voteAs Delegate Rob Bell indicates in this email, this is important. Supposedly, voter fraud does not exist. Wrong! If no effort is made to detect voter fraud, we will not find voter fraud. That makes the fact we have started trying to detect voter fraud important. It also makes the people who said voter fraud does not exist look fraudulent.

You cannot make up your mind which party to vote for in this coming election? You cannot make up your mind which party contains the most frauds? Then do what you can to protect the vote.

Double Voting in Fairfax

Dear Friend:

Bravo to Fairfax election officials!

As reported by Fox News, the Fairfax Electoral Board has identified 17 individuals who voted in both Maryland and Fairfax in 2012.

After years of denials, evidence of actual voter fraud continues to mount.  Note that Fairfax officials only compared voters from one county with those from one other state.  The number of fraudulent votes will grow much larger when additional counties (and states) are compared.

Fairfax officials have transmitted their findings to the Attorney General Mark Herring.  His spokesman predictably parroted the Democratic Party line, stating that the office would investigate but maintaining that voter fraud was “statistically quite rare.”  With this beginning, it is hard to imagine his investigation will be very vigorous.

(In 2013 I patroned the law giving the Attorney General independent authority prosecute voter fraud cases, without having to wait for invitation.  I never imagined the extraordinary spectacle of an Attorney General downplaying evidence of reported felonies before even beginning his  investigation.)

Notwithstanding political maneuvering in Richmond, the Fairfax announcement is an important step.  Thanks to the Board and to all who are working to ensure the integrity of our elections.


Rob Bell
Delegate, 58th District

35 thoughts on “PROTECT THE VOTE

  1. Citizen Tom,
    Again your blog got hijacked and I apologize for that, however, something good came of it regarding Keith and I and I am thankful for that.

    I cannot respond to Scout. I apologize if that is unChristlike; but I fear my responses may be more unChristlike than not responding at all. I will leave him to you, if you don’t mind.

    I promise not to allow your blogs to be hijacked by diversions, at least on my part. It seems that there cannot be a civil conversation if I try to contribute so perhaps I will just read and learn and stay out of things.

    I ask your forgiveness, yet again, for whatever damage I have caused,
    Rhonda aka nanarhonda

    1. No apologies needed. I am just happy to see you and Keith worked out your differences.

      If you don’t think you should reply to scout, then don’t do so. It is obvious he is just trying to provoke you.

      Look carefully at what scout has said here. It is on topic and right of the Democratic Party’s playbook. Hence Keith and I reply to scout because it gives us an opportunity to counter Liberal Democrat talking points.

      Why would scout want to provoke you, myself, Keith, or anyone else? I don’t know. I could speculate, but it would only be guess and serve no purpose. What I can say is such taunting stems from a character flaw, one of those little nasty aberrations we all have. So we should pray for him and each other.

      1. Citizen Tom,
        Thank you for your kind words. I am also happy that Keith and I have worked out our differences/misunderstandings on my part.

        As for Scout, I will leave him to you and Keith. I prefer not to be engaged with him no longer. You make a very good point that he is taunting just like liberal Democrats do. I find that so strange. I have been in many different places on the web and you will find that the liberal Dem will be the name-caller and spin things and make no real points. You don’t really see Republicans, or I should say that I haven’t seen any behave that way.

        And you are also right, we need to pray for him and each other.

        Thank you for your kind response.

        Blessings to you and yours,
        Rhonda aka nanarhonda

  2. My mother (whom I use merely as an example) is an illegal voter? Since when, nanarhonda?

    And Tom, since when does competence to vote (which is in essence a mental competence) equate to physical competence or economic competence to get to wherever one has to go to obtain new credentials. Do you have some support for that statement? It seems facially counterfactual to me. Just go to an old folks home and look around sometime. You’ll find a lot of people who are perfectly capable of making a sound voting decision but who can’t get down the hall without assistance.

    1. Why do bother twisting other people’s words? Once people realize you are doing it, it is you who loses people’s trust. nanarhonda did not call your mother an illegal voter. Pretending she did is just dumb.

      And Tom, since when does competence to vote (which is in essence a mental competence) equate to physical competence or economic competence to get to wherever one has to go to obtain new credentials.

      Does competence to vote directly equate to physical competence or economic competence to get to wherever one has to go to obtain new credentials? No. It sets far too low a threshold. It is too easy. Far too many of the people who have the physical competence or economic competence to get to wherever one has to go to obtain new credentials should not be voting. Unfortunately, we have no one we can trust to judge who those people might be.

      Anyway, government’s job is to make certain voting is conducted in a fair and impartial manner. That includes validating that only lawful voters vote and that lawful voters vote only once. If your mother needs someone to drive her around, that is your job.

  3. Why would you not be concerned about lawful voters being disenfranchised, Tom. My mother is 92. She is an informed voter. She does not have a current valid drivers license. She generally votes in a manner consistent with the fact that our family were founding members of the Republican Party in the 1850s. If the State changes the requirements for her, she will be disenfranchised unless someone figures out a way to come to her to get her the new ID. It shouldn’t matter whether she is a D or an R or anything else. She has a right to vote. How do you propose to ensure that every current legal voter is not disenfranchised by a change in credentialling requirements? Why aren’t you “fretting” about lawful voters being disenfranchised. Why would that not be a concern for you?

    1. If your mother is competent to vote, then she is competent comply with reasonable procedures. She can obtain a photo ID. Otherwise, unless she votes Republican I don’t care.

      It is far more important that everyone believe that voting is conducted in a fair and impartial manner than it is to make certain absolutely everyone who want to do so voted. Volunteers can help the disabled, elderly, and the poor. If you want to make certain your 92 mother votes, then make it your job. It is not everyone else’s job.

  4. Most of these initiatives are arising at the state, not the federal level, Keith. My concern that procedures be in place to prevent disenfranchisement of current lawful voters (I don’t think I need worry that there are any current lawful dead voters or lawful multiple personalities voters or lawful illegal immigrant voters) is focussed on the governmental level where the new credentials are being required. If the government proposes to mandate a new requirement for anything, it ought to be willing to fund the transition to the new requirement. That’s sound fiscal policy and, in the case of the right to vote, it’s essential stewardship of a fundamental right. If charitiable organizations want to chip in, I’m all for that too, but government can’t shirk its responsibilities.

    1. What primarily prevents disenfranchisement is the simple fact that everyone has to comply with the procedures. Since almost everyone has a drivers license with a photo, objecting to that is silly, but Democrats do. Even if state government offer people who don’t drive a free photo ID, Democrats scream foul. Meanwhile, because our leaders won’t enforce existing laws, we have tens of millions of people in the country illegally. Yet here you are fretting that lawful voters might be disenfranchised. Except in the imagination of Democrats, who has proposed any such thing?

      1. It has already been stated that these will be handled.

        Democrats, in legal challenges, were unable to put forward a single example which stood up to scrutiny. There would be more than a year to comply.

        And some of the federal government’s many billions in grant funding — this is my field, I got 4.2 million from the Feds last month to help poor and illegal immigrants with medical coverage for a specific disease — would be directed to driving out to your mother’s place (and my foster mother, who is of course a bit older) and getting her the ID. Simple in her case; she’s already had a driver’s license.

        Those folks who are lawful citizens but who have never had a driver’s license, state ID, birth certificate, passport, visa, or any other similar doc will be more complicated. But there are few indeed of those.

        And yes, this is coming from the states. The US executive branch and Congress want and need the illegal votes.

        ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

        1. Wait a minute… so which is it? You said they are illegal immigrants in one paragraph and then you said in the next paragraph they are lawful citizens. You can’t have it both ways. And SHAME ON OUR GOVERNMENT for giving you $4.2M to help the illegal immigrants (I’ll stay PC) when we have a $17 Trillion deficit. That money should be to send them back. Period. They don’t have documents here because their documents are in their home countries. THIS is not their home country. You sound so proud of getting $4.2M from the Feds. It makes me sick. I’m tired of picking up the tab for all of the millions of illegal aliens in this country. We need to close our border and become a sovereign nation but that will never happen while POTUS in is office. He is decimating this country, and people like you are helping him do it. I take back my compliments to you earlier. I am ashamed of you and your prideful post.

          1. NanaRhonda wrote:

            Wait a minute… so which is it? You said they are illegal immigrants in one paragraph and then you said in the next paragraph they are lawful citizens. You can’t have it both ways.

            There are two different issues going on. First, scout objected to lawful voters being disenfranchised. A foundation I’m on the board of, and countless others, would be happy to jump in and help. And further, the federal government through many agencies provides lots of grant funding for what they consider worthy causes, and would chip in for this one certainly.

            But second, the federal government does indeed spend money on illegal immigrants, and in many projects has a preference for doing so. That was the context for the other part of the discussion.

            I don’t think that the feds spending all this money (for either purpose or group) is a good idea; the majority of what the federal government is involved in these days is not part of their charter, literally.

            A little background, if I may. After a variety of jobs ranging from bag boy to paperboy to running restaurants for five years to … several other things, I launched a computer software firm and ran it for a third of a century. During this time, I became increasingly involved in charity work.

            My practice on the board of a medical foundation (which I’m still on) was not just to decline or approve grant requests, but to critique them constructively. This led to an offer from a grantwriting company to do this professionally “a couple of hours a week” (it has been more than 100 hours some weeks including the first week of this month).

            As I’m a lifelong science buff, I gravitate toward scientific and medical research grants. Again, not the fed’s job to pay for this, but they do (and they extract $1.4 billion on average to approve each new drug, also a problem but the other way). I am pretty good at writing up the research, and I’ve gotten drawn into other sorts of grants. This work is nothing to do with the medical foundation I’m on. My favorite project is one where I am helping to provide a new technology for high-quality prosthetics to replace the lost limbs of our soldiers returning from combat. These will actually be able to provide feedback much like their original arms and hands — our goal is to have a soldier who lost both arms be able to play the piano. The technology is fascinating, and the cause is noble indeed.

            But the sad fact is, the feds are most interested in giving funds if you can show that they will mostly help the “underserved populations” which are minorities, low-income, and immigrants often explicitly including illegal immigrants. I don’t think any of this is a good idea, and it’s not the work I prefer, but my “day job” is to do my work in a professional manner, and I certainly endeavor to do so.

            I’m with you on the morality of the fed’s action here with taxpayer dollars. I would vote to cut that off in a heartbeat; charities can do this work (to the extent it should be done at all; some of these projects are silly or stupid) rather better. In fact, I am crafting a set of Constitutional amendments that would have this effect.

            Yes, I do some work in my professional capacity that I disapprove of, conceptually, in my personal mode. To do penance for this, so to speak, I have been writing for many years on the merits of Constitutional conservatism and encouraging people to help rein in the federal government and cut the ludicrous spending, and the mechanisms whereby bureaucracies grow in power by failing at their jobs. Citizen Tom has seen these writings, and this is one of many areas where we are in complete agreement.

            Incidentally, the federal grant money is earmarked to go out to someone; if I quit or fail, it would simply go somewhere else. Perhaps it is hypocritical, but I do work within the system while endeavoring to completely change it. It is my only source of income, and keeps me thinking about things other than the sudden death of my wife (and my own near-death) a few months ago. There are not too many opportunities for ugly, crippled old wheelchair-bound conservatives. 😉 And the conservative aspect has cost me more money than any of the others; a long story.

            You may still hate me, of course, but at least you have a bit more background.

            Incidentally, you recently called me a coward because you could not reply to a comment I’d made. I think you’ve seen since then that we commenters have zero control over this; apparently WordPress limits replies to a certain number of layers. Some of your own have been minus the reply link as a consequence.

            And SHAME ON OUR GOVERNMENT for giving you $4.2M to help the illegal immigrants (I’ll stay PC) when we have a $17 Trillion deficit.

            I agree. And the real deficit is much larger; the $17 trillion does not count the liabilities we have signed up for in the way of paying government pensions and such.

            I don’t have a problem with private charities doing work for whiomever, but it is not (or should not be) the fed’s job.

            That money should be to send them back. Period. They don’t have documents here because their documents are in their home countries. THIS is not their home country.Agreed again. Eisenhower did a good job with this in the early 50s (“Operation Wetback”), but we no longer have the political will do do the right thing here. And while Bush was soft in this area, Obama is absolutely poisonous and intentionally so.

            You sound so proud of getting $4.2M from the Feds. It makes me sick.

            I am sorry. Regardless of your feelings (and my own) about the propriety of the concept, I was pleased to have been recognized for my work.

            I’m tired of picking up the tab for all of the millions of illegal aliens in this country. We need to close our border and become a sovereign nation but that will never happen while POTUS in is office. He is decimating this country, and people like you are helping him do it.

            I am with you in your opinion of Obama, but my work professionally is not affecting the amount of federal spending. It will be given to someone; each federal project has the funding amounts designated in advance. My work can, at best, influence which community it goes to, and to try to make the process as ethical as possible.

            At the same time, I have invested thousands of hours in trying to educate people about the need to cut federal spending and scale the government back to the roles laid out for it in the Constitution. I also write extensively about the ridiculous exaggerations made by the left on issues of science, primarily global warming (a vastly overstated issue which is a net positive and needs no “mitigation”) as well as other areas.

            I hope that my net effect is positive, though I have only a few hundred regular readers. And you, of course, may still hate me.

            I take back my compliments to you earlier. I am ashamed of you and your prideful post.

            And be ashamed; it is your right of course. But I sincerely believe that you were operating from some misunderstandings, including thinking that I had attacked you when I was defending you from scout’s attacks.

            That whole “inscribed inside the ring” business was something he fabricated and attributed to you, and I called him on it. Somehow, you read this as an attack on you by me. That never happened.

            Best wishes.

            ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

          2. Keith,
            First and foremost, I never hated you. I thought I understood you then I didn’t understand you. (Regarding past posts.) I apologize deeply for misunderstanding you and your motives. Thank you for trying to defend me against Scout… he does seem to have something against me. But he isn’t the first and won’t be the last.

            Second, thank you for sharing so much of your life with me here. You didn’t have to do that, but I truly appreciate that you did as it helps me to better to understand where you are coming from.

            Third, I am so sorry for the loss of your wife and the near loss of your life. While you are able to still work in a wheel chair, I cannot work any longer. And with a long list of diagnoses/codes and no real answers, I will likely never return to any semblance of a normal life.

            So, I can understand what you are saying… if you weren’t getting the money and being responsible with it, it would go to someone else who wouldn’t necessarily have your convictions and integrity. I appreciate those qualities very much and respect you for them. Because you took the time to share all of this with me helps me to understand so much better where you are coming from.

            Forth, you mentioned that you have written on these things. Is there somewhere I can find them? Do you have a blog as well? I would be interested in reading your writings. (There was a time my husband was trying to do grant writing. It isn’t an easy thing to do.) Could you direct me to where I can find your writings?

            Again, thank you for taking so much time to share so much of your personal and professional life with me, even though you didn’t have to. That shows me your character and I have gravely misjudged you and I can only ask your forgiveness.

            Is there some way that I can be of help from here regarding the ideology of smaller government? My own Congressman Paul Ryan is talking about the very same thing; bringing the concept of Conservativism back to the people and less government and less government spending.

            Keith, I ask your forgiveness for my misjudgment of you and your character and your motives. Thank you, again, for taking the time to share so much with me when you didn’t have to. It speaks volumes about your character. I sincerely apologize.

            Abundant blessings,
            Rhonda aka nanarhonda

          3. Accepted, and thank you. As for my political writings, they are in two places: The WordPress blog is, but it is copied to a LiveJournal account which is where most of my readers are, and almost the exclusive place for comments:

            A recent post called “Constitutional Repair” uses material written here as a starting point.

            Sometimes I get more than 100 comments, and I have regular readers on the left and right. I have been fortunate; some of these have followed my modest writings on LiveJournal for nearly 14 years.

            I use the account “Level_Head” on LiveJournal; note that “Level Head” is an anagram of “DeHavelle,” but it also reflects a style I endeavor to live up to.

            Best wishes.

            ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

          4. Keith,
            Thank you for your forgiveness. That takes a load off of my heart.
            Also, thank you for the places where I can find your writings. I will try to get to them. With over 800 emails it may take a while but is there a way to subscribe?

            You are far more generous than comes across in writing and I totally misjudged you of which I shouldn’t have done in the first place as it isn’t my place to judge any man.

            Thank you again, from the bottom of my heart,
            Rhonda aka nanarhonda

          5. As an aside, I was quite hopeful about Paul Ryan the VP candidate. But Paul Ryan has apparently succumbed to the temptation of the Washington establishment; in my opinion he can no longer be counted as a conservative. A great pity, I think.

            I hope that you are able to find answers, solutions, and recovery regarding your afflictions.

            ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

          6. Keith,
            Regarding to your aside. Do you really think so about Paul Ryan? Have you heard him speaking lately? I would really be heartbroken if he had succumbed to the political machine as he has been there fighting against it this whole time. Gov. Scott Walker is not a favorite where I live as I said, there are a lot of unions here. But what he did actually helped to get rid of the non-productive teachers and hire ones that would be. This is good for the public school children even if I don’t care for public education. I know that some people have no option. I don’t think that Gov. Walker will run in 2016, but some think he may.

            I would be interested in your thoughts about Paul Ryan if you would be able to email them to me at so we don’t keep derailing Citizen Tom’s blog! 🙂

            I know you are busy, but I am very interested in this as I have held Paul Ryan in the highest regard so if there is something I need to know, I want to know it!

            Thank you,
            Rhonda aka nanarhonda

        2. Thanks for all the commentary and explanation. As funny as it may sound, I think your comments here often draw more attention than my posts.

        3. I have similar thought about Ryan. When he teamed up with Romney, I considered that a bad sign. My impression has not improved since then, but he is not my congressman. So I have not given him much thought. Unfortunately, it looks like he and Romney want to seize the nomination again. So if you have given Ryan’s performance much thought, your thoughts would probably make a timely blog post.

          1. Yes, I agree, Citizen Tom, that perhaps this is a timely blog post by Keith on Congressman Paul Ryan as he is my Congressman and I would like to know things that I may not be aware of. If I have misplaced my trust, I would really like to know that. I’ve watched his interviews regarding conservatism and getting back to small government, less spending, etc. Remember, he is on several committees including balancing the budget and the ways and means committee I believe. There has been so much going on before their recess, that it all tends to swirl in my head. But I will say this, I was never more proud of him when he said to Koskinen, “I don’t believe you!” He echoed the words of millions of Americans around the country. And that is not his normal demeanor. He is usually more softer spoken, but when he blasted Koskinen, I was very proud of him. And I would nominate for the next A.G. Trey Gowdy. He knows his stuff! And no one is going to get around the law with him! Unlike the do-nothing A.G. we have now.

            I do look forward to hearing if there is something that I need to know so that I am not placing my trust where it ought not to be. It feels right, he’s been helpful on personal levels for both my father and myself. He does town hall meetings all over Wisconsin, especially in the area he serves so his constituents can speak to him about what they what to see done. I have never attended one. But I know he does them as he is from a town just a couple hours west of me. I imagine all of the Representatives do this. Or maybe they don’t… I don’t know. But if there is something I should know, please let me know!

            Thank you both Citizen Tom and Keith,
            Rhonda aka nanarhonda

          2. Thank you, Keith! I understand about numb fingers, only I have two numb ones.

            Off to read what you wrote! I have to brace myself…

            Thank you for taking the time!

            Rhonda aka nanarhonda

  5. Tom – There may be some Dems who oppose photo ID simply because they oppose photo ID. However, I think the larger issue for Ds and Rs is how to change the requirements without disenfranchising any present lawful voters. Without programs to take registration and provision of new credentials out into the community, new requirements will necessarily knock out the sick, elderly, poor and working poor. None of us wants that, I hope. Unfortunately, most proposals for new requirements are pretty skinny on outreach to protect these groups.

    1. There is no reason for the federal government to be involved directly in the tiny fraction of a percent who would be thus affected. Some of those who now vote are being disenfranchised by illegal voting, and the federal government is doing little about this as the ones thus disenfranchised are generally Republican voters.

      We know that illegal voting affected the outcome of one major presidential election, but we cannot turn back the clock and fix 1960.

      Yes, this process will disenfranchise some: dead people, people with multiple personalities in “altered” states, illegals, et cetera. But across the country, there are tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of charitable organizations that would be delighted to mount campaigns to find and help every single one of the legitimate voters you (presumably) refer to. There are perhaps more organizations willing to help than voters needing it.

      The foundation I am on the board of has already discussed this, and would be one of many providing help. But with lots of warning, and with IDs already being required for many ordinary transactions, few will need it.

      ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

      1. Well ‘said’, Keith! I don’t know who the disenfranchised would be other than those who are here illegally and aren’t supposed to be able to vote. As you said, there would be organizations who would go to the elderly that cannot get to the polls, they can verify their ID’s and then let them vote. It would eliminate the dead voters. That’s a good point. I just don’t see the problem with having to show an ID to vote. You have to show an ID to use your credit card… if you are smart enough to put ‘please see ID’ instead of signing it. I just don’t see who would be disenfranchised. Thanks for your contribution, Keith.

  6. Nanarhonda has things a bit wrong (not for the first time), but the truth is bad enough. She is referring to an incident in which, on election eve (I can’t recall if it was 2004 or 2008, but I think it was in national elections), Democratic Party adherents slashed the tires of vans that were intended to carry GOP poll watchers to the polling places early on Election Day. This vandalism delayed the poll watchers by around two hours, according to the State GOP Chairman. It was a dastardly criminal act and, because it was connected with an election, it should have resulted in criminal penalties beyond penalties which also should have applied to any property crime, a matter serious enough in itself without the electoral overlay. I have not followed what happened to these folks, other than one of them turned up on our own Governor McAuliffe’s campaign staff some years later.

    I wonder if the seventeen people in Fairfax had any impact on any particular election. Does anyone have any idea? I guess to determine that, we’d have to know whether their Fairfax votes were illegal or their Maryland votes were illegal, whether there is some confusion caused by duplicate names, and whether any races that they voted in were close enough for their illegal votes (if they were illegal in Fairfax) to have tipped the balance of the outcome.

    There is no problem with ironclad ID at the polls so long as those who advocate it make provision for protecting current legal voters against disenfranchisement. I personally favor duplicate biometrics (fingerprints and retina scans, or the functional equivalent thereof). However, the elderly, the poor, the sick, those without transportation, shut-ins, servicemen abroad, etc. may not be able to obtain new registration if we change the requirements without making provision for reaching out to every current eligible voter to ensure that they get the new IDs without interruption of their voting privileges. For some reason, this outreach and the budgets to ensure that it happens always seems to be neglected when legislators propose new requirements. I’m sure it’s just a careless oversight. We should all support any tightening of ID laws that has within it safeguards that no current eligible voter will lose his/her vote because of a change in requirements. That latter piece is almost always lacking, but it has to be there to ensure that new requirements are appreciated for what they are – efforts to protect election integrity, as opposed to schemes to reduce the electorate by filtering out those least able to comply with new requirements.

    Fortunately, there is no evidence (at least none that I have seen, and I have asked over and over again for people who may know otherwise to present it) that ID fraud at the polling place has ever affected the outcome of a state or federal election in the United States. So it’s not like this is a matter that is distorting the overall results. Nonetheless, we all have an interest in as accurate a canvass as possible of voters. By all means, let’s find ways to ensure that those who vote are who they say they are and that those who vote fraudulently are prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

    1. When dictatorial states have elections they make the same claim about voter fraud. They don’t see. So it must not exist.

      When we combine federal, state, and local spending, that adds up to six trillion dollars. So the money alone — forget all the other issues — provides enough incentive for fraud. And if Democrats are fighting something as simple to implement as photo ID, that should raise suspicions all by itself.

      Imagine a corporation that did not have any procedures to protect its funds from embezzlement. How long do you think it would be before the company went broke? That’s the problem we have.

      1. I have absolutely no problem with having to show an ID. Even people that don’t drive get an ID so they can use credit cards in restaurants, stores, etc. I think it would filter out the illegal immigrants from being able to vote, that is unless POTUS gives some 5 million or more legal status in the next few days. The one thing it doesn’t prevent is an ex-con from voting unless it says it on their ID.

        I’m all for it. I see nothing wrong with it. 🙂

    2. I can see that if I leave any response to Citizen Tom’s blog, i shall be accused of being wrong regardless. Perhaps it was the tires of the vans taking polls workers, but it was also tires of known people to be vaulting for someone other than “their” candidate. Bumper stickers give it away pretty easily.

      I noticed you didn’t scold me about how they also went to the homeless shelters and bought votes with a pack of cigarettes.

      Scout, I live in Wisconsin a short 35 miles from where this all took place. It was big news in our papers.

      You may not have heart about it wherever you are. But that doesn’t make me wrong, It does, however, make the Democrats that did these crimes wrong and they did get caught and they did go before the court system. Granted, they didn’t get what they deserve which is why you ended up with one on your Governor’s campaign staff. Lucky him. The damage was already done; as I said.

      I don’t feel that I should have to qualify myself to you, Scout. If you have issues with me, then they are your issues and I’m sorry.

  7. I just posted this on another blog! When POTUS ran the first time, the Democratic Party in Milwaukee, WI went to the homeless shelters and offered a pack of cigarettes if they would go it and vote for who they told them to. Then then slashed the tires of known Republican voters while they were at work so they couldn’t get to the polls. They eventually got busted, but the votes for the Dems were already counted and the Republican votes didn’t get counted. Republicans are constantly being accused of voter fraud but I have never heard of any legitimate claim that there has been one time it was found to be true. Republicans let the chips fall where they may, so to speak. If the Democrats believed so much in their candidate, then why all the antics? Why not let the people vote? We all know that the popular vote does not put the person in office, the electoral college does. So its much ado about nothing! The kids just can’t play nice in the sand box.

    1. Republicans are not saints, but even with our biased news media there are relatively few substantiated reports of voter fraud by Republicans. Yet with Democrats? And the funny thing is Democrats say voter fraud doesn’t exist. So how could they accuse Republicans of something they say does not happen?

      1. Interestingly enough, when one is wrongdoing, they think others do they same as they do. Their ‘filter’ is gauged on their behavior. It can go the other way as well. Some people who would never do something against the law, can’t imagine someone they know doing it. Their ‘filter’ again is gauged on their own behavior rather than on what others are capable of doing. We are to be innocent as doves, but wise as snakes.

Comments are closed.

Blog at

Up ↑

Mark 1:1

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; (NIV)

Jill Domschot

Joy in the Southwest


Here are some of the things I have learned from studying the Bible

BUNKERVILLE | God, Guns and Guts Comrades!

God, Guns and Guts Comrades!


Blatant - Over-Exposure

Insightful Geopolitics

Impartial Informative Always

Libertas and Latte

Ramblings of a Disgruntled Patriot and Coffee Slave

A Blog About Healing From PTSD

Healing After Narcissistic Abuse & Multiple Traumas

Silence of Mind

Where God Speaks and Creation Listens


Wandering Towards Faith Am I

The Stories In Between

Author River Dixon


From A Garden To A City - The Prophetic Journey

Philosophy is all about being curious, asking basic questions. And it can be fun!

Faithful Steward Ministries and FSM Women's Outreach

Christian Outreach Ministry to those Incarcerated, with Addictions and our Military

Jesus Quotes and God Thoughts

“God’s wisdom is something mysterious that goes deep into the interior of his purposes.” ~Apostle Paul

The Lions Den

"Blending the colorful issues of life with the unapologetic truth of scripture, while adding some gracious ferocity.”


Life through the eyes of "cookie"

Rudy u Martinka

What the world needs now in addition to love is wisdom. We are the masters of our own disasters.


Supplying the Light of Love

The Recovering Legalist

Living a Life of Grace

Write Side of the Road

writing my way through motherhood

Freedom Through Empowerment

Taking ownership of your life brings power to make needed changes. True freedom begins with reliance on God to guide this process and provide what you need.

John Branyan

the funny thing about the truth

Victory Girls Blog

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

Conservative Government

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

The Night Wind

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

In Saner Thought

"It is the duty of every man, as far as his ability extends, to detect and expose delusion and error"..Thomas Paine

Always On Watch: Semper Vigilans

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

Dr. Luis C. Almeida

Dr. A's Website

He Hath Said

is the source of all wisdom, and the fountain of all comfort; let it dwell in you richly, as a well of living water, springing up unto everlasting life

quotes and notes and opinions

from a Biblical perspective




The view from the Anglosphere

bluebird of bitterness

The opinions expressed are those of the author. You go get your own opinions.

Pacific Paratrooper

This site is Pacific War era information


Daily Thoughts and Meditations as we journey together with our Lord.

My Walk, His Way - daily inspiration

Kingdom Pastor

Living Freely In God's Kingdom

%d bloggers like this: