Friday, September 19, 2014

Australian ISIS Plot Reveals Danger of Insecure US-Mexico Border

The fact that our leaders aren't looking at the incident unfolding in Australia and demanding the US border be immediately locked down and secured is no less than treason.

The media is doing their best to ignore this and/or down play it, but it is critical we talk about it and get the word out.

The scale of this plot is what should be worrying all Americans.  ISIS sympathizers in more than 10 suburbs in Australia were plotting to kidnap and behead random citizens across the country and post the videos on youtube.

Why do we know this plot is legit?  It's already happened in the UK when a recent Muslim convert cut off the head of an 82 yr old grandmother in broad daylight:

He also know ISIS has been caught along the US/Mexico border at least twice in the past few days:

If one American dies by ISIS on US soil, everyone of these amnesty loving, open borders advocates needs to be held accountable for treason and dereliction of duty.  The border can and should be secured and they are willfully risking the lives of American citizens to play politics and to pander to unscrupulous crony capitalists.

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Stats Don't Lie, Well Unless You Are Talking About Stats on Illegals

What's wrong with this picture of Texas' 10 most wanted?

When the government says 9 of these 10 men are white, it's no wonder they continue to claim there are only 11 million illegals in the country.  Too bad Greg Orman wants to give them all amnesty.

Friday, September 5, 2014

Walking While White

I'll be patiently waiting for Eric Holder's announcement of a federal civil rights investigation.

Thursday, September 4, 2014

Jean Schodorf Wages War on Women in Kansas

Leave it to Jean Schodorf, a wealthy, liberal Democrat fighting to unseat Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach to try and play the female discrimination card.

Women 4 Kansas is another far left, liberal political organization dressed up as an advocacy group that doesn't feel the need to comply with campaign finance law, despite being created in April of 2013 with the express purpose of electing a new governor and secretary of state, the organization has not filed one single campaign finance report.

So, it should come as no surprise that Jean Schodorf chose one a Women 4 Kansas campaign event it to falsely accuse Kris Kobach of misogyny in order to bolster her street credit with man hating liberal voters.
"Let me read you a quote that has stuck with me, and I quote, 'I can’t imagine how many widows are voting for their dead husbands in communities like I lived in. Yes, it happens all the time.
These words were not spoken by some misogynist from one hundred years ago.  They were spoken in April of this year by Kris Kobach, the current secretary of state when asked about the most common form of voter fraud.  'Yeah,' Kris Kobach says, 'women voting for their dead husbands happens all the time.
There is a war on women being waged in Kansas today," said Jean Schodorf.
There is no other way to describe these comments as anything but a bold faced lie and you can view her making them here.  Schodorf should be ashamed of herself.  She is a disgrace to women who have truly suffered from gender discrimination.

Not only is the conversation, Schodorf referring to not being portrayed accurately, as you can hear for yourself below.  But, Kris Kobach wasn't even the one who made the comment about widows' husbands voting.

In April of this year Kris Kobach appeared as a guest on the Joyce Kaufman radio show, which broadcasts from Florida where she lives.  The host of the show was the one who made the rhetorical remarks about widows' voting on behalf of their deceased spouses after relaying a story from her own life about continually receiving absentee ballots for her deceased mother.
"My Mother passed away in 2010 and in the end I was carrying for her and we were living together.  I still get absentee ballots.  So one day I contacted the secretary.. supervisor of elections for Broward County on my show and I explained the dilema to her about how I was still getting these ballots. And now on the air she said, 'I will take care of that,' and now my most recent certification for my mother to vote came last month.  I mean I can't even get it stripped off.  I can't imagine how many widows are voting for there dead husbands in communities like I lived in," said Joyce Kaufman.
You can here those comments at about the 4:25 mark in this audio clip:

Secretary Kobach then responds to Kaufman's anecdote by confirming that ballots being cast by deceased voters are the most common form of voter fraud.  He followed up by saying that voting in two states using absentee ballots is the second and votes cast by illegal aliens being the third.

And you know what?  He's right.

A 2010 study conducted by the Kansas Watchdog found that not only were deceased voters being left on the roles, but, and you guessed it, they had been casting votes long after their death.
"From the 1,966 potential dead registered voters a check was made between the death date and the date the last ballot was cast.  This resulted in 75 potential “dead voters.”"
If even just one of those 75 potentially dead voters was in deed voter fraud it is a problem.  In this country every citizen's vote matters, and in many cases that mantra has been proven true, like in a somewhat recent Missouri Democrat primary race in which Rizzo lost by one vote.  If even one fraudulent ballot is allowed to be cast it negates the legitimate vote cast by honest citizens and disenfranchises the rest of the legal voters in the state.

Not only is Schodorf disgusting for lying to women and trying to play gender warfare with them (I can only assume she is doing so because she believes they are too stupid or lazy to check into her lies and she knows the media certainly won't) but she is doubly wrong for Kansas as the entire platform she is running on is about making it easier for Democrats to cheat and steal elections.

Jean Schodorf is just plain wrong Kansas or any other state for that matter.

League of Women Voters Says Its Too Hard for Illegals to Vote in Kansas

The League of Women Voters, whose name sounds more like a bad comic book than a legitimate political organization, is doing all the can to try and find anyone who claims to have been unable to cast a vote because of Kansas' Voter ID law.

The problem they are having is that no one is complaining.  No one is out there saying they were unable to vote.  So instead, the League of Sexist Women Voters are out trying to hunt down what they claim are 20,000 voters who attempted to register in KS but have not completed their registration due to being unable to prove their citizenship.

A spokesperson for the group told the Lawrence Journal world that these registrants won't take their calls, won't return voice mails and they won't respond to their letters or emails.

Yet, the Kabal of Women Voters still expects us to believe there is a problem with Voter ID.

Oh, but they have proof.  Leave it to the LJW to find the one rich, politically connected, white lady working in academia and spending the majority of her time in DC to have a voter registration problem because of her inability to prove her citizenship.

That is proof of something, for sure.  You might even believe it is proof of it being difficult to register to vote in KS except for the fact she did prove her citizenship and is fully registered to vote in the state.  Turns out, according to the Kansas Secretary of State's office, the issues with her registration had nothing to do with the voter ID law at all and were all about her recent legal name change and her failure to complete the citizenship status question that is on every single voter registration form in the entire country.

The disingenuous nature of this claim is laughable.  I am curious, did the LJW bother to see if Marci Nielsen was also registered to vote in DC and whether she had been casting ballots there?  Ah, why would they bother doing that?  It doesn't fit the false narrative they are colluding to create.

Of the very few people who are having issues with their registration, the SOS office both calls and mails letters to them reminding them to complete their registration.  The League of Disgraced Women say that isn't enough.
"Some people are so busy just trying to provide a living for themselves and their family, and that one more thing they have to do is just too much. And some people, it is just apathy and they think it just doesn't matter," King said.
I wonder if the League of Their Own Voters were concerned with how busy American citizens were when the federal government was forcing them to go online and buy insurance plans they may not want nor need?

In the end, you can rest assured that the reason the Legion of Broom is having such a difficult time getting results from their campaign to prove Voter ID disenfranchises voters is because it doesn't and the people are their list should be on it because they aren't citizens and should not be casting ballots in the state.

But, what more would you expect from an organization that is supposedly about women voters, yet happily accepts illegal aliens among its membership.

One can't help but wonder if we aren't seeing a case of illegal collusion between the League of Crotchety Old White Ladies and Jean Schodorf, Democrat candidate for KS Secretary of State.  With the League not being a registered PAC with the state of Kansas, one has to wonder about the legality of any such collusion.

Surely her past position with the organization as their Vice President wouldn't present any opportunity for collusion?

Surely the League's convenient press releases touting their position on Voter ID isn't aligning with Schodorf's 'I was for it before I was against it" position on the issue to further her candidacy?

In the meantime, I will just sit back and contemplate the irony of an old white, liberal woman running a sexist, anti-male campaign, to try and be the state's secretary.

Wednesday, September 3, 2014

Paul Davis Thinks Pedophiles Aren't That Bad

"Thanks Jeff [Montague]. You're not so bad yourself," is how Democrat Paul Davis responds to praise he received from a known sex offender who prays on kids in the public school system in his own campaign ad.

Copies of Mr. Montague's arrest record and other investigations can be found here, here, and here.

Are these the kind of Kansas values Democrats find so appealing?

Friday, May 23, 2014

Americans Finally Getting Truth About Benghazi Attack

Emails gathered in recent weeks by Judicial Watch and Darrell Issa's House investigation are finally bringing to light the truth surrounding the Benghazi attack cover-up.

To understand why and how the evidence reveals a premeditated cover up one must look back at what was going on at the time.  This is something Democrats, aided by a complicit media, hope you will not do and the reason why they have delayed and pushed back against any investigation in the hopes that people will forget certain events or fail to make the connections.

The Benghazi attack occurred on September 11, 2012, less than 2 months for Obama's critical re-election campaign.  In the days leading up to the attack Gallup had polls showing Romney within 1 point of the president and Real Clear Politics showed a virtual dead heat.

All election long Obama had been running around the country spiking the football, as he called it, proclaiming victory for assassinating Osama bin Laden and putting, "al qaeda on the run".

We know in the days and weeks leading up to the attack that Obama had been skipping his regular intelligence briefings, saying he reads them on his iPad.  Those briefings contained highly credible evidence of impending attacks across the Middle East on the anniversary of 9/11.

In emails released a few weeks ago to Judicial Watch through a Freedom of Information Act request, we know the White House was very concerned with not letting people connect the Benghazi attack on Obama's failed foreign policy and instead wanted them to focus on a an Internet video for inciting protests in the region.

While the emails came after the attack, but before Susan Rice went on the Sunday morning talk shows  to tell the White Houses version of the story five days later, they reveal a White House that was critically aware of the political ramifications of terrorist attacks against American facilities.

Armed with the knowledge of likely attacks and wanting to mitigate any negative blow back to the president's re-election campaign from any attack, the White House crafted a strategy to get out in front.  The plan they landed on was a poorly made Internet video that hardly anyone had seen up to that point.

On the morning of September 11th, and hours before any protests or attack occurred, the US State Department officials in Cairo released a statement apologizing to Muslims for the Internet video:
"The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions."
In response, and as if on cue, Muslims in Cairo gathered outside the embassy in protest.

Not long after the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi came under attack by Al Qaeda forces.

This is where the White House and Democrats try and make the claim that they believed the attack was another protest about the video.  The claimed it was the CIA who told them it was caused by the video and that that is why they ordered Susan Rice to blame the attack on the video.

But an email released just this morning to the House investigative committee reveals the White House put the blame on the video almost immediately after the attack began and long before the CIA presented them with facts surrounding the cause of the attack.

In the email White House officials are quoted as saying they reached out to YouTube regarding the ramifications of posting the video.
“White House is reaching out to UTube to advise ramifications of the posting of the Pastor Jon Video.”

The email is yet another piece of evidence that reveals the White House had made up its mind about using the video as cover long before any facts were known about the Benghazi attack.  It also proves that we have not yet learned all the facts.

The evidence is, at the very least, circumstantial enough to warrant a deeper investigation like that which will be carried out by the House Select Committee.  Who crafted the white wash strategy?  Was the president aware?  Where was he during the Benghazi attack?  Which, if any, laws were broken and by whom?

One thing we do now know for sure, we know we haven't been told the truth.

The Political Reason Behind the FCC's Decision to Reverse Course on Net Neutrality

In 2005, under pressure from cable companies and entrenched phone monopolies the FCC ruled that next generation Internet services like fiber optic connections were "information services" and therefor not open to regulation by the Federal Communications Commission.  The motivating factor behind the ruling was to avoid forcing cable and phone companies from having to provide wholesale access to their infrastructure, as was required by the 1996 Telecommunications Act.

The result of the decision was the extinction of the independent Internet Service Provider.  For most Americans their choices for accessing the Internet dropped from more than 7,000 to one or two, their local cable or phone monopoly.

With their virtual stranglehold on the last mile in place, AT&T began a propaganda campaign alleging Internet companies like Netflix and Google were stealing from them.  They argued these companies were not paying them to access their customers and that they should be forced to pay some kind of fee.  (I've explained numerous times in the past why the argument made by AT&T is pure fiction.)

Immediately Internet entrepreneurs became alarmed.  They recognized that AT&T's plan to create a "fast lane," where companies with deep pockets could pay a fee to get priority access to customers, would force prices to consumers to rise and stifle competition and innovation.  They responded with their own plan, Net Neutrality, which would prevent Internet providers like AT&T from effectively throttle traffic from competitors to their own TV and other services and force them to treat all traffic equally.

After allegations and admissions from cable companies like Comcast, who began selling Microsoft preferential traffic priority, the FCC  issued a cease and desist order by the FCC for blocking BitTorrent traffic.  In 2010, a federal court sided with Comcast, saying the FCC lacked the authority to regulate the Internet.

The FCC, responded later that year by enacting tough Net Neutrality rules.  They were immediately sued by Verizon, the phone monopoly that controls the Eastern half of the United States.  Again, the courts ruled against the FCC citing the FCC's own decision classifying next generation communications infrastructure as "Information service."

So, why now, after multiple attempts, do a complete 180 on Net Neutrality?  Has the problem gone away?  What has changed?

The answer boils down to what most decisions come down to... power.  Two federal court rulings and the FCC's own past decisions had taken away the federal government's ability to regulate the Internet.

Some members of congress and the current administration have been pressuring the FCC and federal other bureaucracies to start regulating speech on the Internet because conservative sources like the Drudge Report and other blogs are presenting a challenge to their ability to control the message on various scandals and issues.

These tactics should come as no surprise to those who have been paying attention, as Judicial Watch has uncovered numerous emails and documents revealing Democrats like Carl Levin and Elijah Cummings were pressuring the IRS to illegally scrutinize Tea Party groups in order to affect the 2012 election.

By reversing course, the FCC is able to issue a ruling regulating the Internet that cable and phone monopolies will not challenge in court.  The result of which sets a precedence that recognizes the FCC's authority to regulate the Internet and, in turn, their ability to regulate the Drudge Report and other conservative web sites.

Wednesday, May 21, 2014

Obama is Mad as Hell

President Obama is an angry little man.  Don't take my word for it, just look at what he keeps telling us.
OBAMA MAY 15, 2013: It's inexcusable, and Americans are right to be angry about it, and I am angry about it.
OBAMA OCTOBER 21, 2013: Nobody's madder than me about the fact that the website isn't workin'.
OBAMA OCTOBER 18, 2011: It's very upsetting to me that somebody showed such bad judgment, that they would allow something like that to happen.
OBAMA APRIL 15, 2012: If it turns out some of the allegations that have been made in the press are confirmed, then of course I'll be angry. 
OBAMA MAY 13, 2013:  I've got no patience with it, I will not tolerate it, and we'll make sure that, uh, we find out exactly what happened.
OBAMA JUNE 3, 2010: I am furious at this entire situation. I would love to just spend a lot of my time venting and yellin' at people.
OBAMA MAY 15, 2013: We're going to hold the responsible parties accountable. 
OBAMA MAY 16, 2013: The minute I found out about it, then my main focus is making sure that we get the thing fixed.
OBAMA MARCH 18, 2009: I think people are right to be angry.  I'm angry!
OBAMA MAY 21, 2014:  I will not stand for it, not as commander-in-chief ... None of us should. [I]t's dishonorable, it is disgraceful, and I will not tolerate it. Period.
I guess we shouldn't be surprised that Obama is moody, after all, he hasn't slept in 5 years, having promised to not rest.

Of course we all no how good Obama's promises are.

Sentor Roberts Touts Endorsement From Open Border, Internet Sales Tax Advocate

I am not entirely sure the endorsement of an organization that actively works for open borders, job killing free trade agreements, and new Internet sales taxes is something a Kansas conservative should be proud of...