I really doubt that political ideaology had anything to do with the low turn-out. A fireside is well attended when it is well publicized, in an area with a lot of youth/young adults, and the speakers have a strong celebrity factor. The attendance would’ve been far better had the speakers been Frank Lampard and Johnny Greenwood (hopefully that starts some great rumors) as opposed to two American politicians. If our stake had two English parliamentary dudes speak, I’d consider going but the pull isn’t as strong as say, Steve Young or Steve Martin (haha).

I don’t question Senator Hatch’s testimony or belief in his religion, and as a Mormon don’t bear him ill-will. When it comes to politics, that’s a whole different matter. My comment was to expound on Rebecca’s point, showing examples of Hatch supporting Bush’s torture policies.

My thought would be that fellow Latter-day Saints wouldn’t be holding ill-will toward Senator Hatch while he is bearing testimony to them. They risk political suicide no matter who their base is when they bear testimony or talk about their Mormon religion publicly.

A counter example would be Harry Reid. My sense is that although large numbers of Latter-day Saints likely disagree with Harry Reid’s politics, they would still appreciate his testimony. At least that is what I observed when Senator Reid gave the graduation address at my BYU Law School graduation.

Senator Hatch has fully supported President Bush’s “enhanced interrogation techniques,” which really are nothing more than torture. His support of these techniques is based on the justification that the CIA is, (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002608571_cheney07.html)in his words, “They’re going to do everything in their power to make sure that our citizens in the United States of America are protected.” Because of course the protection of the American citizen is the highest priority, far above the treatment of our enemy, regardless of the consequences. He has also said:

As well, we need more discussion about where and by whom the line should be drawn between permissible aggressive interrogation techniques, and when interrogation becomes torture and whether torture is ever justified. We have all read the recent press accounts on these issues with great interest.

(from: http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2004_hr/060804hatch.html)

Senator Hatch has been much quieter about this issue than many Republicans, mostly because he doesn’t need to bray like a mule to the base to score election day points, like say Mitt “Double Guantanamo Bay” Romney. But, as the leading Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, he has done all he could over the past six years to ensure that Bush’s “enhanced interrogation techniques” got through any real scrutiny in the Congress.