Did O Steal Election In Ohio?

Did O Steal Election In Ohio? — President Obama beat Republican Mitt Romney in Ohio by 166,214 votes out 5,489,028 cast last November for a 3 percent margin of victory.

Well it turns out that one out of every five — or 20 percent for public school grads — registered Ohio voter is ineligible to vote.

Now some could say that is just innocent sloppiness and these people never came out to vote anyone.

Or some could say that was a pretty strong sign that the Democrats stole the election in Ohio.

BTW, Ohio Secretary of State John Husted was given the cold shoulder by Attorney General Eric Holder when he sought a meeting to try to balance conflicting federal laws to pare down the list.

Hat tip Bryan Preston.

Did O Steal Election In Ohio?

Bring Out Your Dead Tarheel Voters

The North Carolina Board of Elections, Friday, was presented with a list of 30,000 dead persons still registered to vote.

It was compiled by the Voter Integrity Project that compiled the list using death records from the state’s Department of Public Health from 2002 to March 31 and comparing them to voter rolls.
North Carolina does not have a voter photo ID law.
We in Pennsylvania now do.
Bring Out Your Dead Tarheel Voters

Philadelphia Vote Fraud? Oh yes.

Democrat functionaries like Daylin Leach and Democrat Party propagandists like Annette John-Hall continue to attack Pennsylvania’s photo voter ID bill calling it unfair while wondering if vote fraud can ever be found.

Well, yes, oh you pursuers of banana republicdom. It can be.

Al Schmidt, party of that body’s permanent Republican minority,has unveiled a study “Voting Irregularities in Philadelphia County, 2012 Primary Election” which focused on cases in 15 of the city’s 1,687 election districts and found cases of double voting, voter impersonation, voting by non-citizens, and 23 cases of people who were unregistered to vote but nonetheless permitted to do so.

Note that this focused on just 15 out of 1,687 districts.
Note that this focused on just a primary election.
If don’t believe vote fraud happens in Philadelphia you must believe in Santa Clause.

Thank you Rep. Daryl Metcalfe (R-12) for Pennsylvania’s photo voter ID law. Philadelphia Vote Fraud? Oh yes.

Philadelphia Vote Fraud? Oh yes.

9.2 Percent Vote Fraud Pa.?

The Philadelphia Inquirer on Independence Day carried on its ever-less-read front page a story proclaiming “Voters Without PennDot ID: 9.2%”

It noted 750,000 registered voters in the state did not have driver’s licenses or other approved photo identification required for voting this November.
Now, some will say “That’s horrible! Three-quarters of a million people have been disenfranchised!! For Shame!
Others, however, will point out that dead people can’t drive.
Thank you again, Daryl Metcalfe.
9.2 Percent Vote Fraud Pa.?
9.2 Percent Vote Fraud Pa.?

Michelle Obama Supports Photo ID

Michelle Obama supports the use of photo ID.

At least she does for her book signings as has been revealed by Newsbusters.org.
Of course, getting a book signed by the first lady is a pretty serious thing. It’s not like they are trying to vote or anything.

So Why The Fuss About Photo Voter ID?

Well the ACLU and NAACP are now suing to get Pennsylvania’s popular voter ID law overturned by the courts. They are claiming that  law violates the state constitution’s ”free and equal” elections clause and may cause people to lose their right to vote.

Why don’t they work to get everybody eligible to vote a a photo ID? It really isn’t that hard to do. It’s as easy to get a photo ID as it is to go to a polling place.
Why are the partisan Democrat groups like the ACLU and NAACP — and have no doubt that they are partisan — so against photo voter ID?
I think we know the answer.

Voter ID To Get Trial Run Today

Administration officials are reminding voters who are coming to the polls for the primary election, today, April 24, that they will be asked to present photo ID as the Department of State embarks on a “soft rollout” of the state’s new voter ID law, says State Rep. Jim Cox (R-129). 

While ID will not be required for tomorrow it will be necessary in the November general election. People who arrive at the polls in November without valid ID will have the opportunity to vote by provisional ballot and present identification within six days to the appropriate county board of elections. 

Act 18 of 2012 requires registered voters to present valid photo identification every time they appear to vote and also requires those using absentee ballots to submit proof of identification. Valid forms of identification must include a name, photo and expiration date, except when an individual presents a military identification card. A driver’s license or identification card issued by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT), military identification cards, cards issued by an accredited Pennsylvania higher education institution and licensed long-term care facility will all be accepted.

Pa Senate OKs Voter ID, Thank You Rogers Howard

The Pennsylvania Senate, yesterday, March 7, passed HB 934 that would require voters to present identification at polling places and in applications for absentee ballots. The vote was 26-23 with all Democrats opposed along with Republicans Stewart Greenleaf of the 12th District, and Mary Jo White of the 21st District,  Jane Earll of the 49th District.
Not voting was Republican Jane Orie of the 40th District.
The bill which was introduced March 4, 2011 by Rep. Daryl Metcalfe (R-12) passed the state House June 23, 108-88 and had been languishing in the Senate to the dismay of Tea Party and other citizen groups.
In fact, it didn’t reach the Appropriations Committee until Dec. 14 where it stayed until Monday when it was sent to the floor with expediency.
Could the action be  coincidental with the fuss Rogers Howard, who is challenging Senate Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi in the 9th District Primary, has raised about it?
One could think what one wants one supposes.
The bill allows for acceptance of non-photo ID such as utility bills, the casting of provisional ballots for those not having identification and allows names to merely “substantially conform” to those on the district register  rather than be an exact matches which is a good thing.
The bill now returns to the House for reconciliation.
Pa Senate OKs Voter ID, Thank You Rogers Howard
Pa Senate OKs Voter ID, Thank You Rogers Howard

Voter ID Bill Now Before Pa Senate

The Pennsylvania House of Representatives, June 23, passed, 108-88, a bill requiring most voters to present photo identification at every election.

The bill is now before the Senate.

HB 934 was introduced, March 4, by Daryl Metcalfe (R-12) and 47 co-sponsors including Steve Barrar (R) whose 160th District includes much of southwest Delaware County.

The bill requires “electors” i.e. voters to present a document issued by either the State of Pennsylvania or the United States  which has a photograph of the individual to whom the document was issued along with an expiration date.

It also requires that the name of the individual to whom the document was issued conform to the name of the individual as it appears in the district register — a point which could be an annoying surprise to many long-time voters.

The bill allows those who have a religious objection to being photographed to present a valid-without-photo driver’s license or a valid-without-photo identification card issued by the Department of Transportation. The exception appears to have been written with the Amish in mind.

Stop Election Fraud: No Voting Without ID

This is being republished with the kind permission of Chris Freind


By Chris Freind

I am not wealthy, but have recently acquired 22 domiciles throughout
Philadelphia. My real estate prowess has afforded me a unique
opportunity to make a difference in the lives of our citizens.

I can vote 22 times.

You see, I have staked out prime locations, from a cardboard box
under the Walt Whitman Bridge to a culvert on Cobbs Creek Parkway to a
burnt-out shell at 7th and Diamond. Yes, technically, habitating at
these locations makes me “homeless,” but I much prefer the term
“voter-enfranchised.” When you have such a love of democracy, how can
anyone have a problem with people who want to vote multiple times,
especially the homeless? (Although, in fairness, dead people should
only be able to vote once).

Incredible as it seems, folks in Pennsylvania don’t have to show any
voter identification whatsoever at the polls, with the exception of the
first time, in which a non-photo ID, such as a utility bill, is all that
is needed. And even that’s a stretch since some politicians ignore the
law and permit people, who have never produced identification to vote.
So in Philadelphia, among other places, voters whose “address” is a park
bench or condemned house are regularly pulling the lever.

This system has made multiple-voting quite easy and affords a vote
not only to those who aren’t registered, but those not legally permitted
to cast a ballot — the nation’s 12 million illegal immigrants, since we
aren’t checking citizenship status, either.

*****

Because former Governor Ed Rendell vetoed legislation requiring
voters to show proper identification, election fraud remains rampant.
By definition, allowing people to vote who are not properly registered
is disenfranchising those who play by the rules and cast a ballot the
right way. Bottom line: every illegal vote nullifies one made by a
law-abiding citizen.

And make no mistake. It has gotten so out-of-hand that illegal
immigrants are voting in large numbers throughout the country. Think
about that — citizens from other countries are quite possibly deciding
the outcomes of American elections.

One only has to look to Florida in 2000 to see a real-world example.
President Bush won by a mere 537 votes out of 5.8 million cast. As
governor of Texas, the Spanish-speaking Bush had always been popular
with Hispanics, particularly Florida’s Cubans. Given that Florida has a
large illegal immigration population, it is not unrealistic to think
that at least 537 illegals voted for Bush over Al Gore –the difference
in determining the Presidency of the United States. But since we have
so many “sanctuary cities” –places where it is prohibited to ask one’s
immigration/citizenship status — there is no way to determine who is an
American citizen, let alone who is validly registered.

Rendell’s rationale for vetoing the bill was that it would have
created voting problems for the homeless, the poor, displaced victims of
natural disasters, and those without access to valid ID. And now that
another Voter ID bill is working its way through the legislature — this
time with a solid shot at becoming law given Gov. Tom Corbett’s support —
we are hearing the same old arguments.

Here’s a question. How many natural disasters hit the Keystone
State? And even if one does, how does that obviate the need for an ID?

As far as access to an ID, is it really so excruciatingly difficult
to produce a passport, driver’s license, or employee, government or
student photo identification? Getting past the rhetoric, it has yet to
be shown how a voter identification requirement negatively affects
students, the disabled, and, as the ACLU puts it, “disproportionately
impacts the elderly, the working poor, and racial minorities.”

Since identification requirements would apparently discourage people
from voting, thereby “disenfranchising” them, here’s a solution: let’s
have no rules at all. That way, at least no one will be offended….well,
except law-abiding Americans. But hey, what do they matter, since
they’re the only major constituency with no rights.

*****

Buzzwords like “voter disenfranchisement” aside, the Pennsylvania
Voter Identification Protection Act, sponsored by State Representative
Daryl Metcalfe, is long overdue legislation with which an overwhelming
number of voters agree. What could be easier and more common sense that
simply documenting who you claim to be when participating in the most
fundamental American right?

The true motivations of those opposed are painfully obvious: the vast
majority of non-registered voters have Democratic leanings. They have
become an integral part of the Democratic base, and as such, their
voting process must be obstacle-free if the party is to grow.

Translation: when you can’t legitimately win at the ballot box, go to Plan B — steal the election.

Welcome to the Banana Republic of Pennsylvania.

*****

It’s a shame there hasn’t been a meaningful debate on this. But
rather than discuss the Voter ID bill on its merits, the Left has chosen
to throw out inflammatory accusations of “voter disenfranchisement.”

At one point in our history, Americans were subjected to
discriminatory treatment which truly disenfranchised them, such as being
required to pay poll taxes and take literacy tests. Thankfully, such
practices have been rescinded, and comparing an ID bill to what our
ancestors experienced is a downright insult to those who fought for the
right to vote.

And as long as we’re on the subject of voting reforms, maybe an
amendment to the Voter ID bill could be offered that would eliminate the
option of single-lever voting. Pulling just one lever is far too easy,
and takes the thinking out of voting — which is, obviously, never a good
thing.

Americans have become far too complacent when it comes to voting and,
as a result, we are reaping the consequences of our corrupted system.
Good policy should never come down to just a “Democrat” or “Republican”
one-second pull of a lever. Instead, making citizens vote for
individual over party may yet inspire them to take a more avid interest
in who will be their representatives.

The American voting system isn’t perfect, and Voter ID laws (which
have been ruled constitutional) will go a long way to restoring the
integrity so crucial in the power to choose one’s own destiny.

Having no voter identification requirement is a disgraceful blow to
those who gave the ultimate sacrifice so that Americans could enjoy free
and fair elections.

In a society where one must show ID to enter office buildings,
airplanes, trains or even buy antihistamine at the pharmacy, it is time
to give the same level of importance to voting. The current practice — a
truly disenfranchising one — must end in order to preserve our
hard-earned freedom.