Back on the campaign trail after dazzling a national audience at the Democratic National Convention, U.S. Senate candidate Barack Obama was greeted like a rock star in the small towns of downstate Illinois. Hours before his arrival, the banquet hall of the Turtle Run golf club in this hard-pressed town of nearly 40,000 was filled with 650 people, the biggest… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (46)Page 1 of 1 pagesHe is giving hope to all Americans. He seems real and speaks the language that the people that I know speak. I look forward to supporting him in all his endeavors and will anxiously await when I too can cast a my ballot for the future President of the United States.Forget Hilliary, a new day is dawning in America. A new day that will reflect representation for 98% of Americans that live in the real America.
Posted by Dan Forbes on Sep 6, 2004 at 10:33 AM I believe the Bush policies have failed the American people.
However, I was just thinking that what John Kerry lacks is a message of vision, a leadership that brings out the best in us.
Barack Oboma seems to supply that vision. Mayhis dreams succeed!
Posted by Charlotte Hettena on Sep 7, 2004 at 8:42 AM I see a new hope for America in this young man, it will be interesting to see how he preforms for his state and his country.
Posted by Dorothy Foster on Sep 7, 2004 at 8:49 AM I’m a county co-ordinator for Obama and met John Kerry in Hannibal, MO, at a rally on Aug. 4. When Kerry came to me, I pointed at my “Obama for U.S. Senate” button and said, “President in 2020”. Kerry paused for a moment(I think he was doing some quick math-he and Edwards for 8-yrs. each)and then said, “You’re right. That’s why I chose him to speak(at the convention). He’s a good man”. Kerry already knows Barack Obama’s great potential to one-day be a United States president.
Posted by Mark Cartwright on Sep 7, 2004 at 10:58 AM We watched Barack Obama speak on PBS’s telecast of the Democratic Convention. Too bad the networks hadn’t begun their coverage—their loss & the nation’s. We video-taped coverage that night & replayed Obama’s speech for our daughters, 15 & 18, and for groups of their friends who gather in our home. I’ve replayed this for friends and relatives, ages 12 to 85;
everyone was uplifted by his “audacity of hope.” The older teens (punk rock music fans) were deeply moved. Our 15-year-old can’t wait to vote for Obama for President.
Posted by Karen Reck on Sep 7, 2004 at 11:10 AM I wonder if anyone else finds it interesting to note that the state that once spawned Abe Lincoln now spawns Barack Obama. Is there any way to turbocharge this man’s career?
Posted by Geoff Blankenmeyer on Sep 7, 2004 at 12:33 PM Greetings,
Anytime someone is introduced as a “Rising Star”
as Mr Obama has by the Democratic Party, then he is reflecting someone else’s views, as a star reflects the suns light. Not their own....So again we have an example of a “future Black Leader” who is not independent. It is clear that for a black to be acceptable for white voters he or she has to be a “moderate” or “at the center” on issues. There is no respect for a truthful voice coming from politicians, candidates or clergy -white or black.
The true example of a leader is the Honorable Louis Farrakan.
Posted by Shawn Muhammad on Sep 7, 2004 at 12:35 PM Barrak Obama is a truely inspiring leader. The Senate will be blessed with his courage, wisdom, heart and conscience. Hope is on the way.
Dave Dickman
Posted by Dave Dickman on Sep 7, 2004 at 5:13 PM Obama is a bright morning star. His humility, eloquence, intelligence, and compassion shine in start contrast to the vitriol of the Giulianis, Cheneys, Millers, and Schwarzeneggers. Kerry should listen to him and try to learn to speak with passion and conviction.
Posted by Elinor Bowles on Sep 7, 2004 at 7:27 PM Some years ago in Canada we had Tommy Douglas as an activist politician bringing universal health care to the country. You have Mr. Obama. Don’t just vote for him, nurture him. He’s good news.
Posted by David Gamble on Sep 7, 2004 at 7:56 PM A point on astronomy: unlike a planetary body, a star generates its own light.
A point on Obama: when the time comes, Obama is a presidential vote I would cast with pride…
Posted by BruceK on Sep 7, 2004 at 9:36 PM Barack Obama appears to be too black, too poor, too educated, too honest, too optimistic, too eloquent and too good a man to be president of the United States. I would hate to have to watch the right wing neo-conservatives rip another man of character apart as they have done to others like Jimmy Carter.
I wish him a better life and career, he is brilliant.
Posted by CasagrandeJoseph on Sep 8, 2004 at 4:04 AM I am very grateful to Mr. Obama for running for the U.S. Senate. I am lucky to live in Jan Schakowsky’s district and Illinois is lucky to have Schakowsky, Durbin, and, soon, Obama to represent us in Washington.
Posted by Lindsay Humpal on Sep 8, 2004 at 7:46 AM Shawn Muhammad wrote:
Anytime someone is introduced as a “Rising Star” as Mr Obama has by the Democratic Party, then he is reflecting someone else’s views, as a star reflects the suns light. Not their own
===== =====I am afraid that Shawn has a fundamental misunderstanding of astronomy.
Stars do not reflect the suns light. They give their own.
And many are much larger and much brighter than our own sun. They appear small only because they are distant.
James S. Huggins
...
Posted by James S. Huggins on Sep 8, 2004 at 10:21 AM I’d certainly vote for Obama given the incredible
alternative of Alan Keyes, and also the dismal
alternatives that existed in the GOP & Demo
primaries. But let’s be realistic, he may be a
centrist in the DLC mold. Some of the past Dem
Senators from Illinois such as Alan Dixon, Carol
Mosely Braun and Paul Simon were pretty mediocre.
Chuck Percy, the liberal Republican, plowed under
by AIPAC money, was the last first-rate mind
Illinois sent to the Senate.
Hopefully Obama will live up to his great press
but we should be cautious at the moment.
Let’s see how he does in the US Senate.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 8, 2004 at 11:48 AM The last time a politician gave me chills and hope for our future was Bill Clinton, and Dr King, respectively. Obama is both of these men rolled into one, and then some more to boot.
The first time I heard of him, then heard his words were at the DNC, and no matter where this man goes, I will follow and support him. His future is bright and as David Gamble posted, we need to nurture him, not just vote for him.
Posted by Michelle on Sep 8, 2004 at 1:33 PM Obama is inspiring in the same way that John Kennedy inspired Americans. He is able to connect with people in much the same way. I got chills when he spoke at the Democratic Convention. As a 73 year old who has seen many presidents I would hope in 2008 this man will be the candidate of choice.
Posted by Mary Louise Transue on Sep 8, 2004 at 1:49 PM I don’t live in Illinois but I have deep connections with this fine state,so I try to stay
abreast of it’s workings and doings.Hurrah to Mr. Obama and a “What the heck are you thinking?” to Mr.Muhammad.Having followed Mr.Farrakan(Last seeing him in Accra,Ghana)over the years,he reminds me of George W. Bush.A divider NOT a uniter.It’s not about speaking for one group but for the vast majority.Mr.Obama is a refreshing voice,let it live loud.
Posted by R.Cascio on Sep 8, 2004 at 4:49 PM CasagrandeJoseph wrote:
“I would hate to have to watch the right wing neo-conservatives rip another man of character apart as they have done to others like Jimmy Carter.”
You don’t have to be a right-wing neoconservative to hold Jimmy Carter in low esteem. We’re talking about a man who calls Yasser Arafat a friend, after all. Jimmy Carter is an egomaniac who refuses to learn from his own countless failures. Let’s not forget that we can thank Jimmy Carter for the current situation in Iran. Carter sanctimoniously abandoned the Shah because of his use of military tribunals, allowing him to be replaced by an indisputably greater evil in 1979. Still, the old bastard insists on meddling in foreign policy when he has no authority to do so. Where does the son of a bitch get off thinking he knows better than officials elected by the American people when he got tossed after one terrible term? His sub rosa dealings with the UN before the first Gulf War are a prime example. Jimmy Carter’s actions before and since his presidency are the reason he’s often vilified; not because of any right-wing smear campaign.
Posted by Ralph on Sep 8, 2004 at 5:43 PM David Moberg was correct in writing that Barack Obama has not addressed such issues as the distriution of wealth and power in The United States, and, indeed, in the world. Included would be the growing class divide, the conflict between corporations and workers, the satisfaction of human needs, and the power of
people to benefit from earth’s resources. But, if one agrees with Mr. Moberg, then I think we cannot draw his conclusion that Mr.Obama’s “campaign points to a new era . . .in search for a new majority.” I believe this conclusion cannot be drawn because if Mr. Obama does not address these issues, then, although the force of his charm is undeniable, he has not addressed an issues bound majority.
Posted by Dr. John M. Giannone on Sep 9, 2004 at 4:21 AM Ralph is totally wrong, Carter supported the
bastard Shah of Iran to the bloody and predictable
end, if Carter hadn’t so vigorously supported the
Shah a much better Left alternative might have
risen instead of the Islamicists.
Carter has every right to meddle in foreign policy,all of the hostages in Iran come home alive
in contrast to hundreds dead in Beirut under the
senile Reagan. Carter stopped Clinton from getting
a war with North Korea in 1996.
I wish Carter had gotten the UN to stop Bush 1’s
genocidal war on Iraq in 1991.
We should have recognized Yasser Arafat twenty years before we did. People like Ralph support
the stinking mass murderer Ariel Sharon and are
behind the neocon ultra-right hate campaign against Carter, who looks BETTER AS PRESIDENT
EVERY DAY COMPARED WITH THE RIGHTWING TRASH
THAT SUCCEEDED HIM.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 9, 2004 at 8:49 AM Hardesty, I’m not going to try too hard to reason with someone who doesn’t see Arafat for the terrorist that he is, but please allow me to explain my position on Jimmy Carter. It has nothing to do with my politics or the “neocon ultra-right hate campaign against Carter” you acccuse me of being behind.
You say that Carter helped Clinton avoid going to war with North Korea. He did this by buying off the last Stalinist state in the world with nuclear technology under the condition that they would not use it for weapons. Given the current state of affairs I would say that it was very short-sighted. Does that make me neocon ultra-right hateful conspirator against Jimmy Carter?
You say that you wish Carter’s secret letter had been successful in convincing members of the UN Security Council and NATO to defect from the first Gulf War coalition. I supported that war, but that has nothing to do with my opinion that Carter’s backstabbing letter was disloyal and just short of treason. I would feel the same way if Ronald Reagan or George H.W. Bush secretly (or openly) tried to convince our allies not to cooperate with the Clinton administration. Even if Jimmy Carter thought he was doing the right thing (which he probably did), it was very presumptuous of him to think that he had any authority to subvert the goals of the current government. If the American people wanted Jimmy Carter to make the decisions they would have kept him in office for a second term. And even if they had his self-important insistence on doing things his way wouldn’t give him any license to interfere with the government’s policies. That is why I’m convinced Jimmy Carter is an egomaniac and I don’t think it’s too far-fetched.
Posted by Ralph on Sep 9, 2004 at 12:46 PM North Korea is not a threat to the US and never
has been, spent time in South Korea, it’s a nasty
fascist police state and the US should have pulled out long ago. The South does not want Bush’s warmongering nor was the South an innocent
victim of North Korean “aggression.” See the two
volume work of Bruce Cummings on this subject.
Also I.F. Stone’s The Hidden History of The
Korean War. So yes, Carter was right to stop
Clinton’s warmongering and yes, Bush should
give an unequivocal pledge to never invade the
North in exchange for the North’s disarmament
as they and the South Koreans have repeatedly
requested. You obviously know nothing of the
actual history of the Korean Peninsula.
I never said Arafat wasn’t a terrorist, I said
SO WHAT ? Bush is a terrorist, Sharon, Begin,
Ben-Gurion, Netahanyu, Shamir, et al, were
and are terrorists (the ones still living).
Your support of that war was and is the real
treason, you blowhard. Israel’s lobby ran the pro-war campaign here domestically and it was not worth killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis during the massacre, DESERT SHAME, NOT IN MY NAME,
and it was not worth the millions of Iraqis murdered by US sanctions since 1990.
We can oppose any President’s drift towards war,
that is not treason.
It’s true morons like you elected Senile Reagan
but then Bush was a one termer and his son will
be too.
Ralph, go back to your dittohead hate radio and
spare us your ignorant fascist tirades.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 9, 2004 at 1:48 PM My tirades? I was just trying to explain to you why I don’t think much of Jimmy Carter. I was being civil; your response is a tirade. I don’t care about the history of the Korean Peninsula or how bad South Korea is. All I’m saying is that it would be better if North Korea did not have nuclear weapons. Why does that make you go apeshit? If you can get a hold of yourself and explain to me why that is not true then have at it. Also, I didn’t say opposing a war is treason. But you’re obviously a total fucking lunatic so I won’t repeat myself. Do you call everyone who disagrees with you a “blowhard,” a “true moron,” and an “ignorant fascist?” Do you hate Jews, Hardesty? Is that why you hate Israel so much? Tell me more about your theory that the Gulf War was completely orchestrated by “Israel’s lobby.” Where did you get all this, from David Duke?
Take care of yourself, Hardesty, and don’t let the Jews get you. In the meantime you should try to find someone who can help you out with your rage problem and chemical imbalance and learn to write in paragraph form.
Posted by Ralph on Sep 9, 2004 at 2:56 PM Ralph, my Jewish wife of many years opposed the
Gulf War as much as I did. If you think opposition to Israeli policies is limited to the
followers of David Duke, then obviously you have
never heard of Noam Chomsky, Seymour Hersch, Rabbi Elmer Berger, Alfred Lilienthal, Moshe Menuhin, Stephen Zunes, Howard Zinn and too many
others to list.
Spare me your psychobabble, and your profanity.
Take a close look at your own postings before
you comment on others’ anger. Your not exactly
a model of rational social analysis. If your too
lazy or stupid to take the time and effort to learn the facts of a given situation, whether
it be the Middle East or Korea, THEN DON’T RUSH
INTO PUBLIC FORUMS WITH YOUR BLATANT IGNORANCE.
It would be better if NO country had nuclear weapons, including the US which is the only
country which has used them and Truman’s rationale for using them has been rebutted
many times. As far as name calling goes, you use much more vicious language and in the very sentence right before you criticize me for
name-calling ! Pot, scrub thyself !
I’m a published freelance journalist in many venues including the Washington Post so I do
not require instruction from you in this area.
Things do not always format evenly on web boards
but the content is what counts.
My view of psychiatry is exactly that of Thomas
S. Szasz, M.D., author of The Myth Of Mental Illness and thirty other scholarly debunking
his profession, so I will charitably overlook
your ignorance in this area too.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 9, 2004 at 4:05 PM After reading the thread of posts I have concluded that the young man running for seanate could do better. Why would anyone run for politics. Most American people are mis-informed and not recieving accurate information. Revistionst are re-writing the history books. Carter and Iran are well documented, and I believe Carter is a Great American who has not always been correct in his judgements, Example N. Korea and Arraft, and his mis-handeling of the Shah of Iran. I have always Carter hung him out to dry, and since America turned their back on Shah we have associated ourselves with Iraq and Bin’Landen years ago. No stability in the area since the fall of the Shah.
Louis Farakan is marginalized as he should be, and racism is alive and well. Ignorance is abundent in the country or why would most be debating Gay-Marriage when we are occupying two countries?
Posted by Dan Forbes on Sep 10, 2004 at 4:16 AM You are totally uninformed on the Middle East.
It was precisely the US overthrow of the democratically elected new dealish government
of Mossadegh in Iran in 1953 and the installation
of the butcher Shah that are the root of our problems in the Middle East and Carter was not
that liberal and DID SUPPORT THE SHAH TO THE
BITTER END AND THAT IS WHAT THE RECORD DOCUMENTS.
Same for Carter and all US Presidents since HST
for their stupid blank check support for the Israeli dispossession of a million Palestinian Arabs in 1948 and half a million in 1967.
Arafat is no more of a terrorist than every
Israeli Prime Minister since 1948 as well as
most US Presidents. No less but no more.
Revisionist history is the norm because history
is always being revised to bring it in line with
new facts and new interpretations.
Unfortunately, we have many uninformed people like
Dan who get their “facts” from rightist hate radio.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 10, 2004 at 9:02 AM Mr. Hardesty you are wrong.Mr. Carter turned his back on the Shah and complained loudly of his human rights violations, regarding savak his private police squad.Shah traveled the world looking for refuge. Had Carter supported him, Shah would have slammed the oppoation and we would possibly not be dealing with these nuts today. You ol chap are misguided and ill-informed. No need to respond. I respect nothing you have said.
Posted by Dan Forbes on Sep 10, 2004 at 9:29 AM One more thing,.......I do not listen to any far-right crap and am not dependent on America for my news.
Posted by Dan Forbes on Sep 10, 2004 at 9:31 AM Your call on Truman is Vogue if you are twenty and care nothing of the millions of Chinese and American lives that were saved! He ended the war, a war that was started when we were attacked. I will not question his decision because I was not in his shoes. He ended the war and my family members that did not die in the second world war came home. Now I’m done.
Posted by Dan Forbes on Sep 10, 2004 at 9:34 AM You are simply wrong, Carter did not bring up the gross SAVAK Nazi-like violations of human rights.
Amnesty International listed the Shah’s regime
as the top violator of human rights in the world
in 1978. Carter SHOULD have worked to overthrow
the Shah but he didn’t. Read Noam Chomsky,
Tariq Ali, Edward Said, Philip Diro. That betrayal of the Shah myth is a rightwing canard.
It was precisely the Shah’s slamming of the opposition that prepared the grounds for the
extreme reaction of the Islamic fundamentalists
and people like yourself have blood on your hands for supporting the Shah.
Gar Alperowitz in a massive 1995 book totally
debunked the Truman lie that the a-bombings
were the only alternative to an invasion.
The Japanese had been trying to surrender for
nine months before we bombed them, see Harry Elmer Barnes “Hiroshima: Assault On A Beaten
Foe” National Review, May 10, 1958.
Eisenhower and MacArthur were opposed to the
dropping of the bomb and also even if we had
invaded Japan, which was militarily unnecessary,
20,000 lives would have been lost, not the two
million fantasies that boobs like you repeat.
Again, we could have blockaded and starved them
out but that was not necessary. What Truman did was comparable to Hitler & Churchill, IT WAS A MAJOR WAR CRIME. PERIOD.
You obviously spout the standard ignorant neoconservative, rightwing lie, you sound like
a clone of Zell Miller and he’s a total lying
nut, which is a fair description of yourself
come to think of it.
You a typical neocon who utters ignorant assertions in lieu of arguments.
NOW you really are done, pal.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 10, 2004 at 10:27 AM Good luck reasoning with that maniac, Dan. I’m starting to think “Michael Hardesty” might just be an alias for Jimmy Carter who is patrolling the internet defending his good name. I’m still waiting on Hardesty to give a logical explanation of why Jimmy Carter wasn’t wrong to help the North Koreans build nuclear weapons but all he wants to do is change the subject. He’s finally admitted that Arafat is terrorist but still he flies off the handle when I criticize Jimmy Carter for being friends with him.
Posted by Ralph on Sep 10, 2004 at 10:33 AM I think that I, along with many others, may be idealizing Barack Obama based on very little concrete evidence. After all, if all we know about him was derived from his DNC speech, we know little about his actual stand on specific policy issues. However, we do know that he can put a compelling speech together and that he speaks with compassion and intelligence. That is more than can be said for John Kerry, who doesn’t seem to have had an original or compelling or coherent thought in years. However, I will be forced to vote for Kerry for president since Mr. Bush and his gang scare me to death with their deception, deceit, malevolence, and criminality.
Posted by Elinor Bowles on Sep 10, 2004 at 10:44 AM Carter was right to prevent a war, I never said
Carter helped the North build nuclear weapons,
far from it, US policy of isolation for 50 years
of North Korea has been a total failure and if
the US would have face to face talks with the
North AS SOUTH KOREA HAS STRONGLY URGED it would defuse the crisis. North Korea has said it would
abandon its nukes if the US would agree to a no
invasion pledge, Bush is the holdup here, if the
US doesn’t agree to then I agree the North should
continue with its nuclear program. The USA is
A COWARDLY COUNTRY WHICH DOES NOT ATTACK NUCLEAR
ARMED ADVERSARIES AS THE LONG COLD WAR PROVED.
Thank you, Ralph, for conceding that Begin, Shamir, Netanyahu, Sharon, Ben-Gurion and Bush
are major terrorists making Arafat look like
a smaller scale terrorist, precisely my point.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 10, 2004 at 10:55 AM Carter is not friends with Arafat, Carter SHOULD
HAVE RECOGNIZED THE PLO BUT REAGAN FINALLY DID
IN 1989.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 10, 2004 at 10:57 AM Thanks, Elinor, for your perceptive comments,
totally agree with you.
And thanks for getting the conversation back on
track. Our rightwing extremists just can’t stand
the fact that the great NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER
JIMMY CARTER WILL GO DOWN AS A GREAT MAN IN HISTORY and they are reduced to pulling their
weinies in futile protest.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 10, 2004 at 11:01 AM I never said Begin, Shamir, Netanyahu, Sharon, Ben-Gurion and Bush are terrorists. But I’m glad you finally admitted your hatred of America. You “blame America first” types all seem to love Jimmy Carter. And his Nobel Prize means nothing. Any “peace prize” given to Yasser Arafat is a joke.
Posted by Ralph on Sep 10, 2004 at 11:23 AM We agree that Meir, Ben-Gurion, Jacobotinsky,
Shamir, Netanyahu, Sharon, Begin, Kahane, et al
were large scale terrorists.
And we agree the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded
to very great men.
Sorry you hate all of gentile America, sane
people only hate its government.
President Carter has accepted the apology that
I just sent him on your behalf.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 10, 2004 at 11:54 AM I am a admirer of Former President Carter and believe he has accomplished great works and one of the very best states-men we have had in the country for years. I have NEVER been accused at being right-wing anything. LOL
Posted by Dan Forbes on Sep 10, 2004 at 11:57 AM By the way, did everyone see the great letter
that Jimmy Carter sent to Zell Miller ? The
Atlanta Journal-Constitution published it the
other day. President Carter tore the Zell-man
a new anal cavity.
We would all be much better off today if we had
reelected Jimmy Carter, our Greatest President,
instead of Ronald McDonald Alzheimer.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 10, 2004 at 12:42 PM That’s nice, Dan. Obviously I can’t vouch for
your whole history but could only comment on
what you wrote here. Sometimes the worst righties
are lefties gone south a la David Horowitz.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 10, 2004 at 12:45 PM Would those grandstanders who occupied so much space above please carry on their arguments on their own private e-mail facilities?
Posted by wmmorris on Sep 12, 2004 at 6:32 PM I was sticking to the topic when some rightist trolls came in making historically inaccurate
comments, I did not want to see their lies go
unchallenged. I grant you it can get bogged
down.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 13, 2004 at 1:31 PM Fascinatin’ in’t it? Pretty much degenerated from “audacity of hope” to petty bickering. Seems to prove something Americans learned once but forgot. Mebbe , after all, the smartest candidate for prez was ole Pogo Possum.
Posted by Ron Emery on Sep 23, 2004 at 6:32 PM Ron,
You are right. One of the problems is that trolls
(which term I only recently became familiar with)
prowl all these websites to run their own ideological spin. I probably shouldn’t have responded to the ludicrous attacks on Carter
but I did. I hope the web doesn’t go the way
of rightwing talk radio, I gave up listening
to that decades ago.
Another problem is that certain characters with
their ideological axes to grind will follow people
around and then reproduce selected & often out of
context quotes. I have only posted on a half dozen
different sites total over the years but I would
advise people to never use their real name.
I’m happy to stand by everything I’ve ever posted
but who needs Big Bro’ keeping tabs ?
Take care.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Sep 27, 2004 at 1:01 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by David Moberg
- Our Imperfect Unions
- Dismantling the Myth of McCain
How the Republican senator's maverick image is a sham - Main Street Squeeze
- Winning the White Working Class
- The Healthcare Union War
Tensions between the California Nurses Association and SEIU escalate at the Labor Notes conference - Dissent in the Ranks
SEIU Is the Nation's Fastest Growing Union -- But at What Cost?
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1968 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2004 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
