Oct 28, 2008

Traveling with Obama Lawyer

Recently I met and traveled with a lawyer who was a leader of the local Obama campaign. The next several hours were a tough time for me--traveling with an opponent of most of what I believe in. [BTW, only fools believe real enemies do not exist.]

The morning started with R. boasting that he had gotten out of the stock market near its high point. (I wondered how he knew???) Then this former federal prosecutor announced he was recruiting attorneys to an Obama team to insure vote fraud would not be committed in the election. I mused, "When have Republicans been guilty of organized and significant vote fraud?" My own experience over the past 50 years is that serious vote fraud has always and notoriously been associated with members of the Democratic Party--not the Republican Party.

If vote fraud occurs in the 2008 general election, past history indicates it will likely be associated with Democrats. Why do I say this? Because vote fraud can only be inhibited by requiring proof of one's identity in the presence of alert and fair election workers. Yet the Democratic Party platform of 2008 states, "We oppose laws that require identification in order to vote or register to vote." Phyllis Schlafly adds:
The Democrats have hysterically fought against voter ID laws in Congress, in state legislatures, and in the courts, taking what they thought was their best case, the Indiana law, all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. They lost there because they ran into liberal Justice John Paul Stevens who, hailing from Chicago, was acquainted with many "flagrant examples" of election fraud going back to Mayor Richard Daley's shenanigans that swung Illinois to John F. Kennedy in 1960.
Vote fraud in the presidential election of 1960 was the first significant one I learned about. So much voter fraud in Chicago and Texas were witnessed by reporters that the Chicago Tribune stated "the election of November 8 was characterized by such gross and palpable fraud as to justify the conclusion that [Nixon] was deprived of victory." (As quoted by the Washington Post.)

The second time I became acquainted with election fraud on a major scale occurred when I read about Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson's election to the U.S. Senate from Texas in 1948. Two-time Pulitzer prize winner Robert Caro documented in Means of Ascent that Johnson's Democrats rigged the election in Jim Wells County and other counties in South Texas, as well as stuffing false ballots in Bexar County. Because LBJ won his 1948 election by fraud, he later became Vice-President and then President of the U.S. in 1963 after Kennedy was assassinated.

The third major instance of vote fraud occurred in California when Rep. Bob Dornan lost his 1996 election to Democrat Loretta Sanchez in an upset, by the narrow margin of 984 votes. An investigation by the House of Representatives found that at least 547 non-citizens had voted in the election. Suspicions were great that far more non-citizens actually voted in the election, which resulted in the great loss of a solid Catholic pro-life representative to the U.S. Congress.

I seriously doubt that Obama lawyer R. is concerned about preventing vote fraud by Republicans. One of my friends asked, "Is R. really organizing a Kansas City "Truth Squad"?" to target those who challenge Barack Obama? What happens to free speech and fair elections when government prosecutors and sheriffs are members of these so-called partisan "Truth Squads"?

Make sure you cast your ballot on November 4. I beg you not to squander your valuable vote on a third party candidate at this time. Please pray that the enemies of Christ and His Church be divided and conquered:
Eternal Father, I offer Thee the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and all the instruments of His Holy Passion that Thou may put division in the camp of Thine enemies, for as Thy beloved Son has said, "a kingdom divided against itself shall fail".


Curmudgeon said...

Not squander ones valuable vote on a third party candidate? It seems a squander when one artificially limits oneself to choosing between one candidate who promises to continue the nation down the long road to ruin and another candidate who promises to take a short cut just because everyone else has.

One should vote for the best available man.

That might be Chuck Baldwin (a prot, but one who will clearly direct the country in the right general direction) or Bob Barr (a libertarian who would restore the federal government to its proper place so we can set about straightening the mess out in our true homelands, the states--true I couldn't vote for a libertarian for state office, but they've got it right at the federal level).

And I guess you could still write in Ron Paul or Pat Buchannan, or Phyllis Schlafley, if you wanted.

Neither of they guys is perfect, and neither one of them would build a Catholic culture, but each would create an environment where it would be possible for other men to do so. We'll get no help either from the Democratic "Messiah" or the Republican shuffling "Maverick."

Curmudgeon said...

As I suggested in private correspondence, I don't think it's so much to attack voter fraud as it is to defend and protect it.

I heard today that there were more registered voters in St. Louis County, Missouri than there are resident adults in St. Louis County, Missouri.

Curmudgeon said...

At least if the "Messiah" beats the "Maverick," we'll have the backlash to look forward to.

Curmudgeon said...

Now that the lines are drawn a little more clearly, the counterrevolution can begin!