"Anti-" Christ means "In Place of " Messiah. I'm not looking for the "beast" to be exceptionally flawed or evil. What creates the "antichrist" is actually the people who vote for him, who are expecting an ungodly man to save them IN PLACE OF Messiah. The scriptures say that the Devil is the one who gives power to the beast; and it describes the Devil as having essentially the same form as the beast. He will be a man after the people's own heart; and because the people are evil (shaped like the Devil in their spirits), the beast has the same form.
I don't think Mr. Obama is so evil, that he has to be the beast. Neither do I believe he is so good that he cannot be. I do know that the American people are drifting farther and farther from the God of the Bible; and that we are actually behind the Europeans and Canadians in this. A godless people worships their own mortal, human power -- their own private "beast" -- as a god.
The Bible says all the people of this world will worship the beast, and follow after him. He will be popular. "He" could also be a "she", of course. The saving virtue of Mr. Obama is that he's something of a nincompoop, with no real ideas of his own. This makes him relatively ineffective and harmless. I believe "the beast" will be far more effective, and that people will praise and worship him because of it.
Hillary was Obama's fall guy in Benghazi; and Obama has been nothing but a puppet of the banking industry.
It's hard to get emotional about a puppet.
Hi, Psalm.They are already praising and worshipping him. He's a nincompoop because Satan hasn't inhabited him, believe it or not. So...not saying I think he definitely is. I just don't know how much more evil one needs to get than Obama to become the AC. I also don't think the AC will have any real ideas of his own. He will just be about control.
Really? Basing the abilities of a president on how they "look", and in the same posting accusing women of being "too emotional". LOL. The ironies.No offense, but you too, may be watching too much MSNBC. Didn't she lie about being a Native American and isn't she a bleeding heart liberal?
That aside, I don't want a female president. They're too emotional, even Hilary ("Who the blank cares at this stage?...). She's a communist anyway and she is lying about Benghazi. Even more than Hilary ("Who the blank cares at this stage?...). I couldn't stand Elizabeth Warren as president. She appears flighty. She may not be, but she just looks goofy to me.
No offense, but you too, may be watching too much MSNBC. Didn't she lie about being a Native American and isn't she a bleeding heart liberal?
That aside, I don't want a female president. They're too emotional, even Hilary ("Who the blank cares at this stage?...). She's a communist anyway and she is lying about Benghazi. Even more than Hilary ("Who the blank cares at this stage?...). I couldn't stand Elizabeth Warren as president. She appears flighty. She may not be, but she just looks goofy to me.
Nay! Strength of character is what we need! A man of steel!Have you ever seen John Boehner cry? Do you believe he is too emotional to be second in line to be President? Do we need such an emotional train wreck leading The House?
No offense, but you too, may be watching too much MSNBC. Didn't she lie about being a Native American and isn't she a bleeding heart liberal?
I couldn't stand Elizabeth Warren as president. She appears flighty. She may not be, but she just looks goofy to me.
They don'tn require a membership fee to vote for them. You could vote Republican in the primaries and if none of the good candidates get it as is usually the case, then vote for whoever in the other parties you like best.
Hillary was Obama's fall guy in Benghazi; and Obama has been nothing but a puppet of the banking industry.
It's hard to get emotional about a puppet.
I don't think the abortion lobby was in the same league as the banking industry; and in all fairness, the bankers switched once Romney got nominated, and backed the Republicans. The deficit was made up for by the U of Calif, Microsoft, Google, the US Govt and Harvard U. I don't have figures for 2008; but as I recall, George Soros and most of the world's richest people backed him then -- besides numersous illegal contributions from overseas, especially Arab countries (from places like "Ramallah, PA -- which doesn't mean Pennsylvania)Oh well that's good to know. If the upcoming Republican candidates aren't any good then I will vote Constitution Party most likely.
Not to mention the fact that he's pretty much owned by the abortion lobby.
I don't think the abortion lobby was in the same league as the banking industry; and in all fairness, the bankers switched once Romney got nominated, and backed the Republicans. The deficit was made up for by the U of Calif, Microsoft, Google, the US Govt and Harvard U. I don't have figures for 2008; but as I recall, George Soros and most of the world's richest people backed him then -- besides numersous illegal contributions from overseas, especially Arab countries (from places like "Ramallah, PA -- which doesn't mean Pennsylvania)
Here are the final 2012 figures:
Barack Obama (D)
1 University of California $1,212,245
2 Microsoft Corp $814,645
3 Google Inc $801,770
4 US Government $728,647
5 Harvard University $668,368
Mitt Romney (R)
1 Goldman Sachs $1,033,204
2 Bank of America $1,013,402
3 Morgan Stanley $911,305
4 JPMorgan Chase & Co $834,096
5 Wells Fargo $677,076
By sector, Obama got:
Agribusiness............................ $2,067,055
Communications/ Electronics...... $20,723,578
Construction........................... $4,172,690
Defense................................. $1,141,130
Energy & Natural Resources....... $2,410,062
Finance, Insurance & Real Estate $20,431,321
Health.................................... $18,914,849
Lawyers & Lobbyists................. $27,959,192
Transportation......................... $1,378,606
Misc Business.......................... $22,598,697
Labor..................................... $494,094
Ideological/ Single-Issue........... $17,276,836
Other..................................... $91,795,660
Romney got more from the Finance sector, but less from Lawyers, Ideological Single-Issue, etc.
I don't believe any of the above includes PAC money, which was an enormous sum in both parties
SRC: 2012 Presidential Race | OpenSecrets
The bottom line is that no matter who wins, from no matter from what party, he or she will owe their souls to Big Money.
Ave Maria said:Well, I wasn't saying that the banking industry is owned by the abortion lobby. I was saying that Barack Obama is owned by the abortion lobby.
She either has native ancestors, or believed she did according to her own family stories. A lot of people have family stories of native ancestors, but not all these stories are substantiated. It's unclear to me whether anyone has actually done genetic or genealogical research to confirm or deny those stories.
She was a Harvard law professor, you don't get there by being "flighty" and "goofy". She is well-spoken, stands up for the working and middle class, and consumers in general, against moneyed interests, wants to regulate the financial system (which desperately needs it unless you really *like* banking/financial crises) and call out false rhetoric by having the facts while remaining calm. She's an old-style reformer in a country that desperately needs it.
And John Bohner looks "goofy" but no one suggests he makes a bad speaker on account of "looking goofy." It's more about what he does.
It's interesting, that you wrote this, being a woman. I don't think you're alone; I recall reading that women are more likely to vote for male candidates than men are.Well, if she's all these things and a bag of chips, why does she support Obama? I don't want a female president, ever. God did not make us to be the leaders. We are to be like Esther or Hannah, etc.