Classified Listings

Find jobs, housing, for sale, personals, services, local community, and events.

USA Online local classifieds

Community - politics classifieds in miami

<![CDATA[ This is the Real Deal,It's Now Or Never! We The People Can! The Fierce Urgency Is Now ! ]]>

<![CDATA[Seat the deligates--This isn't Chicago in 1968 --Daily is not the mayor and I waon't get beat up for my free speech. Seat them or lose my vote to the republicans]]>

<![CDATA[Women boycott Chris Mathew as he says the only reason Hillary Clinton is even getting votes and running is because she is an ex-first women. NOT BECAUSE SHE IS THE MOST QUALIFIED CANDIDATE.]]>

<![CDATA[If our choice is between Obama and McCain come November, and Hillary is your choice....we could all write her name in on the ballot.]]>

<![CDATA[click <a href="http://www.thinkweston.com/blog" rel="nofollow">http://www.thinkweston.com/blog</a>]]>

<![CDATA[SINGH FOR 2ND ASSEMBLY DISTRICT 2. HE'S ONE OF US !!!!!!! PAUL R. SINGH 4 ASSEMBLY DISTRICT 2 !!!! PO BOX 905 GRIDLEY CALIFORNIA 95948 Email Address is: singh4assembly2@live.com Also PAUL R. SINGH will be more than glad if anyone would like to make a Monetary Donation to help him with his Campaign. You would be making a fine choice to vote for Paul R. Singh in June 2008. Yours Truly Stacy Carl from Shingletown California ]]>

<![CDATA[Walk into any of the largest Wall Street brokerage firms today and you’ll see a self-portrait of upper management racism and sexism: women sitting at secretarial desks outside fancy offices occupied by predominantly white males. According to the EEOC as well as the recent racial discrimination class actions filed against UBS and Merrill Lynch, blacks make up between 1 per cent to 3.5 per cent of stockbrokers — this after 30 years of litigation, settlements and empty promises to do better by the largest Wall Street firms. The first clue to an entrenched white male bastion seeking a black male occupant in the oval office (having placed only five blacks in the U.S. Senate in the last two centuries) appeared in February on a chart at the Center for Responsive Politics website. It was a list of the 20 top contributors to the Barack Obama campaign, and it looked like one of those comprehension tests where you match up things that go together and eliminate those that don’t. Of the 20 top contributors, I eliminated six that didn’t compute. I was now looking at a sight only slightly less frightening to democracy than a Diebold voting machine. It was a Wall Street cartel of financial firms, their registered lobbyists, and go-to law firms that have a death grip on our federal government. Why is the “yes, we can” candidate in bed with this cartel? How can “we”, the people, make change if Obama’s money backers block our ability to be heard? Seven of the Obama campaign’s top 14 donors consisted of officers and employees of the same Wall Street firms charged time and again with looting the public and newly implicated in originating and/or bundling fraudulently made mortgages. These latest frauds have left thousands of children in some of our largest minority communities coming home from school to see eviction notices and foreclosure signs nailed to their front doors. Those scars will last a lifetime. These seven Wall Street firms are (in order of money given): Goldman Sachs, UBS AG, Lehman Brothers, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse. There is also a large hedge fund, Citadel Investment Group, which is a major source of fee income to Wall Street. There are five large corporate law firms that are also registered lobbyists; and one is a corporate law firm that is no longer a registered lobbyist but does legal work for Wall Street. The cumulative total of these 14 contributors through February 1, 2008, was $2,872,128, and we’re still in the primary season. CONTINUD HERE: <a href="http://subjectseek.com/articles/1936/1/Obamas-Money-Cartel/Page1.html" rel="nofollow">http://subjectseek.com/articles/1936/1/Obamas-Money-Cartel/Page1.html</a>]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exhyMMhdRTk" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exhyMMhdRTk</a> WE REALLY DON'T KNOW HIM JUST HIS ASSOCIATIONS. AND THAT'S HOW ONE IS JUDGED BY HIS FRIENDS WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT HIM.]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/JohnBoehner/2008/05/12/farm_bill_yet_another_example_of_democrats_broken_promises_on_earmark_reform" rel="nofollow">http://townhall.com/columnists/JohnBoehner/2008/05/12/farm_bill_yet_another_example_of_democrats_broken_promises_on_earmark_reform</a> There’s something fishy in the Farm Bill, and taxpayers should beware. It’s a $170 million earmark for the salmon industry, quietly tucked into the mammoth bill at the last minute by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA). I don’t know much about the salmon industry. Perhaps Pelosi and Thompson can explain why it was necessary to earmark $170 million of the taxpayers’ money with no public scrutiny or debate. The earmark wasn’t in the House-passed Farm Bill or the Senate version; it was simply “air-dropped” into the final bill in secret. The Farm Bill has often been abused by politicians as a slush fund for bizarre earmarks and wasteful spending projects, and the latest version up for a vote on the House floor this week is no different. During Farm Bill negotiations, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) slipped in a targeted earmark to help the Plum Creek Timber Company in Montana sell a parcel of land to the scandal-tarnished “environmental group,” the Nature Conservancy. The earmark allows the Nature Conservancy to claim a $250 million “tax refund” – even though, as a non-profit they don’t actually pay taxes. But instead of being open and honest about their intentions to spend $250 million in taxpayer money, Democrats attempted to keep it secret by crafting the provision to ensure the funds go only to a federal forest project of a certain size that also has fish. That’s right. Fish. In a forest. Forest fish. In the whole country, only one tract fits the bill – and it happens to be located in Senator Baucus’ home state of Montana. These examples serve as a perfect illustration of why taxpayers are fed up with a broken Washington. Despite the Speaker’s promises to “drain the swamp” at the beginning of the 110th Congress, it has become increasingly clear why Democrats are fighting as hard as they can to keep the earmark factory open on Capitol Hill. Not only have Democratic leaders have “showered” their newly-elected Members in pork in the attempt to help them win re-election, but their senior members – including the “King of Pork,” Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) – have made it clear that wasteful earmarks are here to stay. I’ve been an earmark reform advocate since my earliest days in Congress. When I first ran for the House, I told voters in my district that if they were looking for somebody to go to Washington and raid the federal treasury on their behalf, they should vote for someone else. For years, this personal stance made me something of an oddity in Congress. But as spending exploded in past Congresses, more and more people began to recognize that the out-of-control earmark process has become the defining symbol of how a broken Washington wastes taxpayers’ money. We did not make nearly enough progress on earmark reform during our time in the Majority, and though we began to implement meaningful reforms after I became Majority Leader in 2006, the fact is, our efforts were too little, too late. But the need to fundamentally reform the earmark process has taken on new urgency since Democrats, who now control Congress, seem intent on breaking nearly every promise they made to the American people. Earlier this year, my House Republican colleagues met to discuss how we should stop wasteful earmarks and reform how Congress spends taxpayer dollars. We decided that the best way forward was to ask Speaker Pelosi to join us in supporting a total freeze in earmarks while we a real discussion of how to reform the system. We also adopted a series of earmark reform standards immediately, one of which prohibits members from “air-dropping” earmarks into conference measures at the last minute. Ironically, Speaker Pelosi’s $170 million salmon earmark in the Farm Bill would have been prohibited under our Republican reforms. We have continued to make our case to the American people. Since the Speaker refused to work with us, we began forcing House votes on a bill written by three Republicans – Reps. Frank Wolf, Jack Kingston, and Zach Wamp – that would institute a total earmark freeze and keep the earmark factory shut down until reforms are in place to prevent wasteful pork-barreling. These votes put the Democrats on the record opposing earmark reform – including their newest Members who campaigned on the issue. We haven’t won yet, but we are making progress on reform. Since we began this effort, a growing number of my GOP colleagues have sworn off earmarks. Some Democrats have broken ranks with Speaker Pelosi on the issue as well. One of the Democrats’ most partisan chairmen, Henry Waxman of the Government Reform and Oversight Committee, admitted he agreed with Republican concerns about earmarks and announced a personal earmark moratorium. Two more senior Democrats, Reps. Ron Kind and Jim Cooper, have done the same. Washington is broken, and it will never be fixed until the earmarks stop and real reform begins. Sadly, the Farm Bill the House considers this week is yet another example of Congress putting secret earmarks and wasteful spending ahead of the interests of the American people. Speaker Pelosi has the power to shut down the earmark process at any time, yet she inserted a $170 million earmark into the Farm Bill at the last minute with no discussion or debate. Can anyone really claim this is the “most open, most honest, and most ethical Congress in history”? ]]>

<![CDATA[Best political ad I've seen -- and he's not even running! I'm talking about this one: <a href="http://www.rjchq.org/media/pdf/lieberman-somethingwrong.pdf" rel="nofollow">Something Wrong</a> Instead, consider the sleazy scummy crooks who are left in the presidential race: First Bitch Billary "Dennis" Rodman, Barry Hussein Osama, and John "Keating" McKook. ]]>

<![CDATA[The Government is invading every facet of our lives with cameras designed to take our pictures and force us to pay fines. There is now a proposal to check on our usage of seatbelts just like speedcams and redlight cams. <a href="http://www.SeatBeltCamera.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.SeatBeltCamera.com</a> How long are we going to accept this invasion?]]>

<![CDATA[Are you interested in Politics? Always wanted to volunteer for a political campaign? We have a need for a bilingual male and a bilingual female (english & spanish) that can volunteer their time to help by talking with people and providing translation from english-to-spanish and spanish-to-english for Miami and Miami beach residents/voters. Please reply to this email if you are a serious and wish to volunteer your time.]]>

<![CDATA[Yes we Can STOP OBAMA! Real Democrats Unite! <a href="http://liberalrapture.com/" rel="nofollow">http://liberalrapture.com/</a>]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/MichaelReagan/2008/05/08/the_other_obama" rel="nofollow">http://townhall.com/columnists/MichaelReagan/2008/05/08/the_other_obama</a> Here we go again. After being subjected to eight years of the collegial presidency of Bill and Hillary, when we were told that when we got Bill we got Hillary as a bonus, it looks as if we are facing another twofer: Barack and Michelle. Effete liberal Democrats are all but canonizing Barack Obama, who they see as one of their own -- cool, detached, impressively intellectual -- all in all what Pat Buchanan described as something fresh out of the faculty lounge, where lofty thoughts abound and contempt for the great unwashed is hardly concealed. That may be an apt description, implying that the Barack Obama who scorned ordinary folks in small towns who, he sneered, cling to such lower-class crutches as religion and guns, is above the distractions of the madding crowd. It does not, however, fit the other half of the new twofer, Michelle Obama, who far from being above it all is down there in the trenches acting like the flame-throwing liberal activist she is. To know her is to know what her husband really believes. As I have told my listeners of my radio show, if you want to understand how Barack Obama uncomplainingly sat through all those fire-breathing sermons without so much as stirring uncomfortably you need to understand the way husbands and wives practice their religion these days. The men in the pews for the most part are passive, while the wives tend to be passionate. In most cases husbands are there because their wives have dragged them there. Chances are that while the women sit in rapt attention to the words of their pastor, the husbands are snoozing, blissfully unaware of what the reverend is preaching. From what we’ve heard from Mrs. Obama she was paying close attention to the Reverend Mr. Wright, eating up his fiery words and probably enthusiastically nodding agreement as he blamed whitey for inventing AIDS to kill blacks as Barack dozed beside her, wondering when the Reverend Wright was going to shut up. Barack is now wide awake, and for the next seven months he’s going to continue to be faced with explaining why he remained silent while his pastor ranted in the pulpit. And insisting that during his presence in the pews the Reverend Wright never once acted like Reverend Wright just won’t wash. Poor Barack, how can he admit that he didn’t hear any of that rabble-rousing rhetoric because he slept through all 20 years of it? If you want to find the culprit here, turn to Michelle. I’m willing to bet she heard every word of the Reverend Wright’s inflammatory sermons, swallowed them whole, and seethed in anger over White America’s wretched mistreatment of her fellow black Americans as described by her pastor. Nowadays she’s playing the role of dutiful wife and doting mother, but every once in a while her anger surfaces as it did most famously when she told a group in Milwaukee, “For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is making a comeback.” Just what is hope in Michelle Obama’s lexicon? Why it’s nobody other than the man she shared a pew with for 20 years, her husband, who she brags “is one of the smartest people you will ever encounter who will deign [i.e. “lower himself”] to enter this messy thing called politics.” “We have lost the understanding that in a democracy, we have a mutual obligation to one another -- that we cannot measure the greatness of our society by the strongest and richest of us, but we have to measure our greatness by the least of these,” she says. “That we have to compromise and sacrifice for one another in order to get things done. That is why I am here, because Barack Obama is the only person in this who understands that. That before we can work on the problems, we have to fix our souls. Our souls are broken in this nation.” Barack Obama, our sole hope -- the cobbler who’ll mend our poor broken souls. With, of course, the help of his wife Michelle. ]]>

<![CDATA[Am I a racist if I don't vote for Obama? WHITE WOMEN VOTED FOR HILLARY AND WILL VOTE FOR MCCAIN THE POEPLE WITH EXPERIENCE.]]>

<![CDATA[Federal Jack is a user driven news source dedicated to exposing information and multimedia relating to the New World Order takeover of the United States and the rest of the free world.Over 30 hours of documentaries and over 1000 archived articles! Check it out now for over 40 hours of streaming video documentaries! It's time for all of us to wake up! This site has it all! <a href="http://federaljack.com/" rel="nofollow">http://federaljack.com/</a> <a href="http://s17.photobucket.com/albums/b51/redskum/?action=view&current=logo.gif" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b51/redskum/logo.gif" border="0"></a> <a href="http://s17.photobucket.com/albums/b51/redskum/?action=view&current=fedjackad.gif" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b51/redskum/fedjackad.gif" border="0"></a> Wake up!!!]]>

<![CDATA[May 8, 2008 Senator Barack Obama Obama for America P.O. Box 8102 Chicago, IL 60680 Dear Senator Obama, This has been an historic and exciting campaign. Millions of new voters have been brought into the process and their enthusiasm for the Democratic Party and the principles for which you and I have fought and continue to fight is unprecedented. One of the foremost principles of our party is that citizens be allowed to vote and that those votes be counted. That principle is not currently being applied to the nearly 2.5 million people who voted in primaries in Florida and Michigan. Whoever emerges as the Democratic nominee will be hamstrung in the general election if a fair and quick resolution is not reached that ensures that the voices of these voters are heard. Our commitment now to this goal could be the difference between winning and losing in November. I have consistently said that the votes cast in Florida and Michigan in January should be counted. We cannot ignore the fact that the people in those states took the time to be a part of this process and to make their preferences known. When efforts were untaken [sic] by leaders in those states to hold revotes to ensure that they had a voice in selecting our nominee, I supported those efforts. In Michigan, I supported a legislative effort to hold a revote that the Democratic National Committee said was in complete compliance with the party's rules. You did not support those efforts and your supporters in Michigan publically [sic] opposed them. In Florida a number of revote options were proposed. I am not aware of any that you supported. In 2000, the Republicans won an election by successfully opposing a fair counting of votes in Florida. As Democrats, we must reject any proposals that would do the same. Your commitment to the voters of these states must be clearly stated and your support for a fair and quick resolution must be clearly demonstrated. I am asking you to join me in working with representatives from Florida and Michigan and the Democratic National Committee to arrive at a solution that honors the votes of the millions of people who went to the polls in Florida and Michigan. It is not enough to simply seat their representatives at the convention in Denver. The people of these great states, like the people who have voted and are to vote in other states, must have a voice in selecting our party's nominee. Sincerely, Hillary Rodham Clinton]]>

<![CDATA[I'm upset, but not because the DNC is not going to seat our delegates, but because some yahoo's decided that they were going to buck the rules, as if rules did not apply to them, and THEY cost us the right to seat our delegates. WE ALL KNEW, going into our primary election, that when we were voting OUR VOTES DID NOT COUNT AND WERE SIMPLY SYMBOLIC WE ALL KNEW THIS!!! It is disengenous to say that we didn't, because our state was warned prior to the decision to change the date and we knew this when the DNC said that our delegates would not be seated if FL didn't follow the rules. Michigan is in the same boat. If anyone is going to give us any credibilty in November then what we should be concentrating on is this: 1. How are we going to beat McCain 2. How we are going to support the rightfully elected nominee 3. How are we going to ensure that this type of fiasco doesn't happen again It's time for us to behave like ADULTS instead of children having hissy fits]]>

<![CDATA["This election is not going to count for anything" So why is she now claiming it matters? Because she is losing? Sour grapes. I'm sorry our state decided to violate the DNC rules and screw us out of delegates, but I am smart enough to know that our votes WILL COUNT in Nov. We are a nation of Laws/Rules and we have to follow them if we expect others to In Nov - vote for Obama]]>

<![CDATA[ If you don't want obama as the nominee go to www.thepetitionsite.com/1/pledge-to-vote-against-obama-in-the=general-election We need to keep this country out of the African tribal Wars obama will get the USA into.]]>

<![CDATA[Who else is outraged that they're not seating our delegates? Hillary won fair and square but where's our voice in the process???? Who else wants to protest?]]>

<![CDATA[ truthers are fucking imbeciles incapable of understanding the truth, thats why they make up imaginary facts to back up their imaginary conspiracies. All truthers are fucking ignorant fools. Time to take your med tin foil hat boy.]]>

<![CDATA[Dear Americans, I hope that in the next 5 minutes you will read this with an open mind. Please imagine, just for five minutes, that we don't really KNOW who committed the terrorist attacks of 9/11? That the American people don't really know who really did it. In these next five minutes, please read the following information without bias. There is a mountain of information that the government and the corporate owned mass media do not tell you and don't want you to know that proves that 9/11 was a U.S. government job with al Qaeda playing a minor role. I offer those who read this entire message a free 9/11 movie on DVD. Please provide your mailing address and your commitment to watch this DVD within one week of when you receive it. I'll mail it to you. The best movie I have seen on 9/11 is called "9/11 Mysteries". It shows you the proof of explosives used in the WTC and Building 7. It also shows you the disinformation planted in the minds of the scared, horrified, shocked, and bewildered citizens of the United States starting on 9/11. We didn't come to believe the al Qaeda conspiracy theory by accident. It was put out from day 1 and repeated ad nauseum. al Qaeda was involved, but they could have never succeeded in the hijacking part without help from the U.S. military and intelligence agencies. Furthermore they could have never blown up the twin towers with or without anybody's help. That part was purely a U.S. government operation, because only the government had access to those buildings necessary to do weeks and weeks of preparation such as planting the explosives, thermite, and all the wiring and computer system. Watch this movie for free on line at www.911Mysteries.com You may ask, "If 9/11 was an inside job, then who really did it?" Great question. My answer is the secret government. The United States secret government. I have another movie, this one made by Bill Moyer in 1986, that tells all about the secret government. Once you see this you may be able to answer that questions, "Who did it?" Same deal; promise to watch it within 1 week, send your name and mailing address and I'll send it to you. You can make copies of it. Thomas Kean, Chairman of the 9/11 Commission, and Lee Hamilton, Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission, wrote a book last August called Without Precedent: Inside the 9/11 Commission. In that book Kean and Hamilton wrote that the 9/11 Commission was set up to fail by the White House and that the Pentagon lied to them. What did the Pentagon lie about? Trying to explain why they failed to intercept the hijacked airplanes on 9/11. The first plane was known to be hijacked at 8:24 a.m. and didn't hit the North Tower until 8:46 a.m. The second plane hit the South Tower at 9:03 a.m. An aircraft hit the Pentagon at 9:38 a.m. And yet all that time the U.S. military didn't intercept the planes. There was a conspiracy by the Pentagon to lie to the 9/11 Commission and therefore to the American people. The Pentagon lied to all of us. So say the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission. Why or how was the 9/11 Commission set up to fail? On August 21, 2006 Lee Hamilton did an interview with Canadian Broadcasting Corporation which you can read on line at this webpage: <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/911hamilton.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/911hamilton.html</a> Asked why he thought the 9/11 Commission was set up to fail, Hamilton said: " Hamilton: Well, for a number of reasons: Tom Kean and I were substitutes - Henry Kissinger and George Mitchell were the first choices; we got started late; we had a very short time frame - indeed, we had to get it extended; we did not have enough money - 3 million dollars to conduct an extensive investigation. We needed more, we got more, but it took us a while to get it. We had a lot of skeptics out there, who really did not want the Commission formed. Politicians don’t like somebody looking back to see if they made a mistake. The Commission had to report right, just a few days before the Democratic National Convention met, in other words, right in the middle of a political campaign. We had a lot of people strongly opposed to what we did. We had a lot of trouble getting access to documents and to people. We knew the history of commissions; the history of commissions were they.. nobody paid much attention to 'em. So there were all kinds of reasons we thought we were set up to fail." There was a conspiracy by the White House to set the 9/11 Commission up to fail. If you study the Joint Inquiry by the Senate and House Intelligence Committees in 2002, you'll find more of the same. There was a conspiracy by the Executive Branch to obstruct the Joint Inquiry's investigation. In particular the CIA, FBI, NSA, DOJ and NSC all obstructed the Joint Inquiry by failing to cooperate and failing to provide access to documents and people. You can find this in the Appendix to the Joint Inquiry report (it's at the end) called "Access Limitations Encountered by the Joint Inquiry", on pages 834-841 of the JI report. You can download the entire report at this government website: <a href="http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/911.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/911.html</a> See all the last page, page 858, a letter to the CIA saying they were denying the Joint Inquiry Staff access to a broad range of documents and information. See how many times they mention that the White House was behind it. There was a conspiracy by the White House and all these intelligence agencies to obstruct the Joint Inquiry's investigation into 9/11. On top of that, in January 2002 both Cheney and Bush called Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle to ask him to limit the scope of the Joint Inquiry's investigation to only intelligence agencies. Nothing else. And he did. That was out and out obstruction of the investigation, which should have been open to looking at everything. You can read that news story at this CNN webpage: <a href="http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/inv.terror.probe/" rel="nofollow">http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/inv.terror.probe/</a> Air defenses were missing in action on 9/11. Hijacked planes flew way off course after losing radio contact and turning off their transponders. We've never seen a video of what hit the Pentagon. Isn't it surprising? What will YOU conclude after seeing the facts? I have several 911 movies on DVD; Loose Change, 2nd edition, physics professor Steven E. Jones, and David Ray Griffin. You can find all of these online at google in their video section and probably on other sites too. But some people don't have high speed internet and can't watch movies online. For you, I offer the movies on disc. Loose Change, 2nd edition tells about the political background as well as eyewitness accounts of the explosions and many anomalies. Tons of film clips, historical background and visual evidence. Prof. Steven E. Jones talks about the physical evidence that the WTC was destroyed on purpose in a controlled demolition. Also Building 7. There are some short film clips. It's a talk from Utah Valley State College's Center for the Study of Ethics. His talk is titled "Scientific and Ethical Questions" about 911. David Ray Griffin talks about 9/11 and the American Empire. Very few film clips or photos, but lots of quotes from various government officials and political writers. Tell me your preference, if you have one. Thanks for caring enough to want to know the truth! You can watch many excellent 9/11 related documentaries for free at www.TeachPeace.com/movies ]]>

<![CDATA[someone had to so it! check it out at myspace.com/systemnoise]]>

<![CDATA[Ian Bernard, co-host of Free Talk Live radio (heard in south Florida on WFTL 850 radio) has written a brutal commentary about what's wrong with <a href="http://radiopages.net/radio/radiosworstenemy.html" rel="nofollow">the FCC</a>'s regulation of radio broadcasting: <blockquote> <a href="http://radiopages.net/radio/radiosworstenemy.html" rel="nofollow">The FCC: Radio's Worst Enemy ... Commentary by Ian Bernard, Co-Host of Free Talk Live</a> </blockquote> It's the latest addition to the <a href="http://radiopages.net/radio" rel="nofollow">Radio News</a> in the South Florida Radio Pages.]]>

<![CDATA[By Paul Mirengoff Barack Obama appears to have won a decisive victory in North Carolina. Moreover, it looks like Hillary Clinton's win in Indiana will not match her recent big wins in Ohio and Pennsylvania. In ordinary circumstances, Obama wouldn't have much to cheer about. Indeed, losing a state bordering on his home turf by any margin would be deemed a setback, particularly coming on the heels of several big defeats in key states. But given the present state of play, tonight's results will suit Obama just fine. Not only can he legitimately claim to have "stopped the bleeding," but his lead among non-superdelegates seems insurmountable. Simply put, Clinton's recent string of good results, as impressive as it is, seems to fall short of what is needed to convince superdelegates to reverse the overall result of the primaries and caucuses. What happens next? I assume that Clinton will come under great pressure to drop out. My guess is that she will resist that pressure until even deeper into the primary season, and probably until the end of it. Her hope must be that Obama will encounter a new set of serious problems. The current set, though it revived her campaign, has not been enough to put it over the top. ]]>

<![CDATA[CUBA SI HOW ABOUT FREEDOM NOW No Love for change under Communist Raul Castro The facts are that so what if the Communist government of Cuba lets the Cuban People have cell phones. Where are they going to get the money to pay for the new fancy toy? This is all a propaganda move by the Communist Cuban regime to make it appear they are giving freedom to the People to buy in this late date, remember, the whole world has mobile phones and E-mail on one’s own computer at home. The USA has been too kind to these dysfunctional Cuban Communists nuts that merely are playing the wait game to see how they can shine again after the defunct Soviet Union stop feeding them billions of kopeks to keep them alive and to keep annoying the USA government. If the USA government had any speck of dignity for human rights and really cared about protesting the Communist China regime it would stop its illegal and unnecessary wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and shortly will attack needlessly Iran. If the American Chaney Bush gang in the White House is unable and incompetent to win in the Middle East Wars, so-called “War on Terrorism,” which merely has been a pretense, and solely benefits the Israeli Zionist stealers of Arab lands. Then, how about a little military foray into Cuba merely 90 miles away from Florida, to eliminate the Communist’s dogs running the wonderful Island of Cuba? Clearly, Latin America takes a dim critical view of the failures of the government of the USA, which pretends to want democracy for Iraq and the world and has been fiddling for decades with a failed isolationist policies with the Cuban stink 90 miles away from our shores. Who do they think they are kidding? The old senile man Fidel Castro used the USA for decades and today is followed by a new despot the new big shot loud mouth Chavez in Venezuela. The USA government even with nuclear powered 10 aircraft carriers throughout the world has failed to convince EU our once upon a time allies to cover our backs in the Middle East. The EU is not convinced the Chaney Bush gang got it right in the Middle East. The USA merely becomes more dysfunctional. Wake up America, we are sliding down the road of national ruination, the Economy is about to cave in, gas fuel will probable hit close to $5.00 a gallon by Christmas, Housing is losing its equity value each day, foreclosures are rampant, employment is soaring, our jobs have been shipped to foreign lands by our smart boomer baby internationalists corporations under the rubric of the banner of economic Globalization. The dollar is worth less every day. Where will all this lead to? Do not expect the present wan-a-bees Presidential candidates to have the intellectual stature to resolve America’s dilemma created by our Liberals and Neo Conservatives. Unfortunately, no one else was on watch to do anything. The American People will have to inevitablly p[ay the price for all this mess. Hillary, Obama nor McCain will be the answer. They are merely adding to the problem. You know we are in deep trouble when the likes of the Rockefeller clan is protesting the mighty Exxon-Mobile Oil CEO and Chairman to make necessary changes. Our oil supplies are dwindling more every day. China, Russia and India are vying to be the Big shot in the world. Cuba appears to be a small problem but represents the nexus of the underlying failures of the USA governmental policy, that is, to have a grand strategic plan of a world view which encompasses the needs and winning the hearts and minds of the world’s people. Merely attempting to push upon different cultures by means of armed military force a democratic system of government is idiotic and suicidal in the long term. The question is wrong; it is not whether change will occur under Raul Castro of any meaningful real benefits to the People of Cuba. Under the Communists menace meaningful worthy change will solely come when US Marines land in Cuba and bring the opportunity of freedom to all the People in Cuba. Conquistadors1492@yahoo.com ]]>

<![CDATA[If The World Treated WW2 Like the War On Terrorism by John Hawkins If the world's liberals treated WW2 the same way they treat the "War on Terrorism" and the "conflict in the Middle East" this is what it would have been like... March 15/16, 1939: Nazis take Czechoslovakia. (Other nations give mild condemnation of Nazi attack but urge Czechoslovakia to be restrained in their response.) May 22, 1939: Nazis sign 'Pact of Steel' with Italy. (Other nations declare that Italy and Germany signing pact to help each other take over the world "not helpful to the peace process.") Aug 23, 1939: Nazis and Soviets sign Pact. (The world heralds signing of treaty as a sign of Hitler's good intentions. He wouldn't be signing a peace treaty if he wanted war would he?) Sept 1, 1939: Nazis invade Poland. (Other nations give mild condemnation of Nazi attack but urge rest of the world to be restrained in their response.) Sept 3, 1939: Britain, France, Australia and New Zealand declare war on Germany. (World condemns these nations for declaring war. This may cause unrest in Europe!) Oct, 1939: Nazis begin euthanasia on sick and disabled in Germany. (World mildly condemns this but declares that we must understand the actions of Germany in the context of the horribly unfair treaty of Versailles.) April 9, 1940: Nazis invade Denmark and Norway. (Other nations give mild condemnation of Nazi attack but urge rest of the world to be restrained in their response.) May 10, 1940: Nazis invade France, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands (Other nations give mild condemnation of Nazi attack but urge rest of the world to be restrained in their response.) June 14, 1940: Germans enter Paris. (Other nations give mild condemnation of Nazi attack but urge rest of the world to be restrained in their response.) July 10, 1940: Battle of Britain begins. (Other nations give mild condemnation of Nazi attack but urge Britain to be restrained lest they further the "cycle of violence.") Aug 23/24: First German air raids on Central London. (Other nations give mild condemnation of Nazi attack but urge Britain to be restrained lest they further the "cycle of violence.") Aug 25/26: First British air raid on Berlin. (World outraged at British attacks! Civilians may have been killed by irresponsible British attacks! World votes 453-4 to condemn Britain!) Sept 13, 1940: Italians invade Egypt (Other nations give mild condemnation of Italian attack but urge rest of the world to be restrained in their response.) Nov 20, 1940: Hungary joins the Axis Powers. (World excited! Hopes Hungary may now have the influence to help move the peace process forward. World publicly says they applaud the peace effort they are sure Hungary will soon begin!) Nov 23, 1940: Romania joins the Axis Powers. (World excited! Hopes Romania may now have the influence to help move the peace process forward. World publicly says they applaud the peace effort they are sure Romania will soon begin!) Dec 9/10: British begin a western desert offensive in North Africa against the Italians. (World outraged at British attacks! How will we ever have peace if Britain keeps attacking the other side?) March 11, 1941: President Roosevelt signs the Lend-Lease Act. (World criticizes Americans for selling weaponry to combatants! Announces they should only give food, blankets, and tents if they're going to get involved at all.) May 10/11, 1941: Heavy German bombing of London; British bomb Hamburg. (World is outraged by British attack on Hamburg! Civilians may of been injured! World condemns Britain in strongest terms and demands they stop bombing anywhere civilians might be!) June 14, 1941: United States freezes German and Italian assets in America. (Americans accused of "hating all Germans and Italians". 32 lawsuits filed.) June 22, 1941: Germany attacks Soviet Union as Operation Barbarossa begins. (World upset that treaty broken. They urge president Roosevelt to personally sit down with Stalin and Hitler to negotiate new treaty.) Sept 29, 1941: Nazis murder 33,771 Jews at Kiev (Other nations give mild condemnation of Nazi murders but urge rest of the world to be restrained in their response.) Dec 7, 1941: Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor (Other nations give mild condemnation of Japanese attack but urge United States to be restrained in their response.) Dec 8, 1941: United States and Britain declare war on Japan. (Other nations outraged! Accuse United States of furthering "cycle of violence". World says that Roosevelt calling Dec 7, 1941 "a date which will live in infamy" is "simplistic" and "not helpful.") Jan 20, 1942: SS Leader Heydrich holds the Wannsee Conference to coordinate the "Final Solution of the Jewish Question." (World declares plan to kill all Jews is "not helpful". Urges Hitler to declare that exterminating all Jews is wrong in German.) Aug 17, 1942: First all-American air attack in Europe. (World outraged at American aggression! Suggests putting Roosevelt up for war crimes trial!) Oct 18, 1942: Hitler orders the execution of all captured British commandos. (World takes occasion to remind "Allies" that German prisoners should get extra bratwurst and beer for "Oktoberfest".) Jan 14-24, 1943: Casablanca conference between Churchill and Roosevelt. During the conference, Roosevelt announces the war can end only with an unconditional German surrender (World outraged! Says that Churchill and Roosevelt must be willing to negotiate with Hitler now while they're being attacked!) May 13, 1943: German and Italian troops surrender in North Africa. (World demands that relief groups monitor the conditions for German and Italian troops to make sure they're not being "tortured.") July 25/26, 1943: Mussolini arrested and the Italian Fascist government falls; Marshal Pietro Badoglio takes over and negotiates with Allies (World fears change in Italian leadership will cause "more instability in Europe.") July 27/28, 1943: Allied air raid causes a firestorm in Hamburg. (World condemns "Allies" raid on Hamburg. Votes 454-2 to order all allied forces to withdraw to their own countries and begin negotiating for peace.) Jan 6, 1944: Soviet troops advance into Poland. (World condemns Soviet aggression! Demands Soviets stop their "brutal oppression.") March 18, 1944: British drop 3000 tons of bombs during an air raid on Hamburg, Germany. (World outraged! Citizens of Hamburg "under siege"! World suggests putting troops inbetween combatants in effort to insure a cease fire.) June 6, 1944: D-Day landings. (World goes nuts! This outrageous aggression by the Allies must not stand!) June 13, 1944: First German V-1 rocket attack on Britain. (Other nations give mild condemnation of Nazi attack but urge rest of the world to be restrained in their response.) Sept 1-4, 1944: Verdun, Dieppe, Artois, Rouen, Abbeville, Antwerp and Brussels liberated by Allies. (World urges Allies to negotiate with Axis for peace! World has moment of silence for the German people who may of been harmed in attacks!) Dec 17, 1944: Waffen SS murder 81 U.S. POWs at Malmedy. (World chides Allies that they had better not treat their prisoners like that!) Dec 26, 1944: Patton relieves Bastogne. (World outraged! Patton is a "hawk". The fact that the Americans put a man like that in charge of their military shows "they're not serious about peace.") Feb 13/14, 1945: Dresden is destroyed by a firestorm after Allied bombing raids. (World calls for all allied leaders to be put up for war crimes trial. World expresses "shock and dismay" at Allies "complete disregard" for civilians!) March 6, 1945: Last German offensive of the war begins to defend oil fields in Hungary. (World comments "Who could blame them after all those allied attacks? Wouldn't you do the same thing in their place?" April 1, 1945: U.S. troops encircle Germans in the Ruhr(World demands US allow German troops a way out rather than attack.) April 16, 1945: Soviet troops begin their final attack on Berlin; Americans enter Nuremberg. (World demands that Hitler not be overthrown! He is the elected leader of the German people!) April 30, 1945: Adolf Hitler commits suicide. (World now very upset! Fears someone "worse than Hitler" may now take his place!) May 7, 1945: Unconditional surrender of all German forces to Allies. (World upset and concerned about fate of German people. Sends relief groups in to make sure Germans not mistreated!) June 5, 1945: Allies divide up Germany and Berlin and take over the government. (World outraged! Demands that the "occupation of Germany" end immediately) Aug 6, 1945: First atomic bomb dropped, on Hiroshima, Japan. (World demands Truman be tried for war crimes. Protestors and peaceniks from across the world flock to Japan to act as human shields) Aug 9, 1945: Second atomic bomb dropped, on Nagasaki, Japan. (World tells US that dropping atomic bombs will only "create more martyrs" and will encourage more Japanese than ever to turn against the Allies!) Aug 14, 1945: Japanese agree to unconditional surrender. (World sincerely hopes the citizens on the Axis nations can forgive the Allies for their uncalled for aggression, imperialism, and oppression in this war.) ]]>

<![CDATA[Who do we have to blame for the fact that we find ourselves at the mercy of OPEC and, now the terrorists? Well, a good chunk of the blame goes to the Democrats. Because, were it not for their pandering to leftist environmental constituents, we could be pumping an amount of oil not much less that what we are now begging the Saudi's to ship to us out of the Arctic National Wildlife Range. But of course Democrats would rather the Bush Administration be in the position of imploring (a diplomatic word for begging) OPEC to not harm our economic recovery with production cutbacks that will raise the price of gas higher than it already is while the Democrats complain that Bush isn't doing enough about high oil prices. The fact that OPEC and terrorism have us over a barrel kind of blows away that tired old Democrat 'no blood for oil' mantra that liberals have been beating to death since before the Iraq part of the War on Terror began and in fact since the last war in Iraq some 14 years ago. The truth is it's total BS. Let's face it: We're the most powerful nation on the face of the earth, bar none. If we were really the greedy bastards the liberals say we are, we'd just go in, occupy the countries and take their oil. Truth is we are not only the most powerful nation on the face of the earth and the most freedom-loving, but also the most giving and compassionate. And not only have we freed the Iraqis from a murderous tyrant, we're helping them get their oil fields up and running again so they can produce oil to sell to us to feed our increasing demand for oil that the Democrats have rendered us unable to mediate at least partially with domestic oil. ]]>

<![CDATA[Ian Bernard, Co-Host of Free Talk Live (heard locally on WFTL) has written a brutal commentary about what's wrong with <a href="http://radiopages.net/radio/radiosworstenemy.html" rel="nofollow">the FCC</a>'s regulation of radio: <blockquote> <a href="http://radiopages.net/radio/radiosworstenemy.html" rel="nofollow">The FCC: Radio's Worst Enemy ... Commentary by Ian Bernard, Co-Host of Free Talk Live</a> </blockquote> It's the latest addition to the <a href="http://radiopages.net/radio" rel="nofollow">South Florida Radio Pages</a>.]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="www.yoursopolitical.com" rel="nofollow">YourSoPolitical</a> We are the first political forum dedicated to getting your thoughts to the people who matter. Feel free to share your opinions on national and international leaders, current events, humanitarian causes, and democracy. <a href="www.yoursopolitical.com" rel="nofollow">YourSoPolitical</a>]]>

<![CDATA[You must be real proud to be a part of the USA's demise for putting in the biggest crooks in America's (and world's) history. And you Christian sheep following the wolf over the cliff with your anti-gay and abortion crap. Let's save the unborn, but to hell with the living.....you jerks are worst than any terrorist group]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/AnnCoulter/2008/04/30/obama_campaign_gives_up_on_finding_mr_wright" rel="nofollow">http://townhall.com/columnists/AnnCoulter/2008/04/30/obama_campaign_gives_up_on_finding_mr_wright</a> Whew! I'm certainly glad to hear the "snippets" from Rev. Jeremiah Wright's sermons "in context." In the famous B. Hussein Obama speech that sent a tingle down Chris Matthews' leg, Obama dismissed the clips of Rev. Wright being played on TV as mere "snippets." He claimed the media were highlighting Wright's "most offensive words," complaining that they had been played endlessly, as if repetition were the problem with the statement: "GOD DAMN AMERICA!" It's absolutely unheard of to repeat passages from famous speeches. In fact, I have a dream that we will not do that. Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask that the media stop replaying "snippets." All we have to fear is repetition itself, because we are the people we've been waiting for to tear down that wall of endless repetition. So, like I said: Whew. At last Rev. Wright's "snippets" have been put in a healing context. In two speeches and one uxorious interview with PBS' Bill Moyers over the past few days, Rev. Wright had plenty of time to lay out the lush analytical context of his remarks. In his speech to the National Press Club on Monday, for example, Wright described America as a country of "segregation, Jim Crow, lynching and the separate-but-equal fantasy." Then he ran outside to feed more quarters into the meter where his time machine was parked. Wright described this as a country that supported the "racist regime of South Africa" and "the Contras, who were killing the peasants and the Miskito Indians in those two countries" -- as opposed to the Sandinistas, who were equal-opportunity murderers with a more diverse group of victims. He said this is a country that "cuts food stamps and spends billions fighting in an unjust war in Iraq," neglecting to add that before you can cut the food stamp program, you must have a country that has a food stamp program. He said we are a country that sent "over 4,000 American boys and girls of every race to die over a lie." And Wright said it is a country "where I can worship God on Sunday morning wearing a black clergy robe and kill others on Sunday evening wearing a white Klan robe." (Unless, like me, you do all your Klan-related murdering on "casual Fridays.") And, to listen to Wright, those were the "U.S. of KKK A.'s" good points! (Is it just me, or does Rev. Wright sound kind of bitter these days? I sure hope he doesn't have a gun.) He clarified his Sept. 16, 2001, sermon, in which he said that on 9/11 "America's chickens are coming home to roost" by saying: "You cannot do terrorism on other people and expect it never to come back on you." I'm glad to get the full context on that because I had thought he was talking about chicken farming. Actually, that's pretty much the way I took it even when presented as a "snippet." Rev. Wright also put into context his church giving an award to fellow Obama supporter Louis Farrakhan by saying: "He is one of the most important voices in the 20th and 21st century. That's what I think about him. ... I am not going to put down Louis Farrakhan." Why did Rev. Wright's supporters think it would be helpful to hear longer versions of the "snippets"? Curiously, Rev. Wright complained that "everybody wants to paint me as if I'm anti-Semitic because of what Louis Farrakhan said 20 years ago" -- especially those damn East Coast, money-grubbing Jews, he carelessly added. This from a man whose entire oeuvre is based on reveling in what happened in this country 250 years ago. Rev. Wright clarified his statement, "GOD DAMN AMERICA!" by explaining: "God doesn't bless everything. God condemns something -- and d-e-m-n, 'demn,' is where we get the word 'damn.' God damns some practices." Well, that changes the meaning entirely. One begins to suspect that the Clintons, flush with those megamillions they got from selling their previous tenancy at the White House, have put the reverend on staff. I believe this used to be called "walking around money." Obama said the Rev. Wright he heard defending himself on Monday was not the Rev. Wright he met 20 years ago. This is the political equivalent of the "It's not you, it's me" speech. He might just as well have said, "I love Rev. Wright. I'm just not in love with him anymore. Hey, can I have my CDs back?" If it takes Obama 20 years to notice that his pastor is a traitorous, racist nut-job, it will probably take him his full term of office to realize that the U.S. has been invaded and subdued by al-Qaida. Let's just hope President Obama pays closer attention during national security briefings than he did during 20 years of the Rev. Wright's church services. The only good news for the Obama campaign this week is that Obama admitted that his relationship with Rev. Wright is "a legitimate political issue," which at least makes him smarter than John McCain, who just last week denounced the North Carolina Republicans for an ad mentioning Obama's raving lunatic pastor. ]]>

<![CDATA[Free Mumia Abu Jamal......He is Innocent .-. Book.Smear Exposed .<a href="http://www.partisandefense.org/pubs/articles/factsheet1231.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.partisandefense.org/pubs/articles/factsheet1231.html</a> ]]>

<![CDATA[great website for all supporters... Go Hillary! www.hillaryclinton.com]]>

<![CDATA[Here's a newspaper article about Randi Rhodes early in her career (after WIOD), when she replaced G. Gordon Liddy at WJNO 13 years ago -- years before Air America. <a href="http://www.radiopages.net/radio/randirhodes1995.html" rel="nofollow">Randi Rhodes</a>]]>

<![CDATA[He is a warehouse forklift operator doing great... Vote for McCain so he can keep making big bucks... also his room and meals are paid too... Thanks Republicans! It's great that you're not screwing EVERYONE... if you are not inside you are f#cked.... GET THE HELL OUT OF DC....OR ELSE!!!!!!!!]]>

<![CDATA[New 527 looking for volunteers and stories. Current US policy does not allow AMerican Citizens to travel to Cuba. Those who have family there can go only 1 time every 3 years (as per US regulations)to visit family (defined as mother, father, Son or daughter) even in the cases of serious illness or impending death. We are looking to restore real family values by giving America Citizens to visit family in Cuba when ever and where ever. Do you have a story about being kept from family in Cuba? we would love to hear it. We can travel to China and Vietnam, why not cuba? Stop an imorral stance on family. Write us today.]]>

<![CDATA[Petition: <a href="http://www.healthcare-now.org/petition.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.healthcare-now.org/petition.php</a> Whereas: We spend over $2 trillion for healthcare in the US, yet 50 million are still not covered and another 50 million are being denied care by their insurance companies; Whereas: Whereas the healthcare coverage in the United States is ranked #37 in the world by the World Health Organization and yet we spend almost twice as much as any other country, enough to cover everybody with excellent comprehensive healthcare; Whereas: A bill has been proposed in Congress, HR-676, non-profit Medicare for All, that outlines a national health care program that will provide guaranteed choice, quality affordable health care and prescription drugs to everyone in the country; Whereas: Over 15,000 doctors have signed on in favor of this plan, including two former U.S. Surgeons General; Whereas: Under this proposed plan, we can pay for a comprehensive national health care program with the same money we are now spending by removing insurance companies -- and cover every single person in the United States; And Whereas: The bill provides money for retraining and giving priority to those whose jobs as administrators in the insurance industry would be lost as a result of this shift; Be it Resolved That: We call on our members of Congress to pass HR 676, non-profit Medicare for All, so our people and our nation can have the excellent health care system we deserve. Health care is a human right, and we call on our members of Congress to recognize that right.]]>

<![CDATA[At the close of the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein was denounced as a ferocious villain for ordering his retreating troops to destroy Kuwaiti oil fields, clotting the air with poisonous clouds of black smoke and saturating the ground with swamps of crude. It was justly called an environmental war crime. But months of bombing of Iraq by US and British planes and cruise missiles has left behind an even more deadly and insidious legacy: tons of shell casings, bullets and bomb fragments laced with depleted uranium. In all, the US hit Iraqi targets with more than 970 radioactive bombs and missiles. More than 10 years later, the health consequences from this radioactive bombing campaign are beginning to come into focus. And they are dire, indeed. Iraqi physicians call it "the white death"-leukemia. Since 1990, the incident rate of leukemia in Iraq has grown by more than 600 percent. The situation is compounded by Iraq's forced isolations and the sadistic sanctions regime, recently described by UN secretary general Kofi Annan as "a humanitarian crisis", that makes detection and treatment of the cancers all the more difficult. "We have proof of traces of DU in samples taken for analysis and that is really bad for those who assert that cancer cases have grown for other reasons," says Dr. Umid Mubarak, Iraq's health minister. Mubarak contends that the US's fear of facing the health and environmental consequences of its DU bombing campaign is partly behind its failure to follow through on its commitments under a deal allowing Iraq to sell some of its vast oil reserves in return for food and medical supplies. "The desert dust carries death," said Dr. Jawad Al-Ali, an oncologist and member England's Royal Society of Physicians. "Our studies indicate that more than forty percent of the population around Basra will get cancer. We are living through another Hiroshima." continued here: <a href="http://subjectseek.com/articles/1440/1/DU-Cancer-as-a-Weapon/Page1.html" rel="nofollow">http://subjectseek.com/articles/1440/1/DU-Cancer-as-a-Weapon/Page1.html</a>]]>

<![CDATA[Yes it is true! look at his web site. ]]>

<![CDATA[Following is a link to an informative newspaper article about Randi Rhodes early in her career (after WIOD), when she replaced G. Gordon Liddy at WJNO 13 years ago. Years before Air America. <a href="http://www.radiopages.net/radio/randirhodes1995.html" rel="nofollow">Randi Rhodes</a>]]>

<![CDATA[ Check out/support/vote: <a href="http://obamain30seconds.org/vote/?v=view-1926-wIFaC9" rel="nofollow">http://obamain30seconds.org/vote/?v=view-1926-wIFaC9</a> Promotional video: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFBc8k_slQ4" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFBc8k_slQ4</a>]]>

<![CDATA[ <a href="http://www.brainspank.org" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://www.brainspank.org/images/brainspank_webbanner.jpg" border="0"></a> Bookmark it!]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="https://128bit.clickandpledge.com/default.aspx?ID=15229&cid=US&a=" rel="nofollow"><img border="0" src="http://www.mcgillis4clerk.com/contribute%20now%202008.jpg"> <a href="http://www.mcgillis4clerk.com/" rel="nofollow"><img border="0" src="http://www.mcgillis4clerk.com/myspace%20flyer%20comments%20black%20300Ddpi.jpg"> <a href="https://128bit.clickandpledge.com/default.aspx?ID=15229&cid=US&a=" rel="nofollow"><img border="0" src="http://www.mcgillis4clerk.com/contribute%20now%202008.jpg"> <a href="https://128bit.clickandpledge.com/default.aspx?ID=15229&cid=US&a=" rel="nofollow"><img border="0" src="http://www.mcgillis4clerk.com/polital%20notice%20logo%202008.jpg"> <a href="http://mipagina.univision.com/mcgillis4clerk" rel="nofollow"><img border="0" src="http://www.mcgillis4clerk.com/univision.gif"> <a href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/Darrin-E-McGillis/8576808083?ref=share" rel="nofollow"><img border="0" src="http://www.mcgillis4clerk.com/VARIOUS%20LINK%20PICS%202007%20(6).gif"> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/McGillis4Clerk" rel="nofollow"><img border="0" src="http://www.mcgillis4clerk.com/VARIOUS%20LINK%20PICS%202007%20(5).gif"> ]]>

<![CDATA[The History of White Patriotism Videos: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HW5cyyTGk8Q&feature=related" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HW5cyyTGk8Q&feature=related</a> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jmLVRyaVG0&NR=1" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jmLVRyaVG0&NR=1</a> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb920QFiuC4" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb920QFiuC4</a> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-7Of_ZhzuA&feature=related" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-7Of_ZhzuA&feature=related</a> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn_42PGV8mc&feature=related" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn_42PGV8mc&feature=related</a> Links: <a href="http://www.mwkkkk.com/firstpage.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.mwkkkk.com/firstpage.htm</a> <a href="http://www.unskkkk.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.unskkkk.com/</a> <a href="http://www.bloodandhonour.com/index.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.bloodandhonour.com/index.php</a> <a href="http://www.bloodandhonour-usa.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.bloodandhonour-usa.com/</a> <a href="http://cdbaby.com/cd/johnnyrebel" rel="nofollow">http://cdbaby.com/cd/johnnyrebel</a> <a href="http://www.knightskkk.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.knightskkk.com/</a> <a href="http://www.kkkk.net/" rel="nofollow">http://www.kkkk.net/</a> <a href="http://www.kukluxklan.bz/" rel="nofollow">http://www.kukluxklan.bz/</a> <a href="http://naawpflch.org/" rel="nofollow">http://naawpflch.org/</a> <a href="http://www.kkk.bz/" rel="nofollow">http://www.kkk.bz/</a> <a href="http://tktie.org/" rel="nofollow">http://tktie.org/</a> <a href="http://www.whitehonor.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.whitehonor.com/</a> <a href="http://officialprussianblue.net/" rel="nofollow">http://officialprussianblue.net/</a> <a href="http://www.whitecivilrights.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.whitecivilrights.com/</a> <a href="http://www.whiterevolution.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.whiterevolution.com/</a> <a href="http://www.ecwu.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.ecwu.org/</a> <a href="http://www.keystoneunited.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.keystoneunited.com</a> New Jersey <a href="http://www.leagueap.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.leagueap.org</a> Midwest <a href="http://www.numbersusa.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.numbersusa.com</a> <a href="http://www.volksfrontinternational.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.volksfrontinternational.com</a> <a href="http://www.ncoal.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.ncoal.com</a> <a href="http://www.cofcc.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.cofcc.org</a> <a href="http://www.whiterevolution.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.whiterevolution.com</a> General Forums <a href="http://www.StormFront.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.StormFront.org</a> <a href="http://www.vnnforum.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.vnnforum.com</a> <a href="http://www.TheAlthing.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.TheAlthing.com</a> <a href="http://www.Enationalist.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.Enationalist.com</a> Music <a href="http://www.prussianblue.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.prussianblue.net</a> &<a href="http://www.prussianbluefan.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.prussianbluefan.blogspot.com</a> <a href="http://www.label56.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.label56.com</a> <a href="http://www.tightrope.cc" rel="nofollow">http://www.tightrope.cc</a> <a href="http://www.finalstandrecords.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.finalstandrecords.com</a> <a href="http://www.freeyourmindproductions.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.freeyourmindproductions.com</a> Internet Radio <a href="http://www.reasonradionetwork.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.reasonradionetwork.com</a> <a href="http://www.community.loudcity.com/stations/my-new-station-id-1239" rel="nofollow">http://www.community.loudcity.com/stations/my-new-station-id-1239</a> <a href="http://www.radiowhite.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.radiowhite.com</a> Books <a href="http://www.noontidepress.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.noontidepress.com</a> Flags & Clothing <a href="http://www.aryanwear.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.aryanwear.com</a> <a href="http://www.patriotic-flags.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.patriotic-flags.com</a> News <a href="http://www.newsnet14.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.newsnet14.com</a> <a href="http://www.AmRen.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.AmRen.com</a> <a href="http://www.vdare.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.vdare.com</a> <a href="http://www.theoccidentalobserver.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.theoccidentalobserver.com</a> <a href="http://www.overthrow.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.overthrow.com</a> <a href="http://www.davidduke.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.davidduke.com</a> <a href="http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com</a> <a href="http://www.newnation.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.newnation.org</a> Social Networking <a href="http://www.newsaxon.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.newsaxon.com</a> <a href="http://www.eurspace.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.eurspace.com</a> Gaming <a href="http://www.leagueoftheright.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.leagueoftheright.net</a> Historical <a href="http://www.ihr.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.ihr.org</a> Academic Journals <a href="http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com</a> General Information <a href="http://www.solargeneral.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.solargeneral.com</a> <a href="http://www.mexicovacationawareness.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.mexicovacationawareness.com</a> miami]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=C670258A-8B93-4935-86B0-F9E3F9C404FD" rel="nofollow">http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=C670258A-8B93-4935-86B0-F9E3F9C404FD</a> This time there were no peace marches. There was no MoveOn.org ad in the New York Times calling the commander of coalition forces in Iraq "General Betray Us." There was no suggestion from Senator Hillary Clinton that crediting the commander's report on military progress in Iraq required the "willing suspension of disbelief." There were no votes on cutting off funds for the war. No expectation of passing a timetable for withdrawal. All of which happened last time, when General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker first reported to Congress in September 2007 on the Bush administration's "surge" policy. But not this time. When Petraeus and Crocker returned to Washington last week, Congress was stymied. Subdued. Cowed. And the congressmen's "frustration," reported the Washington Post, "appeared to stem from a realization that there was little they could do to affect policy in the administration's final nine months." The Post was right. Listening to congressmen meander through various lines of questioning over the two days of hearings, one detected a certain resignation to the idea that U.S. forces will remain in Iraq in substantial numbers at least through January 2009 and possibly well into the future. Why the shift from an emboldened antiwar movement in 2007 to a despondent one in 2008? Democrats in Congress would say the reason is structural. They don't have the votes to overcome GOP filibusters or override presidential vetoes of antiwar legislation. But they do not say why this is the case. The reason they do not have the votes is the success of the surge. If the surge had not forced Al Qaeda in Iraq into retreat, stanched the ethnosectarian conflict in Baghdad and surrounding provinces, and created the tenuous sense of security that has accompanied and encouraged ground-up reconciliation and national political progress, GOP support for the war would have collapsed. The Democrats would have had the votes to force a withdrawal. And Bush would have been unable to stop the rush to the exits. That didn't happen. The surge's success so far has defanged the antiwar movement--for the moment. Petraeus and Crocker have until January 20, 2009, to build on the recent gains. Their plan, endorsed by President Bush, is to withdraw the surge troops by July, then to consolidate and take stock, with any further drawdown of the remaining force of about 140,000 dependent on conditions on the ground. If John McCain is elected president, Petraeus and Crocker will probably have the backing of the new administration. But no matter who is elected in November, a large-scale American military and economic commitment to Iraq may outlast the Bush presidency. As former Bush adviser Peter Feaver noted in Commentary, Iraq may not look the same to a Democratic president in the Oval Office as it did to a candidate on "the stage of a college gymnasium filled with delirious Democratic primary voters." In this scenario, a President Obama or a President Clinton assumes office, listens to the Joint Chiefs and the director of national intelligence, and--presto!--realizes that despite what was said on the trail, there is no easy way out of Iraq. For strategic and security reasons the American presence must continue for some time. Then the new president recalibrates plans for withdrawal, perhaps abandoning them altogether, and in a televised address from the Oval Office, coolly explains to the country that the difficult realities of a dangerous world require the commander in chief to renege on campaign promises of an orderly and timely "redeployment" from Iraq. Fat chance. Some wishful thinkers may not believe the Democratic presidential candidates are serious. They may think that these savvy pols are playing to an antiwar primary electorate and will become more "responsible" if one of them becomes president. They misunderstand the Democrats. For most Democrats, leaving Iraq as soon as possible is the responsible course of action. Hence Hillary Clinton's statement during the Petraeus hearings last week: "I think it could be fair to say that it might well be irresponsible to continue the policy that has not produced the results that have been promised time and time again." Would a President Clinton suddenly decide otherwise? Would she argue that U.S. security requires a large American force to remain in Iraq indefinitely? Do pigs fly? Yes, both Obama and Clinton have been vague about how they plan to "end" the war. And Obama advisers have been in the news backtracking from promises to end the war swiftly (Samantha Power) or writing memos envisioning tens of thousands of Americans in Iraq through 2010 (Colin Kahl of the Center for a New American Security). But these are distractions. What matters is that both Obama and Clinton promise to end the war regardless of conditions on the ground. In a March 19 speech in North Carolina, Obama said that as president he will "immediately begin" to "remove our troops from Iraq" at the rate of one to two combat brigades "each month." He then promises to "remove all of them in 16 months" while leaving "enough troops" to "guard our embassy and diplomats and a counterterrorism force to strike al Qaeda if it forms a base that the Iraqis cannot destroy." At George Washington University in February, Clinton promised to begin removing troops "within 60 days" of taking office, also at a rate of one to two brigades a month. So far Clinton has resisted making a promise to have all U.S. troops out by a date certain. But that is simply to allow her room to maneuver; she understands that a date certain is a promise to voters she may be unable to keep. Her main promise, like Obama's, is to leave Iraq. Which is a promise either one must keep. They must keep it because (a) each believes it's the right thing to do and (b) any Democrat who is elected will face unrelenting pressure to withdraw. This pressure will take two forms. The first is institutional. The Pentagon brass believe the Iraq war has stretched U.S. forces to the breaking point. They already think the Bush administration is drawing down our troops too slowly. So they are unlikely to resist an Obama or Clinton administration's plans to withdraw more rapidly. Meanwhile, in 2009 Democrats will retain control of Congress, perhaps with expanded majorities in both chambers. The Democratic caucus's antiwar bonafides are well established. Senate leader Harry Reid declared the war "lost" in April 2007, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi has long held that Iraq is a "problem" to be "solved" by withdrawal. You can be sure that the Democratic Congress will try to legislate timetables or reduce funds for combat next year, especially if the new president is a Democrat. Would a President Obama or Clinton veto a bill calling for withdrawal? Would either lobby against legislation enacting political timelines for "strategic redeployment" from Iraq? Not likely. The second form of pressure will be political. The election of a Democratic president will be interpreted as a mandate to end the war. The pro-withdrawal faction will have energy and momentum. Failure to follow through will risk a collapse in public support. This happened to the Democratic Congress elected in 2006, which promised to end the war in Iraq and saw its approval ratings sink when it failed to do so. A president requires public approval in order to enact his policy agenda. Obama or Clinton will not want to repeat Congress's folly. So the drawdown will begin. One hopes--one prays--that by January 2009 Iraq will have reached a point where security gains can be maintained with fewer U.S. troops. But that may not be the case. It may be that security will deteriorate as Americans leave, that militias will rearm, and Al Qaeda in Iraq will regroup as the central government fumbles to quell a situation spiraling out of control. Violence may spike. Ethnosectarian conflict may flare. The Sunnis may walk out of the government. The chaos may spread. What then? Will a President Obama or Clinton halt the withdrawals--or, more likely, accelerate them? After all, Obama and Clinton have long argued that the United States should not "referee" Iraq's "civil war." Petraeus and Crocker's achievements in Iraq notwithstanding, Obama and Clinton have promised to leave. Either one, if elected, will most likely follow through. And it won't be pretty. ]]>

<![CDATA[This is the type of posting on political boards around the country by the obama campaign: "..., those states do not and will not count... There is no way in hell the party will allow those votes to count" Are you angry that your primary votes were not counted by the Democratic party? Send them a message, vote Republican in November!]]>

<![CDATA[*** CLINTON-OBAMA: Why Choose If You Can Combine!!! AT <a href="http://www.carlosaoliveira.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.theperfectcombination.com</a> aewgi fae gfuawgwa liuewaeig luaewgiul aewfgliu aewwae guilfwaef iuwgefwaieg luwaeguilfewafg iuwaefwageiul awegiulfweafg iuweafgwe iulafweagliuweagilu aweguiaew lfweaguilweag iufweafgwe iulafwaeguilfaewgiulfweagiufwaefg uilaweaweguilfwaegliu fweaguil aewwaeuiglawegliufweag uilawe fuilgawawgeliuaewgiulfwgiulagilu]]>

<![CDATA[How often are you going to keep posting this same drivel?]]>

<![CDATA[I'm looking for other animal activists/lovers/liberators to rally, liberate and educate South Florida. I noticed PETA does not have a street team or activist group in Miami or any surrounding cities. I also didn't see much in the way of other groups serving the same purpose. I truly believe in this cause whole heartedly and seeking people who feel the same. Radical ideas are welcome and needed. The more people, the more minds, the more power. I have contacted PETA for materials and directional help though I would love to form our own organization as well. People of all kinds needed, wanted and welcome. Let's make some noise and make some changes.]]>

<![CDATA[Hi, the title explains all. The well-known group Iraq Veterans Against War will be speaking as well as my friends from the band Anti-Flag (#2 and Pat). I have more speakers, but their not known very well. All details are on the flyer. If you have any questions e-mail me at sum41teen1234@aol.com or via myspace www.myspace.com/hiddenninjah]]>

<![CDATA[ Nanny / Au Pair to live in your home , watch your children , do some housekeeping and wash. Good driver, loves to swim and is from Germany. Available very soon and for next 6 months to year and a half . Would like to watch school age child (ren ) Is willing to work some weekends and most weekends as well as during the day. Cost is 300 dollars for up to 45 hours of care each week based on your schedule . ]]>

<![CDATA[You are a fucking idiot. You are the reason Abortion should always be legal. Mothers like yours should always think about sticking a coat hanger up their cunt so idiots like you don't have a chance to grow up and become adults and bear more fucking idiots. This is not Bushes war. The fucking Democratic Congress supports this war every time they allow our tax dollars to be spent on it. Don't waste our fucking time spewing your fucking stupidity and blaming Bush. He has nothing to due with it. Your cunt Hilary voted for it and your niggar Obama voted to hep support it with our tax dollars.]]>

<![CDATA[Dear friends and allies in the justice and peace movement: In light of the US drive toward war with Iraq and the urgency of preventing that disaster and somehow derailing this Bush/Cheney death train, I would like to call to your attention some recent findings by Thomas Nagy, Professor of Expert Systems at George Washington University, concerning U.S. Air Force Doctrine Document 2-1.2, "Strategic Attack." And I'm asking you to help in spreading the word about the horrific implications of this document concerning US war crimes (those already committed and about to be committed in the next war against Iraq if the policies in this document are followed now as they were in 1991). The “Strategic Attack, United States Air Force, Air Force Doctrine Document 2-1.2, 20 May 1998” document [was] posted on the U.S. Air Force Doctrines documents site, <a href="http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/pubs/speclist.asp?puborg=AFDC&series=dd." rel="nofollow">http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/pubs/speclist.asp?puborg=AFDC&series=dd.</a> [November 2005: See local archived PDF copy --ratitor] Nagy called this document to my attention, and believes (as I do) that the content, if widely known, could and should be used to argue for revoking the blank check given to President Bush regarding the the use of force against Iraq. This is because the document appears to be documentary evidence from the USAF regarding what appears to be an open admission and approval of the war crime of destroying or rendering useless items essential to the survival of civilian populations. This is specifically banned by Protocol Additional #1 of the Geneva Conventions, Article 54, par. 2 -- and is an illegal action under international law and a war crime. Article 54. Protection of objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as food-stuffs, agricultural areas for the production of food-stuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works, for the specific purpose of denying them for their sustenance value to the civilian population or to the adverse Party, whatever the motive, whether in order to starve out civilians, to cause them to move away, or for any other motive. Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977 <a href="http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e636b/f6c8b9fee14a77fdc125641e0052b079?OpenDocument" rel="nofollow">http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e636b/f6c8b9fee14a77fdc125641e0052b079?OpenDocument</a> Nagy's work and research in this area has uncovered important, shocking findings in the past, as you may already know. Nagy previously obtained a U.S. military report that was issued the day after the 1991 Gulf War started -- it detailed the vulnerabilities of Iraq's water systems (which the U.S. bombed during the Gulf War) including a listing of the specific items which would need to be barred by the UN sanctions committee in order to totally degrade the water and sanitation system of Iraq. Water-borne diseases are now pervasive in Iraq. Nagy's findings were published in England and then in the September, 2001 issue of The Progessive -- "The Secret Behind the Sanctions: How The US Intentionally Destoryed Iraq's Water Supply." (Summary: Pentagon documents reveal how the United States, contrary to the Geneva Convention, intentionally destroyed Iraq's water supply. Nagy shows that there were extremely serious and still-deadly U.S. violations of international law and human rights in US Defense Department planning for the 1991 US war against Iraq and for the sanctions against Iraq.) Noam Chomsky wrote on 8 November 2002: continued here: <a href="http://subjectseek.com/articles/1435/1/Strategic-Attack-and-US-War-Crimes/Page1.html" rel="nofollow">http://subjectseek.com/articles/1435/1/Strategic-Attack-and-US-War-Crimes/Page1.html</a>]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/MichaelBarone/2008/04/19/the_rules_are_changing_for_obama" rel="nofollow">http://townhall.com/columnists/MichaelBarone/2008/04/19/the_rules_are_changing_for_obama</a> Barack Obama seemed puzzled. Angrily puzzled. The apostle of hope seemed flummoxed by the audacity of the question. At the April 16 Philadelphia debate, George Stephanopoulos, longtime aide to Democratic politicians, was asking about his longtime association with Weather Underground bomber William Ayers. The Weather Underground attacked the Pentagon, the Capitol and other public buildings; Ayers was quoted in The New York Times on Sept. 11, 2001, as saying, "I don't regret setting bombs; I feel we didn't do enough." It was at Ayers' house that Obama's state Senate candidacy was launched in 1995; Obama continued to serve on a nonprofit board with Ayers after the Times article appeared. Obamaites live-blogging the debate were outraged. The press is not supposed to ask such questions. They are supposed to invite the candidates to expatiate on how generous their health care plans are. Or to allow them to proclaim that "we are the change that we are seeking." Or to once again bash George W. Bush. There was some of that in this debate. But Obama was asked about his association with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, his remarks about wearing an American flag lapel pin, his comment that "bitter" small town Pennsylvanians "cling to guns and religion" and his "friendly" relations -- "friendly" is his campaign adviser David Axelrod's word -- with William Ayers. Did Obama expect that this would never come up in the campaign? He certainly gave that impression. The normally poised candidate looked irritated and weary. "This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who's a professor of English" -- actually, it's education -- "in Chicago, who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He's not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis. And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values, doesn't make much sense, George." He compared Ayers to Sen. Tom Coburn, who has advocated the death penalty for abortionists. But of course Coburn has never advocated bombing their houses or clinics. "A guy who lives in my neighborhood." Debates are held not just to learn the details of the candidates' health care plans -- which given the complexity of the issue will probably be considerably altered if they are ever actually put on the table -- but also to learn who the candidates are. And that includes learning about which guys who live in their neighborhood they chose to befriend. About Obama almost all Americans knew next to nothing when he got up on the podium of the 2004 Democratic National Convention and instantly made himself presidential candidate material. His gracefully written autobiographical "Dreams From My Father" -- we could learn, if we could get through all 464 pages -- is a story not of transcending racial barriers but of developing a black and African identity. The presidency is a uniquely personal office, and each incumbent puts his individual stamp on it. Obama's choice to join Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church and his choice to befriend William Ayers were not those most Americans would make, and Hillary Clinton was quick to declare, perhaps opportunistically, they were not choices she would have made. This doesn't mean that Obama is responsible for Wright's outrageous statements or for Ayers' criminal acts (the charges against him were dropped because of government misconduct). But Obama's choices to associate with Wright and Ayers tend to undercut his appealing message -- very appealing after 15 years of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush -- that we must strive to overcome the racial and cultural and ideological divisions which have dominated our politics They are something that voters are entitled to weigh as they make their decisions. Obama fans are upset that ABC News' Stephanopoulos and Charlie Gibson broke the unwritten rule that you are not supposed to ask Democratic candidates about these things. Associations with unrepentant radicals and comments made to contributors at a San Francisco fund-raiser in a billionaire's mansion are supposed to be kept indoors. Only the face that the candidate wants to place before the public should be seen. Beliefs that most activist liberals share should be kept under wraps if they are unpopular with most of the voting public. That is how mainstream media have operated for the last generation or more. But not at Philadelphia's Constitution Center on April 16. The rules had changed. And Barack Obama was not well prepared. ]]>

<![CDATA[Please check out this commercial! It is in the moveon.org contest. 1. See video 2. Vote 3. Check your email/click on link sent from moveon/this registers your vote. <a href="http://obamain30seconds.org/vote/?v=view-1926-wIFaC9" rel="nofollow">http://obamain30seconds.org/vote/?v=view-1926-wIFaC9</a> (see the video) The "Little Obama Girl's" mama is an FIU graduate. Thank you Miami. ]]>

<![CDATA[Last week I highlighted the irony of sending nearly $1 billion overseas in military earmarks as we close down bases here at home to save money. Our government's flawed foreign policy troubles me this week especially. Benazir Bhutto's assasination was a great tragedy. Pakistan is now more than ever teetering on chaos. And all the money we have sent Musharraf has inadvertently drawn a target on our backs. Musharraf, unfortunately, appears to have learned how to work our system, much in the way a career welfare recipient has learned to do the same. The perpetual welfare recipient promises to look for a job. Musharraf has promised to look for Bin Laden. Both are terrible investments of American taxpayer dollars, however with Musharraf, its been an astonishing $10 billion loss over the last few years. But it is even worse than that. With his recent actions declaring martial law, and dismissing the justices of the supreme court, he is to the rest of the world, and to Pakistanis, a wildly unpopular, power hungry, brutal military dictator. The perception by most is that we are propping him up while simultaneously urging Ms. Bhutto back into Pakistan as a lamb to the slaughter. continued here: <a href="http://subjectseek.com/articles/1447/1/-Dr-Pauls-Writings--On-Foreign-Entanglements-The-Ties-that-Strangle/Page1.html" rel="nofollow">http://subjectseek.com/articles/1447/1/-Dr-Pauls-Writings--On-Foreign-Entanglements-The-Ties-that-Strangle/Page1.html</a>]]>

<![CDATA[Go Hillary! 2008 Sen. Hillary Clinton for President!]]>

<![CDATA[USA is crumbling economically (imploding) and that's what the Saudis, the ones who attacked us on 9/11 and the ones who enabled it want, ask Cheney for details (they got their "Pearl Harbor event, Google "PNAC Pearl Harbor"). It is statically impossible for three buildings to fall in perfect demolition on the same day from three not exact causes. LOL..you are a clueless one. Did you even read the "Project for a New American Century's 2000 " document. It was talking about the importance of research and IT in the military. The mention of "Pearl Harbor", was in the context of the US being completely unprepared to handle with our current capabilities and technology, revealing formerly unseen shortcomings. No collapse is perfect genius and statistically impossible is meaningless bullshit. From an engineering stand point their collapse was what would have been expected. Even firefighters looked at the buildings and predicted way before they fell that they will collapse. The "have mores" will leave the ruins to the middle class and poor (controlled by warlords/president-dictator) and the elite will relocate out of USA and mostly to Dubai (the "New America). Ask Cheney where a majority of his assets are now (Dubai) and ask Bush about the 20,000 acres the Bush family bought in Paraguay. Yes, some are hell bent on "the end times." What will it take to get back the America I love and I grew up in? Somebody forgot his meds eh? Man you tin foil haters have some whacked out ideas. We now have highest number of bankruptcies, unemployed, foreclosures and foreign debt in American history. Guess what happens when you allow tens of millions to enter America illegally and ship our jobs overseas? Get ready to bunker down cause you have seen the worst yet..."Have a nice day and go shopping" (Bush's solution)...Get ready for "Insane McCain" and a close election 51% to 49%...another stolen election...THIRD TIME!!!! No election was stolen dipshit.]]>

<![CDATA[There's nothing on that site that proves 9/11 was an inside job. I click on a 9/11 section but all it said was some false info on Israel being involved. ]]>

<![CDATA["Ali told me that he, your father, and “Uncle Cyrus” secretly loaded 747’s with gold bars from the Iranian treasury and flew them to Switzerland. If so, why was he going to the Bani-Sadr crowd in France to beg for start-up funds in Silicon Valley?" This quote is from an email sent to me by a scientist who worked on many top security military projects and held top security clearances. I have been reviewing our conversations from over a year ago (which he finally cut short apparently for fear of another attack on his life). Our conversations deal with international secret service corruption, the reason for the murder of Frances Hugle (the actual inventor of the IC), the 9/11 attacks by the US government on the trade towers and little known facts regarding Iran's recent history. I hope to share these conversations with you. I do not know how many will be instantly flagged or ever see the light of day or whether they will be deleted from my 'Inbox' before I can get them into the public arena... but I will try because most of what we think we know is simply not based in reality. 'your father' in the above quote is referencing Bill Hugle (William Hugle, a deceased Silicon Valley entrepreneur and well-known CIA and MI6 arms dealer and technology smuggler). "Uncle Cyrus" is Cyrus Samrad a high level Iranian industrialist under the Shah with numerous development projects in the US and Europe, also a CIA and MI6 collaborator. 'Ali' is Ali Reza Nobari the former Governor of the Central Bank of Iran. ]]>

<![CDATA[Federal Jack is a user driven news source dedicated to exposing information and multimedia relating to the New World Order takeover of the United States and the rest of the free world. <a href="http://federaljack.com/" rel="nofollow">http://federaljack.com/</a> <a href="http://s17.photobucket.com/albums/b51/redskum/?action=view&current=logo.gif" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b51/redskum/logo.gif" border="0"></a> <a href="http://s17.photobucket.com/albums/b51/redskum/?action=view&current=fedjackad.gif" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b51/redskum/fedjackad.gif" border="0"></a> ]]>

<![CDATA[Well Satan and gods are just works of fiction. But if ya have read the bible, you find out that Satan was actually a lot nicer than god was. I'll take Satan over the christian god any day. ]]>

<![CDATA[<a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/LarryElder/2008/04/17/obama_is_bitterly_out_of_touch" rel="nofollow">http://townhall.com/columnists/LarryElder/2008/04/17/obama_is_bitterly_out_of_touch</a> "Bitter," says Sen. Barack Obama, the man of hope and change, about those who live Pennsylvania, small towns and the Midwest. "You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania," Barack Obama said two Sundays ago to the Brie-and-chardonnay crowd at a fundraiser in San Francisco, "and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years, and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate, and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." <br&