A Valid Reason To Run For Office?

[Pahoran]

This showed up in a local paper here: http://www.nzherald....jectid=10768866

Here's a excerpt, just for fun:

Karger's end-game is to shatter perhaps the greatest taboo of this Republican election season by publicly asking front-runner Mitt Romney, a lifelong Mormon, about his beliefs.

"When I was working on the Proposition Eight campaign, I did a lot of work on the Mormon church, and how they funded anti-gay legislation. If I get into a debate I intend to use that knowledge to cross-examine Romney, because although he keeps very quiet about it, he's actually the perfect Mormon."

And of course, "the perfect Mormon" means "the perfect target."

Evidently Karger is dropping all pretense of being a "Californian against hate." His malice is undeniable.

Regards,

Pahoran

[ERayR]

Didn't Diglot assure us we didn't have anything to worry about as far as anti-mormons.

[Storm Rider]

His malice does seem palpable, doesn't it. I wonder why someone wants to carry that burden around? He is to be pitied.

[thesometimesaint]

But NOT voted for.

Ps; The Church didn't contribute one thin dime to the Prop 8 ballot issue. Individual members did. Mr. Kargers' jihad against the Saints is nothing more than a complaint aginst LDS participation in the democratic process.

[Daniel2]

But NOT voted for.

Ps; The Church didn't contribute one thin dime to the Prop 8 ballot issue. Individual members did. Mr. Kargers' jihad against the Saints is nothing more than a complaint aginst LDS participation in the democratic process.

By way of clarification, SometimeSaint,

The LDS church is officially on record (by their own account) as spending much more than "one thin dime" to Proposition 8 campaign in in-kind contributions. From the LA Times:

Mormon church reports spending $180,000 on Proposition 8

January 30, 2009 | 5:51 pm

Top officials with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints filed reports today indicating that they donated more than $180,000 in in-kind contributions to Proposition 8, the November ballot initiative that banned same-sex marriage in California.

The contributions included tens of thousands of dollars for expenses such as airline tickets, hotel and restaurant bills and car-rental bills for top church officials such as L. Whitney Clayton, along with $96,849.31 worth of “compensated staff time” for church employees.

The church said the expenditures took place between July 1 and the end of the year. The church’s involvement has been a major issue in the campaign and its aftermath. Individual Mormon families donated millions -- by some estimates more than $20 million -- of their own money to the campaign.

On top of that, some Prop. 8 opponents say church officials violated election law by failing to file campaign disclosure reports outlining church funds being spent on the campaign. Fred Karger, who filed a complaint with the Fair Political Practices Commission after the election alleging that church officials had not properly disclosed their involvement, said he thought today’s filing proves that his complaint has merit.

“They said they reported all their travel ... now, when there is a [complaint filed] they disclose 25 Southwest tickets just in October,” he said. “They were required to report this” in an earlier filing, he said. Church officials could not be reached for comment this evening.

-- Jessica Garrison

[Pahoran]

But NOT voted for.

Ps; The Church didn't contribute one thin dime to the Prop 8 ballot issue. Individual members did. Mr. Kargers' jihad against the Saints is nothing more than a complaint aginst LDS participation in the democratic process.

While the Church didn't contribute money, it did support the initiative with time and resources; these are considered "in-kind" donations. But while there are plenty of haters who think Latter-day Saints should be prevented from participating in the democratic process, I think there's something more sinister going on here than mere targeted bigotry.

It seems to me that Karger, and other Californians Who Hate (and hold grudges) are using the Mormons as convenient political scapegoats. That's because we are a relatively small group, and plenty of people don't really understand what we are all about. This is the vilest of political dirty tricks; and, of course, it's been done before. And not just to us; most notably, to Jews as well.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Pahoran]

By way of clarification, SometimeSaint,

The LDS church is officially on record (by their own account) as spending much more than "one thin dime" to Proposition 8 campaign in in-kind contributions. From the LA Times:

[snip]

On top of that, some Prop. 8 opponents say church officials violated election law by failing to file campaign disclosure reports outlining church funds being spent on the campaign. Fred Karger, who filed a complaint with the Fair Political Practices Commission after the election alleging that church officials had not properly disclosed their involvement, said he thought today’s filing proves that his complaint has merit.

“They said they reported all their travel ... now, when there is a [complaint filed] they disclose 25 Southwest tickets just in October,” he said. “They were required to report this” in an earlier filing, he said. Church officials could not be reached for comment this evening.

I wanted to quote that portion in particular because it shows how Karger labours to parlay a simple late filing into a dark and machiavellian conspiracy.

He's quite a piece of work, isn't he?

Regards,

Pahoran

[thesometimesaint]

Daniel2:

Last time I Iooked in kind donations are not money. If I give a friend a ride to the grocery store she can't spend it.

[california boy]

While the Church didn't contribute money, it did support the initiative with time and resources; these are considered "in-kind" donations. But while there are plenty of haters who think Latter-day Saints should be prevented from participating in the democratic process, I think there's something more sinister going on here than mere targeted bigotry. It seems to me that Karger, and other Californians Who Hate (and hold grudges) are using the Mormons as convenient political scapegoats. That's because we are a relatively small group, and plenty of people don't really understand what we are all about. This is the vilest of political dirty tricks; and, of course, it's been done before. And not just to us; most notably, to Jews as well. Regards, Pahoran

Of course you are right. The church is completely innocent. They did practily noting to pass prop 8. And the ads that ran on television using the money from church members were completely honest. What is all the fuss about anyway? I just don't get why the church is unfairly targeted.

[ERayR]

Of course you are right. The church is completely innocent. They did practily noting to pass prop 8. And the ads that ran on television using the money from church members were completely honest. What is all the fuss about anyway? I just don't get why the church is unfairly targeted.

Perhaps because those doing the targeting did not like the outcome.

[Daniel2]

Daniel2:

Last time I Iooked in kind donations are not money. If I give a friend a ride to the grocery store she can't spend it.

Neither my comment of clarification, nor the article itself, claims that the church itself donated money. I don't think it's entirely honest to suggest or imply that the church "didn't spend" anything on the Prop 8 campaign, which is why I feel it's worth clarifying the financial declaration of their "in kind" donations. I'm content with sharing the full information and letting each reader judge for himself or herself about whether or not "in-kind" donations are worth noting on this particular matter.

Daniel2

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Of course you are right. The church is completely innocent. They did practily noting to pass prop 8. And the ads that ran on television using the money from church members were completely honest. What is all the fuss about anyway? I just don't get why the church is unfairly targeted.

Innocent? I was not aware anyone was guilty of anything in the first place. I think it funny that all those for gay marriage think the LDS church did something wrong when it's members voted for what they believe.

Perhaps you were just being sarcastic.

[Pahoran]

Neither my comment of clarification, nor the article itself, claims that the church itself donated money. I don't think it's entirely honest to suggest or imply that the church "didn't spend" anything on the Prop 8 campaign, which is why I feel it's worth clarifying the financial declaration of their "in kind" donations. I'm content with sharing the full information and letting each reader judge for himself or herself about whether or not "in-kind" donations are worth noting on this particular matter.

Daniel2

Actually both of you are right. As I mentioned above, "in kind" contributions are not money, but they are valuable nonetheless. However, they are not the same as handing over cash.

And I think it is worth noting the actual amount of in-kind contributions that were made, and contrasting it to the vastly inflated amounts that were at one time being claimed (and which claims are still on record.)

Regards,

Pahoran

[Pahoran]

Of course you are right.

Thank you.

The church is completely innocent.

This is true.

They did practily noting to pass prop 8.

I think everyone accepts that the Church was very interested in the passage of Prop 8 and did whatever it lawfully could to support the campaign. Since this was in no sense a wrongdoing, the Church remains entirely innocent.

And the ads that ran on television using the money from church members were completely honest.

I am not aware that the Church was in a position to exercise editorial control over the contents of the ads. After all, contrary to the published lies of the gaygitators, Prop 8 was in no sense "the Mormon proposition."

Also, while I never saw any of the ads in question, I have heard them complained about; and I cannot say that I am aware of any actual misstatements of fact therein. I am aware of opinions being expressed and predictions made which some people dispute, but that is not the same thing.

However, given the disgraceful, spiteful and manifestly dishonest "home invasion" ad, paid for by the immoralists, I hardly feel that anyone on the "no" side is in any position at all to complain about anything not being "completely honest."

What is all the fuss about anyway? I just don't get why the church is unfairly targeted.

I do. See above.

Regards,

Pahoran

[california boy]

However, given the disgraceful, spiteful and manifestly dishonest "home invasion" ad, paid for by the immoralists, I hardly feel that anyone on the "no" side is in any position at all to complain about anything not being "completely honest."

That was a horrible ad wasn't it. After all, the Mormon Church didn't literally go into anyones home and rip up their right to be married. I don't know how that could possibly relate to anything the church was doing to defeat prop 8. Those crazy liberals.

[Pahoran]

That was a horrible ad wasn't it. After all, the Mormon Church didn't literally go into anyones home and rip up their right to be married. I don't know how that could possibly relate to anything the church was doing to defeat prop 8. Those crazy liberals.

Not literally; not figuratively; not in any other way.

And the missionaries, singled out for special "attention," had nothing whatsoever to do with Prop 8. Missionaries are not allowed to vote, much less engage in political campaigns of any kind.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Storm Rider]

Poor little Daniel having to carry that terrible knowledge around...the LDS Church as a religious orgainization actually does stand up and declar what is moral and what is immoral. The Gay lifestyle is immoral, perverted, against biology and science, and wholly without merit. I understand how that could stick in your craw since you have long ago abdicated any commitment to living a moral lifestyle. Regardless, LDS, Catholics, Evangelicals, etc., will remain completely within their rights as citizens of this nation to vote in elections and support moral issues.

If the Gay community has a problem with that, then it is a personal one and has nothing to do with religious people and how they vote. Give me another ballot, I feel the need to vote again; like John Hancock, I want it written in large letters so that everyone can read how I voted and why!

[california boy]

Not literally; not figuratively; not in any other way.

And the missionaries, singled out for special "attention," had nothing whatsoever to do with Prop 8. Missionaries are not allowed to vote, much less engage in political campaigns of any kind.

Regards,

Pahoran

Good point. After all, controlling who is allowed to marry and who is not allowed to marry has nothing to do with worrying about what someone does in the privacy of their own lives and personal bedroom. Government should be more concerned with our own personal relationships and what goes on in our bedrooms. Nice that the church supports that thinking. I think gays are just too sensitive about how we control who they are allowed to marry. The Mormon church has the political right to determine who they marry. Gays don't seem to understand that Mormon church policies are for their own good.

And missionaries don't represent the church. When non-members see missionaries. the last thing they think of is the church representatives.

[california boy]

Poor little Daniel having to carry that terrible knowledge around...the LDS Church as a religious orgainization actually does stand up and declar what is moral and what is immoral. The Gay lifestyle is immoral, perverted, against biology and science, and wholly without merit. I understand how that could stick in your craw since you have long ago abdicated any commitment to living a moral lifestyle. Regardless, LDS, Catholics, Evangelicals, etc., will remain completely within their rights as citizens of this nation to vote in elections and support moral issues. If the Gay community has a problem with that, then it is a personal one and has nothing to do with religious people and how they vote. Give me another ballot, I feel the need to vote again; like John Hancock, I want it written in large letters so that everyone can read how I voted and why!

Yeah like I said to Paharan, the church knows better how gays should be living their lives and if they don't use their free agency in making the correct decision, the church should pass laws to make sure they don't get married. After all being gay in a non committed relationship is way more moral than if we allow them to marry. Hey maybe if we don't allow gays to be married, they will quit being gay and all the sudden be straight. Yeah I like this plan.

[TAO]

Guys, each sides is going to look at the other as wrong, and is going to vote how they see accordingly.

I think pointing out who is 'innocent' at this point is kinda pointless. Because both sides are 'guilty' of taking action. Or maybe, both sides are 'not guilty' of doing nothing. It depends how you look at it. Moving on.

--------------------

In any case... Karger's article is just the usual stuff we see... not much to expect but the usual stuff. =P.

I think, eventually people will learn to drop it. Eventually, hehe.

People are gonna complain, that they will, and I guess we gotta just ignore 'em =P.

[thesometimesaint]

TAO:

False equivalency. If you say 2+2=5, and I say it is the color green we're both wrong, but I'm not even on this planet.