Monday, July 12, 2010

Submitted For Your Perusal



Some would say this is a case of sour grapes. This documentary maker just wanted Hillary Clinton to get the nomination, but, as a seasoned Obama watcher, none of this new information surprises me.

His history is one of fraud, corruption and lies.

Naturally, Obama's worshippers will label this woman a liar. They will attack the messenger, and have little, if anything, to say about the message. Or, they may concede some voter fraud may have taken place, but that it "only happened in Texas", as some sort of evidence that it wouldn't be an example of wide spread voter fraud, but we have seen news story after news story from all over the United States since 2004 that indicate ACORN (who Obama worked for) has perpetrated voter fraud extensively.

They may say that.

But, it is what it is.

13 comments:

  1. Dan, Jim, Geoffrey, and others will probably say that voter registration fraud, especially if caught in time, would not effect actual elections. Of course, they are right, however, remember, these are only the ones who were caught. Who knows how many of those dead people, fictional people, and/or duplicate people may have slipped past the safeguards and voted for their hero, Obama?

    They might also come up with links to stories and/or videos from obvious Left wing web sites that would seem to refute these charges.

    But, keep in mind, the link I provided within the post links us to a Wikipedia article, and Wikipedia could never be confused with Conservatives. Wikipedia is an unashamedly Liberal web site.

    ReplyDelete
  2. These are they who can find no truth outside their own paradigm. Which makes them the epitome, the personification, of ignorance. And it makes them liars, willfully deceitful.

    I'm getting tired of the ignorant and deceitful.

    We concede ground to them when they score legitimate points. But I rarely see the same from them. Their's is not a world wherein the enemy are afforded any ground. They see their enemy as something to be utterly destroyed (in this we are agreement; their ideology is a dangerous infection). They accuse us of arguing via emotions, and yet their emotional arguments are bankrupting the entire nation. Their paradigm is hypocrisy.

    I'm sick of these fools.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, looks like I called it. The whiny Liberals who so often infect this blog with their incessant blather have nothing to say when it's their own who blow the whistle on their Messiah.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. But, keep in mind, the link I provided within the post links us to a Wikipedia article, and Wikipedia could never be confused with Conservatives. Wikipedia is an unashamedly Liberal web site. [Yes, we know facts are liberal.]

    Wow, you can't even get this right, Mark. Your link is to "Ballot pedia" which is obviously an unashamedly Conservative web site.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Because a site is "unashamedly conservative" means their reporting is false? unworthy of consideration? What if the site was the "huffing and puffington" post? would the charges then be legitimate? If yes, what does that say about your own objectivity?

    It says to me your objectivity isn't worth scratch.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Furthermore, who says Ballotpedia is a conservative site? You? What does that prove?

    ReplyDelete
  8. We here in the people republic have learned the our wonderful senator Al (sleepy) Franken was elected by felons and dead people. Hey 300 ballots in some guys trunk three days after the election, sure let's count them. New Black Panthers intimidating voters, no problem. It's all just a big conservative plot.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Because a site is "unashamedly conservative" means their reporting is false?

    No, but it means different from what Mark is suggesting.

    who says Ballotpedia is a conservative site?

    Any site filled with ACORN dementia is conservative.

    ReplyDelete
  10. You mean ACORN facts.

    Go one, Jim, use your vast resources to prove any of those facts aren't true.

    ReplyDelete
  11. use your vast resources to prove any of those facts aren't true.

    No need. I concede that they are probably true. I note that almost every case involved individuals who were being paid by ACORN to register voters and they used illegal methods to make more money. In some cases ACORN officials themselves turned the people in.

    But nowhere among these facts is there any evidence that anybody tried to illegally influence the outcome of any election or that ACORN as an organization did anything to abet illegal VOTES. On that entire page and "timeline" there is only one case of a person being charged for illegal voting because he was registered by ACORN in two different counties. Registration fraud charges were dropped.

    People got paid to turn in registrations. They turned in fraudulent registrations to make more money. Registration does not equal vote.

    Ergo ACORN dementia. There simply is no "there" there.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Jim, Yes, I predicted Liberals would attempt that argument in the first comment. Those mentioned are only the ones caught.

    Look at it this way:

    Fraudulent voters are like cockroaches. When you see one or two when the lights come on, scurrying for cover, you know they aren't the only ones in the house. Behind the baseboards there are millions more.

    Just because you don't see them, it doesn't mean they haven't influenced or even changed the outcome of elections.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Just because you don't see them, it doesn't mean they haven't influenced or even changed the outcome of elections.

    And just because you imagine them doesn't mean they exist.

    we have seen news story after news story from all over the United States since 2004 that indicate ACORN (who Obama worked for) has perpetrated voter fraud extensively.

    No we haven't. That's demonstrably untrue. There is all kinds of evidence of registration fraud. There is little if any of actual voter fraud and your ballotpedia site proves that.

    Ask yourself where all the Bush DOJ cases against actual VOTER fraud were.

    ReplyDelete

Your First Amendment right to free speech is a privilege and comes with a measure of responsibility. You have the right to exercise that responsibility here but we reserve the right to inform you when you've used that right irresponsibly.

We are benevolent dictators in this regard. Enjoy.