The elections yesterday showed that Democrats are in trouble everywhere. If they cannot win in one of the bluest states in the country with an incumbent, they will have trouble winning anywhere. In the big three races, two went for Republicans and one went for the Democrat. The win in Virginia for Republicans was particularly smashing as they won the top 3 spots. That is a political rarity in Virginia. In New Jersey, Jon Corzine should have won because the state is a sure victory for the Democrats every election. They have had Republican Governors from time to time, but they are rare. In the House race in New York, district 23, the Democrat narrowly won over the Conservative Party candidate. It is rare for a Democrat to hold this seat. The last one was in 1993.

What does all this mean? It means that as of November 4, 2009, people are upset with the Democrat agenda in Washington. Why do I say that? It is because of the amount of time that Barack Obama spent on the Governor’s races in Virginia and New Jersey. He visited each one so many times that he is now eligible to vote in both states. (I am joking.) Both Governors’ races effectively became referendums on Barack Obama because of his extensive involvement. That both races ended up as losses for the White House does not look good for what they are doing to America. The White House will spin it as local issues causing the Democrats to lose both races. That is partially true as it is partially true in any race. But the fact remains, Obama spent a lot of time in each state campaigning for both of the losing Democrat candidates. That both lost in states he carried easily in 2008 is significant.

The House race in district 23 in New York is a horse of a different color. This district almost always has a Republican to represent it. Democrats are claiming that this is the first in 117 years. But the truth is that the last Democrat that represented the district was in 1993. What makes this different than the Governor’s races is the way the Republican Party handled the race. They held some meetings to decide on a candidate and chose one more liberal than the Democrat she was running against or those in Washington. The national Republican Party leaders lined up behind her as the Republican candidate, regardless of her positions on the issues. Sarah Palin and the more conservative Republicans said that they would not support the Republican. They would support the Conservative Party candidate. This caused a furor. Then, the financial support for the Republican candidate evaporated. She resigned from the race and endorsed the Democrat. The Conservative Party candidate was an unknown one month ago. The Democrat was well known one month ago. The Democrat was well funded throughout the campaign. The Conservative Party candidate only started to receive funding near the end of the campaign. To sum this all up, the Republicans shot themselves in the foot on this one. Had they put forward a viable candidate from the start, things would most likely have turned out differently.

These elections will have little impact on the number of Republicans or Democrats in the House or Senate. The Democrats still have enough votes to do just about anything they want to do. What these votes will do is cause those candidates in vulnerable districts or states to reconsider their positions on controversial issues. That could have major impacts on whether we are saddled with a loss of our freedom in the Obamacare package or the “Cap and Tax” plan. If the Democrat has any desire to serve one more term, he/she may decide that it is better not to support a dismantling of the best healthcare system in the world or a dismantling of the best economy in the world. Had these votes gone for the Democrats, we would have both of these bills passed and signed by Thanksgiving. Now we may not even get any discussion on these bills until after the New Year. That puts them in an election year where the issues will be even more volatile.

The Democrats are now in a box. Do they go on and pass the rest of their agenda right now or do they go slower on their agenda? To move quickly means they might get the bills passed, but at the cost of losing the House and Senate in 2010. If they go slow, they might not get the rest of their agenda passed at all. The answer to that question is how much of a dedicated Democrat are you? If you are a fanatic, you will push for everything now and worry about tomorrow when it comes. If you are more pragmatic, you will go slow and might be around to fight again, but without your agenda passed? The fight will begin today for the heart and soul of the Democrat Party. Who will win? Will it be the fanatics or the pragmatists? We shall know all in the next six months. Fasten your seatbelts folks; it is going to be a bumpy ride ahead.

The more I learn about Nancy Pelosi’s version of Obamacare, the less I like it. The bill creates 111 new federal agencies. There is one rule about federal agencies, when you create one, it never dies. What we do not need is more federal agencies. We need fewer federal agencies. In fact, we need a smaller federal government overall. That would solve so many of the problems that we are having in this country that all except the federal employees impacted, we would all cheer the day they were eliminated.

The Wall Street Journal calls Nancy Pelosi’s version of Obamacare the worst bill ever written for Congress. That is saying some because there have been some truly dreadful bills come before Congress. To be labeled the worst, you really had to work to get that designation. It was not something that you got just for showing up.

Democrats that have consumed their gallon of Democrat Kool-Aid are saying that the Pelosi version of Obamacare is ready to be passed as written. I tried to read the bill, but the legal wording was too baffling and hard to understand. I will rely on the people that have the experience in reading this type of material to give me a summary of what is included. There are some like the Heritage Foundation and NCPA (National Center for Policy Analysis) that give excellent reviews of the monstrosity. Now, their analysis will have a conservative bias. But, I share their conservative principles so that fits exactly my take on the situation. I have not differed at all from the NCPA or Heritage Foundation on any item in the bill.

The elections that are being held today will impact this bill greatly. If the Democrats sweep the three major races (Governor in Virginia and New Jersey and the House in District 23 of New York), then this bill will get passed before we can say Jack Robinson. If the Republicans sweep the three major races, then the bill will face much tougher sledding. The reason is the “Blue Dog” Democrats. These are Democrats in the House and Senate that were elected from Republican leaning districts. They tend to be more conservative than the Democrat party generally. But, they cave if Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid even so much as blow in their direction. A sweep by the Republicans will give these Democrats a wake-up call to say that they better be watching what they do if they want to return in 2012. A sweep by the Democrats tells them that the Republicans are too weak to challenge them during their re-election campaigns.

From scattered news reports, there appears to be some voter fraud occurring in New Jersey. Now, that would be a shock. New Jersey is so corrupt that if the Republican wins, he probably actually got 75-80% of the vote. There are already reports of people that went to vote and found they already voted. That could only occur during one of ACORN’s famous voter fraud pushes. Look for areas where over 100% of the voters in a precinct voted. There have already been 3000 absentee votes that came in without matching signatures. The Democrats are trying to have those votes counted. You can guess which way those votes are expected to go. You can also guess where those votes actually came from. Expect more of this type of thing as the day progresses.

In Virginia, the Democrat is so far behind that even ACORN could not save him. In New York, ACORN could save the Democrat, but ACORN does not have a presence in this part of the state. It is a conservative rural area. ACORN only works in the more liberal areas and tends to stick to cities. Do not expect much voter fraud in these two states, unless Mr. Deeds in Virginia starts to get close. But, that is not expected to happen.

The country waits on the outcome of these votes to see which way things will go. Will the Republicans be energized by wins or will the Democrats. Whoever gets energized by the wins will have a big say in how this healthcare legislation goes from hereon out.

There was an election to replace Karen Gilliland in New York this past Tuesday. In the election, the two candidates were separated by 13 votes after counting 150,000 votes. There are still some 10,000 absentee ballots to count, so the election is not over. It does look like the election will go to a recount. Since it will go to a recount, the Democrat will win. I say that because Democrats control all of the machinery that runs the district. Also, Democrats cry foul and demand recounts until their person comes out ahead. When their person is ahead, the election is over.

This pattern was followed in Washington State a few years ago for Governor. The Republican won the election by a good margin, but not enough to stop a recount. Then, the Democrats kept recounting and finding new votes until their person was ahead. In an interesting sidebar to this recount, almost 95+% of the new votes found were for the Democrat. That defies logic as the voting was almost 50-50 in the general election.

The Democrats are following the same pattern in Minnesota where Al Franken and Norm Coleman have been recounting since November 4. Norm Coleman won the election by over 700 votes. As soon as it was announced that there would be a recount, votes were miraculously found for Al Franken. Again, over 95+% of the new votes were found for Al Franken, even though the election was almost 50-50. The Democrat election board has consistently ruled against Norm Coleman, so he has had to go to the courts to get the rulings reversed. Now a three judge panel (all Democrats) ruled that they could only count the disputed 400 “missing” votes. Those votes were those that were counted on Election Day twice. They were in a Democrat county, so you can guess who will get the most votes there. Right now, Al Franken holds a 200 vote margin. That will most likely hold up, unless Norm Coleman appeals to the Supreme Court to get all the disputed votes counted.

The pattern is that you count and count and find new votes for the Democrat. You occasionally find one for the Republican so that you can show “fairness”. The overall new votes are always heavily in favor of the Democrat. The new votes can be found in extremely dubious locations, like the trunks of campaign workers and the like. The new votes usually have only the disputed race marked. That would be unusual as there were other races, including one for President in Minnesota. You get canvas board rulings that are in favor of the Democrat. You get state judges to rule in favor of the Democrat. This is assuming that the canvassing board and the judges are Democrats. If you are even luckier, you get the state Supreme Courts to rule in favor of the Democrat. In states where there are Republicans on the canvassing board or there are Republican judges, the election recounts are harder for the Democrats to pull off. In Democrat leaning states, it is easy.

I am not saying that the Democrats are doing anything illegal. I am just saying that it just looks fishy that every time there is a recount, the same thing happens. Almost 95+% of the new votes found are for the Democrat in an election where the vote is 50-50 is highly suspicious. If the numbers were closer to 60-40 I would not even question them as that is entirely possible, occasionally. If the Republican ever got more new votes than the Democrat, I would not even question their motives. It is just that it happens this way every time. Since it is a pattern, there has to be a reason for the pattern. Patterns usually just do not appear out of nowhere, particularly all over the country. The only explanation that I can see is that some people that lean toward the Democrat side are cheating. I am not accusing all Democrats of cheating. I am just saying that some Democrats cheat when they see a chance to steal a seat away from the evil Republicans. Since Democrats see Republicans as evil, they can justify cheating in their own minds. It is ok to cheat if you are keeping an evil person out of office.

Republicans never see the bus that runs them over. It happens every time. I wish Jim Tedesco well, but I do not believe he has a chance. There are just too many Democrats who are willing to cheat. This is particularly true when it comes to those that support our current occupant of the White House. The only way they know how to play the game is below the belt. It just goes against the grain for a Republican to play that dirty. That is why they get rolled every time. Norm Coleman is getting rolled in Minnesota and now Jim Tedesco in New York. It is a shame.

Coming to your pocketbook some time soon, you will soon see new “sin” taxes like the ones in New York. New York implemented 88 new "sin" taxes on food and drinks to raise money. These “sin” taxes are on anything that has any chance to make you fat. Sin taxes have always meant taxes on things like alcohol and tobacco. These sin taxes are on things that liberals believe might make you less healthy. Where will it end?

We are on a trend for mommy government. The government is supposed to take care of us no matter what. So, if the government is supposed to take care of us, the government should then look out for our welfare in the form of our health. What better way to look out for our health than to put a tax on the things that will make us less healthy. It also increases the income to the state, which is the main reason for the taxes by the way. Looking out for our health is just the justification used to put those taxes on us.

Right now, these new “sin” taxes are only in New York. If they get accepted in New York, you can expect to see them show up in your state soon. Governments are always looking for new things to tax and New York took the leap to taxing things that were bad for your health. If there is a big revolt in New York over these taxes, the chance they will be implemented in your state is low. Now, the taxes will first be implemented in the liberal states and the states with the worst financial problems. Those are usually the same states by the way. Eventually, they will spread to all states as the idea takes hold across the country. So do not think that because your state is controlled by Republicans that you are immune from this type of tax. If your state gets into financial trouble, they will look to this as a way to increase income without increasing the income tax.

We might even see national “sin” taxes if Democrats ever want to balance the budget. With the huge margins the Democrats have in both houses of Congress, there would be nothing to stop them. This would not be an issue that the Republicans would likely go to the mat to stop so the filibuster is probably out the window. They have to save that for the truly monumental issues or the members will start to lose party discipline. Once party discipline ends, the filibuster ends because of the razor thin margin we are working with. This is why it is important to have people you can trust in elected office instead of Democrats.

Once these sin taxes get implemented there is little chance they will ever be repealed. There is just too much to appeal to a politician to ever repeal the tax. It is easily justified as looking out for your health. Everyone wants everyone else to be healthy so who could object. No, the only chance to stop these taxes is now. The only place to fight the taxes is in New York. Those of us outside of New York have to watch and see what the people of New York do. If they stand up and fight, there is hope for the rest of us. If they lie down and take it, we are doomed to be taxed like them. I am not saying that if New York accepts it today that we will get this tax in Arizona tomorrow. What I am saying is that if New York accepts it within this year or two, other states will see their opportunity. They will also implement this new sin tax. Then other states will adopt it and that process will continue until all states have these new sin taxes. This will happen over probably ten years or so. But, if New York does nothing today, we get the same treatment some time in the future.

I believe in smaller government. I believe that government needs as little money as possible. The federal government was authorized to do certain things by the Constitution. That is what the federal government should stick to doing. Everything else is left to the states. That would mean that at least half of the federal budget is not needed. It is probably more like two thirds of the federal budget that is being spent outside of the bounds that the Constitution authorized the federal government to spend money on. The Founding Fathers had it right. We have it wrong. We are headed in the wrong direction and I see no way to stop the train. I fear that we will lose the country very soon, if we have not lost it already.