We know how Paul Ryan, in addition to wanting to privatize Social Security also proposes “fixing” Medicare by introducing a “Voucher” system. In the debate, Mitt Romney suggested he still agrees with that Ryan plan for now. When I first heard of this scheme, my first thought was of the Voucher system that has been introduced over the past 20 to 30 years for education. This rant will examine my belief that Vouchers are designed to destroy successful government programs designed to help Americans and at the same time distribute wealth from the middle and working class up to those who don’t need it. In short, the reverse of the Robin Hood tale.

Thomas Jefferson and most of our founders believed that if you were going to have government of the People, by the People and for the People,  those people had to be knowledgeable and educated. They introduced and promoted basic and advanced education, subsidized by government in order to get as many citizen educated for the least cost to them. Early on they were successful. Though a formal federal program of education was not in place at the time, most of the states instituted education program for their citizens. Many states like Virginia and Massachusetts, abiding by the wishes of Thomas Jefferson and John Adams subsidized advanced education for those who had the ability. Our citizens were so well-informed and educed in our early days, Alexis de Tocqueville commented about it when he toured even the rural areas our country for his book “Democracy in America” how well-informed they were of world events. Education and a vibrant Press kept our citizens able to read, reason and be aware of issues of the day.

Over time, though many States still recognized the need for government subsidized education to provide for all citizens, including those of lesser means, assistance was needed from the federal government, not only for financial support, but to establish national standards. In time, the Department of Education was created to monitor and assist this endeavor. Even in 1912 when Arizona became a State, it was written in the State Constitution that a college education was to be made as “free as possible” for citizens of the State.

Now in addition to public schools and public colleges and universities, we still had private and parochial schools and colleges and universities that wealthiest among us attended. State and federal governments knew that these schools did very well by being able to hire the best qualified teachers and professors available and still make a profit. Government developed scholarship plans to assist the less fortunate the ability to pay tuition to these schools. Though they could still get quality education from public schools and colleges for next to no cost (because tax payer dollars went to them) they had the ability to attend even higher and more prestigious schools with assistance from government or other philanthropic groups. The dividing line was parochial schools. The argument used against tax payer dollars to subsidize that was the separation of Church and State. Then came “Vouchers.”

The argument for allowing tax payer funded vouchers to allow students “of all incomes” to attend Catholic or other private schools, (and later Charter Schools) was the argument that public schools were failing to properly educate our children and the parochial and private schools did much better. Over time, the Courts relented and laws were enacted to establish vouchers for private schools. But there were some problems that were not really discussed in the open when this was going on.

First of all, although inner city public schools did have the problems you would expect from children from lower socio-economic areas that didn’t generate enough tax revenues to effectively fund those schools; overall, the public schools were doing just fine for the whole.

Another problem was “Where would the money come from to pay the tuitions for private, parochial and charter schools?” Well that was simple; money would be diverted from already underfunded public schools making matter worse for them.

Finally, “How would voucher help pay tuition for a child from a poor working class family who couldn’t come up with the rest of the money?” In theory, tuition would go down. Well in reality, they didn’t. In fact, they went up. Remember, these schools are in the private sector where profits must be maintained.

So what were the results of introducing vouchers to pay for school?

More and more tax-payer money has been pulled from public schools to fund voucher for all students to attend private and charter schools. However, since the vouchers do not cover the full tuition costs to attend those schools, working class families can’t afford the tuition with the “education coupon” they get so have only the option of the now even more underfunded public schools. So tax payer dollars end up only benefitting those who don’t even need the money to send their children to private schools. And as the costs of college education continues to sky-rocket and government cutting funding for grants and scholarships, again, only the rich end up being able to afford college educations for their children. Unless you want to get your degree and also be nearly $100,000.00 in debt after you graduate. So school vouchers take from poor, working-class, middle-class and wealthy in taxes and effectively only provide to the wealthiest among us. It is redistribution of wealth upwards.

And what is the Free Market Argument AGAINST Vouchers?

Now for Paul Ryan’s plan to voucherize Medicare (otherwise known as VoucherCare).

First of all, it has been no secret since the mid 1960’s that the Republicans want to eliminate Medicare. It is still in their mind “socialize medicine” and should have never been enacted. After all, providing needed medical service to the elderly with only a 3% administrative cost overhead puts private insurance companies to shame. Republicans want to privatize Social Security and Voucherize Medicare. Problem for them is that the people like Social Security and Medicare as it is. What was the famous sign from the Tea Party during the debate for the Affordable Care Act “Keep Government Away from my Medicare”?

So to deal with that dilemma they followed their game plan from defunding education services to fund the profits of private schools and universities, “Voucher.” Rather that have government provide healthcare benefits to the elderly, the elderly would get a voucher that they can give to a “for profit” insurance company. Nice plan if it would cover the costs. It won’t. As with educational vouchers, the money for Medicare Vouchers would come from money collected from Payroll taxes, depleting money destined for Medicare to give to the private insurance companies. So money going to an organization with only 3% cost overhead would go to a company with 20% cost overheads who have to show a profit. And keep in mind, prior to ObamaCare, insurance companies could have cost overruns far exceeding 20%. It’s by law that it is limited to 20% now. But that’s why the GOP wants to repeal ObamaCare; it eats into their donor’s profits.

Those with the money will now get tax payer money they don’t need to pay for healthcare from private insurance companies. Those who don’t have the money will get a voucher that won’t pay the premiums required for what Medicare already provides. Now they say that the increase of government money going to private insurance companies will drive down the cost. Remember, they said the same thing about private schools and vouchers. It has yet to happen. Just like more jobs being created from trickle-down economics has yet to happen. Tax Payer money going to any “for-profit” organization, whether it be education, healthcare, defense, fire-fighting, policing, what have you only results in more profits to their stockholders with reduced services to the customers who end up not even being able to afford the services provided.

Vouchers are a con from the cons who call themselves conservatives whose only interest is to redistribute money upwards to them and their campaign donors. In education it has already resulted in failing schools across the nation, even the private schools. Apply it to Medicare; it would bankrupt the program while insurance companies laugh all the way to the bank. And privatizing Social Security? Well, I think you all get the idea.

Here’s what the President has to say about Vouchers:

Education must be part of the commons for it to be any good for the entire nation as should healthcare. Privatization only provides for those at the top at the cost for those at the bottom. This isn’t what the founders wanted for a country Of the People, For the People and By the People. Corporations are not People Mitt.


I take no particular pleasure in the following rant. Anyone who’s followed my rants on Twitter and my Blog knows full well how I feel about Sheriff Joe Arpaio. The term “Sheriff” is not an appropriate title for him.

In Maricopa County, the office of Sheriff is an elected office. So you need to be a politician to take that office. To actually have law enforcement experience is a plus, providing you work as a professional law enforcement person, not a politician. From the day Joe announced his original candidacy for office and the day he took office, it was clear that Joe is more of a politician than a Sheriff. What’s worse, he’s a self-centered narcissistic corrupt and racist politician. Joe catered to the low information, non-critical thinking and racist elements in Maricopa County to become “America’s Toughest Sheriff.”

From the day he took office, Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) buildings and sites had Joe Arpaio’s name placed everywhere, in much larger and bolder lettering than Maricopa County Sheriff. He effectively began a propaganda campaign that he was “tough on crime” because he was tough on criminals. He came up with pink underwear, green bologna sandwiches, and Tent City to treat criminals like slime, something low information and racist voters like to think they all are. He’s been effective in his propaganda, especially since he diverted tax payer dollars to feed his propaganda message across Maricopa County and Arizona, the country and world. Why does he need to advertise outside of Maricopa County if he’s only Sheriff here?

Well, he’s become a millionaire as Sheriff by portraying himself as “Tough on Crime.” In reality, he isn’t tough on crime. He’s tough on low-risk, minor offenders, but that’s about it. His pink underwear business got things started. He made his first million that way. As for Tent City; housing inmates in 115 degree plus weather isn’t what it would appear to be. There has never been a shortage of jail space in Maricopa County. In fact there is a maximum security jail actually sitting vacant of inmates, across the street from his 4th Avenue Jail. He houses stray dogs and cats in the “Madison Street Jail.”

The “criminals” housed in Tent City are almost entirely low-end, low-risk first time offenders for misdemeanor offenses or those serving jail as a term of probation. Any offender classified as a high risk offender (due to history of violence, etc) is held in the air-conditioned 4th Avenue Jail, Towers Jail, Durango Jail, etc. So the worst kind of criminal you are, the better you are treated in Maricopa County thanks to Joe Arpaio.

Joe has been responsible for millions of tax-payer dollars being spent to pay off lawsuits from inmates and families of inmates, who were needless injured or killed while in custody due to: brutal behavior, lack of basic medical care, neglect, and lack of supervision. He’s loses most of the suits filed against him, yet continues to allow cruel and negligent monitoring of inmates to continue.

People in Maricopa County don’t realize that Joe only runs a jail, not a prison. No one can be housed in a County Jail for more than one calendar year for their offense; most are housed for less than 6 months. These people get out much angrier and anti-social than they were going in, more apt to take things out on the community. This is why despite a drop of violent crimes everywhere in the nation; it continues to rise in Maricopa County. It’s human nature to not respond well to needlessly abusive behavior. Sheriff Joe make crime worse here, not better.

What’s more, he wastes money on pointless and ineffective “crime-sweeps” looking only for low-risk, low-end undocumented immigrants. He does these sweeps within city limits of Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe, Glendale, Mesa, etc where there are already well-trained and professional police officers around to deal with these offenders. Sheriff Joe’s responsibility is to patrol the unincorporated lands of Maricopa County, not the cities and towns.

He also is sitting on 45,000 open warrants for violent felony offenders while he picks up harmless undocumented immigrants. He ignores investigating Hispanic children being sexually assaulted in El Mirage while he picks up harmless undocumented immigrants. Worse yet, to feed into his political aim of getting support from the most racist elements in Maricopa County, he’s now gone all Birther. He’s wasted tax payer’s money on a total wild goose chase on a matter already proven to be false. He made headlines for a day to two, but that’s about it.

Sheriff Joe isn’t law-enforcement, he represents the worse in low-information, angry, racist politics and as a result, crime isn’t being effectively dealt with in Maricopa County. He needs to go.

This is the difficult part of this rant for me.

Long ago I gave my support to Scottsdale Police Lieutenant Mike Stauffer. Someone brought his name to my attention and I looked him up. He originally planned to run against Joe Arpaio as a Republican in the primary. However, since Joe controls a lot of Republican politics here, he knew he would have problems. He is a professional law enforcement officer with an excellent resume. He understands the theories of law enforcement and how to effectively and economically house inmates. He’s center-right with law enforcement without being fringed right-wing, racist, or counter-productive. I gave him my support as the best alternative to Joe Arpaio, especially in a strong conservative Republican county that we have here.

A while after Mike Stauffer began his run as an independent for Sheriff; Paul Penzone began his run for Sheriff on the Democratic slate. Penzone also has a very impressive law enforcement resume. However, I had already gave my support to Stauffer and wasn’t willing to change my support. Of the two, I honestly felt that Stauffer had the better chance to grab the attentions of the people of Maricopa County and with Joe’s continuing loss of support due to people here finally waking up, had the best chance of beating him.

I was wrong. Polling done in September now shows Joe Arpaio with 44.5% support, Paul Penzone with 39% and Mike Stauffer with only 8% support. This is the closest anyone has come to beating Joe Arpaio. Mike Stauffer disagrees with these poll results. The Phoenix New Times have postulated that Mike is actually an “Arpaio plant” to take support away from his opponent. That I do not believe, but the poll results however, are convincing.

With only a month to go until November 6 and early voting about to begin, the message and answer is clear. The best opportunity we have in Maricopa County to finally rid ourselves of this obnoxious self-absorbed freak is to give full support the Paul Penzone for Sheriff.

Sorry Mike, but removing Joe is the most important thing to do and supporting you for Sheriff only helps Joe keep office. I admire what you have tried to do, but this isn’t your year.

I’m voting for Paul Penzone because he does have an excellent law-enforcement resume, is a real professional, and can beat Joe Arpaio this year.


This is a long post, but please read through to the end, I think if you are of a hopeful rational mind, you will appreciate it.

When I was checking my mail the other day, I saw this very serious “Official Republican Party Document – DO NOT DESTROY” mailed to me. And hey, this had a registration number and code. Now being one who takes the time to make sure everything is properly read and responded to, I thought I would respond to this “Survey” in real time and let anyone interested in what is being asked see what my responses are and why.

Before I begin, from someone who has his Masters in Sociology and worked on creating true and accurate public opinion surveys. To get an accurate and meaningful survey responses, beyond getting a large and representative group to question, it is important that your questions are designed to get an opinion from the participant as opposed to responding to the opinions and preconceptions of those taking the survey. To do that ends up with skewed data.

So let us begin. I will post each question and possible responses verbatim and then give my response and reasons for each response.

Section I-Presidential Performance and Issues

1)    Do you believe Barack Obama has used the presidency and the powers of his office to look out for the concerns and interests of Americans like you?

□ Yes                      □ No

I answered Yes.

2)    Do you agree or disagree with the statement below?

President Obama inherited an economy losing 800,000 jobs a month and averted a worse economic mess while passing health care reform, saving the auto industry, killing Osama bin Laden, and winding down the war in Iraq. He has done a good job and deserves to be re-elected.”

□ Strongly agree      □ Somewhat agree

□ Strongly disagree  □ Somewhat disagree        □ Unsure

I answered Strongly agree. At this point I seriously doubt they would be tabulating any more of my answers. But to continue.

3)    How important is it to voters in your state to have candidates give attention to the following issues during the 2012 campaign?

Strengthening border security

□ Very important      □ Somewhat important       □ Not Important

I answered “somewhat” as the borders are fairly secured right now.

Reducing federal spending

□ Very important      □ Somewhat important       □ Not Important

I answered “somewhat” knowing that only federal spending at this time can get us out of the recession.

Keeping taxes low

□ Very important      □ Somewhat important       □ Not Important

I answered “somewhat” knowing that the Bush tax cuts are the biggest reasons for the deficit and somebody, preferably those with the means, should be paying more.

Exposing Obama’s radical left-wing policies

□ Very important      □ Somewhat important       □ Not Important

I answered “not” since he has no “radical left-wing policies” to expose. He’s a centrist.

Repealing ObamaCare

□ Very important      □ Somewhat important       □ Not Important

I answered “not” since ObamaCare has already proven its worth to millions in the country and is the next step to single payer which is what this nation truly needs.

Expanding domestic exploration for oil and gas

□ Very important      □ Somewhat important       □ Not Important

I answered “not” since under President Obama, we are already at record rates for both exploration and production.

Stimulating job creation in the private sector

□ Very important      □ Somewhat important       □ Not Important

I answered “very” because the Republican House has sat on all private job creating efforts presented to them by the President. They are the ones stalling growth.

Reining in government employee’s unions

□ Very important      □ Somewhat important       □ Not Important

I answered “not” because those unions have never been the problem and are in many ways the solutions to better governmental outcomes for the people. Collective bargaining is a right that should never be infringed in order to satisfy the few elites.

Demanding free and open trade to get U.S. manufacturing growing

□ Very important      □ Somewhat important       □ Not Important

I voted “not” because all the Republican free trade deals have only served to end up shipping our jobs overseas instead of creating them here. Their ideas haven’t benefitted our workers and our employment rates.

SECTION II-Economic Issues

4)    Do you believe that President Obama’s policies have helped make the economy better, had no impact on the economy, or made the economy worse?

□ Strongly believe they have made the economy better

□ Believe they have made the economy better

□ Believe they have had no impact

□ Believe they have made the economy worse

□ Strongly believe they have made the economy worse

□ Unsure

I answered Strongly believe they have made the economy better. It would be better still if the Republican Congress hadn’t blocked 90% of what he’s trying to put forth for public sector job retention and private sector job growth.

5)    President Obama has indicated that if reelected, he will fight to increase tax rates on individuals and families he considers to be “wealthy.” Do you support Obama’s position?

□ Yes            □ No

I answered yes, but let’s be clear with the question. Obama isn’t proposing tax increases, he proposing allowing the Bush Tax Cuts for those making over $250,000.00 a year to expire as they should have expired in 2010. Those people can pay the Clinton rates at no loss to their current standard of living.

6)    Are you concerned about inflation undercutting your savings, devaluing your home and increasing your cost of living?

□ Yes            □ No

I answered “Yes” which is why I will vote against all Republicans in November because it was 30 years of their policies that created the atmosphere where this could happen.

7)    Do you believe that the policies of Barack Obama have helped create good jobs and improve the economy in your area?

□ Yes            □ No

I answered “Yes” because they have and would have created more if he weren’t blocked by Congress. Further, he is now at Net Job Growth and has created more jobs in less than 4 years than Bush did in 8. Over 30 months of economic growth under the President.

8)    Do you support a federal Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to stop deficit spending in Washington?

□ Yes            □ No

I answered “no” because that is the dumbest idea anyone has ever came up with. Reasons states have to go to the federal government for assistance is because of all their “balanced budget amendments” in order to stay afloat. Federal government spending, even if its deficit spending is often indicated and necessary to keep the economy afloat in dire times. It has always worked in the past and will so for the future. It’s a lame concept presented to people with no critical thinking skills to understand the consequences of such a stupid act. It would result in ongoing depression not only here, but across the World.

SECTION III-Entitlement Spending

9)    Would you support a phased-in increase in the retirement/eligibility age for Social Security benefits that would no affect anyone over the age of 50?

□ Yes            □ No

If that was where it would stay, sure taking into account people are living healthier longer lives. However, these are not entitlements; these are payouts back to the people who paid into these programs.

10) Should retirees be exempt from property tax increases on their residence?

□ Yes            □ No

I answered “No” but have no problems with some sort of “means” testing to assist those on limited, fixed incomes.

11) Would you support allowing individuals under the age of 50 to opt to put a portion of their Social Security withholdings into private accounts that they control, but cannot access without penalty until their retirement?

□ Yes            □ No

I answered “No” because this is privatization. Privatization would bankrupt Social Security and prevent those who need it the most to avoid poverty. This only benefits Wall Street Investors, if there is privatization and we have another crash, then those who need it to just survive are quite simply shit out of luck. Stupid idea GOP that why majority of nation will never support it despite what you propose to help only the wealthiest among us.

SECTION IV-National Security Issues

12) Has the Obama Administration done enough to counter Iran’s drive to acquire a nuclear weapon?

□ Yes            □ No

They have done as much as any rational administration can do to avoid another pointless bloody war with no winners at the end. This is what those who fund the GOP appear to want.

13) Should the United States demand that Pakistan reform its military and intelligence agencies in order to receive military aid funds?

□ Yes            □ No

We need to work better with Pakistan and smarter and not forget, they are a nuclear power and doing this stupidly would have catastrophic implications for the region.

14) Do you want our elected leaders to make stopping illegal immigration a top national priority?

□ Yes            □ No

I’m game if the GOP are. Problem is they see it as an issue of race catering to the racist elements of their extreme right wind fringe. If they want to talk serious immigration reform with everything on the table, then we should. If not, then they should just continue to whine as they have for the past 30 years.

15) Do you believe Obama’s strategy of treating all countries as equals to the United States has strengthened our security and weakened the resolve of our enemies?

□ Yes            □ No

What a dumb-ass question based on another false premise. Diplomacy involves treating all participants as adults recognizing that everyone has issues important to them. To work from a position that only you matter, you accomplish nothing. We always have had and will continue to have enemies. However, to treat the World as if it’s our way or the highway despite how it impacts other human beings only serves to isolate us from the entire world and then having no one to come to our aid when needed. This is how a mature diplomatic mission works.

16) Do you believe that the United   States has done enough to ensure that Chinese markets are open and fair for imports from our nation?

□ Yes            □ No

No but this is due to Congress sitting on legislation that would address much of this. However the current set up has been very beneficial to Mitt Romney and his cronies, many of whom fund the GOP in their efforts.

SECTION V-Health Care Issues

17) Do you support immediate and total repeal of the ObamaCare health care legislation and its massive new taxes?

□ Yes            □ No

Not only am I opposed to that, it must be pointed out that ACA is not a new massive tax. In fact, the government has no control, no mechanism to even collect the “taxes” implied by the legislation and it is estimated to only impact less than 4% of the people who chose not to get healthcare and are of the means to purchase it. Another question based on a false premise.

18) Have the government and news media provided information to ensure that citizens have a good understanding of the composition, impact and costs of the Democrat-passed ObamaCare health care legislations?

□ Yes            □ No

Well, FOX has been good at feeding out misinformation about the legislation at the behest of the GOP while the mainstream media hasn’t done much to correct the record. But word is getting out that this is good for the American people and economy despite the whines from the right. By the way guys, its “Democratic-passed” not “Democrat-passed”, that just childish on your part.

19) Are you concerned that Barack Obama and the Democrats intend for their ObamaCare legislation to eventually lead to the creation of “single-payer” government run health insurance and health care system?

□ Yes            □ No

Concerned? I’m counting on it. It’s about time we join the rest of the industrialized world and get better outcomes for less money than we do under the current system. By the way, this is for funding and accessibility of health care, not health care itself.

20) Do you believe you can receive the same quality of health care and accessibility to quality care through a federal government run health care system?

□ Yes            □ No

The rest of the industrialized world does, I believe we can to.

SECTION VI-Values Issues

21) Do you support the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe vs. Wade to allow states to regulate/restrict abortion as they see fit?

□ Yes            □ No

Considering the needless deaths and poor outcomes across the country prior to Roe v Wade, absolutely not. Women deserve to make that choice, to say otherwise is not Pro-Life, it’s Pro-Slavery.

22) Do you believe we should keep a strong pro-life plank in our platform?

□ Yes            □ No

Your platform isn’t pro-life at all if it allows for people of limited means to not have affordable healthcare, education, jobs, opportunities and still supports illegal and pointless wars and executions for people who end up being innocent. Come up with a Pro-Life Plank and then we can discuss it.

23) Should federal funds be provided to non-profit organizations whose primary function is conducting abortions?

□ Yes            □ No

I don’t believe there are any. If you’re referring to Planned Parenthood, only 3% of their operations are geared towards providing women the choice of an abortion.

24) Do you support allowing parents to use government vouchers to send their children to the school of their choice be it public, parochial or private?

□ Yes            □ No

No school voucher system does that. It only diverts public tax money to the wealthiest who can already send their children to parochial and private schools thus saving them money. Those of limited means are left with only underfunded public schools. Vouchers are a con to the tax-payers.

SECTION VII-The 2012 Campaign

25) Are Republicans in your area enthusiastic and committed to voting for our Republican slate of candidates this November?

□ Yes            □ No

If they are, they’re totally misinformed and aren’t interested in theirs or our country’s best interests.

26) Do you support voter ID laws that require individuals to show a government issued picture ID when the go to the polls to vote?

□ Yes            □ No

Only if they are easily provided to all Americans free of charge with no strings attached. Kind of like what Bill Clinton was advocating when he was president and the Republicans balked at such an idea.

27) Do you believe the Republican Party needs to do a better job exposing the Obama record and his radical liberal agenda?

□ Yes            □ No

No, the GOP needs to actually start telling the truth that the agenda isn’t radical or liberal; it’s centrist with many traditional GOP planks in it. Stop the misinformation to the American people.

28) Are you committed to helping ensure that in 2012, the Obama-era of radical liberalism, reckless spending and embarrassing foreign policy comes to an end?

□ Yes            □ No

The last question and yet again based on a false premise and with a mix of projection on the GOP’s part. To put it succinctly, No fucking way losers!

Now if this was just a survey, that would be it. But it wasn’t, it’s primarily a request for contributions. Following the last question was the hit for money. You have three options to pick from:

□ Yes, I will give money to help elect Mitt Romney… etc, starting at $35.00.

□ No, I don’t want to participate but will return the questionnaire with a contribution to “help build the Republican Party’s national campaign to defeat Barack Obama and elect Republicans to all levels of government in 2012.” Starting at $35.00.

□ No. I do not wish to participate, but I am returning this Document with a sponsoring contribution of $15 to help cover tabulating my Survey. I found this last option of the only three absolutely insulting.

There was a final Section after the contribution part for additional comments. I would simply add, fire Reince Priebus and bring some adults back to run the party.

The purpose of this “survey” was so transparent. It started off harmless enough with basic and safe questions of opinion. However, as you will note, as you moved through the survey, the questions were more geared towards the fringed radical right extremists of the GOP. The tone of each question spoke more to the opinions of those who wrote the question and asking for confirmation from those they hope agree with them. As a result, the Right Wing Nut Job who actually completes the survey is so angry at the end, they will contribute money.

Now the fact of the matter is, the GOP has lost sight of the fact that the extremists in their party have driven many Republicans away in the past two years. They have become Democrats or Independents. However, many do still remain in the party but lay low. There is an organization out there:

who represent the last few sane members of the party. This survey would most likely cause them to leave also.

From 2008:

And from this year, Republican Women for Obama:

Anyhow Reince Preibus, I’m not returning this survey to you with a contribution. But you have mine and I believe the answers of rational people to your “survey.” Tabulate it at your own cost, not mine.

GOP VOTER REGISTRATION FRAUD (This is what real fraud looks like)

Remember ACORN? It was during and after the 2008 election cycle when things weren’t looking good for the McCain ticket, and the right-wing were convinced that ACORN, (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), were a subversive group with deep ties to the Obama organization for years. They alleged that there was wide-spread election fraud from ACORN operatives along with other scandals.

Timothy McVeigh look-alike James O’Keefe pulled his infamous and as it turned out in later Court cases, edited “under-cover” taped investigation of the organization trying to link them to fraud and prostitution. Of course it was later determined that not only were the O’Keefe tapes were an edited fraud, no criminal or ethical malfeasance was ever found and the people who were conned were all cleared of any wrongdoing. However, the backlash of this witch-hunt to shut down an organization whose sole purpose was to get eligible voters registered and active, so as to be involved in matters that affected them (can’t have that in a democracy) was so effective, the organization lost money and support and ended up shutting down. To date no criminal charges against the agency were ever proven.

These were the allegations against ACORN that were soundly debunked:

(From 2008)

Despite John McCain’s claim that the group is “on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history … maybe destroying the fabric of democracy.” Nothing of the sort ever came to the light of reality. It turned out to be a desperate red herring from a desperate campaign.

As the clip above shows, there were never any ties of Obama with ACORN prior to or during the campaign, other than him being one of several attorneys, working with the U.S. Department of Justice in a successful 1995 lawsuit against the state of Illinois that made it easier for people to register at driver’s license offices.

There were never any indications of voter fraud or election fraud committed by the ACORN agency itself. Although they had filed registration forms for obviously false applicants, it turned out that ACORN was required by law to submit all registration applications. Further, when turning these forms in, ACORN advised that they were likely fraudulent.

Canvassers hired by ACORN at $8.00 an hour to collect registrations, actually perpetrated fraud against ACORN itself and were identified and terminated. Some of those canvassers were prosecuted with the assistance of ACORN.

None of the “fraudulent” voter registration applicants made it to the polls due to the diligence of ACORN themselves. They identified the fraudulent voter registration forms, turned them in as required by law and the voting jurisdictions took appropriate action. No fraudulent votes for any candidate were cast as a result. As noted, voter fraud in this country is next to zero, literally.

So now let us fast forward to today and what has been revealed in Florida. I bring this up because recently I had a RWNJ on Twitter boasting that the Republicans have been registering more people than the Democrats. Of course, Florida came to mind. The man may be correct, but here is the reason why.

The company at the heart of this is Strategic Allied Consulting. This is shaping up to be true voter registration fraud. Unlike ACORN, there appears to have been a true orchestrated effort from people at the top to commit the fraud. Further, there is a direct link between the GOP and Strategic Allied Consulting along with links to the GOP nominee, Mitt Romney. Strategic Allied Consulting is run by long-time GOP operative Nathan Sproul.

Keep in mind, the Democratic Party was never linked to ACORN. The DNC never hired ACORN to do anything or paid them anything. How do we know there is a connection between the GOP and Strategic Allied Consulting? Well for one thing, the GOP just fired them after the allegations of voter registration fraud came to light. They had been hired in five swing states (Florida, Nevada, Colorado, North Carolina and Virginia) to register Republicans. Florida is where the problems came to light and are being investigated for criminal wrong-doing. Further, there are allegations coming to the surface in the other states involved.

Florida is interesting. The efforts of the Rick Scott administration to make voter registration nearly impossible and to purge voters who lean left, are legendary and beyond doubt. So much so that a recent study showed nearly no new Democratic Registrations in Florida compared to GOP. In Clay County alone, only 67 new Democrats were registered compared to 4,008 Republicans compared to 2,204 Democrats and 3,733 Republicans during the previous presidential election cycle. Strategic Allied Consulting was involved.

According to electoral watchdog Brad Friedman, “A massive GOP voter registration scheme, which appears to involve the upper-echelons of the national party, [has begun] to emerge.” At the center of the controversy is Mr. Sproul, whose firm has faced allegations of questionable tactics in the past, including changing or throwing out registration form filled out by Democrats. ACORN was never accused of changing or throwing out any registration forms.

Mr. Sproul has worked for a number of GOP presidential campaigns including Mitt Romney’s, who hired him last year as a consultant, despite his interstate record of alleged voter registration fraud. In 2004, his group was found to have been tricking Democrats into registering as Republicans, surreptitiously re-registering Democrats and Independents as Republicans and shredding Democratic registration forms. Despite this history, his company was given a $1.3 million from the GOP to register voters in Florida and additional money for the other states. There are currently allegations of missing social security numbers, fake addresses, and dates of births that did not match up. As mentioned earlier, as the evidence comes in, it has been so convincing, that even the GOP has fired Mr. Sproul’s firm with several days to go in these five states to register voters prior to the November election. It’s appears to be far more convincing and real than any of the allegations against ACORN.

As with ACORN, law requires all completed voter registration forms to be turned in. The difference between ACORN and Strategic Allied Consulting has been that:

Strategic Allied Consulting did not alert officials to problems with the registrations being turned in.

They are accused of throwing out non-GOP registrations instead of filing them (something ACORN was never accused of).

The allegations of ACORN were only directed to those hired to fill daily quotas.

There are reports that the canvassers for Strategic Allied Consulting were doing this at the instructions of the upper echelons of the company to included GOP operative Mr. Sproul.

ACORN was never linked directly with the Democratic Party, they were community based.

Elections can be stolen. But they can only be stolen if the race is close. To keep the race close you need to suppress votes, either by caging, purging or hiring people to only get your people registered, not the ones likely to vote for your opponent. And of course enacting voter ID laws that disproportionately affect your opponent’s likely voters is also a good way. The GOP is trying everything this year. Thankfully due to Mitt Romney’s poor campaigning, the race isn’t as close as it needs to be. However, you need to still register, make sure you are registered, then get out and vote no matter what. Oh, and make sure everyone else does to. This cannot be close.

UPDATE: This young woman was working for Stategic Allied Consulting in Colorado following their script and instructions. Now that this clip has been released, she was fired for doing what she was told to do.

This group doesn’t want the majority of people voting in this country because that is the only way the Republicans can win.