Skip navigation

Category Archives: DAMNACRATS

ANOTHER IGNORANT DAMNACRAT

And those dammed Democrats think they know more than the rest of us.  That they are smarter than we are.  That they know and understand the Constitution better than we do.

BULL CRAP

The Constitution was written by the Founding Fathers for a new country and its CITIZENS.

CITIZENS, not for foreign terrorists or illegal aliens.  Those terrorists currently set to be brought to New York for trial in civil courts. These are enemy combatants, they have no civil rights as applied to citizens and legal, foreign, residents.

CNSNews.com

Rep. Kucinich Says Everyone, Including Osama Bin Laden, Should Get the Same ‘Basic Rights’
Monday, November 23, 2009
By Nick Ballasy


Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio)

(CNSNews.com) – When asked whether al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden should have the right to remain silent and be given a lawyer, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) told CNSNews.com that everyone who is accused of a crime should have the same “basic rights” afforded by the U.S. Constitution..

On Capitol Hill on Nov. 19, CNSNews.com asked Kucinich, “If and when the U.S. captures Osama Bin Laden, should he have the right to remain silent and be given a lawyer–told he can get a lawyer?”

Kucinich said: “I think that America does best when the values that we want other nations to share that we profess and stand by, and I think that every one who is accused of a crime should have the basic rights that are afforded. I mean, that’s what America’s about.”

“We can’t have one set of rules there and another set of rules there,” said Kucinich. “America is one set of rules. We abide by the Constitution, and I think that Constitution is our protection now and in the future.”

When asked the same question by CNSNews.com on Nov. 19, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said, “Well, let’s see, how many years has it been? Nine, eight years. Let’s worry about capturing Bin Laden and not worry about your, your question.”

During a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Nov. 18, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked Attorney General Eric Holder several questions about how the capture and legal handling of Osama Bin Laden might be handled and warned that, in his opinion, the United States is “making bad history” by trying 9/11 suspect Khalid Sheik Mohammed in a civilian court.

When Graham asked whether the U.S. would try Bin Laden in a civilian court or military commission, Holder said he “didn’t know” and that the U.S. would have to “go through our protocol” before deciding what to do with the Islamic terrorist.

“If we captured bin Laden tomorrow, would he be entitled to Miranda warnings at the moment of capture?” Graham asked Holder. Holder’s response was “that all depends,” and Graham warned that the Obama administration’s new legal policy would confuse the military and the justice system.

“Well, it does not ‘depend,’” the senator said. “The big problem I have is that you’re criminalizing the war, that if we caught bin Laden tomorrow, we’d have mixed theories and we couldn’t turn him over—to the CIA, the FBI or military intelligence—for an interrogation on the battlefield, because now we’re saying that he is the subject to criminal court in the United States.

“And you’re confusing the people fighting this war,” Graham charged. Later, the senator added, “The only point I’m making (is) that if we’re going to use federal court as a disposition for terrorists, you take everything that comes with being in federal court.”

Holder announced last Friday that he had chosen to try Mohammed in federal court in the Southern District of New York, which includes Manhattan, where the attacks on the World Trade Center occurred in 2001.

CNSNews.com

Rep. Kucinich Says Everyone, Including Osama Bin Laden, Should Get the Same ‘Basic Rights’
Monday, November 23, 2009
By Nick Ballasy


Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio)

(CNSNews.com) – When asked whether al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden should have the right to remain silent and be given a lawyer, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) told CNSNews.com that everyone who is accused of a crime should have the same “basic rights” afforded by the U.S. Constitution..

On Capitol Hill on Nov. 19, CNSNews.com asked Kucinich, “If and when the U.S. captures Osama Bin Laden, should he have the right to remain silent and be given a lawyer–told he can get a lawyer?”

Kucinich said: “I think that America does best when the values that we want other nations to share that we profess and stand by, and I think that every one who is accused of a crime should have the basic rights that are afforded. I mean, that’s what America’s about.”

“We can’t have one set of rules there and another set of rules there,” said Kucinich. “America is one set of rules. We abide by the Constitution, and I think that Constitution is our protection now and in the future.”

When asked the same question by CNSNews.com on Nov. 19, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said, “Well, let’s see, how many years has it been? Nine, eight years. Let’s worry about capturing Bin Laden and not worry about your, your question.”

During a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee on Nov. 18, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked Attorney General Eric Holder several questions about how the capture and legal handling

Advertisements

The Bogus Death Statistic That Won’t Die
By Michelle Malkin
October 23, 2009

Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida has found his calling: death demagogue. First, he accused Republicans of wanting sick patients to “die quickly.” Next, he likened health insurance problems to a “holocaust in America.” Now, he’s unveiled a new website entitled “namesofthedead.com” in memory of the “more than 44,000 Americans [who] die simply because they have no health insurance.”

Just one problem: The statistic is a phantom number. Grayson’s memorial, like the Democrats’ government health care takeover plan itself, is full of vapor. It comes from a study published this year in the American Journal of Public Health. But the science is infused with left-wing politics.

Two of the co-authors, Drs. David Himmelstein and Steffie Woolhandler, are avowed government-run health care activists. Himmelstein co-founded Physicians for a National Health Program, which bills itself as “the only national physician organization in the United States dedicated exclusively to implementing a single-payer national health program.” Woolhandler is a co-founder and served as secretary of the group.

Sounding more like a MoveOn.org organizer than a disinterested scientist, Woolhandler assailed the current health reform legislation in Congress for not going far enough: “Politicians are protecting insurance industry profits by sacrificing American lives.”

How did these political doctors come up with the 44,000 figure? They used data from a health survey conducted between 1988 and 1994. The questionnaires asked a sample of 9,000 participants whether they were insured and how they rated their own health. The federal Centers for Disease Control tracked the deaths of people in the sample group through the year 2000. Himmelstein, Woolhandler and company then crunched the numbers and attributed deaths to lack of health insurance for all the participants who initially self-reported that they had no insurance and then died for any reason over the 12-year tracking period.

At no time did the original researchers or the single-payer activists who piggy-backed off their data ever verify whether the supposed casualties of America’s callous health care system had insurance or not. In fact, here is what the report actually says:

“Our study has several limitations,” the authors concede. The survey data they used “assessed health insurance at a single point in time and did not validate self-reported insurance status. We were unable to measure the effect of gaining or losing coverage after the interview.” Himmelstein et al. simply assumed that point-in-time uninsurance translates into perpetual uninsurance — and that any health calamities that result can and must be blamed on being uninsured.

Another caveat you won’t see on Grayson’s memorial to the dubious dead: The single-payer advocate-authors also conceded in their study limitations section that “earlier population-based surveys that did validate insurance status found that between 7 percent and 11 percent of those initially recorded as being uninsured were misclassified. If present, such misclassification might dilute the true effect of uninsurance in our sample.”

To boil it all down in plain English: The single-payer scientists had no way of assessing whether the survey participants received insurance coverage between the time they answered the questionnaires and the time they died. They had no way of assessing whether the deaths could have been averted with health insurance coverage. A significant portion of those classified as “uninsured” may not have been uninsured, based on past studies that actually did verify insurance status. But the Himmelstein team just took the rate of uninsurance from the original study (3.3 percent), applied it to census data and voila: More than 44,000 Americans are dying from lack of insurance.

Next, the political doctors cooked up scary-specific death tolls for all 50 states (California — 5,302, Texas — 4,675). Newspapers dutifully cited the fear-mongering factoids. The single-payer lobbying group co-founded by Himmelstein and Woolhandler took it from there. Last month, the group set up its own memorial on the National Mall for the phantom 44,000 casualties of uninsurance.

Himmelstein (who was also the driving force behind another flawed study tying medical debt to personal bankruptcies) eschewed scientific nuance and caveats to take to the airwaves and declare starkly that an American “dies every 12 minutes” because of lack of insurance. And now Grayson has taken the monumentally dishonest concept online to solicit sob stories and put flesh on the weak bones of these dubious death numbers.

Where’s the White House health care “reality check” squad when you need it?

Michelle Malkin is the author of “Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies” (Regnery 2009).

COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS.COM

——————–

Note — The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.

The “True Identity” Of Van Jones

AIM Column  |  By Cliff Kincaid  |  September 10, 2009

The fact is that Jones was nailed by his own associations and statements.

Some people are wondering who is next after Van Jones. But the Van Jones story is not over. And we still don’t know who hired this “obscure” official, as some on the left are now trying to refer to him. Some of these controversies are currently being investigated by the new media. Blogger Trevor Loudon, who broke the story about Jones’ communist background, thinks White House official Valerie Jarrett needs to be seriously scrutinized. She appears to have had a family connection to Barack Obama’s childhood mentor, Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis.

For the record, this “obscure” official technically worked at the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), established within the Executive Office of the President. It “coordinates Federal environmental efforts and works closely with agencies and other White House offices in the development of environmental policies and initiatives.” Yet, he never went through a Senate confirmation hearing.

Meanwhile, representatives of various George Soros-funded organizations are coming to the defense of the identified communist.

John Podesta, the President and CEO of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, hailed Jones as an “exceptional and inspired leader who has fought to bring economic and environmental justice to communities across our country.”

Justin Ruben of MoveOn.org said Jones had “worked tirelessly to bring jobs and environmental progress to some of the poorest communities in our nation. His dedication and leadership are exactly what we need more of in Washington. And his resignation is a loss to this Administration.”

Josh Silver of the Free Press calls Jones “one of our most visionary and principled young leaders.”

Questions about Van Jones personally are not over, either. It’s been reported that Van Jones is not his real name. He is really Anthony Jones.

By the same token, Barack Obama was once Barry Soetoro. It’s not exactly clear when his name was changed, and when or if it was reflected on official documents.

Jones and Obama put a lot of importance in names. Jones named his son Cabral, after African Marxist Amilcar Cabral. So what happened with “Van?”

In an interview with Ariane Conrad, the person who largely wrote his best-selling book, Jones said, “Well my true identity, of course, is Anthony Jones from Jackson, Tenn. One might be able to use a search engine to figure that out.”

He may have been referring to the fact that his “true identity” had been previously revealed in a New Yorker article, “Greening the Ghetto,” by Elizabeth Kolbert. She noted, “Van Jones, born Anthony Jones, grew up in Jackson, Tennessee, a small town about ninety miles east of Memphis.” Kolbert explained that “After high school, Jones enrolled at the University of Tennessee at Martin. The first day of his freshman year, he decided that he needed a new identity, or, at least, a new name. Anthony Jones was dull. He chose Van because, he told me, ‘it has a little touch of nobility, but at the same time it’s not overboard.'” On another occasion, he said he picked “Van” because it sounded cool.

If he got a new name his freshman year of college, then why is he listed years later as “Anthony Jones” in the 2005 IRS form 990 filed by the organization he ran, the Ella Baker Center? The form is actually signed by “Anthony K. Van Jones” but printed as “Anthony K. ‘Van’ Jones,” with the name “Van” in quotation marks.

By 2006, it is back to “Anthony K. Jones” and by 2007 it has become “Anthony ‘Van’ Jones.”

In his statement, Podesta said that Jones, whatever his real name and true identity, had “chosen to resign because he believed he was serving as a distraction to the President’s agenda. I respect that decision.” Podesta was co-chair of the Obama-Biden Transition project and employed Jones before he went to the White House CEQ.

But how could he have been a “distraction” when the major media had been ignoring the story? Jones was forced to resign, as the Marxist “progressives” at the Rag Blog website fully understand, because the investigation of Jones was getting too close for comfort for Obama and his inner circle. Sacking Jones was a way for the White House and the major media, just beginning to take an interest in the story, to move on.

It is apparent that Jones was thrown “under the bus” because too many of Obama’s close associates, including Jarrett, are implicated in his hiring. Jarrett had said that “we” had recruited Jones. Who is “we?”

Obama himself obviously approved the decision to bring him aboard. After all, he is the President. Jones and Obama were photographed together. What is the nature of their relationship?

Rep. Mike Pence was the only member of the House Republican Leadership to call for Jones to go. But the resignation has not resulted in any coherent explanation of how he was hired in the first place.

Just before Jones jumped ship, Senator Kit Bond of Missouri sent a letter asking for congressional hearings into the appointment. Among other things, he noted, “Last year, Mr. Jones in a radio interview stated his goals as a ‘complete revolution’ to ‘transform the whole society’ away from capitalism. These recent comments remove the credibility of his assertions that his past radical statements and actions such as the creation of the group Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM) rooted in Marxism and Leninism merely reflect youthful sentiments in the distant past.”

In fact, I am not aware of any claims by Jones that his involvement in STORM was just a matter of being too youthful. He never replied to my calls or emails and I was forced to file a series of Freedom of Information Act requests to try to get answers.

His Marxist rhetoric about a “complete revolution” was made to “Uprising Radio” in April of 2008 and brought to light by Breitbart TV. Going beyond “systems of exploitation and oppression is a process,” Jones said, that will take us beyond “eco-capitalism.”

He explained, “So the green economy will start off as a small sub-set and we’re going to push it and push it and push it until it becomes the engine for transforming the whole society.”

In other words, environmentalism and “green jobs” are the cover for implementing Marxism. Obviously, Jones has not changed. Only his methods have changed.

Bond sent his letter in his capacity as ranking member of the Green Jobs and the New Economy Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. But the chairman of this subcommittee, to whom Bond sent the letter, is socialist Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, a booster of Jones! So the chances of any hearings were always zero to begin with.

Are the Republicans serious about getting to the bottom of this scandal?

For his part, Sanders responded that Democrats should have stood by Jones. “To surrender to them is ridiculous, because they’re not going to stop. They’re just going to go after the next guy. We need to be standing up to them more vigorously and exposing their lies.”

He did not identify what “lies” he was talking about. The fact is that Jones was nailed by his own associations and statements. As he told Conrad, all you had to do was use a search engine.

Before going on to the “next guy,” it’s the job of the conservative media which took this story seriously to examine how Jones got his job. Trevor Loudon’s New Zeal blog is still on top of it. Glenn Beck should not let the Jones story drop now. And that means exposing those who are now defending Jones.

Speaking of Jones, Josh Silver of the Soros-funded Free Press says that “progressives” have a responsibility to “defend the public servants and innocent people who are being attacked…”

Their idea of “innocent” is someone who openly associated himself with an international movement that has taken the lives of more than 100 million truly innocent people. International communism is still the biggest “death panel” the world has ever known.

Which raises the question: why do modern “progressives” want to celebrate the work of a communist?

// // // //
<p><img alt=”Clicky” width=”1″ height=”1″ src=”http://static.getclicky.com/110761-db15.gif” mce_src=”http://static.getclicky.com/110761-db15.gif” /></p>
//

<img src=”http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-f3_BaGrSUyW5s.gif” mce_src=”http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-f3_BaGrSUyW5s.gif” style=”display: none;” border=”0″ height=”1″ width=”1″ alt=”Quantcast”/>

Radical Loon When Obama Was Only 47

by  Ann Coulter

10/22/2008 Radical Loon When Obama Was Only 47

by  Ann Coulter

10/22/2008

The media are acting as if they completely and fully vetted Obama during the Democratic primaries and that’s why they are entitled to send teams of researchers into Alaska to analyze Sarah Palin’s every expense report.

In fact, the mainstream media did no vetting. They seem to have all agreed, “OK, none of us will get into this business with Jeremiah Wright, ‘Tony’ Rezko, Saul Alinsky, Bill Ayers and everyone’s impression of an angry Michelle Obama on ‘The Jerry Springer Show.'”

During one of the Democratic primary debates, Hillary Clinton was hissed for mentioning Syrian national Rezko, and during another, ABC moderator George Stephanopoulos nearly lost his career for asking Obama one question about William Ayers.


In the past week, TV anchors have taken to claiming that Obama “refuted” John McCain’s statement that Obama launched his political career at the home of former Weather Underground leader Ayers.

No, Obama “denied” it; he didn’t “refute” it. If “denying” something is the same as “refuting” it, then maybe the establishment media can quit harping on Palin’s supposed lack of qualifications to be president, since she too “refuted” that by denying it.

Back before the media realized it needed to lie about Obama launching his political career at Ayers’ house, the Los Angeles Times provided an eyewitness account from a liberal who attended the event.

“When I first met Barack Obama, he was giving a standard, innocuous little talk in the living room of those two legends-in-their-own-minds, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. They were launching him — introducing him to the Hyde Park community as the best thing since sliced bread.”

The Times has now stripped this item from its Web page, but the great blogger Patterico has preserved it for posterity on his Web page.

Obama’s glib remark that “Bill Ayers is a professor of education in Chicago; 40 years ago when I was 8 years old he engaged in despicable acts with a domestic group. I have roundly denounced those attacks” — doesn’t answer anything.

First of all, the fact that Ayers is a professor of education proves only one thing: He is dumber than any person without an education degree.

Ayers is such an imbecile, we ought to be amazed that he’s teaching at a university — even when you consider that it’s an ed school — except all former violent radicals end up teaching. Roughly 80 percent of former Weathermen are full college professors — 99 percent if you don’t include the ones killed in shoot-outs with the police or in prison — i.e., not yet pardoned by a Democratic president.

Any other profession would have banned a person like Ayers. Universities not only accept former domestic terrorists, but also move them to the front of the line. In addition to Ayers, among those once on the FBI’s most-wanted list who ended up in cushy college teaching positions are Bernardine Dohrn (Northwestern University), Mark Rudd (a junior college in New Mexico) and Angela Davis (History of Consciousness Department, University of California at Santa Cruz).

While others were hard at work on Ph.D.s, Susan Rosenberg was conspiring to kill cops and blow up buildings, and was assembling massive caches of explosives. This put her on the fast track for a teaching position at Hamilton College!

Despite having absolutely no qualifications to teach, having earned only a master’s degree in “writing” through a correspondence course, Rosenberg was offered a position at Hamilton within a few years of President Clinton pardoning her in 2001, releasing her from a 58-year prison sentence for participating in the murder of cops and possessing more than 700 pounds of explosives.

But Obama thinks it’s a selling point to say that Ayers is a college professor.

Hundreds of college professors have signed a letter vouching for Ayers, which would be like Lester Maddox producing a letter from George Wallace assuring us that Maddox is a respected member of the community. No, really, I’ve got the letter right here!

The media keep citing the fact that the money Obama and Ayers distributed to idiotic left-wing causes came — as The New York Times put it — “from Walter H. Annenberg, the billionaire publisher and philanthropist and President Richard M. Nixon’s ambassador to the United Kingdom.”

Great Republican though he was, Walter Annenberg died in 2002. The money came from the Annenberg Foundation, which, like all foundations, distributes money to projects that its founder would despise. John Kerry ran for president on the late John Heinz’s money. That didn’t mean Republican Heinz was endorsing Kerry.

As John O’Sullivan says, any foundation that is not explicitly right-wing will become a radical left-wing organization within a few years. It could be the Association of University Women, the American Association of Retired People, the American Rose Growers, the Foundation for the Study of Railroad Engineers or the Choral Society of Newport Beach.

Left-wing radicals swarm to free foundation money, where they can give gigantic grants to one another and they will never have to do a day’s work. That’s exactly what Obama and Ayers did with Annenberg’s money.

None of the Annenberg money went to schoolchildren. It went to Ayers’ left-wing crank friends to write moronic papers that we hope no one ever reads.

Instead of teaching students reading and writing, Ayers thinks they should be taught to rebel against America’s “imperialist” social structure. In 2006, Ayers was in Venezuela praising communist dictator Hugo Chavez, saying, “We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution.”

He has backed a line of schoolbooks such as one titled “Teaching Science for Social Justice.”

Forget about Ayers’ domestic terrorism when Obama “was 8 years old.” Does he agree with Ayers’ idiot ideas right now?

DAMN DEMOCRATS ARE CONTINUALLY AT IT.  Not just again, but still.  Ever onward and downward.  I know that there must be some honest Democrats out there (we have 2 right here).

Vote Fraud in Nashville – UPDATED AND BUMPED

Friday, 10/17/08, 9:30 PM: A few hours ago, Nashville’s syndicated radio talk show host Phil Valentine took a phone call from Lynn Greer, one of the two Republican members of the five-member Davidson County Election Commission. Mr. Greer was so angry he could barely control himself. (For the benefit of readers who aren’t familiar with Middle Tennessee, Nashville/Davidson County is a Metro area, in which the city and county governments are combined.)

He informed Phil and his listeners that earlier today, someone was bringing in vanloads of non-English-speaking Mexicans with no identification to one of the Nashville early voting locations. Along with the non-English speaking individuals came a bilingual woman to act as their interpreter. She informed the election personnel that she would accompany the voters into the booth, read the ballot for them, and insure that their vote was cast for the candidates of their choice.

The Davidson County Election Commission, including its Democrat members, decided that the individuals would not be allowed to vote on the grounds that since they were unable to speak, understand, or read English, they could not possibly be citizens, and therefore were not qualified to vote. In addition, Mr. Greer mentioned that these people were unable even to request the assistance of a translator themselves. Accordingly, Ray Barrett, Davidson County Administrator of Elections, instructed his employees to refuse to allow any of these individuals to vote.

However, someone prevailed upon Mr. Barrett to call the state in order to verify the Commission’s decision. Brook Thompson, the Tennessee State Election Coordinator, then ordered Mr. Barrett and the Davidson County Election Commission to allow these non-English-speaking individuals to vote through their bilingual interpreter despite their lack of any sort of identification and total unfamiliarity with the English language.

Phil and Mr. Greer briefly discussed what could be done. They agreed that the only possible remedy would be for the Tennessee Republican Party to file suit in a Federal court. He told Phil that while he intended to urge the state GOP to make the effort, in view of the recent refusal of a Federal court to grant relief to State Sen. Rosalyn Kurita (whose legitimate Democrat primary win was overturned by the big shots of her party in revenge for her vote in favor of a Republican Lt. Governor), he held out little hope that it would be successful. He also noted that even if a court should decide that the votes of these people were illegal, there is no mechanism for withdrawing them. These are not provisional ballots. Once cast, they are inviolate.

There were several more phone calls in quick succession.

First, Brook Thompson himself called up. He told Phil that Federal law requires that these people be allowed to vote with the help of an interpreter if they wish. He pointed out that in some jurisdictions with a higher percentage of non-English-speaking individuals, the Feds require that ballots and registration materials be printed in four or five languages. Therefore, he insisted that he had no choice but to allow these people to vote.

Phil asked him about the requirement that prospective voters must be able to produce valid identification, and Thompson admitted that this is correct. However, he shifted the burden for enforcement back to the Davidson County Election Commission. When Phil asked him if he intended to send someone down to investigate why the ID requirement was not being enforced, Thompson began to stammer and splutter a bit, and finally gave a noncommittal answer to the effect that he’d look into it.

The next phone call was from a woman identified only as Barbara, who is apparently an officer in the Republican Women’s organization. She informed Phil that aside from the identification requirement, Brook Thompson is ignoring another legal mandate of which he is definitely aware. She insisted that the law requires that a prospective voter who desires the assistance of an interpreter must personally request such assistance. In other words, the interpreter is not permitted to go up to the election officials and inform them that she intends to go into the booth and help the voter. She explained that the law includes that provision as protection for the voter against coercion and other forms of voter fraud. Unquestionably, Barbara was accusing Brook Thompson of deliberately ignoring that provision of the law, and thus allowing illegals to vote.

Within a few minutes, a man called up who informed Phil that he had been involved in Tennessee elections for 20 years, and was intimately familiar with the applicable laws. He agreed with Barbara, and added that Brook Thompson is not an attorney, and is not an authority on election law, but is a political appointee – appointed by Democrats. This gentleman disputed Thompson’s assertion that Federal law mandates that voters be permitted to use an interpreter. According to him, elections are governed by state law, which plainly requires that any voter who wishes to use an interpreter must personally request permission to do so from the election personnel. He vehemently disagreed with Thompson’s decision allowing these non-English-speaking people with no valid identification to vote in a Tennessee election.

The caller also informed Phil and his listeners that any voter has the right to challenge any other voter’s qualifications. He advised all of us not to depend solely upon the election personnel, but to take the initiative and inform them of any questionable or suspicious activity which we observe at a polling place.

That’s where the matter ended for today. Since it’s now Friday evening, it is unlikely that there will be any new developments until Monday, 10/20.

Wednesday, 10/22/08, 5:00 AM: As of yesterday afternoon, there have been no further developments. Phil Valentine reported that he has spoken to various law enforcement authorities, and none have been willing to look into this egregious violation of election laws.

During yesterday’s program, Phil spoke by phone with Quin Hillyer, Associate Editorial Page Editor of the Washington Examiner. Quin’s paper just published his column Quin-essential cases: No Righting Voting Wrongs in Ohio covering similar voting irregularities in Ohio.

When Phil informed Quin of these recent occurrences in Nashville, his first reaction was a gasp of surprise. He then remarked, “This election is being stolen right from under our noses.”

Phil is now trying to formulate a plan for some sort of direct action designed to force the relevant authorities to do their jobs. He’s been successful in such efforts in the past. For instance, he was responsible for the famous 2001 horn-blowing mass demonstration at the Tennessee State Capitol which resulted in the defeat of then-Gov. Don Sundquist’s proposed income tax. Whether he’ll be able to devise a successful strategy this time remains to be seen, but if I were a betting man, I’d be putting my money on Phil.

Wednesday, 10/22/08, 2:10 PM: Welcome, Instapundit readers. I learned just a few minutes ago that Phil’s aware of this post, and has verified that it is entirely correct. I’ll update you whenever new information becomes available.

Email thisView CC licenseStumble It!Subscribe to this feed

Inoculate128

5 comments:

Barlycorn , John said…

In 2000, I lived in Palm Beach County, FL. On that election day there were large air conditioned buses picking up “migrant” workers who normally are transported in old school buses without either shock absorbers or air, in South Florida. Which is why, when libs say that the R’s stole Florida, I can only laugh and shake my head in disbelief.

October 22, 2008 10:23 AM

Tiny Bunch said…

I’d be curious to see where the bus went next. Another polling place?

October 22, 2008 11:36 AM

Garey Wheatley said…

If these folks had no ID at all, why not call INS to check for identity. It may sound racist (as everything is called today), but if they are indeed Spanish speaking, they may be illegal. They should have their ID (Green Card) on their person.

October 22, 2008 11:50 AM

Donald Sensing said…

When nothing matter except gaining power, any means is justified by the end. Understand that on page 56 of the official DNC platform document, available online, it says explicitly that the Democrat party goal is to eliminate any identification requirements for either voting registration or voting itself.

October 22, 2008 11:53 AM

Not a sheep said…

Shocking, absolutely shocking. I have linked to your post and reproduced it on my blog.

If true, this needs spreading far and wide, as it does indeed look as though the US election is being stolen by the Democrats. To any Brits looking at this blog I would like to say – what the Democrats are doing in the US, the Labour party are likely to try to do in the UK at the next general election and our media is even more pro-Labour than the US media is pro-Obama.

October 22, 2008 2:03 PM

Links to this post

Obvious McCain supporters involved in voter fraud already

Oh wait, did I say McCain supporters? I don’t believe these people were being directed to vote for Republicans: Inoculated: Vote Fraud in Nashville.

Posted by SPION at October 22, 2008 11:47 AM

Voter Fraud Already Spotted

Via Instapundit: vanloads of illegal aliens driven to the polls in Nashville with the state’s blessing? Outrageous. If Obama wins several states like this, his legitimacy as President will be close to zero.

Posted by Jehuda at October 22, 2008 11:05 AM

Voter Fraud in Nashville

I heard just a snip of Phil Valentine’s radio program while in the car Friday where voter fraud in Davidson County was being outed. I didn’t catch it all but thankfully Inoculcated did and provides the details.

Posted by Kay Brooks at October 22, 2008 10:06 AM

Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Political Play: Obama dances for Ellen DeGeneres

They really will do anything to get elected.

At the end of a long campaign day Tuesday in Florida, Democrat Barack Obama had one more stop: “The Ellen DeGeneres Show.”

DeGeneres got right down to business.

“Let’s talk about dancing,” she said. “Your wife, Michelle, was on the show and she was talking some smack about your moves.”

DeGeneres played music and gave Obama 20 seconds to prove his spouse wrong. He complied, albeit in a decidedly awkward set of circumstances _ standing alone on a patch of concrete and looking into cameras that were to beam him into the studio, as supporters and reporters watched.

He gamely grooved a little, though mostly with his arms, before calling off the operation with a smile.

“Michelle may be a better dancer, but I am convinced I am a better dancer than John McCain,” Obama said of his Republican rival.

During the brief appearance, Obama revealed the Halloween costumes his two daughters have planned. Ten-year-old Malia will be a fairy and 7-year-old Sasha has chosen to go trick-or-treating as a “corpse bride,” he said.

Obama also offered to help DeGeneres with her campaign to lure George Clooney onto her show, agreeing it would be one of the new president’s most important priorities. If elected, he said he would appoint Clooney “ambassador to the Ellen show.”

“We would have you and him sit down without preconditions and solve any differences that you may have,” Obama said. “Just don’t talk about my dancing anymore.”

The interview is scheduled to air Wednesday.

___

Compiled by Jennifer Loven

Daily Kos

The New Stabbed In the Back Myth

Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 02:35:37 PM PDT

(From the diaries. Susan)

Germans had been shaken to their roots by defeat in 1918. The emotional impact was all the more severe because German leaders had been trumpeting victory until a few weeks before. So unbelievable a calamity was easily blamed on traitors.

Robert Paxton
The Anatomy of Fascism
2005

With the prospect of a bone-crushing election defeat staring them full in the face, the diehard rump of the conservative movement is already busy fashioning a narrative to explain the dissolution of its world — the one that Ronald Reagan built and that George W. Bush (with an assist from Wall Street) has thoroughly trashed.

And the emerging story line appears to be, roughly, that ACORN did it.

Given the underlying proclivities of the modern conservative movement (Sarah Palin division) we should have understood that sooner or later it would come to something as absurd as this. Failed authoritarian movements needs scapegoats the way fecal coliform bacteria need a steady supply of raw sewage, and this one has a lot of failures that need explaining.

The remarkable thing, of course, is the right’s effort to make the ACORN boogie man do double duty: responsible not only for the looming “theft” of American democracy (per John McCain) but also for bringing the US and global financial system to its knees (per any number of conservative quacks economists and cranks pundits).

You have to admit: That’s a damned impressive revolutionary track record for an obscure group of community organizers operating on a shoestring budget. I mean, who needs the Red Army when you’ve got ACORN and the Community Reinvestment Act?

It would be easy to dismiss this lunacy as a manifestation of what the social scientist Richard Hofstader called the “paranoid style” in American politics. And some liberals have already made the connection. As far as the grassroots hysterics are concerned(i.e. the sort of people who are obsessed with the kerning and font size on Barack Obama’s “alleged” birth certificate) this is no doubt true.

But I think by now it’s also very clear that the GOP high commmand — as far back as the Twin Cities white power rally, if not before — deliberately adopted the demonization of ACORN/community organizers/the poor as a proxy for the hatred that no longer dares to speak its real name (except at the occasional Sarah Palin rally).

I think this strategy serves two purposes. One is obvious: to play upon traditional racial and class resentments to try to win back middle-class and working-class voters who might otherwise be waivering as they watch their jobs, their homes and their already inadequate retirement savings go spinning around the hole in the bottom of the economic toilet bowl.

We can take a page from John Lewis and call this the George Wallace gambit — not the Wallace of the stand in the schoolhouse door or the bridge at Selma, but rather the Wallace who ran for president in 1968, ’72 and ’76 and managed to attract quite a few Northern Democratic votes with his attacks on school busing, affirmative action, fair housing laws and other examples of “social engineering” foisted upon Regular Joe (Joe Sixpack’s dad and Joe the Plumber’s granddad) by Ivy League professors and pointy-headed government bureaucrats.

Exactly who was supposed to benefit from all that social engineerin’ was left unsaid, just as it is today.

Students of American politics know that Wallace’s populist rabble rousing was quickly expropriated by the GOP and — watered down for respectable middle-class consumption — became one of the weapons used by Richard Nixon and his pit bull of a running mate, Spiro Agnew (Sarah Palin with jowls) to crack open the New Deal coalition.

The ACORN monster, in other words, is a stock character out of a play the Republicans have been performing with mind-numbing efficiency for the past 40 years — making it the political equivalent of what The Fantasticks is for suburban dinner theater.

Given that the same attacks have been used, in some form or another, against a long line of lily white Democratic candidates, it would be unfair to characterize them as coded attempts to make an issue of Obama’s race per se. That’s a line the GOP high command apparently is still not willing to cross, even as coded attacks on Obama’s alleged “foreignness” (i.e. his middle name) have become the order of the day. It is, however, an obvious coded attack (and very lightly coded at that) on the inner-city poor. And in American political slang, “inner-city poor” is simply a five-syllable substitute for “black”.

However, as the McCain campaign descends into bitter futility (clinging to its guns and its religion all the way) and the band of the USS Republican Party assembles on deck to strike up “Near My God to Thee,” the anti-ACORN hysteria is starting to look less like a coherent campaign attack and more like a post-defeat rationalization. Clearly, conservatives are preparing themselves to take a knockout punch. Unfortunately it appears a big part of this psychological armouring will be convincing themselves the election was stolen, not lost. Even worse: stolen by the same “socialist” extremists who destroyed the American economy by forcing the banks to give loans to the n——.

This, of course, is not how the new stabbed-in-the-back myth will be expressed in polite conservative company (i.e. among the David Brooks and Ross Douthats of the world). But anyone who doubts that is the way it will be internalized among the many new members of the Sarah Palin Fan Club simply hasn’t been paying attention.

Choosing ACORN (and/or its constituents) as the scapegoat for the implosion of the biggest credit bubble in American history and, simultaneously, a wholly fictional attempt to steal a presidential election, may seem like a bit much. Why not pick on someone a bit more believable — like, say, the demon id from Forbidden Planet?

The GOP at times has tried to do this — citing, variously, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Democrats in Congress (i.e., the demon id from Forbidden Planet) and greed and corruption on Wall Street as the prime villains. But for various reasons (such as the fact that Rick Davis, McCain’s campaign manager, was a Fannie Mae lobbyist, or that Wall Street is the ideological Vatican of the same militant free market doctrine that modern conservatism has sworn to defend) none of these have proven very satisfactory. As I once noted of the effort to blame the nearly invisible anti-war movement for the debacle in Iraq:

The best scapegoat is one that is both blameless and weak. Blameless, because it relieves the truly guilty parties of the need to decide who among them must take the fall. Weak, because the guilty themselves have been weakened by defeat, and even a modest defense might enable a truly blameless set of scapegoats to convince the country of their innocence.

Given the fratricidal war brewing on the right over which faction (neo, paleo or psycho) is responsible for conservativism’s 1918, that comment appears particularly relevant now.

We don’t need to hark back to the unfortunate history of a certain Central European country in the 1930s to understand how poisonous this kind of political myth making can become. Powerful elements of the Republican Party and the conservative “movement” aren’t just preparing themselves to go into opposition, they’re preparing themselves to dispute the legitimacy of an Obama presidency — in ways that could, if taken to extreme, lead to another Oklahoma City.

It’s hard to tell to what degree the GOP high command fully understands or is trying to feed these dynamics (indeed, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to even tell who the GOP high command is these days). The last thing I want to do is get into an arms race with the wingnut right when it comes to paranoid conspiracy theories. (That’s one race the left will always lose). Still, the recent statements of John McCain and his Bircher-influenced running mate aren’t exactly reassuring:

My opponent’s answer showed that economic recovery isn’t even his top priority. His goal, as Senator Obama put it, is to “spread the wealth around.”

You see, he believes in redistributing wealth, not in policies that help us all make more of it. Joe, in his plainspoken way, said this sounded a lot like socialism.

I’ve been following politics for going on 35 years now, and I don’t think I’ve ever heard a Republican candidate publicly refer to his Democratic opponent as a “socialist” — not even while hiding behind a cardboard cutout like “Joe the Plumber”. This from a man who told the entire nation on Wednesday night that believes an obscure nonprofit group is “perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy.”

Likewise, I don’t think there’s ever been an American vice presidential candidate who explicitly referred to entire regions of the United States as “pro-American” — with the clear implication that other regions are something less than “pro-American.” Not since the Civil War, anyway.

We’ve crossed some more lines, in other words — in a long series of lines that have made it increasingly difficult to distinguish between the ultraconservative wing of the Republican Party and an explicitly fascist political movement. And John McCain and his political handlers appear to have no moral compunctions whatsoever about whipping this movement into a frenzy and providing it with scapegoats for all that hatred, simply to try to shave a few points off Barack Obama’s lead in the polls.

To call this “country first” only works if you assume your opponents (and scapegoats) are not really part of that same country. And we all know where that leads.

It may lead us there yet, or to something like it. Middle class America has clearly entered a prolonged period of economic pain — on top of the existing climate of cultural disorientation and rapid demographic change. Conventional assumptions (401k plans are an adequate substitute for company pensions; black men can’t be elected president) are toppling left and right. Scapegoats that seem remotely plausible only to the most deranged partisans may appear less fantastic to the apolitical majority by and by. And even a party that has nothing left to offer America but fear itself may eventually find itself in a seller’s mar

Ann Coulter

Pull The Hair Plug On This Guy

by  Ann Coulter

10/08/2008

If Sarah Palin had made just one of the wildly inaccurate statements smugly uttered by Sen. Joe Biden in last week’s vice presidential debate, there would have been 3-inch headlines in newspapers across America. (I can almost hear Katie Couric asking me, “Which newspapers?”)

These weren’t insignificant errors, such as when Biden said, “Look, all you have to do is go down Union Street with me in Wilmington or go to Katie’s restaurant or walk into Home Depot with me where I spend a lot of time, and you ask anybody in there whether or not the economic and foreign policy of this administration has made them better off in the last eight years.”

It turns out that Katie’s restaurant, where Biden gets his feel for the average American, closed 20 years ago. The only evidence that he spends any time in Home Depot is that it appears that a pipe wrench fell on his head one too many times.



Palin would surely have been forced to withdraw from the ticket had she said something like that, but most of Biden’s errors were not trifling mistakes like these. They were lengthy Lyndon LaRouche-like disquisitions that were pure fantasy from beginning to end.

For example, Biden said about Hezbollah: “When we kicked — along with France — we kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon.” Hezbollah was never kicked out of Lebanon.

He continued: “I said and Barack said, ‘Move NATO forces in there. Fill the vacuum, because if you don’t, Hezbollah will control it.'” This is madness — Lebanon is not a NATO country, nor had any NATO country been attacked by Lebanon.

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn’t picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of foreign policy.

Biden also stoutly denied that Obama ever said he would sit down with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Liberals find it hilarious that McCain can’t use a computer keyboard on account of his war injuries, but Biden is apparently unaware of the Internet, because there are clips all over the Internet of Obama saying exactly that during the CNN/YouTube debate last year.

Biden might have remembered that debate since: (1) He was there, and (2) he later attacked Obama’s answer, telling the National Press Club in August 2007: “Would I make a blanket commitment to meet unconditionally with the leaders of each of those countries within the first year I was elected president? Absolutely, positively, no.”

And that’s still not all! Obama’s own Web site says: “Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions.”

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn’t picked for the Democrat ticket based on his ability to remember well-known facts.

Biden also gave a long speech at the debate on vice president Dick Cheney’s “dangerous” belief that “he’s part of the legislative branch.” The great constitutional scholar Biden cited Article I of the Constitution as proof that Cheney “works in the executive branch” and has “no authority relative to the Congress.” Biden huffily added: “He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.”

Palin would have had to deny that Alaska is a state in the union in order to say something comparably stupid.

Article II, not I, describes the executive branch. Someone tell Biden, who is supposed to be a lawyer. Apart from getting the Articles of the Constitution mixed up, what on earth does Biden mean when he says that the vice president “has no authority relative to Congress,” apart from breaking ties?

The Constitution makes him president of the senate every day of the week. I realize that Biden may not be able to count to two, but Article I says the vice president is president of one of the two houses of Congress — the one Biden is in, for crying out loud — which is what you might call “authority relative to Congress.”

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn’t picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of the Constitution.

In one especially hallucinatory answer, Biden authoritatively stated: “With Afghanistan, facts matter, Gwen. … We spend more money in three weeks on combat in Iraq than we spent on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country.”

According to the Congressional Research Service, since 9/11, we’ve spent $172 billion in Afghanistan and $653 billion in Iraq. The most money spent in Iraq came in 2008, when we have been spending less than $3 billion a week. So by Biden’s calculations, we’ve spent only about $9 billion “on the entirety of the last seven years that we have been in Afghanistan building that country.” There isn’t even a “9” in $172 billion.

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn’t picked for the Democrat ticket based on his knowledge of math.

In the same answer, Biden went on to claim that “John McCain voted against a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty that every Republican has supported.”

The last nuclear test ban treaty the Senate voted on was the one Clinton signed in the ’90s. As The New York Times editorialized on the Senate vote a few years later: “Last week, Senate Republicans thundered ‘no’ to the nuclear test ban treaty, handing the White House its biggest defeat since health care in 1994.” Forty-nine Republicans voted against the treaty; only four liberal Republicans voted for it. That’s the treaty Biden says “every Republican has supported.”

Somebody please tell me that Biden wasn’t picked for the Democrat ticket based on his ability to function as vice president.


Ann Coulter is Legal Affairs Correspondent for HUMAN EVENTS and author of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors,” “Slander,” ““How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must),” “Godless,” and most recently, “If Democrats Had Any Brains, They’d Be Republicans.”


Reader Comments: (

1064

)

Here are a few of the comments submitted by our readers. Click to view all

Everyone with an ounce of sense knows Biden is a dumbjerk!!!stupid is not the word for it. keep it coming Ann!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!MCCAIN/PALIN ’08!!!!!!!!!

Oct 08, 2008 @ 06:20 PM

LIGHTS,, in the Desert Southwest/LRWGA

Just goes to show, libs can lie from dawn to dusk and the obots will love them all the more.

Oct 08, 2008 @ 06:23 PM

Jerry

tBiden certainly is a dimby. The idea of both of them “in control” of the government is downright scary. About a few days ago, I saw a hilarious article on a conservative web site, the story was called “Two Years” about what it would be like if these two pickle heads stole the election.. Hope it doesn’t happen.

Oct 08, 2008 @ 06:24 PM

Tim R., Baoton MA.

Palin has more integrity and intelligence than Biden and Obama put together. Too funny. I love how all you zombified libtards slammed McCain for his pick, and look what you’ve got. Bwahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!

P.S. But, let’s not forget that Biden won the debate. Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!

Jay
Say it ain’t so, Joe.

Oct 08, 2008 @ 06:24 PM

Jay, Olathe, KS

But Ann, EVERYONE in the media says that Biden won “on substance”… HAHAHA! I heard Bob Schieffer say so himself. Even I knew that Biden was full of crap. He was simply making stuff up… like always does and always has. He’s a pathological liar of the highest order.

Oct 08, 2008 @ 06:29 PM

Gerry

tSenator Biden and young inexperienced boss, are both stupid. The scary thing is it appear Senator McCain is planning to loss this election. Governor Palin may be strong, but she is not running for President.

Instead of the strong Sarah Palin we have the weak Senator McCain. Senator McCain who does not seem to believe it is proper for a Presidential Candidate to be mean to his opponent. Senator McCain who is not willing to tell the TRUTH about what happen with the Economy since it might offend his opponent. Senator McCain just does not seem to have leadership qualities.

We need a strong leader who will fight for the American People, and the American Constitution. We need Dr. Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party.

Oct 08, 2008 @ 06:36 PM

Thomas, Fargo


How about the one that took my breath away—the riff about the primary importance of IDEOLOGY in qualifying a SCOTUS nominee!

Not only is Biden deeply disturbed, he has a badly flawed memory (or is it just the usual leftist mental filter distorting everything that enters his head?).

The saddest part of all is that most Americans are so ignorant that relatively few were even aware of his erroneous statements—certainly not perky but stupid Katie Couric, who undoubtedly reads the NT Times!