Showing posts with label Davis County Clipper. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Davis County Clipper. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Davis County Clipper: Attendees at the American Legion Boys State appear worried about world
by Louise R. Shaw
OGDEN — It was clear from their questions that the young men attending the American Legion Boys State this year are worried.
They’re worried about the economy, about America’s debt to foreign investors, about the politics of gerrymandering and illegal immigration, and about the oil filling the Gulf of Mexico.
And when they’re not worrying, they’re wondering. Wondering about why the word “God” is being taken out of the phrase “God bless America,” why road construction seems to get better financing than education, why space programs are being scrapped, and why each political party blames the other.
It was left to Rob Miller, chairman of the Davis County Democratic Party, and Dave Hansen, chairman of the Utah Republican Party, to answer their questions in a debate Thursday morning at Weber State University.
And while some answers likely did little to calm their fears, both Miller and Hansen encouraged the young men, who just completed their junior years in high school, to stay involved and work to make a difference.
A recurring question came regarding funding for education.
“Public education is a right here in America, and we need to do better,” said Miller. “When times are bad we make cuts, but when times are good we make cuts too,” he said, adding that in the past 10 years, almost $1 billion has been cut from education funding. “I’m appalled at the money that is wasted not only in education but in government in general.”
“Utah ranks always first or second as a well-managed, well-run state,” said Hansen. “But we have an economic crisis now that requires cuts in state government and the budget. We’ve been able to do that without raising taxes and education has taken a hit like every other issue and every other family.
“Will there be enough? There’s never enough. We can always do more, but we are doing an excellent job without having to raise taxes on families,” he said.
When asked about road construction’s seemingly hefty funding as compared to education’s struggles, both men agreed that good roads contribute to the health of the state, and Hansen explained that there are different funding systems and that money couldn’t be taken from one to provide for another.
“We don’t want dangerous roads,” said Miller. “They’re a necessary component. If we don’t have transit, the economy goes down too.”
“Roads bring jobs and industry,” added Hansen. “Businesses looking to our state look at what kind of transportation system we have.”
At the same time, “a lot of the money for roads comes from the federal stimulus program and the state couldn’t take those dollars and put them in education, it’s designated where it has to go.”
The TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) was questioned by the boys as well, including one young man who said it hadn’t done any good.
Yes, it was “ugly and bad,” said Hansen, “but it was necessary.” He said Sen. Bob Bennett’s (R-Utah) vote for TARP was the main reason he was defeated in his bid for the Republican nomination at the recent state convention. “But the folks in Washington, D.C., were told we have to pass this or we’re going to face a huge financial crisis worldwide.”
Miller agreed that it was necessary, stating that, “had I been a senator I probably would have voted for it.” Further, he said, “I don’t think the gentlemen running (for the Republican nomination and election to Bennett’s seat) would have voted any differently. The country needed to do it to stop the worldwide crisis.
“I don’t think things are getting worse,” he told the young men. “I think they’re getting better.”
Miller and Hansen agreed on many issues, from supporting the flag to respecting California’s vote on Proposition 8, from keeping the word “God” in the Pledge of Allegiance to not splitting school districts.
They didn’t agree on gerrymandering, however, with Miller lamenting the failure of an attempt to establish an independent redistricting committee in Utah and Hansen saying it was better to have elected officials “that we know” drawing the lines.
Miller also pointed to the deregulation that occurred during the eight years that Republicans were in the nation’s presidency and the Legislature for criticism, while Hansen spoke negatively of the current administration’s spending patterns.
“They seem to spend like they’re printing money themselves – which they are,” he said, adding that each of the boys had a $45,000 debt on their head right now. “It’s absolutely one of the most critical issues we are facing.”
In the end, Hansen encouraged the young men to take their interest in politics “beyond this day. If you want to make a change, get involved with politics. Take the time to do something in this year’s election.”
Miller advised them to vote for the best person, not necessarily one with an “R” or a “D” by their name. He challenged them to think for themselves and not blindly follow a conservative like Rush Limbaugh or a liberal like Bill Maher.
“Don’t let the emotion of hate or fear drive a wedge or let the issues divide us. Use common sense and the good spirit that is inside you. Stay involved.”
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Davis County Clipper: Meet candidates on motorcycle ride July 10
Davis County residents will have a chance to meet some of the candidates for public office from Davis County and enjoy a motorcycle ride on July 10.
According to Sarah Schofield, Democratic candidate for state representative from District 21 said participants will meet at Golden Spike Harley Davidson, 892 W. Riverdale Road in Riverdale, Weber County.
The registration fee is $20, which includes a burger, fries, and drink at Merlin’s Drive Inn in Bear Lake. Ride begins at 10 a.m.
mwilliams@davisclipper.com
According to Sarah Schofield, Democratic candidate for state representative from District 21 said participants will meet at Golden Spike Harley Davidson, 892 W. Riverdale Road in Riverdale, Weber County.
The registration fee is $20, which includes a burger, fries, and drink at Merlin’s Drive Inn in Bear Lake. Ride begins at 10 a.m.
mwilliams@davisclipper.com
Thursday, March 18, 2010
GUEST OPINION: Party caucuses play vital role in everyone’s future
By Rob Miller
Next Tuesday evening on March 23, 2010, a small group of your neighbors are going to get together and make decisions about a lot of issues that will affect your life for years to come. Everyone is invited but only about 1 percent will bother to show up.
Frankly, some people are counting on you not being involved. You might find out about their plans to profit from tax dollars by doing things like diverting money from our neighborhood schools to other private purposes. Remember it’s not about whether there will be tax increases or tax cuts but who is going to pay and who is going to receive.
Don't know what I am talking about? The Party Caucuses, of course. Those who attend play a critical role in selecting the people who will be on the ballot and go on to make laws for all of us following the general election that will be held on Nov. 2 of this year.
The Davis County Democratic and Republican Parties will hold caucuses at a location near your home on the evening of March 23. Caucus is just a fancy word for meeting. They are very casual and informal. There will be a caucus host to help you feel comfortable and help everyone join in the discussion to the extent they want. They will work to prevent the meeting from being dominated by just one person. It is perfectly normal for a lot of the people just to be there to see what happens in their community.
The meetings are open to the public and free -- although someone may pass the hat and ask for a donation of a few dollars for the county parties. You don't have to give, but it might be worth knowing that contrary to popular belief County Party organizations don't raise even ten cents per voter per year on average. They are far from political fat cats with dollars to burn. There are no corporate interests out there looking to bankroll a County Party.
They do have the goal of selecting delegates to the conventions where candidates will be nominated for the ballot and selecting precinct officers who will volunteer to serve on the County Party Central Committee which keeps up the work of the Party on a regular daily basis. They also try to find people who are willing to be poll workers on Election Day. And, they may ask you to provide your contact information and ask if there are ways that you want to help candidates and the Party.
As Chairman of the Davis County Democratic Party and as a member of the State Democratic Party's Executive Committee representing other county chairs, I want to invite you — yes, I mean you — to attend and participate in this year’s Party caucus. Regardless of your political persuasion, feel free to join the Democrats. We want to assure that your voice is heard and that you have a say in the decisions that affect you.
Some believe that the Parties are responsible for the problems we are facing today. I don't agree, but Parties become what we all make of them. They are what you are willing to put into them. Will you leave them to the extremes? If you choose to be an independent and unaffiliated, then what you are truly choosing is to allow others to make choices for you. They will. But you might not like the decisions they make. They will hold you accountable for your failure to participate. You will be the target for tax increases and you won't receive anything you value in return. Lack of political participation is actually the root to the problems we are facing today.
Take the first step in participating in the political process by attending the party caucus of your choice. Politics is the marketplace of ideas and just like the economy, the more time you invest, the better the outcome. To find your caucus location and participate in a “virtual” meeting visit CaucusOnline.org.
The world is run by those who show up. If you participate, you are effectively multiplying your voice by 100 times by speaking for all the people who don’t get involved.
Next Tuesday evening on March 23, 2010, a small group of your neighbors are going to get together and make decisions about a lot of issues that will affect your life for years to come. Everyone is invited but only about 1 percent will bother to show up.
Frankly, some people are counting on you not being involved. You might find out about their plans to profit from tax dollars by doing things like diverting money from our neighborhood schools to other private purposes. Remember it’s not about whether there will be tax increases or tax cuts but who is going to pay and who is going to receive.
Don't know what I am talking about? The Party Caucuses, of course. Those who attend play a critical role in selecting the people who will be on the ballot and go on to make laws for all of us following the general election that will be held on Nov. 2 of this year.
The Davis County Democratic and Republican Parties will hold caucuses at a location near your home on the evening of March 23. Caucus is just a fancy word for meeting. They are very casual and informal. There will be a caucus host to help you feel comfortable and help everyone join in the discussion to the extent they want. They will work to prevent the meeting from being dominated by just one person. It is perfectly normal for a lot of the people just to be there to see what happens in their community.
The meetings are open to the public and free -- although someone may pass the hat and ask for a donation of a few dollars for the county parties. You don't have to give, but it might be worth knowing that contrary to popular belief County Party organizations don't raise even ten cents per voter per year on average. They are far from political fat cats with dollars to burn. There are no corporate interests out there looking to bankroll a County Party.
They do have the goal of selecting delegates to the conventions where candidates will be nominated for the ballot and selecting precinct officers who will volunteer to serve on the County Party Central Committee which keeps up the work of the Party on a regular daily basis. They also try to find people who are willing to be poll workers on Election Day. And, they may ask you to provide your contact information and ask if there are ways that you want to help candidates and the Party.
As Chairman of the Davis County Democratic Party and as a member of the State Democratic Party's Executive Committee representing other county chairs, I want to invite you — yes, I mean you — to attend and participate in this year’s Party caucus. Regardless of your political persuasion, feel free to join the Democrats. We want to assure that your voice is heard and that you have a say in the decisions that affect you.
Some believe that the Parties are responsible for the problems we are facing today. I don't agree, but Parties become what we all make of them. They are what you are willing to put into them. Will you leave them to the extremes? If you choose to be an independent and unaffiliated, then what you are truly choosing is to allow others to make choices for you. They will. But you might not like the decisions they make. They will hold you accountable for your failure to participate. You will be the target for tax increases and you won't receive anything you value in return. Lack of political participation is actually the root to the problems we are facing today.
Take the first step in participating in the political process by attending the party caucus of your choice. Politics is the marketplace of ideas and just like the economy, the more time you invest, the better the outcome. To find your caucus location and participate in a “virtual” meeting visit CaucusOnline.org.
The world is run by those who show up. If you participate, you are effectively multiplying your voice by 100 times by speaking for all the people who don’t get involved.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
PARTY LINES: Should there be a ‘John Browning’ holiday in Utah? By Rob Miller, Utah Democrat
At some point in our lives, almost every American has wanted to effect political change in the system. Whether it was to enact a new law, or to amend the Constitution, courageous individuals have come forward to lead the effort to bring about change in order to right a wrong or to extent civil rights and liberties to all citizens of our great nation. These individuals have endured hatred and bigotry and have been reviled for their audacity in denouncing racism, sexism, and religious prejudice.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was one of the foremost leaders in the struggle to achieve civil rights and political equality in our society, and he gave his life in pursuit of the dream of racial equality. He did not seek change through violence, but by using the political process to end discrimination in education, housing, and employment. He fought against segregation, realizing that separate and unequal societies could not continue to exist without ultimately bringing us into armed and violent conflict.
Dr. King taught tolerance and acceptance of the views of others. He used peaceful protests and non-violence resistance to soften the hardest heart among his adversaries. For the poor and downtrodden among us, he brought hope of educational opportunities and worthwhile employment from which men and women could rise up to fulfill their dreams – not only for themselves, but for generations to come.
Today, we celebrate the life of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., for the light he placed upon the mountain to guide us to a fairer, more just society with equality of opportunity for all. This day of respect and commemoration should be a time for us to reflect upon and renew our commitment to peace, harmony, equality, and justice.
Recently, however, Sen. Mark Madsen has suggested that we join this celebration of the life of Dr. King with the celebration of the life of John Browning. Although the contributions of Mr. Browning to our state and our nation are great, I respectfully but vehemently disagree, that a holiday celebrating Mr. Browning should be lumped in with Martin Luther King, Jr, Day.
I have no problem with Sen. Madsen’s desire to celebrate Mr. Browning’s accomplishments, but as columnist Paul Rolly stated, “The Utah Legislature has a contentious history with the holiday honoring King. After President Ronald Reagan signed the legislation creating the federal holiday, bitter debates resulted in a compromise, calling the holiday “Human Rights Day.”
“Utah changed the name to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day in 2000, becoming the last state to do so.”
Dr. King taught our nation so much that remains with us to this very day. He showed us that we could overcome being a victim without becoming a tormentor. He showed us that the love of God could overcome the weakness of men, and that we could bring the peace and love of God into the world. And most of all, he taught us how to more fully pursue our unique American dream as one nation, united in common purpose regardless of our differences. Today, more than 40 years after his untimely passing, Dr. King stands as one of our country’s greatest heroes, and he deserves to be honored as such.
PARTY LINES: Should there be a ‘John Browning’ holiday in Utah? By Todd Weiler, Republican
Like most Americans, I enjoy a good holiday. Especially those of the three-day weekend variety. Last week,
Sen. Mark Madsen briefly vetted a proposal to have the state commemorate gun-maker John Browning on Martin Luther King Day. Madsen’s proposal didn’t exactly get off the ground. (It was a lead balloon.)
Sen. Mark Madsen briefly vetted a proposal to have the state commemorate gun-maker John Browning on Martin Luther King Day. Madsen’s proposal didn’t exactly get off the ground. (It was a lead balloon.) Even a legislature that has never quite embraced the civil rights holiday thought it was a dumb idea. Utah finished 50th in the race to name a state holiday after King, after initially snubbing him in favor of a generic Human Rights Day. After finally relenting in 2000, the Legislature began its work on the holiday each year.
Madsen’s idea to honor a gun maker in conjunction with King was in poor taste considering the civil rights leader was shot and killed by an assassin. In his defense, Madsen thought Browning would be a good fit since he was born in January and his automatic pistol design helped America win World War I.
Not quite ready to let this one go, Madsen said that since the Brownings were Mormon pioneers, he will consider July 24th for a joint celebration. In our current political climate, I would not support any legislation to create a state holiday to honor Browning.
At the risk of being labeled a racist, I will admit that it has always struck me as odd that our former presidents collectively share one single holiday — while King has been awarded his own.
As significant as the civil rights movement is, Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Reagan, etc. have each respectively merited less than 3 percent of President’s Day.
Although King was far from perfect (like the rest of us), he has become a symbol of something much greater than any single life. In a very real sense, MLK Day has become a part of this nation’s penitence of its past sins.
But I have to admit that Madsen has got me thinking. Who else deserves a holiday? As I type this column on my computer, I am thinking that “Bill Gates Day” has a nice ring. But that wouldn’t be fair to the iPod or the iPhone, would it?
More close to home, maybe we could celebrate Philo Farnsworth on Superbowl Sunday? How ‘bout an Eliza R. Snow Day whenever school is cancelled after a big storm.
Larry Miller and Steve Young could be candidates. What about an “Osmond Day” to correspond with each season premier of American Idol? OK, that may be stretching it a bit far.
I have never been a fan of the so-called message bills.
In these trying times, we need our elected officials to focus on what matters most: balancing the budget, educating our children, and developing the economy.
Saturday, January 02, 2010
PARTY LINES: What does the recent terrorist attack say about U.S. security? By Rob Miller - Utah Democrat
On Christmas Day, a passenger on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 (en route from Amsterdam, Netherlands to Detroit) allegedly tried to ignite an explosive device on his body setting off a fire as the plane made its final approach to Detroit Metropolitan Airport.
Because of this incident the Clipper has asked the following: What does this foiled attack indicate about our national security? Has the government become lax on terrorism? Do security measures need to be beefed up or is this just an example that every threat cannot be stopped? And, who is responsible and what should be done next?
On Dec. 29, 2009, President Obama said that preliminary information has surfaced that raises some concerns, with one of those concerns being that the father of the suspect warned U.S. officials in Africa about his son’s extremist views but that that warning was not effectively distributed to get the suspect’s name on the no-fly list.
President Obama also stated that there were other deficiencies as well, that even without the report from the suspect’s father warning there were bits of information available that could have and should have been pieced together. President Obama went on to state that had this critical [information] been shared it could have been compiled with other intelligence and a fuller, clearer picture of the suspect would have emerged. “The warning signs would have triggered red flags, and the suspect would have never been allowed to board that plane for America.”
I don’t believe that our government has become lax on terrorism as it is obvious that we have come along way since the 9-11 attacks. Approximately a dozen acts of terrorism have been made this last year that were foiled due to the security measures our government has put into place.
Let’s also point out that our president immediately ordered the following actions to ensure the safety of travelers.
First, he made sure that all flights still in the air were secure and could land safely. He immediately enhanced screening and security procedures for all flights, domestic and international. He added federal air marshals to flights entering and leaving the United States.
Second, he ordered two important reviews because it’s absolutely critical that we learn from this incident and take necessary measures to prevent future acts of terrorism. The first review involves the watch list system to identify known and suspected terrorists to prevent their entry into the United States by strengthening how information is shared between agencies. The second review will examine all screening policies, technologies and procedures related to travel.
President Obama also said, “We will continue to use every element of our national power to disrupt, to dismantle, and defeat the violent extremists who threaten us.”
As to who is to blame, well, we don’t blame crime on the police and ultimately it is the individuals involved in organizing terrorist attacks against our citizenry who must bear this cross of accountability.
No matter what precautions we take there are those who want to destroy our nation, but as President Obama said, “The American people should remain vigilant, but also be confident.” And, we should be grateful for the women and men who work daily to keep us safe.
Friday, December 18, 2009
PARTY LINES with Utah Democrat Rob Miller: What does the TCU-Boise State match up say about the BCS?
Because of my Grandpa Clarke, I love college football. Grandpa Clarke would often drive from Tooele to our home just above the Villa Theater in Salt Lake to pick me up for a Saturday BYU game. Those were the days of Coach LaVell Edwards, when the forward pass was king and the “Hail Mary” became a legend in Utah.Because of my love for football I chose to attend BYU. I wish I could say I wanted a top-notch education, but the truth is I fell in love with BYU because of Coach Edwards and quarterbacks like Gifford Nielson, Marc Wilson, Jim McMahon and Steve Young who were all first team All-Americans.
A year later I transferred to the University of Utah. Although I was a BYU football fan, I was happy to be at the “U” because of Coach Jerry Pimm and great players like Jeff Jonas, Danny Vranes, Jeff Judkins, Buster Matheney, and Tom Chambers.
Eventually, I would realize there was more to college than a football or basketball game, but unlike most people who cheer adamantly for one school or the other I have become a fan of both schools’ athletic programs, have cheered for both, and sometimes just one, depending on the team and the events surrounding those teams during a specific year. But cheering for those teams and following sports as a die-hard fan has taken a major back seat to raising my family, “The Great Recession” and my political activism.
I have one thought when it comes to the BCS decision to pit Boise State against TCU. I hope you won’t take offense, but take the “C” out of BCS and there’s my feelings on the BCS’s blatant manipulation to protect their teams from possible losses to non-BCS opponents.
I have to admit that until the Clipper asked this question I had not even given BCS policies much thought, unlike Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff who believes the Justice Department should join in a lawsuit claiming that the Bowl Championship Series could potentially be violating the Sherman Anti-trust Act which requires fairness because the BCS showers successful top market schools with money year after year as a result of their performance.
And, he is not alone.
In December 2008, Idaho Representative Mike Simpson joined Utah Rep. Jim Matheson in sending a letter to then President-elect Obama asking him to have the Department of Justice investigate the BCS system — and just this last Monday AG Shurtleff told KSL Radio that it was his intent to speak about this issue personally with President Obama at a holiday reception at the White House.
“I am really going to try and talk college football,” Shurtleff told KSL.
“This isn’t just about bragging rights to say we’re number one truly. It’s about money,” said Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff in an interview last January.
Like President Obama who said, “I think a football playoff makes sense.” I feel a playoff series would benefit college football, but for me it isn’t about money. It’s about the American Dream where the underdog can rise up against all odds and show its heart — win or lose.
After all, isn’t that the story of America?
PARTY LINES with Republican Todd Weiler: What does the TCU-Boise State match up say about the BCS?
I have to give it up this week to Rep. Jim Matheson. He really captured the moment in his reaction to the BCS’s decision to pit TCU against Boise State on New Year’s Day. “I don’t know if we should call it the Fiesta Bowl or the Kids’ Table Bowl, because I think these two upstarts were put at the kids’ table to play their own game,” he said. Matheson is right on.
The BCS is based on the false premise that the best team in the nation will invariably emerge from one of eight elite conferences. All other conferences are inferior and therefore incapable of producing a national champion. Over time, the BCS has been bullied into allowing undefeated teams from the lesser, unworthy conferences to play in one of the four most-profitable bowl games (if they meet certain criteria). While the BCS made the correct, and historic, decision to invite two non-BCS teams to go bowling this season, it subsequently cheapened the experience for both of them in an attempt to protect its own. TCU could have beaten Texas, Cincinnati and maybe even Florida. That was a risk the BCS committee was not willing to take. So it punted.
When Utah, Boise State and Hawaii got invited to play with the big boys after their undefeated regular seasons in prior years, they actually got into the game. And the team from the BCS-blessed conference lost three out of four times. Utah won twice. BSU pulled off a miracle overtime win. But Hawaii got exposed as the proverbial over-ranked team who hadn’t really played anyone.
This year, Texas (from the pitiful Big 12 Conference) hasn’t beaten a team ranked in the Top 20 all season. And when it played Nebraska, ranked 22, the Longhorns came up short when the clock ran out of time. After convincing the officials to turn back time a second or two, Texas kicked a game-winning field goal to win 13-12. And the reward for playing its worst game at the end of the season? That’s right, the Longhorns secured a slot in the national championship game.
Unlike a year ago when the Horned Frogs muffed what would have been a game-winning field goal as time ran out, TCU decidedly beat Utah and every other team it played this year. But the BCS cannot withstand another embarrassing shellacking like Utah put on the Crimson Tide. So TCU got cheated.
The current BCS system is, dare I say it, un-American. It reeks of big money, back-room deals by the good old boys. But politicians need to do more than offer witty sound bites. Talk is cheap. Although Obama threatened to “throw his weight around” to get a playoff, a year later things appear to have gotten worse – not better. I have no doubt that the BCS will ultimately be brought down. The only remaining questions are: When? How? And by whom?
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Party Lines: Do you think Christians are being deprived of freedom of speech?
We were actually asked, "LDS Apostle Dallin Oaks recently compared the current treatment of the Church as similar to what the Blacks endured during their struggle for civil rights, and was criticized by some for his use of the analogy. How would you describe the current situation faced by the church?"
I'm not sure I answered the question, but the message is sound, and I want to acknowledge those who helped with this column, Todd Taylor, Patrice Arent, Karen Hale, Wayne Holland, and Sam Granato.
By Rob Miller - Democratic Party
Elder Dallin H. Oaks, member of the Quorum of the Twelve of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, recently made news by comparing the current treatment of church members who supported California’s Proposition 8 in the 2008 election as similar to what African-Americans endured during their struggle for civil rights.
Regardless of what one thinks about whether the analogy was apt, about the underlying issue of marriage rights, or Elder Oaks’ main thesis that freedom of religion is under attack, there was some wise counsel about how to be civil when debating matters of public concern.
Elder Oaks said that one should “speak with love, always showing patience, understanding and compassion toward adversaries.”
Elder Oaks counseled that one shouldn’t be deterred or coerced into silence by intimidation, but that an individual should insist on his or her constitutional right and duty to participate in elections and debates.
Elder Oaks said that should be accompanied by “a right to expect freedom from retaliation.”
Elder Oaks counseled that we should be wise in one's political participation, including the framing of arguments and positions in respectful ways.
And, finally, Elder Oaks counseled us to be careful never to support or act upon the idea that a person must subscribe to some particular set of religious beliefs in order to qualify for a public office.
To these points, most Americans who desire civil debate of public issues will most certainly agree.
This is not just a California problem. Many Democrats and progressive voters are hopeful that these particular remarks by Elder Oaks might be taken seriously in Utah.
Progressive candidates and their supporters have felt the sting of many instances of intimidation and retaliation from members of the majority party. There has been vandalism. There have been job losses. There has been denial of services. The Salt Lake Tribune has documented far too much of this over the years. And, just days after Elder Oaks’ speech, Sen. Orrin Hatch threatened violence on his constituents to “kick them in the teeth.” He had previously denigrated political opponents as “nutcakes.”
Elder Oaks spoke with courage about his point of view. I am going to follow his lead.
Unfortunately, there is disrespectful commentary nearly every day on KSL Radio. Sean Hannity’s program, which airs for three hours every weekday afternoon, does not show “patience, understanding and compassion toward adversaries.”
KSL Radio certainly has a right to air any programming it chooses. And, Sean Hannity certainly has a right to say whatever he wants to on his program.
However, it is my opinion that this program coming from this source undermines our community in just the ways Elder Oaks admonishes against. KSL Radio can do better and serve our community better if it were to produce more thoughtful, respectful, compassionate and understanding programming on public issues.
We can only hope that Elder Oaks’ remarks produce additional introspection and better action from all sides of every public debate.
I'm not sure I answered the question, but the message is sound, and I want to acknowledge those who helped with this column, Todd Taylor, Patrice Arent, Karen Hale, Wayne Holland, and Sam Granato.
By Rob Miller - Democratic Party
Elder Dallin H. Oaks, member of the Quorum of the Twelve of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, recently made news by comparing the current treatment of church members who supported California’s Proposition 8 in the 2008 election as similar to what African-Americans endured during their struggle for civil rights.
Regardless of what one thinks about whether the analogy was apt, about the underlying issue of marriage rights, or Elder Oaks’ main thesis that freedom of religion is under attack, there was some wise counsel about how to be civil when debating matters of public concern.
Elder Oaks said that one should “speak with love, always showing patience, understanding and compassion toward adversaries.”
Elder Oaks counseled that one shouldn’t be deterred or coerced into silence by intimidation, but that an individual should insist on his or her constitutional right and duty to participate in elections and debates.
Elder Oaks said that should be accompanied by “a right to expect freedom from retaliation.”
Elder Oaks counseled that we should be wise in one's political participation, including the framing of arguments and positions in respectful ways.
And, finally, Elder Oaks counseled us to be careful never to support or act upon the idea that a person must subscribe to some particular set of religious beliefs in order to qualify for a public office.
To these points, most Americans who desire civil debate of public issues will most certainly agree.
This is not just a California problem. Many Democrats and progressive voters are hopeful that these particular remarks by Elder Oaks might be taken seriously in Utah.
Progressive candidates and their supporters have felt the sting of many instances of intimidation and retaliation from members of the majority party. There has been vandalism. There have been job losses. There has been denial of services. The Salt Lake Tribune has documented far too much of this over the years. And, just days after Elder Oaks’ speech, Sen. Orrin Hatch threatened violence on his constituents to “kick them in the teeth.” He had previously denigrated political opponents as “nutcakes.”
Elder Oaks spoke with courage about his point of view. I am going to follow his lead.
Unfortunately, there is disrespectful commentary nearly every day on KSL Radio. Sean Hannity’s program, which airs for three hours every weekday afternoon, does not show “patience, understanding and compassion toward adversaries.”
KSL Radio certainly has a right to air any programming it chooses. And, Sean Hannity certainly has a right to say whatever he wants to on his program.
However, it is my opinion that this program coming from this source undermines our community in just the ways Elder Oaks admonishes against. KSL Radio can do better and serve our community better if it were to produce more thoughtful, respectful, compassionate and understanding programming on public issues.
We can only hope that Elder Oaks’ remarks produce additional introspection and better action from all sides of every public debate.
The Davis County Clipper's Party Lines: Do you think Christians are being deprived of freedom of speech?
By Todd Weiler - Republican
Having just re-read the text of Elder Dallin H. Oaks’ remarks last week to the students at BYU Idaho, it struck me that a critic would have to stand upside down and shut one eye to see anything offensive in them.
Instead, the liberal media has misquoted and taken Oaks out of context. If you were to rely solely on media reports, you would believe that Oaks equated the 2008 persecution of California Mormons with the 1960s treatment of southern blacks.
But in an address exclusively about religious freedom, Oaks referred to gay marriage as an “alleged civil right” and used the backlash over Proposition 8 as one example of how people have been intimidated merely for exercising their right to vote, as follows: “[T]hese incidents of violence and intimidation are not so much anti-religious as anti-democratic. In their effect they are like the well-known and widely condemned voter-intimidation of blacks in the South that produced corrective federal civil-rights legislation.”
The analogy was limited to the fact that in both instances, anti-democratic voter intimidation methods were employed.
Oaks never suggested that “the vandalism of church facilities and harassment of church members by firings and boycotts of member businesses and by retaliation against donors violence” was on par with the violence and intimidation that was directed at blacks in the South.
Instead, Oaks used the civil rights analogy to emphasize that society has already judged that people should not be punished simply because they chose to participate in a democracy. “These incidents were expressions of outrage against those who disagreed with the gay-rights position and had prevailed in a public contest,” Oaks said.
Oaks suggested that people can learn to disagree without meanness and contention. He maintained that differences should be civilized and consistent with constitutional principles.
On the opposite end of the spectrum is Obama-loving, liberal-leaning Keith Olbermann on MSNBC. Olbermann single-handedly proved Oaks’ point when he nominated Oaks for a bronze medal in the “worst people in the world” award. Olbermann suggested that because Mormons were on the wrong side of integration and polygamy, Oaks should “shut the hell up” on subjects like gay marriage.
But Oaks said it best: “[W]e must not be deterred or coerced into silence by the kinds of intimidation I have described. We must insist on our constitutional right and duty to exercise our religion, to vote our consciences on public issues and to participate in elections and debates in the public square and the halls of justice. These are the rights of all citizens and they are also the rights of religious leaders.”
Oaks is right on.
When churches or their members speak out on public issues, they have a right to expect freedom from retaliation. People who seek one public policy or another are not violating the constitutional mandate to separate church and state. Faith and religious principles promote good morals in a democracy, which improves the democracy.
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
Guest opinion - Democratic convention an inspiring occasion

By Rob Miller
Utah State Democratic Vice Chair
Throughout my time on this planet there have been several, yet rare events that have occurred that were life altering in an inspiring and spiritual nature. Some of those experiences include the day I married my wife Michelle, the birth of my children Abby, Anna, and Sami, the day my father passed away, and being with my grandmother when she finally received her endowments and was sealed to her husband and children at age 96 in the Salt Lake Temple.
Although I have never thought in my wildest dreams that my political journey could ever bring me to the same state of inspiration as the above events, I can say that attending the 2008 Democratic National Convention, especially the night when Illinois Sen. Barack Obama accepted the nomination to be the Democratic candidate for president, was one of those moments.
When I arrived in Denver on Saturday, Aug. 23, in the late morning the first two people I ran into from our Utah delegation was former Utah State Sen. Karen Hale and Current State Sen. Pat Jones who helped me find my way to the shuttle that took me to the Warwick Hotel in downtown Denver. I can’t think of two better examples of dedicated Utah public servants than Karen and Pat, and both of these two ladies played instrumental parts in my journey in becoming a Utah State Democratic Party officer.
In 2004 I was inspired by Scott Matheson, Jr.’s and Sen. Karen Hale’s Democratic campaign for governor and lieutenant governor, and Sen. Jones was one of the first people to endorse my campaign for vice chair.
Sunday night I attended a event at Red Rocks amphitheater called Green Day at Red Rocks. It was here that I listened to Robert Kennedy, Jr. speak about the opportunities of building a green economy. It was also where I received the phone call from Utah State Senate District 23 Candidate, Richard Watson, that his opponent Dan Liljenquist’s plane had crashed. Richard was very distraught by the news, and called me so I could call my wife because he knew that Dan’s wife Brooke and my wife are friends. After calling Michelle I said a silent prayer for Dan and his family and was relieved to hear the next day that Dan had survived and that he would be home soon with his family.
On Tuesday, I watched Hillary Clinton once again throw her support to Sen. Obama, and on Wednesday I watched her husband, former President Bill Clinton, do the same — and once again I was inspired to see our party coming together as I watched Sen. Joe Biden accept the nomination to be Sen. Obama’s running mate, but nothing up to this point compared to what I would experience on Thursday at INVESCO’s Mile High Stadium.
I arrived at the stadium early and found my seat with our Utah Delegation. As the stadium quickly filled, I felt in awe with the understanding that I was there with 82,000-plus others who like me wanted to see Barack Obama become our next president.
When the tribute to Martin Luther King played I was reminded that it had been 45 years before when Dr. Martin Luther King had given his, “I have a dream” speech. I also realized that it was my father Michael’s birthday, and the emotion of that reality brought me to these words from Dr. King’s last speech, “Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land!”
“Was Dr. King Speaking about this moment in history?” I thought, and once again I felt tears of understanding fill my eyes.
When Barack Obama spoke that night I again thought of my own Obama conversion story, and then this scripture, Matthew 5:16, came to mind, “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven."
For me this scripture explains Sen. Barack Obama’s amazing journey to become our Democratic Nominee and more than probably our next president. When he spoke on Thursday night he not only spoke to Democrats but to all of the citizens of the United States and it is my prayer that Utahns will open their hearts to his message and join me on Nov. 4 when we will elect our next American President
Although I have never thought in my wildest dreams that my political journey could ever bring me to the same state of inspiration as the above events, I can say that attending the 2008 Democratic National Convention, especially the night when Illinois Sen. Barack Obama accepted the nomination to be the Democratic candidate for president, was one of those moments.
When I arrived in Denver on Saturday, Aug. 23, in the late morning the first two people I ran into from our Utah delegation was former Utah State Sen. Karen Hale and Current State Sen. Pat Jones who helped me find my way to the shuttle that took me to the Warwick Hotel in downtown Denver. I can’t think of two better examples of dedicated Utah public servants than Karen and Pat, and both of these two ladies played instrumental parts in my journey in becoming a Utah State Democratic Party officer.
In 2004 I was inspired by Scott Matheson, Jr.’s and Sen. Karen Hale’s Democratic campaign for governor and lieutenant governor, and Sen. Jones was one of the first people to endorse my campaign for vice chair.
Sunday night I attended a event at Red Rocks amphitheater called Green Day at Red Rocks. It was here that I listened to Robert Kennedy, Jr. speak about the opportunities of building a green economy. It was also where I received the phone call from Utah State Senate District 23 Candidate, Richard Watson, that his opponent Dan Liljenquist’s plane had crashed. Richard was very distraught by the news, and called me so I could call my wife because he knew that Dan’s wife Brooke and my wife are friends. After calling Michelle I said a silent prayer for Dan and his family and was relieved to hear the next day that Dan had survived and that he would be home soon with his family.
On Tuesday, I watched Hillary Clinton once again throw her support to Sen. Obama, and on Wednesday I watched her husband, former President Bill Clinton, do the same — and once again I was inspired to see our party coming together as I watched Sen. Joe Biden accept the nomination to be Sen. Obama’s running mate, but nothing up to this point compared to what I would experience on Thursday at INVESCO’s Mile High Stadium.
I arrived at the stadium early and found my seat with our Utah Delegation. As the stadium quickly filled, I felt in awe with the understanding that I was there with 82,000-plus others who like me wanted to see Barack Obama become our next president.
When the tribute to Martin Luther King played I was reminded that it had been 45 years before when Dr. Martin Luther King had given his, “I have a dream” speech. I also realized that it was my father Michael’s birthday, and the emotion of that reality brought me to these words from Dr. King’s last speech, “Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I’ve looked over. And I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land!”
“Was Dr. King Speaking about this moment in history?” I thought, and once again I felt tears of understanding fill my eyes.
When Barack Obama spoke that night I again thought of my own Obama conversion story, and then this scripture, Matthew 5:16, came to mind, “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven."
For me this scripture explains Sen. Barack Obama’s amazing journey to become our Democratic Nominee and more than probably our next president. When he spoke on Thursday night he not only spoke to Democrats but to all of the citizens of the United States and it is my prayer that Utahns will open their hearts to his message and join me on Nov. 4 when we will elect our next American President
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Davis County Clipper: Party lines - Property tax changes, more harm than good?

Property tax changes, more harm than good?
By Rob Miller, Utah Democratic Vice Chair
Death and taxes are two things that we can count on. We may well ask are the new assessments and taxes in Davis County helpful or harmful? Taxpayers basically fall into four groups: 1. Older citizens on fixed incomes. 2. Middle aged citizens still very much in the work place. 3. Young property owners just starting out. 4. Commercial/Industrial and business property.
All taxpayers have the following common denominators: 1. Is my property worth what the assessor says it is? 2. Is the rate my property being taxed at justified by the government service I’m receiving? 3. As Davis County government currently exists, is a one-party system sensitive to public well being regarding taxation?
The answer to question 1 is no. Last year my property tax assessment claimed that my home was worth $378,000, while the lender who refinanced my home had it assessed for $269,000. Your property and my property is not worth what the assessor says it is and this is brought out by verifiable sales comparison data, also the fact that protested evaluations have received a reduction of sorts across the board.
The rate at which properties are taxed is set by the County Commissioners. With the current change in evaluation one might ask is county government providing additional services or a higher level of services that are currently in place? The answer to that question is also no. Ninety percent of Davis County now exists within the boundaries of corporate cities. As the county shrinks and cities expand one could make the conclusion that county services are being picked up by the cities. This should mandate a reduction rather than an increase in county taxes. This particular condition creates unnecessary and costly duplication in certain areas. For all the rhetoric we have heard about efforts to determine our property values there isn’t much being said about consolidating city/county services to eliminate overlap and duplication. A critical look should be taken regarding cost vs. benefit in many areas of county government.
Do we believe that, as Davis County residents, we should be happy to pay a certain percentage of what our properties are worth, justified only by higher costs in surrounding counties? Last year taxes in substantial areas of the county nearly doubled. When a public outcry ensued the county’s response was, “We’ve made a mistake so here’s your rebate.” This year many of your statements show another increase above last year’s and a whopping increase above the slight rebate received. What kind of trickery is this?
Our third and final issue is the crux of the entire dilemma. One-party rule in Davis County has not served us well. Our founding fathers realized the need for checks and balances. In Davis County we have not had checks and balances since 1994. Over the past 13 years Davis County officials have thrust egregious tax increases upon the public. The dereliction and outright incompetence promoted by one-party government clearly exemplified by the mishandling of property values has driven four commissioners from office, and still one-party rule persists.
Please join with me in the voting booth this November to bring responsibility and balance back to county government. Davis County voters have the power to make the needed change.
Property tax changes, more harm than good?
By Wade Farraway, Davis County Rep.Vice Chair
I can see why Todd Weiler asked me to fill in while he conveniently left on his vacation; this week’s question is a tough one. Anytime the way property taxes are assessed is changed there will be winners and losers. In this latest change no one in Davis County Government is to blame, in that it came about because of HB 54 Property Tax Assessment Revisions sponsored by representative Wayne Harper. HB 54 in a nutshell requires that counties of the first and second class use a computer assisted mass appraisal system to conduct their annual update of property values. The bill’s aim was to provide for a “uniform and equal treatment of parcels of real property throughout the county” every year.
HB 54 was hotly contested and had three substitutes before the final product passed the Utah Senate and House without a nay vote in its final form. This bi-partisan bill, when it passed and was signed into law by the Governor, became the obligation of the counties in its implementation.
This being the first year that the new tax assessment tool is in use, it is difficult to determine whether or not it helps or hurts the county. The goal was of course to bring fairness and equality into the property tax system by treating like properties the same. The problem here is that identical twins are rare and so are identical properties.
There are more than 90,000 parcels of real estate located in Davis County with an approximate worth of $8 billion that need to be evaluated annually. This Herculean task currently falls upon the County Assessor James B. Ivie who must somehow evaluate and assess a value to every parcel every year in a fair and equal way. This is not an easy task. Currently, these property taxes go to the Davis School District, State Basic School levy, Davis County, Davis jail bond, County library, water companies, sewer districts and Mosquito abatement to name a few. Obviously these are important entities that need public monies to function.
When it comes to taxes the Republican Party position in the Utah State Republican Platform is: We accept the necessity for limited taxation in order for government to perform and administer those services which meet essential public needs. However, we recognize that the power to tax is also the power to control, and believe that the best way to control government is to strictly control the amount of taxes imposed on the people.
We encourage further simplification of tax systems, the elimination of the estate tax, and broad-based rate reduction where possible.
The Davis County Commission – all Republicans – reduced the tax rate this past year as a good example of proper tax stewardship. Whereas we all know that the Democrats have not met a tax they haven’t liked.
By Rob Miller, Utah Democratic Vice Chair
Death and taxes are two things that we can count on. We may well ask are the new assessments and taxes in Davis County helpful or harmful? Taxpayers basically fall into four groups: 1. Older citizens on fixed incomes. 2. Middle aged citizens still very much in the work place. 3. Young property owners just starting out. 4. Commercial/Industrial and business property.
All taxpayers have the following common denominators: 1. Is my property worth what the assessor says it is? 2. Is the rate my property being taxed at justified by the government service I’m receiving? 3. As Davis County government currently exists, is a one-party system sensitive to public well being regarding taxation?
The answer to question 1 is no. Last year my property tax assessment claimed that my home was worth $378,000, while the lender who refinanced my home had it assessed for $269,000. Your property and my property is not worth what the assessor says it is and this is brought out by verifiable sales comparison data, also the fact that protested evaluations have received a reduction of sorts across the board.
The rate at which properties are taxed is set by the County Commissioners. With the current change in evaluation one might ask is county government providing additional services or a higher level of services that are currently in place? The answer to that question is also no. Ninety percent of Davis County now exists within the boundaries of corporate cities. As the county shrinks and cities expand one could make the conclusion that county services are being picked up by the cities. This should mandate a reduction rather than an increase in county taxes. This particular condition creates unnecessary and costly duplication in certain areas. For all the rhetoric we have heard about efforts to determine our property values there isn’t much being said about consolidating city/county services to eliminate overlap and duplication. A critical look should be taken regarding cost vs. benefit in many areas of county government.
Do we believe that, as Davis County residents, we should be happy to pay a certain percentage of what our properties are worth, justified only by higher costs in surrounding counties? Last year taxes in substantial areas of the county nearly doubled. When a public outcry ensued the county’s response was, “We’ve made a mistake so here’s your rebate.” This year many of your statements show another increase above last year’s and a whopping increase above the slight rebate received. What kind of trickery is this?
Our third and final issue is the crux of the entire dilemma. One-party rule in Davis County has not served us well. Our founding fathers realized the need for checks and balances. In Davis County we have not had checks and balances since 1994. Over the past 13 years Davis County officials have thrust egregious tax increases upon the public. The dereliction and outright incompetence promoted by one-party government clearly exemplified by the mishandling of property values has driven four commissioners from office, and still one-party rule persists.
Please join with me in the voting booth this November to bring responsibility and balance back to county government. Davis County voters have the power to make the needed change.
Property tax changes, more harm than good?
By Wade Farraway, Davis County Rep.Vice Chair
I can see why Todd Weiler asked me to fill in while he conveniently left on his vacation; this week’s question is a tough one. Anytime the way property taxes are assessed is changed there will be winners and losers. In this latest change no one in Davis County Government is to blame, in that it came about because of HB 54 Property Tax Assessment Revisions sponsored by representative Wayne Harper. HB 54 in a nutshell requires that counties of the first and second class use a computer assisted mass appraisal system to conduct their annual update of property values. The bill’s aim was to provide for a “uniform and equal treatment of parcels of real property throughout the county” every year.
HB 54 was hotly contested and had three substitutes before the final product passed the Utah Senate and House without a nay vote in its final form. This bi-partisan bill, when it passed and was signed into law by the Governor, became the obligation of the counties in its implementation.
This being the first year that the new tax assessment tool is in use, it is difficult to determine whether or not it helps or hurts the county. The goal was of course to bring fairness and equality into the property tax system by treating like properties the same. The problem here is that identical twins are rare and so are identical properties.
There are more than 90,000 parcels of real estate located in Davis County with an approximate worth of $8 billion that need to be evaluated annually. This Herculean task currently falls upon the County Assessor James B. Ivie who must somehow evaluate and assess a value to every parcel every year in a fair and equal way. This is not an easy task. Currently, these property taxes go to the Davis School District, State Basic School levy, Davis County, Davis jail bond, County library, water companies, sewer districts and Mosquito abatement to name a few. Obviously these are important entities that need public monies to function.
When it comes to taxes the Republican Party position in the Utah State Republican Platform is: We accept the necessity for limited taxation in order for government to perform and administer those services which meet essential public needs. However, we recognize that the power to tax is also the power to control, and believe that the best way to control government is to strictly control the amount of taxes imposed on the people.
We encourage further simplification of tax systems, the elimination of the estate tax, and broad-based rate reduction where possible.
The Davis County Commission – all Republicans – reduced the tax rate this past year as a good example of proper tax stewardship. Whereas we all know that the Democrats have not met a tax they haven’t liked.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Davis County Clipper: Did Obama’s world tour change the race?

Party Lines - Did Obama’s world tour change the race?
Clipper 29.JUL.08
By Rob Miller, Utah Democratic Vice Chair
Future President Barack Obama’s “World Tour” has not only been worthwhile, it has helped present a new direction for both America and our allies. Unilateralism has been relegated to the dust bin of history and Obama had the opportunity to offer a vision of a future built on cooperation that recognizes the reality that we are all part of a global economy with a common interest in tackling extremism, climate change, and nuclear proliferation, just to name a few.
Throughout this tour, Senator Obama has been able to express the values the world remembers America for. By acknowledging that we have sometimes stumbled, the Obama administration has shown its commitment to a path that does not include torture and violations of the Geneva Convention will not be tolerated. Obama does not offer excuses, rather he gives people around the world a chance to remember why they love our great nation.
In the spirit of JFK and Ronald Reagan, Obama was able to articulate our common love for freedom and appreciation for the rule of law essential to liberty; he is thus laying the foundation for a renewal in relations with other countries that have been sorely lacking over the past 7 1/2 years. Simply said, Senator Obama has not only been able to define what “Change” means to Americans, he has been able to define “Change” to the world. His reception in Berlin reaffirms that the world is not only listening, but is also embracing, a movement that will undoubtedly put our country and its allies back on the right track.
Proof that this positive vision is taking hold can be seen in a recent Gallup Poll Daily conducted from July 24-26 that shows that Barack Obama now leads John McCain among national registered voters by a 49 percent to 40 percent margin which makes sense given John McCain’s repeated references to Czechoslovakia — a country that has not existed since 1993, and let’s not forget McCain’s statement that Afghanistan borders Iraq when in fact it does not.
Our country is at a political crossroads and as a Davis County Democrat who became involved in politics due to the current state of affairs caused by one-Party domination locally, and the failed policies of the current national administration, I can whole heartedly say that I am delighted to endorse and sustain Barack Obama’s candidacy.
Although Barack Obama is running on the Democratic ticket it is my opinion that his leadership represents an opportunity for all Americans. His message transcends party affiliation and that’s why I don’t see Barack Obama simply as the “Democratic” candidate, but as our “American” candidate whose message of “Change” will undoubtedly put our nation back on track both locally and abroad.
Party Lines - Did Obama’s world tour change the race?
Clipper 29.JUL.08
by Todd Weiler, Utah Republican Vice Chair
When I heard Donnie Osmond belt out “Puppy Love” in the Conference Center over the weekend, I was reminded of the media’s man-crush on the junior senator from Illinois. When McCain visited the Middle East a few months ago, the media hardly took notice. Yawn. But when Obama’s foot touched ground in Iraq, the news anchors were live on the scene. As though Neil Armstrong had just landed on the moon or something.
Not surprisingly, the Europeans simply adore the most liberal senator in Washington. Especially the French, who have embraced his cut and run strategy for Iraq. After all, no one knows more about surrendering than the French. Let’s face it, if the election was to be held in Europe, McCain wouldn’t stand a chance. (They didn’t like Reagan either.) But back at home, Barack is slipping in the polls — he is in a statistical dead heat with McCain.
Don’t get me wrong. I readily admit that Barack looked good on the road. He attracted a crowd in Berlin that was reminiscent of Kennedy. Americans saw Obama meeting with world leaders, which obviously made him look more presidential. Since many Americans (like me) view Obama as inexperienced, he needs to convince the electorate that he is capable of leading the free world.
So if the trip went “very well” (Barack’s words, not mine), then why is he losing support? Like all rock stars, Obama looks good on a stage. But what happens when the lights go down?
Obama’s ego trip exposed a serious weakness: pride. Take the troop surge in Iraq. Obama voted against it last year. He said it was a big mistake, and would only lead to bigger problems in Iraq. But he was wrong. Anyone with a pulse can see that the surge has worked, and in a big way. So what does Obama say when he visited Iraq? He said if he had it all to do over again he would still vote against the surge. Wow. What kind of president will he be if he cannot admit when he has made a mistake?
Pride and inexperience are not Barack’s only problems. Voters are beginning to realize that Obama is big on rhetoric but little on substance. In other words, he is an empty suit.
And then there’s his politics. As the campaign intensifies over the next couple of months, America is going to realize that Obama is the most liberal candidate ever nominated for president, far more liberal than Kerry or Gore.
They will discover that when Obama says he wants “change”, he means he wants us to become more like the French. And that isn’t going to sit so well with middle America.
Throughout this tour, Senator Obama has been able to express the values the world remembers America for. By acknowledging that we have sometimes stumbled, the Obama administration has shown its commitment to a path that does not include torture and violations of the Geneva Convention will not be tolerated. Obama does not offer excuses, rather he gives people around the world a chance to remember why they love our great nation.
In the spirit of JFK and Ronald Reagan, Obama was able to articulate our common love for freedom and appreciation for the rule of law essential to liberty; he is thus laying the foundation for a renewal in relations with other countries that have been sorely lacking over the past 7 1/2 years. Simply said, Senator Obama has not only been able to define what “Change” means to Americans, he has been able to define “Change” to the world. His reception in Berlin reaffirms that the world is not only listening, but is also embracing, a movement that will undoubtedly put our country and its allies back on the right track.
Proof that this positive vision is taking hold can be seen in a recent Gallup Poll Daily conducted from July 24-26 that shows that Barack Obama now leads John McCain among national registered voters by a 49 percent to 40 percent margin which makes sense given John McCain’s repeated references to Czechoslovakia — a country that has not existed since 1993, and let’s not forget McCain’s statement that Afghanistan borders Iraq when in fact it does not.
Our country is at a political crossroads and as a Davis County Democrat who became involved in politics due to the current state of affairs caused by one-Party domination locally, and the failed policies of the current national administration, I can whole heartedly say that I am delighted to endorse and sustain Barack Obama’s candidacy.
Although Barack Obama is running on the Democratic ticket it is my opinion that his leadership represents an opportunity for all Americans. His message transcends party affiliation and that’s why I don’t see Barack Obama simply as the “Democratic” candidate, but as our “American” candidate whose message of “Change” will undoubtedly put our nation back on track both locally and abroad.
Party Lines - Did Obama’s world tour change the race?
Clipper 29.JUL.08
by Todd Weiler, Utah Republican Vice Chair
When I heard Donnie Osmond belt out “Puppy Love” in the Conference Center over the weekend, I was reminded of the media’s man-crush on the junior senator from Illinois. When McCain visited the Middle East a few months ago, the media hardly took notice. Yawn. But when Obama’s foot touched ground in Iraq, the news anchors were live on the scene. As though Neil Armstrong had just landed on the moon or something.
Not surprisingly, the Europeans simply adore the most liberal senator in Washington. Especially the French, who have embraced his cut and run strategy for Iraq. After all, no one knows more about surrendering than the French. Let’s face it, if the election was to be held in Europe, McCain wouldn’t stand a chance. (They didn’t like Reagan either.) But back at home, Barack is slipping in the polls — he is in a statistical dead heat with McCain.
Don’t get me wrong. I readily admit that Barack looked good on the road. He attracted a crowd in Berlin that was reminiscent of Kennedy. Americans saw Obama meeting with world leaders, which obviously made him look more presidential. Since many Americans (like me) view Obama as inexperienced, he needs to convince the electorate that he is capable of leading the free world.
So if the trip went “very well” (Barack’s words, not mine), then why is he losing support? Like all rock stars, Obama looks good on a stage. But what happens when the lights go down?
Obama’s ego trip exposed a serious weakness: pride. Take the troop surge in Iraq. Obama voted against it last year. He said it was a big mistake, and would only lead to bigger problems in Iraq. But he was wrong. Anyone with a pulse can see that the surge has worked, and in a big way. So what does Obama say when he visited Iraq? He said if he had it all to do over again he would still vote against the surge. Wow. What kind of president will he be if he cannot admit when he has made a mistake?
Pride and inexperience are not Barack’s only problems. Voters are beginning to realize that Obama is big on rhetoric but little on substance. In other words, he is an empty suit.
And then there’s his politics. As the campaign intensifies over the next couple of months, America is going to realize that Obama is the most liberal candidate ever nominated for president, far more liberal than Kerry or Gore.
They will discover that when Obama says he wants “change”, he means he wants us to become more like the French. And that isn’t going to sit so well with middle America.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Davis County Clipper: What is behind Walker investigation

What is behind the Walker investigation?
Clipper 15.JUL.08
Rob Miller, Utah Democratic Vice Chair
The Walker investigation is the tip of the iceberg. For 30 years, Utah has been a one-party state. The Republicans have used their growing majorities to draw district lines to create as many safe GOP seats as possible and reduce areas where Democrats could be competitive. With total party dominance and guaranteed job security, the far right wing of the GOP has felt emboldened to impose its ideological will on Utahns whether they agree or not — and too many legislators have succumbed to the notion that power equals entitlement.
If you chair a committee that controls the flow of bills, why not put the arm on lobbyists and tell them that they’d better contribute money to your special project if they want their bills to see the light of day? After all, if you can’t use power to throw your weight around, what use is it?
The story of Rep. Walker’s $55,000 salary increase proposal to Richard Ellis if Ellis would drop out of the treasurer’s race is a classic example of power’s hubris-inducing dangers. According to Ellis, Walker told him that his (Walker’s) good friend “has assured me we can make this happen” and that it could be done in stages and covertly so that no one would know about it. Ellis blew the whistle and asked for an investigation. When the Lieutenant Governor declined to act, some legislators stepped forward and called for an ethics hearing.
Clearly, this was an instance where the corruptive use of power spilled into the media in a very public way, and what makes this episode unusual is that Walker had talked with so many people about his clever idea to eliminate an opponent that there were too many people in the know to cover it up, and there was also a paper trail of corroborative e-mail messages.
It’s fair to say that too many years of single-party rule have bred a culture of corruption, where powerful legislators feel they can do anything they wish. What’s really going on when a powerful legislator asks a lobbyist to make a campaign contribution to the legislator’s good friend? The rule says, “members of the House shall not use their official; position to secure privileges for themselves or others.” When that lobbyist has a bill in front of the Legislature that’s important to his employer, what’s the lobbyist going to do? Of course. Ask how much is wanted and write the check. This goes on all the time. It’s how pro-voucher legislators financed a pro-voucher political issue committee in 2007 to tell voters to pass the voucher bill.
Why do we, the voters, put up with this kind of unethical strong-arming? Because the perps like to keep it secret. Who, after all, will blow the whistle? The lobbyists who always need legislators’ votes? Not likely. Thank goodness, in the Walker case, five courageous legislators, three Democrats and two Republicans said, “if not us, who; and if not now, when?”
Walker had made many public statements denying any wrongdoing, but when it came time to deny it under oath and in response to several witnesses who had heard him speak candidly, he didn’t want to defend himself — and he didn’t want to answer questions about which other legislator — most likely in the GOP leadership — had said “we can make it happen.”
I’m a Democrat in Davis County, and we work hard to find qualified candidates who’ll uphold the public trust. The best antidote against legislative corruption is the check and balance of a strong, competitive two-party system. We used to have that in Utah, and government worked better for it.
What is behind the Walker investigation?
Clipper 15.JUL.08
By Todd Weiler, Utah Republican Vice Chair
It is easy to make a snap judgment when you just read about something or someone in the newspaper. “That guy is guilty. He ought to go to jail.” Or, “I think that guy is lying. I don’t believe a word he says.” That used to me. I was that guy. But my perspective has changed. The more involved I have become in politics, the more people I have met. As a result, I know just about all of the key players involved with the Mark Walker investigation.
Mark Walker and Richard Ellis are both great guys: friendly, personable and competent. As a Republican, I was proud to have them both on the ballot because the way I figured it, we would be in good hands no matter who won.
Then everything changed. In late May, Ellis claimed that Walker had offered him an illegal bribe in March, in the form of a job with a big pay raise, to drop out of the race.
Walker denied the allegation, and explained that he only intended to dispel the notion that he wouldn’t fire anyone in the Treasurer’s office if he was elected.
Ellis filed a complaint, and then a lawsuit. On June 24, he won the primary election in a landslide.
Walker resigned from his job during the campaign, lost the election, and now has resigned his seat in the Legislature.
Since Walker is the subject of a criminal investigation, there is no way his attorney was going to allow him to testify before the ethics committee. I don’t blame him for resigning his seat to avoid the hearing. Regardless of his guilt or innocence, he would have been foolish to ignore the advice of his counsel.
As strange as it may sound, much of this controversy is tied to vouchers. The anti-voucher crowd was backing Ellis.
The pro-voucher crowd was backing Walker. Even though the state treasurer has little or nothing to do with vouchers, the battle lines had been drawn.
This all stems back to the referendum on vouchers. When vouchers were defeated last November, the anti-voucher advocates were emboldened. They believed that they had finally shown that the “emperor had no clothes”. In their minds, it was proof that the conservatives in the Legislature had lost touch with the electorate.
This same anti-voucher crowd is now suing the state over the education omnibus bill that was passed earlier this year.
Since they successfully overturned vouchers last year, they decided to take a shot at overturning the omnibus bill this go round.
All of these battles have exposed a deep and bitter divide within the Utah legislature.
Although I cannot predict what will result from the Walker investigation, I am quite certain that this political war is far from over.
If you chair a committee that controls the flow of bills, why not put the arm on lobbyists and tell them that they’d better contribute money to your special project if they want their bills to see the light of day? After all, if you can’t use power to throw your weight around, what use is it?
The story of Rep. Walker’s $55,000 salary increase proposal to Richard Ellis if Ellis would drop out of the treasurer’s race is a classic example of power’s hubris-inducing dangers. According to Ellis, Walker told him that his (Walker’s) good friend “has assured me we can make this happen” and that it could be done in stages and covertly so that no one would know about it. Ellis blew the whistle and asked for an investigation. When the Lieutenant Governor declined to act, some legislators stepped forward and called for an ethics hearing.
Clearly, this was an instance where the corruptive use of power spilled into the media in a very public way, and what makes this episode unusual is that Walker had talked with so many people about his clever idea to eliminate an opponent that there were too many people in the know to cover it up, and there was also a paper trail of corroborative e-mail messages.
It’s fair to say that too many years of single-party rule have bred a culture of corruption, where powerful legislators feel they can do anything they wish. What’s really going on when a powerful legislator asks a lobbyist to make a campaign contribution to the legislator’s good friend? The rule says, “members of the House shall not use their official; position to secure privileges for themselves or others.” When that lobbyist has a bill in front of the Legislature that’s important to his employer, what’s the lobbyist going to do? Of course. Ask how much is wanted and write the check. This goes on all the time. It’s how pro-voucher legislators financed a pro-voucher political issue committee in 2007 to tell voters to pass the voucher bill.
Why do we, the voters, put up with this kind of unethical strong-arming? Because the perps like to keep it secret. Who, after all, will blow the whistle? The lobbyists who always need legislators’ votes? Not likely. Thank goodness, in the Walker case, five courageous legislators, three Democrats and two Republicans said, “if not us, who; and if not now, when?”
Walker had made many public statements denying any wrongdoing, but when it came time to deny it under oath and in response to several witnesses who had heard him speak candidly, he didn’t want to defend himself — and he didn’t want to answer questions about which other legislator — most likely in the GOP leadership — had said “we can make it happen.”
I’m a Democrat in Davis County, and we work hard to find qualified candidates who’ll uphold the public trust. The best antidote against legislative corruption is the check and balance of a strong, competitive two-party system. We used to have that in Utah, and government worked better for it.
What is behind the Walker investigation?
Clipper 15.JUL.08
By Todd Weiler, Utah Republican Vice Chair
It is easy to make a snap judgment when you just read about something or someone in the newspaper. “That guy is guilty. He ought to go to jail.” Or, “I think that guy is lying. I don’t believe a word he says.” That used to me. I was that guy. But my perspective has changed. The more involved I have become in politics, the more people I have met. As a result, I know just about all of the key players involved with the Mark Walker investigation.
Mark Walker and Richard Ellis are both great guys: friendly, personable and competent. As a Republican, I was proud to have them both on the ballot because the way I figured it, we would be in good hands no matter who won.
Then everything changed. In late May, Ellis claimed that Walker had offered him an illegal bribe in March, in the form of a job with a big pay raise, to drop out of the race.
Walker denied the allegation, and explained that he only intended to dispel the notion that he wouldn’t fire anyone in the Treasurer’s office if he was elected.
Ellis filed a complaint, and then a lawsuit. On June 24, he won the primary election in a landslide.
Walker resigned from his job during the campaign, lost the election, and now has resigned his seat in the Legislature.
Since Walker is the subject of a criminal investigation, there is no way his attorney was going to allow him to testify before the ethics committee. I don’t blame him for resigning his seat to avoid the hearing. Regardless of his guilt or innocence, he would have been foolish to ignore the advice of his counsel.
As strange as it may sound, much of this controversy is tied to vouchers. The anti-voucher crowd was backing Ellis.
The pro-voucher crowd was backing Walker. Even though the state treasurer has little or nothing to do with vouchers, the battle lines had been drawn.
This all stems back to the referendum on vouchers. When vouchers were defeated last November, the anti-voucher advocates were emboldened. They believed that they had finally shown that the “emperor had no clothes”. In their minds, it was proof that the conservatives in the Legislature had lost touch with the electorate.
This same anti-voucher crowd is now suing the state over the education omnibus bill that was passed earlier this year.
Since they successfully overturned vouchers last year, they decided to take a shot at overturning the omnibus bill this go round.
All of these battles have exposed a deep and bitter divide within the Utah legislature.
Although I cannot predict what will result from the Walker investigation, I am quite certain that this political war is far from over.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Davis County must pay fluoridation suit fees

SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah Supreme Court has ruled the Davis County clerk/auditor’s office will have to pay the attorneys’ fees of the group that fought a revote for fluoridated water.The Associated Press reported earlier this week that the Utah Supreme Court reversed a lower court ruling last week preventing Utahns for Better Dental Health — Davis from collecting attorneys’ fees from the county. UBDH — Davis, sued the clerk/auditor’s office and clerk/auditor Steve Rawlings in 2002 after Davis County placed the initiative on the ballot for a revote following a challenge from anti-fluoride activists. Pro-fluoride groups said the revote was a misinterpretation of the state’s referendum law.
Second District Court Judge Glen Dawson ruled in favor of UBDH —Davis, but did not grant payment of fees.
Utah Supreme Court Chief Justice Christine Durham, writing for the majority, said the refusal was “at odds” with the original referendum decision.
Now, the parties must go before 2nd District Judge Glen Dawson for a fee hearing to determine how much the county will have to pay.
Originally UBDH — Davis requested $45,000 in attorneys’ fees, but Dawson rejected the award in 2003 and the pro-fluoride group appealed the decision to the Utah Court of Appeals, which sent their case back to Dawson in August 2005.
At that point the group’s claim for attorneys’ fees rose to $145,000.
Utahns for Better Dental Health — Davis attorney David Irvine said at the time that in the two years following the original filing briefs, research and the appeal added to the fees.
Davis County voters approved fluoridating the county’s drinking water (except in Woods Cross) in the 2000 election by a 52 percent vote.
It was then ordered to be implemented in 2001. Later that year, a group opposing fluoridation brought an initiative petition to Rawlings calling for a revote on the issue.
Irvine and UBDH —Davis argued the revote was illegal because the petition should have been filed as a referendum, not as an initiative.
Dawson agreed that the revote should be pulled from the ballot and UBDH —Davis asked that attorneys’ fees be awarded to the group.
On Wednesday, Irvine said he received a partial payment for his services.
He hopes the hearing, which should be scheduled soon, will recoup all his fees. “I’m very happy the (Supreme) Court ruled the way they did.”
Utah Supreme Court Chief Justice Christine Durham, writing for the majority, said the refusal was “at odds” with the original referendum decision.
Now, the parties must go before 2nd District Judge Glen Dawson for a fee hearing to determine how much the county will have to pay.
Originally UBDH — Davis requested $45,000 in attorneys’ fees, but Dawson rejected the award in 2003 and the pro-fluoride group appealed the decision to the Utah Court of Appeals, which sent their case back to Dawson in August 2005.
At that point the group’s claim for attorneys’ fees rose to $145,000.
Utahns for Better Dental Health — Davis attorney David Irvine said at the time that in the two years following the original filing briefs, research and the appeal added to the fees.
Davis County voters approved fluoridating the county’s drinking water (except in Woods Cross) in the 2000 election by a 52 percent vote.
It was then ordered to be implemented in 2001. Later that year, a group opposing fluoridation brought an initiative petition to Rawlings calling for a revote on the issue.
Irvine and UBDH —Davis argued the revote was illegal because the petition should have been filed as a referendum, not as an initiative.
Dawson agreed that the revote should be pulled from the ballot and UBDH —Davis asked that attorneys’ fees be awarded to the group.
On Wednesday, Irvine said he received a partial payment for his services.
He hopes the hearing, which should be scheduled soon, will recoup all his fees. “I’m very happy the (Supreme) Court ruled the way they did.”
mwilliams@davisclipper.com
I' have been spending some much needed time with my family this holiday season, but this is an important issue that needs to be addressed since there is more to this for Davis County residents to understand.
You should read this too...

Davis must pay fees in fluoridation lawsuit
Stay Tuned...
Friday, November 02, 2007
Davis County Clipper rejects Utah's Referendum 1 and Parents for Choice in Education's Tactics

In our view
Time, place isn't right for vouchers
Forget almost everything you see on TV commercials about vouchers.
The comparison to Oreos is just propaganda by the pro-voucher folks. .
And the "too many loopholes" rebuttal by the anti-voucher crowd is propaganda as well.
Neither are fully accurate. And neither give us a solid reasons for voting either for or against. Let's start with the Oreos.
Each Oreo represents $1,000 of the $7,000 spent per pupil in the public schools each year. When a student moves from a public to a private school, three Oreos, or $3,000, moves with the student, leaving an additional $4,000 in the school system without having to teach the student.
It looks like the schools will have more money left over to help the rest of the kids. But for each student who leaves to go to private school, the public schools now have $3,000 less to spend. There are no real savings for that student not being in school.
The cost of utilities, custodial services, overhead and even teacher salaries won't change much. The only real savings would be for textbooks and incidental materials.
So, vouchers could send schools into a downward funding spiral,
But even that's not fully accurate. The Oreo theory does hold true if one considers that the population growth will cause one or more students to fill the vacancy left by each student who moves out to private school. That way, Oreos replaced by the new incoming student, plus the four Oreos left behind by the private school student.
But this supposes that growth trends will continue forever and for all school districts. For any district where growth slows, financial woes won't be far behind.
likewise commercials for voucher opponents aren't convincing either. Their charge that the voucher law has "flaws, loopholes and unanswered questions" is probably true, but meaningless. The same can be said for any law passed since the U.S. Congress and the Utah Legislature began, and even for the U.S. Constitution itself. This tactic is just propaganda and virtually meaningless.
What voters should really consider are the following:
- The tactics used by the pro-voucher forces have been suspect, if not down-right ugly, from the start.
- Out-of-state money was used to fund the campaigns of candidates for the legislature without candidates making their stance clear to the voters. Even when we asked some directly, they would not admit it. We take campaigns with hidden agendas very seriously.
- Some of the pro-voucher candidates seemed to lack any real substance other than favoring vouchers.
- Even with all the high pressure tactics to get pro-voucher people into office, it took severe arm twisting to get vouchers to squeak by in the legislature.
- Then pro-voucher forces sought to block Novembers vote by insisting that an "amendment" to the voucher bill could stand on it's own even if people voted down the original voucher law.
- When it became evident that a vote couldn't be stopped, pro-voucher forces then tried to count the results on a district-by-district basis. This "electoral college" approach meant vouchers could conceivably pass even if voted down by the majority.
- Sanity was saved by the Utah Supreme Court when it ended the mess by ordering a binding, up-and-down vote for Nov. 6, with no funny vote counting.
- Aside from the highhanded efforts to subvert the public, a real problem with vouchers is that they are simply the old story of the camel getting its nose in the tent. While vouchers proposals are modest, there is a real risk that demands will soon grow to eat up all the Oreos.
- A push to raise the voucher amounts is likely because the present voucher plan doesn't offer enough for poor families to benefit, and it provides only incidental relief for the rest. We suspect the low amounts were planned to ease opposition, but with intent to raise them later.
- The whole Oreos thing also seems like an obvious bribe: "Let our children go, and we'll leave money behind,"They've always been free to go and leave all the money behind.
- Vouchers also seem to be aimed at fixing what isn't broken. With Utah schools doing generally well, vouchers seem a better idea for inner city schools elsewhere.
While we don't want to shut the door forever, all this baggage surrounding this issue leads us to conclude it's time to hold off: Someday maybe -- not here, not now.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Davis County Clipper: Bountiful man re-elected to Democrat post
Tom Busselberg 24.JUL.07
tbusselberg@davisclipper.com
BOUNTIFUL — A Bountiful man has been re-elected to a high state Democratic post. Rob Miller was unanimously elected by delegates to the Utah Democratic Party convention to continue in his role as vice-chairman of the state party. Miller is a native Utahn and long-time Bountiful resident. Chairman Wayne Holland was also returned to his seat.
The pair are due to lead the party for the next two years.
“I am honored to be able to help lead Democrats in Utah through the upcoming pivotal elections,” says Miller.
“Like other Democrats across the West, I have been helping to lay a foundation to break the stranglehold of one-party role. (The year) 2008 promises to be a good year for Democrats and other Utahns working to restore responsible, effective government,” he says.
At the recent party convention and Jefferson & Jackson fund raiser, appearances featured visits from two contenders for the Democratic nomination for President: Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico and Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut.
Miller, who ran unsuccessfully for the county commission last year, says he is intimately familiar with issues facing Davis County residents and well-positioned within the party to help Democrats in northern Utah elect city, county and state representatives.
Miller, his wife, Michelle, and their three children are residents of Bountiful.
Currently, he is an advertising executive for the Enterprise Newspaper Group and a board member for Democrats in the West. He recently stepped down after two years as vice president of the Mental Health Association of Utah and three years with the American Cancer Society’s Man-to-Man Prostate Cancer group.
He is also the moderator and primary author of a widely read political blog, The Utah Amicus.
The pair are due to lead the party for the next two years.
“I am honored to be able to help lead Democrats in Utah through the upcoming pivotal elections,” says Miller.
“Like other Democrats across the West, I have been helping to lay a foundation to break the stranglehold of one-party role. (The year) 2008 promises to be a good year for Democrats and other Utahns working to restore responsible, effective government,” he says.
At the recent party convention and Jefferson & Jackson fund raiser, appearances featured visits from two contenders for the Democratic nomination for President: Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico and Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut.
Miller, who ran unsuccessfully for the county commission last year, says he is intimately familiar with issues facing Davis County residents and well-positioned within the party to help Democrats in northern Utah elect city, county and state representatives.
Miller, his wife, Michelle, and their three children are residents of Bountiful.
Currently, he is an advertising executive for the Enterprise Newspaper Group and a board member for Democrats in the West. He recently stepped down after two years as vice president of the Mental Health Association of Utah and three years with the American Cancer Society’s Man-to-Man Prostate Cancer group.
He is also the moderator and primary author of a widely read political blog, The Utah Amicus.
tbusselberg@davisclipper.com
Friday, May 18, 2007
Party Lines - Was Sharpton out of line? Is it time to let it go?
By now, everyone in Utah has heard Reverend Al Sharpton’s comments concerning Mitt Romney. Although Sharpton was directing his comments towards an atheist, Christopher Hitchens, Romney’s campaign saw a political opportunity. And Sharpton’s apology and overblown statement now appear to be Romney’s chance for some free press.As an LDS member myself, most of us have heard many ridiculous and outrageous statements made about our faith. Yet, some Mormons seem to be very offended by Sharpton’s comments. While local conservatives are claiming Sharpton is politicizing Romney’s faith, Republicans in turn are politicizing Sharpton because he is a Democrat. Romney has already encountered numerous anti-Mormon comments in the past few months. But Romney has dismissed those comments because he was surrounded by Republicans. Obviously, Romney is trying to win the attention of evangelicals and the Religious Right.
However, the Al Sharpton incident has re-opened some questions for LDS Democrats. Why do so many LDS members align themselves with a party that is clearly dominated by the Religious Right? These Evangelicals, like James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Charles L. Wood and all of the Southern Baptists claim that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is a cult. Nevertheless, many LDS members try to rationalize the Religious Right as a minority. But that minority may very well keep Romney from winning his party’s nomination. Conservative columnists, George Will and Robert Novak, also claim that Romney has little chance of winning because of his faith.
Another troublesome issue is the hypocrisy of so many Republican Mormons wanting the nation to take the LDS Church seriously and they attempt to show everyone that Mormons are Christians. Yet, many local Republicans believe you cannot be a good Mormon if you are a Democrat. This is despite the fact that the Church has advocated political neutrality for more than 100 years. Yet, too many Republicans believe the Church supports only one party.
Every LDS Democrat has stories of being ridiculed by local Republicans. For instance, the Salt Lake Tribune interviewed Elder Marlin Jensen nine years ago about being an LDS Democrat, yet the Utah GOP blasted Elder Jensen for his comments. In addition, many LDS Democrats still hear jokes about being the “token” Democrat in the ward while others ask, “Why are you a Democrat?” And there are those statements from the Republican Party claiming that the GOP “resonates” with the values of Utah. I wonder if those same values include the “cult” status the Religious Right has labeled our church.
Last week, local Republicans were quick to demand an apology from Sharpton, but for decades, Republicans have never apologized to LDS Democrats. And it is doubtful that we will ever see an apology.
The values of hypocrisy from the Utah GOP is reflected from a line in the TV series M*A*S*H when Colonel Potter said, “Just remember, there’s a right way and a wrong way to do everything and the wrong way is to keep trying to make everybody else do it the right way.”
See Todd Weiler's article here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




















