Gift Wrapped Election - Conservative Catch 22

One of the reasons Romney lost the election, according to Romney, is because of the gifts given out to various groups within the populace.

In each case they were very generous in what they gave to those groups. [...] With regards to the young people, for instance, a forgiveness of college loan interest, was a big gift. Free contraceptives were very big with young college-aged women. And then, finally, Obamacare also made a difference for them, because as you know, anybody now 26 years of age and younger was now going to be part of their parents' plan, and that was a big gift to young people. They turned out in large numbers, a larger share in this election even than in 2008.

I agree wholeheartedly with that assessment. But it is not anything new. Consider the whole concept of amnesty to illegal aliens is an attempt to buy the votes of millions of "new citizens". And I know it worked that way. I had a landlord whose citizenship was owed directly to amnesty by Reagan in 1986 and he would repeatedly tell me that he will always vote Republican as a result, as would his wife.

It is an old tactic. Consider this hypocrisy from the anti-lobby as well as the people who regularly want corporate America to have fewer and fewer rights. Corporate America and lobbyists are routinely attacked for getting things from Congress in exchange for their financial support. But it is the same thing that Obama (and plenty more before him) do...give something to a group for the tacit acknowledgement of an exchange for that group's vote.

What the problem for a true conservative is lies in the very belief of smaller government and reducing spending. How do you convince someone who is getting freebies (at the expense of the rest of the nation) to vote for a principle that would require productivity from the freebie-beneficiary? "Hey, vote for smaller government even though it means you will lose all of your handouts and would actually have to work as a result."

Not an easy sell.

Or the other side of the coin, the proverbial 'hard place', is to join in the give-a-way game. Start buying votes like Obama has effectively done for the past 4 years. Then that will grow the budget, grow spending (which every Republican and Democrat Congress has done anyway, so calling any Congress "conservative" is a laugh) and growing the size of government. In essence this strategy is rooted on sacrificing the very principles that identify you to enable you to win so you can enact principles that identify you. But to maintain winning you will have to maintain sacrificing the principles that identify you so you can continue to win while giving lip service to the your "principles" that used to identify you.

Yes, the Democrats routinely buy votes. It is no secret and it is nothing new. The only scandalous part is that the hate-business crowd mysteriously loses their principled indignation when the "buy votes" coin goes in favor of their party.

The real rub is what strategy can conservatives employ that maintains their principles and can win consistently against the purchased votes?

Hypocrisy Of Energy Nazis

There has been a mad rush into "green energies" including the subsidizing of companies that were insoluble just because they said they were going to produce "green energy". There has been no measured approach and no amount of reason in the matter.

As energy prices soar over the coming few years keep in mind how quickly Obama moves against so-called "dirty" sources of energy.

The hypocrisy comes from the surrogates who hail a slow and measured approach.

"The proposed plan supports the Administration’s all-of-the-above approach to explore the full potential our nation’s domestic energy resources and to develop innovative technology and techniques that will lead to safe and responsible production of resources, including oil shale and tar sands, which industry recognizes are years from being commercially viable, but require RD&D today," Interior spokesman Blake Androff said. (Emphasis added)

Electric cars are years upon years away from being commercially viable, too. That is why the Church of Global Warming members had to get the Feds to heavily subsidize and in some places create extra incentives like qualifying for the HOV lanes.

Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) praised the plan, saying the administration exercised the right amount of caution on oil shale development, which has not yet been brought to commercial scale and brings concerns about the amount of water used in the practice.

Caution...except when it comes to CoGW approved things. Then make it law, subsidize it and rush into it. The hypocrisy from the Church is appalling.

And yet not surprising.

Obama Layoffs

Not often do I so quickly get to say I  told you so.  We are less than a week from Obama's re-election and the surge of layoffs begins.  I had been saying to colleagues and on Facebook that Obama's re-election will force companies to choose survival tactics such as layoffs and closures.  And with these actions (as well as gas price spikes, decreasing dollar strength, rising taxes, increased non-employment, etc) Obama supporters get no credibility to complain.

But first let's get back to the layoffs.

Welch Allyn
Welch Allyn, a company that manufactures medical diagnostic equipment in central New York, announced in September that they would be laying off 275 employees, or roughly 10% of their workforce over the next three years. One of the major reasons discussed for the layoffs was a proactive response to the Medical Device Tax mandated by the new healthcare law.

Dana Holding Corp.
As recently as a week ago, a global auto parts manufacturing company in Ohio known as Dana Holding Corp., warned their employees of potential layoffs, citing "$24 million over the next six years in additional U.S. health care expenses". After laying off several white collar staffers, company insiders have hinted at more to come. The company will have to cover the additional $24 million cost somehow, which will likely equate to numerous cuts in their current workforce of 25,500 worldwide.

Stryker
One of the biggest medical device manufacturers in the world, Stryker will close their facility in Orchard Park, New York, eliminating 96 jobs in December. Worse, they plan on countering the medical device tax in Obamacare by slashing 5% of their global workforce - an estimated 1,170 positions.

Boston Scientific
In October of 2009, Boston Scientific CEO Ray Elliott, warned that proposed taxes in the health care reform bill could "lead to significant job losses" for his company. Nearly two years later, Elliott announced that the company would be cutting anywhere between 1,200 and 1,400 jobs, while simultaneously shifting investments and workers overseas - to China.

Medtronic
In March of 2010, medical device maker Medtronic warned that Obamacare taxes could result in a reduction of precisely 1,000 jobs. That plan became reality when the company cut 500 positions over the summer, with another 500 set for the end of 2013.
...
Smith & Nephew - 770 layoffs
Abbott Labs - 700 layoffs
Covidien - 595 layoffs
Kinetic Concepts - 427 layoffs
St. Jude Medical - 300 layoffs
Hill Rom - 200 layoffs

For those keeping score that is over 6000 jobs from just 10 companies. This does not include companies that will eliminate full time jobs for part time (less than 30 hours per week) since there are huge incentives to do so under the Obamacare rules.

Darden Restaurants
According to the Orlando Sentinel, Darden Restaurants, a casual dining chain best known for their Red Lobster, Olive Garden and LongHorn Steakhouse restaurants, is "experimenting with limiting the hours of some of its workers to avoid health care requirements under the Affordable Care Act when they take effect in 2014".

JANCOA Janitorial Services
The CEO of JANCOA, Mary Miller, testified to Congress that Obamacare was a "dream killer", adding that one option she had to consider "is reducing the majority of my team members to part-time employment in order to reduce the amount that I will be penalized."

Kroger
The American retailer in Cincinnati, Ohio recently was reported to be planning a significant slashing of their hourly workers. Doug Ross writes:

Operative Faith (a mid-level manager with the company) reveals that Kroger will soon join the ranks of Darden Restaurants and slash the hours of its non-exempt (hourly) workers to avoid millions in Obamacare penalties.

According to the source, Obamacare could result in tens of thousands of Kroger employees being limited to working 28 hours per week.

America, this is just the beginning. Expect layoffs for survival over the next 4 years minimum as Obamacare continues to go into effect by 2014 and then as other companies feel the suffocating crunch afterwards. Full time jobs will be increasingly difficult to find much less hold and the foolhardy thing that will happen is to again extend unemployment benefits which is addressing the symptoms of the illness not the illness itself. Unemployment numbers will eventually get better as people's benefits simply expire and there will be confusion about why people still feel like their in a depression.

America, you brought this on yourself. In voting for the same thing (hostile business environment and hostile environment towards the actual people that can solve this--the wealthy) you voted for continuing the our economic path. Eventually the path of circling the drain just goes down the drain.

Liar Asks Who Wants A Liar For President

The levels some go to.

Bill Clinton, whose lies are infamously enshrined in things like political games, and whose lies are so easily documented that I am not going to even bother linking ("I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky", nuff said) delivers a whopper of a question.

In trying to make the case that (a) Romney is knowingly lying and (b) therefore cannot be elected said the following:

You’re laughing, but who wants a president who will knowingly, repeatedly tell you something he knows is not true?” Clinton asked, after discounting a claim in a recent Romney ad that the Obama administration’s auto bailout hurt American workers.

Initially I would have said "ironic" but I think the best description is "unscrupulous". Wouldn't that be as backwards as if Newt Gingrich asked, "Can you really trust a man as Speaker of the House if he has had more than one marriage"?

Why Debate With A 26 Point Lead

California Senator Diane Feinstein (who I still think looks like Momma from "Throw Momma From The Train") is not going to debate with her challenger.

Can't blame her, really. In a state that would elect Marx, Castro, Pelosi or Putin before any even close to center there is really nothing that she or the population can gain from a debate with Righty.

Throw on top of that a 26 point lead in the polls and it is an easy thing to understand.

Polls show [Elizabeth] Emken posing less of a challenge than [the four previous opponents]. A September Field Poll put Feinstein at 57 percent and Emken at 31 percent, a 26-point margin that grew from a 19-point advantage in July.

The campaign spokesperson's reaction was worthy of a chuckle.

Emken spokesman Mark Standriff scoffed at the explanation and continued to criticize the incumbent's failure to debate.

"That's unworthy of the office she's been holding for two decades and disrespectful of the people she claims to represent," Standriff said.

Actually, it is quite representative of California. They are are perfectly represented by her.

And the public is getting a service by not having to suffer debates.

Obama Still Collecting Illegal Contributions

It has been pointed a number of times recently that Obama's campaign has been taking illegal contributions. There is no grey area. All foreign contributions are illegal.

In spite of it being pointed out (and the mainstream media saying nothing, by the way) there have been no corrections to the problem.

Using a Pakistani Internet Protocol and proxy server, a disposable credit card and a fake address, “Osama bin Laden” has successfully donated twice to Barack Obama’s presidential re-election campaign.
...
The acceptance of foreign contributions is strictly illegal under U.S. campaign finance law.

One $15 donation was made at BarackObama.com using a confirmed Pakistani IP address. In other words, as far as the campaign website was concerned, the donation was openly identified electronically as coming from Pakistan.

Before people get their panties in a bunch these tests have also been done on Romney's site...and that campaign is interested in following the law above the drive to collect money to try to win. The apparently foreign-based contributions were conducted as a test after a flurry of media reports described the ability of foreigners to donate to the Obama campaign but not to Mitt Romney’s site, which has placed safeguards against such efforts. In other words there is a respect for the law on one side and not on the other side.

Since the “foreign” contribution was sent, “Bin Laden’s” email address has received several solicitations from Obama’s campaign asking for more donations.

What is interesting about the email solicitations is that they have been reported to request an amount that keeps the donor $5 below the aggregate amount that would require demographic collection, proof of identity and mandatory reporting of all of that.

Circumstantial, sure, but enough individual car on a track make a train. Enough circumstantial evidence in a row is intent.

Obama's campaign seems to know they are collecting illegal contributions and attemptin to not just keep the funds but leverage them for more illegal contributions.

Death Threat Makers Still Active On Twitter

I guess making death threats against Romney is not a violation of Twitter TOS and Rules as those who have done so have not had their account closed yet.

It has been a few weeks since the 2nd Presidential Debate during which several death threats were made against Romney.

More than a dozen Twitter accounts that were used as a medium to publically threaten Republican candidate Mitt Romney’s life after the second presidential debate remain active, nearly two weeks later. This news comes after the Secret Service told this publication that it was “aware” of these very threats on Romney’s life.

“I'm gonna murder Romney right now,” Twitter user @WestonSebree tweeted October 17. But while the user appears to have deleted that particular threat, he remains very active on Twitter.

Likewise, also on October 17, soon after the second presidential debate ended, Twitter user @Jasmineuribe proclaimed, “At this point in time I am completely prepared to MURDER ROMNEY MYSELF!” She continues to remain active on Twitter.

Those are clearly threats that fit under the words of Twitter's Rules, "Violence and Threats: You may not publish or post direct, specific threats of violence against others."

According to Twitter's Terms of Service the accounts should not be active.

We may suspend or terminate your accounts or cease providing you with all or part of the Services at any time for any reason, including, but not limited to, if we reasonably believe: (i) you have violated these Terms or the Twitter Rules, (ii) you create risk or possible legal exposure for us; or (iii) our provision of the Services to you is no longer commercially viable.

Other violators:

And @GoToSLEEP_Hoe tweeted, “Somebody should assassinate Romney...” That user, too, remains very active.

The list goes on—and on. (Such as, users: @LoudJet_Life, @alyy_joee, @iBeBlowinUrMind, @AllHaleDeja_, @4shogbmg, @DamnGurlYuNasty, @LosHomocidio, @m_So_Sinqleee, @ItsCeddyB, @_KingKiera, @emma_rizzuto, @_OVO_Libra. Check Twitchy here, for the original report on threats to Romney’s life after the debate.)

The threats were made.
The accounts are still active.
Conclusion: Threats against Romney are acceptable.


**** UPDATE ****
As of 2pm Central time, 10/29/12 all of the above mentioned accounts are active with posts within the previous hour.

Political Vandalism

I make no bones about my views on political vandalism. I think it is engaged in by cowards and the penalties should be a felony. I would have no problem if it was classified as acts of terror. From stealing lawn signs to outright vandalism it all is designed to intimidate the subject into silence for the simple reason of having an opposing political viewpoint.

Let's start in the state full of faux tolerance, California. By faux tolerance I am talking about preaching tolerance while practicing intolerance. What happens in Alta Loma in the San Bernadino County when you live at a house that shows support for Romney? You get the name Obama keyed into your car and your seats slashed.

Someone keyed the word “Obama” into two cars and slashed seats in another outside a residence that had Mitt Romney campaign signs.

[Ken Slown] estimates the damage to both of his vehicles at about $3,400.

In addition to both cars being keyed, his wife’s vehicle had her seats slashed, as well. Said Slown, “They pretty much cut the backs of all of the seats.”

A neighbor, who also has a Romney/Ryan sign in their front yard, were also hit. “Obama” keyed in the hood and on the black gate of an SUV.

The vandalism-terrorism is not limited to just residences. A church marquee was vandalized in Indiana. For this one you have to give credit for creativity. They rearranged the letters on the marquee.

One side of the sign read “Christ voted Democrat” and the other read “Romney hates women”.

In the end it is still vandalism and theft (the cretins stole the remaining letters).

I love what Luke Jackson, the pastor of the church, said.

"One community member in particular had said, 'I don't believe a church should be promoting anything like that in a political way,' and I agreed 100 percent," he said.

Which is why I believe this church should lose its tax exempt status.

Bishop David Ricken, the leader of the Catholic Diocese of Green Bay, noted in a recent letter to parishioners that voting for candidates who support what he calls “intrinsically evil” positions, such as abortion and gay marriage, could “put your own soul in jeopardy.”

Ricken’s letter, dated Oct. 24, notes that the church has a responsibility to “speak out regarding moral issues, especially on those issues that impact the ‘common good.’” It goes on to note principles to keep in mind in the voting booth on Nov. 6, including abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, human cloning and gay marriage.

“A well-formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program that contradicts fundamental contents of faith and morals,” Ricken said in the letter. “Some candidates and one party have even chosen some of these as their party’s or their personal political platform. To vote for someone in favor of these positions means that you could be morally ‘complicit’ with these choices which are intrinsically evil. This could put your own soul in jeopardy. (Emphasis added)”

But I digress. Back to political vandalism.

Elsewhere in the state of Wisconsin more tolerance. In an effort to do physical damage for the simple offense of having a different political belief some thugs poured nails in the parking lot of a political rally. Keeping it classy.

The Racine Tea Party's "Rally for Jobs" kicked off at 2:30 p.m. Saturday inside the old Sam's Club at 6200 Regency West Drive. Before the event could get under way, though, organizers say a truck affixed with "Obama" stickers drove through the parking lot and dumped quantities of nails.

It seems that the vandalism is decidedly heavy against one side of the political spectrum...and this matches my anecdotal experience in my years both living in Hennepin County and at the University of Minnesota.

Will They Still Want The Electoral College Scrapped

They wants the Electoral College done away with. My hunch was it was pure politics, a gambit to ferment discontent and fan the belief of disillusionment while misleading people to believe they were disenfranchised by the genius of the Electoral College. I did not believe their words to be sincere.

Polls and probabilities are showing a growing possibility of Romney winning the popular vote while Obama wins the election. That would give us a great chance to see if those people were hacks putting their party above any principles or if they actually believe what they said.

One fine example is Secretary Clinton and President Obama. Let us remember her position after the 2000 election.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — Shortly after the 2000 election, as a newly-minted Senator-elect, Clinton called for direct elections of the president. She argued the country has changed since the Electoral College was put in place.

“We are a very different country than we were 200 years ago,” Clinton said at a news conference.

“I believe strongly that in a democracy, we should respect the will of the people and to me, that means it’s time to do away with the Electoral College and move to the popular election of our president.”

And another example of a prominent politician who said the Electoral College needed to be done away was President Obama.

Obama said he supported eliminating the Electoral College as a Senate candidate during a WTTW television debate against Republican Alan Keyes in 2004.

When asked, “Yes or no, eliminate the Electoral College?” Obama responded, “Yes … I think, at this point, this is breaking down.”

Oh, don't worry. I won't be surprised to get some Righties pissing vinegar about the Electoral College. Here are some on the record for maintaining it.

Vice President Biden and Senator Orin Hatch vote against the idea the last time it reached the Senate floor in 1979. There is also Senate Minority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell.

The Senate minority leader told the Associated Press two days after the 2000 election that presidential candidates would avoid small states if the Electoral College was eliminated.

“If we did away with the Electoral College, an awful lot of states would never get a visit from a presidential candidate,” McConnell said.

In 2011, McConnell blasted a national popular vote movement that would circumvent a constitutional amendment. He claimed it would lead to an extreme number of recounts.

“The proponents of this absurd and dangerous concept are trying to get this done while nobody notices, just sort of sneak this through,” and “we need to kill it in the cradle before it grows up.”

I agree with him.

There's more.

Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) — The chairwoman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee shares the same opinion as McConnell about smaller states losing power without the system.

"Washington (state) would be hurt dramatically,” Murray told a Vancouver, Wash., high school on Nov. 20, 2000.

"Presidential candidates wouldn't come here."

Notice the mixed company in opposition of the change?

Let me give the names of a few others wanting to do away with the Electoral College. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Rep. Ray LaHood (R-Ill.), who is now Obama’s Secretary of Transportation, Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) and Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y). Notice the homogeneity in party on this side? One of them had the most ridiculous concept for a justification. Durbin actually posited that people who vote for the loser in a state are disenfranchised.

"Our current system disenfranchises millions of voters who happen to vote for the losing presidential candidate in their state," Durbin said. “The electoral college is an 18th century invention that never should have survived to the 21st century.

Someone who votes and whose vote is tallied cannot by definition be disenfranchised. This is a buzzword to make people believe the speaker's position is a moral imperative and in that vein is a very specious and despicable method of communication.

I saved this one for last mostly because he both changed his story and did it while erroneously leading people to believe that not being visited by the candidates constitutes disenfranchisement.

Former Vice President Al Gore — After the 2000 election, Gore continued to support the current system. But Gore reversed course during this year’s Democratic National Convention, criticizing the process that ignores voters outside of swing states and cost him the election.

“I’ve seen how these states are written off and ignored, and people are effectively disenfranchised in the presidential race. And I really do now think it is time to change that,” Gore said on Current TV.

Sorry, that is nowhere close to disenfranchisement and it only perpetuates a broken victim mentality.

From the World English Dictionary:

1. to deprive (a person) of the right to vote or other rights of citizenship

It is like they do not know what it means...or are counting on the public to be too stupid to know what it means.

Anyway, we might get to see a lot of people suddenly rationalizing a 180 in their "beliefs" and principles. Should be fun to watch.

How Ignorance Spreads

This is how ignorance spreads.  First one person makes a ridiculously exaggerated statement.

But you can't erase what you've already done, they've voted to extend tax cuts for the very wealthy, giving a $500 trillion dollar tax-cut to 120,000 families.

Then the hundred people are going to go home and repeat it as fact. And maybe 1% of the new second hand audience will catch the quote as being wrong. Maybe 4% will catch the quote as being ridiculous. But of the remaining 95% of the new second hand audience maybe as many as 45% will just dismiss it as coming from a partisan who is repeating partisan stuff and dismiss it.

But the remaining 50% will be blindly following enough to repeat the broken figure to people. And so on and so on.

Remember, kids, the national debt is a staggering $16 trillion and if there had been a proposal to cut taxes by more than 50 times the national debt the MSM would have been all over it. You would have heard about it without trying. That person would have been skewered by hacks like Whoopi Goldberg, Cooper Anderson and Steven Colbert. But that person would have my vote!

Not only does ignorance spread from ridiculous misinformation like this, but had this been a Republican that made such an obvious misquote (and with Biden misquotes come often) there would be a national story calling into question the speaker's intelligence as well. Enter the nightly talk show surrogates like Letterman who would reinforce that perception. And then that audience tells someone and ignorance again spreads.

Political Terrorism From Vandalism Strikes Again

And again, more political terrorism and it seems to be a recurring pattern that it is against right-wing people.

William Overbay said someone ignited the flags and signs, which supported Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, that he had lined along his yard. The vandals also painted a sign on his driveway reading "Obama for life," at his DuPont Circle home, Overbay said.
...
Howey-in-the-Hills police say no one left any clues behind to identify themselves. Overbay said as a Vietnam-era veteran, the hard feelings caused by the vandalism run deep.

"To give that many years for my country and to see it desecrated in such a despicable way angers me," Overbay said. "We have freedom of speech and to desecrate any kind of signs is absolutely despicable and a violation of the constitution of the United States."

I agree that it is despicable. It is an attempt at intimidation which is why I believe it is political terrorism.

Voter ID Opponents Do A Facepalm

I bet the folks against requirements to show ID to vote are doing a facepalm over this story. Remember, one of the main tenets of the anti-ID crowd is that there is no voter fraud. I have people tell me that in this state it is impossible. My take is that human nature being what it is and politics being as divided as it is that it is folly to ignore human nature. It is human nature to "stretch the truth" and play in the grey areas...to test the limits and stretch the boundaries.

So when the field director of Jim Moran (D-VA) gets busted on video advising someone how to fraudulently cast votes it makes me wonder how the anti-Safe Election crowd will respond. What is worse is that the field director was telling how to cast those votes...by forging utility bills. And they won't be able to dismiss it as one rogue person. The field director was advising that, if caught, the person could rely on Democrat lawyers to help.

The son of Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va. – who serves as the field director for his father’s campaign – has been caught on video advising an undercover reporter how to fraudulently cast ballots in the name of registered voters by forging utility bills and relying on the assistance of Democrat lawyers.

But, you would say to me, this works on both sides. I'm sure it does. But I don't hear anywhere near as many stories about organized voter fraud on the Right as I do on the Left. In fact, I have never heard of an organized effort on the Right. I have been on mailing lists for organizations across the spectrum from Green Party to Constitution Party and I left some of them for using those mailing list to organize voter fraud. Specifically, that was the Green Party at the U of MN who was trying to organize busing people to Iowa to allow them to vote both in MN and in IA. They were also organizing groups to take advantage of same day registration and vote in multiple locations including at home and at school.

I guarantee if there were as many any stories about Right-leaning groups engaged in this crap then the Left would not be fighting so strongly against the ID Requirements to vote. Wait, I take that back. After the 2000 election the Left suddenly wanted to scrap the Electoral College. (Aside: I wonder if Romney should win the popular vote but lose the election will those people on the Left scream again as loudly about the Electoral College or will they be embracing that part of the Constitution?)

The guy that busted this field director has busted many people including the uber-socialist group, ACORN.

James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas, known for its hidden-camera probe of the controversial national community organizing group tied to Obama, ACORN, carried out the investigation and provided the video exclusively to WND.

The field director has immediately resigned. But I would like to see criminal charges brought against him.

Furthermore, Jim Moran is no angel either. I mean, when a Democrat gets punished by Nancy Pelosi you know he is out there.

Jim Moran, 67, a controversial figure in Congress, has been criticized for his collaboration with Islamic leaders with ties to terrorism. In 2003, Moran, then a regional whip in the House of Representatives, was punished by House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi after he suggested Jews were responsible for the push for war against Iraq.

Back to the voter fraud thing. Notice here that there is not just a plan but obviously a safety net in spite of the new Virginia laws. Human nature. If you make it to easy for everyone then it is too easy to act fraudulently. We go from the 'how to'...

Moran suggests creating fake utility bills to serve as voter ID. But he warns that there will be “a lot of voter protection” at the polling places to enforce the identification laws.

“So, if they just have the utility bill or bank statement – bank statement would obviously be tough … but faking a utility bill would be easy enough,” Moran says.

The reporter asks: “How would you do that?”

“I mean, I would just find, I don’t know,” Moran replies. “I guess. …”

“Microsoft Word and type it up,” offers the reporter.

...to the 'safety net'...

Moran emphasizes that the poll workers will be “trained up” on the new law to protect voters and “be cracking down.”

If there’s any trouble, he says, an Obama for America lawyer, or another Democrat lawyer, will be on hand to provide help, he said.

“You’ll have somebody in house, that if they feel that what you have is legitimate, they’ll argue for you,” Moran says.

But he warns the reporter that the utility bill has “got to look good.”

...to the advice on making the fraud safer...

Later, at the Arlington County Democratic Party office, Moran advises the reporter to contact the registered voters on the list to make sure they don’t plan to cast a ballot Nov. 6. He suggests obtaining the information by posing as a pollster.

Again, this is not an isolated incident. The reporter is working for Project Veritas and has had interesting results just this year alone.

As WND reported, earlier this month O’Keefe’s team captured on video a regional director of the voter mobilization group launched by Barack Obama, Organizing for America, helping an undercover reporter vote for the president in two states.

And wait, there's more.

This year, Project Veritas says it has been conducting an ongoing series of investigations in more than a dozen states “demonstrating the ease with which election fraud can be committed and legitimate voters can be disenfranchised.”

The group’s previous effort in Texas, New Jersey, New York and Connecticut shows Obama campaign workers, including Organizing for America Regional Field Director Stephanie Caballero, helping people who declare they want to commit election fraud. The investigation was inspired by a column by WND columnist Chuck Norris.

Just when you thought it was safe to say that elections are safe...

In April, a Project Veritas investigator was offered the ballot of Attorney General Eric Holder at a polling place.

Think carefully as you look at Question 2 on your Minnesota ballot this year. Think carefully as you try to pull the lever against safer elections. Think carefully how comfortable you are with the system. If your opposing political party controlled the area you live in would you want the present system of not being required to do anything but sign your name on the list of registered voters? And then relying on a partisan Secretary of State office to validate everything?

If Only He Had A Gun

I would love for the laws for political vandalism, including the theft of lawn signs, to be felonies. And I will have no remorse for someone who is engaged in theft of property (and trespassing) to be shot by a homeowner protecting his property.  It is a shame this guy was not packing heat.

Wait, I thought the Left was supposed to be full of peace-loving people.  Or is it the same Left from which I repeatedly received death threats for disagreeing with them?

Obama will provide for us all

In case you have not heard the expectations of the Obama supporters check this out.

"I never thought this day would ever happen. I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won’t have to worry about paying my mortgage. You know. If I help him, he’s gonna help me."

THAT is either the Welfare state (who will pay for that?) or that is Socialism (we all pay for that with our freedom).

Yes, Obama won. How could he not when he promised everything to everyone! This list of promises is so long that people were viewing him as a savior (if not THE Savior).

The expectations of handouts and free rides are so high that by October 31 Obama's camp was trying to figure out how to lower expectations after their victory.

"Barack Obama’s senior advisers have drawn up plans to lower expectations for his presidency if he wins next week’s election, amid concerns that many of his euphoric supporters are harbouring unrealistic hopes of what he can achieve."

How can his supporters NOT harbor unrealistic hopes of what he can achieve when in just one speech on October 30 he gave this laundry list of things he will do:
* "give a tax break to 95 percent of Americans who work every day and get taxes taken out of their paycheck every week";
* "eliminate income taxes on Social Security for seniors making under $50,000";
* "give homeowners and working parents additional tax breaks";
* not increase taxes on anyone if they "make under $250,000; you will not see your taxes increase by a single dime –- not your income taxes, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains tax";
* "end those breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas";
* "give tax breaks to companies that invest right here in the United States";
* "eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses and start-up companies that are the engine of job creation in this country";
* "create two million new jobs by rebuilding our crumbling roads, and bridges, and schools -- by laying broadband lines to reach every corner of the country";
* "invest $15 billion a year in renewable sources of energy to create five million new energy jobs over the next decade";
* "reopen old factories, old plants, to build solar panels, and wind turbines";
* build "a new electricity grid";
* "build the fuel efficient cars of tomorrow";
* "eliminate the oil we import from the Middle East in 10 years";
* "lower premiums" for those who already have health insurance;
* "if you don't have health insurance, you'll be able to get the same kind of health insurance that members of Congress give themselves";
* "end discrimination by insurance companies to the sick and those who need care the most";
* "invest in early childhood education";
* "recruit an army of new teachers";
* "pay our teachers higher salaries, give them more support. But ... also demand higher standards and more accountability";
* "make a deal with every young person who's here and every young person in America: If you are willing to commit yourself to national service, whether it's serving in our military or in the Peace Corps, working in a veterans home or a homeless shelter, then we will guarantee that you can afford to go to college no ifs ands or buts";
* "stop spending $10 billion a month in Iraq whole the Iraqis have a huge surplus";
* "end this war in Iraq";
* "finish the fight and snuff out al Qaeda and bin Laden";
* "increase our ground troops and our investments in the finest fighting force in the world";
* "invest in 21st century technologies so that our men and women have the best training and equipment when they deploy into combat and the care and benefits they have earned when they come home";
* "No more homeless veterans"; and
* "no more fighting for disability payments."

You Voted For This...

From the same people who brought you zingers like: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" and " I support the military" comes a new year for lies... This time, the lie is:

We will restore civility to our debate. As Speaker it will be my solemn duty to serve not just one party, but the whole House of Representatives. To that end, we will restore bipartisanship to the administration of the House, re-establish regular order for considering legislation, and ensure the rights of the minority – whichever party is in the minority. The voice of every American has a right to be heard, and that is what the American people expect and deserve. - Nancy Pelosi

This quote is directly from Nancy Pelosi's House Democratic Leader website, and it hasn't even been 2007 for 9 hours (where I live) before this is already shown to be a lie. To quote the Washington Post:

House Democrats intend to pass a raft of popular measures as part of their well-publicized plan for the first 100 hours. They include tightening ethics rules for lawmakers, raising the minimum wage, allowing more research on stem cells and cutting interest rates on student loans.

But instead of allowing Republicans to fully participate in deliberations, as promised after the Democratic victory in the Nov. 7 midterm elections, Democrats now say they will use House rules to prevent the opposition from offering alternative measures, assuring speedy passage of the bills and allowing their party to trumpet early victories.

Folks. I wish I could say I was completely by-partisan... well, not realy. In fact, I believe that most things that is done by the political left is just plain... Stupid. However, I know that without a right wing, and a left wing, our little air plane isn't gunna fly. We need freaks like Nancy Pelosi to use as examples of what liars you don't want your kids to grow up as. And No, I don't agree with President Bush on everything. But the best chance the democrats can use to claim he "lied" (WMDs) was him making a decision based on the intelligence from our own military, as well as the intelligence from MANY other countries and IRAQ Admitting to having WMDs.

Democrats and republicans both lie... they are people. You can find examples from both sides. But I don't know how people can keep voting for the dems. I expected such a move from them... for years they were the minority, and now that they are the majority, they say "now is the time for bipartinship." That line was BS to start with... but that’s how they work. as long as they are in control, its okay to be bipartisan. This is the same group that chastized Nixon but defended Clinton. The same group that believes that the 2000 and 2004 elections were rigged because they didn't win, and the same group that tries to sue-sue-sue when they don't get the election results they want. Amazing, the apparent "lack" of voter fraud in 06 as apposed to 2000 and 2004, isn't it?

But Nancy and her party shows their stripes, taking away the promise of working with "both sides" in a "restored sence of bipartisanship."

House Republicans have begun to complain that Democrats are backing away from their promise to work cooperatively. They are working on their own strategy for the first 100 hours, and part of it is built on the idea that they might be able to break the Democrats' slender majority by wooing away some conservative Democrats.

Which they should have seen a mile away.

But because the details of the Democratic proposals have not been released, some language could be new. Daly said Democrats are still committed to sharing power with the minority down the line. "The test is not the first 100 hours," he said. "The test is the first six months or the first year. We will do what we promised to do."

Yea Right.

********** Update 1/3/07 11:00am **********

Checking on MSNBC's website fore news, something I do often to anger myself, as they do not tend to be... um... "Fair and balanced." I came across this story:

Bush calls on Democrats to work with him.

Now, I have been quoted as pointing out the extension of the olive branch to 'work together':

1/20/06 - "Consider the partisan olive branch extended."

10/19/05 - "Extend the olive branch, only for a dem to hit you with it sort'a thing."

2/3/05 - "this is so aggravating. why can't the democrats just WORK with the republicans? why do they have to be babies about everything!? You don't have to answer this if it pisses you off. I wanted to draw it to everyone's attention that I think it is another pathetic display on how the republicans have that olive branch extended, but the democrats just can't stop hitting them with it."

2/1/05 - "Bush extended the olive branch, the left is beating him with it while hugging the tree."

However, looking at the rating for this story (of which MSNBC's ratings seam to track the leftist opinion of the stories, don't believe me? Try looking under the environMental section for starters) it would seam there are those who don't want the olive branch to be taken. I expressed my doubt that the democrats would hold to their promise of 'working together' yesterday... and the more I look into it, the more it seams Dems don't want to. Mark my words:

1/3/07 - "The only use a democrat has for the olive branch republicans hold out will only be to give them a concussion"

"To You, for the new year, are offered 1(one) Wheet Thin as a peace offering. Lets make this year a good one... Together. Please don't hurt me." - George W Bush Action Figure

Predictions the day before

This is the 'day before' market predictions for races that I have been tracking on TradeSports. I might also be going into these briefly on tomorrow night's election night coverage on KNSI starting at 7PM.

MN US SENATOR
Kennedy to win: 7.0%
Don't let this price fool you too much. There is no interest in this contract so the 7.0% is a bit of a premium. This contract never went above 50% and was only AT 50% on the day the contract started (December 2005). It has been on a steady decline its entire life last being over 40% in early June and permanently residing under 30% since mid-July. Since mid-September this contract has had only one day over 10%.

MN GOVERNOR
Pawlenty to win: 46.0%
This contract seemed to be a strong possibility to win. Since its inception at the end of March it stayed strongly between 60% and 80% through August 1 (with a 2 day sting slightly under 60% in mid-July). On August 1 this contract shot up above 80% and stayed between 80% and 85% until the Mark Foley scandal broke. That day this (and many other GOP contracts) fell hard. This one fell quickly to 60% and then steadily to as low as 23% by the 3rd week of October. It has not been above 50% since mid-October. The good news for this contract is a new and strong uptrend over the past few days has it rebounding from its new resting place of 30% about ready to break 50% again. At this very moment upward resistance is so weak that a purchase of 7 contracts would push the price back to 59%. The Bid/Ask is very active and also trending upwards.

MN 6th CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
Bachmann to win: 40.0%
Wetterling to win: 40.0%
These contracts started late and have had non-existent interest so prices are not very strong indicators as a predictor. There are two offers on Wetterling (people trying to sell) set at 37.5% and two bids on Bachmann set at 40% & 60%.

US SENATE MAJORITY
GOP hold majority: 72.0%
This is a strange pricing. In the previous post I listed the predictions for all of the US Senate races and there was only two toss-ups (both leaning Democrat). The balance of those contracts gave a party count of GOP 49, DEM 49, IND 2. The other paradoxical thing about this contract is its resiliance. From January 2006 until Mark Foley (beginning of October) this contract was strong residing in the 75%-90% range. After Foley it found a new and very volatile home in the 60% to 80%. Activity is very heavy. The floor-ceiling prices are around 70.0%/77.0%.

US HOUSE MAJORITY
GOP hold majority: 22.4%
This contract started 13 months ago in October 2006 and jumped up to 85%. Since then it has been a steady decline to its present spot. The truly disturbing data for this contract is the lead-like drop since the beginning of November 2006...from 30% to nearly 20%. The strongest support is at about 21.0% and the ceiling for resistance is at 25.0% (though there is a lot of resistance before that batch).

US HOUSE DEM PICKUP
Remember these are listed in 1/2 seats to avoid a push. Prcies followed by the prices last Tuesday in parenthesis.
Gain .5 seats: 98.7 (98.8)
Gain 4.5 seats: 97.4 (94.8)
Gain 9.5 seats: 95.0 (89.9)
Gain 14.5 seats: 85.5 (74.0) (needed for DEM Majority)
Gain 19.5 seats: 69.4 (63.8)
Gain 24.5 seats: 44.0 (38.5)
Gain 29.5 seats: 30.3 (29.5
Gain 34.5 seats: 22.0 (added on November 3)
Gain 39.5 seats: 15.0 (added on November 3)
Gain 44.5 seats: 10.0 (added on November 3)
There is no mistaking the trend in the market. The Democrats will gain seats and the closer the elections get the more seats the market is believing will be gained. Safe money is now on 20+ seats.

US CONGRESS ELECTION PARLAYS
GOP House, GOP Senate: 22.0 (25.0)
DEM House, GOP Senate: 57.0 (46.0)
GOP House, DEM Senate: 2.0 (6.0)
DEM House, DEM Senate: 30.0 (25.0)
The trend here mimics the trend in other contracts...The House will change hands. Control of the Senate reflects the same schizophrenia that is mention previously, leading to a conclusion that the Senate Majority is too close to call.

With the parlays the "Dem House" contracts with both the GOP Senate and Dem Senate are rising in price. Granted, the GOP Senate is +11.0% over the past week while the Dem Senate is only +5.0%, they are both still rising. This coincides with the US SENATE MAJORITY contract mentioned above...the GOP is likely to hold the Senate.

The individual Senate contracts are painting a picture contrary to that...the Party breakdown will be split (49-49-2), though the 2 IND will be on the DEM side of the aisle in reality. There are only 2 toss-ups (MO and VA) in the individual contracts, both leaning DEM. If those toss-ups remain with the GOP or if they split then the breakdown will be a technical GOP Majority (51-47-2 or 50-48-2). Difficult to say and these likely will not have a strong indicator until the returns start coming in tomorrow.

And yes, you can trade on these until certification (typically in December).

There you have it...TradeSports day before predictions. If I get an early enough start to my day tomorrow I may give a Same Day update.

Predictions the day before--US Senate

I wanted to do this a little more frequently, but it was labor intensive in many ways. The first (and only previous) installment of the TradeSports predictions on the US Senate races can be found here. This is the 'day before' market predictions. I might also be going into these briefly on tomorrow night's election night coverage on KNSI starting at 7PM. And, some info about the coverage:

Hosted by Tony Garcia from KNSI’s Race to the Right, Don Lyons from KNSI’s Hot Talk with the Ox, and KNSI News Reporter Cassie Hart.

You’ll stay up-to-the-minute on the latest vote tallies as they come in. All local and state races will be covered along with national updates throughout the evening.

Featuring:
* Dan “The Ox” Ochsner broadcasting live from the Minnesota Republican Party Election Night Headquarters at the Sheraton South, Bloomington.
* Former Congressional Candidate Janet Robert broadcasting live from the DFL Headquarters at the Crown Plaza, St.Paul.
* Dave Phipps from KNSI’s Creative Department broadcasting live from various locations throughout the St.Cloud area.
* St.Cloud Mayor Dave Kleis broadcasting live from the Public Safety Referendum Headquarters in St.Cloud.
* Former St.Cloud Mayor Larry Meyer providing in-studio analysis and historical perspective of local races.
* Special interviews with Police Chief Dennis Ballentine, Fire Chief Bill Mund, and public safety officials planning the 2008 GOP National Convention in Minnesota.

The station's release did not mention it because it was not confirmed at the time, but Marty Andrade will also be helping with the election night coverage behind the scenes. Arguably his job will be the toughest of all. He will be compiling updates for scores upon scores of races (federal, state, county, local...) and updating them on the web for KNSI's listeners to also view...while also feeding them to me for on-air reporting.

OK, back to the US Senate races. Below are the TradeSports market-based predictions (and the chance of it coming to fruition).

If you need a primer on what the percentages relate to go this posting. There is a chart that helps convert the percentages to NFL Point Spreads, fractional odds and plain English.

For the sake of ease for me I am listing the state and the party predicted to win and the percentage of chance for that party winning being given by the market and then the party of the incumbent. (Bold/underline races are within the 'up for grabs' range of 40%-60%.) A note of technicality...these are based on the price of the last transaction rather than the more indicative buy/sell. However, this way is less labor intensive and at this point I need that.

State...Predicted Winner...% chance (% in 4/2005)...result
AZ...GOP...90.0 (89.0) GOP hold
CA...DEM...96.6 (96.8) DEM hold
CT...IND...96.6 (94.5) IND gain
DE...DEM...96.0 (96.0) DEM hold
FL...DEM...98.5 (82.0) DEM hold
HI...DEM...95.1 (96.0) DEM hold
IN...GOP...95.6 (96.0) GOP hold
ME...GOP...98.0 (95.0) GOP hold
MD...DEM...68.0 (62.9) (open) DEM hold
MA...DEM...96.5 (90.0) DEM hold
MI...DEM...94.9 (90.0) DEM hold
MN...DEM...92.9 (63.9) (open) DEM hold
MS...GOP...95.5 (96.0) GOP hold
MO...DEM...56.5 (GOP 59.5) DEM gain
MT...DEM...69.1 (55.0) DEM gain
NE...DEM...95.5 (90.0) DEM hold
NV...GOP...90.0 (90.0) GOP hold
NJ...DEM...91.0 (62.0) DEM hold
NM...DEM...95.5 (99.9) DEM hold
NY...DEM...99.6 (97.0) DEM hold
ND...DEM...95.0 (93.0) DEM hold
OH...DEM...95.0 (GOP 53.0) DEM gain
PA...DEM...94.9 (69.9) DEM gain
RI...DEM...78.0 (55.0) DEM gain
TN...GOP...82.9 (72.5) GOP hold
TX...GOP...97.0 (96.0) GOP hold
UT...GOP...95.5 (96.0) GOP hold
VT...IND...70.0 (90.0) IND hold
VA...DEM...52.0 (GOP 89.0) DEM gain
WA...DEM...92.2 (79.8) DEM hold
WV...DEM...97.0 (87.0) DEM hold
WI...DEM...95.0 (90.0) DEM hold
WY...GOP...95.0 (96.0) GOP hold

What is the total...DEM: +5, GOP: -6, IND: +1. In reality the 2 IND will be no different from being DEM seats. That would make the 2007-2008 Senate makeup GOP 49, DEM 49, IND 2.