Two Excellent Pieces from John Fund and Stanley Kurtz About What We Face From The Corrupt Machinations Of The Left
[Posted by WLS Shipwrecked]
I’m not going to add much to what is said by the authors in their pieces. If you’ve been paying attention for the past 6 months, what they say here won’t surprise you. Nevertheless, the simplicity and cogency of their points are disheartening.
From John Fund’s article in Politico:
[S]upporters of stricter safeguards to protect voter integrity recognize there are two civil rights in play here. One is the right to cast a ballot without fear or intimidation or artificial barriers. We fought a great struggle in the 1960s to eliminate poll taxes, literacy tests and pass a Voting Rights Act to protect the right to vote. But all Americans have another civil right — the right not to have their ballot canceled out by someone who shouldn’t be voting, is voting twice or may not even exist. You can be just as surely disenfranchised by someone canceling out your vote as if someone blocked your entry into a courthouse door where a polling place was located.
I’ve never understood why the GOP hasn’t made this very point the “tip of its spear” in attacking the Dems on voter registration fraud. Its the crux of the issue — an illegally cast vote cancels out a legally cast vote. What could be more disheartening?
From Stanley Kurtz’s new article today, we get this nice summary of how Barack the Radical Wolf has succeeded in dressing himself up on Pragmatist Sheep’s clothing:
Obama’s troubling associations are more than isolated friendships or instances of bad judgment. His ties to Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, Rashid Khalidi, Michael Pfleger, James Meeks, ACORN, the New Party, and the Gamaliel Foundation all reflect Obama’s sympathy with radical-left ideas and causes — wealth redistribution prominent among them. At both the Woods Fund and the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, for example, Obama and Ayers channeled money into ACORN’s coffers. ACORN, a militant group pursuing economic redistribution, succeeded in undermining credit standards throughout the banking system, thereby modeling the New Party’s plans to tame capitalism itself…. Obama’s absorption of Alinskyite strategies of stealthy incrementalism have helped to hide the truth. Following well-worn organizer strategies, Obama knows how to wrap ideological radicalism in the soothing rhetoric of “pragmatism” and classic American values. There is a kernel of truth to the pragmatism, however. Radical though his ultimate goals may be, Obama follows classic organizer strategy — pursuing his ends in tiny, incremental, and cumulative baby-steps.
The goal of the Obama wing of the Dem. party is the formation of a ruling Social Democracy in the US similar to that in many western European countries. The political theory of a “social democracy” is that a healthy economy requires a welfare state that supports ALL citizens, not just those in need.
Its been the goal of the left wing of the Dem party since its fascination with all things Trotsky began in the early 1930s. Its almost comical that just as Europeans have begun to realize the corrosive effects that 50 years of social democracy has had on their countries and begun to turn away, the Dems think they are finally in striking distance of putting the US through the same agony.
– WLS Shipwrecked
My bet is that a lot of US Attorneys will be purged, almost as fast as clinton’s purge
Comment by Joe - Dallas — 11/3/2008 @ 2:12 pm
US Attorneys are political appointees. They are the representative of the President in each judicial district in which they serve.
There is NOTHING improper about a new President having people in those positions who will pursue that new President’s legal and philisophical agenda.
And self-respecting administration would have letters of resignation from each US Attorney to the incoming President, to be accepted or declined as the incoming President saw fit.
US Attorneys are NOT civil servants. They are NOT non-partisans. They are advocates for the executive branch in the courts — within the bounds of the law — and each administration is entitle to pick its advocates.
Comment by WLS — 11/3/2008 @ 2:21 pm
Barack the Radical Wolf
Funniest line I’ve read all week.
Kudos.
Comment by snuffles — 11/3/2008 @ 2:26 pm
Just out of curiosity…who would you say qualifies as a radical leftist, snuffles? Truly curious, I am.
Comment by Chris — 11/3/2008 @ 2:31 pm
The reason that the GOP hasn’t made it the tip of the spear is that the issue doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. It’s only a talking point to whip up the base.
In Fund’s own article the only examples of registration fraud actually turning into voter fraud were two instances of ACORN people using their own IDs to register but not being in the state long enough to be legally eligible to vote. There was no mention of them voting in their home states. No extra votes were counted.
Regarding the ACORN registration cards. There is no sign of any widespread voter fraud, just lazy workers who made names up to get paid. No one is voting fraudulently, if there is, show us the votes.
Comment by The Other Ed — 11/3/2008 @ 2:33 pm
WLS is correct. It’s not unusual for a newly-elected president to ask, during transition, for the resignations of all USAs. The career prosecutors (the AUSAs) remain, as they are more akin to dedicated civil servants. (Analogy: a new president DOES appoint a new Sec. State and new ambassadors but DOES NOT appoint new career bureaucrats at Foggy Bottom or in the embassies and consulates.)
IIRC, Bush allowed many of the Clinton USAs to remain, which (again … IIRC only) is unuusal, for USAs are meant to prioritize prosecutions and investigations as the DOJ/POTUS wish. (Nothing inappropriate about that, per se. A new president who promised easing up on illegal immigrants, for example, will want his USA’s to de-prioritize prosecutions for illegals.)
What was alleged to be improper about the firing of some USAs was that they weren’t fired UNTIL they were said to be insufficiently sensitive to certain politically charged cases/ investigations.
IIRC, some of those fired were folks appointed by Clinton. If so, Bush paid a price for not starting with a clean slate.
Regardless: Expect all new presidents hereafter to start with a clean slate, as Clinton did. There’s absolutely nothing improper about it, and Bush’s example suggests that trying to “be nice” by retaining some of the USAs can have bad consequences if the “holdovers” refuse to change their priorities and end up getting fired as a result.
Comment by Mitch — 11/3/2008 @ 2:33 pm
Communists, Chris.
Comment by snuffles — 11/3/2008 @ 2:34 pm
Is America “different enough” from other socialist countries to stop this from happening, even with Obama as President? I ask this because I think our collective curiosity will expose the wolves before they consume the entire flock.
Comment by dianne — 11/3/2008 @ 2:37 pm
I’m sure both are quite interesting. However, most of the audience for both has probably already made up their minds to vote for McCain. They might sway some conservative Dems, but I have a feeling both are not targeted to that group.
It might be smarter to concentrate on reaching out to independents and the like.
One way to do that is character issues, like giving the finger in the previous post. Another way is to point out that BHO wants to deport his own aunt at the same time as he wants millions of other illegal aliens to remain here.
And, push the coal issue by going to local forums, such as at local newspapers in coal states, and making sure that everyone possible knows about it.
And, I’m just guessing here, but it might be helpful for more people to know that BHO wants to recruit pre-teens and then use them to get votes; see #3 at my name’s link.
Just a guess, but I don’t think most parents are going to want their kids to be recruited into what’s looking more and more like a personality cult.
But, none of that is going to have an impact in echo chambers; they have to be spread to the places where independents and conservative Dems are.
Comment by The Non-Partisan Case Against Barack Obama — 11/3/2008 @ 2:39 pm
Alright, fair enough. In the context of this country’s politics, I personally wouldn’t go that far left to start considering someone radical, but we can quibble over that at other times. Now, my follow-up to that: considering all of Obama’s connections and friendships with known Marxists (not any one of them in particular, mind you, but the sum of all parts), and considering his own words in his book stating that he actively sought to hang around and be seen with Marxists and radicals in his early years…might it not be possible that all of these things, taken in total, might signal that this guy might have some radical leanings of his own? Lex orandi, lex credendi, after all.
Comment by Chris — 11/3/2008 @ 2:43 pm
#8 wrote: I ask this because I think our collective curiosity will expose the wolves before they consume the entire flock.
I hope you are correct. However, the Dems have developed a universal trump card: Racism. The have chilled dissent by successfully labeling anyone who challenges them as racists and I believe the MSM will continue beating down anyone who questions Dem practices.
Comment by Perfect Sense — 11/3/2008 @ 2:48 pm
Not really Chris,
I think Karl Marx would be fairly satisfied with income distribution in today’s America.
Maybe a slight adjustment here and there.
Comment by snuffles — 11/3/2008 @ 2:53 pm
Please don’t feed the Troll, Chris.
Comment by Dmac — 11/3/2008 @ 2:55 pm
Well, again, I would tend to disagree with you, but let’s take that at its face: considering that we have, fairly easily, one of the least socialistic market of the developed nations, doesn’t that tell us that we probably don’t need to go any farther down that particular rabbit hole?
And, what would you say to my previous question?
Comment by Chris — 11/3/2008 @ 2:58 pm
The other Ed (#5):
I must be a Republican because I’m simply too dumb to vote twice. Even though I live in NY and work in OH (and have a signed lease, power and cable bills that are proof of residency), I absentee voted in NY.
Could have just as easily registered and voted in OH where my vote could have potentially made a difference. But then again, I’m fundamentally dumb honest.
How about this (via Instapundit):
http://www.newsnet5.com/news/17859950/detail.html?rss=nn5&psp=news
Sure sounds like fraudulent voting to me. But haven’t the Democrat Party always believed in “One corpse one vote”?
Comment by Dr. K — 11/3/2008 @ 3:00 pm
Depends on what you’re trying to maximize in the American economy, Chris. I think Obama is smart enough to shoot for something more sophisticated than a simple “Steal from the rich, give to the poor!” scheme.
And don’t confuse Karl Marx with the Soviet Union and what happened there.
Marx was a genius, Stalin a psycho.
Comment by snuffles — 11/3/2008 @ 3:08 pm
I doubt that Obama is not quite that smart.
However, Pelosi and Reid are definately would use their usual ham-handed approach to ram it through.
Comment by Dr. K — 11/3/2008 @ 3:11 pm
I’m not sure, WLS, but I think Joe was mocking the Left’s outrage over the Bush AG firings…
The REST of us know that they are appointees that serve at the pleasure of the PotUS… The left only remembers when their side does it.
Comment by Scott Jacobs — 11/3/2008 @ 3:11 pm
And my fundamentally sound and extremely wise vote is going to be (more than) canceled out by votes cast by someone with s**T for brains. Yeah, it’s not the same thing, but the result is the same.
Comment by stevesturm — 11/3/2008 @ 3:14 pm
Alright, one more question…what, in Obama’s history, either in this election or in his legislative background, gives you the impression that Obama’s smart enough to do more than steal from the rich and give to the poor?
Comment by Chris — 11/3/2008 @ 3:17 pm
WLS at #2 said, “There is NOTHING improper about a new President having people in those positions who will pursue that new President’s legal and philisophical agenda.”
How about an exception for when that new President was able to win election by massive voter fraud? Once in office that new President makes sure no USAs, who might object to his methods, are around to seek redress. Wouldn’t that qualify as SOMETHING improper?
Comment by Ropelight — 11/3/2008 @ 3:18 pm
Very sad for Obama. His grandmother has passed on. What a great loss. And at such a time as this.
Comment by love2008 — 11/3/2008 @ 3:21 pm
Yes, very sad. But also very off-topic.
Comment by Dr. K — 11/3/2008 @ 3:23 pm
The problem with vote fraud is the system has been designed to make it impossible to detect or prosecute. The Democrats are deriving enormous benefit from this situation, so don’t expect it to change.
Comment by Eric — 11/3/2008 @ 3:29 pm
Regarding the ACORN registration cards. There is no sign of any widespread voter fraud, just lazy workers who made names up to get paid. No one is voting fraudulently, if there is, show us the votes.
Comment by The Other Ed
This is the standard Axelrod Astroturf response. Votes, once the absentee ballot is removed from the envelope, are anonymous,. That is why absentee voting is the weak spot and the target of the fraud.
In California, there was a huge outrage over Loretta Sanchez’s first election. She defeated Bob Dornan by about 400 votes. There were charges that the GOP stationed poll watchers with uniforms that looked like immigration uniforms to intimidate Hispanic voters. It later turned out that about 360 votes of her 400 total margin of victory were cast by illegal aliens.
Here is John Fund’s version of the story:
A 1996 INS investigation into alleged Motor Voter fraud in California’s 46th congressional district discovered that “4,023 illegal voters possibly cast ballots in the disputed election between Republican Robert Dornan and Democrat Loretta Sanchez.” Dornan lost by fewer than 1,000 votes. In 2002, Dean Gardner, a losing GOP candidate for California’s state legislature, sent out a survey to 14,000 first-time voters. A total of 1,691 surveys came back. The results were startling: 76 people admitted that they weren’t citizens but had voted, while 49 claimed not to have registered at their correct residence, as the law requires. Gardner lost by only 266 votes.
Fund’s numbers are higher than other versions I have read.
Comment by Mike K — 11/3/2008 @ 3:46 pm
Yes, very sad. But also very off-topic.
Comment by Dr. K — 11/3/2008 @ 3:23 pm
Sorry to distract you with such trivia. My apologies.
Comment by love2008 — 11/3/2008 @ 3:47 pm
Chris,
What Obama can and can’t do when he takes office will be dictated by current economic circumstances.
Comment by snuffles — 11/3/2008 @ 3:50 pm
I accept your apology.
I did say it was sad. I should have added for Him. Having never met the woman, she is of no consequence to me.
Now if that makes me out to be a cold, hearltess bastard, then I plead nolo. If I mourned thae loss of a loved one for every clebrity, I would not have any time for important things. Like figuring out how to “Go Galt” if Senator Doolittle wins.
So yes, it is trivia.
Comment by Dr. K — 11/3/2008 @ 3:54 pm
I think Obama is smart enough to shoot for something more sophisticated than a simple “Steal from the rich, give to the poor! scheme.
Really…Other than voting “present” about 150 times, what has Obama ever done to deviated from this economic approach?
But to stay on topic, Obama has facilitated the greatest voter fraud and the greatest fund raising fraud in American history. That’s Change!
Comment by Perfect Sense — 11/3/2008 @ 3:59 pm
I feel bad for Obama’s grandmother as she sacrificed her and her husband’s lives to put him on the path to great success, regardless of the election results. She was then rewarded by being called a “typical white person.” She got very little credit and now has died, although her death today may have spared her great disappointment if he loses the election tomorrow and is not gracious about it. King Lear said it best; “How shaper than a serpent’s tooth it is to have a thankless child.”
Comment by Mike K — 11/3/2008 @ 4:12 pm
Time for a few words from Kipling:
Take up the White man’s burden –
And reap his old reward:
The blame of those ye better,
The hate of those ye guard –
The cry of hosts ye humour
(Ah, slowly!) toward the light: –
“Why brought ye us from bondage,
“Our loved Egyptian night?”
Comment by Ropelight — 11/3/2008 @ 4:39 pm
ropelight - Haven’t seen you around in a while. Hope all is well.
My prayers to Baracky and his family, on the passing of another typical white person.
Comment by JD — 11/3/2008 @ 4:45 pm
I didn’t realize “typical white person” was an insult.
Except, perhaps, to someone who thinks they’re better than everbody else, Mike K.?
Comment by snuffles — 11/3/2008 @ 4:48 pm
Trust me on this one - Mike’s a hell of a lot better person that you are, period.
i>Sorry to distract you with such trivia. My apologies.
Why did The Bobo feel the need to post twice concerning this story?
Comment by Dmac — 11/3/2008 @ 4:51 pm
Sure he is, Dmac.
Every phony conservatives biggest fear: to be considered average?
I think so.
Why else whine about a tax bracket you’ll never be in?
Comment by snuffles — 11/3/2008 @ 4:57 pm
Why is it that the Left is compelled to wage overt class warfare every election?
It is fair to call sniffles a typical twatwaffle?
Comment by JD — 11/3/2008 @ 5:00 pm
The Leftists are a parody of themselves.
Imagine, for a moment, if any Republican said that Baracky was a “typcial black person”.
Comment by JD — 11/3/2008 @ 5:01 pm
Dmac, I think we need to go to that theme song from the Patty Duke Show. “Identical cousins…” Before our time, maybe.
I’ll think about some appropriate lyrics.
But it sure applies to all the astroturfing trolls right now. Something tells me that there are fewer trolls than there are names at present.
I could be wrong, of course.
Comment by Eric Blair — 11/3/2008 @ 5:04 pm
WLS, were you sleeping through the entire US Atty episode? Or do you just naturally speak in red herring talking points?
re: voting fraud: we should just get a national ID and get it over with. Very few people (aside from the rabid left and the paranoid right) would object to a free national ID.
Comment by jpe — 11/3/2008 @ 5:14 pm
I’m unaware of any broad movement away from social democracy in Europe. I miss things all the time, so if I have this time, please let me know and I’d be grateful.
Comment by jpe — 11/3/2008 @ 5:15 pm
Eric, to even list Mike’s accomplishments in the field of medicine (and authorship) would make Sniffy’s head bobble uncontrollably, I fear. So why bother?
But for some odd reason, we have yet to hear of Sniffy’s amazing career exploits - gee, I wonder why?
Comment by Dmac — 11/3/2008 @ 5:19 pm
I’m unaware of any broad movement away from social democracy in Europe.
I don’t know if this example fits, but perhaps you could start with the courts in Germany and Britain trending towards abdication of their country’s laws, in order to be superceded by Sharia Law, particularly in the case of honor killings. A chilling precedent, you could say.
Comment by Dmac — 11/3/2008 @ 5:22 pm
No, dmac, that’s not really in the ballpark. We’re looking for a move toward neoliberalism away from a strong welfare state.
Comment by jpe — 11/3/2008 @ 5:27 pm
Good posts in both regards, Dmac. I just had a student over last night (she babysits my sons) and she was telling me that she has to be VERY careful in her “religion” class…since the professor (a woman) is very, very *defensive* about the actions of fundamentalist Muslims, both in Europe and in the Middle East.
You read that correctly.
The professor (who is a nice lady, otherwise, from a blue blood family and an Ivy League education) feels that we have demonized and overstated issues like arranged marriages and honor killings (she actually maintains that it is no different than drug-related violence in this country).
The fact that the Wahabists would keep that professor at home and under wraps (literally) does not compute. She just cannot conceive of evil. So the people doing those things must be misunderstood, and besides, Western Imperialism made them that way.
Some of the students “get” the disconnect, which is hopeful. The self-hatred of our society is very, very strange.
As for TdJ, well, yes. He works the Slurpee Machine, in more ways than one.
Comment by Eric Blair — 11/3/2008 @ 5:32 pm
I was just thinking of Apu in the Quickie Mart - but then again, Apu is well - spoken.
Comment by Dmac — 11/3/2008 @ 5:39 pm
The difference between liberals and conservatives is that liberals strive to make everyone average, while conservatives aspire to a place beyond their current station in life.
Me, I don’t want to be average. After all, the average person has approximately* 1 testicle and one mammary.
*approximately since the M/F ratio is not exactly 1.
Comment by Dr. K — 11/3/2008 @ 5:40 pm
jpe — before you insult me about something I think you understand very little about, why don’t you make your point?
I would be willing to bet that I understand the US Attorney firings about a thousand times better than you.
Have you read the entire IG report put out a few weeks ago? I have.
Comment by WLS — 11/3/2008 @ 5:49 pm
He doesn’t need to read no stinkin’ report…
He’s got his tpm fro DU…
What else is there?
Comment by Another Drew — 11/3/2008 @ 6:15 pm
WLS: (1) based on your first comment, it didn’t seem you understood the argument that Bush had acted wrongly in firing the USAs. Perhaps you could restate the argument that he did act wrongly.
(2) Every bit of evidence I’m aware shows that people in Europe love their social programs, and people in America overwhelmingly support a more European social welfare state. What evidence or polls makes you think that Europe is moving away from their enormously popular programs?
Comment by jpe — 11/3/2008 @ 6:20 pm
Gee, I don’t know.
Could it be to 10%+ unemployment rates?
Or the VAT added to everything that increases the cost of living?
Or the socialized medicine that makes the elderly and chronically sick wait for treatment in hopes they will die before benefits are paid?
Comment by Dr. K — 11/3/2008 @ 6:23 pm
That’s not evidence that people in Europe want to move away from their social programs, Dr. K.
Comment by jpe — 11/3/2008 @ 6:28 pm
Comment by jpe — 11/3/2008 @ 6:20 pm
I just cannot understand the imbicility of people who fail to comprehend the concept of “service at the pleasure of”.
The USA’s answer to only one person, The President of the United States.
Their job relies on his good pleasure.
If you insult his wife…You could be fired.
If you insult his mother…You could be fired.
It you flipped him the bird…You will be fired.
There is no Padre to go to to have your ticket punched.
In the immortal words of Wilford Brimley…
You don’t work for me son. The President hired you, and he’s the one who’ll determine your future.
Absence of Malice…
Comment by Another Drew — 11/3/2008 @ 6:31 pm
Corruption from the left or merely projection and jealousy on the right because the magic negro ran a flawless race-uniting campaign? Thank god for ACORN, O!’s charisma and magnificent oratory. And don’t forget the perceptive who knows a sure winner when they see HIM and recognize Palin for the ignorant gun-toting, bible reading corrupt racist that she is.
If the evil Rethuglicans somehow still manage to steal another election,we know they are liars, racists and truly diabolical. We MUST all pray that America shows the rest of the world that a great black Uniter will soon take on the problems of the globe and at last bring the USA into some measure of civilized behavior. Let us not allow the wise words of Fatimah Ali, James Carville and Erica Jong come to fruition. Say NO! to rioting and vote for Obama-Biden as many times as you possibly can. The ends justify the means.
Looking forward to unlimited abortion rights sanctioned with tax dollars, the polluting coal companies going bankrupt, saving the polar bears, ending the death penalty (except for hanging of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld), the Fairness doctrine reinstituted, talk radio Rush Limbaugh and blogs such as this one banned, union card check offs and hopefully an amendment to install O! as POTUS for life. A real 100% black man would be best, but even a mulatto will be able to wreak hope! and Change! and fresh fruit. And If in winning the popular vote, the Great Messiah is stymied by the electoral college, it is not unreasonable to use force to install him as the rightful Leader.
Gid forbid a tie. I wonder what the breakdown might be in a new Congress with each state having only one vote? Sieg Heil! Socialism WILL work out this time.
Comment by madmax333 — 11/3/2008 @ 6:32 pm
Will that be National Socialism?
Or, Scientific Socialism?
Perhaps a little Agrarian Reform?
40-acres and a mule!
That’ll put fresh fruit and aragula on Michelle’s table.
Comment by Another Drew — 11/3/2008 @ 6:45 pm
Test.
Comment by Official Internet Data Office — 11/3/2008 @ 6:53 pm
I am not going to respond to jpe’s ignorance, as I am looking forward to the bitch-slapping sure to ensue, from WLS.
Comment by JD — 11/3/2008 @ 6:59 pm
Report clears Palin in Troopergate probe
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP)
“A report has cleared Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin of ethics violations in the firing of her public safety commissioner. Released Monday, the report says there is no probable cause to believe Palin or any other state official violated the Alaska Executive Ethics Act in connection with the firing. The report was prepared by Timothy Petumenos, an independent counsel for the Alaska Personnel Board.”
Comment by Official Internet Data Office — 11/3/2008 @ 7:00 pm
He’s probably preparing the warrants and seizure notices as we talk.
Comment by Another Drew — 11/3/2008 @ 7:00 pm
Comment by Official Internet Data Office — 11/3/2008 @ 7:00 pm
Oh My Gawd!!!!!!!!!!!!
A report from the orginization constitutionally charged with enforcing ethics within the Executive Branch of the Alaskan State Government.
But, how can this happen?
Did anyone consult Olberdouche first?
This, this, … it’s just not supposed to happen.
I blame Bush!
Comment by Another Drew — 11/3/2008 @ 7:04 pm
Another example of snuffles ignorance of all things on which it opines, snuffles wrote: “And don’t confuse Karl Marx with the Soviet Union and what happened there.
Thereby showing that snuffles is ignorant of the real Karl Marx. Karl Marx had no reluctance or disdain for violence. Karl Marx applauded violence in the advancement of Marx’s goals - specifically applauding during his own life the violence and murder of the Paris Commune as an example.
Comment by SPQR — 11/3/2008 @ 7:07 pm
SPQR — that’s just snuffles way of saying “communism’s never been tried”. You know, the usual refrain from those who pine for the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Comment by Rob Crawford — 11/3/2008 @ 7:22 pm
Well, yes Rob, I expect that too. But claiming that Karl Marx did not advocate violence and mass murder is another common falsehood repeated by neo-communists and marxist wannabees.
Comment by SPQR — 11/3/2008 @ 7:28 pm
“Dornan contested that result, claiming thousands of illegal immigrants voted against him. But 14 months of investigations concluded that there may have been some illegals voting in that election, but even if so, there were nowhere near enough to change the result. Even the Republican-led House of Representatives in early 1998 dismissed Dornan’s election challenge by a 378-33 vote. Hunter, of course, was there for that vote.”
Comment by Jimmy the toaster — 11/3/2008 @ 7:46 pm
What’s your point, Jimmy? That if there weren’t enough illegal votes in a prior election, no one should be concerned with illegal votes in future elections?
Comment by Rob Crawford — 11/3/2008 @ 7:48 pm
ACORN is working pretty hard to make sure that there are enough illegal aliens registered this time.
Comment by SPQR — 11/3/2008 @ 7:51 pm
Rob,
At least conservatsm got a fair try under George W. Bush.
What a disaster, eh?
Comment by snuffles — 11/3/2008 @ 7:51 pm
Jimmy, why are you misrepresenting the legislative committee’s actions?
Comment by SPQR — 11/3/2008 @ 8:00 pm
Comment by Jimmy the toaster — 11/3/2008 @ 7:59 pm
The Independent Investigator of the Personnel Board, which is charged in the Alaskan Constitution with enforcing Executive Branch ethics, is a Registered Democrat who contributed to the campaign of Gov. Palin’s opponenet, Tony Knowles, in the 2006 General Election.
I don’t think he owes shit to the Governor.
…and you are toast!
Comment by Another Drew — 11/3/2008 @ 8:06 pm
Another Drew, I’m looking forward to Jimmy’s explanation for why he’s misrepresenting the legislative committee’s actions so blatantly - his own link shows how Jimmy is making stuff up.
Comment by SPQR — 11/3/2008 @ 8:07 pm
snuffles - So your positions is that communism in Russia was thwarted by 70 years of bad harvests caused by manmade global warming?
Comment by daleyrocks — 11/3/2008 @ 8:11 pm
Only one man knows what evil lurks in the mind of man….
The Shadow!
Comment by Another Drew — 11/3/2008 @ 8:12 pm
Comment by daleyrocks — 11/3/2008 @ 8:11 pm
That’s it!
It wasn’t Stalinist attrocities.
It wasn’t a failure in agrarian reform in Ukraine and Kazakhstan.
It wasn’t the yearning of the down-trodden to be free.
It was Global Warming!
See, they wanted easy access to Levi’s so that they could wear frayed cut-offs as it started to warm up.
Comment by Another Drew — 11/3/2008 @ 8:16 pm
I think that McCain just didn’t know how to run against an African American and a leftist radical. It has never been done–how do you avoid looking like discredited kooks like McCarthy.
McGovern was basically a one-issue candidate. Obama is the whole deal. McCain had too many hands off issues, but I don’t know how he could have done it differently.
Comment by Patricia — 11/3/2008 @ 8:26 pm
Bush was a conservative? That’s news to the conservatives.
Bush never ran as a conservative, really. He said he was a “compassionate conservative” and handed the authorship of his education policy over to Ted Kennedy. The most conservative thing he did was his foreign policy; domestically he was center-left.
Comment by Rob Crawford — 11/3/2008 @ 8:27 pm
Still no explanation, Jimmy?
Comment by SPQR — 11/3/2008 @ 8:28 pm
Maybe the farmers in the old Soviet Union weren’t supported by the government with farm subsidies like they are in America, daley?
Comment by snuffles — 11/3/2008 @ 8:32 pm
snuffles, you don’t even realize what collective farming was? Sheesh, my previous evaluations of your ignorance seem to be dwarfed by the reality.
Comment by SPQR — 11/3/2008 @ 8:42 pm
Is snuffles same as alphie? Hi alphie. Sorry if you’re different you just remind me of this guy I used to know named alphie.
Comment by happyfeet — 11/3/2008 @ 9:26 pm
This is the funniest thing about the Leftist trolls. They really do not know what conservatism is. They have a vision of what they believe it to be in their fevered minds.
Comment by JD — 11/3/2008 @ 9:49 pm
Socialism got a fair try under Pol Pot. It failed was because the leadership wasn’t sufficiently committed to implementing the necessary restrictions on individual background, behavior, and initiative which would have brought peace, harmony, and equality to the remaining population.
There were simply too few trained and motivated tribunes willing to address themselves to the difficult task of winnowing the social rice fields in order to bring in the Marxist harvest.
The Cambodian experiment proves that if you aren’t willing to break a few eggs, you’ll never get that Utopian omelet on the table.
PS: Yes, JD, I’ve been in transition lately. I departed the West Coast in early October, drove across country, and am now resident on Topsail Island, North Carolina, just across the New River from Camp Lejeune. I’ll be moving on to Naples, Florida in a few weeks. Best Regards.
Comment by Ropelight — 11/4/2008 @ 6:43 am
Notably, WLS neither is able to state the liberal argument nor give any evidence that either European or American citizenry want to eliminate their social welfare system.
Hack. Giant hack.
Comment by jpe — 11/4/2008 @ 7:42 pm