President Obama---Stop Playing Political Racist Games With This Nation's Security
You're the President of the United States----start acting like it! The people of this country completely understand that our southern boarders are under siege with violence and corruption; uncontrolled borders smuggling guns and drugs that threatens every citizen.
Meanwhile, you and your liberal democrat party are tearing this nation apart with this pure and vile use of false racism designed for political gain and no other reason. We know for a fact that the recent Arizona legislation is not even stronger than the federal laws now on the books. The fact that a person can not even be questioned without a cause or violation prefaced, makes Arizona's law within Federal standards. Any person can be asked for identification by federal authorities, yet under the Arizona statute there must be a reason in advance of asking.
So, Mr. President, stop with the lies. Stop with the racist accusations. Stop and think about what you have pledged to do to protect this nation and its people. Start acting like a President, and not playing these childlike petty games that are embarrassing your office, your citizens, and your country. Stand up a be a man about our borders and secure them now. Your country demands it.
If you think this healthcare joke will cost your party control, you've seen nothing when you and your pathetic advisers realize 80% of the nation wants border security now.
This has absolutely nothing to do with race.........unless you consider the race to the bottomless pit your party is heading----a race you will surely win.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Is Today’s “Mainstream Media” Out of Touch With Mainstream America?
When the controversial law was passed in Arizona recently, polling across the country produced one obvious outcome---70% of this nation’s citizens felt something had to be done about our southern borders. They also felt the Arizona law was not going to lead to racial profiling. When the law was written, the legislators specifically made sure that that the statutes remained in line with federal law which, if implemented, would pass the litmus test if challenged by the higher courts. Governor Jan Brewer and the legislators even went back and revised critical language that may have allowed an incorrect interpretation of how the law was implemented by law enforcement agencies. Brewer was adamant that racial profiling would not be tolerated in Arizona:
“Taking into consideration questions and concerns that have been expressed about the SB1070 legislation I signed last week, today I signed HB 2162 which defines and clarifies even further the proper implementation and enforcement of the law. These changes specifically answer legal questions raised by some who expressed fears that the original law would somehow allow or lead to racial profiling. These new amendments make it crystal clear and undeniable that racial profiling is illegal, and will not be tolerated in Arizona.” link
With Arizona’s southern borders quickly becoming a clear and present danger to all who lived in the border region, Brewer agreed that something had to be done:
"We cannot sacrifice our safety to the murderous greed of drug cartels," Brewer said. "We cannot stand idly by as drophouses, kidnappings and violence compromise our quality of life."
Enter----A Mainstream Media with a boatload of bias
As critics of the bill, (from the Mexican government to the ACLU), began to sound off, our ever reliable liberal media began a barrage of negative stories that included outright lies about the substance of the bill and its intent. The network news agencies predictably reported what their “sources reported” and with deliberate intent, failed to report the overwhelming support for the legislation.
This negative slant followed suit in the newsprint media where more distortions and outright fabrications went unchecked and ignored by leading editors and publishers.
The un-official count of Negative stories vs. Positive stories has ran about one in twelve. The favorite line by both the networks and newspapers was the accusation that Arizona had implemented outright racial profiling against all Mexicans whether legal or illegally residing inside our borders.
While the “mainstream media” and the official response from the White House has been nothing but condemnation, nation-wide polling still shows Americans in full support of Arizona’s decision to do what the Federal government has refused to do---stop the violence and secure the borders.
The Political Slant
While the legal wrangling has just begun, the political ramifications are taking place among the liberal democrats who have long coveted the Latino voting block. But no longer is the promise of open doors and all expense paid living quarters---all at the taxpayer’s expense---being used as a ringing endorsement. The voting public that includes millions of independents and moderate democrats are rejecting these policies of open borders at any cost. With unemployment at 10% nation-wide, competition in the job markets has every legal citizen searching for work. Even legal Mexican-Americans are seeing the injustice of coming in “the front door”, paying their dues, and following the laws of the promised land, only to see millions step ahead in line with no respect for the process.
President Obama, the liberal democrats, and the “out of touch” mainstream media are banking on our humility and compassion to keep the status quo on the immigration policies, but what they don’t see is a nation that has said enough is enough. The futile attempt to paint Republicans as mean spirited racial bigots is falling on deaf and defiant ears. Perhaps they’ll see the light in November when they’re no longer in power or considered a voice of the people.
(edited and revised at the authors discretion)
When the controversial law was passed in Arizona recently, polling across the country produced one obvious outcome---70% of this nation’s citizens felt something had to be done about our southern borders. They also felt the Arizona law was not going to lead to racial profiling. When the law was written, the legislators specifically made sure that that the statutes remained in line with federal law which, if implemented, would pass the litmus test if challenged by the higher courts. Governor Jan Brewer and the legislators even went back and revised critical language that may have allowed an incorrect interpretation of how the law was implemented by law enforcement agencies. Brewer was adamant that racial profiling would not be tolerated in Arizona:
“Taking into consideration questions and concerns that have been expressed about the SB1070 legislation I signed last week, today I signed HB 2162 which defines and clarifies even further the proper implementation and enforcement of the law. These changes specifically answer legal questions raised by some who expressed fears that the original law would somehow allow or lead to racial profiling. These new amendments make it crystal clear and undeniable that racial profiling is illegal, and will not be tolerated in Arizona.” link
With Arizona’s southern borders quickly becoming a clear and present danger to all who lived in the border region, Brewer agreed that something had to be done:
"We cannot sacrifice our safety to the murderous greed of drug cartels," Brewer said. "We cannot stand idly by as drophouses, kidnappings and violence compromise our quality of life."
Enter----A Mainstream Media with a boatload of bias
As critics of the bill, (from the Mexican government to the ACLU), began to sound off, our ever reliable liberal media began a barrage of negative stories that included outright lies about the substance of the bill and its intent. The network news agencies predictably reported what their “sources reported” and with deliberate intent, failed to report the overwhelming support for the legislation.
This negative slant followed suit in the newsprint media where more distortions and outright fabrications went unchecked and ignored by leading editors and publishers.
The un-official count of Negative stories vs. Positive stories has ran about one in twelve. The favorite line by both the networks and newspapers was the accusation that Arizona had implemented outright racial profiling against all Mexicans whether legal or illegally residing inside our borders.
While the “mainstream media” and the official response from the White House has been nothing but condemnation, nation-wide polling still shows Americans in full support of Arizona’s decision to do what the Federal government has refused to do---stop the violence and secure the borders.
The Political Slant
While the legal wrangling has just begun, the political ramifications are taking place among the liberal democrats who have long coveted the Latino voting block. But no longer is the promise of open doors and all expense paid living quarters---all at the taxpayer’s expense---being used as a ringing endorsement. The voting public that includes millions of independents and moderate democrats are rejecting these policies of open borders at any cost. With unemployment at 10% nation-wide, competition in the job markets has every legal citizen searching for work. Even legal Mexican-Americans are seeing the injustice of coming in “the front door”, paying their dues, and following the laws of the promised land, only to see millions step ahead in line with no respect for the process.
President Obama, the liberal democrats, and the “out of touch” mainstream media are banking on our humility and compassion to keep the status quo on the immigration policies, but what they don’t see is a nation that has said enough is enough. The futile attempt to paint Republicans as mean spirited racial bigots is falling on deaf and defiant ears. Perhaps they’ll see the light in November when they’re no longer in power or considered a voice of the people.
(edited and revised at the authors discretion)
Friday, May 07, 2010
Governor Brewer's Response to Obama
H/T---Hot Air
Keep laughing Mr. President. This "joke" will be great theater in 2012.
H/T---Hot Air
Keep laughing Mr. President. This "joke" will be great theater in 2012.
Monday, May 03, 2010
JUST WHAT IS THE DESCRIPTION OF TERRORISM, MR. HOLDER?
In an AP article posted by Breitbart our resident attorney general said today that it was “too early” to designate the Times Square bomb plot as terrorism. I would guess if the perpetrator was just in town for some sight-seeing and forgot to leave home his groundhog eradication apparatus, Mr. Holder could make this “assumption”.
Steve Doocy and Gretchen Carlson, in a Fox New interview with Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano, attempted several times to get Napolitano to at least admit this was an act of terrorism, but there must still remain a strict Obama policy to restrict using the word. (complete video here)
Carlson moves on to questioning Ms. Napolitano about her statements concerning the “much safer southern borders” where there’s also no terrorism taking place at this posting.
A search of the liberal online news outlets only faintly produce the word terrorism in their postings:
In the New York Times:
"While the authorities said they were treating the failed bombing — described as a “one-off” by Janet Napolitano, the homeland security secretary — as a potential terrorist attack, they said there was no evidence of a continued threat to the city."
From the Washington Post:
"Obviously, it wasn't an accident," Kelly said. "It was somebody who brought this to the location to send a message, to terrorize people in the area......"
"The bomb found in the Pathfinder was "a sober reminder that New York is a target for people who want to come here and do us harm," Kelly said Sunday. He said the device would have sent up a fireball from the center of a popular and bustling tourist landmark known to have symbolic importance for militant groups at war with the United States......."
This would be New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, but no where in the Wapo story do they use the word terrorist or terrorist plot in their own context. The Post did mention at the bottom of page two that our “overseas contingency operations”, (my quote), may have riled up our foreign enemies. A friend has suggested that this may have been a “dry run” to see if they, (THE TERRORIST), could get bomb in the Square---remember the towers did not come down on the first attempt---but who or what ever the plot, let’s keep that dirty word “terrorist” out of the conversation. Sadly, I guess when a building comes down and hundreds or thousands more perish, the media and our “leadership” will get around to calling this what it is---TERRORISM.
(cross-posted in the Green Room---Hot Air)
In an AP article posted by Breitbart our resident attorney general said today that it was “too early” to designate the Times Square bomb plot as terrorism. I would guess if the perpetrator was just in town for some sight-seeing and forgot to leave home his groundhog eradication apparatus, Mr. Holder could make this “assumption”.
"Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday that investigators have some good leads in addition to the videotape of the man. Holder said in remarks to reporters that it is too early to say whether the incident was of foreign or domestic origin or to designate it as terrorism."
Steve Doocy and Gretchen Carlson, in a Fox New interview with Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano, attempted several times to get Napolitano to at least admit this was an act of terrorism, but there must still remain a strict Obama policy to restrict using the word. (complete video here)
Carlson moves on to questioning Ms. Napolitano about her statements concerning the “much safer southern borders” where there’s also no terrorism taking place at this posting.
A search of the liberal online news outlets only faintly produce the word terrorism in their postings:
In the New York Times:
"While the authorities said they were treating the failed bombing — described as a “one-off” by Janet Napolitano, the homeland security secretary — as a potential terrorist attack, they said there was no evidence of a continued threat to the city."
From the Washington Post:
"Obviously, it wasn't an accident," Kelly said. "It was somebody who brought this to the location to send a message, to terrorize people in the area......"
"The bomb found in the Pathfinder was "a sober reminder that New York is a target for people who want to come here and do us harm," Kelly said Sunday. He said the device would have sent up a fireball from the center of a popular and bustling tourist landmark known to have symbolic importance for militant groups at war with the United States......."
This would be New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, but no where in the Wapo story do they use the word terrorist or terrorist plot in their own context. The Post did mention at the bottom of page two that our “overseas contingency operations”, (my quote), may have riled up our foreign enemies. A friend has suggested that this may have been a “dry run” to see if they, (THE TERRORIST), could get bomb in the Square---remember the towers did not come down on the first attempt---but who or what ever the plot, let’s keep that dirty word “terrorist” out of the conversation. Sadly, I guess when a building comes down and hundreds or thousands more perish, the media and our “leadership” will get around to calling this what it is---TERRORISM.
(cross-posted in the Green Room---Hot Air)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)