ChristiansUnite Forums

Kerry to air Spanish-language TV ads
Associated Press
BOSTON -- Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry announced today that he's spending $1 million to air Spanish-language television ads, part of his effort to target politically diverse Hispanics.
The ads will air on Spanish-language stations in Florida, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, Ohio, Oregon, Washington, Pennsylvania and North Carolina.
The 30-second ad is titled "Honor" and is designed showcase aspects of Kerry's life that his campaign is betting will appeal to Hispanics.
"We introduce you to a man of faith," a narrator says in Spanish. "A man of family. A man of honor. A man for our community. His name is John Kerry. And for more than 20 years, he has defended working people. And has fought so they can reach their dreams."

Hmmm... so Kerry is a "man of faith".  I have to ask, "faith" in what?  Is he a "Bill Clinton Christian" or does he really have "faith"???  His stand on murdering babies is that it is a "human right" (directly contradicting himself when he says he "doesn't approve of abortion").  I would say his "faith" is lacking, or is in something other than our Lord Jesus Christ.  What does John Kerry have faith in?

john kerry has faith in heathenism and liberalism. he has faith that he can mislead the american people. he has faith that a rich, arrogant massachusetts liberal can defeat a good, patriotic, christian american for president. most of all, john kerry has faith in his lies

SinkSF,
Welcome to C-Unite.
You must be a Dodger fan.   ???
 ;D

He's definitly a "Bill Clinton" Christian, his faith seems to be like most of his positions, he straddles the fence, and just wings it depending on who his audiance is. He's a joker, just like slick Willie.

That is so true.
Again true.

So true

Or another words, a none Christian in the White House. Lord protect us if he gets elected. The Tribulation can't be far after, the elections if Kerry wins. :'(

What religion is Kerry in????????????

Brother Love :)

<:)))><

American politics, all parties involved, seem far removed from Godliness and the love of Jesus Christ.

Pray hard!

Ollie

I voted for Bush, but, I am Not very happy with how the USA is being handled.

It seems the World is more important of the People of the USA. Everything is backwards in the USA.

What about the disabled people (like, I), the homeless, the people with no Health Care, the Jobless, families..

I am Not Happy with Bush at all.... That does not mean I am going to vote for Kerry..

Blasphemer!!! LOL!

But seriously, She scares me.  If she ever got into power, I could see her making religion illegal.

and Brother love, To answer your question.  Kerry claims to be a Catholic.  But they don't want him.

I am disabled as well, Candice Cavalier. If Hillary ever became president, I would have to leave the country. Have you seen her views on reglion? I have, its scary.

Pray hard folks.
God's will be done.

yeah so do I...  At least I have some health care through the Oregon Health Plan (http://www.dhs.state.or.us/healthplan/).

Only a Women understands Our Needs!!!!  I support Hillary!! ;D

If you want socialized medical benefits in the US – the last ticket you want is one with John Edwards.  John Edwards has made millions upon millions upon millions of dollars (all YOUR money I might add) by preying on the medical system.  As a trial lawyer he specialized in suing doctors.  He has made his money by wheelchair jumping.  If you wonder why our current medical system is so expensive – blame Edwards and his evil cohorts.  Every penny he has made comes out of YOUR pocket through higher medical and insurance expenses.  If John Edwards overhauls the American Medical system he will be jerking the silver spoon from his own mouth.  In my opinion, Edwards is the lowest of the low – no one is more loathsome than a trial lawyer.

Wait a while and I will tell you what I really think.

Pray for John Edwards – but pray harder for his victims.


PS - Hitlary is evil.
 ;D

Hillary Clinton is a tool of the devil. she must learn her place

besides, she is the consort of that lying, corrupt and amoral Bill Clinton

I'm not exactly Bush's biggest fan, but he's far better than Kerry.

Having Kerry get elected would have been as bad as having Gore get elected. It would be just like the days when Hillary was prez.

Excuse me! Are you refferring to me at all?

Plus we are Not to Judge anyone Matthew 7:1. Why do you think Hillary is evil? She stood by her man in the White House even though he was unfaithful to her.  

Plus I have No money for health care, I am severly disabled and I am still awaiting SSDI from the SSA.  The USA needs a Health Care Overhaul badly!

Just Because I support Hillary does not mean I am going tgo vote for her.  I rather think my voting is a personal matter between my Daddy (God) and I.

So, Please lets Not fight nor bicker among Christians, that is un-Christian.  Jesus Said to Love One Another John 15:12!

Stay Blessed,  \o/

KristiAnn

Hillary announced to a foreign country that "we" want a tolerant nation-concerning gun control.
Their advisor created an A,B list that the A list was chritians, homeschoolers, militants, etc.
The B list people were more tolerant, and would be able to supposedly be turned around in becoming tolerant to a new world order or martial law.
Yes, talk about scary.

                   Kerry is Scary!  OOOOOOOO

Vote for me!  I will humbly walk to the podium!  Just send me the funds and I will apply 10x10% to the Lord's work!  ;D

(Just kidding of course!)
Hey Kristi!  

Expect to be turned down the first time you apply for SSDI Kristi. I am on SSDI and it took one year for me to be accepted. I was glad I had money socked away, it carried me over till I was accepted.

I myself do not want gun control laws. The thing is we are loosing our rights. When big brother inacts laws, such as gun control. >:(

Tibby must be giggling to himself now - some of you may remember he wanted a "Politics Forum".  (FYI - I was one who was not in favor it.)  Here - I thought this tread could be a discussion of the candidates and their biblical views and truths (or untruths!) - and we are discussing socialized medicine, gun control, etc.  

Tibby - if you are out there - I guess you were right!   ;D

PS: Kristi - I wasn't aiming a post directly at you, just 'venting' to the board.  What I know of socialized medicine is scant.  Maybe our Canadian or European members could fill us in on how well (or badly) it works.  I've heard stories that Canadians come across the border when they want high quality care in a hurry?

PSS:  Dreamweaver - I openly exercise my 2nd Ammendment rights and would not want to lose them.  My best homeowner's insurance policy is through Smith & Wesson.  ;D

NOT!

Maybe health care in a hurry, but we do have a reasonable health care system - not perfect, but reasonable. AND the only reason the US has any "high quality" care is because they steal the Canadian doctors  :P and nurses and spend a ton of money paying their wages, instead of putting it into a health care system   ;D

Up until our most recent "budget" we haven't had to pay for health care (unless you wanted "extended" care, like private rooms, etc.), but somebody had to pay for it. Nothing made by man is free....premiums used to be paid for by the workers ($53/month per family-OHIP) and sometimes, if you were lucky, your employer paid those premiums as part of your "benefits" package. When they changed that (I forget when, but somewhere around 6 or 7 years ago?) there were no individual premiums any longer, but all employers regardless of size were required to pay a percentage (3%, I think?) of their total payroll cost as a health care premium. This was supposed to be able to cover everyone in Ontario. So what happened? Well, we had to raise wages for doctors and nurses just to hang on to them; hospital equipment costs rose because ageing equipment had to be replaced & old buildings refurbished; the influx of immigrants & visitors to Canada (partly because of the health care) rose drastically and is still (to some extent) abused in that way. People who've come here from other places to live bring their families here on a "visit" when they need health care and can't afford it. Is it any wonder our health care system needs help? Now we, each individual or family, must pay a yearly healthcare premium ranging from $300/yr to $900/yr, depending on your annual wage.

I can't honestly say I've ever had to wait long periods for treatment; my husband needed open heart surgery and received it right away; my father needed treatment for leukemia and got it right away; my aunt needed retinal surgery and waited 3 days for it (that's hardly a long time).

Our biggest problem is a lack of family doctors. We just don't have enough for the number of people now in Ontario.

But having said all that, I am glad we have an open system that will treat anybody. We have some of the best specialists in the world here, too. The people who head to the US are the ones who:
(a) can't get treated first because they have to wait in line like anyone and won't
(b) have the money to be able to do it
(c) can't get a particular treatment here because it is not available.
(d) are sent by their doctors because the best doctor for that person's problem is there

Canada's health standards are different from the US: I'm not entirely sure how, but I know that there are certain drugs etc. I can purchase in the states, but that Canada won't let my druggist import because they don't meet the "rules".

Truthfully, I couldn't afford to get treatment in the US, although I'm sure it's probably just as good as ours. Last time I was sick in the US I came home to see my own doctor.

I can't speak for other provinces, though and the health care plans differ from province to province.

And that, I'm sure, is more than you ever wanted to know about Canadian' health care, lol

Gracey

Wow, Gracey - great report!  Thanks for the info.

So do I now, mine is a Colt .38 pistol, built on a .45 911 frame.

Actually, to be more accurate, Wesson should be plural... and I have "riders" on my policy from Remington, Browning and Winchester.
Louisville Slugger and Mr. Nine Iron are backups.  ;D

Of course - my number one insurance policy is Prayer!  :)

What the Wall Street Journal has to say about the John-John ticket:

Liberal Loopholes
July 13, 2004
In embracing John Edwards, John Kerry has also endorsed his populist "two Americas" rhetoric and has put tax increases at the center of the election campaign. So it's fair to ask the two Democrats: How much of those tax increases will actually hit the super-rich like yourselves, and how much will end up on the backs of upper middle-class wage earners?
For an answer, let's look at what the two Senators have themselves been paying in taxes. It turns out that the Kerrys and Edwards have exploited plenty of tax loopholes over the years. Of course, nobody is obligated to pay more than what the letter of the law requires. But the complex tax code benefits the wealthy, who can afford tax attorneys and complicated schemes to skirt the law. And high marginal rates give them plenty of incentive to do so.
Senator Edwards talks about the need to provide health care for all, but that didn't stop him from using a clever tax dodge to avoid paying $591,000 into the Medicare system. While making his fortune as a trial lawyer in 1995, he formed what is known as a "subchapter S" corporation, with himself as the sole shareholder.
Instead of taking his $26.9 million in earnings directly in the following four years, he paid himself a salary of $360,000 a year and took the rest as corporate dividends. Since salary is subject to 2.9% Medicare tax but dividends aren't, that meant he shielded more than 90% of his income. That's not necessarily illegal, but dodging such a large chunk of employment tax skates perilously close to the line.
The Internal Revenue Service takes a dim view of such operations and "may collapse the structure entirely and argue the S corporation is not truly a separate entity," in the words of Tax Adviser magazine. Attorney CPA magazine lists it as No. 11 of its "15 best underutilized tax loopholes," but warns that the IRS "has successfully litigated cases against individuals, particularly sole shareholders of personal service S corporations, reclassifying such deemed distributions as wages subject to social security taxes."
As a political matter, the dodge is especially hypocritical because the income limits on which Medicare taxes are paid were lifted by Democrats in 1993 specifically to hit "the rich," as Mr. Edwards likes to call people in his tax bracket. And the supreme irony? Mr. Edwards has claimed that he set up the subchapter S company to protect himself from legal liability. You know it's time for tort reform when even the trial lawyers say they're afraid of getting sued.
Senator Kerry's personal finances are not so complicated, since most of his income comes from his government salary and a modest inheritance. But he owes his jet-setting lifestyle and indeed some of his political success to the wealth of his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry. Her personal assets have been estimated at up to $3.2 billion, and the couple travel among their five houses scattered around the U.S. on a $35 million Gulfstream V jet. During a tough election for the Senate in 1996, Mr. Kerry sidestepped a gentleman's agreement with opponent William Weld to limit the spending of personal wealth on either side to $500,000 by having his campaign borrow $1.7 million from his wife.
Mrs. Heinz Kerry's finances remain largely a closed book, since she has so far refused to release her tax returns. What we do know so far is that she has prepaid $750,000 in federal taxes on $5.1 million in income for 2003 -- an effective tax rate of 15%. That is because a significant portion of the income came from tax-free municipal bonds, which is perfectly legal.
Even so, her net income must be much higher. We know that since the death of her husband John Heinz in 1991, Mrs. Heinz Kerry has invested shrewdly and possibly even doubled her inheritance. Even if one takes a conservative estimate of her net worth, say $1 billion, an income of $5.1 million means a paltry return of just 0.5%. More likely, the majority of her investment income is sheltered within trusts so that tax is deferred until she or her family actually wants to spend it. Again, perfectly legal, but this is a luxury that the average middle-class professional working for a wage does not have. These are the non-rich who will pay the bulk of any Kerry tax increase.
So when John Kerry and John Edwards say that they want to tax the wealthiest Americans, let's be clear about what they really mean. They want to tax the most productive people at higher marginal rates and close loopholes for corporations, while they themselves dodge taxes by exploiting loopholes they plan to preserve.
Mr. Edwards is right that there really are two Americas. The people who work for their money and want to keep more of their own paychecks. And wealthy politicians who want to raise taxes on the middle class secure in the knowledge that they won't have to pay.

Oh okie dokie, I am sorry, I apologize.   :'( :-X

Blessings,  \o/

KristiAnn

Don't appologize to me!  You didn't do anything wrong!
Smile  :)  it makes a body healthier.  :)

not a single voice mentioned what i am about to say, hence my two cents here on this topic for i received few emails from all types of christian friends about talking to my reps. about the vote that took place yesterday and i refused to do that and deleted the emails promptly.. i don't know how old some of you are or how much exposure you have of the world outside the US. Hold on, maybe not even out of the US, but out of your town... you know in the inner city, you know in the places you would call the ghetto, the trash place, where there are no white picket fences, a few X86 machines in a classroom to be used by all the students, where students can't even write their names properly...

all being said, coming back to the topic, it saddens me that we paint our president as a saint, and Kerry as a villain... I bet God wants Kerry to be president just as much for Bush to be indeed... just on the radio a few days ago, and mind you this usually is mostly conservative radio show, i heard Bush was involved in some type of secret organization in Yale University. but you see, even before that, i have doubts... whenever we realize that individual piety comes before public morality we will get it right in the world(not only in the US but in the rest of the world)...  sometimes i really ask God to take me away because all i see is people suffering left and right- for example my friend was just gauged for $1600 for his car yesterday,- and this guy is a dear brother who has encouraged me a lot in my life... i read some prayer requests yesterday on the board and i was in tears for some that were single moms struggling to make it....  I am so sad that we still envy our broken sisterns to fix our pain and issues through the means of politics... I wonder when we will come to our senses... isn't there enough pain to let us hear God shout to us?

Hello Digme,

I don't make it any secret that I will vote for who I think most represents my Christian values, and that would be President Bush.

You spoke volumes in your post, and many things could be said about it. America started turning its back on Almighty God in the 1950s. With the evil that's grown and our nation's obvious lack of respect for Almighty God, why would God bless our nation? It's getting worse by the second, and some would wonder when it will be time for God to judge our nation for the evil it has become. President Bush didn't turn America away from God. In fact, he's tried the opposite.

One could also look at things and say we're having a preview of the end times. If so, it's too late for America to turn back to God. Biblical prophecy might be unfolding as we speak, and no power in the Universe will be able to stop it.

We are, as individuals, all partly responsible for what happened to America. We certainly can't blame it on President Bush. Personally, I see no comparison at all between Kerry and Bush. You couldn't pay me enough to get me to vote for Kerry. To me, he represents the people who ruined this country. As an example, the ACLU will have parties in the street if Kerry is elected. This isn't a rant, just my personal opinion, but I will have one vote when the time comes.

Love In Christ,
Tom

thanks for the post bep...

i don't like saying much... but i wanted us to start weeping... for God is only going to turn his Head when we start weeping for ourselves and for others....  

Amos 6:

Woe to you who are complacent in zion..
you notable men o fthe foremost nation,
to whom the people of Israel come!  Go to calneh and look at it: go from there to great Hamath, and then go down to Gath in Philistia. Are they better off than your two KINGDOMS? Is their land larger than yours?.....

you dine on choice lambs and fattened calves.....

you drink wine by the bowful.... but you don't grieve over the ruin of Joseph.  Therefore you will be among the first to go into exile: your feasting and lounging will end...

"God whispers in our pleasure, shouts in our pain" CSL

The following is a brief backround on Mrs. John Kerry . She hates being called that, by the way:

Maria Teresa Thiersten Simoes-Ferreira Heinz Kerry. Married Senator Kerry in 1995.  She only took his name eighteen months ago and she is an "interesting" paradox of conflicts.

If you thought John Kerry was scary, he doesn't hold a candle to his wife! Maria Teresa Thiersten Simoes-Ferreira Heinz Kerry was born in Mozambique, the daughter of a Portuguese physician, was educated in Switzerland and South Africa. Fluent in five languages, she was working as a United Nations interpreter in Geneva in the mid-60's when she met a "handsome" young American, H. John Heinz, III, who worked at a bank in Geneva.  He told her his family was "in the food business."

They were married in 1966 and returned to Pittsburgh where his family ran the giant H. J.  Heinz food company. He was elected to the US

House of Representatives in 1971, and in 1976 he was elected to the first of three terms in the United States Senate. A Republican, he wrote a burning diatribe against some of the causes backed by young House member John Kerry.)

Several years later, in 1991, he was killed when his plane collided with a Sun Oil Company helicopter over a Philadelphia suburb. The senator, his pilot and copilot, and both of Sun's helicopter pilots were killed. He was survived by his wife, Teresa, and their three young sons.


Four years later, having inherited Heinz's $500 million fortune, she married Senator John Forbes Kerry, the liberal then-junior senator from Massachusetts. She became a registered Democrat and the process of her radicalization was set in motion.

Heinz Kerry is not shy about telling people that she required Kerry to sign a prenuptial agreement before they were married. John Kerry may not have check writing privileges on the Heinz catsup and pickle fortune, but he is certainly a willing and uncomplaining beneficiary of it.

A lot of hard-earned money, made through many years of hawking catsup, mustard, and pickles has fallen into the hands of two people who despise successful entrepreneurship and who believe in the confiscatory redistribution of wealth.

So how does Mrs. Heinz Kerry spend John Heinz's money?
Just one example:

According to the G2 Bulletin, an online intelligence newsletter of WorldNetDaily, in the years between 1995-2001 she gave more than $4 million to an organization called the Tides Foundation. And what does the Tides Foundation do with John Heinz's money?

They support numerous antiwar groups, including Ramsey Clark's International Action Center. Clark has offered to defend Saddam Hussein when he's tried.

They support the Democratic Justice Fund, a joint venture of the Tides Foundation and billionaire hate-monger George Soros. The Democratic Justice Fund seeks to ease restrictions on Muslim immigration from "terrorist" states.

They support the Council for American-Islamic Relations, whose leaders are known to have close ties to the terrorist group, Hamas.

They support the National Lawyers Guild, organized as a communist front during the Cold War era. One of their attorneys, Lynne Stewart, has been arrested for helping a client, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, communicate with terror cells in Egypt. He is the convicted mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

They support the "Barrio Warriors," a radical Hispanic group whose primary goal is to return all of Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas to Mexico.

These are but a few of the radical groups that benefit, through the anonymity provided by the Tides Foundation, from the generosity of our would-be first lady, the wealthy widow of Republican senator John Heinz, and now the wife of the Democratic senator who aspires to be the 44th President of the United States.

Aiding and supporting our enemies is not good for America,
regardless of your political views.

If voters will open their eyes, educate themselves and see the real Teresa Heinz Kerry, they will not appreciate her position as ultra rich fairy godmother of the radical left.  They will not want to imagine her laying her head on a pillow each night inches away from the President of the United States.

Hopefully they love this country enough to decide that the only way these two will ever be allowed into the White House is with an engraved invitation in hand.

The uninformed will never hear the truth from the press, who want Kerry elected!

Those who buy the Kerry facade, beware of what you vote for ......... you may regret what you get!

I have not made it a secret that, I want GWB relected as President.

Which is why hubby and I have decided no more Heinz catsup in our house.
Thanks for the post DW.

i want to ask an honest question to dreamweaver and to judge_not (kinda of ironic that you have that name and yet you profess .... hmm, read what i wrote about Edwards in my previous post) anyways, i am a little bit having trouble understanding some of you for i see most of you here have never tried to imagine if God ever wanted to have Kerry as a president... if you have doubts about that, read the book of Hosea...

- idon't really think both of them are any good for this country.. for i don't think there is any sincerity in any of them...(do you know what people who think Bush is a christian think about most of us from the reflection of him, i wonder if that is a good witness) oh Kerry... Kerry is just in the world...  God save his soul... and i truly mean it...

i would like to beg you guys and gals to pray hard for both of them rather than already make up your minds...  but the problem with that i tell you is that, it is going to be hard to pray for something that you don't feel a burden for....   in order to feel the burden though, YOU HAVE TO FEEL PAIN... I WONDER IF YOU HONESTLY ASKED YOURSELVES TODAY, HOW MUCH DO I FEEL PAIN IN ANY CAPABLE WAY TO CARRY NOT ONLY MY OWN BUT ALSO OTHERS' PAIN AND SUFFERING IN THIS COUNTRY TO THE GRACE THRONE OF CHRIST? OH AND CHRIST DOESNOT EVEN STOP THERE, HE ASKS US TO DO THAT FoR THE WORLD
 i don't want to be unkind guys... but i have really had it with the so called i know who i will vote for... (please don't bad mouth people that you don't have a knowledge of the full history Judge_not,
in addition to that, I am going to go on a limb here- I have a hunch- i doubt somebody born and who grew up in an impoverished 3rd world country could be such evil person as depicted in the previous post, maybe, maybe but i am highly skeptical... i even doubt, some of you even know where Mozambique is located......  just some thoughts that lingered from the discussion that i had with many of your-alikes while i was attending a christian college... I AM OUT!
Read Joel 6 in the previous post of mine!

correction, amos 6

 Hm.  So you are judging me for being judgmental.  How very hypocritical.  Now that's ironic! Not only did God give us the ability to judge actions, He requires it.  I judge actions, not hearts.  Never forget that, digme, and we'll get along just fine.  You may attack my opinion all you wish - please don't attack the sincerety I have in my heart for working to separate good from evil.
Am I against John Kerry?  YES!  John Kerry condones the blatant murder of 1,000,000 babies a year.  That in itself is more than enough history for me to know without a shadow of a doubt I don’t want him leading a Boy Scout troop, much less the USA.  I judge his act of condoning the killing of babies as going against everything a Christian believes in.  You speak of the poor in other countries yet ignore the mass murder in your own backyard?  

Finally; I'll being praying right along with you for Jesus to win the hearts of all the candidates!  :)

Oklahoma Howdy to JudgeNot,

Brother, I guess that I missed something as it flew right over my head.  :D  I don't understand how anyone would be insulted by anything said here.

We will each decide who to vote for based on what we believe and who we feel would best serve America. I, for one, will pray that John Kerry does not get elected. I've heard and seen more than enough to think he would make America sink lower and further away from God.

Each person is more than entitled to their own opinions and voting for whoever they wish. If John Kerry was the only one on the ballot, I would do a write-in.

Love In Christ,
Tom

I am not a Republican or a Domocrat.


I am a Christian i will vote as a way to thank God for the place HE has chosen for me to live.

As a Christian i will NOT vote for a person or party that believes the killing of the child in the womb is a right. Nor do i believe any one who is Christian will vote for the baby killers.

Sorry Mr. BEP – I guess I kind of flew of the handle there.  I love digme just as much as I love you and Reba.

REEEEEEEEEEEEBBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
Whew – had to get that off my chest.  Kind of makes me feel like Brando in “Streetcar Named Desire”!  
Reba – if you are ever widowed, will you marry me (again)?  ;D

As far as my vote goes; as with Reba, I am not affiliated with any political party.  Living in California, the “Sodomy State” my vote for Bush would be wasted since it is clear all the electoral votes from here will be liberal, regardless of the real issues.  I think I will probably vote the Constitution Party ticket this year.  

JudgeNot,

Brother, I wasn't talking about you. I was trying to understand what portion of this thread upset digme. This is 40 times milder than anything on one of the news channels.

Reba,

Sister, I sure did miss you in your short absence. JudgeNot and I will continue trying to encourage you to come out of your shell of shyness.   ;D

Digme,

I really don't know whether you are a brother or sister. I'll simply say that if you have Jesus Christ as the GOD over your life, that's all I care about. I don't know anything about where you live or what forms your thoughts about politics, but please don't let a discussion here get you upset.

Love In Christ,
Tom

The supreme court under President Nixon seemed to have much to do in the decision to legalize abortion.



"In 1970 a pregnant, unmarried woman sought to have the Texas anti-abortion statute, first enacted in the 1850s, declared unconstitutional. To protect her anonymity she was given the fictitious name Jane Roe. The initial action was against Henry Wade, District Attorney of Dallas County, Texas. Roe claimed that the statute was unconstitutionally vague and violated her right of privacy as guaranteed by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The case was argued before the Supreme Court in December of 1971, reargued in October of 1972.


In January of 1973 the case was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. A majority of 7 to 2 declared the Texas statute unconstitutional. Justice Harry Blackmun, an appointee of President Richard Nixon, wrote the opinion for the majority. Justice William Rehnquist, another Nixon appointee and now Chief Justice, filed a dissenting opinion. Justice White concurred with Justice Rehnquist.


A majority on the Court agreed that Roe had a right of privacy based on the 14th amendment and on earlier Supreme Court decisions. They also agreed that this right was "broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." However, they denied that this right was "absolute" (i.e., that "she is entitled to terminate her pregnancy at whatever time, in whatever way, and for whatever reason she alone chooses.") There were compelling state interests in "safeguarding health" and "protecting potential life" that could justify regulation."***

In that majority of 7 to 2 vote of the court how many were liberal and how many conservative?

"The Vote
Majority: Blackmun(for the Court), Brennan, Powell, Marshall T.
Concurring: Burger, Douglas, Stewart
Dissenting: Rehnquist, White B." ***

***Info retrieved from a Google search on
"Roe vs. Wade".


What has this to do with either democrats or republicans today? In the nineties we had a majority of democrats governing America and abortion was within the law.
Today America has a majority of republicans governing the country and abortion is within the law.

Since "Roe vs. Wade" in 1973 America has had five republican and two democrat presidents. That includes a republican president that was in office when "Roe vs. Wade happened.
Yet the democrats seem to get all the flack about it. The republicans do nothing about it as do the democrats.

It would appear that democrats and republicans are at fault for this lawful murder of unborn children.

Ollie

Thank you Mr. Bepster i need all the help i can get.

So very sadly i agree Ollie. :'(

Another point i cant help but see  is  to ask the question where o where was the Church in 1970?  Dallas Texas also is home to Dallas Theological Seminary  they were quiet ………..

hey guys,

i am a guy, 25.  i feel i have been misinterpreted and misquoted here but i really don't care.  I am not here to prove that i am right or you are right. i am here to share a burden and to ask questions.  I am actually don't care about politics that much. (DONT JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS, READ ON, YOU WILL UNDERSTAND WHY!)  
I believe the Lord Jesus Christ, who is God in the form of the Son, became flesh and blood like us to carry the wrath of human kind so that the propitiation of my sin and the world's sin would happen upon his death and resurrection.  
what upset me bep, may be upset not even the right word, maybe concerned me was the lack of fervent concern on behalf of our people... i believe we are losing more people because none of us- starting with ME guys- i am not even pointing finger now- have dared to stand in the gap. we have felt the blessings and yet we think we are somewhat more special than others... what a foolishness for us it would be to not look back at Rome, Egypt, and most of all Israel as a nation and see where they went wrong.
You see as a german theologian said it:
"sin scorches us most when the lightining grace of Christ shines upon us".. we will only feel the pain of God to some degree and the sin around us and in us, when we understand how much grace has been given upon to us... i just was really saddened to see no one mention anything about how much we need piety in our individual lives so that others would be affected to. God will only move when his people cry out to him....  not when they vote first, for i doubt really God cares if people vote or not unless they are pious only... lol... why is Jeremiah 7 coming to my mind? you remember, Hekal YWH... again READ Amos 6...
again, i hate giving exegisis on passages, for i can give you what i think of the most eloquent of that passage here but would not do you any good, if your heart is not open...

My whole THEME is summed up guys and gals on two terms:

a) INDIVIDUAL PIETY PRECEDES ANY MORALITY!  
b) YOU WILL NEVER LIGHTEN THE LOAD UNTIL YOU FEEL THE PRESSURE IN YOUR SOUL

I DARE say all of my posts in this thread always focused on these two burning issues above.  
What really triggered me to write in this post is what i said one above in this thread about what one of our teaching pastors did in my church last Sunday morning. I am so tired of the rehotoric about labeling the Democratic party as if all that is there is evil.  Likewise, to think of what the Republican party has to offer as perfect and good is misguided.  Then, the question is do we really choose on the basis of  the lesser of two evils or is there another way?
On the basis of practicality i say, vote for the Bush because he is a christian, but when we vote how many of us will be somber realizing that this nation will never get any better until Jesus Christ starts to reign in my heart and yours fully.  Then he will give us that burden because we start to see the world through the eyes that he sees it... i sometimes fancy my Lord Jesus Christ weeping and weeping for my wrongs... that's another story... back on the subject, i am not that upset bep... but if we profess Him, He will have to work His way in every part of our lives... one point, this was so nerve racking Judge_Not, (i hate doing this for my point guys and gals is not to please, please, prove that i am right or he is right and i am wrong)...
it is excellent and i agree with you fully brother (i think) in that we have the right to discern between evil and good and not judge hearts...  my question to you is brother, is it not true we only are able to see evil and good when the Holiness of God first enlightens us to the pain and sin that is around us?  We would be foolish to think we will be able to discern good from evil without feeling the anguish of what Jesus Christ our Lord feels when he sees this world...  because, then that implies we have not understood what grace really is....    

also, the Word of God gives us a stark reminder guys that He is the one to sift the wheat from the chaff.  YEAH I HATE hAVING TO RESORT TO THIS TYPE OF WARNING, but nevertheless it is in His word.
WE WILL BE DOOMED IF We STILL THINK MAN's WAYS & MEANS CAN SOMEHOW BE SYNTHESIZED WITH GOD'S WAY TO BRING ABOUT THE DESITNY THAT GOD BESETS UPON FOR US, FOR IT IS NO DIFFERENT THAN OF IDOLOTARY! Let Alone in conjuction with the Creator of Heaven and Earth, it didn't even work for Marks and Engles.  What makes you think it will work for The Lord of Hosts, who is UNPOLLUTED BY ANY HUMAN EXPERIENCE?  YOUR HOLINESS, we seek IT OH LORD GOD!

Thanks for your understanding brother TOM....   PLEASE READ CAREFULLY

This may be a suprise to some but GOD is in control. God is soverign. He places the kings  or governments at His will. Man is not in comtrol of mans destinity.

Oklahoma Howdy to Ollie,

I must agree with you, but I would like to add something to the equation, something that is being talked about now.

We have a lot of Judicial activism that is not necessarily to do with the law or with the Constitution. They have done many things that are not the will of the people. I would add that the "Separation of Power" is broken. Several recent examples involve the Legislative and Executive Branch of Government being in agreement and the Judicial Branch either overturning them or doing something opposite.

We didn't elect the Judicial Branch of government, and they don't rule America. The people rule America in the form of our representative style government where we vote them in and vote them out. It is far past time for the "Separation of Powers" philosophy of the founders to be repaired. The Judicial Branch of government is involved, up to the eyeballs, in turning America away from God. The Judicial Branch of government is not our elected representatives, and they should never be allowed to rule America.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Oklahoma Howdy to Digme,

 :D  Now I know you are a guy.

I did read your post very carefully, and I think that I understand. I don't think this thread was intended to address our daily walk and fellowship with Jesus. I think it was more intended as a simple political thread for Christians to discuss who they will vote for and why.

There are some Christians who honestly believe that we shouldn't vote at all or voice anything in the affairs of men. According to them, we are not of this world and should have nothing to do with it. Some of those same folks believe that Christians shouldn't hold public office since it would be a conflict of interest serving God.

I bet you can guess that I don't agree with the paragraph above.   :D  Many would be tickled to death if all Christians would simply sit down and shut-up. In fact, many would prefer that Christians were not seen or heard in public. Well, I won't sit down and be quiet. I hope that many Christians feel the same way.

I've prayed for every President almost daily, regardless of whether I voted for them or not. The same would be true when I disagreed completely with what they were doing. I feel it is a Christian's duty to pray for our leaders, regardless of how good or bad we fell they may be doing.

I think that most mature Christians pray at least daily about what to do that would be most pleasing to God. The same would be true for helping the lost, poor, and the hungry. It's more than obvious that hosts of Christians feel burdened to also help the hungry and sick of other countries, regardless of whether they wish to kill us or not. For each Christian, it should be a matter of prayer in everything they do or don't do in their daily lives. Prayer should be the highest priority every day, and everything else should wait.

There are still lost, hungry and sick people all over the world, regardless of how much we do or how hard we try. In fact, there are still lost, hungry and sick people in America. This is also a matter of prayer for most mature Christians every day. I don't hint that I have the answers, but I know who does. HIS NAME IS JESUS!

The problems of mankind started with the first man, Adam. It was his sin and the sin of his seed that are responsible for the horrible mess mankind created. JESUS is the only answer. The darkness and evil of this world will one day be locked away. In the meantime, Christians should stand up and "run a good course". We can't solve the problems of this world, but we should try. Our Saviour will solve the mess men have made at HIS appointed time.

Love In Christ,
Tom  

:'(

Yes, for His purpose not ours.

I agree. The supreme court at times seems to be unconstitutional in their actions. Where is the ACLU when really needed?

Ollie,Members of the supreme court tend to spend very little time "under" the administration that actually nominated them to the court.  Am I correct in assuming the Supreme Court "under" Nixon was a group actually nominated and confirmed under Johnson, Kennedy & Eisenhower?  The reason I put the word “under” in quotes – is because of our form of government:  Legislative, Executive & Judicial.  The president is head of the Executive branch – he does not head the Judicial branch – thus, you cannot say “The supreme court UNDER” any president - the judicial branch is separate (thank God!).

My nick is after the song, "Dreamweaver" by Gary Wright.

Have you seen what the Catholic, think of Kerry? They will not serve him commiution. More Christians are afraid of Kerry then Bush. To me it would be picking the lesser evil, Bush. Bush I know where he is coming from. Kerry........ is anyones guess.

I feel pain everyday at all times, digme. This is another reason I won't vote for Kerry. Kerry wants to elimate SSDI for those under the age of 50. I worked from the time I was 13 and paided my social security, till I was almost killed. Now I am on SSDI and HE wants to take it away??  Not from me if I can help it....
Do you look in history digme? From Austria a 3rd world country at the time, Hitler was born. One of the biggest mass murders of the 20th century. Over 6 million, yes Million Jews were killed on his orders. Another 3rd world country Uganda, birth place of the butcher Admi, who killed unknown thousands, of his own people. The world is littered with hundreds of people like this.........
Getting back to earlier, I believe that Kerry will bring in the start of the Tribulation. Also look at Kerrys record on abortion, Kerry is for abortion. Bush is against abortion. Sorry digme I have to go with the man who will NOT kill the unborn fetus of a child, thats Bush.

The article I cut and pasted said that Blackmun and Rehnquist were Nixon appointees. Do not know off hand of who appointed the others.    ???


"In January of 1973 the case was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. A majority of 7 to 2 declared the Texas statute unconstitutional. Justice Harry Blackmun, an appointee of President Richard Nixon, wrote the opinion for the majority. Justice William Rehnquist, another Nixon appointee and now Chief Justice, filed a dissenting opinion. Justice White concurred with Justice Rehnquist."

Ollie

I don't talk about polotics and religion!

 ;D

Yeah!

Just read the scriptures God never bothered about politics either!  ;D

I guess I should check my history more carefully before making sweeping statements.  
 ;D
The first time I ever cast a vote was for...  NIXON!  ;D  Of course, Nixon’s opponent was George McGovern – who was WAAAAAY to the left in those days.  Now days, McGovern would be somewhere to the right of Dubya.   :P

2ndT says: But polo is such a fine, aristocratic, sport!  Plus it’s played on a fast horse and a sincere prayer.  :)

Okay, okay – I know what you mean about discussing politics and religion – you never do it with your father-in-law.  :)

But – on the serious side – if you care about freedom of worship, babies living beyond the womb, and maintaining a lifestyle that allows to help the less fortunate – you pretty much have to be involved in politics to some extent.

Finally:  Where is Tibby on this subject???

You guys do know I was joking right?...lol  

Grace and Peace!

 ;D
Reba didn't know.
 ;D

 


Hey X Reba is not a guy.  :P

What now????  I guess you are offended by the term "Girly Men", too????  First you slap me because I open a door for you, then slap me because I don't.  Then men want to be women but are insulted when they're called 'girly'.
"Sheesh" (That's a Reba quote.)  Someday's I just want to give up.  >:(
Signed,
X
 ;)  ;D  :D

STONE HIM!!

 ;D just kidding

Oh, my! Now we know where the responsibility lies for why America is as she is today.

 ;D
Ollie

Hey wait a second. By your arguemnet then George Bush would be much worse then Edwards. I mean George Bush cut in front of 100's and 100's of people in line to get into the Nat'l Guard. The majority of those poeple ended up in Nam and suffered the ravages of war. One of those would have been in the Guard if it weren't for Bush.

I dunno. Oil men who claim to be Christian but are really sober dunks are prtty low. Especially since the blaspheme.
Also rich Americans who traded with the Nazi's after Pearl Harbor during WWII is pretty low too. Of xcourse I'm talking about Dubya's garndaddy Prescott 'love that Nazi money' Bush. :-)

Meet the real Bush.
These are from a NONPARTISAN site ok? If it is a partisan it's going to be mendacious. But this is a non partisan site whicjh also has some bad stuff the DNC did too. But since today's GOP uses so much deception they can be compared accurately to 'old red and scaly', the DNC is behind on distortion and mendacity. If anyone really want the truth spend time on this site:

(PS I am a former Republican. But my Love and devotion for the Light of God has made me a man without a party. )

Know the facts. And don't be fooled by the wolves in shepherds clothing!

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=145

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=143

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=102

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=109

http://www.factcheck.org/SpecialReports.aspx?docid=171

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=118

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=167

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=186

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=177

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=187

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=173

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=159

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=152

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=153
 
 
 

RichardElchrist,
Hmmm: "nonpartisan" adjective, free from party affiliation or bias  
Free from party affiliation I can go along with.  Free from bias is humanly impossible.  Just as you are openly biased against Bush, yet you are free of party affiliation (as I am.)  Biases are perfectly within your rights and freedoms.  As are mine.  

I could care less about what Kerry or Bush did 20 years ago or 30 years ago or 40 years ago.  I could care less about whether Bush owns an oil well or a baseball team.  The fact that George Bush flew jets in the N.G. rather than going to Vietnam doesn’t impress me one way or another.  The fact that Kerry managed three purple hearts in 4 months (one a well documented “splinter” in his forearm) does not impact my vote one way or another.  And I could certainly care less about what Bush’s grandfather may have done.  That’s ludicrous! What has THAT got to do with anything other than fueling your bias?  Your biased and open accusation that Bush is lying about being a Christian and is a blasphemous lying dry-drunk does more to lower my impression of you than it does him.  I’m glad I don’t have your apparent ability to see so far into another man’s heart to know what’s really there – it would drive me totally insane.  

My biases, politically, are based on several very distinct and identifiable things:  The candidate who interprets The First Amendment and the Second Amendment most closely to my interpretation and the candidate who is willing to give more than lip service towards stopping 30 years of infanticide is the one who gets my vote.  Bush is well ahead of Kerry in all of those categories.  However, as I stated in a previous post, I intend to vote for neither.

One final thought – this website you tout as NONPARTISAN – who judges that?  Is there a “committee” out there somewhere that “certifies” things as partisan or nonpartisan” and under what rules?

As for me: I am partisan, and I am biased – that’s why I am able to have an opinion.  ;D

I never used the word biased or unbiased.
I am swayed by one thing - the truth. What you call bias appears to really be convictions which can be dangerous. But you have the right to be convinced that a banana is really a grapefruit. And I respect your right to feel that way.

I don't look into Bush's heart, I look into his policies, his actions and his words and deeds. And they are unChrist like.

It appears that you personally don't factor in Christianity as a motive to vote for a president. That's excellent. But many do. And I believe Bush is decieving Christians by insinuating he walks the path of CHRIST.  And that's why I am here to spread unpartisan truth- not my truth but the truths of that unbiased and inpartisan website.

Partisanship is easily discernable to the open minded. www.bushlies.com and www.nojohnkerry.com- both clearly biased and partisan. www.factcheck.org works extremely hard at seperating the wheat from the chaff on both sides of the aisle. Use it to your advantage.

So if you want unpartisan truth I recommend you check out the site. Afterall if a politican uses mendacity to spin his interpretations of the 1st and 2nd amendments shouldn't that be a factor in your decision.
If Bush says Kerry is against the 2nd amendment and that isn't true then wouldn't you want to know that? Especially considering that he usurped the 1st amendment to get you to think that.  Now I'm not saying Bush said that- I said what if.
Because distortions and mendacity are the grist of the GOP mill right now.

Bottom line: use the the light of truth, not the darkness of distortion and mendacity to make the best decision come election day. And don't confuse convictions for truths.

clinton and kerry edwards all part of the baby killing party (democrate) so they will never get my vote. The so called abortion rights is my first line in the sand so to speak. So my the choice of the democrates them selfs they will never get my vote.

Of course Reba you do realize that the lax in abortion policies all took place under GOP presidents right? Does that matter?
And of course only the Sunpreme Court can stop abortion and that probably will never happen.

Do you care if president's kill babies that were already born? Look how many people have died because Bush sent them off to war. Each one was somebody's baby. And what about the innocent Iraqi babies killed by US bombs. Does that matter to you at all?
Just curious. I'm not attacking you - I jst want to know about your line in the sand.

As i stated abortion is my line in the sand.     Seems the democrateic site that has its platform in it is being updated for the elections just now so i cant post the abortion plank.

So should I interpret that as an unborn is more worthy then the born? The death of an unborn a greater tragedy then the death of a born baby?

Would you think the death of 1000 of greater pain then 10?


Baby killers are evil and anyone who supports them , as you are, or in any way,  are also evil.  You seem to support the killing of the unborn wow what  a man! hold you ground guy kill that child. Feel the warm blood run through you fingers, their blood is on your hands.

Yes i get emotional death is an emotional topic.

An unborn baby never volunteered....  ;)

Hello RichardElchrist,

If you are a part of the new Kerry reach out to Christians campaign, it won't work and it's a waste of time. I think that most of us have seen enough actions and heard enough words from Kerry and Bush to make up our minds. This is not to imply that Bush is a wonderful Christian, but it would imply a void of Biblical morals on the part of Kerry.

I really don't need any spins, commentary, or views from partisan or non-partisan web sites, news agencies, or special interest groups. I've heard and seen more than enough from the candidates themselves. The analogy that Bush may be a wolf in sheep's clothing would go in one ear and out the other. I already know that he is far from being a strong Christian. The analogy that Kerry may be the devil in ACLU's clothing is my personal observation that I didn't need any help with.

If there was a third ticket with more Biblical views I would consider voting for them. I would first be concerned about whether they had a chance of winning, and who would get the benefit of a split vote. If I concluded the third ticket didn't have a chance and Kerry would benefit from a split vote, I would vote for Bush. I would have the same concerns for any existing fourth and fifth tickets.

Most of us have heard the stories of the past so many times that they go in one ear and out the other. Most of us have also heard and seen the political machines for what they are - political machines.

I will listen, with interest, what the candidates themselves say. The same will be true of the candidates actions. I have almost no interest in spin, hype, and the messages of the political machines and news media. I'm sorry to be repetitive - the political machines and news media are spin and hype.

I will pay considerable attention to documented stands of the candidates that I have heard and seen for myself. Abortion will be one of those stands. Someone defending or promoting abortion wouldn't get my vote for dog catcher, much less a vote for President of the United States.

I also paid considerable attention to views on a strong military, and more specifically, providing for the needs of our young men and women serving us. I've heard their words and seen their actions from the candidates themselves. In my completely BIASED opinion, Kerry has no concern for either.

I will and have paid considerable attention to morals and Biblical values. In my completely BIASED opinion, Kerry has none.

If other Christians have opinions as BIASED as mine as, very few Christians will vote for Kerry. Regarding our Armed Services and providing for those who protect our way of life, Kerry serves our enemies. I realize that's my completely BIASED opinion, but that won't change. It's an absolute fact that Kerry voted to send our young men and women to war. It's also an absolute fact that Kerry later voted "NO" to buy supplies our young men and women fighting needed to survive. I saw and heard the spin and lies from his own mouth in trying to explain this. "I actually voted yes but I later voted no." This took my single digit respect for Kerry far into negative numbers. There is no explanation, and I'm not interested in the attempt.

I apologize for being so shy on this matter.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Whoa! A lot has happened on this thread since I logged off two hours ago and just logged back in!  My-my!  What passions we have.
 ;D
Passion is good as long as passion is for good.  (I just made that up all by myself!)  ;D

Richard:
No – but as I demonstrated ‘bias’ is part of the definition of ‘partisan’.
Whose truth?  As I’ve said in other threads, there are three sides to every story: your side, my side and the truth.  Your side is only your side as you wish, according to the stories you make a decision to read or listen to and believe.  Which is exactly what my side is based on.  (Well – I am on the Bible’s side, also.)
According to whom you believe!  Have you actually WITNESSED these ‘atrosities' or are you depending on what others have told you and then using your brain to weed out the truth you personally want to believe?
I factor in Jesus Christ into every single minute of my life.  If you accuse me of not doing so because you have a different political opinion from mine, then we have no further reason to exchange any kind of communication.  Period.
Give us all an eyewitness account of his atrocities.
Impossible.  As I’ve pointed out you cannot take the 'bias' out of partisan.
I looked at your site and saw the points back and forth, with most going anti conservative.  But it is all someone's opinion.  If a car salesman is selling both Fords and Dodges does that make him nonpartisan?  Sheesh.
It is.
I don’t care what ‘Bush says Kerry says’ or what ‘Kerry says Bush says’.  I care about what comes out of the individual's mouth.  Kerry is liberal – he interprets the 1st and 2nd amendment differently than I do.  I have heard his interpretations coming from his own lips.  Is that not good enough for you?  Do you understand what I just typed?  I AM NOT A LIBERAL.  I will never be or vote for a liberal.  Liberals are socialist baby killers. (As I have witnessed - no one told me that - I didn't get it from a website - I have WITNESSED it.)  Am I clear about my opinion?  YOU won’t change my opinion.  My opinion is based on biblical values.  
I will not defend the GOP or any “party”.

Lastly, you posted:
 
That is a ludicrous, defensive, childish statement that I wish you liberals would quit making – it shows deep ignorance.  It is obvious you would just as soon Saddam was still in power; even though he was killing 30,000 innocent men, women and babies every year.  His death rate almost equaled the ‘Death by Abortion Rate’ in America.  Sheesh.  Which way do you want it?  Do you care about the unborn AND the troops AND the Iraqi civilians or just your politics and getting your boy kerry elected?

Hello RichardElchrist, do you know that every major war has started, when a dem has been in office. That is a fact, since Teddy Roosvelt was elected to office.
I am afraid that electing Kerry would be the start of the tribulation. If you are a Christian you know what the trib is...........
I am ready to go to the Lord at any time. I would like to see some of the people I know come to Christ. If Kerry is elected there wouldn't be enought time. :'(

Also RichardElchrist, do you know Democrats have killed more of our young men in battle, and wars then any other party put together. Checking the facts;
Civil War--Rep
Spanish-American War--Dem
World war 1--Dem
World War 2--Dem
Korea--Dem
Vietnam--Dem
Iraq 1--Rep
Iraq 2--Rep
Please check your facts, you will find I am correct.

Edited to add;
Every time a republican is in office, they build the Armed Services up. Every time a democrat comes into office they tear the Armed Services down. When some one with a gruge comes along and starts a war.

I do not apologize for being so shy on this matter.
Sorry beeps I could help it. ;D

DW, you last post was good, except for the Civil War part.  Lincoln was a Republican, so it was the Republicans who started the Civil War.

Already changed, I had to get something to eat. When I got back I remembered so I changed it, then I saw your post. ::)
Thanks though. ;D

You are most welcome.

Yes, and it is American politics from both sides of the fence that allow it to continue.

Where is the Christian objection to both guilty parties in our politics in America. I hear silence.

 It would appear that Christians choose the lesser of two evils, but evil is still chosen.

I will vote for Ollie

<:)))><

You must have overlooked Eisenhower and his downsizing of the Americam military in the late 1950s.
Then there was Roosevelt with the largest buildup of American armed forces, in the early 1940s, ever in History of same.
Then there was Truman whose administration decided to maintain a very large military to meet the communist threat at the end of WWII. This continued until Eisenhowers downsizing.
Then you overlooked Bush and his downsizing veterans benefits after we went into Iraq.
 Then there was Nixon who stepped up and beefed up the war effort in Vietnam. Then we lost and it went communist anyway. What was it all about?
However his administaration did bring us lawful abortion. It has gone on through five republican presidents and two democrats.

God's will be done, whether republican or democrat, His will be done.

Ollie

Brothers and sisters in Christ, conversation even in this sensitive topic without the spirit of Christ would not be due respectful... having said that, i want to point out this is really written for BEP(AKA TOM ) for i have the utmost respect for that man(i am assuming)... I really didn't like what I have seen that has been written for none of you ever displayed a heart to hearken that could be molded... a heart that is soft, except maybe brother TOM..... and that is truly from my heart, for i don't like to babble and dabble in here.... getting back to what i said:

Brother Tom, i am assuming you still have a passion to serve and follow our Lord... here is the question that i have,- have you ever thought maybe the solution to solving the abortion problem is not to pass laws? or to elect officials? is that really the solution brother?  Should i say far more than what the Book of Romans explains to us about the Law? I can't understand how we christians can be so blinded.  Law binds us with the a chain.. oh we so conveniently ignore it when it comes to the political arena, but we sure know how to exegisis the HECK OUT OF ROMANS... Have you ever thought brother Tom, God wants the problem rooted out from another vantage point? if you want me to suggest from where, i can? but I am well aware you are at least familiar with some for i have sensed your soft heart from what you have posted... brother, it is really not be unkind to others in here... but some of the stuff written in here grieves the Holy Spirit...
Brother Tom, i ask the same question to myself, and it is an ever daunting task knowing that Jesus Christ every day wants to contradict in the way i experience my life as live; the implications of that means that my thought patterns and the motives behind of what i think have to be tested continuously; i have seen that to be at least somewhat true in your case brother.  I don't think GOD CARES A HOOT ABOUT WHAT AMERICA IS AND AMERICA IS GOING TO BE! QUOTE ME ON IT! ... We would be fools to believe that God is concerened about the state affairs of this country without first being concerned about our piety...  most here just simply shrugged off the comments about the piety thing from my previous posts... let me tell you, i am the one to admit... i am ever so more convicted of that daily, sometimes it feels like hourly.... oh yeah, we have the rehetorics... what we don't understand is that, we might feel this to be a light discussion of a subject important to us... BUT BE WARE... May i say... WE ARE FLIRTING WITH TRUTH! I dare say, if God enjoys seeing that...  remember the story with Felix... and I dare not flirt with it for the implications for this discussion is more detrimental than some of what we realize here now...  I DONT CARE IF WE WILL BE in certain way, a successful country... I just wish God would sensitize me and you and others...  I learned a very deep message just recently from a preacher about the intent of our hearts(email or pm me for that if you would like to hear it)... i am scared now ever so more, of what i say, for i have the faintest little understanding that my heart controls what i say.. in other words, my intent for what i say always precedes the content that i say... that test my friend, i applied it here, and saddly to say, it has failed... many a man and woman here tried to tell me, we judge truth... i say to you and to them, before you stand for truth, judge the intent on why you stand for truth... you think GOD needs a lawyer? Hmm... you think Almighty One, needs feeble man to stand for Him and discuss about why abortion is wrong, when we don't even fail the pain of the woman who is choosing to abort...  what we Don't understand, and including you i am going to assume, is that in the "natural condition of completeness" a woman would not have the necessity to abort, not because she is educated, or is white, or has parents that are rich, or is a law-abiding citizen... but because the glory of God would have indwelt within her.  WE FORGET that SIN is the SOURCE OF ALL EVIL...

BORTHER TOM THE GROUND IS LEVEL AT THE FOOT OF THE CROSS...... WHETHER baby killers, liers, stealers, war-leaders, me you, Nazi, Nietzche, Escarot Euhadah (judah), Peter, St. Paul, Kerry, or Bush... all same.......  same mortal man...  SAME...   sadly i say though, most of us sometimes have a man-made tier, of who is above who is higher on the ladder leading up to God... saddly to say, i am inclined to think you might see it that way sometimes, or maybe not? i will know from your answers

(Note This Quote Below:  "We're going to let our political leaders know 'if you don't stand for God, we won't stand for you,'")
__________

Miss. Christians Rally After FMA Senate Setback

by Allie Martin and Jenni Parker
July 19, 2004

(AgapePress) - More than 6,000 people gathered at the BancorpSouth Center in Tupelo, Mississippi, last Sunday night (July 18) to support the biblical view of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. For that evening the center became a place of worship, as more than 70 area churches joined forces to host the rally for traditional marriage.

Less than a week after the U.S. senate voted to end debate on a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage, Christians are mobilizing and preparing for the next phase in the ongoing fight to keep marriage from being redefined.

This past weekend's Rally for Traditional Marriage was broadcast by American Family Radio to audiences across 35 states. The Northeast Mississippi gathering featured rousing music and speeches from a number of pro-family leaders, including the state's First District representative, Congressman Roger Wicker, and Pastor Bill Owens, president of the Coalition of African American Pastors.

Leaders call on Christians to speak out, pray, and vote

Rally attendees watched a short video presentation of President George W. Bush's address to the recent national meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention, during which he pledged to support the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment. In his own address, Congressman Wicker emphasized the importance of protecting marriage as a basic step to safeguard the health of the family.

The U.S. representative described "a mom and a dad involved in their family" as the best "program" in combating a number of social problems. He pointed out that re-defining marriage would result in cheapening the institution and lowering heterosexual marriage rates, thereby increasing the number of children living in single-parent homes.

Wicker also urged audience members to "vote prayerfully; vote carefully," since the next U.S. president will likely appoint several new justices to the Supreme Court.

Pastor Bill Owens, an African American community activist who marched for racial justice some 40 years ago, told the rally audience the homosexual activists of today have hijacked the civil rights cause. The minister also had a message for elected officials. "We're going to fight until we win," he said. "We're going to have crusades and rallies like this until we win. We're going to let our political leaders know 'if you don't stand for God, we won't stand for you,'" he says.

The battle for marriage will be long, Owens says, but he insists it is a fight that can be won with God's power.

Another rally speaker, Campaign for Working Families Chairman Gary Bauer, challenged believers in America to live, vote for, and defend Christian values without shame or embarrassment. He said Christians must stand up for traditional marriage, which is God's creation.


"Now, I don't know how to break this to folks on the other side," Bauer quipped, "but marriage wasn't dreamed up by the religious right. Marriage actually predates the Massachusetts Supreme Court. Marriage between a man and a woman was there long before San Francisco existed, and it was there before Ted Kennedy took his seat in the United States Senate."

Like Owens, Bauer decried efforts of homosexual activists to characterize traditional marriage defenders as intolerant bigots. "It is not bigotry to believe marriage is between a man and a woman," he said, and the rally audience responded with a burst of applause.

Protest and prayer

However, not everyone that turned out for the rally was in agreement with its purpose. According to the Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal, a few protestors showed up to demonstrate outside the BancorpSouth Center, holding up signs that bore such messages as "Love makes a marriage, not gender" and "Hate is not a family value."

However, most Rally for Traditional Marriage attendees appeared to support its cause fully. Many declared that they had come to speak up in favor of a Federal Marriage Amendment and for American citizens' right to have the chance vote it up or down.

Nearly all of the main rally speakers cast the effort to defend the biblical view of marriage in terms of a nationwide battle, and Bauer himself said America was fighting "two wars" -- one against terror and another for traditional values. But amid all the martial rhetoric, Pastor Larry Hill of Tupelo's First United Pentecostal Church sounded a note of reconciliation.

Hill closed the rally with a unifying benediction in which he prayed for those who opposed the purpose of the gathering, asking God to "Let them know we love them."



http://forums.christiansunite.com/index.php?board=23;action=display;threadid=4466;start=0#msg67466 (http://forums.christiansunite.com/index.php?board=23;action=display;threadid=4466;start=0#msg67466)
http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion01238.shtml  (http://news.christiansunite.com/Religion_News/religion01238.shtml)
Additional information on ChristiansUnite.com is available on the Internet at http://www.christiansunite.com/ (http://www.christiansunite.com/)
Copyright © 2003 ChristiansUnite.com. All rights reserved.

I agree with Brother Love (Yikes!  Did I just say that?)  ;D

Ollie for President. ;D

Sincereheart for Secretary of State. ;D

Blackeyedpeas for Attorney General.  ;D

Dreamweaver for Secretary of Defense.  ;D

Oh - and Reba for Secretary of education.  ;D

2nd Tim should lead the Airforce!   ;)

Can I be on the Supreme Court?????
At least let me be a general!    ??? :-\

Sheesh

I gotta ask:  Does the following promote the 1st Amendment, or stomp all over it?  The liberal left preaches “free speech” but only the speech they approve.

TESTING THE FAITH
Political Snitches Monitor Sermons
Groups threaten churches with loss of tax-exempt status over activism
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 23, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By Joseph Farah
WorldNetDaily.com

WASHINGTON – At least two organizations are monitoring the content of Sunday sermons by U.S. pastors and threatening to report churches to the Internal Revenue Service if they hear political messages they deem inappropriate under federal guidelines on tax-exempt status.

For the full story see:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39596 (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39596)

I wanna be the CIA Director... :'(

I guess that would be up to Ollie - but howabout "Intelligence Czar".  ;D

I just want to be the interior decorator.  :D

OOoooooo...Czar!  Sounds cool!  Could I get a big mug that says "Czar" on it?  ;D

thanks X

  edgeukation  

  wow

Reba you are forsaken if you have called me a babykiller which you seem to have. I am not and yet you have called me such. What does that make you? Who's work are you doing if you call someone a murderer and baby killer who is actually in the Light of God doing work to protect the born and unborn equally?  

Your post says more about you then it does me. For I am a chosen defender of The Christ and you have raised your hand to smote me. Have you forgotten the face of your Father?
Your words are an arrow into a heart fighting for Jesus's 2nd coming. Think about that when He walks past you house.
 

You have mistaken me brother. For I am no follower of any man. I am not Pro Kerry. But I am anti Bush as he is a great deciever and I have weathered a view of a future with him as leader and it is a hellish thing.

The man who was supposed to have lead us was thwarted through evil means by the decievers of the Bush team during the GOP primaries of 2000. And now look at us. Fighting each other while all crumbles around us.

You yourself have admitted that your bias's will guide you. This means you know you are not walking the true path of  the Light of God and yet you appeared to have rationalized it and justified it. Bias's are born of convictions. Convictions are the enemy of truths. Any enemy of truth is enemy of the Word, the Light, the Way.

Errrrr...don'tcha mean "smite"?  I'd hate to have Reba smoting a chosen defender of The Christ when she meant to smite him... ;D  Love ya Sis!

Seriously though, you claim Christ, so that makes you my brother.  You should check out the scriptures to learn God's view of war, government, and His role within each.  He sets up kings and takes down kings.  He steers nations in direction at His will.  I, for one, have no problem saying that the war in Iraq was God's will.  If it wasn't, then somebody sure caught Him by surprise...

1. The truth I am swayed by and blood sworn to defend is The TRUTH. That backed up by facts, not rhetoric, not deception, not distortions, not mendacity.
Just because it may not support your convictions doesn't make it any less true.

2. I have been an eyewitness myself to the deceptions, unfortunately. I have witnessed the unChrist like ways of the Bush adminmistration. I have seen blood in the past and in the future. And for this knowledge I am paying the price.    Truth be told I feel like a dragon slayer who survived yet failed to slay the dragon. Their is no comfort in that type of survival. For I have failed. And when I returned to what appeared from a distance to be the House of God for healing I realized as I grew closer to my destintion that their are many houses built to look like the House of God but inside are only false idols and lost souls. And so my return was met with anger and dare I say hatred. But I promised my Lord I will gladly stand and face the clubs of convictions and arrows of untruth because to do anything less would be a dis-service to the Warriors who have gone before me and The Christ Himself. So here I stand.
And I am sworn to remember the Face of my Father and to do His work, no matter who chooses to be my enemy.
For I must forge a path for the Way, and The Light. Because He is coming.

His_Child said:
HS: I think that's a splendid idea!  ;D

I think Ollie should also create a brand new cabinet member in his new administration - "Secretary of Wisdom".  The wisdom secretary will stand behind a tall, offical looking podium and give confusing and evasive answers to simple questions.  

Oh - wait - there's already a position with that job description:  Press Secretary.   ;D  

ROFL! And we just THOUGHT the country was in trouble.... ;D

JE Said: I can accept your word on that since I don't really have a reason not to.
 My convictions, as I said are Bible based, according to teachers I know and trust.  Nothing personal, but I don't know you.


You're a prophet?  That would be a tough load to bear.
I'm sorry, again - nothing personal, but I'm a little skeptical about that reality... (as we are taught to be by Jesus).

I appreciate your skepticism and may it serve you well.
All I ask and insist is you use your skeptcism with regards to politics and policy as well. For real trouble is amok there and it is serving the swift horsemen known as power and greed.
 
I take none of this personal for that would be wrong. This is not about me. Just like my posts are not really about you although they may be about your beliefs and convictions. Please don't take my words personally either- which appears I don't need to worry about that.

I am not a prophet. I wouldn't survive long in this world (or this forum probably  :D) if I was. But I am a protector of and warrior for The One some call Prophet. For if He were to appear in many a 'house of worship' today He wouldn't make it to the exit 'alive'.  And to sacrifice prematurely is no sacrifice at all and saves nothing, only wastes.
I am merely forging the path and 'clearing the land mines' laid down by the Great Deceiver's 'worker bees'. So I am. I am guided, I dictate not the direction nor the guiding.

   

Richard,

Yes i called you a baby killer and claim the blood of the unborn to be on your hands. Seems you are also a circle talker. No one who supports the democrates, the party of baby killers is christian in my view. It matters not to me how you support them by $$, word or deed. I am done waisting my time reading your posts.

Good advice - the same advice I (or anyone?) would (should) give.

Is this something new?  I was under the impression it has been going on for thousands of years...  It is well documented scriptural fact.

That's cool.

You mean about my belief and conviction that Jesus is God and He rules all things and He will reign forever?

Whew!  You had me worried there for a minute!  But... in another post you said you knew the future... only a prophet could know that...

 Cool!  You are a body-guard and mercenary for a prophet!  (I'm Not trying to mock you in any way - I'm just trying to put this in words the below-average joe; like me, relates to.)  Who is he?  What has he prophesied that is true to The Word?  Surely you can name him - a true prophet wouldn't hide his/her self; for God will protect him/her until God's will is done.  Or is that just it - God's will is not yet done so you can't identify this person?  Okay - I get it.

You use a capital 'H' in this sentence - so does that make the prphet you protect divine?  Wow! this is getting interesting.  And if he just appeared in my congregation, chances are my fellow worshipers would kill him?  Hmmm - that doesn't fit my fellow worshippers at all - they might ask him to leave - but killing???  Your prophet must have a pretty heavy message to turn Christians into killers...

 Dangerous work, I'm sure.


 

Thanks I'll take the job. ;D

I agree with you Reba, excellent!! I too have a better way to fill my time, then saying something to Richard who thinks he is a "protector of and warrior for The One some call Prophet." Who ever that is.........

Makes one think if Richard is NOT being the one mislead by this, "protector of and warrior for The One some call Prophet."

Smart move Dream i am the secertary of edgukation  ;D

I could be like Martha Stewart without the record!  :D

But cheap entertainment is hard to come by!

they was gunna give me that job til i kwit homeskuling.

ROFL!! To true, to true. ;D

That thar tis vhat they told mes to. I's needs ta fin mes skool firs.

me thinks dis thread dun getted hijacked.

I dunno bout that thar, weren't tis thread bein' hi-jack'd on that thar fisr page?

Who is the one that some called a prophet?
Was He God or just a man or somewhere in between?

You're going to have to clarify this for me because I'm having a hard time with taking your posts seriously because you sound like some men who've made history.
Those men would be Jones, Koresh, Manson and a few others.

Thats about what RE sounds like to me too.

RE- are you familiar with TWI?

http://mb-soft.com/believe/txc/way.htm

I know some people online who really like the teachings of Weirwille. (sorry, not sure if that is the correct spelling of the founder's name.)

I disagree with what they believe.

As I disagree with them.

Brother, there are a ton of Christians who have fought abortion for many years and in many ways. I'm one of them. The Bush Administration is the only one I can remember in many years that took the bull by the horns and tried. In fact, it appeared close that Roe vs. Wade was about to be over turned. That battle was lost, so they started a new one on partial birth abortions.

There have been petitions, email campaigns, telephone blitzes, mail blitzes, and just about everything you can think of done by millions of Christians for many years. Many Christian groups went so far as to violate the law and go to jail in the attempt to end abortion. I don't agree with this as an effective means to end abortion, but the government is at least listening now, and many of our representatives are trying to end it, including President Bush. This is no secret about President Bush, and I'm positive he will continue to fight it.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Richard,

I'll simply say with kindness that I don't buy it, especially the part about seeing the future. Are you an Apostle or just a plain prophet?  Or, maybe you are a King or have some other self-proclaimed title. I think that the Enquirer wants to know.   :D  I honestly feel that you deserve a regular pay check from the George Bush campaign to keep doing what you are now doing.   :D

So, you're not a Kerry man, as you say. Who are you going to vote for Richard? OR, are you running? If so, will you vote for yourself?

Hello Digme,

I think that you misunderstand this discussion. Most of us are simply discussing our Biblical convictions concerning the race for President.

I think that we both know that men can not be forced to the FOOT OF THE CROSS. If they could be, it would not be them accepting or believing in anything. I obviously believe that all problems would be solved if all people accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Saviour. However, a large portion of the world is evil, and Christians must decide action or inaction. Almighty God can obviously do anything He wishes in and through His children. However, this is done by us yielding to HIS WILL and following the path that would be most pleasing to HIM, not us. I don't believe for a moment that HE wishes HIS children to remain quiet, defend, promote, or ignore evil. There may be some Christians who honestly feel they are led by the Holy Spirit to not be seen or heard in public. If they believe that, I would expect them to follow their convictions. However, that quiet Christian should also know there are a host of Christians with convictions to speak up, be heard, take a stand for Jesus, and call good and evil what they are.

Personally, I feel led to speak up, stand up, share HIS WORD, and yield to HIS Will and purpose. YES, HE wishes to use us. It's really not a matter of HIM needing us to stand for HIM. One could also say that HE doesn't need Pastors, witnesses, workers for the ill and hungry, cheerful givers to HIS WORKS, etc., etc. YES! HE could certainly do it all by Himself with no help from anyone, but that it not HIS WILL. HIS need of us is not the question. Our willingness to yield and serve however HE leads us is the question.

What is actually happening in this thread is a discussion of rights and wrongs that are available to us in a vote. Personally, I feel convicted to vote every time the door opens. I will study and pray about my vote, and I will certainly vote. I will do lots of other things that I feel led and convicted to do. I understand those Christians who choose to be silent and do nothing, but I disagree with them completely. I associate a silent and do nothing Christian as someone who is either ashamed of their Lord and Saviour, afraid, or otherwise letting the devil takes what he wishes without a fight. Some might even confuse piety with silence and inaction. I understand, but I disagree completely. Think about the following paraphrased:

You deny ME..........

Shout it from the rooftops...

Unto good works..........

Personally, I view silence and inaction as denying our Lord and Saviour. It is HIS WORD and HIS WILL that we are to obey to the best of our ability.

Everyone knows there is no perfect man to put in any office. So, this discussion is not about that impossibility. This discussion is about WHAT IS POSSIBLE, for or against HIS WILL, with the choices we have. I would simply ask one thing: Is it HIS WILL that we say nothing and do nothing about evil? My answer is NO. I would say that the silent and do nothing Christian is not yielding to Almighty God for HIS USE. I see mortal Christians as tools GOD wishes to use for HIS Purpose. Other than that, men are just dirt clods, but God does love us.

Love in Christ,
Tom

I was just thinking how much money I could save this country because it really doesn't cost that much to decorate in Early American Goodwill.

I voted for Bush in the last election and while I would never vote for Kerry, I have become disillusioned with Bush as well. While it is great to have a Christian in the White House and I applaud his stand on abortion, same-sex marriage, etc. I am greatly disturbed by things like the "Patriot" Act, locking away people without trial or even charges being filed, torture of prisoners, etc., etc. - all tactics of a police state and violations of the Constitution he swore to uphold. I supported the invasion of Afganistan, but saw no need for the Iraq war and believe it was brought about through lies and misrepresentations - not tactics a Christian should be using. It has drained valuable resources from the War on Terrorism and domestic programs and stretched our military too thin.

I am also concerned about the massive deficits we are running, largely due to Bush's income tax cuts combined with war expenses. I am old enough to remember Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon doing the same thing during the Vietnam War and the runaway inflation that resulted a few years later. Furthermore, the Democrats are right that the cuts benefited only the rich - I saw no cut whatever in my income taxes, but as usual when income taxes are cut my property taxes went up, along with fees, to cover the revenue lost by state and local governments. Basically the Republican income tax cuts are always shell games to shift taxes from progressive to regressive forms of taxation. Their "less government" platform is also a shell game that means less regulation of huge corrupt corporations like Enron, but more and more government control over individuals and infringement on individual rights.

The Republicans make no real effort to deal with domestic problems such as health care, employment, etc. We need a thorough overhaul of health care, not the band-aid approach both parties have advocated so far. The complexity alone must add billions to our costs of health care - standardizing and simplifying would help greatly, but that seems to be beyond the ability of Americans, who seem to rejoice in continually making everything more and more complicated.

The Democrats, on the other hand, have long ceased to represent the average working person in any way and are now captives of the "looney left" and the sexual perverts.

Anyway, this year I may well vote for the Constitution Party candidate for president, even though I don't agree with some of their positions on taxes or health care, (as I don't see either of the major parties doing anything about them anyway). At least the Constitution Party seems to stand for Christian values. (http://www.constitutionparty.com/party_platform.php).

If  government did not spend what they dont have there would be NO deficits.  


It is not governments place to provide jobs or health care. Why ever is it the responcibilty government to support the unemployed, or elderly.

Reba, dearest X;
Your talking 'common sense'.  Common sense has been outlawed in government by the ACLU - at the same time they outlawed Jesus.

I wish I was just 'cutting up ' (as I usually am), and making a joke... But this time I'm dead (America dead) serious...  :'(

http://www.bidness.com/jbj/crockett.htm (http://www.bidness.com/jbj/crockett.htm)


This story is a bit long for a forum please take time to read the whole.

True, but also true that if they raised taxes to cover spending there would be no deficits. The solution is to decide what really needs to be spent and then tax at a level to cover it. Bush cut taxes while increasing spending.

Unfortunately there is no agreement among Americans on what government should be doing and how much it should spend doing it.

Government really can't provide lasting jobs, except by stimulating the private sector, so we have no disagreement there. Health care has simply gotten so enormously expensive that there seems no alternative to government stepping in. If you have a better idea to reduce medical costs to a level affordable to average Americans, advance it!

(The only idea I have come up with in that area is to have the government direct research money to search for cures and preventions, not treatments. The drug companies have no incentive to find cures or preventions, as they make far more money by selling you medicines (treatments) you have to take for the rest of your life!)

It may be a surprise, but government in America has always supported the sick, unemployed and elderly, from the days of original settlement, if their own families couldn't do it. It was local governments that did it, not the Federal Government, and they usually did a very poor job and did it grudgingly, but they were responsible. (Families and relatives did and should bear the primary responsibility, but they do need help even when they are willing).

I've heard over and over that Christians and churches should be doing the job, not the government, and many of the current programs government runs were originally started by churches and religious organizations. However, the reason government took over in those areas was that the religious organizations either didn't have or wouldn't provide the resources to meet the needs. As government services to the poor have been cut back, I haven't seen a huge increase in giving by Christians to fill the gap. I've heard a lot of rhetoric and seen very little action.

Rhys,

There was a time when churches did do a pretty good job of taking care of those in need. However, there is a new ingredient that is breaking the bank.


Nobody can afford to pay for them in the health care arena. We are long past a crisis in the costs they add to every medical procedure. Some doctors are giving up, especially those in fields that are popular for lawyers to wade into. Some parts of the country are much worse than others, but it appears that lawyers are making health care harder and harder for average people to get.

So, the church question might be asked in several different ways:

Do you wish to help the sick people who can't afford medical care?

Same as above but add - prohibitive costs because we will also be lining the fat cat lawyers pockets with gold in the attempt.

This is a fact of life now. Tort reform must be one of the answers if rich and poor receive adequate medical care.

Love In Christ,
Tom

The more government fixes things the less they work.


 Setting on the board of directors of the 'water district' here we HAD to accept the lowest bid  to install some new pipe. I wanted to take the middle bid because it just looked better all around. Government regulations said we had to take the lowest. the cost overrides were very high. but we took the lowest bid.

The more local the government the better. Local government was the format God gave to Moses to deal with the folks in the dessert.

An interesting quote:

“The biggest danger for Kerry is that his stances on issues are so carefully calibrated that she [his wife] might speak the truth and mess up the very carefully scripted way Kerry is hoping voters perceive the issue,” said Massachusetts Republican consultant Rob Gray. “The more outspoken she is, the more she could end up contradicting him.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5452786/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5452786/)

2 Chron 7:14

14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
KJV

Tom,
     I have to agree with you totally on this issue. We should do what the British do - limit suits to actual damages, no punitive damages unless intent can be proven. And people should be made to take responsibility for themselves, not blame sopmeone else for everything that goes wrong.

                       

Reba,
     If I came across as harsh in my last reply to you I apologize. It was not my intention. I should show the love of Christ.
     "The more government fixes things the less they work". This is a popular belief but think what life would be like without government.  Something like Iraq at present, but likely even worse. God instituted government for a reason. While there can be too much government, there can also be too little.
     The "lowest bid" rule was instituted to prevent fraud and government waste of the "Haliburton in Iraq" type. It does lead to substandard work at times, but I believe government rules do not "require" you to take the lowest bid if you can show valid reasons not to, at least around here. This situation could be avoided by requiring "performance guarantees" as they do in Europe for road construction. If a company uses substandard materials and the road doesn't hold up, they are required to redo it at their own expense. Cost overrides should be the contractor's problem, unless the specifications were changed.
     "The more local the government the better". In my experience the most oppressive (and least responsive) governments are the local ones, followed by State governments - (but then I live in NY, which is well named the "Empire" State. It sure isn't democratic). State and local governments are the worst in ignoring and taking away individual rights to please special interest groups, and local governments are usually the most corrupt form of government.
     Moses was dealing with an entire nation of people, so in effect it was a national, not a local government. (Actually Jethro  suggested a national judicial system, not a government). Almost certainly each of the twelve tribes governed itself to a large extent, under the authority of Moses, who was under the authority of God.
                                           Ted


     
     

Ex 18:25-27

25 And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens.

26 And they judged the people at all seasons: the hard causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves.

27 And Moses let his father in law depart; and he went his way into his own land.
KJV
 
I was too sleepy to look up the reference last night   :P.  I read the above as local government with a centrel control.


Rhys,  You did not offend me. A difference of opinion is not harsh, just different.  I am not good with words and i tend to be blunt. I do not mean to offend either.  ;)

Tom,
     I have to agree with you totally on this issue. We should do what the British do - limit suits to actual damages, no punitive damages unless intent can be proven. And people should be made to take responsibility for themselves, not blame sopmeone else for everything that goes wrong.

                       


"I have to agree with you totally on this issue. We should do what the British do - limit suits to actual damages, no punitive damages unless intent can be proven. And people should be made to take responsibility for themselves, not blame sopmeone else for everything that goes wrong."

                       
We should forgive people their mistakes in life and not see it as a way to gain a bundle of cash in the courts.

However, like Tom said greed from the lawyers have them goading and  convincing people to give in to their own base desires and fall prey to their own inner greed and sue.

Ollie

I am the secuterry of edgucation I will now teach you how to spel LAWYERS



  Sheeesh  thanks judge LIARS    

???

In General, do not expect tort reform from our government of lawyers ('liars' as Reba so thoughtfully points out).  In particular, never expect tort reform if a wheel-chair-jumping trial lawyer becomes our new VP.

Reba you have just called a defender of the Christ and the carrier of his sword something blasphemous.  I suppose this means it is to late for you. I will not waste my blade of Truth on someone who has willingly to jumped into the Great Deciever's lap because they are blind and have confused his burn for the warmth that only the LIGHT of God can provide. Such is his Deception.  We have lost you. Your ignorant balsphemy another stepping stone on the path to hell. Well at least you are not alone.
I don't take the loss of your soul lightly. For that is why I am here. But I shall defend the name and honor of the Christ who I have worn to protect over all else. And I believe if HE showed up in your 'church' you would be one of the 1st to attack Him.
While it is too late for you I will pray for your family.
And I am saddened by your ignorance and you blasphemy. For I did nothing to deserve it but speak the truth and try and save you from the Great Deception. I said nothing to earn the mean spirit you have flung at me. But I suppose your rage will prevent you from seeing that.

If this were true then the their would be no such thing as evil in this physical world. And we both know their is. If this is true then I guess abortion is God's will? I think not. In fact I know better. One of the Great Deciever's method's is to have the masses say- it's ok, it's just God's will. That has been the false justification for so much evil in the world and here you are espousing it yet again. I am learning

 With regards to the Scriptures I have held the originals. I only know 5 others who can claim that. The words I protect have not been compromised by the filter of humans in the throes of greed and quest for power.

Richard, I am still waiting for you to answer my question.

Well I am not surpised by the mean spirit I have met here. It is no different then the mean spirit that I imagine many of you have met on your alleged path to the House of the Father. In fact it is the same I imagine.

Although you guys could be a little more creative in your arrow slinging, I suppose. At least your resistance confirms that I am doing my job.  Jesus in the 1st century AD was also accused of being against God and more. He was likened to the fanatics of His day just as some of you have with me here. And then their's the Baptiste.
   But I am not a fundamentalist. For fundamentalism is responsible for most of the pain and suffering endured by humanity. And they do it 'under the name of god' which means they have fallen for the deception and are actually doing the bidding of the Great Deciever.

I am meek and so an easy target for your hate and ridicule.
I speak the truth people have forgooten so many rush to condemn my words.
I defend the Light and The Way with the sword of the TRUE WORD of The CHRIST and HIS FATHER. FOR HE IS MY FATHER TOO! He is also your Father but many of you have forgotten His face though you falsely claim to worship Him. And your rememberance of the face of your Father will come too late. So your little arrows of fear and hate and ridicule do little more then light my path into battle. Thanks for the heads up!

My whole long life I have been the recipient of your vulgar and mean spirit while you wore the cross over your heart.
I wore your spit and excrement and you made me bleed for your entertainment. And you did this to me claiming you were doing a Christian thing. But your actions reveal that you are worshipping a false idol whom you have confused for The Christ! Or worst you are worshipping an evil wolf wearing a lamb's coat and a fake crown. And so you run away from The Christ to call the devil Jesus. And then you run to people like me and try and slay my spirit and poison my heart. Jesus wept at the sight of your downfall and ignorant cruelty, for He felt abandoned. And I felt His tears fall onto me. Such heavy, beautiful, tragic things. And though at the time I was not worthy I asked if I may protect His tears from ever falling to Earth again. And He granted me this. He gave me His Words and I held them in my hand, and in my heart where they nourish me. It was so beautiful. I was a blind man seeing LIGHT for the 1st time and it became my turn to weep. We talked about how His words have been usurped and misconstrued by followers of the Great Deciever's progeny- fear, greed, power, and hate. Together we wept over how his name and the name of the will of Our Father was used to promulgate evil as a way to His table. How people are shielding themselves from the True Light of God under a blanket of convictions and have stopped seeking the Truth. And we both wept openly. He showed me each lost soul worshipping another under His sacred Name. He showed me the weapons used to destroy Christkind built falsley under His name. And He showed me each soul killed by someone brandishing His Name like a whore brandishes vulgarity in her dance.  And we wept until our tears wiped these horrid visions away or at least tempered them for they are with me now as I write this. He told me that each thing done to these souls would be attempted to be done to me. And so He made me a sacred cloak from His Light to protect me. And He taught me to forge a powerful sword from His words.
And then He let go of my hands and dropped me in a cave. In His 'penultimate embrace' he told me in the cave I would find three things. And if I were to find them I would emerge from the darkness of this cave into His Divine Light and be ready for battle as one of His Souldiers. And then I was to clear a path for Him. For He is coming to the earth again. But if came without a path of Light carved out of the cruel darkness of our land He would be swept away before He could even begin His work. Such is the way of the world right now and the way of religion.  
   In the cave I found the three things. The 1st was a scroll. I opened it but could not read it. The second was a cup, made of wood and filled with a fluid so clear it seemed to radiate. The third was a mirror. When I looked in the mirror I saw an ancient looking man looking back at me. There was a line for every lost or perished soul The Christ had shown me. And then I realized it was me in that mirror. Even though I had met the Christ when I was a young person living under the floorboards of society I was now an old man. And I wept once again. And in doing so I saw something in each tear. It was the Christ whom I saw in each tear. And from this I grew strong.
I gathered these three belongings, my only belongings ever really, and I walked through the cave for what seemed like years. The radiance of the cup my only source of light. Because of this I was knew I couldn't drink from it until I reached the light. And with the scroll tucked under my shirt, a companion for my heaving chest, I have emerged.

And once again on a supposed Christian place I meet the followers of the opposite. Those calling darkness Light and convictions and menadacity truth So my fight continues for the Lord.

And you will find His Souldiers in the walks of life of the meek. And most of you will walk right by us at best or condemn us in word or deed at worse. And we Souldiers will continue to fight and God Willing win in the end. But this is not preordained. For on the life of Earth humanity has existed for only a blink of the Earth's eye. We haven't even begun to walk on our own yet.

RichardElchrist,

WOW!!! - You are a stand-up comedian. I must ask you if you attach some significance to the ending of your Internet name, "Christ".

You are certainly not an entity that can be blasphemed.

Your trying to equate the election of John Kerry to the Will of God is a huge joke.  This may come as a shock for you, but you don't speak for God. We all know that you believe yourself to be a prophet, but many will ask who you serve.

Richard, you are not the self-righteous judge of anyone here, especially the brothers and sister in Christ who see you for what you are. You're not a prophet - maybe a comedian or something lesser. In the meantime, get off of the backs of the brothers and sisters in Christ here.

You are beginning to show your true colors when you talk about YOU being blasphemed. You are just a man, probably in need of serious help. We might be able to help you and pray for you, but we won't be praying to you or be worried about blaspheming you.

You owe an apology to our Sister Reba and anyone else you have talked to in a like manner. Calm yourself and you will be allowed to stay.

Moderator

RE- you took the time to attack my brothers and sisters in Christ, but you didn't have the time to answer my simple question to you. Who is Christ?

BTW- DreamWeaver started a thread on cults. Did you not see that one? I'll be more than happy to link it for you. Or you afraid to join in?

Oh, now I see why you don't want to get involved in the discussion on cults.

RE- You said there were 5 others besides yourself. Since you didn't tell us the names, I'm forced to guess.

Looking at recent history I come up with:
1- David Koresh
2- Jim Jones
3- Charles Manson.

Did you want us to go back farther in history to guess the others?

4- Victor Paul Wierwille
5- Joseph Smith.

I'm sure there are more than 5 others who've made the outrageous claims that you've made.
The company you're keepin' ain't so great!

UM???, Richard, I missed this, so I join others here in asking who this so-called prophet is. We can immediately rule out God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit because they are ONE, ALMIGHTY GOD! Almighty God doesn't need the protection of men to attend our church services. Almighty God has no fear of your so-called land mines laid down by the devil, nor does HE fear the devil. God will deal with evil and the devil at HIS appointed time and manner, ACCORDING TO HIS WILL AND PURPOSE established before the foundation of the world.

Richard, it is time for you to quit playing your self-righteous game of charades and tell us who you serve and who you claim to be. To do less would show shame in your master, whoever that might be. We've recently had three self-proclaimed Messiahs, one King, and one to bring us back to the Law on the forum. They were banned from Christians Unite. Are you one of them back or one of their followers?

If so, you are wasting our time and your time. The charades are over. Who do you think you are, and what so-called prophet do you serve? Most of us here DIRECTLY serve Jesus Christ, God the Son, VERY GOD, ALMIGHTY GOD.


Moderator

He may not answer you beepster. He has evaded this question, a long time it seems.

If ya have to ask...........

Oklahoma Howdy to Dreamweaver and Reba,

I think that both of you are right.

Sister Reba, "If ya have to ask........... " gets right to the heart of the matter.

I'm wondering if the US Military would be interested in the land mine detector.   ;D

Love In Christ,
Tom

RE- take your post to the thread on cults and I'll meet ya there!

hey candice, thanks for your comments.... sorry for this extension of your thought, i really didn't want to mention what you just have mentioned(on the previous post, you most probably have seen it me asking some to think reasons behind the problem too)... anyway, you know i just wanted to mention, what do you feel, that the problem even goes deeper than that? how about the desire for pleasure through our sexuality,- it is not even like the women are forced most of the time... us men- are so ever weak to give in to temptation- for a quick pleasure just as much as women... i don't know if you are male or female candice, but i am pretty sure that you agree with me when i say that the problem is just with women as much as it is with men... i could even go as far as saying our use of types of disfigurments we use to enhance our looks... what a sad expression of idolotary! Candice, please don't misuderstand me, it starts with me... i am not taking myself out of it...

One thing i want to say, candice, I am really disheartened by all that has been written through these pages.  Last time i wrote i think i touched upon something that nobody even looked at including an overlook by BEP. I am so saddened that us christians have chosen to dilute the message and think that it is OK to Flirt with truth, and i believe that is extremely dangerous.  I heard this analogy from a preacher. A man by the name of Malcom Muggerige once gave this analogy that if you put a frog in hot boiling water, it will instantly jump out, but if you take cold water, put the frog in it, and put the water and frog container under heat and slowly boil it, the frog would not jump for it doesn't know it is being boiled.  This thread just provides another means for us to be boiled that way, and unfortunately so many in here(this thread) are boiling and don't even know it yet. As far as i see it that is what is happening in here in this discussion. What do you think candice?

Just for the record yesterday afternoon I took the time to present a reply to all your answers, the angry red ones and the sincere ones too.

I spent a couple hours trying to make it easily understood.

I look this morning and see that my post has been removed with no reason sent to me as why.

I can only assume someone involved with this thread doesn' want the truth to be told.
That can only mean that someone is not supporting the Truth and the Light and the Way but instead the opposite.

I will not repeat it again.
I can't say I've enjoyed my visit to this little piece of the path to The Great Deciever's slaughterhouse, but I can say I tried my best to stay true to Jesus Christ and my rolel as defender of his True word.  

I feel bad for many of you as your hearts and souls were once reflections of the love of Christ. And that has been poisoned.
I offered an antidote. You refused it and scoffed at it.

Your attitudes and words here are very reminiscent of the words and attitudes of the Romans and Jews toward the end Of Jesus's 1st run on this Earth. And yet your blindness makes you think the opposite.

I suppose you could say you won this battle and I have lost.
And you have supported the Great Deciever in your victory.
The thing is you have lost too.
 

I will continue to fight and defend the Word of God and His Son Jesus Christ for I am sworn to do so and was baptised by His tears.

And I suppose you will continue to do the opposite while thinking you are doing the same.

I feel I have failed you.
Such is my lot.

 

General information:

Compiled from various news sources.

***FLASH***

Kerry picks up endorsements from two major political groups.

Over the past several days, John Kerry has won the endorsement of two major political organizations. On Monday, the CPUSA (Communist Party USA) gave Sen. Kerry their unqualified endorsement as the candidate that best and most closely parallels their ideals and agenda.

On Tuesday, the National Socialist Democrats also jumped on Kerry's bandwagon, saying "although we would have preferred Kucinich, Kerry is close enough to what we want".

Candace said...


...ok.  Everyone take a big breath cause I'm about to agree with her!   ;D  I've always said that it doesn't take a man to father a child but it does take a man to be a father.

I'll just add this one too...it does take two to tango Candace.  But I do agree that men should step up and do what's right to begin with.

 :)

I missed that as well. Yes Candace I agree with your statement. I don't know why, alot of people think about is sex. There is more to a relationship then sex.

Oklahoma Howdy to Evangelist,

 ;D  Brother, I think that you just took the prize with your picture in the sig area. As some young people might say, "IT'S COOL!".

Love In Christ,
Tom

Brothers and Sisters,

I don't know what the statistics show about abortion, but I would imagine a fairly large percentage involves another sin by both the man and the woman. Sex outside of marriage is sin, yet elementary schools in some parts of the country are teaching sex education, safe sex, and alternative lifestyles.

What happened to the good old days when Biblical morals were taught strictly. Sin usually does have some pretty rough prices, and many of them leave pain and suffering for a lifetime. "Abstinence" - end of story, unless the dad wishes to add some tender words of wisdom for the young men taking their daughter out for a date. I honestly believe that many people may spend half of their life getting a clue about what real love and marriage is. To say that the young man is just as responsible should be a given. Some folks torture themselves most of their lives and never learn the basics about real love between a man and a woman within the bonds of Holy matrimony. I might add that real love isn't sex, but that appears to be a frequent excuse.

The common denominator appears to be that sin always causes pain and suffering. Abortion just adds to the pain and suffering.

Love in Christ,
Tom

Thank you BEP.....wait'l you see him fly!!

KERRY PICKS UP MORE IMPORTANT INTERNATIONAL BACKING!!

During his Friday sermon in the city of Qom, broadcast by Channel 2 of Iranian TV on June 19, preacher Ayatollah Javadi-Amoli called on Americans to vote against Mr. Bush: "We advise the people of America not to continue to tolerate this oppressing, ignorant, pillaging, criminal, and discriminating administration. In the future, do not vote for Bush and his ilk."


Writing in the Tehran Times on June 17, Kian Nader Mokhtari praised Senator Kerry, and hoped that he would triumph over the "neo-Nazis" of the Bush administration: "It has long been a tradition in U.S. politics for irresponsible gun-toting Republican presidents to pass on unresolved dilemmas to their Democratic replacements, and Bush will be no exception…Kerry is exactly what the U.S. needs… Kerry's sensible and methodical approach will no doubt go some distance in solving the stinking heap of a mess left over by Bush and his neo-conservatives — for a minute there I was going to type neo-Nazis!...He [Kerry] may be remembered as the president whose decisions saved the U.S..."


The Lebanese minister of information, Michael Samaha, also discussed the election on Syrian TV on March 30: "The most important thing that could happen in the coming American elections if Kerry wins is that the neo-conservatives leave. They have a complete ideology regarding their treatment of the world and specifically the Middle East and the Near East to which we belong. If they leave, the real American America will return."


In an article in Al-Ahram weekly on April 18, an Arab-Israeli member of Knesset, Azmi Bishara, called on Arab-Americans to "rethink their alliance with Bush" and "shift their votes from Bush to Kerry."

Evangelist,

 :D  Brother Hank, NOW that is COOL! I imagine that I really don't know what the young people today call it. I was going to suggest "GROOVY", but I'm thinking that would be 60s. Whoever is doing those is very talented, and I hope they continue.

Reference Iraq, if the US Marines have a wheelchair brigade, I want my M16, a helmet, and an airplane ride. I really don't want my grandchildren to be fighting them on our streets. Worse, I don't want them to be innocent victims. If you will put a motor on that wheelchair, I'd volunteer for point man.

WOW!!! - I watched some clips of the Democratic Convention. All I can say is "Twilight Zone". On a funny note, I always knew there was some kind of band called "Blackeyed-Peas", and I finally saw and heard them.  ;D  I might have to change my Internet and forum handle back to what is was for so many years, "357 Magnum".

Brother, thanks for the news.

Love In Christ,
Tom

"With regards to the Scriptures I have held the originals. I only know 5 others who can claim that."

 8)   ::)    ;D   :-X

Dear DreamWeaver,

I do not know if I responded to this already.  I have been turned down by the Social Security Administration Twice already. They have quack doctors that do their evaluations of people!!!  I got a lawyer right away last year in 2003 for this, I also Emailed my Congressman about "My Story".

I have been waiting for more than a year for my SSDI.  I applied July 22nd, 2003.  I should have applied many years ago, hindsight is 20/20 though.  My lawyer has my records from Orthopaedic Hospital Foundation of Los Angeles (http://www.orthohospital.org/) for my severe birth defect called Pectus Excavatum (http://www.shrinershq.org/whatsnewarch/archives01/chest8-01.html).

I have a pretty good attorney, he is known very well in Portland, Oregon. He took my case on contingency, thus meaning I do not pay him until I win my case. For more of "My Story" Click here (http://ka7.proboards30.com/index.cgi?board=hurt&action=display&num=1085317702).  It's located at Kristi Ann's Haven under the Disbilities Forum.

I am tired right now, I just took one of my Vicodin Pain killers and mixed with my Trazodone sleeping pills knocks me out until morning. G'Nite everyone, Stay Blessed in the Lord Jesus.  Praise Jesus for Today & Everyday!

Love Always,

KristiAnn

Men should be taught to keep their pants up. As should women! If a woman keeps hers up and the man doesn't, well.... he shore will look pretty silly running around with his breeches down all by himself!  ;D

I get tired of men taking all the blame when it's clearly not all the men's fault UNLESS it's a case of rape! Am I the only one who knows of women who use their 'feminine wiles'  ::) to get pregnant and then 'hook' the man?  :-X

Can't we just go back to raising our children with Godly values?

There are cases of women raping a man, rare as they are it happens. Other wise I agree with you, sincereheart.

I'm really torn. I don't know what to think....

I do not like George W. Bush whatsoever...in fact the only two things I like about him is that he's anti-gay and pro-life.

I would LOVE to see Kerry in the white house...but can't seem to get past the issue of abortion. Is it fair that I should vote for Kerry, and be happier with the way America is heading... but have so many babies dieing without the chance to see America at all? Or should I just support Bush and hope that abortion laws are changed within the next four years....that way, I may not support the direction America is heading- but at least there aren't so very many lives being just taken away..... But..uh! I'm so confused! thoughts?

Those two sound like pretty big issues.  :)




Why??  :)

I am voting for Kerry.....



There I said it!!!!!!!  ;D

I am a senior citizen..

During the Clinton Administration I had an extremely good and well paying job. I took numerous vacations and had several vacation homes. Since President  Bush took office, I have watched my entire life change for the worse. I lost my  job. I lost my two sons in that terrible Iraqi War. I lost my homes. I lost my  health insurance. As matter of fact I lost virtually everything and became homeless.

Adding insult to injury, when the authorities found me living like an animal, instead of helping me, they arrested me.

I will do anything that Senator Kerry wants to insure that a Democrat is back in the White House come next year. Bush has to go.

I just thought you and your listeners would like to know how one senior citizen views the Bush Administration. Thank you for taking time to read  my  letter.

Sincerely,

Saddam Hussein

*SPEW* ROFL!! thats great BL, 2 thumbs up!!

 QUOTE DreamWeaver:
 
*SPEW* ROFL!! thats great BL, 2 thumbs up!!
++++++++++++++++
 ;D

<:)))><

Kerry seems to support the right to choice, not the chosen act of abortion. So is the right to choice sin?

One problem with the Bush administration is this:

America was told at the beginning of the Iraq thing that Iraqi oil profits would pay for the reconstruction of Iraq. Yet the American taxpayers are footing this bill. Were we lied to and is not lieing just as much a sin as abortion?

Then to top it off the reconstruction is in the hands of an American Company, "Halliburton" that is cheating and overcharging the taxpayers of America by billing the government of America for this reconstruction. Cheney in the past was connected to "Halliburton".

Lord help America. It seems both parties are evil in many ways.

Ollie

ONE MORE TIME FOR OLLIE ;D

I am a senior citizen..

During the Clinton Administration I had an extremely good and well paying job. I took numerous vacations and had several vacation homes. Since President  Bush took office, I have watched my entire life change for the worse. I lost my  job. I lost my two sons in that terrible Iraqi War. I lost my homes. I lost my  health insurance. As matter of fact I lost virtually everything and became homeless.

Adding insult to injury, when the authorities found me living like an animal, instead of helping me, they arrested me.

I will do anything that Senator Kerry wants to insure that a Democrat is back in the White House come next year. Bush has to go.

I just thought you and your listeners would like to know how one senior citizen views the Bush Administration. Thank you for taking time to read  my  letter.

Sincerely,

Saddam Hussein

<:)))><

LOL

One more Time for "BL".  (http://memeart.tripod.com/smiley17.gif)


"Lord help America. It seems both parties are evil in many ways."


Ollie

"Lord help America. It seems both parties are evil in many ways."

Is that anything like they ain't perfect?  ;D

As in willfully and deliberately.    ::)

Itinerary 2004 Democratic National Convention -- Official Program

 6:00pm - Opening flag burning ceremony.

 6:05pm - Pledge of Allegiance to the United Nations

 6:10pm - Secular words by Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton

 6:30pm - Anti-war concert by Barbra Streisand.

 6:45pm - Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.

 7:00pm - Tribute theme to France.

 7:10pm - Collect offerings for al-Zawahri defense fund.

 7:30pm - Tribute theme to Germany.

 7:45pm - Anti-war rally moderated by Michael Moore.

 8:25pm - Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.

 8:30pm - Terrorist appeasement workshop.

 9:00pm - Gay marriage ceremony for mal e and female couples.

 9:30pm - CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN urge defeat of President Bush.

 10:00pm - Posting the Iraqi Colors by Sean Penn and Tim Robbins

 10:10pm - Reenactment of Kerry's fake medal toss.

 10:20pm - Cameo by Dean 'Yeeearrrrrrrgh!'

 10:30pm - Abortion demonstration by N.A.R.A.L.

 10:40pm - Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.

 10:50pm - Special thanks to the New York Times & Washington Post.

 11:00pm - Multiple gay marriage ceremony for threesomes and groups.

 11:15PM - Maximizing Welfare workshop.

 11:30pm - Saddam Legal Defense Fund pep rally.

 11:50PM - Ted Kennedy proposes a toast.

 12:00pm - Nomination of Democratic candidate.

 NEW: 5:00am -Ted Kennedy Will Conduct a Swimming Class

<:)))><

"Kerry also showed himself to be a candidate who can't see beyond the complexities -- at least when it's in his political interest. See the examples from Kerry's actual record in italics.

Now I know there are those who criticize me for seeing complexities – and I do – because some issues just aren't all that simple.
Saying there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq doesn't make it so.

SEN. JOHN KERRY: "t is something that we know-for instance, Saddam Hussein has used weapons of mass destruction against his own people, and there is some evidence of their efforts to try to secure these kinds of weapons and even test them." (CBS’ "Face The Nation," 9/23/01)

Saying we can fight a war on the cheap doesn’t make it so.

October 17, 2003, 4:49 p.m.: John Kerry votes against emergency supplemental appropriation for Iraq and Afghanistan, including body armor for soldiers. Later he says, "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it."

And proclaiming mission accomplished certainly doesn't make it so.

KERRY: "I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him." (ABC News, Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate, Columbia, SC, 5/3/03)"

2 Corinthians 6:14.  Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
 15.  And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
 16.  And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
 17.  Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.
 18.  And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

Ollie

(Email from our Brother Forrest)
___________________________

Kerry

Hmmm   very interesting!!


John Kerry on Defense --

I hadn't seen this list printed until today. (So... send it to as many voters as you can!)

He voted to kill the Bradley Fighting Vehicle
He voted to kill the M-1 Abrams Tank
He voted to kill every Aircraft carrier laid down from 1988
He voted to kill the Aegis anti aircraft system
He voted to Kill the F-15 strike eagle
He voted to Kill the Block 60 F-16
He voted to Kill the P-3 Orion upgrade
He voted to Kill the B-1
He voted to Kill the B-2
He voted to Kill the Patriot anti Missile system
He voted to Kill the FA-18
He voted to Kill the B-2
He voted to Kill the F 117

In short, he voted to kill every military appropriation for the development and deployment of every weapons systems since 1988 to include the battle armor for our troops. With Kerry as president our Army will be made up of naked men running around with sticks and clubs. He also voted to kill all anti terrorism activities of every agency of the U.S. Government and to cut the funding of the FBI by 60%, to cut the funding for the CIA by 80%, and cut the funding for the NSA by 80%. But then he voted to increase OUR funding for U.N operations by 800%!!!

Is THIS a President YOU want?

John Kerry actually did each of these things. His voting record on these issues can be easily verified by checking the congressional voting record which list all votes on all issues brought forth. No one can deny his or her voting record as it is a matter of public record. I was horrified that this person believes that he should be allowed to be President of this Nation. If you feel differently on the subject don't pass this on, otherwise, please pass it on to every voter you know. It's that important.

Is THIS a President YOU want?


NO WAY!


<:)))><

(http://worldnetdaily.com/images2/kerryspaceman.jpg)

JudgeNot,

Brother, If they put some ears on him and sewed his mouth shut, I would vote for him as Easter bunny.   ;D

I must admit that would be stretching it to my limit, and I would want a lengthy probation period to see if he found any other way to communicate. If so, there would be more sewing to do.   ;D

BEP

 ;D   ;D   ;D  This addresses another concern I don't have an answer for - Are his ends interchangeable?  

With Kerry, you never can tell. ;) ;D

A telling circumstance:

As the conflict in Iraq began, all the Democrats wanted to talk about was the economy, and all the Republicans wanted to talk about was the war.  As the war has continued farther than expectations, and the economy has shown signs of a beginning recovery, they seem to have switched places.  

I couldn't help but be sickened at the entire DNC approach of "attack Bush policies at every opportunity."  It was especially wretched to hear Clinton's sly little dig about wisdom and strength not being mutually exclusive, implying that the conflict in Iraq was an unwise show of strength.

And I notice the same attack has taken root all over.  Our newspaper ran a column by Bob Herbert, a New York writer, attacking Bush on education policies that he tried to label as racially biased or slanted.  He spoke of “neglect for underfunded public schools,” and of “using black people as political props.”  He accused Bush of "hijacking" the Leave No Child Behind program, and putting his own title to it, No Child Left Behind.  

I served last year as a member of the District Advisory Council for Title I funding in our county, one of the poorest school districts in the state.  Title I is a federally mandated supplemental funding source, through which the No Child Left Behind program is implemented (or at least it is here).  Our council leader was Hispanic, I was one of two whites on the council, and the other eight members were all black.  We went into the schools to talk with teachers and find what they thought the greatest needs were, and held public events to which parents were invited, and got their input as well.  We held meetings also with principals for the same kind of input.  As a result, $2.7 million dollars that was appropriated for the county was directed to the places where the need was the greatest, much of it going to predominantly black neighborhoods and schools.  Parental involvement in volunteering at the schools was on the increase, and student morale and grades were significantly increased.  

IMO, Bush's "hijacking" of No Child Left Behind, at least as it developed in our area, was more like a "resurrection" of the program.  And it was done by putting the power of implementation where it should be, in the hands of the people and not so much in a hands-on govenmental agency as so many programs are.  

Question everything anyone affiliated with the Democratic Party has to say on issues.  Talk is cheap, and playing the "race card" in this manner has been one of the cheapest shots at our president yet.

R.M.

Greattttttttt post, Mxyzptlk

With Kerry I think his ends are interchangeable beeps. ;D

*Sneaks outta this thread before Beeps can smack me along side of the head.* ;D

The Bush donned a phoney flight suit and told America, after making a dramatic staged landing on an aircraft carrier, "Mission Accomplished". Meanwhile over a year later the mission continues.

The Bush tells America the economy is picking up and job creation has happened. Meanwhile the economy slumps and many are jobless.

Isn't lying a sin as much as abortion or homosexuality is a sin?

Will not unrepented sin of lying create as much wrath from God as unrepented murder intent or unrepented unnatural.affection?

Meanwhile, Kerry says he has a plan to keep jobs in America, What is it?

America's heavy industrial base has been leaving the country under both Republicans ands Democrats for many years and neither party does anything to alleviate this problem for the average working man or woman. Meanwhile they say they have a plan for jobs in America. What is it? In fact the American government encourages the industrial base in America to move off shore.

Political empty rhetoric is what it is and then no matter who is elected it is the same old same old. That goes for congress also. Have you ever noticed how congress manages to feather their bed with wonderful salaries, pension plans, seperate from social security, vacation perks, etc.. Meanwhile, while they take thousands in benefits they try to appease the average man with a dollar or two.

Lord, give us strength in America? May more know your truth and come to your Son. The spirit of anti-Christ is strong in America. However Your will be done.


Ollie

While I agree with what you say here, it seems obvious that neither man will fill Gods standard of righteousness unless Jesus himself runs for president.  A better way of looking at it is, which man is more likely to allow God to influence his leadership?    

Grace and Peace!

The Bush donned a phoney flight suit....

Why 'phoney'? Since Bush IS a pilot....
Sure looks like a REAL flight suit to me. A lot like the one my dad wore.


...and told America, after making a dramatic staged landing on an aircraft carrier, "Mission Accomplished".




Meanwhile over a year later the mission continues.


Meanwhile, over a year later..... Saddam HAS been captured. The Iraqi's are re-establishing a government. How long do you expect it to be OVERALL?

WW II - US involvement was over 4 (almost 5) years.
WW I - US involvement was about 4 years.
Korea - Has not ended....  Started in 1950.

Meanwhile the economy slumps and many are jobless.


Unemployment:
(http://data.bls.gov/labjava/servlets/graphics/generated_graphs/LNS14000000_116331_1091899458959.gif)
I believe that the line being lower now is a good sign.... And I would even venture to guess that the high part was fallout from the Clinton years.

sincereheart,
Thanks for your last post - you summed things up nicely.

Yep - to me it sure looked like a real flight suit worn by a real pilot.  Wow - Ollie - what gives it away as 'fake'?   ???  Are some buttons rearranged or something???

Bush was speaking to a ship full of sailors who were returning home from a mission and they were told their "mission was accomplished".  A single mission is not an entire war.  People who take that and spin it for any other meaning are really, really reaching...

I believe Bush is more moral than John Skerry - but I'm a conservative by nature, and Skerry is left of Kennedy the Life Guard.

(FYI - I can't remember which of our c-uniters first used the term "Skerry" - but it is a jewel I have used often since first reading it somewhere on this forum.  :) )

If every Christian would vote the Constitution Party ticket (which is actually the only party out there with Christian values) Bush and Kerry would both lose and Demoncats and Repo-blicans could all go home happy because the 'opposition' lost the election.  
 ;D
It couldn't get any better than that!

Honestly wish I could take credit for coining the phrase "Skerry, very sKserry", but like you, I read it somewhere and it just stuck.  A jewel indeed!

Grace and Peace!

"A better way of looking at it is, which man is more likely to allow God to influence his leadership?"

That man has not yet come forward. Pray hard!

Ollie

   

It appeared military. Bush is not a military pilot. Most civilian pilots fly in civvies or a civvie's pilot's uniform if a commercial pilot.






Exactly.

Was America ever told the mission was accomplished when it wasn't?

Shame on all the presidents since 1950.  :)


ROFL  ;) The problem being that most of the manufacturing does not exist in America anymore.

I might venture that guess myself.

 ::)
Ollie

It was very slanted.

Did he pilot the plane or chopper he came in on? It was a real flight suit, but phoney on him. He is a civilian pilot and he did not pilot anything to the carrier.

  No it was military and he is civilian. That made it fake.

Baghdad had been taken and he was telling America, Mission Accomplished". The sailors and aircraft carrier were just part of the superficial background chosen to dramatize the actions and capture the hearts of America. When Sadaam was captured later he merely said, "we did it, we got him". I believe from the white house.

I am very conservative, to the point of not being blind to the same-o, same-o evils of both sides and finding it very difficult to make a Christ like decision that would influence my voting. The people of America should be first and foremost in our government's response to anything and they are not. Money and profit is primary.

I remember reading it also, but it escapes me. It is a little skerry to me that we have to resort to such name calling, in all its childishess, to refer to those that could be the leaders of our land. We must be hurting for leaders. And we are. It shows in our immature resorting to name calling of candidates for leadership.

Hmmmm?

It did, it can, it does, and it will. See below.

Revelation 22:20.  He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
 21.  The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.


Ollie

that's why i stopped even saying anything in this thread... i realize some are not checking their condemning spirits at the door before they put their comments on this thread...  again, i am not at all surprised... it almost feels like this thread is an empty barrel and every "christian- truth protector" comes in here and hits this empty barrel with a good wood... again, i will repeat what i have said... some here think that this is just a thread for talking about something half-serious... i beg to differ. playing with truth and lies like this just desentisizes us more, and THERE IS NOTHING MORE EVIDENT OF THIS THAN A NAME CALLING THAT IS UNCHRISTIAN LIKE.. what if somebody ever stumbled here that was an NON CHRISTIAN? WHAT WOULD HE SAY OF THIS NAME CALLING? GO AHEAD BROTHER AND SISTERS WITH THE NAME CALLING AND SEE WHERE THAT WILL TAKE YOU... BUT REMEMBER WHAT 1st or 2nd peter 5 says:  "for judgement starts from the house of God.. "  and that judgement i ponder sometimes might already been laid down and we are reaping the consequences of it with dull hearts that are unable to feel pain and suffering in this world.  

How you do you know this?   God can influence any man, especially one who is willing to acknowledge Him, and in some cases those who don't.

Which man (sorry theres only two to choose from at this point) makes a stand for principles that God can bless and work through with GOD's righteousness? (not mans).  They both have faults, but we must determine which one of the two God can bless and lead our nation with.   Can God bless the unborn who are being murdered and have no voice in this vote, by your casting a vote for the man who is willing to take a stand on the murder of our unborn?   Can God bless men and women and the institution of marriage by having someone who is willing to take a stand against same sex mariages?   These are two obvious ones (even for the wicked hearted to see), and there are many others if you look.  Can you name a few Godly ideals that Kerry has put forth in which God could be glorified by?  Does Kerry even acknowledge God in any of his addresses?  Maybe he does, but I am hard pressed to find them.   Our job as Christians is to vote for the one who GOD can bless and lead our nation through and be glorified by, not the man that is righteous in all things.  That man already sits at the right hand of the father.   I'm sure God will use whoever wins for his purpose, but my prayer is that GOD will appoint the one which allows Godly prinicples to be exhaulted.  As his child, I feel obligated to cast my vote for the one who best represents those principles, and thus far, its a no brainer when comparing the two

1Co 6:2  Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
1Co 6:3  Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

I'm praying hard alright....that I am able to please God with my choice of vote for the man who best represents my nation before God with the choice I am given.   God has blessed this American with a choice, and I for one will not complain about the choices, but will seek the choice that best represents a Godly standard.

Grace and Peace!

EDIT TO ADD >>> sorry didn't mean to imply you were complaining about the Choice Ollie (well maybe a little  :D )....My point was, that we are expected to be faithful with what we are given.  (parable of the 3 men who were given talents is one example).

I got this from sister, My Dad a firm Dem. says Kerry should be shot.

 
Kerry

Hmmm   very interesting!!


John Kerry on Defense --

I hadn't seen this list printed until today. (So... send it to as many voters as you can!)

He voted to kill the Bradley Fighting Vehicle
He voted to kill the M-1 Abrams Tank
He voted to kill every Aircraft carrier laid down from 1988
He voted to kill the Aegis anti aircraft system
He voted to Kill the F-15 strike eagle
He voted to Kill the Block 60 F-16
He voted to Kill the P-3 Orion upgrade
He voted to Kill the B-1
He voted to Kill the B-2
He voted to Kill the Patriot anti Missile system
He voted to Kill the FA-18
He voted to Kill the B-2
He voted to Kill the F 117

In short, he voted to kill every military appropriation for the development and deployment of every weapons systems since 1988 to include the battle armor for our troops. With Kerry as president our Army will be made up of naked men running around with sticks and clubs. He also voted to kill all anti terrorism activities of every agency of the U.S. Government and to cut the funding of the FBI by 60%, to cut the funding for the CIA by 80%, and cut the funding for the NSA by 80%. But then he voted to increase OUR funding for U.N operations by 800%!!!

Is THIS a President YOU want?

John Kerry actually did each of these things. His voting record on these issues can be easily verified by checking the congressional voting record which list all votes on all issues brought forth. No one can deny his or
her voting record as it is a matter of public record. I was horrified that this person believes that he should be allowed to be President of this Nation. If you feel differently on the subject don't pass this on, otherwise, please pass it on to every voter you know. It's that
important.

Hello All,

I see some disagreement, and that's fine and healthy. Each is entitled to their own opinion, vote how they wish, and speak what they wish. Christians are allowed to vote, and we ARE to judge MOST DEFINITELY according to Biblical values and morals.

We are talking among ourselves, and we are allowed to do that, regardless of what some might want or say. We are also allowed to express our opinion, just like everyone else in this country. I choose to tell it like it is, and that's my right as an American and a Christian to do. If someone thinks it's name calling, that's fine, and I'll try to make sure that it is name calling to erase any doubt about my stance. I AM to judge the candidates, but I am not allowed to punish or sentence them. Christians still have free speech, so here it is - NAME CALLING DELUXE:

Kerry is a radical, left wing, liberal wacko who supports abortion, supports gay marriage, and doesn't have a clue what Biblical morals are. If he is elected, I fear that he will complete America turning its back on God. You can be sure that much more about Kerry will come out before the election.

I realize that George Bush is not the strongest Christian, but he is a Christian and he does try. I don't think anyone knows what Kerry thinks or believes. However, I feel pretty sure that he's not going to tell us, and his morals would be light years away from Bush, far on the opposite end of the spectrum.

There are others we could vote for, but I doubt they will do little more than split the vote. In reality, they don't have a chance, and either Kerry or Bush will be our next President. I don't have a problem at all in stating the blunt truth, and neither does my Pastor. In short, it's a no-brainer, we will be voting for Bush. My family, friends, and church family will NOT vote for anyone who supports abortions, supports gay marriage, or one who displays a void of Christian values.

If it's childish for a Christian to speak the blunt truth, then call me a child. Further, the ongoing distortions and blatant lies about George Bush are being brought to light by the day now. I see that for what it is, cheap political garbage. We haven't heard from George Bush yet, but we will. He will have to play the political game and tell it like it is to be elected.

Please let me repeat and expound upon something - Christians are allowed to have opinions, allowed to vote, and are allowed to speak still. We may lose those rights one day, but we still have them today. The devil wants everyone to have their say EXCEPT CHRISTIANS. Don't you know that Christians are to remain silent and let the devil take America without a fight???  NO!!! - I refuse and WILL MOST CERTAINLY EXERCISE MY RIGHTS!!! as long as I live.

I have no problem at all with Christians who feel differently. Do what you feel convicted to do, but PLEASE at least vote.

Love In Christ,
Tom

;D
Yes I think all Christians should vote. For the President they think can do the best. My own choice is Bush. I think Kerry is a weasel, and we all know what kind of damage a weasel can do.

 

 
Sincereheart:
"The aircraft's pilot, Navy Cmdr. John Lussier of Orlando, Florida, said the president "enjoyed the heck out of" taking the controls and doing a couple of maneuvers. "

""Yes, I flew it. Yeah, of course, I liked it," said Bush, who was an F-102 fighter pilot in the Texas Air National Guard after graduating from Yale University in 1968."

If that is true then i missed it and you are correct.


Sincereheart:
""The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time but it is worth every effort. Our coalition will stay until our work is done." "
Which part of this makes Bush a liar?

That does not make Bush look like a liar. It was told to us when he realized that it was taking longer than anticipated and after his "mission completed" statement

Sincereheart:
"And does that make coaches wrong when they give their team a 'pep talk' when they've played well and it's only, say... half-time?"

No, when it is sincere and it is the team that is cared about and not the coaches looking good.  


 
Sincerheart:
"And that's only been from Bush's time in office?  If not, then how has Bush been doing with what was left to him to fix?"

Manufacturing has been leaving America since the fifties. How many administrations have we had since? How many Democrats, how many Republicans? What party is Bush? Still it continues with no end in sight for the American worker and voter. Kerry has a plan to end it. Has he told anyone? What is it? Same-o same-o. Bush probably had a plan in 2000. What was it? Does anyone care?


 

Sincereheart:
"LOL! And when the US doesn't step in, the American people complain that we insulate ourselves and are selfish. Of course, there are international complaints about that, too."

Yes, America can't win for losing and visa-versa. The American people are the real losers, because of our governments actions, not our government itself.  It is average Americans getting murdered and killed over the policies our government implements and puts in to action.

 
 
Sincereheart:
"I haven't seen very many liberals on this particular forum. The 'evil' you referred to with Bush was lying. You're 'proof' wasn't proving. Whether you agree with decisions that Bush makes or not is one thing. To even hint that others are 'blind' to 'evils' that you say exist IS insulting but it does not make it true."

An untruth based decision is deception.
Who said anyone is blind to the evils that may exist in our presidential candidates?

My post was not meant to insult but point out some evils in the Republicans as well as Democrats and that it was making it hard to make a decision on which way to vote.
 As far as being true, I only know what I read and hear, just like you.  :)



Sincereheart:
 "It was in response to you calling Bush a 'liar' and based on the specific points you mentioned. "

I donot recall calling Bush a liar. It was implied. That was only two points of implication. There are others.


Sincereheart:
"'Skerry' or 'liar'?  

*soapbox* I can't imagine what it's like to have people all over the world dissecting every move you make and every word you say. You have Christians complain that Bush isn't perfect. You have non-Christians complain that he's too Christian. And then someone like Kerry shows up and tries to throw some last-minute religion into his own pot. */soapbox*"

You are probably right, Bush isn't perfect, Kerry isn't perfect. Their parties are not perfect. I am not perfect. I have gotten Sincereheart upset, (now that is skerry ;)), with me and I am sorry because I like her very much, judging of course from her posts. I apologize.  

I cannot speak for Kerry and his religion whether it is last minute or not. Only he and God know.

Ollie
 

 

Oklahoma Howdy to All,

I love all of you. It's really been interesting to hear the honest thoughts of many Christians. Our political system is broken and corrupt, so let's just send Christians Unite members to run the country. We wouldn't have a chance unless the politicians were removed first.   ;D

UM??? - I'm trying to think about what the politicians would be good at if they couldn't be politicians. I keep coming back to working with or processing manure in some manner.   ;D

Love In Christ,
Tom

*SPEW!*

Clean up in aisle 4 please. ;D

LOL DreamWeaver!!!

Not many people know I am colored blind too, which is very rare for a female...

Plus lets not fight over Kerry or Bush, Pray for what's best Please!!!!

Blessings,  \o/

:)

"*SPEW!*"

And gag.

"Pray for what's best"

Amen. Also the leaders of the land.  

(http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0RwBTF5cUscu90dSRmcaafTUTwmOHIIAAE*18IsZYsUS5JWG6QerMkzOc6a56d0qAWeH7g16A1xSGHrPGOaB!RDGdluaP2YzhmZ9MgekQwWQ/Aug03963.JPG?dc=4675484104417687151)

;D

Lavender fence posts?  Hmmmmm!

ROFL! Nope. Plain ole wood!  :P
Them two buttin' heads - one is a male and one is a female! ;)

 ;D  Either that or Lawyers...

BEP....sorry to disappoint you, but....I've never heard of a car fixing itself, or a rock metamorphosing itself into a butterfly, or a cow chip becoming a fence post.  Which is to say, a cow chip....er, politician, will always be a pile of.......'scuse me, a politician.  ;D

I liked it better thinking, "Two bulls in a china shop." ;D

Only a man would see that it's NOT a china shop and still try to make it fit!  ;D

Now, that is typical.

And the shop has been destroyed already.

I don't get it SincereHeart   ???


Sheep and goats do the samething!!

Blessings,   \o/

China shop?  The only thing I see is STEAK!  Lots of STEAK!

Grace and Peace!

hmmmmm now I am hungry.......  :-\

I have been away for 10 days and this is the best you got?







SHEESH

Nope check out this thread post 42
http://forums.christiansunite.com/index.php?board=10;action=display;threadid=4535;start=30

Thats cause the china shop has been destroyed!! ;D ;)

Just like men and women they butt heads. ;D

Now I'm hungry, thanks for reminding me I haven't eaten today. :(

Oklahoma Howdy to All,

 ;D   ;D   ;D  It's pretty easy to see politics as a comedy. Some comedians make their living in mimicking what politicians do. DreamWeaver posted some political jokes done by Jay Leno and David Letterman that are hilarious. It's great to have a good laugh every now and then, but our politicians give us laughs every day. However, it's sad that what they do will effect all of us for many years. For this reason and others, I think it should be a duty of every Christian to pray for our leaders every day, especially the ones we don't like and the ones we feel are lost or weak in Christ.

This thread made my day. Now, I think of politics as a giant cow-chip tossing contest.   ;D  YES!!, those do exist. I think our politicians from Oklahoma would have an unfair advantage, as many of them are expert at tossing cow-chips.   ;D

UM???, good point about what to do with the lawyers. Maybe we could make a law that they could only represent or bring actions against politicians.   ;D  Maybe we could isolate them on a deserted island somewhere and make sure there was no communication with the outside world, including messages sent in bottles, etc. I can see it now - the world's largest composting operation.   ;D

Love In Christ,
Tom

Sister Reba,

Where have you been, and how are you? We have finally gotten to the heart of the matter in politics, bull and cow chips, so I thought we had cut through the bull (a little play on words).  I know - GROAN!!!!!!   :D

Give us Reba's words of wisdom, but I think that we are finally on topic.   ;D  We missed you.

Love In Christ,
Tom

But sheep and goats don't go along with BEP saying:

Not to mention the fact that I can walk outside and see our cows butting heads, hence the photo! We don't have sheep!  ;) And we are 'kid-sitting' some baby goats, but they're not 'butting heads', yet!  ;D

So to summarize:
Males and females were 'butting heads' and manure was spoken of.  ;D

Now, I think of politics as a giant cow-chip tossing contest.    YES!!, those do exist. I think our politicians from Oklahoma would have an unfair advantage, as many of them are expert at tossing cow-chips.

(http://www.roadsideamerica.com/attract/images/ok/OKBEAmayor.jpg)


 :-X

SincereHeart,

 ;D   ;D  Sister, You found the capital, but we have contests all over Oklahoma.   ;D  If I remember correctly, Beaver, Oklahoma is in Southeastern Oklahoma in the heart of the Quachita (SP) Wilderness and Mountains. They have to pipe sunshine in there, but it is a beautiful place. My wife and I would love to rent a cabin there and spend 3 or 4 days just enjoying nature. Fall is the perfect time after things cool down and the colors start to change. They also have some of the best fishing in the country. Beaver's Bend State Park is where we want to go. It was built by the WPA, and you can still rent a cabin there for about $40 a night, so poor people can still afford it, especially when the fourth night is free. They are set up with dishes, stove, refrigerator, cooking, and bringing your own groceries to reduce the cost even more. You can forget about TV because they don't receive any signals there, and the cabins are NOT equipped with telephones, so it's perfect for R & R. Rangers provide communications and heavily patrol the camp. Wildlife is very heavy around the cabins, and they have huge picture windows in the cabin to simply enjoy. Did I mention that the walls on the cabins are 1 foot + thick stone?   ;D

There is a town fairly close that is popular for circus people to retire in, so we might not come back.   ;D  We would fit right in.

Love In Christ,
Tom

BEP....being from Oklahoma, and liking politicians and jokes... ;D

Kerry had a rally at one of the reservations in Oklahoma since he is courting the Native American vote.

Got introduced by the chief, and all the gathered tribespeople shouted at the top of their lungs "BAZOONGA"!

Kerry smiled, and acknowledged their accolades.

Started talking, and said "my fellow amurricans..." and was interrupted by a resounding "BAZOOOONGA!"

Throughout his 15 minute speech, he was greeted with a thundering "BAZOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNGGGGGAAAAAAA!" after every 7th or 8th word.

Kerry was just beside himself....he had hit a homerun with these people!

After he finished, Kerry asked the chief what the tribes main industry was, and chief replied "we're in the cattle business in a big way....we run over 200,000 head on the rez...would you like to see them?"

Kerry said "absolutely, I want to know everything about your home and businesses."

As they began to walk from the stage to a jeep to travel in, the chief looked at Kerry and said "careful.....don't stepum in bazoonga."

Awe, baby goats cute!!!


Here's a Good Cartoon for ya all ~> (http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/10/10_9_136.gif)


Blessings,  \o/

Ok now that is cute. ;D

uh huh, right from Smiliey Central    ;D Plus I made it an avatar at Kristi Ann's Haven after I used GIF works to make it transparent...

Blessings,  \o/

Evangelist,

 ;D   ;D   ;D


Brother, I'm really surprised they didn't have Kerry for supper.   ;D

There are parts of Oklahoma yet to be explored. We have swamp lands to the South - we call them Texas.   ;D

UH OH!! - All in good fun, TEXANS.

Love In Christ,
Tom

ROFL! I love it!  ;D

Seriously.....

John Kerry on Faith
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/149/story_14928_1.html (http://www.beliefnet.com/story/149/story_14928_1.html)

George W. Bush on Faith
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/149/story_14930_1.html (http://www.beliefnet.com/story/149/story_14930_1.html)

On Faith and Politics"
Kerry:

Bush:

Um Hmm. And you keep it up, we'll send you some of our mosquitoes. You'll think a B1 is landing at Tinker!

Can anyone show me where our Constitution says 'seperation of church and state' ?


Kerry does not know the Constitution he has sworn to uphold.

Reba:
It doesn't. Period.

That phrase comes from a paper written by Thomas Jefferson some years later, in which he comments that the founding principles of the Declaration and Constitution lead one to a conclusion that there should exist a "wall of separation between church and state, so that the state cannot impose upon the electorate a mandatory form of religious belief or practice, such as has existed in the past in England and other countries..." (paraphrased).

It was not until many years later that the federal court systems began introducing that phraseology and thought into legal decisions, notably during the O'Hair school prayer case.

do ya know Kerry and Bush will be in Portland, Oregon tomorrow Friday the 13th of August, 2004!!

I was going to go to a Kerry thingy near the water front. I changed my mind and am staying home which is 10 miles away from all this.  

Police Station Communication Towers have been burned in many locations in Washington (just a few miles from me) and Oregon.  So, if there would be a prime time for Terriosts to attack tomorrow would be their time.  This is why I am staying away from everything and will watch it on TV instead!!

that my .01 cents for the day!

Blessings,  \o/

I am Voting for Bush........ just so everyone knows.  It's up to me to change my mind if I want..   :-\  :'(

Just currious (and you don't have to answer if you don't want to) what was it that led you to change your mind?

Grace and Peace!

;D
Just like a woman. ;) We still love you MGA, and I won't ask you why you changed your mind.

"In an Oct. 14, 1979, letter to the editor of the Boston Herald, Kerry wrote: "I remember spending Christmas Eve of 1968 five miles across the Cambodian border being shot at by our South Vietnamese allies who were drunk and celebrating Christmas. The absurdity of almost being killed by our own allies in a country in which President Nixon claimed there were no American troops was very real."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,128561,00.html (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,128561,00.html)

Hmmmm.... That's interesting. Especially seeing as how Nixon wasn't even President in 1968.  ::)

Was Kerry even in Cambodia?  ::)

The Kerry campaign first asserted that the Massachusetts senator never said that he was in Cambodia, only that he was near the country. But when presented with a copy of the Congressional Record and asked about Kerry's letter in the Boston Herald, the campaign said it would come up with an explanation. After repeated phone calls, there was still no clarification.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,128561,00.html (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,128561,00.html)

Hmmmm.... That's interesting. Especially seeing as how Nixon wasn't even President in 1968. ;D

<:)))><

We All Have Our Priorities  ::)

Kerry's head for politics:

Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry likes to style himself as the candidate of working folks, while scissoring President Bush as the protector of the rich.

"We have to bring back an America that values work and honors working people, day in and day out," Kerry urged in a recent stump speech.

But when every campaign stop is a photo op, even a man of the people needs a high-quality haircut.

I hear that when Kerry was in Portland, Ore., last weekend preparing to windsurf on the Columbia River Gorge, he flew his Washington-based hairstylist, Isabelle Goetz, across the country to give him a camera-ready trim.

A knowledgeable source told me that the French-born Goetz - who tends the Massachusetts senator's mane while also caring for Sen. Hillary Clinton's coiffure - caught up with the candidate in Portland on Friday (after flying commercial, I'm told), trimmed his luxuriant salt-and-pepper locks and then returned to Washington the same night.http://www.nydailynews.com/08-17-2004/news/col/story/222786p-191398c.html (http://www.nydailynews.com/08-17-2004/news/col/story/222786p-191398c.html)

And for those who want to vote for Kerry based on personal, as opposed to national, reasons here's an interesting thought:

Health care for all, a neat euphemism for socialised medicine, only increases one's dependence on the government -- an important pillar of Communism. Socialised medicine is unworkable. Under Great Britain's national health care system, for instance, patients often wait months for heart surgeryhttp://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=743262003 (http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=743262003)... unless they have their operation in another countryhttp://economictimes.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=49583 (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=49583).

http://guardian.blogdrive.com/archive/cm-08_cy-2004_m-08_d-13_y-2004_o-0.html (http://guardian.blogdrive.com/archive/cm-08_cy-2004_m-08_d-13_y-2004_o-0.html)

The Washington Times
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
December 6, 2002

John Kerry's war record

As Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, considers a bid for the White House, Americans should know a few things about him that he might prefer go unmentioned — and I don't mean his $75 haircuts.

When Mr. Kerry pontificated at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial on Veterans Day, a group of veterans turned their backs on him and walked away. They remembered Mr. Kerry as the anti-war activist who testified before Congress during the war, accusing veterans of being war criminals. The dust jacket of Mr. Kerry's pro-Hanoi book, "The New Soldier," features a photograph of his ragged band of radicals mocking the U.S. Marine Corps Memorial, which depicts the flag-raising on Iwo Jima, with an upside-down American flag.

Retired Gen. George S. Patton III charged that Mr. Kerry's actions as an anti-war activist had "given aid and comfort to the enemy," as had the actions of Ramsey Clark and Jane Fonda. Also, Mr. Kerry lied when he threw what he claimed were his war medals over the White House fence; he later admitted they weren't his. Now they are displayed on his office wall.
.......................................................................... ..
As Mr. Kerry contemplates a run for the presidency, people must remember that he has fought harder for Hanoi as an anti-war activist and a senator than he did against the Vietnamese communists while serving in the Navy in Vietnam.
MICHAEL BENGE
Foreign Service officer and former Vietnam POW (1968 to 1973)
Washington
(http://www.ojc.org/powforum/images/jkbook.jpg)

http://www.powforum.org/liar.htm (http://www.powforum.org/liar.htm)

Did I mention that my husband is a retired Marine?  ::)

Before his death, Maj. Gen. George S. Patton called Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) "soft on communism" for his antiwar stance during the Vietnam War and charged that Kerry "gave aid and comfort to the enemy and probably caused some of my guys to get killed."

Brothers and Sisters,

Well, I think that I've seen too much of Kerry. In short, I don't think he belongs in any kind of public office, especially not the office of President of the United States. I think he probably has horns under that $750 dollar haircut.   :D

Love In Christ,
Tom

Acts 2:44.  "And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
 45.  And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need."

Acts 4:32.  "And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common."

Hmmmmm!
Did the early Christians practice a form of socialism or communism? Not The Soviet Union's brand, which was corrupted in totalitarianism, but God's, to insure no one did with out physical needs. Those that could, worked and shared, with those unable to work or had need.

Just curious if that is a bad road to follow since the early Christians give example of doing it?

Ollie

Did not our Congress many years after make a statement that the Vietnam war was a waste of lives and resources for America and should not have been fought? Not sure of the exact words. My memoery says they did???

Ollie

The trashing of the candidates does not intelligently handle their positions on issues that affect America. Both candidates need to stop trashing each other as well as their constituents need to stop the trash. After all we have all sinned. Let he who is free of sin cast the first stone.

What are their positions on things that affect America? I want to know! So I can make an intelligent choice.
I donot want to know about their past mistakes in life. We all make mistakes. If you knew some of mine you would not vote for me either if you held my mistakes of the past against me.

Thank God for forgiveness.

Ollie

While I agree with the premise of your point, Kerry has made his past record a point that we should consider for choosing him, has he not?   Can't expect some not to take him at his request.

Grace and Peace!

Kerry is Scary and I don't Trust the Bush Administration at all!!

President Bush and Moses

President Bush while taking his morning constetutional noticed Moses about a block ahead of him.

Bush called out to Moses to hold up as he wanted to talk with him.

Moses ignoring Bush just kept on walking.

Bush finaly ketching up to Moses asked him why he would not stop and talk with him.

Moses replied,the last time i talked to a bush i had to spend forty years in the desert alone.



I recall that Moses had a headache... and God gave him two tablets.   ;D

Blessings,  \o/

MsGuidedAngel

Maybe I'm just being extremely dense here, but how in the world does the example of early Christians banding together equate with expecting any government to provide for all our needs?  ::)

Now see, I DON'T remember Congress mocking the US flag and then turning around and saying they were such good Americans and served honorably.  ::)

Exactly! No one has a perfect past (or present). But when Kerry constantly reminds the American public of his FOUR MONTHS served in Vietnam, he conveniently forgets that he came back and made a big production out of how wrong he thought was and how wrong he thought the US was. Now he uses it as a point of pride? The man flip-flops on every issue that I can see..... Is he fit to be Commander-in-Chief of the US Armed Forces? NO!

Did he make mistakes and has since changed? Or does he try to justify and rationalize them? BIG DIFFERENCE!

Brother Ollie,

I understand exactly what you are saying. This is one of the most dirty Presidential elections I've ever seen. I don't ever remember people like Al Gore, Ted Kennedy, and other major public figures standing and yelling at the top of their lungs that President Bush is a liar and distorting events to fit their purpose. They, themselves, had the same agreement with what they were shouting about. George Bush was put into a position where he had to answer. However, it wasn't fair for him to answer in their opinion.

The movies, books, and rhetoric is absolutely ridiculous. The military record of George Bush was attacked, and Kerry chose to run on his own military record. So, the ground rules were chosen by Kerry, and now he doesn't like the ground rules. If you read between the lines, the tenor of the Democratic Convention was changed by Kerry because he was afraid of the answers from Bush. However, it was too late to play nice, lies and attacks were still being made against Bush, and Kerry knew he wouldn't like the answers. Bingo!!, a light bulb came on for Kerry, and I guess he actually thought Bush wouldn't answer the barrage of lies. Bush had nothing to do with setting the tenor of the election, but he will have to answer because some folks actually believe much of the Kerry and Moore stuff.

YEP!!!, the answers will now be given, and Kerry won't like them. Kerry made everything back to the 60s fair game and part of his campaign. Bush must answer, and he will. In fact, Kerry will try to silence the answers. Watch - it will be a very interesting development - day by day. I look forward to the actual records being unveiled, the truth that can't be denied. It will be impossible to put a spin on them that Kerry will like or can explain.

For Kerry, it's not really a matter of forgiveness of what he did in the 60s, it's what he did in all the years since then, what he did yesterday, what he's doing today, and what he will do tomorrow. I can certainly forgive him and will, but I'll do everything possible as a Christian to see that he doesn't become President of the United States.

Love In Christ,
Tom

"Just curious if that is a bad road to follow since the early Christians give example of doing it?"

We the people are supposed to be the government through representatives. Can we the people not provide for one anothers needs if need be?
If it was good enough for God's people in the first century, why can it not be good enough for Americans in the 21st century?

It would not be expected of any government to provide for all our needs, but perhaps those in want and need and incapable of providing for themselves.

Just curious if that is a bad road to follow since the early Christians give example of doing it.

Ollie

I am not altogether sure if Kerry brought it up initially or did it in defense of slurs brought on by the opponent.

If Kerry did bring up his military record is that any reason to continue the trash against him. His records say he is a hero in the Vietnam war.
The opponents record of military service cannot be found.

However I understand your point,

Ollie

"Kerry is Scary and I don't Trust the Bush Administration at all!!"

Pray hard and know you are safe in Christ no matter who is elected. God's will be done.

Ollie

???
I donot understand what this statement has to do with my question?

I don't remember that either.

Ollie

What mistakes did Kerry make? Serving and fighting a war in a heroic fashion and then protesting it when he found out the war was a farce? He did not conveniently forget His protest, but spoke of it at the convention and why he protested. This is America and we are free to protest. Are we not?

There is so much fascist attitude among us, it is skerry.

How has Kerry flip-flopped?

Ollie   ???  

Should not both candidates then have to answer for their past both Bush and Kerry? What of Bush's military records which so conveniently became inaccesible to the public? Kerry's records are their to be viewed. What about Bush letting Sammy Sosa go from the Texas Rangers?   ;D

Ollie

"Kerry is Scary and I don't Trust the Bush Administration at all!!"

(http://www.tvdance.com/bush-gore/images/9anew.gif)

I'm here. Pick me, pick me!
There are other options just as bad as Kerry and Bush.

Sigh!
Ollie

Amen!! ollie
"God's will be done."

 ;D LOL  I like it!

How about this one?

A woman in a hot air balloon realized she was lost. She lowered altitude
and spotted a man in a boat below. She  shouted to him, "Excuse me, can you
help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I don't know
where I  am."
 
The man consulted his portable GPS and Replied, "You're in a hot air
balloon approximately 30 feet above a ground  elevation of 2346 feet above
sea level. You are 31 degrees, 14.97 minutes north latitude and 100
degrees, 49.09 minutes  west longitude."
 
She rolled her eyes and said, "You must be a Republican."
 
" I am," replied the man. "How did you know?"
 
"Well, answered the balloonist, "everything you told me is technically
correct, but I have no idea what to make of your information, and I'm still
lost.    Frankly, you've not been much help to me."
 
The man smiled and responded, "You must be a Democrat."
 
"I am," replied the balloonist. "How did you know?"
 
"Well," said the man, you don't know where you are or where you're going.
You've risen to where you are due to a large  quantity of hot air. You made
a promise that you have no idea how to keep, and you expect me to solve
your problem.   You're in exactly the same position you were in before we
met, but somehow, now it's my fault."   :D


Grace and Peace!

You're joking right?

********************************************
Flip-Flopped On Military Experience As Credential For Public Office

Kerry: Service Should Not Be “Litmus Test” For Leadership. “Mr. President, you and I know that if support or opposition to the war were to become a litmus test for leadership, America would never have leaders or recover from the divisions created by that war. You and I know that if service or nonservice in the war is to become a test of qualification for high office, you would not have a Vice President, nor would you have a Secretary of Defense and our Nation would never recover from the divisions created by that war.” (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 10/08/92, p. S17709)

But Now Kerry Constantly “Challenges The Stature Of His Democratic Opponents” Over Their Lack Of Military Service. “And more than ever, Mr. Kerry is invoking his stature as a Vietnam veteran as he challenges the stature of his Democratic opponents -- none of whom, he frequently points out, have ‘worn the uniform of our country’ -- to withstand a debate with Mr. Bush on national security.” (Adam Nagourney, “As Campaign Tightens, Kerry Sharpens Message,” The New York Times, 8/10/03)

Flip-Flopped On 1991 Iraq War Coalition

At The Time, Kerry Questioned Strength Of 1991 Coalition. “I keep hearing from people, ‘Well, the coalition is fragile, it won’t stay together,’ and my response to that is, if the coalition is so fragile, then what are the vital interests and what is it that compels us to risk our young American’s lives if the others aren’t willing to stay the … course of peace? … I voted against the president, I’m convinced we’re doing this the wrong way …” (CBS’ “This Morning,” 1/16/91)

Now Kerry Has Nothing But Praise For 1991 Coalition. SEN. JOHN KERRY: “In my speech on the floor of the Senate I made it clear, you are strongest when you act with other nations. All presidents, historically, his father, George Herbert Walker Bush, did a brilliant job of building a legitimate coalition and even got other people to help pay for the war.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 1/11/04)

Flip-Flopped On View Of War On Terror

Kerry Said War On Terror Is “Basically A Manhunt.” “Kerry was asked about Bush’s weekend appearance on ‘Meet the Press’ when he called himself a ‘war president.’ The senator, who watched the session, remarked: ‘The war on terrorism is a very different war from the way the president is trying to sell it to us. It’s a serious challenge, and it is a war of sorts, but it is not the kind of war they’re trying to market to America.’ Kerry characterized the war on terror as predominantly an intelligence-gathering and law enforcement operation. ‘It’s basically a manhunt,’ he said. ‘You gotta know who they are, where they are, what they’re planning, and you gotta be able to go get ‘em before they get us.’” (Katherine M. Skiba, “Bush, Kerry Turn Focus To Each Other,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 2/13/04)

Two Weeks Later, Kerry Flip-Flopped, Saying War On Terror Is More Than “A Manhunt”. “This war isn’t just a manhunt – a checklist of names from a deck of cards. In it, we do not face just one man or one terrorist group. We face a global jihadist movement of many groups, from different sources, with separate agendas, but all committed to assaulting the United States and free and open societies around the globe.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At University Of California At Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 2/27/04)

Flip-Flopped On Funding For Our Troops In Iraq

Kerry Pledged To Fund Reconstruction With “Whatever Number” Of Dollars It Took. NBC’S TIM RUSSERT: “Do you believe that we should reduce funding that we are now providing for the operation in Iraq?” SEN. JOHN KERRY: “No. I think we should increase it.” RUSSERT: “Increase funding?” KERRY: “Yes.” RUSSERT: “By how much?” KERRY: “By whatever number of billions of dollars it takes to win. It is critical that the United States of America be successful in Iraq, Tim.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 8/31/03)

Then Kerry Voted Against Senate Passage Of Iraq/Afghanistan Reconstruction Package. “Passage of the bill that would appropriate $86.5 billion in fiscal 2004 supplemental spending for military operations and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill would provide $10.3 billion as a grant to rebuild Iraq, including $5.1 billion for security and $5.2 billion for reconstruction costs. It also would provide $10 billion as a loan that would be converted to a grant if 90 percent of all bilateral debt incurred by the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein has been forgiven by other countries. Separate provisions limit reconstruction aid to $18.4 billion. It also would provide approximately $65.6 billion for military operations and maintenance and $1.3 billion for veterans medical care.” (S. 1689, CQ Vote #400: Passed 87-12: R 50-0; D 37-11; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Kerry Voted Nay)

Kerry Later Claimed: “I Actually Did Vote For The $87 Billion Before I Voted Against It.” (Glen Johnson, “Kerry Blasts Bush On Protecting Troops,” The Boston Globe, 3/17/04)

Flip-Flopped On Welfare Reform

In 1993, Kerry Voted To Kill Bipartisan Welfare Work Requirement. In 1993, Kerry and Kennedy voted against a welfare-to-work requirement that was supported by many Democrats, including Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Harry Reid (D-NV):

Fiscal 1993 Supplemental Appropriations - Welfare Work Requirement. “Moynihan, D-N.Y., motion to table (kill) the D’Amato, R-N.Y., amendment to sharply cut federal welfare administration aid to states that do not, within a year, require at least 10 percent of their able-bodied welfare recipients without dependents to work. The required workfare participation rate would be increased by 2 percent a year until 50 percent were working.” (H.R. 2118, CQ Vote #163: Rejected 34-64: R 1-42; D 33-22, 6/22/93, Kerry Voted Yea)

Flip-Flopped On Leaving Abortion Up To States

Kerry Used To Say Abortion Should Be Left Up To States. “I think the question of abortion is one that should be left for the states to decide,” Kerry said during his failed 1972 Congressional bid. (“John Kerry On The Issues,” The [Lowell, MA] Sun, 10/11/72)

Now Kerry Says Abortion Is Law Of Entire Nation. “The right to choose is the law of the United States. No person has the right to infringe on that freedom. Those of us who are in government have a special responsibility to see to it that the United States continues to protect this right, as it must protect all rights secured by the constitution.” (Sen. John Kerry [D-MA], Congressional Record, 1/22/85)

Flip-Flopped On Death Penalty For Terrorists

In 1996, Kerry Attacked Governor Bill Weld For Supporting Death Penalty For Terrorists. KERRY: “Your policy would amount to a terrorist protection policy. Mine would put them in jail.” (1996 Massachusetts Senate Debate, 9/16/96)

In 1996, Kerry Said, “You Can Change Your Mind On Things, But Not On Life-And-Death Issues.” (Timothy J. Connolly, “The ‘Snoozer’ Had Some Life,” [Worcester, MA] Telegram & Gazette, 7/3/96)

But, In 2002, Kerry Said He Supported Death Penalty For Terrorists. KERRY: “The law of the land is the law of the land, but I have also said that I am for the death penalty for terrorists because terrorists have declared war on your country.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 12/1/02)

Flip-Flopped On Gay Marriage Amendment

In 2002, Kerry Signed Letter “Urging” MA Legislature To Reject Constitutional Amendment Banning Gay Marriage. “We rarely comment on issues that are wholly within the jurisdiction of the General Court, but there are occasions when matters pending before you are of such significance to all residents of the Commonwealth that we think it appropriate for us to express our opinion. One such matter is the proposed Constitutional amendment that would prohibit or seriously inhibit any legal recognition whatsoever of same-sex relationships. We believe it would be a grave error for Massachusetts to enshrine in our Constitution a provision which would have such a negative effect on so many of our fellow residents. … We are therefore united in urging you to reject this Constitutional amendment and avoid stigmatizing so many of our fellow citizens who do not deserve to be treated in such a manner.” (Sen. John Kerry, et al, Letter To Members Of The Massachusetts Legislature, 7/12/02)

Now, In 2004, Kerry Won’t Rule Out Supporting Similar Amendment. “Asked if he would support a state constitutional amendment barring gay and lesbian marriages, Kerry didn’t rule out the possibility. ‘I’ll have to see what language there is,’ he said.” (Susan Milligan, “Kerry Says GOP May Target Him On ‘Wedge Issue,’” The Boston Globe, 2/6/04)

continued....

Flip Flopped On Trade With China

In 1991, Kerry Supported Most-Favored Trade Status For China. “Sen. John Kerry said yesterday that he is breaking party ranks to support most-favored-nation trade status for China … ‘I think the president has some strong arguments about some of the assets of most-favored-nation status for China,’ Kerry said.” (John Aloysius Farrell, “Kerry Breaks Party Ranks To Back China Trade Status,” The Boston Globe, 6/15/91)

In 2000, Kerry Voted In Favor Of Permanent Normal Trade Relations With China. (H.R. 4444, CQ Vote #251: Passed 83-15: R 46-8; D 37-7, 9/19/00, Kerry Voted Yea)

Now Kerry Criticizes The Bush Administration For Trading With China. “Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry said on Monday Americans workers were paying the price for President Bush's weak stance on trade with China and other countries. … On the bus tour, Kerry singled out the Bush administration's handling of trade with China and said that country was manipulating its currency.” (Caren Bohan, "Kerry Pledges Aggressive Trade Stance," Reuters, 4/26/04)

Flip-Flopped On Iraq War

Kerry Voted For Authorization To Use Force In Iraq. (H.J. Res. 114, CQ Vote #237: Passed 77-23: R 48-1; D 29-21; I 0-1, 10/11/02, Kerry Voted Yea.)

In First Dem Debate, Kerry Strongly Supported President’s Action In Iraq. KERRY: “George, I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity, but I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him.” (ABC News, Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate, Columbia, SC, 5/4/03)

Kerry Later Claimed He Voted “To Threaten” Use Of Force In Iraq. “I voted to threaten the use of force to make Saddam Hussein comply with the resolutions of the United Nations.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Announcement Of Presidential Candidacy, Mount Pleasant, SC, 9/2/03)

Now, Kerry Says He Is Anti-War Candidate. CHRIS MATTHEWS: “Do you think you belong to that category of candidates who more or less are unhappy with this war, the way it’s been fought, along with General Clark, along with Howard Dean and not necessarily in companionship politically on the issue of the war with people like Lieberman, Edwards and Gephardt? Are you one of the anti-war candidates?” KERRY: “I am -- Yes, in the sense that I don’t believe the president took us to war as he should have, yes, absolutely.” (MSNBC’s “Hardball,” 1/6/04)

Flip-Flopped On Eliminating Marriage Penalty For Middle Class

Kerry Said He Will Fight To Keep Tax Relief For Married Couples. “Howard Dean and Gephardt are going to put the marriage penalty back in place. So if you get married in America, we’re going to charge you more taxes. I do not want to do that.” (Fox News’ “Special Report,” 10/23/03)

Said Democrats Fought To End Marriage Penalty Tax. “We fought hard to get rid of the marriage penalty.” (MSNBC’s “News Live,” 7/31/03)

But, In 1998, Kerry Voted Against Eliminating Marriage Penalty Relief For Married Taxpayers With Combined Incomes Less Than $50,000 Per Year, Saving Taxpayers $46 Billion Over 10 Years. (S. 1415, CQ Vote #154: Rejected 48-50: R 5-49; D 43-1, 6/10/98, Kerry Voted Yea)

Flip-Flopped On Patriot Act

Kerry Voted For Patriot Act. The Patriot Act was passed nearly unanimously by the Senate 98-1, and 357-66 in the House. (H.R. 3162, CQ Vote #313: Passed 98-1: R 49-0; D 48-1; I 1-0, 10/25/01, Kerry Voted Yea)

Kerry Used To Defend His Vote. “Most of [The Patriot Act] has to do with improving the transfer of information between CIA and FBI, and it has to do with things that really were quite necessary in the wake of what happened on September 11th.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Town Hall Meeting, Manchester, NH, 8/6/03)

Now, Kerry Attacks Patriot Act. “We are a nation of laws and liberties, not of a knock in the night. So it is time to end the era of John Ashcroft. That starts with replacing the Patriot Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time. I’ve been a District Attorney and I know that what law enforcement needs are real tools not restrictions on American’s basic rights.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At Iowa State University, 12/1/03)

Flip-Flopped On NAFTA

Kerry Voted For NAFTA. (H.R. 3450, CQ Vote #395: Passed 61-38: R 34-10; D 27-28, 11/20/93, Kerry Voted Yea)

Kerry Recognized NAFTA Is Our Future. “‘NAFTA recognizes the reality of today’s economy - globalization and technology,’ Kerry said. ‘Our future is not in competing at the low-level wage job; it is in creating high-wage, new technology jobs based on our skills and our productivity.’” (John Aloysius Farrell, “Senate’s OK Finalizes NAFTA Pact,” The Boston Globe, 11/21/93)

Now, Kerry Expresses Doubt About NAFTA. “Kerry, who voted for NAFTA in 1993, expressed some doubt about the strength of free-trade agreements. ‘If it were before me today, I would vote against it because it doesn’t have environmental or labor standards in it,’ he said.” (David Lightman, “Democrats Battle For Labor’s Backing,” Hartford Courant, 8/6/03)
********************************************

Just to name a few for you.

A better question would be, what hasn't Kerry flip flopped on?   Its about the only thing he is consistant with.....changing his mind!

Kerry is like a box of Chocolates....ya never know what you're gonna get.   ;D   Even if you don't like Bush, you know exactly where he stands....no beating around bush with Bush.

Grace and Peace!

I haven't seen where Bush is a 'bad option'.

Purple Heart Number One:

Purple Heart Number Two:

Purple Heart Number Three:



Revealed: how 'war hero' Kerry tried to put off Vietnam military duty:

Senator John Kerry, the presumed Democratic presidential candidate who is trading on his Vietnam war record to campaign against President George W Bush, tried to defer his military service for a year, according to a newly rediscovered article in a Harvard University newspaper.

He wrote to his local recruitment board seeking permission to spend a further 12 months studying in Paris, after completing his degree course at Yale University in the mid-1960s.

"This means that Kerry didn't jump into all that heroic service until he was pushed,".....

In other words: Whether or not Congress made the statement has no bearing on Kerry 'riding' his 'heroism' NOW when at that time he followed his disharge with sedition.  ::)

No. Very serious about finding out.

Thanks for the information. All that is lacking is the reason for the change of mind. Are there legitimate explanations?

For example: Were bills voted against because of pork added to them? But yet the initial bill was favored, but the pork wasn't?

Thanks,
Ollie

Ok. That is your right.

I am not satisfied with either candidate. I think America for many years now has suffered mediocrity in its leaders.
It is beginning to show and tally up in our standard of living for many, or work force, our children, born and unborn, the infrastructure, Industry, peoples attitudes etc..
Perhaps it is part of God's purpose to eventually bring it all to His end.

Ollie

Are there any examples of Bush flip-flopping or changing his mind?

Ollie

Re: Flip-flopping..... 2nd Timothy has covered it well.  :)

Re: Mistakes.....  We probably define 'hero' differently. I definitely don't see Kerry as one. Maybe it's simply because I've spent my whole life around the military.


Kerry tried to get the okay to avoid the war by studying in Paris. That didn't work. So he then signed up for what he thought would be safe duty. Instead, he got three minor wounds and requested reassignment which he did receive. Reassignment is requested ... as a personal aide in Boston, New York, or Wash., D.C. area." Then he trashed all those still serving after he was safely back. Sorry, not my idea of a 'hero'.

Yes, he absolutely has the right and freedom to protest. However, his right to protest does not negate my right to disagree with him.  :)

Kerry-Kennedy liberalism II



Ever since John Kerry won his Massachusetts Senate seat amid former President Reagan's 49-state landslide in 1984, he has acted as a virtual clone of Massachusetts' senior senator, Edward Kennedy. Indeed, based on its annual statistical analysis of congressional voting patterns on economic, foreign-policy and social issues, the authoritative, nonpartisan National Journal has crowned Mr. Kerry the Senate's most liberal member twice in the 1980s, once in the 1990s and, most recently, in 2003.
    In a previous editorial, The Washington Times reviewed the annual ratings that various interest groups assigned to the voting records of Massachusetts Democratic Sens. Kerry and Kennedy. Those organizations included the liberal Americans for Democratic Action, the American Conservative Union, the American Civil Liberties Union, the League of Conservation Voters, the AFL-CIO, the Concord Coalition, the National Taxpayers Union and the Christian Coalition.
For all practical purposes, the ratings were identical. The same conclusion can be drawn from an examination of the voting patterns of Messrs. Kerry and Kennedy on the annual lists of "key votes" that are carefully selected by Congressional Quarterly and National Journal's "Almanac of American Politics."
    Each year CQ identifies about 15 "key votes." From 1985, when Mr. Kerry entered the U.S. Senate, through 2003, CQ has selected 270 "key votes." Mr. Kennedy has cast a vote on 268 of them. For five of the 268, Mr. Kerry neither voted nor publicly announced a position. That leaves 263 Kennedy votes that can be compared with Mr. Kerry's positions. Mr. Kerry voted with Mr. Kennedy on 235 of those "key votes," and he announced a position identical with Mr. Kennedy's votes on eight others. On just 20 of Mr. Kennedy's 263 votes did Mr. Kerry cast a vote different from Mr. Kennedy's.
    In sum, Mr. Kerry agreed with Mr. Kennedy's votes on 92.4 percent of CQ's "key votes" from 1985 through 2003. Moreover, in five of the last six years, Mr. Kerry has not differed with Mr. Kennedy on a single CQ-designated "key vote." Regarding the two votes from 2002 where the two differed — the use of force against Iraq and passage of the Andean free-trade agreement — Mr. Kerry has effectively repudiated both of his votes, bringing him in line with Mr. Kennedy 100 percent of the time over the past six years.
    The National Journal has identified 108 "key votes" spanning 18 years, beginning with the 99th Congress (1985-1986) and ending with the 107th (2001-2002). Mr. Kennedy has voted on 106 of them. On 98 of those votes, Mr. Kerry agreed with Mr. Kennedy. That's 92.5 percent of the time. For his first 16 years in the Senate, Mr. Kerry was in sync with Mr. Kennedy on 96 percent of National Journal's "key votes."
    The conclusion is unassailable: A vote for John Kerry is virtually indistinguishable from a vote for Ted Kennedy and all of the left-wing baggage that he carries.
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20040808-110051-1762r.htm (http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20040808-110051-1762r.htm)

The conclusion is unassailable: A vote for John Kerry is virtually indistinguishable from a vote for Ted Kennedy and all of the left-wing baggage that he carries.

Brothers and Sisters,

This is a great thread, maybe my vote for non-Biblical thread of the year. We are actually disagreeing, agreeing, discussing, exchanging information, and nobody is getting ANGRY.  BRAVO!!!  I'm proud of all of us, including me for a change.

Disagreement and varying views CAN BE very positive. If this is possible with politics, surely it could also be possible with Biblical threads. However, I know that Biblical views are much more personal than politics, obviously so. For Christians, our Biblical views are the core and center of our being. Politicians, for the most part, are clowns and comedians.

I think that Brother Ollie already said it - "God's Will be Done!" I think that's the only thing that matters.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Decorated veteran John Kerry, testifying before the House Foreign Relations Committee, questions the War in Vietnam, Washington, D.C., April 22, 1971.

 
Thank you very much, Senator Fulbright, Senator Javits, Senator Symington and Senator Pell.

I would like to say for the record, and also for the men sitting behind me who are also wearing the uniforms and their medals, that my sitting here is really symbolic. I am not here as John Kerry. I am here as one member of a group of 1,000, which is a small representation of a very much larger group of veterans in this country, and were it possible for all of them to sit at this table, they would be here and have the same kind of testimony. I would simply like to speak in general terms. I apologize if my statement is general because I received notification [only] yesterday that you would hear me, and, I am afraid, because of the injunction I was up most of the night and haven't had a great deal of chance to prepare.

I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say that several months ago, in Detroit, we had an investigation at which over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly decorated, veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia. These were not isolated incidents, but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis, with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command. It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit--the emotions in the room, and the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do.

They told stories that, at times, they had personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam,in addition to the normal ravage of war and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by the applied bombing power of this country.

We call this investigation the Winter Soldier Investigation. The term "winter soldier" is a play on words of Thomas Paine's in 1776, when he spoke of the "sunshine patriots," and "summertime soldiers" who deserted at Valley Forge because the going was rough.

We who have come here to Washington have come here because we feel we have to be winter soldiers now. We could come back to this country, we could be quiet, we could hold our silence, we could not tell what went on in Vietnam, but we feel, because of what threatens this country, not the reds, but the crimes which we are committing that threaten it, that we have to speak out.

I would like to talk to you a little bit about what the result is of the feelings these men carry with them after coming back from Vietnam. The country doesn't know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence, and who are given the chance to die for the biggest nothing in history; men who have returned with a sense of anger and a sense of betrayal which no one has yet grasped.

As a veteran and one who felt this anger, I would like to talk about it. We are angry because we feel we have been used it the worst fashion by the administration of this country.

In 1970, at West Point, Vice President Agnew said, "some glamorize the criminal misfits of society while our best men die in Asian rice paddies to preserve the freedom which most of those misfits abuse," and this was used as a rallying point for our effort in Vietnam.

But for us, as boys in Asia whom the country was supposed to support, his statement is a terrible distortion from which we can only draw a very deep sense of revulsion. Hence the anger of some of the men who are here in Washington today. It is a distortion because we in no way consider ourselves the best men of this country, because those he calls misfits were standing up for us in a way that nobody else in this country dared to, because so many who have died would have returned to this country to join the misfits in their efforts to ask for an immediate withdrawal from South Vietnam, because so many of those best men have returned as quadriplegics and amputees, and they lie forgotten in Veterans' Administration hospitals in this country which fly the flag which so many have chosen as their own personal symbol. And we cannot consider ourselves America's best men when we are ashamed of and hated what we were called on to do in Southeast Asia.

In our opinion, and from our experience, there is nothing in South Vietnam which could happen that realistically threatens the United States of America. And to attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom, which those misfits supposedly abuse, is to us the height of criminal hypocrisy, and it is that kind of hypocrisy which we feel has torn this country apart.

We found that not only was it a civil war, an effort by a people who had for years been seeking their liberation from any colonial influence whatsoever, but, also, we found that the Vietnamese, whom we had enthusiastically molded after our own image, were hard-put to take up the fight against the threat we were supposedly saving them from.

We found most people didn't even know the difference between communism and democracy. They only wanted to work in rice paddies without helicopters strafing them and bombs with napalm burning their villages and tearing their country apart. They wanted everything to do with the war, particularly with this foreign presence of the United States of America, to leave them alone in peace, and they practiced the art of survival by siding with whichever military force was present at a particular time, be it Viet Cong, North Vietnamese or American.

We found also that, all too often, American men were dying in those rice paddies for want of support from their allies. We saw first hand how monies from American taxes were used for a corrupt dictatorial regime. We saw that many people in this country had a one-sided idea of who was kept free by the flag, and blacks provided the highest percentage of casualties. We saw Vietnam ravaged equally by American bombs and search-and-destroy missions as well as by Viet Cong terrorism, - and yet we listened while this country tried to blame all of the havoc on the Viet Cong.

We rationalized destroying villages in order to save them. We saw America lose her sense of morality as she accepted very coolly a My Lai, and refused to give up the image of American soldiers who hand out chocolate bars and chewing gum.

We learned the meaning of free-fire zones--shooting anything that moves--and we watched while America placed a cheapness on the lives of orientals.

We watched the United States falsification of body counts, in fact the glorification of body counts. We listened while, month after month, we were told the back of the enemy was about to break. We fought using weapons against "oriental human beings" with quotation marks around that. We fought using weapons against those people which I do not believe this country would dream of using, were we fighting in the European theater. We watched while men charged up hills because a general said that hill has to be taken, and, after losing one platoon, or two platoons, they marched away to leave the hill for reoccupation by the North Vietnamese. We watched pride allow the most unimportant battles to be blown into extravaganzas, because we couldn't lose, and we couldn't retreat, and because it didn't matter how many American bodies were lost to prove that point, and so there were Hamburger Hills and Khe Sanhs and Hill 81s and Fire Base 6s, and so many others.

Now we are told that the men who fought there must watch quietly while American lives are lost so that we can exercise the incredible arrogance of "Vietnamizing" the Vietnamese.

Each day, to facilitate the process by which the United States washes her hands of Vietnam, someone has to give up his life so that the United States doesn't have to admit something that the entire world already knows, so that we can't say that we have made a mistake. Someone has to die so that President Nixon won't be, and these are his words, "the first President to lose a war."


_______________







 

Continued:

Where is the leadership?
We're here to ask where are McNamara,
Rostow, Bundy, Gilpatrick, and so many others?

_______________




We are asking Americans to think about that, because how do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake? We are here in Washington to say that the problem of this war is not just a question of war and diplomacy. It is part and parcel of everything that we are trying, as human beings, to communicate to people in this country--the question of racism, which is rampant in the military, and so many other questions, such as the use of weapons: the hypocrisy in our taking umbrage at the Geneva Conventions and using that as justification for a continuation of this war, when we are more guilty than any other body of violations of those Geneva Conventions; in the use of free-fire zones; harassment-interdiction fire, search-and-destroy missions; the bombings; the torture of prisoners; all accepted policy by many units in South Vietnam. That is what we are trying to say. It is part and parcel of everything.

An American Indian friend of mine who lives in the Indian Nation of Alcatraz put it to me very succinctly: He told me how, as a boy on an Indian reservation, he had watched television, and he used to cheer the cowboys when they came in and shot the Indians, and then suddenly one day he stopped in Vietnam and he said, "my God, I am doing to these people the very same thing that was done to my people," and he stopped. And that is what we are trying to say, that we think this thing has to end.


_______________

The Army says they never leave their wounded.
The Marines say they never even leave their dead.
These men have left all the casualties
and retreated behind a pious shield of public rectitude.
_______________




We are here to ask, and we are here to ask vehemently, where are the leaders of our country? Where is the leadership? We're here to ask where are McNamara, Rostow, Bundy, Gilpatrick, and so many others? Where are they now that we, the men they sent off to war, have returned? These are the commanders who have deserted their troops. And there is no more serious crime in the laws of war. The Army says they never leave their wounded. The Marines say they never even leave their dead. These men have left all the casualties and retreated behind a pious shield of public rectitude. They've left the real stuff of their reputations bleaching behind them in the sun in this country....

We wish that a merciful God could wipe away our own memories of that service as easily as this administration has wiped away their memories of us. But all that they have done, and all that they can do by this denial, is to make more clear than ever our own determination to undertake one last mission: To search out and destroy the last vestige of this barbaric war; to pacify our own hearts; to conquer the hate and fear that have driven this country these last ten years and more. And more. And so, when, thirty years from now, our brothers go down the street without a leg, without an arm, or a face, and small boys ask why, we will be able to say "Vietnam" and not mean a desert, not a filthy obscene memory, but mean instead where America finally turned, and where soldiers like us helped it in the turning.

 
 


On March 16, 1968, U.S. soldiers, led by Lt. William Calley, invaded the village of My Lai in South Vietnam in search of Viet Cong and their sympathizers. Some 347 unarmed civilians, including women and children, were killed. After about a year of covering-up the killings, the Army opened its own internal investigation, which led to congressional hearings. Five soldiers were court-martialed for participating in the attack. Four were found innocent, and Calley was sentenced to life imprisonment. In 1974, a federal court overturned the verdict, and Calley was released.





Kerry is making a reference to the official language used in the Army court-martial case against Lt. William Calley. In the charges and proceedings against Calley, Army lawyers and members of the Court repeatedly use the phrase "oriental human beings" when describing the number of bodies and the number of people slaughtered at My Lai.

I would like to nominate my son-in-law for "War Hero", President, and "Living Testimony of the Grace of Jesus Christ".

He's currently in Najaf with the 1st Cav as a company sniper.

He lost a finger (left index) from the middle knuckle on some time ago.

He chose to stay.

Just got word that's he's been put in for a Bronze Star with valor, but don't yet know the details other than an apparently heavy firefight in which many of his squad were wounded but he got them out safely (no loss of life).

Best of all, he's witnessed to a number of Iraqi's (against regs), passed out bibles, helped a local church rebuild after being bombed, and seen his entire squad and most of his company get saved.

Please pray for him, because he's having some real difficulties in resolving his actions (as a sniper) with what he believes are Gods expectations.

Touching speech, eh?  :)

And Kerry's emotional, from-the-heart speech had been carefully crafted by a speechwriter for Robert Kennedy named Adam Walinsky, who also tutored him on how to present it.

And filled with lies.....


I would like to nominate my son-in-law for "War Hero", President, and "Living Testimony of the Grace of Jesus Christ".

I'll second that nomination!  ;)

(http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0UwDdAi0bJ7H87PgysNZnUtWZs8BDB1wCQl83DONdRWW8*1QhYoclXLSECNwdH9ZXayv0ZiNXDMFe!eKhIUYZ7c7RCnhgyGb8aJ3wugFljcO0Ruy5yv*1Da5yQRzofrua/kerrys_first_aid_kit.jpg?dc=4675487114773138684)

Did anyone esle the Republican convention last night?   Rudy Juliani<sp> was on a roll!

Grace and Peace!

2nd Timothy,

Yes, I watched Rudy, and I just listened to The Terminator, Arnold. I thought that both were very motivational, especially in talking about what I like to call the real America. I heard quite a few more reasons why I will vote for George W. Bush again.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Arnold was grea!


(http://datacore.sciflicks.com/the_terminator/images/the_terminator_large_11.jpg)

DONT BE AN ECONOMIC GIRLY MAN!    ;D

LOL

I saw quite a few more reasons, I will be voting for GWB as well..

Poly_Ticks.....

If you support the policies and character of George W. Bush,
please drive with your headlights ON during the day on Saturday.

If you support John Kerry, please drive with your headlights OFF Saturday night.

 ;D


 :-X

This is me
(http://pages.prodigy.net/indianahawkeye/newpage13/6.gif)

This is Skerry fans
(http://pages.prodigy.net/indianahawkeye/newpage13/2.gif)

This is a Skerry fan after Kerry loses.
(http://pages.prodigy.net/indianahawkeye/newpage46/11.gif)

Text of Zell Miller's speech

September 1, 2004

Since I last stood in this spot, a whole new generation of the Miller Family has been born: Four great grandchildren.

Along with all the other members of our close-knit family -- they are my and Shirley's most precious possessions.

And I know that's how you feel about your family also.

Like you, I think of their future, the promises and the perils they will face.

Like you, I believe that the next four years will determine what kind of world they will grow up in.

And like you, I ask which leader is it today that has the vision, the willpower and, yes, the backbone to best protect my family?

The clear answer to that question has placed me in this hall with you tonight. For my family is more important than my party.

There is but one man to whom I am willing to entrust their future and that man's name is George Bush.

In the summer of 1940, I was an eight-year-old boy living in a remote little Appalachian valley.

Our country was not yet at war but even we children knew that there were some crazy men across the ocean who would kill us if they could.

President Roosevelt, in his speech that summer, told America "all private plans, all private lives, have been in a sense repealed by an overriding public danger."

In 1940 Wendell Wilkie was the Republican nominee.

And there is no better example of someone repealing their "private plans" than this good man.

He gave Roosevelt the critical support he needed for a peacetime draft, an unpopular idea at the time.

And he made it clear that he would rather lose the election than make national security a partisan campaign issue.

Shortly before Wilkie died he told a friend, that if he could write his own epitaph and had to choose between "here lies a president" or "here lies one who contributed to saving freedom", he would prefer the latter.

Where are such statesmen today?

Where is the bi-partisanship in this country when we need it most?

Now, while young Americans are dying in the sands of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan, our nation is being torn apart and made weaker because of the Democrat's manic obsession to bring down our Commander-in- Chief.

What has happened to the party I've spent my life working in?

I can remember when Democrats believed that it was the duty of America to fight for freedom over tyranny.

It was Democratic President Harry Truman who pushed the Red Army out of Iran, who came to the aid of Greece when Communists threatened to overthrow it, who stared down the Soviet blockade of West Berlin by flying in supplies and saving the city.

Time after time in our history, in the face of great danger, Democrats and Republicans worked together to ensure that freedom would not falter. But not today.

Motivated more by partisan politics than by national security, today's Democratic leaders see America as an occupier, not a liberator.

And nothing makes this Marine madder than someone calling American troops occupiers rather than liberators.

Tell that to the one-half of Europe that was freed because Franklin Roosevelt led an army of liberators, not occupiers.

Tell that to the lower half of the Korean Peninsula that is free because Dwight Eisenhower commanded an army of liberators, not occupiers.

Tell that to the half a billion men, women and children who are free today from the Baltics to the Crimea, from Poland to Siberia, because Ronald Reagan rebuilt a military of liberators, not occupiers.

Never in the history of the world has any soldier sacrificed more for the freedom and liberty of total strangers than the American soldier. And, our soldiers don't just give freedom abroad, they preserve it for us here at home.

For it has been said so truthfully that it is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us the freedom of the press.

It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the agitator, who has given us the freedom to protest.

It is the soldier who salutes the flag, serves beneath the flag, whose coffin is draped by the flag who gives that protester the freedom to abuse and burn that flag.

No one should dare to even think about being the Commander in Chief of this country if he doesn't believe with all his heart that our soldiers are liberators abroad and defenders of freedom at home.

But don't waste your breath telling that to the leaders of my party today. In their warped way of thinking America is the problem, not the solution.

They don't believe there is any real danger in the world except that which America brings upon itself through our clumsy and misguided foreign policy.

It is not their patriotism - it is their judgment that has been so sorely lacking. They claimed Carter's pacifism would lead to peace.

They were wrong.

They claimed Reagan's defense buildup would lead to war.

They were wrong.

And, no pair has been more wrong, more loudly, more often than the two Senators from Massachusetts, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry.

Together, Kennedy/Kerry have opposed the very weapons system that won the Cold War and that is now winning the War on Terror.

Listing all the weapon systems that Senator Kerry tried his best to shut down sounds like an auctioneer selling off our national security but Americans need to know the facts.

The B-1 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, dropped 40% of the bombs in the first six months of Operation Enduring Freedom.

The B-2 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered air strikes against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Hussein's command post in Iraq.

The F-14A Tomcats, that Senator Kerry opposed, shot down Khadifi's Libyan MIGs over the Gulf of Sidra. The modernized F-14D, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered missile strikes against Tora Bora.

The Apache helicopter, that Senator Kerry opposed, took out those Republican Guard tanks in Kuwait in the Gulf War. The F-15 Eagles, that Senator Kerry opposed, flew cover over our Nation's Capital and this very city after 9/11.

I could go on and on and on: Against the Patriot Missile that shot down Saddam Hussein's scud missiles over Israel, Against the Aegis air-defense cruiser, Against the Strategic Defense Initiative, Against the Trident missile, against, against, against.

This is the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of our U.S. Armed Forces?

U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs?

Twenty years of votes can tell you much more about a man than twenty weeks of campaign rhetoric.

Campaign talk tells people who you want them to think you are. How you vote tells people who you really are deep inside.

Senator Kerry has made it clear that he would use military force only if approved by the United Nations.

Kerry would let Paris decide when America needs defending. I want Bush to decide.

John Kerry, who says he doesn't like outsourcing, wants to outsource our national security.

That's the most dangerous outsourcing of all. This politician wants to be leader of the free world.

Free for how long?

For more than twenty years, on every one of the great issues of freedom and security, John Kerry has been more wrong, more weak and more wobbly than any other national figure. As a war protestor, Kerry blamed our military.

As a Senator, he voted to weaken our military. And nothing shows that more sadly and more clearly than his vote this year to deny protective armor for our troops in harms way, far-away.

George Bush understands that we need new strategies to meet new threats.

John Kerry wants to re-fight yesterday's war. George Bush believes we have to fight today's war and be ready for tomorrow's challenges. George Bush is committed to providing the kind of forces it takes to root out terrorists.

No matter what spider hole they may hide in or what rock they crawl under.

George Bush wants to grab terrorists by the throat and not let them go to get a better grip.

From John Kerry, they get a "yes-no-maybe" bowl of mush that can only encourage our enemies and confuse our friends.

I first got to know George Bush when we served as governors together. I admire this man.

I am moved by the respect he shows the First Lady, his unabashed love for his parents and his daughters, and the fact that he is unashamed of his belief that God is not indifferent to America.

I can identify with someone who has lived that line in "Amazing Grace," "Was blind, but now I see," and I like the fact that he's the same man on Saturday night that he is on Sunday morning.

He is not a slick talker but he is a straight shooter and, where I come from, deeds mean a lot more than words.

I have knocked on the door of this man's soul and found someone home, a God-fearing man with a good heart and a spine of tempered steel.

The man I trust to protect my most precious possession: my family.

This election will change forever the course of history, and that's not any history. It's our family's history.

The only question is how. The answer lies with each of us. And, like many generations before us, we've got some hard choosing to do.

Right now the world just cannot afford an indecisive America. Fainthearted, self-indulgence will put at risk all we care about in this world.

In this hour of danger our President has had the courage to stand up. And this Democrat is proud to stand up with him.

Thank you.

God Bless this great country and God Bless George W. Bush.
___________________________________________________

U.S. forces armed with what? Spitballs? (http://www.sirinet.net/~blkidps/s43.gif)

Social Security:

"Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during election years.  

Our Senators and Congresswomen do not pay into Social Security and, of course, they do not collect from it.

You see, Social Security benefits were not suitable for persons of their rare elevation in society. They felt they should have a special plan for themselves. So, many years ago they voted in their own

benefit plan.

In more recent years, no congressperson has felt the need to change it. After all, it is a great plan.

For all practical purposes their plan works like this:

When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die.

Except it may increase from time to time for cost of living adjustments.

For example, former Senator Byrd and Congressman White and their wives may expect to draw $7,800,000.00 (that's Seven Million, Eight-Hundred Thousand Dollars), with their wives drawing $275,000.00 during the last years of their lives.

This is calculated on an average life span for each of those two Dignitaries.

Younger Dignitaries who retire at an early age, will receive much more during the rest of their lives.

Their cost for this excellent plan is $0.00. NADA....ZILCH....

This little perk they voted for themselves is free to them. You and I pick up the tab for this plan. The funds for this fine retirement plan come directly from the General Funds;

"OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK"!

From our own Social Security Plan, which you and I pay (or have paid) into, -every payday until we retire (which amount is matched by our employer)- we can expect to get an average of $1,000 per month after retirement.

Or, in other words, we would have to collect our average of $1,000 monthly benefits for 68 years and one (1) month to equal Senator! Bill Bradley's benefits!

Social Security could be very good if only one small change were made.

That change would be to jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan from under the Senators and Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us ... then sit back and watch how fast they would fix it." ***




***received as e-mail

Claim:   Members of Congress receive lavish pensions but are not required to contribute to the Social Security fund.

Status:   False.
 
http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/pensions.asp  (http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/pensions.asp)

 :P

From John Kerry, they get a "yes-no-maybe" bowl of mush that can only encourage our enemies and confuse our friends.(http://www.sirinet.net/~blkidps/s43.gif)

Arnie's speach was exicting  kewl and all that good stuff. BUT He is a wolf in sheeps clothing he is a baby killer.

Yes, Arnie is a fiscal conservative and a social moderate.

He is so liberal that it makes me wonder how he ever was able to run with the Rep. party.

That could be why he and Maria get along so well and her family is so accepting of him.

That could be why he and Maria get along so well and her family is so accepting of him.

Or they're just skeered of him..... ;)

Can Reba spell??

Yup! She makes up her own spellings all the time!  :-*

How do you know that?

 ;D  Sister, it looks good to me. Well, maybe one more "E" in place of the "A".  I usually spell it:


 ;D

Just a lucky guess!  ;D

But traditional spellings are so boring, anyway!  ;D

Political Veteran
Max Cleland Survived His Vietnam War Wounds. But He Has Yet to Recover From His Last Campaign Battle.
   
By Peter Carlson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 3, 2003; Page C01


In his new job, Max Cleland is supposed to get young people all fired up with idealistic zeal for politics, but that won't be easy. These days, Cleland, a Georgia Democrat defeated in his bid for reelection to the Senate last fall, is angry, bitter and disgusted with politics.

"The state of American politics is sickening," he says.

Cleland has come full circle. In 1963, he arrived at American University's Washington Semester Program as a naive student and left dreaming of a career in the Senate. Now, after six years in the Senate, he's back at the Washington Semester Program, this time as a "distinguished adjunct professor.''

But he lost a few things along the way. In 1968, he lost his right arm and both legs in Vietnam. Last fall, he lost his Senate seat in a campaign that became a symbol of nasty politics.

Cleland, 60, is still livid over a now-infamous TV commercial that Republican challenger Saxby Chambliss ran against him. It opened with pictures of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, then attacked Cleland for voting against President Bush's Homeland Security bill. It didn't mention that Cleland supported a Democratic bill that wasn't radically different.

"That was the biggest lie in America -- to put me up there with Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and say I voted against homeland security!" he says, his voice rising in anger.

"I volunteered 35 years ago to go to Vietnam and the guy I was running against got out of going to Vietnam with a trick knee! I was an author of the homeland security bill, for goodness' sake! But I wasn't a rubber stamp for the White House. That right there is the epitome of what's wrong with American politics today!"

He's sitting in a booth in the Ruby Tuesday restaurant near his office at American University, his wheelchair leaning against a wall nearby. A salad and a glass of water sit on the table but he ignores them as he continues to vent. He's mad about the campaign but he's even madder about the war in Iraq.

Last fall, Cleland voted for the resolution authorizing President Bush to attack Iraq, but now he feels he was bamboozled.

"I voted for it because I was told by the secretary of defense and by the CIA that there were weapons of mass destruction there," he says. "The president said it, Colin Powell said it, they all said it. And now they can't find them! Our general over there, who has no dog in this fight, he said he sent troops all over the place and they found two trailers and not much of anything else. So we went to war for two trailers?"

The war in Iraq is beginning to look awfully familiar to Max Cleland.

"Now wait a minute," he says. "Let me run this back: We have a war. A bunch of Americans die. After the war, we try to figure out why we were there. There's a commitment of 240,000 ground troops with no exit strategy. You know what that's called? Vietnam! Hey, I've been there, done that, got a few holes in my T-shirt."

More people have died from abortions then in the war. Any one who is part of the abortion crowd sounds empty when talking about the death of war.

from the democratic 2004 platform....

We will defend the dignity of all Americans against those who would undermine it. Because we
believe in the privacy and equality of women, we stand proudly for a woman's right to choose,
consistent with Roe v. Wade, and regardless of her ability to pay. We stand firmly against
Republican efforts to undermine that right. At the same time, we strongly support family planning
and adoption incentives. Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.

Kerry is still an idiot even if he became a Republican!  :-X  ;D

WHEW!

Let's make all haste to:

Let the devil do whatever he wishes without resistance.

Make our country a sewer of immorality.

Encourage the lawless.

Give up our freedom of worship.

Let the terrorists roam our streets instead of Iraq's.

Continue or increase abortion.

Welcome abomination in the eyes of God as good.




Psalms 33:12  Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance.

Exactly!

 ;D  WHEW!! - I think that I would have to move somewhere safer. UM?? - Sudan.

I know who I want to vote for, Its a shame he went the way he did........

I'd hate to vote at all, espeically in the american system.  In the last election if a voted for Bush it'd make me feel extra guilty for all the innocent people he has killed in Iraq, don't need that burden on my shoulders.  But i happen to live in England where our government is even worse, definitly need a lot of trust to vote, and my parents always told me never to trust strangers.

I was intrested in the original topic but, I have to comment on this particular reply.

I totally 101% disagree, abortion is not murder. Let's bring up a couple scenarios;

1. A woman is raped and gets pregnant; who wants a baby from this method?
2. A woman finds out in the early stages that the fetus is not going to have a chance at a normal life; it's either got a disease or defect, etc.

It is her choice to decide what to do. She has to carry the baby to term, she has to go through major changes in her own body.

Its her body, nobody elses. Personally, being a male I don't feel I have a say on the subject however, I do have an opinion.

-=-

1. A woman is raped and gets pregnant; who wants a baby from this method?
The couple who have tried for years and can't have one?

2. A woman finds out in the early stages that the fetus is not going to have a chance at a normal life; it's either got a disease or defect, etc.
What if a woman goes to a seer and finds out that at say, age 15, the child will be in a wheelchair from a car accident? Go ahead and abort 'just in case'? What if I find out that my husband now has a 'disease' (which he doesn't that we know of ::)) - should I just shoot him?
Personal sidenote: One of my children was expected to have birth defects from an amnio test. The same child has been labeled as 'gifted'... ::)

Its her body, nobody elses. Personally, being a male I don't feel I have a say on the subject however, I do have an opinion.
No. It's also the child's body! And there are too many instances of men not having a say in the disposal of the child that they DID want!  ::)

My question:

"1. A woman is raped and gets pregnant; who wants a baby from this method?"

sincereheart's answer:

"The couple who have tried for years and can't have one? "

Give your head a shake. This is the most awful response and the most ridiculous statement I think I have every heard in my entire life. I nearly dropped my coffee in my lap when I read it! It virtually tells a <potential> rapist that its ok to rape as the woman might not be able to have a child from her current lover/wife.

I'll bet my entire life savings and my home that you'd think different if it happened to you.

It may sound ridiculous to you, you who are lost to faith. To some one who has faith, its not ridiculous.
Have you ever heard of adoption?? By your responce I would say you never have.........
I think you would loose your entire life savings and your home, to make that type of bet. Again it is a matter of faith.

"Have you ever heard of adoption?? By your responce I would say you never have."

Actually, I was adopted, right at birth. So, I know plenty on the subject.

I also know women who have been raped. Their lifes are forever altered. I can only image. Mental and physical changes a woman must go through. Its a woman's choice. Wrap your head around this one: would you rather have a woman go into a back alley with a coat hanger or have a doctor ready at a safe, clean place? Feel the reality kick in?

I am still shaking my head!


Then you haven't had a lot in life to deal with!  ;)

Gotta be careful with that coffee- hope it's not too hot!  ;)

 
You mean a rapist won't rape someone if they know a woman can have an abortion?  ::) Haven't learned much about rapists, have you?

You'd be homeless and broke!  :-X

There are so many couples who can't have children who would be more than happy to adopt an innocent baby; and a child conceived by rape IS an innocent!

But not enough to realize that a couple would be more than willing to adopt a child conceived by rape?  ???

I would rather she give the child up for adoption than to have the child murdered!
Let this reality kick in:
A woman who's been raped has enough to try and handle WITHOUT knowing that she had an innocent child murdered! Giving that child up for adoption gives her the option of knowing that she did make something good come out of something awful!
Rape IS awful! The fear and powerlessness of having something done to your body without your consent is horrible! To turn around and do worse to another life will only add to it!  :-X
Rape has long term consequences. So does abortion. Neither are ever 'over'!

well said sincereheart!






 
You'd be homeless and broke!  
 
 amen!  :D

Brothers and Sisters,

I think the following Scripture will be one on my favorites for some time to come.

Isaiah 5:20  Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Abortion is evil, just as many other things are evil that some are trying to thrust upon our nation.

Love In Christ,
Tom

sincereheart;

It's a woman's choice, being a woman you should appreciate that.

My Quote:
Actually, I was adopted, right at birth. So, I know plenty on the subject.

But not enough to realize that a couple would be more than willing to adopt a child conceived by rape?

I wouldn't notice or know the difference if I was aborted.

You may decide to carry a baby conceived by rape, thats your choice, just don't expect everyone to follow your choice.

DreamWeaver;

sincereheart's answer to my opinion (and many other people I have asked the same question) is ridiculous. You're right on one thing; I guess I never had faith in Christianity...nor do I want it. If you want to turn a blind eye to life then thats your choice.

Blackeyedpeas;

Quote: "
Abortion is evil, just as many other things are evil that some are trying to thrust upon our nation. "

This coming from a Christian with "Love in Christ" and " (aka: 357magnum)" in the same sentence? ??? ;)

That may be ridiculous to you, but not to a Christian. See you are the one turning a blind eye, not me. You have a choice, the lake of fire or eternal life.  What you do will effect you for all time, after you die. "Torment" or "Joy," those are your only choices.

Oh by the way, my screen name is after the song, "DreamWeaver" by Gary Wright.

Go in peace with God
DW

I'm a retired and disabled police officer. I did 25 years in law enforcement. 357 Magnum was the name of my Christian and Law Enforcement Bulletin Board for many years, and it is also my handle on the Internet. A 357 Magnum was my duty weapon for most of those 25 years.

How about "anduril"? What is the significance of that?

DW, with all due respect you are turning a blind eye. I have an open mind to everything, not just one aspect or one religion. As I mentioned before I think everyone is right. Whatever 'belief system' works for you is best.

BTW, I don't believe in the devil either, it wouldn't like my stubborn attitude or my self determination  ;)

No, my eyes are wide open. You are the one I feel sorry for.............

What are you going to do, when everything happens (prophecy), thats in the Bible?  

Yes, your eyes are wide open however, they are enclosed within the limits of the Bible.

Don't feel sorry for me, I'm going to be just fine.

from anduril2:
No you wouldn't. But the one who had you aborted would.  :)

My 'choice' would be to do away with rape AND abortion. Adding murder after rape isn't.  :)

Ridiculous? Hmmmm..... Sad that a viable option is considered to be so. But it makes it no less viable.  :)

And I suppose you don't see the irony here?  ::)

I'm glad you answered sincereheart. Since anduril2, thinks a guy wouldn't know nothing about rape, or abortion.

'Cept for him, of course..... ::)

It's strange to me how 'discussions' on abortion always end up being focused on the women who were raped. Seems to be the justification for allowing them. But I never can understand why since those abortions only account for (rounded UP) 1% of all abortions performed!  ::)

Some interesting thoughts:

"From his own research and the work of others, (Dr. David)
Reardon reports some results most people would find surprising:

For example, it is commonly assumed that rape victims who become pregnant would naturally want abortions. But in the only major study of pregnant rape victims ever done, Dr. Sandra Makhorn found that 75 to 85 percent chose against abortion. This evidence alone should cause people to pause and reflect on the presumption that abortion is wanted or even best for sexual assault victims.

Several reasons are given for not aborting. First, approximately 70 percent of all women believe abortion is immoral, even though many feel it should be a legal choice for others. Approximately the same percentage believe abortion would be just another act of violence against their bodies and their children.

Second, some believe that their child's life may have some intrinsic meaning or purpose which they do not yet understand. This child was brought into their lives by a horrible, repulsive act. But perhaps God, or fate, will use the child for some greater purpose. Good can come from evil.

Third, victims of assault often become introspective. Their sense of the value of life and respect for others is heightened. They have been victimized, and the thought that they in turn might victimize their own innocent child through abortion is repulsive.

Fourth, at least a subconscious level, the victim may sense that if she can get through the pregnancy, she will have conquered the rape. By giving birth, she can reclaim some of her lost self-esteem. Giving birth, especially when conception was not desired, is a totally selfless act, a generous act, a display of courage, strength and honor. It is proof that she is better than the rapist. While he was selfish, she can be generous. While he was destroying, she can be nurturing.

By contrast, Reardon notes, women who go through with abortion find that abortion itself is the real revictimization.

"Many women report that their abortions felt like a degrading and brutal form of medical rape," he writes — involving "a painful examination of a woman's sexual organs by a masked stranger who is invading her body … while she lies there, tense and helpess, the life hidden within her is literally sucked out of her womb. The difference? In a sexual rape, a woman is robbed of her purity; in this medical rape she is robbed of her maternity."

Moreover, "after any abortion, it is common for women to experience guilt, depression, feelings of being 'dirty,' resentment of men, and lowered self-esteem … these feelings are identical to what women typically feel after rape. Abortion, then, only adds to and accentuates the traumatic feelings associated with sexual assault."

http://www.boundless.org/regulars/kaufman/a0000848.html (http://www.boundless.org/regulars/kaufman/a0000848.html)

I like this quote; kinda sums it all up!

"But in fact, the welfare of the mother and child are never at odds, even in sexual assault cases. Both the mother and child are helped by preserving life, not by perpetuating violence."

http://www.afterabortion.org/PAR/V2/n1/RAPESUM.htm (http://www.afterabortion.org/PAR/V2/n1/RAPESUM.htm)

From The Alan Guttmacher Institute (closely aligned with Planned Parenthood and FOR abortion ::))
PRCH & AGI ã 2003
Most Important Reason Given for Terminating an Unwanted Pregnancy

Inadequate finances 21%
Not ready for responsibility 21%
Woman’s life would be changed too much 16%
Problems with relationship; unmarried 12%
Too young; not mature enough 11%
Children are grown; woman has all she wants 8%
Fetus has possible health problem 3%
Woman has health problem 3%
Pregnancy caused by rape, incest 1%
Other 4%
Average number of reasons given 3.7

http://www.agi-usa.org/ (http://www.agi-usa.org/)