Flag of Our Fathers
Does this make anyone else's blood boil?When the Pledge of Allegiance is said or when the National Anthem is played the proper position for those in civilian clothing is to stand erect facing the flag with their right hand over their heart. It’s incredible that the others can’t seem to find the flag but at least they are trying to show the proper respect. Senator Obama shows an incredible amount of disrespect by his position not only does he not repeat the Pledge but turns his back on the Flag. Maybe unlike his wife he hasn’t yet found any reason to be proud of this country. Allen Barrett
posted by Allen Barrett | 3:09 PM
46 Comments:
What can one say, other than Decadent society waiting for someone to tell them what to do.
Oh shut up. It was proven weeks ago that they weren't yet at the time to salute the flag. Everyone is looking in a different direction and if you had seen the video, you would see that all did turn toward the flag with their hands over their hearts. Let me guess, next you'll be saying he's secretly a Muslim? Because of course all Muslims are terrorists. I've been amused at some of your posts before, but this just baffles me that you would feel the need to perpetuate this ridiculous myth. I didn't even vote for Obama, but you don't have to be a supporter of someone to see that they're being wronged.
This was not a Pledge of Allegiance they were listening to the National Anthem. It is completely within proper protocol to have ones hands at folded. No one else is looking at the big flag behind them anyway. If you are this loose with your facts in cases like this I wonder how loose you are with facts in local matters. I have supported you and your work here, but this has cast serious doubts of your accuracy of opinion and your legitimacy reporting local news. CHECK YOUR FACTS WAB. Don't rely on e-mail BS.
here is the real story
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/anthem.asp
Obama IS a Muslim, there is no secret about it. Check out this link and read for yourself...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/25/wsmear125.xml
What "Baffles" me is that this person stands a great chance at making it to the Presidential Election. What the heck is our country thinking? If you think our country has Bush problems now, we ain't seen nothing yet-just wait till this guy comes in, unexperienced, thinking that he is going to fix everything.
God Help Our Country.
BREAK OUT THE SHEETS THE KLAN RIDES AGAIN!!!!
I received this pictures months ago and wondered if had been doctored or when it was taken.
I couldn't get on the site given to tell about it.
I did get on the site that told about the other picture.
Forget about the pictures and think can he really run the USA.
Now before you get your drawers in a wad, I didn't say he couldn't or could run the country.
For the critics that are trying to make a claim that the photo I posted is somehow doctored or in someway inaccurate I would urge you by all means check out the snopes website.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/anthem.asp
Not only can you read the confirmation that this is an actual occurrence you can even watch the clip of the event taking place. Based on the singing of the National Anthem I’m surprised they weren’t holding their ears but the fact remains. Another thing disgusting about the clip is when they show the audience many of them are talking, moving about and wearing their caps. It is a disgusting display of disrespect for our flag and nation. Now as for holding your hands in front of you it may be a modern custom in the eyes of some but it is absolutely not appropriate protocol for the National Anthem historically or officially. It’s not hard to find the proper behavior when the National Anthem is being played there are several websites that give proper instructions on the subject.
I have had this picture for some time now but did not post it until I had researched the matter extensively. If you would bother to read his book you would see that not only was he raised a Moslem by both his dad and step dad and atheist mother he attended Madrassa. In his book Dreams Of My Father (p.142), Obama writes “In Indonesia, I’d spent 2 years at a Muslim school, 2 years at a Catholic school.” In his more recent book “The Audacity of Hope” he writes expensively about “Frank” his most influential mentor. “Frank” turns out to be none other than Frank Marshall Davis, an avowed communist with direct funding ties to Moscow, who told Obama “not to forget his ‘people’ and not to ‘start believing what they tell you about equal opportunity and the American way and all that s**t.” Now if that isn’t enough on the first day of Obama’s political career in 1995, when he was introduced by retiring Illinois state senator Alice Palmer to influential Chicago liberals as her chosen successor and gave his first political speech, the meeting took place at the Hyde Park home of the former (and to this day unrepentant) Weather Underground terrorists William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.
Now with that said if I was forced to vote for either Obama or Clinton I would choose Obama as the lesser of two evils. Allen Barrett
Allen... I'm sure that Obama refuses to take the pledge for reasons that make little sense -- such as, believing an America without socialized medicine isn't worthwhile.
However, there are some people who, owing to the zeal of their devotion to liberty, have little use for the "pledge." A modest bit of Googling will quickly reveal that the "pledge" was written by a radical Yankee socialist, for propagandastic use as a loyalty oath to big government. The phrase "one nation, indivisible" was a direct slap in the face of the (recently invaded) South, while the phrase "with liberty and justice for all" rings pretty hollow nowadays, what with an ever growing quasi-totalitarian government making practically everything either illegal or mandatory. And of course, we haven't had a "republic" since the Tyrant Lincoln destroyed the voluntary association of states that was the basis of the republic.
I think I'll have to take the side of the Jehovas' Witnesses on this one. Reciting the pledge may not be literal idolotry, but it's still not possible to serve two masters... and I'm damned well going to serve God, rather than scumbag politicians of the Hillary/Obama/McCain ilk. Bring back the "republic," along with "liberty and justice for all" and make the "under God" less of a joke -- with millions of babies "legally" killed every year while Government Schools ruthlessly promote secular humanism, how much different would a government "under Satan" really be??? -- and maybe then I'll reconsider. But until that glorious day, whenever I hear the pledge, I think I'll simply hang my head in mourning, and pray for a restoration of the lost liberties which our forefathers fought so hard to secure.
Oh yes, you might find this site to be of interest:
http://rexcurry.net/
Hey folks... why vote for the "lesser evil?" Voting for the "lesser evil" always results in more evil in government anyway... so why not go whole hog?
Here are two candidates you may find worthy of your unqualified support:
http://cthulhu2008.blogspot.com/
http://www.zod2008.com/
McPeters, you've got issues...
I have a question for Obama supports.
Are you still going to vote for him if Hillary is his running mate?
I didn't think Johnson would be willing to be Kennedy's running mate but he was.
Anonymous, Wednesday, February 27, 2008 7:29:00 AM, said:
McPeters, you've got issues...
Hey, this is an anonymous forum... aren't you willing to get specific, while you're hiding behind the cloak of anonymity?
If I'm wrong in what I've posted, please point out the SPECIFICS of my error. Thanks much!
I won't vote for Obama for several reasons but WAB you said that you fought for the right for people to do this kind of thing. Aren't you being hypocritcal now.
To anonymous of the 28 Feb. 6:12 post.
I don't see any hypocrisy at all. While I dislike the idea one would show so much disrespect and ingratitude I am very aware and agree that they have the right to do so.
The issue isn’t about his right, it’s whether any person with this type attitude toward his county and its symbols be considered for the position of leader.
Without respect for the Flag and its defenders how can anyone serve effectively as commander and chief?
Freedom gives us the right to be as wrong and as stupid as we choose but responsibility holds us accountable. Allen Barrett
I really don't see disrespect. The man has his hands respectfully lowered, he's not flipping the flag off, he's not waving his private parts at the flag, he's not wiping his mouth or any other orifice with the flag. The real reason everyone has a problem with Obama is the simple fact that he is black. That is why everyone is nit-picking and scrutinizing everything the man is doing. Bottom line.
Anonymous, Friday, February 29, 2008 10:48:00 AM, said:
The real reason everyone has a problem with Obama is the simple fact that he is black.
Hogwash! I'd vote to make Walter Williams -- the brilliant free market economist who occasionally makes the "Rush Limbaugh" show worth listenening to -- president for life! And he's at least TWICE as black as Mr. Obama...
That is why everyone is nit-picking and scrutinizing everything the man is doing.
Nonsense. Some of us simply don't want an extreme left winger, who evidently hasn't got a clue when it comes to economics, put into a position of great political power. Now, simply as a HUMAN BEING, it's hard not to like Obama. Between him, and Hillary, and McCain, he's the only one I would enjoy meeting and "hanging out" with. But that's a far, far cry from wanting to see him tax me to death, while running the economy (or what's left of it after the Bush disaster) totally into the ground.
Kendrick..
I do not often agree with you, but I think you have hit the nail squarely on the ehad with regard to Obama. I personally like him but just cannot go along with his politics regarding abortion and higher taxes. His attitude of surrender in Iraq bothers me as well. However, he is a very personable fellow who would get my vote if I could go along with his views. But I can't do that, so I'll hold my nose and vote for McCain.
Two questions about Sen. Obama first should he be treated like every other candidate or should certain embarrassing situations be off limits. Clearly the news media has placed a ring of protection around him. Chris Matthews declared he gets “tingles up his leg when Obama speaks” obviously that rules out his objectivity. The New York Times who did a hatchet job on Mc Cain then condemned others who used the exact same tactic and source against Obama. Not one of the nightly big three newscast have asked any hard questions of him instead doing only fluff spots on him and his wife.
Second question is having missed over a hundred votes as a state legislator and not holding one single meeting of the committee he heads can anyone give something significant, anything that he accomplished as either a state legislator or Senator? He has the most liberal voting record in the senate but what legislation has he written or sponsored? Could Mrs. Clinton be correct once and he is all talk and no work? Allen Barrett
All talk and no work, I guess that does sound familar to you don't it WAB?
Casio says...
Let's be honest. He's a black man who can't do the job - right? Let's get another Republican in office to send even more jobs afar. Look at what just happened to the Boeing attempt to getthe contract to make planes for the Air Force. The contract went to the French company.
Abortion - that's between the woman and God and her family. But we have some here who think they are God. Shame that you are so judgmental.
Have your daughter or wife raped by some a..h... and see if you want either of them to carry that baby to term and love it.
The race issue is always in the background, whether it's mentioned directly or not.
Casio said, regarding Obama:
Let's be honest. He's a black man who can't do the job - right?
That depends on what you think the "job" is. Given that "we the people" aren't gonna be allowed to vote -- this time around -- for someone decent, I'm inclined to support the candidate who can do the best job of running the nation into the ground, the fastest. By that standard, Obama might be just what we need! As regards the "race" issue, I think you should be ashamed to stoop so low, as to constantly insinuate that anyone not experiencing an "Obasm" is some sort of knuckle dragging racist. So, let me put that idiotic idea to rest, once and for all....
If I could wave a magic wand, and thereby appoint anyone of my choosing to high office, I would pick the following "dream team" slate for an All-Ebony Presidency:
Walter Williams, President
Thomas Sowell, Vice President
Alan Keyes, Secretary of State
Colin Powell, Secretary of Defense
Larry Elder, Attorney General
Roy Innis, Secretary of Labor
Bill Cosby, Secretary of Education
Jesse Peterson, Secretary of HHS
J.C. Watts, Secretary of Commerce
Star Parker, Secretary of HUD
Dick Boddie, Secretary of Interior
And for the Supreme Court, I'd like to elevate Clarence Thomas to Chief Justice, and appoint Janice Rogers Brown as an Associate Justice.
So that is a total of 13 blacks who would, in my opinion, do a terrific job of leading this nation in a better direction.
What is the difference between these folks, and Obama? Simply that they recognize that the Constitution provides limitations on what the federal government may do. Obama, on the other hand, believes that, if he can get a majority in Congress to back one of his socialistic programs, then that justifies ignoring the Constitution's clear limitations.
Let's get another Republican in office to send even more jobs afar.
There you go again... falling into the trap of acting as though this nation has two distinct political parties. The real rulers of this country -- the plutocrats who annoint and finance the "front runners" -- rely on people believing in the fake "two party" system. "Presidential politics" in the USofA is every bit as phoney as "professional wrestling." And the sooner everyday Americans figure this out, the sooner we will be able to "take our country back" from the plutocrats who currently own us.
Abortion - that's between the woman and God and her family.
That's not even true, as a matter of current law. Under the present "double standard" system, a man who gets his girlfriend pregnant has no sayso whatsoever, in the question of whether or not an abortion is performed. YET... if a woman DECIDES to carry the baby to term -- and then DECIDES not to put it up for adoption -- the "sperm donor" is then placed on the hook for twenty-one years of coerced child support payments.
So, an unplanned pregnancy is not simply between "the woman, God, and her family" -- not if a family court judge decides to award child support payments to the mother!
Shame that you are so judgmental.
So, let's just abolish all laws against murder, while we're trying to avoid being "judgmental." I mean, shouldn't murder be a matter between the murderer, God, and his/her family?
Have your daughter or wife raped by some a..h... and see if you want either of them to carry that baby to term and love it.
When did they pass a law requiring rape victims to "love" babies that are the product of rape? Last I heard, women were free to hate them with a purple passion, and put them up for adoption!
By the way, only a very small number of abortions are done because of rape. Of the late term, "partial birth" slaughter, exactly NONE are in response to rape. So, how would you feel about at least criminalizing third term abortions? Surely, if a woman is raped, six months is long enough time for her to figure out that she's pregnant, and choose to have an abortion. Right???
The race issue is always in the background, whether it's mentioned directly or not.
Only because people like you refuse to accept the fact that Obama (just like white candidates Hillary and McCain) is utterly unfit for office. His skin color has absolutely nothing to do with it... to paraphrase Bill Clinton's old slogan -- "it's the LIBERALISM, stupid!"
Regarding Judge Janice Rogers Brown:
You can get some idea of what a high quality personn she is, simply by reading Barack Obama's C-Span speech attacking her:
http://www.barackobama.com/2005/06/08/remarks_of_us_senator_barack_o_1.php
Submitted for your approval... some juicy quotes from my favorite federal judge -- Janice Rogers Brown:
The public school system is already so beleaguered by bureaucracy; so cowed by the demands of due process; so overwhelmed with faddish curricula that its educational purpose is almost an afterthought.
Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible.
Where government advances - and it advances relentlessly - freedom is imperiled, community impoverished, religion marginalized and civilization itself jeopardized.
It is my thesis today that the sheer tenacity of the collectivist impulse - whether you call it socialism or communism or altruism - has changed not only the meaning of our words, but the meaning of our Constitution and the character of our people.
Where once government was a necessary evil because it protected private property, now private property is a necessary evil because it funds government programs.
Private property, already an endangered species in California, is now entirely extinct in San Francisco.
We no longer find slavery abhorrent. We embrace it. We demand more. Big government is not just the opiate of the masses. It is the opiate. The drug of choice for multinational corporations and single moms; for regulated industries and rugged Midwestern farmers and militant senior citizens.
The quixotic desire to do good, be universally fair and make everybody happy is understandable. Indeed, the majority's zeal is more than a little endearing. There is only one problem with this approach. We are a court.
Government is the only enterprise in the world which expands in size when its failures increase.
And most significantly, if we can invoke no ultimate limits on the power of government, a democracy is inevitably transformed into a Kleptocracy - a license to steal, a warrant for oppression.
Theft is theft even when the government approves of the thievery. Turning a democracy into a Kleptocracy does not enhance the stature of the thieves; it only diminishes the legitimacy of the government.
My grandparents' generation thought being on the government dole was a disgraceful, a blight on the family honor. Today's senior citizens blithely cannibalize their grandchildren because they have a right [to as much] 'free' stuff as the political system will permit them to extract.
Freedom and Democracy are not synonymous. <.> The idea of a constitutional government is deceptively simple: the government cannot legitimately infringe upon our rights, even if the majority votes to do so. <.> Individual liberty cannot be preserved if the majority's will must always triumph.
Freedom and Democracy are not synonymous. Indeed, one of the grave errors of American foreign policy is that merely installing the forms of a regime like ours, without its foundation - will automatically lead to freedom, stability, and prosperity.
[Natural Law] It provided potent incentive to reflection, the touchtone of existing institutions, the justification for conservatism, as well as revolution.
The claim is that a particular perspective serves the general welfare. What is really served is a will to power.
In the last 100 years we have let the government buy our birthright with our own tax money.
A court of last resort is supposed to do more than resolve individual differences. Such courts ought to be building for the future, providing guidance, structure, stability - instilling confidence in the primacy of the rule of law. But, alas, the decisions of such courts, including my own, seem ever more ad hoc and expedient, perilously adrift on the roiling seas of feckless photo-op compassion and political correctness. And we are, by and large, captives in an intellectual world that is completely antithetical to the kinds of substantial limits an authentic historical interpretation of our constitution would impose. We are committed to doing the right thing. But with only our feelings to guide us, most of the time we cannot figure out what the right thing is.
Democracy and capitalism seem to have triumphed. But, appearances can be deceiving. Instead of celebrating capitalism’s virtues, we offer it grudging acceptance, contemptuous tolerance, but only for its capacity to feed the insatiable maw of socialism. We do not conclude that socialism suffers from a fundamental flaw. We conclude instead that its ends are worthy of any sacrifice – including our freedom
In truth, liberalism’s vaunted tolerance and openness is a lie. In America, at least, liberalism is tolerant only of those concerns to which it is indifferent.
[T]he courts overcame these alleged limitations on their powers with ridiculous ease. How? By constitutionalizing everything possible, finding constitutional rights which are nowhere mentioned in the Constitution. By taking a few words which are in the Constitution like “due process” and “equal protection” and imbuing them with elaborate and highly implausible etymologies; and by enunciating standards of constitutional review which are not standards at all but rather policy vetoes, i.e., strict scrutiny and the compelling state interest standard.
Politicians in their eagerness to please and to provide something of value to their constituencies that does not have a price tag are handing out new rights like lollipops in the dentist’s office.
Something new, called economic rights, began to supplant the old property rights. This change, which occurred with remarkably little fanfare, was staggeringly significant. With the advent of "economic rights," the original meaning of rights was effectively destroyed. These new "rights" imposed obligations, not limits, on the state. It thus became government's job not to protect property but, rather, to regulate and redistribute it. And, the epic proportions of the disaster which has befallen millions of people during the ensuing decades has not altered our fervent commitment to statism.
The right to express one’s individuality and essential human dignity through the free use of property is just as important as the right to do so through speech, the press, or the free exercise of religion
Government acts as a giant siphon, extracting wealth, creating privilege and power, and redistributing it.
In the New Deal/Great Society era, a rule that was the polar opposite of the classical era of American law reigned. A judicial subjectivity whose very purpose was to do away with objective gauges of constitutionality, with universal principles, the better to give the judicial priesthood a free hand to remake the Constitution.
Curiously, in the current dialectic, the right to keep and bear arms – a right expressly guaranteed by the Bill of Rights – is deemed less fundamental than implicit protections the court purports to find in the penumbras of other express provisions.
We are heirs to a mind-numbing bureaucracy; subject to a level of legalization that cannot avoid being arbitrary, capricious, and discriminatory. What other outcome is possible in a society in which no adult can wake up, go about their business, and return to their homes without breaking several laws?
amen to that & sooooooomuch more
casio,
Help me understand how it's the GOP's fault that jobs leave the country. The last time I heard, I think private enterprise has a right to go wherever they wish. Is that no longer the case? I thought government did not own private business and industry? Please help me understand how it's the fault of the Republican party when factories relocate outside the United States.
Kendrick
What you say is true & well written. Unfortunately few will understand & if they do, it will likely be twisted by the PC perspective of public education & the ccp communications industry'
Hang in there & keep the faith. If but one seed of many grows, it's one that wouldn't be, without faith.
Twenty years under the religious influence and close friendship of the reverend Jeremiah Wright helps explain why Sen. Obama will not salute the Flag of Our Country or say the Pledge of Allegiance. It helps understand why Mrs Obama couldn't find any reason to feel pride in our Nation until her husband ran for president. The kind of hate speech and distorted ugliness this man spews and the Obamas have listened to for twenty years is not only disgusting but it is frightening. Allen Barrett
I have to agree with Mr. Barrett on this one. If Obama knew about this preacher that he said he had a close relationship with then he is an America hater just as Wright is. If he didn't know about him after twenty years of dealings with him how can he possibly be able to understand leaders on other nations after twenty minutes with them. It looks like obama is one big liar or one big stupid jerk. So far he has impressed as a rather smart man so that leaves liar.
A racist and America hating liberal democrat.... and what's new about that? Oh, that's right he's running for president I guess that's a vote for diversity!
wab..
I have a couple of legitimate questions for you and anyone else who may choose to address them. HOW does one vote for a democrat who has such things as abortion and homosexual marriage on their side? This is particularly troubling for me when it comes to people who claim to be Christians. Further, WHY would anyone voluntarily vote for those who have already promised them a tax increase?
To 7:13. You got me. I have struggled to understand your questions for a long time and I just don't get it. It breaks my heart to see cars in the church parking lot with stickers supporting those who hold such anti Christian positions. How do people who hold very conservative positions proudly announce they are voting for a liberal democrat? The only thing I can see is that many do not educate themselves to what the candidates stand for, they just take on face value that if they are democrats that's what their granddaddy voted for. They don't seem to understand that a democrat today is not the same as one was years ago. President Reagan in response to the question why he left the democrat party stated "The Democrat Party left me I didn't leave it". When people begin to realize the Democrat Party has left the average man for the extreme crazies hopefully we can get our country back on the right track. Allen Barrett
voted for.
wab....
From one who used to be your staunch nemesis on this blog, let me say that I again agree with you totally. I have talked to Christian-minded people about the issue of voting for pro-abortion and pro-homosexual political candidates. They responded by saying they are against both abortion and homosexuality but that they are excused from the sin of it because they are not the ones actually doing those things. How comforting that must be. But, don't you think they really know better than that? And even if they were right about that, why would you vote for anyone who has promised to get in your pocketbook? I don't get it either!
And you are right about this democrat party as opposed to the one back during the days of JFK; this is not the same donkey their grandparents rode. This IS the party of such notables as jessie jackson, ted kennedy, and robert kkk byrd.
Let's see - An eloquent speaker, convincing all he can provide anything you want to believe in. A person who can convince citizens to chant and praise him as a savior, who will deliver the masses from want, strife, and not getting a big enough share of the political pie. A messanger of love and compassion who belongs to a radical hate group. A patriot who has a problem figuring out when to interchange "bless" & "damn" when it comes to saying God "bless" America! Souns like an oracle of the anti-christ.
I don't think obama is the anti-Christ but he certainly is anti-America and anti-white people. With his extreme socialist views he fits right in with liberal media who have created his fame by hiding his true self. clinton is getting a taste of what it's like to not be the darling of the liberal media after so many years of having her criminal activities covered up. Only difference in the two is their level of hatred for America.
Didn't say Obama was the antichrist - he is the silver tongued orator - spreader of the sweet sounding message of nothingness & illusion. In reality he is but one of three - the most readily identifiable? - maybe.........
anonymous..
Don't you have obama confused with the real silver-tongued orator named bill clinton?
Sorry but Obama makes Clinton, both of them, look like amateurs when it comes to lying to cover his rear.
obama's chickens are coming home to roost, thank goodness people are beginning to see what he really is and what he is about.
I just went back and read all the messages on this subject and am amazed how far out ahead of the main stream media wab was especially about the Wright issue. I thgink the flag and Pledge are just symptoms of a person who hates this nation. I wonder if the reason wab can't get any respect on here is because he is way out in front of most other people.
anonymous...
Let me share a different perspective with regard to wab. Perhaps the reason he gets no respect on this blog is because he very seldom shows respect toward those who would disagree with him. Whatcha think?
I think you're wrong. Everyone is free to have an opinion but he is one of the very few who has expressed his opinions and put his name on them. If it wasn't for him doing that you wouldn't even know who wab is.
Well, looks like Barack Hussain Obama took another step toward proving he has no convictions, other than getting elected, by showing up at a Veterans group wearing an American Flag on his lapel.
The situation sits well with this quote from him, "As I've said about the flag pin, I don't want to be
perceived as taking sides, 'There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression. And the anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all. It should
be swapped for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song '-I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing.' If that were our anthem, then I might salute
it".
What a potential president!!!!!!
Allen Barrett
I find it very interesting that a person running for president of the United States has managed to visit 57 fifty seven of those states and is looking forward to visiting the other two later on.
I would be most excited if Sen. Obama would please name those 57 states he claims to have visited. Allen Barrett
WAB was it surprising when Obama showed up in front of the American Israel confrence wearing crossed flays of the USA and Israel? Is there anything this guy really stands for other than big spending? Apparently he will cater to anyone but white patriotic Americans.
I mentioned this on another thread, but I wanted to repeat it on this one.
Let's assume that this truly is a Christian nation. Having said that,
all McCain would have to do to win this election (in a landslide) is to pick Huckabee as his running mate. How could he lose?
The sad reality is that ours is NOT a Christian nation, and masses of people are no longer concerned with those issues that most everyone believed in at one time. So who moved away from them?Liberalism has caused this, and it's only going to get worse if we keep allowing democrats to win elected offices. Think.
Post a Comment
<< Home