Phony Democratic Talking Points And Their Real Meanings!

 The Leftist agenda being espoused by the Socialists (AKA Communists, Marxists, Liberals or Progressives) is all so predictable and easily dismissed with a few common sense simple facts.

1. We need to raise taxes on the rich and not cut spending.
2. The so called war on women.
3. All who oppose Obama or voter ID are racists.

 

Myth 1 - We need to raise taxes.

 This has been proven repeatedly to not work as every time it has been done any where that it has been tried that when you reach a tipping point revenue actually goes down (see the Laffer curve below)

Even if the government took 100% of everything the "rich" earned, effectively destroying the economy, it wouldn't even fund their out of control spending for 5 months. The only logical choice left is to cut spending and reduce the size of government.

Myth 2 - The so called war on women.

 

What the left and their minions in the main stream media did to Sara Palin and Michelle Bachmann was a real war on women. If anything like that was done to Hillery Clinton or Nancy Palosi by those on the right there would be outrage and calls for immediate dismissals of the perpetrators of that type of hateful rhetoric.


If Julia had a job she could afford her birth control! The BLS data also show that the unemployment rate for women in June was 8.0 percent, up from 7.9 percent in May.  That’s also up from 7.0 percent in January 2009 when Obama became president.  Under President Obama, the number of women living in poverty has skyrocketed. 92 percent of job losses have come among women. Democrats know that today women face really no restrictions getting contraception.
"They know that Republicans aren't going to stop women from getting contraception. They know that nine in 10 employer-based health care plans already cover contraception. Of course the Democrats want to change the subject to a wholly contrived “War on Women” narrative. If there is a war on women, it's on women's pocketbooks and it's being waged by President Obama." Laura Ingraham

Myth 3 - Oppose Obama/Voter ID your racist.

 If one disliked Obama cause he is half black instead of the fact that he is a redistributing Socialist. Then how could those same so called haters on the right then support Condoleezza Rice, General Colin Powell, Lieutenant Colonel Allen West and Hermon Cain as these are all 100% black African American Conservative Patriots.

 

"So sensing the now very real possibility of significant losses of White voters as compared to 2008, Barack Obama is doing all he can to push the numbers of minority voters as high as possible in 2012 – including voters who may very well not be legal citizens – a number that might include hundreds of thousands or even millions of non-citizen votes.  In a close election that could prove the deciding factor between victory and defeat.
As we reported yesterday, there is great irony to be found in the fact that the Obama campaign requires all who attend an Obama campaign speech to  show proof of identification before being granted admission, and yet the Obama administration is aggressively fighting states that wish to require voters to show that same kind of identification before being allowed to vote.
And if Barack Obama runs out of non citizen voters – he can always count on the dead.
That’s the Chicago way…" Ulsterman on June 24, 2012 with 25 Comments in News

 

 Need I say any more. Anyone

I enjoyed this article and think you will also. Yet more examples of the Media Bias against Conservatives.

Four Stories You Won’t Hear About Obama

May 25, 2012 By Floyd and Mary Beth Brown 

inShare8

Most Americans judge a President based on his promises and his results. They measure the success of the nation in part by the question Ronald Reagan asked voters in 1980. Reagan simply said, “Are you better off today than you were four years ago?”

For Barack Obama, this question is deadly. Obama promised big results, but he has failed to deliver. For example, look at these four promises and his results.

Obama’s 825 billion dollar stimulus failed to keep unemployment below 8 percent as Obama promised. Since President Obama’s stimulus passed, America has lost 1.1 million jobs. If you count people who have become discouraged and are no longer seeking jobs, some economists believe that real unemployment rate is above twenty percent.

Obama called his health care package one of his major accomplishments. He told CBS’ Steve Kroft he was “putting in place a system in which we’re going to start lowering health care costs.” Yet it has failed to make health insurance more affordable. According to the fact watchdog website FactCheck.org, ObamaCare is actually making health care “less affordable.” Workers paid an average of $132 more for family coverage just this year.

Obama predicted his investments in green energy would create 5 million jobs, but the Wall Street Journal reports: “The green jobs subsidy story gets more embarrassing by the day. Three years ago President Obama promised that by the end of the decade, America would have five million green jobs, but so far, some $90 billion in government spending has delivered very few.”

Obama pledged to cut the deficit in half, saying: “And that’s why today I’m pledging to cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term in office.” Even if every part of Obama’s deficit reduction proposal was enacted, the deficit at the end of his first term would still be $1.33 trillion, more than twice what he promised.

But don’t expect much reporting on his record. Instead, watch as the media focuses on polls. They like to treat most campaigns like a horse race. Don’t be bedazzled by the speeches and rhetoric, just look at the promises and his results. Judge Barack Obama by his own expectations and you will see he has been a failure.

But the news media is almost as desperate to ignore Obama’s record as he is to hide it.

As a result of his dismal record, he has decided to run a campaign of attacks on Mitt Romney in the vain hope that the subject will be changed. The mainstream media will help him change the agenda.

We will hear stories about how Bain Capital, Romney’s old firm, restructured business and cut jobs, and the media will forget to talk about how Obama restructured General Motors and cut jobs.

We will hear stories about how Mitt Romney bullied someone in school nearly 50 years ago, and we won’t hear about Barack Obama doing drugs 25 or 30 years ago.

We will hear stories about how Mitt Romney is controlled by the far right, and we won’t hear a story about Barack Obama’s associates on the far left.

Expect the media to work as hard to re-elect Barack Obama as they did to elect him. But if Romney stays focused on giving America the facts and forcing the media to report accurately, this election is his to lose.

Obama administration blocks Texas voter ID law

This is the begining of the Chicago style reelection of Obama. I assume we will see a lot more of this kind of stuf from the Big Guvernment/Big Labor Leftists that are attempting to take this country over. We must be ever vigilent and get the truth out to our fellow Conservatives and educate the Moderates on the fence as to what the Leftists are really up to. Please do enjoy this article by Jeremy Pelofsky.

Obama administration blocks Texas voter ID law

Mon, Mar 12 2012
By Jeremy Pelofsky

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Obama administration on Monday blocked a new law in Texas requiring voters to show photo identification before they can cast a ballot, citing a concern that it could harm Hispanic voters who lacked such documents.

The law, which was approved in May 2011, required voters to show government-issued photo identification, such as a driver's license, military identification card, birth certificate with a photo, current U.S. passport, or concealed handgun permit.

The Justice Department said that data from Texas showed that almost 11 percent of Hispanic voters, or more than 300,000, did not have a driver's license or state-issued identification card, and that plans to mitigate those concerns were incomplete.

"Hispanic registered voters are more than twice as likely as non-Hispanic registered voters to lack such identification," Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez, head of the department's civil rights division, said in a letter outlining the objection to the Texas director of elections.

Texas Republican Governor Rick Perry criticized the decision, saying he was obligated to ensure the integrity of elections.

"The DOJ has no valid reason for rejecting this important law, which requires nothing more extensive than the type of photo identification necessary to receive a library card or board an airplane," he said in a statement.

It was the second state voter identification law blocked by the Obama administration, which earlier prevented a strict new law in South Carolina from taking effect. South Carolina then sued in federal court seeking approval of its law.

Under the landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act, certain states like Texas must seek approval from the Justice Department or the federal courts for changes made to state voting laws and boundaries for voting districts.

The Obama administration has already challenged the state's attempt to re-draw congressional districts and that fight is before the courts. Texas in January also sued to get approval for its voter identification law.

Several Republican-governed states, including Texas, Kansas and Wisconsin, have adopted stricter new voter identification laws, arguing they were needed to prevent ballot box fraud. A judge in Wisconsin on Monday issued an injunction against that state's law.

Some civil rights groups have said the new laws threatened to suppress minority voters. Democrats have also said they were aimed at squeezing out university students from the polling booths and seniors who tended to vote for Democrats.

"Photo identification requirements for voters drastically affect the electoral participation of the poor, the elderly, and the transient, which means those who need their government's ear most will be the last to be heard," said Representative Trey Martinez Fischer, a Texas state Democratic lawmaker.

The Justice Department said that potential voters in Texas would require two other identification documents to get a certificate allowing them to vote, which could lead to them paying high fees for copies of legal documents such as birth certificates.

Additionally, nearly one-third of the counties in the state do not have offices where potential voters can obtain a driver's license or state identification card and some residents live more than 100 miles away, the Justice Department said.

Efforts to educate voters about the new identification requirements were also incomplete and the state did not submit evidence of voter impersonation not already addressed under existing state laws, the administration said.

"The state has failed to demonstrate why it could not meet its stated goals of ensuring electoral integrity and deterring ineligible voters from voting in a manner that would have voided this retrogressive effect," Perez said.

Republicans said that the Obama administration's decision to oppose Texas' voter identification law smacked of politics ahead of the 2012 congressional and presidential elections.

"Today's decision reeks of politics and appears to be an effort by the Department of Justice to carry water for the President's reelection campaign," said U.S. Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican.

The Texas lawsuit for approval of the voter identification law is: State of Texas v. Holder in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, No. 12-cv-128.

(Editing by Eric Walsh and Paul Simao)

This is also a must read article written by Dianna Cotter. While I personally do not have the answer to Obama's birth certificate authenticity. The obvious irregularities certainly warrant an independent unbiased investigation.

Arizona sheriff finds Obama presidential qualifications forged

07.03.2012 14:14

AP photo

By Dianna Cotter

A singularly remarkable event has taken place in the United States of America. This event occurred in Arizona on March 1^st and was an earth shattering revelation.

A long awaited press conference was given by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a five time elected Sheriff, which should have made national and international headlines. Arpaio's credentials include serving in the United States Army from 1950 to 1953, service as a federal narcotics agent serving in countries all over the world with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), and served as the head of the Arizona DEA. Without doubt, this is a serious Law Enforcement Officer, not one to be taken in by tin-foil-hat wearing loons.

Yet, in the five days since his revelations there has been little in the way of serious reporting on the findings he presented in his presser. With 6 short videos, the Sheriff and his team presented a devastating case, one the tame US press is apparently unable to report.

On April 27, 2011, President Barack walked into the White House Press room with a Cheshire cat like grin and a "Long Form Birth Certificate" from the State of Hawaii in hand.  From the podium in the press room, Mr. Obama said, "We're not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by sideshows and carnival barkers,". Quite the barb from a man holding a forged document.

That's right, forged.

The president himself created the scene; one filled laughter from an adoring press corp., a scene of unprecedented fanfare while holding a forged document which was later posted on the White House website. This was the news Sheriff Arpaio revealed on March 1, 2012 in Arizona.

Arpaio asserts that his investigators discovered, during a 6 month long investigation which is ongoing, not only was the "Long Form" likely a digitally created forgery, but the presidents Selective Service Card (Draft Card), allegedly filed in 1980, was also a forgery. These documents are what Barack Hussein Obama relies upon to prove his constitutional eligibility to the office of President of the United States.

Forged documents are being used to qualify a President of the United States for the office he holds. Or is usurped the more accurate term?

The silence from the main stream media in the US is deafening. It almost seems as if the press is terrified to even think the question, let alone ask it: Is the President a criminal? The press in Arpaio's audience were certainly asking him to state precisely that, yet nowhere has the question been asked of the White House by the press. Instead the American Press is aggressively protecting the presumed President of the United States, pushing the fraud upon both America and the world, supporting a man who may well have usurped the office.

For months before Mr. Obama released the April 2011 forgery, American businessman Donald Trump had been demanding that the president show the country definitive proof that he was born in the state of Hawaii, and eligible for the Office of President. The birth certificate forgery which was presented by Mr. Obama was in response to the repeated public requests from the billionaire businessman.

One can easily imagine the reaction of the press had this scenario been about George W. Bush in 2004.

On the contrary, the press itself forged documents regarding the 43^rd President: Long term CBS newsman Dan Rather lost his credibility along with his job when he presented forged Air National Guard documents allegedly denigrating the president's service in the 1970's. One can imagine the glee evidence presented by law enforcement officials of a real forgery made by President Bush would have generated. The press feeding frenzy would have eclipsed that of Watergate, the most controversial political event in modern America history which led to the resignation of President Nixon in August of 1974.

The questions in the White House Press room would have been merciless to say the very least.

What has been the response from the Obama era press?

Silence.

Silence so loud it can be felt.

What has been the response from the 44^th president so far?

A tweet from Obama Campaign press secretary Ben LaBolt, containing a link to the conspiracy theory television show "The X-files" theme song: a mocking, Saul Alinsky like, retort.

High Crimes and Misdemeanors appear to have been committed by the President of the United States or his personal representatives in presenting a forged document to the press and the Nation as a legitimate document, and this information has been delivered from Law Enforcement Officials.

Arpaio refused to take the bait offered by a clearly hostile press in the conference room. He refused to accuse the president directly, instead informing the world that they had a "person of interest" in the forgery, and were continuing with the investigation. 

Where is the outrage from the press??

As surreal as this is, it isn't the main event. It's only a part of a larger story.

Citizenship

Years before the 2008 election, Barack Obama was involved in efforts to amend the US Constitution to allowthose who were born to parents who were not citizens to become President along with those born overseas. Those efforts have occurred several times in recent history, and all have failed. It must be intelligently asked why this was a concern at all for the then Senator.

There are two reasons for Obama's concern. The first lay in Article 2 section 1 of the constitution which states: "No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,".

Except for Barack Obama.

The second reason  for Obama's concern lies in the Supreme Court of the United States case Minor V. Happersett (88 U.S. 162) 1875 which defines Natural Born Citizen:

"The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners." Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 168.

This U.S. Supreme Court case decided that Virginia Minor, the plaintiff, could not use the 14^th Amendment to claim citizenship and the right to vote because she was a Natural Born Citizen, and therefor unable to lay claim to the statutory citizenship the 14^th Amendment gave to former slaves, which included their right to vote. This is the only U.S. Supreme Court case in the history of the United States to clearly define what a Natural Born Citizen is.  It has been cited in dozens of cases since.

This is an issue which cannot be brushed aside by Mr. Obama. His father, Barack Obama Sr. was a student from the British Commonwealth of Kenya, a British Citizen who never sought to become a US Citizen, and indeed was eventually forced to leave the country. Mr. Obama has only one parent who was an American Citizen. Obama clearly does not meet the requirements of Natural Born Citizen as defined by the Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett.

The Founding Fathers, the men who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, discussed these very reasons why no person of divided loyalties, divided nationalities, should ever have command of America's armed forces. Dozens of letters and many debates in the constitutional conventions recorded these concerns, always returning the "Law of Nations", Emerich De Vattel's encyclopedic record of the laws civilized nations had developed over two thousand years of which the founders were clearly aware of in their debates:

"The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights."

E. De Vattel  1758 Sec 212 Ch19

Vattel's definition has been accepted since the days the United States was still a motley collection of British Colonies. It has been accepted in no less that 3 Supreme Court Cases, has been accepted in testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives. It is by no means an original source; only recently dug out of dusty tomes in 2008. Indeed, this concept is enshrined in every Nation the world over. Every nation not only accepts, but has enshrined this concept: a person born to two parents who were citizens of that nation and born on its soil was a natural born citizen of that nation.

After his rousing 2004 speech at the Democrat National Convention, Barack Obama was considered a shoe-in for running for president in 2008, and indeed his campaign began that night in Boston. Yet his citizenship was a serious obstacle to his ambitions, and the ambitions of the liberal progressive movement which supported him.

So the efforts to obfuscate Obama's citizenship issues began in earnest. The plan was deviously simple, make certain that people focused on his Hawaiian documents, and minimize the visibility of Minor V. Happersett and Citizenship to the public.

The State of Hawaii

The state of Hawaii's role in this cannot be neglected for several reasons. Hawaii has a couple of legal Achilles heels of its own.

It was well known at the time, that any person could register the birth of a child in the state on a late form with only the signature of a witness (Hawaii Department of Health no longer uses this form). This means of obtaining Hawaiian documents was used frequently by immigrants who needed assistance from the state (such as welfare), and Hawaii needed the federal dollars registering those births brought to the state. Second, and perhaps most importantly, Federal laws with regard to Hawaii had been written to allow a baby receiving state documents to be declared a Citizen of the United States without being subject to the Jurisdiction of the United States:

Sec. 305. [8 U.S.C. 1405] Persons born in Hawaii:

A person born in Hawaii on or after August 12, 1898, and before April 30, 1900, is declared to be a citizen of the United States as of April 30, 1900. A person born in Hawaii on or after April 30, 1900, is a citizen of the United States at birth. A person who was a citizen of the Republic of Hawaii on August 12, 1898, is declared to be a citizen of the United States as of April 30, 1900.

Missing from this US Statute is the following which appears in the 14^th Amendment:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

This disparity created a legal loophole which is specific to Hawaii: A child born in Hawaii, regardless of whether or not they were born in the state and subject to the Jurisdiction of the United States, automatically gained US Citizenship. This is the only state in the United States where this condition existed. This is why Hawaii is so vitally important to Obama, and could explain why it is important enough to forge birth documents for. It is why Obama's birth is being alleged to have occurred there instead of somewhere like Washington State or elsewhere, and is so vitally important.

Obama, by being born in Hawaii, got automatic citizenship status in the United States without regard for whether the United States had jurisdiction over his citizenship. Otherwise, his citizenship would have legally followed his father's, British, as Barack himself admitted on his "Fight the Smears" website during the '08 campaign.

And it only took a witness signature to gain it. It is unknown how many children gained U.S. citizenship through this means. The real citizenship status of these individuals is similarly unknown, and now that it has been discovered that Barack Obama has put forth a forged Hawaiian Birth certificate, his own proof of birth in the state is subject to serious questions by law enforcement officials.

Months before the election of 2008 Barack Obama began deliberately directing public attention to his Hawaiian Records. The Obama campaign, before redirecting the site to "Attack Watch" maintained the "Fight the Smears" website which can still be found on archival websites. The Obama campaign posted the candidate's "short Form" birth certificate with the following information from FactCheck.com:

"When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom's dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.'s children.

Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4, 1982."

The campaign obviously wanted public attention directed at his birth documents in Hawaii.

The campaign itself created the entire birth certificate controversy, and acted to maintain and fan the flames of that controversy for several truly simple reasons. As long as the public was wondering about what being born under "the British Nationality Act of 1948" meant,  and the birth certificate "birther" controversy in general, they were not looking into laws which would have legally prevented the senator from assuming the role of candidate and then President. Legal cases such as Minor V. Happersett.

This case was, and still is, of tremendous import. Had it been found during the campaign it would have prevented his candidacy, certainly preventing him from taking the oath of office in Jan 2009.

So a campaign to hide Minor V. Happersett was undertaken at the same time.

Justia

Justia.com is a free legal internet research site with a specific, dedicated Supreme Court of the United States server containing nearly every Supreme Court case in American history. It is specifically marketed to law students, non-profit agencies, startup businesses, small businesses and private internet researchers. In short, those who cannot afford either a lawyer or the thousands of dollars a year required by subscription legal search engines such as LexisNexis and WestLaw. Justia leverages the Google Mini internal search engine, and through this, Google.com itself increasing its visibility on nearly any search of American law. Justia.com is owned by Obama supporter Tim Stanley, and began a systematic scrubbing of Minor V. Happersett  in the summer of 2008, erasing the name and specific text quoted from the case, along with specific citations to it out of dozens of Supreme Court cases which cited it over 138 years of American Supreme Court History. The controversy was dubbed "JustiaGate".

The author of this article personally documented and published the scrubbing done by Justia, documented the failure of Tim Stanley's explanation for the "errors", and assisted in the research which connected Justia.com to Public.Resource.Org, where Stanley is on the board of directors. Public.Resource.org is the source of Supreme Court materials in data form Justia.com receives for publication. Public.Resource.org is owned and run by Carl Malamud, and funded in part by the Center for American Progress once run by John Podesta, and funded by George Soros. This is a direct connection to the Soros Foundation, a major source of political donations to Barack Obama and the Democrat Party.

Justia erased "Minor v. Happersett" along with text quoted from the case out of its Supreme Court servers deliberately in an effort to minimize the ability of the public to find the case by searching for it, significantly reducing its apparent importance.

These two separate efforts, raising the profile of the Senator's birth certificate in as controversial a manner as possible, while minimizing the legal role of Minor v. Happersett succeeded. Barack Obama was able to illegally win the election, and illegally take office. It was stolen right in front of the American public.

The house of cards is about to come tumbling down around Barack Obama's ears as the momentum of evidence builds. Law enforcement has found his birth documents to be "highly suspect" as a forgery. His draft card has similarly been found by law enforcement as being "highly suspect" as a forgery. The smoke screen cover created by his birth certificate, hiding Minor v. Happersett in a shadow of false mockery, has been blown away. Leaving the Supreme Court case alone on the stage, glaringly exposing Barack Obama as an usurper, an unconstitutional President of the United States.

The American Press is deliberately hiding the evidence published on the internet about this defrauding of the American public and the deliberate evisceration of the Constitution of the United States. It is hiding Barack Obama's Fraud as it has been revealed by a Sheriff in Arizona. The silence of the American press would be unbelievable if it weren't so blatantly obvious.

It is nearly as egregious as the audacity of Obama's fraud itself.

Dianna Cotter is a Senior at American Military University, a 4.0 Student, the recipient of the Outstanding Student Essay of 2009, a member of Delta Epsilon Tau and Epsilon Pi Phi Academic Fraternities and on the Dean's and President's Lists for academic achievement. She has published at Examiner.com, in American Thinker, Accuracy in Media, and Family Security Matters.

Supreme Court Challenge to Illegal Union Fundraising Scheme

 

Fox News Reports on Right to Work's Supreme Court Challenge to Illegal Union Fundraising Scheme  

Published on National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation (http://www.nrtw.org)

Supreme Court Reviews SEIU Political Fundraising Scheme

By Anthony Riedel

Created 10 Jan 2012 - 11:08am

Washington, DC (January 10, 2012) - Today, National Right to Work Foundation attorneys will make their fifteenth appearance before the U.S. Supreme Court, this time representing California state employees challenging a Service Employees International Union (SEIU) political fee charged to workers regardless of their union membership status. Mark Mix, President of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, issued the following statement regarding today's hearing:

"Today, the United States Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case about union bosses using state workers' hard earned money for politics without the workers’ permission.
"Attorneys from the National Right to Work Foundation – the nation's leading advocate for workers who suffer from the abuses of compulsory unionism – will argue that the workers should not be forced to pay for union officials’ political spending.
"The Court should knock down this scheme – closing a giant loophole that allows union bosses to confiscate money from workers' paychecks for political spending sprees – and send a message to union officials, once again, that forced political conformity is wrong."

Terms of Web Site Use      Related Links: National Right to Work Committee | National Institute for Labor Relations Research

Copyright © 2010 National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation
 National Right to Work Legal Defense and Education Foundation, Inc.
8001 Braddock Road / Springfield, Virginia 22160
(703) 321-8510 | (800) 336-3600 / (703) 321-9613 fax - general (703) 321-9319 fax - legal department

Yes, Virginia, There Really Is Voter Fraud

 

True the Vote is an initiative developed by citizens for citizens, meant to inspire and equip volunteers for involvement at every stage of our electoral process. We promote ideas that actively protect the rights of legitimate voters, regardless of their political party affiliation.

 This article is from the Wall Street Journal appeared in the opinion section  on DECEMBER 23, 2011. It shows endemic coordinated efforts from the Leftists supported by sympathetic members of the media that voter fraud is no big deal. Voter fraud as a tool of the left for the purpose of shifting elections has been used for years. Leftists believe in the Alinsky methods that the ends justify any means necessary. How can any one seriously argue that presenting reasonable evidence as to ones identity is racist is such a transparent argument to hide the real intention of purely political motives that even a blind man can see the obvious truth!

Holder's Voter ID Fraud

The AG invents fears of ballot suppression.

The Obama Administration's re-election mobilization continues: Witness Eric Holder's attempt to play the race card and perhaps twist the law in a campaign against voter identification laws.
In the Attorney General's telling, the movement in the states to require voters to show some ID is a revival of minority disenfranchisement a la Jim Crow. A growing number of minorities, he said in a speech last week, are now worried about "the same disparities, divisions and problems" that beset the country in 1965 and "many Americans, for the first time in their lives . . . now have reason to believe that we are failing to live up" to the promise of democracy for all.
If you haven't heard about this national crisis, perhaps that's because you don't travel in Mr. Holder's political circles. He is merely repeating the howls of groups like the NAACP and the George Soros-funded Brennan Center, which claim without evidence that voter ID laws hurt minorities.
The NAACP even petitioned the United Nations this month for a human-rights ruling on what President Benjamin Jealous called a "tidal wave of assaults on the right to vote." He meant in America, not Cuba or North Korea. The American Civil Liberties Union has sued to challenge a voter ID law in Wisconsin.

Getty Images

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder

Mr. Holder's remarks are especially notable because they come as the Justice Department is reviewing voter ID laws in Texas and South Carolina for "preclearance" under the Voting Rights Act. The states' plans require voters to present photo ID like a driver's license or passport to vote, a measure endorsed by the Commission on Federal Election Reform headed by President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker in 2005 to protect the integrity of the ballot.
Mr. Holder says the Civil Rights Division led by Thomas Perez will review the policies and impartially "apply the law." If that's true, Mr. Perez's job should be easy: In 2005, Justice approved a nearly identical law in Georgia. In 2008's Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, the Supreme Court likewise ruled 6-3 that an Indiana law requiring photo ID at the ballot box was constitutional.
The court's liberal lion, then-Justice John Paul Stevens, wrote for the majority that Indiana's law "is unquestionably relevant to the State's interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process." Indiana offered free voter ID cards to all citizens, so the inconvenience of picking up an ID at the Department of Motor Vehicles wasn't an undue burden and was reasonably balanced by the state's interest in reducing fraud, Justice Stevens wrote.
That isn't good enough for Mr. Holder, who says his department's priority is to "expand the franchise." But expand it for whom, exactly? The vast majority of voters already have the necessary photo ID, which they need to get through airport security or register for a grocery-store savings card.
Plaintiffs put up by liberal lawsuit shops routinely claim that ID laws endanger the rights of hundreds of thousands, but lawsuits in Indiana and Georgia were dismissed because they couldn't produce a single eligible voter who'd been turned away due to the ID requirement. Turnout has risen in states that have passed the voter ID laws, with no adverse impact on minorities.
In his speech, Mr. Holder highlighted historical attempts to keep voters away from the polls to "gain partisan advantage." But in a case of more recent history, in 2009, Mr. Holder's department dropped a voter intimidation case against the Black Panther Party, in which members stood outside a polling place brandishing nightsticks and threatening voters. Civil-rights lawyer Bartle Bull saw the Panthers in action and called it "the most blatant form of voter intimidation I've ever seen."
Thirty states now require some form of ID at the polls, and one goal of Mr. Holder's attack is to intimidate other states that want to toughen their laws. He's probably also signaling that Justice will strike down the Texas and South Carolina statutes. This would please the Democratic Party's left while not-so-subtly inventing a threat of Republican racism to drive minority turnout in 2012. Mr. Holder's voter ID alarums are one more reason he's earning a reputation for politicized, partial justice.

Yes, Virginia, There Really Is Voter Fraud

By Hans A. von Spakovsky

Posted on December 22, 2011 1:18 PM

The latest voter-fraud convictions in Troy, N.Y., must be very inconvenient to the public-affairs propagandists over at the DNC and the NAACP, as well as liberal media outlets like the New York Times. It just ruins their constant refrain that there is no voter fraud in the United States. 

Eric Shawn at FOX News reports that two Troy city officials, the city clerk and a councilman, along with two Democratic political operatives, have pled guilty to forging absentee-ballot signatures and casting fraudulent ballots in the 2009 Working Families Party primary. The WFP is the political party associated with ACORN.

One of the citizens whose votes were stolen was stunned at what happened. She said that she was “sure this goes on a lot in politics, but it’s very rare that they do get caught.” This voter was right on the money with that observation — fraud is so easy to commit in our election system that it is rare that fraudsters get caught and even rarer that they get prosecuted.

As for the constant liberal claims that voter fraud does not occur, one of the Democratic operatives who pled guilty, Anthony DeFiglio, told New York State police investigators “that faking absentee ballots was a commonplace and accepted practice in political circles, all intended to swing an election.” And whose votes do they steal? DeFiglio was very plain about that: “The people who are targeted live in low-income housing, and there is a sense that they are a lot less likely to ask any questions.”

That is exactly what former Alabama congressman Artur Davis said recently when he admitted that he was wrong to oppose voter-ID requirements. Davis says the “most aggressive” voter suppression “is the wholesale manufacture of ballots, at the polls and absentee, in parts of the Black Belt” of Alabama, which is an area of very poor black communities. These are the very areas where the NAACP claims voter fraud does not happen. The NAACP opposes all reasonable measures to safeguard the voting process for its own constituents, even going to the extent of defending vote stealers, as the NAACP did in Greene County, Ala., in the mid-1990s. Small wonder one of its local officials was recently sentenced to five years in prison for voter fraud in Tunica County, Mississippi.

In the Troy case, the ease with which voter signatures were forged without detection shows that signature comparison by election officials does not work and poses no deterrent to this type of voter fraud. That is why Kansas combined a voter-ID requirement in its new election law with a change to its absentee-ballot procedures. If you want to vote in person in Kansas, you now have to show a photo ID, and if you request an absentee ballot, you have to provide either a copy of your photo ID or the driver’s license number from the ID. That helps confirm that the registered voter — not some political operative like Anthony DeFiglio — actually requested the absentee ballot.

 Seeing that many in the the main stream media chooses to ignore the stories that are contrary to their chosen Progressive Leftist values I will bring them to your attention for your consideration. Please do read then come to your own conclusions.

"Those who cast the votes decide nothing.
Those who count the votes decide everything."
—Communist Tyrant and mass murderer Josef Stalin

 Union Election Requires Photo ID; Politico Fails to Note Irony
It is indeed ironic that the Left wants photo IDs when it suits them then does not when it would deter voters that may not be eligible to vote in the first place. Gerrymandering is a legal way to rig elections in ones favor that should also be banned.

I found this gem on Media Trackers (a conservative non-profit, non-partisan investigative watchdog dedicated to promoting accountability in the media and government across Wisconsin through cutting edge research and communications initiatives) and felt that it covered the voter fraud issue well so I reposted it on my blog. Please do enjoy it as much as I have.

I have always believed that one actions and deeds have more meaning then their words or rhetoric. The leftists instead seem to adhere more to the say a lie enough times then it becomes the truth method. Seams to me that the convoluted explanations for all the explanations from the Progressives is more inline with a con then the simple obvious truth of Conservative observations.

Article by Media Trackers published on 4|27|2011

Left’s Actions Show They Believe in Voter Fraud

A new Voter ID bill is with the Assembly and expected to pass and head to the Senate. Not a moment too soon.

While the Left has historically claimed that there is no problem with voter fraud in Wisconsin, they must be changing their tune or why would they have supported JoAnne Kloppenburg in her request for a statewide recount of the Supreme Court election when she is down over 7000 votes? Clearly, the Left thinks something stinks, and that something must be voter fraud the likes of something we’ve never seen. The Left must feel this fraud is far-reaching and pervasive to believe they can make up a margin that has never been made up in any election in any state.

It’s obvious Wisconsin needs new Voter ID rules like it’s never needed before.
This new Photo ID bill will replace one that went through the Assembly in February. The bill introduced by Jeff Stone (R-Greendale) makes several changes to the way we vote in Wisconsin, including moving the primary from September to August. The primary must be moved to comply with a federal law to ensure that military and oversea voters have enough time to receive and return their ballots for the November elections.
Besides a shift in the Primary, the crux of the bill is the requirement to show ID when voting. The bill will require voters to show a Wisconsin driver license, state-issued ID, military ID, passport or a naturalization certificate to vote. Student IDs will not be accepted.
To clamp down on fraud due to absentee voting the bill will require voters to provide a reason for needing to vote absentee like being out-of-town, disabled, sick, jury duty, over age 70 or unable to take off of work. Additionally, absentee ballots dropped off in person will only be accepted a week before the election, rather than the current month.
To combat registering to vote using an address that isn’t your own, the residency requirement before voting will be raised from 10 days to 28 days. Additionally, when registering, people will be required to list current and prior addresses and all voters will have to sign the poll book.
Exceptions to the ID Rule will include residents of nursing and retirement homes if a special registered deputy is sent the facility. Victims of stalking and those who object on to a photo on religious grounds can show ID sans photo.
If a person does show up to vote with no ID they will be allowed to cast a provisional ballot which will be counted if they return by the Friday after the election with photo ID.

This is an article from Michelle Malkin and it provides some more great examples of voter fraud.

Voter fraud watch: They’re at it again

By Michelle Malkin  •  October 25, 2010 08:36 AM

Here we go again. Desperation plus the by-any-means-necessary credo plus a nationwide force of Alinsky avengers equals another recipe for voter fraud.
In Colorado, it’s Common Cause of Colorado, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund and the Service Employees International Union caught in an apparent scheme to foist some 6,000 shady voter registrations on the state:

A federal judge declined to force the secretary of state to reactivate approximately 6,000 new voters whose registrations were canceled under Colorado’s 20-day rule.
In a decision issued Monday, Senior U.S. District Judge John L. Kane denied a motion for a preliminary injunction that was requested by several labor and voting-rights groups.
When a new voter registers in Colorado, the secretary of state mails a nonforwardable notice of disposition that the voter’s registration has been received. If the notice comes back undeliverable in the mail, then clerks deem the voter’s registration inactive within 20 days.
Melody Mirbaba, an assistant attorney general, argued that the 20-day rule is designed to stop voter fraud and duplicate registrations.

In Arizona, it’s illegal alien amnesty-supporting, SEIU-tied Mi Familia Vota again and One Vote Arizona submitting massive, last-minute voter registrations. The race between rocket scientist Ruth McClung and open-borders radical Raul Grijalva is down to the wire. Maria Carvajal at Publius Pundit reports:

The Yuma Sun is reporting that two organizations — Mi Familia Vota and One Vote Arizona — submitted more than 3000 voter registrations in Yuma County, and more than 20,000 voters statewide. Even more, they have signed up 43,000 people statewide for the permanent early voter list.
What they didn’t tell you is that voter fraud on a massive scale could be taking place, ostensibly to help Raul Grijalva keep the congressional seat he holds by stealing the election.
Here’s what the article doesn’t tell you, by a source in the Yuma County Recorder’s Office:
* These 3000 voter registration forms were all dropped off at once by the one group on the deadline to turn in voter registration forms.
* Almost all of the registrations were for the Democratic Party, a statistical improbability at best.
* Today, these same 3000 newly registered voters — as a group — had papers dropped off at the Yuma Recorder’s office requesting to be signed up for the permanent early voters list… which means the ballots will be mailed early, with no accountability.
* The Yuma Recorder’s office is checking the voter registration forms and have found that already more than 65% of them are invalid due to the registrant not being a citizen, wrong/invalid address, false signature, etc.
Now, the question is: is voter fraud taking place in Yuma County… and is it taking place on an even bigger scale in Pima County?
So far, the partisan Democrat in charge of the Pima County Recorder’s Office, F. Ann Rodriguez, has been completely silent about any such activity, though certainly even just a few thousand votes could change the outcome of the race between rocket scientist Ruth McClung and boycotter Raul Grijalva.

In Washington state, it’s illegal alien amnesty-supporting OneAmerica Votes sending illegal alien canvassers out to drum up votes:

When Maria Gianni is knocking on voters’ doors, she’s not bashful about telling people she is in the country illegally.
She knows it’s a risk to advertise this fact to strangers — but it’s one worth taking in what she sees as a crucial election.
The 42-year-old is one of dozens of volunteers — many of them illegal immigrants — canvassing neighborhoods in the Seattle area trying to get naturalized citizens to cast a ballot for candidates like Democratic Sen. Patty Murray, who is in a neck-and-neck race with Republican Dino Rossi.
Pramila Jayapal, head of OneAmerica Votes, says the campaign is about empowering immigrants who may not feel like they can contribute to a campaign because they can’t vote.
“Immigrants really do matter,” Jayapal said. “If we can’t vote ourselves, we’re gonna knock on doors or get family members to vote.”

In Florida, it’s suspected absentee ballot fraud — from within a city commissioner’s office:

When police raided Daytona Beach City Commissioner Derrick Henry’s office this week and seized his computer, they say they discovered evidence of what election experts say has become a rampant, largely ignored and troubling issue in Florida — the widespread abuse of absentee ballots.
Police say Henry’s computer was used to obtain dozens of absentee ballots prior to the city’s Aug. 24 elections, in which he was re-elected.
The Daytona Beach probe started when an elections supervisor noticed that as many as 90 absentee ballots had been requested from two e-mail addresses, and that they came from a single computer. (It is illegal in Florida for anyone other than a family member to help in requesting an absentee ballot.)
Volusia County Election Supervisor Ann McFall said she grew suspicious “because 40 requests arrived in one batch on the night of Aug. 6, and another 15 the next day.
“The absentee ballots had no phone numbers on them, and my first concern was to get them in compliance. I emailed the sender and when I got no response checked with the Daytona Beach clerk, because all the requests were from Zone 5 and he didn’t recognize the address. Then I handed it over to the sheriff’s office,” she said.
Police tracked the computer to the office of Henry, the city commissioner from Zone 5, who was running for re-election — and who easily defeated his two opponents with 65 per cent of the vote.

In New York, FNC’s Eric Shawn reports on another absentee ballot scheme implicating the ACORN-tied Working Family Party and a ring of Democrat officials:

There are various allegations of possible voter fraud across the country, against both parties, but nowhere does there seem to be a more unusual case than in Troy, New York.
A special prosecutor investigating allegations of voter fraud, Trey Smith, is collecting DNA from the majority of the city council…all Democrats. Five city councilmen, including the council president, as well as four other city and county public officials and political operatives, have been ordered to or have had their saliva swabbed for DNA samples to compare to absentee ballots and absentee ballot applications that were allegedly forged.
The investigation centers on what has been called “a massive voter fraud scheme,” that involved absentee ballots for the Working Families Party, in September 2009. It has been alleged that Democrats tried to steal the primary election for city council and county legislature, by forging absentee ballots and ballot applications to ensure that their candidates also won the Working Families Party primary line.
‘No comment,” is what Democratic Council member Gary Galuski told us, as well as several other public officials who are under investigation.

In Texas, citizen watchdogs have joined True the Vote to monitor and strike back against election fraud in Harris County:

Talk about denial! A group of liberal activists is making the media rounds, assuring reporters and editors that election fraud is a fairy tale. Nothing serious, they assert, nothing to see here. Too bad for them that citizens in Houston, energized by the Tea Party movement, have formed a group called True the Vote. Their hard work has demonstrated that, in some parts of the country at least, our election system is still infested with problems.
True the Vote is composed entirely of volunteers — hundreds of them. They have pored over election records in Harris County, Texas, looking for signs of fraud. And they have found plenty. Indeed, their initial research into only a very small portion of the voter registration records has led them to ask the U.S. Justice Department’s Voting Section to conduct a federal investigation.
In a letter asking for an official inquiry, True the Vote discusses potential widespread forgery in voter application forms. For instance, it seems from the applications that someone suspiciously signs the letter “J” with a quirky “3” inside the loop. The “3” shows up in multiple signatures for different voters with the names Jenard, Jamark, Jamarcus, and Jones.
True the Vote reports that at least four noncitizens have been registered to vote in Harris County. The group provided Justice with the actual voter registration forms where applicants marked “NO” to the question: “Are you a U.S. Citizen?” The group also provided the voter registration numbers of these confessed noncitizens. Yes, astonishingly, Harris County registered them to vote anyway. They are now on the rolls and able to participate in the upcoming midterm elections.
The Help America Vote Act of 2002 was supposed to stop this from happening. But this federal legislation is only as good as the Justice Department’s willingness to enforce it. If Harris County is registering noncitizens, then it is violating numerous provisions of federal law, including those that prohibit the registration of foreigners to vote in federal elections.
True the Vote uncovered other types of fraud as well. The group forwarded to DOJ seven voter registration forms with applicant names different from the signature name. For example: Ta’mackayn Harrison’s application was signed by “Bra Kelly.” Jason King’s was signed by “Jemma Noel.” Yet Harris County inexplicably approved all of these applications. Jason King, aka Jemma Noel, is now on the voter rolls in Houston.
The citizens group also found multiple registrations for individual voters. For example, True the Vote provided the Justice Department government documents showing that at least four persons, including Jose Gomez and Victor Nickerson, had registered to vote multiple times successfully.
These problems were found by True the Vote in just a small sampling of the county’s voter registration list.

In Kentucky, there’s not much detail, but state and FBI officials are investigating voter fraud in Breathhitt County.
In Illinois, disgraceful officials have reportedly been caught lying about the status of military ballots while DOJ twiddles its thumbs.
In Ohio, it’s Cincinnati schools under fire for busing students to vote and handing them Democrat-only sample ballots:

Three van loads of Hughes High students were taken last week – during school hours – to vote and given sample ballots only for Democratic candidates and then taken for ice cream, a Monday lawsuit alleges.
The complaint was made by Thomas Brinkman Jr., a Republican candidate for Hamilton County auditor, and the Coalition Opposed to Additional Spending & Taxes against Cincinnati Public Schools.
“They plan to bring four more high schools (to vote) this week,” Christopher Finney, COAST attorney, said Monday after filing the suit.
It seeks a temporary restraining order to prevent school officials from participating or helping students participate in partisan politics during school hours or with school property or employees involved.

These cases underscore the need for voters to put secretaries of state into office who will protect election integrity from radical left-wing groups. I’ve said before we need candidates like Kris Kobach, running for secretary of state in Kansas on an anti-fraud, anti-corruption, anti-ACORN platform, in every state in the nation.
In the meantime: Vigilance plus citizen media plus the willingness to be sued for blowing the whistle equals the best defense for voter fraud. We must all be voter fraud watchers now.

Once again the Left and their lapdogs in the media appear to be in a coordinated effort to reinforce the Democratic talking points. The fact that every time they do this more and more average Americans are seeing thru the smoke and mirrors put up by the Progressive ivory tower elites gives me hope for this exceptional country. Common sense is starting to prevail as the fraud being perpetrated by the left is exposed.

Here is a great article by Jon Hall you should read published in the American Thinker on December 11, 2011

Voter Fraud for the Complete Idiot

By Jon N. Hall

A Doonesbury cartoon on a recent Sunday contained a distillation of a current talking point among progressives: "Question: What fraud? Voter fraud is close to non-existent!"
Progressives think that if they make the above claim as though it were an indisputable fact, it will become a fact.  All they have to do is repeat the claim over and over again until it sticks.  To wit:
An editorialist for The New York Times asserts: "There is almost no voting fraud in America."
At the Center for American Progress, Eric Alterman writes: "Members of the mainstream media often give too much credence to empty claims of 'voter fraud.'"
At the Brennan Center for Justice, we read: "Allegations of widespread fraud by malevolent voters are easy to make, but often prove to be inflated or inaccurate."
In The Nation, left-wing firebrand Katrina Vanden Heuvel alleges: "Voter fraud -- the impersonation of a voter by another person -- is extremely rare in the United States."
An uncouth gal for Daily Kos writes: "Some [Republicans] acknowledge that voter fraud is essentially non-existent."  (Who are these Republicans?)
At Mother Jones, we read: "While Republicans have argued such rules are necessary to combat 'voter fraud,' examples of the kind of in-person voter fraud that might be curbed by such requirements are miniscule."
At Slate we read: "Large-scale, coordinated vote stealing doesn't happen."
A lady at Think Progress writes: "Like conservative state legislatures across the country, Maine Republicans have been pushing a Voter ID law, ostensibly to prevent non-existent voter fraud."  (Italics added.)
A blogger at Media Matters writes: "Instances of actual voter fraud are very rare."
(There may be a subliminal message in there somewhere.)
The above claims are as absurd as a big-city mayor claiming that last night, no cases of wife-beating occurred in his fair city because, well, no one reported any to the police.
Question: how is a poll worker manning a voting station supposed to know that a voter checking in to vote is about to commit voter fraud -- if that voter is registered?
If the voter's name is on the signature roster, the poll worker must assume that the registrar has thoroughly vetted him and that he is properly registered.  What's a poll worker supposed to do if a "suspicious-looking" voter shows his ID (if even required in the state) and is on the list?  The poll worker hasn't the means to challenge a voter's registration, nor the time.  Besides, that's not his job.  To perform his job, the poll worker must depend on the voter registration system.
One way in which voter fraud (illegal voting) is made possible is by the registration of people who aren't eligible to vote.  Such registrations are due to fraud (or to error) committed by registrants and even by registrars.  But the most important factor contributing to corrupted voter registries is the voter registration system itself.
Voter registration in America is backward and not worthy of a great nation.  And despite the fact that registration involves very little information, registrars do not verify the most important requirement for voting in America -- citizenship.  The Brennan Center reports:

At least 10 states ... introduced legislation that would require proof of citizenship to register or vote. ... Previously, the only state to attempt to require proof of citizenship was Arizona.  That law has been enjoined by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which has recently heard that appeal en banc.

So the nation's most progressive circuit court will decide whether Arizonans must share their birthright with foreigners.  Immigration Reform Law Institute concludes:

IRLI believes the final outcome of this case will likely define the extent to which states are allowed to prevent non-citizens from being added to their voter rolls.  A final decision could affect other states that have enacted laws which require proof of eligibility to vote at registration.  Those states have determined that preventing unauthorized voting is in their respective state's interest.

Question: if the final outcome of this case does go in Arizona's favor, will the state's method for verifying the citizenship of voter registrants be sufficient?  That is, will Arizona voter registries contain citizens only?
Given the mechanisms of our election systems, voter fraud can be impossible to detect.  And if it can't be detected, it can't be quantified.  Hence: no voter fraud.
Part of the controversy over "voter fraud," which progressives downplay as voter impersonation, is the term itself.  Folks concerned about the integrity of our elections should start using the more inclusive term "election fraud," which includes voter fraud, registration fraud, and other types of fraud, such as fraud committed by election officials.
Republicans don't know precisely how much voter fraud actually occurs -- but then, neither does anyone else.  However, voter fraud occurs more frequently than progressives would have us believe, as was ably demonstrated by Hans A. von Spakovsky in an August National Review article:

The claim that there is no voter fraud in the U.S. is patently ridiculous, given our rich and unfortunate history of it. As the U.S. Supreme Court said when it upheld Indiana's photo-ID law in 2008, "Flagrant examples of such fraud . . . have been documented throughout this Nation's history by respected historians and journalists." The liberal groups that fought Indiana's law didn't have much luck with liberal justice John Paul Stevens, who wrote the 6-3 decision. Before being named to the Supreme Court, Justice Stevens practiced law in Chicago, a hotbed of electoral malfeasance.

Requiring photo IDs to vote is better than nothing and may help at the margins, but it isn't going to stop voter fraud.  Would poll workers have photos of all registrants on hand to match against the photos presented by voters?  (A better solution lies elsewhere.)
The left-wing quotes above don't even rise to the level of speculation; they're part of a deliberate concerted effort to deceive -- a propaganda campaign.  Alleging that voter fraud doesn't exist is a straw man designed to divert attention away from other more pressing election problems. Alleging that an undetectable fraud doesn't exist draws attention away from the frauds that can be detected, but aren't.  Alleging that voter fraud doesn't exist whitewashes America's voter registration mess.
Progressives allege that new voter ID requirements are meant to suppress turnout, especially of "the wrong kind of people," as the Doonesbury cartoon puts it.  But the progressives' resistance to even the most basic safeguards is an attempt to keep elections open to theft.  Progressives don't care about the integrity of elections; they just want to win, by whatever means necessary.
America is fast approaching what some think is the most important election in our lives, an election that will determine what kind of nation we are going to be.  And yet we come to this critical decision with election systems that can be gamed.
Jon N. Hall is a programmer/analyst from Kansas City.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2011/12/voter_fraud_for_the_complete_idiot.html at December 17, 2011 - 07:36:30 AM CST