William Haupt III: Know your rights and how to protect them
“At one time, getting passing grades in civics and U.S. history were prerequisites for high school graduation. Our biggest mistake was to adopt common core and abandon this.” – Michael Polelle Over five decades ago, Congress passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965. It established standards to protect the voting rights of all qualified U.S. voters. Contrary to liberal psychosis, the Voting Rights Act applies to every voter equally. It set parameters for each state to engrain within its voting laws. To ensure equality, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed to protect the rights of ethnic minorities. But its core provisions, like the Voting Rights Act, protects the civil rights of all Americans equally. Contrary to leftist logic, neither of these gave more rights to one group and less rights to another. Five decades later, many Americans don’t know the Civil Rights Act protects all citizens from age, gender, ethnic and religious discrimination, in addition to minority groups. Government cannot give any form of preference to one group without abridging the same rights that others are entitled to. As Boomers began to feel the pinch of age prejudice, many forgot that age discrimination is a key provision in the Civil Rights Act. And very few seniors ever filed complaints with the Department of Justice about this. “We are marching for the civil rights of the Negros and those of all Americans.” – Martin Luther King Jr Even fewer Americans know why our states were obliged to update their voting laws after the last election. All states laws must comply with provisions in the Voting Rights Act to protect “all voters.” In response to the mayhem during the 2020 election, when blue states made up new laws as they went along, 43 states updated voting laws to prevent a repeat of the insane bedlam that took place in 2020. Citizens asked state lawmakers to ensure that nobody could ever question how anybody who couldn’t get elected dogcatcher in his own state get the most votes in U.S. presidential history. Since the Constitution obligates states to enforce the Voting Rights Act, after the last election, they reviewed all mail-in voting, counting ballots received after Election Day and ballot drop-boxes. All these issues truncated the intent of the Constitution and Voting Rights Acts. Yet in the woke world, if you don’t win the brass ring or can’t hijack it, you bellyache that your voting rights were violated! By law, states are responsible for updating existing election laws when they do not comply with the Voting Rights Act that protects all individual voting rights. Yet progressives and identity groups are squealing like pigs in a bacon factory? Why are they upset with states trying to protect their rights? The woke society is built on double standards. It can’t exist any other way. Wokes make up laws to justify breaking laws they don’t like. Either play the game their way, or they will take their ball away. “I learned that being ‘woke’ is being brainwashed by extremist liberal propaganda.” – Lillian Fang Until the presidential election of 2000, the merits of the Voting Rights Act were seldom questioned. But the fiasco in Florida proved, if progressives want to win badly enough, no law will ever stand in their way. After five weeks of trying to turn Al Gore into a winner, the choice of our nation’s new leader came not from the citizens, but from a 5-4 majority of U.S. Supreme Court justices. Liberal contempt for our voting rights began long before the 2000 election when blue states started moving to all mail-in voting. They had the national media’s pump primed; there was no way Al Gore could possibly lose. When the media abruptly called the election for Gore, they ended up with egg on their faces, and progressives and their liberal attorneys around the U.S. cried out election fraud! “Hi. I’m Al Gore, and I used to be the next president of the United States of America.” – Al Gore Although liberal media pollsters and pundits had been predicting a landslide victory for Al Gore, in the real world Pew Research, Gallop, and other independent groups pictured a much tighter race. They forecasted that fallout from the Clinton-Lewinsky sex scandal would mobilize conservatives against the left’s loose morality. Al Gore lost the entire south and even his home state, Tennessee. In reaction to allegations about voter fraud, hanging chads, and especially mail-in ballots that were supposedly miscounted, Democrats petitioned Washington to review U.S. voting rights again. The 2005 Commission on Election Reform, chaired by liberals Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker, concluded that the biggest threat to voting integrity was with mail-in ballots. “We conclude that mail-in voting remains the largest source of potential voter fraud.” – Jimmy Carter Concerns about vote tampering have a long history in the U.S. They helped drive the move to the secret ballot, which all U.S. states adopted between 1888 and 1950. Secret ballots made it harder to intimidate voters and to monitor which candidate a voter had voted for. One University of Florida study found complaints about fraud fell by an average of 14% after states adopted secret ballots. In woke America, facts are an “inconvenient truth.” There have never been more complaints about denial of individual rights, violations of voting rights, and claims of “systematic racism” coming from people who don’t know the rights “they have” and “do not have” than any time in American history. “I have faith in the United States and our ability to make good decisions based on facts.” – Al Gore In 1865, following the Civil War, the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments and the 19th Amendment in 1920 guaranteed equal rights and universal suffrage for all Americans. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 protected those rights. That is why we must have voter ID laws. Every illegal vote cast nullifies the votes of the legitimate voters. Still,
With millions on the table, “Sheldon Adelson primary” still up in the air
Republican presidential candidates are locked in battle for more than just votes, they are also running in what is known as the “Sheldon Adelson primary.” Adelson, the multibillionaire casino magnate, is one of the biggest prizes for GOP contenders, through his willingness to spend a lot of money to promote favored candidates. But in 2016, notes Michael Isikoff of Yahoo Politics, the Adelson primary has become a bit more complicated. After being courted by each of the top Republican candidates, Adelson is reportedly close to supporting freshman Senator Marco Rubio, and is expected to announce his selection soon after the next GOP debate Dec. 15. An event is scheduled for the Adelson-owned Venetian Las Vegas hotel. However, the anointment of Rubio as the winner may face one obstacle – Miriam Adelson, his outspoken and equally conservative Israeli-born wife. Isikoff reports that Miriam Adelson, a physician, has gravitated recently toward Ted Cruz, mostly because of the Texas senator’s hawkish national security stance and unwavering support for Israel. “He really likes Marco, but she really likes Cruz,” Isikoff quotes a source familiar with the Adelson family. “And it’s a standoff.” The impasse between husband and wife could go one of two ways – a split decision, or no decision at all. Both Adelsons have been publicly generous with their donations, with more than $98 million spent in the 2012 election cycle, but it has always been as a couple. Roughly half of the checks (about $47 million) were written by Miriam, and were often accompanied by a similar check signed by Sheldon. This standoff could result in the Adelsons’ sitting out the GOP primary season entirely, with the concern over financially supporting someone in the primaries, leading to the couple funding attack ads against another preferred candidate. But this situation comes at a pivotal moment in the race, as both Rubio and Cruz are jockeying for a position as the establishment candidate, a responsible choice compared to self-financed outsider Donald Trump, the current GOP front runner. The next phase in the Adelson primary comes this week during a presidential forum by the Republican Jewish Coalition, a group strongly supported by Adelson, held Thursday in Washington. Although Sheldon and Miriam will be out of town, all 14 current Republican candidates will be speaking – Rubio and Cruz included. As expected, national security will be the top issue. Coincidentally, several candidates will also hold high profile fundraisers during their time in DC, drawing wealthier members of the RJC, including one hosted by Jeb Bush’s Right to Rise PAC and a Rubio event co-chaired by national finance chair and RJC board member Wayne Berman. Bush’s role in the Adelson primary took a hit recently, after former Secretary of State James Baker, one of the former governor’s foreign policy advisers, spoke at an event held by an American Jewish group supporting the Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank. Baker’s appearance prompted the billionaire to reportedly say Bush was “dead to him,” adding that it will lose his campaign “a lot of money.” According to Isikoff, Bush was compelled to contact Adelson and distance himself from Baker, saying that the former Secretary was only “on a list” and never was considered a top adviser. Rubio saw opportunity in Bush’s gaffe, and aggressively secured the support of the Adelsons, by providing regular updates and attending a private dinner meeting in Washington, with long conversations about family and private lives. This meeting led POLITICO to declare Rubio the “Adelson primary front runner.” Nevertheless, Isikoff says others close to the Adelson’s suggest the pair just might bide their time and see how the race progresses, avoiding the mistake made in 2012, when they sank $15 million in the Newt Gingrich-associated super PAC, only to have the former House Speaker drop out of the race.
