Back to Basics

Turn on the television and wait five minutes and it begins playing. “It’s in our blood, our DNA,” the painfully high voice sings, “Because we’re stronger than the storm.” The ad closes with New Jersey Governor Chris Christie and his family playing on the beach.

The 25 million dollar ad campaign feels like it has been in rotation forever.  The earnest warbling of the song can be heard everywhere. It probably isn’t doing much to move tourists to the Jersey Shore, but that isn’t what it’s there for. It’s there to remind everyone that Christie is the guy who flew over the state in a helicopter after Hurricane Sandy. We’re not stronger than the storm, is the message. Christie is.

The 25 million dollar ad campaign like the 24 million dollar special election is about the Governor of New Jersey.

Some Democrats have criticized both moves as cynical elections ploys and that’s true and it isn’t. The election, against a placeholder candidate, is no threat to Governor Christie who is running 60 to 28.

No matter how many minority voters Cory Booker brings to the polls (and it’s no sure bet that he will bring any, Booker for the moment is far more popular among white liberals than among the inner city voters he is deserting in Newark)  there is no conceivable way that Christie could lose this election.

But it’s not just about winning another four years. It’s about 2016.

Christie doesn’t just want to win. He wants to win by a landslide. And he doesn’t just want to win by a landslide. He wants to win as many Democrats and Independents as he can to make the case that he is the sure thing for 2016. The candidate who is bound to be electable because he has a track record of winning over blue voters.

The 2012 election involved two deals being cut for the 2016 election. Obama cut a deal with Bill Clinton to endorse Hillary for the Democratic nomination in 2016 in exchange for Bill coming out there and campaigning for him and another deal with Chris Christie to give him an easy election now and a clear path to the Republican nomination 2016.

Unprecedentedly the deals made in 2012 are supposed to lock down the nominations for both parties in the 2016 presidential election.

Christie considered jumping into 2012, before deciding to stay out of it. But that didn’t mean that he had any interest in Romney locking down the job and preventing him from running until 2020. And he gave Romney exactly the kind of help you would expect from a man who ran ads in 2008 touting his compatibility with Obama.

New Jersey politics has always been cynical. Its last governor was responsible for a monumental financial scam. The governor before him resigned after a gay affair spilled out into the tabloids. The President of the New Jersey Senate doubles as the General Organizer for the International Association of Ironworkers.

In carefully culled soundbites, Christie’s brazen attitude can seem like a reformer’s breath of fresh air, but it actually reeks of the contempt for voters and everyone else that is typical of Jersey politicians who pride themselves on not even pretending to give a damn.

Apparently the person involved in the Florida fraud case was also campaigning in the race that saw a Democrat beat Congressman Allen West in what turned out to be a very close race.  From Fox News:

The top staffer for Florida Democratic Rep. Joe Garcia resigned this weekend after being implicated in a voting-fraud scheme.

Chief of Staff Jeffrey Garcia resigned Friday after taking responsibility for the plot and being asked by the congressman for his resignation. . . .

Several hours before the resignation, law-enforcement investigators raided the homes of Giancarlo Sopo, the congressman’s communications director, and John Estes, his 2012 campaign manager. . . .

And there was a conviction for vote fraud four times in Ohio.  Apparently there are vote fraud cases in the courts against several other people in the same county.

During the 2012 campaign season, Harry Reid’s continual insinuations that Mitt Romney was some sort of criminal was merely psychological projection.

From the AP:

A former Nevada powerbroker was convicted Wednesday of making illegal campaign contributions to U.S. Sen. Harry Reid.

A federal jury reached the verdict in the case against real estate developer and once powerful lobbyist Harvey Whittemore.

The jury returned unanimous guilty verdicts on charges of making excessive campaign contributions, making contributions in the name of another and causing a false statement to be made to the Federal Election Commission.

Whittemore faces up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine on each count.

Naturally Reid knew nothing about any of this, and he may opt to take the Obama approach:

Many millions of people are still scratching their heads over how Obama won the 2012 presidential election in the face of so many contrary polls.  To those who credit his victory to simple witchcraft there are many who would agree.  But it may have been much simpler than voodoo and witchcraft; it appears to be just a case of numbers.

And yes, I am counting those numbers where the polls show more recorded votes for Obama than there were total registered voters, which I gather are “still being investigated.”  But the numbers I’m talking about are those such as the ones shown by FoxNews.com online as reported by the Associated Press (huge friends of Obama) where they showed in an article titled, “In a first, black voters turnout rate passes whites”.

That is a little more significant than just a “first”; it is an overwhelming feat based on nothing more than skin color and it, as AP states, “surpassed the white turnout for the first time, reflecting a deeply polarized presidential election in which blacks strongly supported Barack Obama while many whites stayed home.”

But how is that possible given the realistic breakdown of simple population numbers which as reported by Wikipedia, “Whites constitute a majority with 72.4% of the population in the 2010 United States Census, while blacks make up 12 percent of the share of eligible voters, they represented 13 percent of the total 2012 votes cast, according to exit polling.”

Huh?  Maybe there was some witchcraft when they got 13 percent of the total 2012 votes cast but they are only 12 percent of the eligible voters.  That could be how they can get more votes than there are registered voters.  But I keep hearing Democrats say that those things are all Republican lies.  Gee, even when AP and Wikipedia say them?

These numbers games that are played by people who live in the political arena 24-7-365 sure can spin and twist a tale or two with a straight face, but the Clintons have been caught with their noses growing even as they spoke, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman – Miss Lewinsky.”  Or Hillary re the Benghazi arms statement, “What difference does it make?”  Oh, only some dead American bodies, Hillary.  The Clintons are great role models and teachers for all Democrats.

The numbers game being played by Democrats reflects one very important item in the elections game—total votes.  The process of buying votes has been one of Obama’s strongest activities since he took over remodeling our government from a Constitutionally strong world center of manufacturing and invention to one of sky-high loss of jobs and long lines for unemployment checks.  But even there Obama has found the secret to getting more votes in this jobless atmosphere—food stamps, not at campaign expense but at taxpayer expense.

Some of this Obama learned from George Bush who, stated that “Participation in the U.S. food-stamp program grew from approximately 17.1 million people in 2000 to approximately 23 million in 2004,” a jump of six million in Bush’s first 4 years.

It is said that one out of every three Americans are Christian. These statistics may mean less than at any other time in our history. Recently one source reported that in fact it may be only 15 percent of Americans are actually professing and practicing Christians. We can hope this is not an accurate statistic, but with so many believers going rogue, liberal and licentious, perhaps, sadly - it is!

The 2012 elections reflected the apostasy of both Catholic and Protestant believers. Whether it is the Bible or the current position of the Catholic Popes, abortion and same sex marriage are forbidden and in direct opposition to the word and will of God. So how did President Obama, a man who supports abortion and same sex marriages, sail unscathed into a second term?

The Catholics alone could have blocked Mr. Obama’s re-election bid with over 60 million Catholic voters, but they chose to go with the popular consensus rather than their own under-shepherd. What went wrong can be described in a single word – apostasy. The ‘falling away’ of the church is both prophesied and clearly defined, (2 Th 2: 3) but the product of the apostasy is so much more than a mere definition.

The apostate church is a divided church, and its product is weakness which allows the advancement of the opposing forces of darkness. The god of this world (Satan) is delighted with wishy-washy Christians and welcomes the trend to bend, to meet his agenda for the end. He is chomping at the bit to be ‘revealed’ to the world as Paul told the Christians in Thessalonica, but the believers have to ‘give it up’ for that to happen. Don’t look now, but that that trend is already a speeding train without brakes.

The world reads the wispiness of the believers as a lack of courage and a failing of conviction. We can hardly fault them for taking this view of us since our Lord himself gave us fair warning about salt that loses its ‘savour’ (Mt 5: 13) and workers who become ‘unfit’ (Lk 9: 62) because they are prone to look back. What could be more telling about Christ’s view of the vacillating heart than this verse spoken to all the churches?

“I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.” (Rev 3: 15, 16)

Reason number one for blaming the Christians, the right or the conservatives when things go bad, like the recent attack in Boston, is because Americans are keenly aware of cowardice and they hate it!

They will argue tooth, nail and claw against our stated positions, but when we fold like a house of cards they will despise us even more. The line from our national anthem which says ‘o’er the land of the free and the home of the brave’ is based on the understanding that maintaining freedom always requires bravery. Are today’s Christians brave?

Rhetorical question of the day: Would this school have required a signed permission slip if the speaker had been Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden?

From PolicyMic:

The former U.S. senator and controversial 2012 presidential hopeful was slated to speak about leadership in front of an assembly of students at Grosse Pointe South High School on April 24.

However, on Monday, parents received a mass email from school principal Dr. Matt Outlaw saying that the speech was called off. Speculation ensued from Santorum himself, proposing that the speech was cancelled due to his stance on gay marriage at a time when equal rights is fervent in the public lexicon.

After some community outrage and compromise with the YAF, school officials reversed their decision, opening the doors for Santorum to speak. Students can only enter, however, if they have a signed permission slip.

In many states this is more parental permission than is required for a minor to get an abortion.

The school’s superintendent claimed part of the concern was that Santorum had never addressed high school before. Somebody can’t or won’t perform a simple internet search, because there is much evidence to the contrary.

Heaven forbid students hear some points of view that aren’t on the official education association list of acceptable opinions.

A recent online article at, dayofrepentance.org, written by a New Jersey Rabbi is one of the most ‘dead-on’ eye-openers that I have seen for many moons.  It not only says what I have been thinking and also what I’ve been saying online myself, but from others whom I consider to be very knowledgeable on the subject.

The author is Rabbi Steven Pruzansky, the leader of a Jewish congregation in Teaneck, New Jersey and his message was relayed as stated above by the online organization ‘day of repentance’ who titled it, “Realities of the State of our Union.  The irresponsible among us are now the majority.” According to the cited website, the article appeared in The Israel National News, and is directed to Jewish readership. According to that source, 70% of American Jews vote as Democrats.

The majority mentioned there is not defined, but the manner in which Obama and Senator Harry Reid, D-NV, Majority Leader of the U. S. Senate are attempting to run roughshod over the rest of the citizens of the country leaves little doubt that those are the culprits on the front lines of the onslaught against the people.

The brazen arrogance of Harry Reid is second only to the bully in the White House who has all sorts of control plans for Americans and is slowly and sneakily putting them into affirmative actions through their internal connections with the dark side of the corrupt and morally bankrupt United Nations.

The Rabbi stated that the most charitable way of explaining the election results of 2012 is that Americans voted for the status quo—for the incumbent President and for a divided Congress. They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship, incompetence, economic stagnation and avoidance of responsibility.

At this point,  I would like to also add that some very unacceptable stories have appeared since the election polls have closed stating some very unacceptable procedures and actions during the voting processes.  Actions that have not appeared to be followed up with thorough investigations, particularly by the Republicans or by any significant parties or authorities.

I have to wonder if they consider it too much bother?

If that last question is true then the Tea Party people are right in saying the GOP is in need of a huge overhaul.

Rabbi Pruzansky also states as another reason for the 2012 election results was that fewer people voted.  Which is true but considering the overall atmosphere and some serious doubts that prevailed during the obscenely long campaigning by both major political parties, much interest had dissipated.

The Rabbi also had this to say about the results; Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle. Romney lost because he didn’t get enough votes to win.

The Rabbi continued to say: That might seem obvious, but not for the obvious reasons. Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness—no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate.

On talk radio, in internet commentary and at right wing conferences, worried analysts and activists obsess over the dire electoral consequence of “three million missing Republicans” who doomed conservative chances in 2012.

This lament for the lost legions of conservatism has been relentlessly recycled in right-leaning media to prove that Mitt Romney failed to mobilize his base with his inept, uninspired campaign. The commonly cited proof for this conclusion is that Mitt Romney received even fewer votes than did the hapless McCain-Palin ticket. If only the GOP had run with a “true conservative” instead of another flip-flopping RINO, the true-believers affirm, millions of dispirited conservatives would have rallied to save the day.

It all sounds perfectly plausible except for the fact that it’s also perfectly untrue.

First, Romney did NOT get a lower popular vote total than did McCain: He polled almost a million votes more (983,000 more, to be precise) and earned 33 additional electoral votes. It was Obama whose vote totals went down sharply, with 3,592,000 fewer votes than the first time.

The mistaken talking point about the “missing Republicans” came from the slow nature of the counting process. In the first few days after the election, millions of votes remained untallied, but even after the completed numbers came in, showing more GOP voters than 2008, few of the conclusion jumpers bothered to correct, or even adjust their post-election remarks.

Moreover, exit polls show that the electorate featured an unusually high percentage of both Republicans and conservatives, rather than offering any scrap of evidence for complaints over a disengaged base. In 2012, self-identified Republicans comprised precisely the same percentage of the electorate as in 2008, and gave even more overwhelming support (93% compared to 90%) to their party’s nominee. What’s more, conservatives not only made up a slightly higher percentage of the voters in 2012 than four years earlier, but even turned out more strongly as a percentage of electorate than they did for the victorious George W. Bush in 2004.

And what about the obsessive media mantra about Evangelical rejection of the GOP ticket because of distrust of Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith? Actually, white “Evangelical” or “Born Again” Christians showed up in proportionately higher numbers for Romney than for McCain or, for that matter, for their fellow-Evangelical George W. Bush. This segment of the electorate amounted to 23% of all voters in 2004, but 25% in 2012, with Romney scoring the same overwhelming level of support as did the outspokenly born-again Bush (78%).

Finally, another false narrative suggests that the real story of Republican catastrophe in 2012 amounted to a wholesale rejection by younger voters who hated the party and its candidate because of antediluvian positions on social issues.

Oh, really? Then how could one explain that GOP support among 18-29 year old voters actually went up sharply from 2008—from 32% to 37%?

Even more startling, young people who happened to be white still comprised a big majority (61%) of all voters below the age of 30 and delivered a shocking, counter-intuitive verdict on the choice between the ineffably cool Barack and the hopelessly square Mitt: going for the Mormon grandfather of 18 by a decisive, near-landslide margin of 7 points.

The North Carolina State Board of Elections intends to prosecute five suspects who allegedly voted in both Florida and North Carolina during the November 2012 election cycle, according the leader from the Voter Integrity Project of North Carolina in an interview with Fox News Channel’s Eric Shawn on Sunday morning.

Lt. Col. Jay DeLancy (U.S. Air Force-Ret.) noted that his group investigated and identified the voters to both states’ election offices earlier last month.

“Thanks to the relatively accessible election records in both Florida and North Carolina, this research was possible,” said Col. Jay DeLancy, who serves as executive director of VIP-NC, “but we have every reason to believe this is only the tip of the iceberg.”

The group thoroughly examined Florida’s election records to identify November 2012 voters who listed an alternate address in North Carolina and then compared that list with the N.C. voter history files. They found over 300 who appeared to be registered in both states and 33 who appeared to have voted in both state’s elections, which is a felony, DeLancy told FNC’s Shawn.

“We turned our list of 33 suspects over to both the Florida Secretary of State’s office and the North Carolina Board of Elections office and asked them to investigate,” said Delancy. “Don Wright, the chief counsel for N.C. State Board of Elections gave us the news that five of our suspects had matching signatures in both states and that his office would refer them [to the state's attorney general] for prosecution.”

Under N.C. law, the State Board of Elections can prosecute election finance crimes but not election fraud laws and the Voter Integrity Project of North Carolina has asked the State Legislature to change that condition, according to the Fox interview.

“It is up [to] the respective District Attorneys if they intend to prosecute the cases,” wrote Don Wright in an email to the VIP-NC, dated March 5, 2013. The agency is yet to release the names or counties of the suspected felons.

Col. DeLancy attributes lack of prosecution authority at the state’s election as a key factor in the public claims by many groups that “no vote fraud happens in NC” and that “voter ID is a solution in search of a problem,” as many voter ID opponents have often repeated.

“Vote fraud deniers make nice poetry and they give good sound bites,” said DeLancy, “but the idea is as absurd as claiming that no speeding happens on I-40 unless the Highway Patrol writes tickets.”

The group also used their findings to press for NC to join a multi-state voter history database that was established by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach.

“The multi-state data base would bring transparency to cases of college students and snowbirds that live in two states and vote in both of them,” said DeLancy. “Except in open-information states like Florida and NC, this type crime has been very difficult if not impossible to detect.”

The group believes the data base would help bring “driver license type controls” to the public’s voter registrations.

In a clear case of the media’s double standard, CNN has been chasing Congresswoman Michele Bachmann around regarding her CPAC comments on the President’s lavish lifestyle. This, when the majority of her speech focused elsewhere: on Benghazi, the federal debt, medical innovations, and cyber attacks.

And while CNN insists on piling it on, they bring ridicule on themselves by being guilty of what they accuse Bachmann of doing. CNN’s Dana Bash chased the Congresswoman down the hall to ask her about her comments. The Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler gave her four Pinocchios in response to her speech. And, to give the liberal meme credence, Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly condemned the Congresswoman as lacking focus with the conclusion, “Two words: Not Good.”

“Congresswoman Goes Rogue: Independent fact check finds Bachmann wrong” read the banner underneath the CNN broadcast. But a closer look at the facts shows that the media themselves are omitting key information about Bachmann’s comments.

Kessler quotes Representative Bachmann at length, writing:

“A new book is out talking about the perks and the excess of the $1.4-billion-a-year presidency that we’re paying for. And this is a lifestyle that is one of excess. Now we find out that there are five chefs on Air Force One. There are two projectionists who operate the White House movie theater. They regularly sleep at the White House in order to be readily available in case the first family wants a really, really late show. And I don’t mean to be petty here, but can’t they just push the play button? We are also the ones who are paying for someone to walk the President’s dog. Paying for someone to walk the President’s dog? Now, why are we doing that when we can’t even get a disabled veteran into the White House for a White House tour? That isn’t caring!”

However, Kessler omits key sentences with which Bachmann prefaced her criticism of the President: “Now we all believe that the President and the First Family, with all seriousness, do deserve the best security and the very best protection that we can get them,” began Representative Bachman. “They deserve to live in the White House. They deserve to fly on a private plane.”

“There is a problem,” she asserted. And that problem is that their “excessive” lifestyle included, for example, five chefs, sleepover projectionists, and paid walking of Bo, the dog.

In his fact check, Kessler found that President George W. Bush spent nearly $1.6 billion in 2008 on the First Family and its security. He says that half of that was for the Secret Service. “Moreover, the money spent on the presidency and the so-called perks she describes appear to be no different for Obama than for Bush or other presidents,” reports Kessler. “It’s absurd to suggest otherwise.”

Kessler points to two sources for Representative Bachmann’s comments: Presidential Perks Gone Royal, by a Republican lobbyist, and The 1.4 Billion Dollar Man: Costs of the Obama White House. In the latter book, author John F.