FROM YOUR FRIEND JAZ - Jazman's Blog - The Bakersfield Voice

Turning Lemons Into Lemonade

Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:36:30 PST

On the air last week, I said it election day was actually a great day for conservatives. Not Republicans. Conservatives. To which many of my listeners responded that I must be in denial and hung over from crying in my beer election night. But I was, and am, dead serious. Let me explain…

Without taking anything away from the impressive campaign that Barack Obama ran, the fact is voters didn’t reject conservatism on Tuesday. They rejected the rejection of conservatism. They rejected Republicans who claimed to be fiscal conservatives but governed as fiscal liberals.

President George W. Bush’s eight years of “compassionate conservatism” wasn’t conservative. It was big government Republicanism.

John McCain was no conservative. Conservatives knew it. The ones who voted for him, like myself, did so only by holding their noses. As for Republicans in Congress, the leadership hasn’t pushed a conservative agenda since the 1994 Contract with America.

All this became bitterly clear, even to the most self-deluded GOP partisans, when Bush, McCain and the Republican Party leadership in Congress embraced that $700 billion (and counting) Wall Street bailout just a few weeks ago.

Voters, particularly conservatives, fired a shot across the bow of the SS GOP in 2006 by knocking them out of the majority in both the House and the Senate. Republicans, naturally, didn’t learn a damned thing and kept doing the same ol’ things the same ol’ ways. So voters this week decided to give them a beating they’d never forget. And then some.

While Democrats scored phenomenal ballot box victories Tuesday, that was a rejection of GOP governing and campaign incompetence, not an embrace of full-scale socialism – even though Barack Obama is, unquestionably, a socialist.

Remember, one of the most important aspects of the Obama campaign was the promise to CUT TAXES for 95 percent of the people. Folks, that’s a conservative agenda.

His campaign also spent a ton of time and money telling people that Barack Obama would not take away our guns. Folks, that’s a conservative agenda.

On the campaign trail and in debates, Obama said he’d pay for his new programs by cutting spending on old programs. Folks, that’s a conservative agenda.

I even heard that at one point Obama’s website had a section claiming he was pro-life. And he also came out, so to speak, as opposed to gay marriage. Folks, that’s a conservative agenda.

Now, I don’t for a minute believe Barack Obama really believes this stuff…but that’s what he campaigned on. And combined with GOP incompetence, he fooled plenty enough people to get elected. It was the political version of Three-card Monte. But once the rubes discover they’ve been conned, they’ll be open to electing Republicans again to the House and/or Senate in 2010, if…

IF.

If Republicans finally wake up and smell the coffee. As Newt likes to say, real change requires real change. Not tinkering around the edges. REAL CHANGE.

That means that if Mitch McConnell is going to remain as Minority Leader in the Senate, he needs to at least bring Tom Coburn and/or Jim DeMint into leadership positions.

I’m sure a case is being made to promote John Ensign instead; however, you can’t overlook the fact that Ensign ran the National Republican Senatorial Committee this year and may end up losing even more seats than Elizabeth Dole lost two years ago when she ran the NRSC. How does the party of merit justify rewarding such a colossal failure?

Under the circumstances, Senate Republicans ought to task the Nevada senator with a single mission for the next two years…

Taking out Harry Reid in 2010.

Kinda like tasking Dorothy with taking out the Wicked Witch of the West. You do that, and you get your heart’s desire, Sen. Ensign.

Over in the House, Republicans took a severe beating in 2006. But their leadership hadn’t been in place for a full term, so House members re-elected them last year.

No excuses this time around. Boom, boom…out go the lights.

Nothing short of a wholesale change of the entire House leadership team is acceptable, starting with Minority Leader John Boehner. Republicans simply can’t keep rewarding failure.

At least former Democrat Minority Leader Dick Gephardt realized that after two losing two successive elections in the 1990s it was time to step aside and give someone else a shot.

If House Republicans won’t change leaders - including, if not especially, McConnell - donors should snap their wallets shut and grassroots activists should sit on their hands until they come to their senses.

They should support only Republicans who vote for wholesale leadership change.

Meanwhile, over at the Republican National Committee there’s only one sensible course of action. When the RNC convenes for its Winter Meeting next January, they HAVE to elect Michael Steel as the party’s National Chairman.

Not because he’s black.

Because he’s the best, most qualified person for the job.

Being black, with a black hombre in the White House, is merely a bonus.

Steel is a former Maryland Republican Party chairman, so he knows how a party organization operates and will be able to relate to and work well with the other state chairmen.

He’s also a former lieutenant governor, so he knows how government works (or doesn’t work, as the case may be).

He’s also been a statewide candidate twice: won one and lost the other. So he knows both the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat.

Oh, and he won as a Republican in the People’s Republic of Maryland…big time Democrat territory (61 percent for Obama).

Presently, he runs GOPAC - the GOP’s premier candidate recruitment and training organization.

Plus, he’s an unapologetic fiscal and social conservative who can articulate the conservative message effectively and isn’t afraid of the press.

Oh, and Vice President-elect Joe Biden said he was clean.

Yes, real change requires real change. And desperate times call for desperate measures.

These are desperate times for Republicans…and the nation. Republicans, heal thyselves. Or be prepared for yet another thrashing in 2010.

AN ELECTION THAT THE REPUBLICANS NEEDED TO LOSE

Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:32:56 PST

AN ELECTION THAT THE REPUBLICANS NEEDED TO LOSE — GOOD LUCK OBAMA

By DICK MORRIS

November 5, 2008

If ever there was an election that was not worth winning, it was the contest of 2008. While it was hard-fought on both sides, had McCain won, it might have spelled the end of the Republican Party. As it is, the party is well-situated to come back in 2010 and in 2012, if it learns the lessons of this year.

Simply put, all hell is about to break loose in the markets and the economy. The mortgage crisis will likely be followed by defaults in credit card debt, student loans and car loans. We will probably be set for two years of zero growth, according to economists with whom I talk. And the federal efforts to protect the nation from the worst of the recession will probably lead to huge budget deficits and resulting inflation. We are in for stagflation that could last for years.

Had McCain won, he would be the latter-day Hoover, blamed for the disaster that unfolded on his watch. Now it is Obama’s problem. With the Republicans suffering a wipeout in congressional elections (although not as bad as they feared), the ball is now squarely in the Democratic court. Good luck!

If Obama raises taxes, the situation could get even worse. With a liberal Congress on his hands, he will be constrained to move to the left, if he needs any pushing. When Clinton was elected in 1992, the Democrats in control of Congress gave him a clear message: Either you govern within the four walls of the Democratic caucus or you won’t get our support. Crossing the aisle to get Republican votes, even including the GOP in negotiations, was a no-no for which the president would pay dearly if he transgressed.

The result was predictable. Moderate initiatives like welfare reform were scrapped, the Congress passed tax hikes and legislation became festooned with liberal amendments. Faced with the need to round up every last vote in the Senate and House Democratic caucuses, Clinton had no choice but to load up conservative bills like an anti-crime measure with liberal pork (like a provision for midnight basketball courts in urban areas) to get unanimous caucus backing.

Obama will have to move left to appease his caucus. He will become their hostage, and they his jailers.

This dynamic will produce extreme-left-wing governance, which the Republicans can blame for the continuation of the recession and for any worsening.

The party will recover, fed by anger at Obama’s policies, and will emerge from this defeat stronger than ever.

But the Republicans must learn the lesson of MoveOn.org. Founded in the bleak days of the Clinton impeachment, MoveOn developed a grassroots Internet base. Building up its e-list of activists and contributors, MoveOn laid the basis for the incredible Internet appeal of the Obama campaign. At last count, Obama has 4.5 million donors, most online.

Conservatives cannot count on the Republican Party to fight their battles for them, and certainly cannot count on them to win. The right needs to develop cyber-roots conservative organizations to rival the power of groups like MoveOn.org.

The stellar efforts of NewsMax.com and its ally, GOPtrust.com, illustrate the power of such efforts. Together, these groups raised $10 million for an independent expenditure on media in swing states featuring the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s anti-American bombast.

And their efforts worked.

Virtually all the polls agreed that Obama would win 52-53 percent of the vote, but the surveys varied in the amount of undecideds they found. On Election Day, virtually every undecided voter went to McCain, and Obama’s final vote share was no more and no less than the 52-53 percent the surveys had predicted. This unanimity among undecided voters is attributable to the endgame of groups like GOPtrust.com and NewsMax.com.

These groups have to lead the way in running media to battle against the leftist legislation that will undoubtedly emanate from the Obama administration and the liberal Congress America has just elected. Then they can become the basis for a Republican resurgence, just as MoveOn.org was this year for the Democrats.

AN OPEN LETTER TO OBAMA

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 17:13:47 PDT

I DIDN'T WRITE THIS BUT...I LIKE IT:

The New York Times carried a story on Saturday, October 4, 2008, that proved you had a significantly closer relationship with Bill Ayers than what you previously admitted. While the issue of your relationship is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America about it.

The Chicago Sun reported on May 8, 2008, that FBI records showed that you had a significantly closer relationship with Tony Rezko than what you previously admitted.

In the interview, you said that you only saw Mr. Rezko a couple of times a year. The FBI files showed that you saw him weekly. While the issue of your relationship is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America about it.

Your speech in Philadelphia on March 18, 2008, about "race" contradicted your statement to Anderson Cooper on March 14 when you said that you never heard Reverend Wright make his negative statements about white America. While your attendance at TrinityChurch for 20 years is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America on March 14.

In your 1st debate with John McCain, you said that you never said that you would meet with the leaders of Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, and North Korea without "preparations" at lower levels ... Joe Biden repeated your words in his debate with Sarah Palin ... while the video tape from your debate last February clearly shows that you answered "I would" to the question of meeting with those leaders within 12 months without "any" preconditions.

While your judgment about meeting with enemies of the USA without pre-conditions is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America in the debate with McCain.

On July 14, 2008, you said that you always knew that the surge would work while the video tapes of you from more than a year ago show that you stated that the surge would not work.

While your judgment about military strategy as a potential commander-in-chief is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America on July 14.

You now claim that your reason for voting against funding for the troops was because the bill did not include a time line for withdrawal, while the video tapes of you from more than a year ago show that you voted against additional funding because you wanted our troops to be removed immediately ... not in 16 months after the 2008 election as you now claim.

While your judgment about removing our troops unilaterally in 2007 is of concern, the greater concern is that you lied to America about your previous position.

You claim to have a record of working with Republicans while the record shows that the only bill that you sponsored with a Republican was with Chuck Lugar ... and it failed. The record shows that you vote 97% in concert with the Democrat party and that you have the most liberal voting record in the Senate. You joined Republicans only 13% of the time in your votes and those 13% were only after agreement from the Democrat party.

While it is of concern that you fail to include conservatives in your actions and that you are such a liberal, the greater concern is that you distorted the truth.

In the primary debates of last February, 2008, you claimed to have talked with a "Captain" of a platoon in Afghanistan "the other day" when in fact you had a discussion in 2003 with a Lieutenant who had just been deployed to Afghanistan.

You lied in that debate.

In your debates last spring, you claimed to have been a "professor of Constitutional law" when in fact you have never been a professor of Constitutional law.

In this last debate, you were careful to say that you "taught a law class" and never mentioned being a "professor of Constitutional law."

You lied last spring.

You and Joe Biden both claimed that John McCain voted against additional funding for our troops when the actual records show the opposite.

You distorted the truth.

You and Joe Biden claim that John McCain voted against funding for alternate energy sources 20 times when the record shows that John McCain specifically voted against funding for bio fuels, especially corn ... and he was right .... corn is too expensive at producing ethanol, and using corn to make ethanol increased the price of corn from $2 a bushel to $6 a bushel for food.

You distorted the truth.

You and Joe Biden claim that John McCain voted like both of you for a tax increase on those making as little as $42,000 per year while the voting record clearly shows that John McCain did not vote as you and Joe Biden.

You lied to America.

You and Joe Biden claim that John McCain voted with George W. Bush 90% of the time when you know that Democrats also vote 90% of the time with the President (including Joe Biden) because the vast majority of the votes are procedural. You are one of the few who has not voted 90% of the time with the president because you have been missing from the Senate since the day you got elected. While your absence from your job in the Senate is of concern, the greater concern is that you spin the facts.

You did not take an active role in the rescue plan. You claimed that the Senate did not need you while the real reason that you abstained was because of your close relationships with the executives of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Countrywide, and Acorn ... who all helped cause the financial problems of today ... and they all made major contributions to your campaign.

While your relationship with these executives and your protection of them for your brief 3 years in the Senate (along with Barney Frank, Chuck Schumer, Maxine Waters, and Chris Dodd) is of concern, the greater concern is that you are being deceitful.

You forgot to mention that you personally represented Tony Rezko and Acorn. Tony Rezko, an Arab and close friend to you, was convicted of fraud in Chicago real estate transactions that bilked millions of tax dollars from the Illinois government for renovation projects that you sponsored as a state senator ... and Acorn has been convicted of voter fraud, real estate sub prime loan intimidation, and illegal campaign contributions.

Tony Rezko has contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to your political campaigns. You personally used your political positions to steer money to both Tony Rezko and Acorn and you used Acorn to register thousands of phony voters for Democrats and you.

While your relationships with Rezko and Acorn are of concern, the greater concern is that you omitted important facts about your relationships with them to America.

During your campaign, you said: "typical white person." "They cling to their guns and religion." "They will say that I am black." You played the race card. You tried to label any criticism about you as racist.

You divide America.

You claim that you will reduce taxes for 95% of America, but you forgot to tell America that those reductions are after you remove the Bush tax reductions. You have requested close to $1 billion in earmarks and several million for Acorn. Your social programs will cost America $1 trillion per year and you claim that a reduction in military spending ($100 billion for Iraq) can pay for it.

While your economic plan of adding 30% to the size of our federal government is of concern, the greater concern is that you are deceiving America.

The drain to America's economy by foreign supplied oil is $700 billion per year (5% of GDP) while the war in Iraq is $100 billion (less than 1% of GDP).

You voted against any increases to oil exploration for the last 3 years and any expansion of nuclear facilities. Yet today, you say that you have always been for more oil and more nuclear.

You are lying to America.

Mr. Obama, you claimed that you "changed" your mind about public financing for your campaign because of the money spent by Republican PACs in 2004. The truth is that the Democrat PACs in 2004, 2006, and 2008 spent twice as much as the Republican PACs (especially George Soros and MoveOn.org).

You are lying to America.

Mr. Obama, you have done nothing to stop the actions of the teachers union and college professors in the USA. They eliminated religion from our history. They teach pro gay agendas and discuss sex with students as young as first grade. They bring their personal politics into the classrooms.

They disparage conservatives. They brainwash our children. They are in it for themselves ..... not America. Are you reluctant to condemn their actions because teachers/professors and the NEA contribute 25% of all money donated to Democrats and none to Republicans?

You are deceiving America.

Oh, Mr. Obama, Teddy Roosevelt said about a hundred years ago that we Americans should first look at the character of our leaders before anything else.

Your character looks horrible. While you make good speeches, motivating speeches, your character does not match your rhetoric. You talk the talk, but do not walk the walk.

1. You lied to America. You lied many times. You distorted facts. You parsed your answers like a lawyer.

2. You distorted the record o f John McCain in your words and in your advertisements.

3. You had associations with some very bad people for your personal political gains and then lied about those associations.

4. You divide America about race and about class.

Now let me compare your record of lies, distortions, race baiting, and associations to John McCain: War hero. Annapolis graduate with "Country first."

Operational leadership experience like all 43 previously elected presidents of the USA as a Navy officer for 22 years. 26 years in the Senate. Straight talk. Maverick. 54% of the time participated on bills with Democrats. Never asked for an earmark. The only blemish on his record is his part in the Keating 5 debacle about 25 years ago.

Mr. Obama, at HarvardLawSchool, you learned that the end does not justify the means. You learned that perjury, false witness, dishonesty, distortion of truth are never tolerated.

Yet, your dishonesty is overwhelming. Your dishonesty is tremendously greater than the dishonesty that caused the impeachment and disbarment of Bill Clinton. Your dishonesty is tremendously greater than the dishonesty of Scooter Libby.

You should be ashamed.

Mr. Obama, it is time for us Americans to put aside our differences on political issues and vote against you because of your dishonest character.

It is time for all of us Americans to put aside our political issues and vote for America first. It is time for America to vote for honesty.

Any people who vote for you after understanding that you are dishonest should be ashamed of themselves for making their personal political issues more important than character.

Would these same people vote for the anti-Christ if the anti-Christ promised them riches?

Would they make a golden calf while Moses was up the mountain?

Would they hire someone for a job if that someone lied in an interview? Of course not.

So why do some of these people justify their votes for you even though they know you are dishonest?

Why do they excuse your dishonesty? Because some of these people are frightened about the future, the economy, and their financial security .... and you are preying on their fears with empty promises ... and because some (especially our young people) are consumed by your wonderful style and promises for "change" like the Germans who voted for Adolf Hitler in 1932.

The greed/envy by Germans in 1932 kept them from recognizing Hitler for who he was. They loved his style. Greed and envy are keeping many Americans from recognizing you ... your style has camouflaged your dishonesty .... but many of us see you for who you really are ... and we will not stop exposing who you are every day, forever if it is necessary.

Mr. Obama, you are dishonest. Anyone who votes for you is enabling dishonesty.

Mr. Obama, America cannot trust that you will put America first in your decisions about the future.

Mr. Obama, you are not the "change" that America deserves. We cannot trust you.

Mr. Obama, You are not ready and not fit to be commander-in-chief.

Mr. Obama, John McCain does not have as much money as your campaign to refute all of your false statements. And for whatever reasons, the mainstream media will not give adequate coverage or research about your lies, distortions, word parsing, bad associations, race baiting, lack of operational leadership experience, and generally dishonest character.

The media is diverting our attention from your relationships and ignoring the fact that you lied about those relationships.

The fact that you lied is much more important than the relationships themselves .... just like with Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon ... Monica Lewinski and Watergate were not nearly as bad as the fact that those men lied about the events ... false witness ... perjury ... your relationships and bad judgments are bad on their own .... but your lies are even worse.

Therefore, by copy of this memo, all who read this memo are asked to send it to everyone else in America before it is too late. We need to do the job that the media will not do. We need to expose your dishonesty so that every person in America understands who you really are before election day.

Mr. Obama, in a democracy, we get what we deserve. And God help America if we deserve you.
Michael Master
McLean, Virginia

OBAMA A FRIEND TO GUN OWNERS?

Sat, 25 Oct 2008 16:52:15 PDT

Barack Hussein Obama has said that Americans "cling" to guns and religion because they are "bitter" about economic woes.

Obama is going to disarm, literally and figuratively all legally owned guns from the hands of law abiding gun owners. He will pry your cold, clinging, fingers from constitutionally protected firearms.

Disarmed, our civilian population is like sheep to slaughter. And with the possibility of a leftist fascist administration, you are going to need your guns. Foe shizzle.

Obama voted with a minority of lawmakers in 2004 against a bill affirming a homeowner's right to use a firearm in self-defense against an intruder.

Richard A. Pearson, Executive Director Illinois State Rifle Association made a pretty convincing case against Obama in his newsletter.

He points out that although Obama claims to be an advocate for the 2nd Amendment, his voting record in the Illinois Senate paints a very different picture.

While a state senator, Obama voted for a bill that would ban nearly every hunting rifle, shotgun and target rifle owned by Illinois citizens. That same bill would authorize the state police to raid homes of gun owners and forcibly confiscate banned guns. Obama supported a bill that would shut down law-abiding firearm manufacturers including Springfield Armory, Armalite, Rock River Arms and Les Baer.

Obama also voted for a bill that would prohibit law-abiding citizens from purchasing more than one gun per month. Without a doubt, Barack Obama has proven himself to be an enemy of the law abiding firearm owner.

At the same time, Obama has proven himself to be a friend to the hardened criminal. While a state senator, Obama voted 4 times against legislation that would allow a homeowner to use a firearm in defense of home and family. Does Barack Obama still sound to you like a “friend” of the law-abiding gun owner?

Then there is his buddy Richard Daley, the mayor of Chicago who has declared that if it were up to him, nobody would be allowed to own a gun.

And let’s not forget Obama’s pal George Soros - the guy who has pumped millions of dollars into the UN’s international effort to disarm law-abiding citizens.

Obama has shown that he is more than willing to use other people’s money to fund his campaign to take your guns away from you.

While a board member of the leftist Joyce Foundation, Barack Obama wrote checks for tens of millions of dollars to extremist gun control organizations such as the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence and the ViolencePolicyCenter.

According to Pearson, bi-annual checks for no less than $700,000 are given to gun control groups to support "legislative efforts".

The Joyce Foundation is a liberal, charitable foundation that, among other things, funds gun control groups. According to Wikipedia :

Since 2003, the Joyce Foundation has paid grants totaling over $12 million to gun control organizations and for research into gun violence prevention. The largest single grantee has been the Violence Policy Center, which received $4,154,970 between 1996 and 2006, and calls for an outright ban on handguns, semi-automatic and other firearms, and substantial restrictions on gun owners.

The Joyce Foundation's Annual Reports list Barack Obama as one of the 12 members of the Board of Directors from 1998 until 2001. (source Sportsmen for Obama?)

Jennifer Bishop, the Brady Field Director, testified in hearings that there is a weekly ANTI-GUN CONFERENCE CALL among gun control groups to coordinate efforts across the US to enact gun control legislation.

When you see anti-gun actions pop up, even now in red states, these are not isolated grass roots incidents. This is part of a network, a large national effort, to ban guns. The leftist machine at work.

In Mr. Pearson's newsletter he warns Americans,

"In closing, I’d like to remind you that I’m a guy who has actually gone nose to nose with Obama on gun rights issues. The Obama I know cannot even begin to identify with this nation’s outdoor traditions. The Obama I know sees you, the law abiding gun owner, as nothing but a low-class lummox who is easily swayed by the flash of a smile and a ration of rosy rhetoric. The Obama I know is a stony-faced liar who has honed his skill at getting what he wants - so long as people are willing to give it to him."

That’s the Barack Obama I know.

Does Barack Obama still sound to you like a “friend” of the law-abiding gun owner? Uh... not so much.

THE MENTALITY OF FAIRNESS DOCTRINE SUPPORTERS

Sat, 25 Oct 2008 14:09:23 PDT

Here we have New Mexico Senator Jeff Bingaman, a Democrat. He is one of these Senators who will soon be serving in a Democrat Senate that will have unfettered power – with Barack Obama in the White House, possibly 60 Democrat senators and maybe 250 Democrat representatives.

So Senator Bingaman went on a talk radio show and proclaimed his support for the return of the Fairness Doctrine. Here's a little bit of his reasoning:

"Radio and media generally should have a higher calling than just reflecting a particular point of view. They should use their authority, their broadcast power, to present an informed discussion of public issues ... The country was well served [by the Fairness Doctrine]. Public discussion was at a higher lever and more intelligent in those days than it has become since."

So there you go. This Senator, who will soon be leading this country without any speed bumps stopping him, believes that we should bring back the Fairness Doctrine because our discussion will be more intelligent.

In that case, if that is really your goal – to present intelligent, informed discussion – let's get rid of Entertainment Tonight.

And while you are at it, American Idol and these sleazy MTV reality TV shows.

And maybe BET as well.

Don't let this guy fool you, folks. The Fairness Doctrine is not about intelligent, informed discussion. It is about power – the power sought by all despots to shut down the opposition.

LIBERALS MORE EMOTIONAL THAN CONSERVATIVES

Sat, 25 Oct 2008 13:58:05 PDT

A new poll by the PewResearchCenter says that Democrats are significantly more engaged and emotionally invested than Republicans in this presidential election.

About 56% of Democrats say they will be "angry" if Barack Obama loses the election compared with only 20% of Republicans.

Angry? I drop-dead guarantee you that if Barack Obama loses in 11 days there is going to be serious violence in urban areas.

Now some of you less-educated people out there are going to suggest that I'm saying this because the people engaging in violence will be black. Well, I'll tell you something that many people will not be able to understand.

It won't be race that will bring the disturbances and riots on .. it will be the urban culture of violence. I'm not a racist .. I'm a culturalist. There .. that ought to keep some of you thinking for a while.

Well this is something I have been saying for years ... only this time, people seem to be acting on their emotion.

I remember reading a while ago about a study by Drew Westen, a psychologist and brain researcher at EmoryUniversity in Atlanta?

At an ultra-left wing "Take Back America" convention, Weston presented his theory that Democrats must tap into the emotions of their constituents in order to win them over.

Don't bog them down with the facts. Don't bother explaining to them how Barack Obama's tax policies are going to kill small businesses in this country.

Don't bother telling them the pitfalls of government-run healthcare. Just appeal to their blind emotions ... and you've got their vote.

Meanwhile, on the other side you are getting headlines like this from the mainstream media: "Ugly election incidents show lingering US racism."

Give me a big-time break.

SOME PEOPLE SHOULDN'T VOTE

Sat, 25 Oct 2008 13:18:18 PDT

I wrote this and posted it on Bakersfield.com and thought I'd share it with you here as my first post:

FROM JAZ McKAY

The common belief is that when voter turn out is low that is a bad thing. I disagree. It's not a matter of how many people vote its a matter of who is doing the voting. People with no true understanding of the issues or who are uninformed about the candidates should not be allowed to vote. Bottom line - stupid people should be prevented from entering the voting booth.

Our country has been plagued with stupid people corrupting society and bastardizing the value of life for all Americans. The intellectually handicapped have been reproducing at a substantially greater rate than those of the informed and intelligent.

There should be a litmus test that determines voter eligibility. I would suggest that if you do not know who your own representatives are you're too stupid to vote.

If you don't know who the Vice President is you're too stupid to vote.

If you don't know which is the majority party in congress you're too stupid to vote.

If you don't know who the Secretary of State is you're too stupid to vote.

If you don't know that the first Tuesday of November is voting day in presidential elections you're too stupid to vote.

By the way, if you can't pass this simple internet test you shouldn't vote. Check out http://dontvote.org/

But now I'll take it a step further, if your on the government dole you shouldn't be allowed to vote. If you're on welfare of any kind you should not be allowed to vote.

Remember this quote attributed to the Scottish author Alexander Tytler:

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse (money-benefits) from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years."

He was dead on! We're seeing that today with the popularity of Obama.

Furthermore, if you can't prove who you are you should not be allowed to vote. You must show ID to vote. And remember that the only people who whine about voter ID laws are Democrats. Why is that? Simple, most illegally cast votes are cast for Democrats. Democrats have been at the forefront of every move to loosen voting restrictions and to counter any attempt to combat voter fraud.

Voter fraud is a reality, and across this country most of the votes that are illegally cast are cast for Democrats. It is Democrats who are driving the demands that non-citizens be allowed to vote in local elections.

It is Democrats who are even insisting that illegal aliens be permitted to vote in some areas. It is Democrats who have opposed each and every move, no matter where, to attempt to clean up the election process by making sure that people who vote are actually legally qualified to vote.

It is Democrats who want felons to vote! They know that felons will, by and large, vote for Democrats. The Democrats are the party of rapists, killers, drug dealers, thieves and gang bangers.

Now .. if you really want to hear Democrats howl ... make it easier for military personnel to vote. Military personnel, you see, usually vote Republican. Fact!