Hat Tip: Nancy Jacques
By: Jeffrey Klein, Political Buzz Examiner
In a speech Eric Holder gave at the LBJ Presidential Library in Austin, Texas on December 13, 2011, he floated another trial balloon idea for the pollsters to process, and that is the threat of the Obama administration bringing action against states requiring stricter voter identification at the polls.
He implored American’s to “call on our political parties to resist the temptation to suppress certain votes in the hope of attaining electoral success and, instead, achieve success by appealing to more voters,” according to David Jackson’s USA Today article from December 14, 2011.
Fredreka Schouten, also a USA Today reporter stated that “more than half a dozen states have passed new laws to reduce early voting, setting up a clash with civil rights groups and Democrats who claim the rules could disenfranchise minority voters in the 2012 election for the White House and Congress.”
“Among states with new restrictions: Wisconsin and Florida, presidential swing states that also are key battlegrounds in the fight for control of the U.S. Senate, where Democrats hold a narrow advantage.”
Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), whose state will now require photo IDs from prospective voters, criticized Holder’s appearance in Austin.
“Voter identification laws are constitutional and necessary to prevent fraud at the ballot box,” Cornyn said. “Facing an election challenge next year, this administration has chosen to target efforts by the states to protect the democratic process.”
Democrats, citing studies suggesting there is little voter fraud, say the measures are actually aimed at reducing minority votes for their candidates.
Eric Holder left the door open by saying … Where a state can’t meet its legal burden in showing an absence of discriminatory impact, “we will object.”
As it is impossible to prove a negative, his language implies that he will likely bring such actions–after he receives the go ahead by President Obama, who will have first consulted with Chicago, after they have analyzed the poll results.
There are a total of 17 states that now have strict voter ID laws, recently joined by Texas, Wisconsin and South Carolina which now require a photo ID, as well as Alabama, Kansas, Mississippi, Rhode Island and Tennessee.
“It’s remarkable,” Jennie Bowser, senior fellow at the National Conference of State Legislatures, said of the proliferation of new laws. In all, 33 states have considered new voter ID laws this year, as reported in Fredreka Shouten’s USA Today article from June 19, 2011.
“I very rarely see one single issue come up in so many state legislatures in a single session,” she said. “This issue has historically fallen along stark partisan lines. Democrats tend to oppose voter ID, and Republicans tend to favor it. This year, there are a lot of new Republican majorities in legislatures,” Bowser said.
Although Republicans now control both chambers in 26 states, it is clear that with 33 states considering stricter laws, there is a perception of [increasing] voter fraud that needs to be stamped out.
And, it appears there is good reason for the Republicans to be taking the lead, as the majority of federal state and local voter fraud convictions seem to belong to Democrats and their operatives, who use fake signatures and the names of deceased voters on phony registrations, petitions and absentee ballot applications as the tools of choice.
The plethora of headline stories coming from the 2008 Presidential elections alone, show that ACORN, the community organization that employed Barack Obama far, to be far and away in the lead with over 54 convictions over numerous states–where the only prosecutions have occurred under the Obama administration.
AG Eric Holder has shown himself to have no appetite for prosecuting voting fraud cases since coming to office, which is highlighted by documents obtained by Judicial Watch, showing that the Bush administration FBI and Department of Justice opened an investigation into ACORN but, the Obama Justice Department, while noting that ACORN had engaged in “questionable hiring and training practices,” closed down the investigation in March 2009, claiming ACORN broke no laws.
Then there was the New Black Panther members voter intimidation case, which evidence was caught on video tape, whose members were indicted by the Bush Justice Department–only to be let free and charges dropped by the Obama Justice Department, claiming once again, insufficient evidence to prosecute.
Finally, according to a July 8, 2010 Wall Street Journal article by John Fund, J. Christian Adams, a former career Justice Department lawyer, who resigned in 2010 to protest political interference in cases he worked on, testifying before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights–laying bare the source of this new DOJ prosecutorial “attitude.”
First, Adams claimed that Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli, an Obama appointee, overruled a unanimous recommendation by six career Justice attorneys for the continued prosecution of members of the New Black Panther Party on charges of voter intimidation.
But Mr. Adams leveled an even more explosive charge beyond the Panther case.
He testified that Deputy Assistant Attorney General Julie Fernandes made a jaw-dropping announcement to attorneys in Justice’s Voting Rights section, saying she would not support any enforcement of a key section of the federal “Motor Voter” law — Section 8, requiring states to periodically purge their voter rolls of dead people, felons, illegal voters and those who have moved out of state.
According to Mr. Adams, Justice lawyers were told by Ms. Fernandes: “We’re not interested in those kinds of cases. What do they have to do with helping increase minority access and turnout? We want to increase access to the ballot, not limit it.”
Fund said in his article that Ms. Fernandes was endorsing a policy of ignoring federal law and encouraging potential voter fraud, and that she was unavailable for comment, but the Justice Department issued a statement accusing Mr. Adams of “distorting facts” in general and having a political agenda.
Now that statement sounds like the Eric Holder DOJ that we have all come to know and greatly disrespect.
It should be noted that having Holder speak at the Lyndon Baines Johnson Presidential Library and Museum provided the perfect [Axelrod] optics, as in 1965, then President Johnson was instrumental in passing the landmark Voting Rights Act, which the Justice Department now uses to ensure voting rights.
If AG Holder and Ms. Fernandes really want to “ensure voting rights,” and “increase access to the ballot [boxes]” for eligible voters, then I recommend they commit the resources necessary to fully implement the MOVE Act, passed into law in 2009 to ensure military personnel access to voting, especially when deployed overseas.
According to the Military Voter Protection Project and Chapman University’s AMVET’s clinic, data collected by congressional mandate reveal that only 4.6 percent of eligible military voters cast an absentee ballot that counted in the November 2010 election; whereas, in 2006, it was 5.5 percent.
These numbers came despite the MOVE mandate of a voter registration office on every military installation before the November 2010 election–even though, there are now still 25 percent of the bases without one.
As far more than 4.6 percent of registered [civilian] minority voters participated in the November 2010 elections–it is apparent that the logical move to fulfill Ms. Fernandes patriotic “zeal,” would be to re-directed her ire at the Pentagon.
If not, then it will be very apparent that Barack Obama and Eric Holder are setting the table to increase voter fraud, which appears to favor the Democrat party, and decrease the mostly Republican military patriots from participating in the process they claim to hold so dear.
Copyright (c) 2011 by Jeffrey Klein
By: Andrea Shea King
The Radio Patriot
And Pauline Kael says she doesn’t know anyone who voted for Nixon…
The expression that one can’t see the forest for all the trees perfectly describes Washington GOP establishment members George Will and Michael Barone, who say there’s no such thing as the “GOP Establishment”.
Please… they’re absolutely, insularly myopic, like the liberal elitist Pauline Kael, whose famous expression succinctly proved the point: “I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don’t know. They’re outside my ken. But sometimes when I’m in a theater I can feel them.”
There’s “them”, and then there’s the rest of us.
In a piece at today’s DC Caller, “In Search of the Republican Establishment”, Newt Gingrich reportedly said that Mitt Romney has the Republican establishment behind him.
No news there. The rest of us have known it since Romney abruptly ended his 2008 bid for the presidency in a speech that shocked CPAC attendees and the rest of America. It didn’t take a brain pilot to figure out that a backroom deal was made by the GOP power brokers: “Look Mitt, stand down this time, and we’ll throw our machine behind you in ’12.”
And they have. The GOP establishment reach extends to the establishment media which, I remind you, has yet to throw a punch at Romney as it destroys Herman Cain or anyone else whose poll numbers eclipsed the establishment’s candidate.
But those who are the “GOP Establishment” deny it. Of course. To admit its existence would be “game over”. Conservatives, including tea partiers, would be in full revolt. (Although I predict that’s not long from happening…)
“Some people claim the Republican Establishment does not exist,” Washington Times columnist Milton Wolf told TheDC. “We have a name for those people: Establishment Republicans.”
“The Establishment is a real thing with amorphous and mutable borders,” political strategist Mary Matalin said. “Ostensibly, it is the members of formal structures (party leaders, Congressional leadership, funders, top line strategists, ideological big thinkers and opiners, etc.).”
Conservative talk radio host Mark Levin scoffs at the notion that there is no such thing as the Republican establishment.
“It is interesting that no one wants to be characterized as part of the establishment, even when they run the instrumentalities of the GOP and have never endorsed a single tea party candidate out of the gate,” he said.
“Besides, if there was not an establishment, there would be no need for the tea party.”
In TheDC’s search for “the establishment,” one name kept popping up from those who ardently believe the so-called GOP establishment is alive and well: Angelo Codevilla.
A Boston University professor emeritus in international relations, Codevilla is the author of “The Ruling Class.” In a 2010 interview with TheDC about the book, Codevilla explained that America is split not between Democrats and Republicans, but between what he terms the “Ruling Class” and the “Country Class.”
[Note: I spent Monday night’s radio show discussing Codavilla’s remarkable thesis “America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution“. It is a MUST read in order to understand there’s little that distinguishes the Democrat and Republican parties — they’re both of an established class: The “ruling” or “elite class. And their sole objective is to amass and retain greater amounts of power.]
“People define themselves as ‘the ruling class’ by tying their livelihoods and hopes to government, and above all by a certain attitude toward the rest of the country,” he said.
“Neither money nor even professional position defines a person as part of the ruling class or not. Rather, membership is all about drawing one’s livelihood from one’s connection with government power, from believing that this is proper, and above all from sensing that sharing a certain set of attitudes and tastes makes one superior to ordinary Americans.”
Rush Limbaugh has spent many hours showing example after example of the GOP establishment and its machinations. It wouldn’t surprise me if Rush talks today on his program about Will’s remarks. Yesterday he spoke of the supposedly “non-existent” GOP Establishment:
“Now, the fact that the Republican establishment cannot make that case and other arguments tells me that they may have already surrendered, and this is a big difference between us and the establishment. They’re in this defensive posture, I’ve told you, I said on Greta how many times, a lot of people inside the Republican establishment secretly don’t even believe Obama can be beaten. And that’s why they want Romney, ’cause they think at least Romney will help ‘em take the Senate. He’ll lose less down the ballot than Gingrich or some conservative will.
But conservatives, you Tea Party activists, you don’t want to give up and you haven’t given up, and you don’t want to accept this propaganda from the left. We insist on challenging it, we insist on fighting it ’cause there’s no other way to save the country, and continually playing these games letting the Democrats rewrite the language, change the definition of things, get away with false accusations against us, never do anything about it, constantly stay on defense.”
For Will and Barone to question the existence of the GOP establishment is ludicrous. And proof that these supposed “savant observers” don’t know one part of their anatomy from another.
Some sherry, dear?
And one more thing. Ann Coulter? Quintessential GOP Establishmentarian.
“Pemmaraju pressed Coulter on Romney’s conservatism, adding that the Tea Party has resisted him strongly, an indication he may not be as conservative as she thinks. Coulter replied that the Tea Party was “wrong about this” because “they’re looking at who is going to go around bombastically demanding to see Obama’s birth certificate or calling him a Kenyan,” instead of substance. She added that “Rick Santorum and [Rick] Perry are very bad on illegal immigration” despite being considered more conservative.”
Hat Tip: BM
Hat Tip: BB
By: Jim O’Neill
“College professors have felt the heat of this repressive new order;
researchers and scientists have encountered its ire; ministers
have found themselves muzzled; teachers have been intimidated;
employees have lost their jobs; even parents have been told that
they cannot exercise their rights. Queer has become something to fear, and gay is beginning to rule the day.”
– Dr. Michael L. Brown “A Queer Thing Happened to America”
(from the chapter “Big Brother is Watching, and He Really is Gay”) Link
I started to write an article about the banning of Bibles at the Walter Reed (“Wally World”) military hospital the other day, but I was concerned that it would end up sounding like an off-the-leash rant by the late comedian Sam Kinison. Although righteous anger is certainly apropos given the nature of the insult, clear-eyed resolve will be more effective in the long run. (Note: the “old” Walter Reed has moved shop, and is now known as Walter Reed at Bethesda). Link
The news about the banning of the Bible at Walter Reed followed closely on the heels of the announcement that the US Senate had voted to repeal the ban on sodomy and bestiality in the US military. Link
Which left me to wonder exactly how traitorous is the US military High Command these days — are most of them quislings, or is it still a minority? It is no secret that many of our bravest and best fighting men and women have left the service in frustration and disgust. What have they left behind — who have they left behind? Bureaucratic paper pushers, or something more sinister and dangerous? What kind of patriot warriors are our military academies turning out these days? Who is running the show, and what sort of show is it? Link
I recently had reason to send someone a copy of an old article of mine in which I wrote “when you’re sworn to defend your country, and you see your country sliding down the tubes, what’re you supposed to do — salute while it sinks?” The person that I sent the article to (a former Army SF operative) wrote back that he was afraid that the US military was indeed doing exactly that — saluting while America sinks. Nice send-off at least, right troops? Link
As they are symbolic of the type of “heroes” we have leading our military these days let me briefly discuss two individuals: First, Gen. George Casey who was the Army Chief of Staff at the time of the Ft. Hood shootings, was more concerned about the safety of political correctness than the safety of his troops. You perhaps recall his words at the time: “As horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.” That’s worse. Link
First of all, it was not simply a tragedy. It was a vicious terrorist attack by a Muslim who murdered 14 defenseless people in cold blood (if you count Francheska Velez’s unborn child, as we should), and injured 30 others. The Muslim, Maj. Nidal Hasan, had no legitimate reason to be in the US Army, after he had exhibited a plethora of warning signs indicating his disturbed mental state prior to the shooting — signs that were ignored because of the asinine politically correct rules instituted by morons like Casey in the first place. Secondly, abstract doctrines like “diversity” do not become casualties — people do. Casey can take his diversity and shove it where the sun doesn’t shine. The US military needs leaders, not arrogant idiots who do not know the difference between protecting the troops and politically correct butt-kissing. Link
Next let us turn to Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who has been a driving force behind arm-twisting the US military into embracing homosexuality. He must have been positively ecstatic when the Senate repealed the ban on butt f–king and screwing animals. Link
Actually, forget Mullen, let’s discuss homosexuality itself. Let me say up front that while some people might think that I hate homosexuals, that simply is not the case. I take people as they come, and if they are decent and respectful to me I generally treat them the same — the exception being people that I know are vile scumbags behind a veneer of polite sophistication. I do not hate homosexuals, but I detest having our military and culture force-fed homosexual behavior as being on a par with heterosexual behavior– it is not.
Rather than explain how unhealthy and life-shortening the homosexual lifestyle is, or how socially destructive it is, or go into how it has been slyly inserted into the American culture (talk about stealth jihad), I would like to take this opportunity to focus on two important issues — one I have written about before, and the other I have not. Link Link Link
The first topic I’ll discuss (the one I have written about previously) is the importance of being aware that the majority of homosexuals do not normally act gay — by which I mean effeminate. The “stealth jihad” waged by the militant homosexual clique has promoted the falsehood that homosexuals are by and large unmanly — such is not the case, not at all. Most homosexuals are, if anything, hyper-masculine. Link
You would be making a grave mistake to remain unaware of the machismo and arrogant attitude at the core of many of the militant homosexuals. Far from being effeminate, soft, or weak; they are often arrogant, strong, and ruthless. There are any number of homosexuals who would laugh at the idea of backing away from a fight — they would just as soon tear your head off and s–t in the hole. An example would be the late Ernest Röhm, the scar-faced thug in charge of Hitler’s brown shirts (although it is well to keep in mind that a number of militant homosexuals would consider such a man to be a déclassé Neanderthal). Link
So I would never accuse homosexuals as a whole of lacking strength, stamina, courage, or any of the other qualities one might look for in a military operative. They can and have served honorably in the past, and no doubt will in the future. My problem — and it is a big one — is with the military being forced to swallow the lie that homosexuality is essentially no different from heterosexuality, and that embracing it will not hamper the military’s effectiveness at all. Oh really? I would love to discuss the topic at length, but it would unfortunately lead us too far afield at present — some other time, with pleasure. Link
There are a number of very serious issues that arise from such misguided, short-sighted, and ultimately destructive missteps by the Pentagon and Congress. A couple of the more obvious pitfalls were mentioned above. The mental and emotional quirks alone would fill volumes (it is not by happenchance that one of the first professional areas to be targeted, infiltrated, and subverted by militant homosexuals was the mental-health field). Due diligence was not performed before DADT (Don’t Ask Don’t Tell) was repealed during the lame-duck session of the 111th Congress — or if it was performed, it was suppressed. Link
This leads me to the second topic that I wish to focus on: the minority within the minority — pedophiles and pederasts. A pederast is of course an adult homosexual who preys on young boys (a “chicken-hawk”), and pedophilia is an umbrella term that can signify sexual exploitation of either young boys or girls. Link
These practices are some of the few taboos left in our society, but their illegality and social stigma has been under long-term attack by their proponents. Thanks to homosexual/liberal icons such as John Maynard Keynes and Dr. Alfred Kinsey, America now has abominations like the pederasty at Penn State, and the recent revelations about pandemic pedophilia in Hollyweird. Link Link
Why do I bring this up? It is not because that in any way I accuse the homosexual community as a whole of practicing pederasty and/or pedophilia — they do not, and I do not wish to imply that they do. There is, however, a significant minority who do practice and promote pederasty and pedophilia (there is some confusion on the terminology here because homosexual pederasts are often classified as pedophiles), and this vile bunch has power and influence way out of proportion to their numbers. They have for many years (centuries in some cases) made it their business to infiltrate and take over positions of power and authority. Link
This powerful and influential cabal of perverts is at the heart of the subtle, slow, steady seduction of America’s culture. You had better believe that there are some powerful “movers and shakers” involved. The “if it feels good do it” philosophy of polymorphous perversity is essentially a codification of the homosexual lifestyle — and starting under the auspices of child abuser Alfred Kinsey it has wormed its way into the American psyche. Link
Where does such depravity end? It does not — there is no end to the debauched chaos of polymorphous perversity. There is no bottom to that particular abyss. The perverted movers and shakers who saw to it that the US Senate repealed the ban on bestiality, are the same ones who saw to it that DADT was repealed, and who applaud the “strange beauty” of the movie “Zoo,” which depicts the true story of a man in Oregon who was f–ked to death by a horse in 2005 — but it was “consensual” sex, so it was okay (unfortunate, but okay). Kenneth Turan of the “LA Times” called the movie “Elegantly made and eerily lyrical.” Sure it is. (That is not to imply anything about Mr. Turan. He may a man among men and the salt of the earth as far as I know — I know nothing about him). Link Link
It is nice to know that the US Senate gave such a big thumbs up to endorsing similar behavior for our men and women in uniform. Is this a great country or what? And we wonder why much of the Muslim world sees America as a degenerate, depraved and corrupt cesspool. It is a win/win situation for Far Left atheists — they destroy America’s moral standards, and then turn to their Islamist buddies and whisper “Look, look how bad they are.” Link
Speaking of Far Left atheists; while researching the many troubles America faces and the history behind them, I came to the conclusion some time ago that the militant homosexual agenda and the Far Left agenda are virtually identical. (Again, I am not speaking of homosexuals as a whole, but the relatively small subset that is behind much of the cultural chaos we see around us. I am discussing a very specific type of homosexual — not homosexuals in general). Link
I have no time to do justice to the topic here, and I hope that the reader will do some investigating of their own. I should underline the fact that I have been dealing with a general “rule of thumb,” and that there are of course, exceptions to the rule. In addition, it is of some importance to take note of the fact that the ranks of the militant homosexual pederasts are swelled by heterosexuals and bisexuals who have taken the same polymorphously perverse lifestyle to heart, and there are also those who are neither pedophiles nor pederasts, but who simply share common interests in other areas. In any event, I would like to write a few words about atheism and homosexuality before closing.
The authors of “The Pink Swastika” believe that Hitler’s genocide against the Jews was in large part fueled by his distaste for, and disgust with, the Judeo/Christian ethos. According to the authors, Hitler’s animosity toward the Judeo/Christian tradition traces its roots to the Bible’s condemnation of homosexuality. Before you scoff, read the book with an open mind, and I believe you will see that they make a good case for their hypothesis. By the by, being the well read and knowledgeable reader that you are, you are no doubt aware by now that the Nazis were [are] a Far Left phenomena and not a right-wing outfit. That opens a whole other avenue to explore that unfortunately we will have to leave for another day. Link
If you can see your way past all of the leftist nonsense about Hitler being a staunch Christian (bulls–t), the atheist/pagan/occult nature of Nazism becomes quite evident (you might want to throw in a strong dash of Hellenic homosexuality as well). The militant homosexual subset that I have been discussing follows much the same formula as the Far Left Nazis of WW II did. In short, they despise the Judeo/Christian tradition, and have been working with a will to suppress it, and drive it out of America’s culture — quite successfully I might add. Link
Although the type of homosexual that I have been discussing (arrogant, vain, predatory) infests our government and military from the lowest levels to the highest, they are probably not America’s chief problem at this time — but they are a problem, and a big one. It is because of men like them (and the collusion of like-minded women) that the Senate repealed the ban on sodomy and bestiality in the armed forces. It is because of men like them, and the insidious poison they have spread, that things like the banning of Bibles at Walter Reed happen.
(Sidebar: Kudos are due to Rep. Steve King [R-IA] for bringing this abomination up on the House floor — as well as the topic of the illegal order for military chaplains to marry same-sex couples. This occurred a few days before Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told an appreciative crowd in Geneva, Switzerland that “Gay rights are human rights”). Link Link
So what can “we the people” do — anything? I suggested to a friend the other day that we should turn the pitiless searchlight of Critical Theory upon them. Shine its bright glare upon the demented Marxist/Fascist drivel that they peddle, and see how long their vaunted ideologies stand up to the remorseless pick, pick, picking of constant fault finding. My friend replied that he felt that would be beneath us, and bring us down to their level. Link
I answered that “we the people” used to understand that sometimes it is necessary to fight fire with fire — not because we wish to; not because we want to, but simply because we must. Allowing that which is good, decent, virtuous, and holy to be trampled in the mud is not Christian; it is not civilized, and by God it is not American. It is ignorance, sloth, and cowardice dressed up as something admirable. When push comes to shove sometimes the only thing that will beat back evil is physical resistance, and your life becomes forfeit for a cause more important than you. Freedom was once such a cause to Americans.
From what I have seen of the Pentagon these days let me say that after refusing to honor their oath to defend the Constitution; choosing to ignore America in extremis, and turning their backs on Lady Liberty as she is scuttled — the least they can do is salute her while she sinks.
Born in June of 1951 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Jim O’Neill proudly served in the U.S. Navy from 1970-1974 in both UDT-21 (Underwater Demolition Team) and SEAL Team Two. A member of MENSA, he worked as a commercial diver in the waters off Scotland, India, and the United States. In 1998 while attending the University of South Florida as a journalism student, O’Neill won “First Place” in the “Carol Burnett/University of Hawaii AEJMC Research in Journalism Ethics Award.” The annual contest was set up by Carol Burnett with the money she won from successfully suing the National Enquirer for libel. Over the last few years, Jim has regularly written for Canada Free Press and now has a personal blog, ConstitutionalWrites.com.
Graphics and video added by Gulag Bound