In Cleveland, Ohio a volunteer group supporting Obama picked up hundreds of homeless people at shelters, soup kitchens and drug-rehab centers and drove them to a polling house yesterday on the last day that folks in Ohio could register and vote on the same day, with almost no questions asked.

One convicted felon noted, “I never voted before, without this service, I would have had no way to get here.”

Every decent law abiding citizen in this country — democrat or republican — should be angry and ashamed of this vile attempt to gain votes, however insignificant the number really is. The law against registering and voting the same day was on the books in Ohio, yet the democratic controlled court made this determination because they are — of course in bed with their political party. Yet another example of how democrats put their party before their country.

Sure, these people can vote for their candidate when they are in the booth, but there’s nothing preventing the fraud of voting in multiple locations. Is one homeless guy who’s bought off for a box of smokes or a six pack of beer worth 3 or 4 of your informed votes?

Let’s not only exploit the children in this country but also the homeless. Who’s next, the mentally disabled?

Tags: convicted felons voting for Obama, homeless people voting for Obama, Obama supporters in Ohio

Advertisement

A MESSAGE FROM URBAN
==================================================================================
If you enjoyed this article, please subscribe to our feed. You can also follow Urban Conservative on Twitter. Let us know if you need blog marketing or social media consulting. And, if you want some serious traffic to your site, you can also buy advertising on Urban.
==================================================================================
VISIT OUR SPONSORS

By now I’m sure everyone in America has heard the news- McCain’s running mate is, to quote Zoolander, really really ridiculously good looking. What’s been most surprising to me, as an attractive woman in my own right, has not been the odd, sexist “V-PILF” website (meaning Vice President, I’d Like to… you know), but the amount of time supposed feminists are spending demonizing her for being attractive.

If Obama can be on magazine covers, why not Palin?

Barack Obama spoke sexism best when he said Hillary Clinton could “do it, and do it better, and do it in heels… I still don’t know how she does it in heels.” Everyone laughed, of course, but I had to take a minute to wonder how one’s choice of footwear could possibly be a handicap to overcome. If Hillary wasn’t comfortable in her pantsuit and heels, wouldn’t she wear something else? Hillary probably lost the democratic primary for no reason other than a bunch of men not thinking a girl can do a “man’s job”, and the media called that sexism. So why is the media getting away with calling Palin’s looks dangerous and an unfair advantage?

Since television coverage became widely used in presidential elections, Americans have generally been electing the guy with the better face for TV. That’s why youthful Kennedy won, why former movie star Reagan won, why handsome and caddish Clinton won (and we know how that one worked out for America…) and why well spoken and funny, good ol’ boy George W. Bush won both times he was up against a cardboard Democrat with poor speaking skills. Up until McCain announced he’d be running with Palin by his side, that guy in this election was Barack Obama. You’ve seen the I have a crush on Barack Obama t-shirts, you’ve seen the Obama Girl youtube videos, and I know you’ve seen certain liberal pundits say that when he speaks a “thrill” runs up their legs. Even Oprah is in love with him.

So, now the playing field is leveled and Republicans have a hot running mate. Obama, angry that he’s not the election’s sexiest movie star anymore, has started firing back by saying “If you put lipstick on a pig it’s still a pig”. Now, you can say that this remark is referring to the McCain campaign’s supposed attempts to dress up the same old policies by spinning them in a new light, but anyone who knows anything about Sarah Palin knows she’s a self-described pit bull with lipstick. Voters, if you’d been paying attention at all and had your listening ears on you would immediately see the parallels in Obama’s comment to Sarah Palin. This is probably more Obama’s speechwriter’s fault than Obama’s himself, but if every other candidate is burned at the steak for things that come out of their mouth it’s our duty to hold Obama just as accountable.

Feminists, remember when you burned your bras and insisted that women could wear whatever they wanted (by which you meant pants) and still be just as capable? Well, Palin, like most Republican women, likes heels and skirts. She’s a big girl and it’s her right to dress herself. There are a million clothing options at the malls of America and it’s a little unfair of you to cry foul because Palin happens to look good. She’s a pretty woman. Get over it.

Advertisement

tags: Obama comments about lipstick on a pig, If you put lipstick on a pig it’s still a pig

You will be missed by your’s truly and your 300+ viewers of your less than mediocre coverage of this year’s 2008 Presidential Election.  It looks like the “real” journalists in upper management were getting tired of your leftist rhetoric being portrayed as objective journalism.

Yes, MSNBC is removing Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews as the anchors of live political events, bowing to growing criticism that they are too opinionated to be seen as neutral in the heat of a very close presidential election. This follows increasingly loud complaints about Olbermann’s anchor role at the Democratic and Republican conventions. Olbermann, who regularly attacks Bush and McCain on his “Countdown” program, felt “truly inspired” and praised the acceptance speech of Obama.

He drew some serious flak last Thursday when the Republicans played a video that included a tribute to the victims of the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that if the networks had done that, “we would be rightly eviscerated at all quarters, perhaps by the Republican Party itself, for exploiting the memories of the dead, and perhaps even for trying to evoke that pain again. If you reacted to that videotape the way I did, I apologize.”

It is also widely believed that the angry chants of “NBC, NBC, NBC,” at the Republican National Convention after Sarah Palin took a shot at the mainstream media were inspired by Olbermann’s leftist views.

Air America is always hiring and at least there you don’t have to pretend to be objective.  

Tags: Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, MSNBC, Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Harball with Chris Mathews 

… until after she is Vice President of the United States. : )

This just in from the Drudge; he is reporting that Oprah’s staff is sharply divided on the merits of bringing Sarah Palin in for an interview.  “Half of her staff really wants Sarah Palin on,” one insider explains. “Oprah’s website is getting tons of requests to put her on, but Oprah and a couple of her top people are adamantly against it because of Obama.”

And, apparently one executive close to Oprah is warning that any Palin ban could ignite a dramatic backlash to the Obama campaign.  Oprah’s executive producer Sheri Salata; who has also contributed thousands of dollars to Obama’s campaign refused to comment on the issue, of course.   This comes after Oprah blocked an appearance by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas from appearing on her show last year.  Seems to me like there is a pattern here.

Oprah responded to Drudge’s report (pun intended) here:

The item in today’s Drudge Report is categorically untrue. There has been absolutely no discussion about having Sarah Palin on my show. At the beginning of this Presidential campaign when I decided that I was going to take my first public stance in support of a candidate, I made the decision not to use my show as a platform for any of the candidates. I agree that Sarah Palin would be a fantastic interview, and I would love to have her on after the campaign is over.

Maybe, just maybe they are talking behind her back because of her open endorsement of Obama. The other issue is that Americans are curious as to who Sarah Palin is. This is quite obvious given the number of viewers of her speech the other night at the Republican National Convention.  Also, Oprah has already used her show as a platform for a candidate. She has had Senator Barack Obama on her show twice (in 2005 and 2006).  And even if she hasn’t had him on her show recently, Winfrey’s name alone has helped snag over 1 million voters for Obama, according to a recent study. Isn’t it fair to share the love and limelight with the other side, which is much more attractive to look at anyway? In this case, perhaps the fairness doctrine would come in handy.

I know most of you adore Oprah, but ummm … I can’t stand her. 

Tags: Oprah Winfrey, endorses, endoresement, Barack Obama, the oprah winfrey show, sarah palin, interview, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Sheri Salata

It seems I have some competition for the cutest girl in politics- Paris Hilton, in association with Funny or Die, has released an ad in response to McCain’s “Celebrity” ad.

It’s funny. You’re allowed to laugh.

But more importantly, I think this ad raises a few interesting points about this election cycle. Doesn’t her proposed energy policy sound suspiciously like McCain’s? Why is it so much more palatable for Americans coming from the mouth of a hot blonde girl? You know, I’m a hot blonde girl. I should start making YouTube videos… Maybe we can get Paris to read all of McCain’s proposals from cue cards in a bikini! Then we’d win for sure.

Second, this isn’t necessarily pro-Obama. She doesn’t mention him and doesn’t say anything to favor him. It’s meant to be a slight against McCain, but it’s Paris Hilton! Come on! No one takes this girl seriously and she knows it. But it’s gotta make you wonder- if the youth vote is supposed to be so important to this election and essentially Obama’s ticket to the White House, I don’t think it bodes well for him that it’s only August and they’re already laughing at the election. How seriously can my peers be taking this if our biggest source of news is The Daily Show and Paris Hilton is speaking for us?

Readers, discuss.

See Paris Hilton Responds to McCain Ad and more funny videos on FunnyOrDie.com.

Tags: paris hilton video, paris hilton mccain ad, paris hilton obama and mccain, celebrity

… but what if it was Bush who said it?  Wouldn’t the media and the late night talk shows crucify him for it? What if it was McCain?  Wouldn’t the media blame his old age for inaccurate statements? So, tell me why Obama gets a free pass for this?  I am not going to fault the guy for misspeaking. He’s been on the campaign trail for over a year; and these candidates work up to 20 hours a day.  He’s fatigued, tired and obviously doesn’t get enough sleep!  This is a clear example of liberal media bias, period. 

The clip is actually pretty funny though. Take a peep.

Subscribe to this blog!

Like this post? Want to call me a jerk, neo-con, fascist or whatever? Please subscribe to this blog and you can receive all future posts delivered right to your inbox!

Tags: barack obama, 57 states

While browsing the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism web site today, I stumbled upon a December 2007 study entitled, “The Portrait from Iraq: How the Press Has Covered Events on the Ground.�?  Before continuing, it is important that I note that I am an avid fan of the Project for Excellence.  The institution’s work is paramount to public understanding of and about the inner workings and outer affects of mainstream media coverage.

Read the rest of this entry »

Yeah, umm…not really.  While I am no Bush apologist, he is far from an arsonist.  The “Bush to blame for everything�? crowd and many democrats are blaming the Bush Administration for the dreadful wildfires rampaging throughout southern California. The reasoning is quite hilarious; but what else can you expect from such people.

The claim is that “because the National Guard is serving in Iraq, there are no resources to help combat the fires�?.

Wrong!!! The Pentagon has stated that 17,000 Guardsmen are available and are just waiting to be called to help out.

Read the rest of this entry »

I am not a big fan of free speech because some people well, umm…just make an idiot of themselves when they open their mouths; but like it or not, it does exist. So, I wonder what the big deal is when Anne Coulter called John Edwards a “faggot�? back in March. Everyone who saw the tape knows that she was only kidding, yet she continues to get attacked by the mainstream media and liberal blogs. The fact is that Ann Coulter has the right to say any damn thing she wants; even if it’s that she wishes John Edwards would be killed in a terrorist assassination plot (sounds quite similar to the comments made by Bill Maher about Cheney a few months back - and where was the outrage?).

Yes indeed, seems like Anne’s comments are a tad bit extreme but let’s go back to all the things that liberals have said that the media hardly ever reports:

Rosie O’Donnell (aka: the beast) - The Bush administration was behind 9/11.

Michael Moore - I personally hold Blair more responsible for this war than I do George Bush. The reason is, Blair knows better, Blair is not an idiot. What is he doing hanging around this guy?

John Kerry - You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.

Ron Paul (who?) - We had 9/11 coming to us because we were attacking Iraq.

Natalie Maines - Just so you know, we’re ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas

Janine Garofalo (horrible actress and failing talk show host) - This dumbing down and this pseudo patriotism, which is very conveniently partisan, because the dumb and the mean love patriotism…Yeah, it’s my country right or wrong. Well what of these colors don’t run? What do you mean? I don’t know. They use the word evildoer with a straight face, knee jerk reactionary phrases that go down well from the Republican Party with the dumb and the mean and then the mean pretend that it’s unpatriotic to be critical of your government.

Hillary Rodham Clinton - This administration is waging war on poor children.

Al Gore - He betrayed this country! He played on our fears! He took America on an ill-conceived foreign adventure dangerous to our troops, an adventure pre-ordained and planned before 9/11 ever took place!

Cindy Sheehan - George and ***, you are both shameful cowards who are sending our brave young people to die to make yourselves and your buddies unbelievably and fabulously wealthy. Neither of you have any idea of the true human, sorrowful cost of war nor do you care that you are ruining lives by the thousands and thousands. You both disgust me beyond belief.

This fat liberal kid on Youtube – I hate Anne Coulter. I just hate her. She is a meany head. I hope she is killed and her bones are ground up to make bread; and that bread is broken by Jesus and that bread is fed to 5,000 people. Amen.

So, for all you cracker head liberals that read this blog…why is it always a double standard with you? You bitch, complain and cry about tolerance yet exercise none whatsoever. You hate capitalism, but did you know that the Edwards camp made $300,000 in campaign contributions using the video of Anne’s comments? I bet not!

By the way, before you start sending me hate mail saying that I hate the US and the Constitution, I was only kidding about hating free speech!! I have done far more for this country than most of you…have a sense a humor.

Technorati Tags: liberal, liberalism, conservative, cindy sheehan, sheehan, al gore, john edwards, anne coulter, rosie o’donnell, john kerry, hillary clinton, ron paul, natalie maines, janine garofalo, michael moore, quotes, free speech

Is there a substantial media bias? The answer is a ridiculously obvious YES and if you don’t see it then you’re most likely considered very highly educated or you’re known to attend cultural awareness rallies in San Francisco.

The examples are many but the latest nauseating example in my mind is the un-reporting of the statements made by the Kurdish PM on the similarities between CNN and Al Jazeera.

Quote from Kurdish PM, “CNN International and Al Jazeera are equally bad in their coverage of …”

Full article here: http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52817

Whatever your politics, it’s a stretch to conclude that this was not news worthy. What a bombshell to CNN and from a seemingly objective source.

To some the question is why would a media outlet risk potential vilification to slant the news? In my view this is organizational dynamics 101, companies and organizations are run from the top down where the ideas, goals, and objectives of the leadership are communicated and acted upon by the individual contributors. Is there any question that media executives on-balance are more liberal than conservative? Just do a little digging and you’ll see that it’s vastly unbalanced. It is simply their vehicle for a political movement under the guise of journalism.

Technorati Tags: iraq, liberal, liberalism, media bias, conservative