Conversational Prayer

Growing up people prayed in King James English. I guess that makes sense because most non-Catholics read that version of the Bible. By the way, there's nothing wrong with still reading the King James Version (KJV), but it's not the only reliable one out there! However, it has proven to be true to the intent and is a "word for word" translation. Many Bible versions today are mere "phrase", "thought" or "paraphrase" translations. Plus, the KJV, is poetic. It is pleasant to read!

Moving back to "prayer", I always thought it was strange when I was young to hear adults speak so artificially. I guess it was natural and became sort of a prayer language. It had the disadvantage that many people would not pray out loud because they did a poor job of speaking an archaic language. With that, I always felt uncomfortable when praying and pretty much just said the bare minimum aloud and most often just prayed silently.

Many years later I considered "conversational prayer". It's not complicated! When praying it's only necessary to speak to God as a person speaks with anyone else. I liken it to speaking to my daddy. I always treated him with respect and love and that's all God wants!

Do you pray out loud? Likely, if you don't, it's because you feel insecure because you don't think that pray you well. "Praying well" isn't a requirement for praying out loud. Praying so that others hear requires a few things: 1) It must be a conversation with God, not a speech to impress others. 2) The prayer must be sincere. 3) The prayer is to magnify God; and 4) Praying is as much listening as it is speaking! (It's okay to pause for reflection).

God  gave us an example how we are to pray. Here's a modern version with today's vocabulary:

The Lord's Prayer

Matthew 6:9b (ESV) “Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name.
10 Your kingdom come,
your will be done,
    on earth as it is in heaven.
11 Give us this day our daily bread,
12 and forgive us our debts,
    as we also have forgiven our debtors.
13 And lead us not into temptation,
    but deliver us from evil.

"Our Father in heaven" (acknowledging God's majesty - praise)
"hallowed be your name" (blessing God - reverence)
"your kingdom come" (faith in God - kingdom of God is our hope)
"your will be done" (what's right and "good" - strength of our prayer)
"on earth as it is in heaven" (here and now - without any sin-purity)
"give us this day our daily bread" (provide our needs-our request)
"and forgive us our debts" (sorrow and repentance-asking forgiveness)
"as we also have forgiven our debtors" (Golden Rule-showing love for others)
"and lead us not unto temptation" (protect us from deception of the devil-ask for a hedge around ourselves)
"and deliver us from evil" (provide the power to us to avoid sin)

This prayer can really be broken down into four parts: 1) Love God (6:9-11), 2) Our prayer request(s) (6:11), 3) Seek forgiveness for current sins (6:12a) and 4) Protect us from the devil (6:13).  It is to be noted that before we pray for any need to repent of our own sin, we must first make things right with others (6:12b):

Matthew 5:23 (ESV) "So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go.24 First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. 

Note that it's not that you are at odds with another, but that another is at odds with you! That means that you may not be at fault, but still have the obligation to mend things with the other person. That's stringent, but that's what Jesus said to do! What gift are you bringing to the altar? Your praise! Don't praise God until you reconcile with your "brother", then come back and pray! (Pray is short for praise!) Reconciliation is a pre-requisite to asking for forgiveness for yourself or even for God to meet your needs. Why should he forgive you when you and your "brother" are still at odds? He doesn't!

What keeps people from making amends? Pride! Pride stands in the way of loving others. You love yourself more than them, but we're all told to love our "neighbors" as we do ourselves. By not reconciling, we're still putting "ME" first and the neighbor is not being loved! When this is done, then you can say your prayer!

Here's how I would pray:

1) Listen to God. Has he placed a name of a brother on my heart to whom amends need to be made?
2) If yes. Go to that person and ask for forgiveness. That person has perceived a problem in me and whether it's real or not, it must be cleared up such that we love each other. Then pray!
3) If no. Then pray:
4) God, you are so powerful that I credit you for me even being here and speaking with you. I know that you are my creator and I want to do what you would have me do. I look forward to the day I can kneel in front of you face to face and honor you as you deserve. I have many things to ask of you, but please, let me ask for what's good in your own eyes. Forgive me if I ask for things which may take my eyes off you, but these requests are what I really need for you to honor. I first I want to thank you for my food, shelter, health, family and church. You have been generous with me and it's appreciated! I have a special request that I ask of you, if it's in your will (name request(s)). I know that I sinned today (name the sin) and I want to ask you to forgive me. I have been weak and can only confess.  God, please keep me from sinning, even being deceived by temptation. My desire is to follow you, but I am weak and need your help. I ask that with your power, God, that you keep me from sinning.  Amen. ("True". That doesn't mean "the end", but that what you pray is truth). Don't pray what is not truth.

Since Jesus, is our mediator we ask for these things in "Jesus name"!

That's the Lord's Prayer, but in my own words! I'm praying as he tells me to pray and it will be honored if it's his will and I'm sincere! That's "conversational prayer". There are no flowery words nor King James English. I can even say it in my natural vernacular; country talk. He just wants it to be what he asked it to be!

Before you pray in a group, get comfortable with talking to God. Pray aloud at home for awhile before praying in public. If you're timid or shy, you will get a special blessing for reaching out to him. Even if you mess up by stuttering, pausing or whatever; your prayer will be honored. For myself, I have an itch in the throat only when I pray. I stop and cough. I've learned to live with that because it's just a little nervousness and perhaps a sub-conscious stall tactic to think about what I'm praying. That's okay!

Philippians 4:6 (ESV) "Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God."

That coughing when I pray; that's anxiety! It's not to bother me. I'm to bring everything to God in prayer!  You will be blessed by doing it out loud and as an extra bonus, your mind won't wander off when praying! Supplication is to do it humbly. God's not a genie. He's God. He's towers way above us and we are to lower to ourselves to our position. We're servants who are to love God and have high reverence for him! That's why we start our prayer with reverence. That's our own recognition that we are dependent on God. He knows that already, but he wants to hear it! That's how we are to pray.

Politics and Religion: Disturbing Trend for Christians to Straddle

I belong to a traditional, but evangelical church denomination. From the pulpit abortion is condemned, same-sex marriage and homosexuality are taught as sins and hard work is taught as desirable and God's will! The founding of America on Christian principles are paramount! I'm proud that my denomination stands by scripture, and yes, these positions are in fact scripture, and being so it is God's Holy Word!

With these thoughts I don't wish to denigrate my fellow Christians on how they vote, but to get them to be discerning! We're not to leave God behind in the voting booth, but some Christians do. You may disagree and that's fine. That's between you and God, but we all will be held accountable even when we're deceived!

Although the "Republican Party" is far from perfect, the Republican Party Platform is plain. A "platform" is the official position of the party. It's very much the same as what would be doctrine within a church denomination. Here's what the Republican positions are on "social issues" which Christians refer to as basic biblical tenets:

• The platform is stated to be based on the U.S. Constitution
• That the concept of America is "heaven ordained"
• Good stewardship of the people's money and responsible spending
• Freedom in the workplace. People deserve what they work for.
• Defense of Marriage Act and the proposition that marriage is between a man and a woman and is a sacred contract.
• Liberty and personal freedom. Minimum regulation into the lives of the people.
• Freedom of religion and free to worship in all aspects of life.
• Free speech in all regards.
• Right to bear arms to protect the people from danger from citizens and government.
• Property rights. 
• Human life is sacrosanct. Both the unborn and the elderly are to be protected. That the right to life is a basic right.
• Support adult stem cell research, but disagree that unborn babies should be harvested for stem cells.
• Patriotism. That the American flag stands for freedom promised by this nation.
• American courts supersede global courts. (Note: Globalism is a trait of the government of the anti-Christ)
• Repealing regulation and providing choice in health care and economic matters. The citizens' job is to create wealth. The government's role is not to redistribute wealth.
• An umbrella for the truly needy and that "entitlements" of the government actually harm those in need.
• And much more that freedom loving Christian people cherish!

On the other hand, we all know the Democrat Party Platform, but I will elaborate anyhow. First off, I use the term "Democrat". It is NOT the "Democratic" Party"! Democracy is a concept based on freedom and Democrats are a party of regulation and constraint, even abridgments of personal freedoms. They claim to be the party of Jefferson, but Jefferson was first a "republican" and secondly a "democrat", being first a republican, then a democrat-republican then a democrat. At that time "democrats" adhered to "republican" principles. Notice these  ideologies weren't technically "parties", but ideologies. Jefferson was by nature a republican! Although Lincoln was the first "Republican Party" president, Jefferson was the first "republican". He's truly the foundation of the Republican Party, not the Democrat Party!

Here is a summary of some parts of the Democrat Party Platform:

• Increased immigration and acceleration of the process. (This is to bring in more Democrat leaning minorities, and weakens America's moral fabric by diluting Christianity with world religions).
• Government becomes the "North Star" for improving the economy. (That means wealth is controlled by the government. Rather than individual initiative it becomes government controlling. Freedom is eroded through more regulation).
• The government controls the "fair shots". (They "level the playing field" by suppressing the freedom and opportunity of some to help others. That's Marxist!)
• Regulate education with more control. (The best way to make more liberals is to teach that in the schools.)
• Create jobs through spending. (Poor stewardship of America's money and creates unneeded work).
• Make health care a "right" rather than an umbrella for the needy. (Freedom is gone with more regulation and government programs are inefficient. Poor stewardship again).
• More regulation in housing and financing. (Regulation is a tool of socialism, aka Marxism).
• Income redistribution. (Steal from the successful to give to the unsuccessful)
• Reducing the deficit through regulation. (The numbers show that Democrats have failed miserably on this issue. They are the worst stewards of the people's money).
• Regulation of private enterprise and resources. (Attempting to create fairness by regulation. Attempting to help some by hurting others, mainly the money producers. Wealth is not a gift from God, but an abuse of man!)
• Favoring unions over workers.
• Wall Street Regulation. (Suppressing capitalism. Seen as enemy No. 1)
• Freedom to marry. Same sex marriage.
• Government supplying birth control (In opposition to those of faith. Abridging religious freedom).
• They do support faith-based organizations as a platform, (but not as a practice because they withhold government funding from those faith-based organizations who don't go along with their views on abortion, same-sex marriage and the like. In reality they are patterning what faith must be by throwing money to those organizations with a humanistic viewpoint).
• Civil Rights (Creating more than equal rights for some groups that they define. Included are homosexuals, transgenders, and other "diverse" groups. While protecting the rights of the extreme, they erode the rights of the rest). Also diversity, which also includes any group! (As a result of civil rights policies the "thought police" have been created. They enforce "political correctness" and that's NOT Christianity!)
• Gender discrimination legislation. (They support every group with an extreme agenda whose goal is the blur the differences between men and women. Gender differences is the plan of God. Although everyone is after fair pay, their policies go into abortion, lesbianism, etc. They have created a war between the sexes and accuse the others of a  "war on women")
• Supports abortion on demand. (Obama as a State Senator even voted to allow post abortion killing).
• Elimination of the Second Amendment right to bear arms.
• They even took references to "God" out of the platform except one place "god-given potential" to work.
• And many other regulation items.

If one examines the statement of principles of "The Communist Party USA" there are few differences! The Democrat Party is as Marxist as is the Communist Party! You might say "How about removing the private ownership of property?" That comes with more regulation.

"Regulation" is in opposition of "freedom". Many can remember what freedom is, but it is being replaced by regulation! "Regulation" means to control. Who do Democrats desire to control. Those with whom they disagree. What happens to freedom with control? It's gone. Those countries who "control" even control who the people worship. Scripture tells us that is the path of globalism.

Regulation is one of the two main tenets of Marxism. The other is the elimination of "God"and primarily, Christianity in the life of the people. It seems that they rightfully recognize Christianity as the enemy of regulation and as a result Christianity must go! In their eyes God controls people rather than the government, but the government must have final authority.

One of the initiatives of Marxism is to create a "war between the sexes". They believe that women are to be more than equal, even dominate "evil" men, because men are capitalists! The false "war on women" which the Democrats have created is a Marxist tactic to create conflict. With the battle waged, the family unit is destroyed! The governement desires to be the sole eduactor of your children. That way they create a socialist environment from birth. Families interfere with that goal!

Marxism is called "godless" because that's what they say they are. However, they realize that it can't be done abruptly, but through a gradual process. That's what Democrats are doing! Since the takeover of the Democrat Party by the communist Progressive Party in 1968, change is happening and it's gradual, but permanent. Obama was honest! He ran on "change" and that he did. 

America is now a Marxist nation. We are there! There is no turning back unless people turn to God. Obama promised "hope". He failed there because there is no "hope" in Marxism. It fails everywhere all the time! The only hope  humans have is in heaven. Until then Jesus himself said "we will always have the poor". If Jesus had been a socialist or a Democrat, he could have eliminated poverty right then. However, he came not to keep the world worldly, but to save the world. Democrats came to put asunder what God has created!

Yes, God created America! He used imperfect Christians, even sinners, but as a result, a Christian nation was created. That's gone! You can thank Marxism and you can thank Democrats! True, the Democrat Party Platform  is cloaked in smooth positive words, but evil lies within! Evil knows to include enough "good" to conceal the "bad".

As a side bar: It's the leadership of the Democrat party who deceive! The average voter fails to recognize that with each vote for a Democrat, freedom is eroded and Christianity is diminished. There are no longer "Blue Dog Democrats". They have been cast by the wayside and even the Republican leadership is starting to do that with increased immigration! 

This brings me back to my main point: Evangelical born-again Christians still vote against their own purported beliefs! They worship and believe the way I do, but then turn around and vote for those who seek to minimize them, even destroy!  It truly bothers me that a fundamentalist preacher in my denomination is running for office as a Democrat. I will not go to his church again! He may be a sound Christian, but he has little discernment and preachers are obligated to know and to set an example. He sets the wrong example!

Some have been taught to love their party. That's silly. When my own party abandons Christians, and that too will happen, I will leave that party!

Today we are as deceived by Democrats as were the Germans by the National Socialist Party (Hitler). He too offered "hope" and "change" and he did change things, but as a result "hope" floated away. In a 1930's election Hitler received 93% of the vote! Many Christians were deceived. They voted for Nazis and Hitler was their "hope". Look where that got them!

Hitler's destruction was toward the Jews. They interfered with "regulation". They were "hateful" sub-human religious people! That's socialism at work! He destroyed them because they weren't fully human and were parasites on true Germans. That's the same argument pro-abortion leaders make! Babies are fetal tissue, inhuman and parasitical. They are a burden to women's lives. The same old story rewritten by Democrats!

"Propaganda" was the tool of the Nazis! Just as they control the media today the progressive (Marxist) Democrats do the same. Each day we listen to the "spin" of Obama's "liar-in-chief" whose job is to paint a positive picture of Obama's Reich, that all is rosy while the empire goes down. 

Yes, it's time for a "change"! It's time to have "hope". Christians, put your principles in action. Vote what is most right even if it's not perfect. When that changes, organize yourselves into another party. We are to come to God in all things, not leave God at the voting both or at the party picnic!

Politics: Dr. Tim Hulsey on Grimes Lying to Get Elected... and they admit it!

Alison Grimes has campaign personnel throughout the Commonwealth. Those people have a clear idea of what she thinks, politically speaking.

Filmmaker James O’Keefe, famous for exposing fraudulent behavior in ACORN and other organizations and political campaigns, thought so, as well. They sent their “best undercover reporters” to investigate.

A reporter asked “Warren County Democrat Operative “ Juanita Rodriguez about Grimes’ anti-coal statements. Rogriguez is seen on tape saying, “You know she has to say that, because in Kentucky, if you don’t support the coal industry, you are dead, politically… I know that’s why she has to say that. But… politics is a game… it’s a lying game, unfortunately.”

Ziya Smallens, Field Organizer, Louisville, says, “You can’t be a statewide politician and condemn coal…You are not going to win.”

Ros Hines, at the Fayette County Democratic Office: “She’s saying something about coal… to be elected… in the State of Kentucky, if you are ‘anti’ coal, you will not get elected, period, end of story.”

Gina Bess, Fayette County Democratic Party Committee member was asked, “If we can get her elected, do you think she is going to do the right thing and… try to wipe out that coal industry and go for better resources?” Bess responds, “I absolutely think she is.”

Crit Luallen, Kentucky Auditor, says, “In reality… Obama’s regulatory policies have had the impact of totally restricting what coal can do… Because it’s already going in the right direction, she’ just got to do what she’s got to do to get elected.”

This is directly from the Obama/Jarrett play book: Promise whatever you must to get elected. After you’re in office, you can renege.

Don’t take my word for it. Check out “James O'keefe on Alison Grimes” on You Tube. You can see faces saying why is claimed!

Acceptance and Rejection

"Acceptance" is to willingly to receive an idea or person. "Rejection" is the opposite. It's a refusal to willingly buy into an idea or to receive a person. There may be no "in-between". It's not pragmatic to reject something that a person wants to accept, or to accept something that a person wants to reject!

"Want" is the key word. That's our willingness to make a decision. The decision doesn't necessarily benefit the one with the dilemma, but it can and most likely is self-satisfying. However, some look short-term and others long-term. It's easy to choose selfishly for the short-term because people expect circumstances to change for the long-term! That's the proverbial "They want their cake and eat it too!"

Let's take an example: The idea that God created the world. The average person will evaluate that idea and believe one way or the other. They will either accept or reject the proposition that God is creator. There are factors which motivate the acceptance or rejection: 1) We base decisions on what we're taught. 2) People go along with the majority, but others are so independent that they intentionally do the opposite! 3) People use reason to decide. 4) Other people accept what others say by faith. 5) Something in our personality makes us agreeable or disagreeable. 5) A combination of any and all of these.

I accept the creation for scientific reasons, for statistical reasons, for anthropological reasons, because I was taught that and because I have faith in God. Emotion has little influence on me, other than I believe because I want to please God! Acceptance offers hope. Rejection offers nothing!

Others reject creation because of science, because of anthropology, because they are taught that and because they have faith in science.They are emotional because they want to be right.

Using the same categories people come to different conclusions! However, there is one aspect where I accept and the skeptic rejects! Statistics can never support evolution! Statistics reinforces creationism. If one rejects the creation, all this universe and all it's order is merely by chance. For those of us who accept creationism there was a plan and chance had little to do with it! Throwing out everything else, I accept creationism because statistically life this complex is infinitely impossible! Someone had to make it happen and that someone is claimed by God to be him and there is no other explanation!

These thought processes occur for any position we take or every person we allow into each of our worlds! If you are my friend, I use criteria and accepted you and you did that too since friendship is a two-way street. We quickly recognize non-friendships when one fails to respond to our advances to be friends. To show that we are befriending we do various things. We want to be with the person and talk. We like to share interests and most of the time we have similar beliefs and lifestyles. We most often want to be with people with whom we're compatible! Society throws in some taboos too. It's more acceptable for friends to be of the same gender and the same marital situation. We can miss many sound friends because we just can't violate that societal norm!

Now for the most practical application of acceptance vs.rejection: We're given a choice in life that determines our future for eternity. Scripture tells us how to have eternal life. We are called only to believe in Jesus as our savior because he died for everyone and to love him for doing that! What we are to do for eternal life is to accept Jesus and what he did! It's idea-centered and person-centered: Jesus did it. That's the person we must accept. What did he do? He died for us. That's the idea which must be accepted. All we have to do to live forever is to believe Jesus died for us all! Simple, huh?

Then why do people reject either the premise, the person or both? Some believe in Jesus, but that he didn't really die on the cross let alone be resurrected! Others don't believe that Jesus is God's son. They don't believe in the person. Others believe that there are other gods who can save. Others believe in Jesus, but that they can have eternal life just by being good. Whatever reasoning they have, and that's their free-will to decide, it's heretical. If anyone rejects Jesus or what he did, they reject eternal life... and they even know that! Most people only believe that they molder in the grave!

Again, there are factors which influence whether we reject or accept Jesus. For me it's because there must be something beyond this life. The answer to that is heaven and I want to go there! I use scripture which tells me that if I want to be "saved" it's only through Jesus and no other. Since events bear out his truth, I choose to accept him! My mind is open because of what I was taught, where I live, because of Jesus' miracles and ministry and because there seems o be no other way to have eternal life! There are no other gods who claimed to have died in place of me!

That's why I accept Jesus, but why doesn't everybody? Many are taught deceptions because of their geography. However, because most have heard of Jesus they must reject him out of pride. They want to be masters of their own fate and do what they want to do! However, they realize that because of their unbelief they sentence themselves to eternal punishment. Oops! Proud people reject the premise of hell!

People who reject God use the excuse "A loving God would never send me to hell!" This is about as close to failing either to accept or reject as can be. It's irrational! How could one reject God then tell others about what God does! In effect they are hoping they're wrong and that God will give them eternal life although they disbelieve. They want the benefits of acceptance with the liberty of rejecting.

So simple yet people make it so confusing. They fail to see pride that they take in stride. Before they can feel sorrow and repent, pride must be set aside. With pride aside then in heaven they can abide. It all makes sense! Reject or accept. The choice is yours.

Politics: Letter-to-Editor on President Portman?

To Bowling Green Daily News:

John David Dyche asked the question "Is president Portman possible? His answer; yes!

Why do "conservatives" get on "liberal" bandwagons? Portman's support for same-sex marriage twisted by a total misrepresentation of what the Bible outright says, is rotten theology and and shows a lack of principle on the part of Portman.

If a person has a relative who chooses any wrong, the fact that wrong is chosen, fails to make the "wrong" right! Toleration is not what the Bible is about. Obedience is! We don't love people by tolerating. If we love we teach them truth!

Republicans are tired of holding their proverbial noses while "pulling the lever" and conservatives just need to quit doing that.! If we are to win elections and maintain conservative principles it must be by nominating candidates who stand for what we do. If we want a Democrat in the oval office why would we just not vote for the Democrat!

For me and my household, we'll stay home if that's the best Republicans can do! Watching Obama destroy the nation is self-assuring because he and his liar-squad are fulfilling prophecy each day!

Dyche loses much credibility with this one. He sounds just like "them". Bi-partisanship is only good where policy is right. Being wrong together fails to be progress.

Politics: Dr. Tim Hulsey on Islam's convert, tax or die

An American convert to Iislam and a former member of the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City stated: “I went to the same mosque the Oklahoma Muslim who beheaded his co-worker today. I live ten minutes away!

The Imam was Imad Enchassi the last I heard. He was a friend of mine. He is a Lebanese-born Sunni who hates Israel. He once gave a sermon that the Israelis were trying to collapse al-Aqsa mosque by digging tunnels underneath it. They have no issue with Palestinian suicide bombings because, as it was explained to me, that is the only weapon the Palestinians have.

They sold Milestones in the book shop while I was there, which as you know calls for replacing all non-Islamic governments with Islamic ones. I remember listening to a tape a friend of mine, Yahya Graff, another white convert to Islam, had that prayed for the destruction of Israel and America.

The imam when I first converted, Suhaib Webb [another previously-Christian American convert], is hailed as a moderate by liberals in the United States but he was the one that explicitly told me that according to Islam, three choices are to be given to non-Muslims: convert, pay the jizyah tax and live under Islamic rule, or jihad. They try very hard to whitewash Islam when the media is around, but they believe in their religion and the ultimate goal of an Islamic caliphate.”


“…the ultimate goal of an Islamic caliphate” is quintessentially Qur’anic. Elimination or subjugation of non-muslims is, as well. Both also have historical precedent in Islam.

How many Muslims would deny this? How many Muslims would announce that to defy the Islamic State? How many would be targets themselves for denying Qur’anic mandates (apostasy)? How many are passive jihadist?

Political: Dr. Tim Hulsey on False Promises about Obamacare

Bart Stupak was among the few who thought you could be a conservative Democrat. He was a Michigan Representative from 1993 to 2011. He was staunchly and openly pro-life.

He wanted to support the Affordable [?] Care Act, but was held back by his pro-life principles. He announced that he and several other Democrats wouldn’t vote for the bill unless it was amended to prohibit federal payment for abortion.

He faced enormous pressure from Obama and the Left to support Obamacare. He finally had to unplug his phone because of "obscene phone calls and threats… a living hell,” typical left-wing tactics.

“In March 2010, President Obama and Stupak reached an understanding whereby the President promised to sign an Executive Order barring federal funding of abortion through the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and Stupak and several of his allies promised to withdraw their opposition…”

Stupak was "perhaps the single most important rank-and-file House member in passing the bill.”

How effective was Stupak in opposing Obama’s agenda? “I am perplexed and disappointed that, having negotiated the Executive Order with the President, not only does the HHS mandate violate the Executive Order but it also violates statutory law.” How well did he represent his conservative constituents? Stupak retired.

Catholic Alison Grimes is pro-choice. “I am supportive of the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade,” but says, “The president and I disagree on a lot of things.”

You’re naïve if you think a fledgling Sen. Grimes could do more to thwart Harry Reid and Obama than the four-term, more conservative Rep. Stupak.

If conservatives fail to vote for Mitch McConnell and allow a Grimes victory, Obama’s effort to turn this country away from its Constitutional path will proceed.

Shame on you, if you do!