Quantcast

Is Sharron Angle on a Mission From God?

Politics 2010/08/20 23:00:00
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Sharron Angle, the Nevada Republican Senate candidate who is running against Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid, has been public about how her faith has guided her political platform.

From her anti-abortion stance to saying God wanted her to run for Senate and she's fighting those who "want to make government our god," Angle has more than once shown her skepticism over the separation of Church and State. But this, apparently, is not new.

Nearly 20 years ago, according to a newspaper editor, Angle was part of a group that was opposed to a local high school football team using black jerseys. The coach, who wanted to inspire his players, wanted to use the new color so that his players would remember a previous loss, the "blackest day" in the team's history.

But Angle, among others, said that the color "was thoroughly evil, invoking the supernatural and especially the devil." Angle and her posse went on to quote scripture on why the players shouldn't wear the jerseys. She later won a school trustee election.

Nevadans don't seem to mind the mingling of religion and campaigning. Angle is in a dead heat with Reid.


Is Sharron Angle on a Mission From God?

Read More: http://pvtimes.com/opinion/angle-strove-religiousl...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Daryl 2010/08/21 20:54:45
    Yes, Angle has God on her side for sure
    Daryl
    +40
    Left-wing activism masquerading as "SodaHead Politics"?

    I doubt very much the author lives in Nevada.

    I do.

    Most Nevadans want to dump Harry Reid and Sharron Angle is the woman to do it.

    I am sorry if dumping Harry Reid gets in the way of the left-wing road map to power.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • WGN Vive le... 2010/08/22 04:15:36
    WGN
    +1
    Extream religiousosity! Symptoms are hearing voices and talking with foot in mouth.
  • JamesCampbell 2010/08/21 04:47:08
    No, Angle sounds crazier and crazier every day
    JamesCampbell
    We need Harry Reid out of the Senate, and the Republicans send this wackadoodle against him? This people, is why no hope, change or savior is on the horizon. There is a back room deal between the Dems and Reps to keep Reid in, has to be
  • Jebrel JamesCa... 2010/08/21 12:35:50
    Jebrel
    You may be right... While I am not a huge fan of Reid, this woman is out of her mind.
  • farkoff JamesCa... 2010/08/21 13:14:52
  • JamesCa... farkoff 2010/08/22 01:08:47 (edited)
    JamesCampbell
    farkoff that is NOT the Tea Party, that is the GOP's plan to overtake the Tea Party, and it looks like it is working.

    Lokk at campaignforliberty.com Not one of those idiots you mentioned (add in Newt) are supported by the REAL Tea Party.

    That is how the GOP are attacking us, when we showed a threat, they decided to make a Tea Party "Express" tour, and you have bought into it as many others have,

    That is whyu we can never have true change, the ones in power control the media to slander others w/o any retribution

    Tea Party people are Libertarians who have a Christian faith but many are fed up with fiscal irresponsibility so that is our main objective, not religion
  • Giantfan JamesCa... 2010/08/21 20:12:41
    Giantfan
    +1
    No. This is what is becoming of the republican party. And people wonder why I refuse to vote for republicans anymore. Either they are like her or they just say no to everything and take their pay and do nothing at all. The easiest thing to do is say no and do nothing. And they are getting paid for it. I will start voting mixed again when the republican party comes back from the abyss and moves more to the center.
  • JamesCa... Giantfan 2010/08/22 01:11:21
    JamesCampbell
    +1
    Vote Libertarian ofr 3rd party, but we ARE trying to get the GOP back to its roots, look at NY...Steve McLaughlin, Debbie Brusch. Those are tea party candidates.
    Paladino is a FALSE Tea Party guy
  • WGN JamesCa... 2010/08/22 04:19:07 (edited)
    WGN
    Back to its roots? The Republicans of the 1860's were liberal and progressive. Where and what exactly to you think these roots are?

    Abraham Lincoln was the first Republican President, but few people would call Lincoln a conservative. So how did his party--the GOP--become the party supported by big business, the religious right, and conservatives of all stripes
    The Republican Party started in 1854. It was a one-issue party, and that issue was anti-slavery.

    Well, to be brutally specific, the issue was the spread of slavery. The infant party knew it couldn't do anything to stop slavery in the South, so its goal was to stop slavery from spreading any further. To new territories in the Midwest, for example.

    The two standard parties before that point were the Democrats and the Whigs-but the Whig party was dead or dying. The Democrats were proslavery back then. Immigrants and Catholics were usually Democrats too.

    Then as now, a large part of the voting public was anti-immigrant. No matter how they felt about slavery, these people hated Democrats and were likely to join the Republicans. In the first Presidential election after the Republican Party was formed, the party did surprisingly well--in the North. In the slave-holding South, of course, no one voted Republican.

    By the ne...













    Back to its roots? The Republicans of the 1860's were liberal and progressive. Where and what exactly to you think these roots are?

    Abraham Lincoln was the first Republican President, but few people would call Lincoln a conservative. So how did his party--the GOP--become the party supported by big business, the religious right, and conservatives of all stripes
    The Republican Party started in 1854. It was a one-issue party, and that issue was anti-slavery.

    Well, to be brutally specific, the issue was the spread of slavery. The infant party knew it couldn't do anything to stop slavery in the South, so its goal was to stop slavery from spreading any further. To new territories in the Midwest, for example.

    The two standard parties before that point were the Democrats and the Whigs-but the Whig party was dead or dying. The Democrats were proslavery back then. Immigrants and Catholics were usually Democrats too.

    Then as now, a large part of the voting public was anti-immigrant. No matter how they felt about slavery, these people hated Democrats and were likely to join the Republicans. In the first Presidential election after the Republican Party was formed, the party did surprisingly well--in the North. In the slave-holding South, of course, no one voted Republican.

    By the next presidential campaign in 1860, when Lincoln captured the majority of electoral votes, horrible, violent events propelled North against South, free states against slave states. There was the Dred Scott decision by the Supreme Court, which forced free states to recognize the rights of slaveholders. The bloody raid at Harpers Ferry, corruption in the White House, a fatal attack in the Senate between two congressmen, warfare in Kansas over slavery. . . all these set the stage for the Civil War.

    So the war was fought from 1860 to 1865, and slavery ended. Where did that leave the Republicans? Their one, unifying issue was gone.

    Even in 1860, many men joined the Republicans because they were concerned about their jobs if slavery was allowed to spread. As the Civil War rolled on, the Republicans worked with industry in the North to increase manufacturing. More railroads were built to supply the war effort, and banks were reformed. During the war, if laborers went on strike, the Union army stepped in to end the strike.

    A relationship was begun.

    After the war, the Republican Congress pushed for railway construction in the South. That didn't score too many points with former slaveholders, however. Most white men of the South remained Democrats; most freed slaves gravitated to the Republican Party.

    But black men didn't vote in numbers large enough to have much influence.

    People change. Ten years after the war, voters wanted to put the conflict behind them. The Republican Party fought to survive, and most Republicans realized that protecting the interests of minorities was no longer a popular concern. The courts chiseled away at the reforms that were passed right after the Civil War, including voting rights for African Americans. No one did anything; it seems that no one in power really cared.

    The Republicans focused on economic issues. This had been their source of strength during the Civil War, and it kept winning elections. Over those first twenty years of its existance, from 1854 to 1874, the Party morphed into the conservative entity we know today, protective of business interests, but with no direct religious goals.
    (more)
  • Giantfan JamesCa... 2010/08/22 13:47:32
    Giantfan
    Not my style. I'd rather be progressive. I believe the world keeps moving forward so why should I go back to the way things were. I liked growing up in the 50's 60's and 70's but I don't want to go back to those times. Everybody to there own as they say. You may like things as they were when our country was formed, me, no way. I like flushing toilets and hot showers. If I need an operation I don't want booze to numb me. Old ways are nice but they are the past. I look forward to the present and future. Memories are all I need of the past.
  • BlytheSpirit~bn0 2010/08/21 04:41:02
    Yes, Angle has God on her side for sure
    BlytheSpirit~bn0
    +2
    Yes, if you're talking about the idiot god of crazy.
  • xscd 2010/08/21 04:32:35 (edited)
    No, Angle sounds crazier and crazier every day
    xscd
    +1
    I'm sure that some religious conservatives like Sharron Angle, but will that be enough to win the election? I don't think so.

    "A June 9, 2010, Rasmussen Reports post-primary poll showed Angle leading incumbent Senator Harry Reid by a margin of 50% to 39%. A July 2010 poll however showed Senator Reid leading Angle by 7 points. The change of margin, 18% in less than a month, is the largest in Senate elections history."

    "Angle has been criticized for largely avoiding answering questions from the local press."

    That's not surprising, since whenever she opens her mouth she sounds like a Tea Party extremist. This does a disservice to the Tea Party, which would like the American public to think that its character and agenda are reasonable and practical instead of promoting a weird, ultra-right, Christian-doctrine based radical extremist agenda.
  • DC xscd 2010/08/21 05:27:28 (edited)
    DC
    +1
    August poll she is up over reid by 2. Stay updated please so as to keep up.
  • xscd DC 2010/08/21 11:19:07 (edited)
    xscd
    That's not a big rise after such a hard fall. The race she's in is an interesting one however, worth watching.

    Provide the source of your information please.
  • DC xscd 2010/08/21 12:20:01
  • xscd DC 2010/08/21 12:48:57 (edited)
    xscd
    According to your source, your assertion above is untrue, that Angle is up over Reid by 2 points. Instead, she has risen in the polls by 2 points to tie with Reid. Only when "leaners" are added to the poll results can it appear that she is ahead by a very small margin.

    Regardless, it is an interesting race.
  • DC xscd 2010/08/21 12:56:46
    DC
    SO she is up by 2 OVER Reid then. My assertion is NOT untrue. With "leaners" she is ahead for the moment. 50%-48%. (Margin of error of course though). Thats up by 2.....
  • xscd DC 2010/08/21 13:03:48 (edited)
    xscd
    You didn't mention leaners. You just said simply, "she is up over Reid by 2." You omitted important aspects of the survey that qualified (weakened) your position.
  • DC xscd 2010/08/21 13:08:08
    DC
    Are you serious? LOL-whats the difference-she is up by 2-LOL
    lol-whats difference-she 2-lol
  • xscd DC 2010/08/21 13:17:16 (edited)
    xscd
    Yes, I'm serious. Misrepresenting a poll to support your position, no matter how minor the issue, undermines your credibility to some extent.
  • DC xscd 2010/08/21 13:36:27
    DC
    Actually now your making a FOOL of yourself. Thats like saying I didn't give out the sample size, date of survey, whether it was LV or RV (If you even know the difference), margin of error, or check to see if the confidence level was the usual 95%.....

    She is up by 2---and if you knew anything about polling--you know LV is more accurate than RV and adding leaners is usually more reliable closer to an election. So again-for at least this one week--she is up by 2....NO ONE WAS BEING DECEPTIVE. Learn how to read polls before you try to analyze them....
    closer election again-for week--she 2 deceptive learn read polls analyze
  • xscd DC 2010/08/21 13:41:22
    xscd
    I stand by my previous comments.
  • DC xscd 2010/08/21 13:49:06
    DC
    So do I----so I'll stand over here and you stand WAY, WAY over there---- i----so ill
    (and take a class in survey research while you are over there)
  • xscd DC 2010/08/21 14:08:19 (edited)
    xscd
    If you're going to use a poll, at least don't cherry pick it. Polls are dubious and skewed enough as it is. At least you provided a link to the poll when asked for it.
  • DC xscd 2010/08/21 14:18:54
    DC
    UNBELIEVEABLE-stop-NO one "cherry picked". She is up by 2 !!!!! Like it or Not!!!!!!! Learn how to read a poll please.... And stay over there-I stayed over here. You have some studying to do about how to read a poll.
    Oh-and got a little present for ya before you head back over there-speaking of polls-see if you can figure this one out-----
    http://politicalwire.com/arch...
  • xscd DC 2010/08/21 14:57:22 (edited)
    xscd
    Thanks for the present! I'll be right over there to pick it up. Might stay for a while just to be sociable you know. How're you doin' anyway?

    So-- Got any gays in your family? Is this global warming thing affecting your area any worse than it's affecting ours? I have to admit it's been kind of a tough summer here.
  • DC xscd 2010/08/22 02:38:06
    DC
    Apparently that poll got in your-well....
  • xscd DC 2010/08/22 13:17:00 (edited)
    xscd
    Nah. I personally don't care about that particular electoral race, although it's hard to believe that any reasonable, rational conservative would listen to or vote for Sharron Angle.

    And that makes me question conservatives as a whole. Just how much does religion (specifically, Christian and Mormon religion) figure into being a conservative?

    Conservatives like to say that they are about "the Constitution, smaller government and lower taxes," but that only seems to mask an agenda that is actually religion based, or bundles so many religious points of agenda with the more classical ideals that religion becomes a liability to conservatives in general, depending entirely on appealing to a core of religiously devout people, a core that is dwindling and fracturing over time as church pews empty and young people turn away from religion (for good reason, in my opinion).

    In my view, the very thing that conservatives have catered to for support in the past (religion, especially Christian religion) is now stabbing them in the back as the more devout religious people are splintering off into more extremist or hard-line groups such as the Tea Party, leaving rational, reasonable, more secular than religious conservatives in their own group.

    It's very interesting to me what is happening among conservatives today, so I like to try to pick up bits of information about it from conservatives themselves when and however I can.
  • WGN DC 2010/08/22 04:20:38
    WGN
    Which August poll? Please post data!
  • DC WGN 2010/08/22 04:29:13
    DC
    Excuse me????? ***Its already been posted on here***-so look for it......
    Also, there is another one posted that you might enjoy as an obamanista. It's about obama vs. Bush in some democrat districts-conducted by a dem. pollster. So find both of them-they have been posted. But don't demand that I post something. That is really rude...
  • farkoff xscd 2010/08/21 13:16:35
  • Torchma... farkoff 2010/08/21 22:42:00
    Torchmanner ~PWCM~JLA
    Nothing but Leftwing propaganda.
  • Walks_on_Clouds 2010/08/21 04:24:21
    Yes, Angle has God on her side for sure
    Walks_on_Clouds
    +5
    Has she been elected yet? MAN she's a tiger. How could you not love this person???

    angle god elected shes tiger love person
  • WGN 2010/08/21 04:19:30
    No, Angle sounds crazier and crazier every day
    WGN
    +1
    Not a mission from the God I know. She is just another RWCNJ. She will never get elected. Everytime she opens her mouth, another foot goes in. She's a regular Sarah Palin- u betcha!
  • ««Gingey, the Master Debate... 2010/08/21 04:02:48
    No, Angle sounds crazier and crazier every day
    ««Gingey, the Master Debater of Þ|-|Дэ†»»
  • DC ««Ginge... 2010/08/21 12:31:06
  • Diane 2010/08/21 03:59:04
    No, Angle sounds crazier and crazier every day
    Diane
    +4
    She's just another religious fanatic nut job.
  • cordielia-jane 2010/08/21 03:58:27
    No, Angle sounds crazier and crazier every day
    cordielia-jane
    +1
    "...the color "was thoroughly evil, invoking the supernatural and especially the devil."..."
    WTF?! i HOPE this woman has opened her mind since then!!
  • Toria 2010/08/21 03:57:57
    No, Angle sounds crazier and crazier every day
    Toria
    Yeah, maybe a blues brother misson but the movie made alot more sense than Angle could ever do. Most of her mis-place political concepts seem to be related to her Scientology guided choices. In a time when Navada is trying to find money for school books and teachers according to Barbra Buckly, Buckly warned other Navada legaslatiors to not go on a trip planned by Angle to see if her ideas of giving Ensenda Baja Californa prisoners Massages, Saunas & vitamen therpy.
    Why she would want to do that for prisoners of another state is Angle's warped mind at work. Thank goodness Navada has other choices to vote for this year.
  • RachelLord Toria 2010/08/21 04:51:30
    RachelLord
    +3
    Poor thing, watching Reid's commercials again? This was deemed Half True
    http://www.politifact.com/tru...

    Here's another link that explains it.
    http://dullardmush.blogspot.c...

    You should probably do your homework a little more carefully before you spread propaganda. "In a time" was 2003, but you kinda forgot to mention that.

    If you don't like her, that's fine, but don't use half truths to convince others.
  • bonehea... RachelLord 2010/08/21 05:08:33
    bonehead15329
    +2
    But that's all they've got -- half truths, and outright lies.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/25 22:12:55

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals