Big Money Equals Access To Obama

It's the Clinton Coffees and the Lincoln Bedroom writ large but with a bit more daylight.  (Who says history doth not repeat?)

OFA, Organizing For A-h****,  is stating right up front that you can buy access to the President.  Just give them a big bucket of cash and they can get you in touch with the people who run the s**t wagon formerly known as America.

And let me tell you.  Access to these people will greatly increase your odds of getting to sit up front, instead of in back.  (OK, so it is also illegal, unethical, immoral...)

The New York Times says ‘giving or raising $500,000 or more puts donors on a national advisory board for Mr. Obama’s group and the privilege of attending quarterly meetings with the President along with other meetings at the White House.’

Excuse us? This just looks bad. It looks like the White House is selling access. The definition of how you define selling access. If you believe money has a stranglehold over the entire political system, this is ceding the moral high ground. And the President always has, from the moment he first announced his presidential bid in Springfield, six years ago, he stressed the need to curb the influence of special interests in Washington.

I'm now forced to decide which is more surprising to me?  Obama's convenience-store campaign organ selling access to the crown or the new York Times getting out in front of it; as if even low information voters might realize this is bad?

Watch for OFA to clarify their remarks/policy/intentions and then do it anyway.  I would not be surprised if they run a media campaign to make influence peddling legitimate and or blame "Republican grid-lock" for having to do it in the first place.  Whatever the plan, liberals everywhere will swoon and rush to their defense, checkbooks in hand.

Because some pigs are more equal than others.  (Sweeeee!)

H/T Hot Air

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

From Top To Bottom The Democrat Party Lacks Principles

The blatant double standards exercised by Democrats is regard to what is outrageous becomes clearer every day.  Here in New Hampshire, spewing hate-speech and laughing at inferred acts of violence are pushed aside when we know that were it the Republicans making ‘off-hand’ remarks of a similar nature, the left would never let it go…. it would be an example of the underlying hate they hold for (insert name here), and would disqualify them for office….and yet not one Democrat has the honor to stand up and say as much when it’s them.

And at the national level the Obama Super PAC has called Mr. Romney many things and most recently a murderer.  But like everything else wrong with the Democrat party, from the violence to the slurs, to the racism, none of them, at least in New Hampshire, has the ‘teabag’ to admit that this is just as wrong as if Republican’s had done it.

The accusation of murder comes to us from Priorities USA, the Obama Super PAC.   The assumption is that because

“a company that Romney used to own closed down a steel mill (several years after Romney left that company) and that meant that the wife of the husband who lost his job at that steel mill (one Joe Soptic) didn’t have any insurance after the wife left her job several years after the layoff and several years after all of that the wife was diagnosed with cancer and then died.”

Did you get that?

So the kid growing up in the wake of the Obama economy, who never finds work and has to turn to crime to better his lot in life..every crime he commits, including murder, is Barak Obama’s fault.  And you know what?  That actually has a leg to stand on.  Becasue in the Obama economy, you don’t build anything without the help of the government, so that has to include everything you destroy as a result of it as well.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder, and Fast and Furious have been tied directly to the deaths of around three-hundred minorities (potential future immigrants–illegal or legal), from their own ridiculous gun running program.  An American, Brian Terry is dead too.  Killed by guns given to their killers by the Obama Administration.  So Obama and Holder have committed murder.

The Democrats who are not defending the Administration are pointing fingers or simply silent.  Very brave, that lot.

So since Holder is only the AG becasue Obama appointed him, and Obama only appointed him becasue people elected Obama President, I guess every Democrat in America is responsible for the death of Brian Terry and 300 Mexicans.

This game is kind of fun.

How does that Ad go?  “New Hampshire Democrats murdered border patrol agent and 300 minorities.”

I bet that would get the armchair decency crowd off their collectivist Donkey’s ass and in an proper up-roar.  But we’re talking about Dear leader, whom they will collectively insist is not responsible for what a Super PAC does.  Or is he?

Surrogate smears are not new, in fact they are a staple of retail politics.  Super PAC’s just make them more well funded and widely distributed.  And while some may argue this is bad, I think it gives an observant and educated electorate a greater opportunity to fisk the claims and even find connections no one wanted anyone to make.  And this Ad is a great example.

It’s a lousy ad.  And when that Ad backfires Obama and his zombies will want to be able to distance themselves, but back in May an Obama Campaign spokesperson introduced the guy in the ad to reporters in a conference call.  Red State has the audio.  So this is not just some guy the Obama Super PAC scrounged up to play six degrees of “Look Romney is a murderer. ” In all likelihood the  Obama’s campaign found him first.

But they didn’t just outsource him to the smear PAC, they are running their own campaign ads with footage of the same guy, in the same clothes, in the same room, at the same time.  (same link above)

So which came first?  The OfA ad or the Super PAC smear, because they were shot the same day.  (Can I say shot?  Is that too divisive of a word?)  They are either sharing footage or were all present.  In either case that suggests collusion.

So the real impact of this ad may not be the long stretch it has to take to make its impossible point (one that even the liberal media is getting incensed at), but that the attack was clearly coordinated with the Super PAC from inside the Obama campaign, in violation of the law.

Break out the flying monkeys to call this some kind of Right wing conspiracy theory.  Go ahead New Hampshire Democrats.   The music is playing.  We know how you are.  Start dancing.

You are reading "Democrat party lacks principles"  by Steve Mac Donald originally posted at GraniteGrok.com (Home)

Republicans For Obama

Back in November 2007 Obama For America published a press release listing 68 New Hampshire Republicans who had publicly announced their support for Obama. 

One signatory was quoted thusly...

“Barack Obama is the only candidate who will be able to break the partisan logjam and inspire Americans to come together around real solutions.”

This of course ignores the democrat congressional majority in 2007 and their log jam against everything from appointments to policy.  The left had been clogging up congress all year, probably so they could then sell the "promise of bi-partisanship" meme for their presidential candidate.  Well that worked out well.

To their credit Obama did inspire Americans to come together around real solutions.   That solution is to get rid of the democrat majority and Obama as fast as legally possible.  And there is significant bi-partisan support to achieve that goal.

Obama's only intentional contribution to the wayward republican desire quoted above is actually called Buy-partisanship.  Thats when the lefty leadership has to buy up partisan support so fearless leader doesn't continue to look like a weak, ineffective loser.

Anyway, I figured that a list of 'republican' prognosticators with this kind of prowess must be shared.  And I do this not so much to mock as to seek follow-up information.  Do these people still feel the same way?  Are they still happy with their vote, and if so are they still pretending to be republicans?

If not, what are they doing to fix this fine mess they've gotten us into?

Richard Adams, Portsmouth, NH
Samuel Aldridge, Gilford, NH
Colette Awad, Hudson, NH
Shirley Barrett, Dover, NH
Kurt Bellows, Londonderry, NH
Marge Bonneville, Lochmere, NH
Roger Brickner, Haverhill, NH
Rhona Brown, Seabrook, NH
Nancy Bruce, Exeter, NH
Philip Cassady, Merrimack, NH
Ellen Dunbar, Peterborough, NH
James Elberfeld, Nashua, NH
Shirley Elliot, Antrim, NH
Barbara Fegley, Center Barnstead, NH
Roy Foltan, Bath, NH
Raymond Gagnon, Barrington, NH
Stephen Gambone, Hanover, NH
Gregory Geheb, Nashua, NH
Fred Harwood, Bedford, NH
Brenda Heon, Somersworth, NH
Michael Hill, Pittsfield, NH
John Hutson, Bow, NH
Cecilia Johnson, Wilmot, NH
William Johnson, Weare, NH
Peter Kayros, Bow, NH
Carol Knight, Hillsborough, NH
George Kurzon, Peterborough, NH
Sarah Kurzon, Peterborough, NH
John Laderoute, Pelham, NH
Virginia Lamberton, Loudon, NH
Edward Largy, Bradford, NH
Angela Lawhorn, Nashua, NH
Patrice Lenzi, Barrington, NH
Clement Lyon, Loudon, NH
Ruth Lyon, Loudon, NH
David Maleham, Milton Mills, NH
Gail Malone, Laconia, NH
Christine Manns, Barrington, NH
Frances Marshall, Concord, NH
Mary Mattise, Amherst, NH
Barbara Mendes, Exeter, NH
Robert McNichol, Bow, NH
Linda McVay, Portsmouth, NH
Anne Middleton, Stratham, NH
Betsy Moore, Conway, NH
Nancy Morehardt, Milford, NH
Mary Morin, Raymond, NH
Olympia O’Neill, Derry, NH
Martha Pasquali, Laconia, NH
Trisha Perin, Hampton, NH
David Pinsonneault, Amherst, NH
Rebecca Pirelli, Milford, NH
Robert Pollard, Portsmouth, NH
Thomas Powers, Thornton, NH
Janet Prevatt, Strafford, NH
Robert Richard, Manchester, NH
Caroline Russell, Meredith, NH
Jane Sander, Rye, NH
Lisa Segal-Bator, Bow, NH
Paul Shea, Pelham, NH
Diane Smaracko, Rollinsford, NH
Stephen Smith, Center Barnstead, NH
Jerry Spivak, Nashua, NH
Isabelle Stache, Manchester, NH
Susan Sundell, Salem, NH
Lawrence Varga, Derry, NH
Priscilla Wentworth, Raymond, NH
Janet Wesson, Springfield, NH