The way our system is set up in our country when it comes to presidential elections, the winner of each other state in the popular vote count takes all electoral votes, aka “Winner Takes All”. With this system, we have seen quite a few landslides, such as Reagan- Mondale, Clinton-Bush and most recently, Obama-McCain. But, what if each state were to enact legislation that gave electoral votes to the respective candidates based on the popular vote in each state. One would have to wonder how some of the election results would look after proportional voting went into effect? Bare in mind, this would make the popular vote just as effective as the electoral college.

I took 4 major elections in the last 25 years: 1984, 1992, 2000 and 2008. When we enact proportional voting here are how the numbers fall:

In 1984, Reagan soundly defeated Mondale, 525 electoral to 13 votes. Reagan that year won 58.7% of the popular vote to Mondale’s 40.5%. When you put proportional voting in place, Reagan wins 311 electoral votes and Mondale gets 227 EV’s. Reagan would still win the presidency but the margin of victory in EV’s would be cut by 214.

In 2008, Barack Obama beat John McCain 365 EV’s to 173 EV’s. Obama also won 52.8% of the popular vote and McCain won 45.6%. With proportional voting, Obama wins 282 EV’s and McCain wins 245 EV’s with 11 EV’s split among third party candidates. Now we get into the heart of the matter: the 1992 and 2000 races.

In 2000, George W. Bush won 271 EV’s and Al Gore won 266 EV’s with 1 floating EV. Bush had 47.8% of the popular vote and Gore had 48.3%. With proportional voting the numbers look much different. Al Gore would have had 260 EV’s under his belt and Bush would have had 258 EV’s, with 20 EV’s going to Nader. This meant that Nader was the obvious spoiler and the election would have been thrown into the House of Representatives. Had Nader’s EV’s been split down the middle, Gore would have had the 270 to win the presidency. Now we look at the 1992 elections.

Clinton won with 370 EV’s and Bush had 168 EV’s, with Clinton winning 43% of the popular vote and Bush receiving 37.4%, followed by Ross Perot with 18.9%. Tack in there the proportional vote factor and the numbers do not look at all like the results of the election. Clinton would have received 232 EV’s, Bush would have received 199 EV’s and Perot would have been a spoiler with a whopping 107 EV’s. This means again the election would have gone to the House. Suppose though, we split Perot’s EV’s and gave each to Clinton and Bush. The numbers would break for Clinton, 285 1/2 to 252 1/2.

Perot according to many estimations, took about 65% of the potential popular vote away from Bush, which translated into 71 EV’s that would have gone to Bush, thereby giving Bush his re-election with 270 EV’s and Clinton with 268.

Proportional voting should be adopted in my opinion across the country for two reasons: candidates and states. Political parties, including third parties would be able to have access to states that typically are considered “red” or “blue” states. The popular vote then would have a deeper impact on the outcome of the presidential race and the Electoral College would not be criticized as ineffective and the larger states “control the outcomes”. The states’ voices would then be the second reason to adopt PV. Smaller states like NH and Vermont would be more empowered and could possibly tip the scale to one candidate or another. The other thing is the larger EV states would not be considered safe by either party, like California, Texas, New York or Florida. This puts all the states, and the potential voters into play, which means it would then be a free for all for the presidency and leadership, and direction our country goes.

Of the people, by the people, for the people.

It is no surprise to anyone that Rush Limbaugh is a die hard conservative. His on air assault of liberal policies are notorious to the Left. But Mr. Limbaugh, aka “the Maha Rushie” of conservative talk radio, is an avid NFL enthusiast with a lot of dough to spend.

Rush Limbaugh, in my opinion, is a shoe in to be a part owner of the woeful St. Louis Rams franchise. Limbaugh, along with St. Louis Blues hockey team owner David Checketts, are in a partnership vying for the team. Limbaugh has the money to purchase the team, and many of the owners in the NFL would welcome him to the club. However, that is not saying that his bid will and has not been met with much criticism, especially from Al Sharpton and head of the NFL Players Association.

Sharpton said in a letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell that Limbaugh is “anti-NFL” and he asked for a meeting with Goodell, in which they could discuss the “myriad of reasons as to why (Limbaugh) should not be given an opportunity” to purchase the team. Also, DeMaurice Smith, executive director of the NFLPA, has stated publicly that the NFL should block the possible purchase of the Rams by Checketts and Limbaugh, because division and hatred are not a part of the NFL mantra.

Gentlemen, I have one thing to say to you: butt out. First of all, this is America, land of the free and home of the brave. Everyone and anyone that has the desire, the drive and the monetary funding can do what they want. Our country was built upon success. If Rush Limbaugh has the money(which he is swimming in) and the passion to purchase a team and make it great and at the same time profit from its success, so be it. The vast majority of the NFL owners are contributors and hold fundraisers for GOP candidates. Alex Spanos, current owner of the San Diego Chargers, Houston Texans owner Robert McNair, and New York Jets owner Robert Johnson are just a few of the owners that have donated money to conservative candidates. Oh, and let’s not forget NFL coaches that have donated money, as well.

Secondly, do we really want to talk about how Rush is politically divisive and bad for the league? Let’s go back to the end of the Super Bowl this year. Pittsburgh owner Dan Rooney, after receiving the Lombardi trophy, the Holy Grail of the NFL, says he would “first and foremost would like to thank President Obama”. Excuse me, but that right there is not only politically charged( he received an ambassadorship to Ireland), but that is a blatant slap in the face of not only the players and coaches, but every single Steelers fan.

Finally, it’s not a black or white issue. It’s a green issue. Rush and co-owner Checketts are in this investment to profit, just like any other successful business owner. When the team is successful, the fans feel successful. And they will come to games to see their favorite players perform, it won’t matter to them who is sitting in the owners’ booth. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, who are “race pimps” in this story, are doing nothing but trying to instigate conflict and racial tensions. Stephen A. Smith said it best in an interview on CNN when asked about black football players not playing for the Rams if Rush becomes part owner:

“Those black ball players that are saying this are lying through their stinkin’ teeth. They’re walking hypocrites. You are telling me that if I am a black football player and Rush Limbaugh is the owner of the St. Louis Rams and the New York Jets offer me $10 million, and the Rams offer me $20 million, I’m gonna have a problem with that? Please! They’re lying!”

When asked about the Donovan McNabb comment that Limbaugh made in 2003, where he said “the media desires that a black quarterback do well”, Smith said:

“It did cause a lot of controversy, and Limbaugh did receive a lot of criticism and was unceremoniously fired, but the reality is that it does not mean that he should not own an NFL team. If he has the dollars, he should be able to do it.”

Stephen A Smith hit the nail on the head. Limbaugh has the money. He has the desire. And if he wants to, he will be part owner of the St. Louis Rams. And Al and Jesse and the race baiters that want to stir the pot, I say this: Money talks, and your BS will walk right out the door and into St. Louis, if the price is right.

In a time when prayer and God and Christianity are coming under ruthless attacks by the Left and the ACLU, this garbage is being thrown into the political arena: Atheists now complaining to a federal judge that “public prayers” make them sick!. How relentlessly stupid and ridiculous have these people become. Since when is it reprehensible for someone to throw a “Hail Mary” to the Big Guy upstairs and have someone who does not believe in a higher divinity not go into convulsions?

One of the plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit said,

“[W]hen Chief Justice Roberts asked the President to say, ‘So help me God,’ I felt threatened and sick to my stomach.” Another plaintiff stated in court documents, “As I watched this inauguration, I cringed with disgust as I witnessed this special secular event again being poisoned with sectarian religious nonsense.”

My question is this: Is the fact they are getting sick because these are Christians that are praying to the Almighty? What if were a Muslim group prayer? A Hindu prayer? Or what about if a Satanic cult was going about, spreading the word of Satan in a public park? Would that not be considered offensive?

I never quite understood why some of these minority groups seem to have to get special treatment, because they are “offended”. I understand that they are protected by the First Amendment about freedom of religion. But those that pray in public, including the swearing in of the POTUS, have that same right, as protected under that same document.

Brad Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute summed it up best:

“The First Amendment cannot be divorced from common sense. While atheists, humanists and freethinkers are a tiny minority in America, they are free to express and practice their lack of faith as they please. That does not mean, however, that the vast majority of God-fearing citizens and public officials must be silenced in order to appease them.”

There are some that are obviously not confident in their beliefs, values and morals, to the point of having to force others to see things their way. Where is the tolerance that so many are talking about? The road goes both ways!

I find it interesting how the Left hijacked the environmental movement from conservatives in the late 60’s and “adopted” it as their own. I also find it quite amusing that they have taken the Democrats’ agenda so far to the left, it has fallen off the earth.

You also have to think about the fact that the environmental wing of the Democratic Party is for green jobs, chewing on granola, wear Birkenstocks and talk about the evil “corporations” and capitalism are trying to bring every down. They run around calling Bush “Hitler” and all conservatives are evil “Eichmanns”.  The enviro-wackos embrace anything having to do with Mother Nature, from protecting plants that halt any type of economic progress, to animals being able to sue people in a court of law? What is this, Dr. Doolittle?

Groups like Greenpeace, ELF, ALF and other left leaning environmentalists have been against any type of war or conflict since the late 60’s, protesting Vietnam, the Gulf Wars, and Afghanistan, saying that war does nothing but destroy the earth. But here is something to chew on:

If environmental groups, who are the “true champions” of Mother Earth and nature, who go out of their way to raise hell about all crimes against nature, from throwing blood on fur to putting chains in trees that cause injuries to loggers when cutting them down, would accept war, then they would get what they want: a world without filthy humans.

The tree huggers should embrace global conflict, especially when Americans die. The faster they are killed off, the faster the earth can be rid of the species that has damaged her the most. They should be lining up at the factories, producing weapons for the military. They should be merchants of death, instigating conflict that would involve people getting killed. And in the end, they should incite all out civil war within the country, and nuclear war outside the U.S., wiping out all the vile filth that is humanity. The earth will heal and the environuts will have their wish: no more humanity to kill the planet.

PETA and Greenpeace should be the biggest advocates of war. Kill those that kill the earth.

We do apologize for the number of segments, but the length of the entire segment was about an hour and the file was gigantic. So we broke it down into 8 1/2 minute segments. We hope you enjoy!

Crap Of Bull

Major kudos to Comrade Borienka for job well done!!!

So much filth has accumulated in the streets of Washington, D.C. and it is time to bust out the mop and bucket.

With the recent questionable “election” of Al Franken, America has become a three ring circus. First, you have a president that can not and will not show his birth certificate. The massive loads of spending and worthless crap that is hidden in all bills passing by Congress are tearing up our budget so badly, Freddy Kruegger would be screaming and running away like a little girl.

This American here has had it up to his eye balls! I am not going to sit by and idly watch as our country is flushed down the toilet by an imbecile and his thugs. Our nation is not a democracy, but a thugocracy run by Barry Capone and a kleptocracy, served by the Commander in Thief and No Brain Nancy Pelosi.

America needs her children to throw the trash out of Washington. America needs to be cleaned up from the accumulation of human feces known as the federal government. And Washington needs an enema, since the town is clogged with crap. The time is now, or else America will not exist much longer to clean up.

My message to those thinking they are going to run wild: you have another thing coming. We are still your bosses. Don’t forget it!