The Left
A Personal Anecdote on How Easy it Is To Vote As Dead Person
Yesterday, I had lunch with a group of Tea Partiers out in Palatine, Illinois while continuing research into two important projects dear to me (stopping the Marxist indoctrination in Chicago Public Schools and preventing voter fraud). I was impressed by how passionate this group of people was, and how invested they are in doing something about ballot tampering, malfeasance with electronic voting machines, and other avenues of voter fraud here in Illinois.
During lunch, the topic of the dead voting in states like Illinois came up — and I suggested that everyone start seeing themselves as vote defenders and slayers of zombie voters. Wouldn’t it be great if the next time you’re at some event, and someone asks you, “What do you do?” you answered with “I stop the dead from voting”. Then, instead of having a conversation with a stranger about people you might know in common in the accounting or lion taming fields (depending on what you “do” as a day job), you could talk about stopping the dead from voting in American elections.
Thinking about all this, I realized that many years ago, in the 1992 elections (before I was old enough to vote), I was offered the opportunity to illegally vote in Cleveland, Ohio but turned it down because I knew it was wrong.
This happened at the polling place for my neighborhood, when my mother and grandmother went to vote and I came with them, but stood to the side. While they were behind the curtains in the little booths set up in the grade school auditorium, the woman working the table (in this very heavily Democrat district) motioned for me to come over and asked me if my name was “Joseph”. I told her it wasn’t, and that Joseph was my grandfather — who had been dead for many years.
Since Joseph was still on the voting rolls, the woman said “It’s a shame that vote’s just going to waste…why don’t you go vote for Clinton too, like your mom and grandma” and she encouraged me to sign the book as my grandfather and vote for him as if he was still alive.
I wanted to vote for Clinton — and would have if I had been old enough — but I didn’t want to impersonate my grandfather and sign the voting book in his name and take a ballot.
However, I was encouraged to do just that and could have easily gotten away with it.
This anecdote is a unique situation since I just happened to be there, no one was watching this woman (who clearly wanted Clinton to win Ohio and was doing everything she could in the race to make sure as many Democrats as possible voted…even the ones who were dead), and there were three people registered with our same last name and only two of them showed up to vote that day.
I can’t tell you how often something like this happens — but I have to wonder if this is still going on in Ohio, since there doesn’t seem to be any more barriers to such voter fraud today than there were back when I was in high school.
Have you ever had an experience like this, where someone offered you a chance to vote for a dead person?
Maxine Waters…Oh No She Didn’t.
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7KkPbGgxKo
Did she call House Republicans demons?
Seriously?
Did she say that she would be the next Chairman of the Financial Services Committee?
That should scare the hell out of all of us.
We can not allow the democrats to take back the House….or keep the Senate…or the White House. The thought of Maxine Waters (who was investigated by a congressional ethics panel for steering federal dollars to her husband’s failing bank) taking over the chair of the financial services committee is unbelievable. Isn’t that like having the fox guard the hen house?
We’ve got to get off our butts and start campaigning for Republican candidates. ASAP!
Here’s a little picture that’s sure to give you nightmares tonight….
Yikes….now that’s scary!
Now get out there and join a Republican campaign.
Democrats’ Persecution of Mormons Begins: Effort Underway to Depict Latter Day Saints As Virulent Racists
Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election strategy is “Occupy & Persecute”, which replaces 2008′s old-and-broke “Hope & Change”.
You know the Occupy part well, because you’ve seen it manifest in the Occupy Wall Street thugs — who are being trained and revved up to assail Willard “Mittens” Romney as the classic caricature of a Thurston Howell III-grade Wall Street Villain.
The Persecute half of the strategy is to demonize Mormons — as the people who belong to the Church of Latter Day Saints are commonly known (and what they will be called by the elite, agenda-driven media in the general election).
Though Romney has aggressively attacked his Republican opponents (with great media assistance) in the primaries, during a general election campaign the media would be rooting for Obama — and thus gunning for Romney. I have, to date, seen no evidence that Romney would be able to withstand an “Occupy & Persecute” Obama victory strategy (or effectively level attacks on Obama that would cut through the media bias and have the same impact on him that Romney’s attack machine has had on Gingrich or Santorum).
The most-used (and most-effective) weapon in the Democrats’ Alinsky-designed arsenal is to depict political opponents as racists. This is a tactic that succeeds in alienating millions of independent voters from whomever Democrats have aimed the Alinsky Death Star at that particular day. Part of depicting Mormons — and by extension, Romney himself — as racists involves the exclusion of blacks from the Mormon church until the 1970s.
Today, I spotted the first attempt by the Tolerant Left to power up the “RAAACIST!” accusations against Mormons and Romney — in a posting that’s popping up on a great number of Leftist Facebook pages and being shared aggressively by the Leftists I monitor in the social networking world.
The video above is the opening salvo in Democrats’ efforts to depict Mormons as racists. Below the fold, you’ll see comments left by Leftists regarding the video. I’m pleasantly surprised that there’s not a consensus amongst Leftists if this strategy will be effective and if the “Persecute” half of Obama’s two-pronged re-election strategy will work.
If you are a Romney supporter, please start thinking of ways to mitigate the damages from the “Occupy & Persecute” strategy now — because if Romney becomes the Republican nominee this is what will have to combat for the five months of the general election.
Screengrab of “Being Liberal” Facebook page below:
How Hard Is It To Get A Photo ID In Your State?
Can you take a moment to help with gathering some information?
The Tolerant Left insists it’s some sort of astronomical burden to obtain a photo ID — and that’s the “official” reason Democrats give for opposing requirements for photo ID checks at polling stations.
In this thread, let’s compile the following information on obtaining a photo ID in all 50 states to see if any burden actually exists that warrants the stink the Tolerant Left emits on this issue.
Let’s table for the moment the fact that a passport also qualifies as photo ID, as do military and law enforcement IDs. I want to focus solely on state photo ID cards (which are different from driver’s licenses). I know there are some extra fees to enjoy the privilege of having a driver’s license, but a state photo ID card can be obtained by any citizen of the state.
Can you chime in with your state’s info for the following:
1. State name
2. Requirements to apply for state ID (ie, what paperwork do you need)
3. Cost
4. Is there possibility of having fee waived for low-income people?
5. How long process takes
6. List of places in state where IDs can be obtained
If you know of something like this already in existence — with a table showing all the information above for each state — please add the URL to comments and we’ll go with that instead.
I’d like to use this as a resource in the future when I next hear the Tolerant Left argue against photo ID check requirements at polling stations because the only reason anyone would oppose checking IDs is if that person hoped to facilitate voter fraud in some way.
Read the rest of this entry »
“Do-It-Yourself-Deportation” in NYT Article: A Critical Look at One Illegal Alien’s Bunk Argument for Amnesty
The following article, entitled Do-It-Yourself-Deportation, appeared in the February 1st, 2012 edition of the New York Times — and was written by NYC high school student Antonio Alarcon (who wrote it in Spanish, which the Times translated into English for him, in much the same way that Spanish-speaking people marching in parades demanding amnesty waive Mexican, and not American, flags in the air). For someone who makes a plea to stay in this country despite not arriving here legally, young Antonio doesn’t seem to be making much effort to learn English or participate in non-Spanish-speaking endeavors in New York. I wanted to analyze what this one illegal alien thinks about amnesty because the bunk the Tolerant Left repeatedly peddles on this issue is glaringly apparent in the talking points he parrots.
This is my translation of the translation that the Times did for Antonio. His words are bolded, with my analysis beneath.
Why Do YOU Think The Tolerant Left Behaves The Way It Does?
I’ve been collecting screengrabs of those on the Tolerant Left taking to Facebook and posting truly hateful screeds attacking anyone who opposes the Democrats’ agenda.
I want to understand what makes these people tick and where the raging hatred they so casually aim at others comes from, because it just makes no sense to me. Politics is my life…and my life’s mission is to bring down the Democrat Party and the Cocktail Party GOP establishment alike, but I’ve never felt any inclination to hate those I oppose politically. When I was in school, I was taught that “hate” is the absolute worst thing in the world — so it still shocks me to see so many on The Tolerante Left treat hatred as a commonplace source of inspiration in their lives.
So far, I’ve identified five key things I see the Tolerant Leftists do on a running basis that are steeped in hatred:
1. Peppering everything they say with needless expletives — why do they need to do that?
2. Wishing death and dismemberment upon those who they disagree with, including often elaborate fantasies where those on the Tolerant Left describe in epic detail exactly how they wish someone would die and the sort of abuse they would do to that person’s corpse after he or she was dead — where do these sick fantasies come from?
3. Repeating apocryphal stories without any attribution or supporting facts — why don’t they make sound arguments based on facts and reason instead of unbalanced emotion?
4. Flipping wildly from supporting someone or something to vowing to destroy that person or thing the next day because they disagreed on an often times minor thing — like with the jihad the Tolerant Left declared on the Susan G. Komen Foundation when it decided it would no longer be extorted to pay for abortions…why does the Tolerant Left seek to destroy anyone or anything it disagrees with instead of realizing that, big picture, some wars don’t need to be declared?
5. Attacking Christians and Christianity and actively seeking ways to destroy the Church and punish Christians for standing by their faith — why does the Tolerant Left do this, while simultaneously doing all it can to aid the spread of Islam in the world?
I would deeply appreciate anyone with psychology training or experience dealing with caustic and unbalanced people to chime in below, or in email if you want to keep it private, and let me know what you think of the questions above.
We have a few months until the general election heats up — when I’m sure the Tolerant Left will rev things up to fever pitch. I think it’s a good use of our time to start taking a hard look at common things the Tolerant Leftists say and do so that we can plan effective strategies for handling these people come summer and fall.
What’s your take on all this? All ideas welcome, even if you aren’t an expert, but especially if you’re someone who’s always wondered about the Tolerant Left’s behavior yourself and have other insight into the terrible and hateful things they do when talking politics.
KOMENIZE: The Tolerant Left Invents New Word to Celebrate Its Perceived Victory for Abortion
[ Click above to embiggen: The Tolerant Left invents new word: to komenize ]
Today I spotted the first usage of the word “komenize” — which the Tolerant Left has coined to describe targeting a charitable organization that does something they disagree with in an orchestrated and sustained effort to annihilate its fundraising efforts.
It’s debatable whether this is what’s really happening at the Susan G. Komen Foundation right now, but it’s a great example of how effectively the Tolerant Left commandeers language and how quickly it manipulates zeitgeist and culture for its own aims.
Conservatives are incredibly foolish to cede ground to Leftists on anything — but that’s exactly what conservative writers and pundits do every time they use the word “liberal” to describe a “Leftist”. That’s like calling a cockroach a “hug-a-bug” or saying “undocumented worker” instead of the more accurate term “illegal alien” (or, even better, the portmanteau of “crimmigrant”). There needs to a new word invented for how monstrously stupid it is to ever agree to the Tolerant Left’s favored verbiage and say “Pro-Choice” instead of what it really is — Pro-Abortion — when Leftists go out of their way to say “Anti-Choice” instead of “Pro-Life”.
If you don’t pay attention to this deliberate wordsmithing, please start. And never say “liberal” or “Pro-Choice” ever again in relation to politics.
The Tolerant Left is masterful at shaping language, which in turn shapes thought, which is a means to nudge the ball a little further down the field in the culture wars.
Conservatives just never seem to learn, and forever (and very stupidly) keep parroting what they hear the fools on television or the radio say — which almost always plays right into the Tolerant Left’s greater strategy.
Today, Lefties are angry at Google for being part of a Tea Party event that’s being planned somewhere or another…and so the Tolerant Left has activated its networks and has set the Alinsky Death Star to “komenize” Google. This is technically misusing the newly-minted “komenize” term, since Google’s not a non-profit and does not rely on charitable donations to survive. A better example would be something like Penn State’s development office that I’d argue self-komenized by being so involved in the child abuse scandal that’s crippled its fundraising and endorsement efforts.
It’s hard to determine what words will catch on and have real staying power.
Here at HB, we coined the term “Cocktail Party” for the GOP establishment back in 2010 — which is something I’m very proud of because it’s a great reflection of the fact that this permanent political class is very much the mirror-nemesis of the Tea Party, and the term also works on the level of conjuring an image of the cocktail parties that members of the Republican establishment forever haunt.
We’ll see if “komenize” has similar legs…but it fills a need for a word like this, because every few months some nonprofit does do something that upsets a group of people…and a boycott of some kind is organized. But, boycotts are most associated with not buying products from someone, not aggressively intimidating people to stop making contributions for fear they’ll be attacked for supporting that group.
“Komenize” does a good job of capturing that so we might just see it enter the zeitgeist’s collective dictionary any day now.
**********************************************
UPDATE: I wanted to bump this comment left by Neil to the front page because I have never heard this expressed better. It’s so good I need to turn it into a graphic:
Just when you think the Left couldn’t be more evil . . .
Let’s recap: A organization that kills innocent human beings for a living, along with its radical supporters, were so offended by the elimination of a voluntary contribution by a non-profit dedicated to curing breast cancer that was a whopping 0.07% (that’s zero-point-zero seven percent — less than one tenth of one percent) of their annual budget that they set out to destroy the non-profit, all the while claiming that they weren’t the ones politicizing the issue and that they were being bullied. And the Leftist media supported them all the way, including hiding the Planned Parenthood CEO’s lies about them doing mammograms. Now Komen is distrusted and disliked by both sides.
The only good news is that others will think more carefully before getting involved with Planned Parenthood. Oddly enough, people who kill babies for cash have some unpleasant traits.
Remember: whenever you use the word “Pro-Choice”, you are helping the Tolerant Left’s PR efforts that promote the killing of babies. Whenever you call Leftists “liberals” you help mask just how evil these people are. Please stop helping them in this way if you disagree with what they do — and please start emailing any conservative writers you see who use the term “liberal” and draw their attention to what they are really doing every time they use that word.
