Be Wary My Friends

The polls are sounding promising for President Bush's reelection. An October 12th CBS Poll Places the race at 48% Bush vs. 45% Kerry, an October 11th ABC poll places the race 50% to 46% in favor of Bush. In most calculations President Bush leads in projected Electoral College votes by a vast margin.

I know what your thinking my conservative friends, "all of this seems positive, why do we need to be wary?"

Because our opponents will stop at nothing to steal this election. If you thought the turmoil after the 2000 election was huge, what will occur if Bush wins this election will make that pale in comparison!

Expect endless legal battles. Why, well because John Kerry has decreed, that his campaign will cry voter intimidation even where none exists. In fact he's already hired legal teams in many states to carry out this plan.

It seems odd to me that the Democrats should be the one's claiming voter intimidation this election year. I mean normally, we conservatives are the ones tagged with the "brown shirt" moniker, but the activities of the Democrats this year certainly make anything we have been accused of miniscule in comparison.

They've had their thugs levy violence on the Republican campaign offices in Seattle Washington, Orlando Florida, Tampa Florida, Knoxville Tennessee, Madison Wisconsin, West Allis Wisconsin and St. Paul Minnesota. There are numerous reports of cars being vandalized simply for having a pro-Bush bumper sticker and vandalism to homes displaying pro-Bush signs.

Not stopping there, they published the names, addresses and hotel accommodations of the delegates at the Republican Convention and stormed Karl Rove's home. They rioted in the streets attempting to disrupt the convention and openly accosted convention delegates on the streets (links: 1, 2, 3). They trespassed into the convention hall itself to disrupt the proceedings .

They've hired professional protesters who have no qualms about destroying property.

All of that seems a little intimidating to me!

Further they've been accused of voter registration fraud in Colorado, Ohio (links 1, 2, 3), Pennsylvania (links 1,2), Texas and Florida (links 1, 2) . In many of these cases an organization named ACORN has been implicated, which claims to be non-partisan, but in fact is simply an arm of the DNC.

Democrat thugs in Florida are blocking polling places.
Republican political commentator, Ann Coulter assaulted by pie wielding thugs.
Bush/Chenney headquarters in Cincinati burglarized.

Added locations of Campaign Office Invasions/Attacks:
Flagstaff AZ, Miami FL, Huntington WV, Gettysburg PA, Bozeman MT, Fairbanks AK, Oxford MS, Edwardsville IL, Bloomington IL, Canton OH, Mount Vernon IL, Edmond OK, Gainesville FL, Escambia County FL, Rochester NY, Arbor Vitae WI, York PA, Salt Lake City UT & Longmont CO. That's 17 states and counting folks!

A man claiming "I was exercising my political expression," attempts to run over Katherine Harris with his car.

Illegal aliens registered to vote in Wisconsin by an illegal alien.

Here's a good one. A Florida woman who appeared in a Kerry-funded campaign commercial is arrested for grand theft for stealing Republican signs from people's yards and for attacking a woman who caught her in the act.

Here's a guy bragging and displaying his haul of stolen Bush campaign signs.

In Milwaukee, 5600 Democrat voter registrations from non-existant addresses.

That's right, I forgot. A high ranking Democrat and his cronies set the precident for this sort of behavior. -Look Here-

A man in Grand Rapids Michigan threatens Cheney with a car bombing while the Vice President was visiting there on a campaign stop.

Shenanigans Found During The Election Process:

Article details: Tires slashed on Republican get to vote vans and Philadelphia voting machines show up pre-loaded with thousands of votes.


I am certain that this is just a partial list of illegal activities the Democrats have perpetrated this year in an all-out effort to steal the election. Why am I so certain? Because this list was assembled with a simple 10 minute google search. This certainly appears to portend a pattern of behavior. Has the national news media picked up on that fact? Not that I have seen. They will certainly report the individual incidents but they certainly won't put it all in one place as I have so that it can be viewed as the trend that it is.

At this point I really must ask my Democrat readers, "Is this what you truly stand for?" It certainly doesn't present a good image of your morals, especially since you are the party that likes to tout your "civil morality" on your sleeves! But then again, you are the party that believes a President should not be held accountable for the crime of perjury.

In view of this indictment of the Democrat's morality, it certainly isn't surprising that they'd choose a man of Kerry's caliber as their front-man.

Make no mistake my friends, we are indeed in a struggle for the very soul of this country. We are in the midst of a war and rather than drawing together we are falling apart at the seams. Hannibal is at the gates and half our nation wishes to ignore him and instead destroy our nation from within.

I'm sure some of my liberal readers will find that claim to be somewhat sensational, but it is none-the-less a true statement of the fact. For 228 years, we've prided ourselves on the fact that we can have a peaceful and orderly transition of power following an election and now I'm hearing rumblings of "If Bush wins there will be a civil war." (and I've heard that on at least twenty occasions).

Our nation has been able to disagree over issues, hold a dialog about those issues and then select a leader without needing to demonize each other, but those days, it would appear are past. Our nation was built on the solid foundation of democratic process and love of country, but our founding fathers must be turning over in their collective graves at what we have become.

One of the Democrat's greatest Presidents once said "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." In a short 41 years, the Democratic party has become all about asking what their country can do for them. They want healthcare and welfare; their every need tended to, from cradle to grave. There is no low to which they will not stoop to see the reins of power surrendered to their greedy hands.

On the issue of a civil war, I have a few further things to say. Firstly, you Democrats already tried that before and failed! Secondly, do not forget it is we, your reviled opponents that are supposedly "the gun nuts" and further, the US military's support is solidly behind the President, so I'm afraid you'll fare much worse than you did the last time.


Blogger Angela said...

Right On!!! Go Bush!!! :)

4:43 AM  
Blogger Carter said...

No offense, gman, but you stated your research was a google search? Here's my question man, did you ever serve? Have you ever witnessed your friends die in front of you? Have you ever lived in a country that hates you, and people have weapons aimed at you? Before you declare how great a this war was, try being in one.

12:15 PM  
Blogger The G-man said...

As a matter of fact yes I have. What post are you reading? This post has nothing to do with the war. It has to do with the slime-ball tactics the democrats are using to steal this election. -BUT- on the subject of war... I certainly have not said anywhere on this blog that fighting a war if fun. It is however at times necessary. Now is one of those times. If it were not justified, why then does the military support the President 4 to 1?

1:18 PM  
Blogger Sheryl said...

In terms of the funds for fighting law abuse, both sides have GELAC funds, I believe they are called.

IT's kind of funny that you would accuse me of only explaining the democratic side, and then link me to your blog where you mention Kerry's law funds, but not Bush's. Is this the pot calling the kettle black? Or did you just want me to come admire your blog? ;)

In terms of why soldiers would prefer Bush over Kerry. There are two major ways to solve problems. One is diplomacy, and one is brute force. It stands to reason that many who register to serve in the military would do so because they believe the brute force method to be more effective. It doesn't follow that believe that it is more effective that it actually is.

Kerry found out from serving in Vietnam that might does not always make right. Bush, on the other hand, has never served in combat, so he would never have learned these lessons.

2:22 AM  
Blogger The G-man said...

So now you're insulting the intelligence of our men and women in uniform... Nice!

Sometimes, might does make right, especially when might is used in the service of righteousness (and I don't mean the religious kind either). When dealing with people who only understand might, the use of dialog is an exercise in futility! Some people are smart enough to discern the difference.

9:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You do realise that you 4-1 poll was an unscientific survey, meaning that the only responses were from people that felt free enough to respond.

During my time in the service, and my fathers before GI's would not express negative opinions about the boss, or military actions outside the company of family and friends.
Many of us still think we shouldn't.

12:47 PM  
Blogger The G-man said...

I'll concede the point that the cited poll claims to be unscientific, but other polls that employ scientific polling methods still return overwhelming support for Bush. Like this one for example.

1:23 PM  
Blogger Angela said...

Carter - Why did you join the military?

1:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

suck it up dumbasses if your to stupid to do it to thats your problem

2:23 PM  
Blogger Carter said...

So, Angela wants to know why I joined the Army. Well I was a trouble maker in school. I couldn't deal with the way classes were structured, and when I moved to Chino, they didn't have a gate program. I would get picked on for what was known as a being a "school boy".

The pressures resulted in me rebelling against everything. And I got in a lot of trouble for it.
So, when I graduated I was in a very bad situation. My best friend said he was joining, and after looking at my future prospects, I felt it would be the best choice for me. I have never regretted my decision.

Did I join to prove my patriotism? no, however I do consider myself patriotic to the core of what is America. And I am proud to say that I stood up to help "protect this country from all enemies; foreign and Domestic."

Did I join to get college money? Not really, but I did need it, and it did come in handy.

I did it to correct my situation in life. I'm only glad that I did it when I did, and not under Bush's reign.

Back to your 1 out of 4 deal, G-man. Besides the unscientific approach. And let's forget about the fact that a lot of people don't bad talk their boss. How do you explain the 33% Awol in the reserve units called back? The Lt. who is suing the government along with the other reservists suing?

If nearly 1/2 this country doesn't understand the reason for war, then we have a problem. I listen to you and all your right-winger freinds, hoping to figure out why you all support this war. And all I hear is the same rhetoric that I hear from Bush. You are the only one who gave a somewhat other reason on why this war is good, but I seriously don't believe Bush could connect those dots.

The republicans are like a great advertising company, and it's sick when you use the same techniques that Nike utilizes, to sell a president.

2:51 PM  
Blogger The G-man said...

The republicans are like a great advertising company, and it's sick when you use the same techniques that Nike utilizes, to sell a president.

I can't help but notice not a single attempt to repudiate any of the claims made in this post.

So what that means is, while the Republicans might be trying to win the election like Nike sells shoes, the Democrats are trying to win it like the mafia collects protection money!

That makes me sick and it should make anyone who truly believes in the democratic process sick as well.

3:31 PM  
Blogger The G-man said...

How do you explain the 33% Awol in the reserve units called back?

You of course have a cite to back up this claim right?

3:33 PM  
Blogger Carter said...

To Angela, you asked why I join, why were you going to attack me for that? if you support this war, how come you are not fighting it?

6:37 PM  
Blogger Ken said...

What is sad, what is really sad, is to see you talk about Democrats as if there weren't even Americans. No wonder you can justify perpetuating lies and disenfranchising a portion of the electorate. One question, do you think Democrats are human?

12:27 PM  
Blogger The G-man said...

I think these Democrats, while human are still criminals and anyone who supports or excuses their activities is a criminal as well.

4:03 PM  
Blogger Kat said...

Carter...angela did not attack your service. She was asking you very seriously, if you so despised the prospect of shooting at someone, whether having done it in the past or just in hypothosis, why you joined.

Frankly, that was in my mind as well. And from your explanation, while the discipline of service must have been good for you, everything else about the military was not.

so, I think her question was legitimate and not attacking.

10:19 PM  
Blogger Kat said...

No wonder you can justify perpetuating lies and disenfranchising a portion of the electorate

Which portion of the "electorate" are you speaking about? The illegal aliens and felons and dead people? Or the legally registered voters?

And, besides the illegal voters I pointed out, please provide evidence of "disenfranchised" voters.

What I find most amazing about these folks is that they all act they are the freedom riders who went to alabama to register the black vote in the civil rights movement when in fact they are nothing of the kind.

Wannabes as they say. Pretty damn sad.

10:22 PM  
Blogger gecko said...

Not much to say, other than the accusations are flying on both sides and it disturbs me. I have not followed past elections as well as I have this one, so besides learning a few things, I sometimes wish I hadn't. We'll see what plays out on Tuesday.

10:50 PM  
Blogger Zelda said...

Nice site. I'll link to you.

This is all sounding so depressing. I have the feeling there will be riots if Bush wins, and I hope Bush wins.

10:50 PM  
Blogger Sheryl said...

First of all, let me address the voter rolls in Milwaukee. Having old addresses on the voter rolls is always a problem, because people move and don't bother to inform their voting administrators. This is true for democratic names AND republican names. In fact, when I moved to New Zealand I not only wrote my voter administrator, but called them to tell them to remove my name and they still didn't remove my name from the lists.

I can show you proof that in my own precinct in 2000 556 people were on the rolls, and yet according to the 2000 census, there were only 566 people in my precinct who were over the age of 18 entitled to vote. And since the elections always go republican in precinct, if I borrowed your logic, I could assume that it was being done to sway the vote to the right. The truth of the matter is that it is sloppy, but mainly laziness on the election's departments. And in fact, it could also indicate that turnout is actually better than they always suggest, because the turnout for my precinct was 55%, but that was assuming that there were 566 people on the rolls.

So unless you believe that we had 98% registration, even though the national average is something like 50%, then my precinct had some dubious names on the rolls. However, you can only call this cheating if these people who have moved or died showed up as having voted. But if we are going to challenge all these voters, then it should be done for the republicans as well as the democrats.

Rest assured that there were just as many republican names on those rolls as democrats, which had also not been cleared. I agree that they should be removed from the rolls if there is proof that they no longer live there. But it should be done by both parties, or we will have some dead people voting republican while they are simultaneously hassling all the democrats who aren't that organized to be challenging the rolls.

However, you had also better be damned sure that these people no longer live at these homes before you clear them from the rolls. Because they may be using the same criteria that they did with those felons lists in Florida, where something like 90% of the names that showed up on the lists had never been felons before.

It really depends on how loose the parameters are for cross referencing the lists. If it just has to be the same last name or date of birth, then John Smith will always get screwed. And if we are going to clear the dead names from the voter rolls, I think the state should do it, so that it will not be done along ethnic or party lines. Or have a bi-partisan commission.

In terms of the group from the National People's Action group, that is clearly an external special interest group with no connection to the party. Certainly if people violate the law, then they should prosecuted, but let's not mix apples and oranges here. And for the record people are stealing Kerry signs as well.

I just read in one of my democratic listserves here how people were having to get new signs so because they had been stolen. I am happy to say that both the Kerry and Bush signs in my precinct have not been touched are mostly starting fade.

The Democratic Party is no more responsible for the actions of all left wing groups than the republicans are responsible for all right wing groups.

That is very different from the kind of obstruction that is coming directly from republican Secretaries of State and elections administrator's offices. Those are public officials, who clearly represent their party by having run under the party's ticket. When I was talking about cheating in Gecko's blog, I was referring to organized efforts by party officials (like not mailing out 58,000 absentee ballots.) Or like how they tried to use their felons lists in Florida again until the court said they couldn't because it was clear that the blacks who vote democrat were being targeted, whereas the hispanics who vote republican in Florida were not.

In terms of WOAI, I'm not even going to look at that article, because that is a San Antonio radio station, and I know how incredibly dishonest and partisan it is.

1:44 PM  
Blogger Sheryl said...

Another point about the voter rolls is that if in fact voters were being registered for locations that did not exist, then the corresponsing voter cards could not be mailed to those empty lots. So whereas names might be on the rolls, the actual voter cards would be at the Dead Letters office of the post office. That should actually be greeted well by republicans, considering the post office is usually run by vets who tend to vote republican.

2:17 PM  
Blogger The G-man said...

How about the Democrat governor of Pennsylvania not allowing enough time for the absentee ballots of deployed soldiers to arrive back in state in time to be counted? I mean that's strictly biased against the Republicans since the majority of military personnel support the President... And that's just off the top of my head!

2:21 PM  
Blogger Sheryl said...

There were some very fishy things going on about the military vote. Something like they would all be electronically mailed to the pentagon (or something like that), and then some private company, which had previously been sued on corruption charges was going to do the count.

Goodness, it's been a while since I read up on that, but I distinctly recall some articles about some very fishy plans going on with the military votes, and it was connected with the Pentagon.

My guess is that if the military is voting by mail at all, it's because they caught wind about their votes would be counted if they voted electronically that way.

Maybe some of them don't actually want to vote for Bush this year. Gosh, imagine that!!!

Oh, I also read that some of the military people who were sent to Iraq sold up their homes before they left and are having problems because republicans are challenging that they are on the rolls, but no longer living at the places they are voting from. Probably they were told they could electronically vote, but some didn't want to trust the pentagon with their vote (and why the hell should they--those are the folks who lied to them about Iraq!)

5:11 PM  
Blogger The G-man said...

Sheryl, give up the faux concern for our military. Coming from you with your obvious lack of knowlege and partisan urges, it really just comes across as so much blah blah blah. If you are truly concerned about them try this and this instead of ranting about things of which you have no knowlege.

5:23 PM  
Blogger Sheryl said...

G-Man, it's amazing how you will link me to your website and then insult me if I say anything in it. I think you are being a tad bit hypocritical when you call me ignorant. There are things I don't know about, but certainly no less than you. And franky, your condescension is not best bluff.

But you did get me to remind myself what the Pentagon was up to last January. The company I mentioned was Accenture (and they are an offshoot of Anderson consulting--the guys who cooked Enron's books.) The project is called SERVE (or Secure Electronic Registration and Voting Experiment.)

It's interesting because there are articles from February saying that the department of defense gave up the idea for internet voting, but then I just saw a report on ABC News last night (or maybe it was the night before last) saying that the military was voting by email. I wonder if they brought the project back or if ABC was just out of the loop. I'm sure if you had known, you would have said rather than throwing insults.

It's ironic actually because you seem to attack more when you don't have information yourself, as if calling someone else ignorant covers for your own ignorance.

See http://www.servesecurityreport.org/ if you are remotely curious what I was talking about.

3:16 PM  


<< Home

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com