Great Debate
I'm trying really hard not to be cynical, so I won't be. Tonight was the first presidential debate between Brother Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama (that I have yet to watch). I just wanted to pass along a thought from my co-worker from the south. What she said cracked me up. She was expressing her confusion as to what to do with regard to her vote when she said, "I'm from the south, and I'm supposed to choose between a black man and a Mormon?" I don't think I've ever considered that southern dilemma before.
For those of you who fight back and forth and stick up for your candidate while knocking down the other, these are for you. :) Don't get too excited about either one, because they're backed by the same banks.
Labels: debate, Obama, presidential, Romney
A Phone for a Vote?
I have no idea if this is true, but it is hilarious to listen to. YOU GOT OBAMA PHONE!!!!!!!
Check out the video below.
Labels: Obama, phone, Romney, vote
Coke or Pepsi?
Labels: coke, Obama, pepsi, Romney
All Mormons Vote For Romney
This post includes a blog post written by Dr. Jack Monnett to Mitt Romney. It essentially contains the objections he has with his views. I'm posting this because I'm very concerned about the perception that people might have that all Mormons are voting for Romney. Especially after the Mormons in America bit on Rock Center, where it just seems like everyone thinks all Mormons will automatically vote for him.
My philosophy has always been this: The only thing more disturbing than
not voting for a presidential candidate because of his religion, is someone who
does vote for them because of their religion. I often wonder if all the Mormon Romney supporters I come into contact with actually have studied his voting record and his policies.
This post is dedicated to my non-Mormon friends so they can see some of the objections I have with Romney. If Mormons have studied his policies and agree with him and feel he is the best for our country, then that is their prerogative.
Mitt Romney Schooled with an Open Letter from Dr. Jack Monnett
Posted on June 26, 2012 by admin
Mitt Romney “aspiring to the honors of men” and seemingly“ambitious,” dishing out “hollow promises” like other “scheming leaders” of our day.
Dear Mitt,
A few years ago, I was also involved in the 2002 Olympics held in Salt Lake City. Although not in such an auspicious role as you held, I nonetheless was able to watch your actions and gather certain impressions. Sadly, the primary impression that I had was that you were able to manipulate public relations and that you were a “grandstander.” The 2012 presidential electioneering has done little to alter that impression.
“Grandstanding” is another way to say that your actions were heralded and seen by others for their media attention and not for their inherent goodness. In the LDS Church we generally call that motivation “aspiring to the honors of men” with a person’s “heart set so much on the things of this world” (D&C 121:35) that principles are forsaken. It is that same “grandstanding” that brought you the nickname “Flip-Flop” Romney–earned because of your desire to appeal to everyone rather than demonstrating consistency with principles. You’ve been in favor of abortion and then against it and finally have said that you are neither pro-choice nor pro-life; in favor of auditing the fed but in favor of leaving it as it is; been on both sides of the global warming debate; been on both sides of the proposed same-sex marriage amendment; touted your mandatory healthcare legislation in Massachusetts while backtracking from its primary provisions; declined to sign a “no new taxes pledge” and then said that you had signed and stood behind it; agreed that illegal aliens should be able to seek citizenship but then said that they should not; said that same-sex couples should have the right to adopt children and then said that you were against such adoptions; and while later denying that you supported the stimulus program under George W. Bush, earlier statements of support demonstrate that that you did.
The above “flip-flops” were clear statements made to appease both those for and against the above issues. Obviously, for the person desiring to know you, there is confusion–there always seems to be a quotation to justify any particular Romney belief. When President Gordon B. Hinckley gave his stirring address, “A Testimony Vibrant and True” in August of 2005, he have a synopsis of the Book of Mormon for our time and said that the chronicled events in that book were “as current as the morning newspaper.” He went on to relate the scriptural story that “the people succumbed to the wiles of ambitious and scheming leaders who oppressed them with burdensome taxes [and] who lulled them with hollow promises.” Few can question your “ambition,” but especially because of your ambiguity, many more have come to question your “hollow promises.”
President Hinckley continued his remarks with another observation that is particularly relevant today: “These evil schemers led the people into terrible wars that resulted in the death of millions and the final and total extinction of two great civilizations in two different eras.” He was alluding to Moroni’s evaluation of the role of the Gadiantons given in the book of Ether, that “they have caused the destruction of the [Jaredites] and also the destruction of the people of Nephi.” (Ether 8:21) This was, as he said, a definite parallel to our day “as current as the morning newspaper.” That, of course, had specific reference to nonending wars on terror used to justify various aggressive invasions throughout Kuwait, Afghanistan, and Iraq, while preparing for further actions in Syria, Iran, and other far-off countries.
In fact, although you were on both sides of the Vietnam War (agreeing with your father at one time and later stating that you had desired to be a part of the fighting forces) your views on war have been consistently hawkish. You supported the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent troop surge; you are on record calling for “blockade, bombardment and surgical military strikes” against Iran; and have recommended an additional 100,000 troops to the United States military. Of current war tactics, you have said that you would double the size of the Guantanamo facility; you have defended the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” including waterboarding; and have voiced approval of military leaders continuing the policy of refusing judicial review for terrorist prisoners.
The Lord is quite specific in Section 98 of the Doctrine & Covenants that preemptive warfare (a Bush Doctrine continued through America’s current administration) violates his commandments. Perhaps you recall an address by President Spencer W. Kimball wherein he said that: “Men depend on armaments as on idols. O foolish men who think the protect the world with armaments, battleships, and space equipment when only righteousness is needed!” That almost sounds like a reaction during the GOP debates wherein one of your opponents suggested that continual warfare and militarism breeds problems rather than solves them and then asked, “Were the shoe on the other foot, how would we react to such military invasion and occupation?” President Kimball continued: “We look to foreign programs, summit conferences, land bases. We depend on fortifications, or gods of stone; upon ships and planes and projectiles, our gods of iron–gods which have no ears, no eyes, no hearts. We pray to them for deliverance and depend upon them for protection.… we train a man in the art of war and call him a patriot, thus, in the manner of Satan’s counterfeit of true patriotism we pervert the Savior’s teachings.”
Your stance on war is a particular issue that forms a wedge between you and the teachings you embraced from the Church in which you were raised. Whereas scriptures emphatically declare that we should “Renounce war and proclaim peace,” (D&C 98:16) your various statements have proclaimed otherwise. Our Founding Fathers, of whom LDS scripture explain were raised for the very purpose of pioneering our Constitution and laying the groundwork for a free country, (D&C 101:77–80) were adamantly opposed to warfare. Perhaps James Madison, the primary author of the Constitution, said it best: “Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.… No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”
Can you think of a time during your lifetime when war was not present? Doesn’t our recent history, and your various statements about warfare parallel Mormon’s observation that: “It is impossible for tongue to describe, or for man to write a perfect description of the horrible scene of the blood and carnage which was among the people.” (Mormon 5:4)
Many of those who would follow you are concerned about your apparent disregard for the Constitution and its companion, the Bill of Rights. As you know from your reading, the Lord had specific reference to them when he said: “That law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.” He then counseled his followers to “befriend that law which is the constitutional law of the land.” (D&C 98:5–6)
Your Church has looked toward the overriding rationale of the United States Constitution as a document that supports “that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges.” Obviously, anything of a mandatory nature flies in the face of freedom; yet, mandatory healthcare (often referred to as Romneycare) is compulsory and only exists by mandate. All studies apparently agree that as a system of healthcare it is abrasively costly but, even more disconcerting, it violates not only the initial premise of the Constitution, but invades individual rights and desires for free choice of coverage. Yet, you claim authorship and even show pride in its adoption on a national level.
You understand that befriending the Constitution literally means knowing it and becoming friends with it. In a debate, however, you unabashedly admitted that you didn’t know it and deferred a Constitutional question to one of your opponents. What a dangerous precedent when the following verse of scripture unequivocally states that “whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.” You would agree that there is accountability–especially for one chosen to guide the course of a free nation.
Others have written about your disregard for the nation’s Second Amendment–the private ownership of firearms. Although you variously answered questions about your own gun ownership and eventually even joined the NRA and said that you hunted small game; as a political student and leader, you know that the Second Amendment has virtually nothing to do with hunting and everything to do with protection from abusive leaders. Your encouragement of the misnamed “assault weapons” ban and the government-aided determination of what weapons can be owned by whom once having procured government permission cannot be looked upon in any other way than infringement on the right to bear arms.
Most egregious to Constitutional protections have been your support of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and the USA PATRIOT Act (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism). As you know, both significantly veer from Constitutional protections. Whereas our Fourth Amendment ensures Americans against “unlawful search and seizure,” the PATRIOT Act allows homes to be entered and searched without probable cause. Likewise, the PATRIOT Act trumps the Sixth Amendment written to ensure a speedy and public trial by negating the right to trial and allowing indefinite imprisonment. The NDAA reinforces the PATRIOT Act by denying trial and the right of habeus corpus to those accused (not found guilty) of perceived terrorism.
You have spoken often about the U.S Constitution and its lofty beginnings and protections. You, more so than most Latter-day Saints, understand the scriptural warning that “whatsoever is more or less than this cometh of evil.”
Both the “evil schemers” that President Hinckley referred to in the Book of Mormon, and the “awful situation” that Moroni warned modern-day readers about, have direct reference to Gadianton destruction that permeates the scripture. Nowhere do readers find that as prevalent as in the book of Helaman where they were engaged in “all manner of wickedness, contrary to the laws of their country and also the laws of their God.” (Helaman 6:22) Leaders were obviously undermining Constitutional laws with laws that were unjust, thereby “trampling under their feet the commandments of God and turning unto their own ways [to] build up unto themselves idols of their gold and their silver.” (Helaman 6:31) Little wonder that the Lord would later say that “whatsoever is more or less that this cometh of evil.”
Mormon, in abridging Helaman’s book, warned readers about Gadianton influence today. He explained how they secretly operated by “filling the judgment seats–having usurped the power and authority of the land; laying aside the commandments of God.” (Helaman 7:4) In this way “they did obtain the sole management of the government.” (Helaman 6:39) Thus they were “held in office at the head of government, to rule and do according to their wills, that they might get gain and glory of the world.” (Helaman 7:5)
Mitt, you know that government wields a two-edged sword. Although none of us are quite certain of the far-reaching consequences of its misuse, all Latter-day Saints know the sacred role of the Constitution and its precepts. To all of us, but particularly to political leaders as yourself, Section 134 of the Doctrine & Covenants recounts that: “We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them, both in making laws and administering them, for the good of safety and society.” Such laws “will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life.” (D&C 134:1–2)
I am deeply concerned about the above cited issues and the directions that you have chosen to respond to them. They are troubling because as a potential president of our country, weighty decisions could be made to significantly curtail our liberties, not only perpetuating but under the guise of conservatism, actually expanding such encroachment.
Dr. Jack Monnett
Dr. Jack Monnett
Jack Monnett is a contemporary historian who particularly writes about educational themes as they intertwine with Latter-day Saint history. Jack holds degrees in education from Brigham Young University and a Ph.D. in the Historical Foundations of Education from the University of Utah. He has taught in the LDS Church Educational System as well as in public schools, and currently teaches part-time for BYU Continuing Education. Brother Monnett has previously served as a bishop and as a member of a stake presidency.
Labels: mormon, Romney, vote
