JQPublix's side room

Here is some proof that he is:

"

Hat tip: Paulette and Cyberella

Obama’s most recent Freudian slip about his Islamic faith, and his 20 year membership in that racist Trinity United Church of Christ makes perfect sense given the legislation the “annointed one” has put forth in the Senate.

In 1997, Obama introduced an Islamic Community Day bill. (Via The Obama File)

Full Text Bill Status

Senate Sponsors:
OBAMA.

Short description:
11/1/97-ISLAMIC COMMUNITY DAY

Synopsis of Bill as introduced:
Declares November 1, 1997 to be South Shore Islamic Community
Center Day.

Last action on Bill: SESSION SINE DIE

Last action date: 99-01-12

Location: Senate

Amendments to Bill: AMENDMENTS ADOPTED: HOUSE - 0 SENATE - 0

END OF INQUIRY 

In 2001, Obama sponsored Illinois Senate Bill 750 creating the “Halal Food Act,” providing for inspections by the Department of Agriculture to ensure that all food labeled Halal is prepared according to Islamic law. "

http://www.theurbangrind.net/?cat=51

Just wondering what everyone thinks abpout this? I also wanted to show some of you people that say the Iraq war was uncalled for how wrong you are.

"

In response to shariah courts being legalized in the U.K., Congressman Tom Tancredo has proposed the following:

“Jihad Prevention Act” would deny U.S. visas to advocates of ‘Sharia’ law, expel Islamists already here.

WASHINGTON, DC – Amid disturbing revelations that the verdicts of Islamic Sharia courts are now legally binding in civil cases in the United Kingdom, U.S. Representative Tom Tancredo (R-Littleton) moved quickly today to introduce legislation designed to protect the United States from a similar fate.

According to recent news reports, a new network of Sharia courts in a half-dozen major cities in the U.K. have been empowered under British law to adjudicate a wide variety of legal cases ranging from divorces and financial disputes to those involving domestic violence.

“This is a case where truth is truly stranger than fiction,” said Tancredo. “Today the British people are learning a hard lesson about the consequences of massive, unrestricted immigration.”

Sharia law, favored by Muslim extremists around the world, often calls for brutal punishment – such as the stoning of women who are accused of adultery or have children out of wedlock, cutting off the hands of petty thieves and lashings for the casual consumption of alcohol. Under Sharia law, a woman is often required to provide numerous witnesses to prove rape allegations against an assailant – a near impossible task.

“When you have an immigration policy that allows for the importation of millions of radical Muslims, you are also importing their radical ideology – an ideology that is fundamentally hostile to the foundations of western democracy – such as gender equality, pluralism, and individual liberty,” said Tancredo. “The best way to safeguard America against the importation of the destructive effects of this poisonous ideology is to prevent its purveyors from coming here in the first place.”

Tancredo’s bill, dubbed the “Jihad Prevention Act,” would bar the entry of foreign nationals who advocate Sharia law. In addition, the legislation would make the advocacy of Sharia law by radical Muslims already in the United States a deportable offense.

Tancredo pointed to the results of a recent poll conducted by the Centre for Social Cohesion as evidence that the U.S. should act to prevent the situation in Great Britain from replicating itself here in the United States. The poll found that some 40 percent of Muslim students in the United Kingdom support the introduction of Sharia law there, and 33 percent support the imposition of an Islamic Sharia-based government worldwide.

“We need to send a clear message that the only law we recognize here in America is the U.S. Constitution and the laws passed by our democratically elected representatives,” concluded Tancredo. “If you aren’t comfortable with that concept, you aren’t welcome in the United States.” "

http://www.theurbangrind.net/?cat=51

I love showing the mindset that some of these people have.  :)

Perhaps this is going a little bit to far. I am not sure but maybe some of the anchors from WGHP have gone through something similar? 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26876388/?GT1=43001
 

You have to commend McCain for showing that his first stance is for the people of the US. Although I am completely against the bailout, I think it is spot on for him to suspend his campaign and go back to Washington. The fact that he probably would have gained valuable points in the debate coupled with the fact he was willing to give that up is stellar.

And I can understand why Obama is not willing to go back to DC to help get us out of this mess. Even he understands that voting straight line absentee on everything on the bailout, really isn't helping anybody. I loved his excuse for not going - "a president should be able to multitask" and "I am in touch with my people back in DC". So his people in DC are going to do his job for him and vote absentee. Just great. As far as multitasking goes, Obama should be aware that we are paying for him to do his CURRENT job - he's not president yet.

He is even not in office yet, but the "chosen one" is already politicking in in Iraq - possibly to the detriment of our soldiers. Here is what Neil Boortz reports on concerning Baracks visit to Iraq.

"OBAMA TRIED TO DO WHAT??

This story got pushed to the sidelines last week in light of all news on the economy. In private, Barack Obama tried to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay any agreements on troop withdrawals. That's right ... The Chosen One tried to keep American troops at risk for the benefit of his bid for the presidency. Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari says that while Obama visited Baghdad in July, "He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington." Obama said that an agreement should not be negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."

Well this one is a no-brainer to figure out. If there is a troop drawdown on President Bush's watch, then the Democrats (therefore Barack Obama) wouldn't get "credit." They wouldn't look like the "heroes." Just like Democrats would rather see energy legislation passed with a Democrat in the White House. It's pure political pandering – with a difference. This pandering could have cost American lives."

http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html

Take a look at Treasury Secretary Paulson's ties. And the democratic Congress is talking about giving control for this guy to dole out $700 billion to $1 trillion? This guy is talking about bailing out foreign banks also?

"Both parties in Washington are about to screw us over on an unprecedented scale. They are threatening us with fiscal apocalypse if we don’t fork over $700 billion to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and allow him to dole it out to whomever he chooses in whatever amount he chooses — without public input or recourse. They are rushing like mad to cram this Mother of All Bailouts down our throats in the next 72-96 hours. And right there in the text of the proposal is this naked power grab: “Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.”

More on the scary facts about this guy are here:

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/22/why-henry-
paulson-must-be-contained/

So hackers got into Governor Palin's Yahoo account. Is this politics as normal? Do we as Americans normally go to this detail to learn about a candidate? Is this seditious? I think it is.

It goes beyond the bounds of our Constitutional rights. As a matter of fact it is almost a "big brother" attempt of controlling who can run for office.  Will teachers now tell their students that they may become president "IF" they adhere to a certain lifestyle? :)

Hey everyone been a while. I live on Morris Farm road off of the new Peidmont Parkway extension. The past couple of weeks we have had C-130's doing some kind of manuevers, around the airport area. Which is rather strange because there is no Air National Guard station at GSO airport.

Can anyone confirm this for me and does anyone have an idea what is going on?

I had the pleasure of going to Kepleys the other day. My oh my what have I been missing my whole life?

Kepleys is located on Main street in High Point and I would venture to say that they may have the best BBQ I've tasted in 10 years. The history of the place is really neat also so make a day trip out of it.

I dont have HBO at home. I got rid of all those channels. But Im on the road this week and the hotel Im at has it.

I've been watching the John Adams series and it is very good. Just wondering if anyone else is watching it. 

I heard a story on the radio today which I couldn't quite believe, so I googled it myself.  I searched for the following words "wisconsin board of regents tuition". There are a numbers of URL links to go to, but the specific one that included the story in question is headlined "New Richmond News | UW Regents to consider charging richer ...".

As you can see from the story, the first two stories read as follows -

"The University of Wisconsin Board of Regents spent several hours Thursday talking about ways to get deserving students from poorer families into college.

 One idea was to charge “market rates” to richer families and use some of their tuition to subsidize those with fewer means. "

This is a Federally funded and accredited college folks. How did the administration there get this stupid, and how do they expect the students under their tutaledge to amount to anything? Seriously. A Federally funded college becoming so blunt to keep any student with money away from it? Its ridiculous.

Now, go back to the page you searched on (back button) and look at the other topics found on that page.

The second and beyond that shows for me follows:

"Regents: Taxpayer Protection Amendment not in Wisconsin’s best ... Mar 23, 2006 ... Board opposes policy that would likely mean increased tuition, fewer students. MADISON-The University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents ...
www.wisconsin.edu/news/2006/r060323.htm - 9k - Cached - Similar pages

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
and, consistent with Board of Regents Policy: Tuition and Fees, ... 4. negotiate or alter by Board action provisions in the Wisconsin tuition reciprocity ...
www1.umn.edu/regents/docket/2007/june/boardthursday.pd
f - Similar pages"

No need to read all of them unless you like. My point is, they tried forms of Socialism in 2006 concerning student tuition and they failed. Now they expect to steal from students attending there who's PARENTS have money to give to EVERYONE? It is very alarming. What is also alarming is that the student newspaper there seems silenced to the point of AGREEING with the board's verdict. Its Hillarious!

I was listening to a radio talk show host today that mentioned something I had not thought of in  my 43 years. He was doing a comparison between corporate pension plans and the Social Security system. What was poignant was that he pointed out that if a corporation raided a pension fund and used the money for other budgets/funds, everyone responsible would be put in jail.

Social Security is also a pension fund, and for years Congressmen from both sides of the aisle have been stealing from it to grow larger governemt and pork projects. None of them are in jail, but shouldn't they be for stealing from us?

Lets get together a list of Senators to be jailed for this crime. It doesn't have to be limited to the sitting Congress.

And if for some reason this ends up being my last post here. it was good conversing with ya'll :-)