O'Reilly Says Mitt Romney Will Be Next President

[Mark]

I appreciate everyone's input on this thread, but I feel like we are entering hamster-wheel-land, so barring something noteworthy being brought up, I am signing off on this thread.

I was going to bow out of this discussion as well my friend but I feel one point needs to be made here in terms of the tone that this discussion has taken as it relates to different feeling toward Bro. Romney. Its interesting to me that my friend Dr. Jones brought up another thread on the principle of unrighteous dominion in quoting section 121. He made some very interesting points. Among other things he said:

41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;
42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—


Here are some thoughts about identifying and coping with unrighteous dominion:

1. Identifying UD -- bullying, compulsion, forcing, Satan's methods, fear-mongering, back-biting, false accusations, constraints on free speech.

2. "Remember that to be Accused is NOT the same as to be Convicted" of wrong-doing. Bullies assertively accuse of wrong-doing, usually in bold but vague terms. Those who exercise the "true independence of heaven" (Brigham Young) do not accept/believe the accusations without doing some checking and verification first, and then they remember the role of repentance and the Atonement without condemning the accused.

Now I have noticed some fairly demeaning comments coming out of the thread and felt those comments were unbecoming Brothers in the gospel. I was immediately attacked by some of the posters here for saying anything about this tone. Posters here have made condescending remarks back and forth and have been demeaning and accusatory with insults stemming anywhere from a supposed lack of intelligence to a lack of charity among other things said. It stems back to what I said to OI before about the difference between disagreeing with others thoughts and becoming disagreeable. I have seen the later in the lack of civility in the treatment of ones brothers in this discussion.

Now I am no cheerleader for Mitt Romney and have my own differences about his politics and his actions. However my relationship with posters like Bob and others here are more important to me than to get into an insult contest on who can make who look more stupid. Bob has tried to bring out the role of repentence and the atonement in looking at those like Bro. Romney. I see that as a good thing. The Lord asks us to use persuasion and meekness and gentleness and long suffering and charity in our discussions as Priesthood Brethren without guile. I have seen very little of those attributes being exercised here in this thread and felt that we should re-examine our words and thoughts to make them more in line with what Priesthood Brethren should attempt. If I am demonized for doing so then so be it. I am far from perfect in this regard but at least have the desire to improve.

[bobhenstra]

I appreciate everyone's input on this thread, but I feel like we are entering hamster-wheel-land, so barring something noteworthy being brought up, I am signing off on this thread.

I was going to bow out of this discussion as well my friend but I feel one point needs to be made here in terms of the tone that this discussion has taken as it relates to different feeling toward Bro. Romney. Its interesting to me that my friend Dr. Jones brought up another thread on the principle of unrighteous dominion in quoting section 121. He made some very interesting points. Among other things he said:

41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;
42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—


Here are some thoughts about identifying and coping with unrighteous dominion:

1. Identifying UD -- bullying, compulsion, forcing, Satan's methods, fear-mongering, back-biting, false accusations, constraints on free speech.

2. "Remember that to be Accused is NOT the same as to be Convicted" of wrong-doing. Bullies assertively accuse of wrong-doing, usually in bold but vague terms. Those who exercise the "true independence of heaven" (Brigham Young) do not accept/believe the accusations without doing some checking and verification first, and then they remember the role of repentance and the Atonement without condemning the accused.

Now I have noticed some fairly demeaning comments coming out of the thread and felt those comments were unbecoming Brothers in the gospel. I was immediately attacked by some of the posters here for saying anything about this tone. Posters here have made condescending remarks back and forth and have been demeaning and accusatory with insults stemming anywhere from a supposed lack of intelligence to a lack of charity among other things said. It stems back to what I said to OI before about the difference between disagreeing with others thoughts and becoming disagreeable. I have seen the later in the lack of civility in the treatment of ones brothers in this discussion.

Now I am no cheerleader for Mitt Romney and have my own differences about his politics and his actions. However my relationship with posters like Bob and others here are more important to me than to get into an insult contest on who can make who look more stupid. Bob has tried to bring out the role of repentence and the atonement in looking at those like Bro. Romney. I see that as a good thing. The Lord asks us to use persuasion and meekness and gentleness and long suffering and charity in our discussions as Priesthood Brethren without guile. I have seen very little of those attributes being exercised here in this thread and felt that we should re-examine our words and thoughts to make them more in line with what Priesthood Brethren should attempt. If I am demonized for doing so then so be it. I am far from perfect in this regard but at least have the desire to improve.

Nuff said!

Bob

[Mahonri]

Forget Mitt, McCain, how about Jan Brewer gov. of AZ for Pres.?

Having spent some time in AZ, I feel qualified to encourage you, in love, to look a little deeper at her. She is not the champion the media is making her out to be. Being personally involved incertainsituations, I know her to be a spoiled manipulitive, big goverment, power mad individual

[Original_Intent]

I have not been innocent, neither have Bob and Natasha. And what irks me is the fact that they can "nicely" say that someone who opposes Mitt is unforgiving, will not be forgiven of their own shortcomings, and are in general un-Christlike, and then proceed to get sanctimonious about people "bullying" and "exercising unrighteous dominion" or "would not have supported Alma" when they have employed exactly these tactics (although in a nicer way) that is exactly what has caused a somewhat hostile (if more honest) response. Frankly, I am going to call a spade a spade and while I try not to be argumentative and contentious, that does not mean I am going to sit idly by why someone in a "nice" way accuses me of being un-Christlike and unforgiving when I (and others) have repeatedly PROVEN that the issue is not one of forgiveness or lack thereof, it is one of judgment. If Mitt wants to be my best bud and hang out with me and discuss things, I will certainly not hold his past against him and welcome him with open arms. This is NOT the criteria we have been commanded to select our political leaders by. And despite this very calmly and clearly having been pointed out numerous times in this thread, this is always glossed over and ignored as Bob and Natasha have instead opted to look for ways to defend the indefensible.

If you are willing to engage in honest debate and a mutual goal of seeking the truth (as opposed to winning the argument) that is what I seek here. And Mark, that is why I do not dismiss you or say rude comments out of hand, because although we disagree on many things, I recognize you as a truth seeker and you do not appear to have an agenda. Those who stake out a position and defend it rather than discuss and show a willingness to examine their own assumptions equally as they expect those they are disagreeing with to do, then that is going to draw fire from me and I will probably err on the side of being direct as opposed to erring on the side of being nice.

The main reason I decided to drop out of this thread is I felt like I had stated as directly and clearly how I felt and I patiently waited for point by point refutations, so that I could correct any errors in my PoV. This may sound strange, but I actually like to be shown to be wrong, because in the process that means I ahve grown. Always being right (or always believing yourself to be right) is STAGNATION.

When someone repeatedly disregards any point that weakens their position (warning: more harsh direct opinion ahead!) I consider them as someone who is not a fellow seeker of truth, but that will not discuss things honestly (if you ignore weakness in your own position you are deceiving yourself and not treating your audience fairly either - possible leading them into diverse paths due to wanting to protect your ego.) A good example of this type of behavior is a lot of the political correctness that we see going on - unable to argue your case on its merits and therefore labeling the other side as "mean", "racist", etc etc and claiming victimhood.

I want to be friends with everyone here, but I also feel that the time is short. Yoda said that fear leads to anger, and I believe he got that right. Sorry for not quoting a scripture and falling back on Star Wars - but I believe that is a true principle. So if I appear angry, let's go to the root of the problem - fear.

Now am I afraid that I am being made a fool of on an internet forum? No. For one, I am completely anonymous here, who cares what anyone thinks? And also, I don't worry about being made a fool when in my opinion the person I am discussing things with is making a fool of himself. So where does the fear come from?

Bottom line is I am afraid for the person(s) who are making such an @#$ of themselves (in my opinion). We are facing times and challenges that I feel both honored to be placed here to fight and also totally incapable of being victorious without tons of help, both spiritual and also from my fellow men. Sometimes I feel that people that get into these little word games are like a child building sand castles on the beach and there is a 100 foot tsunami coming toward them - that's where the fear comes from, and the anger! I see much of the same from Wiik - I don;t always agree with him, but his frustration/anger is clearly not that he does not care about his audience, it is that he cares so much and believes that they are stuck in self destructive behavior that causes the fear which leads to anger, and yes the next step is hate. But it is not hate of the individual, it is hate of the situation, hate of the lack of willingness to quit playing with sand castles and getting to higher ground before the wave comes ashore.

I hope that clarifies why sometimes my tone is sometimes not honey and roses. If you have your alarm clock set to wake you up to gentle music, and you repeatedly do not wake up, then maybe it is time to set your clock to a bit more jarring of an alarm - either some rock music or a loud obnoxious alarm. Yes, I just called myself loud and obnoxious!
I much prefer nice and genteel conversation, but sometimes directness and bluntness is called for, and it does not always mean bullying or unrighteous dominion. I am nto trying to dominate anyone. But I am going to point out flaws in an argument just as I expect (and appreciate) the flaws in my own arguments being pointed out.

/whew!

[Jason]

Mark - you are the KING of "starting something", then pulling out the "I'm so saddened by all the contention" line on this forum............ We could find post after post of this on this forum, and those who have been around for a while know what I'm talking about......

Amen!!! Example after example after example......modus operandi!

[LukeAir2008]

Men and Women who run for public office put themselves under the microscope and subject themselves to public scrutiny.

I love Bro. Romney...I just don't think he'd make a good President, Senator, Governor, Mayor or anything else for that matter. I hear he's great at making money. He should stick to what he does best and keep his private life private!

[Mosby]

Now I have noticed some fairly demeaning comments coming out of the thread and felt those comments were unbecoming Brothers in the gospel. I was immediately attacked by some of the posters here for saying anything about this tone.

Thats funny Mark, so are you willing to put your hero Glenn Beck to this litmus test as well?

Funny how you - along with Bob will rise up on your own personal rameumpton and condemn folks who are just providing FACTS about a man who is literally a wolf in the garments of the priesthood- and then claim that you are being treated poorly.

Funny how you will demonize me and others for pointing out enemies of freedom and calling you and Bob out for your own self-righteous attitude and your defense of evil men.

It's getting old Mark, you have a pattern of doing this on this forum and most are wise to your "holier than thou game" - it's interesting how you expect all of this sterling behavior from a few knuckleheads (me) on a forum that is read by maybe 1,000 people at best- yet you don't require the same from someone who has an audience of Millions (Beck)- does this make sense?

Yes, it makes perfect sense- it's called Mark's little game of demonizing anyone who disagrees with him, characterizing anyone who calls out your flaws in logic as "un Christlike, and unforgiving"......Barf, your hypocrisy is nauseating.

Go ahead and leave the "debate" Mark - you can pretend that you are leaving because of your higher "spiritual" plane than the rest of us, but the reality is you are leaving because your nonsense and hypocrisy has been exposed time and time again by various posters.

Bob - keep posting scriptures that you have hand-picked to bolster your pathetic attempt to gain the higher ground on your excuses for a LDG- by telling us that we are un- Christian.Who knows maybe some day you can be a preacher at a born-again church or a Jewish rabbi- you seem well qualified to do either job given your ability to twist scripture to suit your own needs.

[Mark]

Mark - you are the KING of "starting something", then pulling out the "I'm so saddened by all the contention" line on this forum............ We could find post after post of this on this forum, and those who have been around for a while know what I'm talking about......

Amen!!! Example after example after example......modus operandi!

At least my mommy still likes me. ( I think??) Aloha.

[natasha]

Perception is reality...What one person percieves is his/her reality and what another percieves is his/her reality.

[Jason]

Perception is reality...What one person percieves is his/her reality and what another percieves is his/her reality.

....and pray the two never collide.....

[Mosby]

Perception is reality...What one person percieves is his/her reality and what another percieves is his/her reality.

Yes and No, what you perceive is a reality for YOU, but that does not make it a true reality.

Hitler's (sorry for the referrrence) Perception was that the Jews were the source of all that was wrong with Germany and the world, so that was a reality to him- and he believed it WAS a reality.

But was it accurate? Was it true?

Reality is only reached by carefull analyisis of facts and through much study- and ultimately prayer.

[LukeAir2008]

Perception is reality...What one person percieves is his/her reality and what another percieves is his/her reality.

So are you saying that Bro. Romney is deranged? That when he testifies on camera before millions of people that he supports and protects the right of a woman to destroy her own unborn children he doesn't really know what he's saying and that the fault lies at our door for believing him?

Or are you saying that because of his wealth and social status you believe that he is exempt from the moral standards that the rank and file membership of the church are required to live by?

What has perception got to do with it? Are you saying that when someone bears their testimony on a Sunday we should say No, they don't really mean that, what they mean is this...!

Bro. Romney even took the time to explain that the reason he and his mother were pro-abortion was because of a member of his family dying because of an illegal abortion.

Just our perception is it?

Im not judging Mitt Romney. His personal and private behaviour is his own business. I'll let Christ judge him and me and you. But speaking of public politics and the search for suitable candidates to fill public office - I don't believe he is a suitable candidate to serve.

I'll let the Lord have the last word:

"And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea." (Mark 9:42)

[natasha]

Perception is reality...What one person percieves is his/her reality and what another percieves is his/her reality.

Yes and No, what you perceive is a reality for YOU, but that does not make it a true reality.

Hitler's (sorry for the referrrence) Perception was that the Jews were the source of all that was wrong with Germany and the world, so that was a reality to him- and he believed it WAS a reality.

But was it accurate? Was it true?

Reality is only reached by carefull analyisis of facts and through much study- and ultimately prayer.

True...but until your perception is changed, it's still your reality. I never meant for anyone to conclude that anyone's particular perception was true or false.

[natasha]

Perception is reality...What one person percieves is his/her reality and what another percieves is his/her reality.

So are you saying that Bro. Romney is deranged? That when he testifies on camera before millions of people that he supports and protects the right of a woman to destroy her own unborn children he doesn't really know what he's saying and that the fault lies at our door for believing him?

Or are you saying that because of his wealth and social status you believe that he is exempt from the moral standards that the rank and file membership of the church are required to live by?

What has perception got to do with it? Are you saying that when someone bears their testimony on a Sunday we should say No, they don't really mean that, what they mean is this...!

Bro. Romney even took the time to explain that the reason he and his mother were pro-abortion was because of a member of his family dying because of an illegal abortion.

Just our perception is it?

Im not judging Mitt Romney. His personal and private behaviour is his own business. I'll let Christ judge him and me and you. But speaking of public politics and the search for suitable candidates to fill public office - I don't believe he is a suitable candidate to serve.

I'll let the Lord have the last word:

"And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea." (Mark 9:42)

I don't have a clue how you got all of that out of my statement. Sometimes I think some of you people are really wound tight!!!

[Book of Ruth]

Mahoni.... Thanks a ton for the feedback on Jan! Do you have an opinion on Palin or Ron Paul?

[bobhenstra]

Now I have noticed some fairly demeaning comments coming out of the thread and felt those comments were unbecoming Brothers in the gospel. I was immediately attacked by some of the posters here for saying anything about this tone.

Bob - keep posting scriptures that you have hand-picked to bolster your pathetic attempt to gain the higher ground on your excuses for a LDG- by telling us that we are un- Christian.Who knows maybe some day you can be a preacher at a born-again church or a Jewish rabbi- you seem well qualified to do either job given your ability to twist scripture to suit your own needs.

Amazing, I quote a scripture, interpret it correctly, and it automatically makes me "self righteous!"

I still have not seen proof that Romney is a gadianton?? Anybody working on that??

From what I understand about gadianton robbers from the scripture, its a secret organization, with secret signs, handshakes etc, but several of you here seem to know a whole lot about todays gadiantons and just "who" is involved with them, how is that??

Again, where is your proof Romney is one of them?? You've shown me proof he's an imperfect man! As I am! But I'm a forgiving man, as I have pointed out, as I forgive, I'm also forgiven! You chose not to believe the Lord or Joseph Smith in that matter, fine with me, you will in time, sooner or later, your agency!

I'm not in the least concerned about "our" gadiantons, they're going to be removed in the cleansing. I have the Lords promise concerning them, I trust him! I'm prepared, and I might add, am without fear.! Todays gadiantons don't scare me one bit. No matter "who" you experts know belongs to that "secret" organization.

They concerned me 50 years ago when I was first warned about them, but now, my concerns about their existence has been replaced with concerns about the coming cleansing, our preparations, my family, and my neighbors. Its past time worrying about those things I have no control over, "AND" that includes other peoples imperfections, I find it easier to forgive them their imperfections. In fact I pay no attention to the imperfections of others, easier that way! If that sounds "self righteous" so be it, "judging" isn't one of my problems!

You guys have it your way, I'll have it mine!

Bob

Oh, and OI, King Noah didn't meet with the first presidency, King Hezekiah "did," as has Romney! Maybe Romney's a double agent

My last words on this thread!

[Mosby]

Amazing, I quote a scripture, interpret it correctly, and it automatically makes me "self righteous!"

It's just too easy

[Mahonri]

Mahoni.... Thanks a ton for the feedback on Jan! Do you have an opinion on Palin or Ron Paul?

Palin supports McCain for Senate = what else needs to be said?

Paul isn't perfect, but seems pretty principled generally.

[p51-mustang]

Prove to me that Romney is a latter-day gadianton! To me he's just slightly left of my stance concerning politics. Proof is needed here! You'd be wise to be careful with the false accusations!

Prove to me the "Mormons" are being led astray by Romney! Because you don't like him means I shouldn't like him? Sorry, I think your wrong!

Bob

Bob, on the flip side, what evidence can you give that Romney is leading the mormons correctly? Nearly everything I have heard him say is from a left of center, rockefeller republican point of view. What has he said or done that would indicate that he supports the constitution and understands our nations "real" problems and how to fix them?

You sound so much like my Uncle (bless his heart). I can show him videos of Romney talking like a liberal, but then the only thing he can come back with is "I think you are wrong!" For goodness sakes isnt there a better argument than that? If that is the only thing that can be said in Romneys defense then perhaps he doesnt have as much going for him as you think.

And lets please drop the whole debate about tactics used here on the forum about how you are being treated. The debate is healthy and as long as people keep it reasonably in line then I am good with that. Sometimes I think folks on this forum cant defend thier weak position so they have to rely on the "your being mean to me defense". Nice tactics, but they dont add to the discusion or help us uncover the truth one iota!

The other thing in play here is that some folks have their allegiance to people or personalities and not principles. (another word for it is pride, and yes i am guilty of pride) They are so invested in "thier guy" that even if he does things that are totally wrong and dishonest their blind loyalty wont let them admit they might be wrong about the person. I love Ron Paul, but if he ever supported torture, illegal wars, the IRS, shredding the constitution, etc. (like Bush and Romney have done) I would drop him like a hot potato!

Principles over personalities!

[Book of Ruth]

Yeah, I'mwith you Mahonri, I thought after that whole Mcain throwing Palin under the bus thing, that she would no longer support the "establishment". Here's hoping for Ron Paul then.

[Original_Intent]

I'm with you p51! I think Ron Paul is as good as it gets in Washington, and have been a big fan of his (subscribed to his newsletter for 15+ years!) and yet a couple of times I have heard that he supported something and I was completely willing to walk away and say "Well it was good while it lasted." - only to research further and either find that what I had heard was completely untrue, or when I saw Ron Paul's explanation (and the facts had usually been distorted as well) I found that his position was in fact principled and sound.

[Mosby]

P-51, O.I - you guys are all washed up, if Ron Paul was as good lookin' as Mitt, had made as much money as Mitt, and was LDS like Mitt- you would NEVER walk away from him........No matter what he did