Voter Fraud

               John Beisner (“Voter Laws don’t make sense” Yuma Sun, January 26, 2014) cites the Presidential Commission on Election Administration to substantiate his claim that the incidence of voter fraud in the United States is inconsequential.  What he fails to tell you is that it was not the intent of the commission to investigate such “partisan issues as voter fraud.”

                The Commission was responding to complaints about the antiquated and cumbersome voting process.  Their investigation hoped to bring “efficiency to voting and devise pragmatic solutions for better "customer service."

               Greg Abbot, the Attorney General of Texas has convicted 50 people voter fraud. At least 46 states have achieved such convictions. Now Mr. Beisner is scoffing:  “Fifty votes.  Big deal!”  However, Abbot points out that, because these cases are hard to detect, what few we manage to prosecute are just the “tip of the iceberg.”

               Most of us remember the Cincinnati woman who bragged on national television about voting 6 times. An investigation into that case showed that 19 other people in Harrison County had also voted several times, and when interviewed they insisted that it was not voter fraud.  Their attitude was “What’s the problem?  Of course we vote as many times as we can.” 

The Ohio Secretary of State concluded that many Ohio counties have more registered voters than residents. Close to 3 million Americans are registered to vote in more than one state. Many states have found selecting juries to be problematic because they find so many names drawn from voter registration rolls have to be disqualified for lack of citizenship. There are over 1.8 million dead people registered to vote in this country and Eric Holder has refused to let the states purge the rolls.

               I take Mr. Beisner’s assertion that voter laws will suppress the vote, “especially those who would tend to vote Democrat” as an admission that most voter fraud is perpetrated by those in his party.  I certainly remember the election of 1960.  Voter fraud in both Illinois and Texas was rampant and indisputable.  Few have much respect for Richard Nixon, but I respect him for refusing to “tear the country apart” by calling for the investigation that leaders of his party insisted on.

               Just as it is bigotry to hold minority children to less rigorous standards, it is bigotry to suggest that some citizens aren’t capable of managing the simple details required by voter identification laws.  One must have identification to do almost anything: get working papers, a marriage license, rent a dwelling, get a credit card, rent a post office box, get insurance.

                As Christopher Paslay says, those truly interested in helping people better their lives, ”navigate and participate in 21^st century society,”  would do everything to help them get proper identification.

Real Nation Debt Double the Wealth of the Entire World.

             James Sefcak, (Tea party to blame for shutdown, Yuma Sun, 10/8/) do you really think we should let our government continue to add another trillion dollars of debt every year?  How can anyone demonize a group of Americans intent on forcing our government to be more fiscally responsible?                      Perhaps you don’t understand the concept of 17 trillion dollars.  Think of it this way.  A million seconds ago was some time last Thursday.  A billion seconds ago was some time in 1971.  A trillion seconds ago was is some time in 32,000 B.C.  We have already left our grandchildren 17 trillion dollars in debt.  Counting unfunded mandates, we've left them $220,000,000,000,000.  The wealth of the entire world is estimated to be 110 trillion.

               How much are you willing to add to that debt before something is done? 

A Government that Takes Care of Us Shackles Us.

               I certainly agree with James Sefcak (“Government Responsible for People,” Yuma Sun, November 17, 2013) that our health care system has bogged us down in incredible debt and made health care exorbitantly expensive.  What he does not understand, however, is that the clumsy way in which the federal government inserted itself into the health care industry 65 years ago actually created the problem.  He is misguided in his belief that more government involvement would cure the ills that that the government created.  But that’s an argument for another day. 

               What is most disturbing about Mr. Sefcak’s letter is his assertion that it is the responsibility of the federal government to “take care of us.”  The founders of this country were astute students of history.  Their writings reflect that they knew The Bible and studied every great thinker from Herodotus and Liu Xiang to Thomas Aquinas, Voltaire, John Locke, and Iroquois Tribal Law. A key lesson they learned was that in order to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens, governmental powers must be severely limited. They knew that “the natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground,” an evolution that inevitably leads to tyranny.  When we depend on a government to take care of our needs, we become slaves to the ruling classes.

               Now James will probably say, “Well, the founding fathers, and certainly those primordial ancients, know nothing about the modern world.”  True, they didn’t know about tweeting and twerking.  They did, however, have a unique understanding of some important truths about the human heart.  They knew the intrusive and arbitrary evils wrought by consolidation of power. They knew that all men were vulnerable to greed and an insatiable lust for power.  For this reason they carefully divided and limited the powers of the federal government.

               Apparently when Ben Franklin exited Constitution Hall after 116 days grueling days of intense debate, a woman asked him, “What kind of government did you give us?”  “A republic,” he said, “if you can keep it.”  He predicted our descent into despotism. He, like eighteenth century historian Alexander Tytler, understood the self-destructive cycle of democratic behavior: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back into bondage.

 Our politicians get us to vote for them promising to “care for us,” but every law they pass feathers their own nests at our expense.  .  We used to have a strong middle class.  It’s shrinking.  Soon we’ll be like other socialist nations, the ruling classes living in seclusion in their elaborate seaside dachas while the rest us, mobs of the underclass, huddle in crowded public housing developments grateful for the crumps left for us in our feeding troughs.   

               Norman Thomas said, “The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism.  But, under the name of 'Liberalism', they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened.  I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party.  The Democrat Party has adopted our platform.” 

               Is there a way we can derail this train?

The Founders and Religious Freedom

               Isaac Salutius (“Government can’t dictate religion,” Yuma Sun, March 27, 2013) is, of course, correct when he points out that the phrase “In God We Trust” first appeared on American coins late in the 19^th century. The United States Mint was an independent agency until that time when it became a part of the US Treasury.  He is wrong, however, in suggesting that those words run afoul of the Founding Fathers’ intent.  The one thing that the founders held in common was the belief that religion was a central component of the life of the republic.

               Thomas Jefferson said, “God who gave us life, gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God?” John Hancock: " Continue steadfast and, with a proper sense of your dependence on God, nobly defend those rights which heaven gave, and no man ought to take from us."  John Adams: “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." George Washington: “Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly implore His protection and favor."

               I am not on “a crusade against atheists.” I absolutely respect the people’s right to worship or not worship as they please.  However, atheists do not have the right to limit our religious expression; and, as I previously said, I am confounded by their lack of tolerance.  Our constitution is dedicated to the notion that government “shall not prohibit the free exercise of religion.” We all should feel free to exercise our religious rights at all times and in all places.   

               I hold with Calvin Coolidge who said “Our government rests upon religion. It is from that source that we derive our reverence for truth and justice, for equality and liberality, and for the rights of mankind. There are only two main theories of government in our world. One rests on righteousness and the other on force. One appeals to reason, and the other appeals to the sword. One is exemplified in the republic; the other is represented by despotism.”

               Darrell Scott, who lost his daughter at Columbine, touched our hearts when he said, “What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence.”

Democrats are Hypocrites

              Phillip Smith told William Hadley that Letters to the Editor were “not a good place to pontificate on 160 years of history.  However, most of the responses to Hadley’s article illustrate that we do need to get some lessons in history someplace. 

               Mr. Smith says that the “Lincoln Douglas debates give better insight into Lincoln’s beliefs” suggesting, I guess, that Lincoln was not the abolitionist we think.  A lot of college professors like to leave the impression that the Civil War was not about slavery, but about economics.  The Lincoln Douglas debates, however, are all about slavery, a continuation of the arguments posed by Thomas Jefferson in the original Declaration of Independence where he decried the Kings determination “to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold.”

               In one debate, Lincoln commented on the quote, “You work and toil and earn bread, and I’ll eat it,” saying “No matter what shape it comes, whether from the mouth of a king who seeks to bestride the people of his own nation and live by the fruit of their labor, or from one race of men as an apology for enslaving another race, it is the same tyrannical principle.”  In another, he said, “We think it wrong.”  In another: “We think it is a moral, and social and a political wrong.” In another:  “It as an evil.”  In no debate did Lincoln recoil from his abolitionist stand.

               Mr. Smith also criticizes Mr. Hadley for forgetting about the Blue Dog Democrats suggesting they played a role in the Civil Rights movement.  The Blue Dog coalition was formed in 1994 and their preamble describes their mission to be, like the present day Tea Parties’, dedicated to the financial stability and national security of the country.    

               And Yes, Mr. Zack, I do think Democrats are hypocrites.  Both Lyndon Johnson and John F. Kennedy fought tooth and nail against the Civil Rights act of 1954, but by 1962 they could see the writing on the wall.  They knew their cause was lost, so they finally took up the fight of the party of Lincoln and have since then pretended to be champions of minorities.  Lyndon Johnson famously said, “I’ll have those _____s voting Democratic for the next 200 years.”

               But the Democrats are not the champions of minorities; they are promoting a permanent underclass.  “Vote for us and we’ll give you everything you need, food, shelter, health care, mobile phones.  Enslave yourselves to your new masters and you’ll never again have to worry about taking care of yourselves.  We’ll do that for you.”

               Republicans know better.  We have respect for all men.  We truly believe that all men are created equal and have the right to the fruits of their labor.   We have compassion for the worker and his right to his wealth.  We also have compassion for the truly indigent.  Research shows that charitable contributions by conservatives almost doubles that of liberals.  Nicolas Kristoff admits, “We liberals are the nation’s compassionate tightwads.”  

Heredia Slinging Mud about Voter Fraud

           With regard to Luis Heredia “Election Law Targets Democrats favors Republicans” (AZ Republic July 1, 2013) I don’t know how Arizona’s HB 2305 can favor Republicans.  It prohibits volunteers from any political organization, that’s both Republican and Democrat, from picking up early voter ballots and taking them to the polls.  I have worked the polls and know that members of political organizations drop over 50 ballots at a time in the box at the polls.  There is no record of where they came from or who is authorized to deliver them.  I would think that both Democrats and Republicans would be concerned about truing the vote, unless it’s an open admission that it’s only Democrats that do it.

             Heredia also accused Arizona of having antiquated precinct restriction.  In the last election, voters could vote at any precinct which is one of the reasons that lines were so long.  Poll workers had to have ballots from every precinct to be sure all comers could vote.  It was awkward, expensive, and time consuming, but there were certainly no restrictions.

               Heredia also sees the new law as evidence of Arizona’s “dark history of discrimination.”  It’s the Democratic Party that has the dark history of discrimination.  Republicans have been pushing for voter rights for generations while Democrats have insisted on all manner of restrictions like poll taxes and literacy tests in their attempt to deny the vote.

              As is true of so many pundits on the left, Luis Heredia turns out accusation after accusation, failing to cite evidence in support even one. He subscribes to the rhetorical camp that recommends, “Sling the mud.  Something might stick.”

Dick Durbin's lapse of memory

             Dick Durbin, U.S. Senator from Illinois, laid thick and heavy praise on Obama’s staff laying out a clear vision for conflict in Syria.  He said the distinction between the 2003 Iraq war and the case in Syria is clear.  There is a moral component in what President Obama is proposing. The use of biological weapons is a clear red line.  By comparison, he claims that in the 2003 war President Bush committed a “mortal political sin” by lying to the American people about the weapons of mass destruction. 

             Durbin credits himself with a long memory, but apparently he forgot that Saddam Hussein attempted genocide using biological weapons on the Kurdish populations in Iraq killing 5,000 and injuring another 10,000. According to the August 21^st report, perhaps 650 were killed in Syria.

             He probably also forgot Saddam Hussein violated the agreements he signed at the end of the 1991 Persian Gulf War. U.N. inspectors we supposed to periodically inspect sites suspected of concealing weapons of mass destruction.  For 12 years Saddam refused access.  What was he hiding? Apparently not weapons of mass destruction, but he clearly pretended to have them. 

           The “Mortal Sin” is that we keep sending people like Dick Durbin to Washington over and over again.  They lose sight of truth and honor.  They've forgotten how to work and produce. They have lost any sense of fairness and honesty. We have been stupid to scrimp and sacrifice in order to provide them with their luxurious life style, their sumptuous benefits, and their golden retirement parachute.  What were we thinking?  

          And it is absolutely dishonorable for them to expect or accept it.