12 Comments

• 1. FmrMarine  |  September 13th, 2008 at 3:18 pm

  Mark;
  >>>still a hard fight, but we now have a chance of really sticking it to Democratic voter fraud in Washington and around the country.

  The threats are already beginning!

  >>> Gary Fields and Jonathan Kaufman, Wall Street Journal, September 10, 2008

  An anxious murmur is rising among black voters as the presidential race tightens: What if Sen. Barack Obama loses?

  Black talk-show hosts and black-themed Web sites are being flooded with callers and bloggers reflecting a nervousness—and anger—over the campaign. Monday night, Bev Smith, a nationally syndicated black talk-show host in Pittsburgh, devoted her entire three-hour show to the question: “If Obama doesn’t win, what will you think?”

  “My audience is upset,” she said. “Some people said they would be so angry it would be reminiscent of the [1960s] riots—that is how despondent they would be.”

  Warren Ballentine, a nationally syndicated black talk-radio-show host, added: “Once Sarah Palin was picked and African-Americans saw the Republicans ignited again, they got worried. We are scared now.”

  Black nervousness could help Sen. Obama, the first African-American to head the Democratic—or any major party—ticket, by boosting black turnout in November. But if Sen. Obama loses, “African-Americans could be disappointed to the point of not engaging in the process anymore,” or consider forming a third political party, said Richard McIntire, communications director for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

  {snip} The latest Wall Street Journal poll shows 88% of blacks backing Sen. Obama. Black voter registration has surged.

  {snip}

  “If he loses, it will shake the very ground that we stand on mentally as far as what we need to be to succeed,” said Robert Gordon, a 48-year-old engineering surveyor from Dallas. “From day one, we’ve been told to be a certain way, to be neat, intellectual, speak clearly. He is the symbol of what we were told to be by our parents and by society as a whole. If this doesn’t work, what does that do to our psyche? What do I tell my sons? No matter what the hell we do, it doesn’t matter? We can only assimilate so far.”

  {snip}

  Melvin Thomas, a professor at North Carolina State University and past president of the Association of Black Sociologists, said black response to the election likely will depend on “how African-Americans will see a vote against Mr. Obama. What does the racial distribution of that vote look like? If the answer for African-Americans to the question of why Obama lost is race, an Obama loss will have the potential to deepen the racial cut.”>>>

  {snip}

• 2. Retired Spook  |  September 13th, 2008 at 3:19 pm

  What the Democrat machine in Washington did to Rossi in 2004 is not an isolated incident. It’s right out of the Saul Alinsky playbook, “Rules for Radicals”. I posted this link in an earlier thread, but it was near the end of the thread, and I think it’s important enough to post again because it reveals the morally and intellectually repugnant depths to which the modern Democrat Party has sunk. Here’s an excerpt:

  Alinsky in South Dakota

  Remember that Alinsky’s advice was that the ends justify the means. Think of Florida in 2000 and the manipulation of military ballots. Think of Milwaukee and unattended polling places, which allowed leftist college students to take handfuls of ballots to check off. Think of a million immigrants in the 1996 election granted instant voting rights by the Clinton administration.

  More importantly, think of South Dakota in November of 2002, or Nevada in 1998 or 2002.

  In a brilliant bit of investigative reporting, National Review’s Byron York gave us a grand overview of the corrupt and unpleasant outline of how Alinsky’s rules work during election season. Republicans, once again asleep at the switch, live in the land of euphoria. They still believe that their Democratic counterparts are among the angels on God’s right.

  Considering that Alinsky expresses admiration for Lucifer, they are looking in the wrong place to find many modern Democrats. Republicans still assume that the modern Democratic Party, its media sycophants, its operatives during national or state elections, will play fair. It is hard to say which is worse, Republican naïveté’ or Democratic cheating and law breaking.

  When Democrats cheat, especially under Bill Clinton’s and Terry McAuliffe’s watch, they whine when they discover they didn’t cheat enough to win. When they are caught in the big lies, they expect Republicans to ignore it and give them a pass. The last election in South Dakota is a case in point.

  In the primaries and election of 2002, lawyers from Washington started showing up at polling places in the hinterlands of South Dakota. The Republican leadership and the establishment should have seen it coming but they didn’t.

  As Byron York relates in “Badlands, Bad Votes”: “On Election Day, Noma Sazama knew something unusual was going on the moment she arrived at her polling place, the St. Thomas Parish Hall in Mission, South Dakota. Sazama, a member of the local election board, noticed several strangers in the room – an unusual sight in Mission, population 904, where most people know one another. It turned out the strangers were all lawyers, Democrats who had come to town to serve as poll watchers for the race between incumbent Democratic senator Tim Johnson and Republican John Thune. One was from Washington, D.C., another was from New York City, and a third was from California. ‘There were no locals, and I’ve never seen that happen before,’ says Sazama, who has lived in the area for 73 years.”

  Furthermore, York maintains, “The Democratic team of lawyers confiscated the Parish Hall kitchen only a few feet from the balloting tables.”

  Witnesses swore in affidavits that party hacks had rented dozens of vans and hired drivers to bring voters to the polls. Lawyers from elsewhere made the Parish Hall their headquarters. Seventy-three-year-old Ms. Sazama stated, “They had the names and time-of-pickup and whether someone voted on them, and from those he would contact the drivers.”

  Finally she understood that the influx of outside Democrats were going to use the polling place as their headquarters, an action which is against the laws of South Dakota.

  The lawyers tied up the phones, which meant that the poll watchers and election officials could not make needed phone calls. York quotes the election supervisor: “They were on the phone using it to call I don’t know where, and I needed to call because we had some new districting. They were always talking on it.”

  When Wanless, the election supervisor, protested, she got a chilly reaction from the out-of-towners. “I felt like they were trying to intimidate me,” she recalls.

  In fact, all this is against South Dakota law, which states: “No person may, in any polling place or within or on any building in which a polling place is located or within one hundred feet from any entrance leading into a polling place, maintain an office or communications center. …”

  There were no Republican lawyers or authorities around to inform election officials that it was against the law for the Democrats to be running their campaign from a polling place. That was bad enough, but ever since November Republicans have failed dismally to make it a BIG national issue.

  There was also complete failure to understand Alinsky’s second basic rule: “Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy. Here you want to cause confusion, fear and retreat.” The DNC counted on the locals being intimidated by a gang of high-priced lawyers – and of course they were.

  Another Alinsky rule used in the November elections in South Dakota: “In a fight almost anything goes. It almost reaches the point where you stop to apologize if a chance blow lands above the belt.” In other words, what you do is count on the failure of will by your opponent to call a foul. The opponent usually believes it is easier to do nothing, it is always easier to do nothing, and so Republicans “move on.”

  That is the kind of apathy Hitler’s forces counted on in the Weimar Republic. The end-justifies-the-means cabal figures that even good people find it easier to do nothing.

  In South Dakota, lawyers from diverse places were part of a brigade that the DNC uses to “ensure voters’ rights are protected.” But as York relates, “According to the testimony of dozens of South Dakotans who worked at the polls, the out-of-state attorneys engaged in illegal electioneering, pressured poll workers to accept questionable ballots, and forced polling places in a heavily Democratic area to stay open for an hour past their previously-announced closing time. In addition, the testimony contains evidence of people being allowed to vote with little or no identification, of incorrectly marked ballots being counted as Democratic votes, of absentee ballots being counted without proper signatures, and, most serious of all, of voters who were paid to cast their ballots for Sen. Johnson.”

  According to some witnesses, Democrats were also running car pools out of polling places on the Indian reservations, where investigators are discovering that the dead Indian vote had a major impact on the slim, last- minute, 524-vote Tim Johnson victory over John Thune.

  Affidavits from South Dakotans also indicate that money probably changed hands in crucial areas in the boonies. It was not gas money for van drivers either, but paying per head per vote – shades of Tammany Hall and the elections in Boston wards. Nonetheless, Republicans have decided to “move on.”

  To get the entire story, including affidavits sworn to by South Dakota residents, read York’s November article in National Review Online.

  Most people remember that John Thune defeated Tom Daschle in 2004, but I doubt that too many are familiar with this bit of political trivia from just two years earlier, and that’s exactly the way the Democrats like it — cheat and silently slink away.

• 3. Retired Spook  |  September 13th, 2008 at 3:23 pm

  {snip} The latest Wall Street Journal poll shows 88% of blacks backing Sen. Obama.

  FmrMarine, hell, Kerry got more than that, 92% IIRC. I would expect Obama to get at least 102 -103%, heh, heh.

• 4. New Conservative  |  September 13th, 2008 at 3:43 pm

  I was talking my neighbor recently about this situation. Also it’s unfair to say that if Obama doesn’t win no black person could ever be President. Colin Powell and Condelezza Rice would both make good Presidents in my opinion. I may not agree with them on every issue, but both of them are more qualified and closer to my view of the world than Obama will ever be.

• 5. New Conservative  |  September 13th, 2008 at 3:45 pm

  I’m running a live interactive college football blog at my site all day today. Come check it out
  http://thenewconservatives.blogspot.com/

• 6. Jackie  |  September 13th, 2008 at 4:43 pm

  testing

• 7. Jackie  |  September 13th, 2008 at 5:03 pm

  I am stopping by to wish that somehow , those of us who believe it’s warranted , could PUBLICLY thank President Bush for serving as Commander in Chief during a most TRYING term(s) of office. As he dealt with real horror in the aftermath of 9-11, he had to contend with the relentless, gutter-snipe democrats and their hateful and disrespectful digs at his integrity. He also endured the propaganda-like distortions pumped out , non-stop, by the main-stream-media ( there has to be a special place in hell for the “free press” because of their willingness to betray the principles once honored by those who enjoyed such a sacred priviledge.) ANYWAY, I would love to thank that man publicly with millions of others like me. God knows he deserves it !!!!

• 8. Bull  |  September 13th, 2008 at 5:59 pm

  new con,

  powell and rice aren’t black. they are republicans, so by definition they can’t be black. they are uncle toms.

• 9. kimberly4victory  |  September 13th, 2008 at 6:31 pm

  Jackie, you can also thank him (and Mrs. Bush) personally by writing to them at the White House. I’m sure they will both appreciate it. Last week, I sent President Bush a picture (it’s a lithograph which I personalized for him) and a porcelain US flag ornament, along with a letter of appreciation. :-)

  Maybe … Mark/Matt/Kevin will put together a thread where we can thank him. Of course, it will have to be monitored carefully so no classless and rude comments are allowed - a 24 hour job, no doubt.

• 10. Jackie  |  September 13th, 2008 at 6:39 pm

  Kimberly,
  Thanks for your response. I will thank him personally. Your’s sounds like a lovely tribute . I just wish the purveyors of ” EVERYONE hates Bush” could be made to suffer a little “red in the face ” moment, know what I mean ???

• 11. cmorr  |  September 13th, 2008 at 10:48 pm

  antiques. dust. fear.

• 12. Doug  |  September 14th, 2008 at 1:00 am

  Well, to be honest, it was a more Republican judge that finally ruled against the legal voters in the state, giving the victory to Gregoire. Something along the lines of, yes there were so many illegal votes cast in King County that Rossi could have won, but by George, you didn’t prove to me who each of those illegal votes voted for so the election stands.

  It was a huge embarrassment for the University of Washington Statistics professors who LIED and LIED and LIED under oath about simple mathmatics (since they had PhD’s I’m saying the lied because they couldn’t be that stupid), evidently convincing the judge that more than likely the illegal votes of the felons (who aren’t allowed to vote) were voting for Rossi because most of them were male. Yeppers, King County felons voting for the Republican.