Look For Troops To Be Disenfranchised
Oct 6, 2008 Political
The members of the military are overwhelmingly conservative and have been a solid Republican voting block for a very long time. The Republican party holds values that most in the military find in line with their own and the members cannot stand liberals who always wave the white flag of defeat. Liberals lost Vietnam and if they have their way they will lose Iraq.
I have been told by Obamabots that members of the military are donating more to him than to McCain. I think this is incorrect and it would be hard to demonstrate because Obama has some shady bookkeeping practices. He has a lot of small dollar donors who have given small amounts that add up to 3 or 4 times the legal limit. Obama has also received huge sums of money from people overseas who are NOT American citizens. So when he says that more people in the military have donated to him I would ask, which country’s military?
A recent poll shows that McCain holds a 68%-23% lead over Barack Obama in support of military members. McCain’s support among black members is down and given that many of them are experiencing a chance to vote for a black man, it is not surprising. Not all blacks in the military support Obama and many of those who do seem to be doing so based upon his color. There are those who don’t hold that view:
Army Sgt. 1st Class Derriel D. Collins, who is black, said he was influenced by McCain’s service record, though he acknowledges black friends question his decision.
“I’m not going to give [my vote] to you just because you’re black,” he said. “It doesn’t work like that.” Military Times
The huge amount of support McCain receives means that military votes will once again be targeted by liberals. In 2004 Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania disenfranchised a lot of military voters by disallowing their votes and in 2000 Al Gore worked to exclude the absentee ballots of our men and women serving around the world. These liberals are well aware that a close election could be decided by the absentee ballots of those who serve this country. Since the votes will overwhelmingly go to the Republican, those voters become enemies of the Democratic party. The liberals will do everything they can to keep the votes of our military from counting.
This, of course, is reprehensible. Who would have thought that the very people who protect our freedoms would be denied the rights they ensure others may practice? This should surprise no one because liberals hate the military and believe that money spent on defense would be better off spent on welfare moms who squirt out babies and refuse to work as well as ILLEGALS who break the law to enter this country and steal from the taxpayer.
The military should get a roster of all members who voted absentee and then send liaison officers to every state to ensure that the ballot was received and counted. Any person found disenfranchising those members should receive a mandatory 20 year jail sentence.
Who do you trust in this country, the party that wants to give convicted felons the right to vote, allow people to vote 3 or 4 times, and allow dead people to vote Chicago style, but works to deny military members the right to have their votes counted or the party that wants only those who are legally allowed to vote to do so? After all, Democrats are the party that opposes an ID requirement to vote. Why do you suppose that is?
In an earlier interview Obama said he had to earn the trust of the members of the military. I’d say he failed to do that by a 68-23 margin.
Perhaps our military does not like Obama because he associates with terrorists?
Other Sources:
Washington Post
Newsweek
Tags: disenfranchise, McCain, Military, Obama, support
Debt to Clinton was Paid Long Ago
Apr 20, 2008 Political
A number of people who were huge supporters of the Clintons have recently signed on to the Obama train and are casting their long time friends, Bill and Hillary, aside. This is particularly distressing to the Clintons because they both believe that they are owd by just about every Democrat. Admittedly, there are quite a number of Obama supporters who received appointments to very high paying and high profile government jobs and there are quite a few Democrats who owe Hillary for campaigning for them and helping them win.
Bill Clinton is particularly upset about those who worked in his administration and now support Obama. He was furious with Bill Richardson and as a result their friendship is strained. Surrogates of the Clintons have called people names and have questioned the loyalty of people that received a lot from Bill Clinton when he was president. Bill believes that people owe him but someone should explain to Bill Clinton that he received all that he was owed by any Democrat when they committed malfeasance in office and failed to vote for impeachment. Bill Clinton was paid in full by every Democrats who supported him during the impeachment process. Bill Clinton should have been removed from office. He lied under oath and charges were brought against him. Democrats paid him big time by opposing impeachment. Some Democrats said the charges did not warrant impeachment. Some of these people were in favor of impeaching Nixon and his charges nearly matched Clinton’s word for word.
As for Hillary, sure she has campaigned for people but she has made some of those folks mad along the way. She has piled on Democrats who have made mistakes if piling on made her look good. She piled on John Kerry when he insulted the troops. Hillary was right to pile on because Kerry actually insulted the troops despite what he said about it. However, he was upset she did not back him. She could have just kept silent on the matter but the Clintons are unable to keep quiet. They have to jump in and take the focus group position in order to look “good.”
It is interesting though to see how people have turned on the Clintons. They were once the darlings of the Democratic party. Democrats overlooked all kinds of criminal activity and defended the Clintons every time they were accused. The media ignored major stories in order to help them out (Drudge broke the Monica story that the MSM was sitting on) and they were usually treated as if they were pure as the driven snow. Now they are being beaten up by people who once loved them unconditionally. Amazingly, there are many former Clinton supporters who are now upset with them because they have been dishonest, negative, harsh, demanding, and unrelenting. These are the same people who ignored this kind of behavior from the Clintons for years and who would still be ignoring it if it were not for a charismatic empty suit named Obama.
Loyalty in DC only goes as far as the next election and politicians will disregard friendship if they think backing someone else will help them in any way, shape, or form. As far as Bill Clinton goes, he was paid quite handsomely long, long ago.
It will be interesting to see how much support Democrats get from the Clintons after this election. In a perfect world the Clintons would just fade away but in reality they could still have some value for people who need help getting reelected.
Source:
New York Times (read about Chelsea whining)
Tags: Clinton, debt, impeachment, liars, Obama, support, whining
Pelosi Supports Tibet, but not our Troops
Mar 22, 2008 Political
Nancy Pelosi and a Congressional delegation visited Tibet to offer support in wake of the continuing crackdown by China. Tibetans have been killed by the Chinese for protesting. Pelosi gave her support and thus the support of the US to the Dalai Lama:
While standing next to the Dalai Lama, she denounced “China’s oppression of people in Tibet.”
“If freedom loving people don’t speak out against China’s oppression of people in Tibet, we have lost all moral authority to speak out against any oppressed people.” ABC
Notice here that Pelosi did not tell the Dalai Lama that he and his people should retreat. She did not tell them that they should cease fighting against oppression and she did not tell them to give in to the terror of the Chinese. She even offered support in the struggle and said we will have lost our moral authority if we don’t speak out.
This is the same Nancy Pelosi who does not believe that we should be offering support to the Iraqis and has no ideals about moral authority when discussing leaving them at the mercy of the bad guys who are just waiting for the US to leave a weak Iraq in place so they can swoop in and take over. This is the Nancy Pelosi who has not said that our troops need to continue to fight on and she certainly has not offered her “support” to them by letting them finish their job.
Perhaps it would be nice if Speaker Pelosi spent time in Iraq and Afghanistan meeting with our troops and telling them she supports them and is with the Iraqi people in their struggles. Maybe she could indicate that we will have lost our moral authority if we fail to support the troops in the mission of ending the war by winning it.
When donkeys fly…
Additional source:
My Way News
Tags: dalai lama, moral authority, nancy pelosi, support