Nashua NH Democrat lets Out of State Campaign Worker Register to Vote from Her Home

Nashua New Hampshire Democrat Cindy Rosenwald is back in the spotlight.  If you recall, she's the one who admitted that her party not only knew it had left an 800 million dollar hole in the budget, but they planned to cut spending to fix it.  Well, now we find out that she knew there were out of state voters voting in New Hampshire, because at least one of them has been voting from her Nashua Address since at least 2007.

Ed Nail, here at NH Insider, recently reported on the voting history of a professional Democrat Campaign lackey by the name of Paolo Cozzi.    Mr. Cozzi lived on Clement Street in Sommerville, Massachusetts (Update- He is now currently living in DC).  But they had more than enough Democrats living in MA, so in 2007, 2008 and 2012, Paolo Cozzi hopped on the commuter rail (hey, that's why Liberals want rail service to Nashua), or got in his Obama-mobile--(Cozzi is employed in the service of OFA)--and put his vote to better use by claiming to live at 101 Wellington Street in Nashua, New Hampshire, the home of Democrat House Rep. Cindy Rosenwald.

Cozzi did vote from his Massachusetts "home" in 2010--remember 2010?  That was the year that a Republican actually had a slim chance to win in Massachusetts.  So OFA campaign animal Paolo Cozzi voted where it mattered more that year (in MA), but he mostly votes in the Granite State, from the home of Cindy Rosenwald at ...where was that again?   101 Wellington St, Nashua, New Hampshire.

I wonder if Ms. Rosenwald has ever taken in any other "stray cats" from the liberal campaign apparatus and allowed them to claim residence in her home for "voting purposes."

I'll guess we'll have to keep looking into that.

So!  Given these developments what do you think Ms. Rosenwald's position and voting history could be on domicile and voter ID in New Hampshire?

Thanks to our good friends at Granite State Progress (yes I cached the page) we know exactly how she voted.  She voted to make sure that her domicile-mate of electoral convenience Paolo, could continue to live in Sommerville,  Massachusetts (or anywhere else), and still vote in Nashua, New Hampshire--whenever the urge struck him, without fear of in-state interference.

Voting Rights

• Rep. Rosenwald voted against requiring every registered voter to sign an affidavit and be photographed before being allowed to cast a ballot if they do not present a photo ID. This legislation was anticipated to discourage voter participation and create long lines at polling locations. *ALEC Model Legislation* (SB289, Roll Call #244, 5/15/2012)
• Rep. Rosenwald voted against placing potentially unconstitutional and certainly unfair restrictive prohibitions on the voting rights of individuals who serve in the military or pursue college course work, whether full or part-time. This bill also would not have allowed elected officials to move from their present domicile to another, even when that domicile is in the same district. (HB176, Roll Call #73, 3/15/2011)
• Rep. Rosenwald voted against making it more difficult for college students, military personnel and visiting professionals to participate in the democratic process by limiting their access to the voting booth. *ALEC Model Legislation* (HB1354, Roll Call #80, 2/8/2012)
• Rep. Rosenwald voted against allowing a person to arbitrarily challenge a voter at the polls without reason. Previously, an accusation had to be accompanied by a signed affadavit (sic) attesting to the reason for the challenge. Election law experts testified against this bill, citing potential increases in challenges based on racial profiling or political gamesmanship; they also anticipated longer lines and wait times at polling locations as challenges are freely thrown around. (HB1301, Roll Call #99, 2/22/2012)
• Rep. Rosenwald voted Not Voting/Excused eliminating open primaries, which are a key part of the first in the nation primary. An open primary allows undeclared voters to participate in either the Republican or Democratic Primary as they see fit. (HB1595, Roll Call #139, 3/8/2012)
• Rep. Rosenwald voted against limiting voting rights to those with particular forms of photo ID. For example, a person could use a Massachusetts or Maine driver's license as a valid photo ID to vote, but not a municipal photo ID issued by Raymond or Londonderry. The requirement would cause confusion and frustration at the polls and is bound to result in preventing some voters from casting their vote on Election Day. *ALEC Model Legislation* (SB129, Roll Call #214, 6/1/2011)
• Rep. Rosenwald voted against placing language on voter registration forms that would intimidate students and other from voting in New Hampshire. *ALEC Model Legislation* (SB318, Roll Call #286, 6/6/2012)
• Rep. Rosenwald voted against requiring voters to show specific forms of photo ID when voting, a requirement that will disenfranchise voters who cannot meet those requirements (such as the elderly and disabled). This bill did not provide for any voter education of the new provisions, which could lead to people being turned away from the polls when they go to vote. (HB1354, Roll Call #306, 6/27/2012)
• Rep. Rosenwald voted against overriding Gov. Lynch's veto of a bill requiring registered voters produce photo ID before being allowed to cast a ballot. Voting rights advocates were opposed to this legislation. *ALEC Model Legislation* (SB289, Roll Call #307, 6/27/2012)

All very interesting.

So now we have to wonder...will Ms. Rosenwald take to the Internet to explain this to us?  What crazy story will she concoct?  Should we expect another "myth" post explaining away her complicity?  And will any of those "excuses" bring up questions that create new problems for the Democrat House Rep from Nashua?

We patiently await a response.

You are reading  "Nashua NH Democrat lets out of state OFA campaign worker vote from her home"   by  Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com (Home)

Steve has been recognized as the Americans For Prosperity Blogger of the month for December 2012

Bass Says 'Feed That Pig(ford)"

The Pigford settlement, a fiscal resolution for claims of discrimination against black farmers, is under suspicion of massive fraud.  Fraud that is being funded by taxpayers in excess of a billion dollars thanks to the lame duck democrat congress that added that billion at the request of Mr. Obama.

But yesterday the House had an opportunity to block $1.25 billion in excess funding to that settlement by approving an amendment proposed by Rep Steve King of Iowa.  This could have stopped the Department of Agriculture and the Obama Administration from pumping out more cash until the fraud charges could be investigated.  The amendment failed because seventy eight Republicans voted against it.  One of them was NH CD-2 rep Charlie Bass.

I'm sure representative Bass has a perfectly good explanation for refusing to stop another $1.25 billion for a program under this much suspicion.  But since he is not my representative (mine voted to stop the funding) perhaps his own constituents will feel inclined to do the digging and the asking themselves.

$1.25 Billion is not much in the age of Obama, but then what is.  But you have to start someplace.

 cross posted to http://Granitegrok.com

Piltdown Warming

Back in 1908  Charles Dawson and a few others, claimed to have found the missing link.  A skull that would solve an anthropological problem.  And for the better part of forty years, this "discovery" (in one way or another) drove our cultural and scientific understanding of the evolution of mankind. 

There were skeptics, Piltdown deniers if you like, some of whom were even suppressed or ignored.  But in 1953 it was finally proven beyond any doubt that the Piltdown man was a fake, perpetrated by a serial fraudster, who had lived high on his influence, fame and very likely some grant money, a decent salary from a respected University, and speaking fees.

Fast forward to today and we find ourselves confronted with another scientific consensus that is shaping our culture, our behavior, and our politics.  We have high profile figures like Al Gore who have for over a decade sworn that the science of global warming is settled.  That we are doomed.  Many prominent "climate scientists," New York Times economists, and left wing political figures are on board. 

The solution pushed by these left wing Warmers, conveniently enough, happens to be one of the goals of their leftist ideology; to control the means of production.  If ever you wanted to have a soft socialist takeover in an otherwise democratized western Republic, the shortest path to that end would be to regulate all energy use and consumption.  You'd have defacto control of commerce, transportation and the whole of industry.  So how fortuitous that we have this impending global disaster to facilitate just such a takeover.

And these Warmers all have skin in the game.  Some need the grant dollars.  Some are getting rich off the fear mongering and their own investments in the so called solution to their "sky is falling" fearmongering.  Others would collect significant political power--as well as cash contributions to ensure their continued political influence.  And then there are the computer models, created by the grant getters.  These models declared our demise.  CO2 was the enemy and had to be stopped. But so far, they have all been wrong.

We've got ten years more CO2 (in increasing quantities) and it's not gotten warmer.  While some ice caps melt, others grow.  Glaciers shrink here and grow there.  Storms are not more frequent and not more severe.  And yet the warmers persist. They try to explain away why they can't explain it and hide behind failed models, hoping we'll get bored and ignore the consequences of their own ignorance.

People who object have been laughed at, scorned, suppressed.  But there is a new chink in the warmers armor.

We have proof that at least some manipulation has occurred within the climate record.  We know that the Warmers are very defensive and have worked in concert to suppress opposition.  That they have refused to release the information to support their claims, and destroyed data that might contradict their assumptions.  We can mince details all we like, but this is evidence of outright deception.  Deception by a class of 'profesionals' who are expected to challenge conventional thinking at every opportunity. 

Nothing they predicted has come to pass.  Their defense is that they miscalculated.  That it might just take a little longer.  That maybe they need more research money.  Even the warmers are not settled.

This is turning out to be a serial fraud perpetrated by greedy self interested people who destroyed their own evidence, and have clearly coordinated a long term effort to hide dissenting opinion.  Ask yourself why, if you are so right, you would need to take such actions to protect how right you are?

It's Piltdown Warming. But we can't afford wait 40 years to discover just how wrong these fraudsters are.

We need to start filing suits against all of these people.  We need court room discovery.  We need RICO statutes invoked to uncover the relationship between benefactors of this global scam.  And people need to start going to prison for a very long time.