Newt Gingrich thrice denies the public record in public debate

Newt was once touted as the “best debater” in the Republican candidate field. He was also supposed to be the smartest candidate. But would a really smart debater brazenly lie about something that is a matter of public record? How stupid does he think we are?

by Don Hank

Last night there was a Republican debate among the candidates in Iowa. Michele Bachmann told three easily proven truths about Newt Gingrich, all a matter of public record (as evidenced below, see links to articles by PBS, Mother Jones and Fox News):

These 3 truths were as follows:

1–Newt Gingrich supported cap and trade.

2–Newt Gingrich supported an individual health care mandate

3–Newt Gingrich worked as a lobbyist and tried to influence congress on behalf of his clients.

Incredibly, despite the ready provability of these documented facts, Newt – who has, incredibly, been labeled the most effective debater by some conservative analysts — countered simply by telling a big lie:

“Well, Michele, you know, a lot of what you say just isn’t true, period. … You know, I think it’s important for you, and the – this is a fair game, and everybody gets to – to- to pick fights. It’s important that you be accurate when you say these things. Those are not true.”

Pitiful, just pathetic, when you consider how easily proven all three of Bachmann’s accusations are, as shown below (these are only a tiny sampling of the mainstream sites mentioning these damning facts). The first two are direct Gingrich quotes from before he thought about running as a “conservative.”

1–Newt Gingrich Supported cap and trade:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hotpolitics/interviews/gingrich.html

Gingrich:

“I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there’s a package there that’s very, very good. And frankly, it’s something I would strongly support.”

 

2–Newt Gingrich supported individual health care mandate:

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/12/newts-big-whopper-individual-mandate

“In order to make coverage more accessible, Congress must do more, including passing legislation to: [deletia] and require anyone who earns more than $50,000 a year to purchase health insurance or post a bond.”

3–Newt worked as a lobbyist and tried to influence congress for his clients:

http://nation.foxnews.com/newt-gingrich/2011/11/21/newts-lobbyist-problem

“ A former employee of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, (the main industry lobby) told me Gingrich was being paid by someone in the industry at the time. A spokeswoman for Gingrich’s health care consulting firm, Center for Health Transformation, told me that drug companies have been CHT clients. PhRMA confirmed in a statement that they had paid Gingrich. Bloomberg News cited sources from leading drug companies Astra-Zeneca and Pfizer saying that those companies had also hired Gingrich.”

 

Obviously, there can be no question that Michele Bachmann nailed Newt on all three counts. So the main question for Americans is this:

Does honesty matter?

And another important question is:

Why didn’t any of the other candidates mention these 3 devastating facts?

 

Corporations: A government in the shadows

Are corporations torch bearers of the free market?

Not even close – despite what the “conservative” media and politicians are telling you

 

Don Hank

There is a certain resistance among the public to admit that it is not you and I but the corporations and their lawyers, partnering with the Federal Reserve, that run America. Many conservatives hate to hear anyone “malign” corporations because to them, corporations, including banks, bear the torch of sacred capitalism. The GOP bosses are content with this situation.

On the other hand, since most big corporations donate mostly to the Democrat party, Democrats — especially those in the media and politics – are also loathe to broach the subject of corporate control over government.

Besides, the same corporations lobbying for open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens are also helping build Democrat power. Everyone knows how Latinos tend to vote.

And when it comes to “green” boondoggles, all the fat cats want in on them. They will of course mean a net loss of jobs and enormous subsidies for the most inefficient technologies known to mankind, but “green” subsidies flow freely from government coffers, as anyone following the Solyndra story knows.

Now, many of these corporate lobbyists are pushing very hard for open borders. They donated big bucks to pliable candidates and expect some bang, like more illegal alien labor, for example, and better legal conditions for sending your job overseas. Big corporations and Big Politics want precisely what you dread.

So what about us little people down here?

I wonder what people would say if they knew that the power of their vote is negligible compared to the pressures brought to bear by Big Business lobbies, which effectively dictate policy to your elected officials. I wonder how many have ever figured out that it was your senator’s and congressmen’s utter subservience to corporate lobbyists that made them vote for the TARP bailouts even after receiving phone calls begging them not to vote for it at the rate of 300 calls against the bailouts per 1 call in favor.

I wonder what will happen once the cat is out of the bag.

Maybe We the People will assume our rightful place in this great nation again.

Maybe.

But not unless we put our thinking caps on and realize what is really happening. Try asking yourself honestly: would corporations spend billions of dollars lobbying if they weren’t getting a financial “kickback” in some form or other? And are these kickbacks free or do they cost you money? 

It’s not that long between now and election time. Will your candidate discuss this with you in town meetings or will he mutter something snide, look around and say “next question”? If he isn’t leveling with you on the economy, fire him. You’re his boss and can’t afford another sluggard on your staff.

Where does your presidential candidate stand? I don’t recall the Fox moderators asking about the power of the corporate lobbies. And yet, business as usual in Washington brought down the world economy and cost millions of American jobs.

It’s time to wake up and make the economy and your job the front-burner issue this time around.

DEMAND:

CONGRESSIONAL CONTROL OF THE MONEY (NO MORE FEDERAL RESERVE)

STRICT CONTROLS ON LOBBYING, ESP CORPORATE LOBBYING

Now recall that the mainstream “conservative” media keep reminding you that the Occupy people are all a bunch of Marxists. So what about Alex Jones and Ron Paul’s followers? They aren’t Marxists and they have attended the Occupy rallies in significant numbers all over the country, teaching independents about the issues, making converts. So have people like Steph Jasky and Karl Denninger, who played a key role in founding the Tea Party, as well as a ton of other top-notch people. All while you stayed home, paralyzed with fear by what you read in the “conservative” press and blogosphere about being tainted by the lefties supposedly in charge. Like that photo of a young anarchist backed up against a police car, pants at half-mast, in an act of defiant defecation. Think anyone follows him? All in all, whatever Marxists may be participating in the rallies out in the cities and towns across the country are clueless non-contenders and will have almost no power in this movement if we play our cards right for a change. As I have said before, the movement is ours for the taking. Why do you think the Republican leaders and their minions in Big Talk Radio are all bad mouthing the movement?

Clue: Many of these people on the street are on to the lobbying games that the corporations – as well as the Fed — are playing, and threaten to spoil things for Big Politics by returning the power to you.

That is the main factor in all the negative press on the right. So why do leftwing politicians high five these young protesters? That’s easy. So far, they’ve been smarter than us. They know they can control the movement and its narrative if they act like they are behind it all. But they’re bluffing.  Yes, ACORN, Soros, Van Jones and other shadowy types with Obama links have in fact dreamed up schemes like this and undoubtedly had a hand in it, just as they no doubt had a hand in the Egyptian riots. But this isn’t Egypt now. It’s our turf, and no one can control it unless we let them. So far, the Left is spinning its wheels as its power slips away. Protesters interviewed on camera, for example, have ripped Obama mercilessly for his failures. The End the Fed movement is all over these rallies and for whatever faults they may have, they are vehemently anti-Obama and pro free market.

So if people like you can start thinking – and acting – outside the box, the whole football can be stripped from the hands of the corporatist elites and, with God’s grace, you can have your country back.

Sure, it will be hard work. And the propaganda aimed at making you think you are in bad company among the protesters will be non-stop. That’s a given.

Some of my Christian brethren are saying that to join the protests would mean being unequally yoked.

But consider this: If a bunch of atheists lobbied to make churches accountable for the actions of pedophile church workers, you wouldn’t side with the pedophiles, would you?

Voting against the pedophiles would not make you an atheist and it would not make you look like one. It would be doing God’s work because pedophiles not only harmd children, they are a stumbling block to the unsaved and give the churches a bad name. Let’s be real: For every candidate you have ever voted for, some unsavory characters also voted for him. So what?

Don’t be afraid to join forces with new people who are starting to get it and are just as mad as you, but maybe don’t have as clear a grasp of the issues. You may be the person who reaches a wishy-washy fence rider.

After all, I can’t think of a single election cycle when people on both sides of the political spectrum have been so mad for the same reasons – irrespective of their ideologies.

What a gorgeous opportunity!

If you let the political elites who stole your country steal the election this time around, don’t blame it on me.

 

Some statistics to consider:

 

http://allthingsd.com/20101223/what-tech-companies-are-spending-in-washington/

 

Verizon spent $3.83 million lobbying on several issues, including taxes and texting while driving, at numerous branches of the federal government, including the White House, Congress, the Internal Revenue Service and the Federal Trade Commission. It spent $2.96 million in the same period a year ago.

AT&T spent $3.47 million, up from $3.18 million a year ago. Its agenda items included legislation on calling cards, broadband buildouts and distracted driving.

Hewlett-Packard spent $1.6 million–nearly double the $970,000 it spent in the third quarter of last year–chatting with members of Congress and officials at the Department of Justice and the Commerce Department about taxes, immigration and how government agencies use technology in the areas of health care and law enforcement.

Microsoft spent $1.63 million, an increase from $1.49 million a year ago. It visited Congress, the Pentagon and the Departments of Commerce and Homeland Security to talk about computer security, how the government buys software and the competitive state of online advertising. It also lobbied the Federal Communications Commission on net neutrality.

Oracle spent $1.6 million, up from $1.3 million, lobbying Congress, the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security on patent litigation and the government’s technology spending plans.

Google spent $1.2 million in the third quarter (which TechCrunch noted in October following a press release by Consumer Watchdog), an increase from $1.08 million in the same period a year ago.

IBM spent $1 million, up from $850,000 a year ago, talking about transportation, the power grid, funding for research and the military, on visits to Congress and the Departments of Transportation, Defense, and Health and Human Services.

Intel spent $830,000, which is notable because the amount decreased from $1.1 million a year ago. Intel was the target of both a private antitrust lawsuit from rival Advanced Micro Devices and a government antitrust investigation by the Federal Trade Commission, both of which were intensifying in the fall. Both cases have since been settled. Its efforts were in immigration, government research funding and issues related to trademarks and education.

Yahoo spent $540,000, up from $510,000 a year ago.

Apple, easily the most influential company in consumer technology today, spent relatively little on lobbying efforts: Only $340,000 [BUT they had Al Gore on their board of directors. How cozy. 90% of their political donations went to the Democrats. Did you know that Steve Jobs “invented” mostly cosmetic changes in devices? Can you name an inventor who actually devised the really high-tech stuff like the iPod itself or the Apple computer and monitor electronics? Didn’t think so. They didn’t have dinner with Al Gore—Don Hank].

Facebook spent $120,000.

For a little more on what companies spend on lobbying efforts in Washington, it’s always enlightening to peruse the database maintained by the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks not only lobbying expenditures but campaign contributions.

As you can see, the CRP shows that, among computer and Internet companies, Microsoft was the leading lobbying spender for the first nine months of the year. The wireless industry’s trade association, the CTIA, led the pack in the telephone equipment and services category, spending more than $6 million. Meanwhile, Verizon and AT&T each spent more than $12 million.

http://www.alternet.org/story/146643/hightower:_washington_overrun_by_11,000_corporate_lobbyists_and_$500_million_in_corrupting_donations

  • 11,195. That’s the number of corporate lobbyists who are presently plying their nefarious trade day and night in Washington’s hallways and back rooms.
  • $2.95 billion. That’s the amount that corporations spent on lobbyists last year alone (a sum more than six times greater than the total spent by all consumer,environmental, worker, and other non-corporate groups combined).
  • $473 million. That’s the sum of money that corporate executives and lobbyists have slipped into Washington’s many political pockets–so far–for the 2010 election cycle, including donations to candidates, leadership PACS, and party committees. We are still seven months from the 2010 elections, and already corporate spending has reached the record-breaking total of $475 million shelled out for the entire 2008 cycle.

 

Christianity and Libertarianism and the Consent of the Governed

Originally Posted here by Laigle’s contributor Anthony Horvath


“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” John Adams

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed Declaration of Independence


The last few months I’ve seen some strident statements of opposition against libertarians by conservatives. I’m on several email lists where I’m seeing such commentary and of course its on the web, as in this example. I personally didn’t detect a huge uptick in libertarian sentiment, but alright. I describe myself as a ‘constitutional libertarian’ and in explaining why I hope that I can shed light on what I believe are the true reasons for a rise in libertarianism- among Christians in particular. I can’t speak for them all, of course, but I think I recognize in some of their commentary some of my own thinking.

So, to begin with, let me make two important observations. First of all, when one thinks ‘libertarian’ one might immediately think licentious. However, the two are not identical terms. This leads to the second observation, the direction by which one arrives at libertarianism greatly impacts the flavor of that libertarianism. There can be no question that there are a great mass of individuals, who calling themselves libertarians, really are just people who wish to engage in whatever depravity that they want, with no one to tell them otherwise or worse- stop them. By my observation, the people coming from this direction are really your typical atheist secular humanist progressive who is perfectly happy to foist as much government as people can bear onto themselves and others- in the form of nationalized health care, eg- just so long as they can have sex with whatever and whomever they want and smoke whatever happens to come across their path.

However, someone coming at ‘libertarianism’ from the other direction, say, from a Christian perspective and a conservative, is not looking for a reason to misbehave. This is why I led off with the John Adams quote. ‘Moral and religious people’ will continue to be ‘moral and religious’ whatever freedoms or restrictions are placed on them by the government. I might say: “Libertarianism was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the [government] of any other.” There are any number of forms of government that can work with a ‘moral and religious people.’ For an amoral or immoral or anti-moral or non-religious or anti-religious people, no kind of government is going to work for the long haul. Continue reading

Homo-nazis and the seduction of the West

Nazi Homosexuals and the Slow Steady Seduction of America

 By Jim O’Neill, Canada Free Press

“The American homosexual movement really only began in the 1940s after the Allied defeat of the Nazis. …the center of international “gay” power in the world did in fact shift from Germany to the United States after the demise of the Third Reich. This represented a huge setback for the “gay” movement, requiring it to begin “from scratch” as it were, since America in the 1940s was at least as family-centered as Germany had been in the 1860s.”—From “The Pink Swastika” 

“The 112th Congress requires sufficient time to conduct independent hearings on the consequences of the LGBT Law and policies that the lame-duck Congress did not consider before rushing to repeal the law last December. …The administration’s lack of answers to reasonable questions, combined with revealing missteps like the Navy’s move to prepare for same-sex marriages, are indications that the Pentagon does not know what it is doing.”Center for Military Readiness (CMR) 

”[Pollster Gary Gate’s] best estimate, derived from five studies that have asked subjects about their sexual orientation, is that the nation has about 4 million adults who identify as being gay or lesbian, representing 1.7 percent of the 18-and-over population. …Gates observed that the 10% figure [often used by homosexual activists] was pulled from a non-scientific work by sexologist Alfred Kinsey, and that it was latched on to by gay activists as a useful ‘political strategy.’ …‘It was a brilliant political strategy as a figure that was large enough to ‘matter’ but hopefully not so large as to threaten the general population,’ said Gates.”
Huffington Post, CBS News, LifeSiteNews               

“They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.” Romans 1:25 (NAB)                         

Only in his dreams could Hitler have imagined the blatant homosexualizing of the German Wehrmacht. What Hitler could only dream of, the United States is poised to make fact, a scant sixty-six years after fighting a costly and bloody war to defeat Hitler and the Nazis. Link                     

Before I get ahead of myself, let me point out that the title of this article, and the article itself, are meant to be attention getting, but do not constitute a spurious ad hominem attack on homosexuality; they are designed to bring attention to historical facts that are of profound importance to the future of America (and the world).                               

To give credit where it is due, I first became aware of much of the material presented here after reading “The Pink Swastika” (4th edition 2002), by Scott Lively and Kevin Abram. The entire book can be accessed for free online (link given after the opening quote above). My reaction to the book was similar to Scott Lively’s reaction, “When I initially learned the truths set forth in [“The Pink Swastika”] I was first astonished and then angered.”

At the outset of this article let me reiterate that Communism and Fascism (of which Nazism is a subset) are both Far Left ideologies. That is not to say that they are “like peas in a pod;” they are not—nonetheless they are both left-wing, top-down, big-government social engineering movements.

Read more here:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/37535

The power of a single blogger and his faith

The bill sought to give government the power to exercise out and out thought control and would have criminalized any speech construed as ‘antigay.’ It amounted to nothing less than a direct ban on biblical Christianity.”

Friends, the Western world is falling into the hands of the wicked. I solicit your prayers for our brother Julio, who has suffered great persecution and is still in hiding. At the end of this article are some links to his site. Check it out. Keep in mind that Julio and his family are fugitives because of the stand he takes and the cold-blooded viciousness of gay activists and their minions in the Brazilian government. Imagine being hunted like an animal for your beliefs. Please give as you are led.

Blogs as tools to express the voice of God’s Kingdom

By Julio Severo

A few days ago I received a message from a visitor who recently became acquainted with my blog:

Julio, how are you?

Last Tuesday (26/April/2011) I was having a nap at lunch time and  a name came to me in a dream. I am not in the habit of writing down my dreams, but the name was very clear. I woke up and wrote down the name: JULIO SEVERO.

I had never heard your name before and when I got home I googled it and saw that you are also a Christian and that you fight to preserve Gospel principles from corruption.

Well, I do not believe in coincidences…

I do not believe in coincidences either, at least not this kind.

In my interview with Christianismo Hoje* (the Brazilian version of the magazine Christiany Today) I said,

Early in 1995 I clearly felt God directing me to write a book about the threat posed by the homosexual movement. For weeks, I hesitated, because the homosexual issue was a formidable taboo. There were no gay parades in Brazil, and none of the homosexual obsession we see everywhere today, in the schools, the media, etc. After some time, I overcame my fears, accepted the calling of the Spirit, and began to research the homosexual movement. When, by mid-1995, the first international conference of ILGA in the South Hemisphere was held in Brazil, I understood God’s plan to call me into the battle, because after the conference, Brazilian gay groups made an extraordinary push to advance their agenda. God anticipated this spiritual assault from hell with an action of the agenda of God’s Kingdom. Thus my book “O Movimento Homossexual” (The Homosexual Movement), was born and was published by Editora Betânia, the Brazilian branch of Bethany House Publishers, in1998.

When my book “O Movimento Homossexual” was published in 1998, many thought it was an exaggeration and said that forecasts would never come true. Sadly, they eventually did. And today its readers call me a prophet. The exaggerater of yesterday is today’s prophet.

In 1999, on receiving an autographed copy of my book “O Movimento Homossexual,” Bishop Robson Rodovalho said that he had received the revelation that in the future I would be severely persecuted because of the message of my book, and be forced to flee from place to place. It was an accurate prophecy, but I am sad that the one who delivered it eventually joined the political system that spawned PLC 122 and other absurdities. PLC 122 is the most threatening anti-“homophobia” bill in the Brazilian Congress.

In 2002, even without a blog, I began to warn against an electoral victory for socialist Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva. In 2003, with just a page of articles in the Brazilian Christian website JesusSite, I revealed to Brazil for the first time that the Lula administration had introduced in the United Nations (UN) a resolution classifying homosexuality as an inalienable human right. This was the first time this kind of initiative had come before the UN.

After I reported on this, a Representative in the Brazilian Congress requested an accounting from the Brazilian government because Brazilian representatives at the UN were taking actions without the knowledge of the Brazilian people and Congress. There was also a petition against the Lula administration’s resolution.  JesusSite suffered an attack by hackers and went down. Despite many threats it received pressuring me to remove my articles, JesusSite* stayed firm.

The pioneering resolution from the Lula administration in the UN never advanced, and ILGA, the largest homosexual organization in the world, complained that grass-roots resistance in Brazil stemming from “extremist” websites was helping to deter the resolution. Who said that today there are no little Davids to take down  massive Goliaths?

With the Lula administration’s obsessive pro-sodomy policies, the message of my book, which had been seen as exaggerated, was now coming into focus. Even congressmen were making references to my book in their official speeches in the Congress.

At the inspired insistence of a brother in the Mid-Night Call Ministry, I eventually created a blog at the beginning of 2005, with this brother guiding me in the first steps. The first year, I published very little.

Only later did I begin issung warnings to Brazil more regularly. And God honored me. At the same time, philosopher and Reformed theologian Harold O. J. Brown invited me to write the leading article in his academic periodical The Religion & Society Report. The essay was published in August 2006 and is available in an online version. This was the first time my watch dog ministry was acknowledged by a respectable international publication.

Through my blog, my still small voice was now showing the United States and the world the homosexualist face of Lula and his socialist ideology. Brown told me he did not realize that Lula was so radical, and he wanted to help people outside Brazil learn the truth.

In 2007, I was interviewed by LifeSiteNews, the largest Catholic pro-life news website in the world. It was my small voice echoing with immutable values that transcend frontiers.

Yet, as far as the performance of my simple blog is concerned, the most remarkable aspect in 2007 was the awareness effort against PLC 122, the anti-“homophobia” bill introduced by a member of PT (Lula’s party) in the Brazilian Congress. The bill sought to give government the power to exercise out and out thought control and would have criminalized any speech construed as “antigay.” It amounted to nothing less than a direct ban on biblical Christianity. In February 2007, a group of influential conservative Catholics contacted me to launch an awareness effort. They had read my writings on homosexuality, prepared a paper based on my articles and wanted me just to put my signature in it. Their role would be to spread the message. My role would be to lend my name.

The campaign made great strides. After March 2007, the awareness movement grew like wildfire and was soon unstoppable, having struck the consciences of many people. But there was a price to pay. The same year the campaign was launched, gay activists, in their effort to thwart me, managed to convince Google in Brazil to shut down my blog. With the intervention of Brazilian philosopher Olavo de Carvalho, in an article in the paper Jornal do Brasil denouncing attacks against me, and protests from several lawyers, including an attorney who called Google, my blog came back online.  

Before February 2007, I had already intended to  oppose PLC 122. Yet, in the months of November and December 2006 and January 2007, I was hiding in a refuge with my family, because of persecution.

Before this persecution, God had used a former homosexual to warn me that the devil was trying to destroy me. November happened to be the month that PLC 122 was approved in the House of Representatives in Brazil. Lacking the means to act, I dunned Dr. Zenóbio Fonseca for several weeks to write an article against the anti-“homophobia” bill, because his special legal knowledge was vital. His consulting work allowed him little time, but eventually he managed to write the article. Next, the Catholic message* to mobilize Brazilians was ready, and it was sent to countless thousands of email addresses and other media.

The sequel was that hundreds of blogs, not to mention thousands of people forwarding e-mails against PLC 122, became such a strong chain that the passage of this bill, which was taken for granted because of the influential and imposing support of government and media, eventually became uncertain, because of the resistance, particularly from Evangelical and Catholic blogs.

Catholic and Evangelical magazines — with a shallow Christianity and deep-rooted political ideologies — either ignored the story or gave it short shrift. Had it been up to them, Brazil would today be in thrall to the Kingdom of the Workers’ Party, of Dilma Rousseff and her antecessor Lula, with the passage of PLC 122 hovering like a sword over the heads of prophetic Christians.

Yet, blogs speaking with the voice of God’s Kingdom are having a major impact in opposing the massive power of magazines, papers and TV channels that mirror — and are paid to mirror — the voice representing the ideology and system of state idolatry.

And unlike evangelical TV shows, which ignore or fail to denounce the government’s promotion of aberrations like PLC 122, pro-family blogs are not afraid to speak out against state threats.

The strong resistance to PLC 122 today is a symbol of what can happen when humble little blogs serve as a vehicle for the voice of God’s Kingdom. If one blog makes a lot of people uncomfortable, a host of blogs united in the same effort much more effectively spread the uncomfortable truth that shakes people into action.

In the wilderness of disinformation from magazines, newspapers and blogs that reflect the voice of the political machine and its ideology, God can lead, even through dreams, those who need to know the truth.

This is the value God assigns to blogs that carry His voice.

Do you want be used by God through a blog? Hear and mirror His voice.

PS:

Dear Donhttp://acapa.virgula.uol.com.br/blogs/cindy-butterfly/fanatismo-religioso-um-dia-de-furia!/100/13513/

Let me tell you something important, which perhaps your readers would like to know. Today, as the articles I sent you today show, the Brazilian Senate would vote PLC 122, the anti-“homophobia” bill, but I encouraged Brazil to resist and in the afternoon today the largest gay website in Brazil reported that because of me and another evangelical, who is a televangelist, the anti-“homophobia” bill was not voted today!! See here:

Praise God!

Julio

Reviewed by Don Hank.

* These are Portuguese links. Links without an asterisk are English links.

Portuguese version of this article: Blogagem profética

Spanish version of this article: Blogging profético

Source: Julio Severo in English

www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Other articles by Julio Severo:

Why I am not a socialist