wooops

wooops
Originally uploaded by jimshitz010010010010000101

Proof that Obama's camp faked his birth certificate

Uploaded by jimshitz010010010010000101 on 16 Oct 08, 12.18PM PDT.

Obama Citizenship??? Why should we trust him??

Why should someone tell me where my money goes???

An editorial by Paul Marx, Owner of radio station KBON 101.1FM

I was brought up believing that the United States of America was the
country that gave anyone the opportunity to be as successful as one
can achieve, but now it seems that many people believe that if you
become too successful you should be "punished"; if you make "too
much" money with your success some of that money should be taken away
from you and "shared" with those less fortunate, but aren't we are
already sharing?

Aren't the so called "less fortunate" in this country already being
taken care of? After all they get Federal housing, Food stamps,
medical cards and God knows what else. How much more should we give
them?? We have become a country filled with too many people who want
something for nothing. Do we just keep giving and giving to those who
contribute the least to the country? Shouldn't there instead be some
sort of plan to reward those who contribute to the country or at
least let those who earn success, enjoy it?

Why is it always so popular for a politician or political candidate
to talk about "more taxes" on the rich? Why can't people understand
that in most cases it is those so called "rich people" that own
businesses and create jobs. They are people who in many cases
started at the bottom and worked their way up, many taking a gamble
by investing their life savings into a business or idea. So, they
invest, build their business with hard work, hire people to work for
them and see some well earned success, then we punish them. That's
right folks, while the word "tax" is being used it's not
really "taxing" those people who earned success, it is punishing
those people. Is it fair that we take from these people
to "distribute the wealth"? Distribute to who??

I don't want the government to take money that I have worked hard for
and give it to someone who most likely does not contribute to this
country. I am fed up with driving down the streets at mid-day and
seeing people sitting outside smoking, drinking and playing cards
under a tree while I have to worry about my business; how the downed
economy will affect it. I am tired of going into a store all times of
the day and seeing people buying expensive steaks with food stamps
but having the cash to buy cartoons of cigarettes, bottles of wine or
whiskey and cases of beer. I am tired of driving by bars during work
hours and seeing the same cars there day after day. These are some of
the very people Presidential candidate Barak Obama wants to "spread
the wealth" to.

Anyway don't financially successful people spread the wealth on
their own by spending more money? I would think that they probably
buy bigger, more expensive homes, more expensive furniture, more
expensive automobiles, send their kids to college, etc. In other
words, besides creating jobs for other people who WANT to work, they
help the economy by spending that money that they have earned.
I agree with this "post" I found on a discussion board: "It is not
the governments job to determine who makes" too much" money, only to
make fair rules for all to follow. The smart and motivated will
succeed, the lazy will not".
To Quote "Joe the Plumber": "That's the American Dream to me. You
work hard. You're going to get what you want eventually. It's not
going to happen overnight by no means, but if you work hard enough
you will get it. I resent the government or Obama's plan to take more
away from me." -- (Joe Wurzelbacher, October 12, 2008).

As "Joe" told Diane Sawyer recently: "Americans should get treated
equally. Why do we have escalating tax brackets on higher incomes at
all? Why are we penalizing the success that we proclaim as the
American Dream"?

A writing by Peter Ferrara titled "Federal Income Taxes: Who Pays and
How Much" states: "Facts are that the top 1% of income earners are
paying 40% of federal income taxes, almost twice their share of
income, so the rich certainly seem to be paying their fair share, and
then some. Liberal politicians who say we need to raise taxes on the
rich so they will pay their fair share are either abusively
misleading the public or hopelessly ignorant regarding federal tax
policy. If 40% is not fair for the top 1%, what would be fair, 50%,
100%? Secondly, liberal politicians wailing about Republican tax cuts
for the rich are also either misleading the public, or hopelessly
uninformed. With the top 1% now paying 40% of income taxes, the top
5% paying 60%, and the top 40% paying 99.4%, where are the tax cuts
for rich? Clearly, federal income taxes are overwhelmingly paid by
upper income earners".

In my opinion, Barack Obama's political strategy seems to be more
welfare and give-away programs at the expense of not only who he
considers to be "rich", but also at the expense of the hard working
middle class Americans (Even though many of them may not realize that
yet); taking from them and giving to those who contribute the least
to this country.
It's very sad but it seems that America is becoming a nation of more
& more people with their hands out for charity & freebies, and I have
to give Barack Obama this. He's smart enough to realize that
promising to give more of "something for nothing" to these people
will get him millions of votes.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. This election, maybe more than ever, it is very
important that you THINK BEFORE YOU VOTE and put AMERICA FIRST!

Thank you,

PAUL MARX
Owner/KBON 11.1FM
www.kbon.com

P.S. One more thing. Ask yourself, who would you have voted for if
this election had been right after 9/11? In your honest opinion who
do you think would have best acted on America's behalf?

CHANGE... WE NEED!??

CHANGE... WE NEED!
Originally uploaded by hhsc/Greg

view profile
~ Sailor ~ Pro User says:

Ha! You are gonna get your CHANGE alright. Venezuela got their CHANGE. It's a brave new world, folks. HOPE you can afford the taxes given to another 35,000,000 non-tax paying citizens.

95% of Americans will get a tax cut! NEWS Flash - 30+% of Americans DON'T pay taxes. Do the math!

HA! I quit. I have started with nothing but the shirt on my back 3 times. Not again.

Obama can mail my check and you can keep your CHANGE.

Ha, this is gonna be almost as fun as the 1960s.

Hey, if by chance Obama does lose, will y'all be attending the riots?
Posted 13 hours ago. ( permalink )

obama chicken

obama chicken
Originally uploaded by eywmm0

an orange beach resident put this on the back of their truck.

Uploaded by eywmm0 on 15 Sep 08, 7.16AM PDT.

Obama Truth Squad

Obama Truth Squad
Originally uploaded by malagent

The Barack Obama Truth Squad - Missouri Prosecutors and Law Enforcement Publicly Threaten Obama Critics
Find more info and related video at the links above.
Barack Hussein Obama really can't handle any criticism at all. the Obama campaign has asked MO Law Enforcement and Prosecutors to go after anyone who lies, misleads or uses "character attacks" against Obama.
Just Imagine what it would be like if he is elected?
© 2008 Malagent's NObama 08 Campaign

Uploaded by malagent on 27 Sep 08, 2.33AM PDT.

A new low in politics from Obama

From: http://beltwaysnark.com/2008/09/15/did-obama-seriously-try-to-get-iraq-to-stall-on-a-pullout/

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari said in an interview.

Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops - and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."

"However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open." Zebari says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

Wow. Just wow. Even the Iraqis can see what Obama was trying to do.

Iraqi leaders are divided over the US election. Iraqi President Jalal Talabani (whose party is a member of the Socialist International) sees Obama as "a man of the Left" - who, once elected, might change his opposition to Iraq's liberation. Indeed, say Talabani's advisers, a President Obama might be tempted to appropriate the victory that America has already won in Iraq by claiming that his intervention transformed failure into success.

Maliki's advisers have persuaded him that Obama will win - but the prime minister worries about the senator's "political debt to the anti-war lobby" - which is determined to transform Iraq into a disaster to prove that toppling Saddam Hussein was "the biggest strategic blunder in US history."

Other prominent Iraqi leaders, such as Vice President Adel Abdul-Mahdi and Kurdish regional President Massoud Barzani, believe that Sen. John McCain would show "a more realistic approach to Iraqi issues."

If this can be proven, Obama might as well hang it up. Not only is meddling in ongoing US negotiations with Iraq a no-no of epic proportions, the idea that Obama would even dare to suggest to Iraqis that they should not deal with the Bush administration in creating a timeline (thereby leaving troops in Iraq longer than needed) just to try and make Dems look better if he takes office is sick.

And I don't know why I'm so surprised, I always thought the Dems would do whatever it took to claim the Iraq victory for themselves. I just never thought they'd go so far as to leaving our troops exposed for years longer than necessary to do it.

UPDATE - Here's the word from Team Obama.

But Obama's national security spokeswoman Wendy Morigi said Taheri's article bore "as much resemblance to the truth as a McCain campaign commercial."

In fact, Obama had told the Iraqis that they should not rush through a "Strategic Framework Agreement" governing the future of US forces until after President George W. Bush leaves office, she said.

…

"Barack Obama has never urged a delay in negotiations, nor has he urged a delay in immediately beginning a responsible drawdown of our combat brigades," Morigi said.

That statement didn't help Obama's case much, seeing as his national security spokeswoman just admitted that Obama stuck his two cents where it didn't belong. That's still tampering with an ongoing US-Iraq negotiation, and the idea that Obama didn't urge a delay in negotiations is negated by the fact that he did indeed say that the Iraqis should wait until the next administration to do anything. I'm no genius, but that counts as urging a delay in negotiations to me. And if Taheri's report is correct, that's how the Iraqis interpreted Obama's remarks.

'Urine or You're Out'

THE JOB - URINE TEST

(Whoever wrote this one deserves a HUGE pat on the back!)
 
Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck, I am required to pass a random urine test with which I have no problem.
 
What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test.
Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their tush, doing drugs, while I work. . . . Can you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?
 
Pass this along if you agree or simply delete if you don't. Hope you all will pass it along, though. . Something has to change in this country -- and soon!!!!!!!
I guess we could title that program, 'Urine or You're Out'