Hagee on Israel

John McCain doesn't like John Hagee's anti-Catholic views, but he loves his Israel policy, telling CNN, "I'm grateful for his commitment to the support of the state of Israel, and I'm very grateful for many of his commitments around the world, including to the independence and freedom of the state of Israel." Ben Smith wisely points out that the actual terms of Hagee's support for Israel are that he thinks a strong hawkish stance will help lead to Israel's destruction as it is covered beneath "a sea of human blood." And what about the Jews?

The Jews, however, will survive the battle, Hagee says, long enough to have “the opportunity to receive Messiah, who is a rabbi known to the world as Jesus of Nazareth.”

So Hagee supports Israel, or he supports the destruction of Israel followed by a mass conversion episode and presumably the death of whichever Jews remain Jewish, and McCain specifically sites Hagee's views on the Middle East as praiseworthy. That doesn't sound very good to me, but Hagee's got the AIPAC good housekeeping seal so I suppose "sea of blood" is the new pro-Israel.

Comments

None of it sounds good to me. What religion is it that has you cavorting with a bevy of virgins if you die in a certain manner? If you're going to hallucinate mortality rewards that seems like a pretty good deal.

Posted by steve duncan | May 16, 2008 1:27 PM

That's why I was bemused that Obama thought Bush was criticizing him when Bush talked of those who would appease Adolf Hitler.

Bush was obviously talking about political leaders on the ISRAELI LEFT. Bush was there to help out his Likudite buddy Olmert. Although a good defense lawyer would be more effective, from what I hear.

Posted by Don Williams | May 16, 2008 1:39 PM

Hmmm... maybe Obama can use the fact that many wingnutters paint him as the Antichrist to sway the End of Times vote?

Posted by J.W. Hamner | May 16, 2008 1:41 PM

Better a sea of blood between friends than a trickle of piss between enemies. I think Ghandi said that.

Posted by Njorl | May 16, 2008 1:42 PM

Well, from the standpoint of AIPAC and others who support extreme hawkish positions in israel, the motivations for Hagee's support don't really matter; it's not like they agree with his opinions on the effects of their policies. They're just betting that they're more likely to be right than Hagee is (probably a safe bet).

That doesn't make him any less insane, but AIPAC's not crazy; just a bunch of political realists.

Posted by BP in MN | May 16, 2008 1:55 PM

McCain's lucky that Hagee's not a scary black preacher, otherwise this could be really problematic for him.

Posted by Stu | May 16, 2008 1:57 PM

So, Christians of a certain kind see Jews as going to Hell while true Christian believers go to Heaven and Jews of a certain kind see non-Jews as unclean and themselves as God's chosen people.

Sounds like Religion to me.

It's probably too late to hope that the leaders of a country founded on Enlightenment ideals would actively embrace the Enlightenment, but a fellow has to believe something. And I believe I'll have another drink. Bartender, make mine a Harvey Wallbanger.

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | May 16, 2008 1:57 PM

Here we go - the know-nothings are at it again.

Let's review:

1. ALL serious Christians believe that the Jews must eventually accept Jesus as messiah. That's what Christians do.

2. Hagee does NOT expect/require Jews to be forcibly converted or die (yes, I'm looking at you old time catholics and you current day muslims). Hagee's "controversial" anti-catholic remarks, in fact, were made in the context of a scathing (and accurate) review and condemnation of historic Christian anti-semitism.

3. It is hard to find ANY gentile today who has done more to promote Israel and actually, physically help real, live Jews than Hagee.

The end of days will take care of themselves. In today's world, where people of good will have to stomach the lefty love affair with Hamas and Hezbollah, the fact is that Hagee has demonstrated that he is a real friend of the Jewish people and should be respected as such (assuming, of course, that you care one whit about Jews, which most progressives, frankly, do not).

Matt, sometimes you should think about what you write.

Posted by Eagle613 | May 16, 2008 1:59 PM

Eagle613 is correct.

the basic problem here is that Matt has the typical born and bred NE ignorance of evangelicalism.

Posted by Nathan | May 16, 2008 2:06 PM

Current day Muslims as a whole does not say that Jews should be converted or die. You seem to tag Matt for speaking out of school - but how many Muslims do you know? How many Muslim countries have you been to? How many hours have you studied the Koran or the history of Islam?

I would venture to say that the answer to all of the above is probably the same as the answer to, "How many Jews will be left after Hagee's hoped for apocalypse happens?" Zero.

Posted by Eagle613 is a know-nothing | May 16, 2008 2:15 PM

Current day Muslims as a whole do not say that Jews should be converted or die. You seem to tag Matt for speaking out of school - but how many Muslims do you know? How many Muslim countries have you been to? How many hours have you studied the Koran or the history of Islam?

I would venture to say that the answer to all of the above is probably the same as the answer to, "How many Jews will be left after Hagee's hoped for apocalypse happens?" Zero.

Posted by Eagle613 is a know-nothing | May 16, 2008 2:15 PM

eagle...

1. No one doubts this....the controversy occurs when you support unsustainable political policy in facilitation of said goal.

2. I know of numerous "old-time" conservative Catholics and being a muslim myself do not expect Jews to convert or die, although perhaps you can give context to his controversial anti-Muslim remarks.

3. I'm certain there are a number of evangelicals who have done as much or more than Hagee has in financial, verbal, or otherwise in support of Israel, however this is irrelevant to the crux of Matt's point.

Posted by Sid | May 16, 2008 2:20 PM

Re "the basic problem here is that Matt has the typical born and bred NE ignorance of evangelicalism"
------------
Actually, the "basic problem" is that a bunch of fucking morons want to run this country based upon their --and Hagees'-- mental delusions. Even when that leads to the unnecessary deaths of thousands of Americans.

Correction. The REAL problem is that the people of this country can't seem to summon the will or means to exterminate these vicious, traitorous scum.

OR at least institutionalize them. Instead of giving them access to the public airwaves -- while denying millions of real citizens any voice in the national discourse.

Hagee is the type of person who gave Hitler control of the Reichstag. He merely hates the Muslims instead of the Jews -- supports Republican fascists rather than Nazi fascists. He is a disgrace to Christianity. His is the type of mentality who caused the slaughter of millions of innocents in ages past --for the Glory of God.

Good people are dying because of Hagee.

Posted by Don Williams | May 16, 2008 2:22 PM

Nathan and Eagle613 -- many "serious Chiristians" in fact disagree with the principle that Jews must convert. A denomination is no less "serious" if it accepts there are multiple legitimate paths to salvation. Save us the "fundamentalist creep." As for point two, strictly speaking, Hagee doesn't require anything except extra-wide chairs. The objection is that he thinks that Israel being covered in a sea of blood is a desirable state of affairs. And for point three, all I see is Hagee being a blowhard. What's he ever done? Let alone compared with Jimmy Carter, who brokered peace with Egypt.

I think Matt's broader point is that it is bad news for anyone, least of all ostensibly pro-Jewish organizations, to legitimize this type of rhetoric.

Posted by David B. | May 16, 2008 2:27 PM

The only reason that Hagee provides support for Israel is so that all the can Jews move there by the time his 'lets start a war' policy starts to work.

This is a guy who not only believes in the whole 'end of days' thing, he's actively working to bring it about.

Posted by daveNYC | May 16, 2008 2:27 PM

ALL serious Christians believe that the Jews must eventually accept Jesus as messiah. That's what Christians do.

Says who?

Posted by blah | May 16, 2008 2:36 PM

"3. It is hard to find ANY gentile today who has done more to promote Israel and actually, physically help real, live Jews than Hagee."

I can think of one who arranged billions of dollars in aid to Israel. He also arranged billions in aid for Israel's most powerful and dangerous neighbor in exchange for a guarantee of peace from them with regard to Israel. That peace has lasted about 30 years now. I think his efforts would be pretty hard to top.

Posted by Njorl | May 16, 2008 2:54 PM

And Njorl, that guy teaches Sunday school as well! But he's a Democrat, so he must be faking being a Christian.

"1. ALL serious Christians believe that the Jews must eventually accept Jesus as messiah. That's what Christians do."

Wow, that means I know like no Christians. All of my pseudo-Christian friends are gonna be so pissed when I tell them!

Posted by Reality Man | May 16, 2008 3:12 PM

Re Don Williams

"Correction. The REAL problem is that the people of this country can't seem to summon the will or means to exterminate these vicious, traitorous scum."

How about Mr. Williams showing the way.

Posted by SLC | May 16, 2008 3:45 PM

actually, as a devout Baptist, Jimmy Carter most definitely believes that all Jews should convert to Christianity. (why? because a cardinal tenet of his religion is that the only way of salvation for ALL people is through Jesus)

Posted by Nathan | May 16, 2008 3:47 PM

Nathan, you have no basis to conclude whether or not Carter actually believes that, except to throw around the word "devout."

The point of the Carter analogies is that he, anathema to AIPAC, has actually done things that benefit Israel. And there's certainly no record of him advocating genocide, even if his South Africa analogies are overstated.

Posted by David B. | May 16, 2008 3:56 PM

David B.

I most certainly do. Jimmy Carter is a Southern Baptist and therefore an evangelical. A primary definitional tenet of being an evangelical (indeed, it's embodied in the term itself) is an acceptance of the "Great Commission" (the duty to attempt to evangelize the earth).

so, unless it's your claim that Jimmy Carter is in fact an apostate Southern Baptist...then yes, he does believe that. just like Billy Graham and every other evangelical. they have to.
its sort of the point of a missionary religion.

I don't know why liberals always assume bad faith on the part of people they usually agree with who are conservative religiously.

Posted by Nathan | May 16, 2008 4:16 PM

"no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

"if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain"

The entire existence of Christianity is anti-Jewish in nature.

Posted by David | May 16, 2008 4:16 PM

Nathan, speaking as someone who has undoubtedly spent many more hours in fundamentalist evangelical churches than you have:

There is a MASSIVE difference between what you claim "devout" people believe and what they actually do. "Going into all the world, preaching the good news so that all might be saved" while at the same time loving everyone regardless of their beliefs and respecting the cultures and beliefs of others is correct.

Saying on the other hand that "ALL serious Christians believe that the Jews must eventually accept Jesus as messiah. That's what Christians do." is completely presumptuous, combative, and not in any way helpful to solving the situation at hand.

No serious American politician has as his overriding goal the conversion of all unbelievers; that would be not only wrong and foolhardy, but useless. "Devout" Christians seek as their primary goal to make the world a better place; to end conflict and spread the love of God. This is not done in any way remotely resembling the "you are wrong; repent or burn in Hell" approach Hagee and yourself appear to espouse. You have completely twisted a loving doctrine into something that allows you to pit "your" side against theirs. You have chosen poorly, and are an insult and hindrance to those who are actually devout believers. I hope that you one day see the error of your ways.

Posted by Adam | May 16, 2008 4:17 PM

The end of days will take care of themselves.

Liar. Why do these supposed "Christians" show up only to bear false witness? John Hagee and other radical premillenial dispensationalist leaders are cheerleading for a massive attack on Israel that will signal the beginning of the End Times. Prior to the Rapture, God will miraculously save Israel from this massive attack by the Legion of Doom... er, nefarious coalition of nations we hate (Russia used to be the preferred chief bad boy; nowadays, it's a mashup of Iran + Russia / China). So John Hagee thinks we should stir up even more trouble in the Middle East, because an apparently irresistible multilateral attack on Israel will get the Tribulation ball rolling. Hal Lindsey is also flogging this line incessantly, and it's straight out of the first book in LaHaye and Jenkins' "Left Behind" series. Why using American foreign policy to force the Almighty's hand doesn't count as "tempting God," I'll never know. But stop pretending you guys care about Israel and those unbelieving Christ-killing Jews as anything more than pawns in your bloodthirsty triumphalist revenge fantasy. Ooh, a "remnant" will be spared because they admit that you were right all along. Gee, thank you for your support.

That doesn't make him any less insane, but AIPAC's not crazy; just a bunch of political realists.

Again, these people support stirring up hornets' nests all around Israel prior to the Rapture, and frothingly oppose any attempt to treat the Palestinians as human beings... even the Christian ones. None of this is particularly good for Israel's security back on Planet Reality. So AIPAC might not be crazy, but they seem to be ignorant of the extent of their "allies'" agenda. (Sheesh, Jews for Jesus is critical of Hagee, because they actually take the Great Commission seriously, rather than merely trying to get as many Jews as possible packed into the Holy Land for the Apocalypse.)

Posted by mds | May 16, 2008 4:24 PM

Saying on the other hand that "ALL serious Christians believe that the Jews must eventually accept Jesus as messiah. That's what Christians do." is completely presumptuous, combative, and not in any way helpful to solving the situation at hand.

Helpful or not, it is the truth.

That some Christians choose to sugar-coat their theology is neither here nor there.

Posted by spacegoat | May 16, 2008 4:32 PM

"Helpful or not, it is the truth.

That some Christians choose to sugar-coat their theology is neither here nor there."

Again, this is the exact same point. The view that your particular interpretation is "the truth" and any other possible one is simply self-delusion on a grand scale.

Ridiculous. Get over yourself. The rest of us are extremely happy that your breed is dying out, so that some good can actually be accomplished once your ridiculous black and white approach to everything possible is relegated to the sideshow it deserves.

Posted by Adam | May 16, 2008 4:39 PM

"Jimmy Carter is a Southern Baptist"

I'm pretty sure Jimmy Carter is a Texas Baptist (Baptist General Convention of Texas). He left the Southern Baptist Convention over conflicts with the ideology (specifically the revised Statement of Faith) . But I have no idea what his specific conflicts are.

Posted by fostert | May 16, 2008 4:42 PM

Nathan, I was raised Baptist, and back before thre Southern Baptists were hijacked by a buncha reaganite televangelists, there is no set tenants in the Baptist faith - which is why Baptists are always fissioning off from each other. There's no Thomas Aquinas among the Southern Baptists. Well, there used to be the tenant that if you set a tenant than you are setting up your word against the word of the Lord.

That means you have leaway to think about the paths to salvation, which could well include deciding that Jews, Moslems, Buddhists, etc. are making their own way. That is for God to decide, not you. Of course, the Southern Baptists have tried to tighten the rules, to enforce a doctrine, since the coup, but Carter has been prominently opposed to that program. Which is why the church is on the verge of splitting up.

Posted by roger | May 16, 2008 5:08 PM

Eagle 613: I think you mean all fundamentalist Christians. Secondly, now we're to put this crazy preacher's verbal filth into context? Hmmm . . . sounds familiar (think Jeremiah WRight).

And any Jew who trusts the motives of people like Hagee is really naive.

Posted by cnnr | May 16, 2008 5:28 PM

Roger:

1. you need to learn to spell.

2. you're wrong.

Adam:

nice job of projection. (you're wrong about me and what I believe/don't believe on all accounts by the way.) I understand you're working out some issues with a fundie upbringing. that's fine. I also note that you admit the truth of my point while attempting to change the subject.

Jesus, you people need to grow up. yes, many evangelicals are particular about which beliefs they put front and center..and many, such as Jimmy Carter (and if you asked him whether he believed in the "Great Commission" he would say yes) don't actually point out the exact logical ramifications of their beliefs....but if they were intellectually honest....that's the reality of serious religion in general. inevitably it leads to uncomfortable ramifications for non-believers in that particular religion. de rerum natura. at least ardent religion-attaching atheists understand this.

(for the record, I'm an agnostic)

Posted by Nathan | May 16, 2008 5:33 PM

Re Nathan's comment "Jimmy Carter is a Southern Baptist and therefore an evangelical. A primary definitional tenet of being an evangelical (indeed, it's embodied in the term itself) is an acceptance of the "Great Commission" (the duty to attempt to evangelize the earth)."
-----------
There is a difference between testifying to the Word of God and forcing religious beliefs onto others at the point of a gun -- or in using the power of the state to do so.

REAL Baptists have as their most fundamental tenet that of Soul Freedom. The INDIVIDUAL mediates and decides. That is why infant baptism is not accepted. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptist_Distinctives

The members of each church govern themselves -- because Jesus --not Rev Hagee -- rules us.

Unfortunately, that strong advocacy for individual and church freedom sometimes means that people I consider to be con artists and whores for the wealthy are not confronted when they should be.

If people are interested in Real Baptists, I suggest they talk to preachers who minister to poor and working class neighborhoods. People who use the church's tithe to follow Christ's injunction to help the poor, sick, elderly and oppressed.

I suggest they talk to preachers who DON'T think the best use of charity donations is to buy TV networks, million dollar salaries, multi-million dollar houses and investments in Charles Taylor's Liberian Gold Mine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hagee#Financial_controversy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Robertson#Business_interests

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Robertson_controversies#Charles_Taylor.2C_gold.2C_diamonds_and_racehorse_controversy

Posted by Don Williams | May 16, 2008 5:33 PM

Roger:

1. you need to learn to spell.

2. you're wrong.

Adam:

nice job of projection. (you're wrong about me and what I believe/don't believe on all accounts by the way.) I understand you're working out some issues with a fundie upbringing. that's fine. I also note that you admit the truth of my point while attempting to change the subject.

Jesus, you people need to grow up. yes, many evangelicals are particular about which beliefs they put front and center..and many, such as Jimmy Carter (and if you asked him whether he believed in the "Great Commission" he would say yes) don't actually point out the exact logical ramifications of their beliefs....but if they were intellectually honest....that's the reality of serious religion in general. inevitably it leads to uncomfortable ramifications for non-believers in that particular religion. de rerum natura. at least ardent religion-attacking atheists understand this.

(for the record, I'm an agnostic)

Posted by Nathan | May 16, 2008 5:33 PM

People may want to look at Virginian Pilot Reporter Bill Sizemore's profile of Pat Robertson's business dealings. See
http://www.vqronline.org/articles/2008/spring/sizemore-christian-aces/

In response, Pat appears to be trying to buy the
Virginian Pilot:
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/south/view.bg?articleid=1065974

Let's see how much Christian charity he shows Bill Sizemore if he manages to take ownership.
heh heh

Posted by Don Williams | May 16, 2008 5:46 PM

spacegoat writes:

Saying on the other hand that "ALL serious Christians believe that the Jews must eventually accept Jesus as messiah. That's what Christians do." is completely presumptuous, combative, and not in any way helpful to solving the situation at hand.

Helpful or not, it is the truth.

That some Christians choose to sugar-coat their theology is neither here nor there.

This is not the view of, say, the Roman Catholic Church, which is not particularly known for sugar-coating anything.

Posted by alkali | May 16, 2008 5:49 PM

Catholics certainly call for the conversion of the Jews.

The Good Friday Prayer:

Let us pray also for the Jews.
May our God and Lord enlighten their hearts, so that they may acknowledge Jesus Christ, savior of all men.

Let us pray.

Let us kneel.

Arise.

Almighty and everlasting God, who desires that all men be saved and come to the knowledge of truth, mercifully grant that, as the fullness of the Gentiles enters into Thy Church, all Israel may be saved. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen.

Posted by spacegoat | May 16, 2008 7:06 PM

The amusing thing about this stupidity is that virtually all scholarship into the origins of Christianity have pretty much concluded that Jesus was a faithful - indeed, fanatical - Jew who had no intention of founding any new religion, still less one that would persecute his own people for the next two thousand years under the false charge that they killed him.

Especially when it was a Roman double agent named Saul (later turned Paul) who was himself driven out of Israel by Jesus' own brother and Jesus' own followers and who "checked in" (as we say in prison) to the Romans for protection and was escorted by Roman soldiers out of town when forty of Jesus' followers vowed not to eat, drink or sleep until they'd killed him who invented the entire Christian mythology used to justify the persecution of the Jews.

For Christians to have anything to say about Jews is a joke and a half. It would be hilarious if the Christian Church wasn't responsible for the persecution of Jews, anti-Semitism, and not to mention the millions of deaths of people of other religious and political groups over the intervening centuries.

These scum truly do deserve to be exterminated and they will be in due time.

Far from getting "The Rapture", the Christians are going to get - and deserve - "The Rupture."

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 16, 2008 10:16 PM

"Catholics certainly call for the conversion of the Jews."

Catholics call for the conversion of all non-Catholics because they believe that Catholism is the best way to get to heaven. Look up the prayers said during Easter Vigil services, that’s the day after Good Friday. I can’t remember all of the words but prayers of conversion are said for not only Jews, but other Christian denominations, atheists, even non-practicing Catholics.

Almost all religions believe that they are the best; be it in terms of teaching you to live your life, reaching heaven or finding higher enlightenment. The Catholic Church is different than many Evangelical Churches because it doesn’t believe all non-Catholics or all non-Christians go to hell. Catholic Christianity is your best bet but any person who lives a moral life to the best of his or her ability and does not reject Christ out of anything other than a sincere inability to believe, has a chance at heaven. Perhaps their odds aren’t that good but they are not “on a way ticket to hell” as the loud Rev. Hagee once put it. The Catholic Church believes that it is impossible to definitively know the fate of any departed mortal soul until you pass on and see for yourself. Except for the saints of course, that’s basically what a saint is, a certified occupant of heaven.

But what do Catholics know anyway, we are all worshippers of the Great Babylonian Whore anyway.

Posted by Raindog | May 17, 2008 12:17 AM

"The amusing thing about this stupidity is that virtually all scholarship into the origins of Christianity have pretty much concluded that Jesus was a faithful - indeed, fanatical - Jew who had no intention of founding any new religion, still less one that would persecute his own people for the next two thousand years under the false charge that they killed him." (R.S. Hack)

Then, what was He doing shaming and ass-reaming the moneychangers? Why did He scornfully deride his co-religionists for their hidebound narrowness and moral ugliness? He didn't seem to like them or their faith much at all. If He was such a loyal Jew - why do so many Jews spit on His name? Is it all just bad PR?

Posted by Trevor | May 17, 2008 9:00 AM

There is a MASSIVE difference between what you claim "devout" people believe and what they actually do. "Going into all the world, preaching the good news so that all might be saved" while at the same time loving everyone regardless of their beliefs and respecting the cultures and beliefs of others is correct.

Saying on the other hand that "ALL serious Christians believe that the Jews must eventually accept Jesus as messiah.

"Devout" Christians seek as their primary goal to make the world a better place; to end conflict and spread the love of God. This is not done in any way remotely resembling the "you are wrong; repent or burn in Hell" approach Hagee and yourself appear to espouse.

"Preaching the good news so that all might be saved" would seem to imply to me that those who do not have the good news are probably not saved (i.e. they will burn in Hell). Also, respecting the beliefs and cultures of others does not mean accepting them as correct.

Accepting that there are multiple ways into Heaven is not by any means a Christian doctrine. The fact that the Baptists do not have a central body excommunicating people for heresy does not alter this fact.

Posted by Glaivester | May 17, 2008 9:47 AM

One of the great things about living in a non-theocracy is that people are allowed to interpret their faith however they choose. Someone can choose to be Southern Baptists and respect Jews' devotion to their own faith without going to hell. The Bible is clear that slavery is ok under certain circumstances, so were all of the Christian abolitionists also apostates? The Bible is clear that rapists should marry their victims. However, how many Christians, Jews and Muslims in America actually believe this? You play with these ideas enough and you can basically define away any actual living members of any religion as apostates.

Posted by Reality Man | May 17, 2008 3:21 PM

Trevor: "Then, what was He doing shaming and ass-reaming the moneychangers? Why did He scornfully deride his co-religionists for their hidebound narrowness and moral ugliness? He didn't seem to like them or their faith much at all."

You're basing that mostly on the Christian Bible, which has plenty of motivation to make it seem that he wasn't a fanatical follower of the Jewish Law. Biblical scholarship says differently. Many of his followers appear to have been Sicarii, who were basically the Jewish equivalent of Al Qaeda against the Romans. He may well have wished to modify the path of the Jewish religion somewhat, but as he was intended to take the throne of Israel and kick out the Romans, he really was a died-in-the-wool Jew, not some radical out to replace the Jewish religion with some heresy like Christianity. His primary opposition was to the Jewish collaborators with the Romans.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 17, 2008 8:48 PM

Yeah, Hagee apologized to the Catholic Church, but he clearly did not go down without a fight. Thank heavens a copyeditor from his Texas "mega-church" intervened by revising the apology letter's first draft:http://www.236.com/news/2008/05/16/mccain_pal_apologizes_to_great_6562.php

Posted by eliana | May 18, 2008 1:51 PM

Yeah, Hagee apologized to the Catholic Church, but he clearly did not go down without a fight. Thank heavens a copyeditor from his Texas "mega-church" intervened by revising the apology letter's first draft:http://www.236.com/news/2008/05/16/mccain_pal_apologizes_to_great_6562.php

Posted by eliana | May 18, 2008 1:54 PM