What are they thinking?

First up is Burt Prelutsky who says i am not, thank god, george soros. The stimulus is the requests he gets for political donations.

“If I failed to kick in, the following are just a few of the dire scenarios they warned me would more than likely take place: The Republicans would dismantle ObamaCare; prevent the re-election of such party stalwarts as Elizabeth Warren and Tim Kaine; take control of the U.S. Senate; and, egad, prevent the Democrats from excising the 2nd Amendment from the Constitution!”

Burt has quite a rant – well worth a read-through.

Then there’s Paterico on how the Obama/Holder DoJ Blinds Itself to Voter Fraud Concerns. “Funny how ACORN always seems to come up whenever we hear about voter fraud.”

“One way you might combat phony registrations like the kind described above would be to demand voters present proper identification at the time of registration and/or voting. And guess what? The Obama administration is invalidating a voter ID law in South Carolina, a move which seems to signal that DoJ will nix a similar effort in Texas. And Eric Holder seems to think the only reason to demand voter IDs is to keep minorities from voting

“To me, it’s a matter of fairness. If your vote can be cancelled by an illegal immigrant, or an ACORN scammer, or an Anonymous hacker, then we might as well be a Soviet bloc style satellite state. It is unfortunate that election integrity, an issue of fundamental fairness, should become the province of partisans, scammers, and criminals. If our vote doesn’t mean anything, what does?”

Then there are those who look at the DoJ suit against South Carolina and wonder, if the need to have a good identification is racist as the DoJ affirms, then perhaps we shouldn’t use picture identification documents to buy an gun or board an airplane or do other such things as they’d be racist as well?

The focus may be admirable but when it comes to issues like these, losing sight of the implications and bigger picture can be tragic.

Comments are closed.