I think there may be some folks who read and post here who are taking an interest in the prospect of Mitt Romney running for US President in 2008.
Perhaps my biggest concern about Mitt Romney thus far is his manditory health care program that forces all MA citizens to purchase health insurance whether they want it or not. To me, it matters not that anyone else think they should buy it. It is the moral right of each competent adult to decide for him/herself whether he or she wants that coverage, and nobody elses. And since the money not paid into the system by persons unable to pay has to come from somewhere, the cost of the program also compels taxpayers to contribute via their taxes to the cost of health insurance for MA citizens who somebody will consider unable to afford it. This is socialism, and even though now on a state level, it demonstrates disdain for certain constitutional principles and the principle of free agency.
I think many of us believe that no one has the authority to grant such powers as welfare programs, schemes for re-distributing the wealth, and activities which coerce people into acting in accordance with a prescribed code of social planning. There is one simple test. Do I as an individual have a right to use force upon my neighbor to accomplish this goal? If I do have such a right, then I may delegate that power to my government to exercise on my behalf. If I do not have that right as an individual, then I cannot delegate it to government, and I cannot ask my government to perform the act for me. To be sure, there are times when this principle of the proper role of government is most annoying and inconvenient. If I could only FORCE the ignorant to provided for themselves, or the selfish to be generous with their wealth! But in words of President Grover Cleveland : "... though the people support the Government the Government should not support the people." We should also remember what Frederic Bastiat wrote, that "Nothing can enter the public treasury for the benefit of one citizen or one class unless other citizens and other classes have been forced to send it in."
In addition,
- Romney opposed the Boy Scouts' policy prohibiting homosexuals from serving as scoutmasters and prevented the organization from participating publicly in the 2002 Olympics.
- Romney promoted homosexual propaganda in Massachusetts schools through the "Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth," funding this bureaucracy of social engineering instead of eliminating it.
- Romney advocated governmental recognition of homosexual adoption rights, domestic partnerships and homosexual civil unions.
What does anybody else think about Mitt Romney as a candidate for President?
Below is an e-mail on the same subject that we received the week of December 11th--we copy/pasted it below--it bears repeating--and then scroll down to check out the web address given below where you can read the announcement that last week Ron Paul decided to run for President:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
National news (can't remember which network) over the weekend of 12/10/06 just uncovered Mitt Romney being quoted in printed media back in 1984 that he was FOR same-sex marriage and that "It was time the Republican Party recognized gay rights..." and that he would do better at pushing gay rights and same-sex marriage than Ted Kennedy, who is totally pro-gay rights. Network anchor speculation was that these words were going to come back and bite him, and the question was raised as to how he will handle this obvious contradiction, because they showed him on a current TV show saying the exact opposite of what he had said in the printed paper of 1984. When he filed to do a presidential study the 1st week of January, the radio news reported that he had put on the papers that he was for gay rights but not for same-sex/gay marriages. Power corrupts, no matter who they are, so us "thinking" Mormons are watching and listening. Contradictions this early does not look good, no matter how much is blamed on mud-slinging & public smearing that also goes on--the "secret" is not to have those kinds of contradictions if you're a stable kind of person who stands for values--the same values & character traits yesterday/today/tomorrow.... (because contrary to popular belief pushed in the media, the "Church" or "Mormons" do not run the state of Utah, there are more "non-Mormons" in Utah than Mormons, and mostly self-serving non-Mormons and "compromised" self-serving Mormons are in the political arena running the local, state & federal government & government agencies--not representing the plenty of good non-Mormons living here at all-- "with layer upon layer of corruption," among all of them in public offices (paraphrased quote from Pres. Hinckley, Women's Conference, Sept. 1998)----i.e., the current Salt Lake City mayor who used to be a national ACLU president, and is now known as married/divorced-with-children-allegedly-turned-gay "Jack Mormon"--one who leaves the Church, but never leaves the Church alone by publicly being anti-Church, but, oh, always kisses up to Church officials and Church constituents with photo ops and quoting of Church doctrines "to run the city laws," but only during pre-election time!) A lot of "thinking" Mormons & non-Mormons have already booed Senator Hatch off the Republican Party stage at several local caucuses--WHAT? You say! He has "clout" and "heart" and "seniority" and has become the "great compromiser" and "can do a lot for us" because his campaign signs said so.... and he's a Mormon, too! Yeah, well, the former BYU constitutional law professor, Senator Hatch, who has become a sacred cow in Happy Valley, who initiated laws several times (2000 and 2002) that were anti-4th Amendment, that would have done away with the search and seizure protections from the US Constitution, has also voted, with all the other Utah Congressmen, and Congressmen across the nation (except for 2--more on this below), FOR the Patriot Act (Orwell speak for Terror Act) that takes/denies many civil liberties when "they" choose for it to happen, and FOR the latest new law, Military Commissions Act, that says it does away with habeas corpus (your right to a fair trial and to face your accuser and see their evidence against you--in other words, illegal imprisonment--once declared as an "enemy combatant", even against a US citizen, you're gone, no defense, no appeal), and our present court system is to be replaced with a military tribunal system....and even though it "sounds" as though it's only for the military to use, it has been reported by "thinking" Mormons AND non-Mormons out there on the Internet, that, upon reading it very carefully, there are clauses in it that indicate it's also going to be used against US civilians. Therefore, our "Mormon" politicians sold us out, not just fellow church members, but the whole US population! With their knowledge and priniples they're supposed to live by, they sold us out. By talking about it and debating it, which gets the facts out there and exposes what's going on, it means we're committing the media's "anti-patriotism" criteria, Orwell speak again that means we're to cower in fear and be isolated from each other, not compare notes, the very thing that bullies and Gadiantons fear the most--exposure to what they're doing, and those who question the propoganda may very well end up missing from your neighborhoods. There are only 2 people who did NOT vote for either act, they were the only ones who voted against them, and that was Texas (R) Ron Paul, a physician who keeps getting re-elected in Texas because he's the ONLY politician in Congress who upholds the US Constitution on each and every vote made in Congress---a "non-Mormon" who puts our "Mormon" politicians to shame---now if Ron Paul were to run for President, not that the Powers-That-Be would allow him to be elected or stay in office if he got elected, but then the public would actually have a real candidate to choose from, somebody with a track record of voting only in favor of the US Constitution and having the guts to vote against it if it's against the US Constitution and to publicly defend why he votes on each vote!....and the other Congressman who joined him, this time, on voting against the 2 acts, is Tom Tancredo (R-Colo)...hate to say this, folks, but it's a one party system disguised as two parties---and that "party" is a group of "good ol' boys" owned and run by the Gadiantons!!! Our "Mormon" politicians are merely "useful idiots," so far, who get stars of fame and/or dollar signs in their eyes and turn away from constitutional and gospel principles, to be great "compromisers," but then that's prophesied, too, so we can't waste energy getting upset about it to where it stops us from doing what's right and what's needed to be done to take care of our families and friends. Just keep reading, watching, listening, asking questions--use some careful discernment, people! ("Everybody should have a healthy sense of skepticism."--quote by Hugh Nibley) Don't let yourselves become "sheeple" while you're being manipulated into wishing things are/or could be different/better just because "they" say so, just because the media has adopted "would you vote for a Mormon" agenda...."they" asked the same thing about John F. Kennedy, stirring the people up, asking whether people would vote for a Catholic (who allegedly stopped being a "puppet" to the Powers-That-Be and got assassinated, according to sources on the Internet)....one has to wonder if this is to be a repeat, or......? It's possible that a lot of Mitt Romney fans are confusing his Romney family name with the past LDS First Presidency Marion G. Romney, thus assuming it's "ok" but their family trees (and moral fiber) are miles/generations apart!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Texas' "Ron Paul for President" announcement:
{http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2007/120107ronpaul.htm,http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2007/120107ronpaul.htm}
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Claudehopper comment: asked a stake president once, in Wyoming, how it is that "good" LDS members can do evil at work during the week, but come across as great saints, totally committed, on the weekend -- his answer: they compartmentalize it, what they do during the week has nothing to do with what they do in their religion, and vice versa, which he said made it very difficult to confront them, as he had experienced, because they become beyond-rational in hostility and retaliate anybody who challenges their compartmentalization.
Althouogh I doubt it will happen, I would love to see a race between or involving Mitt Romney and Ron Paul, just to show too the Utah Mormons the contrast between a candidate who has a long rrecord of truly "befriending" the US Constitution and a candidate who has promoted unconstitutional welfare, abortion and gay marriage. Wanna guess which of those two would garner the most votes in Utah?
Ralph,
I already KNOW what they would do. Past history, you know. I have wondered, if the Saints support wickedness and wicked candidates, are they still Saints? Or have they become salt that hath lost its savor and henceforth good for nothing but to be trodden under foot of man?
Cyrus35
As long as we're on the subject of Utah amd Mormons, here is why I think Utah Mmormons would vote for Mitt Romney over Ron Paul in a heartbeat, in spite of Romney's history as a governor vs. Paul's history as a strong constitutionalist.
Utah Mormons are not very politically savvy. There’s not a lot of interest in politics in Utah. Mormons are, first of all, very busy people. One reason is that they spend a lot of time serving as volunteers in their local Wards and Stakes (parishes and dioceses). A lot is expected of them and they expect a lot of themselves.
In the past, the Church definitely has taken a stand on politics and government. According to their doctrine, its members are supposed to take a strong pro-Constitution stand, and they were often encouraged by their leaders to study the US Constitution and participate in government in ways supportive of the Constitution. At least it was that way some years ago. But being so busy, politics is easily pushed aside for religious duties. As a result, most Mormons have become fairly ignorant about what’s going on in government. They don’t realize how un-constitutional their FedGov has actually become. And their ecclesiastical leaders no longer strongly remind them of their responsibilities regarding striving to maintain the proper role of government. They keep sending representatives and senators back to Washington who have kept on proposing and supporting unconstitutional programs like social welfare and foreign aid, have contributed to Congress’ abrogation of its constitutional responsibility to vote on and declare wars and allowed the President to do it for them, have supported and even encouraged illegal immigration, and so on. Many spout ideals that would set the American Founding Fathers rolling over in their graves.
Yes, they want ethical government all right, no question about that. They talk that way, at least. But most of the conservative Mormons seem to be walking in darkness at noon day, to borrow a line of Mormon scripture. And also, wages are relatively low and since so much of their time and energy is used up in normal life, they just go on the best they can. Also, there seems to be a desire on the part of many Mormons, even those in leadership positions, to show the world that they are "politically correct" and in step with the crowd. Sometimes that means following the crowd. And sometimes the crowd is wrong.