Romney's Decision Process for Vote on Impeachment

[MiserereNobis]

3 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

Unfortunately being a good moral person does not always overlap with intelligence and competence. Would that it did. 

Take a good moral man and put him as captain of a battleship during a war. If he also has 25 years of experience with ships and war and leadership , great. If not , thousands will die needlessly.

Look back over the last 60 years and judge the moral character of the past Presidents . Make a list of the ones with outstanding purity. Short list isn't it.

Was Moses a good moral man... Joshua … how about David ? Let's not be naïve. Politics is war. 

One of the early things I remember my mother teaching me over and over is that just because others do it doesn't mean it is ok and is not an excuse for my behavior. Did she teach a sound moral principle?

Also, where is the line? How far do we allow moral requirements to drop?

The belief that politics is war is simply reinforcing the current extreme polarity. In war, you do not compromise with your enemy. In war, you do whatever is necessary to win. Is that how we want our politics to be? Isn't compromise and restraint a moral virtue we should expect in politics so that we have a moral government? If we keep telling ourselves politics is war then we will never get out of the current situation we are in. Politics is not war, it is the art of governing. I don't want to live under "martial law." I don't want Americans to view other Americans as "the enemy" just because they are in a different political party. And I certainly don't want this current insanity of hyper partisanship to continue.

And yes, I want a good man (or woman) to lead the country. They certainly don't have to be perfect, because they certainly cannot be, but let us not make the perfect the enemy of the good. Just because we can't have outstanding purity, as you say, doesn't mean we abandon the desire to have a certain level of purity.

Comparing Trump to Moses, to Joshua, to David has also been another mind-blowing thing I have seen primarily from evangelicals. Is Trump really an anointed prophet and king of God? Is he going to write beautiful psalms begging God for help and forgiveness?

If we can excuse the personal behavior of Trump, then it becomes quite easy to excuse almost all personal behavior of any politician.

[MiserereNobis]

6 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

This says it all. It is not 'clear, ethical failures.' His cabinet appointments are not 'clear ethical failures.' People don't have to like President Trump. I did not like President Obama but when people throw around the "everything he does is to advance himself' narrative, I think it leaves the realm of reasoned discourse. His comments, IMO, seem to show he is not well informed. We can disagree...it's okay.

I'm not necessarily talking about things he has done as president (though one could), or his policies. I am talking about his decades of a very public and well documented life full of dishonesty, fraud, and deceit that was used to his further his own image and money making. His years as a billionaire playboy having clear and open affairs without any remorse, for example. The defrauding of investors, companies, and customers. They are clear ethical failures.

[strappinglad]

18 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Comparing Trump to Moses, to Joshua, to David has also been another mind-blowing thing I have seen primarily from evangelicals. Is Trump really an anointed prophet and king of God? Is he going to write beautiful psalms

At no time did I compare Trump to these men. I suggested the flawed men can also be good leaders with the converse being that good men can be flawed leaders. 

Side note: When the British parliament buildings were built there were government seats on one side of the House and opposition seats on the other side. The distance between them was decided by... the distance of 2 sword lengths. For a good reason.

[Prof]

Principle over party. I'm okay with it.

[let’s roll]

1 hour ago, strappinglad said:

1 hour ago, strappinglad said:

Politics is war. 

 

Politics, like just about everything else in our life, is what we choose , individually and collectively, to make it.  And if we’re unhappy with that choice, change can be made, one person at a time.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Mitt just loves being a media darling, unlike when running for President. Make no mistake, the media still hates him, but vanity will not let his see it. Once this is over, they will throw him under the bus; “Again”! Just like they hate and have always hated John Bolton, but for now he is their (temporary) hero. I truly have never seen the kind of hated that those of the left have for this President, and all who voted for him. Now Mitt, joins the ranks of those who just can’t let go of the past, and get over the fact that he lost. One thing I have always liked about the right, is their candidates eventually are able to accept the will of the people and move on with their lives. But, nuff said, he is toast, and all the good he had thought he might do, will only lead him to be a one term candidate, be it on the “right or left”. 

Edited February 5, 2020 by Bill “Papa” Lee

[Calm]

2 hours ago, bdouglas said:

Opposing Trump does not mean that one “hates him”. It means your eyes are open. It means that, even if you are a Republican like me, you can look past the extreme partisanship that exists in politics today and see the man for what he is: a narcissist and a sociopath who has no moral compass whatever.

That in essence says if you do not oppose him your eyes are closed and you are supporting a sociopath.

I don't see this as different than using "you hate him" as an appraisal.

[bsjkki]

4 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said:

Has the Republican party become a Cult of Personality rather than a set of principles?

I just listened to it being argued that Romney betrayed his principles. It's all a big Rorschach test. Some, truly believe this impeachment set a dangerous precedent for our country with dire consequences. You may not agree with that and that is okay.  As a Republican who follows politics extremely closely, it felt like a betrayal. Is it okay with you that I disagree with your assessment? It is not a cult of personality but a fundamental lack of fairness/due process in the House process that led to this result. 

[Robert F. Smith]

5 hours ago, bsjkki said:

He should join the other party. It's where his heart lies so he should just make it official.

Actually that isn't true at all.  Like his father George, Mitt is a traditional Republican.  The Party has left him, leaving him behind wondering what happened.  This is also true of his fellow Mormon, the former Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, Bill “Papa” Lee said:

Mitt just loves being a media darling, unlike when running for President. Make no mistake, the media still hates him, but vanity will not let his see it. Once this is over, they will throw him under the bus; “Again”! Just like they hate and have always hated John Bolton, but for now he is their (temporary) hero. I truly have never seen the kind of hated that those of the left have for this President, and all who voted for him. Now Mitt, joins the ranks of those who just can’t let go of the past, and get over the fact that he lost. One thing I have always liked about the right, is their candidates eventually are able to accept the will of the people and move on with their lives. But, nuff said, he is toast, and all the good he had thought he might do, will only lead him to be a one term candidate, be it on the “right or left”. 

Moscow Mitch McConnell would love to hear you say all that, and Vladimir Putin is happy as a lark.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

I'm not necessarily talking about things he has done as president (though one could), or his policies. I am talking about his decades of a very public and well documented life full of dishonesty, fraud, and deceit that was used to his further his own image and money making. His years as a billionaire playboy having clear and open affairs without any remorse, for example. The defrauding of investors, companies, and customers. They are clear ethical failures.

Well, but wasn't King David a man after God's own heart?

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

........................................

Comparing Trump to Moses, to Joshua, to David has also been another mind-blowing thing I have seen primarily from evangelicals. Is Trump really an anointed prophet and king of God? Is he going to write beautiful psalms begging God for help and forgiveness?

If we can excuse the personal behavior of Trump, then it becomes quite easy to excuse almost all personal behavior of any politician.

Bear in mind that 80% of American Mormons are loyal Republicans, and almost none of them has a baccalaureate in political science.  The problem is akin to being unable to see anything wrong with one's local parish priest molesting children because of loyalty to Mother Church.

[Calm]

If anyone ever wonders why political discussions are not allowed on the board.....

[bsjkki]

35 minutes ago, Calm said:

If anyone ever wonders why political discussions are not allowed on the board.....

Agreed. Romney's decision and his quoting of a church hymn and quoting his 'oath to God' brings the church into these matters. My local talk radio (non Utah) has many people understanding that Romney is saying God told him to do vote this way. Perception is reality...even when it's wrong. 

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, Calm said:

If anyone ever wonders why political discussions are not allowed on the board.....

Everywhere I go, we're all being divided. Scary when it comes between family and friends. I worry for what I commented about in support of Mitt's courage today on a friend's FB post that had a photo of Mitt and "Loser" across his forehead. I worry about my own family and friends disliking me...and remember the hate these same family/friends had for Obama, when I supported Obama. I guess I'm starting to wonder if something is wrong with me...I hope we can all survive this. 

 

Edited February 6, 2020 by Tacenda

[MiserereNobis]

The other thread got closed but if the conversation continues here I want to make sure my ideas go with it. Here's my post from the other thread:

 

I am so beyond confused here.

We have had many many threads where people have argued that it is not just a constitutional right but a traditional and proper right for religion to operate in the public sphere. That people can and should make decisions in the public sphere based on their religious belief. That we should defend religious freedom, the freedom to believe and act on that belief in the public sphere.

And now...

Here we have Mormons saying that a Mormon who acted on his Mormon belief in the public sphere should not have done so.

The only difference I can see is political. Please show me that I am wrong. Please show me that people should act on their religious beliefs in the public sphere UNLESS somehow their acting on their religious belief in the public sphere somehow conveys the idea that they actually believe God told them to do what they did.

What in the world...? Do you want people to consult God and act on it or not? Do you want people to consult God and actually believe He speaks to them or not?

   4 hours ago,  Bernard Gui said: 

The problem as I see it is saying, "I consulted God, and God told me thus and so; therefore, my position is the right one." 

Please, don't you ever bear your testimony again about how God told you that the LDS church is the only true and living church on the face of the whole earth. You'll be a huge hypocrite if you do.

[bsjkki]

11 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

The other thread got closed but if the conversation continues here I want to make sure my ideas go with it. Here's my post from the other thread:

 

I am so beyond confused here.

We have had many many threads where people have argued that it is not just a constitutional right but a traditional and proper right for religion to operate in the public sphere. That people can and should make decisions in the public sphere based on their religious belief. That we should defend religious freedom, the freedom to believe and act on that belief in the public sphere.

And now...

Here we have Mormons saying that a Mormon who acted on his Mormon belief in the public sphere should not have done so.

The only difference I can see is political. Please show me that I am wrong. Please show me that people should act on their religious beliefs in the public sphere UNLESS somehow their acting on their religious belief in the public sphere somehow conveys the idea that they actually believe God told them to do what they did.

What in the world...? Do you want people to consult God and act on it or not? Do you want people to consult God and actually believe He speaks to them or not?

   4 hours ago,  Bernard Gui said: 

The problem as I see it is saying, "I consulted God, and God told me thus and so; therefore, my position is the right one." 

Please, don't you ever bear your testimony again about how God told you that the LDS church is the only true and living church on the face of the whole earth. You'll be a huge hypocrite if you do.

Well, he said God did not tell him what to do. So, count me confused. He just cited his faith to convey his super ethics? I usually do wait for an answer from God when making a big decision. He just comes off as condescending...especially in his letter to his colleagues. I don't discount the faith of others or their sincerely held beliefs.

Romney is a very prominent member of our faith. Politically, he is the most well known member.  And, like I explained earlier, the anti-mormon comments are flowing. I don't think Catholics as a whole get bashed due to one member of congress's actions.I already posted the LA times and it's 'white horse prophecy' story. Here is a quote from another article out there. 

"And as a man who cares about his church, Romney might have considered what this will do to Mormon candidates in the future. He has made the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints look like a cult, whose members cannot be entrusted with responsible positions. His father, the governor of Michigan and a member of the Nixon cabinet is best remembered for saying that he had been “brainwashed” while visiting Saigon, causing then-President Lyndon Johnson to say that he “must have gone into a corner and brain-washed himself.”

 

Edited February 6, 2020 by bsjkki

[Rajah Manchou]

23 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

He has made the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints look like a cult, whose members cannot be entrusted with responsible positions. 

What on earth are you talking about? Is that a quote from somewhere else, because I don't know how anybody could reach that conclusion.

Edit: found it. That article is one of the saddest things I've read since this whole debacle started.

Edited February 6, 2020 by Rajah Manchou

[bsjkki]

6 minutes ago, Rajah Manchou said:

What on earth are you talking about? Is that a quote from somewhere else, because I don't know how anybody could reach that conclusion.

Edit: found it. That article is one of the saddest things I've read since this whole debacle started.

It's super depressing.

I think if you dislike the President or are not a Republican it might be hard to understand the anger at Mitt Romney over this. People went to bat for him, campaigned for him, voted for him and it feels like he just stabbed you in the back. I don't think it's fair to lump the church into the attacks...really low blow. But, evangelical Christians really don't like us. I grew up as one. I know. This is definitely a step backward with them. It will have long lasting repercussions within the party. 

Edited February 6, 2020 by bsjkki

[let’s roll]

I understand the Senate begins each session with a prayer.  What would be the purpose of that prayer if not to seek wisdom from God?

 

[let’s roll]

4 hours ago, bsjkki said:

Agreed. Romney's decision and his quoting of a church hymn and quoting his 'oath to God' brings the church into these matters. My local talk radio (non Utah) has many people understanding that Romney is saying God told him to do vote this way. Perception is reality...even when it's wrong.

I don’t believe God, prophets or anyone with wisdom would counsel someone not to follow their conscience because some people might misconstrue their actions.

[bsjkki]

2 minutes ago, let’s roll said:

I don’t believe God, prophets or anyone with wisdom would counsel someone not to follow their conscience because some people might misconstrue their actions.

True. But, he did say God didn't tell him how to vote on this. He voted his conscience and his actions will reflect on the church. That's just the way it is. I don't agree with the sentiment but it will be there nonetheless. People interpreted his words as feeling he said God told him to vote the way he did. 

What a terribly polarizing time we live in. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

evangelical Christians really don't like us. I grew up as one. I know. This is definitely a step backward with them

You really think there was some sort of positive change in their attitude towards us lately?  Because they didn't come across as all that supporting, let's get behind the Republican party's candidate and be loyal when it was Mitt as the candidate.

Edited February 6, 2020 by Calm

[bsjkki]

8 minutes ago, Calm said:

You really think there was some sort of positive change in their attitude towards us lately?  Because they didn't come across as all that supporting, let's get behind the Republican party's candidate and be loyal when it was Mitt as the candidate.

Maybe I was just wishful thinking. I mean, Romney did get the nomination in 2012. I didn't think that would ever happen.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

We have had many many threads where people have argued that it is not just a constitutional right but a traditional and proper right for religion to operate in the public sphere. That people can and should make decisions in the public sphere based on their religious belief. That we should defend religious freedom, the freedom to believe and act on that belief in the public sphere.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1990/07/religion-in-public-life?lang=eng

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/civil-society-faith-public-square

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/voice-religious-conscience

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/religions-vital-place-society

Mean to get several more, but have to sleep now.

Edited February 6, 2020 by Calm