Where have all the Politicians Gone?

I have been reading in recent days some of the more famous discourses given in my nations history.


Just a couple examples:


Thomas Paine: The Crisis
Abraham Lincoln: The Gettysburg Address
George Washington: First Inaugural Address
Patrick Henry: Liberty or Death

These are amazing pieces of literature, I would recommend to anyone that they read them, and if you already have, read them again. Start with The Gettysburg Address and Liberty or Death, the two together will probably take less than five minutes to read.

Many mormons talked about Mitt Romney as if he was something special. Why did his speeches not remind me of the ones above? Because he is not as those men were. In those days men had integrity, they had personal morals, a value system, a code of ethics they lived by. It was different for each one of them, no two were the same, but they all shared a common trait: they all held ideals and personal virtue above anything else. Our world is not that way; baseball is not about the sport, neither is football, it is about the TV ratings and franchise revenue. Likewise, politics is not about serving the people, it is about getting the votes.

I had a very good friend who was a Political Science major. Incredibly smart man. During his freshman year in university he became president of the poli/sci club, first time in the history of the club that a freshman was president. He sailed through school and ended up in the Whitehouse. It was not long before he became disillusioned and left. He was offered and turned down a slot as political commentator on a very popular news show on one of the cable news networks. I had many discussions with him about politics and policy. He knew and was on a first name basis with many people you or I will never meet, even though they dictate so much of the policy in this country. One day he made a comment that has stuck with me, he said: "Politicians who think they are there to serve the people would be considered naive by the ones who understand how things work in Washington".

In David McCullough's book 1776, he suggests that the founding of this country happened at a time which was unique in that the smartest people in this country were also the politicians. No other time in history has a civilization's smartest people also been its politicians, the smart people always seem to find something better to do. The American public has begun to think entertainment is all that matters and expects it in their politics, the politicians have answered the call and the political arena has become a circus. Why watch political debates when we know we can get them summed up for us in less than five minutes on Saturday Night Live? Will a generation of PS3 and Wii be able to wake up in time to realize that life is not about stimulation and entertainment? Will the generation taking the reins take it seriously?

The modern day Thomas Paine is no intellectual, he is a conniver, someone who can quip a phrase and stick it on a bumper sticker, there is no one today who is a deep intellectual thinker, yet a God fearing man, and a politician. Where have they gone, when will they return? This nation can not survive unless we have men and women like these, rise up to be counted. I daresay you will not find a one in the halls of Congress, you may not even find one in the lecture halls of our universities, but they must be out there, and they must come forth. Our country needs them now more than ever, I pray that they will find their calling and fill the void that is collapsing this country.

Calls to Repentance, When and How Will They Come?

It has been a week or so since General Conference. Dare I say I was a little disappointed? Don't get me wrong, there were a lot of great talks. But something was missing...

We have all been taught the "pride cycle" in the Book of Mormon. Humble people are blessed by the Lord and prosper, they become prideful and forget God, God humbles them, it starts over. Generally God used prophets to try and humble his people. The prophets would come and cry repentance. Usually it was not "politically correct" or "gentle" or any other such verbiage. Usually it was sharp, cut to the quick, and made people mad. The following passage of scripture shows exactly how I felt the days leading up to General Conference:

"And it supposeth me that they have come up hither to hear the pleasing word of God, yea, the word which healeth the wounded soul. Wherefore, it burdeneth my soul that I should be constrained, because of the strict commandment which I have received from God, to admonish you according to your crimes, to enlarge the wounds of those who are already wounded, instead of consoling and healing their wounds; and those who have not been wounded, instead of feasting upon the pleasing word of God have daggers placed to pierce their souls and wound their delicate minds. " (Jacob 2:8-9)

Wow - how bad were these people? How bad are we? I would venture a guess that most people would agree that we are in the part of the pride cycle where we are too prideful and need to be called to repentance. I was gearing up and ready to go come General Conference. Bring on the calls to repentance...then it turned out to be one of the more mellow ones of recent memory. Hmm. How bad does it have to get before the priority switches from not hurting peoples feelings to saying it how it is?

Then I started thinking about it? If President Monson were to decide that the world needed to be called to repentance, how would he do it? The prophets in the Book of Mormon did not reserve their speeches for members of the church only, everybody got it. Today, how would everybody get it? A proclamation sent out with the Ensign? No, that wouldn't do it. A video sent virally on the internet? No, that wouldn't do it either. There are no walls to stand on, no real places to go where people will gather around to listen, what could he do? In discussing this with my brother, he decided the reason the church is so interested in technology is so they can take over all the TV stations and broadcast 24/7. May be, but probably not. The missionaries came over for dinner tonight and I asked them, they decided it would be the job of the missionaries. May be. I don't know, so far nothing has convinced me. What could he do? How could the prophet of the world, in our day, call the world to repentance? And just how bad does it have to get before he does it?

Do Mormons Know Too Much?

Some time ago, as I was sitting in Sacrament Meeting and not paying attention (which is normal) my wife leaned over and asked “Are you even trying to pay attention?” This spawned a discussion after church. We almost always have a discussion after church, something about the false doctrine taught from the pulpit, misunderstood doctrine discussed at length in Sunday School or speculation run rampant in Elders Quorum. Granted, not every Sunday is that way, but you get the idea. So I decided I needed something to help me pay attention in Sacrament Meeting. How about counting how many times Jesus is mentioned in each talk. That way I would have to listen, it was something I was genuinely interested in. We are the restored church of Jesus Christ, right? How much do we talk about Him?

As I have done this, I have come to some very interesting realizations. All of it is my opinion, of course, but I am interested if there is any people who agree or disagree with what I say.

I have broken it up by talk and by youth or adult speakers. I have also broken it up by category in how they mention Jesus;
- Formalities (like when they are closing their talk)
- Quoting from the scriptures
- Quoting from a general authority or other spiritual literature.
- Indirect (like a reference to the video “Lamb of God”)
- While bearing testimony
- Other
On fast Sunday’s I counted the number of adult testimonies and the number of youth testimonies and then the mentions of Jesus under the above categories in each testimony and counted that as a talk.

Before I give the results thus far, I would like to put forth a couple suggestions as to why they might be so dismal. After doing this for a while, I began to realize if I had been counting mentions of Heavenly Father, the numbers would be much higher. This got me thinking. Most churches believe some form of the trinity, all-in-one. We do not. We separate the three. Many times I heard people thanking Heavenly Father for his mercy, for his kindness, for watching over them, etc. I am not sure that is a correct understanding of our doctrine. I am reminded of the famous video in Mormon Culture “The Mediator” which is adapted from a talk by Boyd K Packer. Watch it again, it is only 10 minutes. This time, do me a favor, do not focus on the Mediator, the main character, focus on the Creditor. Who is the Creditor, do you know? It is Heavenly Father. He demands justice, while Christ supplies the mercy. Hmm, does this make you look at Heavenly Father a little differently?

In the LDS Church, there is a bottomless pit of doctrine, we understand more about Heavenly Father, the Godhead, the Plan of Salvation, our eternal nature (pre and post mortal life) than anyone else. Is this clouding our vision for the role of the Savior? Do we get caught up in all the many outlying doctrines and forget the core doctrine of Christ? Turn on a preacher some day on your radio and listen for how many times Christ in mentioned in a 5 minute period. Then go to Sacrament Meeting and listen to see how many times He is mentioned in the entire hour. There may have been an apostasy, where many of the plain and simple truths have been lost, but what was not lost was Christ, the keystone, and that is what they focus on. Mormons could take a lesson from that and realize that though all else is great and good, it can not dilute or distract us from the true “good news” of the gospel: Christ has saved us from our sins.

So having said that, here are the numbers:

Youth:
Mentions of Christ in an average talk:
0.80 – Times Christ was mentioned as a Formalities
1.00 – Times Christ was mentioned while quoting from Scripture
0.83 – Times Christ was mentioned while quoting from General Authorities (and other spiritual literature)
0.80– Times Christ was mentioned indirectly
0.67– Times Christ was mentioned in the context of a Testimony
1.70– Times Christ was mention for Other reasons
5.80 – Total mentions of Christ in a talk


Adult:
Mentions of Christ in an average talk:
0.92 – Times Christ was mentioned as a Formalities
0.87 – Times Christ was mentioned while quoting from Scripture
0.77 – Times Christ was mentioned while quoting from General Authorities (and other spiritual literature)
0.95 – Times Christ was mentioned indirectly
0.49 – Times Christ was mentioned in the context of a Testimony
0.49 – Times Christ was mention for Other reasons
4.49 – Total mentions of Christ in a talk.

5% pure water, 95% raw sewage

I have had an interesting experience the last week. I have been traveling on business, I am in a small (nearly abandoned) town out in the middle of the desert, a long way from anywhere. While here, I have had little to do, I am not here to work, I am here because of the time sensitive nature of the work being performed, they need people here to fix things immediately if they break, I am on that team. So, basically, I sit around and wait for things to break. So far, nothing has broke.

While I’m here I have had unlimited access to internet and television. I have internet at home so this was no big deal, although I have spent much more time on it than usual and have been surprised at the seemingly bottomless pit of mormon-related blogs. It would be impossible for me to comment on every topic that interests me, or read every post I think I could benefit from – or comment on and may be benefit others. I have even been able to put a couple posts on my own blog.

What has interested me is what is on the television. We do not have a television at home so I am not aware of the current programming. I have traveled for business before, but usually stay only a night or two in a hotel and rarely turn on the TV. This time though, I have watched many shows, and have been appalled. I have found it interesting that in the past, when I tell people I don’t have a TV, it is a very common response to hear something like “I only watch the Discovery, History, and Learning Channels”. Yea, right.

Overall, due to the excessive amounts of annoying commercials, I was not able to make it through an entire show without walking out of the room for a while then coming back, I did watch a few all the way through, but this was an exception rather than a rule.

It seems there is endless ways to kill people and have detectives discover how it happened, all in less than an hour. I had heard about CSI and Law and Order and was interested to watch them but was surprised that there are many, CSI: NY, CSI: Miami, Law and Order, Law and Order: SVU, Law and Order: CI, etc, etc, etc. I tried to watch at least one of each, as well as; NCIS, JAG, The First 48, Without a Trace, and others I probably can’t recall. Very few did I make it all the way through, a couple I turned off after just a couple minutes. CSI: Miami is terrible, the head guy, Horatio, is so arrogant as to surpass any thread of believability, I saw the first five minutes of this one a couple times and they all start out exactly the same: hot scene in Miami with attractive young people, someone gets murdered, cops show up to investigate, someone makes a comment/asks a question to Horatio, he makes an arrogant, brash remark – cut to someone screaming as the opening credits begin. Another one, Law and Order: CI is similar in that the main detective (I forget his name) is so condescending towards the people he talks to as to make me want to punch him right through the TV screen. Law and Order: SVU is dedicated solely to the most “heinous” crimes, those of a sexual nature. Unbelievable. We call this entertainment. Something I noticed as a reoccurring trend was the infusion of homosexuality in these scripts. The victim / criminal was frequently a homosexual whether publicly or secretively.

I did try to watch a couple programs on the Discovery Channel, History Channel, TLC, etc. These too, were hard to sit through. They had the same annoying commercials. A lot of the shows were “reality” type shows, which I have a hard time getting into. The shows that were actually trying to teach you something were taught at what I would guess to be about a third grade level, and at a pace so slow it is almost insulting. They teach the politically correct, or accepted form of a topic, rather than how it really is, and they all seem to follow the same pattern; explain something very slowly with an announcer that is overly dramatic – cut to commercials – review everything you taught before the commercials and add just a little tidbit more – cut to commercials – repeat. A two hour show could be summed up in less than 20 minutes without the commercials and incessant reviewing. Many shows on these programs go deep into investigations on some of the worst acts ever committed. Murders, rapes, manipulation, self-degradation, etc.

The news channels are even worse. Fox News, MSNBC, Bloomberg, the many CNN’s, etc. Where is the news in those? Especially now with the elections, they talk and talk about the elections but never say anything, it is amazing. Quite the art they have perfected. All news channels have agendas that are blatantly obvious, I have a hard time believing other people don’t see it, unless it is a case of the boiling frog syndrome.

Granted, I only have had the opportunity to watch these shows for a week, and did not watch everything I could have. There probably is some quality programming on (I did watch general conference on it) but I am reminded of an essay by Barbara Kingsolver who makes a comment along the lines of “would you want a faucet in your house that delivered 5% pure water and 95% raw sewage?” She was talking about television, I always thought it was a cute statement but was not fully aware of what she meant. I think I have a better idea now.

So THIS is What All the Wars are About

Obsessed with their Happiness

Listening to Russell M Nelsons talk during General Conference this afternoon was kind of a bore at first …prop 8...marriage...blah,blah,blah...I was in the process of tuning him out when something caught my ear. He started talking about how difficult marriage is; it seemed as if he was saying you are doomed to fail unless you try really hard. He said marriage starts with two big handicaps - two imperfect people that must work really hard to make it work, or something like that…it got me thinking about what a bunch of bull that is, all you need to do is two things; 1st Find someone you really love, 2nd Drop your pride and put your partners needs above your own. Once you do that, the imperfectness or flaws in the individuals do not come into play at all, and marriage becomes quite easy.

1st Find someone you really love

I think most people would say this is a no brainer, why would anyone marry someone they don’t really love? I think it happens a lot. When at the marrying age and a part of the dating scene, it is easy to fall for any number of people.


- The more time you spend with someone, the more likely you are to develop feeling for that person, feelings that may be a form of love. Even if there are major personality differences

- Sometimes people meet someone they “click” with. The two get along really well, and due to that they hang out quite a bit. This in turn develops into a form of love. Even if there are some major differences

- Sometimes they find some particular thing attractive about a person (i.e. looks, money, popularity, etc.) and let it overshadow other major differences.

I am not saying you cannot be happy with any of those, you can, but then you will fall into the category Elder Nelson talked about; you will have to work to be happy. So don’t marry them!

2nd Drop your pride and put your partners needs above your own.

If you kneel across the alter and say that you want to be with the other person *forever* you better mean it. Forever is something we mortals cannot comprehend. As we live day to day, week to week, month to month and year to year, it is easy to lose sight of forever. If we truly love someone enough to give them eternity, we love them enough to become obsessed with their happiness.


An example: I have a habit that once we are married and living together, it is discovered to be one of your pet peeves. Immediately upon discovery of this situation I do all I can to drop the habit, regardless of how petty I think it is or how emotionally attached I am to it. At the same time, you immediately begin to work on not letting it bother you.

Viola, no issue, both spouses meet half way and eliminate any problem that may arise from it. Ah Ha, you say, here is where the hard part lies, it is hard to change. It takes effort for the one to drop a lifelong habit and for the other to drop a pet peeve. You’re not listening, I answer, the only reason that would be difficult would be due to PRIDE. If you drop your pride and become obsessed with your partners’ happiness, it is not difficult to drop a habit, or let go of a pet peeve, it is a joy, you want to do it, because you want your partner to be happy, and you don't forget that, not even 20 years into the marriage. You never become complacent in your marriage, or else you will be able to relate to Elder Nelson, and you will sit there and nod your head as he talks about when you went shopping for a spouse and settled for one you didn't want because you bought on an impulse.

Marriage is easy, you see, you just have to go into it with someone you are obsessed with, then not lose focus once you are there.

Give me a break

The media drives me nuts. The economy is failing and all that matters is Hollywood antics on the big screen. Polls are taken that don't tell us anything, campaigns are "suspended", to help out when really, the help is just another ploy to boost ratings. The news stations continually talk about the bailout failing, and how the government is not serving the people. Don't they know it won't work? Two hundred economists from our best universities probably have a better grip on economics than the politicians, yes?

Does anyone wonder where the 700 number came from? Is it possible to put a number on the problem here? Does anyone really understand the problem here? Even those 200 economists, could they put on a number on the amount "needed"? I doubt it. The number was made up, it had no real meaning at all. Then again, our country is so deeply in debt, even if the number was real, the money would not be. The government is wildly in debt, where are they going to come up with another $700 Billion dollars? They're not.

Why not listen to the masses? Why not give the money to the taxpayers? Why not create jobs by spending it on alternative energy? There are lots of better ways to spend the money. Why not do it?

Why? I'll tell you why. It is the government. The government is not out to solve problems, they create problems. Job security. Smoke and mirrors. I knew a business man once, in confidence an acquaintance of his told me: "Watch out for [business man]. He creates a circus for you to watch over here, while he sneaks around and stabs you in the back". Quite unprofessional and cruel I thought at the time, but it saved me, because it was true. That describes what is going on in the government right now. They have created a circus for us to watch so they can stab us in the back.