Much howling and gnashing of teeth from patriots on the right about this. From the Independent Journal Review:

And in the middle of the fed’s financial crisis you have President Obama.  His mainstream media face time suggests that he’s leading the galant charge to liberate America from the impending fiscal terrors; but, as the US finally makes the trip over the edge, the President will be in beautiful, sunny Hawaii, soaking in a 20-day, $4 million dollar vacation …oceans away from the problems that the rest of us are facing.

Mark Levin makes his comments on his show. If you cannot see the video in your browser watch it here.

Published on Nov 30, 2012 by Shoobie Doobie

Glenn Reynolds talks fiscal cliff with Dan Mitchell from the CATO Institute, one of my long trusted sources on free market economics.

If you cannot see the video in your browser watch it here.

Published on Nov 29, 2012 by Pajamasmedia

If the video doesn’t show in your browser watch it here.

Published on Nov 29, 2012 by newsbusted

Most people think that if something doesn’t kill them in the first five minutes it must be harmless. Take marijuana, for instance. I mean, don’t take it. Your brain will never be the same. Check out this rather stunning report by Steven Crowder. Great job.

If you don’t see the video in your browser watch it here.

Published on Nov 26, 2012 by StevenCrowder

Erick Erickson at RedState writes:

Strip away the candidate and coalition and it is on the fifth floor of 66 Canal Center Plaza where the seeds of Mitt Romney’s ruin and the RNC’s get out the vote (GOTV) effort collapsed — bled to death by charlatan consultants making millions off the party, its donors, and the grassroots.

66 Canal Center Plaza is also why Jeff Larson, the Chief of Staff of the Republican National Committee, should not be put in charge of the autopsy of the GOP’s defeat. Multiple sources confirm to me that RNC Chairman Reince Priebus has already put Larson in charge of the so called autopsy.

This is like putting the fox in charge of the hen house. The fifth floor of 66 Canal Center Plaza reveals a tangled web of incestuous relationships among Republican consultants who have made millions all while the GOP went down the tubes. Here the top party consultants waged war with conservative activists and here they waged war with the Democrats. On both fronts, they raked in millions along the way with a more fractured, minority party in their wake. And they show no signs of recognizing just how much a part of the problem they are.

Keep reading The Incestuous Bleeding of the Republican Party

Published on Nov 22, 2012 by dallesandro74

What is The National Council of Churches?

by Jan Shedd | November 28, 2012 | Kaufman County Tea Party

The Marxist’s mission to destroy America began over 60 years ago.  They have worked tirelessly over the decades to elect someone like Barak Obama to the White House.  When they started out, most Americans were keenly aware of the dangers of Communism, which required them to operate quietly and behind the scenes.  But as the years went by, patriotic Americans began to forget that freedom isn’t free, the primary consequence of which was socialism-creep. They were emboldened by winning many battles, and barely losing others. Today, they are quite open about their agenda.  But in the middle of the last century, this was not the case.  In 1950, an organization was formed to promote the Communist cause in America “in the garb of religious teachings.”

It was named “The National Council of Churches.”

Every Sunday, millions of Christians all over America attend their chosen houses of worship.  Of that number, many donate generously to their church.  Worshipping God with a financial gift is just as important as worshipping Him with our spirit, and usually this is a good thing . . . but sometimes things are not what they seem.  Read on.

The NCC was founded in New York City by members of its Communist front-group predecessor, the Federal Council of Churches.  In the beginning, they were openly Marxist.  But this no doubt created problems, so they recast themselves as representatives of the Christian left, (now there’s an oxymoron!).  They promoted liberation theology, which is really Marxist ideology parading as Christianity.  The NCC’s membership consists of 36 Protestant, Anglican, and Orthodox Christian denominations, with 50 million members in 140,000 congregations. Are you a member of one of them?

The NCC openly rejects capitalism, while it supports numerous socialist causes and governments.  Some of the recipients of their support belong to the international community.  In the 1970s, they supplied financial aid with hundreds of thousands of dollars for Soviet-sponsored terrorist rampages by Communist guerrillas in Africa & Central America.

 Keep reading…

A take off on this original. Hat tip Townhall.com

What are they covering up? Here is Senator Kelly Ayotte after meeting with Ambassador Susan Rice and Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham. Hat tip Gateway Pundit.

Published on Nov 27, 2012 by jim hoft

Commentary by Sibyl West

After the fall of Gaddafi Libya has been awash with sophisticated weapons, and Caroline Glick told Mark Levin recently (38 – 39:30 min mark) that sophisticated weapons have been turning up in the hands of Hamas and being fired into Israel. One of the questions in my mind is: Was there a covert operation to funnel weapons to the enemies of Israel, all the while maintaining the facade that the US is Israel’s biggest ally? This is not far fetched since what the freaks who have seized control of our government do in the name of America more often than not goes against the wishes and morality of a large portion of the country’s inhabitants.

Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, whatever — they all target the Jews in particular and infidels generally. Their names are various, their aim is one — domination. Robert Spencer of Jihadwatch notes:

A moment’s glance at the names of jihad terror groups around the world shows that it is precisely zealousness for Islam’s religious tenets that fuels jihad terrorism. … the names of jihad groups are invariably religious: Hamas is an acronym for the Islamic Resistance Movement. Hizballah is the Party of Allah. The group that murdered Ambassador Stevens and the others in Libya was Ansar al-Sharia — supporters of Islamic law. And on and on.

Weapons going to Syria can be diverted on the way or simply fired into Israel from the Golan Heights, as Caroline Glick says they were in mid-November.

This post by a RedState blogger gets to the nub of the Benghazi matter like no one else I’ve found. Looks like a gun running operation, again.

The Benghazi-Syria Connection

By: Breeanne Howe (Diary)  |  November 26th, 2012 at 05:45 PM

Excerpts:

Considering the events in Libya leading up to the Benghazi attack, evidence appears to indicate that what happened on September 11, 2012 was the climax of a series of events that began on February 15, 2011.

The Libyan civil war started on February 15, 2011 …

Left in the wake of Gaddafi’s decades-long regime were huge stockpiles of weapons.  Arms provided openly and covertly to the rebels during the war only added to a new threat facing Libya and the world.  Concerns were immediate that Libyan weapons would make their way into the hands of al Qaeda.  The U.S. wasted no time in beginning to work with the new Libyan leadership in trying to reign in [sic] the massive amount of weapons that had been found around Tripoli.  For their part, the United Nations Security Council adopted a resolution to help secure the loose weapons.  Unfortunately, efforts to stop al Qaeda from capitalizing on the Libyan war were too late.  As reported by Reuters shortly after the conflict began, Libyan weapons had already been secured by al Qaeda in Algeria.  After the war, al Qaeda acknowledged that they had “been one of the main beneficiaries of the revolutions in the Arab world.”  Still, the responsibility of securing the Libyan weapons was one the world was committed to continuing.

Syria became the next country involved in the “Arab Spring” and, once again, countries around the world had to weigh how involved they would be in helping the Syrian opposition.  The official U.S. stance was to pursue diplomatic actions, such as sanctions, and not arm the Syrian rebels.  At the same time, however, the CIA was in southern Turkey helping to distribute weapons from allies to the Syrian opposition fighters.  In March 2011, U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens became the official U.S. liaison to the Syrian opposition, who were believed to have links to al Qaeda.  Not long after Stevens’ appointment, the U.S. announced a program that sought to buy man-portable air-defense systems (MANPADS) that had gone missing in Libya.  Glen Doherty, one of the former Navy SEALs who was killed in the Benghazi terrorist attack, was working in Libya for the state department to find and destroy the MANPADS, capable of shooting down commercial airliners.  Meanwhile at the consulate, with Benghazi still flooded with weapons from the war, Ambassador Stevens and U.S. embassy staff were becoming increasingly concerned for their safety.  Security threats were on the rise in the months leading up to the attack on the consulate in Benghazi.  As noted earlier, Ambassador Stevens’ last meeting was with the Turkish consul general and at least one source has suggested the meeting was to negotiate a weapons transfer;  specifically, SA-7 MANPAD missiles from Libyan fighters.   Interestingly, a week prior to the attack, a Libyan ship docked in Turkey with a large amount of weapons, including SA-7 MANPADS, bound for Syria.

While the official reason given for Ambassador Stevens being in Benghazi on such an important anniversary is that he was to be present at the opening of a new English-language school, it seems he was there to do his job as a liaison for the Syrian rebels.  Considering the fact that the U.S. has armed Libya before, the secret order President Obama authored at the start of the new Libyan war may have included giving weapons to the Libyans once again.  However, as the weapons quickly ended up in the hands of al Qaeda, the United States would have been urgently seeking to recover them; not only due to the security concerns but the fact that terrorists were armed as a result.  When Syria went to war after Libya, the U.S. was in an opportune position to give the Libyan weapons to the new resistance in Syria.  Once again,however, al Qaeda and other terrorist groups were lying in wait to receive the spoils of the newest conflict in the region.  Considering Iran-Contra and Fast and Furious, a new scandal wherein the United States once again armed terrorists would certainly be one the current administration would seek to cover-up.  If terrorists managed to kill four Americans with weapons potentially provided by the United States, the administration would not only be concealing a scandal but also seeking to avoid criminal prosecution for its hand in enabling the attacks.

by Michael Baram | November 25, 2012 | Opinion

It’s all over except for the soul-searching. And the recriminations, and the blame-casting, and the “if onlys”, and the “where did we go wrong?” and the endless hand-wringing. Not to mention “Dump Rove” (and a dozen other pundits who called it wrong on November 6). Oh, yeah, I almost forgot; “The other guys cheated.” (Really, it’s highly probable that they did, but that’s another story.)

But one thing remains, clear and glaring. The Republican Party, trying to deliver a conservative message to the electorate, failed because they chose the wrong messenger (yet I voted for him, because he was our standard bearer). And the audience was the wrong audience. People who are infused with a belief in the nanny state don’t want to hear about doing away with it. What we do need is someone who can better explain to the voters how and why small government is to their advantage.

Enter the knight on the white horse, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida.

Cal Thomas wrote,

“Rubio has the message the Republican Party needs. It’s a long way to 2016 and there are many good potential presidential candidates, but Marco Rubio could be the one candidate conservatives have been waiting for: the second coming of Ronald Reagan.”

However, while some are rushing to greet Rubio as the potential Republican candidate, there remains the issue of the constitutional requirement for the office.  Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution states:

“No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President…”

In his 1758 work, Law of Nations, Emer de Vattel (1714 – 1767), wrote, “Natural-born citizens are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.” Vattel’s work was heavily relied upon by the original Congress, according to Benjamin Franklin, since they were, basically, building a political system from scratch. Yet a definition which seemed apparent to our Founding Fathers was never written into law.

Although lower courts have tackled the subject of citizenship, the Supreme Court has never addressed the issue of “natural born”, despite challenges to the eligibility of (surprise!) some Republican candidates.

On April 30, 2008, the Senate passed a resolution to that effect, “Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.” SR 511 states the following:

“Whereas the Constitution of the United States requires that, to be eligible for the Office of the President, a person must be a `natural born Citizen’ of the United States;

“Whereas the term `natural born Citizen’, as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;

Whereas there is no evidence of the intention of the Framers or any Congress to limit the constitutional rights of children born to Americans serving in the military nor to prevent those children from serving as their country’s President;…

Whereas John Sidney McCain, III, was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That John Sidney McCain, III, is a `natural born Citizen’ under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.”

In other words, the U.S. Senate defines “natural born citizen” as an individual who was born:

1. On American soil (which includes U.S. overseas military bases); and
2. Of parents who were American citizens at the time of the child’s birth.

For the record, Senator Barack Obama was among the signers.

During the presidential campaign of 1964, a challenge to Barry Goldwater’s candidacy was raised, since he was born before Arizona  became a state (in 1912….Happy Anniversary, Arizona!) But at the time of his birth, Arizona was a territory subject to the laws of the United States and, for all intents and purposes, qualified as a state where eligibility was concerned.

Marco Rubio was born in 1971 in Miami, but his parents became US citizens four years later. If we are to go by Vattel’s writings and their acceptance as authority by the framers of the Constitution, Senator Rubio does not qualify as a “natural born” citizen as required by the Constitution, despite all the good wishes and hopes of the Republican Party membership.

By the same token, Barack Hussein Obama, whose (alleged) father was a Kenyan national and a subject of Her Royal Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, is, according to Vattel and the U.S. Senate, ineligible to be President of the United States, but the Democratic Party and its propaganda arm, the blatantly biased media, twice chose to ignore the Constitution in the name of power. Now, if it turns out that, as some people charge, Obama’s real father was Frank Marshall Davis (or even Malcom X…yes, that has been bandied about), then the “two parents who are citizens” issue is settled.

In the meantime, Obama was never properly vetted thanks to the “at all cost” effort by the DNC to gain power, the Constitution be damned.

But you can be sure that they will not stint on hypocrisy regarding Rubio’s eligibility.

—–

See also  Senator Marco Rubio’s father was not a naturalized citizen when Marco was born  hat tip Barbara Mabray.

GOP CONSULTANTS GET RICH ‘NO MATTER WHO WINS OR LOSES’

by TONY LEE | 24 Nov 2012 | Breitbart.com

Rush Limbaugh last week blistered Republican establishment consultants like Mike Murphy and Steve Schmidt for getting “rich no matter who wins or loses” and enhancing their profiles with the mainstream media and the permanent political class by publicly denigrating conservatives. 

Murphy and Schmidt have torn into Limbaugh after the election as being “poisonous” but, as Limbaugh said, these establishment consultants are really attacking conservative voters and a movement they have loathed, never understood, and been ashamed of in their elitist social circles.

Pat Caddell has also railed against this Republican “Consultant-Lobbyist-Establishment” complex for not ever putting the candidate’s interests ahead of their own.

More…

I found a link the day after that showed Schmidt and Murphy got over $123 million for their work in this election cycle. How much of that was from middle class Americans trying to save their country by donating to the Romney / Ryan ticket? Makes me want to puke. – SW

Editor in Chief of Breitbart.com Joel Pollak talks about how some of the layoffs were pending but put off until after the elections so as not to embarrass the current occupant of the oval office. I prefer Coren’s Arena to Hannity, to be honest, since his guests are actually intelligent and informed. Nice for a change. Watch.

Published on Nov 24, 2012 by SDAMatt2a

Sibyl West:  Selwyn Duke has wonderfully articulated what has been in my thoughts for quite a while. Come with me as I go outside of the box for a moment.

After a lifetime of studying the nature of the body/mind vehicle, if you will, through yoga practice and philosophy I came to this conclusion:

Character is the quantitative influence of the spirit over the mind and body.

From study of Holy Scripture it becomes gradually clear that the individual is not a body that has a mind and a spirit; rather he is an eternal spirit inhabiting or utilizing a body via a mind. Spirit is the user, mind is the software and the body is the hardware.

Because the mind and intelligence are subtle their existence can only be understood by their functions, which are quite different. Simply put for this discussion, mind operates via unconscious impulse on a mainly emotional level. Intelligence, on the other hand, sees whether the consequences of certain actions will lead to success (right) or failure (wrong) in life. It is a function that is meant to be honed by education. Unfortunately, in our dumbed down culture where nobody wins and nobody loses, this ability not only doesn’t get a chance to develop, it is actually discouraged. Judgment and discrimination are both functions of the intelligence, yet they are deprecated as prejudice and bigotry in the post-modern Amerikan world.

What Duke describes here is that trying to speak logically about principles in order to sway the electorate is an exercise in futility. The people in general are operating on the emotional level, which is irrational.

Here is the piece.

Invasion of the Liberal Body Snatchers

by Selwyn Duke | November 20, 2012 | American Thinker

When I was a younger and more naïve man, I sometimes thought to myself, “Boy, if I could just get a forum in which to express my ideas, I could really change people’s minds.” This was before I realized that, more often than not, it wasn’t a matter of changing minds. It was a matter of changing hearts.

This is why I shake my head when hearing talk of how conservatives can possibly “win over” women or Hispanics or blacks or whatever the latest pander-worthy group may be, of how they need to “reach out” or “reframe their message,” as if everyone is a logic-worshipping Mr. Spock. After all, even if the media would disseminate the conservative argument without twisting it into a soggy, unpalatable pretzel — which they won’t — did it ever occur to these tacticians that the problem isn’t mainly a matter of intellect, but emotion?

[...]

Then there is rationalization, when we bend reality for ourselves because we can’t bear to bend our wants to reality. The truth is that the cold intellect is generally outmatched by hot emotion, even, sometimes, when we do know better. The ancient sage Confucius lamented this when saying, “It is not that I do not know what to do; it is that I do not do what I know.” And C.S. Lewis spoke of it when writing in Abolition of Man:

Without the aid of trained emotions the intellect is powerless against the animal organism. I had sooner play cards against a man who was quite sceptical about ethics, but bred to believe that “a gentleman does not cheat,” than against an irreproachable moral philosopher who had been brought up among sharpers.

And I had sooner trust the vote of a person who was quite skeptical about religion, but bred to believe in pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, than that of a rote churchgoer who had been brought up among socialists.

Read more. You’ll be glad you did.

She is paying the price for her political mistakes, whether she wants to or not.

by Sibyl West | November 25, 2012 | Opinion

I have to say that, after this recent election, my “pelosi” list is becoming longer and longer. I am tuning out all of the pundits, consultants and empty talking heads whose so-called expert advice never seems to pan out. (Too bad Sean Hannity keeps filling up his show rosters with these dim bulbs, but that’s another story.)

That’s why I couldn’t help but appreciate Jen Kuznicki’s post Coulter is a Coward wherein she describes the maven’s recent miff with Mark Levin. I am 100% in agreement with this paragraph:

I read Ann Coulter’s fractured column from Wednesday only because Mark Levin linked to it. Coulter wants it to be clear that Romney wasn’t the problem, so don’t blame him for the loss. I don’t read her stuff regularly anymore like I used to. I don’t watch her on TV, I don’t listen when she is interviewed on radio. I don’t like frauds, I like people who are honest and forthright, straight-talking and who can connect with me on a “we are all Americans” basis. Someone who sees me eye-to-eye, not one that looks down at me. As a huge fan of talk radio and an observer of American politics, it has been clear now for about a year that Ann Coulter is not who I thought she was, and I have written extensively about it.

The writer tells why she is standing up for Mark Levin. Another big ditto.

It’s no secret I’m a huge fan of Levin, and I summed up why a long time ago on a forum while defending him. I surmised that the reason I defended Mark Levin, was because he defended me. This was years ago, I had no other connection with him than his voice on a radio, but I knew this guy would defend my way of life. My American way of life. Mark defends the coal miner, the mechanic, the truck driver, the farmer, the construction worker, the people who work with their hands who build things and work for others. Beyond that, he marvels at the work they can accomplish, wishes aloud sometimes that he could do the great things they do. Great things that we look at as all in a day’s work, for a paycheck to feed our families. The knowledge that a person far removed from your everyday mundane life understands your world and more than that, respects it, why, that is a powerful bond. And it’s real.

Here is a particularly interesting point she makes, one I hadn’t really noticed until she articulated it.

Are the powers-that-be in the Republican Party sure that they want Ann Coulter as their chief cheerleader and spokesman? I noticed that Ann backed Chris Christie last year and wanted him desperately to get in the race. I noticed he never acknowledged her. I noticed she fiercely defended Romney when it was clear Romneycare was his big elephant in the room, and I noticed that Romney and his people didn’t publicly acknowledge her efforts. When it came time to pick a VP, Ann pushed Christie again saying that the Romney people owed her. But Romney picked Ryan. And now, after the fact, she is still defending Romney and a certain type of Republicanism, and yet nobody holds her out as the prime example of what a loyal Republican should look like. I wonder why?

Read it all.

And if that weren’t enough, one of my favorite writers Daniel Greenfield also came out with this one, along quite the same lines.

THE TROUBLE WITH MITT

Back when the establishment turned Romney into its choice, I said that they should have their shot, but that they should pay a political price for their failure if it blows up in their face. Ann Coulter isn’t willing to pay that price. Instead she’s gone back to her old routine. And Coulter’s routine is a simple one.

1. Take a shot at an easy liberal target

2. Say something shocking about the left or minorities

3. Push liberal Republican apologetics

Items 1 and 2 establish Coulter’s street cred for item 3 which is the real agenda. Using that same 1, 2 and 3 routine, Coulter has been able to sell anything, including RomneyCare as a conservative principle.

Now after taking a shot at Maxine Waters, a hard target if there ever was one, Coulter goes straight to selling Romney as more conservative than Reagan. Or more libertarian which is at least an easier sell.

But first Coulter throws out one of her specialties. Misleading facts.

It gets better. Go here and scroll down to the subtitle above this section. I for one refuse to waste my precious time listening to nonsense and, in my humble opinion, I say it’s time to let Coulter go her way.

Visas to science and engineering workers is about one thing – lower wages.

by Ramparts Patriot | November 25, 2012 | Opinion

With the coming of the new year, we’ll be in a 4 year battle to stop an increase in the flood of people coming to our country.  With reported unemployment near 8%, and the real number (including those who are too discouraged to look for work and those with part time jobs but looking for full time jobs) over 20%, its an outrage that Washington is even thinking of increasing immigration.

House to consider limited immigration bill - AP, FoxNews

The first battle, next week, will be over STEM visas – visas for science, technology, engineering, and math degree holders.  These visas are used to lower wages in science-based jobs, with the additional “benefit” to the business community of discouraging Americans from pursuing these degrees, which then justifies future calls for more of these visas.

College students understand which professions are under attack, and choose to avoid them.  How is the message broadcast that STEM degrees have no future?  Just watch this starting at 1:40 where the lead lawyer says “Our goal is clearly not to find a qualified and interested American worker”,

(If the video doesn’t show in your browser click here.)

Uploaded by programmersguild on Jun 16, 2007

This message is sent to prospective American STEM students every day.  Sending the message to college students that STEM careers have a future will attract more of them to get those degrees.

I’ve worked for 15 years in engineering and can say from first hand experience that foreigners do not bring skills to the U.S. which are not available here today.  Visas to science and engineering workers is about one thing – lower wages.

Action Items

Call Speaker Boehner to tell him more foreign STEM workers are not needed.  If companies need specific skills they should train Americans. The idea that America doesn’t have skilled people is ridiculous.

http://www.speaker.gov/contact

More: House to vote on revised STEM jobs bill - Hot Air

Seeks to expand the pool of green cards available for families of well educated immigrant workers. What could go wrong?

“Thank you for allowing a second class minion such as me to sit at the same table with you, Mr. President. Thank you very much! Am I being good?”

Got a caption? Let us know!

Sibyl West: Here is the deal that was struck between the Republicans and Democrats ensuring that there will be no free and fair elections in the USA. Ever. I am all for True the Vote theoretically, but unless there is actual punishment of wrongdoers and an effective method of flushing them out I don’t really see the point. Maybe an attack dog gang of lawyers FOR the Constitution backing their efforts would do the trick.

A Reader’s Digest Condensed Summary of the 1982 New Jersey Consent Decree 

 How the established political parties and governing interests jockey to consolidate power.

In the aftermath of the 2012 Election there has been some concern bubbling up around the web about a 1982 consent decree entered into by the Republican National Committee and the Democratic National Committee, effectively barring the RNC from “engag[ing] and assist(ing) in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’s approval in advance.” No, you are not dreaming.

After the initial agreement, the RNC tried multiple attempts to get out of the deal, amid new evidence of fraudulent voting activities and new law. Each time, however, the federal courts denied the request and ceded little room for adjusting the agreement. Though this agreement only applies to the national parties, it effectively squashes any attempt at a coordinated effort for election integrity. Today the decree roughly states that:

• The RNC may only be sued by the DNC for enforcement issues;
• Any activity to fight voter fraud must be submitted to the courts for a 10-day preclearance process (think Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act);
• Voter fraud prevention or “Ballot Security” is defined as “any program aimed at combating voter fraud by preventing potential voters from registering to vote or casting a ballot;”
• Poll watching is defined as “stationing individuals at polling stations to observe the voting process and report irregularities unrelated to voter fraud to duly-appointed state officials” (Emphasis ours);
• The Decree expires December 1, 2017 – with detailed caveats.

There are two glaring issues here. First, the decree effectively robs poll watchers (and the ballot stakeholders that put them there) of their most important function: spotting and neutralizing attempted voter fraud. Indeed, poll watchers will mostly make note of procedural errors that could have negative impacts on voters. However, poll watchers also improve overall faith in the system when electors know that ALL of the rules are being enforced. Second, the definition of “Ballot Security” sets an unreasonably high, yet undefined bar for what are acceptable anti-voter fraud operations. If the RNC wanted to execute a plan that prevented non-citizens from registering and voting, the courts would basically tell them to not press their luck. The RNC is effectively jammed: choosing between developing a system that the federal court and the DNC agree would be flawless or spending time and energy on developing issue ideas or get out the vote efforts. Time and money being finite, the RNC picks GOTV over “Ballot Security.”

This whole issue is despicable. The definition and practice of “Ballot Security” should never be the plaything of political parties. Fueled by partisan emotion, one side will always feel cheated after an election with this agreement in effect. However, in this Decree comes opportunity. The RNC, DNC and federal courts have basically created a void where true, disinterested election integrity and ballot security can be created. The answer is in YOU. Should citizens fight to have the Decree overturned? No – such action only legitimizes the agreement. Federal law, the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 in particular, empowers you to fight for clean registrations and fair elections in your own communities.

Take this whole episode for what it is: an example of how the established political parties and governing interests jockey to consolidate power. Follow the facts and history – not the hype – and then do something about it.

Satire Alert: Military Ballot Issues

After the election, the interwebs lit up in some areas regarding concerns that military ballots in great quantities were never delivered on time – enough to swing the Presidential Election. The report came from the Duffel Blog, the military equivalent of The Onion. The story either duped or entertained quite a few people in the aftermath, to the tune of 146,000+ shares on Facebook. For more outrageous examples of military satire available on the site, check out Confused WWII Veterans Demand to Know Why Rommel on Presidential Ballot, Women’s Rights Activists Demands More Females Killed in Combat and US General’s Pornography Collection Promotes Female Empowerment in Afghanistan. It’s all supposed to be funny…it’s not. Some things you just don’t kid about.    

Published on Nov 23, 2012 by sarahnettoo