Anti-FLDS Senate Hearing: What’s Harry Reid really up to?
It’s official. At 10 a.m. one week from today, the blow-hards of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee will entertain testimony from a roster of notorious anti-FLDS charlatans, including the right august Senator Harry Reid, himself the U.S. Senate Majority Leader and the nation’s most prominent MINO — Mormon in name only.
What is Harry Reid up to? What does he get in exchange for not only showboating and showcasing polygamy but getting down and dirty as a witness? I think Reid has at least three motives for attacking the FLDS:
1. Reid simply has to be the center of attention. This is a guy who, when he visits LDS church congregations in Nevada, insists — yes insists — on sitting on the “stand” at the front of the chapel. As if his political position entitles him to that ecclesiastical recognition.
2. Reid is trying to drum up politics and finances for expanding the power of the CPS cabal all across the country. The evidence from Rachelle Kippack at Southern Utah’s KCSG TV:
Reid’s spokesperson said the Senator [Reid] believes that the federal government could better help protect women and children.
Now, there’s a role for the federal government: protect women and children. And how does the federal gov’t “help” anyone? Pour on the money and power. Money, money, money. Power, power, power.
3. Reid thinks he’ll curry political favor with anti-FLDS Mormons (who may be more politically dominant in Nevada than in Utah) some of whom may resent how the FLDS have dragged the LDS brand once again through the polygamy morass. Understand here that I am NOT saying that all Nevada Mormons have it in for the FLDS. But it’s a good bet that some do. And Reid wants their votes.
If Reid really wants to protect women and children, he might ask the Senate Judiciary Committee to call Harriet O’Neill, John Specia, and Barbara Walther to testify about how, in future, they can follow the letter and spirit of the Constitution, Texas judicial recusal statutes, the Texas family law, and the Texas judicial Code of Conduct. That would be a real contribution. But Reid’s focus isn’t on what he can do for his country. He’s in this for himself.
* * *
July 16, 2008
NOTICE OF COMMITTEE HEARING
The Senate Committee on the Judiciary has scheduled a hearing on “Crimes Associated with Polygamy: The Need for a Coordinated State and Federal Response” for Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 226 of the Senate Dirksen Office Building.
Senator Whitehouse will preside.
By order of the Chairman
8 comments
LDS PR Manager - Looks like Texas screwed it up AGAIN. I see sympathy growing and reporters running. What can we do now Harry?
Senator Righteous Reid - Call in the EXPERTS.
LDS PR Manager - Experts at what?
Senator Righteous Reid - Just get me a list of ex-members. We’ll have an ‘invitation only’ party up on the hill.
I think something is being missed in all of this starting right from the first hoax phone call. It’s not just about the fact that these folks practice polygamy, it’s also about the fact that they don’t practice miscegenation. Check out Reid’s wife and the families of some of the worst persecutors including at least one AG and take a look at the way the Salt Lake City gang is pushing miscegenation.
Bob,
You’d have to point out to me a link or two to get started on that theory.
While on that “miscegenation” topic, I did anticipate that such would make it more difficult to determine parentage in the tests they ran.
I’d like to see the results of that testing. Judging by the limit of last names shared, it would have to require more markers than normal to eliminate those who are not the parents of a specific child.
Going off of the list of parents in that published notice of a suit, there were 174 parents names identified.
There were 29 various names, with 8 of them looking to be actually 4 if you allow for a slight variance in spelling (ie; Allred v. Allread…).
About 70% of them shared the last names of Barlow, Jeffs, Jessop[s], Johnson or Steed.
For comparison to how similar the DNA test results would be, you only need 15 of the 26 letters in the alphabet (<60%) to spell all those names.
There were 35 Jessop[s]‘ listed. Imagine how similar the profiles of all the children coming from that group of parents are. Then factor in that there is a very limited number of profiles that were not related to each other going back 3, 4 or 5 generations.
That should read “There were 29 various LAST names…”
“3. Reid thinks he’ll curry political favor with anti-FLDS Nevada Mormons (who may be more politically dominant in Nevada than in Utah)…”
Okay, hold the phone, Kurt. The LDS population in Utah is still pretty close to 70% of the total. And the LDS population in Nevada is only about 6.4% of the total, at the most. I don’t see how 6.4% of a population in one state can possibly be more dominant than 70% of the population of a neighboring state. I’m assuming Mormons in Nevada still only get one vote, just like Mormons in Utah. So I don’t understand how you can make a statement like that. It wasn’t Nevada Mormons who sent Harry Reid to Washington; it was a majority of the other 93.6%. And it’s a majority of that majority that he’s going to have to curry favor with in order to stay there.
I’m often vocally critical of Sen. Reid in my home. My wife said to me on one of these occasions, that from all reports she’s heard, Harry Reid is a very good, active member of the Church. I replied that I’m not criticizing his conduct as a member of the Church, but as a U.S. Senator, he sucks. And I stand by that. I’m perfectly willing to let the Lord judge Mr. Reid for his personal life and conduct. But as a politician, citizens have a right to judge his conduct as a Senator, and as Senate Majority Leader, he represents more than just the state of Nevada, and has a responsibility to more than just the Democratic majority. He should be looking out for the interests of the American people, and I don’t believe he’s doing it.
Jack —
I respect your views, but I think it’s fair to say that if Nevada Mormons abandoned Reid, Reid would lose. They’re a very powerful voice, especially in Clark County. And I think Reid may be badly miscalculating the impact of his anti-polyg vendetta.
As to Reid’s behavior in relation to my view of what it means to be a Mormon “true blue, through and through,” my personal brand is associated with the Church. So is Reid’s. Therefore, most unfortunately, my brand is tarnished by Reid. To the extent that his bad public behavior is wrongly associated with his religious affiliation, it’s a problem for me and all of us.
Yes, Reid and I will settle up with our Maker later. I can’t and won’t get in the middle of his reckoning. But meanwhile, I have a branding issue. I don’t speak for the Church. But I can speak for myself. Reid does not exemplify — in his official conduct — what I view as true blue Mormonism. And it’s a terrible shame. He could do so much good.
K
Jack —
Just a follow up to your question about how Nevada Mormons could — in theory — dominate Nevada’s politics more so than Utah’s Mormons dominate in Utah. It’s actually pretty simple. Nevada Mormons can dominate in Nevada much like Justice Kennedy currently dominates the Supreme Court — divide and conquer. As long as the non-Mormons are split relatively evenly between for and against Reid, a committed, coordinated group of Mormons can control Reid’s election outcome.
Consider that Reid won his 1998 re-election bid against Ensign by 459 votes. I have zero doubt that Reid won at least a thousand Mormon votes just because he attended a few sacrament meetings here and there.
In Utah, if the 70 percent of Mormons are equally divided on whatever (certainly not presidential politics, where they have routinely voted Republican), non-Mormons can walk in and decide the issue with the force of a pinky finger.
There’s also the question of political engagement in different areas of Utah. With SLC at “only” 50 percent Mormon (who are often bitter political enemies), low engagement outside of SLC combined with a split Mormon vote in SLC and a committed, large non-Mormon voting bloc in SLC can swing the election.
Mona Charen has an interesting article on this point in relation to J. Kennedy — http://realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/06/the_republic_of_kennedy.html.
By the way, I wrote today’s MINO post before I saw your comment, above. Wasn’t trying to poke a stick in your eye.
K
We need to contact the Senate Judiciary Committe anyway we can and demand fair treatment for the FLDS. We have to light a fire under their feet.
Leave a Comment