Tweet
The Game Is Over
The New Media Journal
Paul R. Hollrah
3/9/2013
Excerpt:
Part of what made life in the United States such a joy, and what made people from almost every corner of the Earth risk life and limb to come here is that, within our shores, literally anything was possible... or at least it used to be.
In 1840, as French aristocrat and social philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville traveled the United States, observing the American experiment in action, he wrote, "In the United States, as soon as several inhabitants have taken an opinion or an idea they wish to promote in society, they seek each other out and unite together once they have made contact. From that moment, they are no longer isolated but have become a power seen from afar whose activities serve as an example and whose words are heeded."
What de Tocqueville was describing is what we refer to as political parties. And so long as the American people had hope that they could take a shared opinion or idea, promote it, and see it come to fruition, then anything was possible. It represented what Thomas Jefferson described in the Declaration of Independence as the "Pursuit of Happiness." But what if the ability to join together to promote an opinion or an idea is seriously restricted by law or by the courts, what then?
In a majority decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, in a case argued on December 13, 2010, Circuit Judge Joseph A. Greenaway, Jr. wrote as follows:
"In 1982, the Republican National Committee ("RNC") and the Democrat National Committee ("DNC") entered into a consent decree (the "Decree" or ("Consent Decree"), which is national in scope, limiting the RNC's ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court's approval in advance..."
Yes, although some may find it hard to believe, for the past 30 years the Republican Party has been prohibited by court decree from doing what was necessary to protect itself and the sanctity of the ballot from the fraudulent practices of the Democrat Party.
According to background provided in the Court decision, the facts are these:
"During the 1981 New Jersey gubernatorial election, the RNC allegedly created a voter challenge list by mailing sample ballots to individuals in precincts with a high percentage of racial or ethnic minority registered voters and, then, including individuals whose postcards were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge at the polls..."
Yes, this is the same State of New Jersey where Democrats regularly send operatives to mental hospitals and nursing homes with stacks of absentee ballots in hand. Undeterred by hospital staff, they sign up patients and help them to vote a straight Democrat ticket. One woman from Wilkes Barre, Pennsylvania, after visiting her sister in a New Jersey Mental Hospital, expressed shock that her sister had voted, and that she had voted a straight Democrat absentee ballot. She said, "My God! This is a woman who insists that God tells her what brand of shampoo to use."
In Louisiana, during the 1986 congressional elections, the Republican National Committee allegedly created a voter challenge list by mailing letters to African American voters and, then, included individuals whose letters were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge. A number of voters, who apparently did not live at the addresses listed on the voter registration rolls, brought a suit against the RNC in Louisiana state court. In response to a discovery request, the RNC produced a memorandum in which its Midwest Political Director stated to its Southern Political Director that "this program will eliminate at least 60,000-80,000 folks from the rolls... If it's a close race, which I'm assuming it is, this could keep the black vote down considerably."
In 1987, The Republican National Committee was again before the District Court as a result of the alleged violations in the 1986 congressional elections in Louisiana. At that point the Court modified the Consent Decree:
"The modification... added a pre-clearance provision that prohibits the RNC from assisting or engaging in ballot security activities unless the RNC submits the program to the Court and to the (Democrat National Committee) with 20 days notice and the Court determines that the program complies with the Consent Decree and applicable law."
In 1990, Democrats brought a suit alleging that the RNC violated the Consent Decree by participating in a North Carolina Republican Party program. The DNC alleged that the RNC had violated the Decree by participating in a program in which postcards were sent to 150,000 residents of predominantly African-American precincts. The postcards contained a mere warning that it was a "federal crime to knowingly give false information about your name, residence, or period of residence to an election official."
On November 3, 2008, the RNC submitted a Motion to Vacate or Modify the Consent decree, suggesting that, since the 1987 modification, the enactment of a number of fraud-friendly laws, including the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (the so-called "Motor Voter" law), same-day registration laws, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, and the Help America Vote Act of 2002, increased the risk of voter fraud and decreased the risk of voter intimidation. An evidentiary hearing was held on May 5-6, 2009, and on December 1, 2009, the District Court denied the motion to vacate the Decree.
Lest any of us who have contributed financially to the Republican Party assume that our money is well-spent, we might be greatly disabused by what the Court wrote in its findings relative to the December 2010 filing:
"The RNC asks that our Court vacate a decree that has as its central purpose preventing the intimidation and suppression of minority voters. When, as here, a party voluntarily enters into a consent decree not once, but twice, and then waits over a quarter of a century before filing a motion to vacate or modify the decree, such action gives us pause. Further, the RNC, with the advice of counsel, twice chose to limit indefinitely its ability to engage in certain activities enumerated in the Decree by entering into a decree with no expiration date."
It is common knowledge that vote fraud is a way of life for Democrats, yet the leaders of the Republican Party appear almost totally oblivious to the implications of the fraud. For example, in 2000, preliminary RNC research uncovered 858 instances of New York City residents who appeared to double vote in various combinations of eleven states. Four hundred and two New Yorkers voted both in New York and in Florida. In one of the greatest understatements of the century, RNC spokesman Kevin Sheridan, said, "We suspect there are many, many more."
The Bush-Cheney victory margin in Florida in 2000 was only 537 votes. Without the double voting by Democrat "snow birds," the Bush-Cheney margin would likely have been several thousand votes. But the RNC did nothing to bring the perpetrators to justice? It wouldn't be necessary to put all double voters behind bars. If the RNC were to see to it that only five or six of them went to jail for six months or a year, that alone would serve as a major deterrent.
In the State of Ohio, a black woman from the Cincinnati area, Melowese Richardson, an Obama supporter, has admitted to having voted at least six times in the 2012 General Election. The Hamilton County Board of Elections is now investigating Ms. Richardson's alleged fraud, along with 18 other cases of Election Day fraud. If the board finds that fraud was committed in any of the 19 cases they will be referred for prosecution. Melowese Richardson must go to jail.
As matters now stand, in the absence of a strong Conservative Party, the Republican Party is mankind's last best hope for the future of western civilization. But the Republican Party is an army without a general. It has no leadership. The only real leadership the party has is to be found in the state capitals where 31 Republican governors demonstrate every day what true leadership is all about. But a few dozen regimental commanders are insufficient to win a war.
........................................
View the complete article at:
http://newmediajournal.us/indx.php/item/8626
The New Media Journal
Paul R. Hollrah
3/9/2013
Excerpt:
Part of what made life in the United States such a joy, and what made people from almost every corner of the Earth risk life and limb to come here is that, within our shores, literally anything was possible... or at least it used to be.
In 1840, as French aristocrat and social philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville traveled the United States, observing the American experiment in action, he wrote, "In the United States, as soon as several inhabitants have taken an opinion or an idea they wish to promote in society, they seek each other out and unite together once they have made contact. From that moment, they are no longer isolated but have become a power seen from afar whose activities serve as an example and whose words are heeded."
What de Tocqueville was describing is what we refer to as political parties. And so long as the American people had hope that they could take a shared opinion or idea, promote it, and see it come to fruition, then anything was possible. It represented what Thomas Jefferson described in the Declaration of Independence as the "Pursuit of Happiness." But what if the ability to join together to promote an opinion or an idea is seriously restricted by law or by the courts, what then?
In a majority decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, in a case argued on December 13, 2010, Circuit Judge Joseph A. Greenaway, Jr. wrote as follows:
"In 1982, the Republican National Committee ("RNC") and the Democrat National Committee ("DNC") entered into a consent decree (the "Decree" or ("Consent Decree"), which is national in scope, limiting the RNC's ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court's approval in advance..."
Yes, although some may find it hard to believe, for the past 30 years the Republican Party has been prohibited by court decree from doing what was necessary to protect itself and the sanctity of the ballot from the fraudulent practices of the Democrat Party.
According to background provided in the Court decision, the facts are these:
"During the 1981 New Jersey gubernatorial election, the RNC allegedly created a voter challenge list by mailing sample ballots to individuals in precincts with a high percentage of racial or ethnic minority registered voters and, then, including individuals whose postcards were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge at the polls..."
Yes, this is the same State of New Jersey where Democrats regularly send operatives to mental hospitals and nursing homes with stacks of absentee ballots in hand. Undeterred by hospital staff, they sign up patients and help them to vote a straight Democrat ticket. One woman from Wilkes Barre, Pennsylvania, after visiting her sister in a New Jersey Mental Hospital, expressed shock that her sister had voted, and that she had voted a straight Democrat absentee ballot. She said, "My God! This is a woman who insists that God tells her what brand of shampoo to use."
In Louisiana, during the 1986 congressional elections, the Republican National Committee allegedly created a voter challenge list by mailing letters to African American voters and, then, included individuals whose letters were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge. A number of voters, who apparently did not live at the addresses listed on the voter registration rolls, brought a suit against the RNC in Louisiana state court. In response to a discovery request, the RNC produced a memorandum in which its Midwest Political Director stated to its Southern Political Director that "this program will eliminate at least 60,000-80,000 folks from the rolls... If it's a close race, which I'm assuming it is, this could keep the black vote down considerably."
In 1987, The Republican National Committee was again before the District Court as a result of the alleged violations in the 1986 congressional elections in Louisiana. At that point the Court modified the Consent Decree:
"The modification... added a pre-clearance provision that prohibits the RNC from assisting or engaging in ballot security activities unless the RNC submits the program to the Court and to the (Democrat National Committee) with 20 days notice and the Court determines that the program complies with the Consent Decree and applicable law."
In 1990, Democrats brought a suit alleging that the RNC violated the Consent Decree by participating in a North Carolina Republican Party program. The DNC alleged that the RNC had violated the Decree by participating in a program in which postcards were sent to 150,000 residents of predominantly African-American precincts. The postcards contained a mere warning that it was a "federal crime to knowingly give false information about your name, residence, or period of residence to an election official."
On November 3, 2008, the RNC submitted a Motion to Vacate or Modify the Consent decree, suggesting that, since the 1987 modification, the enactment of a number of fraud-friendly laws, including the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (the so-called "Motor Voter" law), same-day registration laws, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, and the Help America Vote Act of 2002, increased the risk of voter fraud and decreased the risk of voter intimidation. An evidentiary hearing was held on May 5-6, 2009, and on December 1, 2009, the District Court denied the motion to vacate the Decree.
Lest any of us who have contributed financially to the Republican Party assume that our money is well-spent, we might be greatly disabused by what the Court wrote in its findings relative to the December 2010 filing:
"The RNC asks that our Court vacate a decree that has as its central purpose preventing the intimidation and suppression of minority voters. When, as here, a party voluntarily enters into a consent decree not once, but twice, and then waits over a quarter of a century before filing a motion to vacate or modify the decree, such action gives us pause. Further, the RNC, with the advice of counsel, twice chose to limit indefinitely its ability to engage in certain activities enumerated in the Decree by entering into a decree with no expiration date."
It is common knowledge that vote fraud is a way of life for Democrats, yet the leaders of the Republican Party appear almost totally oblivious to the implications of the fraud. For example, in 2000, preliminary RNC research uncovered 858 instances of New York City residents who appeared to double vote in various combinations of eleven states. Four hundred and two New Yorkers voted both in New York and in Florida. In one of the greatest understatements of the century, RNC spokesman Kevin Sheridan, said, "We suspect there are many, many more."
The Bush-Cheney victory margin in Florida in 2000 was only 537 votes. Without the double voting by Democrat "snow birds," the Bush-Cheney margin would likely have been several thousand votes. But the RNC did nothing to bring the perpetrators to justice? It wouldn't be necessary to put all double voters behind bars. If the RNC were to see to it that only five or six of them went to jail for six months or a year, that alone would serve as a major deterrent.
In the State of Ohio, a black woman from the Cincinnati area, Melowese Richardson, an Obama supporter, has admitted to having voted at least six times in the 2012 General Election. The Hamilton County Board of Elections is now investigating Ms. Richardson's alleged fraud, along with 18 other cases of Election Day fraud. If the board finds that fraud was committed in any of the 19 cases they will be referred for prosecution. Melowese Richardson must go to jail.
As matters now stand, in the absence of a strong Conservative Party, the Republican Party is mankind's last best hope for the future of western civilization. But the Republican Party is an army without a general. It has no leadership. The only real leadership the party has is to be found in the state capitals where 31 Republican governors demonstrate every day what true leadership is all about. But a few dozen regimental commanders are insufficient to win a war.
........................................
View the complete article at:
http://newmediajournal.us/indx.php/item/8626