As more information emerges about the troubling circumstances surrounding the absence of care in handling national secrets, the public has come to learn some important facts about government service and the responsibilities of every person granted clearance to access sensitive information.
For example, in spite of Hillary Clinton claiming she "did not send or receive information marked as classified", everybody with a security clearance has the responsibility to know what information is a national secret, has a responsibility to know how to handle national secrets, and has a duty to report any potential breach of security safeguarding those secrets.
With the total of Hillary Clinton’s “potentially classified” emails steadily climbing north of 300, Bob Woodward of Watergate fame recently provided a proper context for the scandal. “It reminds me of the Nixon tapes,” he told MSNBC, my old network but the one that now features more objective commentary by Al Sharpton and Chris Matthews. How their faces must have dropped when Woodward suggested that investigators should “follow the trail” of their front-runner’s emails. Is Hillarygate unprecedented or really just Nixon 2.0?
Once again this morning (Friday July 3, 2015), Fox News had two commentators who are NOT Americans of Mexican descent talking about how the Latino vote is being hurt by Donald Trump’s anti-Mexico comments. Why can't they find and ask a conservative American of Mexican descent like (yours truly) for comments?
In a stroke of irony, a federal court has struck down the Texas voter identification law which was passed by duly elected officials, who were voted into office by lawfully, by legal registered voters. This is typical of the upside down world of liberal/leftists who want to expand voting rights to everyone, everywhere until that right is meaningless.
A federal appeals court panel ruled that Texas’ voter ID law discriminated against blacks and Hispanics, and violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The overturned law required voters to bring a government-issued photo ID to the polls. Accepted forms of identification include a driver’s license, a United States passport, a concealed-handgun license and an election identification certificate issued by the State Department of Public Safety.
Liberals consider the Texas law one of the strictest in the nation, and cheer the ruling as victory for voters. The question is which voters?
Voter fraud in Texas, and in other states, is common particularly in south Texas Democrat strongholds. The FBI has anti-corruption task force to clean up the Rio Grande Valley of Texas which has netted dozens of political and local law enforcement officials. In fact, more than any other region in America and almost 100% Democrats and Latino.
Most of the voter fraud, and consequential election of corrupt politicians, is courtesy of “politiqueras”. A Spanish word, commonly known on the border, that means campaign worker. Politiqueras are a tradition in south Texas who help local candidates when they need votes…for a fee.
However, to liberals and their political elitist allies, Texas and other states are guilty until proven innocent. They have been upset about the 2013 Supreme Court decision that blocked federal oversight of election laws in numerous states, including Texas. They considered these states guilty of discrimination, even today, because of past histories of racial discrimination…and the states were supposed to prove their innocence.
Ultimately, these (possibly) well-intentioned challenges to state voter ID laws seem to be about one party fearful of losing elections, and about them playing the politics of fear by scaring certain voters. It will result in expanding the right to vote so that it becomes meaningless, and in facilitating voter fraud and manipulating elections. One again, the liberals’ road is paved with good intentions, but it will lead to disaster.
If there is club that provides benefits and certain advantages to its members, what happens when that club extends those benefits to anyone and everyone? What’s the point of being a member? What happens to the meaning and worth of achievements and accomplishments when standards are lowered so that anyone and everyone can achieve? What happens to the privilege and right to vote of a citizen, when anyone and everyone can vote without proving their worthiness?
In concluding irony, the same liberal groups that oppose voter ID laws such as the Democrat Party, labor unions, and minority advocacy groups demand “credentials” to vote in their organization elections. Is citizenship voting less important?
Mayor Ivy Taylor isn’t a total stranger to me as I was present during the very controversial San Antonio Non Discrimination Ordinance that passed on Thursday, September 5, 2013 violating our First Amendment, Right of Conscience. The NDO passed in spite of the fact that the majority of concerned citizens opposed the unjust ordinance. It passed without Taylor’s vote, 8-3. She voted with the people.
It took courage to stand against the eight duplicitous council members who did vote for the NDO. Whether she was approached by the pastors or not she knew what the right vote should be. San Antonio needs a mayor that will be open to listening to the people. She again listened to the people and was instrumental in stopping the streetcar project.