Monday, July 12, 2010

Voter Fraud and Intimidation........details you should know

IF OBAMA DOESN’T WANT TO NEUTER YOUR VOTE, WHY IS HE ACTING LIKE IT?

By our friend and commenter Deborah at Bayside

It’s a good rule of thumb that if you want more of something you make it easy. Want MORE bad behavior? Make it easy to get away with. Like voter fraud.

Journalist John Fund addressed this in his book Stealing Elections and has written a new primer on the gathering storm of election fraud that threatens our democracy, How the Obama Administrations Threatens to Undermind Our Elections.

The US Civil Rights Commission is investigating Obama’s shocking dismissal of the voter intimidation case against the Black Panthers in Philadelphia. Fund, in a recent interview with Dennis Prager, probed voting abuses sanctioned by the Obamians.

Red Alert!! A tsunami is coming.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 says you can’t intimidate or impede people from voting. It’s usually enforced for infringing minority rights. But not always. When a black political boss in Mississippi was throwing people off the rolls because he didn’t like the way they voted, the Justice Dept. shut him down.

Is Obama actually obstructing the Civil Rights Commission?

Fox News reported on 7-6-10 “it's unclear how far the Commission will get [in the Panther investigation]. The Commissioners want to hear from Christopher Coates, the former chief of the Justice Department's voting section, but the commission claims the Justice Department is blocking Coates from testifying about why the case was dropped.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/06/ex-official-accuses-justice-department-racial-bias-black-panther-case/

Why is Coates important and credible? His roots are as an ACLU attorney, and he’s one of the most celebrated civil rights attorneys - ever. According to Fund “he cracked down on all kinds of voting intimidation cases in the South.” He headed the DOJ’s Voting Rights Section and intended to pursue the Black Panther case. Even the very left American Prospect makes that clear: http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_battle_for_voting_rights.

But Coates was transferred from Washington DC to Charleston SC and away from voting civil rights cases this January.

Why does his “exile to Siberia” matter? John Fund reports the Commission has an arcane rule: you can't subpoena anyone over 50 miles from Washington DC. And now Coates is conveniently outside that limit. So – unless he quits his job like Adams - he can't be subpoenaed to shed light on the machinations in the Obama DOJ.

Which brings us to Round 2: the Motor Voter Law. And Julie Fernandes.*

Motor Voter is federal law. The DOJ enforces it. It requires postcard registration in every state. The opportunity for easy cheating is rampant. So at least it requires states to purge their voter rolls of ineligible names - dead people, felons, illegals, moved aways, absentees who don’t exist, etc.

So why has the Obama administration said they're "never going to tell the states or sue the states saying that you have to clean up your voter rolls” to quote Fund?

Obama's Deputy Assistant Attorney General Julie Fernandes spilled the beans. "We're not interested in those kind of cases” she said. “What do they have to do with helping increase minority access and turnout? We want to increase access to the ballot, not limit it."

Her idea of "access' to the ballot is letting a bunch of ineligible voters stay on the rolls? For “access” to what? Rampant cheating! What else could possibly be inferred? That’s quite the opposite of “access to the ballot” Missy! When you swamp clean votes with dirty ones you deny my “access” as a legitimate voter to be heard fairly. Ms. F is a smart cookie. Do you think this has escaped her notice?

She’s one of the Obama appointees who shut down the Panther case. Her bio claims she “successfully led the civil rights community's effort to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act of 1965.” Oh – that’s the one that says you can’t intimidate or impede people from voting. Yet former DOJ attorney Christian Adams testified before the US Civil Rights Commission that she announced at a policy meeting "the voting section will not bring any other cases against blacks and other minorities." Yikers! It’s 1965 all over again.

Our voting rights are in serious jeopardy with the likes of bad apples like this.

Want to see the enemy in action? Watch her torture reason beyond recognition: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL0SFqFfEE8

Want MORE voter fraud? Make it easy to get away with.

>> Change – the kind Obama believes in, apparently.

*These driveby attorneys don’t just come out of nowhere. Like termites, they’ve been eating away at the structure for years. Fernandes’ lefty pedigree includes: - Senior policy analyst and senior counsel at the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.Focused on policy development and advocacy in the areas of voting rights among others.- Worked for the DOJ under the controversial Bill Lann Lee (remember him?). Focused on voting rights, among others.- Special Assistant to President Clinton’s White House Domestic Policy Council.

THANK YOU, Deborah at Bayside....your research and having put this together as you did is enlightening and should be read by every American. Alas, it will not, and this whole nightmare will be swept under the carpet like so much else these days.

Z

38 comments:

Trestin said...

In November we all need to bring cameras with us.

Z said...

Trestin, thanks for coming by, and I think that's an excellent suggesting, I really do.

Bloviating Zeppelin said...

Votes. More votes. And racisim. Mr Holder and, by extension, Mr Obama are both racists. Jews and Caucasoids. Mr Holder is examining whether or not the white officer already convicted by a jury should endure double jeopardy on a federal level. He wants to ensure the AZ law is overturned. Blacks intimidating and threatening voters AT the polls? Not an issue.

This administration wants to be transparent, does it? I say: yes, it is. Transparently racist, Socialist, enabling Cloward-Piven and determined to redistribute YOUR wealth all for the sake of more votes -- to keep Demorats in power again and again and again.

BZ

Mustang said...

Cameras and well publicized lawfully carried handguns. I don't think many thugs will attempt to intimidate anyone who may be carrying a weapon.

Which of course means that people living in Chicago are screwed. I suspect Obama will carry Illinois again, and he's not even running this year.

Z said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bloviating Zeppelin said...

Oh, Z, you can be guaranteed: amnesty is not only on the boards, it is NEXT in line for fraudulent votes, and all "in the name" of the Messiah. A self-appellated NPD designation.

BZ

Z said...

BZ; "to keep Demorats in power again and again and again."
AMNESTY, anyone?

Mustang; good line about Illinois. I even just got an email from a friend who reads my blog but doesn't comment..citing what you said! :-)

Z said...

BZ..sorry, I moved my comment cuz I'd spelled a word incorrectly...
Ya, that's why I mentioned AMNESTY..it's all about VOTES.

Right Wing Extreme said...

It is a pity that in Oregon we vote by mail. I have my new camera phone and concealed carry. Try and stop me from voting, I dare ya.

Anonymous said...

There's another aspect to this outrage. Having a law expressly to benefit minorities, is profiling.

It was made clear from the beginning, when the motor voter provision was passed, that it was to benefit minorities. Why? All this has accomplished is laziness and fraud.

It focuses on certain groups who are perceived to be so stupid or disinterested that they need to make as little effort as possible to assert the same right we all have.

Well, if one doesn't want to bother to vote, that's up to him isn't it? If one does, it's not complicated, and he will.

As usual liberals see minorities as people who need to be led by the hand to do what liberals want them to do. They think they "own" them, and by God they'll use them every chance they get.

In the first place, naturalized citizens in my experience, are excited to vote. They can't wait to take part in the American process of voting.

They don't need to be led by the hand. In fact after enduring the long, somewhat complicated process of naturalization, registering and voting is a piece of cake.

To register, one only has to go to the nearest party office, or post office to fill out a registration form, or pick up an absentee ballot if that's what he needs.

Here in California, HS seniors who are eighteen are given registration forms to fill out in class and pass them in to the teacher to be sent in by the school. My grandson did.

He's a conservative kid. Interestingly, he never got his sample ballot, and wasn't on the voting rolls, and had to re-register.

This is why all of these efforts to simplify these procedures are open to fraud. They depend on the honesty of others. The fewer people who handle these, the less the opportunity for fraud.

Absentee ballots used to be available at post offices, to be picked up by the voter, and that's how it should have remained. And, one to a customer. Now, they're all over the place to be abused by anyone, or any party, who sees fit to.

As for intimidation. No one should hesitate to walk into a polling place. Someone who want's to intimidate can look menacing, but can't touch you or he is committing assault. Walk in and vote, and call the police, or demand the poll workers do so.

If your entry is intentionally blocked, call the police and wait for them. This has to stop, and we have to stop it.

Pris

Karen Howes said...

Trestin and Rightwingextreme are right-- bring your camera and your gun to the polls! The first to show proof of voter intimidation, and the second to make sure it doesn't work.

Yes, this is the "change" and "fundamental transformation" we voted in... can you believe it?

Z said...

Pris reminds me..
DO NOT DO ABSENTEE VOTING IF YOU CAN HELP IT AT ALL. That's an area rife for fraud. They're advising you avoid that IF at all possible!

I'll never forget voting recnetly..must have been the Obama election but I'm not sure......I was waiting for neighbors who came in to vote after me, so we could chat before we all left the precinct...I'd already voted.
The precinct workers were a surprise because all the years I've lived here they've always been old ladies, frankly....really old and kind of doddering.
This time, there were two guys who looked like they were doing Jimmy Buffet imitations..Cool shirts, nice Khaki pants, etc...very 'hip'. VERY unusual (this year, the return of the old lady happened, I might add...where'd the cool guys GO?)
So, a man walks up to the table and says he isn't registered because he had moved, yadda yadda..."your name isn't here".."Well, I moved"...
This went on for a while and then the Jimmy Buffet lookalike says "Let him vote Provisional Ballot" I heard PROVISIONAL BALLOT a LOT that year.....
I chimed in with "But, he can't prove he lives here..."
The worker says "You going to DENY somebody the vote?"

I was so stunned, but said "Yes, if he's not voting legally.. yes!"
they looked at me as if I had a third eye and I left. It was a tough realization....to know Americans aren't voting legally...maybe it was legal, but it sure seemed weird to me.

Ducky's here said...

It's pretty sad that the far right has taken the issue of a single clown who was removed by the police in Philly and turned it into a loony tunes conspiracy theory now championed by convicted wife beater John Fund.

There's always a question with any party machine about purging voter roles. It's just a fact of life and hardly anything that is party specific. Jeb Bush did some pretty lousy stuff in Florida to purge his roles, when in doubt e purged legal voters.

Can't believe you posted an article from the Prospect, it doesn't do much for your case, but than I have to remember that the right isn't interested in large issues. Time and again they reveal themselves as a frightened marginal tribe that takes its orders from the rabies media.

But this "voter intimidation" case really hits a low.

cube said...

Too many are just fine with ignoring the black elephant in the room which represents the voter fraud/racist/revolutionary/marxistassociations of Obama's administration.

I propose we don't wait until November. This issue needs to be legally challenged now.

Ducky's here said...

No mustang, they'll probaly show up at the polls armed themselves and drop you where you stand or drop some innocent who didn't want to get involved with your big p---- games.

Ducky's here said...

"The Black elephant in the room" ... z, some of your posters are getting a little too close for comfort to tipping their hand.

Z said...

Ducky, would you feel the same about a Klansman in white standing outside a voter precinct carrying a stick and ignoring questions, just staring and glaring?

I thought not.

Why can you never get the bigger picture? Or maybe you do, you can't be that obtuse, and just like to heckle and insult? I get emails about you and motives and I never know quite how to answer, even those who've stopped commenting here because they don't want to have to wade through your ridiculous comments.

Argue intelligently, don't insult. To write off a piece like Deborah's ...the implications, Ducky, it's the IMPLICATIONS, plus no American voter likes being intimidated so it's macro and micro. All bad.

Make sure you watch this video...
then try to respond fairly, OKAY?

http://wewillnotbesilenced2008.com/video/index.htm

The truth shall set us all free. But, your gov't-bought media isn't talking about this...2 years and finally FOX paid attention. Ya, that biased group, biased for Hillary :-)

Z said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Z said...

Ducky, also ...you said "The Black elephant in the room" ... z, some of your posters are getting a little too close for comfort to tipping their hand."

"tipping their hand" inferring they're racists at heart, do I get you clearly? As you know, this blog is THE least racist you'll ever find on the blogosphere, especially the leftwingers' blogs...we believe here that EVERYONE can do well, that everyone deserves a chance if they do it legally and thru hard work...we believe Black Americans are every bit (and more, in my case, as a first and second gen. American) as American as we are, not like your bunch who uses minorities to further your agenda.

If you EVER infer anything like this again, you'll be deleted every single time. Don't test me.
Thanks.

Cube's never said a racist thing, and I don't have to stand up for her; she can do it herself. What the hell color do you think those Panthers ARE, anyway? her LINE stays.

Please answer me re the KKK and how you'd be saying "No big deal" if they intimidated voters...thanks.

Joe said...

Ducky: Up to now, I thought you were just a liberal who liked to stir the pot for discussion's sake. I knew you were extreme left, but that's OK, 'cause in America you can be a leftist if you want to be.

But your objection to voter intimidation being "...a single clown..." and therefore not important shows who you really are.

If a single person is caused a moment of discomfort while trying to cast a legal vote in this country, it is a travesty and must be stopped.

While it may have been "...a single clown..." or perhaps a few, who did the intimidating, it is clear that many people were intimidated, not just one.

That, sir, is a travesty and only a fool would think otherwise.

Do you know what that makes you?

Sam Huntington said...

I think it is possible that Ducky has sh.. for brains. Z has already provided evidence that voter intimidation was widespread in 2008 --in both primary and general elections. What 'single event' is he speaking about?

I honestly think Ducky is the pro-Abortion poster child: 'Cure Idiocy In Your Own Life Time.'

Faith said...

That was quite a video clip of someone trying to sound like she makes sense comparing the discriminatory effect of the poll tax to having to prove your identity. Huh?

Ducky's here said...

z, I would say that the klansman should be removed. And in Massachusetts I would simply mention it to the cop who is at all polling places and have him removed.

Apparently in Philly they had to make the call to the station to have someone come and remove the nutlog.

Here the voices ... that's your cornermen yelling "stay down" because in several of your replies here you have some real bigotry not at all far under the surface.



The response to this rather trivial incident in which a single person was outside a single polling site and was removed after the police received complaints has been disgraceful.

Ducky's here said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ducky's here said...

... oh, before Joe gets here with the proofreading police, I realize the correct spelling is "hear".

Ducky's here said...

Joe, you appear to be completely ignorant about the case. Not unusual for a right winger.

The case is against a single individual carrying a night stick who was peacefully removed from a site after complaints. Okay.

Now anyone who can read between the lines knows what the real issue is here. In the words of Cube, "too many are ignoring the black elephant in the room".

So let's see, I've been called a fool and a s--- for brains by a couple of racists. Pitch till you win, Joe but you know what's happening here as well as I do.
Oh, and I'm a leftist not a liberal.

Z said...

Ducky"Not unusual for a right winger."
STOP.

As for the case, you haven't watched the video, you don't understand longrange implications and ..fine!
Just don't insult US for feeling very different about it.

Z said...

Odd, that same friend I mentioned earlier who reads but doesn't comment here read my account of the very odd voting situation last time I voted and she said the very same thing happened at her precinct in 2008...not the old little ladies who usually work, but a family we know happen to know...who weren't very polite, apparently.
Well, I guess the Dems really do 'work it', don't they. which is fair and legal, if it's legal.

cube said...

For the first time ever one of my comments has provoked the duckster. Oy!

If ducky knew the particulars of my life, he'd NEVER assume I was a racist.

That said, I'm just fed up with these "revolutionary" morons being allowed to say unspeakable things about killing us and our babies, and we can't even use the word "black" in a sentence? I don't think so. Sorry ducky, we feel that we have the right to say what we want, when we want, without caring what you and other liberals think.

Leticia said...

I think we are going to have carry mace, taser guns and full body armor to hit the voting booths.

Nothing will deter me from voting this November.

Z said...

Leticia, nothing might deter us, but fraud is done when we're not looking. :-(

Cube: not being a racist means you must never discuss race, that you can't say the word BLACK, that Blacks can never be wrong OR racist, and you need to believe all minorities are just plain too stupid or lazy to make it on their own...don't you know that? :-)
Thanks for your comment.

cube said...

I hear ya, Z. Funny how there are two playing fields, eh?

Anonymous said...

"Now anyone who can read between the lines knows what the real issue is here. In the words of Cube, "too many are ignoring the black elephant in the room"."

Really Ducky? In that case, please explain the difference between a "black Bush" and a black elephant". Is it the word black that offends you? If so, you ought to take your own advice. Or am I just reading beteen the lines.


Pris

Z said...

Pris..BINGO! Glad you caught that, I'd missed it. Ducky very often says BLACK BUSH about OBAMA...:-)

Cube...apparently!
by the way, I was single for a LONG time before I married Mr. Z and actually contemplated adopting a mixed race child... but, if I mention this hear, I'd probably sound patronizing and condescending to Ducky, now, right?...trying to dig myself out from my RACIST LEANINGS? :=)

Hey, you have GOT to try that Lahmajoon recipe and let me know..it's SO SO SO EASY and SO good! :-)

Joe said...

Ducky: "Oh, and I'm a leftist not a liberal."

First thing you've said that I completely agree with...just like I said.

At first, I DID think you were just a liberal. But, as I said, I was wrong. You are a dyed in the wool leftist.

And the issue was intimidation at the polls. Which the guy with the stick and his buddy behind him WERE doing.

He was removed AFTER complaints, when he should have been removed withing 10 seconds of arriving on the scene with his stick.

Three strikes. You're out!

Deborah on the Bayside said...

Pris, well spoken! So many mouths spouting off about profiling in Arizona. Now mute as mice about this insidiously ugly side of paternalism.

A "get everyone into the polls" lefty knocked on my door to solicit me to get on that bandwagon.

Boy was she stunned when I asked her why would I do such a thing (helping little old ladies and infirm being different of course) for people who were ignorant on the issues (a point SHE had established).

As if it didn't matter and just getting into the voting booth was the holy grail of civic duty. I asked her point blank "why would you want ANYONE to vote on any issue unless they were fully informed and UNDERSTOOD THE RAMIFICATIONS of their decisions? She stared at me slack jawed and weakly bleated her mantra of "getting voters to the polls."

Ducky - has completely ignored the point. And left out the details that matter. History turns on such actions. And, Z, you're spot on about the clansman. Interesting that they have police at the polls in Massachusetts. Wonder why?

Doubt Mr. Holder would be so blithe about a character in a white sheet and hood at the polls.

Cube - the black elephant is a great visual. Not racist in the slightest.

Always On Watch said...

Duck appears to imply that voter intimidation by the left doesn't matter.

Why am I not surprised?

And is that fear I smell from some of his comments, here and at other postings? The fear being the possibility that the leftist agenda will get ousted at the ballot box.

Anonymous said...

"So many mouths spouting off about profiling in Arizona. Now mute as mice about this insidiously ugly side of paternalism"

Thanks DB, I so agree with your remarks here. Paternalism is truly insidious. It's an example of elitism.

The left has dealt in this for decades. They use people with promises they won't keep. They need to create need, and dependence.

Most people who deal in it, I think, don't realize that they imply with their paternalism, that they are superior to those they condescend to.

Pris