How Mitt Romney Lost the Debate and Won My Vote

By Joshua Uda

A campaign is not a solo act. Armies of advisors flank the party nominee to create a winning persona. They tell the candidate how to dress, what to say, how to say it. They even tell the candidate what to think. And they know best, because they have gathered and studied the market research and the psychological profiles of undecided voters. A candidate must be molded, shaped, and framed to energize the base, and then reshaped, and reframed to win the moderates.

While this process requires a degree of misrepresentation, it is necessary to win. And so… candidates soldier on for the greater good, conforming to the demands of their handlers, knowing that once they are in office, they will be free to follow their own moral compass. Until then, they must make sacrifices, even compromise and misrepresent who they really are if necessary. The end justifies the means.

I watched with great regret as this process played out in 2008. For many years, I had followed the public service of Senator John McCain, and admired him for his independence. He was never afraid to cross the aisle and oppose his own party to do what was right for America. He was one of my heroes, and I always hoped he might someday run for president. When that day came, the man I had come to respect seemed ready to stand his ground in his trademark maverick way, discouraging extreme and inflammatory discourse from his base and holding true to the noblest aspects of his conservative values.

Sadly, as Election Day neared and it became apparent that his opponent was taking the country by storm, John McCain suddenly began to change. His words and positions drifted and began to echo the party line, even those parts that he had previously rejected. Little by little, the man before me began to vanish, and all I could see was a puppet being manipulated by campaign managers and public image consultants. No matter how they tweaked him to appeal to the masses, all I saw was someone who had compromised the one thing I admired most for a shot at the presidency. He had abandoned his true self. He lost my respect, and he lost my vote.

McCain, however, was not the only presidential hopeful to catch my attention. During the primaries, another candidate gave me even greater hope for a better America, when he stood before the nation to speak on the issue of religious freedom. The speech was so moving that even Chris Mathews commented, “We have just witnessed greatness for the first time in this campaign.” And Governor Mitt Romney deserved that praise. He had stood before the nation to speak from his heart, giving a speech that he personally wrote and that expressed who he truly is, a man of great faith, compassion, tolerance, and goodness.

As a public servant, he had a solid public record of independent thinking, sound policy, and bipartisan cooperation – much like Senator McCain. However, unlike any presidential candidate in history, Mitt Romney also had a secret and deeply personal record of sincere compassion, astounding generosity, and humble service to all those around him. I had great hopes for Romney, but it seemed that before his campaign could even begin, he was closing the book and bowing out for the sake of the party.

It’s been a long time since then, and much has changed… but a few days ago, that man went before the nation as the Republican nominee to debate the President of the United States. For over a year, I have watched him campaign across America, but not as the candidate that caught my interest four years ago.

As in 2008, the nominee had been subjected to an extreme Washington makeover. Every aspect of the man, from his clothes to his words, was being carefully selected for him. But most notably absent were his personal values of Christian kindness, respect and compassion, his historic moderation, and his critical thinking. I witnessed a man that many characterized as a heartless bully, an arrogant and reckless war monger, a greedy and condescending aristocrat. In debates one and two, he was visually aggravated as he acquiesced to the demands of his campaign advisors to contend aggressively against the president, and at the end of the second debate, he could not even bring himself to look at his opponent, much less shake his hand. His entire countenance was full of darkness.

Like everyone else, I expected more of the same in the final debate, but something had changed since the week before. This time, Romney was pleasant, polite, and respectful from his first words to his last. He avoided contention throughout the debate, refusing to attack or even counter when attacked, and backed off meekly when confronted with misrepresentations of fact. He gave the president praise for the things he had done right, and honestly expressed agreement with policies that had worked well. Most notably, he deviated from his talking points, abandoning the saber rattling party line expressed so aggressively on his own campaign website, instead speaking of his hopes and aspirations for peace.

And so ended the final debate… with conservatives gawking at their champion for going like a lamb to the slaughter, and liberals mocking yet another astounding flip-flop by a candidate who has struggled to find his political identity.
But that is not what I saw.

In an obscure moment of post-debate punditry, one commentator mentioned that he had called a Romney campaign strategist during the debate to inquire as to the sudden and unexpected change of strategy. The strategist answered with frustration, “It was all Romney’s idea. He insisted that he do it his own way.”
His own way…

In that moment, I saw in Romney a man who had been besieged by stakeholders, each demanding that he represent their interests and ideals, each demanding that he play the game right, the way he had been coached, railing against railing, contending with pride and anger, refusing to give ground or to find common ground. I saw a man who had caved to the demands of the world around him, and a man who deeply regretted it because, despite his success and notable gains… their advice went contrary to everything he stood for and against everything he aspired to be.

I saw a man who, at some point after that second debate, recognized the spirit of contention, looked deep into his heart, and reflected on his own way, on the one and only way he had ever known and had always strived to follow.

"I am the way, the truth, and the light. I say unto you, that ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.

For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another. Behold, this is not my doctrine, to stir up the hearts of men with anger, one against another; but this is my doctrine, that such things should be done away.

Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? Do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? Do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect."

According to the polls, Romney lost the debate. Republicans were quick to criticize him for not going for the jugular, for not attacking and counterattacking, for not proudly boasting of American strength… but they will still vote for Romney, no matter how flawed his performance.
As for me… a staunch and vocal Obama supporter… his performance was perfect.

And despite his earlier failings… his repentance and his courageous rejection of contention, not while on the ropes, but with incredible forward momentum and the goal in sight, risking everything… this example of Christian meekness… brought me to shame, and made me reflect on my own failure to walk in the path of Christ in all things… even in politics.

I want a president who will seek peace in the world. Both candidates claimed that night to want peace. But no argument, no matter how perfectly framed, no matter how eloquently delivered, or how loudly proclaimed could ever say more than the humble and heroic choice of a true Christian to stand as a witness of Christ at all times, in all things, and in all places, even if it be unto death.

Some may say that Romney threw the election that night and committed political suicide by failing to contend and by performing such an obvious about face… but I am convinced that he faced that prospect knowingly, determined to no longer be led by anyone but the King of Kings.

As he stayed after the debate to warmly converse with the President and First Lady, I saw a different look on Governor Romney’s face than I had seen a week earlier, not the personal disappointment and shame of compromise nor the lingering fire of contention, but the deepest and most serene peace that comes only from the Spirit of Truth as it witnesses to your soul that the path you have chosen is the path of Christ, the Son of God. It was the smile I have seen on the faces of Bishops and Stake Presidents as they warmly greet those in their congregations with unconditional love.

I could see then that Brother Romney had the peace of knowing that whether he would win or lose the presidential election, he had taken one step closer to making his calling and election sure. In that moment, he may have lost the debate, but he won my vote. He is the best of us, and I would be honored to have him as my president.

He that seeketh his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

Second Debate Advantage: Romney or Obama?

by Nate Mauch


1. This is a town hall format and from the start people have said Mitt is going to be at his weakest in this setting, and thus lowered expectations slightly. I believe that plays into our favor because when you tell Mitt he can't do something very well he tends to surprise. He's practiced town halls since selecting Paul Ryan and he's held press conferences, both of which Obama has NOT done at all during this campaign. Advantage: Tie

2. Libya, Libya, Libya - I'm hoping that once again the first question is about Libya because if so Mitt will pretty much put Obama on the defensive from the very start. He needs to look him in the eye and demand he tell the people in that town hall the truth about Libya, and tell all those watching the truth. He needs to attack on this hard, but his attack can't be about him, it must be that the American people deserve nothing less than the absolute truth. Paul Ryan obviously had a strategy not to be aggressive and let Biden be Biden and kill himself, but Mitt won't make that mistake and will attack and not let him or the moderator off the hook. Advantage: Mitt

3. Obama has said he's not going to be polite and to me that means he intends to come out similar to Biden. It also means he plans on going after Mitt personally on the "47%" and the silly tax returns that only they care about. Mitt has struggled thus far with answers to both of those issues and that's the only reason they worked at all, so I hope they have finally found an answer to respond with. What would I do? I'd use these new personal stories he's started using since the convention to counter the false narrative that he doesn't care about people, and state clearly looking into the camera "the truth is I care about 100% of the people and that's why I'm running." As far as the tax returns, I'd say "why is it people are supposed to care more about my personal finances than they are about how you're spending and wasting their money and bankrupting their kids and grand kids futures?" Advantage: Obama (unless Mitt has answers for them finally)

4. Economy should be easy. Just repeat that this nonsense of a 5 trillion tax cut is just that, nonsense. I'm fully convinced there is absolutely no way Obama has a chance on any economic questions because he's immediately at a disadvantage. He's the one with the abysmal record to defend and quite honestly its indefensible. If Mitt does exactly the same as last time and prosecutes that record while highlighting his experience we should see. Huge key to Mitt's success here is highlighting his bi-partisan experience in MA, the Indies LOVE that. Advantage: Mitt

5. Wild card. Both sides are extremely concerned with the moderator and how she's going to conduct herself, or whether she will follow the preset rules, unlike Martha Raddatz. Hey, I'm not a huge conspiracy theorist but its not a secret the media and Candy Crowley are Obama supporters, and the voters in attendance are selected by Gallup. Yes, the same gallup that Axelrod threatened and suddenly all of their polls swing to Obama and they kept using RV's instead of LV's later than they ever have before. If she tries interrupting Mitt like Raddatz did to Paul (to the tune of 34 times) Mitt must channel his inner Newt Gingrich and call her out. No need to debate 2 Democrats again like Paul Ryan had to do. Advantage: Tie

I think Mitt is in the drivers seat but must win decisively again to keep up the momentum and enthusiasm. I think Obama is on the ropes and close to being defeated but we can't leave it up to the judges, we must knock him out. A few reasons I think he's nearly done include the fact that in the battleground states there's only 1 where he's over 50% (WI). He's reduced ads and ad buys in Florida over the weekend signaling he thinks his chances are slim there and in VA we are out ahead performing way better in early voting and Obama is way down in the same regard. That means our 3-2-1 victory strategy is in play! We needed to win FL, VA, and OH (3), take back NC and IN (2), and win one other state from CO, NV, IA, NH, WI, MI, PA. At this point, I see us winning Ohio, CO, NV, and possibly NH. That's why I say Mitt needs to go for the knockout because we're on the cusp of victory. I'm a big MMA fan and you learn early on NEVER LEAVE THE FIGHT IN THE HANDS OF THE JUDGES, WACKY THINGS ALMOST ALWAYS HAPPEN.


It's my belief that if Obama isn't at 50% or above in a battleground going into the Election Day he will almost inevitably lose each one of those states. There's a reason undecided voters typically break hard for the challenger... They've had 4 years to decide to vote Obama again and if after 4 years they still haven't decided to vote for him, they will almost always decide to give someone else a chance. If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results, then its no wonder they choose to break that cycle.

I'd also add that it all comes down to Ohio. I'm not convinced Mitt can win WI or MI although I obviously hope I'm wrong. In Ohio, there's a definite trend already playing itself out and it's on our side. In early voting Dem requests for ballots are significantly down, and I'm talking down around 30% in Cuyahoga County, the Dem stronghold housing Cleveland. In 2008 I believe Obama had around a 250,000 vote advantage in early voting, but this year Dems have about 160,000 less reg voters and Republicans have about 35,000 more. That pretty much undercuts that advantage now doesn't it? Oh, purely anecdotal but you should see these crowds he's getting in Ohio! I'm talking a town of 20,000 having 10,000 show up when they only expected 1,000! Obama only gets crowds like that at universities like stupid liberal Wisconsin-Madison. "There's a growing crescendo of enthusiasm here in Ohio and across the country for this campaign." - Mitt

Heck, I'm no fortune teller nor can I see into the future whatsoever, but I see something taking hold. When a Republican is only down 47-43 in MINNESOTA we could see a major landslide in our favor, but it completely depends on these final debates, especially on Tuesday. Lose this debate and Obama regains much of those losses, win this debate we continue that momentum and extend leads forcing him to make tough spending decisions in states he did not expect he'd have to defend.

I'm optimistic, cautiously optimistic.

Understanding Obama & Romney "by their fruits"

In response to the previous post- Mitt Romeny: Stake President of the United States, my dad, Carl Uda wrote the following response: 

 I, too, know what Mitt Romney went through while serving as a bishop (I have served as a bishop for the past three and a half years). Knowing what he went through as a bishop, I can say that I know what manner of man he is. Mitt Romney is a good and caring man.

I have always taught my children, "You can always know what type a person a man is by the fruit he bares, for 'by their fruits you shall know them.' "

That has always been the standard by which I have determined what kind of person a man is - not by his good looks or his great wealth or by his good words alone, but by his good works - and it has never failed me. Even when men bash someone and ridicule him and disparage him, they don't denigrate or lessen his good fruits or good works, which are done in secret. Instead, they starken the contrast between themselves and that man of good fruits.

I have never personally met Mitt Romney, but I can say that I already know him and feel a certain kinship for him because of our common experiences as bishops, which, by the way, are not very common. We share a common bond as bishops, even though I have never removed a hornet's nest from my neighbor's swamp cooler like Mitt did. 

It is my belief that Mitt Romney isn't trying to be POTUS because he wants power and recognition or fame. His motives are as pure as the desire to bless people's lives as only a bishop, struggling with the challenges of his ward family, can experience and understand. There are no polls that will tell a bishop how well he is truly doing. But when the 47% start to attend church, do their home and visit teaching, pay their full tithing, fulfill their callings, treat their families and neighbors kindly as they would want to be treated, stop abusing drugs and alcohol, repent of their sins and make life altering changes, then a bishop can feel good about strengthening the ninety and nine (or the other 53%) before leaving them to find the one (or before returning to the 47%) to minister to them for the purpose of blessing their lives and bringing them to Jesus Christ.

Not a moment do I believe that Mitt Romney meant that he doesn't care about the 47% who wouldn't vote for him. That isn't in his DNA. As a bishop, sometimes one must focus time and resources where it can do the most good. It doesn't mean the sinner can't be saved. It just means that, at that certain point in time, the sinner is not ready to be saved. You focus resources where it won't be trampled under foot by the ungrateful. 

Of course Mitt cares about the 47%, but he knows if he can go out and hire more willing laborers from among the remaining 53% pool, he will surely get the fields harvested faster and more efficiently, and then, all will be blessed.

Please don't be too quick to believe the harsh and venomous judgments tossed upon Mitt Romney. If you must compare Mitt Romney to Obama, put those two men's fruits of the totality of their lives, side-by-side, point-by-point, and you judge what manner of men they are, remembering to judge righteouss judgement, for that judgement with which you judge, so shall you be judged. Let the words of the Holy Book guide you and let the Holy Spirit fill your hearts with inspiration to choose the doctrine of Christ and not the doctrine of the world, for the world hated Christ and crucified him. Please do not crucify him again, my friends. I tell you, you know the truth, for the light of truth is within all men, and it is within you, but when you choose against that light and you kick against the pricks, you only bring sorrow and pain to yourselves and to this great nation.

Farewell and good bye and let us pray for God's wisdom to be upon us all, that we may come away victorious, for we are in a war, and we fight not against men, but against powers and dominions and principalities. Our cause is just. This November 6th, vote your conscience. Remember this always, what manner of men ought ye be?

Mitt Romney: Stake President of the United States

I received this as an email forward and have no idea who wrote it, but it provides good insight into the qualifications Mitt Romney has based on the work he did in his church as a bishop and stake president:

Stake President of the United States

A few years back, a hive of hornets decided to make its nest on top of a second-story swamp cooler outside my cousin’s Boston-area home.  My cousin made an ill-fated attempt to remove the hornets, which resulted in a two-story fall and a broken arm.

This looks like a job for your home teacher, said my cousin’s home teacher.

The home teacher brought over his own ladder and clothed himself in homemade beekeeping gear.  He then made his way to the hornet’s nest and gathered the whole thing up in a garbage bag, avoiding any stings or the more severe injuries that had beset my cousin.  He did this with no public fanfare, no accolades, and no thought of collecting payment for his efforts.  And, who was this noble home teacher?  A man by the name of Mitt Romney.

Now, unless you’re familiar with Mormon lingo, you probably got lost when I introduced the phrase, home teacher, or you may have conjured up images of some kind of private educational tutor who was taking care of my cousin’s kids.  That would have left you wondering why a tutor thought it was their responsibility to wrangle hornets.

But if you're a Mormon, the phrase made perfect sense, as did the rest of the story. You would know that every month, every member of a Mormon congregation receives a visit from two home teachers, who share an inspirational message but, more importantly, are charged with the responsibility of looking out for the family’s welfare.  So, if a family is struggling, the home teachers are the spiritual first responders, and a good home teacher jumps at any opportunity to be of service.

Among other things, Mitt Romney is a good home teacher.

People who look to Mitt’s faith for clues about how he’d govern as president usually miss the target by a wide margin.  They rip the more obscure elements of Mormon doctrine out of their theological and historical contexts, polygamy or underwear or planetary real estate and think they’ve discovered or explained something.  They haven’t.  The world at large, as it focuses on unusual theoretical elements of Mormon doctrine, all but ignores the eminently practical aspects of Mormonism as it is manifest in each Mormon's daily life.

Consider the fact that, home teachers receive no compensation for what they do.  In fact, neither does anyone else in a Mormon congregation.  The whole enterprise is supervised by a lay clergy that will often work over forty hours a week in their unpaid positions in addition to their real jobs, you know, the ones that actually earn them money.  Mitt Romney has spent his entire adult life in these kinds of high-responsibility, time-intensive positions.  He has been both a bishop, a leader of a ward that consists of a congregation of about 500 people,  and a stake president, who oversees a stake, which consist of about six or so wards, giving him ecclesiastical responsibility for thousands of people.

So what does this mean?  What, precisely, does a bishop or a stake president do that eats up so much of their time?

Go to a Mormon meeting on any given Sunday, and you’ll see three dudes sitting up by the pulpit.  The guy in the middle is the bishop, and he’s already spent most of the day in meetings where he reviewed the ward's staffing needs and organizing relief efforts for families who may be struggling with health, financial, or spiritual issues.  He’s also been meeting one-on-one with members of the church who look to him for counsel and support for personal problems that would turn your hair white.  Usually, he's been doing all this since before the sun came up, so don’t be surprised if he nods off while the meeting progresses.

Please keep in mind, too, that there are no elections for bishops and stake presidents, nor are there reelections.  Each leader is called to serve, and they accept the responsibility dutifully, no questions asked.  They then serve for a period of time, usually between five and ten years, after which they are released, meaning they rejoin their congregations as lay members and have no more responsibility than anyone else.

The call to serve can come to any priesthood holder in good standing, but it usually comes to a certain personality type.  Remember, bishops and stake presidents are confronted with massive organizational challenges accompanied by the most intimate, personal, spiritual struggles imaginable.  So, they must lead without being authoritarian; they must judge without being judgmental, and they must minister without offending.  That means the people who get this assignment are often more even-tempered than exciting, more reassuring than revolutionary, and more competent than colorful.  Sound like any particular presidential candidate you might know?

Those who remain baffled by Romney's cool public persona have not spent a whole lot of time with an LDS stake president, a role for which Romney provides the quintessential example.  If one truly understands his background, one shouldn’t expect a President Romney to dazzle the masses with rhetorical virtuosity.

One should instead expect him to remove practically and quietly the hornet’s nest from the nation’s second-story swamp cooler.

NewtToons

This was so funny, I had to share!  (From Mitt Romney Central)

Mitt Romney: Habitual Fixer

Utah Representative, Jason Chaffetz, on the campaign bus with Mitt Romney in Iowa. The air vents needed fixing. Mitt found the duct tape and fixed it.

Pastor who called Mormonism a cult would do well to follow basic Christian principles

By R. Murdock

Today a Southern Baptist minister from a mega-church, endorsed Rick Perry, a true Christian.  Afterwards when talking to reporters, he said he did it because Mitt Romney is not a Christian, and that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon) is a cult.

Robert Jeffress just created a huge PR headache for Rick Perry who's campaign later had to come out and assure everyone that Rick Perry does not think that Mitt Romney is a member of a cult.

The funny thing is that Jefress stated "I think Mitt Romney's a good, moral man, but those of us who are born again followers of Christ should prefer a competent Christian." So is he saying it's better to be competent than good and moral?

Jeffress later went on to say that if the choice comes down to Obama and Romney, he would plug his nose and vote for Romney (because apparently it really isn't that big of a deal to be part of a cult these days.)  He gives his reason here:

 

Jeffress Statement:

 "I would rather have a non-Christian who at least supports biblical principles than a professing Christian like Barack Obama who embraces unbiblical positions." 

My Restatement of what he's actually saying:

"I would rather have a member of a cult who is good and moral and at least supports biblical principles than a professing Christian like Barack Obama."

 

I know, it's confusing, a true flip flopper.  Now it's better to have a cult member than a Christian. This guy really needs to figure out exactly what a Christian is, and then act like one. (Hint: Those who followed Jesus Christ during biblical times were called Christians which was a derogatory name, just like "Mormon" started out as a derogatory name as well.  A Christian is a follower of Christ.)

 

As a Born-Again Christian,  I'm assuming Mr. Jeffress probably believes that as long as you profess Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior, then you're saved by grace.  Obama and Romney both claim to have done this, so it really doesn't matter what they do, think or follow after that. 

(Note: Mormons believe that we are saved by Christ's grace after all we can do.  That's why many are perceived as "good" and "moral," because they believe that being a follower of Christ, AKA Christian, actually means following His example and trying to do what He would do.)

Mr. Jeffress also stated in an interview to a news organization that Mormons are not Christian because they worship Joseph Smith.  This is totally NOT TRUE.  Mormons only worship Jesus Christ.  In the Book of Mormon, which is another testament of Jesus Christ, it says "(Christ) is the way; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God."

Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon, which testifies of Christ.  We honor Joseph Smith the same as a Baptist would honor Moses, who brought forth the Ten Commandments; or John the Beloved who wrote the Book of Revelation.  We are grateful to have the Book of Mormon, the Bible and the Ten Commandments.  But in no way do Moses, John the Beloved/Revelator or Joseph Smith save us from our sins, nor would we EVER worship them.

I have no doubt that Mr. Jeffress loves and worships Jesus Christ.  He is not a perfect follower or Christian, and none of us are.  When someone says, “I believe in Christ.”  Who are we to judge what is in that person’s heart. Christ knows perfectly who His followers are.  They are the ones who hear His voice and do their best to follow Him.

With the deep love Mr. Jeffress has for his Savior and Redeemer, how would he feel if someone came along trashing his faith and told him that he does not follow Christ, believe in Christ, worship Christ?  How would he feel if someone said the Southern Baptist Convention is a cult?  I don’t think he would like that at all.

A person's faith is deeply personal and sacred.  The personal relationship they have with God is something great to be treasured.  No one likes to have such treasures maliciously and publicly attacked, belittled and misrepresented.

I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  I'm called a Mormon because I believe in the Book of Mormon, which like the Bible, testifies that Jesus Christ is the son of God, the Savior of the world and all mankind.  I am a sinner and would be lost without the perfect love and sacrifice of Jesus.  I know He loves me.  He gave His life for me and suffered unspeakable pains on my behalf.  I try to show my love and appreciation for Him by doing my best to follow His perfect example.  Everyday I fall short of taking upon me His name.  But I repent and He forgives me and I keep trying.  I am honored to be a follower of Christ.  No matter how many times people say that I am not a Christian, I know that the One person who matters the most to me, knows who I am and knows I do my best to follow Him.  I love my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.  I'm grateful for His grace and mercy.  He wants me to be happy, and when I follow Him, I have joy in my life.

Those like me, who follow Christ, and those who do not, would do well to remember one of His simple yet profound teachings:

"Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."

 Painting by Greg Olson, a Mormon and a Christian who loves Jesus Christ