Abolish the Fed? Romney: "NO."

[iamse7en]

Our LDS friend, Mitt Romney, was asked about Ron Paul's initiative to end the Fed. He's naive to think the Fed audited sufficiently, but predictably, he doesn't want to abolish the Fed.

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/141796

[pjbrownie]

One more nail in the coffin of my Romney support. I was hoping he would keep changing his mind into Constitutional thinking--oh how naive.

[lundbaek]

If you could have seen Romney here cheerleading for McCain a few weeks ago you probably wouldn't waste time hoping he will change his mind into Constitutional thinking. I expect if he runs for President again he will give some lip service or rhetoric to the Constitution, mostly in order to gain support of more of the tea party people and others who believe in the Constitution.

[Quiet Cricket]

It seems like running for president is a career move for him.

I read this article on the Mormon Times website. Although what this guy says is true, I fear it will actually make people want to vote for Romney instead of working for a better candidate. Exposure to the church would be great, but not at the cost of a real candidate. The Lord can expose his church in many ways. If the church grows because of exposure, it is the Lord making good out of the bad.

"If the scenario were true, Watkins said, members of the media would scrutinize his tax returns and wonder why 10 percent went directly to his church . Devoting three or more hours to church meetings and other duties, home teaching and national coverage of Sister Johnson's sacrament meeting talk might turn some heads. General conference would be a major media event. Attending the temple would become complicated.

And think of the possible political satire. "Saturday Night Live" would have a field day.

The U.S. president is typically the most newsworthy person on the planet, so imagine if he were a Mormon. Picture his 14-person entourage following him into church, said Watkins.

"Interest in the church would be off the charts," he told a crowd of hundreds gathered in the South Towne Exposition Center for the 12th Annual Mormon Apologetics Conference. "If a Mormon gets elected to the White House, there would be exponential exposure. People that don't know Mormons now will, if not personally, one could be in the White House.""
...
"Watkins acknowledged possible presidential candidate Mitt Romney as an example, but was careful not to endorse him..." (yeah sure, why bring it up if there isn't even another prominent mormon figure running?)

http://www.mormontimes.com/article/1633 ... ueue_title

I don't know who Peter Watkins is, but I commented anyway.

[bobhenstra]

It seems like running for president is a career move for him.

I read this article on the Mormon Times website. Although what this guy says is true, I fear it will actually make people want to vote for Romney instead of working for a better candidate. Exposure to the church would be great, but not at the cost of a real candidate. The Lord can expose his church in many ways. If the church grows because of exposure, it is the Lord making good out of the bad.

"If the scenario were true, Watkins said, members of the media would scrutinize his tax returns and wonder why 10 percent went directly to his church . Devoting three or more hours to church meetings and other duties, home teaching and national coverage of Sister Johnson's sacrament meeting talk might turn some heads. General conference would be a major media event. Attending the temple would become complicated.

And think of the possible political satire. "Saturday Night Live" would have a field day.

The U.S. president is typically the most newsworthy person on the planet, so imagine if he were a Mormon. Picture his 14-person entourage following him into church, said Watkins.

"Interest in the church would be off the charts," he told a crowd of hundreds gathered in the South Towne Exposition Center for the 12th Annual Mormon Apologetics Conference. "If a Mormon gets elected to the White House, there would be exponential exposure. People that don't know Mormons now will, if not personally, one could be in the White House.""
...
"Watkins acknowledged possible presidential candidate Mitt Romney as an example, but was careful not to endorse him..." (yeah sure, why bring it up if there isn't even another prominent mormon figure running?)

http://www.mormontimes.com/article/1633 ... ueue_title

I don't know who Peter Watkins is, but I commented anyway.

I will vote for Romney, and trust the Lord to use Romney as he see's fit.

I know who's in charge!

Bob

[lundbaek]

I wonder how many LDS voters in Nevada think the same about Harry Reid.

“Satan has control now. No matter where you look, he is in control, even in our own land. He is guiding the governments as far as the Lord will permit him. That is why there is so much strife, turmoil, confusion all over the earth. One master mind is governing the nations. It is not the President of the United States...it is not the king or government of England or any other land; it is Satan himself.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 3, pp. 314-315)

What use would the Lord have for a Latter-day Saint who, having served a mission for the Church, having served in various leadership positions in the Church, and having been blessed with fantastic success in business, stating in an a televised interview that "I don't know that he (God) has spoken to anyone since Moses and the bush or perhaps some others."?

What use would the Lord have for any politician who would be responsible for the a mandatory healthcare program akin to Obamacare?

What use would the Lord have for a politician who will not abide by constitutional principles?

[bobhenstra]

I wonder how many LDS voters in Nevada think the same about Harry Reid.

“Satan has control now. No matter where you look, he is in control, even in our own land. He is guiding the governments as far as the Lord will permit him. That is why there is so much strife, turmoil, confusion all over the earth. One master mind is governing the nations. It is not the President of the United States...it is not the king or government of England or any other land; it is Satan himself.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 3, pp. 314-315)

What use would the Lord have for a Latter-day Saint who, having served a mission for the Church, having served in various leadership positions in the Church, and having been blessed with fantastic success in business, stating in an a televised interview that "I don't know that he (God) has spoken to anyone since Moses and the bush or perhaps some others."?

What use would the Lord have for any politician who would be responsible for the a mandatory healthcare program akin to Obamacare?

What use would the Lord have for a politician who will not abide by constitutional principles?

A penatent modern day King Hezekiah.

May I suggest a study of Hezekiah, Alma, his son Alma the Younger, the Sons of Mosiah, King Lamoni, his family and people, King Anti-Nephi-Lehi, Paul etc. Try to understand what the Lord can accomplish with such, and learn not to commit yourself to such hasty judgement before the Lord is finished with them/you!

Bob

[give_me_liberty]

May I suggest a study of Hezekiah, Alma, his son Alma the Younger, the Sons of Mosiah, King Lamoni, his family and people, King Anti-Nephi-Lehi, Paul etc. Try to understand what the Lord can accomplish with such, and learn not to commit yourself to such hasty judgement before the Lord is finished with them/you!

I hope Romney does turn around and repent as they did, and if he does, at that point I would consider voting for him, but only after comparing him to the other candidates. Until then, I think there are definitely better options out there. Making him our president now because he might repent before causing damage to our country is asking for trouble.

[lundbaek]

I have been watching Mitt Romney since 2002, at which time I also began checking into his backround as well. As of a few weeks ago, when he was here promoting the candidacy of a man I consider a traitor to constitutional principles and our national sovereignty (as well as to MIAs), I have seen no sign of real change and penetance. That can hardly be considered hasty judgement.

We don't need an LDS Republican in the White House. Nor a president with a successful business record. We need a dedicated constitutionalist, and that Mitt Romney clearly is not.

[Mosby]

I will vote for Romney, and trust the Lord to use Romney as he see's fit.

I know who's in charge!

Bob

And that folks is exactly why we as a people both as Latter-Day Saints and Americans are doomed to suffer like we will.

The Lord (who IS in charge) has told us through his servants time and time again to seek out good honest men who sustain the Constitution, the cause of Liberty and the laws of God- Romney is well short on all accounts.

[lundbaek]

We have been told in no uncertain terms to seek out good honest men who sustain the Constitution, the cause of Liberty and the laws of God. And so what have most LDS voters do? Voted in ignorance and made things worse.

There seems to be an awakening, though. In Utah Chris Cannon was put out to pasture. Then Bennett got canned. Here in Arizona McCain is at least being challenged, as is Jeff Flake, both having demonstrated disdain for constitutional principles and support of amnesty and illegal immigrants.

[Shimdidly]

Romney is a career politician and he cares more about power and the camaraderie of the establishment than true freedom and the constitution.

Voting for the lesser of two evils will always feel like more of a wasted vote than voting your concience for someone that truly stands for the constitution and freedom like Ron Paul.

[Original_Intent]

It seems like running for president is a career move for him.

I read this article on the Mormon Times website. Although what this guy says is true, I fear it will actually make people want to vote for Romney instead of working for a better candidate. Exposure to the church would be great, but not at the cost of a real candidate. The Lord can expose his church in many ways. If the church grows because of exposure, it is the Lord making good out of the bad.

"If the scenario were true, Watkins said, members of the media would scrutinize his tax returns and wonder why 10 percent went directly to his church . Devoting three or more hours to church meetings and other duties, home teaching and national coverage of Sister Johnson's sacrament meeting talk might turn some heads. General conference would be a major media event. Attending the temple would become complicated.

And think of the possible political satire. "Saturday Night Live" would have a field day.

The U.S. president is typically the most newsworthy person on the planet, so imagine if he were a Mormon. Picture his 14-person entourage following him into church, said Watkins.

"Interest in the church would be off the charts," he told a crowd of hundreds gathered in the South Towne Exposition Center for the 12th Annual Mormon Apologetics Conference. "If a Mormon gets elected to the White House, there would be exponential exposure. People that don't know Mormons now will, if not personally, one could be in the White House.""
...
"Watkins acknowledged possible presidential candidate Mitt Romney as an example, but was careful not to endorse him..." (yeah sure, why bring it up if there isn't even another prominent mormon figure running?)

http://www.mormontimes.com/article/1633 ... ueue_title

I don't know who Peter Watkins is, but I commented anyway.

I will vote for Romney, and trust the Lord to use Romney as he see's fit.

I know who's in charge!

Bob

It is amazing where letting the ends justify the means can get you. I guess when the Lord said even the elect would be deceived, He wasn't kidding.

[lundbaek]

The best use I have for Mitt Romney is as a lesson in how and why so many LDS voters are deceived into supporting improper roles of government, and in the extent to which so many LDSs vote in ignorance for not having done their homework.

By "homework, I mean the study of the form of government the Lord intended us to have, and also a study of the candidates sufficient to determine if they meet the Lord's standards - or at least to determine which ones come the closest. No small task, BTW, especially in view of the tremendous amount of deception in the rhetoric of many candidates.

[bobhenstra]

The best use I have for Mitt Romney is as a lesson in how and why so many LDS voters are deceived into supporting improper roles of government, and in the extent to which so many LDSs vote in ignorance for not having done their homework.

By "homework, I mean the study of the form of government the Lord intended us to have, and also a study of the candidates sufficient to determine if they meet the Lord's standards - or at least to determine which ones come the closest. No small task, BTW, especially in view of the tremendous amount of deception in the rhetoric of many candidates.

Have I told you nay-sayers how to vote??? No no, not a word, just how I'll vote! I don't care how you vote. However, I sure get the opinion that all of your encouragement to waste our vote on someone who can't possible win, will do nothing more than keep the current resident in the white house "there". And I honestly wonder if "that" isn't your secret agenda!


Bob

[Original_Intent]

Bob, they only "can't possibly win" because too many people have been brainwashed like you that it is more important to pick a "winner" than voting their conscience. I am hopeful that you will prayerfully reconsider your position.

Duty is our responsibility,
The outcome is God's.

We have been commanded time and time again to find the best candidates possible and support them. Joseph Smith Jr. ran with "no chance to win" would you have withheld your vote because he had no chance?

[durangout]

I'm just picking a number out of thin air and going to say that it would take at least 10 election cycles or 40 years of people voting their concience before there was enough trraction for a 3rd party candidate to even have a slight chance of winning.

[Mahonri]

However, I sure get the opinion that all of your encouragement to waste our vote on someone who can't possible win, will do nothing more than keep the current resident in the white house "there".

By having McCain or Romney in the White House, what have we "won"? What did we "win" with Bush Sr or Jr? Bigger government, more war, less freedom in every aspect of our lives, etc, etc, etc.

If that is winning, I say we win either way, and I want no part of it.

[Mahonri]

The Lord himself tells us who to support for office:

D&C 98
10 Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil.
11 And I give unto you a commandment, that ye shall forsake all evil and cleave unto all good, that ye shall live by every word which proceedeth forth out of the mouth of God.

Not my words, the words of the Lord.

Mitt is neither good, honest or wise. No matter what kind of silly nonsense you try to conjure up to say we should vote for him, it is going against the commandments of God to do so.

[lundbaek]

For the benefit of persons new to this on-going discussion, I present the following words of an Apostle and a Prophet.

"May we be wise–prayerfully wise–in the electing of those who would lead us. May we select only those who understand and will adhere to constitutional principles. To do so, we need to understand these principles ourselves.....We should understand the Constitution as the founders meant that it should be understood. We can do this by reading their words about it, such as those contained in the Federalist Papers. Such understanding is essential it we are to preserve what God has given us. (Ezra Taft Benson, April 1976 General Conference)

"[Above] all else, strive to support good and conscientious candidates of either party who are aware of the great dangers inherent in communism, and who are truly dedicated to the Constitution in the tradition of our founding fathers."
(President David O. McKay, October 1962 General Conference)

Let me emphasize the following: "May we select only those who understand and will adhere to constitutional principles." "[Above] all else, strive to support good and conscientious candidates of either party.....who are truly dedicated to the Constitution in the tradition of our founding fathers."

For added emphasis, consider the following:

John Quincy Adams said, "Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost."

Hyrum Smith: We engage in the election the same as in any other principle: you are to vote for good men, and if you do not do this it is a sin: to vote for wicked men, it would be sin. Choose the good and refuse the evil. Men of false principles have preyed upon us like wolves upon helpless lambs. (History of the Church, Vol.6, Ch.15, p. 323.)

Joseph Smith: We shall have the satisfaction of knowing we have acted conscientiously and have used our best judgment, and if we have to throw away our votes, we had better do so upon a worthy rather than an unworthy individual who might make use of the weapon we put in his hand to destroy us! (Comprehensive History of the Church 2:208-209.)

[Mosby]

However, I sure get the opinion that all of your encouragement to waste our vote on someone who can't possible win

I always like to remind those who bring this argument up- that if Jesus Christ ran for president today, that he would have ZERO chance of "winning"

O.I - good point about Joseph Smith's run for office.

[Swan Song]

I'm just picking a number out of thin air and going to say that it would take at least 10 election cycles or 40 years of people voting their concience before there was enough trraction for a 3rd party candidate to even have a slight chance of winning.

That's because "we the people" have been brainwashed that a 3rd party can't win and have put off voting our conscience for the past 10 election cycles and more because of that brainwashing.

[bobhenstra]

However, I sure get the opinion that all of your encouragement to waste our vote on someone who can't possible win

I always like to remind those who bring this argument up- that if Jesus Christ ran for president today, that he would have ZERO chance of "winning"

O.I - good point about Joseph Smith's run for office.

Your opinion! May I have mine?

Bob

[lundbaek]

We are entitled to our opinions. But when we try to bring others to our persuasions we can anad should expect arguement. Especially if others consider our opinions dangerous.

[bobhenstra]

We are entitled to our opinions. But when we try to bring others to our persuasions we can anad should expect arguement. Especially if others consider our opinions dangerous.

OK then, my opinion is; I'll never have to vote for my Savior in any capacity, but I will always sustain him. And, in my opinion, as an example, you guys would not have sustained Alma the Younger as Prophet of the true Church! Why? because you haven't yet learned how to forgive!

Several times I have ask you guys for proof that Romney is an ldg! All I get from you are facts that show he's a bit more liberal than I am. And that he makes mistakes like "I" have and, still do. I don't consider those items as proof, I consider them to be "human," like me!

Brother Romney has as much right to his political views as you do! And I have the same right, if you consider them dangerous, so be it! But understand, I consider your efforts to get people to vote third party equally as dangerous, all your accomplishing is helping/guaranteeing Obumpa will remain in office.

I have felt no misgivings about Romney, the Spirit has not beat me about the head warning me about a fellow brother in the priesthood. All I get is the still small voice telling me he'll be fine. If you'll read what PJ posted about King Hezekiah, you'll see that he was a member in good standing, even though earlier in life he wasn't. The point being Hezekiah was a member of the true church, he had repented and continued to repent, as Alma the Younger did! Thats who I'll vote for, a penitent individual, someone who has confessed his sins, someone who can and will confer with the prophet, like Hezekiah did, like I have!

I seriously doubt Ron Paul would "ever" confer with the Prophet!

I do not believe Romney is a latter-day gadianton, I have seen no proof! Show me the proof! Thats all I ask! I do not consider him dangerous, I consider what your doing dangerous!

Now perhaps your better than me (I'm not making that judgement), closer to perfection, nearer the veil, understand more, are better educated, more scripturally in tune, I don't know, but I know I don't like many of your political ideas! I consider them very dangerous!


Bob