Thomas Paine: American Philosopher, & Revolutionary
From 1776 through the formation of The Constitution I helped create America. Now I have returned to help save America. Please join my Facebook group American Patriots in a free and open discussion to further the cause of FREEDOM.
Now the Democrats are desperately pushing passage of their proposed Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, hoping to ram those through Congress before this year’s mid-term election, just in case they lose control of the majority. To facilitate that suddenly urgent agenda item, they claim it’s a great idea to eliminate the Senate filibuster in order to pass these voting reforms.
It’s a classic standoff between the Democrats who claim to be fighting for everyone to have easy access to voting rights, including non-citizens, with no proof of identity; and Republicans who hope to ensure that all votes are legitimate, cast by actual living citizens, and calling for Voter ID laws. Maybe we should send out mail-in ballots to China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran. Why should they be excluded? Maybe we could include vouchers for taxpayer money if they vote Democrat. That sounds like something they might already have buried in their “pass it to see what’s in it” legislation. The unbelievable part is; they have no shame in promoting ideas like that. They actually think they are reasonable, or you are too stupid to question their motives.
President Biden was in Atlanta this past Tuesday lobbying for passage of both voting rights bills and a “carve out” of the filibuster.
Cedric Richmond, White House Senior Advisor, said Biden’s speech on January 6th was a “down payment” in building the case to the public that the foundations of the country’s democracy are under assault, in reference to the voting rights bills and elimination of the filibuster.
The foundations are under assault alright, by Democrats lobbying for changes to Senate rules. Although the founders did not establish the filibuster, it wasn’t long before it was adopted by the Senate.
Aaron Burr is often credited as the father of the American filibuster, when as Vice President in 1805, he suggested to the Senate that they should eliminate a rule that automatically cut off floor debate, then called the “previous question motion”. The following year, the Senate dropped the motion from their rule book. That opened the door for the filibuster as we know it.
The filibuster assures the American people that legislation adopted by Congress is well thought out and has garnered significant support. It is designed to stop hair-brained ideas from being passed with a simple majority. Any Senator can request the floor to speak without time limit, in an effort to convince other Senators that the proposed legislation should be further scrutinized. The Democrats portray that as stall tactics, and it is sometimes abused by speeches that have nothing to do with the issue at hand. On this particular piece of legislation, Democrats are so desperate to enact their method of retaining power, they label Republicans as “obstructionists.” To prevent, or end a filibuster, a minimum of 60 Senators must agree, known as cloture, whereby the legislation can proceed to a vote. They know they can’t get 60 votes, so they claim the filibuster is blocking “progress” and push to “carve out” an exception to suit them.
To change the Senate rule Democrats need only a simple majority, a 50-50 tie that can be broken by the Vice President, a procedural maneuver known as the “nuclear option”. Currently, Sen. Manchin (D-WV) and Sen. Sinema (D-AZ) oppose the carve out or elimination of the filibuster, but will they hold firm?
The House may operate under the “we have to pass it to see what’s in it” Pelosi doctrine, but the Senate was created specifically, to be the more deliberative body.
The Freedom to Vote Act expands access to the ballot and shields election officials. Apparently that means more mail-in voting which opens the door to more fraud and an easier way to cheat. That other provision to “shield election officials” looks pretty shady to me; “shield them from what”? They just pulled off the most massive voter fraud in history with complete impunity. I know, we have all been “informed” by the media propaganda machine that Trump’s claims of voter fraud were all debunked. Are you positive the 2020 election was fair and totally legitimate? When you gather over 1,000 independent witnesses who sign sworn Affidavits under penalty of perjury, that they saw various “irregularities” in several states that were “coincidently” battleground states, and have video evidence of election officials scanning highly questionable stacks of ballots, after kicking observers out of the room and boarding up the windows, it seems to me that something secretive was going on. So secretive, that Democrats want to “shield election officials” from legal jeopardy by legislation. Maybe they should rebrand the name and call it what it is, the Freedom to Cheat Act.
Joseph Geevarghese, Executive Director of Our Revolution, a pro Bernie Sanders group, said, “If we don’t pass the Freedom to Vote legislation, Democrats are going to get slaughtered in 2022 and 2024. If people can’t get to the polls and exercise their right to vote, our power is in jeopardy and that’s what this is about.”
(Paine): I’ll be bound. Some honesty from a Democrat; their power is in jeopardy. On the other hand, he claims Democrat voters can’t get to the polls, inferring they need mail-in ballots. I’d advise him that polling places are everywhere, probably within walking distance from nearly every urban Democrat where their power base is located. It’s not that hard folks. Or is he painting Democrat voters as too stupid to figure out how to vote in person? Every American is expected to do whatever it takes to get vaccinated. Why can’t Democrat voters get to polling places if they are expected to find a place to get vaccinated?
In an article, dated October 20th, 2021, NPR, National Public Radio states, “Democrats say federal voting legislation is needed to counteract a wave of new restrictions from Republican-controlled state legislatures across the country. Critics of those laws say they are making it more difficult to vote, particularly for people of color. The Freedom to Vote Act would have, among other things, established Election Day as a national holiday, set national minimum standards for early voting and voting by mail, and created new requirements for groups not currently required to disclose their financial donors. It also included standards for states that require voter identification, “
(Paine): “national minimum standards for early voting and voting by mail”? That sounds like a good way to manufacture thousands of ballots as needed in critical precincts in order to win any election. And why is it so difficult to vote if you’re not white? What does skin color have to do with it in the 21st century? In 1888 it was skin color that made it difficult to vote because southern Democrats suppressed the Black vote, then supporting the “party of Lincoln”, and gave incumbent President Grover Cleveland a 90,000 popular vote margin. But karma prevailed, and in the first instance whereby the presidency was decided by the Electoral College, Benjamin Harrison secured victory by the electoral vote of 233 to 168, on the strength of him winning the north and the west. Yet today, the “progressive” left insists the Electoral College is flawed and must be eliminated. How conveniently they disregard history.
Now the media calls these “new restrictions” voter suppression, and has people believing that evil Republicans are trying to deny the right to vote to “people of color”, failing to mention is was actually Democrats who suppressed the Black vote earlier. When a movement suggests their opposition is doing something they did themselves and infers it’s only nefarious this time, that’s propaganda. They are either too stupid to know the history, or they are being deceptive, or both. That’s simple logic.
Biden is on record vowing to “fight like heck” against voting restrictions being passed by Republican state legislatures. 
(Paine): I guess when Biden says “fight like heck” he’s a knight in shining armor; when Trump says the exact same phrase, he’s inciting a riot. (see my post, Trump’s Incitement to Riot)
And what exactly are these “voting restrictions” enacted by state legislatures? Does that mean Republicans are requiring voters to prove who they are by showing a voter registration card? Does it mean voters are supposed to be U. S. citizens? Oh my, the horror.
The United States Constitution, ratified 1789, did not originally define who was eligible to vote, allowing each state to determine who was eligible. Throughout the 19th century, voting rights began to expand to non-whites and citizens who did not own property. Four of the fifteen post- Civil War constitutional amendments were ratified to extend voting rights to different groups of citizens. These extensions state that voting rights cannot be denied or abridged based on the following:
- Race, color, or previous condition of servitude (15th Amendment)
- On account of sex (19th Amendment)
- By reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax (24th Amendment)
- Who are 18 years of age or older (26th Amendment)
Many states require eligible citizens to register to vote a set number of days prior to the election in order to vote.
Notice all these qualifications refer to citizens. In what country are non-citizens given voting rights? I have yet to see any statutory justification for allowing non-citizens the right to vote in any election.
On the 15th of March 1965, Lyndon B. Johnson, 36th U. S. President, gave a speech before Congress in support of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which he had signed into law the previous July. In the speech he said, “Every American citizen must have an equal right to vote.” Notice he did not say “Every American must have the right to vote.” A Democrat President qualified the statement by restricting that right to citizens.
I agree, all citizens should be able to exercise their right to vote, after proving they are an American citizen. One verified citizen, one vote. I don’t mind mail-in ballots per se, as long as they are verified. But who is going to be in charge of the verification? Who is going to count the votes and who is going to oversee the counting? Maybe every citizen should be assigned a unique Voter ID Number, similar to a credit card number. The database could be sorted and scanned for duplicate entries very easily, managed by the Federal Election Commission. When voters relocate from one state to another, their new address would be revised in the database. The Voter ID Number could be attached to each Social Security Number. When a voter is deceased, that Voter ID Number would be eliminated upon notification from the Social Security Death Index. It’s not rocket science, just simple cooperation between the SSA and the FEC.
You don’t have to be a Republican to disagree with everything they stand for. You just have to be sensible.
 National Public Radio, Oct 20th, 2021
 Politico, Jan 9th, 2022