SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (90553)9/8/2010 3:09:30 AM
From: Neeka5 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224704
 
Their law breaking is criminal. Makes the Bush yrs seem like bliss.

h/t LB

Selective Enforcement at Obama's Justice Department

By John

POWERLINE

In Washington, there are probably 10 or 20 faux "scandals" for every real scandal. One of the real scandals these days is the way in which Barack Obama and Eric Holder have politicized the Department of Justice. The Democrats criticized the Bush administration for politicizing DOJ, but that was sheer fabrication. It didn't happen. Immediately upon taking office, however, Obama and Holder embarked on a program of partisan law enforcement the likes of which this country may never have seen before.

The latest manifestation of the Obama administration's perversion of justice is noted by former DOJ lawyer Chris Adams--a deliberate decision, for political reasons, not to enforce Section 8 of the "Motor Voter" law:

>>> If Americans don't want dead and ineligible felons participating in elections, they will have to clean up the mess themselves, as Attorney General Eric Holder won't do his job by enforcing the integrity protections in the "Motor Voter" law passed in 1993.

Motor Voter struck an important balance -- it sought to increase voter registration, as well as ensure voter integrity. Welfare offices and motor vehicle offices became voter registration centers. But the law also required states to conduct list maintenance to ensure ineligible names don't pollute the voting rolls. Dead people, ineligible felons, and people who moved away must be removed from the rolls by state election officials.

The attorney general was given the power to enforce both provisions of Motor Voter, yet Eric Holder is only interested in enforcing one. This attorney general simply won't do his job and enforce the list integrity requirements.

During the Bush administration, the Justice Department enforced both Section 7 (the welfare office registration provisions) as well as Section 8 (the list integrity provisions). Section 7 cases were investigated and brought against multiple states, including Illinois and Arizona. Section 8 cases were investigated and brought against multiple states, like Missouri and Maine.

The decision of the Holder DOJ to ignore the integrity provisions of Section 8 is deliberate and corrupt. In November 2009, political appointee Julie Fernandes told the entire assembled DOJ Voting Section that the Obama administration would not enforce the list maintenance provisions of Section 8. Section 8 "doesn't have anything to do with increasing minority turnout," Fernandes said. "We don't have any interest in enforcing that part of the law." End of story.

At the same time, Fernandes stressed that the DOJ would vigorously enforce the welfare agency registration provisions of Section 7.

She made these lawless instructions in front of me and dozens of other shocked Voting Section lawyers. The DOJ has never once denied that Fernandes gave these instructions, nor has the DOJ countermanded them.<<<

The Obama administration will continue to engage in selective law enforcement for partisan ends as long as we, the citizens, allow them to get away with it. Remember this on November 2.



To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (90553)9/8/2010 2:49:13 PM
From: Neeka5 Recommendations  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 224704
 
Ann,

Why is it that liberals insist we all call them Progressives? I see nothing what so ever progressive about their policies. In fact I'd say the Progressive Movement's very survival relies on policies that hearken back to a time long, long ago in a distant country called the Soviet Union.

There is absolutely nothing "Progressive" about that.