I guess I should repost the interview with Pres. Marlin K. Jensen after all. This
is the interview where he discusses and clarifies a letter that had been sent out
to stake presidents to be read in all wards in at least the United States. One
party domination is in direct defiance of the Brethren.

[emphasis added in bold red]

Salt Lake Tribune
Types: Utah On-Line
Published: 05/03/1998
Page: A1
Keywords: Web Edition; UT; Mormon Church General Authorities;
Politics-Politicians; Social Issues; Communities
Transcript of Marlin Jensen Interview
Byline: Salt Lake Tribune
     Editor's Note: The following is a transcript of a Salt Lake Tribune
interview, conducted on April 23, 1998, with Marlin Jensen of the 1st Quorum of
the Seventy of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Marlin is also a
member of the LDS church's Public Affairs Committee.
      (Jensen's comments have been transcribed verbatim. The Tribune's questions
were edited for clarity
  and concision.)
       The Salt Lake Tribune: Earlier this year, the Mormon Church First
Presidency issued a statement encouraging  members not only to actively
participate in politics, but to run for elected office. What was the motivation?

       Marlin Jensen: ``I think the letter went to stake presidents, I believe
just in the United States. But we even gave some thought and it was discussed how
to do something on a worldwide basis because I think the perception that our
leaders had is that as individual church members we're maybe not quite living up
to our obligation to be good citizens. Not just voting, but actually participating
in the functions of government on an appointed and an elected basis.

     So I think the letter reflects a general concern worldwide that it is really
part of our religion to be good citizens and to do our share in the community. And
its probably related doctrinally in a way to the idea that we're not just to build
up the kingdom of God but we're also to establish his righteousness.

     So that there's a need in order for the gospel to be preached and carried off
to all the world to have an environment of righteousness in which that can occur.
And, in a word, without a good neighborhood and a good community it's very
difficult to have a good family. So good government is very much in the best
interests of us as a church and in the work we have to preach the gospel. So that
I think would have been the general concern.

      But I think frankly there was a more specific concern related to the state
of Utah as well that prompted the initial discussion of this.

     It seems like historically -- and maybe it had to do with our more rural
character at the time, but it seems (and I have thought about this in the little
community where I was raised in Huntsville) that the people of the church, the
main leaders, the main people in the church in that period maybe 40 or 50 years
ago, were people of affairs. They were people who did lead the community as well
as the church. Of course, there was a much greater homogeneity in those days and
we're much more diverse now. But I think there's just a feeling that we need to be
more active and more visible and reach out more in a civic way than we've been
doing.

      Here in Utah in part I think it's related to the fact that the Democratic
Party has in the last 20 years waned to the point where it really is almost not a
factor in our political life right now. And I think there is a feeling that that
is not healthy at all -- that as a state we suffer in different ways. But
certainly any time you don't have the dialogue and the give-and-take that the
democratic process provides, you're going to be poorer for it in the long run.

      We are locally and I think there is a feeling that even nationally as a
church, it's not in our best interest to be known as a one-party church. The
national fortunes of the parties ebb and flow. Whereas the Republicans may clearly
have the upper hand today in another 10 years they may not. So there are just so
many reasons I think to have a <Picture>robust multi-party system<Picture> going
locally and nationally for us, as well as the international responsibilities we
feel -- that's at the heart of this as well.''

      Tribune: Democrats, only half-jokingly, say it may be time for the LDS
Church to once again draw a line down the middle of ward houses and assign
parties.

      Jensen: ``I think if you look at the letter you'll notice that there's a
reference here to urging men and women to be willing to serve -- as you were
mentioning -- on school boards, in city and county councils and commissions, state
legislatures and other high offices of either election or appointment, including
involvement in the political party of their choice. I think that really was an
attempt, is an attempt on the part of the First Presidency to indicate that part
of being a good Latter-day Saint would be to be politically active in a party of
our choice. That we just can't sit by and let other people -- other good people --
do that.

      So I doubt we'll get a stronger statement than that because there's a real
desire to remain politically neutral. And I don't think you'll find that the
leaders of the church are going to say anything more definitive than they've said
in this letter on that point. But that certainly is what was desired with that
statement was that people would become more actively involved in a formal way in
the political process through political parties.[that is, plural]

      By the way, I can't resist just telling you one little story that Oscar
McConkie told me once. (He's a prominent Democratic member of the church, if you
know him.) Apparently, one time, his father was the only Democrat in the Utah
Senate. And he was asking his dad about it once.  His dad said, `Oscar, this goes
way back to the 1890s when we did this' -- it was called the democratization of
Utah for statehood. But it was really an attempt to get us aligned along national
party lines rather than the Peoples' and Liberal Party thing that we had. So the
brethren did.

      (In fact, there's a great story in Huntsville how they came and some were
sitting on the one side of the church and some on the other and the McKays and all
those that were on the one side became the Democrats and the Petersons and all
those on the other side became the Republicans.)

      But anyway, Oscar's father said in one of these meetings in southern Utah,
one of the brethren in the morning session said, `I'm going to put a ledger in the
foyer and we'd like some of you to sign up to be Republicans.'

      Because, oddly, at that time the Democratic Party was the one that Mormons
favored and that really favored Mormons, too. That's really why we gravitated
toward them originally.

      When they came back for the afternoon session, no one had signed the book.
So the general authority, whoever he was, said, `Brothers and sisters, you have
misunderstood.' He said, `God needs Republicans.'

      And Oscar said his father would wink and say, `And you know, Oscar, those
damned Republicans think they've had God on their side ever since.'

      I don't know if you can make any use of that but it's a great story. And
there's a little of that embedded in our culture, unfortunately.''

      Tribune: Some LDS members subscribe to the notion that it is difficult, if
not impossible, to be a faithful Mormon and a Democrat. People point to such
things as the gay rights and pro-choice planks of the national Democratic Party.
How do you respond?

      Jensen: ``That's true. And it is a challenge. And yet, you know, the
Republicans came very close last time to bringing a pro-abortion plank into their
platform. That was maybe the biggest battle of their convention. Which shows that
if you're a pure ideologue, eventually you're going to have trouble in either
party.

      When people say to me, `how do you rationalize being a Democrat?' I just say
I take everything that's true and good and hang onto it. And the basic,
historically the basic foundational principles of the Democratic Party have
appealed to me more. But that's a matter really of personal choice, it has nothing
to do with our salvation.

      I think everyone who is a good Latter-day Saint is going to have to pick and
choose a little bit regardless of the party that they're in and that may be
required a lot more in the future than it has been in the past. But I think
there's room for that and the gospel leaves us lots of latitude.

      I think those who have done that successfully -- I think, for instance, Gov.
Rampton and Gov. Matheson are outstanding examples of Democrats who were very
popular in Utah and who occasionally had to sort of distance themselves from the
national party and it's platform. But (they) did it judiciously and were very
effective and enjoyed very good relationships with most church members and were
some of our very best governors frankly, I think, in the history of our state.

      So it can be done.

      If you think about ways to rejuvenate the Democratic Party, I don't think
much beyond a statement like this that you're going to find our church doing
anything about that. We hope the members will exercise their agency and do much
good of their own free will.

      And I guess we would probably hope that they wouldn't abandon a party
necessarily because it has a philosophy or two that may not square with Mormonism.
Because, as I say, they in their philosophies ebb and flow. I think the main thing
is to stay involved and work within the existing framework, work for changes if
they need to brought about.

      And maybe, to succeed in Utah especially, a politician if he's Democratic,
is going to have to say, `I'm a Utah Democrat. I'm different than the national
party in some important ways.'

      Bill Orton did that, I think, pretty well. So I think it could be done by
others.

      It's lamentable I think that we've got Chris Cannon running unopposed for
the first time I think in the history of Utah in a congressional race. Surely
there's got to be another good and wise man out there who could have taken him on.
And he would have benefited from it as well as everyone else.''

      Tribune: Bill Orton complained about exploitation of religion in his 1996
defeat -- such things as political signs in the yards of bishops and stake
presidents.

      Jensen: ``That's probably more a cultural than a religious problem.  I
remember the night that my brother hosted a Republican mass meeting. My father (a
lifelong staunch Democrat) without any prior knowledge went up to his home that
night and found all these Republicans there in the living room.

      He came right to my house and said to me, `What does your younger brother
think he is doing?'

      I said, `Dad, he's just exercising his agency. Aren't you glad you raised
independent, bull-headed sons?' And he said, `Well, I was until tonight.'

      Sadly, I think it's regrettable when that kind of a spill over occurs.

      I can see how someone from a distance can look at that as a very unfair
circumstance. I don't know how to say this, but I have been here (the First Quorum
of the Seventy) nine years and I had no idea of the church's actions
institutionally in political matters until I came here.

      But if someone said, `What's your overriding impression after nine years and
three years on the Public Affairs Committee?' I would say, I am surprised, very
surprised at how little influence the church seeks to exercise in politics in Utah
or nationally. Because the church really is a force to be reckoned with --
especially here.

      So when these little aberrations occur, it's just due I think to poor
judgment sometimes, unthinking actions on the part of us as individuals in the
church. Certainly institutionally, it's not intended to be that way and it's
regretted at this level when it is that way.''

      Tribune: Is the church position that local leaders have freedom to express
their political preferences, but that it should not be read as an official
sanction of the church?

      Jensen: That's true. And that's hard to separate out. When I was stake
president and people would come to seek my endorsement, I always declined,
respectfully.

      I just said `I would endorse you and if I weren't the president of the stake
I would certainly sign your ad or appear in the newspaper.'

      But I just felt like it was very hard for a lot of people to separate my
church position from my citizen's hat. So I tried to be extra judicious.

      But not everyone sees it that way. Some of them feel like, `Just because I'm
a bishop or a stake president doesn't mean I have to resign my franchise this year
and I'll precede.' So it does create, I think, a misimpression in some cases.''

      Tribune: Is the problem of lopsided partisan affiliation seen to be a
problem elsewhere around the country among LDS members? Or is it perceived as a
situation unique to Utah?

      Jensen: No. I think really the whole Intermountain West, at least, suffers
from the same imbalance among church members. And may among the population
generally in those states -- speaking of the intermountain states.

      Democrats are outnumbered 3-1 in our state in the Legislature and those
conditions exist in the five mountain states -- Utah, Wyoming, Montana, Colorado
and Idaho. I would think Arizona would probably be very close to that, too.

      I don't know that we've got that condition anywhere else that I'm aware
of.''

      Tribune: What is the attitude of church leaders toward the lingering
sentiment among some Mormons -- apparently stemming back to comments made by
former LDS President Ezra Taft Benson -- that it is difficult to be a good LDS
member and a Democrat?

      Jensen: ``I do not know about the authenticity of his statement. But, taking
it for a true statement, that may be something you would want to verify. I don't
know that this (recent First Presidency) statement was issued at all with
reference to that statement.

      But I think I could safely say that one of the things that prompted this
discussion in the first place was the regret that's felt about the decline of the
Democratic Party and the notion that may prevail in some areas that you can't be a
good Mormon and a good Democrat at the same time. There have been some awfully
good men and women who have, I think, been both and are both today. So I think it
would be a very healthy thing for the church -- particularly the Utah church -- if
that notion could be obliterated.

      You think about what would have to happen to accomplish that. I think it
would take the individual action of some good people. The other day when we were
talking about this I remembered my favorite song -- `Stout Hearted Men.' `Give me
10 men who are stout-hearted men, who will fight for the rights they adore. Give
me 10 who are stout-hearted men and I will soon give you 10,000 more.'

      I think if there would be just a few good men come forward -- and women --
in Utah as Democrats who would run for high profile office that would begin
turning this tide. And in the beginning maybe the messengers would be a lot more
important than the message, if we just had good, credible people who would do
that. Most of them I think who are out there and who might do that are just leery,
I think, because the record of Democrats in recent past years has been so abysmal.

      But, yes, I think, at least my own personal hope would be that this letter
would be read broadly enough to encourage someone who is a latent Democrat, or who
might be considering that affiliation, to say , `Gee, I could do this. This says
involvement in the political party of our choice.' And I would hope it would have
that salutary effect on people.''

      Tribune: Any concern about Republicans who may have embraced the letter as
affirmation that their party is the officially sanctioned one?

      Jensen: ``We've taken note of that feeling on the part of some. And the
timing of the letter -- and the fact that it coincided with some things that were
happening nationally that didn't put the Democratic Party in the best light at
that time was purely coincidental. Those things that were happening did not
motivate this letter at all.

      There had been, I think, building for some time a feeling that we just
needed to become better citizens as Latter-day Saints. But if the letter is being
read that narrowly by some they certainly missed, I think, the more expansive
intent that the First Presidency had in discussions that gave rise to this.''

      Tribune: Despite repeated church statements encouraging political
involvement over the years, voter turnout among LDS is down, as it is with the
general population. What is happening to turn people off to civic affairs?

      Jensen: ``I'm not sure I'm sociologist enough to answer that. And there
probably have been some political scientists and social scientists who have maybe
tried to analyze this in recent years. If they have I haven't read any of their
studies.

      But my own personal feeling and observation based on the little world -- and
it really is quite little these days -- in which I live, would be that we've lost,
in a sense, community.

      We've probably, you know speaking very candidly, lost some community within
the church in the sense of wards being the strong cohesive community of people
that they once were.

      Part of that I'm sure has to do with urbanization and lots of different
sociological forces that would bear on this. We probably live more independently
today as people and we don't have maybe the community and group rallying points
that we once had.

      So I think that that tends to make people feel more distant from each other,
from their government. It makes them feel, I think, less empowered to do anything
about what's going on. It just sort of makes you feel like it's going to happen
anyway. `So what? So why try?' So I think there is a little of that malaise.

      And I think that's been compounded by some of our leaders in recent years
not behaving as well as they might have before, during and after their public
service. So that's created a cynicism I think a little bit on the part of most of
us. And there are probably other forces that have contributed to just a general
lack of interest, a feeling maybe of futility on the part of the average person.

      So to offset that and override that is quite a chore. We've attempted to do
it like I think the church should, which is to teach the doctrines of the church
and say, you know, God helped create the constitution and we're to uphold it and
to participate under that form of government, let's do it. But at least
institutionally at this level the most we can do, I think, is to teach the
principles and encourage the people and hope it happens.

      Maybe this letter is the first of several things that will be done. I don't
know really personally where this will take us but obviously if it doesn't have
the effect the First Presidency hoped it would we may do something else. And this
may be talked about more in the future. It's certainly a key issue for us.''

      Tribune: Are you aware of any future plans on part of church to encourage
political involvement?

      Jensen: ``Not at the present, no. But I'm sure this is being assessed. I
know in the Public Affairs Committee we're watching to see what impact this has in
Utah and elsewhere.''

      Tribune: More than a year ago, church leaders issued a statement that
firearms in churches were ``inappropriate.'' Was that a message sent encouraging a
change in state concealed weapons laws that was not heeded?

      Jensen: ``No. At least not within the realm of my knowledge. I don't think I
was here actually when the genesis of that statement may have occurred. But I
think there was a request that we formulate a position on that if we wanted to and
we did. But it is not a burning issue with us. We just wanted, I think, to be on
record, of how we viewed that institutionally.''

      Tribune: There is a perception in Utah that there is a direct channel
between Mormon Church hierarchy and political leaders. What is your view on the
accuracy of that perception?

      Jensen: ``If you think about our real reason for being as a church it has
nothing to do with politics. The best way still to help mankind is to make us all
better men and women. As long as that's our central mission -- and it always will
be to teach the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ -- then our only reason
actually for venturing into the public realm at all is to help ensure that that
can happen.

      That's why the First Amendment issues, for instance, have always really been
important to us and why we've gone off on some of the other little political
issues that we have.

      But we spend our political capital I think very carefully and are always
very thoughtful and deliberate I think before we venture into that arena.

      You may know right now we are involved in helping preserve traditional
marriage by assisting with the passage of legislation that will ensure that
marriage remains the union of a man and a woman. And family is so much at the
heart of the gospel and of our life, in the here and hereafter, that I can see why
the church would do that because it's central to our mission.

      But to go beyond that just doesn't make sense for us. And yet in a state
where we're 60 or 70 percent of the population it's very easy I think for people
to perceive us being involved in things that we're not and heavy handed in lots of
areas and ways that we're not.''

      Tribune: Please expound on the marriage legislation involvement in Congress.

      Jensen: ``We actually helped there (in Congress) with what is known as the
Defense of Marriage Act and then we've been active on a state-by-state basis
actually just helping quietly to promote legislation that will ensure traditional
marriage. And doing it I think in a very charitable way because its very important
to us not to appear homophobic, as they call it, because I think we have great
compassion for people who are challenged by same-gender attraction. But our
fundamental teachings are such that marriage has to be between a man and a woman.

      But we've done the same thing with alcohol, as you know, and with gambling
and with other moral issues over the years.

      I must say though, doctrinally, agency is such a precious thing to us as a
church. And that's really the tone of this letter -- it starts with a reference to
being anxiously engaged in good causes and doing many things of our own free will
and bringing to pass much righteousness using the gospel principles as our guide.

      So our hope is that this would energize the membership generally into doing
just that -- not look toward Salt Lake City at all on these things. But just study
it out and use good judgment and do something about it. The atmosphere, the
environment would be so much more healthy if we were doing that generally
everywhere, but especially here in Utah.

      Tribune: What is the immediate detriment from lack of strong two-party
system?

      Jensen: I can think of two or three things with long-range planning. One of
them right now I'm thinking of is land-use planning where there seems to be a
reluctance right now on the part of a very good governor to get involved in that
on a statewide level.

      Where there may be some who feel that if we had the healthy dialogue that
could press that issue a little stronger right now that we would be in the process
of doing something that would really be of great benefit to us now and in the very
near future.

      One might say that the transportation crisis that we're in might have been
averted had there been better balance in the parties and something was thrashed
out 10 years ago, perhaps during Gov. Bangerter's time, rather than being allowed
to wait until we reached a crisis situation.

      There are probably issues like that environmentally, educationally that we'd
really benefit from if there were a more robust dialogue going on. But we've
lacked that and I think we've suffered somewhat because of it.

      It would be reflected I think most acutely in the long-range planning that
we do in those critical areas of our lives.

      Water management, for instance, is another area where I think we're behind
maybe five years at this point. Development of adequate culinary sources. Again,
it would just help if we had a multi-party system that was really working.''

      Tribune: Interesting that you should start with land-use planning.
Historically, Mormons were planners. Do you see any irony that land-use planning
would be viewed negatively by political leaders?

      Jensen: ``Absolutely, you talk about a historical twist.

      Yes, but see if I were a pure Democrat, I would say what you have there is
Republicanism and their desires to create wealth, which basically is what you do
with unfettered land use. So in my mind, if you're again a pure Democrat, you'd be
in there saying we do need some government regulation in this kind of a case.

      You can sharpen your focus there and say this is where dialogue really would
help and where the ideologies of the parties really do make a difference. There's
some substance to the differences there and if the one voice is basically
unrepresented, then we're going to suffer I think over time.''

      Tribune: Utah has experienced tremendous growth in recent years. Do church
leaders generally believe things need to be done that are not occurring?

      Jensen: ``Frankly, I don't know if we've discussed that. . . . Not that we
wouldn't be participants but it probably isn't anything that we would take the
initiative to do as a church because it's sort of beyond our mission.

      We'd want to be a good neighbor and we'd certainly would want to husband our
own properties well. If you take downtown Salt Lake City and the church's holdings
here, if I could say it modestly, I think we've done a good job holding the city
and making it a beautiful city and a good city, a clean city.

      But I think that does stray beyond our mission. We would certainly serve on
boards and lend our expertise and our money, too, which we have often done in the
past. But you wouldn't see us, I don't think, being the forerunners in that kind
of initiative.''

      Tribune: What is the policy regarding partisan politics within wardhouses,
and is it a problem?

      Jensen: This is related to an experience I had on my mission in Germany
where we had a little branch in Germany that was presided over by a buck private.
He was from the Philippines, a wonderful, wonderful fellow.

      Into that branch one day came a 2nd lieutenant, fresh out of flight school.
I happened to be there on a Sunday morning when this young 2nd lieutenant came
into the branch and introduced himself to the branch president as Lt. so-and-so.

      I've never forgotten that little Filipino brother took that man by the hand
and he looked him in the eye and he said, `Brother, in the church we don't have
any lieutenants. We're just all brothers.'

      You know, that's the spirit of what ought to happen in a branch house or in
a ward house.

      I don't know. What you're talking about I haven't seen. There are
occasionally mistakes made, I think. Situations where judgment maybe isn't the
best and someone may say something, even from a pulpit sometimes someone may say
something, or it will be done through inadvertence. But I really think those are
very few and far between.

      I think there's really quite a conscious attempt made by most Latter-day
Saints to be non-partisan and to be charitable toward people of other persuasions
and other affiliations.

      So I know, at least institutionally here, Boy, we make every effort, even
down to where the church publications are conscious of not featuring one political
party to the exclusion of another. And that's a problem, we don't have many
Democrats to feature.

      You can only put the good Nevada senator's picture in the paper every so
often even if he'd like it every Sunday.

      But there's a real attempt made, I think, to be non-partisan and to not be
offensive or heavy handed in any way on these matters we're talking about. That
certainly would be our desire as a church.

      If as individual members we err sometimes then we're sorry about that and we
learn. There is correction when that occurs. Occasionally you'll hear of someone
forgetting that you shouldn't let something happen in a church and it'll happen
and there's always a call made and a correction given. It's not done with
impunity, I can tell you that.

      I've always had this feeling about lawyers, or the way people feel about
lawyers. They have this vague notion that lawyers know something that they don't
know and they don't know what it is but they don't like it. We don't really know
anything that you don't know, although we'd like maybe to perpetuate that
illusion.

      But in the church, there's nothing covert being done. That's something I
would maybe even just volunteer. Everything I have seen the church undertake here
has been aboveboard, has been in the light of day. There are no agenda that we
don't announce.

      I wish that impression could be given to the people of Utah especially,
because I know that there is sort of a division along Mormon/non-Mormon,
Republican/Democratic lines. I think we regret that more than anything, that there
would become a church party and a non-church party. That would be the last thing
that we would want to have happen.''

      Tribune: Is there anything on horizon between now and the elections in
regard to additional statements from the church regarding politics?

      Jensen: ``No, other than maybe the typical political neutrality kind of
statement we make each year not to use the buildings or our mailing lists for
political purposes. But I don't think beyond that that, we will.

      It's interesting, I happened to be in my home ward the day this (political
involvement statement) was read. And I just kind of looked around. I must say it
wasn't sensational to most people, which I felt kind of badly about because I had
been a part of the discussion and the formulation and then had seen this finished
product as the First Presidency put it together and, of course, was very
interested.

      But I could see some yawning and some totally disinterested and a few who
were really keying into it. Not everybody has an active interest in public
affairs, in political affairs.

      Again, it's the idea that we all get a chance to pick and choose and decide
what's important for us in life. But I think generally there's a feeling that
we've got to take political life more seriously as a church. And I think it really
does relate to family and the idea that you cannot have a good family in a vacuum.
You've got a community, you've got a state. And we have an obligation to take part
in the governance to establish righteousness so that there is an environment where
people can live a life like the gospel prescribes. That's the reason I think we're
doing it.''


Steven Montgomery wrote:

> Perhaps Marc should ask himself the question why Utah appears to be
> dominated by one party politics. Perhaps Utah just leads the way in setting
> trends. The following analysis of our recent elections comes from
> www.citizenslobby.com:
>
> <Quote>
> AMERICA MOVES RIGHTWARD
>
> To the chagrin of the liberal elites, the American people made a monumental
> shift to the right in the 2002 mid-term elections. For the first time in
> history, the Republican Party gained seats in both the House and Senate in
> a non-presidential election. In the gubernatorial races, more Democrat
> incumbents went down in defeat, as the GOP defied expectations with
> victories in liberal states like Maryland, Massachusetts and Hawaii. As for
> state legislatures, the majority of them are now controlled by Republicans.
>
> On various referendum issues, American citizens spoke from the heart. In
> Virginia, voters crushed a sales tax hike initiative. In Massachusetts,
> citizens rejected bilingual education in favor of English-only instruction.
> In the state of Nevada voters repudiated homosexual marriage and
> legalization of marijuana. Likewise, in controversial races with hot-button
> issues like "immigration," Republicans rolled to victory. Rep. Tom Tancredo
> (R-CO), who has made immigration reform and border security the cornerstone
> of his Capitol Hill tenure, was re-elected with nearly 70% of the vote,
> after weeks of slander by radical ethnic groups and the liberal Denver
> press. In Georgia, a Republican was elected governor for the first time
> since Reconstruction! This victory was due, in large part, to Democrat
> incumbent Roy Barnes' politically-correct destruction of the Georgia state
> flag, as well as his laxity in addressing illegal immigrants within the state.
>
> All of these electoral results enumerate a political, social and cultural
> trend to the right. They also happen to coincide, with no surprising
> reason, a major surge in Republican Party registrations in southern states
> and a big increase in independent/third-party registrations nationally
> during the last three election cycles. Hopefully, the White House and
> Republicans in Congress will wake up and seize this opportunity to enact a
> real conservative and populist agenda that reflects the true mainstream of
> America. Among the top priorities of the 108th Congress should be border
> security and immigration reform. Stay tuned with CitizensLobby.com at
> http://www.citizenslobby.com as we fight to put the interests of American
> citizens first.
> </Quote>
>
> My concern is that many of these newly elected Republicans will turn out to
> be RINO's (Republican in name only).
>
> --
> Steven Montgomery
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Nations are defined by their founders. George Washington set a standard of
> selfless public service and heroic private virtue against which American
> politicians continue to be measured - and found wanting - even today."
> --Steven W. Mosher
>
> /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> ///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
> ///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html      ///
> /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>

--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland

“Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick
himself up and continue on” – Winston Churchill

Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the author’s employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.


--
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html      ///
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

==^^===============================================================
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^^===============================================================

Reply via email to