Hucks Army - Faith. Family. Freedom. [Grassroots] JOIN HUCKS ARMY | GET INVOLVED | FUNDRAISING | LINKS | LEADERSHIP | ABOUT
It is currently Sat Sep 21, 2019 1:12 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 164 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 3:47 am 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:47 pm
Posts: 4564
Location: Texas
Likes: 554
Liked: 523
Just read this over at The Weekly Standard
Quote:
Tweet of the night: From Buddy Roemer: “Herman Cain is currently beating me in Iowa. #seriously.”

:lol: I know little about Roemer, but I love a guy who can laugh at himself

(as opposed to a certain candidate who allows his Twitter surrogate to laugh at an opponent, & then dismisses it as irrelevant, when asked about it, rather than apologizing for his juvenile alt ego. Brings his racist newsletters back to mind - and of course #18 from the Tenets of Paulism viewtopic.php?f=181&t=26039&p=219706&hilit=tenets#p219706 :roll: )


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:22 am 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:47 pm
Posts: 4564
Location: Texas
Likes: 554
Liked: 523
Interesting info from the exit polls in Iowa
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/primaries/epolls/ia

What I found particularly interesting, if you scroll almost halfway down,
Vote by Party ID - 43% of Paul's supporters admitted to being Independents, while only 14% called themselves Republicans
Vote by Ideology - 40% of Paul's supporters admitted to being moderate or liberal, while 15% claimed to be very conservative & 21% somewhat conservative

(I say "admitted to" and "claimed" because I have little doubt that not all of them were being honest)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:00 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:50 pm
Posts: 2363
Location: Iowa
Likes: 51
Liked: 211
Don't get me started on people who who wasted their votes by writing in someone at the caucuses. Exit polls also showed Santorum not only won evangelicals but he also won the middle class, women, and tea party vote. Well rounded!

I was a great night for Rick Santorum in Iowa.

_________________
"We fought, we dreamed, that dream is still with us."
Ronald Reagan, 1976


TEAM HUCK IOWA
http://www.facebook.com/TeamHuckIowa


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 4:47 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:03 am
Posts: 4844
Likes: 1174
Liked: 782
QuoVadisAnima wrote:
Washington was not "an idea man" - why was he so popular that he could have been the new line of royalty in this country?

Lincoln was not "an idea man" - why is he considered one of our best presidents?

Reagan was not "an idea man" - why was he so effective and well liked?

Huckabee is not "an idea man" - why are we convinced that he would be the perfect POTUS?

Why do "idea men" tend to make bad leaders?


I would have to disagree to the extent that they were great for not being "idea men." Washington was loved by almost all, but not Lincoln. They had profound ideas and ideals that cut across the "normal" thought patterns of their day. Most people would have accepted the status quo, but they were each great for daring to be a Daniel, daring to stand alone. One of my favorite books about Reagan was written by his speech writer, Peter Robinson, who helped Reagan write the "Berlin Wall speech." Entitled, How Ronald Reagan Changed My Life, it tells stories of how Reagan had ideas that were not accepted by his advisers, and the speech about tearing down the Berlin Wall nearly gave them apoplexy! He withstood the doubters and changed history.

One cannot have good ideas without strong convictions. Or if one does, they will come to naught without the backbone of moral resolve. Only strong convictions that the ideal of religious freedom and personal liberties were so important, as well as independence from foreign rule, gave Washington, Lincoln, and Reagan the fortitude, courage, self-sacrifice, and a boldness to be different, and keep speaking out against evil so it could be defeated.

For Washington, it was the evil of foreign occupation and law that was non-responsive to the people's welfare.

For Lincoln, it was the evil of a divided nation and treating slaves as non-persons.

For Reagan, it was the evil of Communism and a growing, non-responsive, federal government.

Washington saw the need for God in America. He rose at 5:00 AM each day to pray. He wrote journals of prayers and thoughts from Scripture.

Lincoln often quoted Scripture as the basis for his decisions.

Reagan came to have a strong faith in the glory and magnificence of God, and this flowed over into his decision to become pro-life.

And one of the things I admire about Huckabee has been his book, A Simple Government. It is filled with outstanding Scripturally-backed ideas for simplifying the government and bringing back "home rule" and personal liberty.

I have seen few modern defenders of the Christian faith and for the right to worship God in America as strong as Newt Gingrich. Sure, he can be a bit abrasive. But he cares enough to dig in and fight for right, not just to parade Bible verses or claim personal perfection. He has been repentant of sin. And he has written a book called Rediscovering God in America. He may not be the "sweetest" man around, but he will be one of the best, most tireless fighters to protect the rule of law in the Constitution, as well as traditional marriage, life, and other things Christians hold dear. He has the unusual talent of cutting through the pretenses of liberals and RINOs like Romney. It was not a smart move for Romney to put Gingrich down. The debates may be interesting.

And, finally, it appears that there is quite a bit of respect between Santorum and Gingrich. I read that Gingrich's daughter has been a campaign advisor or something for Rick. The other night, Gingrich gave Santorum high praise on the Hannity show.

_________________
Image



Post by justgrace has received Likes: 2 goalieman, janelles
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 6:26 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:21 am
Posts: 2747
Location: Arkansas
Likes: 200
Liked: 653
justgrace wrote:
QuoVadisAnima wrote:
Washington was not "an idea man" - why was he so popular that he could have been the new line of royalty in this country?

Lincoln was not "an idea man" - why is he considered one of our best presidents?

Reagan was not "an idea man" - why was he so effective and well liked?

Huckabee is not "an idea man" - why are we convinced that he would be the perfect POTUS?

Why do "idea men" tend to make bad leaders?


I would have to disagree to the extent that they were great for not being "idea men." Washington was loved by almost all, but not Lincoln. They had profound ideas and ideals that cut across the "normal" thought patterns of their day. Most people would have accepted the status quo, but they were each great for daring to be a Daniel, daring to stand alone. One of my favorite books about Reagan was written by his speech writer, Peter Robinson, who helped Reagan write the "Berlin Wall speech." Entitled, How Ronald Reagan Changed My Life, it tells stories of how Reagan had ideas that were not accepted by his advisers, and the speech about tearing down the Berlin Wall nearly gave them apoplexy! He withstood the doubters and changed history.

One cannot have good ideas without strong convictions. Or if one does, they will come to naught without the backbone of moral resolve. Only strong convictions that the ideal of religious freedom and personal liberties were so important, as well as independence from foreign rule, gave Washington, Lincoln, and Reagan the fortitude, courage, self-sacrifice, and a boldness to be different, and keep speaking out against evil so it could be defeated.

For Washington, it was the evil of foreign occupation and law that was non-responsive to the people's welfare.

For Lincoln, it was the evil of a divided nation and treating slaves as non-persons.

For Reagan, it was the evil of Communism and a growing, non-responsive, federal government.

Washington saw the need for God in America. He rose at 5:00 AM each day to pray. He wrote journals of prayers and thoughts from Scripture.

Lincoln often quoted Scripture as the basis for his decisions.

Reagan came to have a strong faith in the glory and magnificence of God, and this flowed over into his decision to become pro-life.

And one of the things I admire about Huckabee has been his book, A Simple Government. It is filled with outstanding Scripturally-backed ideas for simplifying the government and bringing back "home rule" and personal liberty.

I have seen few modern defenders of the Christian faith and for the right to worship God in America as strong as Newt Gingrich. Sure, he can be a bit abrasive. But he cares enough to dig in and fight for right, not just to parade Bible verses or claim personal perfection. He has been repentant of sin. And he has written a book called Rediscovering God in America. He may not be the "sweetest" man around, but he will be one of the best, most tireless fighters to protect the rule of law in the Constitution, as well as traditional marriage, life, and other things Christians hold dear. He has the unusual talent of cutting through the pretenses of liberals and RINOs like Romney. It was not a smart move for Romney to put Gingrich down. The debates may be interesting.

And, finally, it appears that there is quite a bit of respect between Santorum and Gingrich. I read that Gingrich's daughter has been a campaign advisor or something for Rick. The other night, Gingrich gave Santorum high praise on the Hannity show.


What Washington, Lincoln, and Reagan (and Huck) had in common was there ability to be profoundly more "idea men" than the public knew or acknowledged. Mostly that was due to their great ability to clarify complex issues to the root essence and especially to present their argument with great humility. None of these men carried themselves like they were the "smartest guy in the room" even when they were (which was often).

What they all managed to do was to maintain the focus on the ideas (really ideals implemented) themselves and not lose sight of what they were trying to achieve as power tried to seduce each man with the false siren song that only their political well being and personal interests could make the idea come to fruition. They were also extremely good at "suffering fools" (perfectly by not even letting on that they were doing it) in the realization that a defeated enemy is still an enemy but a converted enemy is an ally.

I do not see those traits remotely associated with Newt.

_________________
"As for us, our days of combat are over. Our swords are rust. Our guns will thunder no more. The vultures that once wheeled over our heads must be buried with their prey. Whatever of glory must be won in the council or the closet, never again in the field. I do not repine. We have shared the incommunicable experience of war; we have felt, we still feel, the passion of life to its top."

Oliver Wendell Holmes


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 8:05 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:47 pm
Posts: 4564
Location: Texas
Likes: 554
Liked: 523
I believe this may be one of those terms similar to our discussion some time back of "career politician" where people generally agree on the meaning so long as it remains vague, but when it comes to specifics, we view it differently.

So I looked "idea man" up to at least give us a mutual starting point

Dictionary.com says it is "a person who is capable of and responsible for providing original ideas."

Merriam-Webster.com says it is "a person with an unusual capacity for visualizing and formulating new techniques, approaches, products"

Now, please give me some leeway to try to explain as it is harder to express what I mean than I had thought it would be. I certainly did not mean that Washington, et al, were not men of vision & of course they all had strong convictions (but then, so did Marx and Stalin), but they were not known for being what might be termed "political or even ideological inventors" (something vaguely along the same lines as a policy wonk, I suppose).

There must be a term for the kind of person who looks at an array of ideas and suggestions and can visualize what would work and what wouldn't - but these are people who look at the concepts proposed by idea men & generally have the judgment to see the practicality and repercussions of those ideas? Sort of like a clearinghouse for ideas personified!

I have always leaned toward geeky & hung around people of the same bent - in my experience, thinkers & inventors are great for hypothesizing & experimenting, but tend to be poor implementers. That's because the temperament of an inventor is predominantly introspective - being inwardly focused tends to make one more vulnerable to being self absorbed, too - & has a propensity for trying things just to see what happens or floating ideas to kick them around a bit (like Newt's enthusiastic proposal to put kids to work :shock: ).

The temperament of an effective leader is one who is focused on finding the best idea(s) and getting them implemented.

The temperament of a great leader - and specifically those leaders that I mentioned - is one who has that focus without regard for personal aggrandizement.

So I believe the ideal president is one who surrounds himself with a variety of good idea people - like Gingrich - can recognize viable solutions within all that is put forth, communicate them to the people, and delegate their implementation to the right people.

Sigh. Anyone else pining for Huck all over again now? :cry:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:40 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:21 am
Posts: 2747
Location: Arkansas
Likes: 200
Liked: 653
I'm not actually in any kind of disagreement with what you are saying but I think the term that best applies is "intellectual."

The term really only came into fashion during the French Dreyfus Affair at the end of the 19th century. Before that the kind of person you describe was known as a "man of letters," or earlier still, "illuminati." What largely distinguished this group from other thoughtful or knowledgeable folks was the breadth of their ideas and interests, the production of distinct and highly contentious nomenclatures, a belief the superiority of intellect over virtue or wisdom (which moved quickly to the notion of only science representing true reason and metaphysics and theology irrational anti-intellectualism), and a general disregard for practicality.

Gingrich shares many of the traits of the academic "intellectual" which is no surprise since he is largely a product of that culture. So is Obama. So are most folks associated with universities today, which is why there is an ever widening gap between main street and the ivy quad. No place in society or government represents that divide more than the Courts, especially the Supreme Court (all of whom are products of two Law schools - Harvard and Yale). Newt has argued against their overreach but ironically shares many of their assumption about the superiority of intellect (which is always defined in a manner that aggrandizes the "intellectual" in society) over virtue or wisdom.

Washington (about whom recent scholarship has changed - he is now regarded as a profoundly influential, radical, original, and deep thinker); Lincoln (whose writings, especially the Gettysburg Address and First and Second Inaugurals, are considered the intellectual zenith of state discourse); and Reagan (whose thirty years of correspondence and personal writings have finally been recognized as reflecting an extraordinarily nimble and subtle mind as well as a comprehensive knowledge of four centuries of Western and American political thought); all possessed great minds and the ability to advance their own original ideas as well as their own synthesis of the ideas of others.

But none of them is thought an "intellectual" by today’s "intellectuals." That is reserved for Jefferson, Madison, and Wilson.

An intellectual is a man who takes more words than necessary to tell more than he knows.
Dwight D. Eisenhower (not considered an intellectual by intellectuals though he did lead the effort to liberate Europe and presided over the greatest period on ecominc growth in the twentieth century)

_________________
"As for us, our days of combat are over. Our swords are rust. Our guns will thunder no more. The vultures that once wheeled over our heads must be buried with their prey. Whatever of glory must be won in the council or the closet, never again in the field. I do not repine. We have shared the incommunicable experience of war; we have felt, we still feel, the passion of life to its top."

Oliver Wendell Holmes


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2012 10:53 pm 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 3:14 pm
Posts: 2120
Likes: 509
Liked: 440
Maybe Santorum won after all! It ain't over, 'til it's over - in this case, until it's certified!

Man claims he was there and helped count and the count was 2, not 22 for Mitt.


http://www.kcci.com/news/30144582/detail.html


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 2:37 am 
Offline
***** General

Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 8:45 pm
Posts: 1792
Location: Pennsylvania
Likes: 208
Liked: 275
Listening to all the pundits today, it appears they learned absolutely nothing from the 2008 GOP primary. They still thinks whoever wins New Hampshire will win the nomination (not necessarily so) and still think the only way to stop Romney is for it to be a 2 man race (Romney was stopped in a 3 way race in 2008 by two under funded candidates). Mittens is the 25% candidate, very beatable as long as there aren't 3 or 4 conservatives splitting the vote. Trounce Mittens in SC and the momentum is with whoever wins SC.

_________________
Most people believe what they see, the Left see's what it believes.....


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 4:10 am 
Offline
Lieutenant General

Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 12:01 pm
Posts: 884
Location: Indianapolis
Likes: 166
Liked: 73
steves wrote:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/01/conservative-elites-to-huddle-109557.html
By JONATHAN MARTIN | 1/4/12 9:48 AM EST
A group of movement conservatives has called an emergency meeting in Texas next weekend to find a "consensus" Republican presidential hopeful, POLITICO has learned.

"You and your spouse are cordially invited to a private meeting with national conservative leaders of faith at the ranch of Paul and Nancy Pressler near Brenham, Texas, with the purpose of attempting to unite and to come to a consensus on which Republican Presidential candidate or candidates to support, or which not to support," read an invitation that is making its way into in-boxes this morning.

The meeting is being hosted by such right-leaning figures as James Dobson, Don Wildmon and Gary Bauer. Many of the individuals on the host list attended a previous closed-door session with Rick Perry this summer.

Movement conservatives are concerned that a vote split between Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum among base voters could enable Mitt Romney.

A source who shared the invitation said the meeting was about how to avoid such a possibility.

Despite his distant fourth in Iowa, Gingrich has shown no inclination to quit the race.
Could this be why Perry decided to stay in when it seemed he was ready to quit? Could they be pushing him to stay in and planning to endorse him?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 4:19 am 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:47 pm
Posts: 4564
Location: Texas
Likes: 554
Liked: 523
Given the names of those to attend coupled with Perry's poor showing in Iowa, I'd be more than a little surprised.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:02 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant General

Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 8:35 am
Posts: 993
Likes: 0
Liked: 24
IowaforHuckabee wrote:
Maybe Santorum won after all! It ain't over, 'til it's over - in this case, until it's certified!

Man claims he was there and helped count and the count was 2, not 22 for Mitt.


http://www.kcci.com/news/30144582/detail.html



I hope this story catches fire quick. I assume once the votes are certified nothing can be done about it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:20 pm 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:28 am
Posts: 457
Likes: 75
Liked: 56
conservativevoter wrote:
IowaforHuckabee wrote:
Maybe Santorum won after all! It ain't over, 'til it's over - in this case, until it's certified!

Man claims he was there and helped count and the count was 2, not 22 for Mitt.


http://www.kcci.com/news/30144582/detail.html



I hope this story catches fire quick. I assume once the votes are certified nothing can be done about it.


Judging by the article, why are the officials not taking up more interest in this?

Plus Santorum also said he wouldn't challenge it and wants to leave it as a tie. Really? Pro-Santorum people better have some answers quick as to this guy's ability to fight, because it's a requirement against Obama. Also, Iowa better get this sorted out right or you guys are not going to look so good.

_________________
"I've always believed the mission is greater than the man..." -Governor Rick Perry
"We're not choosing a pastor-in-chief, we're choosing a commander-in-chief." -Pastor Michael Youssef


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:37 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:50 pm
Posts: 2363
Location: Iowa
Likes: 51
Liked: 211
GAVoter4Huck wrote:
conservativevoter wrote:
IowaforHuckabee wrote:
Maybe Santorum won after all! It ain't over, 'til it's over - in this case, until it's certified!

Man claims he was there and helped count and the count was 2, not 22 for Mitt.


http://www.kcci.com/news/30144582/detail.html



I hope this story catches fire quick. I assume once the votes are certified nothing can be done about it.


Judging by the article, why are the officials not taking up more interest in this?

Plus Santorum also said he wouldn't challenge it and wants to leave it as a tie. Really? Pro-Santorum people better have some answers quick as to this guy's ability to fight, because it's a requirement against Obama. Also, Iowa better get this sorted out right or you guys are not going to look so good.


The results cannot be challenged as it is a caucus....on paper ballots....with people putting and "x" by someone's name or writing the name themselves (depends on each individual caucus) and manual counting. There will be no recount. The Iowa GOP has fourteen days to certify the results. If you lived here, you would know that the chairman of the GOP is well aware of the county in question and is looking into it. If the change does happen Santorum would win the caucus by 12 votes and, yes, that would still basically be a tie...Santorum is correct. You want him to fight when he is already seen as the winner because he came from 5% in the polls to 25% in the polls in about a week and only spent 76 cents a vote and has raised 2 million dollars off of this "tie" with the frontrunner and has also surged in every other poll? What do you want him to "fight?" He is focused on the races at hand, which he should be. People don't want him to whine and I don't see him whining here about getting the shaft or something. I wouldn't call someone who clawed his way to the top not a "fighter."

_________________
"We fought, we dreamed, that dream is still with us."
Ronald Reagan, 1976


TEAM HUCK IOWA
http://www.facebook.com/TeamHuckIowa



Post by Iowans Rock has received Likes: 2 IowaforHuckabee, QuoVadisAnima
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2012 11:28 pm 
Offline
*** General
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 9:48 am
Posts: 1327
Location: Tulsa
Likes: 106
Liked: 43
I saw that story on HLN today at lunch time.

_________________
http://www.RickSantorum.com/
http://www.JimBridenstine.com/
Mike Huckabee Book Store


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2012 7:37 am 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:03 am
Posts: 4844
Likes: 1174
Liked: 782
Yes, Perry staying in will further split the vote. I hope there will be a clear winner over Romney. Next to defeating Obama, I would like to defeat the RINO, Romney, and have a real conservative carry South Carolina.

The only scenario in which this type of muss-up would be beneficial is if it leads to a brokered convention that puts Huckabee in! :wink:

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2012 2:10 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:50 pm
Posts: 2363
Location: Iowa
Likes: 51
Liked: 211
It looks like now the GOP chair of the county in question has also stated that there is an error giving Romney 20 more votes. There could be errors in other counties also so we will have to wait for the final certification. While it would still technically be a "tie" in delegates between Santorum and Romney no matter who comes out on top it sure would be nice to have another name other then Mitt Romney to be the 2012 Iowa Caucus winner.

_________________
"We fought, we dreamed, that dream is still with us."
Ronald Reagan, 1976


TEAM HUCK IOWA
http://www.facebook.com/TeamHuckIowa



Post by Iowans Rock Liked by: Miserere
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2012 2:21 pm 
Offline
Brigadier Geneal
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 5:44 pm
Posts: 578
Location: North Carolina
Likes: 54
Liked: 99
If the caucus is certified in 8 days and shows Santorum to have worn by a thin margin and this is released just before SC, does it have an effect? What do you all think?

_________________
http://homeschoolershearthuckabee.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2012 2:26 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 7:46 pm
Posts: 1563
Location: Texas
Likes: 178
Liked: 374
brownkb wrote:
If the caucus is certified in 8 days and shows Santorum to have worn by a thin margin and this is released just before SC, does it have an effect? What do you all think?


I can't imagine it would. I mean, why should it matter if it turns out a handful of corn farmers really voted for RS rather than MR. But people are crazy, so maybe it will have an impact in Santorum's favor. I'd take that.

_________________
THE TIMES are nightfall, look, their light grows less;
The times are winter, watch, a world undone:
They waste, they wither worse; they as they run
Or bring more or more blazon man’s distress.
And I not help. Nor word now of success:
All is from wreck, here, there, to rescue one—
Work which to see scarce so much as begun
Makes welcome death, does dear forgetfulness.
Or what is else? There is your world within.
There rid the dragons, root out there the sin.
Your will is law in that small commonweal…
G.M. Hopkins.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2012 2:51 pm 
Offline
***** General
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:50 pm
Posts: 2363
Location: Iowa
Likes: 51
Liked: 211
brownkb wrote:
If the caucus is certified in 8 days and shows Santorum to have worn by a thin margin and this is released just before SC, does it have an effect? What do you all think?


It would be some free media for him, which is always good.

_________________
"We fought, we dreamed, that dream is still with us."
Ronald Reagan, 1976


TEAM HUCK IOWA
http://www.facebook.com/TeamHuckIowa



Post by Iowans Rock Liked by: DFCSTech
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 164 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
POWERED_BY