Newsbusted: Dems Go After Sheriff Joe For Voter Tampering

Come on Democrats, don't you have anything better to do than go after Sheriff Joe?  First you didn't like the pink prison outfits, then you attacked him for enforcing immigration laws, that was followed by the DOJ lawsuit and now, according to an exclusive report by Newsbusted anchor Jodi Miller they are accusing the iconic Arizona Sheriff of voter tampering--watch the video below to understand why.

Other news items covered in the latest installment of Newsbusted the twice-weekly faux news feature from Newsbusters.org include; has the occupy movement reached joke status, Nancy Pelosi's strangest attack on the GOP-EVER, is Joe Biden really thinking of a 2016 run?; and much, much, more.

This episode of Newsbusted is the the funniest two and a half minutes seen since Joe Biden officially became SCHMOTUS.

So enjoy the video below, and if you cannot see it please click here

BREAKING- 2004 AP "Keynan-Born Obama" Phrase NOT From Associated Press

This morning another "birther" story got the Drudge treatment, it was from the Kenyan Daily Standard in 2004. The story begins:

Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations.

The article attributed to the Associated Press did appear in the Standard and most of it was from the AP.  The Kenyan paper added the first few words of the story

Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival.

It appeared in the  Seattle Times without that first line:

as it did the San Diego Tribune 

Look folks.  Nobody want Obama out more than I do.  But this birther crap is just that--CRAP. And I hate having to defend the usually biased AP, but fair is fair.

Why are we spending time on this nonsense when there is so much low-hanging fruit to go after...like his record as president.

All this story does is make Obama's opposition look foolish, take time away from focusing on his lousy record and help him win re-election.

Calm Down Birthers-The Literary Agent Booklet is Not Vindication

A message to Birthers: sorry folks--Breitbart.com's great find, a promotional booklet produced in 1991 by Barack Obama's then-literary agency, Acton & Dystel, touting the POTUS as "born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii," is not vindication.  All it really does is lend support to what we already knew, this president is a chameleon who constantly changes colors when it suits his objectives. In fact that's what the Breitbart people wrote as an introduction to their exclusive piece. 

Andrew Breitbart was never a "Birther," and Breitbart News is a site that has never advocated the narrative of "Birtherism." In fact, Andrew believed, as we do, that President Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, on August 4, 1961.

Yet Andrew also believed that the complicit mainstream media had refused to examine President Obama's ideological past, or the carefully crafted persona he and his advisers had constructed for him.

It is for that reason that we launched "The Vetting," an ongoing series in which we explore the ideological background of President Obama (and other presidential candidates)--not to re-litigate 2008, but because ideas and actions have consequences.

It is also in that spirit that we discovered, and now present, the booklet described below--one that includes a marketing pitch for a forthcoming book by a then-young, otherwise unknown former president of the Harvard Law Review.

It is evidence--not of the President's foreign origin, but that Barack Obama's public persona has perhaps been presented differently at different times.

In 2008 Barack Obama said he was a fiscal moderate who would cut the budget gap, and a friend of Israel just to get elected. In 1991 he allowed his literary agent to say he was born in Kenya to just to have a better story and to sell more books (does AFL-CIO Pres. know Obama has capitalist tenancies?).

That is what Breitbart is trying to show, we couldn't trust what he said in 1991, do we really know if he means what he says today?

The other point of the revelation is the reaction of the mainstream media to the story. What reaction you ask?  EXACTLY! The Romney bully non-story was spattered on front page headlines across America. This story more recent and more germane to the campaign will be ignored.

Breitbart.com's story is an indictment of the mainstream media as much as it is an indictment of Obama.

As far as the Birther nonsense, it remains nonsense. If if you believe the birth certificate to be suspect you can't get past those the Barack Obama birth announcements that ran in local Hawaiian newspapers the week he was born.

The only way for those published announcements to be fraudulent is if an Obama operative performed one of those Star Trek maneuvers. You know ---when they fly toward the sun to pick up speed, swing around the sun so fast they go back in time. It worked Star Trek IV when they traveled back in to pick up some Whales and save the future world. I will continue to reject the birther movement until someone comes up with convincing evidence of time travel or, of course the Starship Enterprise (I would even accept a Romulan Bird-of-Prey as long as the cloaking device is intact).

If we use this revelation as proof  Obama was born in Kenya, it will only make him sympathetic and provide his campaign with another excuse to avoid talking about his record. However combined with his open microphone gaffe with Russian President Medvedev ("I will have more flexibility after the election"), and his recent gay marriage flip-flop (it was supposed to happen after November but the SCHMOTUS let it out of the bag), the promotional booklet helps paints a picture of a man who will say anything to get into a position to achieve his goals.

California Proposition 29: An Invitation For More Government Fraud

One thing being ignored this political season are the propositions many state governments have put on the docket.  Some more abhorrent than others. Even when they are written with good intentions, if they do not include iron-clad controls they become just another way for government to get their hands on, and waster our money.  This morning I received an email with some information about California proposition 29 it is the kind of proposition just described. After checking the sources I decided to publish it below as a heads up for my friends on the west coast.

The initiative process in California has become increasingly problematic. What starts out as a good intentioned government program quickly turns into government waste gone wild, as poorly drafted initiatives become law. Proposition 29 is the latest in a long line of measures that have turned out to be disastrous for California taxpayers. Voters can see exactly how Prop. 29 will end just by taking a trip down memory lane.

In 1998, California voters passed Proposition 10, a measure that increased the cigarette tax by 50 cents to raise money for children’s programs. First 5 Commissions were formed to determine how the money was to be used in their respective communities. The problem with the First Five Commissions is that there has never been an oversight mechanism in place to make sure their funds are being used appropriately. As a result, numerous cases of misused funds and misplaced priorities have come to light over the past several years. Audit after audit have uncovered state and local commissions hoarding money, bypassing the competitive grant process, and giving board members exorbitant salaries. Just last month, a Grand Jury report found that Riverside County’s First 5 Commission had evidence of mismanagement, document tampering, and sitting on a $60 million reserve. Lack of accountability and non-transparency has allowed these commissions to run amuck with taxpayer dollars.

The kind of waste and abuse that have occurred under Prop. 10 are a perfect indicator of what’s going to happen if voters pass Proposition 29 next month. Prop. 29 is nearly identical to Prop. 10 – the only difference is that the recipient of the new cigarette tax revenue will be cancer research. We’ll have a new unaccountable government bureaucracy, just like the First 5 Commissions, that will get its hands on nearly a billion dollars of tax revenue with absolutely no oversight. There’s even a special provision that allows the money to go to organizations that employ members of the board. Doesn’t that sound like conflicts of interest waiting to happen?

And, even though the measure allows for an annual published report and audit, it’s really just for show. Neither the Governor or the Legislature can intervene to change the initiative if the board is found to be misusing funds. And they’ll be able to misuse those funds for awhile – should this measure become statute, it will be unchangeable for 15 years. That’s 15 years of this board using taxpayer dollars in any way they want with no one to stop them. The backers of Prop. 29 must think voters are pretty stupid to agree to let another government entity use them as their personal ATM machine. Take a stand against unaccountable government bureaucracies and vote NO on Proposition 29.

Did Mitt Romney Just Fall Into An Obama Trap ?

For a moment Jeremiah Wright was back. The New York Times reported today that a new “super PAC” supporting Mitt Romney was planning to bring up an issue, never vetted in 2008, Barack Obama's 20+ year relationship with the racist, American-hating, Antisemitic "preacher." But after whining from the Obama campaign, the Romney campaign said they would repudiate such an effort--but did he just fall into a one-sided trap?

The plan, which is awaiting approval, calls for running commercials linking Mr. Obama to incendiary comments by his former spiritual adviser, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., whose race-related sermons made him a highly charged figure in the 2008 campaign.

“The world is about to see Jeremiah Wright and understand his influence on Barack Obama for the first time in a big, attention-arresting way,” says the proposal, which was overseen by Fred Davis and commissioned by Joe Ricketts, the founder of the brokerage firm TD Ameritrade. Mr. Ricketts is increasingly putting his fortune to work in conservative politics.

Re-elect Obama campaign manager Jim Messina bashed the idea reported in the Times and vented against Romney for not offering a condemnation of the potential effort:

“This morning’s story revealed the appalling lengths to which Republican operatives and SuperPacs apparently are willing to go to tear down the President and elect Mitt Romney,” Mr. Messina wrote.

He added: “It also reflects how far the party has drifted in four short years since John McCain rejected these very tactics. Once again, Governor Romney has fallen short of the standard that John McCain set, reacting tepidly in a moment that required moral leadership in standing up to the very extreme wing of his own party.”

The standard John McCain set was losing, and part of the reason he lost is his refusal to allow his campaign to do what the media wouldn't---vet Barack Obama. But like a "good little candidate" Mitt Romney issued the condemnation the Obama campaign demanded. He told  Town Hall's Guy Benson in an interview;

“I repudiate the effort by that PAC to promote an ad strategy of the nature they’ve described.I would like to see this campaign focus on the economy, on getting people back to work, on seeing rising incomes and growing prosperity — particularly for those in the middle class of America.”

Pretty words indeed but did the GOP candidate just tie his own hands and leaving his opponent to continue with personal attacks? Obama has already started with attacks and hyperbole because he cannot run on the issues. According to the campaign's commercials, surrogates in the media or other campaign statements, Mitt Romney:

• Is a "vampire" and a "job destroyer"

• Hates gay people because of a teenage prank he did 47 years ago.

• Doesn't believe in civil rights and fairness because he believes marriage is between a man and a woman.

• Hates Dogs because he tied the doggy kennel to the top of the car and had the dog ride in the kennel en route to a family vacation

• Hates women because he is Pro-Life.

• Hates women because he believes a government should not force a religious institution to go against its teachings.

• Is a flip-flopper when he changes positions-while Obama's positions evolve.

• Would not have given the order to kill Osama Bin Laden (by the way did I mention that Barack Obama personally killed Bin Laden).

• Has a Mormon problem and his grandfather was a polygamist (it was his great-grandfather). Lets face it- none of the people running are Jewish so they are all flawed IMHO so religions should not be a factor.

There are plenty more personal attacks where that came from. Obama's people are doing everything they can to get the swing voters to look at the GOP candidate as a "stereotype," unable to picture him as president.

I vehemently disagree with Romney's promise to repudiate such an attack, he just fell into an Obama trap, a one-sided pledge.

Understand this is not a suggestion that the Romney campaign start making Jeremiah Wright the central theme of his campaign. On the other hand he shouldn't stop others for pointing out Obama's lies about his former preacher.

If his great grandfather's religious practices are fair game, why isn't Obama's attendance at a particular church for 20+ years.  If a stupid high school prank is important, why then isn't Obama's relationship with Bill Ayers, who was more than "a guy in the neighborhood," they shared an office.

 If the situation was reversed Obama would be mentioning Jeremiah Wright as often as he describes how he killed Bin Laden. Barack Obama's entire campaign so far has been based on personal attacks on Mitt Romney.

In order to win this election Mitt Romney needs to go all the way.

UPDATE: Jim Geraghty of National Review points out that as long as the Super PAC was re-hashing old Wright stories, its probably best that Romney keeps his campaign "Wright-free:"

Yes, at this point, Romney himself and his campaign shouldn't spend much or any time on Wright, as it would look like Romney is focused on the past instead of the here and now. For the vast majority of voters, Wright is "priced in" to their assessment of Obama.

There is, however, some use here if A) new information is uncovered, like the claim the Obama camp offered Wright $150,000 to shut up until Election Day and B) if we can tie it to how Obama has performed as president. As I was tweeting earlier today, perhaps the most revelatory moment of the whole Wright saga was Obama saying, with a straight face, that he not only did not attend any of the incendiary sermons, but that he never heard Wright say anything like them.


Obama was talking about a man who casually used the phrase "garlic noses" to describe Italian-Americans. It strains credulity to contend that Wright was always goody-two-shoes around Obama and then unleashed his hateful id once Obama left the room.


So what that tells us is not only that Obama will lie - just about every politician does - but he'll offer a truly implausible lie and weather the consequences. "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan."