Unscanned absentee ballots reversed school bond defeat

The "phantom" votes that reversed the reported defeat of the Strongsville schools’ bond issue came from absentee ballots that had not been scanned prior to the close of the polls Tuesday night, according to Pat McDonald, deputy director of the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections (BOE).

On Tuesday night, the BOE posted final election results - with all of Strongsville’s 36 precincts reporting - that indicated that the $81 million bond issue for the construction for a new middle school had failed by an 83 vote margin: 10,923 to 11,006.

However, on Wednesday, BOE reported a change in the vote totals, adding 487 votes to the tally. The revised number included an additional 299 “yes” votes and 188 “no” votes, passing the issue by 28 votes in Cuyahoga County: 11,222 to 11,194. In Lorain County, in which a small number of properties are located within the Strongsville School District, voters rejected the bond issue 7 to 32, resulting in an overall vote of 11,229 in favor of the bond issue, and 11,226 opposed – a three vote difference.

In media reports Wednesday, Board of Elections Spokesman Mike West said he was unable to provide an explanation as to where the additional 526 votes came from.

However, McDonald today explained that the revised vote count was the result of adding additional scanned absentee ballots to the precincts after the Election Day ballots were reported.

"Due to the volume of absentee ballots, not all of the absentee ballots were able to be reported in the initial tabulation but added to the count once the election day optical scanned ballots were uploaded," McDonald wrote in an email. "In our official count, all of the absentee ballots will be identified together along with the Election Day ballots and any provisional voted ballots. The official count certification is currently scheduled for November 27."

There are 698 provisional ballots are waiting to be counted, which means that the result of the bond issue vote can go either way.

A provisional ballot is used to record a vote if a voter's eligibility is in question and the voter would otherwise not be permitted to vote at his or her polling place.

Ohio's totalitarian "hidden box" law is unacceptable

With the federal government employing heavily armed SWAT teams to raid Amish farms that dare sell raw milk to willing consumers, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services confiscating mommy-packed lunches from little girls because of alleged violations of federal nutritional standards, the state of Ohio evidently wants to boost its own share of control over the lives of its citizens.

A proposed state law, Senate Bill 305, would make you a felon simply for having a "hidden compartment" in your automobile. It doesn't matter why you want a hidden compartment, nor what you use it for. If you have one, you may face 18 months in jail and a $5,000 fine if this bill becomes law.

The government, of course, always has a reason for imposing its tentacles into every conceivable part of our lives. In this case it's to "protect us" against the illegal drugs that are apparently being smuggled by the megaton over our highways in secret boxes.

Perhaps if this bill gets passed, we can next look forward to the government forbidding us from having secret compartments in our homes. Or, considering the bodily compartment where some drug dealers have been known to hide their products from the authorities, maybe the state of Ohio will mandate proctological inspections as we leave our homes every morning.

I trust that Gov. John Kasich and the bill's co-sponsor, Sen. Tom Patton, have the best intentions in supporting this ridiculous bill. Unfortunately it is one more example of an out of control bureaucracy micro-managing every minutiae of people's lives and slowly siphoning their God-given freedoms.

If you agree that enough is enough, I encourage you to let Sen. Patton and Gov. Kasich know it by letter, phone or e-mail.
The bill can be viewed here.
Sen. Tom Patton can be emailed here.
Gov. John Kasich can be emailed here.

Don't let Obama off the hook

I hope neither Catholics – nor anybody else – will fall for the politically motivated contraceptive concessions “granted” by the arrogant despot who occupies the White House. In this country, the president doesn't “grant” religious freedom nor “allow” exceptions to his royal mandates, as though we subjects are to be appreciative of his merciful benevolence.

Obama's unprecedented attack on religious freedom is a violation of human liberty that far exceeds any of the belligerent "acts" that angered the colonies into independence from England. Even King George didn’t have the unmitigated gall to suggest to the colonists that his proclamations overrode their relationship with God.

Obama's condescending appeasement, which was applauded by the gullible, and evidently resonated with people like Sister Carol Keehan, should not end this issue.

On the contrary, every American who believes in freedom, and every American whose religion - whatever religion it is - is the main focus of their life, should take a close look at the intentions of the person who was elected to head the executive branch of our federal government.

Do you accept that this man - or any man - has the authority to control your very thoughts and principles?

The media and the secularists on the left spin this issue as a Catholic issue, or a disagreement over contraception.

It is a much larger issue than that.

It's an issue that Americans who believe that their rights come from a higher power - not from the government, and particularly not from one pathetic man with historical delusions of grandeur - need to remember very vividly in November.

Freedom is the only issue

Many of the issues that the media landlords have placed on the agenda for discussion among the common sheeple - Bain & Company, Newt Gingrich's wives, etc. - are important issues for consideration. But they are mainly diversions from the more important issues. Gingrich is obviously a despicable human being, but that's none of my business as it doesn't directly bear on my liberty or lack thereof.

The real facts to be examined reveal that both Mitt Romney and Gingrich are in support of government health care, no matter how much they try to back away from it now. That, the GOP tells us, is a major issue for this election.

Both Romney and Gingrich have supported industry-killing, freedom grabbing carbon taxes and other ridiculous measures to combat the global warming crisis, which is another futures-trading sham contrived by Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street brokerages to extract cash from our pockets with the happy assistance of the useful idiots in the environmental movement.

Gingrich has argued for restrictions on freedom of speech and freedom of the press due to our current "state of war" that will be a never-ending battle as long as progressives and totalitarians can use it as an excuse for the sheeple to give away their God-given freedom to an elite ruling class. Gingrich's views of the Bill of Rights, and what exceptions might be appropriate, indicate that his support of martial law would not be out of the question.

The tea party, for me, was a movement not only against extreme taxes, but against tyrannical government. That movement no longer exists. It took a measly four years for it to be dismantled and replaced by a movement influenced by big government republicrats.

I will continue to make voting decisions through the lens of liberty, freedom from government control of individuals and free, non-manipulated trading markets. For me, the talk about Bain & Company, releasing tax returns, divorcing wives because they aren't pretty enough to be married to a president (and "besides, she has cancer") is all moot because both of these candidates have already been disqualified in my mind, because they are progressives who do not believe in my liberty. They don't want to "represent" me. They want to "govern" me.

Candidates who talk about "running" the economy are not philosophically eligible to earn my vote. If we want an economy that is "run" or "manipulated by central planners, let's say so and stop lying about wanting to live in a "free" market.