Yes, we can?

From Torben, an interesting blog post on why Mormons should consider backing Obama, now that Romney’s out of the race.

May I suggest that, in my opinion, the best person currently in the race is Barack Obama. If we can look past partisan politics, I think more will start seeing this. More and more Mormons are seeing it everyday. He is the friendliest candidate to taking faith seriously in the public square. He wants to unite the country, not divide us. He is a deeply religious man who takes his Christian faith seriously. He is one of the most “fair-minded” public figures that I have ever known of. He prays every day that he will be fair to others, that he will give them the benefit of the doubt. I encourage you to listen to his speech on the role of faith and politics, located on his web site….

Obama is also the candidate who best approaches the LDS communitarian ethic. Politically speaking, he is not unlike Joseph Smith. His approach revolves around “we,” not “me.” His movement is completely invested by average Americans working together, many of whom have never been involved politically before. He has a charisma that inspires people to realize that they really can make a difference in this world. He desires to reach beyond petty bickering and divisions, realizing, as did Joseph Smith, that we can move beyond our differences and work together for positive change in the world.

Now, I haven’t yet decided to bail on Ron Paul come November, but of the four actual possibilities — Obama, Clinton, McCain, and Huckabee, though Huckabee’s pretty much a joke so I don’t even know why I’m listing him — I’m beginning to think that I’d rather have Obama.

I mean, the reality is that one of those first three is going to be president, period. Maybe it’s better to put my idealism on hold — since Paul doesn’t have a chance now — and throw my lot in with the best of the survivors. Maybe principle is more important, though. I don’t know. What I do know is that in the past month or so I’ve been thinking more about politics than ever before, and you know, it feels kind of good. :) (I don’t mean I like “politics,” by the way — I just mean that it feels good to be informed, to have a voice, to actively participate in the democratic process. If you can still call it a democracy.)

Two political posts in one year. Goodness. :P

I don’t know, intelligent and fair political pundits such as Rush Limbaugh don’t like him, and if I can’t trust a pill popping polemical pinhead, who can I trust?

Oh! I thought of something else.

I kinda take issue with the “Well, I’m Mormon and Romney is out. So now what do I do?”

Not that I feel you implied it. I just want my general distaste for the implication that Mormon = Romney vote current of ideas that was floating around there for awhile. Even though many Mormons did support him, I’d like to think it was for more than just the reason that he was Mormon as well.

Obama is definitely my vote come March (Texas primaries) and November, if he’s the candidate.

I’ve been so impressed with his desire to keep the campaign clean, and to unite the country and bring hope back into the cycnicism of current politics. Plus, i think he has excellent stances on health care, the war, the economy, and family values.

As much as his foreign policy terrifies me, I’m feeling the same way right now. There is more to picking a leader than the issues. Character should always be first and foremost.

I don’t trust either of the other big two, but I could sit to lunch with Obama.

sixline: I think it was more of a “Well, I’m Mormon and was going to vote for Romney for other reasons; now that he’s out, though, what do I do?” but I could be wrong.

Janssen: Change is something the government needs, desperately. The question, though, is whether Obama can actually do it.

Nylan: I’ll arrange that for you. ;) No, really, character’s big — but isn’t it a sad statement on our world that it’s not a given? Ideally all (or at least most) of the main candidates would have strong character, so that the issues (and their political/philosophical leanings) would matter more and not be overshadowed by personal blemishes. But that’s impossible. Oh well.

I have been interested as I’ve heard and learned more about Obama. I do agree that he seems to generally be a man of character, and his campaign seems to have largely been run that way. It is refreshing.

However, I would strongly encourage anyone considering voting for Obama (or anyone else, for that matter) to study his political views and policy positions. A helpful summary to start with is here. While Senator Obama seems to be a man of character, his political positions could scarcely be further from those of Ron Paul. The main thread running through Obama’s policy positions is expansion of the governmental role in our society. I’m just sayin’…

I think everyone needs to calm down and seriously think about voting for Obama. I think we’re all grief stricken with Romney out, but Obama is a liberal! He WILL raise taxes, and he is AGAINST the war. McCain, although not a true conservative on a lot of things, is pretty dang conservative.

Bethany, you make some very good points about why we should seriously think about voting for Obama. I think you’ve convinced me to!

I apologize, that was an utterly trollish comment to make. But I couldn’t resist twisting her words.

Ben, it seems like a drastic romantic revision of the past to say that it ever was the case–let alone a given–that character was first and foremost in picking political candidates. I mean, flaunt it if you’ve got it, like they did with the nickname “Honest Abe” for Lincoln, but when was there ever a time when people knew more about their politicians personal lives than today? How could they know more about a public figure’s “character” than we do today, when cameras are always around to catch every unguarded moment? It just seems like a bizarre thing to believe that politics has ever never been all about, well, politics.

But then, you can’t trust me, because I’ll take (Bill) Clinton over (George W.) Bush any day.

Before you look at the stance of each candidate, perhaps it would be helpful that we all become perfectly clear on what kind of government we are bound by God to uphold. He has not been silent on the matter. If we do not, we suffer the consequences.

Maintaining our constitutional government is essential to us as members of the church. As rights are curtailed remember the freedom of religion is usually the last to go. Our freedoms, including those we take for granted or do not think are important, were bought with blood.

I will stick with the scriptural mandate and vote for honest, good, and wise men.

D&C 98:10 Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil.

This has never been rescinded. It does not say, vote for who you think can win. Nor does it say vote for change. Nor lesser of two evils.

Both Obama and Clinton are socialists. They are for concentrating power at the government level. As power concentrates at the Federal level the cost’s of government and waste will increase. As costs increase, each cabinet tries to extend its reach. Rules that have the power of law, yet were not legislated will proliferate and sky rocket. As that happens our rights are further restricted. Oh, and they will take more taxes to cover their grand plans.

I personally could not vote for either Clinton, Hillary or Bill, as I do not feel they meet the mandate, nor does Obama.

One can be honest and good but unwise. Wisdom is the right application of knowledge. Charisma does not balance lack of wisdom. I feel socialism and big government are careless and unwise for America, they may appear to be quick or humane fixes, but that is the surface.

When we elect people that promise us the moon, we are being bought, and good intentions won’t matter much. The quick fixes of socialism are band aides for real problems, not long term solutions, and I do not think it is right to saddle our posterity for our ignorance. Let us not take the carrot. Our nation and every nation that is tied to our economy is in financial crisis. We need fiscal responsibility. I do not feel that Hillary or Barak will be fiscally responsible.

We also need an honest President that when they swear their oath to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States, will have the character to do so and veto every bill that is not constitutionally solid. There are very few men that can have the strength of character to do so. Too many would be into photo ops, trying to buy as many votes as they can for 2012.

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can exist only until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a dictatorship.” Adam Tytler/ Alexis De Tocqueville

Yes, it is that time again. Socialism cannot build a better America. It has never succeeded anywhere. We are naive to think it will succeed here. Yes it is spin time again. Let the liberals tickle your ears and make promises. You will pay more for less.

As Jacob warned, “Oh be wise, what can I say more.”

I think Michelle Obama’s recent visit with church authorities indicates that Obama’s campaign may be thinking the same thing as you, Ben.

Donna, I agree, but bad news: all three leading candidates are what you call “socialists.” Surely you don’t believe McCain’s rhetoric about him being a conservative? Baloney. The last real chance for conservatism died with Romney. So let’s make do with the best socialist we have, since those are our only options. Sorry to say, but supporting Ron Paul, even for the right reasons, is support wasted in vain idealism. Let’s support the socialist who genuinely, although misguidedly, believes he’s doing what’s best for the country.

No I do not buy McCain’s baloney. I have been going into more detail on my blog about this.

BTW, Romney “suspended,” but kept his votes. Even Ron Paul and Romney are not perfect, but then again, we were not counseled to seek “perfect men.”

No, I will not vote for the democratic platform, period.

If the puppet masters feel that McCain is the only viable republican candidate, then we the people must unite and hold his feet to the fire. He cannot for one minute feel he has a mandate.

I am not excited about a war monger. I am even less impressed with largess that the war distracts us from closely scrutinizing.

I think Ron Paul never expected a large percent of the vote. However, his campaign has educated more people and has leavened the lump. Are we going to ignore this knowledge?

Are we going to go vote for charisma? Good, he can smile while he takes our money.

Lets face it, Liberal social policies of the democrat party are not good for America. The social policies of the party do more to under-mind America’s economy and the fabric of our society, far more than people realize.

Many corporate interests in the Republican party do more to promote war and its excesses, than many realize.

Congress is stuck. With out the votes of those who want largess from the treasury, and without corporate funding they have no power. To un-stick them the repeal of the 16th and 17th Amendments would reign them in. Right now those amendments keep the power unbalanced. Their unlimited ability to tax is a slight of hand. America is being impoverished by this tax and spend mentality. If senators were chosen by our locally elected representatives, their beholding to corporate interests would pull us into fewer wars.

There is much, much more, but we have to start somewhere.

If McCain is elected, he has to know it is by the skin of his teeth and that he is beholding to the people to keep his contract and not to corporations. The people must speak up and hold his feet to the fire. We also have to let him know that we do not need another Vietnam. That we will not sacrifice our sons and daughters for corporate gain, as was done in the ill fated Children’s Crusade.

I could go on… but I need to move on.

Of course, politics is a rare topic on my blog, but here are three recent ones about what is going on…

Politics…A Rose by Any Other Name, Still Smells the Same. So does a Skunk!
http://donnasjourney.moorhouseacademy.org/?p=811

Thoughts on Our Sacred Duties In Citizenship
http://donnasjourney.moorhouseacademy.org/?p=810

Thoughts on the Presidential Election
http://donnasjourney.moorhouseacademy.org/?p=807

And yet, isn’t the first thing we’re taught when we’re advised to vote is to not just vote for someone because they represent our chosen political party? I’m registered Republican, but I will not be voting for a man like McCain. I agree far more with Obama’s politics than I do with anyone else’s. And unfortunately, elections for the last few years have been a matter of choosing “the lesser of two evils.” I think it’s irresponsible to vote for the Republican candidate simply because he’s Republican. If you’ve done your research and agree with him more than the others, perfect. But too many people vote for those just within their political party simply because it’s easier than really researching the issues. This is my first presidential election since I was barely too young the last time around. Though I come from a traditionally red state, I’m not going to vote for someone that I don’t believe in, no matter their political party. After the primaries are over, I really think it’s more important to look at someone’s ideals and beliefs than what group of people they supposedly represent.

Marisa,

Agreed. Yet I’m wondering if many people are gravitating toward Obama due to two factors: perceived superior character to the other candidates (perhaps true, but not the only important factor), and his vocal skills of persuasion (which are good only if used in advancing good causes).

I think a better way to choose candidates is by looking at a combination of the issues, policy positions, basic governing principles, and character espoused by them. I’m encouraging everyone reading this to look into these things for themselves, rather than vote for someone because it seems like the cool thiing to do at the time.

The issue of voting for a party is interesting. I’m in the middle. I’m a registered Republican because it’s the only way to vote in Republican primaries in Utah. I’ve always voted Republican, but I am open to voting for whatever candidate best represents my views, no matter what party they’re from. After all, most Democrats in Utah are more conservative than most Republicans in New York. I agree with Marisa that many people vote straight party ticket as an excuse to avoid thinking for themselves. They try to delegate their responsibility of choosing wisely to a political party. They listen to commentary from people like Sean Hannity who tell them what to think, rather than encouraging intelligent discussion and making informed decisions. Bah.

On the other hand, if there were two candidates who I agreed with equally and one was a Republican and one was a Democrat, I would vote for the Republican. Why? Because if you look at the way the legislative branch of the government is run, elected officials usually vote with their party and push for the bills that matter to the party. While there are things I like and dislike in both parties, the Republican Party more closely aligns with my beliefs and so I’m inclined to vote for a candidate who supports that party.

I don’t agree with the democratic view about the role of government. I’m an intelligent adult, thank you very much, and I don’t need the government to take care of me like I’m a child. I can manage my own healthcare, retirement, etc. I think it’s the government’s responsibility to enforce the law, protect me from enemies and provide basic public services such as infrastructure and education (and, as an intelligent adult, I will decide how and if to use those services). It is not the government’s responsibility to make sure I have a job, healthcare, a home, and retirement savings. It certainly isn’t the government’s job to force me into a retirement program I dislike. It’s time for America to grow up and stop expecting the government to solve all our problems. Thus, I won’t be voting for Clinton or Obama, both of whom are appealing to our desire to avoid responsibility.

Good comments, all. Carry on. :)

I do have to say, though, that I agree with Marisa in that we ought to vote for the candidate who best represents our interest, regardless of what party they belong to. That said, I also agree with Laura in that party lines tend to influence politicians more than we realize — I remember reading somewhere that Obama has voted along party lines 98% of the time, for what that’s worth.

Donna: Thanks for bringing up the Constitution and fiscal responsibility! I think those are the huge underlying issues of this election because the war, health care, immigration, etc all can be tied back to those two very basic things. I’m glad you mentioned them because we all need to think long and hard about our own beliefs regarding them in selecting a candidate.

Ben: Ron Paul had a rally at Georgetown the other day as part of the presidential candidate lecture series. It was SUPER informative and cool.

You don’t perchance know if they filmed and YouTubed it, do you?