The Left's War on Voter Fraud Reform
Pretty soon, the right to cast a meaningful vote might be just a memory.
The issue at hand is ensuring that American citizens can exercise the most fundamental civil right of being an American -- casting a vote with the assurance that it will count and not be canceled by an illegitimate vote.
The ACLU has filed three lawsuits seeking to overturn a new Florida law that tightens the integrity of the ballot box, while the Obama Justice Department has scotched South Carolina's new photo ID law. It's part of a nationwide campaign by the left to overturn numerous recently enacted laws designed to defeat voter fraud.
The ACLU claims that the Florida law, enacted by the Republican-controlled legislature and signed by Republican Gov. Rick Scott, will suppress participation by minority, young, and elderly voters.
Actually, the new rules adopted by Florida, South Carolina, and other states are aimed at Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, and Elmer Fudd, who work out of former ACORN offices and whose names turn up on registration rolls and recall petitions.
The ACORN people, perhaps deploying Alvin and the Chipmunks with clipboards, seem to have little trouble signing up Mickey and his friends when elections roll around.
Meanwhile, in New Hampshire, video sting artist James O'Keefe and his team have exposed the fact that dead people's names were readily accepted by poll workers during Tuesday's presidential primary election.
Although Democrats insist that little or no voter fraud is occurring, at least 55 former Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) employees or associates have been convicted of some form of voter fraud in 11 states, according to the Capital Research Center's Matthew Vadum.
Voter integrity rules are long overdue to prevent fraud, and Democrats seem to think that minority, young, and elderly people are morons who can't play by the same rules as everyone else.
The left's strategy is simple: energize the base with false fears while depicting Republicans as barely disguised Klansmen with pitchforks and torches.
In December, Attorney General Eric Holder, Jr. ordered a halt to South Carolina's new photo ID law. Several of his fellow Democrats have compared voter fraud prevention to Jim Crow laws like poll taxes. But the state provides free photo IDs, and South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley has even offered to drive people to the polls who could not get there otherwise.
At a January 10 press conference in Columbia, Haley and South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson announced that the state will sue the Justice Department within the next week or two.
State Sen. Kevin Bryant said from the podium, "When I'm not here, I'm a pharmacist. When you come in my store, and you refill a narcotic prescription, I have to take and look at a picture ID to verify that you're getting your prescription. Let's talk about voter suppression. If you vote, and someone else votes fraudulently, they've suppressed your vote. It's exactly the opposite of what the Obama administration has accused us of."
Under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, any changes to voting law or redistricting in nine states, including South Carolina and Florida, must be approved by the U.S. Justice Department or a three-judge U.S. District Court panel in the District of Columbia.
That panel is reviewing four Florida provisions that "cut the number of early voting days, put new restrictions on organizations that conduct voter registration drives, require voters who change out-of-county addresses at the polls on Election Day to cast provisional ballots and reduce the shelf life of citizen initiative petition signatures from four to two years," according to the Associated Press.
"The Justice Department has cleared the rest of the law, but Florida Secretary of State Kurt Browning chose to have the court, instead, rule on the most controversial provisions. Browning, a Scott appointee, said he wanted the decision to be free of 'outside influence'," the AP reported. Indeed.
The ACLU also assisted with a separate lawsuit in Tallahassee by the "non-partisan" League of Women Voters against the law's registration provision. A hearing is set for Jan. 26. Yet another ACLU lawsuit was dismissed by a federal judge in Miami.
Seven states passed laws in 2011 requiring photo IDs, and others shortened early voting timeframes and tightened requirements for absentee ballots. All but 13 states had legislation introduced in 2011 dealing with the critical issue of voter integrity.
Five states (Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, and North Carolina) enacted photo ID laws that were vetoed by Democratic governors.
Speaking of such, North Carolina Gov. Bev Perdue was caught on tape last September wishing that elections could be suspended so that lawmakers wouldn't have to worry about what voters thought.
If you can't fix the election, why not just cancel it?
Then Mickey, Donald, and Elmer can get back to dodging cream pies and falling anvils.
How Obama Betrays Martin Luther's King's Dream
President Obama has mocked Martin Luther King by policies and actions that judge people by the color of their skin and not by the content of their character.
Martin Luther King, Junior's "I Have A Dream Speech" was one of his more eloquent and moving speeches. His words have resonated with all Americans for the past five decades and will do so for many decades to come. Among his dreams was an America where his four children would be judged not "by the color of their skin but by the content of their character"
Of course, he was not just referring to his own children or to children at all. He meant to heighten the disgrace of racism by picturing innocent children as the victims. What he truly meant -- as was made clear during the rest of his oration -- was that his dream was that all people would "not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."
The man who campaigned on the theme that there was no "white America" or "black America" has used his powers as President to practice identity politics on a scale never before seen in America. Barack Obama has overtly chosen top officials on the basis of their skin color and not on the content of their character. Moreover, he has enacted policies that overtly favor "people of color" over "people of pallor" regardless of the merits of the individuals impacted by his programs.
What were we expecting from a man whose moral compass was the race-baiting Pastor Jeremiah Wright, whose views of white people and America would have repulsed Martin Luther King, Jr.?
Has Barack Obama chosen the best people to run America -- has he picked people in a color-blind way who would do best in helping all Americans or has he used a color filter to discriminate among candidates for office?
He chose Eric Holder to be our Attorney General, despite a controversial background involving the granting of a pardon by Bill Clinton to the ex-husband of a wealthy donor. Holder became America's first black Attorney General. The past three years have seen the Department of Justice tarnished by the Fast and Furious Scandal, incompetency involving whether to try terror suspect in civilian trials in New York City, the Department's refusal to pursue a "lay-up" case involving violent voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party, and the transformation of the Civil Rights Division into a battering ram against businesses and banks on behalf of minorities.
Perhaps the latter dereliction of duty should not surprise us considering that Holder has amply displayed his own true feelings regarding America and how white people treat black people. He has called us a "nation of cowards" when it comes to discussions of race, has characterized criticism of Obama and himself as being a manifestation of racism since "we're both African-Americans" and carries in his wallet a card containing language that Holder says represents his views that "there's a common cause that bonds the black United States attorney with the black criminal." Was that a Never go To Jail Card for the New Black Panther Party members?
Holder's record as Attorney General has been so disgraceful that a growing list of 60 Congressmen, two Senators, GOP presidential candidates and at least two sitting governors have called for his resignation. Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer has called him one of the most incompetent attorney generals in American history.
Yet Obama chose him and continues to support him despite a record of failure. Is Holder serving all the American people? Is there truly no one in the vast ranks of attorneys who could serve in that role? Does Obama care about the content of Holder's character or the color of his skin?
But this is par for the course for Barack Obama.
He appointed Van Jones to be his Special Advisor for Green Jobs. Jones had a record that came to light after he assumed office that was filled with bigotry towards whites (he accused white polluters of steering poison into the people-of-color community), radicalism, flirtation with communism, and conspiracy theories regarding George Bush and 9/11. According to Valerie Jarrett, Obama's right-hand woman, they knew all about Van Jones and had been following his career for years.
Van Jones was compelled to resign when the rest of America found out about Van Jones, courtesy of Glenn Beck.
Was he chosen for the content of his character or for the color of his skin?
Lisa Jackson was chosen by Obama to be the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Since assuming office she has been reckless in her war on carbon and in the wake is leaving job losses, slow growth and an uncertain electric energy supply. She has been accused of exceeding the bounds of her regulatory authority to such an extent that businesses are paralyzed by uncertainty-unsure of what she will unleash next. She is blithely unconcerned that Congressmen have taken her to task for performance.
Was she chosen for the color of her skin or the content of her character?
Susan Rice, America's Ambassador to the United Nations, has kowtowed to dictators, promised that America's joining the disgraceful UN Human Rights Council would lead to its reform and the end of its incessant America and Israel-bashing (it hasn't; there was a reason George W. Bush boycotted the council), hasmissed important meetings and votes, and has heartily criticized our ally, Israel, at that forum of hate. She has been, according to a former spokesman for four previous U.S. Ambassadors at the UN, wildly inattentive at the United Nations because she has been devoting time to the social scene of Washington and the White House.
Was she chosen for the content of her character or the color of her skin?
Then there is Mark Lloyd, the Chief Diversity Officer, a newly created position at the Federal Communications Commission. What are Lloyd's qualifications? He has spoken publicly of getting white media executives to "step down" in favor of minorities. He also spoke of the limited number of these powerful positions and then expounded,
"... unless we are conscious of the need to have more people of color, gays, other people in those positions, we will not change the problem. But we're in a position where you have to say who is going to step down so someone else can have power". He added, for good measure, "there are few things, I think, more frightening in the American mind that dark-skinned black men. Here I am ..."
Job requirement: Character or skin color?
Most recently, Obama chose Cecilia Munoz to be in charge of his Domestic Policy Council. For the past two decades, Munoz has served as the chief lobbyist for the National Council of La Raza ("The Race") and has devoted herself to promoting its agenda of in-state college tuition breaks and drivers' licenses for illegal aliens as well as opposing enforcement of immigration laws and border controls. Obama put in charge of formulating his domestic policy someone who advocated that our laws not be enforced.
Clearly the appointment was well-timed to garner support from Hispanics in key battleground states. This ability to gin up support among Hispanics may also be a factor that led Obama to pick Hilda Solis as his Secretary of Labor (despite a tax scandal involving her husband's failure to pay tax liens)
Was they chosen for the content of her character or for the color of their skin?
Lest we forget Obama's pick for Supreme Court Justice, Sonia Sotomayor. While she attended prestigious schools (like Obama) she was not considered among the top stars of her law school class at Yale . She had a less than stellar record compared to her fellow justices but as a self-characterized "wise Latina" she believed she could often reach a better conclusion than a white male regardless of academic or scholarly skills. When Obama went looking for a Supreme Court Justice is was so obvious that he had a very narrow filter of who would "qualify" that Time's Mark Halperin wrote that "White Men Need Not Apply."
Obama seems inclined to make his choices for judges based on skin color. This came back to bite him recently. The ABA's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary delivered very harsh verdicts on Obama's federal judicial nominees (rejecting them as unqualified at triple the rate of both George Bush and Bill Clinton's nominees). Fourteen nominees were rated as unqualified to serve as federal judges. Thirteen of them were women, Hispanics or African-Americans. The ABA is famously liberal; clearly Obama was not picking nominees based on merit.
Barack Obama seems to be running a one-man affirmative action program. While all administrations have tried to showcase minorities Obama's seems to have gone to the extreme. George Bush had leading figures such as Colin Powell and Condi Rice. However, they had stellar backgrounds and records that fully justified the faith President Bush placed in them when he asked them to serve their nation. While Bush had problems with his pick for Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, they certainly have not risen to the scandals that have plagued Eric Holder's reign. Did Bush have a Van Jones or Harold Lloyd? Did he have a person in charge of formulating his domestic policy that advocated laws regarding illegal immigration not be enforced? Are Americans being well-served by these officials that Obama has chosen to give vast power?
Barack Obama campaigned on theme that there is not a "white America" or a "black America".
President Obama is not practicing what Senator Obama preached. Instead of channeling the heroic Martin Luther King's dream that people be judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin President Obama instead seems to be channeling the views of his moral compass, Jeremiah Wright, Jr.
Michelle Obama and Stokely Carmichael on Collective White Guilt
Jodi Kantor launched a pre-election, pre-emptive biography about the first couple last week. The New York Times reporter has been covering the human interest side of the Obama family since 2007. Kantor's earlier articles focused on the president's love of basketball, Michelle's family tree, and Barack's "search for faith." Now she's written The Obamas, a sleight-of-hand book that has Michelle getting all of the attention while her husband makes unconstitutional recess appointments. In response to Kantor's come-on, the first lady did her part, hitting the airwaves to counteract a few behind-the-scene tidbits.
Michelle told CBS' Gayle King that there will always be people who don't like her and that ever since her husband announced his candidacy in 2007, some see her as an "angry black woman." Cue the mainstream media. The lapdog press couldn't get the "angry black woman" story out to the masses fast enough. Once again, the race card proved an effective distraction from the latest surveillance techniques coming out of Big Sis's Department of Homeland Security.
But luckily for anybody still interested, Michelle's "righteous indignation" created an opening to ask if Juan Williams was right back in 2009. The Fox contributor caught flak for saying that "Michelle Obama has this Stokely Carmichael-in-a-designer dress thing going on." Whether true or not, the symbolism of a woman at war with herself and society was dead-on.
Last week, when Sean Hannity asked Cornel West if the first lady's protestation against Kantor's depiction of her was justified, West stated that some have "wrongly perceived" Mrs. Obama's "brilliance, courage and charisma" in a stereotypical way. "Black folks' passion for the truth" often gets misinterpreted, said West. If Michelle speaks her mind, well, "she's just an honest sister."
West is onto something. Michelle Robinson Obama has been nothing if not honest when it comes to her feelings and philosophy. Playing to the crowds on the campaign trail, Mrs. Obama simulated a stereotype of the cantankerous black woman by publicly outing her husband's nasty personal habits. Next, the public soon discovered she thought that America was a "downright mean country" and that for the first time in her adult life, she was "proud" of the United States.
Based on her own words and actions over the last 30 years, right up until last week, it's a safe bet "the past isn't dead, it's not even past" for the first lady. When Mrs. Obama pointedly uses divisive stereotypes on network television in an election year, she's doing more than running interference. She's never, never letting us forget history. Mrs. Obama didn't make it all the way to the White House for nothing.
The First Lady's 1985 thesis on being black at Princeton gave the tormented, race-obsessed young woman the chance to articulate long-repressed feelings of abjection, separateness, and anger. When she purposely chose the Black Supremacist, radical, separationist, and anti-Semitic ideas of Stokely Carmichael to shore up a study of "Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community," the writing was on the wall. From there, she would go on to Harvard Law school and eventually end up at Reverend Jeremiah Wright's Afrocentric Trinity United Church of Christ with her husband and children.
Coincidently, Wright also happened to be a fan of the rabidly anti-white Carmichael (who changed his name to Kwame Ture, after 2 African dictators). In 1969, while at Howard University, Wright heard Carmichael lecture on black power. The pastor would go on to spread Carmichael's views from the pulpit of his Chicago church. Wright cross-bred Carmichael's Black Power movement with the founder of Black Liberation Theology, James Cone (whom he met in college)'s black rage and "whiteless" Scriptures tenets.
Unlike Oprah Winfrey, who lasted only five years listening to Obama's "close confidante" rail against white people, America, capitalism, and the middle class, Michelle allowed Wright to marry her and Barack, baptize their children, dedicate their home, and serve as spiritual guide through the years.
The First Lady may have put her militant bluster on hold after she settled in the White House in 2009, willing to play second fiddle and take one for the team, but chances are that she is still a gung-ho Reverend Wright/Stokely Carmichael believer. She has never denounced either man's hateful agenda, and, along with her husband, she has no problem using the race card in a post-racial America.
With another election less than a year away, and with three years of "fundamental transformation" under our belt, the first lady's past warrants yet another look.
Barack Obama, in the 2008 "A More Perfect Union" race speech designed to distance himself from "Uncle Jeremiah," described his wife as a "black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slave owners." Soon after he won the election, media outlets published articles with titles like "Michelle Obama's Family: From Slavery to the White House." Ms. Kantor herself co-authored a New York Times article in October 2009 entitled "In Michelle Obama's Family, A Complex Path From Slavery."
Despite the first lady's alleged comment to Carla Bruni that living in the White House was sometimes "hell," she must have been in heaven seeing headlines about her family's roots. The young black Princeton student who felt as if she didn't belong in a predominantly "White university" which "caters to the needs of the White students" and who "felt pressured ... to come together with other Blacks on campus ... in Solidarity to combat a White oppressor" had finally arrived. With a sycophantic media at her command, America's sins could be laid bare.
If her life is sometimes unbearable, even with the lavish vacations, parties, and personal staff catering to her every need, the roots of Michelle's obvious discontent may be found in the psychic strain of reluctantly assimilating into the dreaded dominant culture. According to Kantor, in the early '90s, Mrs. Obama felt "distressed" by the multi-generational "white Irish Catholics" who "locked up power in Illinois." For Mrs. Obama, it must have been Princeton all over again. Her husband may have summed up the source of his wife's frustration in the 1995 book Dreams from My Father:
The minority assimilated into the dominant culture, not the other way around. Only white culture could be neutral and objective. Only white culture could be nonracial, willing to adopt the occasional exotic into its ranks. Only white culture had individuals. And we, the half-breeds and the college-degreed, take a survey of the situation and think to ourselves, Why should we get lumped in with the losers if we don't have to? [Dreams from My Father, pg. 75]
For Carmichael and Wright, Michelle's "guides," being "Middle Class" meant assimilation and integration into the "foreign culture" of the white majority. Michelle Lavaughn Robinson relied heavily on Stokely Carmichael's and Charles Hamilton's 1967 book Black Power: The Politics of Liberation, in which the charismatic Carmichael curses middle-class "values" that have led to oppressive political and social structures. These structures rest within an "illegitimate system of government." A system built on "white folk's greed," as Wright stated later on.
If the United States Constitution is taking a beating under Obama, we need look no farther for one of the major reasons -- white males. There is no half-way in Carmichael's way of thinking. Any assimilation into a "racist" class is a one-way street.
From Black Power:
Thus we reject the goal of assimilation into middle-class America because the values of that class are in themselves anti-humanist and because that class as a social force perpetuates racism. We must face the fact that, in the past, what we have called the 'movement' has not really questioned the middle-class institutions in this country. If anything, it has accepted those values and institutions without fully realizing their racist nature. ... This class is the backbone of institutional racism in this country. [His italics, not mine.]
Michelle Obama derided the biased middle-class curriculum at Princeton which she states was geared toward white students. Everywhere she went, she felt "locked out"; the temptation for high-achieving blacks to sell out, integrate, and adopt the values of the ruling class was always just around the corner. Mrs. Obama's thesis reads like a classic coming-of-age story with its heroine lost in a hostile world -- at the mercy of the all-bad, all-white Princeton bigots. Trouble is thar she wrote it in 1985, way past the civil rights era.
But here, too, Carmichael throws any progress made by Martin Luther King, Jr. and his followers out the window.
I maintain that every civil rights bill in this country was passed for white people, not for black people. ... There has been only a civil rights movement, whose tone of voice was adapted to an audience of liberal whites.
After Carmichael left for Africa in a self-imposed exile, Wright picked up the slack here in America. The Trinity UCC congregation were among the first African-Americans to hear an amalgamated, theologically based rejection of the "White status quo." The Obamas author Jodi Kantor, writing for the New York Times in 2007, touched on Wright's hostility toward the middle class.
To the many members who, like the Obamas, are the first generation in their families to achieve financial success, the church warns against "middleclassness," its term for selfish individualism, and urges them to channel their gains back into the community.
There is little doubt that Mr. and Mrs. Obama took Wright's message of "selfish individualism" to heart. In 1995, while running for the State Senate, Barack railed against the right wing's appeal "to that old individualistic bootstrap myth: get a job, get rich, and get out. Instead of investing in our neighborhoods."
Time and again, Mrs. Obama, along with her husband, has called for "shared sacrifice" and asked young people to delay a corporate career in favor of community service. For the couple, a belief in the inalienable rights of the individual upon which the United States was founded is a "myth." Invoking an American icon in the same 1995 profile, Mr. Obama couldn't have articulated the first couple's worldview any more clearly.
In America we have this strong bias toward individual action. You know, we idolize the John Wayne hero who comes in to correct things with both guns blazing. But individual actions, individual dreams, are not sufficient. We must unite in collective action, build collective institutions and organizations.
Michelle's political and spiritual role models were steeped in separatism, anti-Semitism, black liberation theology, and collectivism. Her earliest influence, Kwame Ture, aka Stokely Carmichael, eventually became a committed Leninist-Marxist, founding the Africanist All African People's Revolutionary Party.
Jeremiah Wright, a Farrakhan- and Gaddafi-sympathizer, spouted anti-American, anti-Semitic poison from the pulpit while Michelle Obama listened for 20 years. Barack Obama, whom she married in 1992, had already been a member of UCC since 1988 when he heard "The Audacity of Hope" sermon. His collectivist agenda is now playing out all over America.
Posts
