No levelheaded American is going to vote for an anti-American Racist Socialist.
Why even the Clintons & the Clintonistas aren't going to vote for this clown...it ruins Clinton's plan to run in 2012 if Obama is elected POTUS.
Yea, Obama has two chances of winning on 2012...slim & none. And "Slim" just left the building. LOL
ping
We should start a collection of money for the Clintoons to have if they Vote for McCain and prove it. That would pay off her campaign debt and throw Obama under the bus? /h
"Obama tries to distract Catholic voters by appealing to their strong sense of social justice with calls for universal health care and government-mandated environmental protection....
And as a popular new video ad by www.catholicvote.com explains, there is no more important set of issues than the protection of our most basic values of liberty, family and life."
Unfortunately, socialized health care and government mandated anything amounts to socialism. And socialism erodes liberty, family and life.
Why are some people so hell bent on their own destruction?
This Christian believer is voting for McCain/Palin 2008.
I haven’t been in any pain over it either.
The little o, and his ilk is in for an awakening come Nov 5th.
You may be right, but I am still worried that guillible people will flock to Oprah’s Obama, such as Barbra Streisand and Woody Allen, and they have many admirers.
You might be surprised by how many otherwise normal everyday Americans have been seduced by the Anointed One and plan to vote for him in Nov. I have been stunned by the pro-Obama and bitterly anti-Bush letters to the editorial pages of the local paper here in this historically Republican/conservative county in north GA. This county went almost 2-1 for Bush both times he ran, but if the anti-GOP mood I am seeing in many local people these days who have been Republican voters in the past is as prevalent and widespread as it appears to be the county could very well go to Obamessiah.
I'm not worried at this point that Obama could carry the entire state, but I am disgusted that the local people who have fared quite well under Bush's administration would fall for the crapola of a slick empty suit like Obama. There are very few AfroAmericans, less than 200 IIRC, compared to around 26,000 whites living in this north GA county that isn't in the cotton belt and was pro-union, anti-slavery during the civil war, so race isn't a factor here in the antipathy toward Bush and Republicans in general this year
http://catholicknight.blogspot.com/
ELECTION 2008 - CAST YOUR CATHOLIC VOTE
McCain/Palin (R)
514 (68%)
Obama/Biden (D)
192 (25%)
Baldwin/Castle (C)
11 (1%)
Barr/Root (L)
6 (0%)
Nader/Gonzales (I)
4 (0%)
Keyes/Rohrbough (I)
25 (3%)
Change your vote
Votes so far: 752
Days left to vote: 45
Bauer is correct, but is this point being articulated clearly to the faith community, among both Catholics and Protestants?
The glib answer at Saddleback belies the seriousness of the question posed by Warren, and a man who claims professorial status on the United States Constitution should have seen it as a constitutional question--not merely a "theological" one.
The answer was not above the "pay grade" of America's Founders, and their answer appeared in their philosophical foundation statement, where they explicitly staked the claim to "Creator-endowed" rights. Why else would the rights to life and liberty be deemed "unalienable"? If such rights were at the whim of a single citizen (a woman) or of judges or legislators, then they could not be claimed to be "unalienable."
Thomas Jefferson capsulized it as:
"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them."
Catholics and Protestants, as well as other religious persons, who love liberty might examine the candidates' willingness to affirm the basic principle underlying our form of government.
It's sad that Biden falls for this liberal stuff because he should know better. He has been informed of his errors on abortion. He can't claim that liberal line about "not imposing his faith" because it's not a mystery of faith. It's an issue of reason, common sense, natural law, objective scientific evidence, and human rights. Why doesn't he run that line about not imposing his faith on rape, murder, theft, slavery, civil rights, and spousal abuse? Or anything else prohibited in the moral codes of Judaism and Christianity which finds parallels in Anglo-Saxon law? Like, say, plagiarism.