Dr. Red Eye

When Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin raised the specter of unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers and his association with Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, the Obama campaign and the liberal media tried to dismiss the rhetoric as “swamping us with small waves even as an economic tsunami threatens us” and as a “long-past association.”

While Obama’s ties with Ayers is neither a small wave nor a long-past association, even the liberal media is finding that Obama’s ties with ACORN are not as easily dismissable.

ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), while proclaiming to be non-partisan, is a far-left organization committed to voter registration fraud in order to elect politicians who fit its ideology. It has a sordid history of voter registration fraud and is in the news again for (surprise) voter registration fraud in a litany of swing states.

As stated by David Freddoso in his meticulously-researched book The Case Against Barack Obama, Obama served on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago (notably along with Ayers) and during that time, the Woods Fund made several grants to ACORN.

But Obama’s ties with ACORN go deeper than that. He actually conducted two unpaid leadership training sessions for ACORN’s Chicago affiliate in the late 1990s.

As they say in the Ginsu informercials, “but wait…there’s more!”

ABC News’ Jake Tapper reports that initially, the Obama campaign tried to sweep this under the rug by stating on Obama’s campaign web site that “Barack was never an ACORN trainer and never worked for ACORN in any other capacity” in its “Fight the Smear” web page.

When the truth was revealed, the Obama campaign changed the wording to “ACORN never hired Obama as a trainer, organizer, or any type of employee” with the key word there being “hired” because Obama did the training pro-bono.

So the Obama camp decided against full disclosure and in favor of deceiving people by using word tricks to give the impression that Obama never worked with ACORN.

Furthermore, Obama’s Fight The Smears campaign web site states that “FACT: ACORN was not part of Project Vote, the successful voter registration drive Barack ran in 1992.” Yet that “fact” was discredited by ACORN itself when a Chicago ACORN leader proudly wrote how ACORN delivered some of the new voter registrations in that Project Vote drive.

In addition, the Obama campaign made a $832,598 payment this past February to Citizens Services Inc., a consulting firm affiliated with ACORN. After initially reporting that the payment was for “staging, sound, lighting” and other advance work when it reported its expenditures with the Federal Election Commission, the Obama camp filed amended reports in August and September to reflect that those payments were for get-out-the-vote efforts. While the liberal New York Times added that the FEC said amended filings are common, this suspicious initial attempt to hide the facts maintains the red flags of Obama hiding his relationship with ACORN.

Which begs the question: what is the Obama campaign trying to hide?

Presumably, Obama knows that admitting his recent association with this illegally-acting organization would be a major blow to his clean-cut image as a reformer, so his team is frantically trying to keep this under the rug as much as possible.

But the more digging you do, the more you find that this is just the surface.

In Obama’s first election in 1996, he ran unopposed because he had his opponents thrown off the ballot for technical reasons. How? By challenging all their petition signatures.

In addition, in 1995, Obama (surprise, representing ACORN) sued the state of Illinois, and won, to impose the federal Motor Voter law upon Illinois. The result was the potential for tremendous vote fraud, as identification was no longer required to register and mail-in registrations would be accepted.

Furthermore, in his bruising primary campaign against Hillary Clinton, Obama engaged in systematic corruption of the Democratic party’s caucus procedures, voter suppression and intimidation as well as manipulation of the voter registration process. Similar arguments made by Clinton’s attorneys were also documented in Freddoso’s book.

Clearly, Obama has a definitive trail of desiring voter manipulation to help his political career. Is this someone you can trust over the next four years? Someone who will use Chicago machine politics to win at all costs and who has poor judgment?

But in addition to the unethical tactics Obama uses, which belies his unexamined character, is the issue of whether this election will even be a fair shake for McCain. Consider this stunning but entirely realistic possibility: tens of thousands of Democratic voter registration fraud translates into tens of thousands of fraudulent Democratic votes. Combine potentially tens of thousands of fraudulent votes with the system of early voting, where votes can simply be mailed in (i.e., no identification required) in 28 states, and you have the prospect of a rigged and unfair election. And in a contest that is getting closer lately, and recalling the very tight victories of the past two elections, Democratic voter fraud would enable Obama to secure that recently elusive Democratic presidential victory regardless of everyone else’s honorable votes.

The whispers surrounding Obama and ACORN are not going away but the whispers need to elevate into shouts in order to truly raise public awareness of Obama’s questionable character and methodologies. Is this really change you can believe in?