Home  |  Register  |           | Search   

NAPOLITANO: Hope for the dead — and the living

Christ’s sacrifice on the cross sealed the union of God and man


By Andrew P. Napolitano     Friday, March 29, 2013


On this Good Friday, what does freedom have to do with rising from the dead?

When America was in its infancy and struggling to find a culture, and frustrated at governance from Great Britain, the word most frequently uttered in speeches and pamphlets and letters was not safety or taxes or peace; it was freedom.Two acts of Parliament broke the bonds with the mother country irreparably. The first was the Stamp Act, which was enforced by British soldiers writing their own search warrants and rummaging through the personal possessions of colonists looking to see whether they had purchased the government’s stamps. The second was the imposition of a tax to pay for the Church of England, which the colonists were forced to pay, no matter their religious beliefs.


The Stamp Act assaulted the right to be left alone in the home, and the tax for the Church of England assaulted the freedom to choose to support one’s own means of worship. The two taxes together caused many colonists to realize they needed to secede from England and form their own country, in which freedom would be protected by the government, not assaulted by it.Today, it seems the power of the government continues to expand and the freedom of the individual continues to shrink. The loss of freedom comes in many forms. Sometimes, it is direct and profound, as when the government stops you from doing what you formerly had the freedom to do — like choose your own doctor and your own health care insurance or choose not to have health care insurance. Sometimes, it is more subtle — like when the government prints money to pay its bills and, as a result, all the money you already have loses much of its value. And sometimes the government steals freedom without you knowing it — like when federal agents write their own search warrants, authorizing themselves to learn of your computer use or medical or banking records, and they never tell you what they’ve done.Freedom is the ability of every person to exercise his own free will, rather than be subject to the will of someone else. Free will is the essence of humanity, and humanity is God’s greatest gift. When the government affirmatively takes away freedom, the government violates the natural law; it prevents us from having and utilizing the means to the truth. Your moral ability to exercise your free will to seek the truth is your natural right, and the government may only morally interfere with the exercise of that right when you have used fraud or force to interfere with the exercise of someone else’s natural rights.


We know from the events 2,000 years ago, which Christians commemorate and celebrate this week, that freedom is the essential means to discover and unite with the truth. And to Christians, the personification, the incarnation, the perfect manifestation of truth is the Son of God.


On the first Holy Thursday, Jesus attended a traditional Jewish Passover Seder. Catholics believe that at that last supper, He performed two miracles so that we could stay united to Him. He transformed ordinary bread and wine into His own body, blood, soul and divinity, and He empowered His disciples and their successors to do the same.On the first Good Friday, the government executed Him for claiming to be the Son of God. He had the freedom to reject this horrific event, but He exercised His freedom so that we might know the truth. The truth He manifested is that His acceptance of the destruction of His body would demonstrate to us that we can liberate our souls from the slavery of sin and our free wills from the oppression of the government. Three days later, on Easter, that manifestation was complete when He triumphed over death by rising from the dead.


Easter is the linchpin of human existence: With it, life is worth living, no matter its cost or pain. Without it, life is meaningless, no matter its fleeting joys or triumphs. Easter has a meaning that is both incomprehensible and simple. It is incomprehensible that a human being had the freedom to rise from the dead. It is simple because that human being was and is God. Easter means that there is hope for the dead. If there’s hope for the dead, there’s hope for the living.Like the colonists who fought the oppression of the king, we the living can only achieve our hopes if we have freedom. And that requires a government that protects freedom, not one that shrinks it.


Do we have such a government today?


Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at the Fox News Channel. Judge Napolitano has written seven books on the U.S. Constitution. The most recent is “Theodore and Woodrow: How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom.”



Thanks, from the washingtimes.com




From 2012 to 2013, Article 26, Secrets Of A Debt Free Nation
Posted by Michael Lindsay | Posted in Articles, Monetary Reform | Posted on 04-02-2013


Featured Article by Michael Lindsay, February 4, 2013


Congratulations, everyone!  You survived the end of the Mayan Calendar in 2012 and made it past the first month in 2013.  Whew!  Wasn’t it exhausting hearing from all the doom-and-gloomers and the elitist puppets, along with watching the real power controllers move the world’s humans in the direction deemed appropriate?

I find in incomprehensible that 97% of the world’s population follows the trail laid out for them.  I find it incomprehensible that so few ask the basic questions necessary to ensure individualism.  And on this Super Bowl weekend, I was saddened beyond description by the words of a wonderful woman who dislikes thinking for herself: “I need them to guide me, I’m happy with that!”  It showed me how effective the elite are at controlling a segment of the citizenry.

In 1984, I was informed by a ruling elitist that it was a matter of choice: “You are with us or with the herd.”  I am happy to say, and have no regrets, that I elected to travel with the herd.  Most of you in the herd will second-guess that decision and ask why, so here are your answers: Courage.  Benevolence.  Love.  Fear.

These qualities do not exist in the ruling elite.  They fear nothing, or so they would have all believe.  They are devoid of emotions, especially love.  Benevolence is not allowed.  Any member exhibiting such, unless under specific orders, is disciplined harshly.  Since they have no fear, they have no courage.  Attack them face-to-face, head on, and they run.  Where to?  Well, to their safe havens, where orders are given to the soldier minions they control; where orders are issued to remove whoever confronted, challenged, or attempted to remove their source of power.

Their source of power has been identified by those in the past, who paid the ultimate price for their courage.   Their source of power is the right to issue a medium that is used to allow interaction to occur.  The masses identify the medium as “money”.

Have any of you ever put a face to the elitist that control that right to issue?  Probably not!  Would you like to?  Maybe!  Here is your answer to the question of where to begin.

First, go to www.sec.gov, the official Securities Exchange Commission website.  Once there, look for the title “Filings” and click on “Search for Company Filings”.  Then, select annual reports for a specific company.  But before your journey can begin, some information is needed: where the “über-elite” hide out.  Well, they sit on the boards of directors of the wealthiest companies and/or are top-ten shareholders, and all have been appointed as puppets.  You will find the 300 most powerful über-elitists on the planet controlling the following companies, in no particular order:

      1. Bank of America Corporation
      2. Morgan Stanley
      3. Northern Trust Corporation
      4. State Street Corporation
      5. J.P. Morgan Chase & Company
      6. Merrill Lynch & Company, Inc.
      7. Bank of New York Mellon Corp.
      8. Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
      9. Walton Enterprises, LLC
      10. Legg Mason, Inc.
      11. Vanguard Group, Inc.
      12. Barclays, PLC
      13. Société Géneralé
      14. Credit Suisse Group
      15. Capital Group Companies, Inc.
      16. Franklin Resources, Inc.
      17. UBS, AG
      18. AXA
      19. Legal & General Group, PLC
      20. FMR Corporation
      21. Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Inc.
      22. Natixis
      23. T. Rowe Price Group, Inc.
      24. Deutsche Bank AG
      25. Wellington Management Co., LLP


Sad to say, once you identify this group, you will find one thing: they too follow orders.  Identifying that group is a real challenge; good luck on the journey.  This group not only owns and controls most of the Fortune 500, plus the right to issue your money, but also owns and controls the majority of debt instruments issued by the governments of over one hundred nations.  Difficult to wrap your mind around.

This elite group could pay off the U.S. national debt—over $16 trillion—and fund all unfunded government obligations, and then still have more hoarded away than the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP), currently $33 trillion.  But their hoard is not all in dollars; it is in baskets of currencies that are hidden in designated havens all over the world.

Stay tuned, my fellow citizens; it is going to get much more exciting in the months ahead.  Let us see how many of you actually discover some real hidden gems in their annual filings.  After all, they hid them in plain sight . . .

Bless you all.







The Fiscal Cliff:  Information or Disinformation?

Featured article by Michael Lindsay — November 14, 2012

The monetary elite has concocted a multitude of public-relations fables for your consumption.  The most recent one I haven’t seen yet is the “Simpson-Bowles: Rise Above” broadcast being advertised.  I caution all of you to heed my interpretation of what the writers of the Federal Reserve Act really meant back in 1910:

We care not what laws, religion, or philosophy the inhabitants of a nation conceive or enact, as long as the power to issue the medium of exchange rests with a privately owned entity.

Ever heard of a basic math principle called the law of exponentials?  It applies to the growing demand for limited resources.  How about the term “compounding interest”?  If you’ve ever had a savings or investment account, you’re familiar with its phenomenal power.


No one on the Simpson-Bowles Committee (or anyone else, for that matter) will ever mention publicly the cornerstone of America’s central bank, the U.S. Federal Reserve: the Federal Reserve Act, begun in 1910 and enacted in 1913.  This legislation enabled the Fed to (a) create money to buy U.S. Treasury debt, and (b) make you forfeit part of your earnings to pay for it.


And they’ve been at it ever since, counting on you, the taxpayer, to keep buying their 100-year-old campaign of half-truths and disinformation so you’ll keep supporting their time-honored system of forfeiture.  Many citizens have long protested that their system of forfeiture was illegally ratified and covered up, because the States did not approve the Income Tax Amendment.


As I recall the testimony of a former Chairman of the Federal Reserve, the Federal Reserve creates credit for purchase out of thin air, as a debit/credit on its balance sheet.


Hello!?  How would you like the power to create money that everyone uses in daily life and business?  You bet you would!  Some of you already know which yacht and jet you’d buy.  Some of you would buy a new home, or car or TV, and go right on raising a happy, healthy, hardworking American family.  You, I love.  The yacht and jet lovers, well . . .

So what can you do to actually fix the problem?


Begin with family and friends and start a letter-writing campaign to your Congressional delegate and both Senators.  Demand that they enact monetary reform by removing the Federal Reserve’s power to create money and putting it in the hands of our government.  Yeah, I know; sounds crazy, right?  But look at it another way: If that happens, state and federal income taxes will cease to exist.


Demand a write-in ballot for every election—whether or not you belong to a political party.  It is the only way your vote will be counted correctly.  Nine states already disallow your right to a write-in ballot, with legislation pending in many more.  As long as you have the right to request and use a write-in ballot, you will hold the true power of freedom.

Allocate one hour a month for meetings with prospective leaders.  Grill them on their goals, and tell them what you want from them if they get elected:


Michael Lindsay



BBC News - Strict voting laws affect millions of Americans.



When Americans go to the polls in the 2012 presidential election, in some states they will be asked to show photo identification and proof of citizenship for the first time.
Other new laws prevent citizens from registering to vote on election day.
More than a dozen states have changed their voting laws since 2011 in an attempt to prevent voter fraud. Critics argue that the low number of cases of fraud do not justify the impact these new laws might have on millions of voters.
The BBC takes a look at the numbers behind voting registration in the US and who is most likely to be impacted by stricter rules.


Take One Person to Vote

By Michael Moore, Open Mike Blog

01 November 12


have a personal favor I'd like to ask each of you. We all know the election next Tuesday is going to be very close. But I've got an idea that could help put President Obama over the top.

I want you - yes, YOU, the person reading this right now - to get ONE of your fellow Americans who would not otherwise vote to show up at the polls and support Obama.

Here's the math: there are upwards of five million of you seeing this, via email, on my website, on the Huffington Post and all over the internet. There are 1.2 million following me on Twitter. I've got almost 700,000 Facebook friends.

I want just one million of you to convince just ONE person each - one person who's planning NOT to vote - to go to the polls and vote for Barack Obama. That's it. And those million extra votes could make all the difference in what will be a very tight election - and it will save us from a tragic return to the Bush years.

Do you realize that there are 90 million people who are planning to NOT vote next Tuesday? That's according to a poll conducted by USA Today. 90,000,000!! It's a shocking number, isn't it? In the old days we'd just label these people as apathetic or stupid. Not anymore. They don't need our admonition - they need our empathy.

The non-voter today knows exactly what's going on, and he or she wants no part of it. They are discouraged, disillusioned, and have almost lost hope that things will change. Many are jobless or working for peanuts. They're angry, and we should tell them they have every right to be.

But here's something else about them: despite everything, they haven't utterly given up on politics. When USA Today asked the non-voters who they'd choose if they HAD to vote for someone in this election, 18% said they would vote for Romney - and 43% said they'd vote for Obama! That means there are nearly 40 million people who prefer Obama - AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO VOTE.

The other question they were asked was, what would it take to get you to vote? 85% of the pro-Obama non-voters said they would go vote IF they thought the election was going to be really close and that their vote would actually make the difference.

This is, for all its frustrating logic, incredibly good news. So our job for the next six days is clear: We - you and me - have to bring a little over 1% of the 90 million non-voters to the polls. If we do we'll send Romney packing back to New Hampshire/Massachusetts/California or wherever he's going to build car elevators next.

The time to convince undecideds to vote for Obama is over. All it's about now is whose supporters simply show up. The side that does the best job of literally dragging people out of their homes between 6:00 AM and 8:00 PM on Tuesday, November 6th is the side that wins.

Each of us knows Obama-supporting non-voters. They're your cousin, your coworker, your friend from the choir at church. Identify just one of them (best of all if they're in a swing state) and pledge to get them to the polls. You can try to convince them with all the good arguments as to why they should vote for the O (click here), but I think the best way to do this is to ask them personally, just this once, to do this for you. Not for the country. For you.

Then, once they've committed to vote, make a commitment to them: that you are not going to be silent after Tuesday, that you are going to keep fighting like hell (including, when need be, fighting Obama) every single day after the election for them, for you and for all of us.

So, that is your mission - YOURS, the person reading this right this second. Bring just one non-voter to the polls. Easy! Do it and be known as part of the group that defeated Mitt "Bush #3" Romney and gave Barack Obama another term - and another chance to do what we sent him there to do.



Retired NSA Analyst
Proves GOP Is Stealing Elections Part I

By Denis Campbell, LA Progressive

28 October 12


hy is Mitt Romney so confident? In states where the winner will be decided by less than 10%, of the vote he already knows he will win. This is no tinfoil hat conspiracy. It's a math problem. And mathematics showed changes in actual raw voting data that had no statistical correlation other than programmable computer fraud. This computer fraud resulted in votes being flipped from Democrat to Republican in every federal, senatorial, congressional and gubernatorial election since 2008 (thus far) and in the 2012 primary contests from other Republicans to Mitt Romney.

This goes well beyond Romney's investment control in voting machine maker Hart Intercivic and Diebold's close ties to George W. Bush. Indeed all five voting machine companies have very strong GOP fundraising ties, yet executives (including the candidate's son Tagg Romney) there is no conflict between massively supporting one party financially whilst controlling the machines that record and count the votes.

A retired NSA analyst has spent several sleepless nights applying a simple formula to past election results across Arizona. His results showed across-the-board systemic election fraud on a coordinated and massive scale. But the analysis indicated that this only happens in larger precincts because anomalies in small precincts can be more easily detected.

"Easy to Cheat"

Retired NSA analyst Michael Duniho has worked for nearly seven years trying to understand voting anomalies in his home state of Arizona and Pima County. This publication has written extensively about apparent vote machine manipulation in a 2006 RTA Bond issue election that is still being fought in the courts. Said Duniho, "It is really easy to cheat using computers to count votes, because you can't see what is going on in the machine."

When Duniho applied a mathematical model to actual voting results in the largest voting precincts, he saw that only the large precincts suddenly trended towards Mitt Romney in the Arizona primary – and indeed all Republicans in every election since 2008 – by a factor of 8%-10%. The Republican candidate in every race saw an 8-10%. gain in his totals whilst the Democrat lost 8-10%. This is a swing of up to  20 point, enough to win an election unless a candidate was losing very badly.

Since sifting through and decoding massive amounts of data was his work for decades on behalf of the National Security Agency, he wanted to understand why this was ONLY happening in large precincts.

Nose Counting

The idea of examining large precinct results came via a link to a report written by Francois Choquette and James Johnson. Choquette became curious about South Carolina primary results in the February Republican contest. There a poll observer noted an unusually big gain of votes for Mitt Romney in larger precincts than in smaller ones. Choquette wanted to know why?

He examined and applied all of the normal statistical markers to see where a variance might occur: income level, population density, race, urban vs. rural, even party registration numbers. He found no correlation to explain why Romney votes trended upward while Paul and Santorum votes trended downward -yet only in large precincts.

Choquette then looked at all 50 states and found roughly a 10% switch in votes from GOP to Democrat everywhere except Utah, where the presumption was, as it was Mitt's religious home state and very conservative, there was no chance of Romney losing.

Choquette even saw in Maricopa County, which is Phoenix and its suburbs, that in 2008 Romney used this technique against John McCain. But McCain beat him by too much for a 10% fraud gain to matter. McCain tried to do the same thing in the general election to President Obama but 9 million votes nationally were too many to make up.

Examining every county across America was too massive an undertaking for any one person so he included a simple set of instructions and encouraged others to do the same with raw vote totals in their county/state.


Now here it gets a bit dense: He needed to add columns that show cumulative totals by candidate then compare them by candidate to establish trend lines.

That reveals trends should remain statistically constant throughout an election.

Stealing Votes

But as the spreadsheet shows, the larger the precinct, the numbers start to change dramatically.

"If percentages did not change from one precinct to the next, we would see a flat line, but what we are seeing is sloped lines downward for Democrats and upward for Republicans (or, in the case of the Presidential primary, upward for Romney and downward for his opponents), said Duniho."

In every election contest, the trend lines dramatically crossed for no apparent reason. It was revealed that votes were being systemically bled off for Rick Santorum and Ron Paul and then being credited to Mitt Romney.

Once Duniho completed the spreadsheet, he pumped in actual vote totals from other Arizona election contests.

He looked at every 2010 race in Arizona from Governor Brewer to Senator McCain and Congresswoman Gabby Giffords. The trends lines all did the exact same thing. Someone had manipulated the election outcome, most likely one person inserting a programme inside the system's central computer… that flipped votes.

The results were astounding.

They showed that Governor Brewer actually lost her election and Gabby Gifford's razor thin less than 1% point re-election victory over Tea Party Conservative Jesse Kelly was closer to a 20 point victory for her.

Duniho added, "We need to have strong hand count audits to confirm the integrity of these elections. This means comparing hand counts with official reports of the election."

Ohio Precedent

This isn't the first time Republicans have been charged with vote theft. It happened in the 2004 presidential election, in Ohio and Florida. In Ohio, GOP consultant Michael Connell claimed that the vote count computer program he had created for the state had a trap door that shifted Democratic votes to the GOP.

He was subpoenaed as a witness in a lawsuit against then-Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, and lawyers for the plaintiff asked the Dept. of Justice to provide him with security because there were two threats made against Connell's life by people associated with Karl Rove. But in Dec. 2008, before the trial began, Connell was killed in a plane crash outside Akron Ohio.

There were problems in Florida, as well.

A study by the Quantitative Methods Research Team at the University of California at Berkeley found that anomalies between Florida counties using touch-screen voting and those using other methods could not be explained statistically. Noting the higher-than-expected votes for Bush in three large Democratic counties, Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach, Michael Hout, a Berkeley professor who did the study said there were strong suspicions of vote-rigging.

"No matter how many factors and variables we took into consideration, the significant correlation in the votes for President Bush and electronic voting cannot be explained," Hout said. "The study shows that a county's use of electronic voting resulted in a disproportionate increase in votes for President Bush. There is just a trivial probability of evidence like this appearing in a population where the true difference is zero - less than once in a thousand chances."

Don't Trust, Verify

Indeed the only way to 100% verify this election fraud would be through handcounts of ballots by precinct, matching those results to the reported totals. But as was mentioned earlier, a group in Pima County has been trying unsuccessfully to get access to ballots to conduct such a count for almost five years since anomalies first surfaced in voting machines in 2006.

Is there a judge in Arizona likely to suddenly reverse past trends and allow access to conduct such a handcount of ballots 12 days before a national election? And if not, why not? Maybe someone needs to commission the Anonymous hacker group to re-level the playing field because the courts are not going to do it.

The results of Duniho's analysis can only happen if votes are being stolen, and the only way that's possible is if the computerised machines are programmed to steal them. Welcome to Zimbabwe.

More than 100 million Americans will cast their ballots thinking their vote will be fairly counted. It should be. Yet the crooks know they can safely flip up to 10% of votes without consequence. Anything more than that is statistically suspect.

President Obama won by such a huge margin in 2008 that even with this anomaly built into the system, he cruised to victory. This year the election is much closer. Can American democracy afford yet another election crisis placing three of the four last national Presidential election results in question or worse: The outcome was stolen, the outcome a victim of election theft?

Don't Take Our Word

Use the spreadsheet above to do the maths in your own state, county or precinct. The results are compelling. Then demand that the Justice Department stop this insane view that results need to be reported by 11 pm for the television networks. Demand hand ballot counts!

We use paper ballots in the UK and results do not even begin to trickle in until 3 am. The final outcome can take up to three days to finalise. But voters in Britain know the count is accurate because every ballot is transparently hand-counted. When I read this article that Serbia, Belarus and Kazakhstan were sending election monitors to watch the US Election?, I knew we'd jumped the shark.

We are already being victimized by vote fraud on a scale that, in another country, would lead to calls for international election monitors. It is time for Americans to stop being victims of ghosts in the machine.

Denis G. Campbell is the author of 6 books including ‘Billionaire Boys Election Freak Show,' ‘The Vagina Wars' & ‘Egypt Unsh@ckled.' He is the editor of UK Progressive Magazine and provides commentary to the BBC, itv Al Jazeera English, CNN, MSNBC and others. His weekly ‘World View with Denis Campbell' segment can be heard every Thursday on the globally syndicated The David Pakman Show. You can follow him on Twitter via @UKProgressive and on Facebook.

Charley James is a long-time independent journalist who covers social justice, politics and economic issues. He's worked in print and broadcast media for national magazines, large newspapers and major market radio and television outlets. Follow Charley on Twitter @SuddenlyHomeles.


Write-In Your Candidate


Special Article: October 9th 2012

Information or Disinformation—You Decide

Featured article by Michael Lindsay — October  5, 2012

A recent Wall Street Journal article—“The Magnitude of the Mess We’re In” by George P. Shultz, Michael J. Boskin, John F. Cogan, Allan H. Meltzer and John B. Taylor—painted a bleak picture with a political slant.  Between the figures, opinions and facts they presented, the authors blamed the current Administration for expanding the problem.


They also revealed the real foundation of the problem.  I’m sorry to say they did not offer a solution as well.

The fifth paragraph holds the first clue to unmasking the problem: 

“The government has to get the money to finance its spending by taxing or borrowing.”


The sixth paragraph holds the second clue as to what is and has been occurring: 

“Did you know that, during the last fiscal year, around three-quarters of the deficit was financed by the Federal Reserve?”


A good investigation starts with “Why?”  The answer is sad.  We the people gave away the United States’ right to create our medium of exchange—“money”—a hundred years ago.  The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 created a privately owned bank and granted it the power to create our money.  That’s like giving your mortal enemy the power to decide if you live or die.


What happened back then created an entity with the power to not only completely control commerce, but also mask a form of slavery, and all under the guise of patriotism.  Clever little biological entities; they wrapped themselves in a cape of freedom and sold us a lifetime of obligation and forfeiture.  And we bought the whole meal.

It makes my blood freeze to quote the true hidden agenda behind this con:


“Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes its laws.”

(Mayer Amschel Rothschild)


“Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce.” (Paul Warburg, drafter of the Federal Reserve Act)


Now you know WHY the government has to tax and borrow.

Next question: “WHAT consideration was put forth to buy the bonds created to finance the debt expenditure?”  Answer:  NOTHING!

So, WHERE did the money come from?  The Fed created it out of thin air under the power authorized.  So we must forfeit our earnings from labor to pay the principal and interest to the holder of the debt-obligation created by the Treasury and acquired by the Federal Reserve, which created the money.  Read your money.  Every “Federal Reserve Note” is backed by an issued bond.

This is like you creating a mortgage for someone to buy a home where you put up nothing, but the new homeowner has to pay the interest and the principal plus tax to you, who gets paid for nothing.

Pretty cool.  I’d give everyone a mortgage at 1%.  Heck, 1% of a trillion dollars is $10,000,000,000.  Yes, TEN BILLION a year in interest.  I could live on that . . .


Reform the monetary platform.  First, we remove the right to create money from our private central bank.  Second, we appropriate their transaction-processing system and set the fee at one-quarter of one percent. 


Third, we utilize our ability and power.  WHAT power, you ask?  Good question!

Your power is your vote.  Your superpower is your ability to request a write-in ballot.  Believe me, this power is feared all the way up to the highest of the highest.  Request a write-in ballot , even if you want a Democratic or Republican candidate as your representative.


Did you know that, in some states, it has been proposed that if any independent write-in candidate manages to get a vote, it will not be counted?


Requesting a write-in ballot sends a message to the governing bodies that you are watching and will not buy their public-relations garbage.  I have heard in meetings that “Any candidate who breaks away and runs as a write-in will be blacklisted for life.”


We are up against very powerful and deadly serious people who mean business.  They do not want the public interfering with their two-party system.  They refuse to be questioned or examined.  They honestly believe that you do not know what’s best and they do.

Sad, isn’t it?  Their blood isn’t blue, but don’t try telling them that . . .


Michael Lindsay — October  5, 2012


Write-In Your Candidate!!!

Supporting the free elections process void of parties, that are controlled by the International Bankers, in this country and abroad. We know that a free election process is vital to a free country, and that dissent is essential to the process of freedom, as our founding fathers new all to well...


Every election, in every year, some voters decide that the candidates they see printed on their ballot are just not to their liking. Those are times when people choose to go with a “write-in” candidate rather than the common candidates.


Most All states allow for write-in candidates as well. When you receive your ballot, you will see a blank line just below the designated candidates for each party in each race. If you want to write in a candidate, go right ahead.


(Side note: It will be interesting to see how that plays out in the Alaska race for US Senator. Lisa Murkowski is not an easy name to spell)

Many people also like to use the ballot as a time to play a joke or two on elections staff. But remember, only the names of real people will be counted.

Most Counties have staff working on election night and they are prepared for write-in votes. Many voting tabulators have equipment where “normal” ballots fall into one stack, and ballots with write-ins fall into another stack. That way, elections staff can easily access the ballots with writing on them, not just ones with filled in bubbles.





U.S. District Court Grants Injunctive Relief Against California’s Deadline for Newly-Qualifying Parties

May 22nd, 2012


On May 22, U.S. District Court Judge Percy Anderson granted injunctive relief to the Constitution Party and the Justice Party, against California’s January deadline for newly-qualifying parties to get on the ballot. The case is California Justice Committee, et al v Bowen, 2:12cv03956. Here is the order.


Injunctive relief can only be granted when there is a substantial likelihood that the challenged law is unconstitutional. It is likely that in the near future, the California deadline will be held unconstitutional and the legislature will need to write a better law. This is the first ballot access law affecting minor parties and independent candidates in California that has been either enjoined or declared unconstitutional since 1988. In 1988, a U.S. District Court struck down California’s old 60-day period for independent presidential candidates. The legislature then expanded it to 105 days.


This new California development will assist similar deadline lawsuits now pending in Oklahoma, Alabama, North Carolina, Montana, and New Mexico. It will also help to retain the victory already won against Ohio, where the state legislature is still appealing. UPDATE: here is a press release about the decision.





Smith runs successful write-in campaign


State Rep. Matt Smith, D-Mt. Lebanon, was unopposed on the Democratic ticket during the April 24 primary, and recently learned he was the successful write-in candidate on the Republican ticket.


His name will appear on the November ballot as both the Democratic and Republican candidate and he appears the likely winner for the seat. A person needs 300 write-in votes to gain a party nomination in the primary, equivalent to the number of signatures on a nominating petition. “I am very happy to announce that I secured well over 300 write-in votes on the Republican side for State Representative in the 42nd Legislative District,” Smith said in a prepared statement. “I view this as an affirmation of my commitment to work everyday in a bipartisan manner towards finding solutions to the problems we are currently facing in Pennsylvania. I have worked hard to bring people together to better our community and I have worked with others on both sides of the aisle to reform Harrisburg, improve the quality of K-12 education and to make higher education more affordable, and make government work for my constituents.


“There is much more work to be done and I will continue to try and solve problems in a bipartisan manner. I appreciate the support I have received from my constituents on both ends of our political spectrum and will keep fighting for our community.”



Americans Elect, Struggles to Find a Suitable Third-Party Candidate

May 16, 2012

Americans Elect is going through some tough times. The advocacy group was created by several wealthy activists to place an independent presidential candidate on the ballot in all 50 states this fall. The trouble, it turns out, is that no one has met the group's standards to qualify for its presidential nomination, and Americans Elect has announced that it is suspending the process, at least for now.


It had sounded so impressive: Americans Elect would go through the trouble, state by state, of placing an independent "ticket" on the ballot, and then it would use new online technology to allow people to choose nominees for president and vice president. What was missing were credible candidates, and that's still the case.

The ballot access program has been going well, with Americans Elect on the ballot in more than half the states. But the closest that the group could come to a candidate is Buddy Roemer, the former governor and congressman from Louisiana. He ran for the Republican presidential nomination this year, was excluded from the debates, and went nowhere during the primaries. Roemer now concedes that he has failed to get enough online support to qualify for the group's ballot. He got about 6,000 "clicks" for his candidacy in an online system that required at least 10,000—1,000 in each of 10 states.

Roemer said he still wants the nomination and will work harder to get it.

"What Americans Elect has done for our country is revolutionary," he told reporters. "It is my sincere hope that they continue on their mission of putting forth a credible candidate to face the bought candidates—Barack Obama and Mitt Romney."

"The American people are hungry for reform and both parties are not providing it because they are too busy fighting like schoolchildren," he added.


Americans Elect leaders are now trying to figure out their next step. The group's leaders say the stumbling block was the concern of potential candidates that running for president would subject them and their families to intolerable levels of attack and unwelcome levels of scrutiny. And with the major party candidates already lobbing negative bombs at each other nearly every day, and the media on the hunt for embarrassing stories, those concerns are understandable.




Candidates seek write-in votes 4/22/2012 3:53 AM

By Barbara S. Miller, Staff writer , bmiller@observer-reporter.com
At least two legislative candidates, one a Republican and the other a Democrat, are notifying voters via direct mail they're running write-in campaigns on the Democratic ballot in Tuesday's primary.

Greg Parks of Pleasant Hills, the Democrat, is seeking his party's nomination in the 37th Senatorial District. No Democrat filed for the office for a chance to succeed State Sen. John Pippy, R-Moon Township, next year for a four-year term. Republicans in the race are Sue Means, State Rep. Mark Mustio and D. Raja.

A Senatorial write-in candidate, to be included on the November ballot, must receive at least 500 votes, equal to the number of valid signatures on a nominating petition.

The 37th Senatorial District includes parts of southern and western Allegheny County, plus Peters Township in Washington County.

In the 40th Legislative District, State Rep. John Maher, a Republican from Upper St. Clair, is seeking a write-in nomination on the Democratic ticket, where no Democrat has filed. A write-in candidate for General Assembly must receive at least 300 write-in votes to be listed as a party nominee on the November ballot. The district includes Upper St. Clair and part of Bethel Park in Allegheny County and Peters Township in Washington County.

Complete write-in results from the two counties may not be available Tuesday night with unofficial primary returns.

Maher, who is unopposed for the 40th District legislative seat on the GOP ticket, is also running for the Republican nomination as auditor general against Frank Pinto of Harrisburg. The winner of that contest will face Democrat Eugene DePasquale of West Manchester, York County, who is unopposed in the primary.



Write-ins notch victories in NE Iowa Story

By TINA HINZ, tina.hinz@wcfcourier.com | Posted: Wednesday, November 9, 2011 12:00 pm | (0) Comments


WATERLOO --- Voters in Northeast Iowa Tuesday had their say in who they want to lead their communities.

In some cases, voters favored newcomers. Mayors in Frederika, Garrison, Hawkeye, Holland, Norway, Reinbeck, Toledo, Tripoli and Waucoma all saw defeat.

Carrie Folkers of Alta Vista won by 11 votes against incumbent Linda Kobliska. Ron Walthart, a write-in, beat Chad Staton, also by 11 votes, for the mayor's seat in Quasqueton.

Write-in Kent Halverson did not anticipate a victory by such a wide margin for mayor in West Union. He earned 462 votes. Troy Schott had 128, and Marc Rue tallied 81. Nearly 48 percent of the city's registered voters --- 672 total --- submitted their ballots Tuesday.

"I always said that no matter either way, I just hoped people got out and voted," Halverson said. "I think they did for our town, so I'm pretty proud of that."

Halverson, a lifelong resident of West Union, is new to city government. The experience will require a lengthy learning process, he admits, but he said people's encouragement is what fueled his decision to run. He is looking forward to "bringing the community back together a little bit with a few different issues."

"I think word of mouth did most of the campaigning for me," he said. "I think it'll go well. I really do."

Brandon appears to be without a mayor after Bob Bearbower, 74, decided to call it quits after nearly three decades.

In other races, the incumbents will get to keep their jobs. Ted Vorwald of Fairbank came out nine votes ahead of Randy Robinson to fill a council vacancy.

"I said it could go one way or the other," Vorwald said.

Vorwald, who was appointed to the council about a year ago, said he will do his best to follow through with upgrades to the wastewater treatment plant and maintenance at Island Park. He noted the city has gained about 70 residents during the past decade and has the third-lowest taxes of 11 towns in Buchanan County. He hopes the town averages three to four new homes annually.

"We're pretty fortunate," he said. "We'll just have to try to keep moving the town forward because smaller towns are all fighting for survival."

Some council races produced a mix of old and new. Peggy Sherrets secured her seat by a landslide against longtime incumbent Duane Brandt.