FJM Blog

“Why are you targeting the black community, Planned Parenthood?”

Colorado Right to Life and American Right to Life will stand with black leaders from around the country at their Power in the Park rally and press conference on August 25, 2008, 8:30 am at Martin Luther King Park, one block from the largest Planned Parenthood abortuary in the nation.

The killing center, dubbed Auschwieitz, by local opponents of the racist organization, is situated in north Denver’s minority neighborhood - consistent with the patterns of targeting minorities noted by Blackgenocide.org.

Speakers include presidential candidate Dr. Alan Keyes with America’s Independent Party, Jessie Lee Peterson, president of BOND, Rev Clenard Childress of Blackgenocide.org, Flip Benham of Operation Rescue National, and Denver’s Bishop Phillip Porter, former chairman of Promise Keepers, who will expose the tragedy that although black women comprise 6% of the population, they receive nearly 40% of the abortions in America. The leading abortion providers exploit blacks by placing 94% of abortuaries in urban neighborhoods with high black populations.

These leaders agree with CRTL and ARTL that because abortion is always wrong, every innocent human life deserves legal protection, from the moment of fertilization and through natural death.

Black leaders, including Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King have recently been asking why black Americans are being targeted by Planned Parenthood for abortions and demanding that the killing stop.

Dr. Keyes, in fact, relates his revulsion about Denver’s new abortion mill:

“The number one taker of black life is abortion, and it’s time people woke up to that fact. The location of this latest Planned Parenthood facility in yet another minority neighborhood is a part of the continuing fulfillment of the racist, eugenicist dream of their founder, Margaret Sanger, but it is a travesty of the American dream. Planned Parenthood’s agenda discards the principle that we are all created equal, which is the basis of liberty for all Americans.” — Alan Keyes

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

By Armstrong Williams

Modern China has always posed a perplexing question for the West.  From the Western perspective, China is a closed society, whose greatest symbol is a wall designed to keep invaders out.  However, rather than using its isolation to protect and nourish its people, the Chinese government has ruthlessly suppressed political freedom, and all but stamped out cultural expression.  Why, one wonders, would China go through such lengths to defend itself, when on the other hand it seems to want to destroy the very thing worth preserving?

The debate about China in the West has been largely speculative and intensely ideological over the last half century.  Speculation arose because of the West’s relative ignorance of Chinese civilization, its traditions and aims.   However, because it was aligned with the Soviet Union during the cold war, the West believed that China was an expansionist empire that threatened to thwart democratic progress in Asia .  So much so in fact that the United States fought proxy wars in Korea and Vietnam hoping to halt the spread of communism.  A closer look at China in the post-cold war years reveals a much different picture: it reveals a country facing inward to develop the brains, heart and courage to make the most of the modern world.

While China ’s inexorable economic advance over the past two decades has made it now a force to be reckoned with, doubts about its true strength have remained prevalent.  Despite evidence to the contrary, Westerner’s assumed that China ’s economy would not really thrive unless it began to adopt Western-style democracy, observe international human rights conventions, and develop the technological proficiency to begin producing specialized, non-commodity goods.  

All of this has proven to be false.  Not only has China  built a world-leading economy on the back of steel, paper, textiles and lumber, it has been able to effectively manage an empire that contains almost a fifth of the entire world’s population.  This feat has been largely underappreciated in the West; but its centralized government, draconian regulations on population growth, and state-managed economy were able to impose some degree of order and standardization in a relatively short period of time, on an absolutely astounding scale.  It has now become clear that the Chinese communist party, despite its many weaknesses, is far from naïve.  Its decision to crack down on cultural expression, religion and human rights was tactical rather than ideological. 

To wit, the Chinese government has recently worked to revive certain Confucian traditions, such as ancestor reverence. Their reasoning is that these traditions are now important because they help to instill respect for authority within the population.  This is an interesting turn of events, in that communist party initially encouraged flouting the authority of the Emperor and religious leadership and returning power to the people.  However, now that the process of cementing central government authority under the current regime has been completed, China now seeks to reinforce its authority by imbuing it with cultural significance.

While China has needed to expand in search of markets and materials to fuel its voracious growth, it has done so under the banner of trade rather than ideology.  Forced by circumstance (perhaps some recall the political backlash that forced China to drop its bid to acquire U.S. oil company Unocal in 2005), China has adopted a pragmatic approach that has afforded it opportunities in the developing world that the West has foregone.  As the West tried to isolate Sudan and Zimbabwe through trade sanctions, hoping to force their regimes to stop human rights abuses, China engaged. In doing so, however, China was criticized in the West for being soft on human rights and enabling brutal dictators.  Rather than try to cover for the regimes it traded with or attempting to justify their strategy, China humbly accepted the criticism and continued to trade.

By largely ignoring international political pressure, China has been able to stay focused on its most important aims. The result is that in a relatively short period of time it has cobbled together a massive trading empire.  The fact that over eighty world leaders are present in Beijing for the Olympics, the most ever in attendance at any Olympics is a testament to China ’s effectiveness at negotiating agreements without getting bogged down by ideological principles.

Whether China ’s strategy continues to bear fruit remains to be seen. But by all indications, growth in China will continue to increase over the next several decades. By sticking to its principles, acting in the face of opposition, and making the necessary sacrifices, it looks like China will come out on top.  And it did not take a wizard to pull it off.

“The Armstrong Williams Show” is broadcast on WPGC-AM 1580 in Washington, XM Satellite Power 169, and WCBM/WVIE, Baltimore.

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

Tags: Uncategorized by Rev. Ceasar LeFlore III
No Comments »

How to be Black for Fun and Profit

Part 1
 
by Brother X
 
If you always wanted to be the kind of Black leader who cares only about your ego, your bank account, and your self-preservation above the needs of the community and want to make a fabulous living from the Black community and White guilt, then this is what you must do:

First of all, you must convince your constituency that all Whites will always do their best to hinder Black progress.  There is no such thing as “The American Dream” for Blacks.  You must convince them that Whites are always burning the midnight oil, always thinking of new, innovative, and creative ways to oppress your constituency. Always convince your constituency that all Whites in general are devils, unspeakably evil and always will be. Always give them the impression “Whitey’s gonna get you.” 

Convince them that mass genocide, except by abortion, is very close around the corner. (Never attack the rich, white abortion industry!  They may have the wrong skin color, but their green money is very good looking!)  Keep your Black folk scared.  Keep your Black folks angry!  Encourage them to satisfy their thirst for an elusive “freedom” by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. Do not encourage them to struggle on a high plane of dignity and discipline.  Never let them know there is such a thing called “personal responsibility,” which only can be a White man’s concept. Let them wallow in the valley of despair.

Keep your Black folks worked up! And you must show your constituency that you will always be their only friend and voice for them. You must always “romance” them, wine and dine them so to speak. Appeal to their egos. Make them feel superior to all other ethnic communities. Make them feel that the “outside communities” of all ethnic groups will never accept them. You must actually control and isolate your people, rather than really care about them.  Do everything to make them feel good, to make them want to be “movin’ on up” just like The Jeffersons. Promise them a “piece of the pie.”  Just like Jack Nicholson said to Tom Cruise in A Few Good Men, “You can’t handle the truth!” your constituency cannot handle the truth. The truth is they must stay on the “plantation.” You want them to be dependent on you. You want to be popular enough so that your word is law. People will do what you tell them to do on blind faith. People will vote the way you tell them to vote, sight unseen because you are their leader.

Let people believe that a victory for one Black is a victory for all Blacks, like when boxer Joe Lewis beat that white German years ago.  It will make them feel good, but it may not necessarily change their own personal situation or their community. But change is not your concern. Making them feel good is your concern.

Remember, poverty is your best friend as long as it does not come to stay at your house.  Just keep on demanding that the government do what it is not designed to do. Demand that the government end poverty NOW (ain’t gonna happen).   If the masses of people found a way to get out of poverty, you would not be needed anymore. Your funding sources would dry up. You would be in the unfortunate position of having to find a real job. You are in this game for three things only – Reputation, Power, and Money.

Constantly make big threats to the media about “hell breaking loose” and brothers and sisters “finding freedom at home.”  Make big demands and say if those demands are not met by a certain deadline, there will be “serious consequences.” Burn, baby burn! Two wrongs don’t make a right but it damn sure makes it even.  Accuse the government of constantly attacking your constituency and keeping them in poverty. And if your feelings get hurt, cry “Racism!”  Blame the White man at every opportunity. Also get on Black radio talk shows and blame every problem there is in the Black community on racism and the Republicans and say you are trying to get Black folks to wake up.

You should always demand that the federal, state, county, and city governments take the responsibility of solving all the problems of the Black community.  Your constituency must believe that it is the government’s responsibility to provide jobs. They must believe it is the government’s responsibility to provide health care.  They must believe it is the government’s responsibility to reduce crime.  They must believe it is the government’s responsibility to provide housing.  They must believe it is the government’s responsibility to keep on spending money on schools since lack of money is absolutely the only reason why Black children are not getting a good education. They must believe it is the government’s responsibility to end poverty. They must believe the solution to the ills of the Black community is “electing the right people.” If a young Black man from your constituency says that welfare is something “the White man owes me,” you have done your job well.  Congratulations!

If you are in a city with a Black Mayor, a Black Congressman, a Black city manager, a Black superintendent of schools, a Black county treasurer, a Black chief of police, a Black fire chief, Blacks on the county Board of Supervisors, Blacks on the school board, etc., if there are any problems in those governments, find any White man somewhere to blame.  Remember, our Black elected officials are NEVER to be held accountable, even if caught with $90,000 in their Louisiana home freezer. (The White man and slavery made him freeze his money.)  They are innocent even if proven guilty.

Celebrate “diversity,” but never, ever tolerate diversity of thought or opinion.  Only your opinion matters in the community. And yours is the only correct view.

On the subject of the media, whenever you are interviewed, remember, you are representing the authentic Black point of view. Say something controversial and when you are later challenged on it, say that your comments were taken out of context. Even better, blame the White establishment of trying to distort your message.  Accuse them of always trying to get you and to take you down. You must be the “consummate victim.”

Call any White person who criticizes you or your Black friends a Nazi, Klan member, Aryan Nations member, cracker, Dixiecrat, honky conservative, or just a plain old White supremacist and do your best to keep them feeling guilty. Call all Black people who criticizes you house negroes, sellouts, Uncle Toms, whitewashes, sugarcanes, Oreo ™ cookies, coconuts, Uncle Toms, Trojan Horses, fades, bug-eyes, Judases, race traitors, handkerchief-head Negroes, Uncle Toms, self-haters, Uncle Toms, boot-lickers, wannabes, parasites, self-loathers, Uncle Toms, Sambos, Farinas, Stymies, Buckwheats, hyenas, wombats, weasels, Uncle Toms, brown pelicans, servants of the right-wing, Uncle Toms, or anything else you can think of that is a good insult. For example, if one has the name Ezola, call her “Ebola” or if she is named Condolezza, call her “Condemnesia.”  Publicly accuse the feet-shuffling, sellout, disrespectful, self-hating Uncle Tom and Aunt Jemima, Stepin Fetchit sycophant, extremist, persona-non-grata Blacks who call themselves “conservatives” and who oppose you as being self-serving house-negro whores of the White establishment. If they call you on any facts you cannot dispute, ask them publicly “What are the White folks paying you to say all that?” to embarrass them.  You completely must tarnish their reputations before any of your constituency takes what they say seriously.  Some of them just may listen to them. Accuse them of having Messianic complexes and delusions of grandeur while saying “Yassa Massah!  We’s good black folks. We sho’ gonna do whate’r yall say!” to their White puppet masters. Tell your constituency these sellouts are the “enemy within,” and they must be exposed and opposed vigorously.  It is your duty to isolate them, And your constituency must never, ever in life accept them. You must always have people question their Blackness.  Remember, dissent within the Black community you must never tolerate. Criticism from the White community you must never tolerate. Your constituency must know that to deviate from your standard doctrines is to “work against the Black race” and is contributing to their genocide.  Freedom of thought must never be encouraged.  You must make other Blacks afraid to openly express feelings other than your standard doctrine. Make them afraid to be called Uncle Toms.  And you must never let anyone question your commitment to your constituency.  You must be recognized as the Keeper of the Blackness.

When you talk to the media, exaggerate instances of racism. For example, if there was Black voter suppression in one election, for the next election, plan on mentioning unconfirmed reports of voter suppression in several states. Who will check you out? It makes for a good entertaining sound byte. The media will not hold you responsible for hearsay, and your constituency will love you for your “honest” vigilance.  Besides those comments maybe forgotten. If not, at least you planted the seeds of suspicion.

If there have been overt cases of racism and genocide that does not serve your purpose in any way, like gun control laws that disarmed Blacks and not Whites over 100 years ago, or the Negro Project (endorsed by Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger) that sought to sterilize Black men in the south in the 30’s, Black slavery in Africa (which has been going on for 800 years), or the massacre of 800,000 Blacks by Blacks in Rwanda, ignore them.  You are not interested in Black-on-Black genocide at all. Only White-on-Black genocide is a tragedy worthy of recognition. Blacks killing other Blacks is NEVER as bad as Whites killing Blacks. You need to high profile cases of White racism and genocide that will boost your reputation, power, and money. If anyone tries to make any useless cases of genocide public, tell them to back off.  It is only working against your cause, which is reputation, power, and money.

Tags: Uncategorized by Robert Oliver
No Comments »

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

By Larry Cirignano

Cue the Olympics anthem. Ready a drum roll.

Sen. Barack Obama is attempting his most daring, acrobatic feat yet - a triple reverse flip-flop on abortion.  If he can pull it off, he’ll be hailed as a “moderate” on the issue. So he hopes, anyway. Maybe even grab some of those evangelical votes.

If he flubs it - if he fails to “stick” the landing by seeming to equivocate, say, in his enthusiasm for Roe v. Wade - feminist judges who are still sporting “Hillary ‘08″ buttons will knock points off his score.

As nimble as Obama proved himself to be on other, more-nuanced flip-flops - Rev. Wright, Iraq withdrawal, gun control, offshore drilling, Russia’s invasion of Georgia - the apostle of “Change We Can Believe In” has never attempted anything on this scale.

How does a politician whose voting record has earned him a perfect score of 100 from the National Abortion Rights Action League (and a score of zero from the National Right to Life Committee) abruptly reposition himself near the middle of the road where a majority of conflicted Americans stand on this vexing issue?

First, he has some lawyerly language changes made to the Democratic Party’s platform plank on abortion. While voicing the party’s continuing, adamant opposition to “any and all efforts” to limit the accessibility of abortion, the party now pledges to support, rather than sneer at, pregnant women who reject the option of abortion.

Second, Obama has lined up a convention-speaking slot for Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey Jr., who bills himself as an anti-abortion Democrat. You’ll recall that the senator’s dad, then-Pennsylvania Gov. Bob Casey Sr., was shunned at the 1992 Democratic convention because he held strong views against abortion and didn’t back off from voicing them.

From the vantage point of moderates (although certainly not from the vantage point of fervent partisans on either side of the issue), the change in the platform plank and the speech slot for Sen. Casey are sensible, conciliatory adjustments. But how does Obama align himself with these adjustments given his own record, which stands in emphatic refutation of them?

How? With extreme difficulty, that’s how. With a Herculean effort worthy of that aforementioned drum roll.

For starters, Obama faces the self-imposed difficulty of his willingness to countenance “partial birth abortion” - or “intact dilation and extraction,” to use the clinical term for this grisly, late-pregnancy procedure.

More challenging yet is Obama’s vote while an Illinois senator against the Illinois Born-Alive Infants Protection Act. Modeled on a similar federal law, this legislation sought to extend full legal protections to any fetus outside the mother (i.e., any baby) that survived its attempted termination by abortion. In other words, a live baby couldn’t just be discarded as medical waste. Who in the world could object to what in effect was a law against infanticide? In Congress when the legislation came to a vote in 2002, not even the most liberal Democrats in the place.

But in Illinois in 2003, Obama opposed such legislation. Since becoming a presidential candidate, his story has been that he opposed the Illinois measure because it failed to include a “neutrality clause” clarifying that the measure didn’t in any way restrict a woman’s right to a legal abortion. He would have voted for the federal law, so his story goes.

Now - greatly complicating Obama’s triple reverse flipflop to position himself as moderate on the issue of abortion - the National Right to Life Committee has pointed out Illinois legislative voting records that it says put the lie to Obama’s story.

According to Right to Life, the records show that a legislative committee, with Obama presiding as chairman, in fact voted to insert such a neutrality clause, which was copied word for word from the federal law. But after voting in favor of adding that clause to the Illinois bill, Obama then joined the committee majority in killing the bill itself, by a 6-4 vote, says Right to Life.

And so now, back to the triple reverse flip-flop. May we have that drum roll, please?

Tags: Uncategorized by Rev. Ceasar LeFlore III
No Comments »

By Harry Jackson, Jr.

Is climate change a greater threat than freezing the jobless in the dark? This is a real question for both today’s priests and politicians. Energy policies that protect the poor should be the highest priority for both the clergy and lawmakers.

As our culture awakens to the changing dynamics of our environment, we cannot forget our history. In 1900, there were no airplanes or computers, and virtually no cars, telephones or electricity. Wood and coal heated drafty homes. Tuberculosis and other diseases killed millions. The average American life expectancy was only 47 years old.

Thanks to affordable energy and the indomitable American spirit, the average American now lives to age 78. He or she travels our nation and world at will, and lives better than royalty did a century ago. We’ve eradicated killer diseases and developed technologies even Jules Verne couldn’t imagine.

Abundant, reliable, affordable energy also transforms constitutionally protected rights into opportunities and rights we actually enjoy – including jobs, homes, food, transportation, healthcare and the pursuit of happiness. When access to energy is restricted, job creation and civil rights are hobbled.

Nearly 85% of US energy comes from fossil fuels – and we’re producing and using that energy more efficiently and with less pollution every year. Unfortunately, energy is no longer affordable.

Experts tell us that the United States has native supplies of oil, gas, coal, oil shale and uranium that would last us for centuries to come. But environmentalists and politicians have made most of these resources off-limits. Instead, we send foreign dictators trillions of dollars driving up food and energy prices and eliminating the jobs, lower prices, royalties and taxes that producing US energy would bring to our economy.

That’s not just insane. It’s an immoral war on the poor.

It will take years to find and develop deposits, especially if environmentalists keep filing lawsuits. But if we end leasing and drilling bans, speculators would instantly start selling oil contracts and prices would drop. If we don’t end the bans, we won’t have still won’t have sufficient energy in yet another decade, prices will be even higher, and more families will suffer.

“Alternatives” like wind and solar energy will also take decades to grow from their current status (1% of our energy sources) to meeting a greater portion of our needs. The same is true of flex-fuel vehicles.

To some radical environmentalists, these facts are “irrelevant.” These extremists simply want to end fossil fuel use immediately. They do not care who this action may hurt.

“We’re trying to save the planet,” says House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who blocked votes on drilling, before flying off on a book tour, presumably in a solar-powered jet. “Our very health and economic well-being are at stake,” insists a misguided black, political studies group who purport to be guardians of minority interests.

The real dangers to poor and minority families will come from policies implemented in the name of environmental protection. Those policies would send energy prices soaring, destroy jobs and economic growth, and force people to choose between food, fuel and pharmaceuticals.

The poorest families are already spending half of their incomes on energy. For families earning $50,000, energy expense amounts to a quarter of their income. This cannot continue.

Environmental activists want higher prices to force Americans to stop using oil. If prices are used to force energy conservation, the net effect will be greater economic pressure on the domestic poor. The Congressional Budget Office says cap-and-trade measures to slash emissions by 70% would raise average household annual energy costs by $1,300 and cost America trillions of dollars in lost economic output.

These increased costs would make it harder for families to afford a home or college education. The costs would also send airline, tourism, agriculture, manufacturing and other industries into tailspins, costing millions of jobs that will not be replaced by so-called “green-collar” jobs.

In recent years, opinion pioneers have challenged evangelical Christians to take a stand on the environment. They rightfully argue that God commanded us to be stewards of his entire creation. Unfortunately, some radical environmentalists forget that this stewardship is both of animal and human life; wildlife habitats and poor families all need to have faith-based advocates. We can’t save polar bears, yet stand idly by while elderly people die because they can’t afford heat for their homes. By emphasizing production, conservation, efficiency, new fuels, and technologies we can assure that human needs are met.

I believe the faith community will be instrumental in breaking the ideological environmental deadlock. Several groups are emerging that see the environment as one of the important moral issues of our day. These groups are attempting to base public policies on a common sense mix of biblical principles and factual evidence. Groups like the We Get It campaign, The Cornwall Initiative, and The Stop The War on The Poor campaign address real environmental challenges. They understand God’s commandments to be responsible stewards in His wise design.

Become part of the solution. Combine your faith and your understanding of environmental issues to make a difference. Join one of the campaigns above and help us break the deadlock on environmental policy. For more information on how to do this visit www.stopwaronpoor.org.

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

by Herman Cain

On November 5, 2008 nearly half of the voting public will be disappointed that their presidential nominee did not win. If history and the most recent presidential elections are any indication, the November presidential election will be another very close election.

If my choice for president does not win, so be it. That’s the process and I still had the opportunity to exercise my right and responsibility to vote.

But my greater disappointment would be if more Democrats are elected to the House and Senate, which would further empower Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, the respective leaders of those chambers of Congress.

The president can’t sneeze without the intense scrutiny of the mainstream media and some members of Congress, and thus, his opportunity for abuse of power for purely political or personal agendas is minimal.

On the other hand, inappropriate uses of power by the Speaker of the House or the Senate Majority Leader are a lot less challenged by the media and the general public.

We only need to consider Nancy Pelosi’s arrogant adjournment of Congress for a five-week recess on August 1, 2008, which sparked a protest by House Republicans. Or consider Harry Reid’s insistence that the Social Security system is not approaching a financial crisis.

Jointly, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have refused to allow meaningful energy legislation to even get to the floor of their respective chambers for debate and a vote. Why? They know that enough Democrats would vote with the Republicans for what’s right, and meaningful energy legislation might pass.

Both Pelosi and Reid have declared that they want the “Bush tax cuts” to expire, which will send the fragile U.S. economy into a recession. If they do not believe it will happen, that’s a sad commentary about the leadership in the United States Congress. If they believe it will happen and will allow it to happen anyway, that’s just dangerous and irresponsible.

Both Pelosi and Reid declared the “surge” in Iraq a failure before General Petraeus could get back to his post in Iraq following another round of useless congressional hearings. Now that success in Iraq is imminent and the Bush Administration is talking about troop reductions, the silence from Pelosi, Reid and the Democrats is deafening.

There are enough RINO’s (Republicans In Name Only) in the Senate that if four or five more Democratic Senators are elected in November, Harry Reid will be able to get the required 60 votes to end debate on most bills that make it to the floor of the Senate. And as Reid has demonstrated, the bills that make it to the floor of the Senate will be of his choosing and not what the public is screaming for.

In the House, there are enough correct thinking Democrats to prevent Pelosi from completely steamrolling the legislative process, but a few more rookie Democratic representatives and the power of “earmarks” for pet projects could give the most powerful woman in America too much power.

When power is abused, that’s too much power.

Both Pelosi and Reid have been in Congress for over 20 years. They are well versed in the rules of the game, and how to create new ones with a party majority if they need to. They are also well schooled in how to say a lot about cooperation, openness and bi-partisanship, and then do very little to demonstrate those objectives.

There is a lot of uncertainty about the actions of the next president.

There is a lot of certainty about the actions of an empowered Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

That’s disappointing.  

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »

Here is a great article written by Jonathan Morris for the Fox Forum:

Saturday’s presidential candidates forum, moderated by Pastor Rick Warren, gave me a number of new reasons to believe John McCain may beat Barack Obama in the 2008 race for the White House, a race Obama’s party has every reason to win.

But first, congratulations are in order for Pastor Rick Warren, whom I am honored to call a friend. His questions were fair, concise (what a relief!), and important. He managed to get the candidates to reveal their differences on important issues in a way that has not been done before.

And Pastor Warren’s function as “Values-Inquisitor-in-Chief” reminded all of us that while a certain separation of church and state is very good for our republic, it is dangerous and un-American to advocate for the divorce of religiously motivated moral values from politics. The candidates proved this in their own words by explaining how their religious and moral values shape their policy proposals.

Before Saturday’s event, most analysts agreed the forum at Saddleback Church was the perfect venue for Obama to break into McCain’s considerable advantage among evangelical voters. He would be on their turf and could talk their language—beautifully, of course—and that would be enough.

How wrong they were. (click here to read the rest)

Tags: Uncategorized by Dr. Eric Wallace
No Comments »