Primary Day (Missouri)


Many have worked towards today. Some will be successful today, others will not. After today the robo-calls will cease for awhile, the daily mail will shrink and opponents will reconcile. Well some will.

We’ve had some democrat infiltration in this election. That isn’t new either and it’s happened in both directions. There will be cross-overs—dems trying to influence the ‘Pub selection. That’s happened before, too. And there are RINOs running being supported by dem organizations and unions.  Unfortunately, that’s happened before as well. 

In elections, regardless of the level, election fraud and voter fraud happen.  The democrats have made election fraud an art form. Especially voter fraud.  The Washington Examiner published this column examining one such occurance.

York: When 1,099 felons vote in race won by 312 ballots

August 6, 2012

In the eyes of the Obama administration, most Democratic lawmakers, and left-leaning editorial pages across the country, voter fraud is a problem that doesn’t exist. Allegations of fraud, they say, are little more than pretexts conjured up by Republicans to justify voter ID laws designed to suppress Democratic turnout.

That argument becomes much harder to make after reading a discussion of the 2008 Minnesota Senate race in “Who’s Counting?”, a new book by conservative journalist John Fund and former Bush Justice Department official Hans von Spakovsky. Although the authors cover the whole range of voter fraud issues, their chapter on Minnesota is enough to convince any skeptic that there are times when voter fraud not only exists but can be critical to the outcome of a critical race.

In the ’08 campaign, Republican Sen. Norm Coleman was running for re-election against Democrat Al Franken. It was impossibly close; on the morning after the election, after 2.9 million people had voted, Coleman led Franken by 725 votes.

Franken and his Democratic allies dispatched an army of lawyers to challenge the results. After the first canvass, Coleman’s lead was down to 206 votes. That was followed by months of wrangling and litigation. In the end, Franken was declared the winner by 312 votes. He was sworn into office in July 2009, eight months after the election.

During the controversy a conservative group called Minnesota Majority began to look into claims of voter fraud. Comparing criminal records with voting rolls, the group identified 1,099 felons — all ineligible to vote — who had voted in the Franken-Coleman race.

Minnesota Majority took the information to prosecutors across the state, many of whom showed no interest in pursuing it. But Minnesota law requires authorities to investigate such leads. And so far, Fund and von Spakovsky report, 177 people have been convicted — not just accused, but convicted — of voting fraudulently in the Senate race. Another 66 are awaiting trial. “The numbers aren’t greater,” the authors say, “because the standard for convicting someone of voter fraud in Minnesota is that they must have been both ineligible, and ‘knowingly’ voted unlawfully.” The accused can get off by claiming not to have known they did anything wrong.

Still, that’s a total of 243 people either convicted of voter fraud or awaiting trial in an election that was decided by 312 votes. With 1,099 examples identified by Minnesota Majority, and with evidence suggesting that felons, when they do vote, strongly favor Democrats, it doesn’t require a leap to suggest there might one day be proof that Al Franken was elected on the strength of voter fraud.

And that’s just the question of voting by felons. Minnesota Majority also found all sorts of other irregularities that cast further doubt on the Senate results.

The election was particularly important because Franken’s victory gave Senate Democrats a 60th vote in favor of President Obama’s national health care proposal — the deciding vote to overcome a Republican filibuster. If Coleman had kept his seat, there would have been no 60th vote, and no Obamacare.

Voter fraud matters when contests are close. When an election is decided by a huge margin, no one can plausibly claim fraud made the difference. But the Minnesota race was excruciatingly close. And then, in the Obamacare debate, Democrats could not afford to lose even a single vote. So if there were any case that demonstrates that voter fraud both exists and has real consequences, it is Minnesota 2008.

Yet Democrats across the country continue to downplay the importance of the issue. Last year, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, denounced “the gauzy accusation that voter fraud is somehow a problem, when over and over again it has been proven that you’re more likely to get hit by lightning than you are to [be] a victim of voter fraud.”

Wasserman Shultz and her fellow Democrats are doing everything they can to stop reasonable anti-fraud measures, like removing ineligible voters from the rolls and voter ID. Through it all, they maintain they are simply defending our most fundamental right, the right to vote.

But voter fraud involves that right, too. “When voters are disenfranchised by the counting of improperly cast ballots or outright fraud, their civil rights are violated just as surely as if they were prevented from voting,” write Fund and von Spakovsky. “The integrity of the ballot box is just as important to the credibility of elections as access to it.”

We’ve had local examples, too.  A few years ago, a Jackson County election issue/office (I don’t remember the details now) was decided by one vote—despite the documented vote fraud at one polling place.  The fraudulent votes were allowed to stand. 

What was once known in Illinois as “Daley Deals,” after Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, is now a standard democrat tactic.  It’s spread across the country.  A few elections ago, more votes were cast in a St. Louis polling station than there were registered voters.  This is NOT an uncommon occurance.

Regardless of your ‘Pub candidate for Secretary of State, we must remove Robin Carnahan and end, as much as possible given the dem strongholds in St. Louis and Kansas City, voter fraud.

Friday Follies for March 30, 2012

It’s been a while since I’ve posted Friday Follies. Since I have no single topic today, it’s time revisit the Follies.

Heard on the Morning Radio. Inflation, as it is currently calculated is around 3%.  If the rules that existed during the Clinton Administration in the 1990s were used to calculate inflation, today’s inflation rate would be 6%.  If the rules that existed during the Reagan Administration in the 1980s were used to calculate inflation, today’s inflation rate would be 11%.

If we want truth in government, and by extension in government reports, let’s use a standard set of rules that doesn’t mislead the public. Let’s return to Reagan’s rules and make sure we really know how much the democrats have screwed us.


Obama wants us to be just like the Euros. He thinks European-style socialism must come to the US.  After all, everyone knows the Euros always knows best.

Then we see something like this and I’m glad the Euro idiots are over there instead of over here.

Dim Bulb: Jean-Luc Melenchon

Who: French presidential candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon.

What: He is calling for a 100 percent tax rate on all annual income over 1 million euros.

Why it’s dim: Let us count the way! But at the very least, this is a great way to get rich people to change their residency to other countries. Spain is beautiful this time of year, and its government could use a few additional high-income taxpayers.

Cure: A bit of economic common sense among politicians.


For you local readers, the Raymore City Council finally repealed the city’s Business Excise Tax on a vote of 6 to 2. Mayoral candidate Pete Kerckhoff and Councilman candidate Charlene Hubach voted to retain the tax. 

I think it’s important to remember who voted to retain an unneeded tax whose revenues, according to Mayor Pro Tem Jeff Adams, isn’t budgeted.  Jeff Adams is also a candidate for Mayor.

The Raymore City Council repealed the city’s wheel tax earlier this year.  I’m glad the city is allowing Raymore’s residents to keep more of their own money instead of finding new ways to spend the unneeded revenue.

Raymore is fortunate that in addition to fully funding our annual budget, the city also has an emergency fund twice as large as required by statute.


Obama’s attempt to punish the oil industry failed yesterday in the Senate on a vote of 51-47. The democrat lie about ending “subsidies” to the oil industry didn’t pass muster.  The reality is that there are NO subsidies.  The bill proposed by Obama and the dems would punish the oil industry by disallowing tax credits and deductions that are allowed to ALL business entities. The so-called subsidy was allowing the oil industry to keep their own money.

The dems knew the bill would fail.  It was just an effort to retain support for their class warfare advocates.


A state liberal judge decided Missouri’s constitution admendment, “unfair and insufficient.” The judge’s decision is filled with inconsistencies.

Court says ‘no’ to voter photo I.D. ballot measure

A Cole County judge has struck down a measure that would only let voters with a photo identification cast a ballot.
Circuit Judge Pat Joyce called the proposal — which would be put to a vote of the people this November – ”insufficient and unfair.”
According to court documents, she says the ballot summary includes the phrase “Voter Protection Act” even though the phrase never actually appears in the constitutional amendment. Secondly, the summary says the amendment would allow the General Assembly establish an early voting period, when in fact the amendment would “restrict the time period during which advance voting may occur.”
She has sent the measure back to the legislature to fix it — “Because significant change are required here and policy choices need to be made as to how to reallocate the words in a revised summary statement, the Court chooses to vacate the summary statement and to provide the General Assembly an opportunity to revise it.”
The ballot title approved by the Legislature asks voters: “Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to adopt the Voter Protection Act and allow the General Assembly to provide by general law for advance voting prior to election day, voter photo identification requirements, and voter requirements based on whether one appears to vote in person or by absentee ballot?”

Judge Joyce must have very good eyes to see words that don’t exist in the text of the amendment.  If there is any way to impeach a state judge, Judge Joyce should be first on the list to be removed from the bench for bias and incompetency.                                                       

Friday Follies for July 8, 2011

The June 2011 jobs report was released this morning and the report is shocking.  There were only 18,000 new jobs created last month—for the entire country!  That’s all forty-eight contiguous states, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam and a scattering of other US possession around the world.

The Jobless rate, which includes only around half of those unemployed, went up to 9.2%.  Not only that, but they’ve revised the May numbers downward.  The new jobs created for May, 2011 was reduced by 44,000.


The democrats strive to continue their job-killing agenda. They believe they can continue to spend without repercussions.  One, Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN), continues the claim that Social Security payments is not debt. He continues to spew the lie that SS “loans” money to the government.  While once true, the IOUs issued by the government has been called due.  This year, SS did not receive sufficient payments to cover the outgo.

Van Jones, former Obama “Green” Czar, claims the US is not broke, that it can continue spending for who knows how long.  He also claims that any effort to curtail the liberals wild spending is “robbing” those dependent on government

The liberals know they’re losing.  They can’t support their claims that we can spend our way to prosperity. They now turn to their tried-and-true class warfare rhetoric hoping those lies will stop conservatives. 

The liberals know better.  What concerns them most is the loss of power, not the betterment of the country nor the betterment of those who live here.


The Missouri legislature passed a Voter-ID requirement this year.  Democrat Governor Jay Nixon veto’d the bill last month. The supporters of the ID effort are now circulating a petition to place an constitutional amendment on the ballot to enact voter-ID.  The libs are outraged.  Why, why, it’s unfair to curtail our vote-fraud efforts they claim.  They’ve now filed suit saying the language for the ballot “is misleading.” They’re confident one of their activist state judges will rule in their favor.

The libs claim the purpose is to disenfrancise voters.  The rest of us know the real reason is to limit voting to US citizens and eliminating democrat vote fraud.  That vote fraud is a proven fact and well documented for anyone who spends a few minutes googling “Missouri vote fraud 2010.”  The libs know if this goes to a vote, they’ll lose.


The budget/debt debate is shifting and not the way the dems want.  Earlier ‘Pubs submissions, while cutting spending, did nothing about eliminating our national debt.  All those efforts only limited the GROWTH of debt.  Even Paul Ryan’s plan, as good as it was, only reduced the growth of debt.

That is changing.

The ‘Pubs now have a new effort called “Cap, Cut and Balance.”  There is a pledge for ‘Pubs to sign to support this effort.

The plan has three elements:

  1. Cut. We must make discretionary and mandatory spending reductions that would cut the deficit in half next year.
  2. Cap. We need statutory, enforceable caps to align federal spending with average revenues at 18 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), with automatic spending reductions if the caps are breached.
  3. Balance. We must send to the states a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) with strong protections against federal tax increases and a Spending Limitation Amendment (SLA) that aligns spending with average revenues as described above.

The Heritage Foundation has this to say about the plan.

The House Republican Study Committee (RSC) has deployed a new theme to be introduced into the debt limit increase debate: “Cut, Cap, and Balance.” The debt limit is expected to be considered by both chambers of Congress by August 2. House conservatives have drawn up a list of demands in consideration for allowing the debt limit to be increased.
The fault lines are clear in the debate right now. The Los Angeles Times reports today that there is a standoff between the two parties on a debt limit deal, and no comprehensive deal on taxes and entitlement reform is expected.

The standoff over raising the nation’s nearly $14.3-trillion debt limit may conclude this summer with a more limited round of spending cuts and promises of future reform, pushing off the tough choices about taxes and Medicare until after next year’s election. Republicans, by not compromising on taxes, can continue to campaign on the no-new-taxes stance that is a cornerstone of their political strategy, while attacking Democrats and President Obama for their proposed tax increases on the wealthy. Democrats, whose political prospects have brightened since House Republicans proposed deep cuts in Medicare, have all but ruled out any deal that would relinquish the issue as a political weapon.

Liberals want to increase taxes to balance the budget. They seek to remove entitlement reform from the debt limit debate, because they fear any changes to these programs. Liberals are pushing right now to divorce the debate over spending cuts from the debate over increasing the debt limit. They don’t want spending cuts to be attached to the debt limit increase.
Another liberal idea introduced into the debate was President Obama’s mechanism for automatic tax increases if the budget was not in balance starting in Fiscal Year 2014. Obama deployed the idea of a “Debt Failsafe Trigger” as a means to automatically increase taxes and cut spending when the budget is not in balance. Of course, this idea would exempt entitlement programs from the automatic cuts, and one should not expect that these cuts would end up balancing the budget.
Conservatives want to shrink government and are dead set against raising taxes as a means to balance the budget. The opponents of big government want to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution, set up a tough budgetary mechanism to control spending, and/or implement entitlement reforms.

The dems want automatic tax-increases. The ‘Pubs want to curtail spending, reduce the debt and require a balanced budget.

The struggle for the future of our country continues. 


As a departing present this week, I give you this Lisa Benson cartoon.  For those of you not aware of the ongoing investigation into the BATFE’s Fast and Furious project (directing US gundealers to sell guns to Mexican drug cartels), the path keeps leading higher in the Department of Justice.

And this one from Michael Ramirez.

Y’all have a great weekend, hear?