I find it very odd that it was Barack Obama.  Not Gary Johnson, or Jill Stein, or Virgil Goode Jr., or Richard Duncan, or Stewart Alexander.  All are presidential candidates on the Ohio ballot.

No, it was Barack Obama.  Amazing.  There would be a one in six chance that Barack Obama would be the candidate who erroneously lights up instead of Mitt Romney.

That’s one helluva coincidence.

If the voting machine randomly chooses someone other than Mitt Romney when the voter attempts to vote for Romney, there is just a 17% chance that Obama would be the selected candidate.

Could the Ohio irregularities simply be a mis-adjusted machine(s)?  Yes.  But the odds seem greatly against the only candidate who could realistically defeat Romney would be the one who benefits from the mis-adjustment.

I smell a rat…

Never mind that he had his party in complete control of both the House and Senate for the first two years of his administration, and he still had to bribe some Senators from his own party to get his mysterious healthcare plan passed.

In addition to getting a healthcare bill that nobody read passed, Obama circumvented law and created his own bankruptcy process to aid his union supporters in the auto industry, got a stimulus bill passed that didn’t stimulate, including for “shovel-ready” projects he later had to admit did not exist, and gave billions to his environmental supporters so they could build failing solar cell factories that included Disney-singing robots, spas and glass-enclosed conference rooms.

Obama did all of this without Republican input.  He didn’t need it and he did not seek it.

When Senator John McCain reminded the President that Obamacare was produced not out in the open as he had promised, but rather behind closed doors, Obama told McCain, ”We’re not campaigning anymore. The election’s over.”

When Republicans presented the newly sworn-in President with some proposals, Obama told them, ”Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.”  In other words, screw you.

By 2010, distraught and disillusioned by failure,  millions of Americans rose up to form Tea Parties.  They tuned in and got involved.  They became responsible for one of the greatest political overthrows in American history.  Many long-serving Democrats simply retired rather than face certain defeat.  Others felt the wrath of people dubbed “artificial turf” by Nancy Pelosi and were sent home.

What Obama doesn’t understand is that these people were sent to congress to stop him.  They were intended by the voters to be obstructionists.  They were supposed to stop cap and trade.  They were sent to Washington to stop Obama’s extreme left-wing agenda.  Now they won the election.

Obama learned what it felt like to be a Republican in 2009.  The shoe went to the other foot, and Obama didn’t like it.  So he resorted to using executive orders, separation of powers be damned.  He got away with making up his own rules for the auto industry, so now he’s decided he can probably get away with making his own rules for everything else.

Meanwhile he goes around the country talking about the obstructionists in congress.  Hey buddy – that’s politics.  What goes around comes around.

Harry Reid then doubled down by going to the floor of the U.S. Senate to levy an unsubstantiated claim that Romney paid no taxes for ten years.  Reid did not specify if Romney did so illegally.  Without any proof or evidence, Reid of course must be classified as a liar.

Some on the left, like Bob Beckel, while in angry rants about Romney’s tax returns, mention wanting to know if Romney has offshore accounts.  I guess that’s supposed to be bad.

So what if Romney has offshore accounts?  Assuming everything is done legally, why would this be a bad thing?  I would assume anyone, including the wealthy, will do what is most advantageous to them.  Wouldn’t you?

Having offshore accounts would prove Romney understands U.S. tax code and human nature.  He understands why people like Nancy Pelosi and  Debbie Wasserman Schultz use offshore accounts.

As President, Mitt Romney could use that knowledge to change the environment that encourages sending money and jobs offshore.  President Obama obviously doesn’t have a clue.

Of course the left doesn’t want to hear why the wealthy send their money offshore, because the answer is high taxes, and that is 180 degrees away from where Democrats want to go.

What Mrs. Pelosi may not have considered is that KFC has come under fire from her buddies, the environmentalists, for using wood harvested from Indonesia’s rain forest to make their chicken buckets.

Now you and I both know had the shoe been reversed and a Republican said that, the left would be all over the media and Internet claiming Republicans want to destroy rain forests.  Just like Republicans are for dirty air and water.

I doubt that you’ll hear a single Republican say Nancy Pelosi wants to destroy rain forests.  That’s why I’m saying it.

Maybe it’s about time Republicans stop trying to play by the rules of civility and resort to the same sort of dishonest, underhanded rhetoric used and perfected by the left for decades.  A lot of people obviously believe the lies from the left.  How else could you explain Barack Obama’s ability to keep this race close?

Company president Dan Cathy recently reiterated his beliefs by stating his support for traditional marriage.  Based on the firestorm that has followed, you’d think Chick-fil-A was selling crack on a bun.

The Christian ideology of the company’s leadership should be no surprise to anyone.  That’s why the restaurant chain has never been open on Sundays.  And this may come as a surprise to some, but the Bible is not politically correct.

Now at least two left-wing mayors have vowed to keep Chick-fil-A from expanding in their cities.

Boston mayor Thomas Menino sent a letter to Cathy to say, “There is no place for discrimination on Boston’s Freedom Trail and no place for your company alongside it.”  So Menino arbitrarily decided Chick-fil-A does not have the freedom to be on the Freedom Trail.

Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel said, “Chick-fil-A values are not Chicago values.”  Really?  So what are Chicago values?  Murder?  Crooked politics?  Emanuel went on to say, “If you are discriminating against a segment of the community, I don’t want you in the First Ward.”

It should be noted Chick-fil-A has not discriminated against anyone.  The next person to be refused service at a Chick-fil-A because of sexual preference will be the first.  The president of the company merely stated his opinion.  To my knowledge he hasn’t acted on that opinion via Chick-fil-A, so where is the discrimination?

There is certainly no problem if people choose not to patronize Chick-fil-A because of the statements and beliefs of its leader.  But it’s a whole other matter for government to ban the business because of those statements and beliefs.

There are some businesses that I choose not to patronize at least in part due to the political leanings of their founders.  Ben & Jerry’s and Progressive Insurance would be two.  But I would never consider banning them from my community.  Every individual should have the right to choose.

And that is the problem with the left.  They do not you believe you should have that right.  They want to make the choices for you.  Even to the absurd degree of preventing you from having a chicken sandwich.

The first curious accusation is that Mitt Romney exported jobs while at Bain Capital.  Curious indeed because it’s not true.  Didn’t happen.  And that comes from that right-wing rag known as the Washington Post.

But also curious because exporting jobs is supposedly a bad thing for a Presidential candidate.  Why?  I would actually consider it a good thing had Romney actually done it.

Good, because had Romney exported jobs while at Bain, he would have known the reason why he exported jobs.  Which already puts him ahead of President Obama, because the Liar-in-Chief obviously has no clue why jobs are sent overseas.  A President with a history of exporting jobs could work to change the environment that encourages such behavior.

But the problem for Obama and the left is that changing the environment to discourage job exportation will almost certainly involve restructuring our tax code, including the lowering of corporate taxes.  Despite our corporate tax rate already being the highest on the planet, Obama wants to push them even higher, which will make the problem of job loss even worse.

When Romney was running Bain, his first priority was to look after the best interest of the owners/stockholders.  To do otherwise would have been dereliction of duty.  In that case the left would accuse him of incompetence.

The left conveniently ignores the thousands of drilling jobs Obama exported from the Gulf of Mexico, the thousands of jobs not created by blocking the Keystone pipeline, and the billions and billions of “stimulus” dollars sent out of the country to create jobs in places like Finland, Denmark and Mexico.

The second curious accusation is that Romney has a Swiss bank account.  Curious because some of Romney’s loudest critics also have or have had overseas investments.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz had a Swiss bank account at one time.  Oops.  Chief hypocrite Nancy Pelosi made millions from foreign investments.  Touche.

Wasserman-Schultz says it’s alright for her because she’s not running for President.  Oh, OK.  So anyone who has ever had a Swiss bank account is automatically disqualified to be President.

The reason Romney has a Swiss bank account is because be felt that was in his best interest.  Same for Wasserman-Schultz and Pelosi.  So what’s wrong with that?  Nothing.  Most people do what is in their best interest.

So the question is, why is it in Mitt Romney’s best interest to have a Swiss bank account?  Again, the problem for Obama and the left is the answer takes us back to our tax laws, and they want to raise taxes and make the problem worse.

This is going to come as a big surprise to liberals, but anything the rich does with their money other than paying taxes, stuffing it in a mattress or burying it in the backyard helps the economy and the middle class.

The rich buy stocks and bonds so companies can expand and create jobs, and government can build more projects that create jobs.  When the rich buy an expensive car or private jet, it’s the middle class that built that car and plane, the middle class that made the parts that went into that car and plane, the middle class that drove the trucks and trains that transported the parts and finished products, the middle class who sold that car and plane to the rich person, and it’s the middle class who will do the maintenance and repairs on that car and plane.

The politics of class warfare and wealth envy will drive this country into the opposite direction of what we want.  It will be the death of us.