Roundup

Voter fraud?  What voter fraud?  Nothing to see here, folks.  If you advocate for photo ID for voters then you are obviously a racist.

Ask yourself why the mainstream media isn’t all over this — or doing it themselves!

—–

I am actually a fan of congressional gridlock.  Less cooperation = less new laws to strangle the country and make our lives more complicated.  But sometimes bipartisanship can be good.  What is fascinating is how Obama ran his 2008 campaign pretending to want to unite people, when his career and his presidency showed the opposite.  Yet his supporters don’t seem to notice or care.

Hopefully the independents will notice that Romney has an actual track record of working with people on the other side.  Here’s a thorough analysis of how much better Clinton was at this than Obama.  The potentially good news is that Clinton’s ability to work across the aisle got him re-elected, and Obama’s hypocritical failure to do so may result in his loss.

—–

All these Obama fans at a political rally didn’t have a clue about Benghazi.  But they will totally vote for Obama.

—–

While Obama is trying to milk some ill-advised comments about rape and abortion made by a couple Republicans, what is lost is the pro-abortion extremism of him and his wife.  She actually sent a fund-raising letterbased on her support for infanticide (though they call it “partial-birth abortion.”).  Also see Obama supports late-term abortions, born-alive abortions and sex-selection abortions.  That is extremism.  Even most pro-choicers disagree with those positions.

—–

The media is still playing the race card.  Ann Coulter does a good job of refuting their arguments.  Ever wonder why the media doesn’t report how much higher the black unemployment rate is under Obama?

It’s hard to evaluate Matthews’ slander inasmuch as it contains no facts. But if it’s conservatives and “the white working class in the South” who are burning with racial hatred, why don’t white liberals ever vote for black representatives in their own congressional districts?

Black Democrats apparently can get elected to Congress only from majority black districts, whereas black Republicans are always elected from majority white districts: Gary Franks, J.C. Watts, Tim Scott, Allen West and (we hope!) Mia Love.

How come white liberals won’t vote for a black representative? Why can’t a black person represent Nita Lowey’s district?

Democrats do nothing for black Americans except mine them for votes, ginning them up with tall tales about racist Republicans.

—–

Free Contraception Reduces Pregnancy? An Adventure In Bogus Science — This is a good link to keep, as you’ll be hearing this bit a lot from the gullible.

recent study published in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology is creating a collective orgasm in the Sandra Fluke wing of the Democrat party. This study purports to show that free contraception reduces not only pregnancies but abortions. This study is a prime example of the politically motivated crap that appears in low impact scientific journals. It is research by press release and agitprop masquerading as science.

The study is a monument to tautology. We often hear that 30 percent of medical costs occur in the last year of life and that most traffic accidents occur within a mile of home. The reasons for this is obvious. Most people don’t receive expensive medical care unless they are near death and about 100% of your driving is done with a mile or so of home. The results of the study are hardly surprising. Women using contraception tend to have a lower rate of pregnancies and because they aren’t pregnant there is no need to have an abortion. I think most of us knew, or at least suspected, that to be the case.

—–

Public School Teacher Assaults Child During Islamic Indoctrination — Why no mainstream media coverage, even though she was charged with assault?  Oh, because it is about Islam and a pro-Obama teacher forcing her religious and political views on her students.

 [teacher Tara] Harris has a disturbing trend of “indoctrinating” students with Islamic teachings. She also said the teacher openly campaigns for President Barack Obama in the classroom.

When Bennett’s daughter couldn’t do the Islamic hand sign for “power and strength” properly after two straight days of instruction in place of reading and math class, Harris lost her patience.

“When she didn’t get it right, [Harris] went over and yanked her hand out of her desk and my daughter’s hand got hung up on the metal wire on her file folder and the skin got caught on it,” the mother explained, her voice cracking with emotion. “The other children saw my daughter’s hand dripping with blood after the teacher had gotten so mad that she went to twist my daughter’s hand into an Islamic sign.” …

The mother said her daughter told her that Harris “prays to Allah in Arabic” around five times a day in front of students and teaches them about Islam and how it is superior to other religions. …

—–

Super freaks: When government runs health care: NHS offers sex tips to children as young as 13.  In the U.S. we have Planned Parenthood fulfilling this role.

Teenagers as young as 13 are being given explicit sexual advice and tips on how to lose their virginity from a taxpayer-funded website and iPhone app.

The respectyourself.info website contains graphic detail about various sexual acts – including those that involve a man physically abusing his partner during sex.

On the website, which is targeted at those as young as 13, teens can take an ‘Are you ready quiz’ and answer a series of multiple-choice questions to assess whether they are prepared to lose their virginity.

—–

Porn-Free Church: Sex, God, and the Gospel –

This begins with exposing the lie of porn. We sin because we have “exchanged the truth of God for a lie” (Rom. 1:23-25). Porn is no different. Porn makes false promises. . . . We need to expose these lies. Then we need to show how God promises more.

—–

California Official Who Misreported Unemployment Is Obama Donor — Shocking.

—–

The top 5 myths of Intelligent Design — A key to any productive conversation is ensuring you define your terms.  One of the ways that evolution / creation / Intelligent Design conversations get off track is by misstating definitions (whether deliberately or not).  The link has a great list.  My favorite:

MYTH #4: ID uses a disguised form of the “God of the gaps” fallacy.

The true story: ID does not say “We don’t yet know how life emerged from non-life, therefore an intelligence must have done it.” Rather, it makes a two-fold argument: 1) Neo-Darwinian explanations for the emergence and divergence of life are sorely insufficient in their explanatory power and 2) there are features of nature, such as the specified complexity of the digital information in DNA, that are best explained by intelligent agency. We already know from direct experience how to detect intelligence in other branches of science, so inferring intelligence based on the same type of observed effects is completely reasonable. In scientific practice, we infer the existing cause that is KNOWN to produce the effect in question. Since biochemistry contains information, ID theorists infer that there must be an informer, because there are no other sources of information. Ironically, whenever a materialist says, “We don’t yet know how life emerged from non-life, but one day science will explain it,” they are actually using the Science of the Gaps fallacy.

—–

Great video supporting natural marriage.

Why Obama will win. Or possibly lose.

While arguably the worst President ever — before he has even finished his term! — Obama could still win.  Here’s why:

  • He could cancel MLK day, expose Je$$e and Al for the poverty pimps that they are and more, yet still get 90% of the black vote.
  • Democrats will cheat.  Again.  Especially knowing that if they win that their “Attorney General” will cover it up again.  Expect more New Black Panther voter intimidation.  Why do you think they fight so strenuously against voter ID laws, which are so common sensed that even liberals from Europe can’t understand why we even debate them?
  • All the pro-aborts will vote for him.  They really, really like abortion with absolutely no restrictions, including safeguards for women.
  • When the 51% of people getting benefits realize they can [temporarily] tax the 49% into oblivion, they will do it.  Thinking 15 minutes into the future isn’t their forte’.  The entitlement crowd would rather see the country burn to the ground than give up their benefits.  (See: Greece.)  He isn’t the Food Stamp President by accident.  He wants people to be dependent on the government.
  • The massive payoffs to his union supporters (that your grandkids will pay for) will garner votes, and they’ll want more.
  • The media died in 2008, but the zombie media will still shill for Obama 24×7.
  • He’s the incumbent.  That makes it hard to lose, especially when you are a shameless campaigner-in-chief who has hosted more fundraisers than the last five Presidents combined.  And ask yourself why your media of choice hasn’t told you about that.  Do you think the media would have hidden it if it were President Bush?

So what does that mean?  Unless you want to see the country destroyed even more, then you need to vote for Romney.  Yeah, he’s a Mormon and not very conservative, but the lesser of two evils is less evil.  And Romney is a lot less evil than Obama.

Remember, the next President may get to appoint two Supreme Court justices, and Obama has already tipped his hand at how he’ll be even more unhinged in a 2nd term.  And he’ll abuse his executive powers even more.

Here’s why he might lose:

  • Romney is doing a decent job of campaigning.  He deflected Obama’s ridiculous “Mitt wouldn’t take out Bin Laden like I did” faux macho by noting that even Jimmy Carter would have done it.  Oh, and Obama’s authorization was very tightly written so that if anything went even slightly wrong he would be off the hook.  He made sure it was all about him.  If it goes great, he campaigns on it as if he bravely pulled the trigger, if not, he washes his hands of it.  I think some people will see through that.
  • Some people may come to their senses and realize that they’d rather have jobs than endless unemployment benefits.
  • The independent voters are unlikely to be suckered a 2nd time.
  • His attacks on Romney typically boomerang.  Again: Dog mistreatment issue?  Hey, at least Mitt didn’t eat his.  Silver spoon issue?  That ignores, as Ann Coulter called it, the silver spoon of affirmative action, and ignores Leftist icons FDR and JFK.  Attacking Romney’s faith?  Yeah, polygamy is terrible!  What, it runs in Obama’s family as well?!  Oops!  The “war on women” because you don’t want to pay for contraceptives for 30 yr. old students at expensive law schools who want to sleep around?  Uh, yeah, except the vast majority of jobs lost under Obama were from women and he has a horrible record in how he treats them (they are paid less than men in the White House).

From the “I can’t believe we’re having this conversation” category: Voter ID opponents

If an alien came to earth it would be shocked to discover that anyone would oppose voter identification laws.  What could be more simple and foundational to the integrity of the voting process?  Yet here we are, with countless Liberals opposing this most common sense of measures.

They really tip their hands with their opposition to voter ID.   What other motive could they have but trying to remove one of their barriers to committing voter fraud?  We shouldn’t even have to provide examples of other places where ID is routinely required, but the list is long: Buying anything with a credit card, at the bank, getting a driver’s license, air travel, and so many more.

There is a reason for the truism that Republicans have to win elections by a large enough margin that the Democrats can’t cheat to win.  See Pajamas Media » Every Single One: The Politicized Hiring of Eric Holder’s Voting Section.

Recently released documents — disclosed by the Obama Justice Department only after a court battle — reveal that the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice is engaging in politicized hiring in the career civil service ranks. Typical Washington behavior, you say? Except the hiring in question is nearly unprecedented in scope and significantly eclipses anything the Bush administration was evenaccused of doing. And the evidence of the current political activity is far less impeachable than what was behind the libelous attacks leveled at officials from the Bush years.

For nearly a year, the Civil Rights Division rebuffed Pajamas Media’s Freedom of Information Act request for the resumes of attorneys hired into the Division during the tenure of Eric Holder. PJM was finally forced to file a federal lawsuit earlier this year. Only then did Justice relent and turn over the documents. The result leaves little wonder why PJM’s request was met with such intense resistance.

The Department’s political leadership clearly recognized that the resumes of these new attorneys would expose the hypocrisy of the Obama administration’s polemical attacks on the Bush administration for supposedly engaging in “politicized hiring” — and that everyone would see just how militantly partisan the Obama Civil Rights Division truly is. Holder’s year-long delay before producing these documents — particularly when compared to the almost-instantaneous turnaround by the Bush administration of a virtually identical request by the Boston Globe back in 2006 — also shows how deep politics now runs in the Department.

As Richard Pollock of Pajamas Media observed in an article, none of this should surprise anyone even remotely familiar with Holder’s highly partisan nature. Indeed, Holder boasted to the American Constitution Society (an organization started as a liberal counterweight to the Federalist Society) back in June 2008 that the Obama Justice Department was “going to be looking for people who share our values,” and that “a substantial number of those people would probably be members of the American Constitution Society.” The hiring records from Holder’s initial thirty months in office underscore how serious he was about this mission.

. . .

But don’t just take my word for it. Let the resumes speak for themselves.

We start today with the Civil Rights Division’s Voting Section. This Section is responsible for enforcing, among other things, all aspects of the Voting Rights Act. This includes reviewing redistricting and other pre-clearance submissions under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act that covered jurisdictions throughout the country must submit to the Justice Department for approval. Redistricting maps, voter ID statutes, citizenship verification laws, and a host of other politically contentious election issues rest in the hands of these Voting Section bureaucrats.

Long a refuge of partisan activists and ideological crusaders, the Section has been filling its ranks over the last 30 months with like-minded liberals ready to do the bidding of left-wing advocacy organizations. Sixteen attorneys have come on board in this hiring binge. Who are these new radicals?

Bryan Sells: Mr. Sells was recently hired as one of the Voting Section’s new deputy chiefs. He comes to the Department from the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, where he worked for nearly 10 years as a Senior Staff Counsel. During his tenure, his organization strongly opposed all voter ID laws, and challenged the right of states to verify the U.S. citizenship of individuals seeking to register to vote. He also characterized state felon disenfranchisement laws – which are expressly authorized in the Constitution — as a “slap in the face to democracy,” and consistently took the most aggressive (and generally legally unsupportable) positions onredistricting cases throughout the country.

Read it all.  It gets worse.

If anyone opposes voter ID, you can be sure they are highly disingenuous or truly lacking in critical thinking skills.

Are voter ID bills racist?

Of course not.  What could be more logical than requiring voters to prove that they are who they claim to be?  Anyone fighting voter ID laws tips their hands at their endorsement of voter fraud.

Are convenience stores racist for asking for ID before someone buys alcohol?

Somehow, it’s okay to have to show ID to the clerk at 7-11 for cigarettes and chewing tobacco, or at the liquor store and college bar to buy any form of alcohol.

Heck, you even have to show ID to a cop if you get pulled over.

Despite all of this, though, as Wisconsin passes a new law to require IDs in order to vote it’s racism according to the SEIU:

via SEIU: New Wisconsin Voter ID Bill Is Racist! | RedState.

Random thoughts – updated

Election burnout – Some good thoughts on that here.  For Christians, nothing should steal our joy in Christ except our own sins, and then only until we confess and remind ourselves of God’s forgiveness.

If McCain loses, God is still in control and Jesus is still the unchanging rock.  We’ll be sad for all the people who will be hurt by Obama’s awful policies, but we know that God can work through anything sinful man does and accomplish what He desires.

If Obama loses, his followers will have lost their man-made messiah, but we’ll still have our real Messiah.

Having said that, I actually wish the campaign could go on longer, because it would improve McCain’s chances.  I wish he could make another trip through Pennsylvania and other coal-producing states after Obama repeatedly said they would bankrupt the coal industry.

Palin has more experience than Obama, but even if she didn’t it shouldn’t be an issue for liberals.  After all, aren’t they pro-affirmative action?  Why raise the drawbridge just for her? 

Voter fraud - Once again, we see real, live voter fraud (a la ACORN) from the Democrats – including people from Obama’s campaign – but the MSM focuses almost exclusively on hypothetical Republican fraud.  The games from team Obama are well documented, but the media ignores them.

I view the whole thing as a toss-up at this point, given that polls are almost always too favorable for Democrats.  But the MSM is 180 degrees off on the voter fraud issue, and that will set up the Democrats for major disappointment and rioting should McCain win.  After all, they all “know” Obama already won, so the only way McCain could win is by cheating, right?

Bad arguments for same-sex unions.

I just heard a typical and bad retort to opponents of same-sex marriage:  I’m not telling them what to do, why should they tell me what to do? 

Uh, because that’s what the government is – us.  (Does “We the people…” sound familiar?)  So in making same-sex legal you ARE telling us what to do:  Accept, support, protect, and subsidize something we have rational and moral objection to, isn’t good for children or society, is a public contract and covenant as marriage not just a bedroom arrangement, and has no historical or moral precedent in human history.  And you’ll use the force of government and law to tell me what to do.  Now that doesn’t sound very tolerant.

Dirty tricks from team Obama – predictable, but sad

You’d think they’d be so embarrassed about the rampant ACORN frauds that they wouldn’t dare bring up the topic, but they have the audacity to bring back the 2004 game plan of making up voter intimidation accusations pre-emptively

You read that correctly: The Left and the mainstream media (redundant, I know) gloss over real, live fraudulent activity yet will unashamedly act out their script full of lies once again. 

Documents obtained by Townhall show the Democratic Party encouraged party activists to accuse the GOP of intimidating minorities on Election Day even if no evidence of intimidation existed in the 2004 presidential election. The tactic is being used again in 2008, this time to downplay fraud charges against a predominantly minority non-profit supporting Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

Carpenter describes nine pages of a former Kerry-Edwards handbook titled Minority Voter Intimidation. After instructions on how to recognize “intimidation,” the manual moves on to what to do if you don’t find any intimidation:

Some of the suggested talking points included lines like “Nothing is more despicable than trying to deprive any American of the previous right to vote, the foundation of our democracy for which so many have sacrificed.”

“If no signs of intimidation techniques have emerged yet, launch a ‘pre-emptive strike.” The manual said this should be done by placing stories in mainstream and specialty press “in which minority leadership expresses concern about the threat of intimidation tactics” and “prime minority leadership to discuss the issue in the media; provide talking points.””

The Democrats’ preemptive strike has been delivered from Barack Obama’s legal team this time around.

Watch and see how much the MSM covers this, or if they get serious about Obama’s fraud on credit card donations.