Obama Justice Department Decision Will Allow Non-Citizens to Register to Vote in Georgia
Posted By: sm. on 2009-06-05
In Reply to:
Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel issued the following statement following the U.S. Department of Justice’s denial of preclearance of Georgia’s voter verification process
Atlanta - “The decision by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to deny preclearance of Georgia’s already implemented citizenship verification process shows a shocking disregard for the integrity of our elections. With this decision, DOJ has now barred Georgia from continuing the citizenship verification program that DOJ lawyers helped to craft. DOJ’s decision also nullifies the orders of two federal courts directing Georgia to implement the procedure for the 2008 general election. The decision comes seven months after Georgia requested an expedited review of the preclearance submission.
“DOJ has thrown open the door for activist organizations such as ACORN to register non-citizens to vote in Georgia’s elections, and the state has no ability to verify an applicant’s citizenship status or whether the individual even exists. DOJ completely disregarded Georgia’s obvious and direct interest in preventing non-citizens from voting, instead siding with the ACLU and MALDEF. Clearly, politics took priority over common sense and good public policy.
“This process is critical to protecting the integrity of our elections. We have evidence that non-citizens have voted in past Georgia elections and that more than 2,100 individuals have attempted to register, yet still have questions regarding their citizenship. Further, the Inspector General’s office is investigating more than 30 cases of non-citizens casting ballots in Georgia elections, including the case of a Henry County non-citizen who registered to vote and cast ballots in 2004 and 2006.
“It is important to underscore that not a single person has come forward to say he or she could not vote because of the verification process. Further, while DOJ argues that the process is somehow discriminatory, the historic voter turnout among Hispanic and African-American voters in the 2008 general elections clearly says otherwise.
“This decision provides a specific example of the inherently illogical and unfair nature of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. It is a sad day for the rights of our state and for the integrity of our elections. I remain committed to continuing the fight for citizenship verification. In the coming days, I will consider every option available to the state, including the possibility of legal action.”
Background:
As required by law and ordered by federal courts in October 2008, the eligibility of new applicants to register and vote is checked against the Georgia Department of Driver Services (DDS) and Social Security Administration databases to ensure that individuals registering to vote report similar information. If information in these databases does not match information reported on the voter registration form, the applicant is asked to clarify the information. Additionally, if the applicant previously reported to DDS that he or she is not a U.S. citizen, that person is asked by a registrar to provide proof of citizenship.
Prior to the November 2008 General Election, Secretary Handel sent letters to 4,771 voter registration applicants whose records at DDS indicated they were not U.S. citizens, asking them to provide documentation of their citizenship. As of March 2009, 2,148 of these applicants still have chosen not to resolve the question about their U.S. citizenship.
In the November 2008 General Election, county election officials reported that 599 individuals cast a challenged ballot because the voter had previously indicated to DDS that he or she was not a United States citizen and had not resolved their status with county officials at the time of the election. Of those, 369 ballots were accepted because the voter provided documentation of their citizenship after the election; and 230 were rejected because the individual chose not to confirm his or her citizenship status.
On October 10, 2008, activist organizations including the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit to attempt to prevent Georgia from verifying the eligibility of applicants to register and vote in the November General Election, including whether those individuals were citizens of the United States.
On October 16, 2008, U.S. District Court Judge Jack Camp denied the motion by MALDEF and ACLU; directed the State to continue the verification process; and acknowledged the State’s requirements to verify information under the Help America Vote Act. In his order, Judge Camp stated:
HAVA requires that Defendant Handel match information in the statewide voter registration database with information from the Georgia DDS and the SSA databases “to the extent necessary to enable each such official to verify the accuracy of the information provided on the applications for voter registration.”
Judge Camp also stated: ...
LINK/URL: Read Full News Story
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Citizens are allowed to vote
with any motivation they wish - FOR someone, AGAINST someone, because they had soup for lunch, etc. Supreme Court (hey there's a case someone can discuss) upheld same-day registration and voting. Since they know the constitution and the law, I will trust their judgment.
The election system is OBVIOUSLY sound, because when Ohioans suggested that the Bush reelection count was rigged, they were denounced as conspiracy theorists. One cannot have it both ways.
Pop 8 was vote of MAJORITY of citizens who said NO...
--
I never said citizens weren't allowed to vote.
I just do not think that same day register and voting should be allowed. That is my personal opinion and I have the right to have that opinion regardless on how a court ruled on the subject.
Please don't base your decision on who you vote...sm
for on this or any other board. Look at the issues and make your decisions based on them, not personalities or rhetoric.
also, Obama did not flub the oath - the justice did - nm
x
Obama's Justice: Reconciliation, Not Retribution
Wednesday 18 February 2009
by: Cynthia Boaz, t r u t h o u t | Perspective
President Barack Obama. (Photo: Gerald Herbert / AP)
In the wake of Sen. Patrick Leahy's (somewhat) surprising and determined call for a Truth Commission to investigate the abuses of the Bush-Cheney administration, the Obama administration has been - to many progressives and those on the left of center - disturbingly silent. It's safe to say that the president's less-than-forceful position on the issue has been a source of intense criticism and skepticism from the left about the president's sincerity regarding his claims to promote a new era of transparency and accountability in American politics.
These concerns reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of the president's perspective as well as his role. A Truth Commission is a serious matter. In societies overcoming severe oppression or wrongdoing, Truth (or Truth and Reconciliation) Commissions can serve a critical role in healing the wounds wrought by the injustices and can promote much-needed trust, goodwill and reconciliation between the various parties. Peru, South Africa, Morocco and East Timor are just a few of the places where TRCs have helped their societies heal and have facilitated reform by acknowledging past wrongs and ensuring that the horrors of history will not be repeated.
Night after night, on radio talk shows, disgruntled, self-identified progressives call in to inform the host and her audience that we (the American people) can - in fact - "walk and chew gum at the same time" (a response to the argument on the part of some Obama defenders that now - in the midst of the worst economic crisis in decades - is simply not the right time to focus our energies on a task of this magnitude - that such an effort would be an irresponsible distraction). Those folks, many of whom, frankly, invoke images of villagers wielding torches and pitchforks, are sadly missing the point.
For starters, the Obama administration has taken as its primary goal the mission of reconciliation, not retribution. Although his efforts have been thus far frustrated by a small but dogmatic segment of the Republican Party, Obama is, in the truest sense, a unifier. It is simply not the style - politically or personally - of this president to seek the same sort of "justice" desired by the pitchfork-wielding villagers. In the mind of this president (I imagine, anyway) emphasis on punishing wrongdoers runs the risk - especially in this very politically contentious climate - of only promoting divisions and inflaming precisely the wrong emotions necessary for a culture of healing - namely, anger, hostility and the desire for vengeance. To wit: one caller to a progressive radio show stated (apparently oblivious to the irony) that "Bush should be publicly shamed." Surely this person - and others like him - do not seriously believe that the appropriate response to the culture of impunity we've been subject to for the past eight years is the subsequent creation of a culture of retribution.
This is not to say that the president does not hold a high regard for the rule of law, or that Bush and the others should not be held accountable for their misdeeds - which in some cases, appear to rise to the level of crimes against humanity. To the contrary - and this brings me to my second point - the rule of law can only truly be applied in an environment that is as independent from political motive as possible. If Obama were to come out openly advocating the seeking of legal retribution for the crimes of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the others, it could not but be regarded (accurately, in my view) as a political maneuver. Such an event would degrade the president's legitimacy by rendering his tactics no better than those of the people he would seek to prosecute. While the president certainly can (and should) not hinder the prosecution of his predecessor and his administration should another state (who can use the ICC) or entity (such as an organized group wishing to file a class-action suit against the previous administration for harm to the group as a whole - e.g. taxpayers organization, veterans groups, etc.), it is not the job of the president himself to seek such "justice." Directly punishing their predecessors is something done by tyrants in authoritarian regimes, not by legitimate, democratic leaders in an open society. This is why it was the widely revered cleric Desmond Tutu, rather than the newly elected President Nelson Mandela, who led South Africa's own Truth and Reconciliation Commission at the conclusion of Apartheid in that country.
As Americans and democratic citizens, we have an obligation to acknowledge the truth about our recent shared past and its present consequences. But this can only legitimately be done by those whose job it is to hold leaders accountable in a democratic society - the people. And it can only justly be motivated by a genuine desire to adhere to the rule of law, not by a desire to seek political retaliation. Otherwise, our collective hope for evolution beyond the stains of our recent past is nothing more than a facade for our complicity in politics as usual.
--------
Cynthia Boaz is assistant professor of political science at Sonoma State University, where she specializes in political development, quality of democracy and nonviolent struggle.
Justice Roberts messed it up, Obama knew that. sm
He could not repeat it as Roberts stated it because it was wrong. He correctly paused in order to give Justice Roberts the opportunity to state it correctly so that he (Obama) could repeat the oath correctly.
sorry, Obama did not make this decision -
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/FTRIALS/conlaw/ButlervPerry.html
It was decided in 1916!
I agree neither choice is great, but will vote McCain just as a vote against Obama. nm
x
I agree with Obama's decision to not show them. (sm)
It would embolden our enemies and help to recruit more terrorists. I thought Obama, once again, listened to both sides and then made his decision. If only Bush could have done that, instead of only hiring aides that would reflect HIS views and discarding those who didn't, including some of those "generals on the ground" that Bush claimed to honor.
I don't understand the posts below about Obama showing the photos. Last I heard, the complete opposite was true. Did something change, or are these comments just another attempt to completely ignore the truth in order to continue their assault on Obama, regardless of whether it's true or not?
Obama Decision to Move Census to White House...
GOP Sounds Alarm Over Obama Decision to Move Census to White House
A number of Republicans are joining the fight to put the census issue into the political spotlight "before it's too late."
FOXNews.com
Monday, February 09, 2009
1 x
in order to recommend a story, you must login or register.
199 Comments | Add Comment
ShareThisPhotos
The Census Bureau's U.S. Population Clock (Census.gov)
PEOPLE WHO READ THIS...
Also read these stories:
Stimulus Package Clears Key Procedural Hurdle in Senate
[2009-02-09]
gop sounds off on 'spendulus', gop, gop sounds off on stimulus, stimulus, stimulus passes senate test vote
987 visitors also liked this.
Private Sector Likely to Have Role in Government Bank Bailout Plan
[2009-02-09]
84 visitors also liked this.
Leahy Calls for 'Truth' Panel to Investigate Bush Administration
[2009-02-09]
72 visitors also liked this.
Graham Says Obama Is 'AWOL' on Stimulus Debate
[2009-02-05]
graham slams obama calls him 'awol on leadership', this process stinks, obama, graham slams obama callshim 'awol on leadership', graham obama 'awol' on stimulus debate
6345 visitors also liked this.
Schumer Calls for Ticketmaster Probe Over Suspicious Springsteen Sales
[2009-02-09]
help find the 'spendulus' pork, help
298 visitors also liked this.
powered by BaynoteUtah's congressional delegation is calling President Obama's decision to move the U.S. census into the White House a purely partisan move and potentially dangerous to congressional redistricting around the country.
Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, told FOX News on Monday that he finds it hard to believe the Obama administration felt the need to place re-evaluation of the inner workings of the census so high on his to-do list, just three weeks into his presidency.
"This is nothing more than a political land grab," Chaffetz said.
Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, told the Salt Lake Tribune that the move "shouldn't happen." He and Chaffetz are trying to rally Republicans "before its too late."
"It takes something that is supposedly apolitical like the census, and gives it to a guy who is infamously political," Bishop said of Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, who would be tasked with overseeing the census at the White House.
The U.S. census -- a counting of the U.S. population -- is conducted every 10 years by the Commerce Department. Its results determine the decennial redrawing of congressional districts
As a matter of impact, the census has tremendous political significance. Political parties are always eager to have a hand in redrawing districts so that they can maximize their own party's clout while minimizing the opposition, often through gerrymandering.
The census also determines the composition of the Electoral College, which chooses the president. If one party were to control the census, it could arguably try to perpetuate its hold on political power.
The results of the census are also enormously important in another way -- the allocation of federal funds. Theoretically, a political party could disproportionately steer federal funding to areas dominated by its own members through a skewing of census numbers.
At this point the White House doesn't seem willing to say what Emanuel's role will be in overseeing the census, and White House officials say census managers will work closely with top-level White House staffers, but will technically remain part of the Commerce Department.
But critics say the White House chief of staff can't be expected to handle the census in a neutral manner. Emanuel ran the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in the 2006 election, and he was instrumental in getting Democrats elected into the majority.
"The last thing the census needs is for any hard-bitten partisan (either a Karl Rove or a Rahm Emanuel) to manipulate these critical numbers. Many federal funding formulas depend on them, as well as the whole fabric of federal and state representation. Partisans have a natural impulse to tilt the playing field in their favor, and this has to be resisted," Larry Sabato, the director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, told FOX News in an e-mail.
Critics note that the method of counting can skew the census. Democrats have long advocated using mathematical estimates, a practice known as "sampling," to count urban residents and immigrants. Republicans say the Constitution requires a physical head count, which entails going door-to-door.
In 2000, Utah, which has three congressmen, was extremely close to landing a fourth House seat based on U.S. Census numbers, but the nation's most conservative state fell short by a few hundred votes because the Census Bureau wouldn't count Mormon missionaries from Utah serving temporarily overseas.
The GOP took the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, but was ultimately unsuccessful. Utah leaders had hoped the 2010 census would rectify the problem, but now worry that they will lose again if the census is managed by partisans.
When Obama nominated New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson to be commerce secretary -- he was later forced to withdraw -- he indicated that Richardson would be in charge of the census.
The decision to move the census into the White House was announced just days after Obama named New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg, a Republican, to be his commerce secretary. Gregg has long opposed "sampling" by the census and has voted against funding increases for the bureau.
Sabato said moving the census "in-house" will likely set up a situation where neither the Commerce Department nor the White House will know exactly what is going on in the Census Bureau. He said the process is "too critical to politics for both parties not to pay close attention."
"I've always remembered what Joseph Stalin said: 'Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.' The same principle applies to the census. Since one or the other party will always be in power at the time of the census, it is vital that the out-of-power party at least be able to observe the process to make sure it isn't being stacked in favor of the party in power. This will be difficult for the GOP since I suspect Democrats will control both houses of Congress for the entire Obama first term," Sabato said.
Obama on his decision to deploy additional 17,000 troops in Afghanistan..sm
"There is no more solemn duty as President than the decision to deploy our armed forces into harm's way," Obama said. "I do it today mindful that the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan demands urgent attention and swift action."
Idea--register under the name
and then nobody can take it from you. Until you do that you don't hold exclusive rights to any moniker and should cease and desist sermonizing people for using free reign monikers.
Have a nice day 
Then you need to vote for Obama. A vote for McCain will...sm
not help you. Obama wants to give tax relief to 90% of Americans who earn 1% of the gross earnings in this country. The top 1% of earners bring in 90% of earnings. Any one person who earns $250,000 or less will benefit from Obama's tax plan.
Voter fraud does not register with SS# and
xx
This post really makes me WANT to vote for Obama. I am undecided, but this pushes me closer to Obama
...Thanks for the info!
Got a whole lot more going in the substance department
his campaign jumping from one smear to the next, lurching around trying to find his trajectory, running from the issue of the economy ("is not my strong suit and if we talk about it, we'll lose), has yet to come up with a coherent campaign theme except the change slogan he highjacked fromm Obama and cannot articulate one single sentence on the subject of how he would handle his 90% self any differently than the shrub.
That's the job of the immigration department.
LAPD deals with robbery, rape, murder, drugs, domestic violence, car chases, etc., in other words actual crimes.
The immigration department deport illegal immigrants.
If an illegal immigrant commits a crime, LAPD is allowed to arrest them.
Personally, I find that most illegal immigrants are much harder workers than many of the lazy US citizens who think they are too good to put in a hard day's work.
Germany released him, OUR state department up in arms
and protesting the release...what's the point. It only proves that the U.S. don't want this thugs released...
Yeah, when does the Department of Free Stuff start, my house payment is due! nm
xx
Labor Department's report of 533,000 job losses in November — the biggest job loss in 34 years
Getting worse every day.
That is why I can't vote for Obama.
nm
exactly why I CANT vote for Obama.
nm
Exactly why I could NEVER vote for Obama.
nm
VOTE FOR OBAMA
There goes one of those extremist Republican tempers again, quoting so called facts and figures set forth by a "fat cat" named Senator McCain and his rich rich rich wife. As I said before.. You vote for McCain and I will vote for Senator Obama.
VOTE FOR OBAMA
your mamma
Let's Vote Here For Fun - Obama
Let's see how many here are for McCain and how many for Obama. You can just put the name (or even O or M) in the subject line. As you can see above, I vote for Obama. 
Some of us would NEVER vote for Obama either.
nm
I did not vote for Obama, still would not.
nm
The "world" says vote Obama...
best reason I have heard yet to vote McCain/Palin.
Would not vote for Obama, no matter what he
nm
Obama and Biden vote
What you don't realize is that when the vote took place, Pubs were in charge of house and senate. They always throw in crap (like the Bridge to Nowhere) in with the budget. In order to get anything done for the American people, the Democrats have to vote yes even though there are things in there that they don't agree with. That's how the Pubs do it. Lumping everything together instead of the way it's supposed to be done. Democrats have to compromise in order to get anything done. Pubs never do. They always want their way, like little babies, instead of doing what's right for the country. Like when congress went on vacation in August, they threatened a government shutdown if Pelosi refused to bring up a vote on drilling. Then when the government's shut down and more people suffering, they blame the Democrats when it's all the Pubs' fault. And stupid Pubs just listen to everything that comes out of their mouths and believe it. Wake up people! Watch CSPAN once in awhile and see the truth for yourselves!
Yeah, how can you vote for Obama? How could you
nm
How can a sensible person vote for Obama?
nm
Yes I make more and I will vote Obama because sm
I want it to be fair as far as taxation. I do not want to get a tax break when people are sleeping in their cars who 2 years ago were in the middle class. I will pay taxes, only 3 percent more. Actually it is going back to the tax structure that Clinton had which worked out fine for the country and we had no debt.
Why this black man can't vote for Obama
Why I can't vote for Obama: Worth the read!
I wanted to send this article from Huntley Brown - a fabulous concert pianist, a man of God and a black man. I appreciate so much his reasoning for not voting for Obama. I would like to see his article published or spread out via Email to as many as possible. It's good stuff!
Why I Can't Vote For Obama
By Huntley Brown
Dear Friends, A few months ago I was asked for my perspective on Obama, I sent out an email with a few points. With the election just around the corner I decided to complete my perspective. Those of you on my e-list have seen some of this before but it's worth repeating...
First I must say whoever wins the election will have my prayer support Obama needs to be commended for his accomplishments but I need to explain why I will not be voting for him.
Many of my friends process their identity through their blackness I process my identity through Christ. Being a Christian (a Christ follower) means He leads I follow. I can't dictate the terms He does because He is the leader.
I can't vote black because I am black; I have to vote Christian because that's who I am. Christian first, black second. Neither should anyone from the other ethnic groups vote because of ethnicity. 200 years from now I won't be asked if I was black or white. I will be asked if I knew Jesus and accepted Him as Lord and Savior.
In an election there are many issues to consider but when a society gets abortion, same-sex marriage, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning to name a few, wrong economic concerns will soon not matter.
We need to follow Martin Luther King's words, don't judge someone by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I don't know Obama so all I can go off is his voting record. His voting record earned him the title of the most liberal senator in the US Senate in 2007.
NATIONAL JOURNAL: Obama: Most Liberal Senator in 2007 (01/31/2008)
To beat Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton as the most liberal senator, takes some doing. Obama accomplished this feat in 2 short years. I wonder what would happen to America if he had four years to work with.
There is a reason Planned Parenthood gives him a 100 % rating. There is a reason the homosexual community supports him. There is a reason Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Castro, Hamas etc. love him. There is a reason he said he would nominate liberal judges to the Supreme Court. There is a reason he voted against the infanticide bill. There is a reason he voted No on the constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. There is a reason he voted No on banning partial birth abortion. There is a reason he voted No on confirming Justices Roberts and Alito. These two judges are conservatives and they have since overturned partial birth abortion. The same practice Obama wanted to continue.
God help him. There is a reason Obama opposed the parental notification law.
Think about this: You can't give a kid an aspirin without parental notification but that same kid can have an abortion without parental notification. This is insane.
There is a reason he went to Jeremiah Wright's church for 20 years.
Obama tells us he has good judgment but he sat under Jeremiah Wright teaching for 20 years. Now he is condemning Wright's sermons. I wonder why now?
Obama said Jeremiah Wright led him to the Lord and discipled him. A disciple is one in training. Jesus told us in Matthew 28:19 - 20 'Go and make disciples of all nations.' This means reproduce yourself. Teach people to think like you, walk like you; talk like you believe what you believe etc. The question I have is what did Jeremiah Wright teach him?
Would you support a White President who went to a church which has tenets that said they have a ...
1. Commitment to the White Community
2. Commitment to the White Family
3. Adherence to the White Work Ethic
4. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the White Community.
5. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting White Institutions
6. Pledge allegiance to all White leadership who espouse and embrace the White Value System
7. Personal commitment to embracement of the White Value System.
Would you support a President who went to a church like that?
Just change the word from white to black and you have the tenets of Obama's former church. If President Bush was a member of a church like this, he would be called a racist. Jessie Jackson and AL Sharpton would have been marching outside.
This kind of church is a racist church. Obama did not wake up after 20 years and just discovered he went to a racist church. The church can't be about race. Jesus did not come for any particular race. He came for the whole world.
A church can't have a value system based on race. The churches value system has to be based on biblical mandate. It does not matter if it's a white church or a black church it's still wrong. Anyone from either race that attends a church like this would never get my vote.
Obama's former Pastor Jeremiah Wright is a disciple of liberal theologian James Cone, author of the 1970 book A Black Theology of Liberation. Cone once wrote: 'Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him.
Cone is the man Obama's mentor looks up to. Does Obama believe this?
So what does all this mean for the nation?
In the past when the Lord brought someone with the beliefs of Obama to lead a nation it meant one thing - judgment.
Read 1 Samuel 8 when Israel asked for a king. First God says in 1 Samuel 1:9 'Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do.'
Then God says
1 Samuel 1:18 ' When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day.' 19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. 'No!' they said. 'We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.' 21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the LORD. 22 The LORD answered, 'Listen to them and give them a king.'
Here is what we know for sure.
God is not schizophrenic
He would not tell one person to vote for Obama and one to vote for McCain. As the scripture says, a city divided against itself cannot stand, so obviously many people are not hearing from God.
Maybe I am the one not hearing but I know God does not change and Obama contradicts many things I read in scripture so I doubt it.
For all my friends who are voting for Obama can you really look God in the face and say; Father based on your word, I am voting for Obama even though I know he will continue the genocidal practice of partial birth abortion. He might have to nominate three or four Supreme Court justices, and I am sure he will be nominating liberal judges who will be making laws that are against you. I also know he will continue to push for homosexual rights, even though you destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for this. I know I can look the other way because of the economy.
I could not see Jesus agreeing with many of Obama's positions. Finally I have two questions for all my liberal friends.
Since we know someone's value system has to be placed on the nation,
1 Whose value system should be placed on the nation.
2. Who should determine that this is the right value system for the nation?
Blessings, Huntley Brown
Obama and the black vote...
I don't mean this offensively to you but don't you think since Obama may possibly be the first black President of the United States, that the majority of black people want to share in that historical moment? I may be a white lady or a "cracker" as the blacks sometimes call me, but I can understand the majority of black people wanting to vote for a black man for President.
I did not vote for Obama, nor do I agree...sm
with most of the issues he stands for, but this is just plain CRAZY!
No, which is why I didn't vote for Obama....
**
I am in Georgia... nm
x
that's only in Georgia - I am using it by the way - nm
x
well they don't in Georgia -
they won't share the nature of the visit, but they sure share the bill at a private doctor's office.
GEORGIA!!!
Can't even get a job with a degree because they hire minorities first!
Speaking from experience!
LOL
Yeah, even scarier that you will vote for Obama
nm
i bet hillary doesn't vote for obama
will snicker as they push that button for mccain
Obama got my vote for none of the reasons you listed.
My vote is between myself and the canddiate. He is my voice. On any given subject, I could start a sentence that he can finish the same way I would. This has not happened for me in my entire adult lifetime. I was a few years shy of voting age in 1960. Kennedy was the only other candidate that gave me voice. That is why there is nothing anybody could say to sway me one way or the other and I find it sad that those who would try do not seem be able to understand that I am not the only one who feels this way about supporting this remarkable man.
How did Obama vote in the bailout issue..... sm
and what did he have to say about it?
""To the Democrats and Republicans who opposed this plan yesterday, I say step up to the plate and do what's right for this country," he said. "And to all Americans, I say this: If and when I am president of the United States, this rescue plan will not be the end of what we do to strengthen this economy, it will only be the beginning."
Tony Fratto, White House spokesman said, "Obama blasted Congress Monday for not passing the rescue package, while McCain's campaign accused Obama and Democrats of putting "politics ahead of country." "
Looks to me like Obama is just as much at fault as the *gasp* Republicans for throwing good money after bad...or is bad after worse....money into a scheme with no real plan in place beforehand. At least they made the big 3 come up with a plan.
I think Obama will ask his voters to vote for who he wants in; I hope not though! nm
OT but this is justice LOL sm
Wondering about Georgia. s/m
Are they like Arkansas? We may be hillbillies but we have enough sense to step on politicians when they don't deliver. The Democrat who replaced Mike Huckabee got the mess straightened out in this basically Republican state. I don't know of any individual cities who have their hand out here either. Seems like states, cities AND people all want a piece of the free money. Like all the posts here and elsewhere waiting for Obama to fill their hands with all that free cash. EVERYBODY needs to wake up:
This is a little story about four people named everybody,somebody,anybody and nobody.
There was an important job to be done and everybody was sure that somebody would do it.
Anybody could have done it but nobody did it.
Somebody got angry about that because it was everybody's job.
Everybody thought that anybody could do it but nobody realized that everybody wouldn't do it.
It ended up that everybody blamed somebody when nobody did what anybody could have done.
georgia editorial
This is an editorial that appeared in the Griffin, GA newspaper, written by Pastor Herb Flanders of the United Methodist Church.
Dear President Obama,
As I gather the Sunday before Memorial Day to worship with two United Methodist congregations I pastor in Griffin, Ga, I'll think about some of your recent comments. I'll be thinking of what you told a crowd of about 2,000 in Strasbourg, Germany, as you spoke of our nation's views of Europe - "Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive." The gray, balding heads on the people who worship with me attest to their years of toil and labor on this Earth. They are, as Jesus said, the 'salt of the Earth." They are grandmamas and granddaddies, blue collar folks who worked hard to build a community and raise families, to give to others when they had precious little for themselves. They continue to do these things today.
Salt of the Earth they are and heroes to boot. When this nation called they answered with a resounding 'yes' and went where Uncle Sam asked them. A couple of months ago, we laid John Busbin to rest. Like you, he visited Europe on behalf of the U.S. He beat you there by 65 years and spent his time marking and clearing mine fields, not giving speeches. Rather than being arrogant, dismissive or derisive, John partnered with the French and others to meet a common challenge. Others did the same, sailing on ships, slogging through mud or soaring through the air because evil and tyranny were well on their way to taking over the world.
I wish you'd come May 24th and sit with these folks as we sing America the Beautiful and America. I'd like it if you could sit up front with me when Maxine Bunn and Jerry Turner do a medley of military service hymns and the veterans or spouses of deceased veterans stand when their branch's hymn is played. They grab hold of the pew in front of them to pull themselves to their feet. I know I'm in the company of giants. I'd love for you to meet Janie Worthy and understand those tears that still glisten on her cheeks each Memorial Day Sunday. Janie married John Pershing Botkin in August 1943. Their daughter Gail was born Aug. 10, 1944, three or four months after John shipped out to Europe. Janie, 19, went to St. Mary's, Ohio to stay with her in-laws after Gail was born. One Sunday afternoon in early December, farm families began to call each other as the postmaster's Model A made its way down the country roads. They knew that car carried news that would shatter a family and were trying to figure out where he was headed. He stopped in front of Janie's in-laws' farmhouse. Her daddy-in-law walked out to meet him and learned that John was killed in action Nov. 11, 1944, serving with the Army in Alsace. Cpl. Botkin never saw, held or kissed his little girl. As a father, you can empathize with Janie's salty tears.
Perhaps if you could come you'd see why your words hurt so many so much. America may be many things and she certainly isn't perfect, but heroes with whom I share my life have hardly been arrogant, dismissive or derisive of Europe. They've given themselves to save Europe when Europe couldn't save itself. So, Mr. President, get out of Washington for a weekend and take a trip down to Georgia. We'll feed you some barbecue over in Williamson and I'll introduce you to some friends of mine, some everyday giants and ordinary heroes.
God bless,
Herb Flanders
|
