Given the plummeting popularity of the Obamessiah and his policies, and given the tremendous movement in the Right-leaning grass roots, one might wonder why the Democrats aren’t more afraid of the 2010 election. It’s a very good question to ponder.
For starters, I think that a lot of the freshman Dems and those in right-leaning districts are sweating bullets. They know very well the thin ice their leadership has pushed them out onto, and they’re going to have to make some tough decisions about whether they will continue following that leadership into a fast retirement, or to pull back and potentially keep their jobs.
Still, Obama and the Dem leadership is showing no sign of slowing their agenda. Part of this could be because they know they’ve got a golden opportunity to implement their wildest dreams during this short window of time where they’ve got super-majorities in Congress. But, I think there’s more to it. I think they’ve got a plan to substantially boost their ranks between now and the 2010 election by tapping two particular groups of people who are already here, already far-Left-leaning, and ready to vehemently join up. Who are they? Illegal immigrants and felons.
I won’t even attempt to establish the long history of Democrats advocating for and shilling for both groups of people, trying to get them the right to vote; I think that’s well enough established that pretty much everyone will agree with me on that. So, the question is how they’re going to get that done now.
The felon vote is already in process, starting with Obama himself. As a Senator, he co-sponsored a piece of legislation called the Count Every Vote Act, which would have done just that. Now that he is President, his first Supreme Court nominee has a track record of supporting voting rights for felons:
“Advocate” is a loaded word when referring to a judge, and with good reason. Judges are not supposed to allow their personal preferences influence their interpretation of the law and the facts at issue in a given case. But their really is no other way to describe Sotomayor’s dissenting opinion in Hayden v. Pataki, a case brought by inmates in New York State under the federal Voting Rights Act.
The inmates were suing the State of New York for the right to vote, alleging New York’s prohibition of felon voting was discriminatory based on race and ethnicity. Sotomayor sided with the inmates in a four-paragraph long opinion, holding that the Voting Rights Act prohibited states from disenfranchising felons because the majority are black, Hispanic, and other minorities.
While this empathy standard is precisely what Obama wants, it is blatantly unconstitutional. But, it’s now entrenched in the form of the Wise Latina. I’ll wager many other federal judges agree, and it won’t be long under this administration before the issue comes up in an official capacity.
The illegal immigration debate is much more widely known, especially since the most recent ruckus took place only a couple years ago. If you’ll recall, the so-called ‘comprehensive immigration reform’ bill of 2007 was little more than a rhetorical disguise for another giant amnesty. It was eventually defeated by a massive grass roots uprising, though individual components of that sweeping amnesty plan have popped up every few months since then.
It’s coming back in full force soon:
The New York Times reported August 10th: “President Obama on Monday reiterated his commitment to pursuing comprehensive immigration reform, despite his packed political agenda….” He must be serious; Obama has made that pledge to reporters twice in four days. On both occasions, the President also said he plans to start off where the Bush administration left off and introduce a bill that gives amnesty to the entire unlawful population in the United States (generally estimated at about 11 million). Reports are this bill is being written behind close doors with Congressional leaders and government officials and it is shaping up to be a wish list for activist groups. The plan is to finish drafting the bill this fall and introduce the legislation next year.
America has tried amnesty numerous times since the 1960s. None have worked. Each time, the deal is struck to grant amnesty this ‘one last time’…and then we’ll secure the borders. And yet, somehow, that border security just never quite happens, and a few years down the road there is another call for amnesty, but the numbers are even greater. Now we’re up to over 10 million illegals in the country, by most accounts. Demographics studies show that these people skew vastly to the Left, and support Democrats in huge numbers.
How do you think the addition of 10 million new Democrat voters would go over with Obama and the Ruling Party?
A reminder of the margin of victory in the last few presidential elections:
As you can see, amnesty would build an instant and substantial cushion for Democrats, and could very well alter the voting demographics of the nation for decades. And, if Obamacare passes, there is that much more incentive for illegals to enter the country before an amnesty takes place, so the numbers are likely going to be even higher.
But there’s another dirty little secret that the Democrats are planning to use: the census. Get a load of this:
Next year’s census will determine the apportionment of House members and Electoral College votes for each state. To accomplish these vital constitutional purposes, the enumeration should count only citizens and persons who are legal, permanent residents. But it won’t.
Instead, the U.S. Census Bureau is set to count all persons physically present in the country—including large numbers who are here illegally. The result will unconstitutionally increase the number of representatives in some states and deprive some other states of their rightful political representation. Citizens of “loser” states should be outraged. Yet few are even aware of what’s going on.
Hit the link for a detailed explanation of how the census dictates the composure of Congress. The bottom line here is that by including illegals in the census, states with high illegal immigrant populations (mostly blue states) will have an artificially high number of representatives in the House. And, since the House is where all spending bills are supposed to originate, well, you can see where that goes.
So, I believe that the Democrat leadership isn’t really sweating the 2010 elections…much. They believe that with their super-majority in Congress for the next 18 months, they’ll be able to pass Obamacare, cap-and-tax, amnesty, and all kinds of other legislation that will stack the election deck in their favor. They’re right, they have the votes to do it, unless those freshman and ‘conservative’ Dems take a stand. The aim of the leadership is, as we’ve discussed many times before, to enshrine Democrat rule in America for the foreseeable future, and these are some of the key vehicles for doing so.
Quite frankly, I can’t think of a worse fate for America, nor a less fatal one.
Send your thoughts and comments on these topics to your members of Congress.
There’s my two cents.