The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

A Poor Substitute For Live At Five

Posted on | October 9, 2012 | 14 Comments

— by Wombat-socho


I had every intention of getting up at the usual ungodly hour this morning and doing Tuesday’s Live At Five, but I underestimated how fatigued I’d be after eight hours of doorknocking for American Majority Action yesterday down in Prince William County. I slept right through the alarm and didn’t get up until 0900. It’s good and necessary work, though; every day this weekend, in spite of the occasionally drippy weather, yours truly and a couple dozen Hill staffers have been out pounding on doors, dropping literature, and otherwise doing our bit to win Virginia for Mitt Romney. This will be going on every weekend until the election, and in fact I’ll be putting in time during the week as well. Of course, we could always use more people, so if you happen to live in Northern Virginia – particularly in Fairfax and Prince William counties – and want to earn a little extra pocket money, drop office manager Chris Smith a line and let him know you’re interested.

Category: Blogging, Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy, Virginia

Ash!

Posted on | October 8, 2012 | 16 Comments

by Smitty

It’s slightly mundane, the triumph of a Presidential candidate with enough motivation for the job to take on a little rain:

Indeed, it’s a far cry from the ol’ boom-stick days: UPDATE: [well, so much for letting me advertise Army of Darkness for free for them. . .]

Category: humor, Mitt Romney

Among The Minor Side-Ironies Of The End Of Progressivism

Posted on | October 8, 2012 | 12 Comments

by Smitty

Daily Pundit links Insty, noting the 2/3 military support enjoyed by Romney. Of the third who do support #OccupyResoluteDesk, one wonders what chunk would drop were the racial background of the #Occupant to alter. . . More interestingly than that, the military, including retirees, should form a vast special-interest group. Cleverly, the active duty DoD is kept substantially at odds with itself internally, with the services devouring each other in addition to budget resources. And, yes, there are plenty of retiree outfits lobbying to keep the Veterans Administrations afloat. Something about PTSD, missing body parts &c motivates.

Yet the frequent swearing of oaths to support and defend the Constitution, and the frequent changes of command, hinder the organization from achieving enough identity to form a junta. A General Petraeus (or General McChrystal, or Admiral McRaven, just to throw out some names), wouldn’t dream of gathering support for some takeover scheme, even were some rogue neurons to formulate the idea.

While veterans have some consciousness and response when being thrown under the bus by the government, and can inform heavily a de-centralized undertaking like the Tea Parties, they would fail miserably if some Community Organizer came along. I can imaging Van Jones trying to whip a crowd of veterans into some grievance frenzy, and getting drowned by. . .crickets. Cold-stared into wetting himself. Exiting in haste to a low, bass rumble seemingly coming from everywhere.

Ironically, the military knows a mutiny when it sees such, and refuses to be turned into some sort of vast ACORN/SEIU muscle pool for the Left. Those who have given so much already in support of liberty wouldn’t give it up for a serious leader, say, an american Caesar, much less a sad joke like BHO.

Category: Barack Obama, Military

@chucktodd Is There Is An Honest Bone In The Media Or The Administration, Insofar As There’s A Difference?

Posted on | October 8, 2012 | 7 Comments

by Smitty

Via Brietbart, below the fold for autoplay reasons, we have the sad case of somebody in an industry that has been working since, oh, Bush v. Gore to support an ideological takeover of the U.S. government.

Oh, is that a baseless attack? Fine. Retracted. I freely admit to an allegation which I’m not going to back up with facts. But here’s your real problem: the perception that you and the Obama Administration are in cahoots is accepted conventional wisdom.

So you can bemoan this, and whine about that, or you can wipe that stuff off your chin and engage in some legitimate journalism. Not just for a change, but for a while. You’ve a long way to go to re-establish any credibility.
Read more

Category: Media Bias

Movie Rated ‘R’ for Scene in Which Breitbart Rapes the Media Narrative

Posted on | October 8, 2012 | 14 Comments

Tonight is the DC premiere of Andrew Marcus’s excellent new documentary, Hating Breitbart, which gets some unexpected free publicity:

Producers of the biographical documentary “Hating Breitbart” got news last week that their film received an “R” rating from the Motion Picture Association of America. And with that move official Hollywood, long the preserve of liberal culture warriors, has had what appears to be the last laugh on the late Andrew Breitbart. . . .
Breitbart was never at a loss for words. And some of those words were decidedly profane. Andrew Marcus, the director of “Hating Breitbart,” which was scheduled for release on Oct. 12, told The Daily Caller on Sunday that the film’s nationwide unveiling has been pushed back one week while he and his team approach the MPAA with a request for a re-hearing.

Raping the narrative? Hey, the narrative was beggin’ for it.

UPDATE: Trailer for the movie:

Learn more at the Official HATING BREITBART Web site.

 

Category: Andrew Breitbart, Movies

Liberals Beginning to Realize They’ve Overestimated Obama’s Popularity?

Posted on | October 8, 2012 | 170 Comments

A steady drip, drip, drip of polling data — including a new Battleground poll showing Democrats on the losing side of an “enthusiasm gap” — has started to undermine the carefully maintained perception of Obama’s re-election as inevitable. Ed Morrissey comments:

If Obama trails in a D+8 poll by 6 among the extremely likely voters with four weeks to go, he’s in deep trouble — and his debate performance certainly won’t boost him.

Meanwhile, also via Hot Air, we find the WaPo’s Chris Cilizza as the first liberal analyst to try getting ahead of the chance that Obama might lose:

Obama’s debate performance also raised a bigger question: Is he overrated as a candidate?
Four years ago, that question would have been unimaginable …
Fast-forward to this campaign — and specifically its last two major public events — and you see Obama’s flaws as a candidate in starker relief.
His acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention was flat and, rhetorically, felt like a patchwork effort — five or six different speeches all clumped into a single address. His debate performance was glum and defensive, leaving anyone who watched with the overwhelming sense that the president would have rather been anywhere but sharing the stage with former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney (R).

That the question “would have been unimaginable” in 2008 is likely a result of Cillizza having his head inside the liberal media echo chamber where never was heard a discouraging word about Obama. Democrats were pumped up and eager for action after eight years of Bush, and having a completely untested candidate allowed them to project onto Obama whatever they wished to see there. If you bought into that hype (as Cillizza evidently did), then it was easy to imagine Obama the Light-Bringer riding to glory astride a flying unicorn, eating Magic Peace Flakes for breakfast and farting rainbows all day long.

Reality? What a bummer. It’s like the old joke: What did the Grateful Dead fan say after the dope wore off? “Dude, this band sucks.”

Two weeks ago, I warned that Democrats were “spiking the ball early,” but they didn’t listen to me then, and I don’t expect them to listen now. Cillizza is shrewd enough to see the value of hedging his bets, being one of the first liberal media types to warn of the possible defeat ahead, but Nate Silver seems unwilling to kick the Kool-Aid habit just yet.

Remember that a month ago, Silver gave 4-to-1 odds against Romney. Nate’s confidence is quietly fading, as he starts to wonder what excuses he’ll make on Nov. 7 if he has to explain why he was wrong.

“Ride Right Through Them — They’re Demoralized as Hell!”

UPDATE (Smitty): Welcome, Instapundit readers.

Category: Barack Obama, Ed Morrissey, Election 2012, Polls

‘THE MANTLE OF LEADERSHIP’ —
Text of Mitt Romney’s Speech at VMI

Posted on | October 8, 2012 | 12 Comments

The text of the foreign policy speech Mitt Romney gave today at the Virginia Military Institute, as prepared for delivery:

I particularly appreciate the introduction from my good friend and tireless campaign companion, Gov. Bob McDonnell. He is showing what conservative leadership can do to build a stronger economy. Thank you also Congressman Goodlatte for joining us today. And particular thanks to Gen. Peay. I appreciate your invitation to be with you today at the Virginia Military Institute. It is a great privilege to be here at an Institution that has done so much for our nation, both in war and in peace.
For more than 170 years, VMI has done more than educate students. It has guided their transformation into citizens, and warriors, and leaders. VMI graduates have served with honor in our nation’s defense, just as many are doing today in Afghanistan and other lands. Since the September 11th attacks, many of VMI’s sons and daughters have defended America, and I mourn with you the 15 brave souls who have been lost. I join you in praying for the many VMI graduates and all Americans who are now serving in harm’s way. May God bless all who serve, and all who have served.
Of all the VMI graduates, none is more distinguished than George Marshall—the Chief of Staff of the Army who became Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense, who helped to vanquish fascism and then planned Europe’s rescue from despair. His commitment to peace was born of his direct knowledge of the awful costs and consequences of war.
General Marshall once said, “The only way human beings can win a war is to prevent it.” Those words were true in his time—and they still echo in ours.
Last month, our nation was attacked again. A U.S. Ambassador and three of our fellow Americans are dead — murdered in Benghazi, Libya. Among the dead were three veterans. All of them were fine men, on a mission of peace and friendship to a nation that dearly longs for both. President Obama has said that Ambassador Chris Stevens and his colleagues represented the best of America. And he is right. We all mourn their loss.
The attacks against us in Libya were not an isolated incident. They were accompanied by anti-American riots in nearly two dozen other countries, mostly in the Middle East, but also in Africa and Asia. Our embassies have been attacked. Our flag has been burned. Many of our citizens have been threatened and driven from their overseas homes by vicious mobs, shouting “Death to America.” These mobs hoisted the black banner of Islamic extremism over American embassies on the anniversary of the September 11th attacks.
As the dust settles, as the murdered are buried, Americans are asking how this happened, how the threats we face have grown so much worse, and what this calls on America to do. These are the right questions. And I have come here today to offer a larger perspective on these tragic recent events—and to share with you, and all Americans, my vision for a freer, more prosperous, and more peaceful world.
The attacks on America last month should not be seen as random acts. They are expressions of a larger struggle that is playing out across the broader Middle East — a region that is now in the midst of the most profound upheaval in a century. And the fault lines of this struggle can be seen clearly in Benghazi itself.
The attack on our Consulate in Benghazi on September 11th, 2012 was likely the work of forces affiliated with those that attacked our homeland on September 11th, 2001. This latest assault cannot be blamed on a reprehensible video insulting Islam, despite the Administration’s attempts to convince us of that for so long. No, as the Administration has finally conceded, these attacks were the deliberate work of terrorists who use violence to impose their dark ideology on others, especially women and girls; who are fighting to control much of the Middle East today; and who seek to wage perpetual war on the West.
We saw all of this in Benghazi last month—but we also saw something else, something hopeful. After the attack on our Consulate, tens of thousands of Libyans, most of them young people, held a massive protest in Benghazi against the very extremists who murdered our people. They waved signs that read, “The Ambassador was Libya’s friend” and “Libya is sorry.” They chanted “No to militias.” They marched, unarmed, to the terrorist compound. Then they burned it to the ground. As one Libyan woman said, “We are not going to go from darkness to darkness.”
This is the struggle that is now shaking the entire Middle East to its foundation. It is the struggle of millions and millions of people — men and women, young and old, Muslims, Christians and non-believers — all of whom have had enough of the darkness. It is a struggle for the dignity that comes with freedom, and opportunity, and the right to live under laws of our own making. It is a struggle that has unfolded under green banners in the streets of Iran, in the public squares of Tunisia and Egypt and Yemen, and in the fights for liberty in Iraq, and Afghanistan, and Libya, and now Syria. In short, it is a struggle between liberty and tyranny, justice and oppression, hope and despair.
We have seen this struggle before. It would be familiar to George Marshall. In his time, in the ashes of world war, another critical part of the world was torn between democracy and despotism. Fortunately, we had leaders of courage and vision, both Republicans and Democrats, who knew that America had to support friends who shared our values, and prevent today’s crises from becoming tomorrow’s conflicts.
Statesmen like Marshall rallied our nation to rise to its responsibilities as the leader of the free world. We helped our friends to build and sustain free societies and free markets. We defended our friends, and ourselves, from our common enemies. We led. And though the path was long and uncertain, the thought of war in Europe is as inconceivable today as it seemed inevitable in the last century.
This is what makes America exceptional: It is not just the character of our country — it is the record of our accomplishments. America has a proud history of strong, confident, principled global leadership—a history that has been written by patriots of both parties. That is America at its best. And it is the standard by which we measure every President, as well as anyone who wishes to be President. Unfortunately, this President’s policies have not been equal to our best examples of world leadership. And nowhere is this more evident than in the Middle East.
I want to be very clear: The blame for the murder of our people in Libya, and the attacks on our embassies in so many other countries, lies solely with those who carried them out—no one else. But it is the responsibility of our President to use America’s great power to shape history — not to lead from behind, leaving our destiny at the mercy of events. Unfortunately, that is exactly where we find ourselves in the Middle East under President Obama.
The relationship between the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Israel, our closest ally in the region, has suffered great strains. The President explicitly stated that his goal was to put “daylight” between the United States and Israel. And he has succeeded. This is a dangerous situation that has set back the hope of peace in the Middle East and emboldened our mutual adversaries, especially Iran.
Iran today has never been closer to a nuclear weapons capability. It has never posed a greater danger to our friends, our allies, and to us. And it has never acted less deterred by America, as was made clear last year when Iranian agents plotted to assassinate the Saudi Ambassador in our nation’s capital. And yet, when millions of Iranians took to the streets in June of 2009, when they demanded freedom from a cruel regime that threatens the world, when they cried out, “Are you with us, or are you with them?” —- the American President was silent.
Across the greater Middle East, as the joy born from the downfall of dictators has given way to the painstaking work of building capable security forces, and growing economies, and developing democratic institutions, the President has failed to offer the tangible support that our partners want and need.
In Iraq, the costly gains made by our troops are being eroded by rising violence, a resurgent Al-Qaeda, the weakening of democracy in Baghdad, and the rising influence of Iran. And yet, America’s ability to influence events for the better in Iraq has been undermined by the abrupt withdrawal of our entire troop presence. The President tried—and failed—to secure a responsible and gradual drawdown that would have better secured our gains.
The President has failed to lead in Syria, where more than 30,000 men, women, and children have been massacred by the Assad regime over the past 20 months. Violent extremists are flowing into the fight. Our ally Turkey has been attacked. And the conflict threatens stability in the region.
America can take pride in the blows that our military and intelligence professionals have inflicted on Al-Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, including the killing of Osama bin Laden. These are real achievements won at a high cost. But Al-Qaeda remains a strong force in Yemen and Somalia, in Libya and other parts of North Africa, in Iraq, and now in Syria. And other extremists have gained ground across the region. Drones and the modern instruments of war are important tools in our fight, but they are no substitute for a national security strategy for the Middle East.
The President is fond of saying that “The tide of war is receding.” And I want to believe him as much as anyone. But when we look at the Middle East today — with Iran closer than ever to nuclear weapons capability, with the conflict in Syria threating to destabilize the region, with violent extremists on the march, and with an American Ambassador and three others dead likely at the hands of Al-Qaeda affiliates— it is clear that the risk of conflict in the region is higher now than when the President took office.
I know the President hopes for a safer, freer, and a more prosperous Middle East allied with the United States. I share this hope. But hope is not a strategy. We cannot support our friends and defeat our enemies in the Middle East when our words are not backed up by deeds, when our defense spending is being arbitrarily and deeply cut, when we have no trade agenda to speak of, and the perception of our strategy is not one of partnership, but of passivity.
The greater tragedy of it all is that we are missing an historic opportunity to win new friends who share our values in the Middle East -— friends who are fighting for their own futures against the very same violent extremists, and evil tyrants, and angry mobs who seek to harm us. Unfortunately, so many of these people who could be our friends feel that our President is indifferent to their quest for freedom and dignity. As one Syrian woman put it, “We will not forget that you forgot about us.”
It is time to change course in the Middle East. That course should be organized around these bedrock principles: America must have confidence in our cause, clarity in our purpose and resolve in our might. No friend of America will question our commitment to support them… no enemy that attacks America will question our resolve to defeat them… and no one anywhere, friend or foe, will doubt America’s capability to back up our words.
I will put the leaders of Iran on notice that the United States and our friends and allies will prevent them from acquiring nuclear weapons capability. I will not hesitate to impose new sanctions on Iran, and will tighten the sanctions we currently have. I will restore the permanent presence of aircraft carrier task forces in both the Eastern Mediterranean and the Gulf region—and work with Israel to increase our military assistance and coordination. For the sake of peace, we must make clear to Iran through actions —- not just words —- that their nuclear pursuit will not be tolerated.
I will reaffirm our historic ties to Israel and our abiding commitment to its security —- the world must never see any daylight between our two nations.
I will deepen our critical cooperation with our partners in the Gulf.
And I will roll back President Obama’s deep and arbitrary cuts to our national defense that would devastate our military. I will make the critical defense investments that we need to remain secure. The decisions we make today will determine our ability to protect America tomorrow. The first purpose of a strong military is to prevent war.
The size of our Navy is at levels not seen since 1916. I will restore our Navy to the size needed to fulfill our missions by building 15 ships per year, including three submarines. I will implement effective missile defenses to protect against threats. And on this, there will be no flexibility with Vladimir Putin. And I will call on our NATO allies to keep the greatest military alliance in history strong by honoring their commitment to each devote 2 percent of their GDP to security spending. Today, only 3 of the 28 NATO nations meet this benchmark.
I will make further reforms to our foreign assistance to create incentives for good governance, free enterprise, and greater trade, in the Middle East and beyond. I will organize all assistance efforts in the greater Middle East under one official with responsibility and accountability to prioritize efforts and produce results. I will rally our friends and allies to match our generosity with theirs. And I will make it clear to the recipients of our aid that, in return for our material support, they must meet the responsibilities of every decent modern government — to respect the rights of all of their citizens, including women and minorities … to ensure space for civil society, a free media, political parties, and an independent judiciary … and to abide by their international commitments to protect our diplomats and our property.
I will champion free trade and restore it as a critical element of our strategy, both in the Middle East and across the world. The President has not signed one new free trade agreement in the past four years. I will reverse that failure. I will work with nations around the world that are committed to the principles of free enterprise, expanding existing relationships and establishing new ones.
I will support friends across the Middle East who share our values, but need help defending them and their sovereignty against our common enemies.
In Libya, I will support the Libyan people’s efforts to forge a lasting government that represents all of them, and I will vigorously pursue the terrorists who attacked our consulate in Benghazi and killed Americans.
In Egypt, I will use our influence — including clear conditions on our aid — to urge the new government to represent all Egyptians, to build democratic institutions, and to maintain its peace treaty with Israel. And we must persuade our friends and allies to place similar stipulations on their aid.
In Syria, I will work with our partners to identify and organize those members of the opposition who share our values and ensure they obtain the arms they need to defeat Assad’s tanks, helicopters, and fighter jets. Iran is sending arms to Assad because they know his downfall would be a strategic defeat for them. We should be working no less vigorously with our international partners to support the many Syrians who would deliver that defeat to Iran—rather than sitting on the sidelines. It is essential that we develop influence with those forces in Syria that will one day lead a country that sits at the heart of the Middle East.
And in Afghanistan, I will pursue a real and successful transition to Afghan security forces by the end of 2014. President Obama would have you believe that anyone who disagrees with his decisions in Afghanistan is arguing for endless war. But the route to more war — and to potential attacks here at home — is a politically timed retreat that abandons the Afghan people to the same extremists who ravaged their country and used it to launch the attacks of 9/11. I will evaluate conditions on the ground and weigh the best advice of our military commanders. And I will affirm that my duty is not to my political prospects, but to the security of the nation.
Finally, I will recommit America to the goal of a democratic, prosperous Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with the Jewish state of Israel. On this vital issue, the President has failed, and what should be a negotiation process has devolved into a series of heated disputes at the United Nations. In this old conflict, as in every challenge we face in the Middle East, only a new President will bring the chance to begin anew.
There is a longing for American leadership in the Middle East — and it is not unique to that region. It is broadly felt by America’s friends and allies in other parts of the world as well — in Europe, where Putin’s Russia casts a long shadow over young democracies, and where our oldest allies have been told we are “pivoting” away from them … in Asia and across the Pacific, where China’s recent assertiveness is sending chills through the region … and here in our own hemisphere, where our neighbors in Latin America want to resist the failed ideology of Hugo Chavez and the Castro brothers and deepen ties with the United States on trade, energy, and security. But in all of these places, just as in the Middle East, the question is asked: “Where does America stand?”
I know many Americans are asking a different question: “Why us?” I know many Americans are asking whether our country today — with our ailing economy, and our massive debt, and after 11 years at war—is still capable of leading.
I believe that if America does not lead, others will — others who do not share our interests and our values — and the world will grow darker, for our friends and for us. America’s security and the cause of freedom cannot afford four more years like the last four years. I am running for President because I believe the leader of the free world has a duty, to our citizens, and to our friends everywhere, to use America’s great influence—wisely, with solemnity and without false pride, but also firmly and actively — to shape events in ways that secure our interests, further our values, prevent conflict, and make the world better — not perfect, but better.
Our friends and allies across the globe do not want less American leadership. They want more—more of our moral support, more of our security cooperation, more of our trade, and more of our assistance in building free societies and thriving economies. So many people across the world still look to America as the best hope of humankind. So many people still have faith in America. We must show them that we still have faith in ourselves—that we have the will and the wisdom to revive our stagnant economy, to roll back our unsustainable debt, to reform our government, to reverse the catastrophic cuts now threatening our national defense, to renew the sources of our great power, and to lead the course of human events.
Sir Winston Churchill once said of George Marshall: “He … always fought victoriously against defeatism, discouragement, and disillusion.” That is the role our friends want America to play again. And it is the role we must play.
The 21st century can and must be an American century. It began with terror, war, and economic calamity. It is our duty to steer it onto the path of freedom, peace, and prosperity.
The torch America carries is one of decency and hope. It is not America’s torch alone. But it is America’s duty — and honor — to hold it high enough that all the world can see its light.
Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.

UPDATE: Romney’s “harshest language yet” on the Libyan terrorist attack. Reaction from Ed Morrissey:

Democrats opened up this line of attack in two ways. First, they very overtly brought up the topic repeatedly in Charlotte during the convention, especially on the final night, as John Kerry, Joe Biden, and Obama himself attacked the Republican ticket for their lack of experience on foreign affairs. I interviewed Romney in 2007 and stuck to foreign policy almost exclusively, and I knew this was a trap for Democrats even before the Benghazi attack. Romney has an extensive knowledge of foreign policy, especially on trade, but by far not exclusive to it.

UPDATE II: Jake Tapper: “Security Team Commander Says Ambassador Stevens Wanted His Team to Stay in Libya Past August.”

 


Category: Aghanistan, Egypt, Election 2012, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Military, Mitt Romney, Syria, Terrorism, Virginia

‘Machine Gun Preacher’ Endorses Mitt

Posted on | October 8, 2012 | Comments Off on ‘Machine Gun Preacher’ Endorses Mitt

When the cellphone rang this morning and I saw the name on caller ID, it was a pleasant surprise: “Sam, how the heck are you, man?”

Pastor Sam Childers, the Harley-riding missionary whose amazing life story inspired the film Machine Gun Preacher, caught me up on his latest activities and asked what I was up to. After I told him I’ve been out covering the presidential campaign, Pastor Sam told me how some reporters had kept after him about crazy rumors that he was diamond smuggler or a gun runner, and he threatened to run for president himself:

“There’s nobody on this earth, including Christ, who has ever done anything good that people didn’t come against him. Nobody. And I made the comment the other week: If they keep coming up with any more garbage or accusations, I’m going to run for president in 2016.”

Don’t doubt him for a minute. He’s done crazier things than that before, but he was laughing about it, especially when he said some other reporters had actually taken him seriously. Pastor Sam is truly unique — sui generis — and is politically independent.

Of course, he’s a Bible-believing Christian fundamentalist, but Pastor Sam comes from a blue-collar background and has a natural skepticism toward politics and politicians, so he’s not officially part of the “Religious Right” and, indeed, his courageous missionary work in Sudan and Uganda has won him the admiration of many Hollywood liberals. As a matter of fact, in 2007-08, the candidate who most interested him was Democrat John Edwards.

Pastor Sam’s vote for Mitt Romney? Yeah, that’s actual news.

Pastor Sam is currently preparing to go back to Africa and his Angels of East Africa ministry is raffling off a motorcycle to raise money, and God bless everyone who clicks that link and gives. He is a righteous servant of the Lord, no matter what Vanity Fair says about him.

Sam was telling me about the smears, which really do annoy him, but he’s learned to laugh about it: “There’s no such thing as bad publicity.” Indeed. And never doubt the miracles God can do.

CLICK HERE TO BUY A $20 TICKET FOR
THE ‘MACHINE GUN PREACHER’ BIKE

UPDATE: Jai Simon reminds us that Sam Childers is the “only man Chuck Norris fears.” Trust me, you never want to see Sam angry.
 

Category: Election 2012, Mitt Romney, Religion, Sudan, Uganda
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin