Tweet
As part of my legal duties for various Landover political clients, I am required to keep abreast of various trends in modern methods of discouraging voting by liberals. Whenever certain politicians are running, I advise them on the legality of various techniques to persuade demoncrats to stay at home on election day.
For example, you know those flyers that show up in the slums surrounding the gated parts of Landover that remind the darkies to "Make Sure To Vote On November 5th" when the actual election day is November 4th? (Liberals whine about things like this here.) That was one of mine. Other examples include the posters that announce that police may be checking for outstanding warrants at polling places and that parking officials may be checking for outstanding tickets.
We have argued successfully in various courts that it is legal free speech. We don't say that election day is the 5th, and we don't specify what people should be voting about on the 5th. And as for the "cops may be at the polls" type of posters and flyer, all we say is that those officials may be there. It is true. While they never have been there and they have publicly stated that they would never do any of these things, they very well may change their minds.
Well, I am glad to announce that this movement to discourage the poor from voting has taken on new life and is growing wildly. Modern theologians are suggesting that instead of wasting all of our time and money trying to trick or dissuade folks from voting, we should just take away their right to vote.
Check out this new brilliant article written by Matthew Vadum entitled Registering the Poor to Vote is Un-American. From the article:
Exactly!! It is 100% Un-American to give the vote to the poor. Giving poor people a vote is like handing them a gun and telling them to go and murder the land owners. I agree with one of the commenters on the article who pointed out that from when the Constitution was written until about 1850, only white male property owners could vote. After 1870, former slaves could vote. Then in 1920 we had woman suffrage. In the 1960s, it became illegal to require voters to be literate. The motor voter law was passed in 1995. In 2008 it became de facto legal for Black Panthers to intimidate voters at the polls. Is anyone noticing a trend here? When the country started, voting was restricted to citizens who had a financial stake in small government. Now anyone with a pulse can vote. Eventually, you might have to fight your way into the polling place through a gauntlet of government dependents who will decide if you look like someone who will support big government candidates.
Of course, the highest law of the land, the King James Bible, supports this 100%. The Good Book instructs the poor not to vote:
Follow God's logic? Here it is:
1) Republicans are always in power in Landover because God loves Republicans and hates liberals.
2) Poor people always vote against Republicans because the poor hate our freedom.
3) God tells us that "going against" those in power is the same as resisting the commands of God himself.
4) What could constitute a greater "resistance" to those in power than voting against them? Nothing!
This means that when all the poor in Landover vote against all of the Godly Republicans, they are sinning and will go to Hell. By forbidding them from voting, we are saving their souls. (You are welcome, poor.)
Now, fuzzy-bunny Christians may argue that if a demoncrat is the one holding office, like n0baba is now, then it would be a sin to vote against him. Nothing could be further from the truth. Consider Deut 17:
First, God points out that while we all vote, God is the one who really chooses the "King" above us. (Talk about tampering with the ballot box! 
) But he goes on to say that we may not vote for a stranger...someone who is not "our brother." I don't know about you, but I can't think of anyone further from brotherhood with me than someone who looks like n0bama.
As a side note, some people have asked why would God have chosen 0bama to be president if he forbade us from having a dark stranger as our "king." The Bible does not contain any contradictions. This is merely an example of God testing us. He used the election to present us with a "tar baby" problem. He wants to see if we will figure out that whomever voted for the foreigner is a hell-bound sinner.
In light of this new concept presented in the wonderful article I posted above and in light of the clear Biblical instructions that 1) tells us to save people from sinning. and 2) that voting for Obama is a sin; I propose that we disallow registration of voting to anyone who is poor.
It would be the most American thing we have done in our lifetimes.
For example, you know those flyers that show up in the slums surrounding the gated parts of Landover that remind the darkies to "Make Sure To Vote On November 5th" when the actual election day is November 4th? (Liberals whine about things like this here.) That was one of mine. Other examples include the posters that announce that police may be checking for outstanding warrants at polling places and that parking officials may be checking for outstanding tickets.
We have argued successfully in various courts that it is legal free speech. We don't say that election day is the 5th, and we don't specify what people should be voting about on the 5th. And as for the "cops may be at the polls" type of posters and flyer, all we say is that those officials may be there. It is true. While they never have been there and they have publicly stated that they would never do any of these things, they very well may change their minds.
Well, I am glad to announce that this movement to discourage the poor from voting has taken on new life and is growing wildly. Modern theologians are suggesting that instead of wasting all of our time and money trying to trick or dissuade folks from voting, we should just take away their right to vote.
Check out this new brilliant article written by Matthew Vadum entitled Registering the Poor to Vote is Un-American. From the article:
Why are left-wing activist groups so keen on registering the poor to vote? Because they know the poor can be counted on to vote themselves more benefits by electing redistributionist politicians. Welfare recipients are particularly open to demagoguery and bribery.
Registering them to vote is like handing out burglary tools to criminals. It is profoundly antisocial and un-American to empower the nonproductive segments of the population to destroy the country -- which is precisely why Barack Obama zealously supports registering welfare recipients to vote.
Registering them to vote is like handing out burglary tools to criminals. It is profoundly antisocial and un-American to empower the nonproductive segments of the population to destroy the country -- which is precisely why Barack Obama zealously supports registering welfare recipients to vote.
Of course, the highest law of the land, the King James Bible, supports this 100%. The Good Book instructs the poor not to vote:
Romans 13
1Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
1Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
1) Republicans are always in power in Landover because God loves Republicans and hates liberals.
2) Poor people always vote against Republicans because the poor hate our freedom.
3) God tells us that "going against" those in power is the same as resisting the commands of God himself.
4) What could constitute a greater "resistance" to those in power than voting against them? Nothing!
This means that when all the poor in Landover vote against all of the Godly Republicans, they are sinning and will go to Hell. By forbidding them from voting, we are saving their souls. (You are welcome, poor.)
Now, fuzzy-bunny Christians may argue that if a demoncrat is the one holding office, like n0baba is now, then it would be a sin to vote against him. Nothing could be further from the truth. Consider Deut 17:
Deuteronomy 17
14When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me;
15Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.
14When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me;
15Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.
) But he goes on to say that we may not vote for a stranger...someone who is not "our brother." I don't know about you, but I can't think of anyone further from brotherhood with me than someone who looks like n0bama.As a side note, some people have asked why would God have chosen 0bama to be president if he forbade us from having a dark stranger as our "king." The Bible does not contain any contradictions. This is merely an example of God testing us. He used the election to present us with a "tar baby" problem. He wants to see if we will figure out that whomever voted for the foreigner is a hell-bound sinner.
In light of this new concept presented in the wonderful article I posted above and in light of the clear Biblical instructions that 1) tells us to save people from sinning. and 2) that voting for Obama is a sin; I propose that we disallow registration of voting to anyone who is poor.
It would be the most American thing we have done in our lifetimes.
Comment