Mitt Romney Bully Story Is An Issue Because He's Still A Bully

By now, you've probably heard about how Mitt Romney allegedly bullied a kid in high school.  Mitt's "denial" was that he did some crazy things in high school, doesn't remember this incident, and besides, he didn't know the kid was gay.


First, gay kids aren't the only ones who get bullied.  As a straight kid who got bullied a lot, I know.


Second, by saying he didn't know the kid was gay, but doesn't remember this incident leads me to think that maybe he did bully the kid.  Maybe not to the extreme portrayed in the post, but by his own admission, he wasn't exactly an angel.


So, why does it matter?  Well, because Mitt hasn't really grown out of it.  As Paul Begala wrote:

One can draw a straight line from the young man who pinned down a terrified teenager and walked a blind man into a closed door, to the adult who put the family dog in a kennel and strapped it to the roof of the car, to the businessman who laid off hundreds of people, cancelled their health benefits, and paid himself millions while their company went bankrupt. And the line continues: the governor who slashed education and raised fees on the middle class, and the possible president who would use his power to cut taxes on his fellow millionaires while pushing for the gradual demise of traditional Medicare. 

Then there is the aura of someone who acts as if the rules don't apply to him.The Post reported that the abused boy was ultimately expelled from Cranbrook—for smoking a cigarette. Really. The victim got expelled for smoking a cigarette, but Mitt faced no sanctions for maliciously victimizing a vulnerable student and a teacher. It's good to be a prince. Maybe that's why Romney felt entitled to take a $10 million bailout for Bain, but opposed President Obama's bailout of the auto industry. He thinks there's one set of rules for the privileged, and another for the rest of us.

There is also the story of his arrest for disorderly conduct.  He had gone to  launch his boat in a lake.  There was a park ranger there who told him not to launch the boat because the registration had been painted over.  Mitt launched anyway, because it's only a $50 fine.  That "I'll do what I want" attitude is common among bullies.  

Or, there's any time a reporter or someone else calls him out on his "evolving" stances on issues.  You see, Mitt Romney is consistent on issues.  His current stance is the stance he's always had, regardless of what evidence you have to the contrary.  Mitt has always been at war with Oceania.  He gets upset when you ask him why he used to be at war with Eurasia.

Character matters in politics.  People's character often doesn't change in their lives.  If Mitt could provide any examples that his character has changed, I'd give him credit.  Unfortunately, evidence shows that he hasn't changed.

My View on Marriage

The gentleman on the left is my third-great-grandfather John R Winder.  Born in England in 1821, he became the manager of a shoe store in Liverpool.  After joining the LDS Church in Liverpool, he arrived in Utah on October 10, 1853, exactly 99 years before his great-great granddaughter (and my mother) was born.

While in Utah, he engaged in several business ventures, including Winder Dairy, which still exists today (as Winder Farms).  Winder led the Nauvoo Legion against Johnson's Army in the Utah War, and served as Chairman of the "People's Party" while seeking to establish a two-party system of politics in Utah.  He also served as a delegate to serveral state Constitutional Conventions.

Winder was called to be the Second Counselor of the Presiding Bishopric of the Church in 1887.  As Second Counselor, he oversaw the completion of the interior of the Salt Lake Temple.  He was called to be the First Counselor in the First Presidency in 1901, a position he held until his death in 1910.

John Winder married Ellen Walters in 1845 in England.  He Married Tilda Jensen (my Third-Great Grandmother) in the President's Office in Salt Lake City in 1855.  In 1857, he married Elizabeth Parker in the Endowment House in Salt Lake City.  In 1893, he married Maria Burnham.

That's right, John R Winder practiced marriage that went beyond "one man one woman."  When the government banned plural marriage in 1887, they were in the wrong.  Any attempts since then to define marriage are equally as wrong.

I believe that marriage is a religious ordinance.  As a religious ordinance, it is between men and women.  Much like I believe that baptism, another religious ordinance, is to be done by immersion, and the baptism should only be performed on people older than 8.  Should the State of Utah pass a constitutional amendment banning the baptism of infants, so as to preserve the sanctity of traditional baptism?  Should Massachusetts ban immersion?

And, if we are to regulate marriage, how far do we go?  I'm just waiting for Alabama to pass a law further "protecting traditional marriage" by ensuring that marriage for eternity (as practiced by Mormons) is banned.  After all, the tradition is "til death do we part" is it not?

The "Sanctity" of Marriage

If my friend John has been in a committed relationship for 9 years.  There is a lot more "sanctity" in that relationship than in my friend Sam's 18 month marriage.  Or my friend Tim's 8 month marriage.  Newt Gingrich has married two people who previously held the title of "mistress" before they were his wife.  Sorry, but "marriage," as it stands now, really means nothing.

But, if Gay Marriage were legal, The Church would have to perform gay marriages.

Well, that part is a complete lie.  A Baptist marrying a Catholic is legal, but it doesn't mean they are legally allowed to be married in the Temple.  In fact, I have many good friends who are both LDS that were not allowed to get married in the Temple.  So, to say the Church would have to start performing Gay Marriages is, well, being dishonest.

I'm confused, what is your position?

Well, marriage should be a religious institution, unregulated by the Government.  However, it has also become a civil contract entered into by two people and endorsed  by government.  And, as a civil contract, it should be open to any two adults who want to enter into the contract.

Mitt Romney's Re-writing History on Pakistan, bin Laden

Remember last week when Republicans were making a big deal about President Obama taking credit for the death of Osama bin Laden?

Who cares that he had to make the final decision whether to go in or not.  I mean, we don't elect Presidents to make decisions, do we?

And then Republicans were all up in arms when Democrats had the nerve to point out that Mitt Romney wouldn't have made that decision.  I mean, how could Democrats know what Mitt Romney would do?

Well, because Mitt Romney version 2007 told us:

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney criticized Democrat Barack Obama on Friday for vowing to strike al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan if necessary as the Obama camp issued a strident defense of his plan.

What had been an internecine foreign policy battle between rival Democrats Obama, an Illinois senator, and New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, spilled into the Republican arena in the heavily contested state of Iowa.

"I do not concur in the words of Barack Obama in a plan to enter an ally of ours... I don't think those kinds of comments help in this effort to draw more friends to our effort," Romney told reporters on the campaign trail.

Obama on Wednesday said if elected president in November 2008 he would be willing to launch military strikes against al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan with or without the approval of the Pakistani government of President Pervez Musharraf.

"If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will," Obama said.

Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who is one of the Republican front-runners, said U.S. troops "shouldn't be sent all over the world." He called Obama's comments "ill-timed" and "ill-considered."

"There is a war being waged by terrorists of different types and nature across the world," Romney said. "We want, as a civilized world, to participate with other nations in this civilized effort to help those nations reject the extreme with them."

Oops.  Of course, Mitt has been known to change his mind once in a while.  It's the only thing he is consistent on.

How to Kill a Lying Attack Ad

Let's say for a moment that your opponent an outside group supporting your opponent runs an ad with wildly inaccurate statements.

One that PolitiFact called "pants on fire." They checked the sources listed in the ad and made a couple of phone calls, and the whole house of cards starts to crumble.

Well, that's not enough. After all, it takes some effort to get the message out that this well-funded "independent" group is lying.

So, you create your own video. And you encourage your supporters to share it with their friends:

Best line of the rebuttal?

"I keep hearing about Tumbler and whatever that is, use it too."

-Bob

Much Ado About Something

I've got a story for you. It's about this wonderful state named Uathia. Uathia is the most beautiful state in the United States. In fact, Uathia is one of the most liberal states in the country. A Conservative hasn't been Governor of Uathia since 1985. A Consrvative hasn't represented Uathia in the U.S. Senate since the 70's. More than 2/3 of the Uathia State Legislature is Liberals.

The current Governor of Uathia is Herb Garrett. Herb Garrett was elected as Lt Governor. He was nominated as Lt Governor by Hunt Johnson to provide balance to the ticket, as Hunt Johnson is moderate, and Herb Garrett, who was a county commissioner at the time, is very liberal. They won election in 2004, and then reelection in 2008. Herb Garrett became governor when Governor Johnson left the state to work for the Obama administration early in his second term. As a result of this, there was an election in 2010 to fill the remainder of the term.

The Governor's election of 2010 pitted Herb Garrett against the mayor of Uathia's most populous county. Mayor Corey Peterson had won election in his county in 2004 and reelection 2008.

In 2009, the state of Uathia was set to start the largest road construction project in state history. This project was to take place in Woebegone County, which is the most liberal county in Uathia and happens to be Governor Garrett's home county. Three companies submitted bids for the project. Ultimately, Beta Construction won the Billion-Dollar project.

During the campaign, it was discovered that one of the bidders on the project, Alpha Construction, received $13Million for the Department of Transportation. As things got looked into more, it was discovered that Alpha Construction was all set to win the bid, but then the bid rules were changed, and Beta Construction, who happened to donate money to the Garrett campaign around this time, and whose head also had a few closed-door meetings with Governor Garrett around the same time, was the "better" of the three proposals. When Alpha construction found out about the changes in the rules, they threatened to sue. They received a $13Million payout.

When asked about the $13Million payout, Governor Garrett's first reply was that he didn't know about the payout until reporters started asking him about it. He then said that the payout was to cover Alpha Construction's costs for preparing the bid. Nobody bothered to ask why the bid cost $13Million or why the third company, Charlie Construction, didn't get money to cover the cost of the bid. Ultimately, the media was told to go ask Alpha Construction why they were paid $13Million. Alpha Construction replied that a condition of their payment was that they couldn't talk about the $13Million.

When the Peterson campaign made the $13Million hush money a campaign issue, they were accused of dirty campaigning. Ultimately, the voters of Uathia decided that they preferred pay-to-play governance over dirty campaigning.

However, the Garrett Administration wasn't done. An investigation was launched to see how Alpha Construction found out about the bid process changing. Turns out, they called someone at the transportation department named Debbie, who told them that all the information was available on the internet. And Debbie was fired for it. Debbie then complained that she should not have been fired for pointing out that something was available on the internet. An administrative judge agreed with her, and ordered the transportation department to give her her job back, along with the pay that she would have gotten for the time that she was "fired." She was given a job, but it was very different than the one she had before, and did not use her skill set. Oh, and she wasn't given her back pay. When she complained about it, the Elephant Party (the party of the conservatives in Uathia) made an issue out of it. Debbie and the Elephants were accused of playing politics. Then, she was offered her back pay, but only if she signed a paper saying that she should have been fired, and that she would tell the Elephantss to stop talking about it. Which, of course, angered the Elephants. But the Donkeys (the majority party of Uathia) told the Elephants to stop complaining about it. Because, well, it makes Doonkeys look like they are doing a bad job running things.

OK,so Uathia is not a real place. But if it was, you know Republicans would be all over the airwaves and newspapers complaining about it. Unless, of course, instead of being a liberal state, Uathia was a conservative state, like Utah.

Well, I may have made up Uathia, but the story is very real, and is taking place right here in Utah. And the Utah Republican Party is more concerned with winning elections than running a state, which is why they want us to ignore gross ineptness in at least one state agency.

Because ineptness is only costing us taxpayer money, right?

In Memory: Todd Taylor

I don't have a picture of me with Todd Taylor. This makes me sad. However, this picture of him with Rob Miller is a great one.

When I read on Twitter that Todd had died, I cried. I cried as if I had lost a brother.

Well, because in a way, I did.

I don't recall ever meeting Todd. Then, one day in 2007, in response to a blog post saying I was looking for a job, I got an email from Todd. Only I didn't realize it was THE Todd, because he didn't include his last name (I had worked for the Democratic Party for months before I realized that the "Todd" who frequently commented on my blog posts was THAT Todd). He was sending me details about a job at Utah Democratic Party HQ. Well, it wasn't so much details as "We've got a job for you. Call this person for an interview." My interview was basically "Todd said I should hire you. Here's what we're doing. Are you in?"

I remember my co-workers faces of dread whenever Todd would show up to a staff meeting. When Todd was there, meetings were never short. It's because once Todd got going on a subject, he kept going. And most of the kids I worked with really didn't understand Todd. I found myself on more than one occasion translation Todd-ese into English.

However, I did. Todd and I were cut from the same mold. I never really understood that until we were sitting in the hotel bar late one night in Denver.

It was late at night, and a bunch of us were sitting around B.S.ing. Most people had gone to bed. Several Utah reporters were there, and Todd made it clear early and often that everything was off the record (With Todd, every conversation was "off the record," unless he told me afterword to go start typing. Usually those conversations were held in the parking garage).. It was Todd telling story after story. He also got a little personal talking about how much of an introvert he really was. I, myself, am quite introverted and appreciated that there was a niche for me. Like Todd, I also took life as a series of experiences meant to educate us. And that education is meant to be shared.

I've let the narrative get me sidetracked. But, since Todd once told me that is favorite blog posts of mine were the ones where he knew I didn't care if anybody was reading, I'll move back to a couple of experiences. One was a time when he wrote an email regarding yard signs to send out to candidates. Well, it wasn't so much an email as it was a novel. He discussed things right down why certain color schemes work and don't work and how fast someone should be able to drive and still be able to get the most out of you sign I think of that email every time I see a bad yard sign. And there are many bad yard signs.

Another great moment was when I had written a post that dealt mostly with inner-office politics. He called me into his office, made me close the door, and he gently rebuked me for posting about things that happened in the office without clearing it through him. When I asked him if I should take the post down, he said "No. I want to see if [then Utah Democratic Chair] Wayne [Holland] reads your blog like he says he does. When he reads it, he'll yell at me, and I'll let you know it's time to take it down." That post is still up.

As knowledgeable as Todd was, he wasn't afraid to admit when he wasn't an expert on something. He invited me to sit in his office to listen in on a conference-call training regarding blogs and ads. Most of the conversation was over his head, but he wasn't afraid to ask questions. That is the mark of a real genius.

I really wish that somewhere out there, there is a book of wisdom written by Todd. That is a book I would purchase, and give to my friends. I would also offer to translate it into English for them.

One of the last conversations Todd and I had was 52 weeks ago today. I had bitten off more than I could chew by organizing a rally in the capitol rotunda. It was about 2 hours before the rally was supposed to start, and he found me in the capitol cafeteria. He stopped, asked how things were going, and then changed the subject to something non-political. After about 15 minutes, he said "No matter what happens, you've done good today. Don't ever forget that."

Right back at ya, Todd.

(First photo stolen from Rob Miller on Facebook. Second photo stolen from JM Bell on Facebook)

Regerrymandering Part VII: What do Bear Lake, Jeremy Ranch, and Flaming George have in Common?

What do Bear Lake, Jeremy Ranch, and Flaming George have in Common?

A member of the State Legislature, that's what.

Regerrymandering Part VI: What do Grantsville, Tremonton, and Southern Cache Valley have in common?

What do Grantsville, Tremonton, and Hyrum up in Cache County all have in common?

I'm stumped to find an answer.

Well, other than sharing the same State Senator for the next 10 years, that is.

There's a lot of commonality there, my friends. I'm just waiting for the GOP spin to find it.

Regerrymandering Part V: Senate District 12 -- Straddling the Oquirrhs

Senate District 12 is an interesting shape. In addition to having an interesting shape, it is naturally separated by the Oquirrh Mountains.

Yep, the Senator representing this district will have to drive outside his district to visit his constituents on the other side.

Another winning map brought to you by the Utah Legislature.

Regerrymandering Part IV: Equal Population at what cost? Oquirrh Edition

If you live in the Salt Lake Valley, and you are West of I-15 and South of about 4300 South, you live in the Purple district.

Well, unless you live in the Oquirrh neighborhood of West Jordan. Then you might be in the Yellow district.

Yep, if you live in this part of the subdivision, your congressman won't live in areas that share similar characteristics to yours. Your Congressman will live in Downtown Salt Lake. Or Bountiful. Or Tooele. Or St George. Or Blanding.

One thing's for sure: you probably won't ever see him campaigning in Oquirrh. Because you are separated from the rest of his district.

And that just isn't right. Surely, the Legislature could have found a neighborhood elsewhere along the border to draw into the neighborhood. I wonder who lives there that just got drawn into a different district.

Regerrymandering Part III: Equal Population at what cost? Holladay Edition

So, you think the Congressional Lines drawn by the Utah Legislature took some interesting turns around the Columbus Library, take a look at Highland Downs Ln in Holladay:

The dividing line between the purple and green districts from 4800 South to I-215 is Highland Drive.

Well, except for Highland Down Lane. Highland Downs Lane is a Private Lane that curves east from Highland Drive south to 5165 South. Compacted in the small space of this complex are 7 nearly identical duplexes. This small private lane (skinny enough that on-street parking is not allowed) is a dividing line between Congressional Districts. 3 duplexes are in the purple districts, and the other 4 are in the green.

Does this make sense to anyone?

Regerrymandering Part II: Equal Population at what cost?: Columbus Library Edition

There are some really interesting lines drawn in the Utah Legislature's 2011 Regerrymandering maps. They've got equal population in their Congressional districts, but at what cost?

Take, for example, the lines drawn around Salt Lake City's Columbus Library:

This is an area between roughly i-80 and 3000 South and 300 and 900 East. There are a few interesting lines here (like the fact that putting the golf course in the purple district make the lines look less puzzle like). Let's zoom in on the really interesting line:

The boundary here runs down 500 East. If you live on the east side of 500 East along here, you are in the yellow district and your Congressman will live somewhere between Bountiful and Blanding. If you live on the west side of the street, it gets a little more complex.

The first 5 houses south of the freeway are in the yellow district. Then we have 3 houses, the library, and two more houses in the purple district. Then there are six houses in the yellow district, and then purple again the rest of the way to 2700 South.

Why did they do this? It's simple: Even though there is some wiggle room (the districts don't have to be exactly the same), they wanted to make the districts exactly the same. They did this so that when the citizens of Utah pointed out that their maps were crazy puzzle pieces, they could say "well, they are equal."