Souls to the Polls March and Rally for Obama

People of Faith for Obama are a holding Souls to the Polls Early Vote Event tomorrow!

Join our community as we rally and march to the polls to re-elect our President!

Sunday October 28th, 2012 at 1:30 PM
Red Arrow Park
920 N. Water St, Milwaukee

Featuring Tammy Baldwin, Tom Barrett, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Mayor of Denver Michael Hancock

Your Vote. Your Voice. Make it count!

Why wait to cast your ballot for Barack Obama and Joe Biden?

This is being organized by Organizing for American Wisconsin.


Related Articles

8 thoughts on “Souls to the Polls March and Rally for Obama

  1. They would say that groups and/or individuals of faith have every right to support any candidate they so choose. Individual and collectives of churches, however, cannot endorse or support individual candidates or political causes, lest they lose their tax-exempt status.

    1. I’m not talking about churches and tax-exempt status. I am talking about a group called “People of Faith for Obama.” I guess it’s ok because it’s a liberal candidate, but when it’s the other way around I see liberals look their noses down at it. How dare “people of faith” be involved in politics! “Souls to the polls” –really? Double standard at its finest.

      I wonder if any of these people of faith will bother to ask Tammy Baldwin what faith she has, since she has refused to reveal such information.

      1. Tammy Baldwin’s faith is her business, as mine is my business and yours is your business. It’s obvious your screen name is not all that you have forgotten. You have forgotten the good sense God gave you and continue instead to pretend He intended you to be a jackass.

        1. Sexual orientation is also a matter of private business, but she has no problem disclosing that piece of information.

          As one of only 5 members of Congress who doesn’t specify a religion, I think it’s a fair question when she is featured at an event such as this. But apparently it’s ok to use “people of faith” in order to get their “souls to the polls” regardless.

          Also you ignored the obvious point that if it were “People of Faith for {Republican Candidate}”, liberals of all kinds (probably including this blog) would do nothing but mock and scoff and deplore the evil influence of religion on politics. But that argument doesn’t apply when you need to seduce a few more votes, does it?

          1. I don’t have any problem disclosing that I am straight – why should Tammy Baldwin have any problem disclosing that she is not? You clearly are interested only in arguing moot points that have no real meaning to anyone but fanatics who live empty lives and come on these blogs in order to have someone to talk to (or in your case, at).

            No liberal I know (and I know thousands) has any problem with “people of faith” supporting political candidates. I am a person of very deep and abiding Faith. The problem is when churches violate federal law by endorsing individual candidates, political parties, and partisan policies. And I personally have no problem with churches doing that, as long as they then start paying taxes as the law requires them to under those circumstances.

            As for your comment about “seducing new votes” – that’s just about the dumbest comment I’ve heard anyone make in a very long time. When you have the good of the nation and ALL of its people on your agenda, you don’t have to seduce anyone, much less voters. The only reason anyone with an ounce of sense would support Mitt Romney, who cannot remember from one day to the next what his position is on any issue, is simply to get the Black guy out of the White House.

            Your arguments have no merit. They are being made solely to argue. And I do not argue with idiots. Now, it’s way past your bedtime. Why don’t you check back in when you’re old enough to vote?

            1. Follow my point: you claim that her/your/my faith is our own business and need not be disclosed. I say the same is true of her/your/my sexual orientation and you say you have no problem disclosing that… so then what’s the problem with disclosing her faith? You’ve kind of made the point right there: liberals are fine with “people of faith” as long as they keep to themselves.

              You keep bringing up the problem of churches endorsing candidates — as if that were the only and central argument liberals have against faith. Many liberals say religion or even an opinion based on religion have no place in the public square. So just use them for their votes and then tell them to shut up and go away. I hope not too many fall for that. Of course “people of faith” here could be referring to those that have faith in government or themselves. For all we know it was a typo that should read “People of Faith IN Obama.”

              1. LIke I said, I don’t argue with idiots. Keep arguing with yourself if you like – you’re your own best fan…

Comments are closed.