punch drunk ramblings
- Posted by Chris on October 12th, 2008 filed in Barack Obama, General, John McCain, Politics
It’s interesting to see what happens toward the end of an election cycle when the people on the percieved losing end start grasping at straws. In the last couple days I have heard a couple whoppers.
First up is the Berg V Obama case. Talk about a need for tort reform. This suit is a bigger joke than the McDonald’s coffee suit. It should be used by conservatives as the basis for tort and lawsuit reform in this country. Berg has no evidence. Period. The fact that this suit is still in play is just a sad statement on our court system. Obama could send out a copy of the certificate but he doesn’t have to. Berg has the burden of proof. If I am Obama, I am waiting for the weekend before the election and then doing it while making a big deal about it. That will help tarnish McCain even more with the indies. The sad thing is that Berg is a Clintonite. He wants Hillary. He thinks he can get her with this. It’s silly and holding on to this is beyond absurd. To their credit, the bloggers I know mention it but toss the BS flag on it like I do. Unfortunately this will be pressed on McCain and the republicans.
Next up is the reported RICO case against Obama and ACORN. “BS on the offense. 15 yards, loss of down.” Ok, this one is even funnier than the birth certificate issue. Fitzgerald is going to file a suit against Obama? Come on. Patrick Fitzgerald is a corrupt shill of the democrat party. He entrapped Libby to get a conviction since there was absolutely NO CRIME comitted in mentioning that Plame sent her hubby to get anti-W information. He knew this but wanted to do as much damage to the republicans and Bush as he could, so he made crap up. Do you really think that this corrupt shill is going to do anything to endanger Obama? That doesn’t pass the laugh test.
Here are the facts: Yes, Obama has coordinated with ACORN to get as many illegal votes as possible. Yes, Obama knows that the votes are illegal and supports it. He’s a democrat. His mission in life is to steal elections. That’s what they do. That’s all they do. And they will never ever stop until all conservatives are dead… Sorry, drifted off a bit there. You get the idea though. Reality is reality and reality is ACORN and Obama are registering and casting illegal ballots and they will get away with it. There is nothing we can do about it since the democrats control the election offices of the states involved and even if they didn’t a republican would cave as soon as the first “racist” charge was hurled. No use getting hopes up or bothered by that which you cannot control. Go get control of the election offices in the states, then bring it to an end.
Next up: the polls are wrong. Zogby says it’s close and you know he’s the accurate one. Funny, I thought that would be Rasmussen. Well it was Rasmussen until he showed what nearly every poll shows: Obama winning big at the moment. Others say the same thing. Here’s the problem. The polls tend to be right this time of the year. Yes people make up their minds late. However this is about the time that the “October Shift” occurs and it did for Obama. The October Shift is usually a permanent shift. It was for W in both elections. It was for Clinton in 92. Now this is a different type of election no doubt, but like the despair.com poster says, “in the battle of you against the world, bet on the world“. If all polls say Obama is winning and something must happen to change that, then our saying the polls are wrong does not make it so.
There are still surprises that can come out. But there are only 22 days to election day. 3 weeks for McCain to make a move. He started right by unleashing Palin. Despite what Glen and Greg in comments think, she is a big plus for the campaign not a minus. Had McCain picked Romney or Huckabee he would be looking at a Mondale sized butt beating. As it is he still has an outside chance and that is due entirely to Palin’s popularity in the base and with the independents.
The saddest thing here is that McCain could be winning right now. If he had saddled the democrats with the bank situation like he rightfully should have, he would be counting the states to a landslide, not Obama. But alas, you go to battle with the candidate you have and we have one who wants to be nice. I guess it’s up to us to be mean. Hitting Obama on ACORN and the banking crisis will work. Hitting Obama on his ties to corruption will work. Exposing Obama on his tactics in winning his state and federal senate seats will damage him. Rev Wright will damage him. His tax policies will damage him. Use those. Donate to the 527’s like rightchange. Then tell the fringe folks pushing Berg, RICO and “bad polls” to leave the stage.
Greg says:
Perhaps you are right that McCain is doing better with Palin than he would with any other running mate. I thought Pawlenty (sp?) was the strongest choice for him. Yes she excites the base, but I disagree that Independents are excited by her. The Indy’s have shifted to Obama - that’s the 7-10% swing we’ve seen taking hold.
Harry says:
You know, I don’t have a clue who will win. Obama’s pulling away these days, but a lot of his leads are very close–razor thin. Sometimes Obama leads in them. Other times it’s McCain. Like Missouri, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, New Mex, Colorado. They seem to change leads all the time. So damned if I know the outcome. I don’t want to make a prediction, because it’s really hard to say at this point. However, like Jimmy Carter before him, it’s John McCain who happens to have a catastrophic event come down in the incumbent party. In 1980, it was the Iran Hostage Crisis. In 2008, it’s the Stock Market Crash and financial crisis. Will wait and see on election day.
Barry says:
The Berg issue may be , as you think , grasping at straws . However ; It is an unknown , It keeps the public aware of “what is the 2 year long hold up of Obama providing a REAL copy of his Verified Birth Certificate” ? If I were an Independent voter going into the voting booth with that question unanswered would certainly allow me a clear conscience to vote against that particular candidate ! It kinda` goes along with all Obamas`college records that have been barred from sight until after the election . Even Michele Obama`s college records have been “closed to the public” until after the elections ? The Berg issue ; This is just one of a dozen hidden unknowns` about Obama ? Obama`s 1/2 sister has given 2 different hospitals in Hawaii that she said he was born in ? So at the moment no one knows for sure about Obamas`birth place, also there are no verifiable records of a marriage between his father & mother ; and no verifiable record of divorce in Hawaii ! Lets` wait and see ! Until Obama can show and prove a “FBI verified copy of his Hawaiian birth certificate” ,then I am for Berg keeping this avenue open as long as it goes unanswered along with all the other Unknowns about Obama !! You can follow McCains` career , the good and the bad of it from his birth to the present ! However , In Obama`s case there are gaps in his career of unknown years ! That is suspicious in its` own right ! We know Obama lies , the latest lie is Obama saying he wasn`t connected with ACORN in Chicago, so everything he say`s needs to be verified ! In Obama`s case , he may believe silence is golden , but the “truth” is the silver lining of ones` character ! At the moment , Obama`s character is missing in action ! PS . Make a note to watch the interview tonight 10/13/08 of Jerome Corsi just back from Kenya on Fox News with Sean Hannity ….. Should be very interesting !!!
Lance says:
What Barry said!
The growing mountain of unanswered questions ’bout The Stinky One plus all the obvious lies just may swing enough real americans to sink his ship!!
The next problem will be the riots if O’possum looses! If he wins, we’re in big trouble as every leftist & fascist tries to take over, which may lead to revolution & civil war!
Not the best of times!! This has become much more than an election!!
Greg says:
Lighten up guys. McCain was born in Panama.
This is not the first time posters on this site have referenced civil war when Obama wins.
Really? If your candidate loses, you’re gonna cling to your guns out of bitterness?
We “leftists” (independent small business owners), didn’t riot or rebel against the Union when the Supreme Court installed Bush in 2000, nor when Ohio went for Bush in 2004 contrary to exit polls.
When Obama wins it will be legitimate. Sorry if that upsets you, but let go of the civil war talk. Get your party together. Stop sending Republican pedophiles and closet gay hypocrites to Congress. Maybe your party will bounce back.
I know there are plenty of bad Democrats ready willing and able to screw things up. So watch and wait, let go of the fringe elements of your base. Come back with better Republicans. Hell if you send some real fiscal conservatives, I might even vote for them.
Chris says:
Lance,
Palin had nothing to do with that swing from McCain. It was McCain’s lack of voice during the crisis a few weeks back that did that. Had he started screaming about Obama, Dodd and the rest of the dems with the money blood on their hands, he would be leading.
Greg,
I only know of one poster who has mentioned a civil war and that was only in comments. Lance above. Read carefully what he has said. He said if Obama wins and the socialists/facists start on their takeover attempts, then there will be a fight. As far as I know, that won’t happen.
As for 2000, again, Gore lost Florida. Period. Every race whore in the country went to Florida to find just one, only one single person who was denied the right to cast a legal ballot. They could not. The SCOTUS killed Gore with the 7-2 decision stating that every vote must be counted using the SAME STANDARD. Hardly a bad decision. Once that was decided, Gore had lost because only by counting the votes the way they wanted could they win that election. Even the papers said that.
No, no one riotted after those, but this time is different. There are racial issues and the stakes for a lot of people are beyond mere politics. It is life. If Obama loses, there are elements in the criminal community that WILL use this as an excuse to riot and try to fan the fires of those who think Barack is more than a politician. It can happen. It probably will.
Sisyphus says:
“Berg has no evidence. Period.”
Did you read any of his motions? Clearly not.
Berg is asking for all the documents that Obama refuses to release to the public (and which the media ignores). He is obligated to do so if he seeks the biggest office in America.
Sisyphus says:
By the way, the suit has nothing to do with torts. How “tort reform” is going to solve anything is beyond me.
Lord Bitememan says:
Hey Greg, for all the consternation Dems flopped around with in that whole debacle there is one immutable fact that remains: Gore, throughout the entire process, could never produce an official count of votes that showed him ahead. So, drop the “Supreme Court installed Bush” melodrama. It demonstrates only your illiteracy in caselaw. The Supreme Court did not officially rule that Bush was president, simply that the recount process, by that juncture, was over and had to cease. The only body that “installed” Bush was the only body that has installed any president in the last hundred years, the electoral college.
Greg says:
From September 28th posting by Kevin:
“This battle is far from lost my friends, the American people see the empty suit that is Barack Husssien Obama, and they will NOT let him in the White House. I hate to say it but I can see an Obama presidency inciting an armed insurrection in this country. We cannot, will not, and must not tolerate a Marxist in the White House.”
http://www.americanarmed.blogspot.com
Look, if Obama maintains a 12 point lead in all the polls and next week somehow loses, then yeah I might go out and protest non-violently. If instead, the polls tighten and Obama loses I will accept it.
What Lance and Kevin are talking about is justifying armed insurrection and civil war because a Republican didn’t win this time. It looks like Obama is going to win, and the Dems will have a majority in Congress. it is safe to conclude that the country is in for a dose of liberal medicine, There is no justification for armed insurrection. These guys are just part of the Republican base showing their true colors.
Greg says:
Terrorism.
That’s what guys like Lance and Kevin are describing. The William Ayers/Tim McVeigh kind, not the Bin Laden kind.
Chris says:
Sisyphus:
“He is obligated to do so if he seeks the biggest office in America.”
Well, clearly not since he’s not releasing them. Berg has the burden of proof, not Obama.
“By the way, the suit has nothing to do with torts. How “tort reform” is going to solve anything is beyond me.”
Ok, got me there. I’ll use the Obama “too tired from campaigning” excuse, but the fact is I had tort reform suck in my head when I wrote that instead of lawsuit reform. The point remains though, this is a ridiculous lawsuit and the fact that it hasn’t been tossed is a sad statement on the legal/court system.
Chris says:
Oh, and as for “Did you read any of his motions? Clearly not.” I’ve read some of the stuff yes, but he can’t prove any of it. Fake but accurate and Kinko’s faxes may work for CBS, but the legal system (so far) doesn’t allow that willingly.
Chris says:
Greg,
Let’s wait until Obama wins and the “terrorism” happens before we tar the repbulicans. We haven’t rioted in any of our other losses. My guess is we won’t here either. The left however uses anything to justify a good riot. Seattle, Rodney King, Malice Greene, a Bush speech, a republican convention, and so on. The left enjoys rioting and destroying property. It’s in their genes.
If Obama wins, we’ll be pissed, but we’ll be more pissed at McCain for blowing it. He should be up 10 in this thing having hung the bank problems rightly on the heads of the democrats. However, if Obama loses, there *will* be riots and lots of violence and burnings and all. And it won’t be the republicans doing it.
raz0r says:
Still bitterly clinging to Florida (2000) and Ohio (2004)?
Gore lost. They counted, recounted, and recounted yet again. Gore still lost. He was a sore loser and so was the collective left (hence the whole selected meme they continue to yammer about).
Exit polls? Umm, sure. Did such a great job in 2000. Kerry lost. Get over it.
Don’t care if the polls show Barry ahead by 10, 12, or 20 points. Polls don’t mean anything come Nov. 4. They’re pretty meaningless in general. Not far from what Twain said about statistics.
Lord Bitememan says:
Greg, a simple win or loss may be no justification. If it turns out that there is widespread voter fraud on the part of ACORN, and Dems abuse their majority to silence any investigation into it, begin placing the blame for the banking crisis on Republicans in partisan line committee votes, and start abusing their majority to institute things like the fairness doctrine, don’t be surprised if violence does come about.
Greg says:
…and the Laird of the Blog thus condones violence if his conditions are met.
tort reform | violent image blog says:
[...] properties couldn’t …injuryboard Local Blogs - http://www.injuryboard.com/regional-blogs/|||Comment on punch drunk ramblings by ChrisI’ll use the Obama “too tired from campaigning” excuse, but the fact is I had tort reform suck [...]
Lord Bitememan says:
Yeah Greg, behold, sometimes violence is condoned when certain conditions are met. America was started because we condoned violence over a disagreement on tax policy. America was preserved because we condoned violence over a dispute about fort rights in South Carolina. Democracy was saved in Europe because violence was condoned over Polish sovereignty. So, yeah, sometimes we condone violence under certain conditions.
Greg says:
Lord B.
You seem kind of informed, so by now you must know that ACORN can’t commit voter fraud, and that as voter registration advocates they are required to turn over all registration cards to election officials. Beyond that, they label suspicious registration cards. Voter fraud is rare, hard to do, and would theoretically have minimal impact on a national election. An example of voter fraud would be Ann Coulter living in one city, and registering to vote in another city, and actually voting in an election. While this might be fraudulent voter behavior, it still isn’t going to have a huge impact on an election. If somebody submitted false names, and if those names made it onto registered voter rosters, then cheating individuals would have to show up at more than one polling place to vote fraudulently. It would have to be a mass coordinated illegal effort to have an impact. It is a lot less plausible than the election fraud perpetrated routinely by a handful of Republicans.
But I digress.
You appear to be saying that if Obama doesn’t win in a landslide, or if you have satisfactory doubt about the legitimacy of his win, then:
If the Democrats behave like the Republicans from ‘00 - ‘06, and pull the levers of power predictably for their own agenda, it is o.k. to get your violence on.
And apparently this is the equivalent of the American Revolution, the Civil War, and World War II.
Lord Bitememan, you must be into Yoga, because that is quite a stretch.
Lord Bitememan says:
“You seem kind of informed, so by now you must know that ACORN can’t commit voter fraud”
Certainly it can. If it produces a host of fraudulent applications and its members use information from these rolls to cast multiple ballots they certainly can. It’s not that far-fetched. At least, no so far-fetched that the Gore campaign didn’t use voter fraud as a pretext to disqualify numerous absentee ballots in Florida in 2000.
“If the Democrats behave like the Republicans from ‘00 - ‘06, and pull the levers of power predictably for their own agenda, it is o.k. to get your violence on.”
Republicans from 2000-2006 didn’t use the organs of power in an attempt to silence and malign the opposition. The party didn’t use the 9-11 commission to place the entirety of the blame for 9-11 on the Clinton administration. The party didn’t institute a university “fairness doctrine” demanding the universities tenure as many conservative professors as liberals. The proposed changes the Democrats are making are geared specifically at trying to silence conservative voices in their successful media and to start enshrining their talking points into public record. I certainly wouldn’t support violence over higher taxes, socialist healthcare, etc. I would support violence over systematic attempts to subvert the two-party system.
Greg says:
“I would support violence over systematic attempts to subvert the two-party system.”
What would you do?
Lord Bitememan says:
Well, first thing’s first. Wait and see till election day. All this is moot if, say, the Democrats don’t obtain filibuster strength in the Senate or, slim but not impossible, McCain might actually win. So, suppose Obama wins (margin oesn’t really matter, it’s worse if he’s close, but even a 55-45 win leave 45% of this country sitting as an out-group), and obtains Lieberman-proof wins in the Senate. I sit up and take notice. There will be allegations against ACORN. If the Dems actually commission a non-partisan, or a fully and honestly bi-partisan commission to investigate it and don’t try to derail the investigation or hijack it to echo their talking points, I settle back down. Now, suppose there is interference, then I start prepping. I start getting a bunch of Republican friends together, and we start to get on board with one another. But, we wait before getting any further.
Now, the next plays are in the Democratic court. I’m not going to raise a stink over hard line liberal judicial nominees, tax increases, or other general policy issues. Those are par for the course, and with a large election win, even predicated on ACORN voter fraud, as long as the system still remains competitive enough that we can regain seats in the legislature, no real damage is done that can’t be undone with time. However, the next Congress is going to have two issues it can ponder which strike at the heart of our competitive process and these I will not abide. The first will be a commission to investigate the causes of the banking crisis. The second will be fairness doctrine. If the Democrats abuse their role in power to enshrine their talking points about banking deregulation as the sole cause of this crisis in party-line committee votes, me and my little group go ahead, get permits, and purchase rifles. If, then, Congress passes the fairness doctrine, we start demonstrating in the streets, weapons in hand. It won’t be long before the police fire a shot at us, I’m sure, and we will reply in kind.
On the other hand, if the Democrats don’t abuse their power and try and subvert the capability of Republicans to compete in elections, I’ll probably just sit home and play Rome Total War instead.
Greg says:
Have you picked out a name for your group? You gotta have a name, something cool like Minutemen. You can’t go wandering the streets with rifles in hand and panties in a bunch without a cool name.
Lord Bitememan says:
Yeah, it’s called the “No Greg’s Club,” and we already have our one Greg.