What up? I just dropped by. I’ve gotta say, you have kewl site! You need to visit my government grant money site….

…

On February 18th, 2008 at 1:53 am, Alphonse said:

Bush is such a horse crap artist. If he wasn’t inviting thousands of terrorists in through the Mexican border in the War on Wages we wouldn’t have such a big security hole in the first place, so let’s take care of priorities first.

1. Bin Laden and al-Qaeda attacked us; therefore we should get bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Isn’t that logical? Instead we waste all our resources on a puny country that was never an enemy.

Iraqis developing and implementing bio-weapons, missiles which can (and have) hit Israel … nope, no threat here. Do we have a withdraw plan for Germany now? Korea? If those are too harsh to be used as examples, perhaps we should ask Mr. Slick Willie about Haiti or perhaps Bosnia/Herzegovina?

Granted, I can point out all of the detriments of the war as well like how we gave power and even aid to those like Hussein and Bin Laden, the destabilization of “checks and balances” by not having one prevailing powerhouse in the middle east and on down that line as well.

2. Open borders to facilitate Bush’s War on Wages for his business cronies is thousands of times worse for security than some silly eavesdropping law that everybody knows about anyway. Terrorists probably make all kinds of “noise” knowing NSA is listening and bureaucrats will spend billions in panic to protect their butts.

Immigration is an issue central to the Security and Prosperity Partnership. It has more to do with appeasing the Mexicans than any concern for America or her citizens. Any Economics 101 course (Not relegated by the system of indoctrination but an actual fact-based education) in a third rate city college will show it is not now, nor has it ever been a source of “cheap labor”.

You are right on target when you say we should make this a priority since it is a national concern which adversely affects us all. I think your reasoning is a bit off but that is just my opinion.

3. Why do we put up with chamberpot immigration? Washington brings in millions of dangerous immigrants and then we’re supposed to give up our freedom in order than everybody’s communications be monitored.

We are giving up rights when we allow the government to dictate what indoctrination is shoved down the throats of our children, when we allow the govt to tell us what we can and cannot do in the confines of our own home … even when those actions are perfectly legal, when we allow the govt to illegally redistribute our funds, when we allow the govt to mandate behavior and thoughts, when we allow the govt to take private property from one citizen and give it to another to increase their tax base and the list goes on.

When we let the government listen to and monitor communications of those communicating with people outside of our (nonexistent) borders, we are allowing them to do their damn job of protecting this nation … one of the few powers that they do actually have.

When we grant immunity to the telecoms we are keeping our enemies (The ACLU at the top of the list) from suing them on behalf of our enemies who are afraid of them assisting the government in doing its job.

1. Bin Laden and al-Qaeda attacked us; therefore we should get bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Isn’t that logical? Instead we waste all our resources on a puny country that was never an enemy.

2. Open borders to facilitate Bush’s War on Wages for his business cronies is thousands of times worse for security than some silly eavesdropping law that everybody knows about anyway. Terrorists probably make all kinds of “noise” knowing NSA is listening and bureaucrats will spend billions in panic to protect their butts.

3. Why do we put up with chamberpot immigration? Washington brings in millions of dangerous immigrants and then we’re supposed to give up our freedom in order than everybody’s communications be monitored.

Political donations from the trial lawyers is more important to the Democrats than security from terrorist attacks.

The true cause for blocking the bill was the Senate-passed retroactive immunity from lawsuits for private telecommunications firms asked to eavesdrop by the government.

66 trial lawyers representing plaintiffs in the telecommunications suits have contributed $1.5 million to Democratic senators and causes. Of the 29 Democratic senators who voted against the FISA bill last Tuesday, 24 took money from the trial lawyers (as did two absent senators, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama). Eric A. Isaacson of San Diego, one of the telecommunications plaintiff’s lawyers, contributed to the recent unsuccessful presidential campaign of Sen. Chris Dodd, who led the Senate fight against the bill containing immunity.

http://townhall.com/columnists/RobertDNovak/2008/02/18/torts_and_terrorism

It seems Mrs. Clinton’s adopted state of New York may be trying to short change her opponent. “Unofficial primary results gave Obama no votes in nearly 80 districts, including Harlem’s 94th and other historically black areas – but many of those in…

Still restless even after viewing the Marine AD so – went to new (for me) site :

Heads up all :

BERKELEY and SF officials in news for fraud – that would be ALLEGED FRAUD – don’t want the dreaded Anti-Christian LU on my case:

Chris Kavanaugh -SIX FELONY COUNTS – resigned from BERKELEY RENT STABILIZATION BOARD- (alleged)

SF SUPERVISOR – Ed Jew alleged fraud and extortion

from : GOP.com

Please-say it isn’t so – not our trusted officials…..

On February 16th, 2008 at 10:38 pm, Christian Soldier said:
What “BUGS” me is that my $$$$$$$$$$$$ via taxes are helping to fund the Anit-Christian Legal Union.

AWWWWW, C’MON!

Let’s stop being “phair”, and start being HONEST – we all know it is the anti-Christian lawbreakers union! hehehehe

And since Congress didn’t let us VOTE on them funding the lawbreakers with our tax dollars, it is THEFT, Taxation Without Representation.

Our Founding Fathers would throw them overboard without a second’s hesitation.

I vote for keel-hauling, at this stage of the game. Clean the barnacles off the hulls, mates. The ACLawbreakersU members must be good for SOMETHING.

On February 16th, 2008 at 10:17 pm, David Segal said:

GREAT!

As long as you realize, the mood we are in, that also means that those who want to sue the telcom businesses for helping SECURE THIS NATION, can also BE SUED, and charged with TREASON for obstructing our SECURITY measures.

The ACLU have been mighty busy painting themselves into a mighty tight, windowless corner.
And they’ve been mighty busy overestimating how many friends they have.

And the MAJORITY of Americans are getting #$#$#$#$## tired of not seeing any obstructers being charged with TREASON – like CODE PINK AND BERKELY, and PETA, for example.

To the FULLEST EXTENT of the TRADITIONAL law about Treason, that is, David Segal.

Because, after all, that is just plain wrong. And it is dangerous to keep on breeding the fruit of the CONSEQUENCES of INJUSTICE, you know.

Now, we know their original intention is to breed VIGILANTISM and hope it leads to ANARCHY – but they always forget to plan on doing things so they themselves are NOT THE TARGETS of what they are SOWING – they are just being mighty sloppy, these days, and one of the things they are sowing since Bill Clinton is just a plain lack of self-control, or desire to have any self-control, for that matter – so when it BACKLASHES, it’s going to be just plain JUSTICE, after all.

And that is BAD, because in the meantime, it means they turned an awful lot of great people with decent moral values into just plain animals who don’t care anymore.
Like a few times in the last few years, one just a few weeks ago, where rapists were caught by a crowd who took the matter of justice into their own hands.
What will they do when they catch those guilty of blatant TREASON, at a moment when they have “lost self-control”, too.

We Conservatives don’t want to see that happen – but the ones who are most susceptable to turning on the Treasonous instigators of ANARCHY are never the Conservative respectors of Law and the Rule of Law, anyway, are they.

The ones who lose control are always those little mindless banty roosters who the Anarchists have been ragging and ragging, and toying with.

But one day, the Anarchist raggers just forget to show up with plenty of FOOD for the raggees.

And when things snap, the Conservative law abiders never have enough resources on hand to protect the raggees from those they ragged on for so long – usually be cause the raggers always stripped the Conservatives of the means to protect themselves, thinking the only ones that would NEED protection from the raggees would be the Conservatives – but it usually doesn’t work that way, in real life – only rarely.

And then there you are with the raggers getting their just deserts, like that dictator about 20 years ago – Czechoslavakian???? Glory be, it was 1988, wasn’t it! when the Walls came down in Europe, and they dragged him out of his palace and showed him their pent up love and appreciation for all he had ever done for them, one afternoon.

Very sad – not the kind of community or neighborhood where Conservatives like to raise their kids, Then they leave – and the TAX DOLLARS go with them.

So sad. ‘Cause single people without kids just don’t pursue the kinds oactivities that lend to paying high taxes to govt individuals, you know. Or maintaining Life-giving community structural support, either, for that matter.
Where you are living dies, the jobs die, the income opportunities die, the govt t##ts die… then what can the Liberals do! Being incapable of sustaining life, as they are.

Very sad.

Don’t you just love it-our$$$$$ going to Planned PARENTHOOD AND La Raza toooooooo.

The socialists really do know how to spend our $$$$$$$$

It’s time for me to go to THE AD -Our Marines .com – as always – I sleep better after watching it.

Our tax dollars are also funding La Raza, Family Planning and many other socially socialist important causes!