Tag: Eric Holder

Ending Shared Theft

I can’t believe I’m going to say this but here goes. Ahem. Cough. Uh, is this thing on?

Hi. Um … here we go …

Eric Holder has done something right.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. on Friday barred local and state police from using federal law to seize cash, cars and other property without warrants or criminal charges.

Holder’s action represents the most sweeping check on police power to confiscate personal property since the seizures began three decades ago as part of the war on drugs.

Since 2008, thousands of local and state police agencies have made more than 55,000 seizures of cash and property worth $3 billion under a civil asset forfeiture program at the Justice Department called Equitable Sharing.

The program has enabled local and state police to make seizures and then have them “adopted” by federal agencies, which share in the proceeds. It allowed police departments and drug task forces to keep up to 80 percent of the proceeds of adopted seizures, with the rest going to federal agencies.

I’ve talked about civil asset forfeiture many times. This is the vile practice where law enforcement officials seize your money, your car or your bank accounts and … well, basically keep it. You never have to be charged with a crime. They never have to prove the assets came from crime. They just take it, like a highwayman. And they are perfectly free to use those assets for any purpose, including, in one case, a margarita machine.

Some states have trained to “reign this in”. Granted, they haven’t reigned it in by say, abolishing it. But they’ve at least tried to redirect the money from going directly to law enforcement to going to schools or something. The Feds responded with their Equitable Sharing Program, where the police turn the money to the Feds to bypass state laws. The Feds keep a cut and then turn it right back over to the police. That’s the program Holder is suspending.

Now, to be fair, this is a directive. The next AG could reverse it. Hell, Holder could. Let’s not mistake this for, say, Congress passing a law to abolish it. Radley Balko breaks down the decision further, pointing out that federal investigations — such as investigations by the DEA or IRS — will still be able to use this tool. And, in fact, local law enforcement will be able to use Equitable Sharing when they are part of a federal or joint investigation. In fact, Holder’s justice department recently successfully argued before the Supreme Court, in Kaley, that the government could seize your assets before trial to keep you from hiring a good lawyer.

So let’s not dance in the streets just yet. But this is a step in the right direction. The next thing that needs to happen is for Congress to abolish the practice completely. Asset forfeiture may have made sense when we were seizing the 18th century smuggling ships of overseas booze barons. It makes no sense in a modern context. If the Supreme Court won’t abolish it, Congress must and should.

Holder Out

Eric Holder has stepped down as Attorney General. I believe he is the only cabinet member to be held in Contempt of Congress for his role in Operation Fast and Furious. He also dropped the investigation into the New Black Panthers, declined to prosecute any of the people responsible for the financial crisis, led monitoring of the media including James Rosen, continued to persecute medical marijuana clinics and helped preside over one of the more lawless administrations I can remember.

But I’ll be nice and hope the door doesn’t hit him in the ass on the way out. Or at least, doesn’t him too hard.

Unleash the AG’s

So this happened last week:

Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday that state attorneys general are not required to defend state laws they believe to be discriminatory. Specifically, he said those who think state bans on gay marriage are unconstitutional are not obligated to defend them. Comparing today’s gay rights fight to the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 60s, Holder said he would have challenged discriminatory laws on the books during the time of racial segregation. “If I were attorney general in Kansas in 1953, I would not have defended a Kansas statute that put in place separate-but-equal facilities,” Holder said.

He encouraged state attorneys general to intensely scrutinize state laws like those that address equal protection, but not to oppose them based upon political or policy leanings. Holder’s comments are not customary for a federal attorney general, as they do not frequently instruct their state counterparts on how to do their jobs.

Holder is taking a lot of fire for this this and it’s understandable. An AG’s job, after all, is to represent the state and to defend its laws in the courts. But … after thinking about it for a while, I actually agree with Holder for probably the first time in his entire tenure.

The second part of Holder’s statement is probably the more important: an attorney general should not refuse to defend a state law simply because he disagrees with it. All lawyers are required to argue cases where they don’t like the side they are arguing. Do you think criminal defense attorneys like defending rapists or murderers? They do it because everyone deserves a defense. They do it because it’s their job. An attorney general should defend his states laws even when he doesn’t like them because that’s his job: to represent the state.

However …

There is one exception, and that is when the attorney believes that the law involved is unconstitutional. In that case, I would posit that not only should an AG not defend a law he believes is unconstitutional. In some cases, he should argue against it.

I know that sounds like a recipe for chaos and I think this power should rarely be invoked. DOMA, for example, was of questionable constitutionality and I think, in that case, the Obama Administration should have stood by it. But when an Administration believes that a law is a blatant violation, should they not defend our liberty in court?

I’ll admit that this is an outgrowth of my view of how our government is supposed to work. Far too often, the judgement of whether a law is constitutional is left the Courts. But it is the sworn obligation of all branches to defend our liberty. The Courts should bounce bad laws, yes. But they don’t always, as the Kelo abomination demonstrated. In those cases, we need the other branches to defend our liberty. We need them to stick up for us when the Courts won’t.

Congress and State Legislatures should not pass laws that they believe are unconstitutional. The President and the Governors should veto unconstitutional laws and refuse to use powers they believe are unconstitutional, even if the courts approve them (warrantless wiretapping, for example). And even if the AG does enforce bad laws, for the sake of order, I have no problem with him arguing that the law is unconstitutional (there will never be a dearth of attorneys willing to argue in favor of the government).

I hate to play the game of If I Were President, but I think it’s relevant here. Just last week, I wrote about the vile unconscionable thing that is asset forfeiture. Should not a President order his Justice Department to end asset forfeiture? It is a choice, not a requirement, after all. And should he not have an AG go into Court and argue that this violates the people’s rights? Why must the engine of government justice always be turned against the citizen and against his liberty?

It’s a little shakier when you get down to the state level, where you could argue that the state AG’s should defend a law even as the federal lawyers argue against it. Or you could argue they could resign on principle. There is a danger of opening a can of worms and politicizing the court process even further. I see that.

But I don’t think this issue is as clear-cut as a lot of people want to make it. I’m not sure gay marriage laws pass the threshold, but I don’t think it’s ridiculous to argue that a state can realize it is in the wrong and refuse to defend an unconstitutional law.

Holder the Liar

The one good thing I figured Barack Obama would do as President was go after the shysters in the mortgage industry. Surely a Democrat as liberal as Obama would make sure that those who aided and abetted mortgage fraud would be punished, right? And last year — coincidentally, right before the election — they announced that they had brought 530 cases representing over 73,000 fraudulent mortgages and a billion in lost home value. It was just the tip of an awful iceberg, but it was something.

Oops:

The Justice Department made a long-overdue disclosure late Friday: Last year when U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder boasted about the successes that a high-profile task force racked up pursuing mortgage fraud, the numbers he trumpeted were grossly overstated.

We’re not talking small differences here. Originally the Justice Department said 530 people were charged criminally as part of a year-long initiative by the multi-agency Mortgage Fraud Working Group. It now says the actual figure was 107 — or 80 percent less. Holder originally said the defendants had victimized more than 73,000 American homeowners. That number was revised to 17,185, while estimates of homeowner losses associated with the frauds dropped to $95 million from $1 billion.

The government restated the statistics because it got caught red-handed by a couple of nosy reporters. Last October, two days after Holder first publicized the numbers, Phil Mattingly and Tom Schoenberg of Bloomberg News broke the story that some of the cases included in the Justice Department’s tally occurred before the initiative began in October 2011. At least one was filed more than two years before President Barack Obama took office.

It will surprise no one who reads this blog that the Justice Department used every tactic short of extraordinary rendition to evade reporters’ questions about the program. When pressed for details of the arrests and prosecutions, they stalled delayed and obfuscating until … get this … after the election.

Oh, and they’ve done it before:

This was the second time, mind you, that Holder’s Justice Department had pulled a stunt like this. In December 2010, Holder held a press conference to tout a supposed sweep by the president’s Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force called “Operation Broken Trust.” (The mortgage-fraud program was part of the same task force.) As with the mortgage-fraud initiative, Broken Trust wasn’t actually a sweep. All the Justice Department did was lump together a bunch of small-fry, penny-ante fraud cases that had nothing to do with one another. Then it held a press gathering.

At least on that occasion, the Justice Department promptly provided me with a list of the defendants’ names and case details when I asked for them. That is how I was able to determine for a December 2010 column that the government’s Broken Trust numbers were inflated. Among the handful of cases on the list that I spot-checked, one defendant was sentenced to probation before the operation’s supposed start date. Another person on the list had no record of criminal charges. Other cases had nothing to do with any actions by the task force. The Justice Department still hasn’t restated the Broken Trust numbers — even though those statistics clearly were in error, too.

And, just in case you’re wondering about the brokers who piled fraudulent mortgages into tottering piles of securities shit and the ratings agencies that gave those tottering piles of shit AAA ratings: they have not been held responsible either.

Holder is setting records of lies and obfuscations on every issue imaginable. From Fast and Furious to mortgage fraud, he consistently and continuously misleads the American public. And yet when the Republicans tried to cite for contempt (for lying his ass off about F&F), they were branded as anti-Obama-crazed maniacs. And the DOJ is just a fraction of the lies spewed by this Administration on the subject of the law, from claiming they are winding down the War on Drugs while they ramp it up to the head of NSA lying to Congress with a straight face.

So you’ll forgive me if I take today’s announcement of changes to the War on Drugs with some salt. I love the idea of not charging low-level drug offenders with crimes that invoke harsh minimum sentences. But I don’t trust these assholes to actually do it. What I trust them to do is, shortly before the 2014 election, announce that they’ve overhauled or War on Drugs and kept non-violent people out of prison while they continue to do it.

Holder has earned that distrust. And that distrust is the biggest reason why he shouldn’t be Attorney General any more. Respect for the Rule of Law is a critical component to any functioning society. Holder has brought the Rule of Law into contempt. Enough of this.

Hey Mr DJ: Ril Ruhtarrded Edition

What else can we possibly talk about this week besides the Zimmerman trial? I’m sure you’re sick of it, but I’m starting to wonder if Zimmerman isn’t shaping up to be the controversial John Brown character of our day.

Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry confirmed the worst of what the South feared about the intentions of the North and the threat of a slave uprising. Although there were many causes for the Civil War, Brown did more than enough to amplify the environment of racial paranoia and political polarization that characterized the run-up to it.

Zimmerman’s trial has done much the same. We can barely even discuss it civilly. For blacks, it confirms that the rest of America regards their children as dangerous animals who can be murdered without consequence. The rule of law has nothing to offer them, yet again. Liberals look to the outcome and see that guns are being used against unarmed people while Stand Your Ground laws lead to a vigilante culture. Right-wingers are monsters who obviously believe that Martin somehow deserved to die.

Many on the Right have viewed this case as proof of not only the need for concealed carry permits and stronger self defense laws to defend themselves from out-of-control thuggery carried out by feral black youths between the ages of 14 and 25; but even that the Obama Administration really is out to perpetuate a full-on race war and that he has picked his favorite side. From Obama’s first irresponsible statements about Trayvon looking like the son he never had to Eric Holder suddenly finding something that he’d like to investigate. I mean, it’s not like that whole IRS scandal or the matter of how those Mexican drug cartels got their hands on all those guns that the US Government provided did much to arouse his curiosity, is it? No, the full attention of the Department of “Justice” (which shall always be identified by me with sarcastic quotation marks for as long as Holder is the AG) must remain firmly fixed on a man who was tried and acquitted of shooting a 17 year old in self-defense in some Florida town most of us had never heard of before it happened.

It’s not excessive to suggest that Zimmerman is as true an enemy of the state as one can be. The Obama Administration is seeking any shred of any evidence they can find or invent that Zimmerman ever once said “darkie” or refused a menthol cigarette or committed any other thought-crime they can imagine. I would even argue that Obama probably doesn’t have it in for Snowden as bad as Zimmerman. At least Snowden attacked surveillance programs that Obama criticized too, before he happened to become President of the United States. On some level, I suspect that Obama and Holder can respect that. Zimmerman, however, has been given executive level attention by the DO”J” for what he is suspected of thinking before defending himself from a deadly force assault from someone who looked like he could be Obama’s son.

Worse than that, Snowden is certainly safer than Zimmerman, being under the care of the Russian government. Zimmerman is the target of attackers who will come at him legally and illegally, including the Black Panthers (who are pretty much allowed to do what they like nowadays as far as federal law enforcement is concerned). Given the level of persecution Zimmerman is going through, it wouldn’t be absurd to imagine him filing an asylum request with some Third World dictatorship where he can finally be safe from the vengeful prosecutors and racial vigilantes Obama’s Administration and supporters can bring forward.

It’s no secret what I thought of the case. From the beginning, I’ve considered it to be an obvious self-defense matter. You can argue about guns, SYG, morality of justifiable homicide, the racism in Zimmerman’s heart, or whatever. The point is that the prosecution simply could not prove that Zimmerman started the fight that ended with Martin getting shot with the evidence they had. They didn’t have the credible witnesses or the forensic evidence to support murder or manslaughter. It just wasn’t there, guys. The Sanford police knew it from Day 1. The only people who were surprised by this verdict were the ones paying the least attention to the proceedings, I’ll bet. The weakness of the case was writ large for those looking with their eyes on facts.

My own interest in the outcome was the knowledge that once the facts were heard and the verdict was read, it could only further shame and degrade the American news media that I hate so very much. Out of all the legal proceedings to follow, I am only looking forward to Zimmerman’s lawsuit against NBC for doing more than its part to agitate us against ourselves. They weren’t the only ones guilty of this incitement, but they were the most blatant. And they were successful.

Things are getting worse out there, I think. I was initially relieved that there weren’t any major outbreaks of violence. After the Rodney King/LAPD verdict, it was quick. This time is different though. There is this sense of seething in the city; more of a slow burn. It reminds me a lot of how tensions were gradually escalating right before Angela Corey filed charges against Zimmerman. What is there to stop it now?

So that’s where my John Brown comparison comes in. This has left a mark on us and how we feel about each other, no question. Maybe in 150 years, Florida v Zimmerman will just be a case that criminal lawyers study when preparing for self-defense cases. I’d like to hope so. Alternately, it could be that this is the moment we all decided not to “get along.” The distrust of the system and of each other, finally breaking it all apart. We’re being driven to it, you know. It’s all being ginned up by those who benefit from exploiting grievances, bolstering ratings, selling fear, and pimping votes. Those are the only ones worthy of our hatred. They’ve brought this on. All of it.

This is Trayvon Martin’s America; in which we support our tribes, right or wrong, and demand an eye-for-an-eye for every perceived offense. We find justice in outcomes, not law. This is George Zimmerman’s America; where we fortify our neighborhoods, arm ourselves on suburban streets, and shadow strangers. Justice is what we are willing to do with our own two hands because we have abandoned all hope in the goodness and competence of the authorities.

I call it all real retarded, sir.

Music.

1. “Black-on-Black Crime”: It’s almost been forgotten about. Damn Peruvian octoroons killing all those Chicagoans and all that. I know you guys have been hiding some gangsta rap. Now is the time to pull it out.

2. “Three Civil Brawls, Bred of an Airy Word”: Songs of unrest. I always enjoy this category.

3. “Stand Your Ground”: Songs that you feel best speak for your race/creed/color/hometown/county/religion/etc. Ignore the fact that everyone else thinks you’re a dumbass.

4. “Hero Complex”: Songs about Quixotic, frequently wrongheaded, fools who rush right in.

5. “Creepy Ass Crackers vs Fucking Punks”: Music about just being mistaken and misunderstood. The world is a hard and unforgiving place sometimes.

Bernie de la Rionda Bonus: Doing the best you can with what you have, win or lose. Especially losing.

Dedications for all gun-grabbing, limp-dick racial agitators and bloodthirsty, negrophobic cowboy assholes right here:

Mississippi Yankee: And now for the ridiculous and bizarre narcissism that was foretold…City Hall by Tenacious D. It has a couple of minutes silence at the end, which I guess represents part of the amount of time Martin could have run away or something.

WVR: Midnight by Ice-T

InsipiD: You Don’t Understand Me by The Raconteurs

pfluffy: Glorified G by Pearl Jam

Santino: Reason is Treason by Kasabian

Biggie G: Que Onda Guero by Beck

stogy: I Predict a Riot by Kaiser Chiefs

Iconoclast: You Don’t Know How It Feels by Tom Petty. Because I Won’t Back Down would have been in mildly poor taste, under the circumstances.

Now, I do not want to hear any griping about the dedications from those of you who didn’t put in a song last week for my road trip. We all know you were lucky to get anything at all this week. Incidentally, I had a nice time. Went to Omaha, enjoyed the zoo. Came home with a sty in my eye somehow, but made the most of it anyway.

As a side note, Omaha would have been a fantastic city to ride out any potential nationwide race riots.

Fast and Furious Executive

Uh-oh:

In a mounting confrontation with congressional Republicans, President Barack Obama invoked executive privilege Wednesday to withhold documents a House committee is seeking. The panel neared a vote on citing Attorney General Eric Holder for contempt.

Comments rapidly grew more heated. A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner suggested administration officials had lied earlier or were now “bending the law,” while Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings said the committee’s GOP chairman “had no interest” in resolving the issue and was trying to pick a fight.

In a letter to the committee chairman, Darrell Issa of California, a Justice Department official said the executive privilege applies to documents that explain how the department learned there were problems with an investigation in Arizona of gun-running into Mexico, called Operation Fast and Furious.

The citing of contempt for Holder should have been done already. As has been pointed out, Holder already lied to Congress about the Administration’s medical marijuana policies. Unfortunately for him, Congress isn’t like the New York Times or the Center for the American Regress: they are actually aware of the facts and will call the Administration out when they lie.

But the Executive Privilege thing is a real tell. Executive privilege has been most heavily invoked by the Nixon and Clinton Administrations (and, to a lesser degree, by Bush II) to cover up bona fide scandals or, at least, bona fide embarrassments.

The purpose here is delay. Obama is hoping to kick this past the election. But really, I don’t think this is going to matter. Conservatives are going to vote against Obama anyway. And liberals would support him even if Fast and Furious involved Holder personally shooting puppies. Some middle-of-the-road voters might be persuaded. But we’d really need a media that was doing its job and cared about people getting killed because guns were allowed to be smuggled into Mexico.

I’m not holding my breath.

Update: In case you want to know what I consider Media Matter to be a useless Left Wing lie factory, Eric Boehlert is claiming that Ronald Reagan invoked executive privilege 20 times. In fact, the tally is 24 times over all Administrations since Reagan. The tally is Reagan 3, Bush 1, Clinton 14, Bush II 6 and Obama 1. There are plenty of places where you can read about the times executive privilege has been invoked. It has almost always been to cover up embarrassing, rather than classified, info.

Weekend Roundup

As of tonight, I am on the other side of the world. Actually, most people would say I blog like someone on from a completely different world. But in this case, it’s literally true: I’m back in Australia. As a result of preparations and travel, I’ve missed the biggest news stories of the week. So I’ll go through them quickly in a weekend roundup form to hopefully start a few (well-reasoned) fights.

….

First, Indiana became the latest right-to-work state over fierce labor union opposition. Ever so slowly, the unions are losing their grip on power. Watch out for Mitch Daniels come 2016. That guy has President written all over him.

….

Eric Holder continues to lower the bar for attorneys general. His latest statement is that he will crack down on Operation Fast and Furious. Actually, he will crack down on OFF whistleblowers. This man’s allegiance to government power should be a much bigger story.

….

The latest jobs report is out. Not only did job creation numbers blow by expectations, but December and November numbers were revised upward. All told, 300k jobs were added in multiple sectors, including manufacturing, and the unemployment rate is down to 8.3%. It’s been many years since we had a jobs report that solid.

Now, the total unemployment number — which accounts for people who have given up looking for work — has only fallen a little. But it has fallen … a little. This is ceasing to be a blip and starting to look like a resurgence. It’s not near strong enough. But it’s hopeful. We’ll know things are really getting better when job creation numbers rise and the unemployment rate also rises. That will tell us when people are rejoining the labor force.

….

I don’t have a lot of interest in the spat between the Komen Foundation and Planned Parenthood over the former pulling funding from the latter because of abortion, then reversing that decision. I do however, think Josh Barro has a legitimate point: Planned Parenthood supporters need to quit pretending that abortion is only incidental to PP’s mission and function. They are one of the largest abortion providers in the nation, it is a huge part of their budget and anyone who has been to a clinic can not but notice how big a part abortion is of what they do.

The Planned Parenthood defenders are throwing out a statistic that abortions are only 3% of Planned Parenthood’s services. That may be literally true, but it’s comparing apples to watermelons. An abortion is a far more involved and expensive procedure than a breast cancer screening or a birth control consultation. By way of illustration, a surgeon may do see a patient ten times for follow-up of a single surgical procedure. But only an idiot would claim that surgery is only 10% of what a surgeon does.

People who support Planned Parenthood do so, in part, because of their abortion services. If Planned Parenthood ended abortions tomorrow, their support would shrink, at least a little. You can not both support Planned Parenthood because someone needs to provide abortions and then turn around and claim abortion is only a small part of what they do. Agreeing with this doesn’t make you pro-life or anti-woman or anti-choice or even anti-Planned-Parenthood. It makes you connected with reality.

….

Finally, the CBO released their latest projection, which is for a $1.1 trillion deficit this year (believe it or not, that’s down by several hundred billion from the peak) and more trillions over the next decade. They also project that the economy will weaken as tax hikes and spending cuts kick in. Color me very skeptical on that last part. The CBOs models are rigged a certain way. And that way is of dubious accuracy.

Holder caught in a lie: LSM yawns

Late last Friday in a dump they hoped everyone would miss, the DOJ released a series of documents related to operation “Fast & Furious” that all but make it a given Eric Holder lied to congress when he first told them the whopper that he had not heard about the operation until a few weeks before he showed up to testify. He then compounded that lie by claiming it might be weeks instead of months. The document dump shows Holder knew about “Fast & Furious” from the very damned start, and as people now doing the work the LSM is avoiding are finding out, might even have been behind the whole thing from the start.

As I pointed out when the story broke out, only to be chastised because I could not meet some standard of evidence even a court doesn’t expect from it’s participants, or because the LSM was avoiding the story, and when forced to cover it, they where spinning everything favorably for the Obama Administration, this was going to be a whopper. Our DOJ ran an operation, on foreign soil, that cost people their lives, all so they could then affect public perception and support for disarming people. This is the kind of high stakes tyrannical bullshit I expect from gun hating collectivists, and I pointed out the order very likely came straight from the Oval office, only to be excoriated for daring to point out what I clearly see as a plan to push for Obama’s new America.

The DOJ is now de facto been identified as a player. Holder now is about to be grilled again in front of Congress, and while I am sure the left will rally around him to protect him, this display of “support” is going to only help get people to see how cynical and vile the left is in their pursuit of power: and have no doubt that disarming law abiding citizens is a prerequisite to tyrannical control of the populous. We also already know that there are many links to the WH. And sooner than later we will also find out Holder took his order from the very top. Mark my words. Those that want to defend the indefensible can start flinging pooh now, and pray it distracts the people long enough for the crooks to steal another election and really get busy.

Leftist debate 101

Now that Holder is feeling the fire, and then, despite the LSM and the WH, in what I am sure in a coordinated effort, playing like this story isn’t big when it makes Watergate look tame, non of us should be surprised that he has resorted to the left’s most favorite attack to silence or impugn the character of the people that are pissing them off: the race card!

Them evil honkeys is after me! And not just because I am a lying scumbag that has been caught covering for the fact that I was running, by direction from the WH more likely than not, an illegal operation, on foreign soil, that armed real evil killers, caused the death hundreds, if not thousands, including an American government official, with thousands more dying as the war goes on, destroying those that dared get in the way and point out how illegal this whole thing was, and did it all, so we could then lie about the US arming these evil people and sway public opinion and/or the courts against the second amendment. Them honkeys is after me cause I am black!

Holder needs some of the “love” our prison system promises those sharing cells with “Big Bubba”. He is a corrupt pussy after all.

Democrat response to voter fraud…

Vote, vote as often as you can in the same election, help the dead cast their votes, and help those people that are incapable of voting by voting democrat for them all!

That’s basically what the democrats seem to want. That’s from guy that pretends he had no clue about operation “Fast & Furious” and actually deserves to be hauled into court to defend the criminal activities he and his people have been trying to cover up with a web of lies. Eric Holder’s main point was that he thinks any kind of system that tries to prevent voter fraud is wrong and actually only intended to intimidate voters.

The question begs to be asked: what kind of voter is intimidated by a system that requires them to prove they are who they say they are, and limits them to a single vote? Isn’t the answer obvious? Equating the requirement that voters properly identify themselves at their polling place, and are also limited to a single vote, to disgusting practices like a poll taxes or a literacy test – both practices heavily used by Southern democrats that wanted to control who voted, I add for historical perspective – smacks of idiocy. Again: who benefits the most from a system with no checks? Let me direct you to the typical democrat controlled shithole where they have close to or over 100% of the eligible and registered population show up to vote for a clue.

And Holder’s belief that people should automatically be registered to vote is frightening to me. I have registered to vote a couple of times. By far, this is the most pleasant experience one can have dealing with government entities. It never took me more than 5 minutes despite the idiots that usually work at these places. And if the average citizen is so apathetic about the political process that they can not take such a little bit of time to register, I do not want them voting. They are likely to be just as apathetic and uninformed about the issues and the election they are now able to vote in. Guess what party benefits from dumb people that vote emotions and not issues?

I guess democrats want to “count every vote”, except those of the military, and those of real citizens that only vote once as they should. This 2012 election is going to be a doozy. I expect voter fraud to be rampant and if the donkeys steal the election I expect Holder to kill any and all instances of real voter fraud or intimidation like he has already done in the case of the ones brought up around the 2008 elections.

This is an all out attack on anything decent in this country. These crooks are not even ashamed anymore of what they are doing and the destructive results their practices have. Power to the collectivist powerblock above all else.