As a Brit, I have a slightly more sanguine perspective on what the future holds for Barak Obama. I remember the heady days of the early days of the Tony Blair period in the UK. He was just like Obama: the bright, energetic, face of the future..and then...and then: when Blair made his first decision against the left, they (and the media) turned on him - and destroyed him.
I suggest you take a deep breath and wait a year. You'll simply be able to fuel the left and media's anger. The seeds of Obama's destruction have already been sown, in the nature of the expectations of his own supporters.

You are not alone in that anger about the media - I would, in fact, pin the blame directly on them (the media - CNN, NBC, ABC, NY Times, etc.), in advance, for any post-election violence that takes place - regardless of which cantidate wins.

There are millions of us out here quietly fuming, and trying to decide what action we should take about the media having changed from being a 4th estate to being a 5th column.

They - the media - are deliberately fanning the flames of racism, division, and anger unlike anything that has EVER been done in this country before. I honestly believe that they have now pushed things to the breaking point - where a close vote that could be blamed on media bias and ACORN's voteer fraud would literally push this country into a civil war.

Things will never be the same in this country - fraud, corruption, and media bias have permanently changed the rules of "the game". There are many millions of angry voters out here that have watched our votes being marginalized and out Constitution being shredded day by day. As a people we are slow to anger - and this time, we got there - the media "done pissed us off really good".


Without fair elections and unbiased reporting, an elected government can not be considered credible or legitimate. The people of the United States will not stand for this happening, and are tired of passively being stolen from. Let Pelosi try to pass another bailout bill, for example, and this time around you'll likely have millions of people marching on Washington.
.


I can almost guarantee that a day of reckoning, will take place after this election - one way or another - and it might get ugly...

John Bosworth,

Actually I really don't think that's the way it'll play out here. That wasn't
the way it worked with Bill Clinton for example. I'm pretty sure that most
people at ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN, and the overwhelming majority of newspapers
personally identify with Obama. He'd have to do something truely extraordinary
for them to break with him.

But even if things were as you imagine, is this really much to hope for? I'm
not British, but the impression I get from here is that Britain in many ways
has moved far to the left during the Tony Blair administration. He may have
talked a moderate line but the reality was the power the state and the intrusion of
the state into people's lives grew by leaps and bounds.

1. Absolutely agree with you that if Obama wins swing states with voter fraud, then he is not my president.

2. First comment mentioned that the British press "turned on him - and destroyed him". Blair won 3 elections and served 10(?) years and handed off the PM to a successor. While the BBC et al may have hounded him, does not sound like they "destroyed him".

3. The mainstream media is a part of the Democrat party machine. That is a fact. The MSM are part of the political enemies of the Right. It is up to the Right to deal with that factual, albeit unpleasant, situation.

John Bosworth, I have to agree with Mark. Unless everything I heard is wrong, the UK has become the worst kind of nanny state. Correct me if I am wrong. Tony Blair got in trouble over the war, but the bad side of his legacy is a vastly expanded government, more crime, an awful health care system, total surveillance and no real freedom of speech. Last year, 207000 British citizens or 0,34% of the population emigrated and only a small part will return. At the same time over 500000 immigrants arrived. How can your example reassure us?

I will second (or third?) the statement that a fraudulent win by Obama will invalidate him as my President; I won't accept a Saddam Hussein-type election victory.

Those on the right have to continue to deal with the MSM in that fashion that they are now: marginalize them economically. I have given up on most major outlets and have turned to the blogosphere for my news, a few clicks on the advertising of each website will help them continue their existence.

If Obama wins count me in for the John Galt movement. I will NEVER acknowledge this liberal fascist, elected with massive voter fraud, as my President. I too pursed a journalism, albeit a minor in journalism underneath my Political Science major, and am deeply worried about the public fleeing MSM for its unbalanced coverage. If their is no objectivity we may well push Lady Liberty to the breaking point.

It's the hard left's (or is it Stan's?) goal to either have things their own way or, lacking that, to set us at each other's throats. Once the nation's in the grip of anarchy, it'll be easy, under the guise of establishing order, to take over with a despotic regime and get what they want that way.

This election is win-win for them. Whichever way it goes, they get what they want.

He will not be my president. He condones and monetarily supports election fraud, and will continue to do so as president. He attempts to intimidate and legally stifle critics with opposing views, and will continue to do so as president. He believes in socialist and radical left solutions, not free market, capitalistic solutions, and will continue to do so as president. He surrounds himself with associates that espouse hatred and anti-democratic actions, and will continue to do so as president.

This is not my president -- this is Mugabe-Lite, or if you prefer, Son of Mugabe. Literally, the worst combination of political and personal flaws and characteristics from across the globe will have been forced upon this country by a totally failed MSM. God help us, because little Mugabe won't.

Forget ACORN. Forget Ayers, Rezko, and Wright. The biggest untold (for obvious reasons) story of this election is the obscene dereliction of duty committed by the mainstream media. The only reason Obama has any national standing whatsoever is because of the MSM's active and willful promotion of him and their active and willful denigration of his opponents. Obama, really, is just a stooge who would probably be befuddled at how the hell he rose to such heights, if he weren't so full of himself.

Here's what I propose conservatives do with the remainder of this campaign, and beyond: take all that (supposed) anger the media is so eager to report on, magnify it tenfold, then focus it like a laser back on the MSM. Take all of the anti-Obama signs--and what the hell, a portion of the McCain/Palin signs--and replace them with anti-MSM signs. Flood the political rallies of both candidates with strong anti-MSM messages. Make it impossible for the MSM to ignore it. Force them to report on themselves and their complicity in the greatest political fraud in the history of the U.S. Let them try to spin it, deny it, or cry foul; any defense they put up will expose them even more.

Then, pick a specific date--say, the day after the inauguration (regardless of who wins)--and declare it Freedom from the MSM Day. On that day, conservatives--and, hopefully, newly enlightened moderates--will cancel our subscriptions to liberal newspapers and magazines. We'll call the TV and radio networks and local stations, and their advertisers, and tell them that we will no longer watch or listen to their news programs. On that day, the MSM will get the message that they will no longer be the sole arbiters of public opinion and knowledge about the new administration, or the world at large.

I'm not a person who is easily moved to action, so if I'm feeling this frustrated by the frankly un-American treachery of the MSM, then I know there are legions more conservatives who are just as fired up. Now is the time for conservatives to put the MSM in their place. While it can be argued that the MSM is in decline, this election cycle has proven that they still wield far too much influence. It's time to bring them down.

How do you feel about the diebold fraud in 00 and 04? Suddenly thats not an issue?

I guess since the Democrats won in 2006, all the problems were solved by then? It's interesting that those complaints only arise when Democrats lose elections. - S.

Obama will never be my president. He's a communist with no regard for the Constitution, the flag, or the anthem. He has no regard for freedom. That's not a man I'd be proud to call Mr. President. Given the chance, I'll hand to the Dems exactly what they handed to GW for eight solid years. We'll be crying for Dubya when the Dems' lying Ivy-league moron gets through with us.

I plan on giving Obama the exact level of support that the left gave to GWB in 2001 and onward. I can't imagine democrats having a problem with that.

It really doesn't matter what kind of president Barack Obama turns out to be and to what degree he delivers on his socialist, internationalist, America is not exceptional, "talk and surrender abroad" agenda. The Left, the MSM, and especially most African-Americans will never break with Obama--they'll be disappointed and perhaps even furious, no doubt, but they won't say so in public. They'll blame other people or circumstances (GWB, racism, class warfare, the economy, world events) for his inability to deliver on his promises.

They are already like a co-dependent, abused woman who won't break free of her abuser--too ashamed to admit their problem so they can free themselves of it, too invested in their mistake to see it and correct it. And to the degree he does succeed in fulfilling his agenda, we will all be losers.

The most we can hope for is that Obama will fail at anything he tries that would be harmful to America--which is most of his ideas. Unfortunately, if he has a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and a large majority in the House backing him up, he will have at least two years to do great harm to the country both legislatively and judicially, before the voters will be able (if we as a people recognize our mistake and have the courage) to do anything about it in 2010.

Yes, our “new media” friends sounded the death knell of the MSM much too soon. Few anticipated, however, anticipated the willingness of the MSM to go so unashamedly all-out in support of one candidate, to shed any shred of objectivity in their profession in doing so. The news and political junkies among us forgot that most Americans STILL get most of their news and commentary from the MSM (nightly news programs, 60 Minutes). Most are busy living their lives, raising their children, running small businesses, paying taxes, and coaching Little League teams. They pay attention only in snippets--and usually that info comes to them, filtered, from the MSM. That isn't going to change anytime soon, if ever.

Not me. While I'm upset with the media, Obama is by far the greater menace.

But that's just crazy thinking. Truth is that after the election the Iraq war will end suddenly, the economy will turn up, there will be no illegal aliens in the country, Wall Street will return the money and every NFL team will win the Super Bowl. All that will happen, the newspapers will gain readers, the press will become trusted, the terrorists will lay down their bombs, Palestinians will give up their rockets and Iran its bombs, and the streets will flow with milk, honey, human kindness and tolerance. Count on it. By the end of November.

first off, there is no reason to hate on obama now for voter fraud that hasnt even happened yet. the fraud that people are talking about it voter registration, which has no say on election day, unless all of those dead people come out to vote. and like some said, has every republican forgotten about '00 and '04?
second, to those people who say they will give obama the same credit the left gave throughout bush's presidency, keep in mind, bush had an overwhelming approval rating after 9/11 till a year after the war started dems and reps alike. he only got knocked back after his policies started failing and he started saying things like "i dont really think about him (osama bin ladin) anymore", or for going into iraq on false pretenses, which is a fact for which ill get reamed.

I'm fairly confident that the below article is in fact why whoever wrote this is in fact wrong/silly/anti-democracy:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/oct/13/election-acorn-voter-fraud

You do realize that under the law, ACORN has to turn in any and all voter registration applications it receives, right?

ACORN, in order to save the Fed's time, marks those applications it believes to be suspect as such, which is how we know about the vast majority of them.

So this whole 'voter fraud' thing is really a massive distortion of what really goes on. ACORN follows the law, and willingly turns over those workers who violate it.

Meanwhile, the GOP has used every sort of voter manipulation, voter disenfranchisement, robot-calls, sending false information to voters, using plants and agents provocateur to misrepresent and manipulate the process, etc. The whole lot of them should be in jail.

Whats with the cries of Obama being a communist? Wasn't it the GOP who proposed the 700 billion bailout? Wasn't the GOP a major proportionate of cooperate bailouts? Didn't they advocate absolute power for the executive branch, to 'fight our nations enemies'?

That seems infinitely more communistic and totalitarian then anything Obama proposes.

The hatred of the MSM is silly as well. It's a sign that the people the MSM is criticism can't defend their positions, and therefore, just condemn the source of those criticisms. Its a well known GOP practice, going back to the Nixon era. It's a sign their policies are without worth, and downright wrong.

Pull the wool from your eyes people, and actually take a look at the world around you.

If Obama is elected, I fully intend to give him as much leeway as Teddy Kennedy gave Robert Bork. Or Howard Metzembaum gave Clarence Thomas. Or Charlie Gibson gave Sarah Palin. Or Howard Dean gave George Bush.

Every four years, Republicans are told that we can't escalate the animosity. That we must tone down the rhetoric and work with the Democrats for the common good. Every four years we do. We end the campaign the day after the election and try to find common ground. And every four years the Democrats take this as a sign of weakness and turn up the heat. They begin the next campaign before the vote count is final.

They lie. If one crack addict sees a traffic cop less than a mile from a polling place, they charge massive voter intimidation. If one Republican is elected in a disputed district, the lapdog media repeats every crackpot conspiracy theory that the Democrats can provide as gospel truth. And if the Democrats are busy filing fraudulent lawsuits, the "working press" will invent the crackpot conspiracy theories for them.

They cheat. From ACORN to the big city machines, they register tombstones, house pets, cartoon characters and illegal aliens. And they demand we count every vote. Any attempt to protect the integrity of the process is subject to media hysteria and endless legal action to protect the right of Fluffy the Poodle to vote.

They steal. From elections to taxes on everyone they dislike, Democrats are so good at taking what doesn't belong to them they make the mafia look like pikers.

Republicans have often disappointed me. John McCain is not my favorite candidate and I'm sure that if he's elected, he'll be no better than Bush. Which is to say, mediocre at best. But I will never trust any Democrat. Ever.

Honest Democrat is a contradiction in terms.

Solane71;
Are you saying that vote fraud is not a problem now but was in 2000 and 2004? Does this make sense? Any hypocrisy here? The biggest voter fraud in 2000 was election officials trying to guess how people voted. Bush won the election and until Carter and others admit that he won Obama opponents have no reason not to smear Obama with election fraud charges.

I have officially bookmarked this page. You all are my people!

Obama will never be my president. He is a socialist MSM puppet. The MSM will glorify him, just as they did Clinton, all the while forgetting it was a RED congress when Clinton was in office. At this point, all we can do is HOPE American wakes up and elects a RED congress & house to oversea what "the man" is up to.

He is surely not the answer to the problem, but THE Problem. Part of this financial nightmare we're all dealing with is HIS fault. However the MSM will NEVER post that he profitted from this.

I am not shocked to the lengths his loyal followers will go to get him elected either. Picking up the homeless and driving them to the polls to vote for him, ACORN. The list goes on, but MSM certainly won't speak or mention any of this.

I share the anger being expressed here, but I would offer a dissenting perpective on how to respond to an Obama presidency.

First of all, if Obama wins, he will not be "my" president or "your" president or anyone's president. He will be "the" president. I'm not going to try to solace myself by pretending not to recognize him. That would just be a waste of emotional energy and a distraction from the work that needs to be done.

Acknowledging Obama as the president will not imply a belief that he won the election fair and square. It will simply mean that, on the day they counted the electoral votes, he will have received at least 270 of them. Insofar as nobody else will be able to claim the same thing, Obama will have become THE one and only president. So let's please put that nonsense aside.

Another thing we need to avoid is personalizing our objections to Obama to such an extent that he actually benefits from the experience. This, quite frankly, was the genius of Bill Clinton. Clinton did very little as president to enamor himself to the left. What he did do, however, was play the victim card for eight years against supposed conservative bogeymen from Newt Gingrich to Ken Starr. The left loved him for that. Let's try to avoid a repeat of that ordeal with Obama.

What we need to focus on is Obama's agenda, and that of the Democrat-controlled Congress and the lefty-dominated mainstream media. If we want to contain the damage, the focus needs to be on what Obama and his allies are DOING, and not on what he IS. Fulminating over "ancient history" like the election or what Obama was doing in Pakistan in 1990 (or whenever) will be nothing but an exercise in frustration for our side. Let's not fight the "last war." If and when Obama wins, it can be assumed that the majority of the people didn't care enough about those issues to cause them not to support him. That, or they just don't grasp the information that has been presented to them. Either way, it's going to matter even less to them starting Jan. 20 than it did on Nov. 4, so there's no point in keeping the focus there.

No, the focus needs to be on derailing the Obama-Pelosi-Reid agenda at every available opportunity. I would gladly accept the prospect of Obama's leaving office as the most admired man in America if, in exchange, I could be sure that NONE of his lefty plans for the country ever reached fruition.

In short, respect the office, even respect the man, but attack the hell out of his plans for the country.

Geez i dident know they let trolls write blogs

And I wasn't aware that "didn't" could be spelled with an "e." Looks as though we both learned something new today, doesn't it? -S.

MSM coverup? absolutely f**king right.

People working for ACORN in several states have been accused of submitting false voter registration cards. Leaving aside for the moment the fact that the fraud appears to have been committed against ACORN, since ACORN dutifully flagged obviously false cards, as required by law, and notified the states of their findings — can anyone explain to me how a bunch of registration cards with fake names on them could possibly give Obama an edge in the election, and the writer of this blog is evidently claiming?

Voter fraud is a serious problem.

It also has nothing to do with ACORN. ACORN used paid workers to collect registrations, and some of those turned out to be fraudulent voter registrations. In most cases, ACORN was able to first notify the relevant authorities that they had received fraudulent registrations from their workers.

As you probably know, it is a crime in most states to not turn in a registration you have collected. This is because the Republicans were infamous for having registration drives, and then throwing away all the Democratic registrations. So ACORN had no choice in the matter. They were required, by law, to turn in fraudulent registrations.

That is voter registration fraud. Until those people show up and try to vote, it is not voter fraud.

And I'm sure they keep submitting all of those fraudulent registrations because they love democracy or something. It's likely just a gosh-darned shame of a coincidence that it always seems to be ACORN, in multiple states, that is guilty of encouraging people to submit fraudulent voting forms. What terrible luck they must have. -S.

Registration fraud, perhaps, voter fraud NO. It isn't voter fraud because no votes have been casted yet.
If votes are casted under fraudulent names, then it is at the fault of the state election officials, who didn't do their job at verifying identity, not Obama or ACORN.

While I am not a McCain supporter and not a blind Obama supporter, I desperately wish for intelligent conversation about all this and I am so grateful for posts like Mrs. Haff's (10/15 2:26pm). It's ridiculous that both sides keep pointing fingers saying the other is more rotten. They are both rotten in their own ways and any sort of research we each do will only bolster the opinions we have already. So let's get past this and talk about something constructive.

We should all be outraged about voter fraud but when your candidate wins it sure is easy to let it go. If we can't trust our voting system how can we call this a democracy? I just want the votes to be counted, if this all comes down to something as crazy as hanging chads hopefully something comes of it this time around.

It's only fair for McCain supporters to be sore if Obama wins, this is what happens every election, the losing side feels incredibly defeated. Sometimes this manifests into a battle of witty Photoshop pictures. The difference this time is that there seems to be a different type of opposition and IMHO it has everything to do with fear of the unknown. What a time for a guy with a foreign sounding name, different skin tone, questionable links to questionable people to be up for office, when our nation has spent the last 7 years with the specter of "them" (the unknown) wanting to get us.

I also wonder how those who dislike Obama could weigh in on the question that what if everything they have heard isn't true? What if the Ayers thing is completely ridiculous? What if Rezko was not what it's made out to be? I'm not defending any of it, I just like the exercise of thinking what if everything you have been told was wrong, was something invented to whip you up. I ask myself this about my own beliefs of all kinds on a regular basis and it makes me stronger.

Ooops I mean the comment by Conrad Bibby, not Mrs. Haff.

Democrats originally gave Bush no support because of the way in which the election was "decided" - not by votes, but by whack-job political appointees.

They then gave him no support because he has led the charge against good science (global warming, sex education) and good foreign policies (failed adventure in Iraq).

As for the voter-roll manipulation - the Republicans and Democrats both try to keep people out of the polls, whether by chopping names that look kind of like those of felons, or by supplying substandard/faulty voting equipment.

I'd encourage all of the folks using words like "menace" and "Mugabe", etc. to take a deep breath and calm down. You are not just adherents to a long-standing political tradition, you are *representatives* of that tradition and you must convince others of the wisdom of your position if you want to have influence in a democracy. It doesn't help to be seen as screaming and ranting and raving: you'll just scare the children like the Code Pinkers do now.

If you want to plan a strategy for turning back this tide of Liberalism, though, you must keep in mind that there has been a lot of battlefield preparation that will make it very hard for you to have an impact if and when Obama is elected. Thus, you'll need to do your own preparation and not just get yourselves impaled on the pointy sticks that the media has set up for you (the "angry right-winger" narrative). Remember, Buckley transformed Conservatism by making it an appealing intellectual movement - not by embracing the John Birch society! We could do with more intellectual argument (we have the better argument, after all) and less with nominating people that are unable to articulate the core intellectual principles of Conservatism / Liberty. My biggest problem with McCain, for example, is that, when offered opportunities to defend free markets in the face of a *government-sponsored* meltdown, instead chose to bash "Wall Street greed."

About that "preparing the battlefield," here are a few examples.

It is likely that blatant voter fraud will contribute to Obama's margin of victory. When it does, the Democrats will shrug and say "Well, Bush stole Florida." He didn't but the "case" that he did is air-tight as far as many on the Left are concerned. They feel no moral obligation whatsoever to run a clean election because they believe that they've fallen victim already to two "dirty" elections - despite the facts on the ground.

If Obama begins tightening the screws on Conservative speech (and I am less convinced of this than others here) the Democrats will simply say that they are sick of the political "lies" being spread about Obama. "For the good of the country," things need to be made more civil. Indeed, the populace as a whole *is* sick of the incivility of politics. It doesn't help that McCain's negative ads have been relentlessly cited by the MSM as evidence of the essential nastiness of our political discourse (despite Obama's use of the same). So, there will be a surprising degree of support for the Fairness Doctrine, etc. when it raises its ugly head.

If there are new infringements on your civil liberties (e.g. 2nd amendment restrictions), the likely argument from the Democrats is that Bush has already "shredded the constitution" and Obama is just trying to repair the damage. They will say that the "radical" right-wingers who rode shotgun on Bush's constitutional assault shouldn't be given a free pass to continue undermining America. That is, the entire thing will be made to look like the Conservative's fault for overstepping the line. I think that this last is the least likely path for Obama unless the right wing is effectively painted as violent and out of control (again despite the fact that a fair comparison shows far more actual politically-motivation violence on the left).

The end-result is that we'll all need to be much smarter about the presentation of the Conservative / Libertarian case than we have been to date while remaining steadfast in its defense. Amazingly enough, our positions (as opposed to those of the big government Republicans) is still quite popular. Accept Obama if he is elected because he will indeed by "your president" but don't ever give up a vigorous defense of the alternatives to the policies he is likely to push.

"It is likely that blatant voter fraud will contribute to Obama's margin of victory."

Again I ask, how? Tony Romo and Mickey Mouse aren't actually going to vote in Nevada. Is there evidence of some other type of voter fraud going on that would actually benefit Obama? Anybody?

I'm sure ACORN has nothing but the best intentions when they bus homeless people to the polls and tell them who to vote for; or when they create duplicate forms based on real people, which would allow someone to vote in that person's place and disenfranchise the victim of identity theft. They do this because they love democracy, I suppose? -S.

I'm sure ACORN has nothing but the best intentions when they bus homeless people to the polls and tell them who to vote for; or when they create duplicate forms based on real people, which would allow someone to vote in that person's place and disenfranchise the victim of identity theft. They do this because they love democracy, I suppose? -S.

Citation needed. Sounds like just another GOP antidote that we are suppose to accept without question.

Now, which party was it that sent a bunch of political staffers impersonating a mob of Florida voters to Miami-Dade to get the district to stop their recounts? I do believe, from the pictures and documentation, that was the GOP.

So really, why should we believe the GOP on this, when they have so blatantly done voter fraud or manipulation in the past elections?

The fact that you are already pointing to voter fraud for Obama's victory before the votes have even been counted just shows how pathetically desperate you (Republicans) have become. It's not voter fraud. It's voter registration fraud perpetrated AGAINST ACORN! They flag all the erroneous registrations and turn the over to the election board and let them sort out the rest of them. No one is going to vote as Mickey Mouse and its disgusting that you are trying to steer peoples opinions towards an impotent conspiracy theory. Stay classy Republicans!

Amazing how your comments all make the same points, using the same language. You've made Mr. Axelrod very proud, folks. -S.

I actually think a lot of you are wrong about Obama's effect - just look at the proto-Obama Deval Patrick - he's not evil - just weak and stupid - the issue won't be what Obama does - it will be his compliance to Pelosi who is evil and Reid who is stupid. Remember congress lackeys report to their leaders not the POTUS.

Yeah and the constant bitching about the Republican vote hacking in 2000 and 2004 completely undid the Bush administration. Grow up Acorn has nothing to do with obama. and there is a large difference between registration fraud and the voter fraud and intimidation put on by the Republicans.

Hey folks, chill out a minute here. Look back on your lives and ask yourself: how many signficant decisions or events in your life depended on who was in the White House?

Did you choose your college major, your spouse, or your career based on what party was in power? Did you decide whether or not to have children, move to a new city, or change jobs based primarily on who was president at the time? Did your life as you knew it come to a screeching halt when Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter were elected?

My point is this: I am voting for McCain, and I believe there are many very valid reasons not to vote for Obama. He is too socially and economically liberal for my taste. BUT, I do not think he can singlehandedly destroy this country and end life as we know it. He is still just one branch of the government, and most of what he does has to be approved by Congress. Life will go on regardless of who is president.

Also, how many presidents of either party ever did every single thing they promised to do during the campaign? I don't think Obama will either.

Instead of wringing your hands about how awful everything will be if he wins, why not start thinking about POSITIVE ways to spread the conservative message under an Obama Administration? Don't sit and stew about what the "other side" does or how "biased" the media are, show them we are better than that.