The cloak and dagger tale circulating on the Internet about a group of hackers who claim to have purloined old tax returns of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney and say they will release them to whoever is first to pay their ransom suggests why a federal court case that absolved former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards of campaign finance crimes was wrongly decided.
During his 2008 campaign, Edwards relied on the largesse of two wealthy Democratic donors to keep his affair with campaign worker Rielle Hunter secret. Edwards' campaign did not report the donations, nor did it report the payments made to support Hunter, who was pregnant with Edwards's child at the time. Had the public learned of Edwards' affair, his candidacy would most certainly have been over. Justice Department lawyers argued that Edwards, in benefiting from huge undisclosed financial support and undisclosed expenditures, flouted campaign finance laws that limit the size of donations and restrict the uses of that money to campaign purposes. The jury disagreed (as did many campaign finance experts) and Edwards walked free.
Fast forward to the 2012 campaign, and a story almost as bizarre as l'affaire Edwards. An anonymous group claims that it broke into a Tennessee office of PricewaterhouseCoopers, the accounting firm that prepares Mitt Romney's tax returns. The group further claims that they secured years of Romney's returns, and has offered to sell them to whomever can come up with $1 million in an Internet currency known as bitcoin. If no one antes up, the group says they will release the tax returns to the media.
Now, let's steal a few bases to make some assumptions: First, that the group has claimed to have legitimately stolen Romney's returns (by no means certain, given some of the inconsistencies in their story); second, that the Romney campaign believes release of the returns would damage the campaign. We need not assume that Romney hasn't paid taxes for ten years as Sen. Harry Reid famously and without substantiation claimed, or that they show Swiss bank accounts, Cayman Islands corporations, Netherlands Antilles trusts and the locations of jars of cash buried in the backyards of Romney's many homes -- it's enough for the Romney campaign to worry that discussion of his tax returns, his refusal to release them, their release by a third party and the inevitable vetting of them would distract from his message during a critical part of the campaign.
Though Romney's campaign certainly has enough money to pay the ransom, it's not clear that blackmail is a legitimate campaign expense, and in any case having a million-dollar expenditure in bitcoin currency show up on a campaign finance report could be an even more damaging story than having the returns released. The same disclosure would be required if the Republican National Committee or a Super PAC like Restore Our Future paid the ransom. But suppose a wealthy donor -- an Edward Conard (who tried to use an LLC to anonymously donate $1 million to Restore Our Future) or a Sheldon Adelson (who has devoted a small fortune to supporting Republican candidates) or the Koch Brothers -- decided to pay the ransom. For the sake of argument, let's also assume that they do so without telling the Romney campaign in advance, informing them only after their bitcoin transaction that the matter is taken care of.
Let's further suppose that, tax issue averted, Mitt Romney wins a narrow victory in November. How much access could that wealthy donor who paid the ransom expect? Not only had he helped the Romney campaign hide potentially damaging material that could have cost them the election, he would have in hand that material. Imagine the leverage that kind of relationship between someone who, the North Carolina jury told us, is not a campaign donor and need not disclose the payments that benefited the candidate.
Of course the potential for leverage the other way exists too. Suppose a Democratic donor acquires the material, and quietly informs the Obama campaign of the fact. Suppose he has issues before the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Internal Revenue Service or is seeking federal loans for a pet solar project, and would be happy to release the material should his own issues get a little presidential attention.
It would be fair to regard all this as conspiracy mongering were it not for the Edwards precedent, in which a candidate benefited from backdoor conduits and a donor slush fund that aided his campaign -- with no disclosure.
This post was written by Bill Allison.
Follow The Sunlight Foundation on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@SunFoundation
Rev. Seamus P. Finn, OMI: Show Us the Money
After death, while their husbands are creating and ruling over planets, the women have the questionable honor of bearing his "spirit children" for eternity. These spirit children descend to their Father's planet to inhabit bodies as mortals, who are then ruled over by him. Mormon Doctrine states that these celestially married men and women "will live eternally in the family unit and have spirit children, thus becoming Eternal Fathers and Eternal Mothers" (516). A man who has multiple wives can beget many more spirit children, making him much more powerful. Birth control is, of course, very strongly discouraged. Ambitious Mormon men must beget many children with as many wives as possible, for "their glory (in heaven) is in proportion to the number of their wives and children" (Snowden 141).
Mormons believe that all humans are literally the spirit children of God who are momentarily inhabiting fleshly bodies. This creates a philosophical problem for them, for how could their spirits have been begotten by a Father without a wife? Therefore, in addition to the Father in Heaven, there is "a Woman of like glory, perfection, and holiness" who is "associated with him as a Mother" (McConkie 516). This seems quite unusual for such a patriarchal religion, and indeed, there is almost nothing written about Her. There is also no explanation for God's disregard for his own commandments on polygamy.
http://www.exmormon.org/mormwomn.htm
Ba Rock the votre Moving right along
http://saintsalive.com/resourcelibrary/mormonism/a-few-simple-comparisons
"Celestial" marriage, as this eternal marriage is often called, is essential for Mormon women. Without being celestially married to a holder of the priesthood, a woman cannot be "saved" (Green 154). Mary Ettie Smith, a Mormon woman who left the church and Utah in 1856, said that "women do not amount to much in themselves," and that women in those times were often celestially married to men they had no intention of ever living with, so that they could have a man who would be able to get them into heaven (Green 154).
http://www.exmormon.org/mormwomn.htm
There were other justifications for polygamy. Mormons were often fond of stating that they were better than "Gentiles," as non-Mormons are called, because their system of polygamy kept them from committing the sin of adultery. Polygamous marriage was supposed to "make possible the procreation of enough bodies for thousands of spirits which have long awaited incarnation" (Snowden 141). Some Mormons today explain that many men died from war and disease, and all of the extra women needed husbands to support them. A less sympathetic view of polygamy was voiced by Sir Richard Burton on a visit to Utah. He said, "The..motive for polygamy in Utah is economy. Servants are rare and costly; it is cheaper and more comfortable to marry them" (Wallace 94).
Polygamous marriage is basically essential to Mormon theology. Mormon Doctrine states that God was once a human man, and "He is now a glorified, resurrected Personage having a tangible body of flesh and bones" (250). As a matter of fact, "all gods first existed as spirits, came to an earth to receive bodies, and then, after having passed through a period of probation on the aforesaid earth, were advanced to the exalted position they now enjoy" (Hoekema 38). After death, a good Mormon man who has followed a few certain rules is catapulted to this same status and receives his own planet to populate and rule over (Fife 103).
There were many reasons given for the practice of polygamy. The one most popular during the time was, of course, that God had commanded it, through Joseph Smith. The Mormon belief is that polygamy is holy and was practiced commonly in ancient times until people began spreading false religions. Adam, in his previous, spiritual existence, had many wives, of whom Eve was just one (Wallace 291). Jesus was also a polygamist "who was married whereby He could see His seed before He was crucified" (Hoekema 56), and his wives were Mary, Martha, and Mary Magdalene. Mormon Doctrine states that the president of the church had to suspend the practice of polygamy in 1890 because of the conditions at the time, but "obviously the holy practice will commence again after the Second Coming..." (578).
On July 12, 1843, Joseph Smith declared that God had given him a new revelation concerning marriage and he revealed it to his brother and other high-ranking male church members. This revelation from God, at one point, specifically instructed "mine handmaid Emma Smith, Joseph's wife" to accept this doctrine and allow Joseph to have as many wives as he liked, as long as they were all "virtuous and pure" (Snowden 191). Emma Smith was a very strong-willed woman, and Joseph was so frightened of her wrath that he sent his brother Hyrum to inform her of God's plan. E
At age twelve, boys become members of the Aaronic, or lesser priesthood, and at nineteen become eligible for the Melchezedek, or higher priesthood. Members of either priesthood are higher authorities on everything than are non-members. Women are, of course, excluded from the priesthood. This practice in effect says that a woman's prepubescent son is more qualified to advise her than she is to advise him. The official explanation is that women are kept from having the priesthood because women are more spiritual than men, therefore, men need to have the priesthood to teach them how to be better people (Johnson 86). Women are also told that, because they have the all- important ability to bear children, men need the power of the priesthood merely to remain equal with them.
if u ask i will give URL HP does not like URLS?
The Role of Women in Mormonism
This article is used with the author's permission. I found it to be particularly insightful. This might help explain to the readers why for every letter I get from a man, I get 4 letters from women who were Mormons. This ratio has held consistent now for the last 3 months. - Eric 2/9/96.
Author's name: Jessica Longaker
The Bibliography is on the bottom of this page
Religious Studies 263
March 27, 1995
Women and Mormonism
Many religions have recently begun changing in an attempt to equalize the roles and responsibilities of men and women. Mormonism is one of the exceptions. The Mormon position on women has changed little since the early 1800's, when the official view was that "woman's primary place is in the home, where she is to rear children and abide by the righteous counsel of her husband" (McConkie 844). This attitude, coupled with the doctrine of polygamy and the absolute power claimed by the men of the church, created a legacy of profound sexism which modern Mormonism has been unable to escape.
\
There's a sewer that runs from K Street to Capital Hill and the unSupreme Court has openly ensured that its carrying capacity be increased manifold.
http://bermudasun.bm/main.asp?SectionID=24&SubSectionID=270&ArticleID=60483
These guys should call Larry!