 |
|
The Democratic Coup in the
State of Washington
by
Adam Teiichi Yoshida
“Why is it always the Democrats
who steal elections?” a friend asked me recently, “isn’t it that you’re
just a Republican and you want to blame everything on Democrats?” While
that is, of course, mostly true it does not alter the fixed fact that
Democrats commit electoral fraud with far greater frequency than
Republicans do. This is not (entirely) due to the well-known moral
turpitude of the followers of the party of idleness, dishonesty, and
treason, rather it is mostly a product of a geographic situation which
results in Democrats universally possessing the two elements necessary to
commit a crime: motive and opportunity.
In a broad sense, Democrats steal elections simply because they feel like
it. More specifically, I suspect, Democrats rationalize it to themselves
through logic that was on full public display during the most recent
Presidential election. Essentially, Democrats believe that they are the
natural party of government and, if they do not win, that means that
they’ve been victims of fraud or deception or that their voters have
somehow been “disenfranchised.” This is the driving force behind the
increasingly wild conspiracy-theorizing over matters in the State of Ohio.
Democrats can’t accept that they lost because they don’t believe that it’s
possible for them to lose. They tend to view their failure to win as ipso
facto proof of fraud or malfeasance.
This is, of course, a humorous thing since it’s well-known that Democrats
are far more likely to engage in electoral fraud than Republicans. As I’ve
already shown, they’ve got motive a-plenty for fraud (not to say that
Republicans don’t as well), the difference is this: the Democrats have
opportunity as well.
The places where it’s easiest to commit electoral fraud are, obviously,
those with the most voters. In other words: inner city precincts. Those
places, as it so happens, fall under almost-total control by the
Democratic Party. It’s hard to create thousands of new ballots in a rural
county with two thousand people. It’s easy to do it in Seattle, Detroit,
or Columbus.
Combine motive, opportunity and immorality and, more often than not,
you’ve got a crime. And so we have.
What we’ve got in progress today in the State of Washington is nothing
less than a non-violent coup d’etat. The will of Washington voters is
being overturned through fraud and the complicity of a media which is, as
always, willing to cover up the wanton criminality of the Democratic
Party. What’s going on in Washington is the same thing which the Democrats
try in every election: the perpetuation of a great crime against the
people.
Simply put, at this point, any election result which puts State Attorney
General Christine Gregoire in the office of Governor is, on its face,
invalid. There’s simply been too much malfeasance for any such result to
be accepted. Frankly, at this point the actual ballots in Washington State
have been so heavily contaminated that I don’t think anyone can trust the
results.
The stories of what’s gone on are legion. And, of course, almost all of
them involve King County: a locality controlled by a classic, old-time
Democratic machine. Ranging from the initial discovery of 10,000
“misplaced” ballots, to the “enhancement” of ballots that the machines
wouldn’t read, to, finally, the sudden “discovery” of another 750 “lost”
ballots, the whole thing has been closer to what you’d expect out of South
Texas in 1948 than Washington State in 2004.
Frankly, when all’s said and done, I won’t be at all shocked if we
discover that those final absentee voters all managed to vote in
alphabetical order.
Now, I realize that among the final batch of “disenfranchised” absentee
voters in King County was a King County Councilman. This, on its face,
would seem to be strong evidence that those voters were actually excluded
from the original count as a result of worker error. Very strong evidence.
In my opinion, suspiciously strong evidence.
Frankly, I wouldn’t be at all shocked if someone simply manufactured those
additional ballots and make sure to put a prominent politician’s name of
the list of supposedly disqualified voters in order to create the
appearance of the vote’s propriety. It wouldn’t be hard at all. Get a list
of people who voted absentee and pick off seven hundred plus people at
random and add their names to the lists while manufacturing a second
ballot for each of them.
I’m not claiming that is what happened: I’m just saying that it could have
happened. I really don’t know. A month and a half is an awfully long time
for ballots to be sitting around.
Further recounts won’t do any good: the pool of ballots has already been
contaminated. Trying to separate the dirty Democrat ballots from the rest
would bear remarkable similarity to attempting urine from a swimming pool.
The opinions expressed in
this column represent those of the author and do not necessarily reflect
the opinions, views, or philosophy of TheRealityCheck.org, Inc.
|
 |
|
|