Archive » July 5, 2012
On the Ranch
By Nancy Crawford-Hall, Publisher
Voter fraudIn the news now is a report about problems with primary elections in New York between well-known Democrat Charlie Rangel and another Democrat. Apparently there are entire precincts missing, reportedly illegal aliens voting, and the usual variety of ways that progressives use to ensure election success. There are also complaints by non-English speaking voters who said they were prevented from voting. Even the supposed Republican frauds are often perpetrated by progressives to confuse the issue. This is not a good situation, but why is someone who has been convicted of numerous ethics violations even running again, anyway?
This is why 82% of the American people want photo voter ID laws enacted at the federal level. Many states have taken the initiative and passed their own version of a photo voter ID law, only to be challenged by our head law enforcement officer, the Attorney General who is currently laboring under a contempt of Congress ruling.
What possible reason would a law-abiding person have to argue against making sure that people who voted were actually eligible to vote? It is extremely unfortunate that 1960’s politics are being used by prominent Democrats (progressives) to make it look like this is an effort to keep certain segments of the population from voting.
Get a life, idiots! The only people that are trying to do that are those who are raising this issue! Our votes are precious and not to be devalued because some people who count on winning elections by cheating (because they wouldn’t win otherwise and they know it), are systematically destroying our election system. If no one has confidence in the results being genuine and legitimate, one will begin to doubt whether it is worth voting. Ultimately, the election system will collapse and we will no longer be a democratic nation, just another banana republic.
Last weekWow! Last week, all kinds of momentous things happened. Our Attorney General has been charged with Contempt of Congress for not cooperating enough with the investigating committee on the subject of the gun-running scheme called Fast and Furious that resulted in several thousand guns being sent to Mexico drug gangs, resulting in numerous deaths of Mexican citizens and a DEA agent.
Then the Supreme Court OK’d Obamacare health program as a tax that will apparently result in 75% of it being paid by people earning less than $120,000. This is a very disturbing turn of events that was specifically promised wouldn’t happen. Employers are going to be hit hard as well now, in addition to having to pay extra for their employees when many are just barely making it as it is, but now they have more reporting requirements in whatever spare time they might have. This is crazy and unnecessary!
Next, we finally got the official results of our last election and we now know that UCSB students, a transitory group, are making decisions for those of us who live here, have property and jobs here and make this our permanent home. Is it reasonable for someone who knows virtually nothing about land use issues or anything about the surrounding community including its history, the people who live and work there or what they might want for their community, has the ability to make long-lasting decisions that will affect the area for many years? I don’t think so, and I know most of you would agree.
I believe that students should vote in their hometowns with which they are familiar. There are many reasons for this, and some of the more important ones will become evident when I tell you about an organization that figured largely in the past elections in District 3.
I have some ideas about how this can be fixed for the future and I am anxious to explore this with you. I also would like to hear your ideas. We have recently explored the idea of splitting North County off of South County, but it was unsuccessful mostly because of the lies told by those not in favor of the plan. Perhaps because we, you, now have a voice, we could more fully vet the idea and then make it work not having to depend on outside media to spread the idea. What do you think? Is it not time to represent ourselves, instead of relying on people who aren’t on the same page?
USSAThe United States Student Association. Have you ever heard of it? While I have been a student at a number of public universities, I had never heard of it until investigating two of the individuals who participated in the 2008 elections in Santa Barbara County. These are two people who are mentioned in the sheriff’s report of those who possibly were involved in committing voter fraud.
This is a description of the organization according to their website: “American students have been organizing on a national level for nearly a century, and USSA has been an important part of that organizing since the end of the Second World War – as a nascent student union in the late forties, as a cautiously liberal organization in the fifties, as an increasingly activist federation of student governments in the sixties, as a radical anti war outfit in the early seventies, and as a broad-based progressive advocacy group in the eighties and nineties. Today USSA remains the largest, most inclusive national student association in the nation.”
While the original focus of the organization was on student/university issues such as class size, class focus and fees, at some point their focus expanded to registering students to vote, not in their home towns that would make sense, but in hapless, unknowing college towns now that would be dominated by temporary residents. Perhaps it was the inclusion of some of the founders of the radical Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), some of whom live right here in Santa Barbara and who were involved in our litigation for voter fraud in the Third District, into USSA that created a more wide-ranging agenda.
It was about that time that USSA became heavily involved in politics. They worked to deny the presidency to Lyndon Johnson, went to North Vietnam to gather evidence of violations of international law by the US and promoted other radical ideas. Their history is an interesting one with a number of joinings with other groups, uncoupling with others and splits into other organizations dedicated to students rights.
Two of their leaders, one from UCSB and one from UCLA who attempted to vote in the District Three 2008 election even though not a resident, including one who is now President of USSA, are mentioned in the sheriff’s report on possible voting violations. Also, one of these two “voted” for the other with a mail in ballot that was caught by the Registrar’s Office though it was not turned over to law enforcement for prosecution. Wonder why that was? Given the enormity of the organization, the huge numbers of “friends” on the Facebook pages (more than 800) that I reported on some time ago makes complete sense now. At the time of discovery, I was astonished by the huge number, but it is totally understandable with the current information. I was also surprised to see the “friend” with one of these individuals that Doreen Farr was before she was a Supervisor. How close was that “friendship?”
The USSA Board of Directors includes an individual from UCSB who also sat on the Board of Directors of the University of California Students Association. This person bragged about registering more than 5,000 students for the 2008 primaries and 10,241 students for the 2008 presidential election. We know they were all registered Democrat, though that is statistically impossible so it lends credence to the fraud claim. There was also mention of working to keep elected officials accountable. So what about elected officials being accountable to taxpayers?
It’s funny that all of these people who were active in our local district election have now got jobs in Washington, D.C. Is this a benefit for a job (the presidential election) well done? When you think about it, what is to prevent these folks or their inheritors from doing the same thing for our last District election or even for our upcoming presidential election in November?
I guess it is relevant to mention that our litigation, despite considerable irrefutable evidence, was difficult at best. We were not allowed repeatedly to present evidence, and just as we presented actual witnesses whose registration was copied and used, we were cut off and told we didn’t have standing. It is a frustrating process but we are happy to report that it is not over. Despite Farr’s claims to the contrary, the attorney’s fees issue is still in appeal, and if the judge is willing to rule with the evidence presented, we will prevail. After all, our funds didn’t come from employee-forced contributions in order to work unions.
So stay tuned. There is a lot more information where this came from, and I would be happy to let you know what it is. Then let the naysayers try to refute it. Good luck! In the meantime, please keep up with P.O.L.O. and POSY in their efforts to represent you in preventing further expansion of fee to trust.