Barack Guevara

arbilad · Head Chef

Barack Guevara

Valhalla · Profuse Pontificator

And as Mosiah said:

Mos. 29:

26 Now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your lawto do your business by the voice of the people.
27 And if the time comes that the voice of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited this land.

I fear great judgments and destruction are soon to be upon us. How can anyone in good conscience vote for any of the candidates left?!

mirkwood · Senior Bucketkeeper

Valhalla wrote:
I fear great judgments and destruction are soon to be upon us.

The lesser evil vote mentality has supported bringing us to this point. It is only a matter of time till the judgements begin.

arbilad · Head Chef

I'm just shocked that there's not more of an uproar over this issue. If a McCain volunteer were photographed with a Third Reich flag in the background, you can bet that there would be a gigantic scandal. McCain would have to condemn it in the strongest terms possible to even have a chance after something like that.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Do you equate Che and Hitler?

--Ray

arbilad · Head Chef

Hitler did things on a more massive scale, but they are superficially similar. Both helped depose the previous government (Hitler tried an outright rebellion at first, and then settled for a palace coup approach). Both were mass murderers. Both felt that the rightness of their goals allowed them to do pretty much whatever they want.
Now, there are some obvious differences between Hitler and Che. Che used guerrilla warfare. His killings, although still qualifying him as a mass murderer, were much fewer than Hitler's. But I used the Third Reich because it is a liberal bogeyman that is often equated by them with the far right.

Duke of Mirth · Profuse Pontificator

I personally like it when I see some snot nosed teen wearing a Che shirt at the mail. Not one of them I'm sure even had a clue who the guy was. It's just sick!

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

I completely agree with the Mosiah scripture quoted by val. I felt the beginning of this was in '92. (I don't look at it like, oh- at 2:35pm on February 14, 2008, the voice of the people officially started choosing iniquity... it will probably come to pass over a generation maybe...? And I think we're in it now.)

Fregramis · Senior Member

Boing! Another thread holding the Constitution pops out....

The Church will be called upon for leadership during a time of need (economic, political, social, all three maybe). Our Stake Presidencies and Area Authorities are in a good position to help, but I imagine that will happen after Adam-ondi-ahman.

(Reference : Bible Dictionary, "Revelation of John", Point of Doctrine 6, page 763)

Smaug · Senior Member

Well, the question I have is, when was the last flawless president elected? If there wasn't one, then it's always been a choice between the lesser of two evils. Thus, you should write in the Savior's name.

arbilad · Head Chef

That doesn't make sense. Having sinned does not equal being evil. We've all sinned. President Monson has sinned. But I wouldn't call him evil. George Washington was a good man. John Adams had his flaws, but he was still basically a good man. McCain is evil. There are some good possibilities for third part presidential candidate. Some good men.
I'm sorry that Ron Paul won't get elected. He is a good man. He wasn't right on everything, but he was right on the most important points, such as supporting the constitution.

Dyany · Senior Member

I think that calling McCain evil is beyond extreme. Just because he does things that you do not agree with does not make him evil. He is flawed. He has different opinions. But I honestly feel that he does the best he can to do what he feels is right, and most of his ultimate goals are not EVIL, even if they don't match what you want. I think we need to be careful in the political arena to not label differing opinions and methods as evil.

arbilad · Head Chef

I don't call people evil just because I disagree with them. For instance, there have been several issues that James Dobson and I disagree on, but I think that at heart he is a good man who is doing the best he knows how.
There are many reasons to call McCain evil. I'll concentrate on one for the moment: McCain-Feingold. It specifies what you can say about political candidates, when you can say it, and how you can say it. In short, it limits free speech.
If McCain didn't intend to limit free speech with that act, then the possible explanations are not good. For instance, he could have not known the bill would have that effect if he was simply incompetent. Not the best recommendation for a presidential candidate.
But I actually think that McCain is a very smart man. He sponsored that bill specifically to limit our free speech. That, in my opinion, is a very evil thing. It's perhaps one of the biggest or the biggest reduction of our free speech rights in the history of the nation.
Besides which, the Constitution grants free speech rights. It is superior to any law that Congress may pass. The only way to change what the Constitution says is to amend it, which is a lengthy and involved process that McCain did not go through.
So, McCain circumvented the law of the land to limit our free speech rights and in the process make it easier for an incumbent politician to stay elected. That's an evil act.
There are several other issues I could talk about. And I've been reviewing stories about him, because I don't just accept stuff uncritically. For instance, there is some controversy about whether McCain can legally be president, since he was not born in one of the states of the US. He was born in the Panama Canal area when it was a US possession to US Citizen parents. Personally, I don't know whether that is even an issue or not. I am not an expert on the subject, so it's perfectly possible that he qualifies as a natural born citizen of the US.
There's also Mahonri's report of rich Arizonans being intimidated into donating to McCain. While that fits into my opinion of the man, there is no way for me to verify it, so it's just hearsay. I've decided not to use that as an argument against McCain, although I initially did a bit.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

I think McCain is not quite pure in his motives. I think power has corrupted him and the thought of absolute power absolutely corrupts him more.

LoudmouthMormon · Profuse Pontificator

Fortunately, "Absolute Power" and "President of the United States" don't have much to do with each other.

Pt314 · Senior Member

arbilad wrote:
For instance, there is some controversy about whether McCain can legally be president, since he was not born in one of the states of the US. He was born in the Panama Canal area when it was a US possession to US Citizen parents. Personally, I don't know whether that is even an issue or not. I am not an expert on the subject, so it's perfectly possible that he qualifies as a natural born citizen of the US.

I am pretty sure that counts as being a natural born citizen. There are plenty of military families that get stationed around the world and have kids.

Jen · Senior Bucketkeeper

Hooray for checks and balances.

Jen · Senior Bucketkeeper

I was just remembering when Clinton was first elected, and my mom was convinced that the end was near, the sky was falling. We read Ether 8 constantly. . . over and over and over. . . and talked about all of the terrible things that were going to happen, and what we needed to do. We made it through that 4 years, and another 4, and the sky is still there, as are we.

I believe the prophets. I believe that we must be prepared for whatever it is that comes upon us, be it job loss, bad economy, health issues, death in the family. . . I also believe President Hinckley's words from not that long ago, that while evil is increasing in the world, so is good! He was optimistic. He was excited about the future. He said that there was a lot to look forward to.

I think we just prepare our families, vote how we feel we should, and keep on living. Plant trees. Don't panic.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

But, but --- panicking is so fun!

DaKnife · Senior Member

I am pretty sure that counts as being a natural born citizen. There are plenty of military families that get stationed around the world and have kids.

Or to be more precise, until Carter gave it away, the Canal Zone was a US territory/possession. Any child born to US Parents in the Zone was by birth a US Citizen.

And I agree that calling any of the Candidates Evil is going way to far. I dispise Hillary, and fear her getting elected, but she is not evil, and should she win it all the nation and Constitution will not collapse and we will survive through to the next presidency.

As to the original issue. I do agree that this is a prime example of the Double Standard the media holds between the left and right. And it seems the media is giving Obama extensive leeway with what he does/doesn't do. Of course I'd still rather have him in office than Hillary.

I'd say mostly though, some volunteer thought it'd be a great idea to hang a Cuban flag to help get the Cuban vote. And don't forget the liberal belief that Che was somehow a populist hero, (thus his popularity among the idealistic college and HS youth of the country) instead of the communist terrorist that he was. Thus they hung that flag in their idealistic ignorance.

The best fix for this would be for Obama to acknowledge that it was inappropriate, instruct that it be taken down, and perhaps set guidlines for what is allowed to be displayed at any of his campaign offices. However to blame him for everything his volunteers do in every campaign office across this massive nation is foolish.

palmon · Senior Member

-------------
the Canal Zone was a US territory/possession. Any child born to US Parents in the Zone was by birth a US Citizen.

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

Any child born to parents that are US citizens ANYWHERE are by birth natural US citizens. Whether they can be president, I don't know. Two of our sons have birth certificates of citizens born aboard.

Mahonri · Senior Bucketkeeper

Where do you draw the line between evil and not?

And it came to pass that in this *same year, behold, GeorgeW. delivered up the judgment-seat to a man whose name was Obama.
2 For as their laws and their government was established by the voice of the people, and they who chose evil were more numerous than they who chose good, therefore they were ripening for destruction, for the laws had become corrupted.
3 Yea, and this was not all; they were a stiffnecked people, insomuch that they could not be governed by the law nor justice, save it were to their destruction.

Then what happened. We are in a parallel time!

arbilad · Head Chef

So, Mahonri, you consider a society with rampant abortions, immorality, the worship of sex, infidelity, the destruction of marriage as an institution, to be evil?

Mahonri · Senior Bucketkeeper

Of course, don't you?

We live in it. It is truly evil.

yes there are good people but we are in some serious trouble.

I hope folks in SL felt that 6.2 wakeup call the other day cause there is more headed that way.

arbilad · Head Chef

I asked it as a more or less rhetorical question. While there is a lot of good, there is a lot of evil.

Jen · Senior Bucketkeeper

Mahonri wrote:

Of course, don't you?

We live in it. It is truly evil.

yes there are good people but we are in some serious trouble.

I hope folks in SL felt that 6.2 wakeup call the other day cause there is more headed that way.

You mean the people in Wells, NV that felt the 6.0 "wakeup call"? Hyperbole only invalidates your view to some.

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

Wells is a wicked, wicked place. That's why they have earthquakes.

DaKnife · Senior Member

Really

, compared to say Vegas or Reno? Why haven't those cities been leveled by earthquakes, or Fire and Brimstone for that matter.
And care to explain the Wasatch fault running through Saintly(Where's the tongue in cheek emoticon) Idaho and Utah?

Mahonri · Senior Bucketkeeper

It's wicked as far as I and my family is concerned. We had more cattle rustled from our ranch north of there, than I could have every believed. Are there some good folks in Wells?

I imagine there are one or two.

:0)

Smaug · Senior Member

arbilad wrote:

The only way to change what the Constitution says is to amend it, which is a lengthy and involved process that McCain did not go through.

True. But there are other limits on free speech. The example has been given many times about shouting "Fire" in a full movie theater when there's no fire. Also, there are FCC regulations on what people can or cannot say on the public airwaves. And why didn't the Supreme Court declare McCain-Feingold unconstitutional?

arbilad · Head Chef

I have no faith in the Supreme Court ruling properly. Remember, not to long ago that they ruled that local governments can take your land if a private company wants it.
And there's a huge difference between not saying something that could cause immediate physical harm or death, and limiting what and when you can say about political candidates. It'd be like saying that having laws against public nudity means that you can have laws requiring women to wear burqas. It's just not right.

Smaug · Senior Member

arbilad wrote:

I have no faith in the Supreme Court ruling properly. Remember, not to long ago that they ruled that local governments can take your land if a private company wants it.
And there's a huge difference between not saying something that could cause immediate physical harm or death, and limiting what and when you can say about political candidates. It'd be like saying that having laws against public nudity means that you can have laws requiring women to wear burqas. It's just not right.

Well, Arbi, I gotta agree with you there. I've never been in favor of McCain-Feingold. Funny---I listen to Michael Medved a lot and of course, he's a McCain supporter, but one of his arguments whenever McCain-Feingold is brought up is something like "Well, why haven't you heard about any member of Congress being against it and trying to repeal it?" the obvious answer is, because they're all corrupt incumbents. Still, I find it hard to believe that there isn't a single honest member of Congress out there who would lead a fight to repeal this inane law. While I feel that there are some things that are happening today that the Founders never had a clue would happen (for example, people strapping bombs to their bodies and walking into a crowd of innocent people, then setting off the bombs), that document is still the finest piece of God-inspired, but man-made work that the world has ever seen. To diminish it in anyway (not the least of which is the Commerce clause which has been abused ad infinitum---proof that the wording of the Constitution was not as clear as it could have been) is to reduce God-given rights that all Americans should be fighting for.
Instead, we seem to be living in a society that more and more expects (and desires) government interference. Just like the frog in a pot of water analogy.

arbilad · Head Chef

I'll answer more later, but one thing I wanted to point out - you don't know that there aren't members of Congress who have tried for the repeal of McCain/Feingold. For instance, I think it's safe to say that most members of this board knew little to nothing about Ron Paul until this election. There are a lot of members of Congress that are relatively unknown outside of their state or district. I'd venture further to say that probably none of us watch C-SPAN all day.