Here is the statement that was in the
Salt Lake Tribune, they have it on tape, they have witnesses to confirm that it happened.
At a recent meeting in American Fork a man identifying himself as a former Green Beret stood to share his testimony.
"If you're a Democrat, I want you to understand that I support my president," he said in comments recorded by the church for homebound members. "And if you have a problem with that, we can talk behind the church."
I don't know if this is typical, or if this guy was LDS (I assume he was, otherwise, what was he doing testifying). I was only going off an interview of the article's author (who did interview lots of people and got many replies to his article) as to the extent of the problem. My concern is about over deference to authority, not the threat of violence.
As for the comparison of what Clinton did to what Bush did: Clinton did a limited strike based on concrete information. And for all we know, this strike is what eliminated WMD's in 1999 and Saddam fudged having them until 2003. By the way, republicans wanted to see proof and talked about "Wag the Dog" when he did it. I have no way of knowing what Clinton's motivations were. I think he is a smileball for having an affair with a 23 year old intern and lying to the public about it and his staff (and wife). But I don't think it was an impeachable offense.
There is mountains of evidence that the Bush administration knew that the intelligence was not rock solid, but they ignored or whitewashed any doubts or hesitations of those officials. There is some sketchy evidence that a DoD official (Larry Franklin) shopped the fake yellow cake documents to people in Italy to get the idea that Saddam had nukes or wanted them in the for front.
I can name dozens of times Cheney, Bush, Rice, and others misled and insinated that Saddam was connected to 9/11 and had nuclear weapons or was trying to get them. All of these instances are on tape.
As to Bush as sinner. I get the redemption thing and I am sure Bush doesn't drink anymore and he believes in all the doctrines of the Southern Baptists. And hats off to him for that. But he still a liar, he still supports tabbacco companies, he still thinks he is more important than other people, and he still is jealous, vengeful, hateful, hypocritical, deceitful, arrogant, incompetent, and irresponsible. And to make him out as more religious than say Kerry is ridiculous. Kerry was an altar boy. He goes to mass...religiously, he went even though there were threats to deny him eucharist because of his position on abortion. Anyone and everyone can refer to God (in God we trust, etc.), and that is fine with me. But when they say to friend that God put them there to do, it bothers me. As Lincoln said, both sides of the war think they are doing God's will; they both can't be right.
I think the Church leaders ARE more moderate than their political leadership. Rumor has it that the Prophet (President Hinckley) is a Democrat. A very good Mormon (head of the mission in Vancover or Montreal) was liberal Democrat: fmr. US Rep. Wayne Owens. I knew Wayne; he was a great man who spent his last days working for middle-east peace and leading search parties for Elizabeth Smart.
I sure hope that Bush has been dropping in Utah. I don't understand what there is to like about his administration, what he has accomplished. And don't say 9/11: any president would have done that. And Iraq, well I am glad Saddam is gone, but the country is definately less stable and less secure becuase of our presence (see the bombing of a Shite holy site today in Iraq). I wouldn't consider that an accomplishment. No Child Left Behind, Medicare part D, and other domestic legislation has been a disaster. The tax cuts haven't helpped anyone but the rich. I gave all of my $50 2001 tax cut to the Red Cross after 9/11, then wished I could have given it to a better organization. THe Bush presidency has been a failure and a sad example of how far partisanship will ruin our constitution and our country.
Posts
