Showing posts with label democrats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democrats. Show all posts

Saturday, June 16, 2012

Articles: Obama: Going Rogue

Remarkably, President Obama has gone rogue, running as no other Democrat before him, openly declaring war on America. The opposing armies are Obama's entitlement-minded-social-justice-zealots vs. hardworking Americans -- patriots who love their country and respect our Constitution.

Please allow me to explain.  Every election, Democrats never campaign on who they really are.  They never reveal their we-know-better-than-you-how-to-run-your-life, intrusive big-government agenda.  Instead, these great pretenders whip out the old "moderate" mask, disguising their "extreme liberal" intentions until after the election.  Obama won the presidency in 2008 pretending to be a moderate.

To win re-election, Obama has "gone rogue," boldly going where no Democrat has gone before.  Obama in essence has said, screw it.  I am not going to masquerade as a moderate.  I am going to campaign as a full blown anti-capitalism, anti-Constitution progressive/socialist!

Obama believes he and his minions... Read full story here

Friday, June 15, 2012

38 reasons why Obama should not be re-elected

Editor’s note: The following column is a work of collaboration by me and some friends of mine – some of whom feared retribution for speaking so plainly.

Looking back over the past four years, read this to better understand where we are going as a country under the leadership of Barack Obama.

  • WHEN he refused to disclose who donated money to his election campaign, as other candidates had done, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he received endorsements from people like Louis Farrakhan, Moammar Gadhafi and Hugo Chavez, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN it was pointed out that he was a total newcomer and had absolutely no experience at anything except community organizing, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he chose friends and acquaintances such as Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn who were revolutionary radicals, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN his voting record in the Illinois Senate and in the U.S. Senate came into question, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he refused to wear a flag lapel pin and did so only after a public outcry, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN people started treating him as a Messiah and children in schools were taught to sing his praises, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he stood with his hands over his groin area for the playing of the National Anthem and Pledge of Allegiance, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he surrounded himself in the White House with advisers who were pro-gun control, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual marriage and wanting to curtail freedom of speech to silence the opposition, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he said he favors sex education in kindergarten, including homosexual indoctrination, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN his personal background was either scrubbed or hidden and nothing could be found about him, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN the place of his birth was called into question, and he refused to produce a birth certificate, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he had an association in Chicago with Tony Rezko – a man of questionable character and who is now in prison and had helped Obama to a sweet deal on the purchase of his home – people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN it became known that George Soros, a multi-billionaire globalist, spent a ton of money to get him elected, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he started appointing White House czars that were radicals, revolutionaries and even avowed Marxist/Communists, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he stood before the nation and told us that his intentions were to “fundamentally transform this nation” into something else, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN it became known that he had trained ACORN workers in Chicago and served as an attorney for ACORN, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he appointed Cabinet members and several advisers who were tax cheats and socialists, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he appointed a science czar, John Holdren, who believes in forced abortions, mass sterilizations and seizing babies from teen mothers, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he appointed Cass Sunstein as regulatory czar, who believes in “explicit consent,” harvesting human organs without family consent and allowing animals to be represented in court, while banning all hunting, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he appointed Kevin Jennings, a homosexual and organizer of a group called Gay, Lesbian, Straight, Education Network as safe schools czar and it became known that he had a history of bad advice to teenagers, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he appointed Mark Lloyd as diversity czar, who believes in curtailing free speech, taking from one and giving to another to spread the wealth and who supports Hugo Chavez, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN Valerie Jarrett, an avowed socialist, was selected as Obama’s senior White House adviser, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN Anita Dunn, White House communications director, said Mao Zedong was her favorite philosopher and the person she turned to most for inspiration, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he appointed Carol Browner, a well-known socialist as global warming czar working on cap-and-trade as the nation’s largest tax, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he appointed Van Jones, an ex-con and avowed socialist, as green energy czar who was forced to resign, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN Tom Daschle, Obama’s pick for health and human services secretary could not be confirmed because he was a tax cheat, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he bowed to the king of Saudi Arabia, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he traveled around the world criticizing America and never once talking of her greatness, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he upset the Europeans by removing plans for a missile-defense system against the Russians, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he played politics in Afghanistan by not sending troops requested by field commanders to win the war, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he started spending us into a debt that was so big we could not pay it off, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he took a huge spending bill under the guise of stimulus and used it to pay off organizations, unions and individuals that got him elected, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he took over insurance companies, car companies, banks, etc., people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he took away student loans from the banks and required they go through the government, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he designed plans to take over the health-care system and put it under government control, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he set into motion a plan to take over the control of all energy in the United States through cap-and-trade, people said it didn’t matter.
  • WHEN he finally completed his transformation of America into a socialist state, people began to wake up – but it was too late.
The last paragraph alone is not yet cast in stone. You and I will write that paragraph. 

38 reasons why Obama should not be re-elected

Immigration policy shows Barack Obama is in 'full panic mode,' Rush Limbaugh says - POLITICO.com

Rush Limbaugh on Friday said the Obama administration’s new immigration policy is proof that the president is in “full panic mode” about the upcoming election.

“The regime today told the border agents: ‘If you catch young illegals, let ‘em go and grant ‘em work permits.’ No more deportation of illegal immigrants. They are to be given work permits and they can stay in the country,” Limbaugh said, according to a transcript of his show. “So what this is, is ‘Catch, Release, Vote.’”

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Sorry, We’re not buying the Bush Excuse

Sorry, We’re not buying the Bush Excuse http://commonsenseinaradicalage.blogspot.com/2012/06/sorry-were-not-buying-bush-excuse.html http://commonsenseinaradicalage.blogspot.com/  Wed, 13 Jun 2012 18:07:00 GMT  

You cannot blame Bush for Solyndra or the economy, simply because it sounds so much better, than “I, the most arrogant poc to ever enter the White House (and, there have been some real stinkers before you), have created an economy that would make dogs howl.” It’s not that simple. Worse than that, Obama—you pathetic loser—it’s a lie. Here’s the deal. You set out to “fundamentally change America,” in short, destroy her, and you’ve damn near accomplished your purpose. We’ve listened to you whine. We’ve heard you lie, and now; you're grasping at straws. You’re done. It’s over. The country you chose to change has more backbone and more ethics than you will ever know, and you’ve lost through simpering, whining, and lying.

George Bush started the bank bailouts, not the automobile industry bailouts, not the stimulus for shovel ready projects that were, by no man’s calculation save your own, shovel ready. He didn't transform health care into a Nanny state dream that no nation could support, monetarily. He didn’t stop the drilling of oil, but left behind policies making it possible for you take credit for the amount of oil being drilled today. He didn’t react to Katrina for two days. You didn’t react to the BP oil rig disaster for 45 days. He didn’t promise to pay for low-income folk’s gas, rent, mortgage, or groceries. You did, and you didn’t deliver because you cannot deliver without taking money from someone else’ pocket.

He didn’t promise to redistribute other people’s income. You did, and what most of us would like to know is, “Who the hell died and made you a god that can decide who gets to keep their income and who has to forfeit to accomplish your goals?”

The Main-Stream Media—not to be mistaken with legitimate news agencies—has declared your foreign policy “The Best that ever Was!” Yes, thanks a lot you stupid jerk, now the whole world knows we have a wimp in the oval office that is willing to bow down to thugs and hoods overseas. You’ve claimed—all by yourself to hear you tell it—that you killed a man who died in Tora Bora in 2002 from kidney failure…who you had those men kill, is beyond most of us; however, no blame goes to them. They were simply following orders. Yesterday, another one of your “sure kills” rose from the dead. Are we surprised? Not in the least.

Today, you believe that the American people have a short attention span, and that we will forget what you’ve done to our beautiful nation, but don’t count on it!! Your arrogance has you insisting that you be given the respect due to a president, but you have not earned it. The only thing you’ve truly earned is a one-way ticket home…and most of us, to this day, are really not sure where that home is, because you were given a free pass and have never had to prove anything.

We hear all the cries of “racism," and it falls on deaf ears. One, you’re half white, and two, your policies and not your skin color are what we abhor. Racism has nothing to do with what is wrong with this nation. Our country has been, and will be, the only country in the world that won’t judge a man’s actions by his color but simply by what he has chosen to do. Your actions speak volumes, while your words are hollow and without meaning. Your lies are another thing. Those may seal your fate, yet.

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

NoisyRoom.net » Blog Archive » Communist Defector Speaks Out on America’s Marxist Future


A top communist defector is warning of an unprecedented “alliance” between the Democratic Party and the Communist Party, reflected in the CPUSA’s endorsement of Barack Obama for president in 2008 and the party’s continued support for Democratic Party policies. But is this warning going to be too hot to handle for the media? And the Republicans?

Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa, the highest-ranking official ever to have defected from the former Soviet bloc, says in an article for PJMedia that any doubt that the Democratic and the Communist parties had secretly joined forces was erased in 2009, “when Van Jones, part of a left fringe of declared communists, became the White House’s green jobs czar.”

Obama aide Valerie Jarrett had disclosed at a left-wing bloggers convention that “we,” apparently referring to herself and President Obama, had hired Jones for the job. However, Jones was fired when an outcry developed over his communist background, and the media quickly dropped any probes into Jones’ White House contacts.

Pacepa, who served as a top aide in the Romanian communist regime, tells Accuracy in Media, “The Democratic Party has become dangerously infected with the Marxism virus. I recognize the symptoms because I once lived through them, and I believe it is my obligation as an American citizen to help the conservative movement to prevent any further spread of Marxism in my adopted country.”

He adds that he is personally convinced that Obama is a Marxist.

Read full article: NoisyRoom.net » Blog Archive » Communist Defector Speaks Out on America’s Marxist Future

Saturday, June 9, 2012

AP Panic Is Evident Over Obama's 'Private Sector Is Just Fine' Comment, Non-Walkback

AP Panic Is Evident Over Obama's 'Private Sector Is Just Fine' Comment, Non-Walkback http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2012/06/08/ap-panic-evident-over-obamas-private-sector-just-fine-comment-non-walkba http://newsbusters.org/  Sat, 09 Jun 2012 03:47:49 GMT  

Today at a press conference, President Barack Obama said that "we’ve created 4.3 million jobs over the last 27 months, over 800,000 just this year alone. The private sector is doing fine. Where we’re seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government ..."

Later, in a cleanup attempt, in what the press is claiming is a walkback, Obama really didn't walk it back: "Listen, it is absolutely clear that the economy is not doing fine. That's the reason I had the press conference. ... what I've been saying consistently over the last year, we've actually seen some good momentum in the private sector. We've seen 4.3 million jobs created -- 800,000 this year alone -- record corporate profits. And so that has not been the biggest drag on the economy." He never pulled back from saying that "the private sector is doing fine." The abject panic at the Associated Press is evident in tonight's report by Ken Thomas and Philip Elliott (HT to a NewsBusters tipster; bolds and numbered tags are mine):


Obama gets grief for saying private sector 'fine'

President Barack Obama made Mitt Romney's day by declaring "the private sector is doing fine" and opening himself to the accusation that he - not the rich Republican [1] - is the one who is out of touch with reality. Obama quickly clarified his remark Friday but Republicans already had their teeth in it [2] and weren't letting go.

"Is he really that out of touch?" GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney asked as Obama's initial comments ricocheted through the presidential campaign.

Seeking to head off any damage, Obama backpedaled and declared it is "absolutely clear that the economy is not doing fine." [3] While there had been some "good momentum" in the private sector, Obama said, public sector growth lagged behind, making it imperative that Congress act on his proposals to hire more teachers and first-responders.

Obama's original six-word sentence, even if taken out of context, amounted to an unforced political error. The economy is the single biggest issue on voters' minds and a weak spot for him, given the nation's stubbornly high 8.2 percent unemployment rate.

Nearly every day, Obama finds himself having to defend his stewardship of an economy that has struggled to recover from the 2008 economic downturn and pleading with voters to stick with him because, he says, Romney would pursue policies that led to the recession.

But on Friday, Obama may have given his rival an opening. [4]

... Obama's comments at a White House news conference were reminiscent of Republican nominee John McCain's assertion in mid-September 2008 that the "fundamentals of our economy are strong," [5] just as the U.S. economy was melting down. Candidate Obama seized on those comments then. Now, as president, he was getting grief along similar lines.

... But while "doing fine" is in the eye of the beholder, Obama was correct that the job picture in the private sector is brighter than in the public sector. Since the recession officially ended in June 2009, private companies have added 3.1 million jobs. [6]

Notes (in how Thomas and Elliott might have discussed these matters among themselves):

[1] -- "Geez, we have to get something in here really quick about the fact that Romney is rich, even though it's totally irrelevant to our report."

[2] -- "We need a wild, out-of-control animal reference to make Republicans look like the unreasonable meanies."

[3] -- "We know this really isn't a backpedal, because he didn't admit that the private sector isn't fine, but we're going to pretend it is anyway. Those dummy subscribing publishers and broadcasters who use our content won't know any better."

[4] -- "Even though we know it's something Mitt Romney and Republicans will be driving a Mack Truck through for the next five months, let's just call it an 'opening.'"

[5] -- "We know that McCain was only talking about the economy's capabilities as opposed to where it actually stood, but we pounced on it when we had the chance. So let's use it now, even though Obama's out of touch flub is obviously different, as it clearly refers to his take on the private sector's current actual health."

[6] -- "Let's be sure not to tell anyone that 737,000 of those jobs are with temporary help services, that the number of part-time employees is at an all-time high of 28 million, that full-time employment is down by 1.6 million since Obama took office (and only up by 1.5 million since the recession ended almost three years ago), or that non-postal federal employment is up by over 140,000 since January 2009. And whatever we do, we can't say that states like Wisconsin which have addressed public sector employment costs have largely avoided public employee layoffs, while states like Ohio which tried but failed to rein in costs due to union activism are seeing public-sector layoffs all over the state."

Obama had a chance to simply say he was wrong, and didn't. It's too late now; for reasons far beyond what is detailed here, this seems destined to haunt him all the way until Election Day. The way Thomas and Elliott pathetically and desperately tried to construct their defenses at the Administration's Press clearly demonstrate that.

Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.

Friday, June 8, 2012

Liberalism is terminally ill

Liberalism is terminally ill http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/liberalism-is-terminally-ill/ http://www.wnd.com  Fri, 08 Jun 2012 23:37:41 GMT  

It’s been a pitiful sight – a sad week for progressives and “Big Union” Democrat-shilling thugs. In the wake of Tuesday night’s devastating recall smackdown in Wisconsin, tens of thousands of “Occupy” hippies across the nation have simply been too depressed to get stoned and not look for work.

On Wednesday the White House released President Obama’s detailed itinerary through October:

1. Worry

2. Lie

3. Obfuscate

4. Golf

5. Fundraise

6. Worry

Indeed, the president has much to worry about. No honest politico can deny that liberals’ Wisconsin debacle likely represents a shadow of things to come – a precursor to November.

Recall DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Shultz’s admission on CNN. In a rare moment of candor, she said Wisconsin was a “dry run” – a “test run” for the 2012 election. (A bit like the Titanic’s test run, as it turns out.)

Tuesday night Sarah Palin took to Fox News where she said that Scott Walker’s humiliating defeat of Tom Barrett, the DNC and heretofore-excessively-coddled-labor-union-leaders spells big trouble for little Barry. “Obama’s goose is cooked,” she said. “It’s the union leaders who need to be recalled.”

Does this mean the Democratic Party is not long for the world? That our two-party system is on its way out?

Of course not.

As long as there are voters who really, really want lots of free stuff from other people, there will be Democrats and Democratic politicians.

Still, what it does mean is that beyond the short-term political reality that Wisconsin presents a bleak forecast for Democrats in 2012 – liberalism itself (or “progressivism,” as the left euphemistically prefers) is terminally ill.

On Tuesday night, blogger David Burge of the Iowa Hawk blog “tweeted: “The principal delusion of liberals is that liberalism is popular. The principal delusion of conservatives is that liberalism is popular.”

Simple, yet profound.

Liberals should be afraid. They should be very afraid. The jig is up. Polls consistently show that Americans identify as conservative over liberal by a two-to-one margin. Wisconsin was an earthshaking manifestation of this reality.

But it was only a tremor.

There’s a distinct probability a massive quake awaits liberals when, later this month, the U.S. Supreme Court releases its decision on Obamacare. If this, both Obama’s and Democrats’ signature accomplishment, goes down, so too do the obtusely utopian, neo-Marxist dreams of the Democratic Party’s progressive base.

And in November? The tsunami.

Indeed, the political tectonic plates are shifting. Unsurprisingly, so-called “progressives” pretend it ain’t so.

Problem is, so do conservatives.

Stop it, both of you!

This is about worldview. This is about an epic clash between two irreconcilable, diametrically opposed socio-political philosophies. It’s a zero-sum game. Somebody wins and somebody loses.

On the one hand, we have secular-socialism, a cultural and political philosophy embraced by labor unions, Barack Obama, the base of the Democratic Party, the mainstream media and many of those controlling the reigns of our elitist institutions. It is “progressivism.”

This is a philosophy that, throughout history, has proven to be a serial failure. One need only look to Europe for the latest example. This secularist worldview is based loosely on the unattainable, redistributionist ramblings of Karl Marx, the father of communism.

It hates Christianity. It hates constitutionalism. It hates the precepts of individual liberty and responsibility codified throughout our nation’s founding documents. It embraces moral relativism and says there are no clear lines of demarcation between right and wrong.

It says that government is God and that as government giveth, government taketh away.

In sum: It’s garbage.

On the other hand we have the Judeo-Christian worldview. This is the socio-political philosophy embraced by our Founding Fathers. The historical record is unequivocal. It was within this framework that our U.S. Constitution was created. It is conservatism.

It says that we are endowed by our “Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

It embraces the virtues of fiscal responsibility, individual liberty and personal charity. It says there is black and white – right and wrong. It strives for less government and more freedom.

It acknowledges that there is a sovereign God – to whom we are all accountable – including both government and those whom “we the people” place in government.

It holds that as God giveth, God taketh away, and that you lying, cheating, ungodly snakes in Washington, D.C., better just take a step back and quick.

In sum: It is truth.

On Tuesday night, as the election returns came in and it became clear that Scott Walker was landsliding liberals and their union thugocracy, some progressive nut broke down, sobbing on camera and cried: “Democracy died tonight!”

Progressives, get this straight: On Tuesday night democracy didn’t die. Democracy was fulfilled in a powerful and transformative way.

And it’s only the beginning.

Liberals went to Wisconsin for a recall vote and a revolution broke out. We the people have spoken. Tea party? Yes. “Occupy”? Not so much.

Christian apologist C.S. Lewis wrote, “We all want progress, but if you’re on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.”

On Tuesday America hit Wisconsin and did an about-turn.

Judge lets lesbian cash in on 'marriage'

Judge lets lesbian cash in on 'marriage' http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/judge-lets-lesbian-cash-in-on-marriage/  http://www.wnd.com  Fri, 08 Jun 2012 21:53:19 GMT

 

Michael F. Haverluck

A judge in New York has taken advocacy for normalization of same-sex “marriage” to the next level, ruling this week that a major component of the federal Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional because it doesn’t provide the same financial benefits for homosexuals and lesbians.

The ruling from District Judge Barbara Jones was that a federal law defining marriage as a legal union between a man and a woman is not consistent with the U.S. Constitution.

“[DOMA] intrude[s] upon the states’ business of regulating domestic relations,” Jones stated in her decision this week. “That incursion skirts important principles of federalism and therefore cannot be legitimate, in this court’s view.”

There have been a number of judges who have ruled in favor of same-sex “marriage” ever since the Obama administration said it would refuse to defend the law of the land – the federal DOMA. Then Barack Obama recently announced his complete “evolution” to fully endorse same-sex “marriage.”

“President Obama has been actively promoting an agenda to undermine the nation’s marriage laws,” said Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver. “When you weaken the family, as President Obama is doing by his policies, you weaken society.”

The White House’s increased support of same-sex “marriage” is seen as emboldening more people over the past few years to sue the government by challenging existing laws under the federal DOMA.

In 2010, Edith Windsor filed the New York suit against the government to get back $363,053 that she was required to pay in federal tax on her deceased partner’s estate. The two were “married” as a same-sex couple in Canada two years before Windsor’s partner died in 2009. Windsor sued because she was ineligible to claim the unlimited marital deduction.

Striking down federal law, Jones included in her ruling that the government must reimburse Windsor the entire amount she was legally obligated to pay in estate tax.

And those supporting the homosexual agenda are hoping and claiming that the Empire State’s ruling against DOMA is more than a fad.

“[The decision is] another example of the trend of the judiciary continuing to see that treating same-sex couples differently than their heterosexual counterparts is not only wrong but goes against the laws of equality and justice here in the United States,” said Marriage Equality USA Executive Director Brian Silva.

The American Civil Liberties Union is endorsed the normalization of homosexual behavior.

“[This] adds to what has become an avalanche of decisions that DOMA can’t survive even the lowest level of scrutiny by the courts,” commented the ACLU director of the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Project, James Esseks.

Even New York State Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman applauded Wednesday’s ruling, calling it “a major step forward in the fight of equality.”

The decision came less than a week after a similar First Circuit ruling was issued in Boston that declared as unconstitutional a section of DOMA that reserved federal benefits only for couples in marriages that are between one man and one woman. On May 31, the federal court of appeals judge in Massachusetts – the first state to allow same-sex “marriage” in 2004 – affirmed a 2010 decision made by a federal judge.

But Staver says that this battle over DOMA is far from over, as the U.S. Court of Appeals indicates that the U.S. Supreme Court will have the final say in the Bay State’s matter.

“We have done our best to discern the direction of these precedents, but only the Supreme Court can finally decide this unique case,” Staver explained regarding the final outcome of the Massachusetts case, which he believes has been poorly judged.

“This ruling makes no sense. A state cannot dictate the kind of benefits the federal government must provide,” contested Staver. “If a state recognizes polygamy, does that mean that the federal government must also recognize multiple spouses? Absolutely not! This decision is the proverbial tail wagging the dog.”

Yet these types of decisions aren’t only seen on the East Coast. The tide of judicial activism to abolish marriage protections began earlier this year when a couple of federal judges in California ruled that DOMA works to violate “married” same-sex couples’ due-process rights. With the push over the years to legalize same-sex “marriage” much legislation has taken place across the United States.

Since 1996, more than 30 states have approved and instituted amendments to protect marriage as between one man and one woman, while eight states allow – or are in the final stages of allowing – same-sex “marriage,” including Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, New York, Iowa, Maryland and Washington State, as well as Washington, D.C. Legislation allowing same-sex “marriage” is not yet in effect in the latter two states, where referendums could determine their final fate.

Despite all of the political and judicial maneuverings over same-sex “marriage” that are taking place just months out from this year’s presidential election, pro-family advocates want America to remember the most important thing at stake here.

“Children fare best when raised with a mom and a dad,” Staver said. “Redefining marriage to something it was not intended to be weakens the family and is not in the best interest of children or society.”

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Democrats treat minorities like imbeciles

http://www.wnd.com Democrats treat minorities like imbeciles

One Angry Man writes that you need a valid photo ID to adopt a pet, buy a gun, create a bank account, get a credit card, write a check, obtain a passport, apply for a loan, build, buy, and close on a house, get married, buy beer or cigarettes, drive, get on a plane, get insurance, get a job, legally hunt or fish, rent a car, rent an apartment, rent a hotel room, get welfare, get Medicaid or Medicare, receive Social Security, buy a bus ticket, buy antihistamines at a drug store, walk into a bar, go to college, have your utilities turned on, get cable, pick up a package at the post office or from UPS and Federal Express, and have a prescription filled.

There are other things.

The mantra that “Republicans don’t want you to vote,” that actually showing a photo ID is some nefarious form of voter manipulation, is the slogan of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. That’s right: An organization whose goal is to “keep a Democratic majority in the Senate” actually believes that showing a valid photo ID at the polls is an attempt to stop Democrat voters from casting ballots for Democrats.

We really ought to ask ourselves why that is. The party made famous for its attempts to throw out military ballots (because military voters were more likely to vote for George W. Bush), the party that made courtroom manipulation of elections its stock in trade (yes, Al Franken, this means you) wants vote fraud to be easier, not harder.

The website dmv.org, “a privately owned website that is not owned or operated by any state government agency,” describes its mission as “aiming to simplify the lives of the online community. … [We] leverage what’s cool about the Web to create a community of drivers willing and wanting to share useful knowledge about DMV-related topics.” The site has collected a complete list of requirements for obtaining a photo identification in the United States, region by region.

“State-issued identification cards are a handy resource if you do not, or are not old enough to, carry a driver’s license,” reads the site. “Having some form of photo ID is critical in our world today; you need to be able to prove you are who you say you are in many situations. You’ll need a picture ID to board an airplane, get a job, set up bank accounts, and in order to make certain purchases.” The website even goes on to point out that several states allow you to renew your identification online.

What are the requirements for a non-driver’s license, a simple state photo ID, in New York, one of the most bureaucratic and controlled of states in the union? You need to fill out a form, then show a Social Security card and a birth certificate.

That’s it.

In California, you’ll do much the same. You’ll get your thumbprint taken and, in addition to your birth certificate, you’ll need to prove you’re in the state legally. There’s a long list of documents you could use to do this.

In the middle of the country, in Kansas, the requirements are again the same, although they sound less stringent. You must present two proof of identity documents and pay about $22 in fees (unless you’re a senior citizen, in which case the fee is $18, total). Your ID is then valid for six years and can be renewed at any driver’s license exam station. There’s a $12 fee for replacing a lost card.

Any reasonably productive, contributing member of society looks at these requirements and is wholly unimpressed. It’s EASY to get a photo ID. It’s inexpensive to get a photo ID. It’s even simple to get a photo ID … and this is a process governed by your state’s Department of Motor Vehicles, an institution whose methods and demands are almost never characterized as simple, easy, or cheap.

Despite this, Barack Hussein Obama’s racist, recklessly murderous attorney general, Eric Holder, believes voter ID laws – laws whose ONLY goal is to prevent voter fraud – are some form of Jim Crow. Mewling that “both overt and subtle forms of discrimination remain all too common and have not yet been relegated to the pages of history,” Holder pandered to a black audience late last month by telling them that voter identification “threatens” blacks’ right to vote across the country. The imagery is clear enough: We are expected to picture a bunch of white racist officials peering haughtily over tall tables at impoverished voters-of-color. Said voters probably have tattered hats in hand; they want nothing more than to engage in the democratic process and fulfill their civic responsibilities. Our fictitious officials will smile at them with reptilian menace before saying, “Why, of course you can vote. All you have to do is … show us your photo ID.” Thus foiled by corrupt and hateful people in power, our disenfranchised voters run, tears of disillusionment streaming down their cheeks, from the polling place.

How dare those monsters demand voters produce, on request, something those voters already use every day?

There is no functioning American citizen who does not have valid photo identification. The only people who can’t get such identification are those people who don’t have birth certificates and Social Security cards, which are also very easy to obtain if you were legally born in this country and thus eligible to vote. This begs the obvious question: If photo ID is easy and inexpensive to acquire, which it is, and if the only obstacle to getting it is the fact that you are not an American citizen, how could anyone conceivably consider voter ID racist or a tool of vote suppression?

The answer is simple. The Democrats are the party of vote fraud. They believe voter ID interferes with their frequent attempts to encourage felons, illegal aliens and dead people to vote for liberals. They also believe that persons of color are too stupid to obtain valid identification.

There is no other explanation. There is no other possible interpretation. http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/democrats-treat-minorities-like-imbeciles/
http://www.wnd.com
Enhanced by Zemanta