Comments about ‘Readers' forum: Great caucus meeting’

After prayer? Pray before you come to a public meeting. Pray before you come, bring a prayer in your heart, but leave your religious riituals home.

Re: ". . . leave your religious riituals [sic] home."

Tell you what -- you leave your religious rituals wherever you like. But don't presume you have the right to tell others what they must or must not do with theirs.

'kay?

Procuradorfiscal, it's called seperation of church and state..and it's why you're not allowed to have crosses as memorials.

Nothing like the Utah Mormons' perverted mixing of Church and Political Party affiliation.

It would be more appropriate to have a few moments of silence so each attendee could say what ever is in their heart to whomever they would say it to. Having said that, this letter leaves strong clues as to what Utahns really believe about those that would govern them and by golly they need to quit demonstrating so much faith and expect more honest representation.

Seems to me that the gentlemen who promulgated this "separation of Church and State" y'all refer to so much, always started their deliberations with a prayer. Even today the Senate and House begin their deliberations with a prayer, for all the good it does them. Additionally, isn't it Church and State not Religion and State. What Church is it that prays in Congress? Or is it a non-denominational prayer?

Our caucus was as follows.

1. They did not read the party platform.

2. They did not always have a secret ballot, sometimes merely a show of hands,
And there was no verbal count of the votes which were
counted out of sight, with only the winner declared.

3. The numbers did not tally with the number of voters.

4. All nominees turned out to be Hatch supporters only.

5. The nominees were only allowed one minute to speak and it
was more than they needed. They seemed to know nothing and had
no convictions only KSL had told them to re-elect Senator Hatch

7. No one mentioned freedom, virtue, honesty or any of the
founding principles of the nation. (things prominent in that party platform
that as usual was not read out.

The Church did definitely get more out to the caucuses but these had no clue
as to what they were doing nor of any of the issues.
They may have succeeded in undoing the work of those
who were dedicated to securing a free, virtuous and constitutional
government.

kibitzer
Magna, UT
I’ve read over several of your posts this morning.

1.You seem to have a case of sour grapes.
2.You didn’t get your way, so now you want to disenfranchise other GOP voters and accuse them of being uninformed, ignorant, and not worthy of showing up to caucuses and voting.
3.You believe your opinion somehow has more clout, and therefore should mean more than others.
4.You even go so far as to even vaguely accuse the LDS Church for encouraging members to be involved, and not telling them to vote YOUR way.
For all intents, you are out of touch, extremist, and on par for Authoritative Totalitarianism at it’s finest.
Hardly the Free, Constitutional Democratic Republic you so seemingly say you so strongly support.

Might I suggest you re-evaluate your position?

LDS Liberal:

"Ive read over several of your posts this morning" QUOTE

You couldn't have. I only submitted two.

"you are out of touch, extremist, and on par for Authoritative Totalitarianism at it’s finest". QUOTE

I have not noticed any open mindedness whatsoever in your typical offerings, yet I have never attacked you. Your attack is extremely inaccurate. I totally oppose authoritarian government and such government may have a beginning, I daresay, in such thoughtless, sloppy, or suspicious caucuses such as that I outlined and which have been occurring nationwide.

My complaints were of either an ignorance of, or contempt for, republican caucus rules and basic democratic procedure, and the suspicious way in which the process was rushed and of nominees who knew nothing of the other candidates.

I certainly did not criticize the LDS general authorities which seems to be implied by you. They did get more people out, though not most of its members. They cannot control how members vote. They always encourage members to take part but I feel sure they want people to study the issues and to follow caucus rules.

What does it take to be a delegate? Does one have to have read the Constitution? Does one have to have an idea what he is doing? Does one have to know what the candidate he supports has voted on?

The answer to all of the above is a definite "no".

No one has to have read the Constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights that guarantees us all the right to be told why we are accused, to have an attorney represent us and then to have a trial.

No one has to have read the voting record of anyone running for office.

No one has to have any idea what it means to be a representative of the people of the precinct.

All that has to be known is that "Brother X" did a good job in his church calling, so he is well suited to being a delegate, and, I really liked the way that "Sister Y" handled the problem at camp last year, so I voted for her.

Normally, I don't mix church and State, but I actually heard those remarks at the caucus meeting last week.

We get what we deserve.

I'm prayin' for obama to take the cup.

@Mike Richards;

Except for the part about your "normally not mixing church and state" I agree with your comments.

@kibitzer: I've learned to just ignore LDS Lib.

In our meeting we had more old folks out who had no idea of what Hatch has voted for but have bought into the power and Finance Chair arguments. When I cornered one Hatch delegate to go over Hatch's votes on TARP, Dream ACt, NDAA, Patriot Act the only response was, "We need Hatch in the chairman's seat and in there for Romney".

My reply was, right now those are 2 big long shots and if those don't happen then what? No reply.

Ignorance is bliss in the Hatch camp.