Perfect ticket for '08

I like Pat Paulsen.

 

Ashcroft never ran from a fight in his life. He has been rejected by the Baptists because they reject all charismatics.

Lay this defeat on the inability of the Baptists to even conduct a review of some of their theology such as the end of spiritual gifts, the replacement of the church for Israel, and the economically exploited minority doctrine of the impending pre-tribulation rapture (a doctrine that seems to be all about money, money, money) as well as an inability to end 99% of abortions by agreeing to an exemption for rape and incest. The Baptists have tabled to many subjects that need review. Also, the Baptists have divided themselves into far right and conservative. The far right has been adept at throwing mud but has shown little other talent or willingness to act logically. Emotions are for girls.

 

Picky picky picky.

 

Ashcroft is far too radical to get elected.

 

Hillary is the logical choice for the globalists to install in the White House. She will have no qualms of using the power Bush is pushing for to use martial law and confiscate our weapons. The Patriot Act(s) will give her the power to put dissenters and protesters out of her misery.

Stay vigilant and keep yer power dry folks.

 

Who do we want? Condi!

Where do we want her? President!

When do we want her? January 20, 2009!


Two bits, four bits, six bits, a dollar,
All for Condi stand up and holler!

 

It's fairly obvious which globalist Ken prefers.

 

Thank you, poncho. I thought my position was quite clear about my admiration for our Secretary of State whose photo adorns the cover of the inaugural issue of The American Interest.

Condi, Condi is our candidate,
If you have any doubt then maybe you should ruminate.



http://americansforrice.com/

 

More of interview here:
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/mar/05031401.html

 

I wouldn't mind seeing an Allen/Coates or Allen/Rice ticket.

 

Hey Ken, how 'bout this one....

WE WANT CONDI, NOT THE BLONDIE

 

Excellent. Can I use that?

 

No problem Ken. What's her stance on conservative idea's like a constitutionally limited federal government and a conservative fiscal policy?

How about the sovereignty issue, is she for getting us out the UN or is she for "reform" of anti American/Christian institutions such as UNESCO?

Or the illegal alien issue, is for securing the border with Mexico and curbing the invasion or is she willing to go along with leaving it open and "building a North American Community" via the CFR plan?

Does she consider the Minutman project to be made up of patriotic Americans that are doing the job their government refuses to do or does she consider it to be full of racists and vigilantes?

 

Excellent. Can I use that? </font>[/QUOTE]Sure can.

 

Lopez: You dismiss the McCain-Rudy option on a primary level. But if it is clear that a Rudy or McCain is the only shot there won't be a second Clinton administration, won't a heck of a lot of conservative voters settle?

Morris: Not if there is a social conservative, religiously grounded candidate like Condi Rice around.

Lopez: On Condi: She's described herself as "mildly pro-choice." Why are you so sure pro-life conservatives will be okay with her?

Morris: Because she strongly believes in protecting human life, she favors parental consent and notification, and opposes Medicaid funding [of abortion]. The "mildly" part of her position is that she opposes abortion but worries about government action to prevent it.

- LINK

 

Condi is not a candidate - at least not yet. To borrow a phrase you have used elsewhere in this forum, it is best for her to keep her powder dry at the moment so as not to interfere with her job as our chief diplomat and so as not to tip her hand to possible GOP primary opponents.

 

Condi is not a candidate - at least not yet. To borrow a phrase you have used elsewhere in this forum, it is best for her to keep her powder dry at the moment so as not to interfere with her job as our chief diplomat and so as not to tip her hand to possible GOP primary opponents. </font>[/QUOTE]The ole stealth candidate ploy again Ken? Why should I put any trust in or back a person for any office that would hide their true intentions or stances on issues because they are afraid of what their opposition or colleagues might think or say?

Why should I put any trust in a person that might forward a candidate in such a way for that matter?

"I'm the authority, trust my judgement" just doesn't work for me.

 

Why should you trust anybody ?