Rick Moran lays out his terms of surrender in a good piece titled "IF ELECTED, OBAMA WILL BE MY PRESIDENT":
This is how it should be. And whether Obama wins – if he wins – by one vote or millions shouldn’t matter. It doesn’t matter if you believe the reason he won was because the press was in the tank for him, or ACORN cheated, or McCain didn’t get a fair shake, or any other legitimate or illegitimate reason you can think of. At the very least, Barack Obama will deserve our acknowledgement that he is the legitimate elected president of the United States.
That doesn’t mean we have to slavishly follow him or join his cult like groupies. What it means is that where what he proposes to do is reasonable and doesn’t conflict with our principles, he should expect our support. It means that we don’t have to delegitimize his presidency to oppose him either. People of good will and good conscience can disagree without tearing each other and the country apart. And in this day and age, such an outcome would be unbearable.
An Obama election will mean changes – not all of them for the better. So be it. We will fight like hell against what we believe to be wrong. But we not do it by trying to delegitimize the elected president. Get personal, sure. Satirize and make fun of him, absolutely. Argue on the merits, most definitely.
But when push comes to shove and crisis erupts somewhere in the world involving American interests – and no president in recent memory has escaped such a challenge – I plan on backing my president’s play. I may give voice to skepticism about the path he chooses. This is our right and duty.
Let me add this - I thought the 2005 debate over Bush's proposed changes to Social Security was a positive example of how issues can be debated. I have a clear recollection of distortions and over-simplifications from both sides but often enough there was a sense that people were talking to, rather than screaming past, each other.
As another example, what about the immigration debate? Hmm, maybe not so much. But let's take hope that reasoned debate is still possible in this country and will occur after Jan 20, 2009 (if not sooner.)
OR. FROM THE OTHER SIDE: The VodkaPundit braces for the day that Dems revive the Fairness Doctrine. If that does not worry you enough, worry about this - what will become of the huge investigative apparatus built up by the left over the last eight years? There won't be any governmental abuses to investigate once the White House, Senate and House are controlled by well-intentioned Democrats, so where will they turn with their investigative fervor?
A possible clue - the NY Times put Andy Martin, a deplorable Obama critic, under a microscope, thereby confirming for all and sundry that Sean Hannity hosts a right-wing agit-prop show. Who knew? But investigate The One who might be President? You jest. So maybe we should look for the legacy media and crazed lefty bloggers to focus on every right-wing critic out there in order to pass the time and fill their days while the powers in place deliver paradise on earth.
Today the directive has gone out from Townhouse to declare criticism of Acorn to be racist.
I'm not certain I feel reasoned debate is on the table, although I am certain Obama will always be allowed to look reasonable.
Posted by: MayBee | October 14, 2008 at 11:47 AM
What it means is that where what he proposes to do is reasonable and doesn’t conflict with our principles, he should expect our support.
I don't expect that to be real frequent.
Posted by: Pofarmer | October 14, 2008 at 11:53 AM
It doesn't matter if Obama is elected through massive voter fraud, he should be acknowledged as the legitimate President. Huh.
In that case, why have election law at all? Why have elections? Let Obama stay in office until he tires of it and appoints a successor (Michelle?), and the whole time we can say it doesn't matter whether we think Obama is violating every Constitutional and statutory check on power, he should be (at the very least!) acknowledged as the legitimate elected President of the United States.
Posted by: bgates | October 14, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Tom, Tom, Tom. ****I thought the 2005 debate over Bush's proposed changes to Social Security was a positive example of how issues can be debated.****
You must have dreamed this debate. The way I remember it, Democrats refused to debate and refused to offer any of their own proposals. They just said Bush's plan was no good.
Bush's plan also got no Republican support.
Posted by: PaulL | October 14, 2008 at 12:06 PM
There's no telling what Obama will do. He could turn into a little Chavez, or maybe left to his own devices for once, he will moderate. If he moderates, and comes up with some acceptable lefty socialist programs, like a good health insurance plan, then I, as a centrist, won't have a problem with him.
Posted by: sylvia | October 14, 2008 at 12:07 PM
It doesn't matter if Obama is elected through massive voter fraud, he should be acknowledged as the legitimate President. Huh.
-- BGates
Now the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken. Let there be no doubt, while I strongly disagree with the court's decision, I accept it. I accept the finality of this outcome which will be ratified next Monday in the Electoral College. And tonight, for the sake of our unity of the people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession.
-- Al Gore
For the sake of comity, I’ll not even address the merits of the antecedents.
Posted by: TexasToast | October 14, 2008 at 12:20 PM
Hey don't blame Rick and Tom for their position. They are high profile bloggers and by professing to give the benefit of the doubt and support to the Maximum Leader they may avoid the camps.
Posted by: Paul | October 14, 2008 at 12:22 PM
Oh, just accept cheating. Great. Good luck with that.
The whole thing is an extremely weasel-worded bunch of garbage. He essentially says nothing. He'll oppose like crazy but back the president's "play". What is that supposed to mean?
Look, support your country. If the president acts in a way consistent with your view of what's best for the country, support him/her. If not, don't. But for gawd-sakes, don't write drivel.
Posted by: Barry Dauphin | October 14, 2008 at 12:29 PM
We've had 8 years of lefty bomb throwing Mr. Moran. Are you saying I don't get my turn?
Posted by: william | October 14, 2008 at 12:32 PM
T.Toast- I should let bgates speak for himself, but my guess is you've been too clever with your gotcha.
Hint:who still talks about Bush being "selected, not elected"? Why was "Recount" so poorly watched, yet so ballyhooed and so well-rewarded with Emmys?
Posted by: MayBee | October 14, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Sorry, but I will never accept the Cloward-Piven candidate.
Posted by: SWarren | October 14, 2008 at 12:35 PM
TT wants to hold up Al Gore, the man who "used to be the next President," as the paragon of acceptance of electoral results. Heh.
The difference is there was no fraud in the Republican victories. No Doodad Pro, no unanimously fake registrations in Lake County, no donations from Gaza, &c. The evidence Democrats can produce to demonstrate Republicans cheated is that a Democrat lost. The evidence Republicans can marshal is actual evidence. That may not matter to election Truthers like TT, but it's the truth.
Posted by: bgates | October 14, 2008 at 12:41 PM
Poopy on all that.
Obama said he is going to fundamentally change America.
CHANGE WASHINGTON, NOT AMERICA!
Posted by: Syl | October 14, 2008 at 12:48 PM
We have been told for 8 years that dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
I plan on being as patiotic as possible.
Posted by: Bob from Ohio | October 14, 2008 at 12:58 PM
I thought the 2005 debate over Bush's proposed changes to Social Security was a positive example of how issues can be debated. I have a clear recollection of distortions and over-simplifications from both sides but often enough there was a sense that people were talking to, rather than screaming past, each other.
I agree with PaulL: I can't imagine a more distorted account of that than your summary. Is the "clear recollection" seared, seared in your memory?
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 14, 2008 at 01:03 PM
Posted by: cathyf | October 14, 2008 at 01:07 PM
I can't imagine a more distorted account of that than your summary.
TM may have been thinking of the debates over the Iraq war, prisoner interrogation, climate change, to name a few more remarkable for how rarely Democrats accused the other side of crimes against humanity.
Posted by: bgates | October 14, 2008 at 01:18 PM
A number of folks here, including myself on several occasions, have taken the following oath.
Posted by: Bill in AZ | October 14, 2008 at 01:21 PM
Rick Moran is a softie. A smart softied but still a softie. The question is not whether Obama deserves our respect as POTUS but rather is he a legitimate POTUS or a pretender who will use his power to usher in a marxist/leninist black liberation philosophy political agenda and system. As an American I have as much right to resist his presidency as he has in promoting it. Believe me, resistance will not be futile but rewarding if we can keep the value system in America true to the original and living intent of the Constitution. You will be amazed as to how many people like me are looking forward to this resistance and how far we are willing to take it civilly. But don't be surprised that this possible presidency is more 7 Days of May than Manchurian Candidate. Avoid a 2nd Civil War and vote McCain.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | October 14, 2008 at 01:21 PM
So now I'm the racist? At least I provide a clean, fully functional, well heated, double pane windowed apartment to MY black tenant. Guess I should have gone the non-racist Rezmar route, eh Zero?
You guys can sing kumbaya - I'm making other plans. Oh, and make sure you get your repairs and business done early in the year, under Zero a lot of people will be taking the fall/winter season off.
Posted by: rhodeymark | October 14, 2008 at 01:26 PM
STOP BELIEVING THE POLLS!! This is still a 50-50 country. Either could win this. This board sounds like there is no need to have the election. Just go out and vote. And, again, STOP BELIEVING THE POLLS!! Garbage in=garbage out.
Posted by: bio mom | October 14, 2008 at 01:29 PM
Is Sarah on Rush right now?
Posted by: boris | October 14, 2008 at 01:34 PM
This holier-than-thou attitude seems to dove-tail nicely with the recent 'GOP Mobs need to be reined in!' meme. Synchronicity.
It's going to be a long, hard Winter for the GOP - and don't you even think payback for consolation!
Posted by: Barbula | October 14, 2008 at 01:35 PM
real clear politics electoral map shows big momentum for Obama
Not counting leaners:
Obama/Biden 313
McCain/Palin 158
bio mom is right, polls can indeed be wrong.
Obama could easily get even more electoral votes than these rcp estimates.
Posted by: kim jane il | October 14, 2008 at 01:45 PM
Republicans are stupid. Rick Moran is stupid. If you seriously believe that liberals are going to be "nice" after Obama is elected (if he is), then you're a fool. They will, as they have always done, press their advantage as hard and as fast as they can. They have been the "take no prisoners" crowd for over fifty years now, and the Republicans are still saying, "Can't we all just get along?"
The irony seems completely lost on them. Terrorists? Oh, the only way to deal with them is to take the fight to them. Democrats? Oh, let's be civil and nice and all get along. (And for the brain dead trolls that hang out here, NO, I AM NOT COMPARING DEMOCRATS TO TERRORISTS.)
The liberals are the enemy. They believe in socialism and communism and think that's how America should be run. It's a complete abandonment of the Constitution. Yet Republicans want to play nice?
Our forefathers took up arms to defeat oppression. Republicans want to get along.
Is it any wonder this country is so f****d up? Jefferson et. al. are turning over in their graves at the cowardice of their heirs.
Posted by: Antimedia | October 14, 2008 at 01:59 PM
Welcome to the new politics.
Don't like Obama, have the Secret Service visit you.
Say Obama's full name at a political rally-and you happen to be government employee-well that's a Hatch Act violation.
They aren't even waiting.
Posted by: RichatUF | October 14, 2008 at 02:05 PM
There are limits to what any citizen can or should accept. Wholesale voter fraud in a close election is a very bad start that should have us all very sensitive to further degradation of our democratic processes. If Obama pursues his political objectives through legal channels, we'll all give him the benefit of the doubt.
Any proposal or action from the Obama Administration to limit free political speech will be met with serious opposition as will criminal or civil prosecution of political opponents.
To quote WT Sherman, "If war be the remedy of my enemy's chosing, I say, give it to him."
It might be Obama's choice.
Posted by: Joseph Somsel | October 14, 2008 at 02:05 PM
They believe in socialism and communism and think that's how America should be run.
Here's something that hasn't generated as much coverage as I would have expected: we plan on modifying Republican DNA with nucleic markers for easy identification. (Don't worry, a new tax will cover the costs.) It also allows us to more effectively control your breeding rates.
Once the genetic markers are in place the whole 'enslavement of Republicans' thingy will go much more smoothly.
And we have even bigger plans for the more attractive members of your newly created race, but there'll be no official announcement of that until after the election.
Posted by: kim jane il | October 14, 2008 at 02:15 PM
Barbula - I get my consolation from Bezmenov. When the real bootheel comes down, the useful idiots go first.
Posted by: rhodeymark | October 14, 2008 at 02:21 PM
Joseph Somsel-
If Obama pursues his political objectives through legal channels, we'll all give him the benefit of the doubt.
Then we can call him The Legal One.
Posted by: RichatUF | October 14, 2008 at 02:25 PM
Prepare for a new America from Gateway Pundit:
Posted by: SWarren | October 14, 2008 at 02:30 PM
This is kinda weird, via Rich's link above.
Guglielmi didn’t know the timeline for the investigation, but he said the office wants all Hatch Act violation cases finished before the election. The office is investigating hundreds of cases called in throughout the election, he noted.
So, if you are an elected Republican, you can't stump for republican candidates??
Man, the Horror of using Barry's middle name.
Posted by: Pofarmer | October 14, 2008 at 02:39 PM
Italiacto
Posted by: boris | October 14, 2008 at 02:43 PM
So according to one of the biggest bullies in the blogosphere, I'm supposed to respect a president Obama even if he gets elected with bogus voters and turns this country into the next Cuba or Venezuela? I expect this garbage out of Moran, but from you TM, it is a surprise, if not shocking.
Obama would have enough sheep at his command to make him feel good, he won't need me to add to his already overblown ego. Sorry, but if Obama becomes president, he can rule without my respect and/or support. Fortunately I don't have any wealth to be redistributed and I have good survival skills.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 14, 2008 at 02:48 PM
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 14, 2008 at 02:49 PM
Holy crap Rich.
did you read the comments in that article you linked???
Posted by: Pofarmer | October 14, 2008 at 02:51 PM
America must "heal wounds" it has caused to other nations, revive its alliances
What wounds to what nations? What alliances need reviving? I hope Jesse took his bastard kid to the "French lakeside resort"; it would be the responsible thing to do. I'm guessing he didn't.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 14, 2008 at 02:52 PM
Fortunately I don't have any wealth to be redistributed
According to Republican dogma you made bad choices and deserve your lot in life.
Posted by: kim jane il | October 14, 2008 at 02:54 PM
Moran's a bully? Who knew?
I'm not sure what I'll do..probably formally change my name to I'm Not Spartacus--just in case and wait while they round up others hoping they'll be tired by the time it's my turn..
That's never worked well before , but who knows..this time it could be different.
JJ's comments sting though--I really hate the thought of giving up all that power.
Posted by: clarice | October 14, 2008 at 02:54 PM
Well, if that sheriff's in trouble, what about those pro-Obama assholes in Missouri?
Posted by: clarice | October 14, 2008 at 02:56 PM
I'm praying for grace if Obama wins. I so do not want to be like my liberal counterparts. I plan to wish the man well if he wins (or more likely steals) this election. What I don't want to be like is the trolls who hang out here.
That doesn't mean I won't criticize the man wholeheartedly and work to rescue the country I love. But I will give the system its due - and then work to make sure it never happens again. Or at least I'm planning to try.
I just have one question: Will it be inappropriate to refer to him as "ChimpyMcCastro"?
Posted by: Jane Whitman | October 14, 2008 at 02:58 PM
New 8th Grade English Textbooks Now Contain 15 Page Section on Obama!
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 14, 2008 at 03:01 PM
Speaking of welcoming our new overlords, Chris Buckley has resigned from NR. He plans to take a sabbatical from writing to join Ron Reagan's ballet troupe, after which he will begin a biography of Barack Obama, tentatively titled "Thank You For Sucking".
Posted by: bgates | October 14, 2008 at 03:04 PM
Wisconsin - McDougal Littell Literature book
Next year's printing comes in an attractive red binding, that will be called:
the McDougal Littell Red Literature book
And you can order a copy once you've shown proof of your genetic marker upgrade.
Posted by: kim jane il | October 14, 2008 at 03:08 PM
Let the finger pointing and recriminations begin!
Bush Strategist: McCain Knows He Put Country At Risk With Palin Pick
Matthew Dowd, a prominent political consultant and chief strategist for George W. Bush's reelection campaign eviscerated John McCain on Tuesday for his choice of Sarah Palin as vice president.
Saying that Palin was a "net negative" on the ticket, he went on: "[McCain] knows, in his gut, that he put somebody unqualified on the ballot. He knows that in his gut, and when this race is over that is something he will have to live with... He put somebody unqualified on that ballot and he put the country at risk, he knows that."
Matthew Dowd
Posted by: kim jane il | October 14, 2008 at 03:14 PM
Chris Buckley has resigned from NR
Really? Thank goodness. His column was awful, a column which bumped Mark Steyn's. Can we please unbump Steyn's? Thx!
Posted by: Jim Ryan | October 14, 2008 at 03:32 PM
FWIW, nobody has yet told me why Palin is less qualified than Edwards. Or Barry for that matter.
Posted by: Pofarmer | October 14, 2008 at 03:36 PM
From where I sit she is far more qualified than either Obama or Biden.
It's all about the spin I guess.
Posted by: Jane Whitman | October 14, 2008 at 03:38 PM
Jim, this from Rich Lowry at the Corner is worth quoting in full:
Posted by: bgates | October 14, 2008 at 03:47 PM
From where I sit
Then we're in agreement that Palin on your ticket was a good thing for the USA!
Posted by: kim jane il | October 14, 2008 at 03:50 PM
And from "President of the World" Obama we will have this Bill which is already sponsored by Senators Obama and Biden:
Barack Hussein Obama, George Soros, the Tobin Tax and the Tie That Binds
Excerpt:
Posted by: SWarren | October 14, 2008 at 03:53 PM
bgates, thanks. Steyn "hiatus." Now over. Uh, huh. Well, it's good news.
I found the C. Buckley column boring before I knew that he supported Obama, fwiw.
The change from Misanthrope to Steyn was fine, and both were good. I delight to see Misanthrope back from time to time. But the change to C. Buckley was a clunker, in my view.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | October 14, 2008 at 03:56 PM
So Buckley lies and whines? Yep. He's a liberal.
Posted by: Sue | October 14, 2008 at 04:08 PM
Watch your credit card bills. This couple ended up with a $2300 charge for a contribution they never made.
Credit Card Fraud For Obama
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 14, 2008 at 04:13 PM
I've been hunting for this for a while. Finally found it today. Over at Volokh Jim Lindgren did a piece on Obama's plans for 'voluntary groups'.
Senator Barack Obama is proposing to remake American society in a way that the American public does not yet understand...
Obama's New Corps and other service programs
Posted by: Syl | October 14, 2008 at 04:14 PM
LOL.
Socialist Brain of a Liberal Democrat
I like the "free radical" roaming around looking for a hyphen.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 14, 2008 at 04:21 PM
So Buckley lies and whines?
And if he only played the victim card while he lied and whined he'd be a Republican.
Posted by: kim jane il | October 14, 2008 at 04:23 PM
Hey guys... Doesn't the election have to happen first? Personally, I don't plan on Obama becoming president, and I don't think the American people will actually pull the lever for a man of his caliber.
And if he is somehow elected, I fervently hope is that Bush appoints a few special prosecutors on his way out the door, just to make it fair. Voter fraud is already happening, and there's no way that'll get investigated otherwise. Ditto for some other important underpinnings of a free society.
As for me, I'm not following Rick Moran's lead. If the President earns my support, he'll get it. Otherwise, he won't. And if he earns the exact opposite, he'll get that in spades.
Posted by: Extraneus | October 14, 2008 at 04:23 PM
C Buckley: Good riddance and take the rest of the NRO losers with you, leaving only Stein.
Who gives a rat's ass what a quisling twat like Matthew Dowd thinks. Another stuffed shirt loser with an abundance of excessive self-esteem.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 14, 2008 at 04:24 PM
Bush Strategist: McCain Knows He Put Country At Risk With Palin Pick
You mean the once-and-future Democrat who defected more than a year ago? Republicans defect to the Obama camp (May 6, 2007):
Yet another "strategist" who was perfectly wrong on the "surge" strategy and jumped ship as a result. Now we're supposed to be concerned with his opinion of Palin? Is that really the best you've got?Posted by: Cecil Turner | October 14, 2008 at 04:26 PM
Doesn't the election have to happen first?
How quaint. 'The Election.' Heh.
As if we haven't already loaded the election results into all those lovely Diebold machines.
'The Election.'
That's a good one.
BTW, out of sympathy we let you keep Texas in the Red column.
Posted by: kim jane il | October 14, 2008 at 04:35 PM
kjII
This is for you. Obama is non-partisan in his election fraud shenanigans. I watched the whole thing and found it devastating.
We Will Not Be Silenced
Posted by: Syl | October 14, 2008 at 04:44 PM
Matthew Dowd, Bush’s chief campaign strategist in 2004, announced last month that he was disillusioned with the war in Iraq
Disillusioned with a war that was won. Brilliant; no wonder KJI thinks so highly of this strategic genius.
Posted by: Captain Hate | October 14, 2008 at 04:50 PM
Later tonight, Canadian election results can be found here.
Posted by: Elliott | October 14, 2008 at 04:51 PM
OT Did anyone else catch Neil Cavuto's interview with Ron Weisflog, the guy who gave McCain what for at a recent rally?
I,m not kidding when I say that if we could get him to replace McCain on the GOP ticket with Palin in the next three weeks, they would smoke Obama/Biden and save the Republic.
McCain could take his place in the audience.
Posted by: Publius | October 14, 2008 at 04:54 PM
OT Did anyone else catch Neil Cavuto's interview with Ron Weisflog, the guy who gave McCain what for at a recent rally? I,m not kidding when I say that if we could get him to replace McCain on the GOP ticket with Palin in the next three weeks, they would smoke Obama/Biden and save the Republic.
McCain could take his place in the audience.
Guess I should add a link. LUN
Posted by: Publius | October 14, 2008 at 05:03 PM
PROMINENT DEMOCRAT CAUGHT IN MONEY LAUNDERING SCANDAL
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 14, 2008 at 05:10 PM
Obama Now Buying Ads on Video Games
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 14, 2008 at 05:16 PM
When I said "legal" as to Obama political processes, I meant that to include the Bill of Rights. Most of his programs should also be reversable - although Social Security was a program that can't be reversed.
The idea of Obama's "national service programs" almost sounds like a Praetorian Guard as protection against a military coup or maybe cover for a Chavezian "neighborhood watch".
Paranoia does have its pleasures, does it not?
Posted by: Joseph Somsel | October 14, 2008 at 05:27 PM
It almost sounds like we have a genuine culture of coruption going on among the Dims. Too bad nobody will cover it. Not nearly as juicy as sending e-mails to young adults or bumping around in a bathroom stall.
Posted by: Pofarmer | October 14, 2008 at 05:31 PM
Thanks for the Wexler tip Sara. I've blogged it and h/t'd you.
Posted by: clarice | October 14, 2008 at 05:34 PM
Ill Kim Jane, knows how to pick them, doesn't she?
Posted by: clarice | October 14, 2008 at 05:37 PM
@Extranious
Hey guys... Doesn't the election have to happen first?
…
Voter fraud is already happening ,…
Let me get this straight - the election hasn’t happened yet but it has already been “stolen”? Is this a real argument? Sounds more like a tear in the space/time continuum or some other such staple of science fiction.
Early voting has indeed started in some states, but there has been no credible evidence of any voter “fraud”. Voter registration has skyrocketed, but, to paraphrased many: registration fraud and voter fraud are not close to the same thing; a significant increase in voter registrations will obviously include a corresponding increase in bogus registrations; completed voter registration forms, from whatever source, must be submitted to election officials so that they can make a determination of validity; and “Mickey Mouse” has almost certainly not voted and almost certainly won’t. Moreover, Gallup has two likely voter screens in its daily track to adjust for the increase in voter registration. Obama is substantially leading under either screen. If “fraud” will result in a “stolen” election, why don’t the polls reflect it? Is Gallup (and, for that matter, all of the other pollsters) in the “fraud tank” as well?
Its amazing to find that, after 8 years of GWB, a financial meltdown, a looming recession and a pathetically erratic McCain campaign, the majority of this board can’t seem to find any explanation for Obama’s lead other than “fraud”. Do we need some kind of razor here?
Posted by: TexasToast | October 14, 2008 at 05:38 PM
In Germany in the 1930s, was it patriotic to say " If elected, Adolf Hitler will be my president."
Just asking. He was, you know...elected.
Posted by: J Verner | October 14, 2008 at 05:42 PM
Naomi Wolf is an idiot.
Posted by: bad | October 14, 2008 at 05:47 PM
kim jane il,
Please don't try to engage me. I'm not into trolls.
Posted by: Jane Whitman | October 14, 2008 at 05:52 PM
registration fraud and voter fraud are not close to the same thing
Well except for the small detail that vote fraud requires registration fraud first. A fraudulant voter first has to register fraudulantly. So one assumes that if registration fraud is widespread enough to influence polling ... that is so not likely to be the one and only reason to do it.
Posted by: boris | October 14, 2008 at 05:57 PM
"the majority of this board can’t seem to find any explanation for Obama’s lead other than “fraud”.
There are plenty of other reasons...smoke and mirrors, hope and change, koolaid, the MSM's failure to identify Obama as an unqualified lightweight,etc. And of course, the support of those interest groups that think he will give them a lot of free goodies and those who think they will be on the gaining side of wealth distribution. But in any event it is fraud any way you look at it.
Posted by: ben | October 14, 2008 at 05:59 PM
registration fraud and voter fraud are not close to the same thing
And registration fraud happens because...???
Posted by: bad | October 14, 2008 at 05:59 PM
The thing that bugs me about C.Buckley his reasoning could have been used to support Kerry in 04.Pretty wimpy to wait until Dad dies to set your inner liberal free
Posted by: jean | October 14, 2008 at 06:00 PM
And let's remember who were talking about--
The man Louis Farakahn is calling the "messiah."
The man Jessie Jackson just said would end Zionist control over Washington.
And these are two men who know him a hell of a lot better than we do. He's their home bro.
And we could go on and on.
I might be more inclined to agree with Rick if 90% of the new registered voters who might push the dems over the edge this time--and perhaps forever--were not as dumb as dirt clods, and only care about the $1,000 check they've been promised. That's how republics end up being something else altogether.
Doesn't look good folks. Taking all of our money away may just be the least of our problems.
Posted by: J Verner | October 14, 2008 at 06:00 PM
On the bright-side C.Buckley leaving NR will open a room on their cruise.Someone could jump in there and grab a room.I bet it is a nice one
Posted by: jean | October 14, 2008 at 06:04 PM
There will always be people like TT who will see no hint of election fraud without a Republican victory to "prove" it. For those who are not blinded by partisanship, Obama's long-term association with an organization which has registered nonexistent voters in several states is troubling, as are Obama's denial of that association. Obama's party's adamant stance against voter identification is troubling. Obama's refusal to release information about small donors is troubling. The hordes of illegal donations discovered in cursory investigations of Obama campaign records is troubling.
TT of course has no interest in this mountain of evidence. What on earth do fraudulently inflating the voter rolls and preventing clear identification of voters at the ballot box have to do with vote fraud? Obviously if the rolls increase, sometimes his candidate's pet organization will submit a batch of thousands of unanimously fake applications. Instead he points to - polls. Polls which overstated support for Gore in 2000, Kerry in 2004, and for Obama (v Clinton) in primary contests earlier this year. TT's hypothesis is that, hey, maybe this time the polls are right! -and if not, the existence of polls showing the Democrat with a lead in October disproves even the possibility of election fraud.
Unless the Republican wins.
Posted by: bgates | October 14, 2008 at 06:07 PM
Early voting has indeed started in some states, but there has been no credible evidence of any voter “fraud”.
The homeless bodies who voted early will also be dragged in to vote on election day. They'll simply be given different names.
The only registration fraud caught is duplicates and non-existent addresses. Nobody has caught the legitimate names/addresses of people who did NOT register but who will magically 'appear' on election day.
Posted by: Syl | October 14, 2008 at 06:08 PM
Jean, I think you're right. Mr. Buckley has daddy issues--perhaps not unlike Ron Reagan Jr. His endorsement of Obama is fine by me. He should be his own man. And let's cross our fingers that he is right, and Obama will rise to the occasion.
Though while I doubt Sarah Palin would have been WFB's type, does anyone think that if alive, he would be supporting Obama and thrashing MCCain in the pages of NRO--especially when considering what Stanley Kurtz is coming up with?
It seems to me that Obama is just the sort of person WFB spent his life fighting against.
Posted by: J Verner | October 14, 2008 at 06:11 PM
One of the complaints I heard over and over in Wisconsin, was how sick and tired everyone is with the election. Many of them claim they automatically stop listening to anything that sounds political, including voter fraud.
Since most of the people I eavesdropped on claimed to be independants, I found that info disconcerting.
Posted by: bad | October 14, 2008 at 06:14 PM
Gee, a vote fraud already? When's Election Day?
Anyway, like I said, it'll never be investigated if Omana wins unless a special prosecutor is named by Bush, and I'd bet money that McCain would squash it, too.
But let's not forget that A Vote For Obama is a Vote For Civility.
Posted by: Extraneus | October 14, 2008 at 06:18 PM
MoRAN HAS DRUNK DEEPLY OF THE kOOL aID FOR QUITE A WHILE. I pledge I will give the same respect the MSM and dhimmieerats showed Bush. I pledge the same good humor that SNL has always displayed. I will honor an Obama presidency in the same way Dowd and the other trolls at the NY Times honored any Republican. I swaer to conduct myself in a manner that would do honor to the DU and Kod Kiddies, as well as their sponsors.
So what if the election is stolen? So what if we will see military votes uncounted yet again. I pledge not to drink the same Kool Aid that Moran drinks so deeply of.
Posted by: Thomas Jackson | October 14, 2008 at 06:26 PM
bgates,
The whole things puts me in mind of narration in Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels*:
Cast the parts to your choosing, maybe replace London with "Leftdom." I'm sure Hit and Run will appreciate the foodstuffs involved.
_________________
*I fixed a couple errors in the transcription.
Posted by: Elliott | October 14, 2008 at 06:42 PM
Please don't try to engage me. I'm not into trolls.
Eeeeeew! As if!
Posted by: kim jane il | October 14, 2008 at 06:42 PM
Ill
As if, indeed. You could never get that lucky.
Posted by: bad | October 14, 2008 at 06:50 PM
Has anyone here read anything about what happened to Romney? Why he isn't campaigning? Is it just McCain's hatred of him?
Posted by: PaulL | October 14, 2008 at 06:50 PM
Joseph Somsel-
You caught that. The O salute has a more sinister begining as well.
Posted by: RichatUF | October 14, 2008 at 06:51 PM
There is a certain strain of romanticism running through the pro-BHO forces. I put Chris Buckley in that camp. BHO is in Chris's age cohort and of a similar educational pedigree. I have a hunch that Chris feels a kinship with BHO that he doesn't feel with JSM or Gov. Palin. He probably does believe he BHO will rise to the occasion, and hopes he does.
But I think his emotions have gotten the better of him here. One simply must be blind to BHO's philosophy (as expressed in his writings, votes and political allies) as well as his uniformly leftward political record to think he will not lean left when faced with tough decisions.
As much as I want to see a man of African descent rise to the highest office in the land (and I want that very much), I cannot ignore his political predilections. Nor do I think anyone else should.
That's not racist in any fair definition of the term.
Posted by: jim Rhoads aka vnjagvet | October 14, 2008 at 06:52 PM
C. Buckley.Sometimes greatness skips a generation
Posted by: jean | October 14, 2008 at 07:01 PM
Why he isn't campaigning?
He is campaigning and raising money. I just saw him commenting after the last debate.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | October 14, 2008 at 08:06 PM
I'm glad to hear Romney is bringing in some dough. But I don't see any evidence of him changing the minds of undecided voters.
Posted by: PaulL | October 14, 2008 at 08:27 PM
Via Hot Air, Marc Ambinber has this quote from McCain's pollster:
Add this nuggest to the mix, and I'm sure the lefties can whip up a first rate conspiracy theory.
Posted by: Elliott | October 14, 2008 at 08:30 PM
Jim, we know that he leans left--the question is, how much will he pull left.
I wouldn't treat Obama like the truthers and the Bush as monkeyhitlers treated our current pres., although I'm certainly going to keep my eyes open.
He would have to prove himself before I ever call him "my" president.
Posted by: J Verner | October 14, 2008 at 08:33 PM
IF ELECTED, OBAMA WILL BE MY PRESIDENT
You mean conservatives aren't going to flee north if Stephen Harper remains the Prime Minister?
Posted by: Elliott | October 14, 2008 at 08:41 PM