I.
Love.
It.

Man we should all frickin do this next time.

Now if that were a Republican newborn McCain/Palin supporter on an Obama supporter's yard:

We should give the newborn baby some body armor and a Purple Heart, for surviving the birth canal and the post abortion attempt onslaught!

Maybe the Obama-Nation(tm) should go rethink their support of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA).

-- The Illinois Born-Alive Infants Protection Act (BAIPA) was a simple three-sentence bill to establish that every baby who achieved "complete expulsion or extraction" from the mother, and who showed defined signs of life, was to enjoy the legal protections of a "person." As a state senator, Obama led the opposition to this bill in 2001, 2002, and 2003. On March 13, 2003, Obama killed the bill at a committee meeting over which he presided as chairman. In the October 15 debate, Obama said, "The fact is that there was already a law on the books in Illinois that required providing lifesaving treatment." This claim is highly misleading. The law "on the books," 720 ILCS 510.6, on its face, applies only where an abortionist declares before the abortion that there was "a reasonable likelihood of sustained survival of the fetus outside the womb." But humans are often born alive a month or more before they reach the point where such "sustained survival" – that is, long-term survival – is likely or possible (which is often called the point of "viability"). When Obama spoke against the BAIPA on the Illinois Senate floor in 2001 -- the only senator to do so -- he didn't even claim that the BAIPA was duplicative of existing law. Rather, he objected to defining what he called a "previable fetus" as a legal "person" -- even though the bill clearly applied only to fully born infants. These events are detailed in an August 28, 2008 NRLC White Paper titled "Barack Obama’s Actions and Shifting Claims on the Protection of Born-Alive Aborted Infants -– and What They Tell Us About His Thinking on Abortion," which contains numerous hyperlinks to primary sources.

Happy Halloween!!

Cheers

Hans-Christian Georg Rupprecht, Commander in Chief

Frankenstein Battalion
2nd Squadron: Ulanen-(Lancers) Regiment Großherzog Friedrich von Baden(Rheinisches) Nr.7(Saarbrucken)
Knecht Rupprecht Division
Hans Corps
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”

The kid was lucky it was only a "pet" version, and not the higher powered cattle type :D

Why is it always the democrats who are stealing signs and committing voter fraud.

I can't wait for a McCain victory.

Why is it always the democrats who are stealing signs and committing voter fraud.

I can't wait for a McCain victory.

Damn! Why hadn't that little prick's parents suggested he just go over and pee on the sign?

Brad, you have to understand that the left see it as their right to rule in perpetuity.

They will do anything they have to do to ensure their vision comes true, whether it is the will of the people or not.

McCain signs are bad, therefore Democrats feel a moral obligation to remove them.

b_c; lol...double points for that one!

The really bothersome part is that the lightfingered "little prick" likely had no moral issue with taking something that didn't belong to him, election sign issue aside. His approach to the sign in the video is not even slightly furtive.

More Chuckles Dept:
On the linked page http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1274504.html there's a bunch of 'Yahoo' sponsored adverts for electric fences! :)

"likely" had no moral issue. No DaninVan. I would say he DEFINITELY has no moral issue with that. After all,he is being raised by the "what's mine is mine,what's yours is also mine" crowd.

VERY nice!

Posted by: DaninVan at October 30, 2008 2:41 PM

Baawwwhhahahah there is too!

That is what smart web tech will get ya!

Election sign vandalism is all too common in Canadian elections. We also found that Police will not respond when called and some of our party workers ended up in a fight with Lib sign wreckers as a result.
Also had experience with city workers removing signs. In one incident a Lib party worker was chased right back to campaign headquarters with one of our signs in the back of his truck.
The frustrating part is that this is all public knowledge and does not phase the voters. As Forest says, crooked is as crooked does. And their surprised when Lib promises are not kept?

DaninVan and Justthinkin

I'd blame the parents more than the kid for this. I doubt that kid would've thought of taking the sign unless he was ordered to do so. Too bad the mother was a coward and didn't have the guts to steal the sign herself.

starting early.

everyone knows there are more democrat supports in jail in the US, like in Canada , most jailbirds support the lieberals.

Liberals are all moral degenerates incapable of recognizing a correct action from an incorrect one. They are further unable to understand why that might be a problem.

Don't taze me bro!

none of you morons even read the story, the mccain sign was on a piece of shared community property and the family was aware of their son doing this

You missed this part Todd:

"Noble told an investigator that the boy had been trying to pull up the McCain sign so that he could see how it was constructed, a spokesman for the Sheriff's Department said Wednesday.

The video, Turschak said, makes clear that the boy was planning to switch the signs, which are essentially sheathes that slip over metal framework. The boy had only brought the Democratic sheath, not the legs."

Looks like the boy's family didn't care that it was on shared community property if they were getting him to switch the sign.

And I highly doubt a kid that young would be interested in political signs unless someone put him up to it.

Todd 5:11. Suggest you go back and read the story slowly. You have made the same mistake the child's parents did.

hahaha 10 points to Eskimo

Chairman.....re-read my post.You will note I did blame the parents and their culture.Stop making excuses for the inexcusable.

Way to go Todd - we can see just who the moron really is.

Justthinkin,

I wasn't disagreeing with you. The kid should know better that stealing is wrong, there's no doubt about that. But it also doesn't help if his parents are encouraging it.

Sorry if my wording was a little confusing.

What they couldn't scratch a backwards B into the sign

I bet that little thief has the reading comprehension of todd too.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

Mommy Mommy that sign you told me to switch shocked me, waaaaaaaaaah !!!!

What? Grrrrrrr.

I sure enjoyed seeing that boy get shocked. I wish he didn't turn it off. I'd have liked to see the adult woman get shocked too.

Excellent Eskimo. "Todd", you could and should read whole story before throwing out the comment.

Brilliant but smell the foul stink of a frivolous lawsuit in the making.

FTA: The corner of the Turschak's yard where the signs are posted is a prominent point in the Oak Crest subdivision just south of Chapel Hill, so the homeowners association maintains it.

It's far enough from the Turschaks' home that it's not obviously part of their yard, and the boy's mother, Johanna Gisladottir, said she and many neighbors thought it was community property.
------------------------------------------------

Looks like it was Turschaks's property to me. I agree, should have turned the voltage up, got a couple of Pitt Bulls, and put a coontrap just a few inches under that foliage.