Tag Archives: candidate

Mitt and Faith

Mitt Romney, who the Republicans call “Him”, has a past that speaks to a matter of his soul, which I believe is the foundation of his core beliefs. Mitt spent 32 years in a religious organization that indoctrinated the idea that blacks were fundamentally cursed — by God — and that by virtue of their birth were unworthy of the highest spiritual affirmation. Being an African America and someone who believes in God this ideology is a huge problem for me.

Let me give just a brief historical background of his faith. The word Mormon most often refers to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints because of their belief in the Book of Mormon, though members often refer to themselves as “Latter-day Saints” or sometimes just “Saints.”

The term has been embraced by most adherents of Mormonism, most notably the fundamentalists, while other Saints denominations, such as the Community of Christ, have rejected it. The term Latter-day Saints (LDS) was given to its founder Joseph Smith during an 1838 revelation mentioned in Doctrine and Covenants. The term “saint” was used by Paul the Apostle to refer to early members of the Christian church with “later-day” being added to differentiate the modern church from the early church.

Most people associate the Mormon religion with polygamy or sex with young girl through marriage which was a distinguishing practice of many early Mormons. However, it was renounced by the LDS Church in 1890, and now they say is discontinued. Today, polygamy is practiced only by fundamentalist groups that have broken with the LDS Church.

From the start, Mormons have tried to establish what they call Zion, a utopian society of the righteous. Mormon history can be divided into three broad time periods: (1) the early history during the lifetime of Joseph Smith, (2) a “pioneer era” under the leadership of Brigham Young and his successors, and (3) a modern era beginning around the turn of the 20th century.

Now back to the cult’s racial views. Romney was confronted during a NBC’s Meet the Press (12/07) appearance when the late Tim Russert brought up the ban on blacks and the fact that Romney was an adult before the ban was lifted. Russert pointedly asked if Romney had a problem with associating himself with an organization that was seen as racist. Romney answered, “I’m not going to distance myself in any way from my faith.”

Russert asked if Romney was willing to disavow the Church’s earlier teachings, and Romney refused — choosing instead to cite examples of how his father supported civil rights. Mitt even claimed that his father, George Romney, marched with Martin Luther King, Jr.; a statement that was later proven false and that Romney recanted.

There is “no religious test” for holding political office, but there is a moral one. As a leader in his church, a young Romney would have been compelled to teach the racist Mormon ideology to others. His curious answer to Russert affirms the belief that the church was infallible in its teachings. Romney cannot be excused of his own affiliation with an explicitly discriminatory organization without, at the very least, providing an acceptable answer.

Barack Obama was forced to disavow controversial statements by his former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, during the 2008 campaign culminating in his now famous race speech. Romney cannot be given a pass especially when, unlike Obama’s situation, Romney remains in a church whose codified beliefs are sketched in proverbial stone. The priesthood ban may be gone, but the cursed text remains and is still taught as divinely inspired doctrine.

The former governor rarely discusses religion. But the recent controversy over the contraception clause of the new healthcare law and the Catholic Church’s public disagreement with the Obama administration precipitated comments from Romney that Obama was attacking freedom of religion. Romney spoke while campaigning ahead of the Michigan and Arizona primaries that he “knows a lot about being persecuted” for one’s faith.

There is a cognitive dissonance inherent in the idea that one can be a victim of religious persecution, while simultaneously adhering to a faith which does the same based on race.

It’s a complicated subject, with an equally complicated history, and though Romney may not now, or ever have held racist feelings or beliefs on a personal level, it is a public office that he seeks. And, as such, he must be compelled to offer an open and honest explanation. Frankly, with his well documented history of flip-flopping (lying) – is this the guy any American would want to be the next president of the United States.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pcw0woPX5VY

And that’s my Thought Provoking Perspective…

“Just a Season”

Legacy – A New Season is Coming!


Drum Beats of Yesterday

The drum beat of the Republican Party’s dogma looms large in this political season as the GOP desperately try to find someone to unseat President Barack Obama. We have witnessed endless debates with the kind of political rhetoric unlike any that I’ve ever seen. Wait a minute; let me qualify that by saying not since the last Presidential election. At which time America, because of the republicans, was facing financial Armageddon and now in 2012 we are about to really see Armageddon; if one of these right wing-nuts were to become president.

I read an article recently written by the author Dr. Anthony Asadullah Samad where he said:

“Four years ago, they were predicting terrorist attacks in the first month of his administration if Obama was elected. Of course, it didn’t happen—but the rhetoric sounds good. The Republican’s “Big Three,” which many call the last three, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul sound like the Supremes singing “Baby Love” asking the American People, “where did our love go” for President Obama. Stands to reason it went the same place our love for every incumbent President facing re-election went…in the gutter. Mud-throwing is a professional sport in politics. No matter what the incumbent does, it will never be good enough for the party out of power. Same goes here.

The real question is how far are the Republicans willing to go to get Obama? Will they say anything to get Obama? Will they be, God-forbid, unpatriotic in their attacks of the nation’s Commander-in-Chief, that ended the war they started, soft-landed an economy that was falling fastest than a safe pushed off a roof, and had to fight for every single concession—even perfunctory tasks like debt-ceiling raises and payroll tax extensions. The rhetoric of refusing to compliment Obama, on anything, is not healthy for the national morale. Stands to chance that none of them would have done any better they been in the President’s shoes and the rhetoric toward healing our wounded spirits would be much different.

Under Nixon, Reagan and Bush II, the nation did what it was asked to do for the national good during recovering economies and re-election bids. The opposite party was asked to tone down the rhetoric for the good of the nation’s morale. There has been no such call from the Democrats for this President. In fact, some Democrats have added to the rhetoric. While the President has no party opposition (at this time), some in his party have kind of been getting their “digs in” on the slide… And then there’s the Tea Party rhetoric, an obstructionism that makes no sense.”

I could not have said it better. However, the difference in this election season is that the last crop of pretenders projected their bigotry vaguely in subliminal coded language. This “pool of fools” has no shame in their game. The race card is being displayed so transparently that Ray Charles can see it. One of these pretenders owned a lodge named “N-Word Head” and another had a news letter that espoused racial hatred so vial that one would think he was the Grand Wizard of the Imperial Knights. Another Republican candidate has said that “black children where better off during slavery” than today.

Wait there’s more! One of them has publically talked about succession. Another said, get off welfare and get a check. It was this guy who went on to say if you’re twelve years old you should be cleaning schools. This is not the same candidate who said if you’re black and twelve or thirteen this “buck” should be treated as an adult if he were to be punished in the criminal justice system.

Who are they talking too or speaking for? I seriously doubt these people would say that about an enemy captured in a time of war. Oh sorry, when they were in power they did and brought them to a place Called Gitmo.

This language takes me back to a time I thought had long past. This kind of thinking conjures up images of Bull Connor and Strom Thurmond. Let’s face it because the man duly election to be the Commander in Chief is a man of color. It appears to me from the rhetoric that is being hurled with such distinction that these folks have come from under the hood and taken off the sheets.

Whichever candidate might emerge as the GOP contender to which each of them has used the coded language like “take back our country”. They WILL DO damage under a cloak of cover and not worry about the law coming for them because they will be the law.

So, we are back to the question: How far are the Republicans willing to go to get Obama? Moreover, what will they do to us, if elected! And that’s my THOUGHT PROVOKING PERSPECTIVE…

Legacy – A New Season the sequel to “Just a Season” is soon to be released.

Visit http://johntwills.com for more information
and get “Just a Season” today! AMAZON


Show us your Damn Returns

In 2009, former Senator Tom Daschle was nominated to head the Department of Health and Human Services. Mr. Daschle’s nomination was derailed, in part, because of issues with his tax returns. You cannot be considered for a position in the President’s cabinet or any other high-level government position without allowing your tax returns to be reviewed.

At last night’s Republican Presidential Debate, Senator Tom Daschle was asked if he intended to release his tax return. After stuttering and rambling around an answer, Mitt implied that he would release his return sometime around April.

I suppose that he wants to give his accountants the opportunity to produce a return that will be more palatable to the American electorate. I mean really, didn’t you file a tax return last year, Mitt? Why won’t you show us that one?

What could Romney’s return possibly show that would turn off the American voter. Could it be that his effective tax rate is 15% or lower? And, how is it possible that us regular working stiffs could be taxed at a higher rate than the uber-rich Mr. Romney. Couldn’t that be considered a “transfer of wealth” from the poor to the rich? Did he pay any taxes at all? Without the release of his returns, these and other questions will never be answered.

It is amazing that a person cannot hold a high-level government position without showing their tax returns to the American people and yet, a man who wants to hold the highest office in the land is, shall we say, reluctant to disclose.

By Jackie Lambert
Co-Host of “Let’s Talk About It”

http://johntwills.com

http:thoughtprovokingperspectives.wordpress.com


A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words

Well Mrs. Cain finally made an appearance – of sorts. Gloria Cain appeared on the network of Fox and Fools recently to be interviewed by Greta Van Susteren and was asked a very simple direct question; if her husband would be a good president? The answer may have been of course not all that surprising if you were to read it in print. But if you watch her response it’s a whole different matter … not exactly a ringing endorsement of Herman.

I’m pulling for Cain and I really hope he get the nomination. If he does I can guarantee President Obama another term in office. Let me just say, I was taught by my mother that if you don’t have anything nice to say about someone – don’t say anything! So I will end this piece with this: learn something about the world, like if China was a nuclear power or who the President of Uzbekistan is. Oh, how about that Libya is in Africa! Its clear Cain’s thinking or lack thereof is the same old conservative song and dance; it’s everyone else fault that he is ill informed, not knowledgeable, ignorant, and just plain buffoonishly stupid.

I’ll add that I am sure Gloria is a sweet woman and from what I have read she voted Democrat last time, which says a lot. But let’s be honest, this woman probably have never told a lie in her life until that question was asked and it appears as if it was the hardest thing in the world for her to do; unlike her husband, she’s not a natural liar.

She gave a look that said, “Negro Please!” And that’s my THOUGHT PROVOKING PERSPECTIVE…

http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http%3A%2F%2Fexample.com%2Fpage%2Fto%2Flike&layout=standard&show_faces=true&width=450&action=like&colorscheme=light&height=80


Stranger than Fiction

I have become enthralled with this year’s Republican cast of characters. It might be more accurately stated as circus or sideshows. After the last debate I asked myself; has it come to this? I’ve been trying to recall when the mentality or the lack thereof represented on the debate stage was, if ever, more comedic. I have lived long enough to have seen many things, and frankly this group takes the cake.

I really thought I’d seen the worst during the last presidential campaign with the War Hero and Caribou Barbie. Remember them, one could see the future and the other could see Russia from her house. The only way I can describe this current group of fools is to compare their insanity to it being on steroids.

I have really enjoyed the debates because they have been ridiculously hilarious. In the last one I got the biggest laugh from the presumed frontrunners. These people want us to believe they are ready to be the leader of the free world. Hmmm! I’ll start with the guy who had a mortifying episode of brain-lock during the debate and of course I will talk about his opponents who somehow managed to remember their lines but honestly didn’t do any better making sense.

Let’s say Mr. Perry’s Meltdown was a human episode. Ok, I’ll admit I am compassionate and understanding but really with his political background, do we really want this guy to have the black box with his finger on the button. I don’t! This plus the “N word Lodge” thing gives me reason to suggest perhaps he should head back to Austin. It was embarrassing for me to watch. So I know it was embarrassing for him and frankly, his plunging poll numbers suggest that he has little chance of winning the nomination; and by the way, um, let’s see, wait a minute, it’ll come to me. . . . Oh, I forgot; um, um.

He tried for 43 humiliating seconds, which is an eternity when you’re in front of a television camera, before finally giving up. Now, it was not like he was trying to remember the formula for dichotomizing the atom. He was merely trying to remember the three federal agencies he would eliminate if he became president. He named the Commerce Department and the Education Department — then blanked on the third. WOW! To his credit he did remember it about 15 minutes later, at his next opportunity to speak – the Energy Department. But the damage had been done.

I myself just had a momentary mental lapse, a couple of paragraphs back, but on national TV when he should have been prepared. Shocking! Now, its one thing to misstep when the list is 10, 15 or maybe 20 items – but three? If you look back at his other performances in previous debates they were not much better, which begs the questions about his intellectual depth, not to mention basic grammar.

Ok, time to move on. Next there was the one they, meaning Republicans, call “Him” – Mitt Romney. Most talking heads seemed to think that “Him” was the winner by default. Romney has mastered the art of surviving these multi-candidate encounters: Speak fluidly and with conviction, secure in the knowledge that with so many others on the stage and so little time for each question, there’s hardly any danger of being caught in any of his obvious contradictions, flip-flops and non sequiturs. Actually with “Him”, there is just a noun a verb and Obama.

Then there was Newt! He is, by some, considered the intellectual of the cast as he often remind us that he once was a professor of history and a historian. I recall reading somewhere that his PhD thesis at Tulane University was titled “Belgian Education Policy in the Congo: 1945-1960.” If you don’t know that’s about the history of colonial Africa, which might be a sign of the times if he were to get the job as president. Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum, Jon Huntsman, and Ron Paul were merely present and accounted for or maybe props would be more fitting.

Last but not least is the star of the circus or the GOP’s token shade of color; the pizza man – Herman Cain. With all the alleged sexual harassment claims coming from so many white women he had the nerve to refer to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi as “Princess Nancy.” I know he has spent the past week trying to convince the nation he’s not guilty of chronically self-indulgent behavior toward women. Belittling the first woman to become speaker of the House with a flip, sexist insult was appalling.

Well this is my view of the debacle that was the last sideshow they called a debate. If you don’t know, I am a huge boxing fan and at the end of each boxing match the referee will raise the hand of the victorious fighter. Let’s say they would do this for the fight to be the next president of America. It would sound like this: “The winner and still president of the United States – Barack Obama!”

And that’s my THOUGHT PROVOKING PERSPECTIVE!

http:johntwills.com

http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=http%3A%2F%2Fexample.com%2Fpage%2Fto%2Flike&layout=standard&show_faces=true&width=450&action=like&colorscheme=light&height=80


%d bloggers like this: