How to end voter fraud forever

Every time I hear about voter fraud and election irregularities, I realize that the problem could easily be solved by doing away with the secret ballot. If we could simply match every voter identification card with each ballot and publish the results, every vote could be accounted for. Further, anyone could go on-line to see if their vote was counted.

I usually vote by absentee ballot and I always wonder whether my ballot was mysteriously lost in the mail or somehow didn't get counted. It would be great if I could simply go on-line and see that I voted.

We publish the names of registered voters and which political party they registered under, so I have always wondered why the ballot must be secret by law. The majority of Republicans vote Republican; Democrats vote for Democrats; and so on. Therefore, given a person's political party, age, sex, income, profession, and religious beliefs, pollsters can determine who you will vote for within a 90 percent degree of accuracy. If all of this is published, why then do we have a "secret" ballot?

Now some will point to intimidation, discrimination and a hundred other reasons why their vote needs to be private. We can accomplish the same thing, however, without disclosing a voter's identity publicly.

The answer is simple: encryption.

In the same way that people feel safe to let retailers use computers to scan their credit cards, every voter identification card could be assigned a PIN and then voters could use their number on the internet to see how they voted and thereby police the polling officials. No one could see how you voted until the PIN was entered into the system. That way the ballot would remain "secret," but people could see that their vote was counted.

Of course, if we do that, some will falsely claim they voted for another candidate or will discover they made a mistake, but once scanned, ballots must remain irretrievably fixed. There can be no "do-overs." Even though there will always be some who will abuse the PIN system to "cry wolf," we would still be able to see which polling places exhibit the greatest irregularities. Since voter fraud is a federal felony, this tracking system with encryption would effectively end voter fraud and help to fix irregularities due to human error.

Clearing the Media Smokescreens: Sarah Palin didn't know Africa was a continent?

There was a story reported to Fox News yesterday that had an anonymous McCain aide complaining about Sarah Palin resisting their input in prepping her for interviews. The story says that Palin didn't even know Africa was a continent and not a country.

I am sorry if I don't swallow the bait, but something smells fishy about the story.

First, it's from an anonymous source leaked to the press. It may be a distortion or sour grapes. At most I imagine the following scenario: in a mock interview she may have mistakenly referred to Africa as a country. Of course, we all make mistakes and missteps in our speech when we are tired.

Second, it plays into the line that Plain didn't have enough foreign policy experience to be president. It is true that in just two years as a governor, she doesn't have much experience, but I don't believe that she didn't know Africa was a continent.

Third, it plays into the misperception that Palin is dumb, in the same way that Dan Quayle was painted as a lightweight because he supposedly didn't know how to spell "potatoe" when he dutifully read a spelling bee flash card at an elementary school that had the word misspelled. (Note that none of the press attacked the "stoopid publik skool teecher" responsible for the gaffe.)

The Africa bungle is obviously fabricated, but because it was told on a conservative news network it is being taken as an established fact. It will be drivel for the left to gleefully spew for years to come: "Palin thought Africa was a country! Can you believe how dumb that is!"

What bothers me most about the story is it is hearsay from an anonymous aide leaked to a reporter. If this has any credibility then it behooves the alleged witness to make himself known. But amateurish second and third-hand reporting with an agenda doesn't bother the press. In fact, there is little distinction now between what used to be worthy news outlets and the frothing-at-the-mouth screeds of liberals blogging from their mothers' basements. Just watch MSNBC on any given night if you want an example.

Back when our pro-life activist group in Melbourne, Florida was often in the news, I discovered how often the press distorted news, got the facts wrong, and repeated unconfirmed fallacies. If you are a news maker, you become extremely suspicious of the press after you see the low standards of local reporters for confirming the facts. These stories get passed on verbatim in other news articles.

It's also obvious that the liberal press is going to continue to work hard to smear Palin amid any speculation that she might seek the presidency in 2012. It's interesting that they are keeping up the campaign. They must instinctively fear something. However, in all the lies and distortions we can see that they are fearful of a pro-life Christian who could become a powerful force in conservative politics. Therefore, her opponents simply dismiss each of her strengths by floating a contradiction.

Her ability to connect and communicate with the average voter electrifying huge crowds wherever she speaks is met with the falsehood that she is dumb and inarticulate.

Her knowledge of the oil industry and campaign for energy independence is met with the glib accusation that she knows little about economic or foreign policy.

The plain fact that she is a self-made woman from working class roots plays into the contradiction that she is a "diva with a $150,000 wardrobe."

Her charming and gracious personality is countered with the charge that she is mean-spirited and vindictive. Most were misled to think she was convicted of a crime in "troopergate" when in fact the first opinion saying she "abused power" was just that of one independent investigator. When the board that had the legal authority to decide made a ruling, she was cleared of any wrongdoing.

I could go on. The point is that whatever poison that liberals spew at Palin, you can be sure that they are reaching and the opposite is true.

None of the facts surrounding these mini-bites of misinformation matter much to liberal bloggers and political pundits searching for fodder. They are just convenient barbs that the public may be led to believe if the lie is repeated enough times. You can be sure that the "Africa bungle" is just one of many fabricated falsehoods about Sarah Palin.

Polls prove to be inaccurate

It looks like the margin between Obama and McCain is about five points. That's a lot closer than a lot of pollsters had it. In fact, I see only two polls that had it as a five point race yesterday, Diageo/Hotline and Battleground. Check RealClearPolitics for the final polling.

If McCain had won, I was going to decry the way that the media uses false poll information to influence public opinion. Since Obama won, it is a moot point. It probably sounds like sour grapes to say that several polls that had him 9 to 11 points ahead (and they have the audacity to claim they have a 3 point margin of error).

It's impossible to know how much the polls influence people's decisions, but the fact that McCain was within five percent is much different than the scenario the media painted

The Catch-22 of this election is that even if McCain had won, he'd have an impossible economic situation. He'd have to cut spending and taxes and then the Dem majority in congress would be crying bloody murder for two years. Also, having a moderate Republican just postpones true reform. If you look at mid-term elections usually the president's party suffers loss of seats. If McCain was president 2010 would have given the Democrats a super-majority in the Senate and more seats in the House. So much for a conservative Supreme Court with 60 plus seat Senate for the Democrats.

Barack Obama's Catch 22 is that he has promised to balance the budget, cut taxes on 95 percent of wage earners, introduce universal healthcare and a trillion dollar package of social programs. Most would agree that this is a tall order. If he fails, will it be possible to blame the Republicans?

If the Democrats go too far to the left and the economy continues to scuffle along, we'll likely see something similar to to 1994 and the Gingrich revolution against Clinton. I don't think the USA will become a left wing country so quickly. But we will see.

There were going to be positives and negatives about either outcome for the Republicans, so I am not depressed today. The failure of Bush's big government spending policies opens a door for a mini-revolution within the Republican party in the next two years. Candidates who never would have had a chance can now emerge.

I was never a big McCain fan. He actually impressed me as I got to hear him more. I thought he would have been better on spending than Bush who I did not vote for (I voted for Howard Phillips and Mike Peroutka three times) and of course I was excited about Sarah Palin. I was thinking down the road what could happen with her if something happened to McCain.

It's amazing that Palin is so similar to me -- about the same age, baptized as a Catholic, converted to Christ in an Assemblies of God Church, now a member fo an independent evangelical church and with a Christian spolitical philosophy and worldview. I've never heard a candidate speak so clearly about what matters. It's amazing that someone like this would have been picked.

If McCain won, I had an article ready, "The Swiftboating of Sarah Palin." The idea from the Republicans and goes back to Lee Atwater's strategy against Mike Dukakis.

Since Dukakis was a fiscal conservative, they attacked him as "a card carrying member of the ACLU and a tax and spend liberal." It wasn't true, but it worked.

Then John Kerry was a war hero and also somewhat fiscally conservative, so they destroyed him with the Swiftboat ads trying to show that he was a traitor -- not true, but many were willing to believe it.

The Democrats caught on to this because they saw that Sarah Palin was a bright, fresh, articulate rising star who was energizing the Republican base with her ability to speak directly to people like me. The media cynics were able to somehow portray her as inarticulate, dumb and anything else they could concoct. If McCain won though there was a real danger that she would have quickly become a Dan Quayle with the left waging a propaganda war to prove to the world that she is a stupid bimbo. Now at least she has a chance to show what she can do in Alaska with energy and fiscal responsibility.The irony is that if she remained the Governor of Alaska, the media would have continued to refer to her as "America's most popular and successful new governor."

As a vice presidential candidate Palin's negatives rose, but she remained hugely popular with the conservative base. I was at one rally with 70,000 people in The Villages, Florida. That's unheard of for a VP candidate. It will be interesting to see where she will go from here.

McCain's hope rests in five states

McCain must win Florida, Ohio, Virginia, and Nevada -- plus at least one other state -- either Pennsylvania, Hew Hampshire, New Mexico or Colorado to pull this out. Commentators call this an inside straight, but the odds aren't as unlikely as they paint them. But an early and decisive win in Pennsylvania by McCain may signal a historic upset.

Since the weekend polls show these races tightening, I have to conclude that the momentum for McCain will continue through Tuesday. The first three are not so tall an order and even though Obama is ahead withing the margin of error in the most recent polls, he is at or under 50 percent in all these critical states and that is the key.

Watch Obama's numbers in the in polls tomorrow, not the spread between the two candidates. With this many undecided who say they intend to vote so late in the game, Obama's numbers have probably peaked at where they are right now. If Obama falls to 48 or 49 it bodes well for McCain.

Then there the Nader/Barr wild card factor that could shift the election either way -- but probably favors McCain since Nader is more popular than Barr and will pull votes from Obama.