and thereby foolishly playing into the clintons hand, servilely acting as their '08 Ross Perot and committing the greatest anti-life act imaginable by putting at risk ALL of our children, the born and the unborn alike.
jla, when push comes to shove, I don't believe you will place that de facto vote for these two dangerous creatures. I understand how badly you want a conservative president, but you know that we don't have the luxury in this critical, post-9/11 election to address the chronic problems. We must address the acute ones. Or the patient will die.
jla, when push comes to shove, I don't believe you will place that de facto vote for these two dangerous creatures. I understand how badly you want a conservative president, but you know that we don't have the luxury in this critical, post-9/11 election to address the chronic problems. We must address the acute ones. Or the patient will die.
1776, 1812 and the latter half of the 20 c. were equally perilous times. (Did you know that a few Russian generals lobbied for a nuclear first strike against the U.S. in the 80s?). Surprisingly, Washington, Madison, and Reagan were also Christians and managed to lead the nation onto a victorious, and virtuous, pathway despite some sounding the clarion call of expediency and insisting that we 'temporarily' abandon our nation's idealism in order to subdue a threatening menace.
The aforementioned gentlemen chose the right course of action, as they very well knew that morality and Judeo-Christian ethos were/are not incompatible with the security of this country.
In my opinion, if HRC wins in '08 it will be on account of the GOP nominating a Giuliani-type candidate. Don't wish to see HRC sitting in the oval office? Then the conservative, true conservative, candidate should get your vote.
Reap what you sow.
I have to also say that you don't mask your disdain and contempt for Christian conservatives all that well. Some may even take it as a very personal, and undeserving, insult.