Dear KLo,Interesting article in The Globe, but as a Mormon myself it all seems very far-fetched. I’ll admit that most of us are watching Romney’s potential candidacy with interest, but with as much concern as hope. After all, attention brought to the Church can as easily be negative as positive and might easily generate hate. We’ve been through that before and aren’t eager to revisit it.We figure, obviously, that Romney’s positions on key political issues will likely reflect our own, although Harry Reid is also a member of the Church and his positions are quite different than Romney’s; just being a member of the Church is certainly not enough. The Church is extremely careful to avoid endorsing candidates or parties, and so I doubt that The Globe’s presentation of events is accurate. Meetings may have occurred, but I think it is far more likely that these have been held specifically to discuss the need to avoid any attempts to politicize the Church: some of Romney’s supporters might imagine that the Church would rush to become involved, and might need to be told otherwise in an official manner. At the very least, I can assure you that no directives or instructions or even comments have come to the Church’s stakes and wards (dioceses and parishes) except for the oft-repeated reminder that the Church remains neutral with regard to candidates and parties, and that Church resources (including lists of members, buildings, etc.) must not be used for any political purpose.Most members are proud of Romney, however, as he has generally represented the Church well. I’m guessing that a majority of Mormons will support him if he is the candidate for president, but as individuals, not as a church.
Rarely in my life have I read a more hostile or vicious takedown of a public figure than last week’s New York Times profile of Canadian author and psychologist Jordan Peterson. Rarely have I witnessed a more bizarre and bad-faith interview of a public figure than journalist Cathy Newman’s January ... Read More
Conventional wisdom regarding America’s relationship with royalty goes something like this: Americans have no time for monarchy as a political concept but can’t get enough of the British royal family. The American media’s round-the-clock coverage of the recent royal wedding certainly seems ample evidence of ... Read More
Why exactly did nearly half the country vote for Donald Trump? Why also did the arguments of Never Trump Republicans and conservatives have marginal effect on voters? Despite vehement denunciations of the Trump candidacy from many pundits on the right and in the media, Trump nonetheless got about the same ... Read More
On Sunday, President Trump tweeted a “demand” that the Justice Department investigate political spying in the 2016 campaign. This replays the political-spying controversy that surfaced in late February. Right now, the issue involves the Obama administration’s use of at least one confidential informant -- a ... Read More
We’re rapidly reaching a point in the Russia investigation where partisan opinion revolves almost entirely around unproven assertions. On the anti-Trump left (and parts of the Never Trump right) there exists a burning conviction that Robert Mueller “has the goods” — that there is strong evidence of ... Read More
It is now clear that Russian attempts at interference in the 2016 election, though somewhat outrageous, were ineffectual, unconnected with any particular party, a small effort given what a country of Russia’s resources and taste for political skullduggery and chicanery is capable of, and minor compared with the ... Read More