Democrats Stealing Democracy: Amnesty’s Role in the Destruction of America

Remember this, ANY law passed by liberal progressives ALWAYS has the EXACT OPPOSITE of its stated intent, and ALWAYS has a hidden agenda.  Look at the name of H.R. 3335 and what liberal scumbag racists like John Conyers CLAIM it will do, and why.

“Democracy Restoration Act.” – Democracy is a principal used by CIVILIZED societies to allow the expression of opinions by its citizens. For democracy to be successful, there must be some limits.  Most importantly, those who have demonstrated themselves to be UNCIVILIZED don’t get to play lest they drag the rest of us down with them.  Once you have chosen the career path of a criminal, you have forfeited the rights afforded to civilized people.  You don’t give democracy to CRIMINALS, which is exactly why our government is FAILING.  Our government is FULL OF CRIMINALS.

“The right of an individual who is a citizen of the United States to vote in any election for federal office shall not be denied or abridged because that individual has been convicted of a criminal offense unless such individual is serving a felony sentence in a correctional institution or facility at the time of the election.” – That person is in a “correctional institution” for a reason.  The reason that got them there forfeits their right to vote unless it is proven that they were wrongfully convicted.  Their “rights” are not being denied or abridged, they were forfeited by a conscious choice.

Advocates of the bill trumpet it as a civil rights issue and a matter of freedom, while pointing out that a disproportionate number of black and Hispanic Americans have been disenfranchised by laws restricting felons from voting. – Wrong again, liberals.  The only civil rights that were infringed upon here were the ones of the victims that the criminal trampled when he/she committed their crime.  As for the proportion of blacks and hispanics in jail, there is a higher percentage of them in jail because they are committing a higher percentage of the crimes.  This is the liberal/progressive approach to “justice.”  If someone walks into a post office and shoots 20 people, if the shooter is black or hispanic he is a victim because he was abused as a child, or came from a poor family and was economically oppressed, etc.  If the shooter is white, he must be a conservative, ultra right-wing nut job who represents all conservatives.  The ignore the TRUTH that no matter the skin color, the shooter is still a criminal.

“State disenfranchisement laws disproportionately impact racial and ethnic minorities,” – He makes it sound so random and unjust with his politically correct language, doesn’t he?  If you look at his statement through the eyes of a liberal/progressive who thinks we all must have the same dream, and they will tell us what that dream can be, or their penchant for trying to legislate outcomes, then you see why this is so ridiculous.  “Disenfranchisement” sounds so bad, but in this case it means that the law was applied to a criminal.  As far as the LAW applying “disproportionately” to minorities, that is a liberal lie to generate sympathy for their agenda.  The crime statistics from the FBI and police agencies prove that the majority of crimes are committed by minorities, specifically hispanics and blacks.  That is not racism, it is just simple fact.  If these minorities don’t want to make up such a large percentage of the prison population, then they need to get their family lives in order, take responsibility for their own communities and actions, and QUIT COMMITTING CRIMES.

Given current rates of incarceration, approximately one in three of the next generation of African-American men will be disenfranchised (read this as “in prison”) at some point during their lifetime. Hispanic citizens are also disproportionately disenfranchised based upon their disproportionate representation in the criminal justice system.” –   Many or most of the hispanics in jail are criminals simply by the fact that they are here in America, because they broke the law to come here.  Many hispanics, because they REFUSE TO ASSIMILATE, then gravitate towards latino gangs and resort to crime because they “feel disenfranchised.”  Liberals refuse to call a spade a spade, and will not call the illegal aliens ILLEGAL.  They are cultivating them as a future voter base.

Do you think I’m making this stuff up?  Listen to Obama adviser Eliseo Medina, international executive vice-president of Service Employees International Union, or SEIU, explaining in his own words why liberal/progressives are working so hard to rush through an amnesty for illegal aliens, or what they refer to as “immigration reform.”

Medina and the SEIU are top supporters of Illinois Rep. Luis Gutierrez’s Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America’s Security and Prosperity Bill, which seeks to document up to 12 million illegal immigrants inside the U.S. [1]  Why do you think they’re in such a hurry to legalize nearly 30 million illegal aliens?  Yes, 30 million.  It may have been 12 million back in 2000, but at a rate of between 2 and 3 million illegals entering this country every year, there are far more than 12 million illegal aliens in this country.  But back to the original question.  Why?  Let’s look at it first from an economic standpoint.  The pushers of the recent health care bill say it will SAVE money.  They claim that they will be able to cut $500 Billion from Medicare, yet not reduce the quality of Medicare.  Are you seeing a problem with that logic?  Next, you plan to add 20-30 million people to a health care system that is already overburdened, and expect it to still save money and provide better care?  Not going to happen.  You can promise gullible people whatever you want, and they will probably believe you.  But eventually when you consistently can’t/don’t deliver, even the stupid people catch on.  The progressives know this, and only need the illegals to vote in one or two elections.  Then they will have so much power that the ballot box can’t take it away.  Look at what is happening in Greece.  They racked up over $12 Trillion in debt, which is pretty impressive for such a small country, by spending on the same types of social programs that our own liberal/progressives are pushing.  Now they have run out of funny money, and the rest of the EU doesn’t want to bail them out because they know it’s a bad investment and will likely hasten the collapse of their own countries.  So, what’s happening?  The dependent class, like our own welfare class, are angry because they aren’t getting free stuff and they are rioting.  That’s what is coming to America, folks.

About 3/4 of Americans are awake to the fact that the enemy of America is in Washington D.C., and many of these people are having voters remorse at having bought the snake oil sales pitch.  If you’re one of the minority that doesn’t yet see this, I suspect you are either one of the progressives who hope to be in power when this is all over, or you’re more gullible than I thought.  Wake up before it’s to late to save our republic and restore the constitution to its rightful place as the governing document of our great nation.

---

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=131313

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

ON CAPITOL HILL
WorldNetDaily
Forget amnesty, look where Democrats now stoop for votes!
Proposed law would grant Obama’s party deluge of new supporters

Posted: March 23, 2010
10:44 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn

WorldNetDaily

Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich.

Democrats in Congress are pushing for a new law that would allow nearly four million people currently banned from voting to cast their ballot, and most of those millions, studies show, will vote Democrat.

And where will these new voters come from?

From the ranks of convicted felons.

Last week, a House subcommittee heard testimony on H.R. 3335, the “Democracy Restoration Act.” The bill seeks to override state laws, which vary in how they restrict when convicted felons released from prison can vote.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., and sponsored in the Senate by Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wis., states, “The right of an individual who is a citizen of the United States to vote in any election for federal office shall not be denied or abridged because that individual has been convicted of a criminal offense unless such individual is serving a felony sentence in a correctional institution or facility at the time of the election.”

Advocates of the bill trumpet it as a civil rights issue and a matter of freedom, while pointing out that a disproportionate number of black and Hispanic Americans have been disenfranchised by laws restricting felons from voting.

Critics call it another example of the federal government overstepping its constitutional powers to squash state sovereignty and point out that the laws don’t discriminate against minorities, for the statistics simply reflect the disproportionate numbers of black and Hispanic Americans convicted of crime.

Critics have also hinted that the law is politically convenient for Democrats.

Hans von Spakovsky, a former Commissioner on the Federal Election Commission, explained in a blog statement, “What is particularly revealing about this bill is that it does not say anything about the other civil rights that a felon loses, such as the right to own a gun or serve on a jury or in some states, to work as a public employee.

“That is an interesting comment given that the ‘findings’ in the bill claim that such state felon laws ‘serve no compelling State interest,'” he concluded. “I guess this legislation would serve one compelling interest for the sponsors – it might get them votes they need to win in close elections.”

Multiple studies have backed up van Spokovsky’s claim, showing that convicted and former felons consistently lean Democrat.

During the hotly contested 2000 presidential election, for example, an article in the National Law Journal stated, “Al Gore sure could use an extra million-plus votes on Nov. 7. And those potential voters are out there. But inconveniently, they’re all in Sing-Sing, San Quentin and hundreds of other prisons, and in the big pool of prison alumni. And for now, they can’t vote. … But a movement is afoot to change that. And if that happens, a new study co-authored by criminologist Christopher Uggen of the University of Minnesota indicates, the felon vote could give many close elections to the Democrats.”

Uggen’s study concluded that Bill Clinton pulled 86 percent of the felon vote in 1992 and a whopping 93 percent in ’96, and in most elections going back decades Democratic candidates for U.S. Senate would have received at least seven of every ten votes cast by felons and ex-felons.

---