About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

On The 700 Club, Robertson smeared Rep. Frank with false claim that he "was caught running a group of male prostitutes out of his D.C. residence"

July 16, 2008 2:17 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: On The 700 Club, Pat Robertson falsely claimed that Rep. Barney Frank "was caught running a group of male prostitutes out of his D.C. residence." In fact, a House ethics committee investigation cleared Frank of such allegations in 1990.

63 Comments

On the July 15 edition of The 700 Club, co-host Pat Robertson falsely claimed that Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) "was caught running a group of male prostitutes out of his D.C. residence." Robertson said to his guest, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC): "I remember, Barney Frank, who's now the head of an important committee in the United States House of Representatives, was caught running a group of male prostitutes out of his DC residence, and one of his colleagues had said, 'Did you think that the Congressman Frank is immoral?' And they said, 'Oh, no, no. What he's doing isn't immoral.' Well, I used to think homosexuality was immoral." In fact, as Media Matters for America has repeatedly noted, the House ethics committee -- which, at Frank's request, investigated the allegations made by Stephen Gobie that Gobie was running a prostitution ring out of Frank's house with Frank's knowledge -- determined in 1990 that Frank "did not have either prior or concomitant knowledge of prostitution activities involving third parties alleged to have taken place in his apartment." Moreover, the committee did not conclusively determine whether Gobie was even using Frank's apartment for "prostitution activities," noting in its report that purported evidence offered by Gobie that he had been engaging in prostitution from Frank's apartment collapsed under scrutiny.

Earlier, while introducing his interview with DeMint, Robertson claimed that People For the American Way, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, and Media Matters are "trying to stifle the speech on this program and to embarrass those who make it."

From the July 15 edition of Christian Broadcasting Network's The 700 Club with Pat Robertson:

ROBERTSON: Well, our next story and our next guest, I know about personally. There's an organization and they're called People For the American Way. They have camped on this program for decades. They record every single word that I say. If there's any possibility that they can catch something or change it, and then feed it to the AP, they do, and so the next thing you know it's a big story. Then, in -- added to them, was one of their ACLU operative who started an organization called Americans United with Separation of Church and State. They have people assigned to monitor every word, and then to take those words, change them often, take connectives out of them, change the sense of it, and then feed it to the -- a willing agent in the Associated Press. Then, on top of that, there's another group that's -- I think has backing from somebody like George Soros, called, what -- what is it? Media Matters. So, there are three of them trying to stifle the speech on this program and to embarrass those who make it.

Well, we have a senator saying that, indeed, his speech is being squelched by what he calls political correctness, and when people speak out on moral issues having to do with sexuality, having to do with drugs, having to do with family breakup, all these things, there's a great hue and cry to silence those who speak. And the book is called, Why We Whisper, and this senator says it's time to stop whispering and take back the First Amendment.

[...]

ROBERTSON: Well, many conservatives are outspoken about moral issues, but who's doing the whispering?

DeMINT: Well, I hear it often, Pat.

ROBERTSON: Yeah.

DeMINT: I speak out about things that I think are wrong, and we get a lot of support, but a lot of that support is whispered. And I've really seen a lot of intimidation around South Carolina and around the country. People are afraid to say that certain things are wrong and to make value judgments because they have been told that that's hateful and it's intolerant. And from our schools to universities, to groups like you mentioned, the ACLU, people are really afraid to make value judgments, and if -- you can see it in cases that come up almost every day: the teenage girls who made a pact to get pregnant.

Their schools can't tell them that it's wrong. If they do, the teacher's likely to lose their job. Or in South Carolina recently, a high school principal resigned because his school board told him that he had to sponsor a gay club in his high school. He said he thought that was inappropriate, but the school board said that they couldn't stand the expense of a lawsuit. The book talks a lot about what we call SLAPP lawsuits, where the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, others, just come in and intimidate just from the cost of a lawsuit, so even if a school wins, they often lose a lot of money.

ROBERTSON: I remember, Barney Frank, who's now the head of an important committee in the United States House of Representatives, was caught running a group of male prostitutes out of his D.C. residence, and one of his colleagues had said, "Did you think that the Congressman Frank is immoral?" And they said, "Oh, no, no. What he's doing isn't immoral." Well, I used to think homosexuality was immoral.

DEMINT: Well, the problem today is the government has said it's right, not only that it's right, but it's a constitutional right. And states like Massachusetts and now California are sending signals to the American people that what we've thought was wrong for years is now being given the status of marriage, which is our premiere institution in our whole society. So, a lot of what we do in the book, Pat, is research the causes and the cost of our culture decline, and as you pointed out, a lot of court decisions and legislative decisions by Congress have turned right and wrong upside down. But before the '60s, we knew abortion was wrong, and sex outside of marriage, and unwed births, and pornography, homosexuality. Yet, if you look now, the official, or at least implicit, position of the government that all these things are right.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by snoopy (July 16, 2008 2:22 pm ET)
         
      To bad ol' Pat "don't make me go to war, daddy!" Robertson isn't as concerned about Phil Gramm financing porn films. IOKIYAR...
      Report Abuse
      • Author by pete592 (July 16, 2008 2:43 pm ET)
           

        And who delivers the porn to homes via satellite?  Rupert Murdoch's own DirecTV.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 2:50 pm ET)
             

          But those guy's VOTE the irigth way, so their sins are absolved.  It's like his version of [the Catholic practice of] confession, repentence and pennace.  Except that there's no actual admission or feeling of guilt and the pennance is (always) that you pull the "R" lever in November! 

          Report Abuse
        • Author by captfoster2 (July 16, 2008 4:31 pm ET)
             

          Pete,

          That might partially explain BillO's need to keep reshowing scantily clad young women video clips during his self-righteous, self-promoting 'moral values' show.......

          ewwww

          Report Abuse
      • Author by tman418 (July 16, 2008 7:01 pm ET)
           
        Snoopy, what does "IOKIYAR". Zat is quite a long acronym, non?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mary59 (July 16, 2008 7:20 pm ET)
             
          It's ok if you're a Republican. (I had to use the google a while back myself when someone else used it.)
          Report Abuse
    • Author by Kyle_Broflovski (July 16, 2008 2:24 pm ET)
         

      DEMINT: Well, the problem today is the government has said it's right, not only that it's right, but it's a constitutional right.

      Umm... it is a constitutional right.  So, your problem is with the constitution, or with government agents upholding the constitution (which they swear to do - on the Bible)?

      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 2:26 pm ET)
           
        Our fearless leaders put their hands on the bible and swear and oath to uphold the Constitution.  These funny-mentalists seem to think it's the other way around.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (July 16, 2008 2:24 pm ET)
         
      Baring false witness appears to be a family value. Who'd a thunk?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 2:52 pm ET)
           

        Seeing as how western law only outlaws three of the ten commandments, you'd think he could, at a minimum, honor the same three.  I guess that's to much to ask.

        (Putting aside that we have industry (mostly right-wing owned corporations) that panders to each of the 7 deadly sins, but that's another story.  Its' just amazing how much of a 'christian nation' we are, and what a 'christian party' they are huh?)

        Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (July 16, 2008 2:26 pm ET)
         
      Isn't Pat Robertson the same guy who set a world record for leg pressing 18,000 pounds or something?  What a freakin' Praise The Lord nutcase. If I was God I'd be ashamed to have Pat Robertson speaking on my behalf.  ;>)
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Kyle_Broflovski (July 16, 2008 2:29 pm ET)
           
        Could God create a leg-press weight so heavy, that He couldn't lift it?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by IRONY 101 (July 16, 2008 2:32 pm ET)
             
          Pat could leg press the freakin' Empire State Building...if he wanted to.  ;>)
          Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 2:35 pm ET)
           
        I'd be ashamed of Pat Roberston, the late Jerry Falwell, Jim Dobson, the late Dr. Kennedy, Jim Baaker, Jimmy Swaggart, Chuck Hagee, Rod Parsly, Haggard, Jack Chick, Fred Phelps and every single one of the "holier than thou" bastards on this list: http://www.armchairsubversive.org/
        Report Abuse
      • Author by jawill11 (July 16, 2008 3:33 pm ET)
           

        The fact that Robertson has not yet been hit by a lighning bolt is proof that either god doesn not exist, or is indifferent to human activities. 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 3:48 pm ET)
             

          Not necessaarily.  There's still the possibility of hell.  And he'll be in very good and familiar company.  It may even take a while for him to figure out where is, wha with all those preachers and evangelists and so few gays...

          (And also since most of the gays that are there will also be preachers & evangelists.)

          Report Abuse
          • Author by jawill11 (July 16, 2008 3:54 pm ET)
               
            See, I think the concept of hell as punishment for these people is unfair to all of us who would like to see them get what they deserve.  If god really wanted his rules followed, he would punish people on earth as a warning to everyone else. 
            Report Abuse
    • Author by foghornleghorn (July 16, 2008 2:34 pm ET)
         

      But before the '60s, we knew abortion was wrong, and sex outside of marriage, and unwed births, and pornography, homosexuality. Yet, if you look now, the official, or at least implicit, position of the government that all these things are right.

      GOP - the party of illusory "family values" from the 1950's.  Demint is just another delusional dinosaur.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 2:47 pm ET)
           

        But before the '60s, we knew [...] was wrong...

        I read this as "we still DID it, but at least we had the decency to be ashamed enough to lie about it and pretend we didn't!"

        Report Abuse
    • Author by foghornleghorn (July 16, 2008 2:40 pm ET)
         

      And states like Massachusetts and now California are sending signals...

      What's with the right's use of the phrase "sending signals"?  You hear that all the time, that anything liberals do "sends the wrong signal" If the signal is sent, do they receive it?  If they receive it, to they understand it?  If they understand it, will they signal us back?  Am I stuck in an Orwellian nightmare?

       

      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 2:54 pm ET)
           
        States like Massachusetts and now California are leading the way to SANITY once again!
        Report Abuse
    • Author by BottleBlonde (July 16, 2008 3:07 pm ET)
         
      If Robertson's speech embarrasses him, then he needs to shut up or say something else. It's not Media Matters fault that he puts his foot in his mouth every once in a while.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 3:09 pm ET)
           

        If Robertson's speech embarrasses... Who?  God?

        Robertson was not just "putting his foot in his mouth" he was LYING.  I'm not nec a fan of Barney Frank, but what Robertson is saying IS FALSE.  IT'S A LIE.  And that IS under MMFA's mission.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by BottleBlonde (July 16, 2008 4:12 pm ET)
             

          Then, on top of that, there's another group that's -- I think has backing from somebody like George Soros, called, what -- what is it? Media Matters. So, there are three of them trying to stifle the speech on this program and to embarrass those who make it.

          Robertson said that the purpose of Media Matters offering transcripts of his exact comments was to embarrass him. If it embarrasses him, then he needs to shut up or stop putting his foot in his mouth.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 17, 2008 8:03 am ET)
               
            Aaaah!  My bad.  I get you now.  I thought you were replying to something else.  GOOD POINT, BTW! :)  *slinks away*
            Report Abuse
      • Author by pete592 (July 16, 2008 3:13 pm ET)
           

        MMFA's most frequent and thin-skinned targets all have at least one thing in common.

        Their biggest fear is not that they will be misquoted, but that they will be quoted correctly. 

        Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (July 16, 2008 3:10 pm ET)
         

      I suggest that Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) not have anything to do with abortion, sex outside of the marriage, unwed births, pornography and homosexuality (anything else, Jim?) if he considers them wrong. However, if Sen. DeMint is a true conservative why is he attempting to restrict the individual freedoms of Americans?

      Why is it that the words theocracy and hypocricy sound so much alike?  ;>)

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Kyle_Broflovski (July 16, 2008 3:13 pm ET)
           

        Irony-

        Why do you want to restrict Demint's freedom to oppress and control others?  Are you some kind of fascist?

        Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 3:14 pm ET)
           

        Hey, that's the party that wants to reduce government interference in your life that you're talkin'bout!    ;)

        LOL.  What a croc! LOL.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by IRONY 101 (July 16, 2008 3:23 pm ET)
             
          Well if people's mommas and daddies aren't going to teach them that all those things are wrong then I guess the government has to do it. Right...?  ;>)
          Report Abuse
      • Author by rtwmd1230 (July 16, 2008 3:18 pm ET)
           
        If DeMint avoided all the activties you mention, he would no longer meet the qualifications to be a member of the Republican Caucus.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by shaggles (July 16, 2008 3:16 pm ET)
         
      I love the "I get a lot of whisper support" line.  Makes it easy to claim you have backers without having to prove it.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 3:22 pm ET)
           
        Yeah.  Unfortunately for Robertson & co, the pro-choice movement, gay-rights movement, fiminist movement, etc... all have even larger support and their supporters tend to SHOUT and CARRY SIGNS.  (Who needs a bnch of pansy whisperers?!)
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (July 16, 2008 3:28 pm ET)
             

          I'm on the Human Events mailing list, and one of the most recent emails I got was for their campaign to fight Gay marriage. They described the actions of Cal. & Mass as "Judicial Tyranny".

          Only these people could equate expanding civil rights to tyranny.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by RABBITLUVR (July 16, 2008 3:31 pm ET)
               

            That's Mark Levin's beef with the gay marriage thingy too. Judicial Tyranny. Tyranny, tyranny, TYRANNY! That's all he ever whines about.

            Of course... he cannot even be honest with his pathetic audience about the *real* reasons why he hates gay marriage.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 3:51 pm ET)
                 

              Yep. It's Tyranny to give people choice. Tyranny to limit the power of the government.  Tyranny to champion life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  IOW - it's Tyranny to fight TYRRANY!

              (There's no inherent hypocrisy in being intolerant of the intolerant!)

              Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (July 16, 2008 3:35 pm ET)
         
      Sen. DeMint complains of Massacusetts and California sending the wrong signals to the American people. If Sen. DeMint is a true conservative doesn't he believe in States Rights? And that the people of those states are entitled to decide for themselves what laws to enact in their own states?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 3:45 pm ET)
           

        You make a very valid point RE the right's incosistancy on this issue, BUT (just for those who don't know) this IS NOT an issue for states to resolve.  That's because only a tiny fraction of the rights and laws protecting the rights of married people come from the states.  The overwhelming majority come from the federal government. 

        Besides... SLAVERY was considered a states rights issue as well.  When it's cleary a TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY the federal gov't and those activist judges are obligated to step in and put right the worngs.  And THANK GOD THEY DO!  (Occasionally.)

        Report Abuse
    • Author by night-n-day (July 16, 2008 3:36 pm ET)
         

      You have to understand. Pat Robertson is a Republican Christian - meaning, he's not only ethically devoid he's also morally bankrupt. Should he try for the trifecta (Patriotic Republican Christian) he will be ethically devoid, morally bankrupt, AND despise everything this country stands for, just like Bandar Bush.

      One thing about rightwingers I've always found to be true, they spend their entire lives touting the aspect of their life that is least true (Christianity, decency, honesty, patriotism, homophobia, etc.) What ever they claim to be or claim to be against, who they are is the exact opposite.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by IRONY 101 (July 16, 2008 3:40 pm ET)
           
        So, in other words, Pat Robertson really can't leg press like 24,000 pounds...?   ;>)
        Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 3:52 pm ET)
           

        One thing about rightwingers I've always found to be true, they spend their entire lives touting the aspect of their life that is least true (Christianity, decency, honesty, patriotism, homophobia, etc.) What ever they claim to be or claim to be against, who they are is the exact opposite.

        Well... I do believe that he's homophobic...

        He may still be gay; but that only makes him a homophobic hypocrit.

        ;)

        Report Abuse
      • Author by anotheramerican (July 16, 2008 4:08 pm ET)
           

        Night,

        Do you realize how silly and biggotted your statement really is?  You've grouped all rightwingers together and judged them to all be guilty of whatever they are against.

        Are you sure mean that? If you applied your standards, to say people of color or a nationality what do you think that would make you?  

         

        Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (July 16, 2008 4:31 pm ET)
             
          You see that's the problem with LABEL'S.  None of them (Dem, Pub, Lib, Con, LW, RW) are really any better than stereotypes.  That being said, in my observation conservative thinking tends to want to label things more often than liberla thinking.  (It's an off-shoot of black & white thinking as opposed to multifaceted and nuanced thinking.)  (And that's just my experience, and opinion. I don't claim it as a fact.)  But of course it's also easy to turn my whole argument around, because the truth really depends on your own point of view.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by IRONY 101 (July 16, 2008 4:37 pm ET)
               
            I hate people who want to put a label on everybody. I call them labelers.  ;>)
            Report Abuse
          • Author by anotheramerican (July 16, 2008 5:02 pm ET)
               
            You can label Democrats or Republicans as such, because they are. But assigning motives and character flaws to everyone in that group just because they are in the group is plain bigotry.  I think many here do not realize what they are saying when they make accusations like those above.  
            Report Abuse
            • Author by IRONY 101 (July 16, 2008 5:20 pm ET)
                 

              But assigning motives and character flaws to everyone in that group just because they are in the group is plain bigotry. 

              You mean like what Republicans do...?  ;>)

              Report Abuse
            • Author by friedbergboy1422 (July 17, 2008 2:41 pm ET)
                 
              Like you saying that the left admiring Mussolini is historically accurate without any examples?
              Report Abuse
    • Author by cArn (July 16, 2008 4:29 pm ET)
         

      Are you sure mean that? If you applied your standards, to say people of color or a nationality what do you think that would make you? 

      People aren't born Christian or Muslim or some other religion. Race and nationality are not something people choose. Belief systems are fair game for criticism and ridicule. I do, however, agree with you that not all rightwingers think alike and not Christians are homophobic.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by foghornleghorn (July 16, 2008 4:38 pm ET)
           

        I do, however, agree with you that not all rightwingers think alike and not Christians are homophobic

        Most if not all of the ones holding political power (and media power i.e. right-wing talk radio) certainly do think alike and are blatantly homophobic.  Aren't they the elected representatives of the people, and therefore speaking for the people who elected them?  Where's the outrage?

        Report Abuse
        • Author by anotheramerican (July 16, 2008 5:17 pm ET)
             

          I am of the opinion that much of this labeling is done to avoid the real issue. If you can label someone as homophobic, you have successfully delegitimized them and their ideas. Once that is done you simply dismiss whatever they say.

          I am of the opinion that you don't have to agree with people or accept their arguments just because they are similar to others in some group. The arguments and opinions are much more interesting to discuss than engaging in name-calling.

          We all find those posts with whom we disagree here to be the fodder that spurs discussion. Everyone agreeing is pretty boring. Simply dismissing those with whom you disagree by labeling with terms like racist or homophobic or by putdowns  does nothing to further the discussions. 

          Having strongly held views is great and arguing passionately makes it interesting. A good zinger now and then is fun. Elanor Roosevelt had it right when she said, "Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people." 

           

           

          Report Abuse
          • Author by foghornleghorn (July 16, 2008 5:31 pm ET)
               

            I am of the opinion that much of this labeling is done to avoid the real issue. If you can label someone as homophobic, you have successfully delegitimized them and their ideas. Once that is done you simply dismiss whatever they say.

            With all the gay marriage ballot issues/amendments, and all the constant preaching that marriage is under attack, after hearing all that, yes I do label most republicans as homophobic (including the self-loathing people such as Melman and the bathroom stall senator).  And therefore, when republicans do speak about marriage/sexual orientation issues, I do simply dismiss it as political posturing because it is based on fallacies and HATE.

            We all find those posts with whom we disagree here to be the fodder that spurs discussion. Everyone agreeing is pretty boring.

            Most of the disagreements are about the FACTS, not opinions.  You, more than anyone, should realize that.

            Report Abuse
      • Author by nativeofsf (July 17, 2008 7:00 am ET)
           
        Here’s another great example of Accepting a False Hypothesis: Carn would have you accept his premise, “People aren't born Christian or Muslim or some other religion.” First off, ask yourself, “How does Carn know that?” He doesn’t give the source for his attempted bombast. Yet the errancy of his covert dichotomy is the rather furtive, “or some other religion.” With such empty rhetoric, it’s as if he’s never understood, “Once a Jew, always a Jew.” Then his, “Race and nationality are not something people choose.” remark goes nowhere near to understanding the persona of Richard Pryor’s character in Bingo Long & His Traveling All-Stars. But I’m being a wee bit facetious about all this and my respects to Mr. Carn as well. Though his “nationality” statement is something else, again. ¶And for nigh on eight years now, Mr. Bush has presented his duplicitous and egregious actions and behaviors, with constantly misleading rhetoric and outright lies. Squandering the health of America’s natural resources, its monetary savings, rule of law & justice, America’s once-strong international goodwill, our dollar’s stability as well as the health & welfare of almost all Americans. Mr. Bush has deceived to such an extent he probably can be tried for murder. And yet for all the hurt & wrong, and injustice & suffering and more he, his cronies & toadies, have heaped upon other Americans, as well as the world community, a smirking imbecilic visage will probably walk out of the White House untouched as it were. And because of this and more, Mr. Carn, sometimes I feel so ashamed, that deep within myself I wonder if anyone else would choose not to be an american. Fair game?
        Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (July 16, 2008 5:16 pm ET)
         

      There are two kinds of people. Those who think there are two kinds of people, and those who don't.

      Judicial activist enthusiasts. How bout the recent court decision backing shrubs ability to call anybody an enemy combatent and hold them indeffinetly.

      I have no doubt of its popularity in a small population. I'd like to see one of the true Believers call this proper judicial restraint on camera. And then watch his lips go crazy.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by jmmartin3402 (July 17, 2008 12:00 am ET)
         

      No wonder some of the young people on an aircraft carrier (in the PBS series of that name) voice mixed emotions about what purpose they serve in the Persian Gulf!  Robertson and his 700 Club (that's 700 billion: the amount Pat wants for his retirement parachute) represent the same unyielding 16th century mindset as the al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and other Islamic jihadists.  It is the mindset of most Christian evangelicals and  almost all televangelists. Pogo had it right. The enemy is us.

      The ignorant and ridiculous remarks of DeMint speak for themselves:

      "...before the '60s, we knew abortion was wrong, and sex outside of marriage, and unwed births, and pornography, homosexuality. Yet, if you look now, the official, or at least implicit, position of the government that all these things are right."

      Why not go all the way and stone women for getting pregnant, letting the men go scott free.  Why not punish some adulteries but not others.  Why not behead gays and cut off hands that make or buy porno.  Why not revert to the savagery humans called "civilization" only 140 years ago.

      DeMint is bemoaning the Dark Ages of coathanger abortions in dark alleys; gay bars where snoopy cops come in unannounced and without warning, shining flashlights into patrons' eyes and demanding to see identification; unwanted children who, not having established bonds with their biological parents, grow up confused and often drug addicted, neurotic, or crazy.

      Where is this government that is supporting abortion, porno, and homosexuality and why haven't these things enjoyed greater support from your own born-again village idiot during his almost eight years in the White House.  Talk about elitist!  Robertson and his rumplick DeMint aren't even living in the same universe.

       

       

       

       

       

      Report Abuse