LIFE IN THE ASYLUM
FOLLOW-UP ON PREDICTIONS (11/5/12):
MO Atty, having gone out on out on a limb with his Election Day predictions, decided to take a recovery period before following up on that column. Remember, however, that the column began with a caveat: “The following presupposes that the other party (once known, believe it or not, as the party of JFK) will content themselves with shuttling around a few hundred busloads of illegal aliens to vote in selected key precincts, and forego their new GOTV technique that would allow thousands of the ever reliable dead people to vote not just once, but multiple times each.”
Unfortunately, we are told, Obama won. In the “battleground” regions, despite huge crowds braving frigid weather at Romney rallies while pathetic numbers showed up for Obama; in the coal regions, despite the United Mine Workers declining to endorse Obama and masses of individual miners openly calling BHO a liar; at the very last minute, like magic, the exactly right numbers of votes popped up in the exactly right places to give him every “battleground” area and, thus, the election.
There was, of course, no voter fraud. Nothing to see here, folks . . . move along. Our Republican elites, after careful investigation, concluded that the Dems simply had more sophisticated campaign software. This software was so amazing that it could materialize actual, flesh and blood voters out of thin air, precisely when and where needed. Lessons for us for future elections? Get better software. Start trying to be more like the Dems. “Rebrand” ourselves. Start compromising. Get rid of the Tea Party, or anyone actually quoting words from the Constitution.
Pay no attention to Philadelphia, for instance, where The Philadelphia Inquirer reported unofficial vote tallies in 59 voter divisions showing Obama outpolling Romney by a combined total of 19,605 to 0. Professor Larry Sabato, not known for his right wing politics, said of that result that the number of zero precincts in Philadelphia deserves examination. "Not a single vote for Romney or even an error? That's worth looking into."
Pay no attention to Melowese Richardson, who vowed to fight “for Mr. Obama's right to sit as president of the United States!" by voting for him multiple times in Cincinnati. [It is easy to pay no attention to Melowese if you live in St. Louis. A digital search of its only newspaper, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, revealed no mention of her name].
In fact, please do pay attention to Melowese. Click on this video and view every frame. Does she not sound very well versed in the ease and importance of multiple voting? Is it possible to believe that she is the only such person out there? Is it possible to believe that there are not thousands of such as her in every “battleground” district in every state?
Barack Obama, repulsively leftwing, dishonest, and arrogant, got his political education in the one-party thugocracy of Chicago. Is there any doubt that he knew, right from the start, the importance of having lots of the likes of Melowese organized to “fight” for him? He nominated Eric Holder as his Attorney General [19 Republicans voted Yes, including Lindsey Graham and John McCain]. Is there any doubt that he knew, right from the start, how willingly Holder would sic the Justice Department on any state or local government that tried to insure honest registration or voting procedures?
Victor Davis Hanson, speaking of immigration, says “comprehensive immigration reform” has become “a silly construct,” observing that:
It does not exist any more. The truth is that we will allow “a pathway to citizenship” for those who broke the immigration law but who have been here a few years, who are working, and who have not been arrested. And, likewise, for those who broke immigration law but are not working, have just arrived, are on public assistance, and have been arrested, we will mandate neither citizenship nor deportation - but just allow a perpetual limbo of residence. When proponents of amnesty declare pathways of citizenship predicated on a fine, or on learning English, or on returning to the back of the line, we know both that they will never audit such requirements and that it would not matter much whether they did. There is now just a sort of nothingness.
So what does it matter whether one is legal, illegal, holds a green card, holds no green card, is in line for citizenship, or is in line for deportation? There is no deportation; there is no real border anymore; there is no federal immigration law. All these are but states of mind, talking points of politicians without meaning.
These observations describe not only our border “security,” but overlap with and equally describe the “security” of our electoral process.
For decades our elite rulers in Washington have been clearing Obama’s path to the current absurdity of what now passes for “elections.” First we had to lower the voting age to eighteen. As a nation, we proclaimed that, although eighteen year-olds are not mature enough to drink a beer or smoke a cigarette, they are fully prepared to study the issues and elect our “leaders.” In 1993 we discovered the pressing need for the commonly called “Motor Voter Act,” more realistically the Saul Alinsky-Cloward-Piven voter registration chaos act [for which six reliable Republican Senators voted “Yes”]. We followed in 2002 with the “Help America Vote Act,” which passed the Senate by a carefully thought-out 92-2. While the ever-helpful John McCain voted “Yes”, believe it or not the two No’s were Democrats.
So here we are. As “election day” approaches, we know that many congressional districts throughout the country have been legally gerrymandered to guarantee a minority winner (known as “majority-minority districts”). Thus, while Alan West gets no guarantee (not minority enough?), Jessie Jackson, Jr. does, despite not campaigning and being on his way to a Federal Penitentiary. We now have “early voting”: in North Carolina, e.g., you can mail your absentee ballot starting September 6th, with no showing required that you will be absent. In South Dakota you can Early Vote in person on September 21st, before any of the official presidential debates has taken place.
We can “register” when we show up at the polling place, and if we cannot make the slightest showing that we should be allowed to vote, we get a form of “late voting”: we must be allowed to cast a “provisional vote” that will have to be pondered over after the polls close. No amount of chaos is too great, but thank God we have dedicated public servants like Melowese Richardson to keep everything in order.
For actual, in person voting, we now use electronic data machines. Even if you ask for a “paper” ballot, it gets scanned into a digital collector and stored on a hard drive. For scores of years prior to 2002 we very successfully used the IBM keypunch card, where we used a metal pin to punch through a hole representing our selection. The physical cards were kept until any controversy over the vote count was resolved. Then we finally discovered how hopelessly confusing and complicated those cards were. Who could be expected to figure out how to punch a metal pin through a hole?
Congress, including every Republican Senator, demanded that the trusty punch card be done away with throughout the country and replaced with computerized voting machines. Aside from the massive cost, and the usual corruption of officials signing voting machine contracts with their brothers-in-law, and untested machines riddled with errors, and no storage of any physical cards, everything worked fine. All vote tallies are now kept in computer databases. And don’t worry – they’re secure!!
Except that we now know, see e.g., Infoworld, that virtually any such database can be hacked with relative ease. And we are now told that the Dems, heavily supported by Google, Facebook, and other major digital sophisticates, have dramatically better campaign software than anything we can come up with. It would seem that a major digital sophisticate, feeling the need for a slight change in the vote tally in a “battleground” district, might be able to make that happen. Thank God we can rest assured that the Dems would never even contemplate any such dishonesty as they pursue their fundamental changes.
None of this is meant to suggest that our Republican leaders could not have chosen better candidates. If 2012 was the best we had, we are truly in trouble. And maybe Republican shortcomings were enough to allow Obama to squeak through despite the enormous damage he has been doing to this country. Or maybe not. We know Melowese was out there, we know she has lots of company, and we know no investigations or consequences will follow.
So the most we should be willing to say for now is “Obama might have won.” And very soon we need to get a lot of Republican lifers out of Congress, and replace them with people who remember the word “No” when a Democrat bill comes before them. If we don’t start giving the American people an actual choice, we may never win another election no matter what kind of software we have.