Hussein Obama

Has anyone noticed, how sensitive Obama is about his name. Is he ashamed his name is Hussein? Or is he just afraid all of America is going to learn, there is a lot more to this undercover muslim, than "hope and "change"?

I say if you're a muslim be proud of it, don't be a slimy little worm, trying to keep it hid. If you're and apostate, be proud of it, Tell that blood and gore murderous cult, that you may have been born muslim, because your dad and stepdad were muslim, but you left that phony cult.

If you're a white people hating, Jew hating, apostate, undercover muslim Marxist.......Be PROUD and LOUD, don't run from it - either come on national TV and embrace it- or go back to Kenya, set down and shut up!

The New Commander and Chief of The Free World.....

Barack Hussein Osama

Muslims Hate Everybody and Everything....Even Little Doggies

Visit our News page

by Daniel Pipes, Jewish World Review, February 19, 2008
Westerners opposed to the application of the Islamic law (the Shari'a) watch with dismay as it goes from strength to strength in their countries — harems increasingly accepted, a church leader endorsing Islamic law, a judge referring to the Koran, clandestine Muslim courts meting out justice. What can be done to stop the progress of this medieval legal system so deeply at odds with modern life, one that oppresses women and turns non-Muslims into second-class citizens?
A first step is for Westerners to mount a united front against the Shari'a. Facing near-unanimous hostility, Islamists back down. For one example, note the retreat last week by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in a dispute concerning guide dogs used by the blind. [emphasis added].
Muslims traditionally consider dogs impure animals to be avoided, creating an aversion that becomes problematic when Muslim store-owners or taxi drivers deny service to blind Westerners relying on service dogs. I have collected fifteen such cases on my weblog, at "Muslim Taxi Drivers vs. Seeing-Eye Dogs": five from the United States (New Orleans, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Brooksville, Fl.; Everett, Wash.); four from Canada (Vancouver, twice in Edmonton, Fort McMurray, Alberta); three from the United Kingdom (Cambridge, twice in London); two from Australia (Melbourne, Sydney); and one from Norway (Oslo).
News accounts quote Muslim cabbies rudely rejecting blind would-be passengers, yelling at them, "No dog, No dog, Get out, get out"; "Get that dog out of here"; and "No dogs, no dogs." The blind find themselves rejected, humiliated, abandoned, insulted, or even injured, left in the rain, dropped in the middle of nowhere, made late for an appointment, or caused to miss a flight.
Islamist organizations initially responded to this problem by supporting anti-canine cabbies. The Muslim Association of Canada pointed out how Muslims generally regard dog saliva as unclean. CAIR on one occasion echoed this assertion, claiming that "the saliva of dogs invalidates the ritual purity needed for prayer." On another, the head of CAIR, Nihad Awad, declared that "People from the Middle East especially ... have been indoctrinated with a kind of fear of dogs" and justified a driver rejecting a guide dog on the grounds that he "has a genuine fear and he acted in good faith. He acted in accordance with his religious beliefs."
However, when the police and the courts are called in, the legal rights of the blind to their basic needs and their dignity almost always trump the Muslim dislike for dogs. The Muslim proprietor or driver invariably finds himself admonished, fined, re-educated, warned, or even jailed. The judge who found a cabby's behavior to be "a total disgrace" spoke for many.
CAIR, realizing that its approach had failed in the courts of both law and of public opinion, suddenly and nimbly switched sides. In a cynical maneuver, for example, it organized 300 cabbies in Minneapolis to provide free rides for participants at a National Federation of the Blind conference. (Unconvinced by this obvious ploy, a federation official responded: "We really are uncomfortable ... with the offer of getting free rides. We don't think that solves anything. We believe the cabdrivers need to realize that the law says they will not turn down a blind person.") And, finally, last week, the Canadian office of CAIR issued a statement urging Muslims to accommodate blind taxi passengers, quoting a board member that "Islam allows for dogs to be used by the visually impaired."
CAIR's capitulation contains an important lesson: When Westerners broadly agree on rejecting a specific Islamic law or tradition and unite against it, Western Islamists must adjust to the majority's will. [emphasis added]. Guide dogs for the blind represent just one of many such consensus issues; others tend to involve women, such as husbands beating wives, the burqa head coverings, female genital mutilation, and "honor" killings. Western unity can also compel Islamists to denounce their preferred positions in areas such as slavery and Shar'i-compliant finances.
Other Islam-derived practices do not (yet) exist in the West but do prevail in the Muslim world. These include punishing a woman for being raped, exploiting children as suicide bombers, and executing offenders for such crimes as converting out of Islam, adultery, having a child out of wedlock, or witchcraft. Western solidarity can win concessions in these areas too.
If Westerners stick together, the Shari'a is doomed. If we do not, we are doomed.

Global Warming -The Biggest Scam/Myth, Since The Lie Of Evolution

Tuesday, February 19, 2008 11:55 AMBy: Phil Brennan

Are the world's ice caps melting because of climate change, or are the reports just a lot of scare mongering by the advocates of the global warming theory?
Scare mongering appears to be the case, according to reports from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that reveal that almost all the allegedly “lost” ice has come back. A NOAA report shows that ice levels which had shrunk from 5 million square miles in January 2007 to just 1.5 million square miles in October, are almost back to their original levels.
Moreover, a Feb. 18 report in the London Daily Express showed that there is nearly a third more ice in Antarctica than usual, challenging the global warming crusaders and buttressing arguments of skeptics who deny that the world is undergoing global warming.
The Daily express recalls the photograph of polar bears clinging on to a melting iceberg which has been widely hailed as proof of the need to fight climate change and has been used by former Vice President Al Gore during his "Inconvenient Truth" lectures about mankind’s alleged impact on the global climate.
Gore fails to mention that the photograph was taken in the month of August when melting is normal. Or that the polar bear population has soared in recent years.
As winter roars in across the Northern Hemisphere, Mother Nature seems to have joined the ranks of the skeptics.
As the Express notes, scientists are saying the northern Hemisphere has endured its coldest winter in decades, adding that snow cover across the area is at its greatest since 1966. The newspaper cites the one exception — Western Europe, which had, until the weekend when temperatures plunged to as low as -10 C in some places, been basking in unseasonably warm weather.
Around the world, vast areas have been buried under some of the heaviest snowfalls in decades. Central and southern China, the United States, and Canada were hit hard by snowstorms. In China, snowfall was so heavy that over 100,000 houses collapsed under the weight of snow.
Jerusalem, Damascus, Amman, and northern Saudi Arabia report the heaviest falls in years and below-zero temperatures. In Afghanistan, snow and freezing weather killed 120 people. Even Baghdad had a snowstorm, the first in the memory of most residents.
AFP news reports icy temperatures have just swept through south China, stranding 180,000 people and leading to widespread power cuts just as the area was recovering from the worst weather in 50 years, the government said Monday. The latest cold snap has taken a severe toll in usually temperate Yunnan province, which has been struck by heavy snowfalls since Thursday, a government official from the provincial disaster relief office told AFP.
Twelve people have died there, state Xinhua news agency reported, and four remained missing as of Saturday.
An ongoing record-long spell of cold weather in Vietnam's northern region, which started on Jan. 14, has killed nearly 60,000 cattle, mainly bull and buffalo calves, local press reported Monday. By Feb. 17, the spell had killed a total of 59,962 cattle in the region, including 7,349 in the Ha Giang province, 6,400 in Lao Cai, and 5,571 in Bac Can province, said Hoang Kim Giao, director of the Animal Husbandry Department under the Vietnamese Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, according to the Pioneer newspaper.
In Britain the temperatures plunged to -10 C in central England, according to the Express, which reports that experts say that February could end up as one of the coldest in Britain in the past 10 years with the freezing night-time conditions expected to stay around a frigid -8 C until at least the middle of the week. And the BBC reports that a bus company's efforts to cut global warming emissions have led to services being disrupted by cold weather.
Meanwhile Athens News reports that a raging snow storm that blanketed most of Greece over the weekend and continued into the early morning hours on Monday, plunging the country into sub-zero temperatures. The agency reported that public transport buses were at a standstill on Monday in the wider Athens area, while ships remained in ports, public services remained closed, and schools and courthouses in the more severely-stricken prefectures were also closed.
Scores of villages, mainly on the island of Crete, and in the prefectures of Evia, Argolida, Arcadia, Lakonia, Viotia, and the Cyclades islands were snowed in.
More than 100 villages were snowed-in on the island of Crete and temperatures in Athens dropped to -6 C before dawn, while the coldest temperatures were recorded in Kozani, Grevena, Kastoria and Florina, where they plunged to -12 C.
If global warming gets any worse we'll all freeze to death.

Dictatorial Powers Available To Our President

The dictatorial powers available to a U.S. president, once he declares a national emergency are virtually equal to the vast legal powers that were held by Adolf Hitler, during his Nazi dictatorship.

The term "national emergency" is not defined in the laws- so it is left solely to the ruling president to declare a national emergency, suspend the constitution, and exercise his tremendous executive powers.

Here are some of the executive orders a president can legally exercise at his sole discretion-

Executive order 10995: The seizure of all print and electronic communications media in the U.S.

10997: The seizure of all electric power, fuels, and minerals, public and private.

10998: The seizure of food supplies and resources, including farms and equipment.

10999: The seizure of all transportation, cars, trucks, control over highways, harbors, and waterways.

11000: The seizure of American citizens for civilian labor forces, under federal supervision.

11002:The registration of every "citizen" (not illegal aliens) by the postmaster general for government service.

11003: The seizure of all airports and aircraft.

These seizures include all public and private. Source- Grant R. Jeffrey (War on Terror)

AND YOU STILL WANT THAT EMPTY SUIT SECOND RATE UNDERCOVER MUSLIM, SOCIALISTIC MARXIST, POLITICAL SLEAZE HUSTLER TO BE LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD?

It sure want be free for long .....check with all the other countries that have a Marxist dictator controlling their citizens. This sleazebag muslim gives speech after speech about "hope" and "change", well- let's look at his record, six years in the Illinois state senate.....Did he bring "hope" and "change" to the people of this state?

This is what he did bring.....he voted against "one" social program. That program was taxpayer heathcare for babies that had survived an abortion. Is this the hope and change he is preaching about. His voting record matches any other socialistic marxist.....Is this the change he's talking about? Is the hope he spews out of his nostrils, helping those unborn babies, as their skulls are opened with a pair of scissors, and their brains sucked out (in partial birth abortions)? This is not hope...this is cold blooded murder. The change may be ....that this is considered "normal".

This clown has spent the last couple years in the U.S. senate, has he brought you hope and change? Even you little socialist freeloaders know the answer to that. His voting record on open borders, amnesty for up to 39 million illegal aliens, matches both John McCain and Clinton's record. His desire to pull our troops from fighting our enemies -the muslims- matches Clintons'. His desire to close Gitmo and have an "Al Qaeda bill of rights" along with giving the Gitmo prisoners constitutional rights- matches John Amnesty McCain and Hillary La Raza Clinton's record-So where is the hope and change from this empy suit second rate undercover muslim socialistic marxist, political sleaze hustler???

The Great Leaders of New Orleans

Idiot Ray Nagin points AR-15 at the Police superindent. The only people that have a lower IQ than this useless clown, are the freeloaders that voted him back into office.... you know the same freeloaders, that waited on the government to rescue them as the flood waters reached their ear lobes. I got an idea, these people could get a job, get an education, pay their own way in life, and maybe the next time, a hurricane comes your way- you will use the brain that the Lord gave you, and get in your car, and drive away from danger. This same government, that didn't show up, is the same government, you freeloading socialist, want to run our heathcare system. IDIOTS!!!!

Tancredo Sends Letter To President of Mexican Sewer

( WASHINGTON, D.C. ) – Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Littleton) today sent a letter to Mexican President Felipe Calderon questioning the motives behind his current visit to the United States as well as the charges levied by Mr. Calderon against the fairness of American immigration policy. A copy of the letter is below:

President Calderon:

I was disappointed by misguided comments you recently made regarding U.S.-Mexico relations and U.S. immigration laws. Purveying misinformation and absurd allegations is hardly a positive step to building a constructive partnership.

According to the Associated Press you recently said, “You have two economies. One economy is intensive in capital, which is the American economy. One economy is intensive in labor, which is the Mexican economy. We are two complementary economies, and that phenomenon is impossible to stop.” Yes, both countries benefit by the 85% of Mexico’s manufacturing exports that come to the U.S., but people are not commodities. While I appreciate your concern for our joint prosperity, the economic and social ills that plague your country cannot be resolved by simply exporting your citizens to the United States.

It is undeniable that Mexico faces major challenges. Endemic corruption and the power of violent drug cartels still dominate everyday life across Mexico. Beyond the headlines, Mexico has deep institutional maladies. Mexico’s absurdly antiquated Napoleonic-inquisition styled legal system and the squandering of robust energy-industry opportunity by a poorly managed, state-run Pemex monopoly are just two examples of the kind of self-inflicted wounds that hobble your troubled nation.

I understand that you are attempting to resolve some of these problems and applaud your leadership in trying to do so. But what would contribute more to the long term stability of your economy and your country would be to focus more energy on addressing your domestic challenges and less on lobbying the U.S. to provide amnesty for Mexicans who have illegally entered this country with the blessing of your government. In doing so, you might be able to keep Mexico’s “best and brightest young men” in Mexico – where they can contribute more to Mexico’s economy than remittance payments. Unfortunately, your recent comments indicate that Mexico will continue its policy of encouraging illegal immigration and treating the United States as little more than a dumping ground for your social and economic problems.

In your speech yesterday to the California State legislature, you lectured the American people on how to improve our immigration policies. Why did you not propose that we model our policies on Mexico’s own policies toward illegal entry across your own southern border? Mexico expends enormous resources to prevent Guatemalans, Hondurans and Salvadorans from entering the country illegally, but you castigate the United States for wanting secure borders. Mr. President, in my neighborhood that is called hypocrisy.

You proposed in your Sacramento speech that “migration” be made “legal, safe and organized.” Mr. President, we already have such a program and it is called legal immigration. Over one million legal immigrants come through our ports of entry each year, not across our border fences. The American people set limits on the number of legal immigrants through our immigration laws, and it is not the job of the Mexican government to revise or expand those limits.

President Calderon, you are insulting the American people when you tell us that fifteen to twenty million illegal aliens in our country bring only benefits and no costs. I challenge you to give one concrete example of how the enforcement of our existing immigration laws violates anyone’s human rights. The people of Oklahoma are not anti-Mexican for passing laws to require verification of employment eligibility. The people of Indiana are not anti-immigrant for passing laws to require photo identification for voting. The people of California are not anti-Mexican for denying driver’s licenses to illegal aliens. The people of Arizona are not anti-immigrant for passing laws that deny welfare benefits to people who are in that state unlawfully.

It is no secret that the purpose of your visit is to influence the American election, and in fact your trip has been billed as a high-stakes effort to shape the immigration debate underway in the U.S. presidential race. What is perhaps more disappointing, however, is your attempt to insinuate that anti-amnesty sentiment here in the U.S. is the same as anti-Mexican sentiment. I am referring to your statement, “I need to change in the perception that the Americans are the enemy, and it is important to change the perception that the Mexicans are the enemy.”

It is both disingenuous and dangerous for you to inject this kind of xenophobia into this debate. The fact that the overwhelming majority of Americans support the enforcement of our immigration laws and take issue with the notion that we should reward illegal behavior, hardly qualifies as ethnic animosity or international enmity. What you must understand is that a treasured aspect of our national foundation is a respect for the rule of law. Perhaps if corruption were not so widespread and commonplace in Mexico, it would be easier for you to understand this.

President Calderon, in many ways your trip thus far has been a long series of mixed messages. You accuse the United States of recent protectionist trends, yet you heavily restrict foreign entry into Mexico’s energy sector through a massive, state-run Pemex monopoly. You assure American politicians that an open flow of cheap Mexican labor is not only benign but vitally necessary, but you take great care in securing your own southern border with Guatemala. You come to the United States purportedly to promote better political and economic ties with the U.S., but then issue a thinly veiled threat that Mexicans will regard the U.S. as an enemy if we refuse to provide millions of illegal aliens with unconditional amnesty.

President Calderon, I respectfully suggest that the next time you visit our country, rather than trying to influence U.S. policymakers or our election process, you take time to listen to Americans rather than lecture them. If you want to make changes in government policies, apply your energies to Mexico’s laundry list of problems rather than meddling in domestic American politics.


DeportNow...
If I were to add anything to Tancredo's letter, it would be to tell that little useless Mexican worm, to shut his pie hole and, take a long trip down the Rio Grande!

Muslim Hussein Obama Turns Back On Old Glory

Pledge allegiance to Old Glory, you ungrateful empty suit lowlife!

Two Hundred and Twelve Years of Freedom Sent to The Bowels of Hell

This useless trash isn't qualified to be president of a dog pound!

Every Knee Will Bow And Every Tongue Will Confess........Says The Lord Jesus Christ

This is “cultural jihad” at its most obvious. Remember: the holy books of Islam clearly and repeatedly exhort Muslims, as a duty to Allah, to advance Islam and the supremacy of Allah throughout the world, by whatever means necessary. Islamic terrorism is an obvious and frightening example of one of those means. Cultural jihad is just as ominous and perhaps more insidious, because it occurs gradually, incrementally, until the host is overwhelmed from within.
As Melanie Philips notes: “Instead of gaining a clear-eyed understanding of the ideology that so threatens it, Britain has thus been subverted by it” (p. xvii).

THE EVENING STANDARD
ADOPTION OF ISLAMIC SHARIA LAW IN BRITAIN IS 'UNAVOIDABLE', SAYS ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY Last updated at 18:37pm on 07.02.08 Controversial: Dr Rowan Williams believes the introduction of Sharia law to Britain will help maintain social cohesion
The Archbishop of Canterbury has today said that the adoption of Islamic Sharia law in the UK is "unavoidable" and that it would help maintain social cohesion [emphasis added].
Rowan Williams told BBC Radio 4's World At One that the UK has to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system.
He says that Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court. He added Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty".
Dr Williams said there was a place for finding a "constructive accommodation" in areas such as marriage - allowing Muslim women to avoid Western divorce proceedings.
Other religions enjoyed such tolerance of their own laws, he pointed out, but stressed that it could never be allowed to take precedence over an individual's rights as a citizen.
He said it would also require a change in perception of what Sharia involved beyond the "inhumanity" of extreme punishments and attitudes to women seen in some Islamic states.
Dr Williams said: "It seems unavoidable and, as a matter of fact, certain conditions of Sharia are already recognised in our society and under our law, so it is not as if we are bringing in an alien and rival system.
"We already have in this country a number of situations in which the internal law of religious communities is recognised by the law of the land as justifying conscientious objections in certain circumstances."
He added: "There is a place for finding what would be a constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law as we already do with aspects of other kinds of religious law.
"It would be quite wrong to say that we could ever license a system of law for some community which gave people no right of appeal, no way of exercising the rights that are guaranteed to them as citizens in general. Sharia law in Britain would provide Muslims with an alternative to our divorce courts
"But there are ways of looking at marital disputes, for example, which provide an alternative to the divorce courts as we understand them.
"In some cultural and religious settings, they would seem more appropriate."
But his views were condemned today by senior Tory MP Peter Luff, who said: "This is a very dangerous route which we should not go down. You can't be a little bit pregnant. You can't have a little bit of sharia law [emphasis added].
"We should not start introducing new different legal systems alongside ours."
But the Archbishop defended his position saying people needed to look at Islamic law "with a clear eye."
"They should not imagine, either, that we know exactly what we mean by Sharia and just associate it with ... Saudi Arabia, or whatever," he continued.
"Nobody in their right mind would want to see in this country the kind of inhumanity that has sometimes been associated with the practice of the law in some Islamic states: the extreme punishments, the attitudes to women."
There were questions about how it interacted with human rights, he said.
"But I do not think we should instantly spring to the conclusion that the whole of that world of jurisprudence and practice is somehow monstrously incompatible with human rights just because it doesn't immediately fit with how we understand it."
Dr Williams said Orthodox Jewish courts already operated in the UK, and anti-abortion views of Catholics and other Christians were "accommodated within the law".
"The whole idea that there are perfectly proper ways the law of the land pays respect to custom and community, that's already there."
He said the issue of whether Catholic adoption agencies would be forced under equality laws to accept gay parents showed there was confusion on the matter.
"That principle that there is only one law for everybody is an important pillar of our social identity as a Western democracy.
"But I think it is a misunderstanding to suppose that means people don't have other affiliations, other loyalties which shape and dictate how they behave in society and that the law needs to take some account of that."
He said he accepted people might be surprised by his call but urged them to consider the wider question.
"What we don't want is a stand-off where the law squares up to people's religious consciences, on something like abortion or indeed by forcing a vote on some aspects of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill in the Commons ... we don't either want a situation where, because there's no legal way of monitoring what communities do, making them part of the public process, people do what they like in private in such a way that that becomes another way of intensifying oppression within a community."
Sharia law was originally more enlightened in its attitude to women than other legal systems, he pointed out, but did now have to be brought up to date.
"But you have to translate that into a setting where that whole area of the rights and liberties of women has moved on.
"The principle and the vision which animates the whole Islamic legal provision needs broadening because of that."
Responding to comments by one of his senior bishops that Islamic extremism was creating communities with "no-go areas" for non-Muslims, he said it was "not at all the case that we have absolute social exclusion.
"But we do have a lot of social suspicion, a lot of distance and we just have to go on working at how that shared citizenship comes through."
The Bishop of Rochester, The Rt Rev Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, said last month that non-Muslims faced a hostile reception in places dominated by the ideology of Islamic radicals.
Dr Williams said the use of the phrase "no-go areas" had sparked controversy because it reminded people of Northern Ireland.
"I don't think that was at all what was intended; I think it was meant to point to the silo problem, the sense of communities not communicating with each other.
"Many Muslims would say that they feel bits of British society are no-go areas for them."
Mohammed Shafiq, director of the Ramadhan Foundation, welcomed the comments.
"These comments further underline the attempts by both our great faiths to build respect and tolerance.
"Sharia law for civil matters is something which has been introduced in some Western countries with much success; I believe that Muslims would take huge comfort from the Government allowing civil matters being resolved according to their faith.
"We are however disappointed that the Archbishop of Canterbury was silent when Mr Nazir-Ali was promoting intolerance and lying about no-go areas for Christians in the UK by Muslim extremists.
"Unless he speaks out against this intolerance, Muslims will take his silence as authorisation and support for such comments.
"The Ramadhan Foundation will continue to work with the Church of England to build understanding and respect for our two communities."
Dr Williams's comments are likely to fuel the debate over multiculturalism in the UK.
But he insists that Sharia law needs to be better understood.
At the moment, he says "sensational reporting of opinion polls" clouds the issue.

...Unbelievable as it may seem, the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act of 2005 contained a provision giving insurance companies the right to help devise a plan for extending US health care to Mexico (Sec. 1004. BINATIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH INFRASTRUCTURE AND HEALTH INSURANCE).

Even more unbelievable, the senator who sponsored the bill is not on the verge of being thrown out of office for this odious piece of legislation. No, the senator who introduced the bill, Senator John McCain of Arizona, is on the verge of locking up the Republican nomination to be our next president.

Mitt Romney Delivers Great Speech

SOCIALISM / COMMUNISM -You have two cows. The government takes them both and provides you with milk. FASCISM -You have two cows. The government takes them and sells you the milk. BUREAUCRACY -You have two cows. The government takes them both, shoots one, milks the other, pays you for the milk, and then pours it down the drain. CAPITALISM -You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull. CORPORATE -You have two cows. You sell one, force the other to produce the milk of four cows, then act surprised when it drops dead. LIBERAL GOVERNMENT -You have two cows. The government taxes you to the point that you must sell them both in order to pay the taxes to support a man in a foreign country who has only one cow which was a gift from your government.

Welcome To The North American Union

Traitor McCain

Socialist Clinton

Empty suit Muslim Hussein Obama


How did we lose the most blessed piece of real estate on the planet?

Look in the mirror .........We didn't lose it. You gave it away.

John McCain Says Take This America!

McCain, Clinton, Obama Will Give America To Mexico

McClintObama Amnesty Plan: 20 million illegal alien voters by 2010Posted on Friday, February 01 @ 17:07:57 CST Topic: John McCain President Campaign
February 1, 2008 by William Gheen Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC) http://www.alipac.us/undefined/http://www.alipac.us Have GOP Voters forgotten that just a few months ago, John McCain stood hand-in-hand with liberal icon Ted Kennedy pushing for the largest amnesty for illegal aliens in American history? While Rasmussen polling showed that Americans following the legislation very closely opposed it 3 to 1 (69% to 23%), McCain ignored the massive public outcry! The angry calls rolling into the Senate offices, including John McCain's, were between 50 and 100 to 1 against McCain and Kennedy's bill. We know this because we stood outside his door counting calls received by his staff and because other Senators told us the ratios they were receiving. History was made when the Capital phone system shut down, due to overload of calls from angry Americans. John McCain refused to listen to Americans and went so far as to call members of the Senate who refused to support the McKennedy Amnesty "Racists"! John McCain showed no regard for American voices and instead called those who disagreed with him petty names. Who was John McCain listening to? He was listening to the US Chamber of Commerce and the racist illegal alien support groups like La Raza (The Race) whom he openly coordinated the effort with. John McCain has illustrated in dramatic fashion that when he feels safe in his office, he couldn't care less about what a majority of Americans think. Now, John McCain claims he is listening because he wants to be President in a few months. He says he will "Secure the Border First!" Even if you could trust John McCain, which you cannot, his border security pledge will be quickly reduced to irrelevance, if his desire for Amnesty for 20 million illegal aliens becomes a reality...Barrack Obama brags about how he worked with Senator McCain for "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" amnesty. If the GOP voters allow McCain to win the primary, they will be denying Americans any real choice against Amnesty in November. Unless an independent candidate enters the race, our choice will be between Clinton, Obama, or McCain all pushing for Amnesty from the White House, just like Bush! Some conservatives will hold their nose and vote for McCain out of fear of the Democrats, others will go third party. Many conservatives would not vote for McCain at gunpoint! The Republican Party will not be destroyed, if the McCain, Obama, Clinton Amnesty becomes a reality. Each party will race to replace American voices in their ranks, with the twenty million new voters who were recently illegal aliens. Does this surprise anyone who is knowledgeable about how American homes, jobs, tax dollars, limited health care resources, and finite seats in schools are being given to illegal aliens as well? Any border security promised by McCain will quickly fade into irrelevance beneath the political weight of America's new race based voting block of legalized illegal aliens. What hope will Americans have for border security or immigration enforcement once this happens? The answer is clear... NONE! Seventy Seven percent of Americans oppose licenses for illegal aliens. Under the McClintObama plan, twenty million illegal aliens will be eligible for licenses within a few years. Over seventy percent of Americans oppose taxpayer benefits and welfare for illegal aliens. Under the McClintObama plan, twenty million illegal aliens will be turned into citizen voters and will be eligible for welfare and all taxpayer benefits. Over 80 percent of Americans oppose in-state tuition for illegal aliens. Under the McClintObama plan, twenty million legalized illegal aliens will qualify for in-state tuition. Under the McClintObama plan, employers will only have to worry about hiring the next twenty million illegal aliens flooding the country, in response to the Amnesty provided to the most recent wave. John McCain supports Amnesty. If you have any doubts, then ask yourself why his campaign has deployed open borders fanatic, Juan Hernandez to secure the Hispanic vote for McCain. Juan Hernandez is a dual citizen of Mexico and America. He used to work for Mexican President Vicente Fox by reaching out to and organizing illegal aliens from Mexico inside the US. Hernandez is known for his stance called, "Mexico First". He is a regular on national television, where he flagrantly advocates amnesty and Open Borders with Mexico. Juan Hernandez is the face of the McCain's campaign to Hispanic voters and he did a great job delivering the Hispanic vote in Florida to McCain! There are two main reasons McCain is winning the GOP Primary right now. One is the anti-illegal immigration vote is split up between Romney and Paul, who appear to be sincere in their "No Amnesty" pledges. The anti-illegal immigration vote is also splitting to Mike Huckabee, who truthfully supports Amnesty and a path to citizenship for illegal aliens, but is a very skillful liar. Huckabee is deceiving voters by mailing out endorsment cards from lone Minuteman Jim Gilchrist. The anti-illegal immigration vote is divided three ways, and the pro-amnesty vote is now collected around John McCain. The second reason McCain is winning is that many GOP voters don't know his immigration stances, have forgotten his immigration stances, or have forgiven his immigration stances. They say, "He has changed" or "We have to stop Clinton and Obama". John McCain has not changed or he would not have Juan Hernandez out promising Amnesty for illegal aliens. John McCain has not changed or he would not be saying, "Secure the Borders first", without getting into the part where amnesty is then passed. John McCain has not changed because he recently stated on the national news that he would still vote for his amnesty bill or sign it into law as President! Do GOP voters really prefer to have one of their own pushing amnesty than a Democrat? I am a Republican, getting closer to independent every day, but I will say that at very least the Democrats are more honest about their pro-amnesty positions than McCain and Huckabee. What madness, lies, or misinformation would infect the mind of a GOP voter for them to support a man like John McCain, who works openly with ultra-liberal Democrats, almost changed parties to join the Democrats in 2001, and has the worst record on immigration of any of the GOP candidates? Why would anyone support a man who is so detached from reality that he told a booing crowd of Union workers that they would not pick lettuce for even $50 an hour!?!?! John McCain says he knows all about securing the border because he is from Arizona. Say what? Has anyone seen the conditions in Arizona lately, where they have declared a state of emergency and fought to pass strict state laws to enforce the immigration laws, which John McCain and his DC insiders refuse to enforce? There are good reasons why Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Laura Ingram, Hugh Hewitt, and Michelle Malkin are heavily criticizing John McCain. There are good reasons for Ronald Reagan's son, Michael to condemn the McCain candidacy. There are good reasons why ALIPAC, NumbersUSA, and almost every other organization in America fighting against Amnesty and illegal immigration, while supporting Border Security, are screaming NO to McCain! The principles of this nation are at stake. The value of our votes is at stake. The survival of the United States, in its current form, is at stake. We must stop the McClintObama Amnesty Plan. We must stop twenty million illegal aliens from becoming voters by 2010. We must race against time to warn every GOP voter before Super Tuesday, because we must do all we can to stop John McCain.

Poverty Pimp Parachutes' Into Bigot Rally

Alfonso Sharpton better known as the professional race baiting poverty pimp, parachuted into a rally of bigots and racist yesterday. He then proceeded to give a seventeen minute race baiting speech, as his "followers" screamed with verbal support.

Brotha Alfonso, came to support a broken down brotha that wanted to become sheriff of socialist hellhole, NC. But brotha Al forgot to present a single fact as he gave his opinions. In fact Al seemed to be very uneducated on the facts of this issue. Speaking of uneducated, brotha Al sure is English language challenged- he begin one sentence with "it an't got nothin to do wit it". Someone forgot to inform PP (short for poverty pimp) that the broken down brotha, that has aspirations to be sheriff, may qualify to be in the jail -but doesn't qualify to run the jail. You dig?Peace out Brotha!