I am confused. . . but most of all I am a Christian Conservative.

Archive for April, 2014

GOP vs Tea Party

An open letter to the Conservative Republican Members of the House.

Dear Conservative Republican Members of the House of Representatives,

It is time for you to act.

You are out of time.  The fate of the nation as well as the Republican Party rests in your hands.

A little history is worth remembering here.

In 2006 and 2008, the Republican Party was slaughtered.  The GOP was on the endangered species list.  One more bad election and the GOP would have taken its place as a minor party, with only slightly more members than the flat Earth society.

Then came the Tea Party. 

We saved the GOP.

We only asked for a few things in return.  We asked for smaller government.  We asked you to stand up against wasteful government spending and we asked you to at least defund Obamacare, if not force its repeal. 

Once the Republicans took over in 2011, all we got was John Boehner’s freshly laundered white flag of surrender. He surrendered on the debt ceiling, he surrendered on spending and he surrendered on Obamacare.

Every time we conservatives wanted to fight Obamacare, the GOP leadership told us it was not the right time and Majority Leader Eric Cantor helpfully offered yet another totally meaningless vote that he knew was not going anywhere.

Now Cathy McMorris Rodgers says Obamacare is here to stay.  John Boehner is now saying it is too late to repeal Obamacare, let’s just commit political suicide by passing Amnesty.

You have a choice to make. 

Revolt or die.

Revolt and depose the entire leadership team of Boehner, Cantor, Whip Kevin McCarthy and McMorris-Rodgers or see the end of the Republican Party.

Chris Cillizza writing in his blog “The Fix” on the Washington Post website, on Friday posed the question, will the Tea Party walk away from the GOP in 2016?

Forget 2016!  If the GOP follows Boehner’s lead right on to the crazy train, the Tea Party will leave in 2014.

If the Republican Party isn’t going to cut taxes, cut spending and stop Amnesty, what good is it?

If the conservative base, wanted higher spending, higher taxes, Obamacare and Amnesty, all we needed to do was stay home and let Nancy Pelosi become Speaker again.

Either the House Leadership is replaced by conservatives or you will see conservatives walk this fall. 

For any Republican Members of the House currently suffering from Potomac Fever, here is a clue.  K Street cannot reelect you.  The Chamber of Commerce cannot reelect you.  The conservative activists in your districts are the ones who reelect you.  It would only take a switch of 16 to 18 seats to put Nancy Pelosi back in the Speaker’s chair.

Vote them out because you oppose them on principle or vote them out and replace them with conservatives simply because you want to stay in the majority.

The choice is yours.  Either live up to the conservative values that you claim you support or watch conservative voters leave the GOP for a new party.

Choose well.

“Little Things”

When I was going overseas in 1967 I was given a pocket New Testament. I won’t say that I read it a lot but it traveled with me wherever I went and I still have it. It traveled with me to Thailand, Guam Okinawa and Plattsburgh and finally to Waterford. I pulled it out once in a while to thumb through it and still do that to this day. It may not have been my preferred reading all these years but it somehow inspired me to be a better Christian and to try to go to church more regularly – like that Mustard Seed. It was a small thing, given to me by Rev Dean (one of my mothers relatives) but sometimes it is these small things that make a difference in our lives. I haven’t seen a small pocket New Testament in a very long time other than mine and wonder if doing “small things” has become a lost art. I hope not as it has made a difference in my life; I wonder how many other lives can we touch by practicing doing some small things for them.

Black Bundy Bodyguard: He’s Not A Racist; "I’d Take A Bullet For That Man"

CNN REPORTER: You’re protecting this man and he’s wondering whether African-Americans would be better off as slaves. How does that strike you?

JASON BULLOCK, BODYGUARD FOR CLIVEN BUNDY: It doesn’t strike me any kind of way. This is still the same old Mr. Bundy I met from the first day of all this happening.

CNN REPORTER: But aren’t those offensive comments to you

BULLOCK: Not at all.

CNN REPORTER: Not offensive?

BULLOCK: Because Mr. Bundy is not a racist. Ever since I’ve been here he’s treated me with nothing but hospitality. He’s pretty much treated me like his own family.
BULLOCK: I would take a bullet for that man, if need be. I look up to him just like I do my own grandfather.


BULLOCK: Because I believe in his cause and after having met Mr. Bundy a few times, I have a really good feel about him and I’m a pretty good judge of character.

The Obama war to make America a third world country

Posted by Judson Phillips on April 17, 2014 at 7:34am in Tea Party Nation Forum

It is now beyond dispute that the overwhelming objective of the Obama Regime is to turn America into a third world nation.  Every policy they have is designed to destroy a great nation.

Obama is doing everything possible to destroy the American military and America’s ability to project force in our national defense.  The regime is doing everything possible to destroy the middle class, through its economic policies like Obamacare.  Obamacare creates a huge disincentive for full time employment. He is saddling the nation with an unsustainable debt that destroys the economy even more.

But there is one other shocking thing the Regime is doing.  We have just now found out about it and it may be the worst thing the Regime has done.

What is this shocking thing the Regime is doing?

Yesterday, America discovered that Lois Lerner, the former IRS executive was conspiring with attorneys at the Department of Justice to try and prosecute conservatives for the crime of being conservative.

In third world countries, the criminal justice system is simply another arm the Regime uses to prevent political competition.  That is what officials of the Obama Regime wanted to do in America. 

In one email, Lerner wrote: I got a call today from Richard Pilger Director Elections Crimes Branch at DOJ … He wanted to know who at IRS the DOJ folk s [sic] could talk to about Sen. Whitehouse idea at the hearing that DOJ could piece together false statement cases about applicants who “lied” on their 1024s –saying they weren’t planning on doing political activity, and then turning around and making large visible political expenditures. DOJ is feeling like it needs to respond, but want to talk to the right folks at IRS to see whether there are impediments from our side and what, if any damage this might do to IRS programs.

Then she followed it up with another email: 

As I mentioned yesterday — there are several groups of folks from the FEC world that are pushing tax fraud prosecution for c4s who report they are not conducting political activity when they are (or these folks think they are). One is my ex-boss Larry Noble (former General Counsel at the FEC), who is now president of Americans for Campaign Reform. This is their latest push to shut these down. One IRS prosecution would make an impact and they wouldn’t feel so comfortable doing the stuff.

So, don’t be fooled about how this is being articulated – it is ALL about 501(c)(4) orgs and political activity.

Lerner targeted conservatives when she worked for the Federal Election Commission and with Obama running the White House, she felt so emboldened that she thought they could prosecute and jail conservatives for the crime of being conservative. 

Rush Limbaugh has talked for years about the left trying to criminalize being a conservative.  Here we see this principle in action.

Lois Lerner and others wanted to put conservatives in jail. 

It is clear the IRS was moving and perhaps even had a target in mind.  Writing in the PJ Tatler, Bryan Preston says he thinks he knows who the target would have been. 

Catherine Englebrecht of True the Vote. 

The Obama Regime has unleashed its fury on Englebrecht sending every agency it could to audit and harass her and her family’s business.

The IRS scandal is simply another symptom of what the Obama Regime is trying to do.  It wants to fundamentally transform America. It wants to transform America from a nation of laws to a thugocracy. 

Obama wants to change America from the greatest, freest nation in the world to simply another banana republic.

This is what the IRS scandal is about at its heart.

The only question left is will real Americans stand and fight this or quietly submit.

Disgrace: WH Rejects Ft. Hood Survivors’ Request to Meet with Obama

Let’s begin with the depressingly morbid clarification that we’re talking about survivors of the 2009 shooting rampage at the Texas military base, not the most recent one. As you’ll recall, the former massacre was perpetrated by Army Major Nidal Hassan, an avowed Islamic extremist, who shouted “Allahu Akhbar” as he mowed down his unarmedcompatriots. The US government shamefully decided to categorize the murders as an instance of “workplace violence,” rather than the anti-American terrorist attack that it was. To its credit, left-wing magazine Mother Jones has followed this story, giving voice to frustrated victims, and explaining the background issues at play that almost certainly led to this outrageous snub:

In 2012, nearly 150 Fort Hood victims and their family members filed suit against the Department of Defense, seeking compensation for their suffering and lost benefits. But the case has bogged down, and the Senate has balked at passing legislation that would give victims of the 2009 shooting the same benefits as soldiers killed or wounded in combat or terrorism attacks. Lunsford and other survivors had hoped that a personal meeting might persuade the president to intervene and break the logjam.“Right now, he only knows our stories second hand,” Lunsford says. “We wanted to meet with him face-to-face so he could look us in the eyes and see our pain. That’s the only way he’s really going to understand our situation.” According to their lawyer, Reed Rubinstein, roughly two dozen victims and their relatives were planning to attend. But they didn’t hear back from the White House until the day after the memorial, when McDonough sent a brief reply: “After receiving your letter yesterday, and consulting with the White House Counsel’s office, we forwarded your letter to the Departments of Justice and Defense, who are leading the government’s efforts to ensure the victims of the 2009 shooting receive the justice and benefits they deserve. Unfortunately, we were unable to meet your specific request for a meeting with the President yesterday.”

President Obama was unable to accommodate a meeting request from the surviving victims of the deadliest terror attack on US soil during his term in office. He was, however, able to accommodate a pair of high-dollar Democratic fundraisers on the trip, as well as a private meeting with gubernatorial candidate and late-term abortion champion Wendy Davis. Allahpundit, rightfully disgusted, examines the context:

The survivors have been begging the Pentagon for years to classify their injuries as combat-related so that they can receive a more robust complement of benefits and medical care. (One family says the difference in pay alone is $70,000 so far.) The brass has resisted, though, going so far as to deny them Purple Hearts in the interest of protecting the “workplace violence” designation. At one point the victims were told that it’s a matter of legal strategy: If the Defense Department had formally labeled Hasan a terrorist while the case was pending, he would have moved for a mistrial on grounds that he can no longer get a fair trial. Okay, but … the trial’s over now and the shooting still hasn’t been re-classified. Why not?Another theory, floated by Mother Jones, is that the Pentagon’s simply too embarrassed by the many, many jihadist red flags it missed in Hasan’s past and won’t call him a terrorist lest it lose face. I don’t understand that either, unless its institutional inertia taken to an Orwellian degree. Literally no one outside the Pentagon’s PR department believes that Hasan’s rampage was “workplace violence” and not terrorism; protecting the formal designation achieves nothing except to make Defense look ridiculous…
A few GOP congressmen have been trying to get Hagel to do something about this. Last year they picked up Democratic support from Pennsylvania Rep. Chaka Fattah and an amendment requiring combat pay for the survivors was added to the House version of the defense appropriations bill — before it was stripped out by Harry Reid’s Senate. You can imagine, then, why the survivors would think their last, best option would be to demand an explanation from Obama face to face — and why O, knowing that, would steer far clear.

At the risk of being unduly partisan, it seems Senate Democrats and the White House have at last settled on a cost-saving measure they can actually support. Unsurprisingly, it involves the military. (Though it’s worth noting that the Pentagon brass has also been complicit in this contemptible episode). And at the risk of sounding glib, these Ft. Hood survivors are going about things all wrong. Everyone knows there’s a quick and easy way to guarantee four face-to-face meetings with President Obama every year. Unfortunately, it doesn’t entail writing a polite letter, even if you’re the victim of a horrific jihadist shooting spree. I’ll leave you with Obama’s speech at last week’s memorial, after which he raced off to two fundraiserswith Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid:

“Part of what makes this so painful is that we’ve been here before…This tragedy tears at wounds still raw from five years ago. Once more soldiers who survived foreign war zones were struck down here at home, where they’re supposed to be safe.”

“So painful.” Just words.

Statistical Frauds

Thomas Sowell | Apr 15, 2014

The “war on women” political slogan is in fact a war against common sense.

It is a statistical fraud when Barack Obama and other politicians say that women earn only 77 percent of what men earn — and that this is because of discrimination.

It would certainly be discrimination if women were doing the same work as men, for the same number of hours, with the same amount of training and experience, as well as other things being the same. But study after study, over the past several decades, has shown repeatedly that those things are not the same.

Constantly repeating the “77 percent” statistic does not make them the same. It simply takes advantage of many people’s ignorance — something that Barack Obama has been very good at doing on many other issues.

What if you compare women and men who are the same on all the relevant characteristics?

First of all, you can seldom do that, because the statistics you would need are not always available for the whole range of occupations and the whole range of differences between women’s patterns and men’s patterns in the labor market.

Even where relevant statistics are available, careful judgment is required to pick samples of women and men who are truly comparable.

For example, some women are mothers and some men are fathers. But does the fact that they are both parents make them comparable in the labor market? Actually the biggest disparity in incomes is between fathers and mothers. Nor is there anything mysterious about this, when you stop and think about it.

How surprising is it that women with children do not earn as much as women who do not have children? If you don’t think children take up a mother’s time, you just haven’t raised any children.

How surprising is it that men with children earn more than men without children, just the opposite of the situation with women? Is it surprising that a man who has more mouths to feed is more likely to work longer hours? Or take on harder or more dangerous jobs, in order to earn more money?

More than 90 percent of the people who are killed on the job are men. There is no point pretending that there are no differences between what women do and what men do in the workplace, or that these differences don’t affect income.

During my research on male-female differences for my book “Economic Facts and Fallacies,” I was amazed to learn that young male doctors earned much higher incomes than young female doctors. But it wasn’t so amazing after I discovered that young male doctors worked over 500 hours more per year than young female doctors.

Even when women and men work at jobs that have the same title — whether doctors, lawyers, economists or whatever — people do not get paid for what their job title is, but for what they actually do.

Women lawyers who are pregnant, or who have young children, may have good reasons to prefer a 9 to 5 job in a government agency to working 60 hours a week in a high-powered law firm. But there is no point comparing male lawyers as a group with female lawyers as a group, if you don’t look any deeper than job titles.

Unless, of course, you are not looking for the truth, but for political talking points to excite the gullible.

Even when you compare women and men with the “same” education, as measured by college or university degrees, the women usually specialize in a very different mix of subjects, with very different income-earning potential.

Although comparing women and men who are in fact comparable is not easy to do, when you look at women and men who are similar on multiple factors, the sex differential in pay shrinks drastically and gets close to the vanishing point. In some categories, women earn more than men with the same range of characteristics.

If the 77 percent statistic was for real, employers would be paying 30 percent more than they had to, every time they hired a man to do a job that a woman could do just as well. Would employers be such fools with their own money? If you think employers don’t care about paying 30 percent more than they have to, just go ask your boss for a 30 percent raise!

15 Examples Of "Liberal Privilege"

John Hawkins | Apr 15, 2014

Since liberals can’t find enough real examples of racism to whine over, they’ve taken drastic steps to invent imaginary bigotry. One of the ways they’ve done this, especially on college campuses, is by embracing the concept of “privilege.”

The general idea is that as a straight, white heterosexual male, you have all sorts of special “privileges” you should feel guilty about because of your “dominant” position in society.Buzzfeed even put together a special quiz on the subject called, “How Privileged Are You?” Some of the indications of “privilege” on the quiz include:

* I have never been told I “sound white.”

* My parents are heterosexual.

* I am a man.

* I have never felt unsafe because of my gender.

* I have never been homeless.

To take this sort of hyper-sensitivity seriously requires a mind-boggling lack of self-awareness because EVERYBODY has some kind of “privilege” that could benefit him in some way, shape or form that others don’t have.

I’ve worked at jobs where the managers have said they couldn’t fire a black employee who deserved it solely because they needed more of a paper trail to fire a non-white employee. There are illegal aliens getting in-state tuition when Americans from other states can’t. There are transexuals who can use whatever bathroom they want based on how they “feel” about their gender that day. It’s much more acceptable for a woman to stay home and take care of her kids while her partner supports her than it is for a man. If you’re gay, you’re much more likely to be taken seriously if you claim that you’re the victim of a hate crime than someone who’s straight.

Oh, but those don’t count…why not?

Because if you apply the same rules of “privilege” to everyone, it becomes obvious that whole concept is stupid?

Well, the rest of us already know that, but in order to help liberals catch up, here are 15 examples of “liberal privilege.”

1) You can commit a crime and your local newspaper usually won’t mention what party you’re in if you’re a Democrat.

2) You can be a white liberal who viciously mocks black men like Clarence Thomas, Allen West, and Ben Carson without being called a racist.

3) You can be a Communist or a radical Islamist, you can hate America or even engage in acts of terrorism and still get a job as a college professor. In fact, it probably makes it more likely you’ll be hired.

4) You can live in a mansion, fly around in private jets and consume more energy than a small town and still be taken seriously when you say we need to cut back on our lifestyles to fight global warming.

5) You can hold a conference like Netroots Nation that’s as white as any Tea Party without having people suggest that your event is somehow “racist” for not having more minorities present.

6) You can hold protests without paying for permits, illegally sleep in the park for weeks, and crap in the street and the police turn a blind eye to what you’re doing.

7) You can make Ebenezer Scrooge look like Mother Teresa and you’ll still be told you’re “compassionate” for supporting liberal policies that ruin the lives of poor Americans.

8) You have the option of sending your kids to a liberal school, watching liberal news, and then enjoying liberal TV shows so that your insular liberal world never has to be shaken by actual conservatives explaining their ideas.

9) If you work for a newspaper, a college, or in Hollywood, you can freely spout your political beliefs at every opportunity without fear of facing any retaliation for your beliefs. As an added bonus, you can then tell everyone how “brave” you are for taking the same positions all of your friends and colleagues hold.

10) If you’re a liberal minority politician, you can be crooked, ignore your constituents, and do nothing of consequence to make their lives better while you get elected over and over again.

11) You can be taken seriously as some kind of girl power, women’s rights icon even though your entire career is built on being married to a serial adulterer who became President.

12) You can have millions of dollars in the bank and not be laughed at when you complain about all those awful rich people ruining the country.

13) Newspapers will ignore scandals that would be front page news FOR MONTHS if a Republican were involved because a liberal is behind them.

14) You can wear mom jeans, throw like a girl, and look like a dork on a bike and Hollywood will tell everyone you’re cool if you’re a liberal President.

15) You can cheer for women who abort their female babies right before you accuse OTHER PEOPLE of waging a “war” on women.

What the Left Did Last Week

Dennis Prager | Apr 15, 2014

In his column last week, Charles Krauthammer crossed a line. He declared the American left totalitarian. He is correct. Totalitarianism is written into the left’s DNA.

Krauthammer wrote about a left-wing petition “bearing more than 110,000 signatures delivered to the [Washington] Post demanding a ban on any article questioning global warming.”

He concluded:

“I was gratified by the show of intolerance because it perfectly illustrated my argument that the left is entering a new phase of ideological agitation — no longer trying to win the debate but stopping debate altogether, banishing from public discourse any and all opposition. The proper word for that attitude is totalitarian.”

America is engaged in a civil war — thank God, a non-violent one, but a civil war nonetheless. It is as divided as it was during the Civil War in the 19th century. The issue then was slavery — a huge moral divide, of course. But today, the country is divided by opposite views about much more than one major issue. The left and right are divided by their views of morality, politics, society, religion, the individual and the very nature of America.

The left seeks to, as candidate Barack Obama promised five days before his first election, “fundamentally transform the United States of America.”

That is what the left is doing. There is almost no area of American life in which the left’s influence is not transformative, and ultimately destructive.

Beginning with this column I will periodically, perhaps regularly, devote this space to that transformation and destruction. My reason for doing so is that most Americans, including more than a few Republicans and more than a few Democrats, simply do not know what the left is doing to their country.

So, here is some of what the left has done in the last week or two.

–The left-wing directors of Mozilla, the parent company of the browser Firefox, compelled their CEO, Brendan Eich, to resign after he refused to recant his support for maintaining the man-woman definition of marriage. Even though his gay employees acknowledged how fairly he treated them individually and as couples, the mere fact that he believes that marriage is between a man and a woman rendered him unacceptable as an employee of Mozilla/Firefox. (For more details, see my column of last week, “Uninstall Firefox.”)

The Wall Street Journal condemned Mozilla. The New York Times has not taken a position.

–Brandeis University rescinded its invitation to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, perhaps the world’s foremost activist on behalf of women in the Islamic world. Hirsi Ali, an African woman born into a Muslim family and raised Muslim, who now teaches at Harvard, was scheduled to receive an honorary degree at the forthcoming Brandeis graduation ceremony. Brandeis rescinded its invitation after protests led by a Muslim student and the Council on American-Islamic Relations, an Islamist organization, erupted over Hirsi Ali’s criticism of the way women are treated in many parts of the Muslim world.

The Wall Street Journal condemned Brandeis. The New York Times has not taken a position.

–The University of Michigan canceled a showing of the documentary “Honor Diaries.” The film features nine women who are either Muslim or come from a Muslim country. They speak about honor killings, female genital mutilation, forced marriages at young ages, and the denial of education to women in Muslim communities. They praise moderate Muslims. But the University of Michigan cancelled the film lest a non-moderate Muslim organization, CAIR again, label the university “Islamophobic.”

–Six weeks ago, a University of Wisconsin student released a video he had made of a guest lecturer in the freshman general education course “Education 130: Individual and Society.” The lecturer, the political and organizing director for Service Employees International Union Local 150, delivered a diatribe, with obscenities, against conservatives, whites and Republicans. Last week. When confronted with the evidence that classrooms at their university were being politicized, the faculty of the University of Wisconsin reacted with indignation — at the student who made the video. And then the faculty passed a resolution demanding that the university ban recording any of its classes.

It’s hard to blame the faculty. Given the intellectual shallowness and the left-wing politics that pervade so many liberal arts classes, the University of Wisconsin faculty has every reason to fear allowing the public to know what professors say in class.

–Today is the cutoff date for public reactions to the California Supreme Court’s ethics advisory committee’s proposal to forbid California judges from affiliating with the Boy Scouts, which the left deems anti-gay. Given the Left’s animosity to traditional value-based institutions, it is not surprising that it loathes the Boy Scouts. What is remarkable — actually, frightening — is how easy it has been for the left to make it (SET ITAL) illegal (END ITAL) for a judge to be a leader in the Boy Scouts. This is the now case in 22 states. It will soon be the case in California as well.

This was just one week — and only selected examples — in the left’s ongoing transformation of America.

When you have a gutless President.

  • Posted by Judson Phillips on April 11, 2014 at 12:34pm in Tea Party Nation Forum

    There are so many descriptions that can be used for Barack Obama.  He hates America and Americans and he is totally gutless.

    When Iran nominated a new ambassador to the United Nations, it created a stir when it was revealed he was a part of the group that held America diplomats hostage for 444 days in Iran in 1979 and 1980.

    This was a deliberate move by Iran. It was sticking a finger in America’s eye. 

    What did Barack Obama do?

    Not a thing.

    Ted Cruz did something.  He introduced legislation to bar Iran’s new ambassador to the United Nations.

    From the Hill:

    The White House said Friday it would not issue a visa to Iran’s next ambassador to the United Nations, who has ties to the Iranian hostage crisis.

    “We have informed the United Nations and Iran that we will not issue a visa to Mr. Hamid Abutalebi,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said.

    Abutalebi has admitted that he worked as a translator and negotiator for the student group that held Americans hostage at the U.S. Embassy in Iran for 444 days.

    His nomination prompted bipartisan outrage on Capitol Hill, where both chambers of Congress passed legislation that would prevent the government from providing a visa to any United Nations ambassadors with ties to terrorist attacks against the United States.

    Carney stopped short of saying that the president would sign that legislation, saying the administration was reviewing its constitutionality.

    The bill would contradict a 1947 treaty that obligates the United States to grant entry visas to the representatives of U.N. member states, which was signed as part of the bid to attract the permanent headquarters to New York.

    Even Bill Clinton would have not thought twice about denying Abutalebi a Visa.

    Obama is too gutless and weak. Iran knows this.  Fortunately Ted Cruz gave Obama a backbone.

    If we had a real American President, there would be a better option.  Tell Abutalebi he could come to America.  Then we show the Iranians the same respect they showed for our diplomats in 1979 and lock him up for the rest of his life.

    Unfortunately for America, not only does Obama not have the courage to do that, he is cheering for the Iranians, not the Americans.

    How did Barack Obama win reelection in 2012?

  • Posted by Judson Phillips on April 11, 2014 at 7:18am in Tea Party Nation Forum

    How did Barack Obama win reelection in 2012?

    There are a lot of reasons given.  Mitt Romney was a terrible candidate.  That is certainly true.  Conservatives stayed home. Again, that is true.  Romney and his brain trust made no effort to reach out to conservatives or even appear to be a conservative, so conservatives stayed home.

    But there may be another reason why Barack Obama, the worst President in American history, managed to squeak out another term.

    What is the shocking secret that may explain how Obama got a second term?

    A study done in North Carolina showed that 35,750 people who live and voted in North Carolina may have voted in another state in the 2012 Presidential election.  The study was based on comparing the first and last names along with date of birth for people who voted in 28 other states.  In 765 of those cases, social security numbers matched as well.

    This number would have probably been larger but only 28 states participated and the four largest states, California, New York, Texas and Florida did not participate.

    If you extrapolate this figure out over the entire population, that could be over one million double votes in 2012. 

    Liberals shriek that voter fraud never happens.  Conservatives don’t engage in voter fraud but liberals do.  Only weeks ago, Democrats in Cincinnati celebrated the release from jail of Melowese Richardson.  The poll worker and Obama bot confessed to voting for Obama multiple times.

    She saw nothing wrong with that as she pledged her allegiance to her Dear Leader.   Richardson was prosecuted in Ohio court and was convicted and given a five year sentence. Leftist groups screamed in horror that a Democrat convicted of voter fraud would actually have to serve a prison sentence and pressured the authorities in Ohio to grant her an early release.  Illegally voting in a Presidential Election is a federal offense, but Attorney General Eric Holder shows about as much interest in prosecuting Richardson as he does in going after the criminals at the IRS.

    The results of this North Carolina study are not just alarming, they could have changed the outcome of the 2012 election. 

    Mitt Romney lost the popular vote.  But a shift of 333,000 votes in four states would have given him an electoral win. 

    As reported by Breitbart in November 2012:

    Romney lost New Hampshire’s 4 electoral college votes by a margin of 40,659. Obama won with 368,529 to Romney’s  327,870.

    Romney lost Florida’s 29 electoral college votes  by a margin of 73,858. Obama won with 4,236,032 to Romney’s 4,162,174.

    Romney lost Ohio’s 18 electoral college votes by a margin of 103,481. Obama won with 2,697,260 to Romney’s 2,593,779

    Romney lost Virginia’s 13 electoral college votes by a margin of 115,910. Obama won with 1,905,528 to Romney’s  1,789,618.

    Add the 64 electoral college votes from this switch of 333,908 votes in these four key states to Romney’s 206, remove them from Obama’s 332, and Romney defeats Obama 270 to 268.

    If all fifty states had participated in the North Carolina study, the numbers would be much higher.

    It is also worth remembering that Obama did not carry a single state that has voter ID laws.

    Democrats are not winning elections.  They are taking them the old fashioned way.  They are stealing them.

  • Tag Cloud