...And the Horse You Rode In On Nancy !

239 - 183

--

Is the Election Fraud Conducted By Kansas City Somalis a Prelude To the Democrats Strategy To Hijack the November Elections?

This article, from American Thinker, is disturbing - to say the least. It deals with an election primary in Kansas City that pitted a strongly conservative Democrat against a far, far left candidate for the Democrats - the leftist won ...but HOW he won is what is sending chills through the conservative community in America.

First, let me just say that most of us have not forgotten what happened regarding the voter fraud of 2008's Presidential election - the fact that ACORN was busted for voter fraud with many of its officials in several states now serving time in prison should be enough to shatter the dreams of all American voters. Let's throw in the debacle that occurred with the "election" of Senator Al Franken in Minnesota and there is cause for real concern on what the Left will do in November.

Let's look at what happened in Kansas City:

Through a combination of massive, Somali-driven voter fraud, stunning Election Board incompetence, and the willful blindness of the Kansas City Star, machine Democrat J.J. Rizzo managed to beat conservative Democrat Will Royster by one vote in a Missouri State House primary on August 3.

There is no Republican running in this heavily Democratic, multi-ethnic Kansas City district. The Democratic nominee will face only a seriously outgunned Libertarian in the November election, and truth be told, Royster may be to the right of the Libertarian.

Royster, a retired Navy fighter pilot and all-around good citizen, asks a fundamental question: "If we won't let Somalis hijack our ships, why do we let them hijack our elections?" As many as a hundred Somalis voted, nearly all of them illegally, likely all of them for Royster's opponent, in a House district in which only 1,300 people showed up to vote.

First to testify was Lindy Hobkins, a Republican supervisory election judge. As she related, a group of Somalis came into her Kansas City election site led by one Somali man.

"They were unable to communicate on the most basic levels," said Hobkins of the Somalis. To help his voters along, the leader "left the premises, went outside to where the electioneers are out at the appropriate space allotted for them, and he brought in a sign for Mr. Rizzo." Hobkins continued: he "held it up and pointed at it and said this one, this one, this one."

Hobkins knew the law. "How could they be registered to vote," she asked Raymond, "if they did not know how to speak English on any level?"

At the end of the day, Judge Stephen Nixon, a product of the same machinery that produced the Election Board, ruled against Royster. No new election, no serious recount.

So, that is what the voting process has come to in America? A busload of non-English speaking immigrants are brought into a polling place and a "concerned citizen" holds up a sign in their native language and tells them which candidate to vote for? And just HOW did those Somalis get registered? Hmmm....you don't suppose that "concerned citizen" might have taken care of that FOR them do you?

What we can't lose sight of in this particular situation is that many, many of the races for House seats across this country literally come down to margins of victory less than 500 votes...some closer to 100 votes. When you consider that a Democrat could repel a Republican challenger by 200 votes out of say, 10,000 votes cast...well, you can see what a strong voter registration of fraudulent voters could mean.

So, I ask the question of all of you. Let's just say that a number of races that have been called for Republicans in November turn out to be won by Democrats ... how many of you are going to wonder just what happened? And what if fraud is found like it was in 2008? When ACORN did its dirty deed in 2008, most people agree that it didn't involve the kind of numbers to have affected the actual election of Barack Hussein Obama, but what about a Leftist who wins by 115 votes and takes a House seat away from the Conservative? Can this country survive that kind of tainting to our election process?

Sneak Preview: The Hijacking of the 2010 Election



Through a combination of massive, Somali-driven voter fraud, stunning Election Board incompetence, and the willful blindness of the Kansas City Star, machine Democrat J.J. Rizzo managed to beat conservative Democrat Will Royster by one vote in a Missouri State House primary on August 3.

There is no Republican running in this heavily Democratic, multi-ethnic Kansas City district. The Democratic nominee will face only a seriously outgunned Libertarian in the November election, and truth be told, Royster may be to the right of the Libertarian.

What the Democratic machine and the Star, which endorsed Rizzo, did not count on was for the intrepid Royster to challenge the election in court. In so doing, he has provided a sneak preview on how a desperate Democratic Party will attempt to neutralize the will of the people this November, and not just in Kansas City.

Royster, a retired Navy fighter pilot and all-around good citizen, asks a fundamental question: "If we won't let Somalis hijack our ships, why do we let them hijack our elections?" As many as a hundred Somalis voted, nearly all of them illegally, likely all of them for Royster's opponent, in a House district in which only 1,300 people showed up to vote.

The trial on September 7 in Jackson County, Missouri Circuit Court revealed several disturbing trends, some of which can be corrected by election day, some of which cannot.

First to testify was Lindy Hobkins, a Republican supervisory election judge. As she related, a group of Somalis came into her Kansas City election site led by one Somali man.

"They were unable to communicate on the most basic levels," said Hobkins of the Somalis. To help his voters along, the leader "left the premises, went outside to where the electioneers are out at the appropriate space allotted for them, and he brought in a sign for Mr. Rizzo." Hobkins continued: he "held it up and pointed at it and said this one, this one, this one."

In a disturbing little twist, David Raymond, the attorney for the Kansas City Election Board, grilled Hobkins as though she were a hostile witness. After she acknowledged that the Somalis were all somehow registered to vote, Raymond asked snidely, "Do you believe these voters should be disenfranchised?"

Hobkins was more than a match for Raymond. She and her husband had been helping refugees resettle. "The biggest deterrent to them becoming citizens, because they all want to be American citizens when they come here," she noted, "is that they do not have a handle on the language to be able to pass the test."

I checked the rules for citizenship. According to the official site for French-speakers (sorry, I don't speak Somali), an individual has to "connaître l'anglais et être au courant de l'histoire et du gouvernement des États-Unis." This translates to "know the English language and be current in the history and government of the United States." I cannot imagine that the requirements for Somalis are any different.

Hobkins knew the law. "How could they be registered to vote," she asked Raymond, "if they did not know how to speak English on any level?" Other than Hobkins, Royster, and Royster's attorney, no one else involved -- the Democratic Party, the Star, the Election Board, the trial judge -- expressed the slightest interest in the answer to this question.

Wendy Jones, an election judge at a separate polling place, provided even more damning testimony. "Did you notice groups of Somali voters entering the premises?" Royster's attorney asked. "Oh my gosh, all day long," she answered. When asked how many voters she saw, Jones answered, "To be honest, more than 50. That's the truth, your honor, more than 50."

According to the law, as the Republican co-director of the Election Board would testify, a person "with a disability or who cannot read or write" must state his disability under oath, sign and date a voter assistance card, and then have two judges sign and date the card. This voter can be assisted only by a judge or by a person the voter has sworn to be a family member. This procedure is usually reserved for the blind or seriously disabled.

Of the fifty-plus Somalis at Jones' polling place, not a single one was asked to sign a voter assistance card despite the fact that they all needed assistance from their "interpreters." Said Jones, "I witnessed myself seeing [the interpreters] fill out the ballots, actually fill out the ballots and actually tell the people ... where to fill it out at, what to sign."

When the interpreters, four of them, were asked why the Somali voters needed help, according to Jones, "Someone said they were blind, some of them said they couldn't read, some of them said they couldn't write. These are the excuses all day long that we had for these four individuals to vote with them and for them."

When Jones appealed to the Democratic supervisory judge for help, he reportedly told her, "You know, we all just want to make a little money here and just get out, just make the best of it and just -- let's go home."

Several other election judges testified, and none of them disputed what Jones and Hobkins said. A little unnerving was that other than Hobkins and Jones, the election judges had a hard time getting their nouns and verbs to agree. The collective ignorance of election law from top to bottom in the Kansas City Election Board stuns the observer.

One Somali did testify. An employee of the Somali Foundation, Abdul Kadir Sheikh told the court, under oath, of course, that he had taken Election Day off work because his wife was expecting a baby that day. Sheikh, allegedly a citizen, said that he had gone to Jones' polling site to vote but could not find his name on the voter rolls and so did not vote.

It just so happened, though, that while at the polling place, another Somali man approached Sheikh and asked for help voting. Sheikh obliged. That was it. As it happened, his baby was not born that day after all. "We didn't have any experience," Shiekh told the court. It was his first child.

One doubts that Sheikh will ever be challenged on his word, but Royster had already collected affidavits from two other poll watchers at that same site. Said one, "I personally witnessed Abdul Kadir Sheikh escort approximately (30) Somali voters into the polling place." A second person saw Sheik "sign their names in the registration book." This person claimed to have seen "more than 30" such people.

At the end of the day, Judge Stephen Nixon, a product of the same machinery that produced the Election Board, ruled against Royster. No new election, no serious recount.

Nixon took the same position that Rizzo's attorney had taken in his question to the Republican co-director. "Should a qualified voter, an American citizen, if you will, should they be disenfranchised, that is, should their vote not count because a judge forgot to initial the ballot[?]" As Nixon saw it, these good Somali citizens should not be "disenfranchised" -- the Democrat word du jour--because of multiple judges' errors. Royster is appealing.

The Kansas City Star has given this challenge only the slightest coverage. And in no article in a print edition has the word "Somali" appeared in relationship to the controversy.

In November, rest assured, the Somali vote and that of others of dubious citizenship will be turned against Republicans. There is a way for readers to fight this. Call your local Election Board today. Sign up to be a judge or a poll watcher. Ask for an inner-city precinct. And make sure you know the law better than your Democratic counterpart does. It won't be hard.

As Predicted, ACORN Rears Its Ugly Head Again...Under Cover of New Organizational Names

As I had predicted in my post here on March 23rd, ACORN has reassembled after "dissolving" operations and is apparently looking to decentralize and operate under separate organizational names, state by state.

Considering the critical nature of the 2010 mid term elections in November, you didn't really think the Marxists in power would give up the advantage of additional election fraud votes, did you?

From the report here at the Daily Caller:

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) said in a March 20 statement it was disbanding in the face of “well-orchestrated, relentless, well-funded, right-wing attacks that are unprecedented since the McCarthy era.”
But now its multi-headed progeny are rising up like zombies, Republicans on the House oversight committee say in a new draft report obtained by The Daily Caller.
“This is all a shell game,” Kurt Bardella, California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa’s press secretary said in an interview. The report says asset transfers to the new groups “appear to be an effort to protect the survival of the organization as well as a consolidated effort by senior ACORN officials to consolidate resources.”
In California, ACORN transferred all its assets to Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE); Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut chapters have consolidated under the banner New England United for Justice – and so on.
In each case, a group with the same assets and staff is operating at the same address with the same mission as the ACORN branch that once operated there.

By doing this, ACORN will have successfully distanced itself from a central power and direct linkage to the Democrat party and the Marxist operatives who helped coordinate the election frauds of 2008 and at the same time, they will probably begin a fresh new funding request in individual states hoping that unwitting souls have no clue who they are. Let's take a look, state by state, at the names of the newly rebranded frauds:

In California, ACORN is now the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (“ACCE”)
In Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, ACORN is New England United for Justice.
In New York, ACORN is New York Communities for Change.
In Arkansas, ACORN has become Arkansas Community Organizations (“ACO”).
In Louisiana, ACORN is “A Community Voice”.
In Missouri, ACORN is Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment (“MORE”).
In Washington state, ACORN is Organization United for Reform (“OUR”) Washington.
In Minnesota, ACORN is Minnesota Neighborhoods Organizing for Change.
In Pennsylvania, ACORN has become the Pennsylvania Communities Organizing for Change (“PCOC”) and Pennsylvania Neighborhoods for Social Justice, Inc.
In Texas, ACORN is now the Texas Organizing Project.
ACORN Housing Corporation (“AHC”) has renamed itself Affordable Housing Centers of America, Inc.

So, there you have it...the snakes of ACORN all dressed up in their new duds. I wonder if the Justice Department is investigating the non-profit applications for each of these new entities? Hahahaha. I know, I know....silly me.

Zombie-like, ‘disbanded’ ACORN coming back to life in form of new groups


The group that schemed with undercover journalists over how to claim underage prostitutes as “dependents” for tax purposes wants you to think it has disbanded.

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) said in a March 20 statement it was disbanding in the face of “well-orchestrated, relentless, well-funded, right-wing attacks that are unprecedented since the McCarthy era.”

But now its multi-headed progeny are rising up like zombies, Republicans on the House oversight committee say in a new draft report obtained by The Daily Caller.

“This is all a shell game,” Kurt Bardella, California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa’s press secretary said in an interview. The report says asset transfers to the new groups “appear to be an effort to protect the survival of the organization as well as a consolidated effort by senior ACORN officials to consolidate resources.”

In California, ACORN transferred all its assets to Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE); Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut chapters have consolidated under the banner New England United for Justice – and so on.

In each case, a group with the same assets and staff is operating at the same address with the same mission as the ACORN branch that once operated there.

ACORN representatives in several states and ACORN media contacts in Washington did not reply to a request for comment by press time.

Changing the names of the organizations is important because it could allow the organization to escape accountability for scandals that prompted Congress to defund the group. (A federal court ruled the law defunding ACORN was unconstitutional).

“Rebranding is an important legal strategy for ACORN to survive. By changing the names of its state and local affiliates, ACORN can rebuild its tax-exempt contributions under the guise of its superficially new and separate corporations as well as its public image,” Issa’s report said.

The legal arrangements show the new groups are not in any significant way different from the previous chapters.

“These rebrandings and transactions indicate that local chapters are not forcibly separating themselves from ACORN, but are attempting to reinvent themselves through a process done in full coordination with ACORN and its national senior leadership including [ACORN chief executive] Bertha Lewis,” the report said.

The asset transfer in California is case in point. Under the terms of the agreement, which was signed by Lewis and ACORN big-wig Amy Schur, ACCE pays Lewis $9,000 for all of the ACORN California chapter’s assets, including property, donor e-mail lists, and a database of dues-paying members.

The full list of new ACORN groups is as follows:

In California, ACORN is now the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (“ACCE”)
In Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, ACORN is New England United for Justice.
In New York, ACORN is New York Communities for Change.
In Arkansas, ACORN has become Arkansas Community Organizations (“ACO”).
In Louisiana, ACORN is “A Community Voice”.
In Missouri, ACORN is Missourians Organizing for Reform and Empowerment (“MORE”).
In Washington state, ACORN is Organization United for Reform (“OUR”) Washington.
In Minnesota, ACORN is Minnesota Neighborhoods Organizing for Change.
In Pennsylvania, ACORN has become the Pennsylvania Communities Organizing for Change (“PCOC”) and Pennsylvania Neighborhoods for Social Justice, Inc.
In Texas, ACORN is now the Texas Organizing Project.
ACORN Housing Corporation (“AHC”) has renamed itself Affordable Housing Centers of America, Inc.

Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison has Challengers for 2010

by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook

Barb Davis White (R-MN) and Lynne Torgerson (D-MN) are challenging Keith Ellison's U.S. House seat for the state's 5th district in Minnesota. One of these women must remove him from Congress.

Keith Ellison and Barack Obama

Keith Ellison, who is also Keith Hakim, is the first Muslim to be sent to Congress from any state, and the first to be sworn on the Koran. He is an attorney, a Democrat and an Black convert to Islam. He was raised Roman Catholic in Detroit and is a supporter of the Nation of Islam's leader, Louis Farrakhan (aka Louis Eugene Walcott).

Ellison is a fundraiser for the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). Nihad Awad, the head of CAIR and James Yee, a Muslim Guantanamo cleric were featured speakers at Ellison's Congressional fundraiser.

The fact that the FBI has broken all ties with CAIR, saying CAIR is not "an appropriate liasion partner," should be enough to divert Keith Ellison's affection for the organization. This report quotes an FBI assistant director, Richard C. Powers, saying the FBI is unsure whether the relationship between CAIR and Hamas ever was severed. So, with all of CAIR's presence on Capitol Hill, with their mammoth media blitzs and lobbying efforts, with their denial of terrorist ties, the FBI cannot support their claims...yet CAIR continues to walk the halls of Congress...and Keith Ellison continues to support the organization.

Okay, there are two women committed to running about Keith Ellison (aka Keith Hakim) in Minnesota. I'm a conservative, and so I am interested in the candidacy of Barb Davis White, but assuming this is a very blue district, I'm also interested in Lynne Torgerson, a Democrat - because neither of these women are Muslim. One of them must unseat Ellison.

Barb Davis White

Republican Barb Davis White is 49-years-old and single. She lost to Keith Ellison in record numbers according to the The Minnesota Independent, but she will "give it another go in 2010." White is Black and an evangelical minister. In the video below you'll hear her speak of the total lack of coverage of her previous run against Ellson  saying it was virtually impossible to get reporting on her candidacy:

A staunch conservative in the state’s most progressive district, White has burnished her credentials this year through involvement with the local Tea Party movement. “I want to be listed as a Christian and a patriotic right-wing conservative American,” she told Tea Partiers in April.

The online news souce linked above said Davis has had ongoing difficulty with her FEC filings. No detail was given. In the video below, you'll see that she is a dynamic speaker and a plain talker. Find White on Facebook here.

Minnesota's 5th District is 73.5% White, 12.9% Black, 6.0% Hispanic, 5.2% Asian, 1.6%Native American and 3.2% other. She was recently chosen for the Frederick Douglass 2010 Freedom Calendar.

Before saying more about Torgerson, this is my disclaimer. She is not Muslim, she will not support CAIR or raise money for CAIR, and likewise, CAIR will not raise funds for Torgerson. This should give the good people of the 11th District of Minnesota pause to rethink their vote. Islamic faith cannot abide peacefully within the hall of Congress.

 Lynne Torgerson

The Huffington Post reports "the growth of anti-Muslim sentiment in Minnesota." That's a good thing, in my opinion. Here's a quote from Holger at Holger Awakens in August 2008 in a post about Somali immigrants, the tuberculosis they brought with them and their habit of never, with one exception, integrating into society:

...the one documented act of assimilation into Minnesota society by the Somalis was in 2006 when they massed at the voting precincts in Minneapolis to cast their votes. And who did they help elect? The mouthpiece for the Nation of Islam, Keith Ellison.

According to Lynne Torgerson's website, she believe that life begins at conception:

My views regarding abortion are consistent with the Catholic Church.  Life begins at conception.

With all due respect, abortion is simply wrong.  I do not condemn those who have undergone such a procedure, but rather, I have compassion for them.  Women are traumatized by the abortions they have had, I believe, for the rest of their lives.  Also, any women who has suffered a miscarriage is terribly grieved, and, knows that she lost her baby, her child.  Thus, I simply believe it is wrong and would vote to oppose legislation supporting abortion.

I would also oppose legislation which supports using embryonic stem cells for research or other purposes.

It is not appropriate for us to decide to sacrifice one life for another.

She wants a strong Homeland Security, and goes wobbly when she talks about animals and being "green on the environment." We are all "green" on the environment - but we differ on the measures necessary to keep the environment green.

Torgerson is for a health care public option, but does not want to eliminate the private sector (naive at best), she supports the Second Amendment and is a gunowner, seems to be strong on immigration control (although she wonders a bit as she tries to express her thoughts), she supports Israel, and wants to stop Iran's nuclear aggression. Torgerson wants to "eliminate our dependence...on foreign oil," wants to develop clean energy, keep jobs in America, and she opposes the auto bailout.

When it comes to freedom of speech and freedom religion, Torgerson says that freedom of religion does not include criminal behavior in the name of religion. This gets her to Islam:

And thus, we come to the teachings of Islam, or the Quran.  The Quran actually teaches Muslims to kill people not of their faith, which are labeled infidels, which includes Christians and Jews, as well as people of other faiths.  ("Slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush.  (Sura 9:5)).  This is advocating criminal behavior.  Thus, at a minimum, this portion of the religion of Islam cannot be protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.  It portion is not "religion" recognizable under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.  

The Quran also says that if a person leaves Islam, that that is an offence mandating death.  Recently, a Harvard Muslim Chaplain, Taha Abdul-Basser, stated that apostates (those who leave Islam) should be killed, although he stated that they could only be killed by a legitimate Muslim governmental authority and cannot be performed by a non-state, private actors.   Again, this is advocating criminal behavior.  Again, this is not allowing all people the right to freedom of religion.  Thus, the Quran conflicts with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and our criminal laws.  Thus, the total "religion" of Islam is not fully protectable by our First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Further, evidently, the goal of Islam is to Islamize the entire world, or, global Islam.  I believe there is a term, "umrah" that reflects this goal.  Well, this goal also conflicts with our First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Islam also oppresses women.  That conflicts with the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the United States Constitution.  

And, what do I know of Islam? Well, I know of 911.  Nineteen (19) men from Saudi Arabia, all Muslim, hi-jacked planes, and flew into the two (2) World Trade Towers murdering thousands of people, and tried to fly into our Pentagon, and some believe they also tried to fly an airplane into our White House.  From this, what I perceive is Islam conducting an act of war against my country.  

People say that we can't include the moderate, peace loving Muslims.  Well, I agree.  But, who are they?  They need to stand up and identify themselves loudly and clearly say that they oppose Jihad and terrorism, etc.  Who are these people?  I cannot tell.  It is not for me to go and try and find them.  Rather, it is their duty to stand up and identify themselves, if there are any.

Torgerson cites Ayaan Hirsi Ali's book Infidel and the proof of "repugnant" behavior which is contrary to the First Amendment. She asks and answers "what else do I know of Islam." This strikes me as an earnest question made by a woman sincerely concerned about the threat of Islam and trying to be "real" about it.

 I'll say it again, she is a Democrat who is not Muslim, she will not support CAIR, will not raise funds for CAIR and CAIR will not raise funds for her. Find Torgerson on Facebook here.



Barb Davis White Challenges Keith Ellison in 2010 (video)