Jim Crow and Racism Destroy Liberal Minds

When Liberals can not honestly win an argument, they resort to throwing out 'red herrings' or 'straw men' arguments, to divert attention from the real issue:

By now, every Conservative should know how the argument of a Liberal degrades. It goes something like this:

A Conservative makes some valid political point seeking a Liberal’s counterpoint. Instead of providing a well-thought out intelligent answer, the first response is usually some irrelevant or made-up statistic. Sometimes it can even be a made-up quotation. After the Conservative provides a sound defense of his position, the Liberal continues to answer unintelligibly. Repeat this process three times (Sometimes it only takes making the original point). Finally, out of desperation, and knowing his position is full of holes, the Liberal resorts to calling you a racist or if you are proposing some sort of policy, the term ‘racist’ won’t do, so your policy is now a part of the old Jim Crow laws.

Americans have been increasingly interested in implementing a law that requires all voters to provide an ID card before placing their vote. Alabama just passed a law that does just that and provides the ID for free. The logic is simple: If you provide an ID card then that ID will be matched up with your name when you come to vote. You can’t vote as someone else or vote multiple times. Voter fraud is thereby reduced. Sure, there will some people who violate the law and illegally create multiple voter IDs, but at least there will be a step that most people won’t take.

While a voter ID makes sense to most normal people (apparently 75% of Americans agree with a voter ID), but according to the DNC chair Debhttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifbie Wasserman Schultz, those that want to implement a voter ID want to “drag us all the way back to the Jim Crow” era. She provides no logical explanation except that she did finally backtrack on her words to a more “reasonable” argument:

[S]he still claims that requirements to show ID at the polls – which are designed to cut down on election fraud – are racially discriminatory. Godfather Politics.

So, if you are against voter ID laws, you are a racist, just as if you are against anything Obama does, or the present Democratic administration does, you are a racist.

But then, maybe this is a good thing. Calling everyone a racist who does not agree with the administration a racist, is like yelling 'wolf' all the time. It will soon be meaningless.

Judge Who Voided Collective Bargaining Law Has Tie To Labor Dispute

What else is new? Chicanery, dishonesty, lying, patronage, and related corruption is rampant throughout the left.

June 7, 2011 by Personal Liberty News Desk http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif

Wisconsin judge who voided collective bargaining law has family tie to labor disputeA legal expert from The Heritage Foundation has questioned the validity of the recent decision to void Wisconsin’s law that limits collective bargaining rights for public workers.

Judge Maryann Sumi, who rendered the May 26 decision, should have withdrawn from the case. Sumi’s son was an organizer for one of the big unions that protested Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s legislation. Read original article here.

The Wisconsin law is not unconstitutional, regardless of what pro-union activist Judge Sumi thinks. The law does not come into conflict with any article or amendment of the constitution. It only comes in conflict with what the pro-socialist union bosses want, which is to force state workers to belong to the union regardless of personal preference.

Collective bargaining is one thing when done between a private company or corporation and the union, when representatives of both are present. But, it is another thing when state officials, put into office by union donations, sit down with the same unions to negotiate salaries, benefits, and other concerns, without the taxpayers present to argue their case. The taxpayers, providing the money for salaries and benefits, are not represented, and that is where the difference lies. As a member of a union family growing up, this turns me off from unions and their bullying activities, like selfish babies who cry and throw tantrums when they don't get what they want through law and the ballot box.

A Win for Arizona, and the Rule of Law

NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE
May 27, 2011 4:00 A.M.

The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld Arizona’s 2007 law requiring all employers in the state to use the federal E-Verify system for screening out illegal aliens and revoking the business licenses of firms that knowingly hire them.

The court split 5–3 along party lines: Breyer, Ginsburg, and Sotomayor (Kagan recused herself) ignored the plain meaning of the federal law empowering states to use their licensing power to address the employment of illegal workers. Chief Justice Roberts, on the other hand, found “no basis in law, fact, or logic” for the argument that Arizona should be stopped from doing so in the name of federal “preemption” of state activity.

It’s an important win for many reasons, not least of them the fact that Arizona’s E-Verify mandate actually works. While the illegal-alien population nationwide fell 7 percent from 2008 to 2009, according to the Department of Homeland Security, the number of illegal aliens in Arizona fell by nearly 18 percent, and many analysts credit the E-Verify mandate with that success. Post Continues on www.nationalreview.com

Is Obama Going to Socialize the Oil Industry?

A Slip of the Togue tells us what our socialistic government is planning

Posted without comment. Speaks for itself.

In a blog post dated Monday, April 24, Castillo recounts what happened to her at DFW airport last week after opting out of going through one of the TSA’s new x-ray scanners.

Susie's Experience with the TSA Pat Down from SusieCastillo.net on Vimeo.

Conservativebyte.com

The Left's Loud and Vulgar Protest Against Tea Party

I do not like to post this kind of stuff. But the grossly disrespectful actions of the left against the Tea Party should be shown. Warning. You may not want to watch this. Foul language is used throughout the video picturing "peaceful leftist demonstrators."



Courtesy Conservativebyte.com

The Second Amendment is Anathema to the NWO Crowd

The U.S. Constitution grants sovereignty to the states and to the citizens of the states. The "No-borders" progressives, liberals, marxists, are pushing for a New World Order in which government will enforce peace. This might seem like a good idea to the mind-set of the members of this leftist group of 'elites' who know more than the rest of us what brings peace. They do not understand the principle that true freedom is what brings peace.

These One Worlders realize that the possession of personal firearms are counter to their evil plans as the following article shows:

Gun-Grabbers Undermine U.S. Sovereignty
by John M. Snyder
(Council for America)
American gun owners face a double-whammy: A political establishment that seeks to undermine both 2nd Amendment rights and United States national sovereignty.

For decades, gun-grabbers in politics, academe and media have promoted various gun-control schemes to weaken if not ultimately eliminate the individual 2nd Amendment right of law-abiding American citizens to keep and bear arms.

They’ve proposed federal firearms registration, gun-owner licensing, handgun-purchase waiting periods, one-gun-a-month handgun-purchase limitations, bans on inexpensive handguns, bans on semiautomatic firearms, bans on .50-caliber firearms, bans on personal defensive firearms use, limitations on gun shows, and almost any other restrictive approach they can dream up. Read rest of article.

It was the intention of our founding fathers that each state have its own state regulated militia with every healthy individual owning and bearing his own firearms. The fathers were also against a powerful standing army, a principle we have violated in forming a powerful military. They wisely placed it under a civilian commander-in-chief. However, for this to work, the commander-in-chief must be a pro-American patriot and faithful to the Constitution.

Today, we have neither. And as such, we must, even to the shedding of blood, protect the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.