Elections: Tools of Tyranny?

Ballot box, symbol of elections. The Texas voter ID law will stop people from stuffing this, and hopefully other kinds of voter fraud. If Donald Trump doesn't insist on this kind of backup, he'll likely lose the election.
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Just this past week yet another conservative hopeful has failed his country, our Constitution and the people who have placed their confidence in him.  Rand Paul has joined the Progressive camps of the ruling parties with his declaration that voter fraud, the worst kind of election fraud, should be ignored.

The foundation of liberty and freedom is built upon representatives of the people and all those in position of power being held accountable by fair and honest elections. The integrity in the election process and the belief by the people that the results are unblemished is the basis for the rule of law and the compliance to it.

Election results and the laws and regulations that are a consequence thereof, can be acquiesced to even if they run contrary to one’s culture or ideology if those results were understood to be obtained honestly. The sense would be that detrimental and dangerous programs could be overturned once the people see the effects of them and change course in the next election cycle.

But when the people lose faith in the system, when they begin to understand the corruption, the cheating and the flagrant voter fraud has been so ingrained that no amount public education will affect in anyway the pre-determined outcome of elections, the rule of law will break down.

It is important to note here that even as we understand that honest elections are the tools of a representative democracy and the shield against government domination, fraudulent elections are even more powerful tools of tyrants.

A conservative leader standing against election integrity?

Are honest elections a mere distraction to politicians?It is simply disgraceful for any conservative leader to remove himself from the continuous battle against those who would subvert the veracity of free elections.  If Rand Paul supposes that looking the other way or just out right ignoring voter fraud is the way to the White House, it may be time Americans reconsider why supporting for him would differ from supporting any liberal Democrat.

Before we go into some of the crimes and unconstitutional processes which are growing like a cancer on our liberty, right here in America, let’s look at some very good uses of rigged elections which are going on right now in Europe.  This is a prime example of how corrupt governments use “elections” as a tool for power and aggression.

The Premier of the Ukrainian Provence of Crimea, was elected to his office despite Russian-Ukrainian voters being outnumbered by Ukrainian Nationalists by more than a 4 to 1 ratio.  But what the Russian government supported Premier had in his favor was crooked elections controlled by the Russians. As a result, when Russian policies were being imposed on the Crimea, the people who understood the election of their Premier was crooked, refused to except his decisions and ousted him.

Since then the Russians, in preparation for the ultimate invasion and take over of the Ukraine, held yet another fraudulent referendum whereby a small minority of Russian-Ukrainians voted overwhelmingly to forsake Crimea’s sovereignty and turn the country over to Russia. That would be similar to Texans voting to allow Mexico to annex it.

This past weekend, after announcing even more referendums for even more Ukrainian territory to be handed over to Mother Russia, Ukrainian security forces raided a Russian separatist compound and confiscated hundreds of thousands of pre-marked ballots. Pre-marked by the way, to join Russia.

We have pointed this out because this chaos, this corruption and this type of circumvention of honest elections is well underway here in America.  The schemes and plots may be different, but the results will be the same.  If those in power are allowed to remain there by voter fraud and usurpation, voters will stop voting at the ballot and start voting from positions of armor plated camouflage.

Back now to America.  Those whom have decided that honest and reliable elections are nothing more than an inconvenience, may, someday soon, be even more inconvenienced when they find themselves whiling away endless hours in darkened cell or being contributing material in a landfill.

The Founding Fathers, having lived under tyranny understood the need for governments to be accountable to the people. They also knew the only way for that to happen is to provide for fair elections. For this reason they limited those who would make our laws to very short two year terms.  That way each representative, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, would be accountable to the people, in short order.

Insuring party dominance

Allowing the manipulation of congressional districts that guarantee the election of one party member or another was the beginning of “organized voter fraud”.  This clearly is unconstitutional and prevents accountability of the people in favor of accountability to the party.  Organizing voting districts in order to balance out, as equally as possible, registered voters from various parties, is the only way gerrymandering could be considered constitutional.

Voting early and often

Early voting is an open invitation to voter fraud which is clearly unconstitutional and a violation of Article 2, Section 1 of the United States Constitution.  All across this country, for months prior to a Presidential Election, the state election officials open the door to voter fraud by allowing early voting. These early votes are in the hands of people who have proven over and over again they will do anything to win or steal an election.  The founders understood the nature of the power hungry politician and put into the Constitution a means that would limit the ability of criminals to hide or manipulate the votes being cast.

Here are they words they wrote:

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

For those who may not have been home schooled or have already suffered that delusion of Common Core Education, the electors are those voted for in the election and they all must be chosen on the same day.  This does not mean “early voting” or any other such thing.

Computers deleting or changing your vote

Of course the authors of our founding documents could never have imagined electronic voting machines and the perilous manipulation of the software associated with it.  But for them to accept that votes could be cast into a black hole of a computer program, where no verification of any kind would be available, is beyond the realm of possibility.  A return to paper ballots is the only way to protect every citizen’s vote.

And, how about these points of interest?

  1. Just recently it was discovered that hundreds of thousands of voters, living in several states, are registered to vote in more than one place.
  2. It was also discovered that many tens of thousands of dead people were still on the voting books and no cross reference was done or will be done to see how many ghouls found their way from coffin to polling station.
  3. In at least five voting districts in swing states, Obama received 100% of the vote in the last election.  Not one person even made an error voting and cast a ballot for Romney. Not even one.
  4. Several other districts in states such as Florida and Ohio, areas dominated by Democratic operatives, the number of people who voted, outnumbered those who were registered.
  5. On election day, news outlets reported having to hold many polls open past the scheduled closing times to accommodate the high volume of voters.  Then, strangely enough, we were told that millions of conservatives did not turn out and the total number of voters was way down as to compared to other elections, when by the way, the polls closed on time.

Obama’s Justice Department, headed by the gun running racist, Eric Holder, has not, nor does he ever intend to prosecute voter fraud and now it appears that Senator Rand Paul is in his corner.  God help this country.  We are in for some very rough times.

Reprinted from TPATH

<a href="https://www.sodahead.com/united-states/elections-tools-of-tyranny/question-4320459/" title="Elections: Tools of Tyranny?">Elections: Tools of Tyranny?</a>

[subscribe2]

12 Responses to Elections: Tools of Tyranny?

  1. […] Elections: Tools of Tyranny? […]

  2. Fergus Mason says:

    “Rand Paul has joined the Progressive camps of the ruling parties with his declaration that voter fraud, the worst kind of election fraud, should be ignored.”

    Except that’s not even remotely like what Rand Paul actually said, is it? What he REALLY said was that some Republicans are exaggerating the scale of the problem. I can’t find any source that vaguely suggests he’s saying fraud should be ignored. Quite the opposite in fact.

    I respect Terry because, even though I think he’s wrong about a lot of things, I believe he’s sincere in his views and statements. You’re just dishonest.

    “Dead people do still vote in some elections. There still is some fraud. And so we should stop that” – Rand Paul, 22 April 2014

    • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

      Mr. Kehoe based his essay on the slant that The New York Times put on the article. The Times would love to suggest that Rand Paul wants people to ignore the problem of electoral fraud.

      Since then, another piece came out in WND suggesting the Times deliberately misconstrued Senator Paul’s remarks.

  3. Fergus Mason says:

    That’s not the way I read the NYT article; it seemed to be stressing that he’s out of alignment with the rest of the party but I didn’t see anything to support Mr Kehoe’s rather eccentric interpretation of it.

    Personally I’m baffled that anyone could oppose asking people for ID before they vote, seeing as my experience of the USA is getting asked for ID before I can even buy a “pint” of beer (real pints are bigger than yours) but it seems to be keeping people entertained.

    • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

      We seem to have a class of politicians who, to say the least, want to trump up charges of racism and “voter suppression.” And to say the most, these same politicians might turn out to win elections by voting the move-outs and the cemetery.

  4. Fergus Mason says:

    Well, there does seem to be plenty of genuine racism around, which probably doesn’t help. I suppose the big question is, what sort of ID should be acceptable?

    • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

      A photo I.D., with double barcodes for verification, based on the sort of six-point identification system for a driver’s license in New Jersey. And issued at the expense of the State if necessary. Though it’s hard to imagine why a would-be voter wouldn’t be able to scrape twenty or thirty bucks together. Which is about the cost of a driver’s license.

      Also, whenever a voter registers to vote in one jurisdiction, the Division of Elections ought to have a place to go to query other jurisdictions for the same voter registered somewhere else. That should trigger a letter to the voter asking which address he would like to be registered to vote at – his choice, of course. And if the registrant had a felony record, the system should check for any pardon or reprieve that would effectively restore the registrant’s right to vote.

      Finally, the County Surrogate to whom someone reports a death should notify the Division of Elections of the deceased’s name. This should flash to every Division of Elections around the country.

  5. Fergus Mason says:

    “it’s hard to imagine why a would-be voter wouldn’t be able to scrape twenty or thirty bucks together”

    For some people that’s a week’s grocery budget.

    We used to have a suffrage system based on ability to pay. It didn’t work out so well. In fact one of our colonies – can’t remember the name – had a revolution to get away from it…

    “the Division of Elections ought to have a place to go to query other jurisdictions for the same voter registered somewhere else.”

    You mean like a national residents database?

    “And if the registrant had a felony record, the system should check for any pardon or reprieve that would effectively restore the registrant’s right to vote.”

    There’s a simple solution; let any adult who’s not actually in jail vote. When someone has finished a prison sentence their crime has been paid for. Given that the USA has the worst statistics in the world for the percentage of its citizens it locks up, lifetime voting bans are taking a major bite out of your democracy.

    • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

      I’m not sure I want to share my franchise with someone who committed one of the Big Four, but that’s another debate.

      A week’s grocery budget? Maybe in Côte d’Ivoire, or Ghana, the Mecca of Internet money scams. Not in the United States of America.

  6. Fergus Mason says:

    “I’m not sure I want to share my franchise with someone who committed one of the Big Four”

    On the other hand the USA has an extensive list of felonies, including “threatening a government official.” Would you agree to disenfranchising everyone who aimed a weapon at the BLM during the Bundy debacle?

    Convicted criminals who’re in jail should be denied the vote. Once they’ve served their sentence, however, they’re supposed to be given a fresh start, a chance to rehabilitate themselves. Disenfranchising them for life – making them a non-citizen – is not exactly going to help. And how about “No taxation without representation”?

    “A week’s grocery budget? Maybe in Côte d’Ivoire, or Ghana, the Mecca of Internet money scams. Not in the United States of America.”

    It might surprise you. Plenty of people in first world countries have that amount or not much more to spend on food for a week.

    • Terry A. Hurlbut says:

      Revision of the criminal statutes, and better assurances of equal application of those statutes, is an issue separate and apart from deciding whether to reinstate someone’s franchise after he is released-after-serving-his-sentence-in-full or even while he is on parole or probation. (Or whether to bring the question of whether he can ever vote again, before a judge.)

  7. Fergus Mason says:

    The only countries I know of that continue to disenfranchise people after they’re released from prison are the USA and… er, nobody.

    I have to admit to being puzzled that a country which makes so many claims to be a beacon of freedom then jails, proportionately, twice as many people as a Stalinist hell-hole like Belarus and three times as many as a crazed theocracy like the UAE, and continues to persecute them even after they’ve served their sentence. There are times I suspect that you’re not actually very free at all.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.