WITCHCRAFT - - - IT'S OFFICIAL, TODAY I BOUGHT MY HOUSE FROM A FEMINIST WITCH.

It's like a kid in a candy store.

Our first task for our family is to burn all her witchcraft idols and objects in the front yard. A big bond fire. I love it when the good guys can take back the things of the wicked and claim them for Christ.

It's too much fun.

I think my 3 year old daughter will throw the first evil thing in the fire. She's so excited to do this.

And guess what. I did not even have to ask. But she volunteered the info. She told me:

1) She hates Republicans
2) Loves Obama
3) Loves Evolution
4) Hates McCain
5) Hates Christianity
6) A Political Liberal and Hardcore Progressive

Deductively speaking as I have argued before, I knew ALL of this before she ever told me.

It's beautiful to see my arguments via the theorectial so obvious in the practical. I knew this before she even opened her mouth.

Know your enemy. And then go buy their house.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

Hi Dave,

On O'Reilly's own show, he gave equally the option that God may be a man or a Woman. This was in passing.

The more you peel away O'Reilly's pagan theology, the more justification and understanding it becomes to his luke-warm political spectrum.

Did you see his conversation with Glenn Beck yesterday. Even Beck was shaking his head at the guy. DIck Morris was doing the same on today's show.

I do not know his heart, but his words are his words. He is luke warm in the political arena, but he is a down right heretic in the theological arena thus making his politics skate on thin ice.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

GOD MIGHT BE A WOMAN? ? ? ? ------ THIS IS WHAT BILL O'REILLY SAID ------

I believe it was last week that Bill O'Reilly said on his show that God might be a woman. He may be a man too, he gave this as a possibility, but equally is possible according to O'Reilly God might be a Woman.

The Black Liberal on his show on another occasion I believe (Dr. Hill?) told Bill quote. "Welcome to the Left."

Are you telling me that a person's theology has no bearing on their politics. This has been my point from the beginning. Bill O'Reilly claims to be Roman Catholic, and also is extremely Liberal theologically speaking.

Now, even if we didn't know anything about O'Reilly, via his extremely pagan theology of Feminism, we would expect to see his politics wicked and liberal on some points.

And boy, do we ever. Is O'Reilly a Witch? What's going on here?

Somebody needs to take this luke-warm wannabe out of commission.

QUESTION: = If a person thinks God is or may be a woman, does this have ANY bearing on how they funnel their worldview regarding politics?

And if so, how?

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

Hi Conservatarian,

I'm trying to be helpful. Sometimes passions trumps logic and if it happens in this case, your goals will fail.

One should never stop thinking. All actions should continually reviewed and tested in the process. Thus your tense issue is a logical fallacy of passion over logic.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

Hi Conservatarian,

You said:

"People in Nevada, California and other states are in position to do this--not thinking about it"

This is disturbing. To think before one acts. Essentially this is impossible unless you are possessed by demons or something. One has to think before they act.

The question is how much thinking and if the thinking corresponds to the reality of what is right and wrong. If the right and wrong is the OUGHT verses the IS.

I would ask that you put more thought in the method of approach of the actions that follows. Actions flows from and away from its base and the base is ideas while the actions flow from the ideas.

I am currently setting myself to run for office. I stated that a while ago.

If you simply ACT without thought, the enemy will beat you down and your well intentioned purpose to take back this country will NOT STICK, and will fade away when the arguments made for this country are seen as extremely unsound, though possibly valid.

No need to fix something that is not broken. So if the Platform is Conservative, then you need to hold phonies accountable to this standard instead of making a brand new document that future Republicans or Conservatives won't follow just like the Platform. A circle will happen.

So think and act on accountability if indeed you are stubborn and do make a new document.

You are shooting yourself in the foot and not fixing the problem. That being accountability.

Though I will pray that your thoughts will correspond to your actions of what a Conservative is according to the Platform and according to the Holy Scriptures.

Do not give an enemy a chance to kill you intellectually. In all your conduct of thought and deed, make it correspond to the reality of ethics, truth, and justice. For that is truly what a politician should stand for.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

Hi Conservatarian - - - Sloppy verses Logically

The choice it taking the Country back logically and correctly, or via the means of absurdity. If you want to take the country back and make it STICK, then you must be sound in all areas of method and understanding.

Have you read the Republican Platform? Is this not Conservative?

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

THE PRECINCT TACTIC GIVES VICTORY TO THE ENEMY

- THE REPUBLICAN PLATFORM (AN APOLOGETIC) -

Nobody talks about or discusses the Republican Platform. Have you read the Platform Conservatarian? You need to do this.

The Precinct Tactic is not actually correct. The Republican position, if followed CONSISTENTLY in reference to the Republican Platform (<a href="http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/)" target="_blank">http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/) would be extremely close to what a Conservative ought to be. Virtually zero Republicans adhere to or follow the Platform consistently, thus making them FAKE Republicans. Though there are an extreme few.

So it's not taking a party OVER to replace old concepts with new concepts. It's breaking the door down and finding the chaff among the wheat, and burning the chaff so the wheat stands. It's blowing the enemy of stealth OVER Conservative lines to eat at conservative concepts like Termites starving for wood as a means of strategy and deception.

The enemy is on the same side in the battle manipulating the Republicans to redefine their terms on a practical scale.

I challenge you to find me 10 Republicans on the Hill that adhere to the Platform on a consistent level. This you cannot do. It's simply not the case.

So rather then attempting the precinct tactic (which is false and gives credence to the enemy and our defeat), we need to burn the double agents and stealth spies at the stake intellectually, and shame them with some old fashion Reductio Ad Absurdum.

The goal is worthwhile, but this allows victory for the enemy. We need to blow the enemies boat right out of the water by taking back the principles of Conservative values outlined in the Republican Platform which is virtually never mentioned or discussed.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

HI Dave,

I was right after all. Gates was the racist and the cops were NOT. Gates used the logical fallacy of equivocation in regards to the term Racism while the Cops were more conservative in their approach.

I know how these liberals think, especially black liberals (99% of them). Clarance Thomas would be one of those rare wonderful Conservatives that the black community hates.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

Hi Conseratarian,

This is extremely good. Reclaim the Party back to the Conservative concept within the Republican term.

If Republicans today were simply consistent within the Republican "Platform," we would be much more conservative on the Hill.

Have you read the Republican "Platform." Is this not predominately conservative? The Platform is wrong about Islam, but is mainly conservative as a whole.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

Hi HerbalRemedy,

So Mote It Be ! ! !

"Do What Thou Wilt Is The Whole Of The Law, Love Under Will, Love Under Law."
Alister Crowley - Book of Thelma IV.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).