Now, at this particular time in our nation's history, we have to return to the true founding principles in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Time constraints no longer allow us to vote for someone who is "conservative." We are on the precipice of destruction. We have to get this upcoming election right this time, because if we don't, we probably won't have another chance. No longer can we skate by with the idea that "I'll vote for candidate X or Y will be elected, and X is the lesser of two evils." That kind of thinking produced the problems we face today. Conservative Republicans are destroying us almost as fast as liberal Democrats. See the quotation below for proof.

Norman Thomas, who ran for the presidency five times on the Socialist Party ticket said, "The United States is making greater strides toward Socialism under Eisenhower than even under Roosevelt, particularly in the fields of Federal spending and welfare legislation." The funny thing about that is Eisenhower was a conservative Republican and Roosevelt a liberal Democrat. Later, Thomas stated, "The difference between Democrats and Republicans is: Democrats have accepted some ideas of socialism cheerfully, while Republicans have accepted them reluctantly." (W. Cleon Skousen, The Naked Capitalist, 130)

Both major political parties are guilty of taking us to the brink of national disaster by this practice. Voting for the lesser of two evils just doesn't work. One is still voting for evil. The slide into Socialism may be slower with a conservative Republican, but becomes steeper and therefore stronger as time passes. We simply don't have the time to say, "I'll vote for the lesser of two evils this time, and we'll get a constitutionalist in the next time." We are on the brink of the destruction of the Constitution, forecast by Prophets, and we cannot let this kind of logic sway our thinking anymore.

Anther phrase used all too often is "Since only Republicans or Democrats are elected, a vote for a third party candidate is a wasted vote." In fact, both the Republicans and Democrats, whether they are liberals or conservatives, are destroying our Constitution, as Norman Thomas testified. So in reality, voting for either of the major party candidates is the wasted vote. In fact, voting for these two parties is akin to voting for one's own eventual slavery.

Dr. W. Cleon Skousen used to say that all of America's political problems nowadays are due to a departure from the Constitution and that the cure is to return to the original principles of the Constitution, in the tradition of the Founding Fathers.

There is no time left for equivocation on the question of voting. We have to vote for the right candidate, regardless of party. That will leave our consciences clear before the Bar of God. Joseph Smith said, "... we shall have the satisfaction of knowing that we have acted conscientiously, and have used our best judgment. And if we have to throw away our votes, we had better do so upon a worthy rather than an unworthy individual who might make use of the weapon we put in his hand to destroy us." (Joseph Smith, Jr., Times and Seasons, IV:441)

That is very wise. The people we vote for are destroying us today, either through malice aforethought, or ignorance. Either way, our Constitution is in jeopardy. I hope you will join with me and vote for the candidate in this upcoming election that most closely stands for the principles of the Constitution.

Having said all that, let's now consider the two candidates in question. The best way to compare them is to use their own words when talking about the same subject. I'm going to do that by going to both Bradley's and Lee's campaign websites. Here are their URLs.

Lee: http://www.mikelee2010.com/

Bradley: http://www.scottbradleyforsenate.com/index.html

Here we find a difference. Lee wants to work within the present system for healthcare reform, while Bradley wants to eliminate all healthcare reform approaches as unconstitutional.

• 1. Investing in the technology, personnel, and physical infrastructure necessary to secure the southern border

• 2. Enforcing existing immigration laws

• 3. Improving and promoting the use of E-Verify--a nationwide immigration-status verification system designed to enable employers to ascertain quickly and accurately whether would-be employees are authorized to work in the United States;

• 4. Mandating and enforcing the denial of federal and state welfare benefits to illegal immigrants;

• 5. Clarify the original intent of the citizenship clause through legislation specifying that children born to illegal-alien parents in the United States are not entitled to automatic citizenship; and

• 6. Making clear that illegal aliens will not receive amnesty in any form, and must return to their own countries before applying for a visa; illegal aliens should receive no benefit from having entered the United States illegally, and should not be granted guest-worker visas or the opportunity to "purchase" lawful immigration status.

The overall conclusion of these comparisons is that Bradley is the true constitutionalist, when comparing the two candidates views side by side. The idea of working within the system in the entitlement area is especially enlightening. They are plainly unconstitutional and are responsible for a huge amount of the federal budget. But that's not all. The percentage of future budgets that entitlements will consume is increasing year by year. Clearly America cannot possibly continue with ever escalating social programs. So the fact that they are 1- unconstitutional and 2- cannot be continued should be a very clear indicator as to who we should vote for.