C3

Fischer: Obama is Trying to Make Gun Owners Seem Crazy

When President Obama unveiled his list of recommendations for combating gun violence earlier this week, a few of the items involved efforts to improve mental health services ... which Bryan Fischer claims is part of an effort to portray supporters of the Second Amendment as crazy:

Wilson Tells Caller who Threatened the President His Conspiracy Theory on Government Ammunition Hoarding

Buster Wilson of the American Family Association routinely uses his radio show to push bizarre and false claims that the government is fomenting violence against its citizens and building concentration camps while also promoting quasi-birther allegations.

So it was no surprise that a caller on his show seemingly threatened President Obama’s life, telling Wilson that “we need to take him out, one way or the other.”

While Wilson made sure to reject and distance himself from the caller’s threat, he went on to tell her about his latest conspiracy theory, one endorsed by fellow AFA radio host Bryan Fischer, about how the government is seeking to make ammunition unavailable to gun owners. The next caller told Wilson that they might soon be sharing a jail cell.

Wilson: Cynthia, thanks for calling from Palestine, Texas, glad to have you on.

Caller: Thank you sir, I just want to say nobody is bringing up the fact that that Muslim shot up Fort Hood and they knew he was on the move to do that, and Benghazi you bet and the Border Patrol, where’s the bullets for them? But you want to come out here and you want to take everything we’ve got and set up the Muslim Brotherhood just clearly shows it’s like a zero dart right into the center. Also talking about holding us hostage to get his ceiling, the checks won’t come, you know, this guy. America, we need to take him out, one way or the other.

Wilson: Okay Cynthia, thanks for calling. Well I want to be careful on saying things like that we don’t want anybody to think we’re talking about—we don’t support any kind of concept of taking the President out. We had an opportunity to vote him out and the country didn’t take it so he is rightfully our president, he was voted by the majority so there you go, he’s in. but you did sort of sum it all up in one sentence everything from Benghazi to Fort Hood to Fast and Furious to the Border Patrol.

You know something else that a lot of people are not mentioning, I called my dealership that I trade with on a regular basis today to ask about the purchasing of another gun and they didn’t have any. They couldn’t tell me when they were going to have any in, they couldn’t tell me when they were coming, they didn’t know if there were going to be any more coming. She said “until we have the dust settled on all this stuff from yesterday” she couldn’t tell me if there were going to be any more guns coming in stock.

Ammunition, same thing, can’t find ammunition. You can find a few guns but you can’t find ammunition. Somebody asked me last night and I thought it was a perfect question to ask, almost a billion and a half rounds of ammunition purchased last year by the Department of Homeland Security, Border Patrol and even the armed services of the Postal Service ordered a large cache of ammunition. Why is the government ordering these huge, I mean the numbers are unbelievable, almost a billion and a half rounds by Homeland Security alone, why is the government ordering such large amounts of ammunition and you and I, Mr. Average Joe America, can’t find any ammunition? Is it just the supply and demand thing or is there something else going on? I don’t know, I don’t want to be the conspiracy theory guy, but it is a question somebody needs to answer. Let’s talk to John from Alabama.

Caller: Long time no hear Buster. Maybe one day we can get to share a jail cell and praise the Lord together.

Wilson: I hope not but I’m ready to go if need be.

After the caller warned that Obama is implementing the planks of the Communist Manifesto and creating a Nazi-like state, Wilson moved from his standard ‘I’m just asking the question’ excuse to plainly arguing that the government is planning to make ammunition unavailable to gun owners in order to “make our guns obsolete.”

Wilson: I’ve said this before, what they’re going to do in the place of confiscating the weapons that they know will cause too much civil unrest, they’re going to go after the ammunition. As I mentioned earlier, right now I can’t find anywhere where I live to buy the ammunition I want, it’s not out there. I believe whether it’s through taxation or whether it’s through demands on the corporations that are the manufacturers, they are going to do something that will stop the flow of ammunition and that’s how they will make our guns obsolete. It’s a Second Amendment right, that’s why we look at it. I just shared with you two stories today about how they are attacking the First Amendment right. The First and Second Amendments, our government, this government today, seems to be in all-out war against.

Farah: Obama's Gun Policies lead to 'Mass-Murdering Tyranny'

The right-wing press really can’t get enough of the comparisons of President Obama to Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin over his new executive actions and proposed gun laws, including the reauthorization of the Assault Weapons Ban. While the first Assault Weapons Ban that lasted from 1994 to 2004 didn’t produce a fascistic dictatorship, WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah writes today that “Obama’s gun grab” is how “every mass-murdering tyranny in the history of the world started.” Farah claims that the left will bring about “the end of liberty” and that Americans will be in the same situation as the colonists confronting a “tyrannical government” during the American Revolution.

Left leads to the end of liberty. The right path buys us time to restore the principle of constitutionally limited government.

If the U.S. government renders its citizens as subjects by disarming them, it will be the end of the dream of liberty that drove our founders to arms to fight for self-government and independence.

In fact, that was what precipitated the War of Independence. When British occupying forces set out to seize New Englanders’ arms depots at Lexington and Concord, the colonists drew a line in the sand. They understood that without firearms, they would lose any leverage they might have with their masters. They understood that without firearms, they would be hapless subjects of tyrannical government forever.

A new generation of Americans find themselves in just that predicament again, as Barack Obama puts on a full-court press to ban entire classifications of firearms leading inevitably to a government monopoly on force.

He’s appealing to emotion, and, for many Americans, dumbed down by government education and cultural institutions that place no value on freedom and personal responsibility, it’s working.

Yes, children were slaughtered at Newtown, Connecticut’s Sandy Hook Elementary School. But not one of those children would have been saved by Obama’s gun grab. To many Americans, that doesn’t matter. They just feel that something must be done.

What they don’t understand is that they are helping to set up more carnage, more Sandy Hooks, more bloodshed and, ultimately, the end of government accountability to its citizenry.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist or a Ph.D. in history to know that every mass-murdering tyranny in the history of the world started like this. They began with a government monopoly on force. Once that is established, the citizenry is no longer served by government, government is served by its subjects.

Barton: There Should Be No Limits on the Second Amendment

Shortly after the Sandy Hook tragedy, David Barton appeared on Glenn Beck's television program where he made the case that the Second Amendment was intended to guarantee to citizens access to any and all weapons that might possibly be used against them in the name of self-defense.  And since citizens might have to defend themselves from the government,  they were entitled to own the same types of weapons that the government possesses. 

Under Barton's logic, the Second Amendment therefore guarantees to citizens the right to own tanks and bombers and attack helicopters and destroyers and even nuclear bombs because that is what the government owns. 

But that seems crazy and he couldn't possibly mean that, right?

Wrong. That is exactly what he means because he made the same point today on "WallBuilders Live":

The Second Amendment is not to arm you less than it is to arm the government. Because what specifically happened was if the Americans had not been able to go home and grab their guns off the mantel over the fireplace, they could not have taken on the British coming after them. 

The British was their government and the Americans had to have equal firepower with whoever was coming after them and that's why they went to Fort Ticonderoga and got all the British cannons and came back and used those. That was just individual citizens doing that.

So the purpose of the Second Amendment was you have got to be able to defend yourself, your rights, period against anybody and that sometimes means it may be your government coming after you.  So if the government has got AR-15s, guess what? The people can have AR-15s ... Whatever the government's got, you've got to be able to defend yourself against. So there was no limitation on what you could or couldn't do with the Second Amendment; it was a self-defense amendment and if everybody is coming at you AR-15s, you don't defend yourself with BB guns, you get AR-15s.

Matthew Hagee: Massacre at Wounded Knee Shows Dangers of Gun Control

On this week's installment of the "Hagee Hotline," Matthew Hagee weighed in on the issue of gun control by citing the 1890 massacre at Wounded Knee, in which hundreds of members of the Sioux tribe were killed by government forces, as the sort of thing that happens "when the federal government attempts to confiscate firearms and take from Americans their liberty":

Erik Rush: Chinese Military Building Bases in the U.S. and Pushing New Gun Laws

According to WND columnist Erik Rush’s definitely real “sources,” the Obama administration is giving American land to the Chinese government in exchange for debt forgiveness. While this does sound a lot like the plot of the Albert Brooks book 2030, Rush says this is all part of Obama’s push “for the disarming of the American populace” to please his Chinese overlords and usher in communism. And all this time we thought Obama was ushering in Sharia!

Let me share that which was related to me via one international business interest with strong ties to the nations highlighted in the following scenario: According to this source, President Obama had a mid-level U.S. official meet with a Chinese officer in 2011 to find out if the Chinese were open to a land and resource swap for debt forgiveness. The upshot of this is that the Chinese are now engaging in experimental “farming” and “scientific” studies in several locations in the U.S. (in various states). The personnel involved are all Chinese military, and the plan is to use these as the base for the expansion of “land settlements” in payment of the U.S. debt to China.



So Obama has sold America out – literally – which will come as little surprise to many readers, this plan apparently being the brainchild of Obama’s senior adviser, Valerie Jarrett, and members of China’s Politburo Standing Committee. Thus, the under-reported but long-standing goals of Jarrett, Obama, David Axelrod and a host of communist Obama cronies to bring America under communist sway will finally come to fruition.

Such activities have been rumored over the last couple of years, but had not been substantiated. However, this data has been verified by sources I know to be reliable; in fact, I have reported on their information previously, much to the consternation of the Chinese government.

It is the Chinese who are pushing for the disarming of the American populace. They do not want to bear the brunt of the backlash from the American public when their work and aspirations are exposed. Three weeks ago, I was told that “this will happen in weeks, not months,” and it is now occurring.

So much for our curiosity as to why in the midst of our economic woes, Obama is so vigorously capitalizing on the Sandy Hook massacre to advance what will certainly be draconian and unconstitutional measures relative to firearms. Obama’s gun-control plan includes at least 23 different executive actions – bypassing Congress and prompting at least one GOP lawmaker to suggest impeachment proceedings if Obama acts in this manner.

At this juncture, I think that impeachment is incredibly unlikely despite his treason, given what he has succeeded in getting away with under the noses of the Republican leadership. As I have been informed, there are key Republican leaders who are aware of what is transpiring between China and the Obama administration. These have been sold the notion that America is bankrupt, but that they can work with our debtors to see that an equitable settlement is reached.

The question to which this gives rise, of course, is: Equitable for whom? Is this the precursor to the Second American Revolution, or have gun sales gone through the roof for no apparent reason and toward no apparent objective (such as “to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution”)? Are heretofore sane, sober citizens of this republic taking leave of their senses en masse, or are they quietly and methodically preparing to stop our Union, to which thousands have given their lives, from being torn asunder?

I lean toward the latter. God help us all, and God bless America.

PFAWF Releases Reports on Outside Election Spending in 21 States, Organizes ‘Money Out/Voters In’ Events Across the U.S.

Out of State Money Floods Contests in 2012

Washington, DC –  Today People For the American Way Foundation unveiled new state-by-state fact sheets detailing outside spending in U.S. Senate and House races in 21 states.  Each report analyzes the outside spending totals from Super PACs, dark money groups, and out-of-state spenders in the down ballot federal races from the 2012 election cycle.  The fact sheets reveal that, on average, a majority of outside election money in these states came from Super PACs.  And in every case, a vast majority came from organizations registered outside of the state.

The release of the “Outside Spending, Outsized Influence” reports coincide with the weekend marking Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and the third anniversary of Citizens United v. FEC  to draw attention to the dual threats of voter suppression and unlimited corporate and special interest money in politics. The reports – a partnership between PFAWF and U.S. PIRG – are part of the Money Out/Voters In campaign.  As part of that campaign, People For the American Way Foundation, its affiliate People For the American Way, and other organizers across the country are hosting “Day of Action” events in more than 76 cities in 33 states this weekend. Members of People For the American Way Foundation’s African American Ministers Leadership Council will be leading Money Out/Voters In events in Georgia, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Virginia.

“Last year’s elections were far and away the most expensive in history,” said People For the American Way Foundation Executive Vice President Marge Baker.  “A major reason was the influx of outside, special interest spending in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United v. FEC decision. When big money floods our elections, it dwarfs the ability of individual Americans to have their voices heard. Just as important, when politicians push laws to suppress the vote, we turn back the clock on decades on progress to expand and improve our democracy. We need to pursue the full range of remedies to address the problem of too much money in politics, including amending the Constitution to overturn Citizens United, and we need to stand up against the growing threat of voter suppression.  This weekend we are joining with allies across the country to call for a democracy that gets Money Out and Voters In.”

The states featured in the reports are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina, New Jersey, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin.

For links to each report, please visit: http://www.pfaw.org/issues/outside-spending-outsized-influence-big-and-s...

For more information about the Money Out/Voters In campaign or the Days of Action, please visit: http://www.moneyout-votersin.org

###
 

Martin Luther King, Citizens United and Driving Voters to the Polls

On a weekend that features both the third anniversary of the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC and Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, it is a timely moment to "take the temperature" of our democracy. Dr. King once said, "So long as I do not firmly and irrevocably possess the right to vote, I do not possess myself." What is the status of that right today? Or, to pose a broader question: what is the status of our democracy?

In the past year I worked with a network of 1,100 African American churches and 7,000 pastors to educate, motivate, and turn out our congregations and communities on Election Day. We facilitated hundreds of thousands of voter registrations, made more than a million contacts and even transported over 27,000 people to the polls. While we are proud of the work accomplished this year, it is clear to me -- and to many who facilitated get out the vote work -- that our elections aren't working equally well for everyone. More often than not, those for whom they are not working are people of color.

One of the reasons is that Americans -- and especially Americans of color -- are questioning whether our voices can be heard over the noise of massive corporate and special interest political spending in the wake of Citizens United. In the last election, more than 1.3 billion dollars of outside money flooded the airwaves, and voters understand that politicians are paying close attention.

Last year the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law conducted a national survey on American's perceptions of Super PAC spending and the implications for our political system. An overwhelming majority of respondents (77 percent) agreed that members of Congress are "more likely to act in the interest of a group that spent millions to elect them than to act in the public interest." Americans are seeing that excessive special interest spending is overwhelming the voices and priorities of individual voters -- as well they should. I believe that this is especially true for people of color, many of whom are starkly aware of the reality of the lack of power, influence and opportunities often available to us politically.

And as Colorlines' Brentin Mock pointed out, that's all before we even set out to vote. Faith leaders on the ground all across the country who I worked with witnessed the effects of voter suppression tactics such as voter ID laws and early voting restrictions. We all remember seeing photographs of voters standing in six hour long lines until 2:00 am on election night, waiting to cast their ballots even after the presidential election had been called. And a number of new suppressive laws may go into effect this year.

A democracy in which Americans do not have a fair opportunity to have their voices heard -- whether through discriminatory voter suppression tactics or through the overwhelming influence of big money on the political system -- is not a democracy working as it should. It is a democracy in need of healing.

That's why organizers around the country are speaking out this weekend to bring attention to the interrelated attacks on our democracy today. Under the banner of Money Out/Voters In, organizers are hosting "Day of Action" events in more than 76 cities in 33 states. Some of the same faith leaders who devoted their time and energy to GOTV efforts are leading teach-ins this weekend about the dual threats of voter suppression and unlimited corporate and special interest money in politics. As African American faith leaders who value the ideals of justice and fairness, we believe it is our responsibility to advocate for a system that puts electoral power in the hands of everyday Americans rather than corporations.

Perhaps Elder Lee Harris of Jacksonville, Florida -- one of the African American faith leaders organizing voting efforts this fall -- put it best: "We've come too far and fought too hard to let anybody take away our vote again."

This post was originally published at the Huffington Post.

PFAW Foundation

Barber & Staver: Obama is Pushing America Toward Civil War

2013 is the 150th anniversary of both the Emancipation Proclamation and the Gettysburg Address, and so Liberty Counsel has christened this year a "New Birth of Liberty." As Matt Barber and Mat Staver explained, President Obama is the antithesis of Abraham Lincoln and is systematically working to divide and weaken America and pushing the nation toward civil war:

Outside Spending, Outsized Influence: Big and Secret Money in Wisconsin in the 2012 Elections

A People For the American Way Foundation "Government By the People" Report

The following report, co-written with Wisconsin PIRG, analyzes the 'outside spending' on federal Senate and House races in Wisconsin in the 2012 election cycle. 

Outside spending refers to spending by groups independent of campaigns or political parties.  These outside groups are legally prohibited from coordinating with campaigns.  Citizens United v. FEC and subsequent cases that relied on its holdings led to increases in outside spending in elections by removing a number of restrictions and/or prohibitions on corporate and union political activity.

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

Outside Spending, Outsized Influence: Big and Secret Money in Utah in the 2012 Elections

A People For the American Way Foundation "Government By the People" Report

The following report, co-written with US PIRG, analyzes the 'outside spending' on federal Senate and House races in Utah in the 2012 election cycle. 

Outside spending refers to spending by groups independent of campaigns or political parties.  These outside groups are legally prohibited from coordinating with campaigns.  Citizens United v. FEC and subsequent cases that relied on its holdings led to increases in outside spending in elections by removing a number of restrictions and/or prohibitions on corporate and union political activity.

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

Outside Spending, Outsized Influence: Big and Secret Money in Oregon in the 2012 Elections

A People For the American Way Foundation "Government By the People" Report

The following report, co-written with Oregon PIRG, analyzes the 'outside spending' on federal House races in Oregon in the 2012 election cycle. 

Outside spending refers to spending by groups independent of campaigns or political parties.  These outside groups are legally prohibited from coordinating with campaigns.  Citizens United v. FEC and subsequent cases that relied on its holdings led to increases in outside spending in elections by removing a number of restrictions and/or prohibitions on corporate and union political activity.

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

Outside Spending, Outsized Influence: Big and Secret Money in North Carolina in the 2012 Elections

A People For the American Way Foundation "Government By the People" Report

The following report, co-written with North Carolina PIRG, analyzes the 'outside spending' on federal House races in North Carolina in the 2012 election cycle. 

Outside spending refers to spending by groups independent of campaigns or political parties.  These outside groups are legally prohibited from coordinating with campaigns.  Citizens United v. FEC and subsequent cases that relied on its holdings led to increases in outside spending in elections by removing a number of restrictions and/or prohibitions on corporate and union political activity.

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

Outside Spending, Outsized Influence: Big and Secret Money in Michigan in the 2012 Elections

A People For the American Way Foundation "Government By the People" Report

The following report, co-written with Michigan PIRG, analyzes the 'outside spending' on federal Senate and House races in Michigan in the 2012 election cycle. 

Outside spending refers to spending by groups independent of campaigns or political parties.  These outside groups are legally prohibited from coordinating with campaigns.  Citizens United v. FEC and subsequent cases that relied on its holdings led to increases in outside spending in elections by removing a number of restrictions and/or prohibitions on corporate and union political activity.

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

Outside Spending, Outsized Influence: Big and Secret Money in Maine in the 2012 Elections

A People For the American Way Foundation "Government By the People" Report

The following report, co-written with US PIRG, analyzes the 'outside spending' on federal Senate and House races in Maine in the 2012 election cycle. 

Outside spending refers to spending by groups independent of campaigns or political parties.  These outside groups are legally prohibited from coordinating with campaigns.  Citizens United v. FEC and subsequent cases that relied on its holdings led to increases in outside spending in elections by removing a number of restrictions and/or prohibitions on corporate and union political activity.

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

Outside Spending, Outsized Influence: Big and Secret Money in Georgia in the 2012 Elections

A People For the American Way Foundation "Government By the People" Report

The following report, co-written with Georgia PIRG, analyzes the 'outside spending' on federal House races in Georgia in the 2012 election cycle. 

Outside spending refers to spending by groups independent of campaigns or political parties.  These outside groups are legally prohibited from coordinating with campaigns.  Citizens United v. FEC and subsequent cases that relied on its holdings led to increases in outside spending in elections by removing a number of restrictions and/or prohibitions on corporate and union political activity.

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

Outside Spending, Outsized Influence: Big and Secret Money in Colorado in the 2012 Elections

A People For the American Way Foundation "Government By the People" Report

The following report, co-written with Colorado PIRG, analyzes the 'outside spending' on federal House races in Colorado in the 2012 election cycle. 

Outside spending refers to spending by groups independent of campaigns or political parties.  These outside groups are legally prohibited from coordinating with campaigns.  Citizens United v. FEC and subsequent cases that relied on its holdings led to increases in outside spending in elections by removing a number of restrictions and/or prohibitions on corporate and union political activity.

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

Outside Spending, Outsized Influence: Big and Secret Money in California in the 2012 Elections

A People For the American Way Foundation "Government By the People" Report

The following report, co-written with CAL PIRG, analyzes the 'outside spending' on federal Senate and House races in California in the 2012 election cycle. 

Outside spending refers to spending by groups independent of campaigns or political parties.  These outside groups are legally prohibited from coordinating with campaigns.  Citizens United v. FEC and subsequent cases that relied on its holdings led to increases in outside spending in elections by removing a number of restrictions and/or prohibitions on corporate and union political activity.

CLICK TO DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

Gaffney: 'People For the Islamist Way' Advancing 'Red-Green Axis'

Frank Gaffney hosted Andrew McCarthy of the National Review yesterday on Secure Freedom Radio where he warned that People For the American Way is “promoting the Islamist agenda in the attack on Michele Bachmann” and should really be called the “People For the Islamist Way.”

PFAW recently delivered a petition opposing Bachmann’s reappointment to the House Intelligence Committee due to her long history of making extremist claims including her recent charge that Muslim Brotherhood agents have “penetrated” the U.S. government, a conspiracy that Gaffney helped concoct.

McCarthy joined Gaffney to defend the Minnesota congresswoman, who smeared Muslim-Americans in government including Hillary Clinton’s aide Huma Abedin, and once again argue that Bachmann is the real victim. He said that PFAW and other progressive groups have “decided to ‘bork’” Bachmann “because she has been so effective.” Gaffney said that the petition was part of the “red-green axis” that exists “between the left and the Islamists.”

Apparently, the PFAW-Islamist conspiracy must go all the way to the top of the Republican Party as Speaker John Boehner; Senators John McCain (R-AZ), Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC); House Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Rogers (R-MI) and Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee Chair Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) have all strongly denounced Bachmann’s allegations.

Gaffney: Let’s start with a woman that I think we both admire, who has been vilified in both Democratic and Republican circles, shamefully, for having had the courage to speak the truth about a problem that you have documented, most especially involving the woman that I guess caused so much controversy when Michele Bachmann and four of her colleagues asked the perfectly reasonable question: how did Huma Abedin with her ties to the Muslim Brotherhood get a security clearance and what influence is she having on policy? Give us your read on the fact that the so-called People For the American Way and I must say it sounds much more like it’s the People For the Islamist Way is up to when they try through a very substantially subscribed-to petition to have Michele Bachmann thrown off the Intelligence Committee in the House?

McCarthy: Well it seems to me Frank that it means that Michele has irritated all the right people who ought to be irritated. The American people ought to understand since we’re talking about People For the American Way that that organization is a contrivance of a far-left television icon of the 1970s and 80s named Norman Lear who was instrumental in the slander of Judge Robert Bork, so much of a slander that Judge Bork’s name became a verb in our modern lexicon and Michele Bachmann is the latest person that the left has decided to ‘bork’ because she has been so effective and because she’s been a staunch defender of American national security.



Gaffney: Andy McCarthy you have also drilled down in your writings about the axis, some call it the red-green axis, between the left and the Islamists. This certainly seems to be a prime example of it as you say with Norman Lear’s background and the role that they are playing and in this instance promoting the Islamist agenda in the attack on Michele Bachmann.

Lapin: God Does Not Want You to Ever Retire

Rabbi Daniel Lapin appeared on AFA's "Today's Issues" this morning where he made the case that people are never supposed to retire because the word "retirement" does not appear in the Bible.  In fact, it is because people retire that their health often deteriorates because they are basically saying to God that they are done serving people, and since that is the case, well "then who needs you"?

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious