JQPublix's side room

So lets talk about change because both candidates promised it.

I am an IT Consultant. I help companies manage change. One thing that I have learned, and subsequently would be confirmed by any systems analyst is that you cannot force change without a progressive timetable.

A systems analyst would also tell you that if change is not managed correctly then there is a chance that the changes could break the system. I am sure only the most left wing embracing UNC professor wishes for that.

So I for one would like to see Obama's timetable for change. I would like to see how he plans on managing and financing those changes with the economy being as bad as it is.

My assumption is that here is that elections everywhere are considered legitimate.

My SAT scores were not very good. I went through a period of time where my mind was more diminished than it is now. I pulled tobacco and picked strawberries amoung other things to help my family through our crises at times.

But I do know this:

It will be interesting to see what happens concerning votes in the states neighboring the great state of California after the mass evacuation concerning those people being pushed out of their houses with the inflated housing market out there.

Nevada, Oregon, Idaho, Arizona may all be swing states that are not being considered so.

A note to WGHP that there is no need to supress my stances on Islamic revolutionists any longer. I have had many Muslim friends and aquaitances in my life that I have worked with and we have accomplished the jobs we needed to do. I can call upon them to re-quiest those experiences if you like. Don't  take for granted those were projects that have ended successfully.

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

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/

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 :-)

I recently read a blog entry on here and without calling the person out by name, I'd rather allow the person to feel free to come forward and defend their stance. Here is the blog entry in question -

"3. I would take away the tax exempt status of religion all churches; all religions would pay taxes on the billions of dollars they take in"

So basically, you are saying you want to place churches under state control? All religions under one state control as a matter of fact. This is one of the fundamental reasons the basic concept of "seperation of church and state" comes from.

So do you support the concept of "seperation of church and state"? If you so choose to answer this question, you will be given ample time to provide specific reasons for your response. This message will self-distruct at the next system purge.

Its been very strange. I heard about this movement about a week ago and checked it out. I've tried the website out several times on several different days. Its never up. Someone powerful sure doesn't want the word getting out.

Visit the official campaign web-site of Tom Tancredo, the next President of the United States of America! ... Paid for by Tancredo for a Secure America

• teamtancredo.org

First off, I'm not a big fan of the Onion. But I gotta say, sometimes they have some pretty funny bits on their site. You might have to watch the thing twice, but make sure to read the ticker on the bottom of the media player.

As obese population rises, candidates courting the obese vote

"Entertaiment Weekly reports that character actor Johnny Depp is losing himself in the character of Johnny Depp".............lol

This is startling and very scary. Before I watched this I was telling myself I wouldn't mind him becoming the first black president. Well guess what- I've been scared straight.

If you weren't concerned about him getting in office then I am sure this will change your mind.

" February 20, 2008 Obamboozled: Did B Hussein O Steal Speeches From Racist Spike Lee Movies?

By Debbie Schlussel

It sure looks like it. Do you really want a Prez whose ideas for this country are stolen from racist, anti-Semitic Spike Lee's movies glorifying Nation of Islam leaders? (Thanks to reader David for the tip!)

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2008/02/oba
mboozled_did.html

Watch the whole video. It's well done to the end. Do you really want this apparent imitator of Denzel Washington imitating Malcolm X?

So let me get this straight, the man who wants to be leader of the free world claims he doesn't like the Nation of Islam. But he likes to imitate its leaders as portrayed in movies?!

G-d help us.

Can you really afford to have this phony as the next President of the United States?

NO, YOU CAN'T.

Ya been Bamboozled. Ya been hoodwinked.

--"Barack Hussein Obama: There Will Be Bamboozling."

Barack Hussein Obama Playing Denzel Washington Playing Malcolm X:Is This the Next Prez? "

source: http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2008/02/obambo
ozled_did.html

Not surprising it has come to this but it should have happened much earlier. Ra Ro Raggy.

"RUSH: "The government's top campaign finance regulator says John McCain can't drop out of the primary election's public financing system until he answers questions about a loan he obtained to kick-start his once faltering presidential campaign. Federal Election Commission Chairman David Mason, in a letter to McCain this week, said the all-but-certain Republican nominee needs to assure the commission that he did not use the promise of public money to help secure a $4 million line of credit he obtained in November. McCain's lawyer... said Wednesday... that McCain has withdrawn from the system and that the FEC can't stop him." The lawyer also said that the campaign "did not encumber the public funds in any way." Now, we all know that Senator McCain is a longtime advocate of stricter limits on money in politics -- which led to more money in politics. I mean, CFR gave us the 527 organizations! We also know that Senator McCain was one of the few leading presidential candidates to seek Federal Election Commission certification for public money during the primaries. "The FEC determined that he was entitled to at least $5.8 million. But McCain did not obtain the money, and he notified the FEC earlier this month that he would bypass the system, freeing him from its spending limits. But just as McCain was beginning to turn his attention to a likely Democratic opponent, Mason, a Republican appointee to the commission, essentially said, 'Not so fast.' By accepting the public money, McCain would be limited to spending about $54 million for the primaries, a ceiling his campaign is near. That would significantly hinder his ability to finance his campaign between now and the Republican National Convention in September." In his letter to McCain, "Mason said the commission would allow a candidate to withdraw from the public finance system as long as he had not received any public funds and had not pledged the certification of such funds 'as security for private financing.'" And that's what this thing is all about -- his little snag here regarding public money and whether or not McCain used the insurance that that's coming in order to get a $4 million line of credit. "

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_022108/
content/01125104.guest.html