As they push corporate sponsors to distance themselves from ALEC, ColorOfChange, which is attempting to force the government to give minority Black voters in American the majority political voice through threats and intimidation. As their slogan says, they are attempting to change the color of democracy in America. They justify the intimidation of corporate America because, they say, "major companies that rely on business from Black folks shouldn't be involved in suppressing our vote."
On the ColorOfChange website, they insist that "for years, the right wing has been trying to stop Black people...from voting...and now some of America's biggest companies are helping them do it. Supporters of discriminatory voter ID laws claim they want to reduce voter fraud (individuals voting illegally or voting twice). But such fraud almost never actually occurs, and never amounts large enough to to affect the results of elections."
The three corporations ColorOfChange singled out with allegations of racism to force them to agree to stop sending checks to ALECeven though none of those corporations were funding the vote fraud initiative. It's all about draining ALEC's financial resources enough to force them to have to make up the money they are losing from Coca Cola, Kraft Foods and Pepsico with funds that might otherwise be used to lobby for Voter ID legislation in the 27 States currently debating this type of legislation.
In point of fact, none of the statements made by ColorOfChange in the former paragraph are true. The "right wing" (i.e., in this reference, those who oppose legislation to prevent vote theft), not even the southern White redneckwho some still fancies blows his nose with his fingers and wipes them on his pantlegobjects to honestly registered red, white, black or blue voters voting because the right to vote in America is sacrosanct. Once per voter per election. But, unlike the ColorOfChange rhetoric, our concern today is not that nonregistered voters are voting once or that registered voters are voting twice. Our concern is the leftwing social progressive groups who are successfully stealing our nation one election at a time by voting not two or three times in an election, but that caravans of buses carrying 20 or more hired voters are being transported to various voting precincts and, using fake Motor Voter IDs, are each voting 10 to 20 times on Election Day as a host of various voterssome blatantly fictitious, some deadand, during the primary season community activists are registering the same invidivual as 10 to 100 or more different voters. Each of these "voters" needs a live person to vote in their name. That's why "caravan voting" is now the rage for social progressives.
In 2008, according to CBS News, 12 States raised serious red flags about more than 10 thousand fraudulent voter registrations in each of the States that had been submitted by ACORN. Project Vote workers were re-registering people who told them they had already registered to vote "...maybe 10 to 15 times." Charles Barkley, a Pizza Hut worker in Cleveland said the Project Vote workers told him he was paid for each registration he turned in and Barkley could register as many times as he wanted. Barkley said he registered 15 times. Testifying under oath before the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections, 21-year old Lateala Goins also admitted to registering several times. She had no idea how many times she signed her name to a voter registration card. Goins justified her crime by saying that, although she registered over and over again, she only wrote down her name. She never put down an address. The Cuyahoga County "winner" in 2008 was Freddie Johnson with 72 fraudulent voter registrations (that they were able to find)and 72 Democrat absentee ballots cast. According to the State of Ohio, Barkley, who said he registered 15 times filled out 41 fraudulent voter registration cards. So, between Barkley and Johnson, they voted for Obama 115 times.
In Philadelphia the US Attorney was able to identify 50,663 fraudulent voter registration cards. Another 57,435 voter registration cards were rejected by State officials because they contained faulty Social Security numbers, incorrect birth dates or forged signaturesbut only after the "voters" submitted their absentee ballots. So, while the registrations were rejected, the votes were already castand they were counted as valid votes. So, forget the ColorOfChange rhetoric about "registered voters voting only once or twice." And forget the rhetoric that "...such fraud almost never actually occurs, and never amounts large enough to to affect the results of elections." In 2008 the Democrats got a virtual stranglehold on both the White House and Congress through vote fraud. And, if you recall, Republicans were not allowed to participate in any discussions on any piece of legislation in either House from Jan.5, 2009 until Jan. 3, 2011.
From Nov. 9, 2008 until Dec. 8, 2009 the Federal Election Commission posted the election results for the Presidential race on its website. Sometime in late November, California attorney Orly Taitz filed a Quo Warranto lawsuit against Barack Hussein Obama, asking for positive proof that he had the authority to act in the capacity of President of the United States. Dr. Taitz further asked for, as proof, Obama's long form birth certificate. Instead, Obama arrogantly posted the FEC 2008 Election results on the home page of the White House website. That's where I found it on Nov. 28, 2009. Even though that was the last thing in the world I was looking for at the time.
But, a glaring error on the top line of the form caused me to stop. There was a missing number that should not have been missing. The FEC report noted that there were 169 million registered voters in 2008. They also noted that 56.8% of them voted. But the box that should have said how many registered voters voted was empty. I thought that was strange since you get the percentage of the voters who voted by dividing the number of registered voters who voted into the number of registered voters. You can't get the percentage without the number of registered voters who voted. So, I went to the FEC website and found the answer. There were 96,992,000 registered voters who voted. Had that number appeared in the form on the White House website, I would dismissed it and continued searching for the information I went there to findwhich had nothing to do with the Election of 2008. However, when you find an error that was deliberately inserted, any curious mind would wonder why it was there. So I began looking.
I found the answer on the last line of the form (which would exist for another 10 days before the FEC 2008 Election Results document got a face lift. On the last line of the form it said: "Number of votes counted: 132,618,580." Whoa, TriggerHi-yo, Silver. What's wrong with those numbers? There appeared to have been 35,626,580 more votes counted than registered voters voting. Now, about ColorOfChange's assertion that vote fraud has never occurred in "... amounts large enough to to affect the results of elections," we know is pure bovine secretions. Barack Obama was credited with receiving 69,456,897 votes in 2008. It's a safe assertion that minority community activists were not drumming up make believe votes for John McCain in 2008. So, those extra votes had Obama's name on them. Doing the simple math, it looks like Obama got more "extra votes" in 2008 than he did legitimate votes. Deducting the non-registered votes from the registered voters who voted votes, suggests only 33,830,317 registered voters voted for Obama. So, it appears you can steal enough votes to win a national election. It depends, I guess, on how many loyal, stone blind, totally stupid precinct workers are manning the desks. I say totally stupid because the bad things the social progressives wish on the right, they also wish on the left. When Obama created the Death Board which set up the rules that will determine when those who drain more money from the bureaucracy than they pay into it with taxes die, the left (particularly the minority Americans who are marching to the beat of the ColorOfChange drums) needs to remember who was on generational welfare, and who also was the recipient of the Social Security Trust Fund money that financed generational welfareand bankrupted the Trust Fund, creating the need for a strategy similar to that used by the European socialists to lighten the load of those living on the government's largesse. (But, that's a discussion for another day.)
When ColorOfChange.org "reached out" to minorities to help them threaten the corporate giants that were helping ALEC get a vote fraud ID measure on ballots of the 27 States previously mentioned and work on others, ColorOfChange (through the threats of what they refer to as 85,000 ColorOfChange members) who "reached out" to Coke, Pepsi and Kraft Foods, demanding that they stop funding ALECor else. I'm not sure that anyone at Coke, Pepsi or Kraft asked, "Or else, what?" Coke, Pepsi and Kraft got the mesage.
Coca Cola buckled under the minority threats noting that their involvement with ALEC was "...focused on efforts to oppose discriminatory food and beverage taxes, not on issues that have no direct bearing on our business." In other words, Coca Cola isn't in any way interested in stopping crooked politicians from stealing elections. They don't have a Coke cap in that fight. I wonder if they would be more interested if Obama decided that Pepsi should have a right to Coke's restaurant concessions because his kids prefer Pepsi over Coke?
Kraft Foods publicly announced it would not renew its ALEC membership when it expires this spring, noting their involvement in ALEC was strictly limited to matters dealing with economic growth and development, transportation and tax policy. By the way, Kraft also got calls from the same 85,000 ColorOfChange members.
And, so did Pepsico, which has been an ALEC member for 10-years. Pepsi assured ColorOfChange in January that it would not renew its membership in ALEC. To the media, Pepsi simply said it would not renew its membership in ALEC for "financial reasons."
Since ALEC has been the most successful in getting anti-vote fraud voter ID laws enacted (over two dozen already), social progressive groups and leftwing activists feel it's imperative to drive a wedge between ALEC and its corporate donors because, according to Common Cause Deputy Program Director Douglas Clopp, with ALEC "...there was no public accountability. There was no transparency. Everything up until now had been done behind closed doors, and these memberships were not known to the American people."
That's probably because ALEC is not generally engaged in political dog fights that political action groups like Media Research Center, Judicial Watch, 60 Plus Association, CCRKBA, CDFE, FAIR and scores of other trench warfare PAC groups who are fighting the left's takeover of America, are.
None of the donors listed in Common Cause's financial statement are entrepreneurs of the free enterprise system whose businesses can easily be financially threatened by leftwing activists using Saul Alinsky tactics. Their supporters are a litany of socialist trusts like George Soros' Open Society Institute, the Joyce Foundation, the Gay & Lesbian Fund, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and Rockefeller Family & Associates, the Streisand Foundation, the Tides Foundation and scores of other leftwing radicals who don't like the US Founder's vision of America and prefer one that more closely resembles the former Soviet Union. And, where are the donor list for ColorOfChange.org? They simply doesn't exist in the public domain. Now there's real transparency for you. That's the left's view of transparencyit's essential for everyone except themselves. Well, for whatever it's worth, once again, you have my two cents worth on this subject. Until next time...