I'm writing this from a little resort town in Arkansas called Fairfield Bay. A little north and east of Little Rock, it's a little resort town that seems to have retirees as its main population. Close by, there are a number of small Arkansas towns like Clinton and Shirley, full of ordinary Americans.
The door that leads outside has a tiny little porch with two chairs on it. The room itself overlooks what looks to be a park of some kind, perhaps even a golf course. The trees have seen the last of their green foliage turn rusty red, dull yellow, and burnt orange in anticipation of winter's arrival. There's a definite chill in the air.
But here in my room, it's warm, almost hot. I've got a stack of books that I've started reading but haven't finished, due to this or that reason. There's no Internet here, and the TV has only a few channels that it can get. So what am I doing? Yes, trying to pound out another column for you guys.
The sacrifices I make.
Anyway, I can't really bring any new insight to what is in the news right now. I've realized that I'm not really somebody who has original thoughts, such as my favorite blogger Morgan Freeberg. I don't know how Morgan and other bloggers do it, but they are able to look at a situation and put their own stamp on it.
Then there are people who are able to summarize a situation in a sentence or two that makes you think and then links to an article that explains the situation more deeply. Here, I'm thinking of Instapundit, but his style has been copied by countless others.
Although one of the things that I do well is fisking, my favorite target Gene Lyons' weekly column has been removed from the only state-wide newspaper in Arkansas to make some room for John Brummett. As much as I'd like to fisk Brummett's columns, he doesn't seem to be as insane and deeply partisan as Lyons' columns usually were. Plus, I want to give him the benefit of the doubt for a little while longer. Being as liberal as Brummett is, though, I'm sure the insanity and partisanship will start popping up before the Presidential election is over.
And this brings me (finally!) to the subject of this column. One of the books that I am reading right now is J. Christian Adams' book INJUSTICE. Adams is a former lawyer in the Voting Rights Section of the Department of Justice who took part in the lawsuit of voter intimidation against two members of the New Black Panther Party. Adams reveals in his book how the Department of Justice had already won the case when they were told to drop it entirely.
If you are shaking your head in amazement at that last sentence, you are not alone.
Adams also writes about a prior case that happened in the early 2000's that involved voter fraud. Or perhaps that is vote fraud. Let me sidetrack here for a second to explain that last comment. A letter that ran in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette was from a booger-eating mohron who was ranting that the only reason Republicans wanted a law that made it mandatory to show photo ID at the voting booth was to prevent minorities from voting. Apparently, minorities don't carry identification. This must explain why they keep winding up in prison.
This booger-eating mohron stated that there is no instances of voter fraud, then states that there are some examples of vote fraud. I think the distinction he was making is that there is not an effort made by individual people to commit fraud in the voting booth, but there is an effort by groups to commit fraud by stuffing ballot boxes and other fraudulent practices. I'll give you three guesses as who he most likely thinks is most responsible for this kind of vote fraud, and the first two don't count.
Anyway, the instances of vote fraud that Adams documents in his book are disgusting to read about. The short version is that people of a certain political party were showing up at people's houses and helped them fill out their ballot, or showed up at the voting places and helped people fill out their ballots. Or perhaps I should say, 'helped' them fill out their ballots, if you catch my drift.
Now, you would think that the Department of Justice would come down hard on that kind of practice, and the DOJ under the Bush Administration did. The DOJ under Attorney General Eric Holder, however, has not.
Oh! Did I forget to mention that in the instances that Adams documents, the racial majority is black and the racial minority is whites? The reasoning that was given to Adams is that blacks cannot discriminate against whites, and the DOJ is not interested in pursuing cases of voter fraud against a population minority of whites.
Adams further documents how the Voting Rights Section is made up almost entirely of people who have been hired because of their activist background. Many have been hired directly from their work in the NAA(L)CP, the SEIU, the AFSCME, or other liberal activist groups. Thus, the Voting Rights Section's agenda is not to make sure that everyone has an equal opportunity to vote, but that certain sections of the population are given more of a opportunity to vote than others.
Does Attorney General Eric Holder know this? Where do you think their agenda came from? What about President Obama, does the Most Transparent Administration Ever know about this kind of advocacy? Not only knows about it, but condones it.
So what are the implications of all of this? Quite simply, I am very concerned about the upcoming 2012 Presidential election. I suspected in 2008 that there was some vote fraud, but our candidate was so weak that there really was no need to look into such charges. Sarah Palin's involvement was the only reason I myself voted.
So, if we don't want another Obama term, we need to energize the conservative base. Just because Obama has low poll numbers now, doesn't mean that he will come Election Day. Even if Obama has low poll numbers on Election Day, that still doesn't mean that he will lose. We can't take anything for granted. The national Republican Party needs to put the pedal to the metal starting now and not let up until the day after Election Day.
We need to make sure that this race isn't even close, that there is no question who the victor is. We need to select not only the most conservative candidate, but also the candidate that can reach across and forge an alliance with the middle, just like Reagan did in 1980. We can do this by selecting the most conservative candidate who will remain conservative.
That, I think, is the key. To not just be seen as conservative, but to actually BE conservative. Someone who will stand for their principles, but is not unreasonable. That their principles are who they are, not who they are perceived to be. The middle will respect that, the conservatives in the country will love it, and the liberals... well, who cares what the liberals do?
We do this, and we will win. We don't, and all of America loses.
Please bookmark!
No comments:
Post a Comment