October Surprise?

You know, comrades,” says Stalin, “that I think in regard to this: I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this — who will count the votes, and how. 

Boris Bazhanov’s Memoirs of Stalin’s Former Secretary, published in 1992

Sadly, it would seem that several blue states decided the would cut out the middle-man — rather than worry about counting the votes, they’ll simply neglect to send them in a timely fashion.

According to the MOVE Act, the states were supposed to mail out absentee ballots to overseas voters, including military personnel serving in foreign lands, 45 days before an election.  Delaware, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, and Washington State all applied for waivers from the Department of Justice regarding compliance with this act, which were granted, despite the lack of demonstrable hardship that left them unable to comply with the law, which is the standard for granting such a waiver.  In the case of New York, they simply scheduled the primary sufficiently late (four days before the primary) that they couldn’t possible send out the ballots — a little too cute, I’d say.

Of course, the Department of Justice, rather than admonish the states for their failure to comply with the law or demonstrate a real reason they couldn’t comply with their electoral responsibilities, simply handed out the waivers two-a-penny candy.  Now, here we are, nearly a month later and New York *still* has yet to fully comply with the law.

And there isn’t just something rotten in the Big Apple…  Apparently, while the dead might be able to vote in Illinois, their military personnel might not.

Cris Cray, Director of Legislation at the Illinois State Board of Elections, says not all of Illinois’ 110 jurisdictions were compliant with the 2009 Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act (MOVE).

The law requires every state to mail their absentee ballots 45 days prior to Election Day to overseas troops, government employees and other Americans who want to vote from abroad.

Cray says she is currently compiling data from each of Illinois’ jurisdictions to determine which were compliant and which were delinquent. Cray said it’s possible the ballots may not be counted because the state was tardy in sending them out.

Illinois was required to have all of its absentee ballots mailed by Sept. 18, the national deadline. Election officials have until Nov. 15 to count the absentee ballots, which must be postmarked by midnight Nov. 1 to be eligible.

Coincidentally, there are tight races in which the generally more conservative military ballots could make a crucial difference.

Of course, we all know we can rely on the Civil Rights division to protect the rights of our men and women overseas, the same way they protect the rights of every voter here in the United States, right?

Miss me yet?

I know I do. Set aside for the moment that he bought into Nancy Johnson’s outrageously expensive Medicare prescription drug program and try to remember this was the man who saw Islamofascism as a threat to national security and the battle against the terrorists as a war and not a police action. Read more

Seventeen Afghani military officers disappear from Air Force base in Texas

Although the story is quite interesting, this could just be 17 guys who realized the United States was a nice place to settle down, or on the flip side it could be a more nefarious plot. That said, I know the first place we should look for them.

Read more

Obama steps in it – claims troops a “good photo op”

President Obama will tell us his comments fit the mood of the crowd, but when I first heard Obama’s comments in South Korea stating hundreds of troops in uniform was a good photo op, my eyes rolled. Our American forces are not a political tool to be used by politicians in constant campaign mode as a photo op.

Read more

Congress robs the military to pay… themselves

Or, at least, their districts…

Senators diverted $2.6 billion in funds in a defense spending bill to pet projects largely at the expense of accounts that pay for fuel, ammunition and training for U.S. troops, including those fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to an analysis.

Among the 778 such projects, known as earmarks, packed into the bill: $25 million for a new World War II museum at the University of New Orleans and $20 million to launch an educational institute named after the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat.

While earmarks are hardly new in Washington, “in 30 years on Capitol Hill, I never saw Congress mangle the defense budget as badly as this year,” said Winslow Wheeler, a former Senate staffer who worked on defense funding and oversight for both Republicans and Democrats. He is now a senior fellow at the Center for Defense Information, an independent research organization.

Mr. Wheeler, who conducted the study, compared the Obama administration’s requests for funds with the $636 billion spending bill that the Senate passed. He discovered that senators added $2.6 billion in pet projects while spending $4 billion less than the administration requested for fiscal 2010, which began Oct. 1.

Of course, the usual suspects were deeply involved in this pick-pocketing of the military…

Money for the Kennedy Institute was inserted by Mr. Inouye and Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat. Sen. Mary L. Landrieu, Louisiana Democrat, and Sen. David Vitter, Louisiana Republican, sought the funding for the World War II museum.

Whitney Smith, a spokesman for Mr. Kerry, said the earmark was “a worthy investment.”

Would that be the same inebriated fellow who got his daddy to spring him from the Army two years early?  That Ted Kennedy?  The Ted Kennedy who was willing to sell out the US to the Soviets during the Reagen era for a second shot at being elected President?

Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR. The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy.

“On 9-10 May of this year,” the May 14 memorandum explained, “Sen. Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow.” (Tunney was Kennedy’s law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) “The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov.”

Kennedy’s message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. “The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations,” the memorandum stated. “These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.”

Kennedy made Andropov a couple of specific offers.

First he offered to visit Moscow. “The main purpose of the meeting, according to the senator, would be to arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA.” Kennedy would help the Soviets deal with Reagan by telling them how to brush up their propaganda.

Then he offered to make it possible for Andropov to sit down for a few interviews on American television. “A direct appeal … to the American people will, without a doubt, attract a great deal of attention and interest in the country. … If the proposal is recognized as worthy, then Kennedy and his friends will bring about suitable steps to have representatives of the largest television companies in the USA contact Y.V. Andropov for an invitation to Moscow for the interviews. … The senator underlined the importance that this initiative should be seen as coming from the American side.”

That Ted Kennedy?

I think PJ O’Rourke said it best, when he described the government as a “parliament of whores.”  Maybe that best explains their reverence for Teddy, an all-time champion at “playing the game,” along with their willingness to countenance robbing American soldiers in a time of conflict.  It certainly stinks like a whore-house at low tide.

Media Mendacity

Remember the media’s effort to be permitted to photograph returning military caskets during the Bush administration?  Remember how they forced themselves upon the families of the deceased, seeking to cover what they, the media, claimed was an important story?  A story so important that even then-Senator Biden realized it?

“”These young men and women are heroes,” Vice President Biden said in 2004, when he was senator from Delaware. “The idea that they are essentially snuck back into the country under the cover of night so no one can see that their casket has arrived, I just think is wrong.”


Without Bush to harry and hound, the media apparently has lost interest in “this important story,” given the lack of political hay to be made.

“So far this month, 38 American troops have been killed in Afghanistan. For all of 2009, the number is 220 — more than any other single year and more than died in 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 combined.

With casualties mounting, the debate over U.S. policy in Afghanistan is sharp and heated. The number of arrivals at Dover is increasing. But the journalists who once clamored to show the true human cost of war are nowhere to be found.

Now that this has become Obama’s war, especially in Afghanistan, the media has decided that covering this story is no longer important, embargoing it through their silence far more effectively than any Pentagon policy.

Obama: International community should not avoid action during genocide

On the campaign trail in 2007, Senator Obama was having a tough time using the prevention of a genocide in Iraq as a good reason to keep our troops in Iraq. President Obama yesterday insisted the international community should not shy away from acting when a genocide is occurring.

Can someone please ask the president what he means?

I understand that people don’t get the reason why we needed to act – with military intervention – in Iraq while the United States did not act – with military intervention – in places like Darfur. Quite honestly, the United States must first be concerned with the health and security of the United States, and the Middle East takes precedence when it comes to our safety and economy.

That’s a tough pill to swallow when a genocide is happening in Darfur, but what has/is the “international community” done for Darfur? Not much I presume.

Hat tip to Jim Hoft, a.k.a the Gateway Pundit.

Here is the story in the USA Today article from 2007.

Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn’t a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there.

“Well, look, if that’s the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now — where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife — which we haven’t done,” Obama said in an interview with The Associated Press.

“We would be deploying unilaterally and occupying the Sudan, which we haven’t done. Those of us who care about Darfur don’t think it would be a good idea,” he said.

And now from an AP story yesterday, where there was an interesting line dropped in the middle of the story, which I have emphasized.

“Threatening Israel with destruction or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews is deeply wrong and only serves to evoke in the minds of the Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve,” Obama added.

It was a pointed message to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has expressed doubts that 6 million Jews died at the hands of the Nazis and who has urged that Israel be wiped from the map.

“He should make his own visit” to Buchenwald, Obama told NBC in an interview Friday. He added: “I have no patience for people who would deny history.”

Earlier, the president told reporters: “The international community has an obligation, even when it’s inconvenient, to act when genocide is occurring.”

Obama is the first U.S. president to visit Buchenwald, and the stop was personal. A great-uncle helped liberate a nearby satellite camp, Ohrdruf, in early April 1945 just days before other U.S. Army units overran Buchenwald.

Ohrdruf no longer stands. But Buchenwald’s main gate, crematorium, hospital and two guard towers have been kept as a memorial.

What is the president’s definition of action?

Is it strong diplomatic efforts followed by strong military action if diplomacy does not work? Or is it strong diplomatic efforts followed by strongly worded United Nations letters followed by more diplomatic efforts, more letters and the threat of military action.

I’m not implying that President Obama has taken the military option off the table, I’m suggesting that terrorists and our enemies – and yes they are out there – are betting that Obama will not go the military route at all.

It may be a pretty good bet.

Obama administration ignores Constitutional mandated spending

The Constitution clearly states that the role of Congress is to provide for the common defense of the United States. So therefore, the current administration has elected to ignore that requirement and stop all funding for the F-22 Raptor.

I’m not suggesting that we need – or do not need – the F-22 for defense of the country. I honestly do not know, but my interest involves the oath of office taken by Congress and the president, you know, that part about preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States.

So the F-22 gets cut, but $1.7 million goes to a honey bee factory in Weslaco, Texas? What other funding is the administration cutting out of the Pentagon’s budget?

On top of that, we have a government sponsored program to provide free cell phones – including air time – to those in need! Get this crap, with my emphasis in bold.

TracFone Wireless believes that cell phone ownership is a right and an important tool for individual success in today’s world.

Lifeline is a real FCC program. Here’s part of a news release. …

The SafeLink Wireless service will provide eligible low-income households a free cell phone, mobile access to emergency services and free 41 minutes of air time, monthly, for one year. The cell phone offers in-demand features: voicemail, text, call waiting, international calling to over 60 destinations and caller ID.

Back to the F-22… From Hugh Hewitt’s piece in The Washington Examiner, with a hat tip to Hot Air.

Did I mention that the F-22 is shovel ready? Remember all those jobs President Obama wanted to “create or save”? Evidently there is a category of jobs he doesn’t count among those worthy of retention –those on the national security shift.

The piece goes on …

Secretary Gates is providing a little cover for the Pentagon budget-cutters at OMB whose priorities are with increased NEA spending and a new fleet of hybrid cars for the government, but not much. Whether or not his heart is in it won’t and shouldn’t still the sharp criticism headed this budget’s way.

The Obama administration and the Democrat Congress will continue to route funding that is the federal government’s responsibility to programs for which they have no mandate.

We’re loosing our freedom to tyrany on a daily basis with liberals and socialists in control. What will you do?

Losing Faith

Not so much disturbing as it is disheartening. Via Hot Air … a new survey called the General Social Survey asking Americans how they feel about a wide variety of issues shows an declining faith in everything from science and medicine to the press. You will be interested in knowing that the American people show the least amount of faith in “The Press”. But organized religion has not fared well either.

So what, you ask, do the American people put their faith in? Well it ain’t the one. Check it out.

The only major institution to have gained a statistically significant about of trust since 2000 is the military, which is now the most trusted major institution in the country . The gain came as a result, presumably, of 9/11, with the number of Americans expressing a great deal of confidence in the military shooting up from 41 percent in 2000 to 57 percent in 2002. The figure peaked at 59 percent in 2004 and has fallen slightly since, but the rating was slightly higher in 2008 than it had been in 2006 before the Iraq conflict had begun to wind down.

If you have the time, it is worth the look.

Watching how the military reacts to the president

I’ll let this video stand on it’s own without serious analysis, but I do find it interesting how the Marines reacted to visits from President Bush and more recently, President Obama.

Sister Toldjah and I have a similar opinion.

Maybe it’s the types of events that determines the reactions? I find the contrasts in the reactions to the arrivals of both respective Presidents stunning, but maybe I’m missing something in terms of how military protocol works.

We may need a bit of help here from our military readers. What is your reaction to the video? Remember that the sound levels can be manipulated by the broadcaster, the room could have different acoustics and the event may have different protocols.

If you’re current or former military, or if you are familiar with these types of presidential visits, chime in or send us an e-mail. Video courtesy The Real Revo.