My opponent and I spoke to a combined two voters from our district tonight at a candidates night put on by the PTA at Jordan High School.
And, the the voter I spoke with, I didn't run into until the evening was officially over and the tables were being put away. (It was a PTA worker.)
But, I tell you this, I still like such things as candidate forums. I wish it could be said they represented what the future of campaigning will be.
Because, I do not like the way campaigning is done now, money being poured into advertising. The problem with this is that candidates such as myself have little chance of being elected.
I'm not accepting political contributions, and I have little money of my own. I'm quickly outspent, a pour boy in a rich-man's game.
Yes, I wish we could take the dollar out of politics. I wish instead of the race going to the person with the pocketbook, it went to the the one who presented the better ideas, who argued the issues better.
So, as tonight's PTA event was winding down, I asked Todd Kiser, if he would be willing to debate. He said he would.
Only trouble is, will any one show?
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Monday, October 11, 2010
The Many Faces of Hatred
Well, then, just who are the most-hated members of our society?
Is it the gays and transgenders, a people killed, beaten, mocked, and spat upon?
Or, is it the undocumented residents, they of a national outcry against them?
I would submit that one of the very most-hated of all, certainly, would be the rapists. And, the child-abusers. Yes, the rapists and child-abusers ahead of even the murderers. And wife-beaters are very hated.
Any time one group of people hates another . . . hmmm . . . Democrats hate Republicans and Republicans hate Democrats. Those two each have, in rough terms (and depending on how loosely the term "hate" is used), almost half of all Americans hating them. So, they may be the two largest hated groups of all.
Politicians are hated. Lawyers are hated.
Mormons. Or, as I prefer not to call them that, then the LDS. They are still hated, after all these years. And, they are probably hated more in Utah than any other place.
Those who are not LDS are among the hated. Some LDS show hatred toward them.
Christians, Jews, and Muslims. They all attract some hatred.
Wiccans and devil worshippers.
Smokers, drinkers, drug addicts.
Idiots, or those we perceive to be idiots.
Those who don't keep themselves clean, who smell, who lack good hygiene.
Those on food stamps. Those on welfare.
Panhandlers.
Fellow workers, who we perceive to be in the way of getting the job done right.
Bosses who make us work too hard.
Bill collectors. Telemarketers.
Landlords. policemen. . . .
There are plenty of options, for the title of most-hated. Too much do we hate each other, pick at each other, find fault, belittle and berate.
And, what does all this have to do with stating an opinion on an issue, as I try to post on an issue most every day?
Not sure. I got off on this as I thought on hatred towards the gay and transgender community, which is certainly a political issue. I left the political arena, though, when I let off talking about gays and lesbians and undocumented workers and started thinking of all the other ways we hate each other. Now that it's bedtime, this will have to do.
Is it the gays and transgenders, a people killed, beaten, mocked, and spat upon?
Or, is it the undocumented residents, they of a national outcry against them?
I would submit that one of the very most-hated of all, certainly, would be the rapists. And, the child-abusers. Yes, the rapists and child-abusers ahead of even the murderers. And wife-beaters are very hated.
Any time one group of people hates another . . . hmmm . . . Democrats hate Republicans and Republicans hate Democrats. Those two each have, in rough terms (and depending on how loosely the term "hate" is used), almost half of all Americans hating them. So, they may be the two largest hated groups of all.
Politicians are hated. Lawyers are hated.
Mormons. Or, as I prefer not to call them that, then the LDS. They are still hated, after all these years. And, they are probably hated more in Utah than any other place.
Those who are not LDS are among the hated. Some LDS show hatred toward them.
Christians, Jews, and Muslims. They all attract some hatred.
Wiccans and devil worshippers.
Smokers, drinkers, drug addicts.
Idiots, or those we perceive to be idiots.
Those who don't keep themselves clean, who smell, who lack good hygiene.
Those on food stamps. Those on welfare.
Panhandlers.
Fellow workers, who we perceive to be in the way of getting the job done right.
Bosses who make us work too hard.
Bill collectors. Telemarketers.
Landlords. policemen. . . .
There are plenty of options, for the title of most-hated. Too much do we hate each other, pick at each other, find fault, belittle and berate.
And, what does all this have to do with stating an opinion on an issue, as I try to post on an issue most every day?
Not sure. I got off on this as I thought on hatred towards the gay and transgender community, which is certainly a political issue. I left the political arena, though, when I let off talking about gays and lesbians and undocumented workers and started thinking of all the other ways we hate each other. Now that it's bedtime, this will have to do.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Religion a Positive Influence
I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a much-believing member, and also a candidate for public office. I post my position on issues, political issues. The church takes stands on issues, moral issues. Sometimes the two are the same.
I so much doubt you will ever find me differing from a moral position the church takes.
Every person in politics brings their values with them. Mine includes belief in a modern-day prophet, and modern-day apostles. Of course, now, if they are truly prophets and apostles, I will want to follow them, and I do.
Many of you are members of the other churches and followers of other beliefs. Oftentimes, though, you are as influenced by your religions and by your beliefs as I am by mine. No person can be expected to be without influences. Not all things are good influences, but religion is.
There will be times I take stands you disagree with, whether they be issues I side with church positions or not. Candidates cannot agree with each and all their voters all the time.
Here's hoping I agree with you on most issues, on enough to persuade you to vote for me.
I so much doubt you will ever find me differing from a moral position the church takes.
Every person in politics brings their values with them. Mine includes belief in a modern-day prophet, and modern-day apostles. Of course, now, if they are truly prophets and apostles, I will want to follow them, and I do.
Many of you are members of the other churches and followers of other beliefs. Oftentimes, though, you are as influenced by your religions and by your beliefs as I am by mine. No person can be expected to be without influences. Not all things are good influences, but religion is.
There will be times I take stands you disagree with, whether they be issues I side with church positions or not. Candidates cannot agree with each and all their voters all the time.
Here's hoping I agree with you on most issues, on enough to persuade you to vote for me.
Preset Temptations, Then, Can Be Overcome
Yes, I do have feelings of concern, tonight, for one of the foremost leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
President Boyd K. Packer, the senior apostle, the man next in line to be prophet of the church.
I do not know what thoughts have gone through his mind, as he has reflected on the talk he gave Sunday, and on the storm of protest raised against it. But, I judge him to be right in whatever he says or does on this issue.
That does not mean it hasn't been a trial for him. Although I am not in position to know, I imagine it has been.
There was the protest Thursday, thousands walking around the temple. There remains the Human Rights Campaign, and others, saying what changes President Packer made in his Sunday talk are not enough.
Church leaders are allowed to edit their talks before the written versions are released. President Packer's talk had him say that "The Family: A Proclamation to the World" is revelation. In the written version, President Packer refers to the Proclamation as a guide. I do not know that that means the Proclamation is not a revelation, it only means that in his written version, President Packer chose to refer to it as a guide.
After a portion in the talk in which he alluded to the idea same-sex attractions are born-in, President Packer omitted the line, "Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone?" Is that change a nod to those in the scientific community who say it is scientific fact that some people are born with same-sex feelings? I do not know. I do not know whether "Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone?" means God would not make them that way or means, instead, God would not make it so they could not overcome those feelings.
And, President Packer, in alluding to the notion of same-sex attractions being born in, chose the word "tendencies" in the talk, but chose "temptations" for the written version.
Here's how the spoken and written version differ, in the two key changes. I do not know that the changes mean what was spoken is not correct. I only know President Packer chose to make the changes for the written version. These are the changes as posted at the website http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=299
Spoken version: "Fifteen years ago, with the world in turmoil, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles issued “The Family: A Proclamation to the World,” the fifth proclamation in the history of the Church. It qualifies according to the definition as a revelation and would do well that members of the church to read and follow it."
Written version: "Fifteen years ago, with the world in turmoil, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles issued “The Family: A Proclamation to the World,” the fifth proclamation in the history of the Church. It is a guide that members of the Church would do well to read and to follow."
Spoken version: "Some suppose that they were preset and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn tendencies toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone? Remember, God He is our Heavenly Father."
Written version: "Some suppose that they were preset and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn temptations toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone? Remember, God is our Heavenly Father."
Perhaps of note in understanding what President Packer was saying is the scripture he then quoted, 1 Corinthians 10:13, which says, God . . . will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it."
There are temptations I have that maybe will, but perhaps will not go away as long as I live. But, I have learned I can put them off, not acting on them. I do not know what the scientific community believes as to whether a person can overcome same-sex attraction, by not acting upon it. But, my own experience being a form of scientific study, I know it true. No, my experience has not been with same-sex attraction, but I cannot see why it would not apply.
President Boyd K. Packer, the senior apostle, the man next in line to be prophet of the church.
I do not know what thoughts have gone through his mind, as he has reflected on the talk he gave Sunday, and on the storm of protest raised against it. But, I judge him to be right in whatever he says or does on this issue.
That does not mean it hasn't been a trial for him. Although I am not in position to know, I imagine it has been.
There was the protest Thursday, thousands walking around the temple. There remains the Human Rights Campaign, and others, saying what changes President Packer made in his Sunday talk are not enough.
Church leaders are allowed to edit their talks before the written versions are released. President Packer's talk had him say that "The Family: A Proclamation to the World" is revelation. In the written version, President Packer refers to the Proclamation as a guide. I do not know that that means the Proclamation is not a revelation, it only means that in his written version, President Packer chose to refer to it as a guide.
After a portion in the talk in which he alluded to the idea same-sex attractions are born-in, President Packer omitted the line, "Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone?" Is that change a nod to those in the scientific community who say it is scientific fact that some people are born with same-sex feelings? I do not know. I do not know whether "Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone?" means God would not make them that way or means, instead, God would not make it so they could not overcome those feelings.
And, President Packer, in alluding to the notion of same-sex attractions being born in, chose the word "tendencies" in the talk, but chose "temptations" for the written version.
Here's how the spoken and written version differ, in the two key changes. I do not know that the changes mean what was spoken is not correct. I only know President Packer chose to make the changes for the written version. These are the changes as posted at the website http://mormonsformarriage.com/?p=299
Spoken version: "Fifteen years ago, with the world in turmoil, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles issued “The Family: A Proclamation to the World,” the fifth proclamation in the history of the Church. It qualifies according to the definition as a revelation and would do well that members of the church to read and follow it."
Written version: "Fifteen years ago, with the world in turmoil, the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles issued “The Family: A Proclamation to the World,” the fifth proclamation in the history of the Church. It is a guide that members of the Church would do well to read and to follow."
Spoken version: "Some suppose that they were preset and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn tendencies toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone? Remember, God He is our Heavenly Father."
Written version: "Some suppose that they were preset and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn temptations toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone? Remember, God is our Heavenly Father."
Perhaps of note in understanding what President Packer was saying is the scripture he then quoted, 1 Corinthians 10:13, which says, God . . . will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it."
There are temptations I have that maybe will, but perhaps will not go away as long as I live. But, I have learned I can put them off, not acting on them. I do not know what the scientific community believes as to whether a person can overcome same-sex attraction, by not acting upon it. But, my own experience being a form of scientific study, I know it true. No, my experience has not been with same-sex attraction, but I cannot see why it would not apply.
Organizing for America Makes Appeal
I receive emails from Organizing for America. This one of interest just came across. Some of what Organizing for America does can be good, and I laud the insinuation we'd be better not influenced by out-of-country money. The email also includes a call against special interests, and that is the core of my campaign. I do not think it well that the very people contributing to campaigns often are the same who, after the election, come calling for legislation favors.
I am not taking any political contributions.
I don't know what President Obama said today about Medicare and Social Security and the minimum wage. I don't even know how extensive an effort is being made against them.
I do know the reason I decided to run is that I believe many on our various welfare programs could be offered work for what they receive. I feel it would benefit both them, and in some measure, the economy. It has been 75 years since the Social Security Act of 1935, and we have spoken year after year of having people work for what they receive.
It is time to end the talk, and make the change.
Well, here's the email:
"This is a threat to our democracy...And if we just stand by and allow the special interests to silence anybody who's got the guts to stand up to them, our country's going to be a very different place."
That's what the President just said about the Chamber of Commerce, a right-wing group spending $75 million to beat Democrats this fall, and reportedly taking money from foreign corporations -- some even owned by foreign governments.
These groups are trying to buy our elections, backing candidates who want to tear down everything that makes the middle class strong in this country: things like Medicare, Social Security, even the minimum wage.
Donations are pouring in from the President's and First Lady's notes this week, but we all need to do what we can to stop this threat to our democracy.
Will you chip in $3 right now? Your gift will be matched by a fellow supporter who is just as dedicated as you are.
There's no cavalry to help fight against this -- just you.
You knock the doors, make the phone calls, and talk to one voter at a time to sway this election. And yes, every clipboard, every office, every piece of mail reminding a voter where to cast her ballot, and every pizza for weary volunteers gets paid for by you. Not by PACs, not by lobbyists -- you.
There's another grassroots supporter who knows this, and has offered to match your contribution.
Donate $3 or more now to double your impact today:
https://donate.barackobama.com/OctoberMatch
Let's do this,
Mitch
Match Stewart
Director
I am not taking any political contributions.
I don't know what President Obama said today about Medicare and Social Security and the minimum wage. I don't even know how extensive an effort is being made against them.
I do know the reason I decided to run is that I believe many on our various welfare programs could be offered work for what they receive. I feel it would benefit both them, and in some measure, the economy. It has been 75 years since the Social Security Act of 1935, and we have spoken year after year of having people work for what they receive.
It is time to end the talk, and make the change.
Well, here's the email:
"This is a threat to our democracy...And if we just stand by and allow the special interests to silence anybody who's got the guts to stand up to them, our country's going to be a very different place."
That's what the President just said about the Chamber of Commerce, a right-wing group spending $75 million to beat Democrats this fall, and reportedly taking money from foreign corporations -- some even owned by foreign governments.
These groups are trying to buy our elections, backing candidates who want to tear down everything that makes the middle class strong in this country: things like Medicare, Social Security, even the minimum wage.
Donations are pouring in from the President's and First Lady's notes this week, but we all need to do what we can to stop this threat to our democracy.
Will you chip in $3 right now? Your gift will be matched by a fellow supporter who is just as dedicated as you are.
There's no cavalry to help fight against this -- just you.
You knock the doors, make the phone calls, and talk to one voter at a time to sway this election. And yes, every clipboard, every office, every piece of mail reminding a voter where to cast her ballot, and every pizza for weary volunteers gets paid for by you. Not by PACs, not by lobbyists -- you.
There's another grassroots supporter who knows this, and has offered to match your contribution.
Donate $3 or more now to double your impact today:
https://donate.barackobama.com/OctoberMatch
Let's do this,
Mitch
Match Stewart
Director
Friday, October 8, 2010
Toooo Many Judgeships on Upcoming Ballot
Watch out when you see your ballot in this upcoming election.
It will be a long one, a very, very long one. I learned this while down at the Democratic Party headquarters today.
The new, enlongateted ballot comes thanks to more judgeships, many more judgeships, being added to the ballot. Until this election, municipalities appointed and dismissed the judgeships that are being added. Now voters have the call as to whether these judges should be retained after city officials appoint them.
Now, sometimes when people call for a return to a more Republican form of government, I tend to think where we are is okay. Some would have the U.S. Senators elected by state legislators, instead of by the public, as that is the way the original Constitution called for it to be done.
But, in that, I quite like the shift away from the more Republican form, which was made by the 17th Amendment.
But I believe one of the virtues of a Republican form of government is that it acknowledges the people cannot keep up with all the issues, nor be aware of every public official.
Voters will have more than enough to study up on without having to conjure up opinions on whether judges they have never heard of should be retained.
The ballot this year serves as an argument for a Republican form of government. We neither need nor want to decide whether so many judges should be retained.
It will be a long one, a very, very long one. I learned this while down at the Democratic Party headquarters today.
The new, enlongateted ballot comes thanks to more judgeships, many more judgeships, being added to the ballot. Until this election, municipalities appointed and dismissed the judgeships that are being added. Now voters have the call as to whether these judges should be retained after city officials appoint them.
Now, sometimes when people call for a return to a more Republican form of government, I tend to think where we are is okay. Some would have the U.S. Senators elected by state legislators, instead of by the public, as that is the way the original Constitution called for it to be done.
But, in that, I quite like the shift away from the more Republican form, which was made by the 17th Amendment.
But I believe one of the virtues of a Republican form of government is that it acknowledges the people cannot keep up with all the issues, nor be aware of every public official.
Voters will have more than enough to study up on without having to conjure up opinions on whether judges they have never heard of should be retained.
The ballot this year serves as an argument for a Republican form of government. We neither need nor want to decide whether so many judges should be retained.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
'Unalienable Rights' for 'Illegal Aliens'
Irony is to be found, perhaps, in the Declaration of independence suggesting all men are endowed with "certain unalienable Rights," and then for a group who are deprived of liberty and the pursuit of happiness -- deprived from having those things in the United States, anyway -- to be called "illegal aliens."
I wish that instead of treating them as illegal aliens, we treated them as unalienable, as unaliens.
I wish that instead of treating them as illegal aliens, we treated them as unalienable, as unaliens.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)