Wednesday, October 20, 2010
The Democrats Will Steal the Election if We Let Them
Great article summarizing many examples of Democrat interference with the will of the people by the theft of the vote. Most recent is Franken in Minnesota. We must be vigilant throughout the nation this November.
Excerpt: The longstanding Democrat tactic of stealing elections threatens a reappearance on November 2. It would be foolish to pretend otherwise and rely on the voters' voice to be heard merely because the public has turned on the Democrats.
A number of comments on my recent pieces dealing with electoral issues (particularly "The American Left Slides Into Psychosis") have mentioned the importance of protecting the vote to assure that standard corrupt Democratic tactics are not allowed to lessen the weight of the impending November avalanche. This is certainly a valid point in this age, when Stuart Smalley has found his way from the tube to the Senate and the Black Panthers have been resurrected from their status as footnote to the '60s to serve as enforcers for humane, progressive liberalism. It will serve us well to take a close look at the Democrat record in this matter, consider what they may be up to regarding this election, and, the most serious question of all, ask why the GOP lets them get away with it.
Democrats and election-stealing by any means necessary go back a long way.
It's widely accepted (and denied only by fanatic Kennedy stalwarts such as Theodore Sorenson) that the Kennedy-Nixon contest, won by scarcely 100,000 votes, was stolen by a combination of zombie voters from Chicago and Texas votes from the eighth dimension, arranged by VP candidate Lyndon Johnson. LBJ, known as "Landslide Lyndon" for exactly this reason, had been involved in gimmicking elections since the '30s, and he always had a few votes on his person in case of emergencies. Harry Truman, who loathed the Kennedys, told Merle Miller that a late influx of votes from West Virginia also played a role.
This operation was very likely carried out with the cooperation of Joe Kennedy's Mob contacts from his days as rum-running king, a point that should be kept in mind.
So what did Nixon do? A thug and a paranoid in his own way, Nixon was ready to lash out at anyone. But there are numerous episodes in his career suggesting that there was a lot more to this strange and complicated figure, and this is one of them. Because Nixon did nothing. When approached with evidence by GOP officials, he turned them away. "The American people should not know that the presidency of the United States can be stolen." The one time he would have been justified in lashing out, he refused. The fact that Nixon acted out of honorable reasons as he saw them will not sit well with many people, but it's apparently the case. (Some years ago, Sorenson killed a lot of trees writing a lengthy article claiming that it never happened.)
I could also mention the New York State election when, as a small child, I was sent out to tear down posters of the master of evil Arthur Goldberg to assure that Bobby Kennedy would win the state AG contest, but we'll skip that. (The theory was that the cops wouldn't bust a child.)
We have a clear picture of how vicious the Dems can be, how thorough their plans, and how far they will go. Stealing elections is no peccadillo, no charming piece of nostalgia from the days when men wore white gloves and top hats to check the mailbox. The Democratic Party is, in a real sense, built on electoral fraud, and not only in Chicago. The Dems have used the vilest criminal elements to carry out their electoral schemes. They have used fraud to control cities, regions, and entire states. Not even the presidency has been immune. Men have been killed for trying to vote in the United States of America, the same as in El Salvador, Lebanon, or Afghanistan. Those days could return at any time if we let them. (None of this is to suggest that Republicans never steal the vote. But the tenor is different. With Republicans, it's kind of an amateur effort, along the lines of a cottage industry. With Democrats, it's big business, like Big Steel or Google.)
For many more examples of voter nullification by the Democrats, read The American Thinker article here.
Excerpt: The longstanding Democrat tactic of stealing elections threatens a reappearance on November 2. It would be foolish to pretend otherwise and rely on the voters' voice to be heard merely because the public has turned on the Democrats.
A number of comments on my recent pieces dealing with electoral issues (particularly "The American Left Slides Into Psychosis") have mentioned the importance of protecting the vote to assure that standard corrupt Democratic tactics are not allowed to lessen the weight of the impending November avalanche. This is certainly a valid point in this age, when Stuart Smalley has found his way from the tube to the Senate and the Black Panthers have been resurrected from their status as footnote to the '60s to serve as enforcers for humane, progressive liberalism. It will serve us well to take a close look at the Democrat record in this matter, consider what they may be up to regarding this election, and, the most serious question of all, ask why the GOP lets them get away with it.
Democrats and election-stealing by any means necessary go back a long way.
It's widely accepted (and denied only by fanatic Kennedy stalwarts such as Theodore Sorenson) that the Kennedy-Nixon contest, won by scarcely 100,000 votes, was stolen by a combination of zombie voters from Chicago and Texas votes from the eighth dimension, arranged by VP candidate Lyndon Johnson. LBJ, known as "Landslide Lyndon" for exactly this reason, had been involved in gimmicking elections since the '30s, and he always had a few votes on his person in case of emergencies. Harry Truman, who loathed the Kennedys, told Merle Miller that a late influx of votes from West Virginia also played a role.
This operation was very likely carried out with the cooperation of Joe Kennedy's Mob contacts from his days as rum-running king, a point that should be kept in mind.
So what did Nixon do? A thug and a paranoid in his own way, Nixon was ready to lash out at anyone. But there are numerous episodes in his career suggesting that there was a lot more to this strange and complicated figure, and this is one of them. Because Nixon did nothing. When approached with evidence by GOP officials, he turned them away. "The American people should not know that the presidency of the United States can be stolen." The one time he would have been justified in lashing out, he refused. The fact that Nixon acted out of honorable reasons as he saw them will not sit well with many people, but it's apparently the case. (Some years ago, Sorenson killed a lot of trees writing a lengthy article claiming that it never happened.)
I could also mention the New York State election when, as a small child, I was sent out to tear down posters of the master of evil Arthur Goldberg to assure that Bobby Kennedy would win the state AG contest, but we'll skip that. (The theory was that the cops wouldn't bust a child.)
We have a clear picture of how vicious the Dems can be, how thorough their plans, and how far they will go. Stealing elections is no peccadillo, no charming piece of nostalgia from the days when men wore white gloves and top hats to check the mailbox. The Democratic Party is, in a real sense, built on electoral fraud, and not only in Chicago. The Dems have used the vilest criminal elements to carry out their electoral schemes. They have used fraud to control cities, regions, and entire states. Not even the presidency has been immune. Men have been killed for trying to vote in the United States of America, the same as in El Salvador, Lebanon, or Afghanistan. Those days could return at any time if we let them. (None of this is to suggest that Republicans never steal the vote. But the tenor is different. With Republicans, it's kind of an amateur effort, along the lines of a cottage industry. With Democrats, it's big business, like Big Steel or Google.)
For many more examples of voter nullification by the Democrats, read The American Thinker article here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment