As America approaches the crossroads of an election, we are reminded once again of the stark contrast of our candidates.

Senator Obama believes we should award illegal aliens with the coveted American Drivers License. If people come here illegally, why would Obama reward this illegal behavior? Obama knows these people would have an opportunity to register to vote. As we have seen with the debacle of ACORN’s voter registration scam, this offers yet another means for the Democrats to expand their voter base. The Wall Street Journal reported that eight of the 9/11 terrorists were registered to vote. Senator McCain’s experience affords him the judgement to oppose such an misguided proposal.

Obama is willing to cast our country’s safety aside for electoral gain. He believes additional voters are worth the risk of American lives. Obama’s lack of experience is the only plausible reason that could lead to such fallible judgement.

“I think that it is the right idea,” Obama declared, adding that licensing and insuring illegals is “a public safety concern.”

“We can make sure that drivers who are illegal come out of the shadows, that they can be tracked, that they are properly trained, and that will make our roads safer,” he said. “That doesn’t negate the need for us to reform illegal immigration.”

In the days that followed the Drexel debate, critics blasted Spitzer’s proposal. Polls showed that the issue was sinking Spitzer’s approval ratings even in heavily Democratic New York.

Critics warned that giving illegal immigrants licenses would be a security nightmare, allowing terrorists to travel on planes, rent trucks and vans, and move about the country with ease, and without detection or scrutiny.

“Imagine if a potential terrorist enters the U.S. but has no history of previous terror activity or has changed their identity,” Wheeler says, adding, “How does Obama weed such dangerous people out before giving them a driver’s license? You can’t.”

Sen. John McCain has stated he opposes driver’s licenses for illegals. He also has stated his opposition to any benefits for those who “have come here illegally and broke our law.”

Given your misinformed comments on Obama’s supposed connection with the “ACORN scam”, I am assuming you missed the third debate. Let me give you the transcript (and not the biased account that is traveling through email forwards and news reports):

MCCAIN: Yes, real quick. Mr. Ayers, I don’t care about an old washed-up terrorist. But as Senator Clinton said in her debates with you, we need to know the full extent of ...  Read Morethat relationship.

We need to know the full extent of Senator Obama’s relationship with ACORN, who is now on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy. The same front outfit organization that your campaign gave $832,000 for “lighting and site selection.“ So all of these things need to be examined, of course.

SCHIEFFER: All right. I’m going to let you respond and we’ll extend this for a moment.

OBAMA: Bob, I think it’s going to be important to just—I’ll respond to these two particular allegations that Senator McCain has made and that have gotten a lot of attention.

In fact, Mr. Ayers has become the centerpiece of Senator McCain’s campaign over the last two or three weeks. This has been their primary focus. So let’s get the record straight. Bill Ayers is a professor of education in Chicago.
Forty years ago, when I was 8 years old, he engaged in despicable acts with a radical domestic group. I have roundly condemned those acts. Ten years ago he served and I served on a school reform board that was funded by one of Ronald Reagan’s former ambassadors and close friends, Mr. Annenberg.

Other members on that board were the presidents of ...  Read Morethe University of Illinois, the president of Northwestern University, who happens to be a Republican, the president of The Chicago Tribune, a Republican- leaning newspaper.

Mr. Ayers is not involved in my campaign. He has never been involved in this campaign. And he will not advise me in the White House. So that’s Mr. Ayers.

Now, with respect to ACORN, ACORN is a community organization. Apparently what they’ve done is they were paying people to go out and register folks, and apparently some of the people who were out there didn’t really register people, they just filled out a bunch of names.

It had nothing to do with us. We were not involved. The only involvement I’ve had with ACORN was I represented them alongside the U.S. Justice Department in making Illinois implement a motor voter law that helped people get registered at DMVs.

Now, the reason I think that it’s important to just get these facts out is because the allegation that Senator McCain has continually made is that somehow my associations are troubling.

Let me tell you who I associate with. On economic policy, I associate with Warren Buffett and former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker. If I’m interested in figuring out my foreign policy, I associate myself with my running mate, Joe Biden or with Dick Lugar, the Republican ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, or General Jim Jones, the former supreme allied commander of NATO.

Those are the people, Democrats and Republicans, who have shaped my ideas and who will be surrounding me in the White House. And I think the fact that this has become such an important part of your campaign, Senator McCain, says more about your campaign than it says about me.

—-

Source: http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2008d.html

Words spewed forth from his mouth, and we all felt so much better.

It sounds like you could benefit from actually listening to those words

Sorry, but I just don’t take much stock in what Obama utters.

From another thread:
A direct quote from Obama:

OBAMA: Yes. I have been a long-time advocate for public financing of campaigns
combined with free television and radio time as a way to reduce the influence of
moneyed special interests. I introduced public financing legislation in the Illinois State
Senate, and am the only 2008 candidate to have sponsored Senator Russ Feingold’s (DWI)
bill to reform the presidential public financing system. In February 2007, I proposed
a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election.
My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return
excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general
election. My proposal followed announcements by some presidential candidates that they
would forgo public financing so they could raise unlimited funds in the general election.
The Federal Election Commission ruled the proposal legal, and Senator John McCain (r-
AZ) has already pledged to accept this fundraising pledge. If I am the Democratic
nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to
preserve a publicly financed general election.

Obama, the self-admitted “long-time advocate for public financing of campaigns”, has raised $605 million dollars after going back on his word.  I don’t know about you, but if Obama walked up to me, shook my hand, and said “I will be your advocate” I would have to laugh right in the man’s face.  I have ZERO faith in anything he has to say, and can only go by his past record, which is so MINUSCULE as to be worthless, and what there is of it shows he is nothing more than a die-hard democratic liberal across the board.

This is a bad idea and shows Obama’s naivety and lack of judgement.

One additional thing about this subject to consider, is the increase in our insurance rates.

aliciaring - 19 October 2008 11:26 PM

If I’m interested in figuring out my foreign policy, I associate myself with my running mate, Joe Biden or with Dick Lugar, the Republican ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, or General Jim Jones, the former supreme allied commander of NATO.

Source: http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2008d.html

This dude’s running for President of the United States. What’s all this “If I’m interested in figuring out my foreign policy” stuff. I thought he was fully qualified to be Commander in Chief. Isn’t foreign policy (or lack thereof) one of the things they blast Palin for?