Unfortunately a Lake County Judge has allowed early voting to begin in northern Lake County Indiana.    A federal judge had sent it back to the state for a ruling.  The county judge  sided with Democrats who wanted it, (all the early voting locations are in the more urban Democrat part of north lake county,  the only south location is Crown Point, the county seat) Republicans fear major voter fraud for opposing it.   And for good reason!   This is what I posted at  the Chicago Tribune

begin quote"""Let the voter fraud begin.  Lake County is as bad as Cook County when it comes to that.  If it was for voter convenience there would be locations in the south part (outside of Crown Point) of the county too,  but no.  Stuff like this makes it so much easier to commit fraud.

It makes the confidence in a fair election lessen to many voters in other parts of the county.  Its nonsense to think peoples "rights" are being stepped on if can't vote at their convenience. 

Vote on election day or get a absentee ballot if you aren't able to go that day. Its as simple as that.  Why more then that is necessary is ridiculous. Its no harder or easier for anyone.

The issue is confidence in a fair election.   Not that people are denied the right to vote because they can on election day or by absentee ballot. With this ruling, as a lake county voter, my faith in a fair election is MUCH less.   When groups like acorn are out there with their fake voter registrations (they even registered a Jimmy John's sandwich shop here as a voter) you got a problem. There has been more then a thousand of those that they have found already.  There are many more out there.

If the election isn't fair, it will not matter if you voted or not.  A fair election should not be sacrificed for political correctness or for some lazy "voters".   The old saying in Chicago "Vote early, Vote Often" isn't so funny when fraud happens. """end quote

I don't know if they will post it,  it moderated so it may never appear.  The Tribune isn't very conservative anymore.   So thats why it here too. 

Obama just doesn't get why taxes hurt small businesses.    A good example of that ignorance is this story.     A self employed  plumber asks why he needs to be taxed even more.   Obama's answer proves that he just doesn't get it at all.

Today's entrepreneurs and small businesses endue very high tax rates.    Many may combine their business income and their personal income.    That happens because most entrepreneurs only pay themselves when there is money to do so.   So it may appear that they make big money when they really aren't.   The government doesn't care if the money belongs to the business or its owner.  Paying taxes on $250,000 is really unfair when you are not actually paying yourself no where near that amount,  but the business cash flow may be near that number.    You shouldn't have to pay taxes on money that really  belongs to your business,  why  individuals need to pay  that is bad policy on the part of government.

I have never seen a study (because there isn't one) on how many jobs that were not created because of high taxes on the small businessman.    I believe the high income taxes has prevented millions of new jobs from being created because of it.  It has also prevented people from even starting a small business.    It is a big negative to start a new business knowing that the government thinks of your new enterprise as a bottomless piggy bank. 

Never mind that the majority of new jobs created in this country are made by these small businesses and entrepreneurs.     It amazing that most jobs are created that way,  in spite of all the government roadblocks,   free enterprise still manages to win! 

Really what is better for society?   That an entrepreneur create a new job,  or pay higher taxes?    You cannot do both,   today the high taxes are paid not the new job.  

Wouldn't it be better to increase the amount of Americans that have their own businesses?    All these people would create their own jobs,  lowering the amount of people that need to be employed by others.     Today's high taxes lowers the amount of new businesses that would have been started so it is time to change the unfair taxes on those that create economic activity.  

Obama has never run a business.   It really shows by the lack of economic understanding.   He most likely will never  run a business.    He doesn't understand how one works,  and how taking too much money away destroys its economic activities preventing it from creating a new job.   $250,000 sounds like a lot of money but it really isn't and that will hit MANY little companies with even more taxes.  

Taxing more will not help the people he thinks it will help.   Helping poor people isn't the job of government,  it the job of private organizations and charities.     Little businesses are not greedy in any way when it comes to not wanting to pay more, they already are paying too much.    Higher taxes will prevent many  of these poor people from ever finding a job because the small company didn't create the new job because it had to pay more taxes.     Its a really bad cycle that will only get worse if taxes keep rising. 

Boy,  Chicago taxpayers sure are getting it in the rear this year.   No wonder I see so many Chicago residents at my open houses in Indiana lately.   There are so many folks fleeing the Peoples Republic of Illinois, and many more are planning on leaving soon.  

The newest tax scam is from Daley this time,   he wants new fees and taxes, as well as fewer parking tickets before your car gets booted.   Read about it here.     They just don't get the budget cut thing in Illinois lately.    

Attention Illinois Politicians, this is how this works:  You take in X amount of dollars,  Y is what you want to spend.    Y cannot be a bigger number then X.   If Y is bigger you don't have the money and cannot spend any more.   Y must get smaller because X cannot get any bigger.   X is already a too high number,  it has to get smaller too.    Cutting Y is easier then you think,  since there is plenty of fat to cut.  

But nothing is that easy for a politician is it?

The sad thing about this current "economic" crisis is,  that even if the government could "solve" the current problems, there is a even bigger one looming.  

If Social Security was run like it is by a private company,  there would be politicians so outraged  there would be criminal investigations.       But it is run by the government.

If Insurance companies sold policies as bad as Social Security nobody would buy them,  and politicians would demand refunds and lawyers would demand big pay-outs  for those stupid enough to buy them.      But it is run by the government. 

Since nobody would think of Social Security as a good investment for retirement income,  the government makes us buy every time we work and earn any income.     Image even conservative investments  made with that money by individuals,  instead of paying it to the government,  would produce far more money for your retirement income then the payment you could get from Social Security.    That's provided there is still Social Security when your retirement age.    I am in my thirties,   and have no plans on getting anything from Social Security.    Because it will most likely be long gone,  or offer so little money (not that the money now is all that great) to be worth anything.

Its too bad that President Bush's proposal to fix Social Security didn't go anywhere.  It was the only really good plan to reform Social Security in decades.     But Democrats don't want to give back any control over our lives.    They want to keep our money,  so we can't spend it in the way WE choose to do.     If Social Security was given back to the citizens we would have greater income,  more money to give to our families,  charities or to simply spend on yourself.    You can't give away your Social Security "benefits" when you die,  they just end.   Never mind that you paid in your whole life,  if you die at 66, it doesn't matter that you only got it a year or so,  you can't give your spouse or kids the "leftovers".    Even though you paid for it all its never really yours.

Thats why this election is important!   Do you want our government to make our decisions over every little thing?   Even though that whatever they do turns into the next disaster.    Because the Democrats want control over the economics of this country even though they know nothing about how it actually works.       

Its not just corrupt outside organizations like ACORN trying to change the election in Northwest Indiana (and Indiana as a whole) to Obama's favor, its local Democrats as well.  Early vote remains on hold in Gary, Hammond and East Chicago.    Local Democrats hope the increased voter turnout will conceal Democrat voter fraud and one of the ways they hope to do that is with the "early vote".  All the early vote locations are in the Democrat urban base,  none in the Republican suburbs.  This is by far the biggest attempt at fraud by actual elected Democrat officials.  I can't image the more hidden stuff that they have up their sleeves.   Their voters are so lazy the actual election day is too hard for them to get to. 

Thankfully most of the fraud committed by ACORN will be stopped in Lake County (see earlier post on that).    I was thinking that would be a  lost cause too,  but at least someone is trying to stop this nonsense.    If this election is close,  and Obama "wins" it will be because of Democrat voter fraud.   Its like 1960 all over again.    In that case the first Mayor Daley delivered the state of Illinois to the Democrats when the downstate vote indicated Nixon was winning Illinois.   Magically  new Democrat votes appeared out of nowhere (there were more votes for Kennedy then there were residents of Chicago).  The state changed to Democrat,  and combined with massive fraud in Texas,  Kennedy "won" the election.  

Most people don't know that Kennedy didn't win fair.    Nixon could have (and should have) taken Kennedy to court and gotten the election overturned.    But Nixon knew the danger of trying to overturn an election.    He thought it would cause far more damage to the U.S.  so he stood to the side and let it happen.    I can see it from that angle,  but corrupt elections seem like something that need to be stopped.   We have far to much at stake to allow Obama to "win" unfairly.    If he wants to be president,  he has to get real voters to vote for him.    Of course at least half the country seems to know better and will not fall for his nonsense .

Democrats tried to do it again in 2000 in Florida.   Although they have managed to make themselves look like the victim in this case.   They simply aren't.    Thankfully they were stopped in this case. 

Voter fraud is becoming a big problem for this country again.   It just isn't good for any president to have a cloud of corruption over his head.    If real voters want McCain we need to have McCain to be president not a cheating Obama.   Just because the global elite, "mainstream media" and Hollywood would prefer Obama,  doesn't mean he should be president at all costs.  

Unfortunately the  "mainstream media" clouds the real issue.   Never mind that Democrats are the real bullies,  the Republican are always shown negatively.   In a lot of ways they are guilty of voter fraud as well.    They want to win so bad,  they are more than willing to commit fraud,  even though Obama could maybe win without it!  

Boy,  today kind of sucked.    I have a nasty cold and the flu,  the White Sox lost,  polls are showing Obama ahead in many places where McCain was leading just a few days ago and their trying to retry McCain on the Keating 5  thing again.   Oh, by the way,,,,,, liberals,,,,,,, all the other 4 are DEMOCRATS but nobody remembers that, and that McCain was found to have nothing to do with Keating.     Thats right the Keating scandal was yet another DEMOCRAT scandal not a Republican one. 

Are people insane?    They think that Obama would be better with the economy?   That nuts,  it one of his greatest weaknesses! (and he has plenty of those).   McCain had better do something about that or he is going to lose like Bush Sr. in 1992!   And he cannot count on Obama saying something stupid at the townhall meeting later today (although we can hope).      This debate can make or break it for him.   

It pains me that Obama has the upper hand on the White House at the moment.    People are going to be so disappointed with a Obama presidency (and that would include his biggest supporters).   The  combination of naive,  arrogance,  inflexability  that Obama shows is a recipe for disaster.    People just don't realize how truly awful a President Obama would be.     It would make the crummy Carter years look like a walk in the park.   There is a reason Chicago politicians don't make the national stage.   The corruption is so much of Obama he can't even see it anymore.     He is the product of the Chicago machine.  

There is a reason he doesn't want to talk about his friends in Chicago.  McCain needs to let Palin show it,  since it is true!    If people realized he was merely yet another corrupt Chicago Democrat,  there would be no reason to believe his was their messiah.    There is no difference  between Obama and  the Jacksons,  the Shaws,  the Daleys,  the Strogers,  Blagojevich,  Durbin,  and all the other crooks making Chicago and Illinois a lousy place to be. 

Do you really want the whole country run like Illinois?????

I was looking at the local paper and saw this headline,   County rejects large number of invalid voter registrations.    I thought to myself,   is ACORN involved somehow?     Of course it was!    This  sleazy pro Democrat organization has been trying to wreck elections all over the country.     This group needs to be shut down before it changes a election.    

Of course Republicans get blamed for faulty elections although all the vote fraud that I know of involves Democrats.   Humm,,,,,,,,, 

Google,  yes that google,  wants to save the planet.   Yep,  I use google every day,  but it is unfortunately run by bleeding heart liberals.    There seems to be a lot of them in tech.   How they manage to stay liberal when running a business (it seems doing that makes someone conservative faster then just about anything) is anybodies guess.     But they are,  most likely since they are in California. 

They want to do it by 2030 (save the planet that is).    Not quite as fast as Al Gore who wants to do it in ten years.  But whatever,  nobody is even remembering that he said that.   Like this will be remembered for long.    What I would like to know,   what is a green job?   My guess is it yet another meaningless term people like to talk endlessly about.   Or  it will undoubtedly end up being a highly subsidized government job that does nothing useful but pays someone that went to a ivy league school very well. 

Its just sooooo stupid...................................

Why did the McCain-Palin campaign agree to Gwen Ifill as the moderator  of the VP debate?   She is writing a book that puts Obama in a  very positive light so we know where she stands on this election.

Of course I have a problem with the objectivity with any "reporter" from PBS and NPR.    Why is it that only liberals can be moderators at debates?  

Why is it that we know who reporters are voting for,  without them actually saying who they are voting for?    Because liberals have a very different idea of what objectivity is.   They truly believe that liberal ideas are the "mainstream" (note to the media,  they aren't) so they just do it.    However its one of the things that make liberalism unworkable.    A utopia idea vs. reality.   Reality always wins,  no matter how much they stack the deck against reality.  John Stossel has made a whole career out of pointing  it out..

I don't hold anything against Gwen Ifill,  but she shouldn't be the moderator due to her new book.   I know any conservative with a new book about McCain wouldn't be allowed by the Democrats under any situation,   so this shouldn't happen either. 


UPDATE:  Didn't mean to post it six times!   Sorry!   I have tremendous problems with the blogging software that runs townhall.  It just looks like the software is so buggy the IT guys aren't going to be able to get rid of them all.    It is sooooooooo slow too. 

Most people consider this mess that is the economy a failure of business.  The media pushes this idea and does little to show what is going on and what is true about this.   Of course there is far more than meets the eye.   Yeah, the big banks are poorly managed.   Yeah, a lot of people spent money they didn't really have.    But these are little parts of a bigger problem.  

Most people who work in government in Washington DC think we are idiots.    We are too stupid to "run" the economy.   We are told how we should spend our money.    We need regulations so that big bad rich people will not rip us off at every chance they can.    The economy should be run from Washington they say. 

Only thing,   Washington can't run the economy.   It just doesn't work that way.    And most people just don't think thats the way it works, they think that Washington has some control.    Most folks have thought this way since the 1930's.   

This is the failure of government "control" and regulations.   The only regulations that should remain are rules on prohibiting fraud.  Preventing fraud brings confidence to our economic marketplace.   As you can see there isn't any today.  All the other things need to go.    Most of the other things are mandates that have really nothing to do with doing business.    It is social engineering  to build in other regulations.  Green mandates are the latest thing.  Making banks make loans to people who shouldn't be borrowing money,  which brings even more problems to communities with bad financial problems already .   Granted nobody did anything about it before nobody was losing money until now.

It actually is increasing fraud.   Business (mostly the big ones) have developed a lot of bad habits due to the regulations.   To much time is spent on non-business.   That is a problem.  

America doesn't want to bail out crooks taking advantage of the "system".   Thankfully Congress didn't pass the bailout today. 

What we need is regulation reform.  

Wow, I didn't think that would happen, the House voted against the bailout!   Even forty percent of Democrats voted against it.   Of course the blame game began immediately.   Pelosi blamed Republicans,  which seems strange since almost half of Democrats voted against it too (two-thirds of Republicans voted against it).   She didn't do her homework.  

Most American's are against this bailout.    So most of house then voted against it,  probably because of the polls showing little support for this bailout.    Most of the time I criticize doing things because of polls.   But Congress has to do a better job at doing what  people want.    This time they did. 

So they did the right thing,  but not because its a bad bill.  

Why is this "bailout" such a bad idea?  There are so many bad things about it.   Taxpayers are throwing away perfectly good money after bad.    $700 billion lost to government scandal and incompetence.   Not the failure of free enterprise,  because "free enterprise" really isn't allowed, it a sham.    We wouldn't have these problems if we had true free enterprise.   Senator Obama is totally wrong when he blames the business community and the relaxing of a very few regulations for this mess.  

 No,  we have to have overregulation (because we know better then you)  to protect the consumer or something.   Well guess what, it didn't work.   The consumer got ripped off.   So much for the regulations!  Over-Regulations are a big problem for business,  namely honest business folks that worry on a daily basis if they could be sued or persecuted for breaking some stupid little rule.  

President Reagan was right about regulation,  once the money is regulated away,  its time for it to be subsided by the taxpayer.   Note I say taxpayer, because the government isn't paying for it,  you are, the stupid taxpayer.  Yes, the stupid taxpayer because they think we are and will go for this to stop a recession or worse a depression. 

Guess what,  the economy of the U.S. will not collapse if this bailout doesn't pass.

This isn't a economic problem its a government scandal.   And it will cost us big!    There is technically  no recession,  even though it may feel like it.   The real issue is whether or not we will be able to stop the slow growth of socialism that is taking over in the U.S.    Reagan slowed it down in the 1980's but it is still a threat to our economic system.   We really haven't tried true free enterprise but it is blamed for all the economic ills. 

We have now re-nationalized  the mortgage business,  not that it was very free to begin with.    It took more then forty years to partially  privatize it yet it gets the blame for the mess.  If anything it should be totally privatized since the government part is the what  failed. 

Yes,  we need a few rules (note: few) for business since there are bad people out there.    But the current regulations do nothing to protect people,  and cost business time,  money and many other things.   I work in real estate,  a business with more regulations then you would believe.  We mow down forests to make the paper for the forms that are required today. (the company I work for has 8 warehouses to store paper, yes EIGHT)  Yet people get ripped off regularly (not by us),  in spite of all the classes for realtors in ethics,  good business practices and anti-discrimination to name a few.    So the current rules do little to stop people from ripping off others.   We need rules that make people know that they can't do that and think they will get away with it.

True free enterprise could do that.   I know many don't believe that,  but you need to get that liberal idea out of your brain that free enterprise system is heartless.    Socialism and BIG government is the system that is truly heartless.    There is nothing in it that forces it to work, it just fails again and again.   Free enterprise,  like democracy has that force that makes it work.  

Image how much stronger our economy would be had people learned from Reagan and done more to make for a more free economic system at that time,  we only got a small taste of what could be.    We cannot be truly free if our economic system isn't.  

It been a great scam that has been played on us economically.   Washington DC. has allowed just enough free enterprise so they have something to blame when socialism fails.    Just look at the Reagan years again.   It was all blamed on Reaganomics when factories failed in the rust belt and blue collar people lost their jobs.  

Nobody notes that the overall size of the  economy of the 1980's on is so much larger then the 1970's and before.   Not because socialism continued its expansion then,  but because it was finally slowed a little. 

Its a important election.    We could be back on the hard road to socialism.   We need to educate the citizens that even though it looks like the "right thing,  the fair thing," it is in fact the wolf in sheep clothing.     The media makes it hard,  since they hide the fact that socialism fails over and over in all the countries that try it.    We would be no different. 

Voting for Obama-Biden puts us back on that road.    There will be far less if any economic growth during a Obama presidency.    What he proposes for the economy will do no less.    The Democratic Congress will rubber-stamp every little thing that will take our economic freedom.    I think McCain could pull a rabbit out of his hat by voting against this bill.   It could finally put him on top for good.   Americans are very much  against this bailout but congress is hellbent on passing this thing,  and President Bush will sign it into law.    He is too worn out to do otherwise.  

The U.S. is the last shining light on a hill.   We need to go our own way on economics,  using tired old ideas from Europe is a bad idea for the U.S. to do.  We wouldn't be any different from them.   Republicans need to take the lead on this since the Democrats never will.     They need to take some notes on how WE do things for a CHANGE.   

Obama over and over kept on with the tired ol'  nonsense that hasn't changed for more then thirty years for the Democrats.    When are they going to ditch it?    Iraq is like Vietnam (Oh, by the way,  we really didn't lose that war).   Tax increases,  more regulations on business, income  redistribution, on and on with the stuff that the Democrats have been trying to sell us for a long time.  

We ain't buying it,  Senator Obama!

We cannot afford an Obama presidency.   We need to cut spending with the hatchet not the scalpel.   You got that wrong too,  Senator Obama.  In reality we need to take a chainsaw to spending.    Left politics don't really make much sense.   Obama was way fast with interrupting at times,  that's rude Senator.    He still thinks there aren't Muslim terrorists in Iraq,  what planet are you on?  Not knowing the name of the soldier on your bracelet wasn't so great either.    The commander in chief needs to be far more interested in the military and what goes on in that part of government.    It by far the most important part of it right now and Obama interests really are somewhere else. 

I can't wait for the townhall style debate,  McCain is really good with those,   Obama not so much,  no TelePrompter.   


This is what I posted at the Chicago Tribune article on who won.   Somehow Obama is leading the poll there.    Try to get over there to even things out.    The editoral board at the Tribune went for McCain as the winner. 


 begin quote  "McCain is the clear winner.   Obama didn't bring anything new to the table.  He brought some old populist ideas that might score him some points with some,  but are meaningless for the most part.  McCain didn't call him on that however so that will make for some to believe that Obama came out on top in that part.  Missed opportunity  for McCain to hammer away at a naive economic "plan".   Populist ideas are generally not good for an economy so not breaking from that,  Obama loses. 

McCain experience showed more in the military and foreign policy part of the debate.   Obama ideas are ill suited for the real world and very naive at best and dangerous if actually done.    McCain did better at hammering away at this part.   Obama loses.

Obama doesn't have much in the way of details,  so McCain needs to push at that and clearly talk about why his way of doing things will be better for the U.S."   end quote

In spite of all the rhetoric about equal pay,  Biden is a hypocrite about pay as well as Obama.   Biden pays male staff more then women staff.    Obama's Washington D.C.  staff is similar as his campaign staff,  the men make more. 

They complain that large companies don't pay women as much as men.   However the pay is closer in those large companies then the staffs of the Democratic candidates.    Who do they think they are?   Above the laws,  that they want for the rest of us.  

The choice is clear.    Rhetoric and nonsense from the left,   rules to live by that they don't follow, but they make you do.   More proof that the left's "solutions" just  don't work,  because they don't want to do them either.   No credibility,  none. 

Its so sad that the Democrats can't come up with anybody better then these two.   

They treat her like crap and then wonder why they get banned!    Duh,,,,,,,

Of course many of the "mainstream" press think of her as the second coming of Dick Cheney.     Glad she is following in his footsteps in not letting them walk all over her.     Dick Cheney hates reporters, for good reasons,  they never have given him a fair shake. 

Most reporters are not worth the paper they waste writing things.    It so sad how bad its become.