Texas Rainmaker
August 9th, 2004 9:22 am
Watch it closely!
So Bush caved to the request to invite outside parties to monitor our election. And the initial group of Democrats who brought up the idea aren’t giving any credit to Bush at all (calling it “Colin Powell’s committment” - conveniently forgetting who he represents). It may be a good thing, however, considering our recent history with elections in this country. In case you’ve forgotten…

Not so long ago, there was a Presidential election that was decided by a razor-thin margin. The election saw 68 million votes cast and the winner decided by 113 thousand. That’s less than 2/10 of one percent. Subsequent investigations showed rampant voter fraud. In one state’s county, over 6,000 votes were cast, while the county had less than 5,000 registered voters. 75% of the votes cast went for one candidate. Another county showed that only 86 people had voted and the certified final tally was 147-24 for the same candidate who won the landslide in the other county. The state’s Election Board was coincidentally run by the party that won the election. A reporter also found a cemetary in one town that mirrored the voter registration rolls. The same reporter found that many “voters’ addresses” were just abandoned or even demolished buildings. Finally, after the inauguration of the President, the Department of Justice investigation was launched…. the head of the DOJ was none other than the President’s brother.

While you may be thinking this sounds like the 2000 election, it’s not. It was 1960 and the winner was Democrat John F. Kennedy.

Sounds like a lot of suspicious activity, doesn’t it? One state that gave JFK the victory was Illinois. The leader of the Democrat machine in Chicago at the time was Mayor Richard Daley. He insured JFK carried the state by a mere 9,000 votes…making it so close, it was hard to trace the fraud.

Ironically enough (or not?) Al Gore’s campaign manager in 2000 was Bill Daley, son of the late Richard Daley of the 1960 fame. Given that the very fraud we saw in 1960 reared it’s ugly head again in 2000 gives rise to speculation that 2000 was simply the attempted sequel to 1960. Thank God they didn’t get away with it.

Now a group of Democrats have requested international inspectors in to monitor our elections. I only hope this international group isn’t as corrupt as the U.N. (who, by the way, was the first choice of the Democrat group). If the OSCE is really a neutral party here to insure fairness in the election, the Democrats may have invited trouble upon themselves. It seems THEY are the ones who have trouble with fair elections. THEY are the ones who have to try and throw out military votes. THEY are the ones who tried in 2000 to narrow the entire national election down to a few hand-picked, Democrat-run and Democrat-friendly counties. THEY are the ones who don’t see a problem disenfanchising the entire nation so long as it gets them in power. THEY are the ones who position their opponent as a “divider” because it makes close elections more believable.

They’ve found an interesting political strategy - make it close and cheating can be accomplished. Let’s hope the invitation to the OSCE provides a chance for them to shoot themselves in the foot.
Posted by TexasRainmaker |

Texas Rainmaker is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).
Graphics by: Margolis Media Works | Style by: Lisa Sabin - E.Webscapes

Copyright © 2003-2006

Users Online



    • HuckPac.com

    • sidediv

    • sidediv


    Fatal error: Call to undefined function wswwpx_fold_category_list() in /home/texasrai/public_html/wp-content/themes/rainmaker/sidebar.php on line 62