Viewing 10 - 18 out of 31 Blogs.

<< First  < Previous | Page:  1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next >  Last >>

Cross-posted at www.malignantlibiocy.blogivists.com

Obama supporters are being directed to get “in the faces” of independents and Republicans to make the case for their candidate and the case for you being a racist jerk if you don’t dream of Obammunism.

Michelle Malkin’s column at Townhall.com, “Obama Releases His “In-Your_Face” Hounds“, provides some insight into the Obamorons’ “face-to-face” strategy:

When Republicans get aggressive, it’s “dirty.” When Obama gets aggressive, it’s “feisty.” Exorteth the One: “I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face.” Team Obama is so committed to this “face-to-face” shock troop campaign that it is now busing activists from state to state (”Drive for Change!”) to target undecided voters — and offering subsidies to volunteers. In advance of Obama’s rally in Nevada, California field director Mary Jane Stevenson organized a pilgrimage to boost the crowd numbers with housing incentives: “Face-to-face contact with undecided voters is the single most effective way to grow this movement. No experience is required, and we’ll help you make the trip as easily as possible with either housing in Nevada or discounted group rates at an area hotel.” Yep, a bunch of angry Obama cultists and left-wing ACORN drifters are coming to your neighborhoods to accuse you of racism, call you unpatriotic for not bowing down and forking over more taxes to keep the Mother Ship afloat, and check your tire pressure and thermostats while they’re at it. Feel the power of positive change. wrote:

I contend that there are several very good reasons to avoid an “in-your-face” moment with an Obamoron. Most of these reasons depend on the type of Obama supporter with which you are dealing, but there is the basic ignorance that all Obamorons share. Who wants to listen to the ignorant spewings of a raving lunatic, especially at close range? I bet they spit when they espouse the virtues of total government control.

The supporter type-dependent reasons you likely want to avoid these “in-your-face” confrontations areas follows:

Race-based supporters might: * accuse you of being a white supremacist because you believe in individual responsibility and liberty. * tell you that any argument you provide as to why you don’t support Obama is laced with “code words” that mean “black.” * compare your reluctance to support Barack Obama to being a member of the KKK (like Sen. Robert Byrd.) Environmentalist supporters might:

* smell really bad since bathing wastes valuable water, and who is man to steal water from Mother Earth?

* have their talking points scribbled on the one square of toilet paper they intend to use during their next restroom visit.

* profess the benefits of using only wind and solar power to generate electricity, while your sense of smell is violated by the wind carrying the odor from the activist that has spent too much time in the sun without bathing into your nostrils.

* stand there in leather shoes and yell at you about the affects of oil drilling on animals.

* knock you over, having noticed in mid-diatribe, an extremely attractive tree some distance behind you.

Change-inspired supporters might:

* tell you that Barack is for “change” and if you aren’t, you are a racist.

* opine that “change” is a good thing but get confused when you point out that if he stops breathing, that would be “change.”

* tell you that this is cosmic fate because if you put your hand over part of the big “O” in Obama, you can make a big “C” like in “Change!”

Abortion-inspired supporters (NOW, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, Emily’s List) might:

* scream at you for wanting to kill scared young girls with rusty coat-hangers in dark alleys.

* try to convince you that you would make all women victims of an antiquated patriarchal society if you think killing children is in some way wrong.

* try to convince you that it is a violation of privacy… to have child molesters reported to authorities.

* drool about “reproductive justice” (which apparently involves a death sentence for the one party involved that played no part in the “choice” to have sex.)

* assert that you “can’t legislate morality” … unless of course the immoral act is murder, rape, or robbery committed by anyone other than the IRS.

* tell you that “it” isn’t a child… even if “it” has been born and is breathing following a botched abortion.

* insist that there is a constitutional right to abortion, but not to keep and bear arms.

Economy-inspired supporters might:

* Decry the wealth of “big business” (of course ignoring who it is that employs them if they indeed have jobs.)

* Screech that oil companies are making profits while we are paying too much at the gas pump (but of course Hollywood types deserve their “windfall profits” from their oh-so-important movies and television shows.)

* try to explain the value of further government controls and ignore your questions about the naturally subsequent job losses.

The thought of “Big Brother” Barack Obama becoming President Of The United States is so frightening and depressing that some conservatives (like myself) are supporting John McCain! This alone should be enough to make one wonder just what exactly is wrong with Obama supporters, particularly those that believe enough to try and convert normal people?

Tags: Obama Election

Cross-posted from www.conservablogs.com/conservativecommonman

Thank God for The Heritage Foundation and the alerts they disseminate!

I received an e-mail today which contained links and information on several topics, but the one that grabbed my attention was the link to this message from James Jay Carafano, Ph.D. “Time Is Ticking: Congress Must Re-Authorize E-Verify Now.” It is no surprise that I had no idea that E-Verify is set to expire, considering how dead set our congress seems to be on ignoring the will of its constituents!

Unless Congress steps in, on November 30, E-Verify is set to expire. E-Verify is a system that allows employers to verify electronically whether their newly hired employees are legally authorized to work in the United States. E-Verify should be re-authorized. A Valuable Voluntary Program Through E-Verify, participating employers can check the work eligibility status of new personnel they are hiring through an online service that compares information from an employee’s I-9 form against Social Security Administration (SSA) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) databases. This service is provided free to employers (though the individual companies must bear the cost of providing the infrastructure and people to enter the data). So far this year, E-Verify has processed over 4 million eligibility checks. The system has proven to be quite effective, and SSA and DHS continue to work to improve service, reliability, and privacy protections. wrote:

Could our members of the “do-nothing” congress (which would be a good thing if they would also refrain from doing the things that harm our nation… perhaps “do-nothing good” congress is more appropriate) be hoping November 30 will come and go quietly? Could many off them be hoping the attention to the presidential election will distract an already apathetic electorate? I would suggest that some of the open borders, flood the labor pool, amnesty for illegals liberals and RINO’s are indeed hoping this deadline passes unnoticed by the masses. Of course some of the career politicians may be too wrapped up in campaigns of their own or of fellow partisans to be bothered by the work of the people. Obviously no one expects my senators from Illinois, Barack “Born Alive, Let Them Die” Obama and the equally worthless Dick Durbin to to their jobs, but some of the rest of you might be able to get through to yours.

Remember that the next job that goes to an illegal alien might be the one you previously held. I urge you to call your senators and representatives! Make your voice heard (and hopefully your senators aren’t as ridiculously anti-America as mine.) Visit the following links to find the contact information for your members of our illustriously incompetent congress:

www.senate.gov

www.house.gov

While you’re at it you might want to let them know that you aren’t fooled by Nancy Pelosi’s “compromise” energy bill that only allows off-shore drilling were the bulk of the oil ISN”T!

**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, email brianbonner90- at-gmail- dot-com and let us know at what level you would like to participate.

Tags: Illegal Immigration E-Verify

Cross-posted from www.conservablogs.com/conservativecommonman

Common sense dictates that landlords should be allowed to know who rents their apartments, houses, or condos. Common sense cannot be found in the courtroom of U.S. District Judge Jane Boyle. What can be found in Boyle’s courtroom is yet another weapon in the federal court war on the citizens of this country. Judge Boyle’s tactical target is the citizens of Farmer’s Branch, Texas.

Newsmax.com reports:

DALLAS — A federal judge on Friday stopped a Dallas suburb’s latest attempt to drive away illegal immigrants, ruling that Farmers Branch cannot enforce a ban on home rentals to those who can’t prove they live legally in the country. U.S. District Judge Jane Boyle’s temporary restraining order stopped an ordinance that had been set to go into effect Saturday. The ordinance was intended to replace a similar measure that was struck down in federal court. “We’re very disappointed in Judge Boyle’s view of the ordinance, but we’re confident that ultimately it will be upheld by the federal court system,” said Michael Jung, the attorney representing the city of Farmers Branch. The judge said the ordinance has the potential to cause irreparable injury to landlords who are likely to lose business to neighboring cities that don’t have similar laws. wrote:

I suppose if neighboring cities didn’t have similar laws against public nudity, a city that had outlawed public nudity would not be allowed to enforce its laws. I can see that there would be “irreparable injury to” grocery store owners that refused service to nude shoppers who would likely go elsewhere to shop.

Put another way, illegal aliens are going to rent property so it should be legal. People are going to drive drunk anyway, so that should also be legal. People will commit rape anyway, so , well you get the idea. Do most law schools require a course in “Citizen Persecution For Political Gain?” If not, I can’t fathom why there is such an apparent dearth of common sense and decency in our federal courts.

From predatory prosecutors like Johnny Sutton to judges that side with illegals, you’d think these were Mexico’s federal courts! The good news for the federal court, Mexico, and illegal aliens across our nation is that the next president of The United States is on their side. This is bad news for the citizens of this great nation and a reminder that we need to pound the next administration with letters, e-mails, calls, and faxes to try and convince them to have some concern for the citizens of the nation they lead!

This concept cannot be made clear enough: our federal courts are harming citizens in favor of “ILLEGALS!” The word illegal must have different meanings to different people. Apparently to U.S. District Judge Jane Boyle, “illegal” only means “illegal” when U.S. citizens are the accused.

**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, email brianbonner90- at-gmail- dot-com and let us know at what level you would like to participate.

Tags: Illegal Aliens Fed Court

Cross-posted at http://www.malignantlibiocy.blogivists.com

Feeling bloated? Abdominal pressure starting to get to you? Those are natural physical reactions to the possibility of Democrats controlling the executive and legislative branches of the federal government next January. This “gut reaction” is not the type of gas to which this blog refers. This is about the type of gas (gasoline) that the libiot Democrats would like to use to buy votes in the coming election. It’s not, however, like buying votes is the only goal of the American Marxist (aka Democrat) Party. Their plan serves the secondary purpose of class division based on income.

The Hill has an article today, “Democrats’ latest idea: gas stamps.”

“It’s certainly under consideration,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told The Hill on Thursday afternoon. “It would be like food stamps for those people who need help.” Gas stamps would work like traditional food stamps, which some Americans have collected since the 1930s. They would be used, however, to pay for regular unleaded instead of meat and potatoes. Under one version of the proposal, a person earning up to $31,200 or a family of four earning up to $63,600 could receive government payments totaling $500 for gas. Hoyer said he was not ready to discuss details about the proposal because he is focused on passing a comprehensive energy bill Democrats unveiled this week. wrote:

Is there any doubt that we must continuously monitor these morons? The Dems want to keep gas prices high, get the government’s unfair share via taxes, and maintain their majorities with a little bribery. So back to the question posed in the title, “can Democrats give you gas?” Apparently the answer is yes, if your income is below a certain level, you can reap the benefits of wealth redistribution. The libiots certainly love their class divisions, don’t they?

Whose brilliant scheme is this “gas stamp” redistribution?

The idea for fuel stamps was first proposed by maverick Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), chairman of the House Income Security and Family Support subcommittee, who remembers his family using gas stamps when he was a boy during World War II. “If you had to drive to work, you got to buy more gasoline than if you just drove your car on the weekends,” he said of the wartime policy. McDermott, who introduced the idea before the August recess, said that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) made favorable mention of gas stamps Wednesday during an afternoon caucus meeting on a pending energy bill. wrote:

I hope the good people of McDermott’s district are strongly considering Steve Beren this November. I don’t think Mr. Beren would support spending tax dollars to buy votes for Democrats at $500 a pop… or is that $1500 a pop? It would be grotesquely negligent to forget about “Big Brother” Barack Obama’s “New Energy For America” plan. This bold plan presented by this hollow man proposes stealing earnings from oil companies and redistributing $1000 increments to citizens who did not earn it.

* Enact a Windfall Profits Tax to Provide a $1,000 Emergency Energy Rebate to American Families.Obama will enact a windfall profits tax on excessive oil company profits to give American families an immediate $1,000 emergency energy rebate to help families pay rising bills. This relief would be a down payment on Obama’s long-term plan to provide middle-class families with at least $1,000 per year in permanent tax relief. wrote:

Barack and his fellow libiots intend to create further dependence on government! Is it even remotely possible that a thinking person could look at these proposals and not see the loss of liberty? Punishing success stands very little chance of encouraging job creation. On the surface this will work out for the vermin that populates the American Marxist (aka Democrat) Party, but eventually they will drive enough companies out of business and out of the country that there is no longer enough income for them to use to buy votes. A great nation will lie in ruins thanks to the short-sided power seeking of these miserable people and once again there will be a dull example that socialism does not work. Unfortunately for the American electorate, if “Big Brother” Barack Obama, Steny Hoyer, Jim McDermott, and their ilk have their way, we will be the next example.

Tags: Gas Prices Vote Buying Obama

Cross-posted at http://www.conservablogs.com/conservativecommonman

This excruciatingly pro-longed election season has been a mental and emotional roller coaster for most that follow it closely. I can only speak from my personal conservative perspective and say that the current situation might qualify as a crisis. This crisis demands action… yet who knows which course of action is in the best interests of our nation? This particular day, September 11, is a reminder of what has been done to our nation and what we are up against. Today’s reminder of the threats we face makes the conservative voter’s decision making even more difficult.

The American Heritage Dictionary defines crisis as:

1. A crucial or decisive point or situation; turning point.

2. A sudden change in the course of an acute disease toward improvement or deterioration.

My personal ride on the “Election 2008″ roller coaster began when Rudy Giuliani was being touted as the front-runner for the Republican nomination and peddled by “political strategists” as the only one that could beat Hillary Clinton. Soul searching and self-examination convinced me that I could never cast a vote for a candidate that believes it is acceptable for a mother to request that her child be killed as a matter of “choice.” Once The Republican Party’s preference was eliminated as an option for me, I began to search for a candidate. I found that I could stand firmly behind two candidates while a few more would have been acceptable if the candidates I agreed with were no longer in the race. There were also a couple of candidates for which I doubted I could actually support.

I chose to do everything I could to help the best man in the race, Representative Duncan Hunter, win the nomination of the party to which I believed I belonged. Energized and filled with “hope” (not Barack “Born Alive, Let Them Die” Obama’s brand) I worked as hard as I could for the candidate I still believe to be the best choice for our country. Conservative ideals were not to be heard on public airwaves as the party and talk show hosts decided to push “moderates” with money. Eventually Congressmen Hunter and Tancredo ended their campaigns, leaving a choice between less than conservative Republicans.

While disheartened, I decided to support the most conservative of the remaining candidates. Unfortunately the combination of early “open” primaries and Huckabee’s hatred of Mitt Romney combined to leave one man standing at the end of The Republican Primary fiasco. The low point in the track had been reached as John McCain, champion of illegal aliens, enemy of free speech, and passenger on Al Gore’s anthropogenic global warming bandwagon was left as the the nominee. Naturally, I felt the nausea sometimes associated with a sudden descent, but this time the ill feeling lingered much longer.

Defeated, I searched for an alternative. Where could a conservative go and not feel dirty after voting? The Libertarian Party doesn’t care about the lives of the most innocent so their candidate was not an option. I hope it is obvious that no candidate from the modern Democrat Party could come close to even being remotely acceptable. The Constitution Party appeared promising, but two factors prevented me from joining and supporting its nominee: the American electorate generally doesn’t play close enough attention to politics to allow a third party candidate to win a national election and The Constitution Party nominee does not want to finish the job in Iraq.

The most reasonable course of action (most of the time) appeared to be to vote for John McCain for the sole reason that he is not Barack Obama the socialist… that is of course unless McCain pulled a McCain. Pulling a McCain would involve something along the lines of naming a pro-choice or otherwise liberal running mate or pushing one of his stupid liberal stances during the remainder of the campaign. As the convention drew near and the possible V.P. choices were floated, the empty feeling grew. Hope dwindled to near non-existence.

Then the coaster took a sharp turn skyward when John McCain did the unthinkable. He named a conservative and a “real” person to be his running mate. I was excited! I decided that I would support The McCain-Palin ticket because of a hope that Sarah Palin could be a leader of The Republican Party for the next several years. The goal would be for conservative thought and principles to come home to the party if new, conservative leadership could be established at the highest levels. I still have hope, but it has dimmed somewhat.

The report that a few young men at the Republican Convention were forced to get rid of their “Build The Fence” sign leads one to believe that the roller coaster has reached its peak and is beginning yet another descent. The enthusiasm is dampened by the realization that this is still politics and we are still stuck with two major parties that generally seek power and control with the best interests of our nation along for the ride as an afterthought.

Why is this so difficult? How can we have fallen so far as a society that our next president will be Barack Obama or John McCain? Both men may believe that they will be good for America. John McCain could possibly do a reasonably tolerable job as president. How is that for inspiration? The problem isn’t isolated among the candidates. The party leaders seem to have forgotten our nation’s founding and the actual responsibilities and LIMITATIONS of the offices for which they peddle their substandard candidates!

Are we at a point that a majority just doesn’t care anymore? Do most American citizens:

* feel like victims that cannot provide for themselves and their families?

* believe that they are incompetent and therefore need government to make their decisions for them?

* believe that they are owed something by everyone else?

* believe that the grotesquely inefficient bureaucracy can provide medical care?

* believe that our borders and our jobs should be open to illegal aliens?

* believe that jobs will be created by taxation and regulation of businesses?

* believe that the federal government should hold hearings on professional sports?

* believe that the carbon dioxide humans exhale and plants require is a pollutant that is to be restricted to the further detriment of American industry?

There are so many ridiculous intrusions into American life by our monstrous government that we may indeed be lost. The majority of citizens may be comfortably numb to the reality of our metastasizing government and their may be no hope for “change.” I am not there yet. I am not ready to give in thanks to six particular reasons (the sixth is due in February.) I probably will still vote for McCain because of Palin, but that does not mean he has my support.

I hope that we will badger the next president and the members of Congress, most of whom could be honestly described as parasites, on every important issue that arises. I hope once the election is over, the talk radio voices rediscover McCain’s penchant for kicking conservatives in the crotch and help keep the public informed of the plans being hatched in the pits of Washington D.C. Vigilance will be required as we monitor our elected officials. I hope that as soon as the election results are announced, we begin a new campaign to return our government to the people. We need to find candidates that will not be sucked into the vacuum of Washington power. We need to find candidates that respect The Constitution. Of course we also need to make the majority of citizens aware of the need to return to limited self-government… and that is truly the problem.

Tags: Election Obama McCain Palin Principles

Cross-posted at http://www.malignantlibiocy.blogivists.com

Barack Obama’s gutless evasion of the question regarding when a baby receives human rights is now infamous. The “above my pay grade” cop out has apparently hurt the anointed candidate among we, the little people. What does Barack “Born Alive, Let Them Die” Obama do when his words or his associations begin to harm his campaign? He backtracks. The man whose pastor of twenty-plus years was not the pastor he knew has now taken a similar approach to his Saddleback side-step.

From Politico via Yahoo News, “Obama considered joining military, regrets abortion answer.”

During separate televised interviews last month, Pastor Rick Warren asked the two presidential candidates when a baby gets human rights. Obama replied that the question is “above my pay grade,” while Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) won love from the right by saying quickly, “At the moment of conception.” Now, Obama tells ABC’s George Stephanopoulos in an interview taped for “This Week”: “What I intended to say is that, as a Christian, I have a lot of humility about understanding when does the soul enter into … It’s a pretty tough question. And so, all I meant to communicate was that I don’t presume to be able to answer these kinds of theological questions.” In the ABC interview, Obama goes on to give the answer he wishes he’d given: “What I do know is that abortion is a moral issue, that it’s one that families struggle with all the time. And that in wrestling with those issues, I don’t think that the government criminalizing the choices that families make is the best answer for reducing abortions. “I think the better answer — and this was reflected in the Democratic platform — is to figure out, how do we make sure the young mothers, or women who have a pregnancy that’s unexpected or difficult, have the kind of support they need to make a whole range of choices, including adoption and keeping the child.\ wrote:

Apparently it takes a few weeks after an event to iron out (undoubtedly with the help of PR people) exactly what the supposedly eloquent professional candidate actually “intended” to say. I wonder if, “as a Christian” Illinois State Senator Barack Obama wasn’t quite sure if the living, breathing baby that had just survived an abortion attempt had received his or her soul. I suppose the “humility about understanding” led to his despicable stance in blocking The Born Alive Infant Protection Act in 2002.

S.B. 1663 would require:

(2) (a) No abortion shall be performed or induced when the fetus is viable unless there is in attendance a physician other than the physician performing or inducing the abortion who shall take control of and provide immediate medical care for any child born alive as a result of the abortion. No abortion procedure which, in the medical judgment of the attending physician, has a reasonable likelihood of resulting in a live born child shall be undertaken unless there is in attendance a physician other than the physician performing or inducing the abortion who shall assess the child’s viability and provide medical care for the child. wrote:

The man that would six years later give the infamous “above my pay grade” response at Saddleback stood against protecting the infants that survived abortion. The transcript of the 82nd Legislative Day of The State of Illinois 92nd General Assembly (pp 31-35) shows for whose interest the future agent of “hope” and “change” fought! Here is an example of “The One’s” statements from that dark day:

As I understand it, this puts the burden on the attending physician who has determined, since they were performing this procedure, that, in fact, this is a nonviable fetus; that if that fetus, or child - however way you want to describe it - is now outside the mother’s womb and the doctor continues to think that it’s nonviable but there’s, let’s say, movement or some indication that in fact, they’re not just coming out limp and dead, that, in fact, they would then have to call a second physician to monitor and check off and make sure that this is not a live child that could be saved. Is that correct? wrote:

On page 33, B.O. fertilizes the floor of the state senate with his assurances that doctors would already feel obligated to save a child in these situations and he makes it a point to state:

“but I think it’s important to understand that this issue is about abortion and not live births. Because if these are children who are being born alive, I, at least have confidence that a doctor who is in that room is going to make sure that they’re looked after.” wrote:

If Jill Stanek’s recollection of babies being left today in soiled linen closets are accurate, then Barack’s trademark “judgment,” a thing his campaign touts, has once again proven to be very poor.

Tags: Obama Abortion Pay Grade

Cross-posted at: www.malignantlibiocy.blogivists.com

The Axis of Abortion, showing a certain amount of tactical flexibility, has focused its guns on the one enemy that must be eliminated at any cost. This new target poses a catastrophic danger to the propaganda of the Axis. Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and Emily’s List must destroy the target before too many of their subjects become inspired to revolution. If allowed to succeed, this threat might inspire followers to assess the Axis’ proclamations about “women’s choices” and realize that they have been misled. Governor Sarah Palin must be destroyed before too many supporters of the highest sacrament in the religion of Liberalism notice her example… or Margaret Sanger forbid, follow her example and exercise the “choice” that could weaken the stranglehold of the Axis.

The Hill has an article on the assault, “Abortion-rights groups target Palin.”

“This is the most anti-choice ticket in history of the Republican Party,” said Beth Shipp, the political director of NARAL. “McCain put someone as outside the mainstream as you can on his ticket, which is Sarah Palin,” Shipp added. Hoping to drive a wedge between the pro-life GOP base and party centrists who favor abortion rights, NARAL Pro-Choice America plans to raise and spend $10 million to communicate to voters in 34 to 35 congressional districts and battleground states. The group is also targeting independents. Planned Parenthood, another liberal group, plans to spend $10 million on its One Million Strong campaign, an effort to mobilize “pro-choice voters in battleground states,” said spokesman Tait Sye. And EMILY’s List, a group that backs female Democratic candidates who support abortion, will spend nearly as much as the other groups on its Women Vote! program. wrote:

The Cerberus of infanticide must destroy any prominent woman that dares to commit the sacrilege of giving birth to a child with Down’s Syndrome and loving him. This is in addition to having four other children, which in itself sets a dangerous example that a woman might be happy and fulfilled even if she embraces motherhood (or worse yet… because of it!) The Axis needs women in power that will force their teenage daughters to clandestine abortions if they become pregnant. Perhaps the worst war crime against the Axis is the love and support shown to a pregnant teenage daughter who will be allowing her baby to live.

Is Beth Shipp of NARAL correct when she claims: “McCain put someone as outside the mainstream as you can on his ticket, which is Sarah Palin?” Is the mainstream of this great nation not comprised of hard-working people that have family values, morals, and a desire to do what is right? Is it out of the mainstream to believe in the value of a family? I certainly hope that the idea of killing babies for convenience and profit is not what has become mainstream in The United States of America!

Tags: Palin Abortion NARAL Planned Parenthood Emily's List

Cross-posted from http://www.malignantlibiocy.blogivists.com

World Net Daily has an alarming story that might just serve as a glimpse of the future under a “Big Brother” Obama administration. This particular incident is the second notable occurrence in recent days that should terrify anyone that reveres personal liberty (particularly free speech.)

From WND: "Dem cops cuff, stuff Christian girls"

What did these girls do to deserve arrest? Did they commit murder, robbery, vandalism, or such? No, they committed a crime that will be far worse if Obama has his way, “thought crime.”

DENVER – Two teenagers who had been given city permission to write their messages protesting Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama’s support for abortion on public sidewalks during the Democratic National Convention this week were shoved to the sidewalk, cuffed and arrested for doing just that. The two are part of the Survivors organization, a Christian, pro-life activism group dedicated to educating and activating high school and college age individuals. It is called Survivors because those born after 1972 are survivors of the abortion holocaust, the group said. “One-third of your generation has been killed by abortion in America.” Spokeswoman Danielle Versluys told WND the group had consulted with Denver city officials as well as police prior to the DNC, and had been told that chalk messages on sidewalks would be allowed. Even though the city’s deputy chief was in the meeting, that message apparently didn’t get forwarded to officers on the street. wrote:

“Big Brother” is not yet in office, but it is never to early to set an example. These girls were fortunate that they weren’t dealt with the way “thought criminals” in Orwell’s classic, “1984.” Of course give Barack The Baby Killer time to take charge and who knows what future “thought criminals” might endure.

It should not matter that the girls had permission to express their opinions with sidewalk chalk, this is Barack Obama after all. Any negative report or pointing out of his deep flaws will not be tolerated, which brings us to the prior incident.

Barack “Born Alive, Let Them Die” Obama’s campaign is attempting to use The Justice Department to prosecute a man because his group dared issue the truth regarding Barry and his association with the vile domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers. The American Issues Project produced an ad questioning the relationship and “Big Brother” is trying to use the full force of the federal government to silence them!

The Obamorons want to tout judgment in this election due to their candidate’s lack of experience in anything except campaigning and ACORN activism (while now daring to talk about the lack of experience of GOVERNOR Sarah Palin.) I suggest that associations and friendships with people that proudly declared war on our country and bombed its buildings speaks volumes to his judgment.

Please support The American Issues Project, The Survivors Organization, and any other group that attempts to expose the danger that faces our nation in the form of Barack Obama!

Tags: Obama 1984 Big Brother Abortion Ayers

On the eve of “Big Brother” Barry’s acceptance speech (or Greek tragedy),his D.C. based Ministry Of Truth (The Washington Post) found time to once again lament the plight of illegal aliens and their criminal employers. I suppose it is in the spirit of unity inspired by their Communist candidate that The Post is now on the side of business, the evil most closely associated with the Barack “Born Alive, Let Them Die” Obama’s (and Uncle Karl’s) most hated entity, capitalism! “Hope” for “change” does exist! If the D.C. rag can find it in its heart to take the side of the capitalist pigs, anything is possible! Maybe St. Barack can power all our cars without any sort of fuel.

Of course the only reason D.C. ministry would defend a business is if it furthered one of the rag’s favorite issues, in this case, the defense of illegal immigration. The article headline warns, “Businesses Cite a Catch-22 After Miss. Immigration Raid.”

Major U.S. employers assailed the expanding crackdown, saying it creates a Catch-22. If businesses fail to enroll in E-Verify, they run the risk of a raid by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, business groups led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said. But if they sign up, they face added costs, labor disruptions and discrimination complaints — as well as the risk that flaws in the program won’t stop all illegal hiring or prevent government raids, they said. “I think it’s a mistake on the part of a company to think that simply because they enroll that they are going to be protected from any kind of government audit or raid,” said Myles Gladstone, vice president of Miller & Long, of Bethesda, a major construction firm based in the Washington area. wrote:

Oh the horror, added costs! I wonder if the business that just had 600 illegal employees removed face any added costs now. I heard a report that a tip by a union rep or member led to the raid of Howard Industries and that workers cheered as the illegals were removed. How does that report gel with the notion that illegals are needed to do the jobs Americans won’t do?

The second part of the excerpt above is actually funny. How can a business owner be surprised that enrolling in a program is not enough, that it it might be necessary to actually meet the requirements? I suggest that the people Mr. Gladstone is referring to could be classified as morons, which would provide further explanation of WaPo taking their side.

In its only comment on the raid, Howard Industries released a statement saying:

“Howard Industries runs every check allowed to ascertain the immigration status of all applicants for jobs. It is company policy that it hires only U.S. citizens and legal immigrants.” wrote:

Well as long as Howard states that it is their policy to follow the law, it is good enough for The Washington Post and should be good enough for the rest of us. I would like to suggest to Howard Industries and other criminal enterprises that they actually follow their policies or run the risk of being defended by The Washington Post, a low point for any decent institution.

**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, email brianbonner90- at-gmail- dot-com and let us know at what level you would like to participate.

Tags: WaPo CAII Illegal Aliens E-Verify

<< First  < Previous | Page:  1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next >  Last >>