Amen

Only in Utah my friends... only in Utah.

Quote of the Day

"God has spoken to me. I listen to God and what I've heard is that I'm supposed to devote myself to rebuilding the conservative base of the Republican Party."

Tom Delay, Former House Majority Leader
Quoted in "Party Unfaithful" by Jeffrey Goldberg
New Yorker Magazine, June 4, 2007 Issue

Caffeinated Mormons

I recently came across a post on the LDS blog By Common Consent that featured the caffeine content of a variety of popular drinks. One particular comment on the thread got me thinking about how many of these drinks stack up to some popular chocolate products on a caffeine per ounce basis. The results are sure to keep the debate on whether caffeine is prohibited by the Mormon Word of Wisdom raging on...

Drinks	Caffeine per Ounce
Starbucks Coffee	23.3 ML
Brewed Coffee	13.4 ML
Rock Star	10 ML
Red Bull	9.6 ML
Mountain Dew	4.6 ML
Dr. Pepper	3.4 ML
Sunkist Orange Soda	3.4 ML
Coca Cola	2.8 ML
Barq's Root Beer	1.8 ML
Hot Cocoa	.63 ML

Chocolate	Caffeine per Ounce
Semi-Sweet Chocolate Chips	17.5 ML
Hershey's Special Dark Chocolate Bar	12.4 ML
Regular Hershey's Chocolate Bar	5.8 ML
Reeses Peanut Butter Cups	2.5 ML

Quote of the Day

"We had five boys that were 10 or younger.... I was willing to change the urine-soaked diapers, but the messier types gave me dry heaves. So my wife allowed me to escape that."

Mitt Romney
Interview for GQ Magazine's
Upcoming Father's Day Issue

An Open Letter To John Ashcroft

John,

I owe you an apology big man. Your former Deputy Attorney General James Comey's testimony yesterday before the Senate Judiciary Committee convinced me that I may not have given you a fair shake as Attorney General. I used to think of you as a narrow-sighted rubber stamp who was too tightly-wound and carried a rather prickly demeanor. I'm here to say I was mistaken. Now don't get me wrong, I'm still not a fan of your politics. The original Patriot Act had some pretty troubling issues and your proposed Patriot Act II seemed like one hefty push toward a police state. Plus, you have to admit, draping a curtain in front of the Spirit of Liberty in the Justice Department was just a little weird, and, the fact that you lost to a dead guy in the 2000 Senate election and were subsequently confirmed as Attorney General three months later by a meager 58-42 vote in the very Senate you just left suggests that neither your former constituency nor your former colleagues were really itching to have you back.

But James Comey's riveting testimony (you can watch it here) does speak volumes about your integrity and your respect for the law. I'll admit to being surprised, but it was refreshing. I found it inspiring that you stood up to an attempt by the White House to take advantage of you in a gravely ill state and at a time when you had temporarily ceded your powers of office to your Deputy, Comey. To lock horns with the full force of the Executive Branch as Alberto Gonzales and Andrew Card attempted to sidestep your Deputy and a Justice Department determination that the Surveillance Program had no legal basis is no small thing. But, despite your weakened condition, you held your ground and refused to re-authorize the Program. Comey describes you as having "stunned" him:

[Attorney General Ashcroft] lifted his head off the pillow and in very strong terms expressed his view of the matter, rich in both substance and fact... and then laid his head back down on the pillow, seemed spent, and said to them, "But that doesn't matter, because I'm not the attorney general."

When the White House reauthorized the program anyway without any signature from the Justice Department attesting to its legality, the fact that you stood ready to resign, along with most of the Justice Department's leadership, made clear to me that I'd sized you up wrong. We may not agree on all the same policies, but it seems that we do see eye-to-eye on the need for the rule of law. When the Administration backed away from its position and changed its Program to secure the Justice Department's blessing—ultimately deciding to submit all of its surveillance requests for judicial approval—a Constitutional crisis was averted and the Executive branch maintained its legitimacy.

So a belated thank you John Ashcroft. On this decision, you were right on key and you truly Let The Eagle Soar.

Sincerely,

Marc

Rate Bohn's Spam

Over the past few years I've developed a habit of sorts... I periodically email out news articles that I come across to people I think would be interested in them. Some might call this spam, but I like to think of it in a more positive light... as something more akin to a listserv.

It started out as just a few emails here and there to a couple of family members and a few friends. Over time, however, it's become a much larger list of family, friends, classmates, and associates. The articles I send out sometimes cover funny stories of general interest, occasionally something betraying my political bent, but, more often than not, they tend to deal in some way with Mormons or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I readily admit that I've unilaterally opted most of the current "News Group" onto the list (though a good handful or two have requested themselves on), but I tell myself that everyone must enjoy the emails since I have yet to receive any cease and desist orders. That's not saying much though. My emails very likely might be flagged and filtered as spam by some who don't want to risk offense.

Others might take a more low key approach in the form of subtle mockery. One friend, Woo, actually started a pretty entertaining blog devoted solely to chronicling and abridging "the hundreds of uninvited emails of varying quality from Marc." For a time, he essentially lampooned every one of my emails on the site (though I did manage a few positive reviews, see here and here). He's thrown in "the proverbial towel" on his gold standard of one post for every email, but it seems as though he still plans on gracing us with commentary from time to time. We'll see if he can keep a handle on inflation and manage another statistical analysis of bohnspam (my personal favorite). I should note that I've specifically asked him if he wants off the list and he didn't bite, so perhaps he enjoys the emails more than he lets on.

In any event, for those that want off the list, feel free to let me know (no offense taken). For those who appreciate the additional opportunities to bag on me, have at it. And for those who are curious enough now to want on the list, just say the word (I promise I won't tell anyone).

Hello World...

Hello world. I'm back.

I've weathered yet another round of finals and managed to tie the bow on three years of law school.

Three years down... just like that. Don't get me wrong, by all accounts law school was a pretty miserable experience, but I'm still surprised by how fast it flew by. I haven't quite adjusted to the idea of moving beyond academia into the professional world, but I'm betting that preparing for the bar exam will disabuse me of that hesitation.

For the time being, I'm just relishing the post-finals (and post-law school) lull. I submitted my bar application today, and I tell ya', life is good. The difference between this week and last week is simply remarkable... No worrying in the back of my mind at all times about papers to write, reading to catch up on, outlining to do, or essay questions to prepare for. Best of all, no "next semester." I've got myself a job lined up this fall; I've passed the mantel on all of my extra-curricular responsibilities; and I've got the satisfaction of having finished one of the hardest things I've ever undertaken. I honestly think it's the first time I've fully relaxed in almost three years.

While I'm well aware that the stress is certain swing back full circle as my bar studies ramp up, it sure is satisfying to catch my breath.

Lurking

Have no fear. I haven't abandoned the blog. I guess you could say I've just been lurking in the bushes a bit of late. Know that I have a few posts simmering, though, which I hope to throw on the front burner soon.

Romney Explained

As some of you might have noticed, I haven't been the most prodigious blogger of late… at least not on this site. I’m going to just come clean and admit it. I've been unfaithful to my blog. For the last two months I've been contributing to another site called Law Students for Romney. Since that might strike those of you familiar with my liberal leanings as a little paradoxical, allow me to set the record straight. I am not really a law student for Mitt Romney. I am, however, an avid Romney watcher who was invited by a friend to contribute on a Romney-themed blog. I accepted, and that's that.

While I am admittedly something of a political junkie anyhow, much of my interest in Romney actually stems from the fact that he's a Latter-day Saint. As a result, I've been especially attuned to how he's presenting himself as a candidate and how the media has portrayed him and his faith.

So just what do I think of Romney and his candidacy? Frankly, I'm disappointed. I actually used to like Romney a lot. I even encouraged my sister in Massachusetts to vote for him back in 2002. Politically he was a centrist then; not overly ideological and very pragmatic. Romney was the problem solver. He spoke of compromise and bridging differences, and his rhetoric was overwhelmingly positive. Today, however, he stands in stark contrast to his former self. In less than four years he's become a staunch conservative, shifting his policy positions on a broad range of issues including, but not limited to, campaign finance, affirmative action, taxes, gun control, stem-cell research, gay rights, immigration, bilingual education, and, most well-known, abortion. He's gone from rejecting the "Reagan Republican" label, to embracing it. Now, to make clear, I'm fine with policy shifts in and of themselves. In fact, one of my criticisms of the current administration has been its stubborn resistance to change. Flexibility can be a good thing sometimes, but in Romney's case, the timing of his many position shifts raises the specter of political expediency. Add to this the hard line Romney's begun to take on important issues like immigration, foreign policy, economics, and the environment, and, for me, his candidacy really begins to lose his luster.

Chuck Todd, the incoming political director for NBC News, captures my feelings well in a recent article he wrote about Romney and John Edwards' political shifts:

[Romney] is widely respected in the business community as someone who knows how to tackle a problem, and he seems to have applied this mindset to his ideology. Technically, he's doing all the things that should please the right and make himself more palatable to conservatives.

But the mistake Romney appears to be making is that as he's fixed all the little problems with the sale of his product (in this case, himself) to niche markets, he's done serious damage to the overall brand of what he represented previously.

Romney's best traits, arguably, are the outsider tag and his problem-solving skills. But he's so bogged down in proving his bona-fides to conservatives that questions about his overall authenticity are now damaging his reputation as an outsider and a problem-solver. By getting into bed with many conservative elites, is he no longer an outsider? He's literally checking every box (NRA membership? Check; Heritage Foundation contribution? Check; and so on). The more he plays the flip-flopper and finger-in-the-wind, the less his best traits come through.

It's still early, but both Edwards and Romney need to recognize that if they lose the personal connection that once made them seem like naturals, it won't matter how well they answer the NRA or SEIU questionnaires. Voters will punish the candidates for losing touch with the people they most need to stay in touch with -- themselves.

Even more disconcerting to me is the rhetoric that has accompanied Romney's conservative turn. Rather than elevating the debate and focusing on substantive issues, Romney has adopted the hyperbole of the far right. In several of the speeches and interviews I've seen over the past few months, he's sought to demonize the left with broad, over-reaching generalizations on values, security, and economic policy. A recently leaked internal campaign document of Romney's lists France, Massachusetts, liberalism, and "Hollywood values" as "bogeymen" he intends to target. The document also lays out how Romney plans criticize the European Union for wanting to "drag America down to Europe's standards." In his speeches, Romney all too often caricatures those with whom he disagrees, erecting strawmen out of targets like France, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Democrats, and the so-called "liberal media," which he easily knocks down for cheap applause. In the Republican primary campaign, he’s also begun to fight a somewhat dirty campaign, going so far as to unapologetically misrepresent the positions of his competitors at times.

I've never been a fan of partisan warfare, but I recognize that the realities of running a presidential campaign require a certain amount of stereotyping, generalizing and even mudslinging. That said, as I’ve listened to Romney, I've found myself much more comfortable with the rhetoric of several of the other candidates on both sides of the aisle. John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Bill Richardson, and especially Barack Obama have, on the whole, run campaigns that pander less and maintain a more elevated political discourse than Romney's (whether this continues to hold true remains to be seen, but it's something I hope the candidates continue to strive for).

The worst part for me is that I think Romney had the potential to be a great candidate. I believed his executive experience and his pragmatic approach set him apart as someone who could really affect positive change in Washington. Now I feel like Romney is becoming just another ideologue who grandstands for the party base. My father, a political scientist, thinks that Romney believes it is the only way he has a chance with religious conservatives who are already wary of his Mormon faith. Perhaps Romney is just being "pragmatic" in how he's choosing to run his campaign, but that doesn’t make me feel any better about his candidacy. I vigorously defend Romney when his faith is attacked, but I have a hard time defending many of his policy shifts. He’s boxed himself in on a whole variety of issues. I don’t think it’s possible for him to go back to being the pragmatist that he was anymore without sacrificing all of the credibility he’s attempted to build with this rightward shift in the first place.

My Wife

Thought I should plug Melbo's triumphant return to the blogosphere.