Mitt vs Newt

A Poygamist who doesn't polyg vs a mongamist who doesn't monag

If you follow the Republican primaries you might be familiar with the difficulty that Governor Romney has in gaining supporters in Iowa. Apparently Iowa is overrun by those with a common religious persuasion determined that Mormons are "not Christians", a "cult", untruthful, "unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God", and every other unbecoming attribute. I can't say that Mormons are without fault, in fact, we sometimes bring criticism upon our selves because we see ourselves as follows: We are "honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and .. doing good to all men; indeed, we may say -- We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things." On the other hand we see non-Mormons this way: "Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof". The political question becomes "Is it possible to support one in a political office for whom one has such fundamental religious disagreements?" Latter Day Saints have been in the minority for so long in most places that we have had to accept political leaders from a variety of religious traditions. Non-Mormons have less experience in accepting a Mormon political leader.
The first Mormon Senator elected from Utah was Senator Smoot back in 1903. He was challenged by the Senate. "We’ve come a long way since 1903, when the Utah Legislature elected Reed Smoot to be the first Mormon to be seated in the Senate. But when Smoot arrived in Washington in early 1904 with every expectation that he would be sworn in, he instead spent the next four years on the sidelines while a Senate committee investigated the charges against him, prompted by a nationally organized campaign by church leaders who passionately opposed the seating of any Mormon, however deserving, in Congress." For the whole article click here.http://www.rollcall.com/news/bonker_religious_intolerance_a_political_problem_for_romney_but_a_bigger-211131-1.html. "On the last day of the Senate deliberations, Sen. Fred Dubois (R-Idaho), who led the attacks against Smoot, charged that the Mormon doctrine commanded the “Saints to take unto themselves a multiplicity of wives, limited in number only be the measures of their desires.”
That prompted Sen. Boies Penrose (R-Pa.) to respond by making the point that Smoot had always been faithfully married to the same woman; then, as he deliberately cast his eye around the Senate chamber, he commented that he was well familiar with the behavior of some of his colleagues known for philandering, concluding with this rhetorical line: “I would rather have seated beside me in this chamber a polygamist who doesn’t polyg than a monogamist who doesn’t monag!”

All is Well in Zion

Look at the big picture.

The Democrats and the President keep pushing the country into more and more spending. It is incredibly confusing why they would continue on such an apparently destructive path. where is the money going to come from? All they really want is to stay in power, damn the consequences. Krauthammer's article is instructive.. What huge liars these people are. They talk about these minuscule efforts to even slow down the GROWTH in the most massive increase in spending ever seen as if pablum was being stolen from the mouths of babies. Are the people so stupid as to believe their lies? I am afraid so many people see themselves as being on the receiving end that they are willing accomplices to the theft.

Oh well, football season is starting. We can go back to ignoring the politicians. They can get on with leading us "carefully down to hell".