Posted by deborahrose (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 1:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I thought the candidate was John McCain - not Sarah Palin.

Posted by BobWilliams (Bob Williams) on October 31, 2008 at 1:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Oof!

Posted by BobWilliams (Bob Williams) on October 31, 2008 at 1:44 p.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Posted by jafo (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 1:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hmmm, a vote for less tax for the middle class, and for SMALL business would be a vote for Obama.

Your vote is your business, but don't try to pass off John McCain as a man of great character. Check his military record... it's pathetic... the ONLY reason he wasn't booted out of the Navy, is because his father and grandfather were Admirals... fact. As a POW, his nickname given by his captors was "songbird"... fact. He was a known womanizer while he was single, and a known adulterer while he was married. He then dumped his first wife, and married his current wife within a month's time... fact. He has a well-known, and well-documented temper... bordering on abusive... fact. So, you may have different beliefs, you may believe in trickle-down, you may believe in nation-building, you may believe that infringement of personal liberty if OK, ie Patriot Act, habeus corpus, etc.. you may believe that you can "borrow and spend" the nation into astronomical debt, and then cut taxes too! That's fine, whatever. But don't be putting McCain on some highhorse, moral pedastal... in doesn't fly. Oh, and also, our founding father knew enough to keep religion and government separate... it's a good idea, really.

Posted by Callie25 (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 2:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Everything I have read about McCain and Palin with regard to energy is that their only agenda is to open drilling in Alaska and McCain for sure is not particularly interested in alternative energy sources. McCain and Palin are on the side of big business and rich constituents.

Posted by pilsnerurquel (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 2:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm Christian but religious zealots like this are ruining the Republican Party. So much for being a party that accepts people from all religious backrounds, races, and sexual orientations.

Posted by lsssjss (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 2:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank God we won't have to listen to this malarkey for much longer.

Posted by theweasel (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 2:56 p.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Posted by TWLincoln (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 2:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

My family lived in Fergus Falls from about the Civil War until the early 1980s. My grandfather was a Republican businessman for over 60 years and ran the BG wholesale grocery. My great-grandfather ran a funeral home and several of my ancestors lived right on Lake Alice. One of my great-grandfathers founded the Ottertail Historical Society and I believe the library there is named after him.

I have always had fond memories about Fergus and its people. I have admired its civic spirit and gumption. I was last there in 2000 (I took my father to his 60th High School Reunion) and it looked much the same as always (although the downtown has clearly suffered)

I have always thought of the people of Fergus as open-minded Midwesterners. Mr. Dombusch's ignorant and nasty letter has lead me to doubt that impression and I hope he is not somehow represntative of some sort of "new Fergus."

My late grandparents would undoubtedly share my sadness in reading this kind of simple-minded writing.

I would hope that Fergus can do better than this and live up to its reputation as a beacon of tolerance and goodwill in NW Minnesota.

Tom Lincoln

Posted by hf2hvit (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 4:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

WHAT MAKES ANYBODY THINK MCCAIN IS SUCH A HOLY CHRISTIAN? HE IS AN ADULTERER! WHY CAN'T YOU RELIGIOUS HYPOCRITES GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD? HE HAD HIS SECOND MARRIAGE LICENSE 30 DAYS BEFORE HE FINISHED HIS DIVORCE FROM HIS FIRST WIFE--THE ONE HE CHEATED ON, COMMITTED ADULTERY AND THEN LEFT HER IN A PHYSICAL MANGLED MESS AFTER AN ALMOST FATAL AUTO ACCIDENT.

Posted by AmyO (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 5:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wouldn't it be great if the Republican party was half as excited about their presidential nominee as they are about their vice-presidential nominee?

Posted by mgdbottled (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 5:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wanta teach religion in public schools? Let's teach them all. There's literally thousands of religions. My preference would be "witchcraft". Yeah, let's teach the kiddies all about "witchcraft". How about Pantheism? I like that one too. When would the poor kiddies ever have time to learn their A,B,Cs or Arithmetic?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rel...

Posted by Lala (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 5:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well if I recall Clinton was an adulterer and was a liar, but now he's behind Obama?! That should tell you what kind of people Obama surrounds himself with. Bill Ayers... does that ring a bell????? Sorry, but I really don't want to vote for someone who stands behind a domestic terrorist.

Posted by BaddaBing (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 6:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

...and ignorance is bliss.

Posted by waxwing069 (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 6:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Have any of you supporting Palin/McCain seen thier rallys? Full of so called Christians, and see them shouting the most vile, racist names imaginable? Does that sound Christian? I think God would be very dissapointed in these Followers of him,. If you doubt me, go to Youtube, and type in Palin rally, you will see for yourselves just how much hate and racism is spewed out by Christians. Don't get me wrong, I am a Christian and believer in God and Jesus, but I also have a belief that everyone is made in his image. and seeing the hate and racism in these Republican rallies saddens me greatly. Still want to vote for Mc Cain?

Posted by waxwing069 (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 6:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

And everytime someone shouts, off with his head, terrorist, all Palin does is smile and gives them a wink.. Some Christian spreading hate like that.

Posted by pilsnerurquel (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 7:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

John McCain is no Christian. He cheated on his wife after she was disfigured in a horrible car accident, called his current wife a c**t in front of a newspaper reporter and continues to call for bombing innocent Iraqi women and children. Sarah Palin belives that homosexuals go to hell. Her preacher believes that you can "cure" people of homosexuality. God makes people the way they are. If you believe you can change that then you must think you are better than God. They are the anti-Christian!

Posted by Synova (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 7:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow.

No lack of "simple writing" is there.

If Obama's rallys aren't so nasty it's because the anti-Palin posters here aren't there. But they are every bit as nasty... starting with the bile spewed at Palin for simply being a woman and ending with someone pushing over a 75 year old man in Florida and putting him in the hospital. Not to mention somebody going through government records and personal information about Joe the Plumber and releasing it to the public. How would you like if someone at the Court House there in Fergus Falls did that to you because you had an Obama sign in your yard? Has Obama condemned that action or has he attacked Joe himself in his speeches, tacitly approving and encouraging others to violate other people's right to privacy?

Has everyone given leave to their reason?

Obama is not a muslim terrorist, and probably not racist either, for all that he sat in a church for 20 years that makes Palin's church look just like the church YOU attend. But he is liberal, as we'd expect any Democrat to be. He's voted with his party 95% of the time (more than even the party leaders have). He believes in solving problems through government programs. A lot of people really like that.

A lot of people don't.

McCain is a moderate Republican who has voted with his party less than just about anyone else calling him or herself a Republican... despite the ads Obama runs emphasizing his votes with Bush which were for some particular sub-section of votes. McCain is notorious for leaving the party fold and working with Democrats. He doesn't even *like* Bush.

Palin got elected on her own effort and bucked her own party to enact reforms in Alaska. SHE wants to drill for oil in a tiny subsection of ANWAR. McCain does not.

Can't you vote for Obama without lying about McCain or Palin?

Posted by Synova (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 7:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Considering the really vile things said here about McCain's military service...

You need to say that louder... in public... where more people can hear you.

Posted by Lala (anonymous) on October 31, 2008 at 9:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Synova,

Blah, Blah Blah.... now your rambeling on like Obama does. Words come out of his mouth, but nothing seems to make sense.
I'm sorry, is voting for someone who believes abortion is OKAY very christian like? I didn't think so. Obama supports pro choice.... bad, bad , bad....... nothin' but baby killers in my eyes. And not to mention the Bill Ayres thing I stated earlier.....
Vote McCain!!!

Posted by waxwing069 (anonymous) on November 1, 2008 at 8:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Actually the real baby killers are the Dr.s themselves...

Posted by pilsnerurquel (anonymous) on November 1, 2008 at 8:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If abortion is killing babies then what is killing innocent Iraqi women and children? Anyone who advocates for war has just as much blood on their hands. John McCain is a war monger who thinks we should sit in the Middle East for 100 years. How can anyone who is pro-life think it is OK to slaughter innocents in an unholy war?

Posted by betterworld (anonymous) on November 1, 2008 at 10:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Lala, this doesn't make sense. Pro-choice is not baby-killing. That is so hateful and untrue. It is giving the woman a right too her own decision. Pro-choice is not pro-abortion. Now make this analogy, and does it make sense; so if Dick Cheney loves his Lesbian daughter does that then mean that he is pro-homosexuality? So then, if he is prohomosexuality, he must be the devil himself since a true, good Christian would never support pro-homosexuality. You arguement is void, and it seems that this one of the only arguments, though thoughtless, that the McCain/Palin supporters have left. But wait, there's more; Sarah McPalin's 17 y/o is pregnant and she is going to allow her 17-y/o to marry her boyfriend of 18 y/o. Who among ANY of us parents would encourage our 17 y/o or 18 y/o to get married? No education, no job, no future for the whole family, chances of ugly divorce pending in what, 1, 2, 3 years? What are the chances, honestly, of a young marriage like that surviving?

Maybe a whole slew of so proported good Christians could let Ms. Palin know that they will take her baby....you would be getting a good baby from good blood. Oh but wait, then shouldn't all good Christians be offering to take the millions of unwanted, unloved babies all over the United States? Wouldn't the bible tell us to love all of God's children?

Bible thumpers are just that. They thump the bible but beleive what fits their agenda.

Obama 08

Posted by metasonics (anonymous) on November 1, 2008 at 12:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

when I was employed by the republican national committee during the early 1990's, it was my job to call people and prompt them to get out and vote about abortion laws.
the thing that may not sit well with those of you who believe the republican party actually cares either way concerning pro-life is this.
the first half of the day we called and encouraged people to support laws banning abortion while the second half of the day we called those same people back to persuade them to go out and vote against any laws that would restrict abortions.
the republican party deliberately keeps the abortion rights arguments going for political gain.
Obama voted against a bill that had a "right to life" clause added in , but would have jeopardized the lives of mothers because, it was and is already the law and responsibility for the Doctors in that state to keep a baby alive who survives abortion.
it is important to remember that just because a person claims Christianity doesn't prevent that person from decieving. the Rev. Jim Jones claimed to be a Christian and then poisoned as many of his followers as he could.
it is dangerous to place blind faith in people who actions prove they are lying.
the Republican party finances both side of the abortion issue only so they can cast anti-christian claims on opponents.
these deceptive tactics have destroyed too many lives, and the end result is only eternal conflict.
the GOP will never close the door on abortion.
no presidential candidate is in favor of abortion.

Jamie Cooper

Posted by HDRDMF (anonymous) on November 1, 2008 at 7:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey Sarah, I can see the moon from my backyard.
Does that make me an astronaut??????????

Posted by betterworld (anonymous) on November 2, 2008 at 8:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I understand prolife. It means protecting the innocent. All of the innocent. That would include babies, soldiers, victims of war, all colors, all creeds. All. Some of the people here in Fergus Falls go to their church one hour per week, claim their God the one and only loving God, and all else be damned. It can't be that way, our world is Global. Not based on one church's philosophy in one town...

What I'm saying here is, hypocrites. Many of our citizens are hypocrites. Our own citizens here, will damn the church down the block just to protect their own interpretation of what their personal church teaches and to build their own congregation. I've heard it hundreds of time; right here in this town, badmouthing the Church next door.......

How can we love the members of our own Church, but condemn the members of the church down the block and still call ourselves Christian? How can we say we support all unloved, unborn children but yet not be the first to stand in line down at the adoption agency waiting to show that love and take those children and give them a good home for 18 years? Hypocrites. And my original, if God hates homosexuality, how can Christians nationwide be okay with Dick Cheney and his love for his own daughter, but not be okay with ALL homosexuals? Because according to your bibles, homosexuality is the devils work, right? I mean, isn't that what your preachers preach at their pulpit. How dare we be so selective and not be considered a hypocrite? What about all of those ugly chants that were uttered at Palin rallies about "kill him" and etc. Those people attending those rallies proport to be "Christians". Was that right of them to be so ugly and incite hatred?
What about the Palin pregnancy? If so many people were so okay with it, why then do so many people here in this town look down at young pregnant women, and why aren't they stepping up help her? Because they are hypocrites, that's why. God would never suggest one of his children is better than another. Never. For the most part it would seem that, with the exception of attendance in Church for one hour per week, many many of our fine citizens are Godless.

I have had an abortion due to rape when I was a young girl, I have many friends and cousins who are homosexuals, I have friends of all colors and creeds, I am a good mother, I am a good citizen, I am a good Christian and I follow a kind, balance, healthy and generous way of life. And my children have gone on to be the same, but yet, because of the two first issues in this statement, according to thumpers, God should condemn me. Hypocrites.

We have become a mean, hateful, ugly, selective, greedy world. And we have a chance to change course, in my eyes, with an Obama presidency. Go Obama.

Posted by Lala (anonymous) on November 2, 2008 at 11:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The difference between soldiers and abortion, is that a soldier has a choice BEFORE sigining his or her papers to enlist, a baby in the womb does not have the same choice.

Posted by Synova (anonymous) on November 2, 2008 at 9:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Not to be too annoying but... just how long does a person have to *wait* to adopt an infant in the United States?

Talking like there is some huge number of unwanted infants that "Christian" people are not standing in line to adopt is deceptive. Willfully deceptive.

The "unwanted" babies in this country are those that someone *else* figures that the mother should not have had. The babies that some hypothetical "Christian" hypocrite should have adopted were never given up for adoption to begin with. You can't force people to give up infants they don't want to give up... and trying to make some moral point about the people who do not adopt these UNAVAILABLE infants is dishonest.

(The small children in foster care, no matter how tragic, have parents or grandparents who want them *back*. They are not available either.)

And how can Bristol Palin even be brought up as an example of someone with a baby that someone should step forward and offer to adopt? Is she *supposed* to give up her baby for adoption just so someone can get morally superior about the "Christian Hypocrites" who aren't ripping the child from her arms?

And the doom and gloom about Bristol and Levi's future... they'll both go to whatever amount of schooling they'd have gone to if they didn't have a baby. Family support makes a whole lot of difference there, and every indication is that both families are highly supportive of their son and daughter. They don't view a baby as punishment.

That's Obama... who doesn't want to be punished with his daughter's babies. Which is what he said, isn't it. Punished with a baby.

It's sad.

Posted by betterworld (anonymous) on November 3, 2008 at 6:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I used the Palin girl as an example; and then asked, "who among us would want to rush our kid into a marriage that has a higher-than-not probability of not working out". Realistically, what are the chances, in today's world, of this marriage being a healthy, happy long-term one. And in this case, both kids have supportfull parents who will probably help in untold ways. There are many, many young girls who through rape or incest have their own pregnancy to deal with by their own, lone self. There are hundreds of thousands of resulting babies waiting for adoption; in fact, they wait so long that they turn into 10 and 13 year olds moved from temp to temp... Where are the loving "Christians" that should be taking these children into their homes regardless of their behavior problems or other social issues that result from long term foster-care? No body wants these kids. The tragedgy is that our society turns a blind eye to these kids, and certainly your comment suggests just that "their grandparents want them". Maybe in a small percent of cases, very small.

Barrack Obama will address the issues that put these young girls at risk in the first place. He wants to address the real problems that result in hundreds of thousands of babies that go unloved and unwanted throughout their lifetime...

Prolife, Prochoice...there will never be a middle ground. There can't be.

What can be done though is to have a President who will change our world as we know it; greed, corruption, distrust, hatefullness...these are un-Christ-like.

Posted by BobWilliams (Bob Williams) on November 3, 2008 at 3:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm sorry, Taibbi quote or not, it really did look like Gidget addressing the Reichstag.
*Bracing for second deletion*

Posted by Mel (anonymous) on November 3, 2008 at 4:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Bitterworld, I know several who had to go overseas to adopt a child, Don't tell be they are unwanted.