Caffeinated Thoughts

No, Obama Didn’t Steal the 2008 Election through Fraud
Branstad’s Education Bill: Dead or Mostly Dead?
Gingrich Bows Out, Santorum to Meet Romney
Matt Strawn to Chair GOPAC-Iowa Effort
A Victory for America’s Family Farms

No, Obama Didn’t Steal the 2008 Election through Fraud

Posted: 01 May 2012 11:18 PM PDT

Barack Obama
The Internet is screaming with headlines of how Obama “stole the 2008 election” through voter fraud. The source are some leaked strategy memos from the McCain campaign. However, the headlines are far from justified when reading more in depth. The main salient allegation here is this:

1) The black Dems were caught stuffing the ballot boxes in Philly and Ohio as reported the night of the election and Sen. McCain chose not to fight. The matter is not dead inside the party. It now becomes a matter of sequence now as to how and when to “out”.

Given that the best evidence here is a three and a half year old unsupported email, a couple of questions become apparent. First of all what proof is had of them being caught?

Secondly, Obama won Ohio by 262, 000 votes, he won Pennsylvania by 620,000 votes.Did these black Democrats stuff 882,000 ballots? If not, Obama would have still won both states. If so, Obama would have still won the electoral college by a solid margin.

Anyone who stuffed ballot boxes should be prosecuted criminally, but its easy to see why the McCain campaign or State parties never made a big deal over this. If there were 20,000 or 30,000 ballots stuffed in a couple states, they still lost. Making a big public complaint about this as a sort of bloody shirt would only make Republicans look petty and like sore losers.

Though to hear people talk, no one’s lost an election since 2000. Florida 2000, of course, was stolen by the Bushes, 2004 was stolen by Diebold, 2008 was now stolen by ballot-stuffing Blacks, and the only reason Ron Paul hasn’t won every single primary and Caucus in 2012 is massive voter fraud.

Allegations of voter fraud and manipulation are understandable, particularly in the face of a result like a presidential election coming to 537 votes in a large state. However, when people complain that a clear election like Obama’s 08 victory or Bush’s 04 victory was stolen on scant evidence, it undermines the whole basis for our representative government.If 600,000 ballots were secretly stuffed in Ohio and Pennsylvania, then it makes it a worthless action to even bother with voting and when people start to think the system is rigged with probably millions of ballots being stuffed, you’ve created a dangerous situation.

On the other hand, the cry of “stolen election” quickly becomes like the boy calling wolf. If we were wise, all sides of the political arguments would refrain from claiming voter fraud unless there was real evidence something occurred that affected the election outcome.

Branstad’s Education Bill: Dead or Mostly Dead?

Posted: 01 May 2012 06:30 PM PDT

State Capitol Jason Noble of The Des Moines Register reports that Iowa Governor Terry Branstad suggested that Iowa Senate Democrats among others could face political fallout because of their opposition to elements of his K-12 education reform bill. I highly doubt it. Branstad was brought into office mainly because of former Governor Chet Culver's inability to govern, not because of Branstad's education plan. I really don't see any conservative Republican candidates anyway campaigning in favor of Branstad's bill and challenging incumbent Democrat senators opposition to it. Conservatives by and large don't want an expansion of state government which is what the bill really is, there's no other way to put it.

Iowa House Republicans on the other hand who voted for it may have some explaining to do if they have a conservative primary opponent. Even if they don't constituents who care about local control and smaller government need to hold their Representative's feet to the fire if they voted in favor of this bill. I doubt that the majority of them are going to go forth in an election championing the bill.

I've been told that one of three things could happen with this bill. They could end up going to a second or third conferencing committee, with the third committee the rules can change and items could be added. Both the House and/or the Senate could decide that they are too far apart and give up on the bill which would effectively make it dead in the water. A third option could be that the leadership of the House and the Senate could agree on a couple of items and submit a leadership bill which will then have to pass the House and the Senate. With the House members being released to campaign and the Senate wrapping up for the rest of the week it is unlikely they will be in any hurry to come back to compromise or vote.

So borrowing from The Princess Bride will Branstad's education reform be "dead or mostly dead" for the year? Because I highly doubt he is going to get even remotely close to everything he wants and based on what was in his original bill I consider that to be a good thing.

Gingrich Bows Out, Santorum to Meet Romney

Posted: 01 May 2012 04:45 PM PDT

Newt Gingrich in a video sent to supporters said that he would be officially suspending his campaign on Wednesday. Different sources within the campaign state that it is expected to endorse Romney. Last week in a speech in North Carolina he conceded that Romney is the nominee. Gingrich said, "It's clear Romney is the nominee and the focus should be on defeating Obama. We should not focus on defeating ourselves." In the video (see below) he said:

Because of your help and your support, we were able to put up a terrific campaign, and I want you to know that Callista and I are both very grateful to everybody across the country. I want you to know that we’re going to continue out there on the road. Both Callista and I will be talking, campaigning, making speeches, doing everything we can to help defeat Barack Obama.

You can watch the video here:

Additionally Rick Santorum is set to have a sit-down meeting with Mitt Romney for a private meeting on Friday, and one issue won't be on the table – Santorum's campaign debt.

As CNN Chief Political Analyst Gloria Borger reported last week, an immediate endorsement of Romney by his one-time rival is not expected at this meeting. Santorum wants assurances from Romney and his associates they are committed to the conservative principles important to him and that session will be part of a process.
"I am sure endorsement will be discussed at this meeting," Brabender said (Santorum strategist). "The Senator is very clear if he does endorse it will be done for the right reasons, not the wrong reasons." He mentioned other campaigns have asked for some help with retiring their debt.

Politico points out that the Romney Attack Dog, the Restore Our Future Super PAC has already scrubbing the attack ads run against Gingrich and Santorum (HT: Lisa Graas)

Matt Strawn to Chair GOPAC-Iowa Effort

Posted: 01 May 2012 10:45 AM PDT

Washington, DC – GOPAC Chairman Frank Donatelli today announced that Iowa businessman and former chairman of the Iowa Republican Party, Matt Strawn, will chair GOPAC's effort in the Hawkeye State this election season.

"Matt is a nationally-recognized leader for his monumental work in rebuilding and revitalizing the Iowa GOP," said Donatelli. "Under his leadership, Iowa Republicans witnessed historic electoral victories, unprecedented voter registration gains, and robust fundraising. We are excited to have his talents leading the way for our organization in Iowa."

Strawn said GOPAC's solutions-oriented approach and successful history of developing conservative leaders were major factors in his decision to lead the organization's efforts in Iowa. "The greatest opportunity to make a difference in Iowa's future is cultivating the next generation of our state's leaders," said Strawn. "Working with GOPAC to identify, train and elect leaders who share a commitment to economic opportunity and individual freedom will lead to a more prosperous Iowa."

Donatelli said many of GOPAC's activities in Iowa will build on Strawn's experience as its Iowa team will be heavily organizational in nature, including, but not limited to, candidate training, voter registration and issue identification efforts aimed at increasing the Republican ranks in the Iowa House and Senate and across Iowa's county-level offices.

Strawn indicated that a personal focus will be outreach to groups of Iowans who may not necessarily consider themselves Republicans. "There is no societal challenge or problem that cannot be met by applying common-sense, conservative solutions. By championing conservative ideas and policies, we can create jobs and economic opportunities that allow all Iowans the freedom to succeed beyond their wildest dreams. This is a message that should have no socio-economic, racial, gender, or ethnic boundaries."

Strawn, 38, is a native of Van Horne, Iowa, and is president of The Strawn Company, which holds interests in the Des Moines-based Iowa Barnstormers Arena Football League (AFL) franchise, a family-farm operation in Eastern Iowa, and a communications firm. Strawn and his wife, Erin, reside with their three small children in Ankeny, Iowa.

GOPAC is an organization dedicated to educating and electing the next generation of Republican leaders to state and local office. Since 1978, GOPAC has been searching the ranks of state and local governments for promising Republican leaders, and giving them the education and financial support they need to lead America. Led by Chairman Frank Donatelli and President David Avella, 84% of GOPAC-supported candidates in 2010 were victorious.

A Victory for America’s Family Farms

Posted: 01 May 2012 10:30 AM PDT

By Congressman Tom Latham (R-IA)

America's family farms won a great victory over misguided government regulation last week when the U.S. Department of Labor abandoned plans to pursue mindless regulations that would have kept farm youth from working on farms owned by their own families. The labor proposal would have upended Iowa's great family farm tradition, and I'm heartened that the public outcry the regulation sparked among farmers and youth agriculture groups forced the U.S. Department of Labor to withdraw the rule.

But the decision doesn't mean we can give up our efforts to defend Iowa's family farms. Instead, we must remain vigilant to make sure government bureaucrats understand the needs and realities of modern family farmers.

The U.S. Department of Labor's proposal threatened to eliminate an exemption to child labor laws that had been extended to family farms for decades. It could have outlawed youth from working on operations that are owned jointly by parents and extended family members such as aunts, uncles or grandparents. It also would have eliminated a pair of certification programs that allow student learners to perform certain kinds of farm work, such as the operation of tractors. The proposed elimination of the certification programs, which are designed to encourage safety among youth farm workers, drew opposition from groups like FFA and 4-H. The regulation would have made it impossible for many FFA and 4-H students to complete projects that involve the use of facilities owned by neighbors or extended family members, which is a common practice today. Additionally, the regulation would have kept many FFA students from completing their supervised agricultural experience (SAE) projects.

As soon as I learned of the department's proposal, I did what the federal bureaucracy seemed incapable of doing: I sought input from Iowa family farmers, youth agriculture groups and others who would be impacted by the proposal. Then I wrote legislation in response to the overwhelmingly negative reaction I got to the proposed labor rule.

This grassroots process resulted in my introduction of two bills. The first was a sense-of-Congress resolution that would have recognized the special status of family farms when it comes to labor regulations. The second piece of legislation, which I introduced in March, would have taken legally binding action to block the U.S. Department of Labor from implementing its mindless proposal. My bill was also used to introduce companion legislation in the U.S. Senate by Sen. John Thune, R-South Dakota.

I reached out to Rep. Dan Boren, an Oklahoma Democrat, as the lead co-sponsor of the bill because this is a bipartisan issue. Protecting one of the greatest traditions in American agriculture goes beyond the scope of party politics. It's simply the right thing to do, and that's why I've been so proud to work in a bipartisan fashion with Congressman Boren throughout this process.

But this isn't a victory lap. We have more work to do to preserve America's family farms. I'll continue the push to get binding legislation approved by Congress to ensure that these misguided rules don't threaten Iowa's family farms in the future. There's no guarantee that the Department of Labor won't reconsider its decision to abandon the regulation, and the only real solution is binding legislation blocking them from taking that route in the future.

It's encouraging to see the U.S. Department of Labor withdraw its regulation to keep farm youth off of family-owned operations, but we must remain vigilant against similar misguided initiatives in the future. The family farm is a cornerstone of Iowa's economy and cultural heritage. We can't allow federal bureaucrats, many of whom have never set foot on a farm, to tarnish that powerful tradition.

Congressman Tom Latham represents Iowa's 4th Congressional District, and is running for the newly drawn Iowa 3rd Congressional District against incumbent Congressman Leonard Boswell (D-IA).

Horoscop

miercuri, 2 mai 2012

Caffeinated Thoughts

Caffeinated Thoughts

Un comentariu: