Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Barack's winning the evangelicals
American Thinker ^ | 12/29/06 | Nicole Russell

Posted on 12/29/2006 7:14:59 AM PST by teddyballgame

Like a dutiful dancing partner, Senator Barack Obama has begun courting the evangelical right, and some are already waltzing along in perfect time.

With his attendance at Rick Warren‘s church, Saddleback Valley Community, a mega-church in California for a large conference about AIDS, Obama has begun to align himself with an important base of voters to gain what conservatives lost this last year. Already lauded by some prominent evangelical publications for his outstanding "Christian faith" and a person Rick Warren called a "good friend" and a someone he'd like to work with on important issues, Obama is in perfect position, if he can keep the momentum, to use an unusual strategy for political gain.

Obama has become well-known not only for his charisma and sudden rise to fame in the last few months, but for his outspoken Christian faith to which he refers regularly.

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: barackobama; bhusseinobama; bigears; bisexual; evangelicals; falseprophetwarren; fauxchristians; goldencalf; hussein; islaminsheepskin; muslim; obama; religiousleft; rickisadeceiver; rickwarren; rwwolfnsheepclothes; sleeper; valuesvoters
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-185 last
To: new yorker 77

I guess some do when it's dressed in sheep's clothing.


151 posted on 12/29/2006 12:54:39 PM PST by kalee (No burka for me....EVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
Time to break out the references and brush up on propaganda techniques and logical fallacies. Learn to recognize when you're being lied to. Go in knowing it's bait, and that what they're after is an intemperate, emotional response.

"Yeah, but..."

The "but" is that, realistically, there are going to be a lot of decent folks that are gonna be dropping like flies, easy prey to paid pros "who do this for a living."

152 posted on 12/29/2006 1:08:43 PM PST by Don Joe (We've traded the Rule of Law for the Law of Rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77
I didn't know Evangelicals supported Partial-Birth Abortion.

these would be the same Evangelicals who supported Clinton... and there were enough of those... the thing is, Obama isn't even from the Bible belt...

153 posted on 12/29/2006 1:16:02 PM PST by latina4dubya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sue Perkick

A little leaven leavens the lump.


154 posted on 12/29/2006 1:18:50 PM PST by Don Joe (We've traded the Rule of Law for the Law of Rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe

This is probably going to be an unpopular thing to say, but objectively the ones who are going to be best prepared to deal with them are probably going to be the evolutionists who've managed to survive the crevo wars.


155 posted on 12/29/2006 1:19:07 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Terriergal

LOL. Thanks a lot. :)


156 posted on 12/29/2006 1:19:12 PM PST by Sue Perkick (Just a water spider on the pond of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: tutstar

don't forget to read this...


157 posted on 12/29/2006 1:19:53 PM PST by tutstar (Baptist Ping list - freepmail me to get on or off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe; Terriergal

LOL. Just make sure you're not drinking yonder coffee when reading some of Terriergal's posts who almost caused a big mess a minute ago.


158 posted on 12/29/2006 1:20:12 PM PST by Sue Perkick (Just a water spider on the pond of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
They will probably not find that out from the MSM,

It's pretty much a guarantee the MSM won't tell folks

Just like how the NOW Hags and NARL didn't say a peep about Bob Casey, Jr. and his so-called pro-life stance

159 posted on 12/29/2006 1:26:14 PM PST by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: teddyballgame

Qatch out! He's come too soon and fast. Thanks to the media. First the media then the mega churches. That's the way to work it, publicity then the mega church coffers. SMART MOVE.


160 posted on 12/29/2006 1:32:01 PM PST by tillacum (Happy New Year ((Nita.)) May all your resolutions be complete.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

You might be right, I don't know. Time will tell, I guess.

Speaking (soley) for myself, I plan on taking a sabbatical when it starts getting ugly. I'm nearly sixty, I'm in lousy health, I have a year and a half old son with some potentially serious health issues (yeah, I robbed the cradle when I married my young wife), and my life is just too short for the kind of crap I see coming down the pike.


161 posted on 12/29/2006 1:40:22 PM PST by Don Joe (We've traded the Rule of Law for the Law of Rule.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Arizona Carolyn

What?


162 posted on 12/29/2006 1:42:02 PM PST by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Don Joe

It ain't gonna be pretty, that's for sure.


163 posted on 12/29/2006 1:44:55 PM PST by Sue Perkick (Just a water spider on the pond of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: mariabush

Not true.I work with many died in the wool black evangelicals and almost all are vote a straight Dem ticket.
Those nasty Republicans are just SOOO racist!
At least thats their consensus.


164 posted on 12/29/2006 2:29:14 PM PST by Riverman94610
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: firebrand

One of the chapters in Alan Colmes (Hannity & Colmes) was Jesus would be a liberal and why.


165 posted on 12/29/2006 4:25:59 PM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Arizona Carolyn
Aha, those "Would Jesus drive an SUV?" commercials.

Now it makes sense. I guess if I had a TV I would have gotten it.

166 posted on 12/29/2006 5:14:40 PM PST by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Verax

Let's hope they don't get intimidated by his larger than life persona and hordes of followers.


167 posted on 12/29/2006 6:52:16 PM PST by Terriergal (All your church are belong to us! --- The Purpose Driven Church)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: lexington minuteman 1775
Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ

He sure is, and you should hear how Slick Rick "I'm not a politician" Warren gushed about Obama's pastor Jeremiah Wright. "One of the great uh Godly preachers in the black church and uh so I know he's got soul cuz he's got a good pastor."

(I guess by that reasoning we can assume all the people at Ted Haggard's church are sexual perverts addicted to illegal drugs.)

Not a word against the UCC, nothing... !!!

Rick Warren on Tucker LAME interview!!! What a weasel!!! He dodges the very first question like a pro politician. He repeats every mantra he's come up with this last month since Farah started in on him (THANK YOU JOSEPH FARAH!). He doesn't have one original idea in his head.

"Have you talked with Senator Obama?"

"Of course, he knows exactly how I feel" (about issues we disagree on)

Well that's very nice that you feel that way Rick, if you're not going to publicly say anything about it and speak out against anyone except those who criticize YOU. It makes it kind of look like butchering babies isn't quite as bad an offense as questioning the great Rick Warren.

Water-borne eye diseases? That's his next project?

NOTE: He references the public message "Why we do what we do" which is available on purposedriven.com, which has been altered to remove any reference from the Syria video. I have seen both versions. Here is the segment from the middle of the message (different service that day, same message) where the Syria video was shown. You can see the edit after "I wish I could take you with me on those missions trips" etc. in the public version.

THE SYRIA VIDEO THAT DOESN'T EXIST

It's a personal thing - by Steve Taylor (The press conference) It's a personal thing, and I find it odd
you would question my believing in a personal God
I'm devout, I'm sincere, ask my mother if you doubt it
I'm religious, but I'd rather not get radical about it
the old-time believers had timidity and grace
but this new generation doesn't know its place
you're entitled to believe, but the latest Gallup Poll
says you mustn't interfere--that's the government's role



chorus:
'Cause when you throw your hat in the bullring
before you know it's a personal thing
and when he comes to the day of reckoning
he's gonna tell 'em, "uh, uh, uh, it's a personal thing"


(The nomination speech)
It's a personal thing, and I boldly state
that my views on morality will have to wait
'til my personal life's out of the public eye
and the limitations statue can protect my alibi
I'm devout, I'm sincere, and I'm proud to say
that it's had exactly no effect on who I am today
I believe for the benefit for all mankind
in the total separation of church and mind


(chorus)
(The victory night)
It's a personal thing, and I plainly speak
(from the same code of ethics that I held last week)
as I promised if elected this election day
with the help of God almighty...I'll do it my way


(chorus)
'Cause when you throw your hat in the bullring
before you know it's a personal thing
and when he comes to the day of reckoning
HE's gonna tell him, "hey, back off buddy, it's a personal thing."

168 posted on 12/29/2006 7:16:07 PM PST by Terriergal (All your church are belong to us! --- The Purpose Driven Church)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: knarf

Ever since Rick Warren dissed Fundamentalists I've figured out I'm a fundamentalist and not Evangelical. Big hearted Rick who preaches about loving annoying people like Jesus would, lumps us 'fundies' in with terrorists as one of the biggest enemies of the 21st century.

Getting us kicked out of my church (for rebuking our Warren-emulating pastor-weasel) was the best thing I ever did!


169 posted on 12/29/2006 7:20:27 PM PST by Terriergal (All your church are belong to us! --- The Purpose Driven Church)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: darkwing104
You can get the money from this generous lawyer in Nigeria.

BAAAAAAHAHAHAHA!

170 posted on 12/29/2006 7:21:49 PM PST by Terriergal (All your church are belong to us! --- The Purpose Driven Church)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: new yorker 77
I didn't know Evangelicals supported Partial-Birth Abortion

They don't. But many of them are suasible suckers and credulous chumps.

171 posted on 12/29/2006 7:22:27 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: teddyballgame
I loved the "Purpose Driven Life"

If I may ask.. uh... why?

Go back and read it again and pretend you're totally ignorant about sin, the sovereignty of God, his holiness, your depravity, etc., what happens when you die, mormon or JW or even some other religion. And see if it's as good as you once thought. See if there's anything in there that challenges you to leave that behind, repent of your sin and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ who willingly suffered to pay for your sin, *before* it says you're a part of God's family. Try very hard to find the gospel in it. You won't.

172 posted on 12/29/2006 7:26:18 PM PST by Terriergal (All your church are belong to us! --- The Purpose Driven Church)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Mo1

Let me clue you........evangelicals want NOTHING to do with this empty suit.

Clear enough?


173 posted on 12/29/2006 7:27:16 PM PST by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
The American Thinker and the World Net Daily (Farah)have one thing in common. They are fierce partisans for the State of Israel.
And you are supposed to be neutral?

What Pastor Warren's real sin was he went to Syria and made some perfunctory positive remarks about the regime full well knowing the Christians from Iraq have found sanctuary in Syria. Admittedly, Syria and Assad are not open minded and tolerant but they have give sanctuary of a sort.
Noing virtually nothing about the land or history, Warren allowed himself to be used as a spokesperson for the Pan-Arab Nationalists. This is the same regime that ended Christian rule in Lebanon.
Warren is a useful idiot or dhimmi.
What's your excuse?

The problem for the Israeli Bots is 80% of the nonobservant Jews vote RAT and one can not turn around without some nonobservant suing some little town or city for having a creche' in the town square.
So you hate Israel because of the actions of non-observant Jews. Has it occured to you that many of these liberals and leftists have the same opinion on Israel that you do and that you are helping them?
Also, shall I hate Christian countries for the actions of atheists who were born Christian?

The Israeli BOTs IMHO are about to face a come uppance. Wanting Israel to succeed does not mean we have to hate either Muslims or Arabs. Further, there is increasing concern about the anti-religious efforts of nonobservant Jews--richos especially including Soros on down. We know who yor are!
YOu are a sadly ignorant person.
1. The Muslims have been at war with Jews and Christians since 622 CE.
2. Soros hates israel. The former Arrow Cross youth member, who spent World War 2 stealing Jewish property, now pretends to be Jewish so he can creat anti-Zionist groups that claim to be Jewish.
He remains a toady for the Nazis.


That iodiots like you hate Jews for his actions is icing on the cake.

174 posted on 12/30/2006 1:07:22 AM PST by rmlew (Having slit their throats may the conservatives who voted for Casey choke slowly on their blood.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: rmlew
No, I don't hate the Jews, but you hate the truth. Anyone who disagrees with your world view is ipso facto an antisemite.

That is why you are losing and will lose some more. The "antisemite" thing is not going to work any longer.
175 posted on 12/30/2006 6:08:26 AM PST by shrinkermd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: teddyballgame
but for his outspoken Christian faith to which he refers regularly.

That's funny, I never heard Obama claim to be a Christian. All that I have heard from him is that he was exposed to Christianity, while living with his grandmother (while attending a Catholic high school. Up until high school, Obama attended Sunni Muslim madrassahs from an early age, both in Hawaii and Indonesia, where his mother was living with her second Muslim husband. In other words, Obama is a Muslim. Once a Muslim always a Muslim and after all those years of radical Islamic brainwashing, Obama could never become a Christian. They would kill him (literally). If you have any doubts about a Muslim leaving the faith, read America Alone, by Mark Steyn.

176 posted on 12/30/2006 2:12:30 PM PST by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
You lunp us in all together and attach Israel for action of those who dislike Israel!
The Jew did this, the Jews did that...
But how dare you call me an anti-semite!
177 posted on 12/30/2006 2:56:45 PM PST by rmlew (Having slit their throats may the conservatives who voted for Casey choke slowly on their blood.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: rmlew

well, did they do and say those things are not?


178 posted on 12/30/2006 2:58:06 PM PST by shrinkermd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd

Why do you blame Israel for an anti-Israel activist like Soros?


179 posted on 12/30/2006 3:36:04 PM PST by rmlew (Having slit their throats may the conservatives who voted for Casey choke slowly on their blood.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: rmlew
This seems to be a Jewish dispute with Soros's position basically being that of the RAT party. See below from 2003:

NEW YORK, Nov. 7 (JTA) -- It's not often that George Soros, the billionaire financier and philanthropist, makes an appearance before a Jewish audience.

It's even rarer for him to use such an occasion to talk about Israel, Jews and his own role in effecting political change.

The UK Online URL is: "http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/03/11/JTA071103.html"

So when Soros stepped to the podium Wednesday to address those issues at a conference of the Jewish Funders Network, audience members were listening carefully.

Many were surprised by what they heard.

When asked about anti-Semitism in Europe, Soros, who is Jewish, said European anti-Semitism is the result of the policies of Israel and the United States. "There is a resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe. The policies of the Bush administration and the Sharon administration contribute to that," Soros said. "It's not specifically anti-Semitism, but it does manifest itself in anti-Semitism as well. I'm critical of those policies."

"If we change that direction, then anti-Semitism also will diminish," he said. "I can't see how one could confront it directly."

That is a point made by Israel's most vociferous critics, whom some Jewish activists charge with using anti-Zionism as a guise for anti-Semitism.

The billionaire financier said he, too, bears some responsibility for the new anti-Semitism, citing last month's speech by Malaysia's outgoing prime minister, Mahathir Mohammad, who said, "Jews rule the world by proxy."

"I'm also very concerned about my own role because the new anti-Semitism holds that the Jews rule the world," said Soros, whose projects and funding have influenced governments and promoted various political causes around the world.

"As an unintended consequence of my actions," he said, "I also contribute to that image."

After the conference, some Jewish leaders who heard about the speech reacted angrily to Soros' remarks. "Let's understand things clearly: Anti-Semitism is not caused by Jews; it's caused by anti-Semites," said Elan Steinberg, senior advisor at the World Jewish Congress. "One can certainly be critical of Bush policy or Sharon policy, but any deviation from the understanding of the real cause of anti-Semitism is not merely a disservice, but a historic lie."

Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, called Soros' comments "absolutely obscene."

"He buys into the stereotype," Foxman said. "It's a simplistic, counterproductive, biased and bigoted perception of what's out there. It's blaming the victim for all of Israel's and the Jewish people's ills."

Furthermore, Foxman (right) said, "If he sees that his position of being who he is may contribute to the perception of anti-Semitism, what's his solution to himself -- that he give up his money? That he close his mouth?"

ASSOCIATES said Soros' appearance Wednesday was the first they could ever recall in which the billionaire, a Hungarian-born U.S. Jew who escaped the Holocaust by fleeing to London as a child, had spoken in front of a Jewish group or attended a Jewish function.

The one-day meeting on funding in Israel, which took place at the Harvard Club in New York, was limited mostly to representatives of Jewish philanthropic foundations.

After Soros' speech, Michael Steinhardt, the real-estate magnate and Jewish philanthropist who arranged for Soros to address the group, said in an interview that Soros' views do not reflect those of most Jewish millionaires or philanthropists.

He also pointed out that this was Soros' first speech to a Jewish audience.

Steinhardt approached the lectern and interrupted Soros immediately after his remarks on anti-Semitism.

"George Soros does not think Jews should be hated any more than they deserve to be," Steinhardt said by way of clarification, eliciting chuckles from the audience.

Steinhardt then gave the lectern back to Soros, who said he had something to add to his remarks on the issue of anti-Semitism. Soros then paused to ask if there were any journalists in the room.

When he learned that there were, Soros withheld further comment.

Mark Charendoff, president of the group that hosted the conference, said he was pleased overall with the Soros event.

"We found him to be enormously frank, candid and generous with his time," Charendoff said. "I would be delighted if Mr. Soros would bring his passion, his brilliance and his resources to a range of different causes that are important to the Jewish community."

Charendoff is not alone.

Regardless of what they think of his politics, most Jewish activists likely would welcome Soros' participation in the world of Jewish philanthropy. Though he's ranked as the 28th richest person in the United States by Forbes magazine -- with a fortune valued at $7 billion -- Soros has given scant money to Jewish causes.

Soros' first known funding of a Jewish group came in 1997, when his Open Society Institute's Emma Lazarus Fund gave $1.3 million to the Council of Jewish Federations, and when Soros gave another $1.3 million to the Jewish Fund for Justice, an anti-poverty group.

As much as Jews may not like what Soros has to say -- at Wednesday's meeting, he called for "regime change" in the United States and talked of funding projects in "Palestine" -- they are eager to get Soros involved in giving to Jewish causes.

"In many ways, this was an introduction for Soros," Charendoff said. "He remarked to me how impressed he was with the quality of the people he met. We can only hope that this was a beginning of an engagement with the Jewish funding world."

Soros said he has not given much to Jewish or Israel-related causes because Jews take care of their own, so that his financial clout is better directed elsewhere.

Steinhardt tried to correct him on that point, saying the field of Jewish giving is not as crowded as Soros thinks.

"Even if we were a crowded field," Steinhardt told Soros, "I'm sure we could make room for you."

During his speech, Soros announced that he would support the "Geneva accord," an unofficial Middle East peace plan proposed by two out-of-office politicians, Israel's Yossi Beilin and Palestinian Yasser Abed Rabbo.

That plan envisions two states along pre-1967 borders and a shared Jerusalem, and is vague on the demand that Palestinian refugees from 1948 be allowed to return to Israel.

It was not clear whether Soros' support of the plan would involve funding. Beilin's office did not return a call seeking comment.

The parts I have underlined are the unofficial, but common, position of the RAT party in Minnesota. Incidentally, this includes almost all nonobservant Jews. It would seem Soros's position of 2003 has prevailed in the Jewish community as well as in the gentile community. So why are you mad at me and President Bush for being against further West Bank settlements?

One answer is you wish to convince us. Calling us antisemites or ignorant of the issues is no longer working. You have a Jewish political dispute here and an Israeli Arab problem there.

180 posted on 12/30/2006 4:20:52 PM PST by shrinkermd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd
Soros has given money to groups in Israel that denigrat J$udaism and religious Zionism and lie about Israeli history.
That some liberal Jewish leaders whore themselves doesn't change my position.
Then again, I don't read history according to David Irvind. http://www.fpp.co.uk/
181 posted on 12/30/2006 5:30:48 PM PST by rmlew (Having slit their throats may the conservatives who voted for Casey choke slowly on their blood.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: rmlew

Like it or not Soros's positions in 2003 are currently the positions of Minnesota RATS and the 80% of the nonobservants who always vote for RATS.

He didn't defeat President Bush, but he did almost eliminate support for Israel's present borders on the Left and has made inroads on the right.

That is reality. Calling people names or impugning their integrity will not change what has happened and what seems to be happening.

President Bush does not intend to support more West Bank settlements. Indeed, he condemns them. His party will follow and the RATS are assuming far more serious consequences for Israel. In the meantime how is Olmert doing?


182 posted on 12/30/2006 5:41:48 PM PST by shrinkermd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: rmlew
Here is the best written article I can find and it is on Free Republic. It is also from Commentary where I have drawn my facts from:

"http://www.commentarymagazine.com/cm/main/viewArticle.aip?id=10810"

183 posted on 12/30/2006 7:09:41 PM PST by shrinkermd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Melas

Considering what a disaster the IL GOP is in - Keyes is lucky he got 27% of the vote. Maybe had he actually been from IL the result might have been a bit different; however IL is a liberal state. Furthermore, Keyes has never held an elected office; whereas BHO was a state Senator. That type of thing holds a lot of weight for people.

I should have clarified my statement-however I thought it was clear that we were talking about Evangelicals-so I didn't believe that it needed to be stated in my response.

Evangelicals/conservative Catholics usually vote for pro-life candidates - some of them overlook party to vote for pro-life candidates...Pro-life Dem is better than a pro-choice Republican....even if the Republican represents a lot more of your values than the pro-life dem would....

So, for this group, the pro-lifer IS going to win over the pro-choicer-especially if they are a single-issue voter - which a significant portion of evagelicals are on the issue of abortion.

Making the assumption that the pro-lifer would automatically win against a pro-choicer outside of evangelical circles is absurd because we know that relatively conservative areas will elect pro-abort candidates. My state just re-elected our pro-abort gov and MI isn't nearly as liberal as NY.


184 posted on 12/31/2006 9:44:39 AM PST by kcbc2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
[Who is managing this guy? There has to be someone in the background calling shots.]
 
 
“Now, who could it be? Could it be…SATAN?
 

185 posted on 01/01/2007 5:53:37 PM PST by VxH (There are those who declare the impossible - and those who do the impossible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-185 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson