Category Archives: Politics

Silliness at work

Current events, Main, Politics

This is somewhat moot now, what with Romney suspending his campaign, but it’s silly nevertheless. Steve Sailer over at VDARE has noted that Mitt Romney has largely been winning in states with caucuses and has an explanation:

That seems to be a pattern — Romney does well in caucuses and loses in primaries. Before today, he won caucuses in Wyoming, Nevada, and Maine, and a primary in his “home” state of Michigan. Perhaps that’s just because the more dedicated, public affairs-oriented individuals who show up at caucuses have carefully assessed each candidate’s positions and resumes and made a responsible choice for Romney.

Or maybe … it’s because Mormons keep packing the caucuses.

Unfortunately, I can’t find exit polls for Colorado and Minnesota, but we do know that Romney’s victory in the Nevada caucus was boosted by Mormons making up 25% of the GOP caucusers and going close to 100% for Romney. So, I have my suspicions about his other caucus victories. If anybody has any evidence one way or another, let me know.

For starters (as I wrote Steve and told him), if you take his article and substitute “Obama” for “Romney” and “African-Americans” for “Mormons”, the article quickly seems silly, if not pointless.

Second, I’m not sure how Mormons would “pack” caucuses. My wife attended the Republican caucuses last Tuesday night; everyone attending was carefully checked against voter registration roles to ensure that they were currently registered for that precinct. (In fact, my wife said a friend of ours — a Mormon, no less! — was turned away because his voter registration wasn’t current.) Since Mormons only make up a little over 2% of Colorado’s population, the idea of Mormons somehow accounting for Romney’s 60% of the caucus votes — other than by simply showing up in their own precincts, as anyone could — seems far fetched. ..bruce..

Dirty tricks in Virginia?

Current events, Main, Politics

I found the following interesting item over at the Washington Times:

Is a conspiracy afoot by an unnamed Republican presidential campaign to draw votes away from former Massachusetts governor and Mormon Mitt Romney?

That’s what one Inside the Beltway reader wants to know, saying that at 7:30 p.m. on the evening of Super Tuesday, two young men claiming to be Mormons knocked on the front door of her Northern Virginia home.

“Interestingly enough, the Virginia presidential primary is one week away,” she notes. “I’m not normally the suspicious type, but it dawned on me that those two young men were not Mormons, but supporters from another presidential campaign … trying to hurt Romney with this religious card.”

She points out that most people “find it irritating to be interrupted during the dinner hour, and I think most door-to-door salespeople know that. I’ve never known any religious door knockers to canvass neighborhoods at night. And besides, these guys were not good looking enough to be Mormons.”

Gotta love that last line. Still, they well could be LDS missionaries. I don’t know exactly where this woman lived other than “Northern Virginia” (which covers a bit of territory; I used to live in NoVa myself), so I don’t know which LDS mission would cover that area and what rules that particular mission might have about tracting at night.

Here are the big questions:

That should be enough to identify them. 🙂 ..bruce..

P.S. OK, wearing Doc Martens isn’t strictly required, but it sure is common. And, boy, do I wish I had had Doc Martens during my two years in Central America back in 1972-74. If you think it’s hard finding size 13 dress shoes here in the States….

Carter: missing the point?

Belief systems, Current events, Main, Politics, World Religions

Consider the following two quotes. Here’s the first one:

“…But you never asked me what my paper is about! I’m taking the text about growing up to the stature of Christ and working out an idea which I feel sure you’ll be interested in. I’m going to point out how people always forget that Jesus…was a comparatively young man when he died. He would have outgrown some of his earlier views, you know, if he’d lived. I’m going to ask my audience to consider what his mature views would have been. A profoundly interesting question. What a different Christianity we might have had if only the Founder had reached his full stature! I shall end up pointing out how this deepens the significance of the Crucifixion. One feels for the the first time what a disaster it was; what a tragic waste…so much promise cut short.”

I’m sure many of you recognize this quote; it’s from C. S. Lewis’s classic work The Great Divorce; in this particular passage (found in Chapter 5), a ‘Christian intellectual’ refuses to go to heaven so that (among other reasons) he can go back down to his ‘Theological Society’ in purgatory to read this paper.

And now here’s the second quote, in which former US President Jimmy Carter speculates on how better things might have been if Christ had accepted Satan’s temptation to rule over all the kingdoms of the earth and thus — one has to conclude logically — pass up His own crucifixion (from an article by Shawn Macomber at The American Spectator):

What a wonderful and benevolent government Jesus could have set up. How exemplary justice would have been. Maybe there would have been Habitat projects all over Israel for anyone who needed a home. And the proud, the rich, and the powerful could not have dominated their fellow citizens! As a twentieth-century governor and president I would have had a perfect pattern to follow. I could have pointed to the Bible and told other government leaders, “This is what Jesus did 2000 years ago in government. Why don’t we do the same?”

Anyone else see some eerie parallels here? Beyond that, I’m not sure Carter realizes why Satan’s offer was a temptation and why it was a good thing for Christ to refuse it. [UPDATE, based on personal communications from Shawn Macomber] Or maybe he does: Ed Morrisey over at Captain’s Quarters defends Carter and cites the subsequent paragraph from Carter’s book to indicate that the above paragraph has satiric overtones:

But the devil stipulated fatal provisos: an abandonment of God, and an acknowledgment of earthly things as dominant. … Anyone who accepts kingship based on serving the devil rather than God will end up a tyrant, not a benevolent leader.

On the third hand, Carter in this paragraph seems to still consider the idea a great one — he just rejects the “fatal provisos.” Macomber has his own doubts about Carter’s meaning and intent, as does Micah Tilman, a philosophy lecturer at Catholic University. Here’s a full, continuous extract from Carter’s book, so that you can make your own decision:

The devil’s third and final temptation was his offer to allow Jesus to replace Caesar and other leaders as ruler of the entire world. What a wonderful and benevolent government Jesus could have set up! How exemplary the justice would have been! Maybe there would have been Habitat projects all over Israel for anyone who needed a home. And the proud, the rich, and the powerful could not have dominated their fellow citizens.

It is easy to see the attractive nature of this offer. It would have not just exalted Jesus but also set an example for centuries of later rules. As a twentieth-century governor and president, I would have had a perfect patterns to follow. I could have pointed to the Bible and told other government leaders, “This is what Jesus did 2,000 years ago in government. Why don’t we do the same?”

But the devil stipulated fatal provisos: an abandonment of God, and an acknowledgment of earthly things as dominant. Jesus answered, “It is written, ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him” (Matthew 4:10). Anyone who accepts kingship based on serving the devil rather than God will end up a tyrant, not a benevolent leader.

Hat tip to Jonah Goldberg at National Review Online for pointing me to the whole brouhaha. ..bruce..

Some campaign advice for Mitt Romney

Current events, Humor, Main, Politics

No, not from me. From Frank J, blogger extraordinaire and author of one of the funniest and most politically incorrect books I’ve ever read:

What Romney needs is an image change. First thing: Grow a goatee and shave your head. That will make you stand out from the paint by numbers presidential candidates. Next, lose the suit and wear something more appropriate for a member of Hell’s Angels. Thirdly, tame a timber wolf and have it follow you around on the campaign trail. Finally, lose the long winded speeches. Instead, just shout to assembled crowds words like “CRUSH!” and “DESTROY!” (those really are great applause lines). If you feel you must say something more, say, “I am Death! My coming cannot be stopped!”

If Romney can pull that off, I’ll not only vote for him, I’ll donate to his campaign.

UPDATED 01/30/08: Frank J. has more information about the ‘real’ Mitt Romney, as well as a photo of Mitt and his wolf Krull.  Heh.  ..bruce..

A smart move by Obama

Main, Politics

[UPDATED 02/04/08 — Here is an LDS Church press release about Michelle Obama visiting LDS Church headquarters today and spending time with Apostles Russell Ballard and Quentin Cook. Hat tip to A Soft Answer.]

[UPDATED 01/31/08 — I’ve been getting some hits from people using search engines to see if Barack Obama is a Mormon. Answer: no, though we’d love to have him. Obama is a member of the Trinity Unity Church of Christ, though he has publicly distanced himself from a few of the actions and comments of its retiring senior pastor, Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr.]

According to the Beehive Standard Weekly — an LDS news source that I encountered for the first time today — the Barack Obama campaign staff is looking to reach out to moderate Latter-day Saints for the general election should McCain and/or Huckabee end up as the Republican candidate:

An important source at the highest levels of the Obama Campaign in Nevada said Thursday that the Obama Campaign is most fearful of Mitt Romney coming out as the Republican candidate as he is dynamic and has a command of economic issues. This revelation came about as the Obama Campaign was inquiring to several Mormon civic leaders about a possible Mormon cross-over vote in the Southwest to Obama if Huckabee or McCain were to be the eventual nominee. The reliable source indicated that the Obama camp is currently implementing a plan to attract Mormon Moderate Republicans to their camp as a second choice to Romney, assuming he doesn’t get the Republican nomination.

If true, this is a smart move for several reasons. First, both the Huckabee and, to a lesser extent, the McCain campaigns have already been involved in attacking or slurring the LDS faith in an effort to counter Romney. From what I can see, there are many Latter-day Saints right now who would frankly refuse to vote for either McCain or (especially) Huckabee for exactly that reason. Most US-based Latter-day Saints have dealt with a lifetime of active anti-Mormon literature and protests from the Religious Right and are largely disgusted thereby.

Second, I suspect that moderate and even liberal Latter-day Saints would be more prone to support Obama rather than Clinton due to the moral baggage that the Clintons would bring back to the White House.

Third, I suspect that many Latter-day Saints would respond to a sincere outreach effort by Obama due to the constant (and, in my opinion, largely erroneous) labeling of Latter-day Saints as racist due to the former policy regarding blacks and the priesthood. It’s interesting to note that Armand Mauss’s sociological research regarding Latter-day Saints’ attitude towards blacks in the late 1960s showed no significant difference with those evinced by white American Protestants or Catholics.1 And as has been well-documented elsewhere, the overwhelming reaction of the LDS Church membership when the policy changed in 1978 was relief and gratitude.

Fourth, while the common caricature of Mormons is as rock-ribbed Republicans, that overlooks the fact that what was the single greatest concentration of Mormons in the world — the population of the state of Utah — kept electing and re-electing Democratic governors for decades. From 1917 until 1985, the governor of Utah was a Democrat for 50 of those 68 years, including a 20-year block from 1965 until 1985. In fact, the single longest-serving Governor (Territorial or State) of Utah, and one of the most popular, was a Democrat: Calvin “Cal” Rampton (1965-1977). Likewise during that same period (1917-1985) at least one of Utah’s US Senators was a Democrat for 52 of those 68 years. Note that this all occurred during a period when Mormons made up a higher percentage of the population of Utah than they did today.

The shift of Mormons away from the Democratic Party over the past 20+ years is, I suspect, due largely to the ‘radicalization’ of the Democratic Party during that time. However, the rise of the Religious Right as a major power base within the Republican Party, particularly with Huckabee’s candidacy, leaves many Mormons uneasy due to the pervasiveness of anti-Mormon literature and attitudes among Evangelical Christians. If the Presidential contest this fall is between a Democratic ticket starring Obama and a Republican ticket with Huckabee and/or McCain, Obama could well be very successful in getting a significant portion of the LDS vote in the Western US. ..bruce..

=======================

1 See Mauss, Armand L. All Abraham’s Children: Changing Mormon Conceptions of Race and Lineage (University of Illinois Press, 2003), esp. Chapters 8 and 9.

Mitt Romney’s new ward? [UPDATED]

Humor, LDS Society, Main, Politics

[UPDATE 01/14/07] A reader kindly pointed out to me that if you go to the “Worship With Us” section on Mormon.org and type in the White House address, it shows that Romney would attend DC 3rd Ward (there have obviously been some changes since I left DC back in 2005). I’ve updated some of my comments below appropriately.

====================================

I belong to an “LDS/National Security” e-mail list (and the fact that such a listserv exits should give this author some pause for thought). Most discussions are serious, but some occasional humorous bits come through. I found this one particularly funny since I lived for six years in the ward (Chevy Chase Ward, Washington DC Stake) that Mitt Romney and his family might well attend were he elected, including a few years in the bishopric (congregational leadeship) of that ward. I’ve stuck in a few notes based on my experience there. ..bruce..
============================

Mitt Romney’s new ward?

So….if Mitt Romney became President of the US (from this point forward referred to as POTUS), won’t we have something we’ve never had before – a president who goes to a specific church? All other presidents belonged to religions that didn’t have tight congregational boundaries. Now, think about that: What Ward would POTUS be in? [See above.] If you are his new Bishop, here are your top 10 questions:

1. Will you allow an inaugural ball to be held in the cultural hall? Do you mount security cameras on top of each basketball rim and have a secret service detail stationed on the stage?

2. Can you call Mitt and Ann as the Nursery leaders… even if you really feel inspired?

3. Who is going to home teach them? Will you call someone who needs activation but may not pass the vetting and national security screening?

4. If Harry Reid [who is in the Chevy Chase Ward] and Mitt Romney are in the same High Priest group, will you need to be there to keep order?

5. Exactly how will tithing settlement work? Will the Secretary of the Treasury come, too?

6. Will you be inviting the new Romney family to speak in Sacrament Meeting… and if they go a little over, at what point do you ask them to sit down?

7. Will the Secret Service do a sweep of the building before each meeting? And if the Romney’s always leave before Sunday School, will the Sunday School president need to interview them? If they stay, where will you hold the class?

8. Can you call the Secret Service agents to help out in Primary?

9. If you give Mitt a calling and the two Democrats in the Ward [NOTE: there’s a lot more than just two Democrats in any of the DC wards and branches] raise their hand AGAINST sustaining him – partly out of habit – does the Supreme Court need to be involved?

10. If you can’t give them a calling (job), and they don’t attend very often (for presidential stuff), will that mean they’re ‘inactive?’ If they’re not active, can you give them a Temple Recommend? And if you do, can they go? Will the Secret Service have to screen the temple too?

11. If the President wants to hold Sacrament Meeting at Camp David or the White House for security reasons, is that a conflict of Church and State?

If you’re assigned to be the Romney’s home teacher:

1. Can you just drop by, no appointment?

2. Can you even call them for an appointment, or do you have to go through the Chief of Staff?

3. Can you bring by Christmas sweets and cookies? Will they be analyzed? And for how many people – family, secret service details?

4. If you don’t come, can the IRS do an audit on you?

5. Will they want to do a national security background check?

6. Do you have to have a permanent companion who has been vetted? Can you just grab any teacher or priest to come with you? And what if that priest has been a little wayward? Do you need to search him first?

7. Do you have to help him move in and out of the White House?

8. If Ann Romney gets sick, are you allowed to bring in meals or at least tell the Relief Society about it?

9. What can you share with the Bishop about the Romneys?

10. Do you have to ask them about their year’s supply?

11. If you get a late night call for a blessing, will reporters follow you around wanting to know what was wrong and what you said?

If Mitt Romney is assigned to be YOUR home teacher,

1. Is telling the group leader you haven’t been home taught a national security breech?

2. If he wants to come at the end of the month, do you accept his reason, ‘I’ve been out of town’?

3. Will he drop by unannounced, or will the media crews give him away?

============================

Heh. The good news is that if Romney were to attend the Chevy Chase Ward, the Washington DC Stake would probably finally buy the property next door to the Chevy Chase Ward building and put in some decent parking — which the Chevy Chase residents in that neighborhood would probably be very grateful for, given all the street parking that gets taken up every Sunday. ..bruce..

What a wonderful opening paragraph!

Belief systems, LDS History, Main, Politics

I found the following article on-line thanks to Google News:

How corrupt are the Democrats with the Mormon Mafia/CIA?

For many years I have warned members of the Mormon Church about secret operations the CIA uses through foreign returned LDS missionaries in controlling every day life throughout the world. The only location not under the control of the Mormon Mafia is the US general public. Americans still believe Mormons are a cult. Since the days of Brigham Young and the announced “Utah War” in 1857 after Albert Pike and the Freemasons (including Heber C. Kimball and BYoung) murdered Mormon Apostle Parley P. Pratt near Fort Smith, Arkansas (9/11/1857 Mountain Massacre beginning event) the One World Order group has (money-changers) failed to destroy the US of A. The following special question given to the three leading Democrat candidates in New Hampshire, plus a recent exposed Democrat letter reflect how corrupt politics has become…

Each time I re-read this paragraph, I keep thinking: there’s a wonderful alternative-history novel in there somewhere. There may even be a coherent and logical train of thought in there, though I have less hope of that; as far as I can tell, just about every sentence (and the occasional individual clause) is a non sequitur to all that precedes it, which itself is a pretty amazing accomplishment.

However, the truly remarkable thing is that the rest of the article, which is quite lengthy, never again mentions Mormons or the LDS Church, which makes the title and opening paragraph even more mystifying — but not as mystifying as to why Google News accepts that web site as a news source. YMMV. ..bruce..

[Note for puzzled readers: “YMMV” is not the Mormon Tetragrammaton. It’s a well-known ‘net acronym for “Your mileage may vary.”]

[And just because I like it so much, I’m putting up this picture again:

Now I'm worried

The photo originally came from here. ..b..]

Ignorance at work

Belief systems, LDS Doctrine, Main, Media, Politics, Press

UPDATED 01/12/07: A more general critique of Feldman’s article can be found over at GetReligion.

Noah Feldman, in today’s New York Times Magazine, puts forth a thesis about “Mormon secrecy” that just is ill-informed. Feldman clearly has access to certain bits of historical information about the Church, but in his effort to establish his main thesis — that the LDS Church is committed to “secrecy” regarding its beliefs — he displays a significant lack of knowledge about the Church itself. To wit:

Like Mormon ritual, much of Mormon theology remains relatively inaccessible to outsiders. The text of the Book of Mormon has always been spread to a broad audience, but the text is not a sufficient guide to understanding the details of Mormon teaching. Joseph Smith received extensive further revelation in the nature of sacred secrets to be shared with only a handful of close associates and initiates within the newly forming church.

First, of course, is the long-standing issue (within LDS circles) as to whether a “Mormon theology” even exists (since, for the most part, there are no “Mormon theologians” nor a “school of Mormon theology”). But setting that aside, I would suspect that Feldman has not spent much time inside an LDS church or a Deseret Book bookstore; I suspect that he has not searched the online “Gospel Topics” section at LDS.org, nor its on-line “Gospel Library“, including archives of LDS General Conference Addresses, various current lesson manuals, and the online version of The Encyclopedia of Mormonism. All these are freely and publicly available to anyone; indeed, the Church works very hard to promote all these sections. In short, while claiming an LDS effort at doctrinal secrecy, he appears to have failed to actually reviewed what the LDS Church says and promotes about its own doctrine.

He also appears to gloss over the fact that the LDS Church has sent out over one million missionaries to preach its message of the Restoration since its founding in 1830, with over 50,000 serving worldwide currently. My experience is that most people outside of the LDS Church complain that we try to tell them too much about our religion, rather than too little.

Beyond that, Feldman’s particulars regarding “Mormon secrecy” — a concept that comes straight out of evangelical anti-Mormon literature — are wrong and could have been easily refuted had he bothered to do a modicum of research. For example, he states:

The course was set for the Mormon religious practice of the 20th century: a process of mainstreaming, both political and theological. The less said the better about the particular teachings of the church, including such practices as the baptism of the dead and the doctrine of the perfectibility of mankind into divine form.

Actually, those two “particular teachings” have always been a key part of the missionary discussions (under “Plan of Salvation”), at least since I served my own full-time mission back in 1972-74. If Feldman had actually looked through Preach My Gospel, the standard LDS missionary discussion guide used by 50,000+ LDS missionaries in teaching investigators worldwide — publicly and cheaply ($6-$9) available via LDS Distribution Services, Deseret Book, and the BYU Bookstore, as well as downloadable as a free PDF file — he would have found the following:

The Savior loves all people and desires their salvation. Yet millions of people have died without having any opportunity to hear the message of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ or receive saving ordinances. Through His loving grace and mercy the Lord makes salvation possible for everyone who did not have the opportunity to receive, understand, and obey the gospel during their mortal lives. The gospel is preached to those deceased people in the spirit world. Members of the Church on earth perform the saving ordinances in behalf of their deceased ancestors and others. Deceased persons living in the spirit world have the opportunity to accept or reject the gospel and the ordinances performed in their behalf.

For this reason, Church members search for information about their ancestors. They complete pedigree charts and family group records and submit the names of deceased relatives who need to have saving ordinances performed on their behalf in sacred temples, This is family history work. Worthy members ages 12 and over, including new members, may receive from their bishop a recommend to perform baptisms for the dead. (p. 86)

And again:

Those who have repented of their sins and received the ordinances of the gosepl and kept the associated covenants will be cleansed by the Atonement of Christ. They will receive exaltation in the highest kingdom, also known as the celestial kingdom. They will live in God’s presence, become like Him, and receive a fullness of joy. (p. 53)

* Exaltation: Eternal life in God’s presence; to become like our Father in Heaven and live in His presence. The greatest of all the gifts of God. Exaltation comes through the Atonement of Christ and through obedience to all the laws and ordinances of the gospel. (p. 58)

So much for the “secret” doctrines.

Beyond that, Feldman appears to commit a version of the Pauline Kael fallacy (“How could Nixon have won? Nobody I know voted for him!”). He assumes LDS secrecy, probably because he — unlike literally millions and millions of people worldwide — has never actually had the missionary discussions, and he probably doesn’t know anyone who has, so he just doesn’t know what LDS missionaries actually teach. He takes the one area of LDS sacred ritual, the temple, and attempts to conflate it — without any real evidence or justification — into a general Mormon tendency towards secrecy. His unsupported (and unsupportable) thesis drives his article, when instead he should have done actual research first and spared himself some embarrassment.

I would recommend that Feldman pick up Preach My Gospel (or download the PDF version) as well as this year’s LDS Relief Society/Priesthood Study Guide, Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith (also available on-line), and read them both. Then maybe he’ll be a bit more qualified to talk about LDS doctrine and its public availability. ..bruce..

[UPDATED 01/06/08 1922 MST — Welcome visitors from the Deseret News LDS Newsline! Feel free to look around. ]

Grading press coverage

Main, Media, Politics, Press

Joel Campbell — an assistant professor of journalism at BYU, who blogs at the LDS Newsline site — has graded (A-F) some recent efforts at press coverage of the LDS Church and its beliefs. He’s pretty blunt and not afraid to name names:

“D” Work: In news reporting classes that I teach I talk a lot about “relevance” and a “news peg.” I couldn’t find much of either in this very long piece about Mitt Romney’s involvement in the building of the Boston Temple in Belmont, Mass. Based on the article’s sheer verbosity, you would think Romney played some leading role in building the temple and selecting the site. Although it is framed with the sinister headline, “Mormon Temple Casts a Shadow,” the article doesn’t make that case. It was written by WaPo Style writer Sridhar Pappu, who appears to be assigned to provide some meaningful narratives on the candidates. This one is a dull story and not too meaningful at that. Maybe Pappu felt like he had more to write after his novella on Romney ran in the September 2005 Atlantic, in which he asked Romney “How Mormon are you?” and then quizzed him about his undergarments. It was certainly one of the low points of the coverage of the presidential campaign.

Read the whole thing. ..bruce..

Current votes for the Anti-Christ

Main, Politics, Preparedness, World Religions

OK, so I’m finishing my preparations this morning for teaching my Sunday School lesson (on the book of Revelation), and the thought strikes me: how many folks out there (and by “folks”, I mean evangelical Christians) believe, fear, or suspect that Mitt Romney may be the ‘Anti-Christ’ alluded to in Revelation by John?

Well, a very simple Google search (Mitt Romney AntiChrist) turns up about 26,000 hits. But, as it turns out, Romney is dead last on the list of major presidential contenders. Here are some searches for the other candidates as well as the current and immediate past Presidents and Vice-Presidents:

  • Mike Huckabee: 156,000 hits
  • Fred Thompson: 108,000 hits
  • Bill Clinton: 84,900 hits
  • Rudi Giuliani: 84,800 hits
  • Ron Paul: 82,700 hits
  • George W. Bush: 64,800 hits
  • Hillary Clinton: 63,500 hits
  • Al Gore: 62,500 hits
  • John Edwards: 61,200 hits
  • Dick Cheney: 40,800
  • Barack Obama: 31,700 hits
  • John McCain: 28,500 hits
  • Mitt Romney: 26,000 hits

Admittedly, this is a crude and inaccurate measure — all I’m checking for is the presence of the word ‘AntiChrist’ along with the candidate’s first and last name. But the results certainly are counter-intuitive: not only is Mitt Romney the lowest on the list, but almost all the other major Republican candidates are ahead of all the major Democratic candidates, John McCain being the exception — but he’s still ahead of Romney.

I may do more refined searches later. ..bruce..