Here we go, here we go!

How high will the tidal wave be on Tuesday?

Republicans will take back the House, the Senate is in flux but probably will remain in Democrat hands (barely).

But when the dust settles, what will change?

What to you think?

Minnesota Governor Pawlenty just explained on Face the Nation that the battle would be over reducing government via, of course, reducing entitlement programs.

George Will's Sunday column encourages us to watch carefully certain races in order to fully appreciate the depth of the revolution of 'less' government that is upon us.

Ummm...less, continually less, less and less spending. I get it. But few specifics. Nearly never any explanations of how to spend a lot less. Just what do the Republicans agree among themselves to reduce? Will representatives and senators from Arizona and Florida, two hubs of retirees, dare to cut Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security? How about reducing military spending in states that have major military installations? How about closing down federal agencies? Which ones? Will repeal of Obama's health care plan bill be a safe effort for them?

I don't fear the Republican wave because they will be just as inefficient, just as unwise, just as unwilling to cross the aisle as the Democrat and Republican majorities that preceded them.
And ultimately, it is unclear what, if anything, will change for the better in our lives.

Utah and Massachusetts

Democrats in Utah fight behind enemy lines. The state’s governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, state treasurer, and state auditor are all Republicans. Republicans have 21 seats in the state senate to the Democrats’ 8, and 53 seats in the state house to the Democrats’ 22.

Republicans in Massachusetts fight behind enemy lines. The state’s governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of the commonwealth, attorney general, and state auditor are all Democrats. Democrats have 35 seats in the state senate to the Republicans’ 5 and 144 seats in the state house to the Republicans’ 16.

Federal government representation in Utah has 2 Republican
Senators, 2 Republican Representatives, and 1 Democrat Representative.

Federal government representation in Massachusetts has 1 Republican Senator, 1 Democrat Senator, and all 10 house seats are held by Democrats.

In 2008, Utahs gave John McCain 62% of the vote and Barack Obama 34%. The results are similar for Massachusetts in that Barack Obama had 62% of the vote and John McCain 36%.

Overall, it seems that Massachusetts is as much Democrat as Utah is Republican.

The purpose of this post is mostly informative, but also inspired by a local Democratic candidate for House District 60 in which I live. Alan Keele (D) is running against Brad Daw (R). I know Brad Daw personally, and I know Alan Keele from BYU. He was a professor of German and had an office just down the hall from me. I also used to live by his aged uncle. I knew Alan Keele to be a respected professor (more evidence that BYU is not monolithically Republican) and he seemed to be a reasonable man. I read some of his campaign literature to see if he could be a Democrat I could vote for (I am always looking for such a candidate). He seemed to be saying all the right things, i.e., fiscal responsibility, good on education, even the usual stuff about the environment, but then I ran across this line: "A one-party system benefits only extremists. Think of Cuba or North Korea." I was deflated. He is comparing Utah (and Massachusetts
for that matter) to Cuba and North Korea, and implying that Utah Republicans are dictators (and MA Dems as well, I guess). In Utah and Massachusetts, other parties are allowed to operate and run for office. That is not the case in Cuba and North Korea. Opposing persons are either dead or in prision. So such a statement was too over the top for me. I will be sticking with Brad Daw.

I vote "No" Mosque so close to ground zero

When O'Rielly argued with the ladies on the view this past week and stated that it was "Muslims that attacked us on 9/11", the ladies got all in a huff stating that he shouldn't blame the entire Muslim people and that he shouldn't lump them all together to insinuate that they are all terrorists. I think what O'Rielly was saying was similar to what we all do when we are talking war. "the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor", "The Germans murdered Jews", "The British are coming!" We've always lumped people together. We do that to ourselves. Honestly, all the attackers and Master Mines on 9/11 were Muslim. Radical yes...but they carry the name and they even admit that they did it in the name of Islam. Is that to say that we should have said..."The Radical Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor" and the "Radical Germans murdered the Jews" and "the Radical British are coming"? No....because everyone already knows that not the entire nation of Japan attacked Pearl Harbor....their government made that decision. Same with the Germans and the British. If those women of the view think that we viewers are so stupid to hear O'Rielly say that "the Muslims attacked us on 9/11" and we are all sitting there thinking that the entire Muslim population were in on that...then they are just rediculous. I'm not so stupid to sit there and think that. I know what he meant. And although I am not opposed to the Muslims building their mosques in our country, after all, we have our Christian churches and temples built through out the world, I do beleive that out of respect for those families and those people that lived through the horror of 9/11, they should sell the land they purchased and build their Mosque further away from the actual site of where 9/11 occurred. It is kind of a knife twisting thing to have it built there. I think that would be the honorable thing to do.

We don't know God's time.

I hardly get any time to post or write anymore, even about some of the topics I've promised to write about. Even in this bad economy, I still have way too much work on my desk (Malachi 3:10). Nevertheless, I try to read as much as I can, and I found this article by Orson Scott Card closely reflects the way I think about most of church doctrine. That is, God has revealed only a sliver of the 'what to do' and 'what not to do,' and has revealed almost nothing about the how and why. Click on the title of this post of find it.