True Power

True Power

Saturday, July 30, 2011

Enemies Praying to the same God for Victory

HAS EVERYTHING TURNED INTO A TEST OF CHRISTIANITY? SHOULD EVERYTHING BE TURNED INTO A TEST OF CHRISTIANITY? AND IF SO, WHO IS THE TESTER GIVING THE SCORE OF PASSING?

If you haven't heard there is a clarion call for all Christians to head to Texas for a day of fasting and prayer by Govenor Rick Perry on August 6, 2011. Christian radio commentator Brian fisher has said lawsuits filed by atheists against a governor calling for a day of prayer (because they believe it infringes on separation of church and state) is just another case proving liberals hate God.

With so much verbal animosity going on in the public sphere (cable news and radio) between Republicans and Democrats; my mind can not help but think about the Civil War.

Clear lines were drawn between the North and the South during the Civil War. The president was caught between a rock and a hard place and the one sure person each side could aim their venom and feel a sense they were comrades against a common enemy (a scapegoat for all anger and frustration; relevent or not).

One question historians have posed since the Civil War was the CLAIM OF GOD BY BOTH FACTIONS. How could this be possible? Could God be on the side of both the North and the South? And I wonder now, with Brian Fisher's assumption that all democrats hate God aside - can both Republicans and Democrats have a CLAIM OF GOD while being vicious enemies each fighting for victory in politics?

I address this very point in my book, in chapter two of "The Politics of Prayer." Here is an exerpt from the chapter dedicated to the topic (the book sites references for qoutes and other material):

"Involvement in politics is part of being a citizen of the United States. It is a privilege to participate in the Democratic process and I encourage every American citizen to become active in local and national elections and affect policy changes. The point I want to stress in this chapter is we are not on one side or another of politics, but we are on God’s side. Stanley Hauerwas reminds the Christian that there is a temptation, once the Christian becomes involved in politics, for leaders and people in general to convince one another that they alone are on God’s side, while those that disagree with them are completely evil. Christians can confuse political power with faithful witness.


Last year, while watching a program about the Civil War on the History Channel, I was amazed to realize both generals of the North and the South prayed to God for victory. Both of the generals were earnest and persistent in their religious request to be the victor of God for a cause they each believed in their souls. If God answered the prayers of the general of the South would that mean all of the participants of the opposition were evil and deserved to die? If God answered the prayers of the general of the North would that mean all of the participants of the opposition were evil and deserved death? Was one group Christian and the other group sinners? How could two groups with differing views on slavery both pray to God and both claim to be Christian?

Terrie D. Aamodt, in Righteous Armies, Holy Causes: Apocalyptic Imagery in the Civil War (2002), demonstrates how the theme of cosmic struggle, good verses evil, was accepted by both the North and South. The apocalyptic theme was a necessary key to legitimize their perspective cause-for and against slavery. Aamodt states, “Thanks to the aesthetic power of apocalyptic imagery Americans were able to tiptoe on the deliciously dangerous edge between the sublime and the terrible as they contemplated the glorious future awaiting them beyond the dreadful suffering of the battlefield.” Apocalyptic images were attached to the war’s horrors in song, poem, oral history, tracts and sermons.


In “The Bible and Slavery” (Religion and the American Civil War), Mark Noll asserts that the availability and widespread access and limitless use of the Bible in a society where each individual was concerned with their own growth and prosperity; framed by the conflict of slavery – ultimately led to war. Both North and South would turn to the Bible as the ultimate source in answering the dilemma of slavery, but in radically opposite manners. Northerners appealed to the spirit of the Bible (liberalism) in opposing slavery, whereas southerners appealed to the letter of the Bible (literalism) in defending slavery. These competing biblical claims helped shape public perceptions that led to secession and war.


Robert McKenzie said that Mark Noll’s views on the Civil War were those believing there to be a theological crisis and referred to Abraham Lincoln’s observation in his second inaugural address. Lincoln stated that both the North and the South had read the same Bible in which America had relied upon to build America’s Republican civilization. Noll would assert that the Bible was not as unifying for an overwhelmingly Christian people as they had believed.

Most of the Civil War Generals were Christians and very devout. The list of generals upholding religious values during the Civil War include: Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, Leonidas Polk, George B. McClellan, Oliver O. Howard, and William Rosecrans. Stonewall Jackson was very religious. In the heat of battle he would stand calm and assert. "Captain, my religious belief teaches me to feel as safe in battle as in bed. God has fixed the time for my death. I do not concern myself about that, but to be always ready, no matter when it may overtake me. That is the way all men should live, and then all would be equally brave."

William Rosecrans was a very devout Catholic. It has been said he would never fight on Sunday. Oliver O. Howard is best known as the commander who after the Civil War led the pursuit of Chief Joseph of the Nez Pierce in the high plains and mountains of the west in 1877. Howard’s men called him the Praying General because he insisted they observe the Sabbath and he attempted to introduce chaplains into the military during the war. Howard also made his men observe some form of temperance, which they detested, but he also saw to their needs far better then many Union commanders.

Below are religious themes that had a major impact on the North during the Civil War.

• Belief that America was preparing the way for the kingdom of God on earth helped to inspire the loyalty of both the Union soldiers and those on the home front.

• The conviction that blood needed to be shed in order for the nation to be reborn undoubtedly stiffened the resolve of bluecoats and civilians alike to endure unprecedented

• Staggering losses.

• Without the churches' growing conviction that the hand of Providence was indicating the need to end slavery, it is unlikely that the government would eventually have embraced full emancipation as a war aim.

Protestant churches, in particular helped in the effort of Reconstruction in the years following the war. Reconstruction was based on the ideals of the so-called Radical Republicans. This was a Reconstruction in which the vote would be available (in the language of the Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution) to all regardless of "race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Drew Gilpin Faust, in The Creation of Confederate Nationalism: Ideology and Identity in the Civil War South (1988), argues that religion played a central role in the shaping of a southern nationalism which both defended and criticized the South. It is clear that Southerners were certain God was on their side and they would be victorious because they were His chosen people.

As early Confederate victories on the battlefield gave way to a pattern of defeats, Southerners were forced to ask why God was punishing them. Perhaps the essence of southern religion’s fears in relation to the institution of slavery is summed up by Daniel Stowell in, “‘We Have Sinned and God Has Smitten Us!’

There is no doubt the average Confederate soldier was devoutly Christian. They came from families strongly influenced by the camp meetings of the Great Revival that had swept thru Kentucky, Tennessee, and the Carolinas in the early parts of the nineteenth century. Most were of Methodist, Baptist, or Presbyterian heritage. Many carried their Bibles from home into battle as well as a Soldier's Prayer Book.

Union soldiers carried a Soldier's Prayer Book, containing 58 pages of an abbreviated form of Morning Prayer, several Collects and prayers (many of which do not appear in the BCP, Book of Common Prayers), Selections of Psalms different from that in the BCP, and a number of hymns. It was published in 1861 by the Protestant Episcopal Book Society in Philadelphia, and was authorized by the Bishop of Pennsylvania in much the same way as were BCP's of the day.

For the Confederate soldier the basis of their faith can be found collectively as The Roman Road printed in 1861:

The Roman Road To Salvation:

Romans 3:23 (KJV) For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.
Romans 6:23 (KJV) For the wages of sin is death; But the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Romans 5:8 (KJV) But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
Romans 10:9 (KJV) That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Romans 10:13 (KJV) For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Romans 10:10 (KJV) For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. The Soldier's Prayer Book was a pocket sized book that contained a collection of prayers for different occasions as well as assorted hymns and psalms.

When people begin to choose political sides and equate Christianity with those choices, there is the danger or temptation of turning a cause, as righteous as it may be, into a test of Christianity by man. God has given the criterion for who is and is not a Christian. Christianity can not be judged by deeds alone even though actions are good indicators of one’s religious belief. I have heard many Christians state “I am a die-hard-Republican” or “I am a die-hard-Democrat” or “I am a die-hard-Patriot.” It would be music to God’s ears if they would say “I am a die-hard-Christian.”

Reverend Jim Walls affirms the belief that God is for all of His creation. He is against sin, but he awaits every person turn or return to salvation. “God is not partisan: God is not a Republican or a Democrat. When either party tries to politicize God, or co-opt religious communities for their political agendas, they make a terrible mistake. The best contribution of religion is precisely not to be ideologically predictable nor loyally partisan. Both parties, and the nation, must let the prophetic voice of religion be heard. Faith must be free to challenge both right and left from a consistent moral ground.”

So, as the country becomes more divided between political parties, we must remember, this is nothing new. Our nation fought brother against brother and believed in their cause, philosophy, moral conviction or whatever label they wanted to use to justify the battle. And sadly, each decided God was on their side and GOD became the ultimate weapon in the man made war. I encourage people to learn history because it has a tendency to repeat itself.

In the case of the Civil War, was it ever declared, without a shadow of a doubt who's side God was on? The Bible makes it clear WHO God stands with. He has encouraged His children to have a personal relationship with Him. That personal relationship will be seen by others, thus being a light to draw others to Him. Is this the message echoing throughout the United States? Will the August 6, 2011 call for fasting and prayer be a beacon of light turning all eyes to God? I hope it will and that it is more than a CLAIM ON GOD.

My book is available on amazon.com for those interested in reading more on the subject of prayer, wisdom, politics, and God.

Sunday, July 24, 2011

Showing some skin during the tough times

After Watching Joan Rivers and her stinging commentary on what celebraties are wearing, my attention was peaked when she said "hemlines are geeting longer" and the particular dress she was refferring to was just below the calf.

My mind started to reach a foggy fact I had heard somewhere at sometime about the economy having an affect on whether women wore the hemline of their skirts or dresses longer or shorter depending on the economic climate.

The news article, I was trying to remember, if memory serves me correctly, stated that dress length/economy correlation was first propounded by US economist George Taylor in the 1920s.


During the Great Depression, hemlines reached as far as the ankles

Taylor argued that women wore shorter skirts in boom times because they could afford expensive silk stockings and wanted to show them off. During a recession, however, the skirts grew longer, because the women couldn’t afford stockings and wanted to hide the fact that they weren’t wearing any.

The story said Taylor’s theory had been surprisingly accurate. In the 1920s, 1960s and 1980s, which were boom times in the US, hemlines rose. On the other hand, they reached down as far as the ankles during the Great Depression.

The stock market’s measure of consumer confidence has far-reaching implications. Fashions, such as women’s hem lines, tend to follow the market (high hem lines and high stock prices imply confidence in various areas of life). Movies such as the gangster movies of the 1930s, Godfather style movies of the 1960s, and Batman or Darkman in 1990, follow the stock market contractions of the same periods. Financial indicators such as home construction and buying, auto and major appliance purchases, vacations, etc. all follow the stock market cycles, and in fact stock market trends measure the confidence and psychological attitudes of peoples (including those who are not investors), and thus provides a convenient and concurrent mathematical measure of attitudes and a wide range of economic, political, and societal events.


So, with all of the economic turmoil going on in America these days, will we see longer dress on an everyday basis?

In 2008 this was the question on the mind of almost all fashion designers. What will women want to wear during our economic downturn? This is what the fashion community has to say on the subject.

The oldest adage about fashion and the economy is that hemlines rise and fall with the stock market. In the boom times of the 20s and the 60s, skirts were short; in the 30s and 40s, they fell. Except that, on closer inspection, even this most famous theory fails to hold water. During the wartime years, arguably the period of greatest privation in modern history, hemlines were shorter than before or after the war; in the recession of the early 90s, hemlines fell. We cannot rely on skirt length alone to track the economy through fashion.

After 9/11, upscale New York boutiques reported a surge in demand for lower-heeled shoes: on the shopfloor, they said, women were explaining they wanted shoes they could run in if necessary. The financial crisis has not had the same effect: heel heights have been rising steadily for several years, and look set to continue their skyward trajectory next season.


Betty Jackson keeps it simple. Illustration: Betty Jackson A downbeat stockmarket is not necessarily reflected in downbeat clothes. Indeed, according to fashion historian Valerie Steele, "this whole idea that fashion is a 'reflection' of the economy is a misnomer. It would be more accurate to say that fashion and art are as much a part of living history as the economy is." What happens on Wall Street, says Steele, "is mediated through the manners and mores of the time" before influencing the fashion aesthetic. In the 60s, for instance, what impacted on fashion was not so much a booming economy as "the anti-conventional youth movement" which flourished in a booming economy.

"The hemlines theory was invented back in the 1920s. But it just doesn't hold up. Take the 20s - hemlines actually began to fall in 1927, two years before the crash. They were falling by 1969, two years before the downturn of 1971," says Steele. In many cases, fashion designers appear to have an ability to read the writing on the wall, without waiting for the newspaper headlines. Between 1936 and 1939 fashion began to pick up on the rumble of warmongering, with military-inspired square shoulders teamed with lower heels. Even nightgowns sported three-inch shoulder pads. At other times, we may misinterpret clothes in retrospect in the light of world events. Christian Dior is usually credited with grasping the mood of the moment with his joyous, full-skirted Corolle collection of 1947, which launched Dior's New Look - but in 1939, before the outbreak of war, the Paris collections of Chanel and Mainbocher were both modelled on a full skirt and a wasp waist. With the war came a dampener on fashion, and the trend did not catch on until Dior revisited it.
Rosemary Harden, curator of the Fashion Museum in Bath, agrees that the notion of a catwalk aesthetic which straightforwardly reflects the economy "feels quite glib. It's much more complex than that, and I think it's important to unpack it a bit. The 20s and 60s were a time not just of boom but of liberation. The short skirts of the 20s were driven as much by the rise of sportswear as by the stockmarket. The sense of liberation cut across the social spectrum - there are photos of my grandma in south-east London wearing short knitted skirts. The 20s, like the 60s, was a time of opportunity, a time of people not feeling shackled. Opportunity led to newness and experimentation. It is connected to a buoyant economy, but the link is not as direct as people imagine."


Simon Doonan, creative director of Barneys department store in New York and author of the memoir Beautiful People, is rather more blunt. The notion of fashion design reflecting the economic mood is "a total fallacy. Fashion people live in a creative hermetic bubble, and are rarely so tuned in to the political or financial vicissitudes of the world. The idea that they might have a Dr Strangelove conclave where they confer about hemlines and the economy is hilarious." Nonetheless, he says, "there is one certainty about recession, which is that fashionistas will buy less - by which I mean one pair of Louboutins instead of three."

Those expecting to find Grapes Of Wrath chic in the stores - dungarees and grubby faces as the hot new look come spring - will be disappointed. Next season's clothes are, if anything, rather more upbeat than those on sale this winter. At John Lewis, recent weeks have seen an upturn in sales of miniskirts and opaque tights, rather than catwalk-led trouser styles. It seems we are in tune with Doonan, whose advice to customers "is always to dress up rather than down, in tough times. You owe it to your pals, family and colleagues to present yourself in an optimistic and fabulous way. Remember what Quentin Crisp said? 'When war broke out, I bought five pounds of henna.' "

So there you have it. Women will do what they want to do when it comes to fashion. Whether the hemlines grow longer or get shorter; the point will always be - to look fabulous.

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

A Kinder and Gentler Nation or just you

WHO ARE ALL OF THE MEAN COMPLAINING PEOPLE FILLING THE DAILY NEWS CYCLES?

I began wondering why are people so mean and hostile these days. Do Americans really have a lot to be upset about? We are still the country illegal immagrants risk their lives to come and start a new life the last time I checked. What is going on in America?

I once heard someone say everything they learned that was worth learning; was learned by fifth grade. When our children are born we sing them the ABC song and teach them to count to five and then to ten. We teach them their colors, birthdate, and address. Our dangerous society has forced us to teach them to watch out for strangers and to understand exactly who is a stranger.

As our children grow we reluctantly at times teach them about the birds and the bees and sex educators are telling parents to start teaching children about sex sooner than later. We get into the car with them and help them learn the laws of the driving world. We teach them all of the basics we believe they will need to be successful adults in their lives and in the world. But lately I've been wondering: 'Do we teach our children to be KIND?'

When is it exactly do we do our best to ensure we are raising kind people? In the South, many people see it as a sign of respect if young children are taught to say 'yes sir' and 'no sir.' We love to hear a 'thank you' or 'please' from anyone of any age. But all of the above pleasantries can be labled under respectful and are not indicators as to whether or not the people using thank you and please are kind. I believe the essence of 'kindness' goes deeper than words.

To do or be something one must first have a working understanding of the word, so let's look at the definition of the word KIND:


adj. kind·er, kind·est

1. Of a friendly, generous, or warm-hearted nature.

2. Showing sympathy or understanding; charitable: a kind word.

3. Humane; considerate: kind to animals.

4. Forbearing; tolerant: Our neighbor was very kind about the window we broke.

5. Generous; liberal: kind words of praise.

6. Agreeable; beneficial: a dry climate kind to asthmatics
 
Now that we have the definition of what it means to be kind; we can now ask ourselves the important question whether or not we are raising kind children who will grow up to be a kind person, mate, co-worker, and or parent.
 
Within the family unit it goes without saying children are expected to be kind to their siblings, family pet and grandma and grandpa but who else does the parent insist the child be kind to? I do not believe there are any other names expected to be added to the KIND list outside of the family circle.
 
If we are not raising our children to be kind then there should not be an expectation of living in a civilized world. Remember it takes kindness to be friendly towards others. You have to be taught to have a warm hearted nature. It takes kindness to show sympathy or understanding or to be charitable toward another human being. Kindness has to be taught for one to treat another humanely, to be forebearing and tolerant of unintentional errors or even differences among people. A person who has been taught from youth how to be kind are more generous, able to give praise and to be more agreeable.
 
Maybe our world is suffering not so much because of the evils of the world and the people who inhabit it but because we forgot to teach our children kindness and now live side by side with unkind adults.
 
"Since God chose you to be the holy people he loves, you must clothe yourselves with tenderhearted mercy, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience." Colossians 3:12 New Living Translation Bible
 
"Instead, be kind to each other, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, just as God through Christ has forgiven you." Ephesians 4:32 New Living Translation Bible
 
I hope this world filled with unkind people can be changed and when we look into the eyes of our new born baby; I hope one of our greatest desires is that that baby grows up to be a KIND person. A kind person is not a weak pushover but a person who examples God. God wants His children to be clothed in kindness. I have met people who wanted you to know they were meek, humble, and kind so you would know they were a Christian, but I am not sure they were kind so they would interact with others and the world in a different manner filled with compassion, tolerance, and understanding.
 
A kind person would not mind saying: "I am kind to strangers, I am kind to people who are different than myself, I am kind to those struggling with sin, I am kind to my enemies because I am clothed in God." I believe pride and fear would keep many from embracing kindness. We all wonder what will happen if we were kind to everyone. It is a valid concern, but we should also ask ourselves what type of person are we if we are not a KIND person. What is the opposite of KIND? 
 
The argument against being kind towards others suggests being kind means condoning wrong doing and this is in no way true. Understanding why people do what they do, because of Satan's misleading, allows you to have compassion for the person and knowing God can do a wonderful work in them the same way God did a wonderful work in you. Being kind keeps you from condemning others just as God holds off condemning you until judgement day. And just as in the Parable of the Prodigal Son, God is watching and waiting for His child to return to Him and has demonstrated through the parable His level of tolerence for that lost child as he went in search of what God knew would not be the child's happiness. At no time was God condoning the prodigal son's behavior, but kindness understood the shortcomings of the son.
 
Christian maturity is not easily obtained. Maturity itself is difficult for adults, but someone needs to be the grown up and grownups should have KINDNESS in their character. In the political arena, in issues that have pitted women against men in the home and workplace, and on the most segregated day of the week, Sunday; when the races/ethnicities go to their small corner of the world in their own church to worship, we can eliminate the petri dish in which unkindness grows and spreads by teaching our children the true and full definition of kindness.
 
Let's work together for a kinder gentler nation and let it begin by rearing children who have been taught how to be kind in word and deed.
   



Friday, July 8, 2011

GOP Christian Values and stuff momma never told me about History

Play dirty in your own background and leave history out of it.

It seems like I have to make this statement. Lately the news has been reporting the most outragous things. Presidential candidate Michele Bachmann has gone on record saying the founding fathers worked tirelessly to end slavery. Well, history did not record all of their sit ins and rallies as they protested against slavery. If history has distorted and maliciosuly left out the endless fraught with violence struggle of the founding fathers to end slavery, then our country is being misled and we should do our best to correct the error. But, we do have concrete evidence; the Civil War, that there was a strong incentive to maintain slavery and that incentive was MONEY. Money does not have strange bedfellows; it has just who you think would be there.

Fast forward and we are in another historical period where race and money seems to be what is causing unrest in the United States once again. The cry "I want my country back" has deeper roots than the economy. We are living in a time of the 'perfect Storm' for all skewed thinking to surface. The ugliness of the political arena is the manifestation of the disease of prejudice. The ire over Obama's election breeched the levee of tolerance. Now everything that was hated at a family level is now hated on the national scene. The BLACK stereotypical life is on blast and WE are not going to take it anymore. The ills of America can be traced back to blackness: gang violence, welfare, unemployment, medicaid, abortion, the increase in the Muslim religion, national debt, laziness, illegitamate children, family breakdown, drugs and add whatever else you can think of to add to the list. Obama, it seems raised the fear that the world is headed to doom and he will lead the country to the way of the blacks, socialism, communism or whatever the buzz word is today. It is not projected as such, but make no mistake there is more going on in America than meets the eye. Ask other countries about America and why there is so much internal bickering and you will get an answer you may not want to hear. WHAT IS OUR PROBLEM?!


What is an attack on America? When a group joins together so the President fails (If he fails doesn't America fail/fall too and if someone outside of the United States hatched and announced this same scheme then it would be a hostile act of aggression against the country), when groups sign pacts after the only pact to follow in their JOB description is the constitution (treasonous at least declaring loyalty, signing oaths and such while in public office to entities)? WHAT IS OUR PROBLEM?!

Has any other president had to fight against a political party the way Obama has? His stimulus plan didn't fail; it was rejected by states headed by Republicans set on the president not helping their economic situation. The unemployment rates are slow to recover as Republicans ban together in unison across state lines to put teachers, nurses, firemen, and policemen out of work and call it breaking unions. At this moment Minnesota is shut down based on partisan disagreements. Hurting Obama hurts America. Senator McConnell said his number one goal was to make Obama a one term president. WHY? The gloves came off and yet people with this mentality say they are looking out for the interest of ALL Americans. Disagree without being disagreeable. WHAT IS OUR PROBLEM?!

CAN THE INSANITY GET ANY WORSE?

A Marriage pact was signed by social conservatives (Michele Bachmann) saying during slavery African Americans were born into a 2 parent household and since the election of a black president they are born into a single parent household. When were there black families in slavery? Women were used as baby machines and black men as studs and children; cotton pickers.What is biblical about any of this. What society are you helping and who are the members of THIS society? MY hsitory is being rewritten to make someone feel better about what? I believe when you begin to lie and believe it yourself - you are moving away from God and more towards selfish needs. God raised up a standard; a tangible to measure your Holy life by. Is America moving away from that standard? JUST BECAUSE YOU ADDED OTHER STUFF ABOUT MUSLIMS, HOMOSEXUALS, PORNOGRAPHY DOESN'T MAKE ANY OF THE SLAVERY STUFF TRUE and vice versa.

There will be dueling Bible passages for each point of view but the heart condition which God looks at will be the "truth teller" Look at the Parable of the Rich Man's Harvest Luke 12:16-20 who had a great harvest, built for himself bigger storage so he could live off of his wealth for years "take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry" God had a different agenda and the greedy man who thought of his own comfort died before daybreak. Ugliness, sinfulness, or whatever it is that makes one nurse bitterness whether dressed up in perfume and catchy names can be smelled a mile away as hatefulness. A bad 'heart condition' can't/won't be hidden forever. The question has to be asked: "What set the masses off when Obama became President?" Directly after 9/11 we did not have such an assault against Muslims, but it is believed Obama is a Muslim. Spreading the Wealth is a tag now used but remember when oil monopolies were broken for the betterment  of the nation and philanthropy was encouraged for the filthy rich? Were they socialists when this was done?

Glenn Beck decided to explain to the black populous how the intent of the Planned Parenthood founder was to get rid of blacks through genecide and we should hate them. This did not shock any black people because since their introduction into America the intent was to get rid of them in one way or another after usefulness, this was just another attempt in another way and to bring up Planned Parenthood in a climate where such hate is evidenced against the first black president is the pot calling the kettle black. Michele Bachmann is giving the biggest insight into a world once theorized but now ringing true. I tell my kids the next thing to happen is the gift of blankets with smallpox and David Duke has a good chance of winning the GOP backing this election.

So, if the Medicaid, Medicare, abortions, homosexual legislation, voting rights of people released from jails, unions, and whatever else is taken away, Obama was still a president of the United States. His history has already struck and is not eraseable. What history are we as individuals and Christians writing? Huntsman, the GOP Mormon candidate, has done more to elevate his religious beliefs just by being a decent human being unwilling to delve into the slop of partisanship that uplifts no one. GET YOUR MIND RIGHT PEOPLE.
Whether you agree with me or not is not the point. the point is VOTE VOTE VOTE and read my book "The Politics of Prayer"


This Could Be Me At Your Next Event

This Could Be Me At Your Next Event
Author And Public Speaker

NEED A SPEAKER FOR YOUR NEXT EVENT?

Do you have an upcoming gardening, church, or women's event planned and need a speaker? Contact me. I can speak on various topics such as:

1. Detangling Ancient Mythology From Christianity
2. The Female Presence In The History Of Christianity
3. Superstitions and Gardening In The 21st Century
4. The Politics Of Prayer: The Bible Speaks
5. African American Geneaology: Pride From The Grave


Contact me at rizerfall@yahoo.com for booking arrangements

Book Reviews

I review for BookSneeze