Archive for 01/08/2010

A Very Useful Timeline of Climategate

Posted: 01/08/2010 by Lynn Dartez in Prayer Request

By Dr. Tim Ball  Thursday, January 7, 2010

The leaked emails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) are a treasure trove of information if you know climate science, the evolution since 1998, and the characters involved. The attached document was produced by Mohib Ibrahim who produces professional timeline charts and was first displayed at JoNovaʼs wonderful web site. here.

(Joanneʼs site offers different download options.)

CFP has published many articles about the files and their implications but as individual items they do not provide an over view. This document written by an expert in timelines is an encompassing and engrossing document that provides the over view but also puts things in historical sequence. It has a useful bibliography.
It is presented unedited so there are minor typos and grammatical errors but they do not detract from the explosive and disturbing story of manipulation and abuse of science.

If CFP readers have any questions regarding the document, let us know and we will try and provide answers.



Full body scanners; it’s just common sense

Posted: 01/08/2010 by Lynn Dartez in Prayer Request

By Arthur Weinreb  Friday, January 8, 2010

The use of full body scanners in the world’s major airports will not guarantee that another terrorist attack involving an aircraft will never happen. But, if used properly the scanner might have found the materials that the undiebomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, concealed. It may have even deterred him from doing what he did in the first place. Nevertheless there is no shortage of arguments coming from those on the left that these scanners should not be used.

The major argument against scanners that photograph people through their clothing is that they invade privacy rights. A typical example is the argument made by the B.C. Civil Liberties Association. According to the association, these machines should not be used because they photograph people naked. Michael Vonn, the policy director was not impressed by the fact that the faces of persons scanned will be blurred. That would be akin to forcing people to run naked through a room but allowing them to put bags over their heads. This analogy breaks down of course when it is impossible to imagine how running through a room naked could possibly save lives.

The real privacy argument is of course that some people will be deterred from flying due to “cultural (read, Muslim) sensitivities” to being seen naked especially by members of the opposite sex. Well, no one will be forced to go through these scanners; they have the option of choosing not to fly. The way some on the left go on and on about people who will refuse to be scanned makes it seem that flying from Point A to Point B is a human right. It isn’t, of course. Procedures that can save lives should not be abandoned simply because a potential airline passenger might feel bad or choose not to fly.

The privacy argument reaches the zenith of silliness when the discussion turns to famous people. For some reason Angelina Jolie’s name comes up quite a bit in this context. Tabloids would spend millions of dollars to obtain a naked scan of a star and this is somehow worse than blowing up a plane with hundreds of passengers. Rules can be put in place to destroy the images; there is no real reason to keep the scans after the flight has landed safely. No system of security or anything else for that matter is foolproof and it is possible too that someone could put a scan into the public realm. Whatever happened to those lefties who want long guns registered on the theory that “if it only saves one life”? When people are involved there is always the possibility of wrongdoing but that is a poor argument for refusing to take steps to protect the public from terrorist acts.

Privacy is the main argument against these full body scans but there are others. The CBC warned that the scanners emit radiation. Well, if ways have been found protect x-ray technicians and others who work with radiation, then the screeners can be protected. And there was nothing to suggest that flyers who get scanned are at risk although when the machines are put into use, that will inevitably come up.

A good argument in favour of the use of full body scanners is that the Toronto Star is against them. In an editorial the paper criticized Prime Minister Stephen Harper because he’s planning to buy too many machines. These lefty Harper haters would be the ones that scream the loudest if a Canadian plane was ever brought down by a terrorist attack.

And if an award is ever handed out for the most original argument against the use of fully body scanners, that award would go to those in the U.K. who say that minors cannot be scanned because the images would breach the country’s child pornography laws. Despite these reservations, the U.K. is one of the countries in the EU that is in favour of the use of scanners. Canada, for one has no intention of scanning children at the present time. After all Islamic terrorists wouldn’t bring a child with hidden explosives on an intended doomed aircraft, would they?  Minors should be scanned and to link these scans to child porn is ludicrous. Police officers routinely possess child pornography all the time. Not only do they possess it but they distribute it to prosecutors who further distribute it to defense lawyers. Then the prosecutors further distribute it to judges who show juries. For some reason these people aren’t considered to have committed criminal acts because they are doing what they do to protect the public. Just like those who operate full body scanners are doing.

Contrary to what we are led to believe, none of this is rocket science; it’s just common sense. Common sense dictated that Abdulmutallab should have been stopped from flying because he paid cash for his ticket. He should have been prevented from boarding the aircraft because he had no luggage. Common sense says that when he was put on a watch list he should have been put on a no-fly list. All of the miscues could have been prevented by the simple use of common sense.

And it is common sense to use full body scanners at the world’s major airports.

The Self Serving Elitist Class

Posted: 01/08/2010 by Lynn Dartez in Prayer Request
America’s Forum at AIPNews – ‘We are the Media!’


Dr. David M. Berman                                                        

History has much to teach us, and it is always a shame when I hear people speak of modern events and decisions without any historical perspective. We know from history how tyrants come to power and what truly motivates them. Money certainly is a motivating factor, however it never stops there. The true lust that motivates them for the long term is not only money, but also power. Once tyrants have money they do not leave their position of power. Instead, they seek more power, more control, and the more never satisfies. This power fuels their elitism, furthering their megalomania, reducing their “subjects” to mere peasants.

In order to maintain control, authoritarians always create a certain ruling class that I call the Self Serving Political Class. This is the class of societal elite whose purpose is to increase centralized power and maintain it. They are always placed in positions of influence such as government, education, media, and entertainment where they are rewarded for their loyalty to the system of political elite autocracy. They themselves do very well since the senior leaders of the self serving political class need them to maintain and grow their power. After a while many in this class actually begin to believe that they are good and are functioning for the good of society. It is in this delusion that they lose all sense of the principles of liberty that our founders realized were “self evident.”

Great nations are rarely conquered, they usually rot from within. We are in the worse time in our nation’s history. Some would say that I am foolish to make such a statement. I however stand by this statement and I will explain why. If we point to what most would say was the most difficult time in the history of America; The Civil War, we see something much different than now. There is no doubt that the Civil War was an intense trying time with death, and destruction. It was a time when perhaps our nation could have fallen so low as to be invaded and taken over by a power that would use our divisional weakness against us. That was a bad time and yet not as foundationally bad as now. We can point to times like WW2 when we were fighting both the German’s and the Japanese with great strain on our country. That was also a very difficult time and yet our nation was on a much stronger philosophical foundation than we are on now. We can look back on many times of great testing however there has never been a time in our history that we have so moved away from the principles of liberty as we have in the last 20 years, and particularly since Barack Obama became president. With a majority in the house and a filibuster proof senate, the Marxist [Alleged] President Obama has a willing self serving political class to institute tyranny as this nation has never experienced. Thankfully we survived the great tests. The Civil War was a fight to restore liberty that saw the end of slavery and the beginning of bringing civil rights to Black Americans. WW2 was a fight against a nation that attacked us and a nation that sought to dominate Europe and exterminate an entire race of people. Hitler had to be stopped. These fights were principled in liberty, as was the American Revolution.

The fight we are in now is another civil war. For the moment it has been a cold war without bloodshed. The ruling self serving political class has pulled out all the stops and is going for their true desire; power! They have taken over huge portions of the private sector and are seeking to totally control the citizenry. They tell us what we can and can’t do, what we can say, and when we can say it, what we must buy and not buy, how we can and can’t use our land that they make us pay rent in the form of property taxes at the threat of them confiscating it. They arbitrarily quote the Constitution when it suits there aims, and reject its principles constantly when it threatens their supremacy. These are the worst kind, who use the money and power that they seize from the citizens through intimidation to keep them in power. They do this while they perpetrate the charade of free and fair elections with the choice of two parties who work together for the furtherance of the self serving political class. This is why they make it so hard for a challenging party to get on the ballot.

Although it is clear that the Republican Party contains many conservatives at the grass roots, it is also clear that the Republican Party self serving leadership class is not conservative, but rather is in a dance with their cousins the Democrats. Together they have established an industry where money is raised to pay them and all their political operatives who work to continue their political corruption. Hundreds of millions of dollars are raised for the purpose of furthering the political industry that has come about by graft, and manipulation of the masses.

The war we are in is not for the change of a few things that we may disagree with. This is not simply disagreements on basic methods of grey areas. It is much more than that. We fight for the very same thing that sparked the American Revolution. This time the enemies of liberty are not only within, but also hold the most powerful positions of ill-gotten authority. They occupy huge bureaucracies in government. They are Presidents, Congressmen, Senators, staffers, and entire political machines. They are media elites and leaders of our education institutions. These are not Americans. They are traitors who put self interests above the Constitution. Their world-view is Marxist, (in some ways, Fascist) and globalist with them ruling all who they consider to be unenlightened, old fashioned, and lacking intellectual prowess. You know the contempt they have for those (as Obama put it) who “cling to their guns and religion.” They are the ruling class, the self serving ones, the ones who desire global government and the destruction of our national sovereignty. They push for global treaties that place the United Nations in authority over American citizens.  They desire global taxes and regulations, they negotiate trade policy that devastates our countries ability to manufacture goods and thus provide for itself (making us more dependent of foreign countries).

What are we who believe in the founding principles to do? Are we to sit back and watch our heritage be stolen from us? Are we to get in line with the culture of corruption, graft, payoff and find a way to get some crumbs that fall from the “King’s table?” Do we have a right to fight? Should we fight beyond just words and political action or does there ever come a time to say; ENOUGH!!!? Does there come a time to bear arms in defense of liberty? These are questions we freedom loving, God fearing, Constitution Patriots must answer. The government is already labeling American Constitutional advocates as “terrorists.”

I am not calling for an armed revolution at this point. I hope and pray that we can turn things around and return to our beautiful root principles that we may all?White, Black, Hispanic (or whatever ethnic makeup) live under the Constitution that made this country to envy of the world, and as close to the best that ever can be in a fallen world run by imperfect humans. There may come a time to bear arms we must. I pray that does not happen but if given a choice between hard tyranny and fighting for liberty I know what choice I will make.

I know that the words I speak may seem radical to some who read this but that is because of what I said in the beginning of this article; “it is always a shame when I hear people speak of modern events and decisions without any historical perspective.” Do you not realize that you would not have this nation if Patriots of liberty did not fight against tyranny? Does not history teach us of the vile abuses of repressive rulers? My people (The Jews) waited too long to defend themselves from the Hitler’s minions. History is replete with examples of people allowing the self serving political class to slowly take their liberty until it’s too late to fight. Am I radical because I believe the founding of America was paid for with the blood of freedom loving Patriots? Am I radical because I believe that the Constitution must not be arbitrarily interpreted as to allow the destruction of the principles it stands for? Am I radical because I expect the people who put their hand on the Bible, and solemnly swear to defend the Constitution from all enemies both “foreign and domestic, to not become the very enemies they swore to defend against? Consider these “radical” words;

“All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. – That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.”

Radical?  Terrorist? Is that what these words are? Indeed not! These are the words of our Declaration of Independence. These words were confirmed by men who understood liberty and were willing to fight for it. As I said, I hope and pray that we do not get to the point of armed resistance; however I fear that is exactly what is going to happen because there is a breaking point for freedom loving honest people. There comes a point where the winds of freedom blow in such a way as to make men see the principle of the most powerful of quotes of the revolution;

“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”  – Patrick Henry

I am not some crazy forty year old man still living in his mother’s basement writing this anonymously from behind a computer screen. (Like so many cowards who criticize me). I have been in business, have employed people, have started three churches, personally trained men for ministry, and have raised a family. People know me. My website tells you where to get in touch with me. This is not a joke people, this is real. Wake up!

The time may come when I will get arrested for saying what I am saying in this article. Alarmist you say? The F.B.I “Terrorism Task Force” already issued a pamphlet declaring that “defenders of the Constitution” are “extremists” and that the F.B.I should be on the lookout for them. Alarmist you say? So called “Hate Crimes” legislation has been signed by [Alleged] President Obama and enacted to limit the first amendment, as well as the bill that President Bush signed into law called “Campaign Finance Reform” which limits political speech.  Alarmist? [Alleged] President Obama had a web site set up so citizens could report other citizens who are sending out “misinformation”?.Do you not see the history of “big brother” repeating itself? I hope you know the answer to this question: Is it I and others like me who are radicals or is it those who trample the rule of Constitutional law who are the radicals?

I cannot say what other men may do, or what it may take for other men to get to the point that Patrick Henry came to. What I can say is that each American Constitutional Patriot must ask himself the question that Patrick Henry asked; “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?” I trust our answer will be “Forbid it, Almighty God. Give me liberty or give me death” Open your eyes, listen to history, stand up before it’s too late, exhaust every peaceful means, but never give in to the promises of the self serving class and never sell your freedom for so called security, for history teaches us that you will end up with neither. If called upon to defend liberty, we true Americans of every ethnic makeup must be both ready, and willing to fight. May the Lord God have mercy of us so it does not come to that point. Live Free or Die!

Posted 2010-01-05 5:55 PM (#31518) By: EternalVigilance
Well said. You managed to state what most of us patriots were already thinking in a very organized manner. But remember most of those early settlers were not the pampered brats Americans have become after being raised on television, public schools, and industrialization. They knew how to weave fabric to make their own clothes, so they could boycott from buying English clothes, as an example. They milked their cows and churned their own butter. They knew how to work hard at farming, hunting, and fishing, and some of them had to take good advise from the Indians to learn it better. They could walk and hike for miles and miles without becoming discouraged. They could sit in a church building all day long on Sunday, with their kids in the sanctuary, without getting bored or fidgety after the first ten minutes like the majority of Americans do today. Many of those early settlers taught their kids to read with the Bible so they were much more spiritual than today”s youth. But almost as important as their Bible readiing was the fact that they had guns and knew how to make their own ammo. In fact my children and I (homeschoolers) read a story about how the patriots even melted down a statue of the king of England to make their weapons of war at one point. And they were also very handy at hiding, after learning the lay of the land and how to hide, from their friends and enemies the Indians. Ultimately they had assistance from France at fighting England when it looked as though there was not hope left. So yes we really need to learn from our history.

Another thing to learn from history, my mother in law, a holocaust survivor, once noted that the only reason the Nazis could do what they did was because the citizenry was un-armed.

January 08, 2010
One thing you’ve got to say for MS-NBC: They stand by their man. But even Tammy Wynette would cringe at the senseless devotion to Barack Obama they displayed this week.
To call it puppy-dog-like would be an insult to canines.
Just days after seven CIA officers and operatives lost their lives in defense of this country, MS-NBC conspired with unnamed senior White House sources to slander the victims and the rest of the intelligence community, just to try to defend Obama’s incompetence on intelligence.
MS-NBC spent much of its Monday prime-time promoting the spurious contention that intelligence agencies may have deliberately allowed the attempted Christmas Day plane bombing to proceed in order to make Obama look bad.
This contemptible idea was floated during the “Countdown” comedy hour when The Sportscaster reported “Breaking News” that White House sources believe the intelligence community’s failure to stop the plot “might have been intentional and not accidental.” Further, “the information was in some way deliberately withheld from some higher or broader authority to make someone look bad,” leaving little doubt that the victim of this new, vast right-wing conspiracy was Obama.
Earlier, fellow Obama sock-puppet Richard Wolffe reported that White House officials said the intelligence debacle was the result of “a failure by individuals who maybe had an alternative agenda.”
Wolffe “covered” the 2008 campaign for Newsweek while simultaneously penning a paean to Obama. He was granted frequent access to Obama as a candidate and reportedly is now working on a second book, presumably with similar access. Wolffe and MS-NBC have already been accused of deceiving the public about Wolffe’s various conflicts of interest.
Three guesses as to Wolffe’s source on what Obama is thinking about the Christmas Day bomb attempt?
Wolffe, who was born in Birmingham, England, declared that the question being asked in the White House about the intelligence failings was “Cockup or conspiracy?”
MS-NBC continued to promote Wolffe’s charges as “Breaking News” on the following program. “What’s new and particularly worrying,” uber-lib Rachel Maddow solemnly intoned, “is the prospect that intelligence was deliberately withheld by one part of the American intelligence community from another, either by a grudge to make somebody look bad, or for any other reason that put petty politics above national security.”
Apparently, even this White House realized they had taken liberals’ animus against the intelligence community too far. Wolffe, their unofficial spokesman, immediately began walking back the allegation. Wolffe had “just checked in” with his masters, and he told Maddow by phone that the storyline he and The Sportscaster had spun was, in reality, “ten steps ahead of where the White House is right now,” and that “this comes down to human error more than this is some willful withholding.” Granted, Wolffe added that the conspiracy “questions are being asked.”
In other words, this White House trial balloon went over about as well as the Balloon Boy stunt.
But the damage was done. The left-wing blogosphere — the kind that puts all those Os in looney toons — quickly picked up the Obama talking points, confirming that instead of “the Place for Politics,” MS-NBC is actually the Place for Propaganda.
The airtime between Wolffe’s regurgitation of White House talking points and MS-NBC’s character assassination of the intelligence community was filled with — surprise! — Bush-bashing. Somehow the release of Gitmo prisoners, which the left had pursued with the persistence — and the lack of sense — of a child holding his breath, was Bush’s fault. That so many of the released Gitmo prisoners were from Yemen was also, inexplicably, Bush’s fault.
(MEMO TO COUNTDOWN PRODUCERS: The previous administration is just that: previous. You’ve become a one-trick-pony show whose pony done died.)
So far, no apology is forthcoming from either the White House or Wolffe to the thousands of hardworking professionals they slandered, or to the families of those in the intelligence community who have died in the nation’s defense.
As for MS-NBC, it has sunk to yet another nadir in its eagerness to pimp Obama’s political agenda, its reportage now the stuff you scrape off shoes.
William Tate is an award-winning journalist and author.

Obama and the White House Chicago Boys

Posted: 01/08/2010 by Lynn Dartez in Prayer Request

January 08, 2010

By Ed Lasky

Barack Obama has a problem. His polls numbers are dropping and his policies are fueling an angry backlash across America. The Democratic party is held in disrepute, and congressional Democrats are dropping like flies. This imperils Obama’s radical agenda and his own 2012 prospects. What to do? Game the system and rig the future elections. That is how things are done in the streets of Chicago.

Signs are emerging that the Chicago Boys — the triumvirate of Obama, Emanuel, and Axlerod — are up to their old tricks, as I touched upon in a previous American Thinker column. My recent interest was piqued by two news items that floated across my screen in the last week.
One was the release of the White House visitor logs that showed visits by Anna Burger, Secretary-Treasurer of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and named by Fortune Magazine as “the most powerful woman in the labor movement. ” We know Andy Stern, head of the SEIU, routinely visits the White House and has boasted of the tens of millions of dollars and man-hours the union spent in electing Barack Obama to the presidency. We can expect a repeat performance come 2012.
But Anna Burger is far more than an SEIU honcho; she also is the vice-chairman of a shadowy group called the ” Democracy Alliance,” composed of billionaire funders and savvy political operatives who set out a few years ago to change politics as we know it in America. Among their projects was something called the Secretary of States Project that set about electing secretaries of state in key battleground states.
These are the very officials who are charged with maintaining the integrity of the voting process. Recall the controversies in Ohio and Minnesota — including ACORN problems — regarding the accuracy of the votes in those states last year? The secretaries of state who gave a stamp of approval to these elections (where Democrats won) were Democrats supported by the Democracy Alliance. Various state chapters of the Democracy Alliance  have formed to use a range of controversial methods to ensure Democratic victories. (See “The Colorado Model” by Fred Barnes for a display of the type of tactics that can be used to manipulate elections. These include creating faux controversies, spreading them through supposedly non-partisan groups created by Democrat activists, and relying on an echo chamber effect until the mainstream media picks up the “story” and broadcasts it far and wide. Other groups are formed to harass journalists and editorial writers who don’t push the liberal line.)
Was Burger in the White House to plot future strategies with, say, Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod? These are putatively the Chief of Staff and Senior Adviser, respectively, to President Obama. But before that, Emanuel was the maestro of political fundraising and spending, and Axelrod was a veteran political strategist who has run numerous political campaigns over the years (including Obama’s). The Democracy Alliance has helped form front groups to get Democrats elected. Axelrod is a master at this type of tactic.
The Alliance’s handiwork played a role in the victory of Al Franken over Norm Coleman, which helped secure a sixty-seat majority in the Senate. There was a group — Alliance for a Better Minnesota — that posed as a group of concerned citizens. The Alliance was funded by outsiders, namely the wealthy, hyper-partisan Democrats behind the Democracy Alliance. This was a so-called astrotruf group: it falsely appeared to be a true grassroots effort.
Tellingly, the Obama team has killed off disclosure rules mandating that unions reveal how they spend the billions of their members’ union dues. These, in turn, are often poured into “front groups” and other “funds” each year. Anyone care to wager whether these funds will flow to help Democrats? Thanks to Obama, we will never know. So much for transparency. But we do have change.
The second item that sparked my interest was Obama’s move to ditch the superdelegates’ role in nominating Democratic candidates for the presidency.
These superdelegates include Democratic members of Congress, national party figures, and established leaders of the Democratic Party. They vote at the nominating convention. The system was established in the wake of the 1972 Democratic Party nominating process, when anti-war radicals seized control of the party and ended up nominating George McGovern. The superdelegates were supposed to ensure that radicals did not take over the party’s nominating process. Well, apparently that sort of restraint does not appeal to Obama, who now has taken steps to shape the nominating process to play to his preferred territory: the caucuses, where his brand of populism holds sway. The Wall Street Journal noted the trick:
One reason for the superdelegates in the first place is the disproportionate role of activists in states like Iowa, which rely on caucuses rather than primaries. Mrs. Clinton held in her own in the primary states but Mr. Obama crushed her in the caucus states where his supporters found it easy to dominate proceedings where older and frequently busier people weren’t able to invest the time to counter them. Take the case of Texas, which has both a caucus and a primary: Mrs. Clinton won the state’s primary in which 2.8 million people voted, but Mr. Obama so controlled the caucuses where far fewer people (some 800,000) participated that he ended up with more delegates overall. The new rules, if approved, would likely mean even more of the same.
Since Obama’s policies are sacrificing the careers of Democratic congressmen to fulfill his agenda, these politicians may withhold their support at a future nominating convention. What is the solution? Remove them from the equation by stripping their vote. Out they go, joining the ever-increasing number of bodies under the bus.
Of course, the boys who earned their stripes in the rough-and-tumble world of Chicago politics (where the phrase “vote early and vote often” should be the city’s motto) will not stop there in their drive to win.
Why should they? Customs, rules, ethics, and traditions were thrown under the bus to get ObamaCare bills passed by the House and the Senate. Why stop there when there are so many ways to skin Americans? Skullduggery comes naturally.
There are other cards to play (and Obama is an avid poker player).
How else will the Chicago Boys game the system and gin up victories?
There was the plan to bring the census operations into the White House. That would have been a neat trick — put Obama acolytes in charge of the process that determines each state’s electoral votes (a strategy akin to Obama’s role in gerrymandering districts to favor his own campaign as a state senator).
While that seems to be off the plate for now, there is still the prospect that sampling may be used to collect census figures. That is a statistical method that has been denounced by, among others, John Fund of the Wall Street Journal as a formula that could be abused to exaggerate the number of residents of certain states and municipalities. This would affect the number of House seats awarded to each state. Those figures also play a role in the amount of federal funding flowing to those areas. Those are also the very figures used to determine electoral votes.
Will census figures compiled by community groups chosen by this administration be reliable? Remember that this team earned their stripes in Chicago and has ties to ACORN, which is embroiled in voter registration and other scandals across our nation.
There will be a strong desire to boost numbers in blue states, especially since red states seem poised to pick up seats and electoral votes, as people vote with their feet and move to red states. This won’t do for the Obama team — not at all.
So what to do? Fool ’em with some other numbers, this time the ones with dollar signs in front of them. But the Chicago Boys may have tipped their hands by revealing one of their cards:
The government, reports The Hill newspaper, will target $80 million of those dollars to racial and ethnic minorities and non-English speakers — groups that vote disproportionately Democratic. Nor will Democrats permit efforts to limit the count to those here legally. An effort by Sen. David Vitter (R., La.) to exclude illegal aliens from the count went nowhere.

Illegal aliens don’t (usually) vote of course. But when they are counted in the Census they do affect representation in Congress. So some of the money you pay in taxes will go toward increasing the legislative clout of one party.

And those illegal aliens will also boost electoral votes of those blue states. We can also expect a campaign to allow felons to regain their right to vote. Anything to boost those numbers and rack up some wins.
But wait, there’s more.
The push to “Rahm” through universal voter registration is a ploy ripe for voter fraud, as noted so well by my American Thinker colleague James Simpson in his recent column. This is a proposal to impose a federal mandate regarding voter registration. State laws will be overridden by federal law drafted and passed by Democrats. As John Fund notes:
The feds will tell the states: ‘take everyone on every list of welfare that you have, take everyone on every list of unemployed you have, take everyone on every list of property owners, take everyone on every list of driver’s license holders and register them to vote regardless of whether they want to be …’
What is the problem?  Many of these lists include vast numbers of illegal immigrants, there will be felons, there will be duplicates, and there will be a lot of people who never cared enough about the country or democracy to take the simple steps to register under state laws. What will be the end result? A huge pool of likely Democratic voters will be created out of thin air — and then Obama’s army of volunteers and Democratic Party activists and paid contractors (think ACORN) will shepherd them to the voting booths. Between the pickup at home and the pulling of the lever, a lot of steps can be taken to ensure they vote the left way.
Are there any more ways for Obama and the boys to stack the deck?
The Federal Election Committee monitors how campaigns raise and spend money. Obama has appointed John Sullivan, SEIU’s in-house lawyer, to serve on its six-member panel. Obama’s campaign was marked by fundraising and spending scandals. (Among them were foreign donations being received and hundreds of thousands of dollars going to the SEIU, and to Obama-linked ACORN for “get out the vote efforts.” Hmm…”get out the vote”…is that anything like “street money“?) Community groups are being used, by the way, to collect census numbers. Given the record of “community groups” and vote fraud, is that a bright idea? The answer depends on which side of the aisle you sit.
The Department of Justice under Eric Holder, a close ally of Barack Obama , has shown a very lax attitude towards prosecuting Obama supporters for voter intimidation (à la the New Black Panthers Party travesty). Conversely, the DOJ is aggressively challenging state voter verification laws meant to ensure the integrity of the voting process. The steps that Obama’s DOJ is taking will allow non-citizens to vote and will also boost the number of votes, legitimate or not, for Democrats in 2010 and Obama in 2012. Does anyone think Holder’s Justice Department will prosecute criminals that help Democrats, given the example of the New Black Panther case?
The administration has also telegraphed a plan to push for illegal immigrants to become citizens. How many of the estimated twelve-million-plus new citizens will vote for the man, and party, that bestowed upon them U.S. citizenship? Quite a few, I imagine. It’s true that there will not be a quick payoff for this effort, since citizenship will take some time. However, there will be some Democratic voters created, and the effort will curry favor with groups that favor such immigration reform.
Many blue states are indeed blue (emotionally) these days because their economies are a wreck. Think California, New York, and Michigan. All are states that may no longer be so rich when it comes to money, but they are rich with electoral votes. These states might pose a problem for Obama in 2012 (vote the bum out). How to salve their anger?
How about billions and billions in stimulus money that is disproportionately being showered upon Democratic districts, and that often does not correlate as well with unemployment numbers as it does with partisan makeup? This is stimulus money, all right — designed to turbocharge Democratic turnout and reward Democratic interest groups (teachers, government workers) for their fealty to Obama. This is a far bigger pot of money than what’s collected when we voluntarily choose to fund elections on our tax forms.
There are other steps that Obama and the Chicago Boys are taking to help Obama. Obama may have won the Nobel Peace Prize, but he knows how to fight when it comes to his own career. Let’s remember that this is the candidate who un-presidentially boasted that he brings a gun to a knife-fight — one more sign that he does not play fair! Of course, if he had only a knife, he would likely use it to stick someone in the back, as is his wont. He did this with drug companies when he suckered them into a deal to back health care reform and then reneged on his pledge to oppose drug re-importation efforts after their support was in the bag. Israel is one small voodoo doll to him, given his proclivity to stick it to that nation. All the pledges and people thrown under the bus…
Will the Chicago Boys sic the recently expanded Internal Revenue Service on Obama’s ever-expanding scroll of enemies? He joked that he would do so when Arizona State University had the temerity to question his bona fides when it came to awarding him an honorary degree. A joke, yes — and like the jibes at Special Olympics contestants and Joe Biden, not a particularly witty one.
What happens when a media outlet does not kowtow to Obama? They get the treatment meted out to FOX News. What happens when a pollster reports Obama’s plummeting popularity? The Chicago Boys rev up the vast Oval Office conspiracy, as they did when their liberal shock troops attacked Scott Rasmussen. What happens when talk radio ticks off the Obama team? Threaten to resurrect the Fairness Doctrine. Then apply a dose of Media Matters criticism. Lather it up with some insults, and then rinse and repeat.
If that doesn’t do the job, release the dogs of war (bloggers, Air America, Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow) to spread some misinformation and insults (“teabagging”).
And of course, there is always, always the race card. Obama’s ace in the hole.
There are other perfectly fine steps Obama is taking to prepare for 2010 and 2012. For example, the Obama drones are being prepped to swarm our neighborhoods again. That is legitimate, at least, if annoying.
But are the tricks outlined above legitimate? Weren’t we promised the most transparent administration in history, one that would transcend partisanship? That was so 2008. Sweet talk has been replaced by trash talk, and promises have been and will be betrayed.
What we got was a team that will stoop very low indeed to win elections, honesty and transparency be damned. Obama may be a good basketball player, but he and his team excel in the blood sport of politics, and they will use every trick and tactic, no matter how disgraceful, to win. That may be the Chicago Way, but it is not the American Way.

Ed Lasky is news editor of American Thinker.