» 2012 » August

Rule of Law

Monthly Archives: August 2012

The GOP Goes Alinsky on Obama

August 31st, 2012 - 8:27 am

I’ll leave it to the crack reporting of others at PJ Media on the ground in Tampa to give you the full story of the Republican National Convention.  But I detected a change from past GOP conventions that bears mention. The Republicans seem to at last be reading Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky. The messages and tactics of Alinsky, long the monopoly of the Left, have been discovered by the Right.

A couple of examples. First, Clint Eastwood’s speech was pure Alinsky.

RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

The mockery of the empty chair was straight out of Rule 5, and predictably, the Left is seething and irrational over it.

But the message of the night was Alinsky’s Rule 4.

RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.

This has become the centerpiece of the Romney campaign — forcing Obama to live up to his own standards, his own book of broken promises from 2008. The keystone of Romney’s speech was that he won’t lower the oceans or heal the Earth, but instead will help hurting American families.

RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”

Romney presented the constructive alternative. After Eastwood obliterated Obama and reminded everyone of the lost hope of 2008, Romney’s positive vision gave Americans something that has been lacking for three years — a constructive, positive alternative vision for America. The vision reminds people of an age before Obama, when the entire nation watched Neil Armstrong step foot on the moon.  Pride and confidence are the alternative to diminishment and fear.

And if there was any doubt, this campaign will be about the failures of President Obama, failures of the man to fulfill the requirements of the office.

RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

Pages: 1 2 | Comments bullet bullet

When I give speeches or interviews, I am often asked how the Department of Justice can be fixed. Of course Mitt Romney has to win in November to undo the damage Eric Holder has done. But winning is only step one. It is just as important that President Romney appoint the right person as attorney general. Appointing the wrong person will cover over the rot inside DOJ (and perhaps even strengthen it) because some conservatives will be less willing to criticize bad DOJ policies in a Romney administration.

So who is the right person to serve as Eric Holder’s replacement? First, let’s list some qualifications. The next attorney general cannot view the threat of terrorism as a law enforcement issue. It is a national security issue and should be treated as such.

Next, because racialist policies are being used to advance a broad leftist agenda to the detriment of American business, institutions, and state sovereignty, the next attorney general cannot be a coward, to borrow Eric Holder’s term, about racial matters. (Of course my New York Times bestseller Injustice details this very problem.) Candidates fearful of what the once-proud and now corrupt NAACP says about him or her are not qualified to serve in a Romney administration. Many others in the GOP sold out the dream of Constitutional racial equality in the face of such threats.

Last, and perhaps most importantly, the next attorney general must recognize that the vast majority of the career civil service will seek to thwart the administration’s goals. The next attorney general sadly must view many in the career civil service as an instrument of Democrat Party policy.

I’ve spoken with a broad range of former Justice Department officials about who satisfies these three requirements, and a number of names emerge.

In no particular order, the people who are best suited to replace Eric Holder are listed below.

No state has suffered under Eric Holder more than Arizona, and nobody knows this more than Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne. Horne is intimately familiar with the radicalism of DOJ policies – from the lawlessness of Fast and Furious to the lawless immigration policies of Eric Holder. Washington could use a dose of common sense from a state attorney general. Horne would bring a healthy skepticism to the bureaucracy and send a signal that the Romney administration will respect state sovereignty over elections while asserting control of American borders.

Arizona Attorney General Horne

Pages: 1 2 3 | Comments bullet bullet

MN Supreme Court: Voter ID on Ballot

August 27th, 2012 - 2:47 pm

Another crushing defeat in a voter ID case for the ACLU and League of Women Voters.  The Minnesota Supreme Court today allowed a constitutional amendment to go to the voters in November. Voters will get to decide whether to adopt voter Id.   The ACLU and company sought to prevent the voters from having a voice.  Today, the Minnesota Supreme Court disagreed and approved the question for the ballot.  (Disclosure, I am one of the lawyers on the case).  You can read the court opinions linked at Election Law Center.

How much more donor money is the ACLU going to waste fighting voter ID?  They’ve lost in every case they’ve brought attacking voter ID.

To get a sense of the racial incitement Democrats will be willing to use in November’s election, read this article written by a couple of college kids and published in the Tucson Sentinel. Despite the fact nobody reads the e-only-Tucson Sentinel, this irresponsible report by A.J. Vicens and Natasha Khan demonstrates the depths the Left is willing to plumb to stoke up racial resentment during the election.

A. J. Vicens

Vicens and Khan’s operation isn’t a real journalism program. They are part of News21, an operation designed to attack conservatives and Republicans in the upcoming election — to accuse them of ill will and conspiratorial efforts against minorities. They are a well-funded and unfair opposition research program.

Natasha Khan

No sane Republican or conservative should grant an interview to anyone from News21 this fall, unless they demonstrate a change in their biases.

But of course News21 can’t change their biases. Their funders wouldn’t be happy. News21 is bought and paid for by the left-wing Carnegie Foundation. (The great Scot immigrant and Pittsburgh industrialist would be in a rage to learn his legacy is being used to undermine the rule of law). Their other funder, the left-wing Knight Foundation, is no different.

Pages: 1 2 3 | Comments bullet bullet

Jenner and Block, the big law firm fresh off of helping Al Qaeda terrorists, has taken on a new insidious cause – advocating for racial preferences in the Supreme Court of the United States.  While one can perhaps forgive a law firm for having a soft spot for leftist causes, one can hardly forgive their clients – 100 American companies proudly supporting racial preferences in the Fisher v. Texas case. (See also, Eric Holder: Racial Preferences Needed for … National Security at PJ Media today.)

Jenner and Block lawyers David DeBruin, Elaine Goldenberg, Caroline Lopez and Jennifer Yeh are representing a group of Fortune 100 corporations who support the exclusion of Abigail Fisher from the University of Texas law school because she is white.  They include:

Abbott Laboratories


American Express Company

AOL Inc.

Cargill, Inc.

Cisco Systems, Inc.

The Clorox Company

Dell Inc.

Deloitte LLP

The Dow Chemical Company


Eastman Kodak Company

Exelon Corporation

Furniture Brands International, Inc.

Gap Inc.

General Dynamics Corporation

General Electric Company

General Mills, Inc.

W. W. Grainger, Inc.

Halliburton Energy Services,Inc.

Intel Corporation

International Business Machines Corporation

International Paper Company

Kaiser Foundation Hospitals

Kellogg Company

Kraft Foods Inc.

Marriott International, Inc.

Microsoft Corporation

Northrop Grumman Corporation

PepsiCo Inc.

The Permanente FederationLLC

Pfizer Inc.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Shell Oil Company

Southwest Airlines Co.

Sprint Nextel Corporation

Starbucks Corporation

United Airlines, Inc.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Xerox Corporation



The Eric Holder Justice Department has filed this brief in the United States Supreme Court defending racial preferences at the University of Texas. (Texas, by the way, is also vigorously defending the racial preferences.) Abigail Fisher, who is white, is challenging race preferences that cost her a slot at the University of Texas law school.  Because the racial spoils go to Obama’s most loyal political constituency, people of color, naturally Eric Holder’s Justice Department is defending them by spending your tax dollars paying lawyers to write the brief.

None of that is a surprise. What is surprising is the argument the Justice Department makes in the brief — that racial preferences are vital to national security:

It is a pressing necessity in an era of intense competition in the global economy and ever evolving worldwide national-security threats. The government, moreover, has a vital interest in drawing its personnel — many of whom will eventually become its civilian and military leaders — from a well-qualified and diverse pool of university and service-academy graduates of all backgrounds who possess the understanding of diversity that is necessary to govern and defend the United States.

This might mark the first time the ideologues in the administration have placed national security topmost among their priorities — even if it is a phony argument.

Let’s consider one of the lawyers who signed the brief. Thanks to PJ Media’s Pulitzer-nominated/submitted Every Single One series, we know a great deal about the radical backgrounds of well over 100 new hires in the Justice Department. Sharon McGowan is a new Holder career civil service hire in the Appellate Section of the Civil Rights Division.

Sharon McGowan

Hans von Spakovsky at PJ Media:

Sharon McGowan: Prior to joining the Section, Ms. McGowan spent six years as a staff attorney at the ACLU, working on its Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender (LGBT) & AIDS Project. Her claim to fame there was that she brought a lawsuit against the Library of Congress on behalf of a Special Forces veteran who was denied a job after announcing his/her intention to transition from male to female. The case resulted in a dubious ruling by a hard-core liberal Clinton appointee (James Robertson, who mercifully has since retired from the bench) that Title VII’s prohibition on sex discrimination also protects individuals who are undergoing sex-change operations. Judge Robertson’s decision notwithstanding, I’m fairly confident that’s not what Congress had in mind when it passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

While working at the ACLU, Ms. McGowan co-authored “The Rights of Lesbians, Gay Men, Bisexuals and Transgender People: The Authoritative ACLU Guide.” She also was a contributing author to “Lesbian/Gay Law Notes,” which is published by the Lesbian & Gay Law Association of Greater New York. Earlier in her career, she interned for the National Center for Lesbian Rights. And she remains a frequent speaker on gender identity issues. Here’s a sample of her work.

Pages: 1 2 | Comments bullet bullet

A witch hunt to track down whistleblowers has commenced at Janet Napolitano’s Department of Homeland Security. Sources tell PJ Media that DHS policy drafts regarding amnesty programs have been pipelining to Republican congressional offices. As a result, political appointees at DHS are feeling the heat and have commenced a witch hunt to track down the sources of the leaks – conducting interviews bordering on interrogations.

One such policy draft sent straight to GOP congressional offices included a memo titled “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.” A July draft of the document shows an effort by DHS political appointees to suspend laws against illegal aliens remaining in the United States. Another source tells PJ Media that DHS doesn’t want robust standards to establish the actual identities of the illegal aliens. They have been instructed to overlook inconsistent tax records and other red flags about the actual identity of the aliens.

The DHS amnesty draft also reveals embarrassing errors, such as not labeling Hawaii as part of the United States. 

The memo obtained by PJ Media inartfully states:

The centers, which are located throughout the United States and its outlying territories to include Hawaii, Guam, and Saipan, facilitate the capture of fingerprints and biometric data.

The policy draft specifically allows some illegal aliens to remain in the United States even if they are convicted of a crime – as long as the crime was punishable by five days or less.

Pages: 1 2 | Comments bullet bullet

Some are concerned that voting machines will alter the results of the 2012 election.  A new book by John Fund and PJ Media’s Hans von Spakovsky demonstrates that all of us should be concerned about the machinery of American elections, not the machines themselves.

Who’s Counting: How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk (Encounter Books, 2012) is essential to understanding the electoral mechanisms that will decide the November elections. The authors debunk voter fraud deniers with case after case of fraud, and explain how the fraud affects public policy.

Consider the clown who went to Congress, Al Franken. “Would Obamacare have passed without voter fraud?”  Who’s Counting asks and answers that question. The answer, according to the authors, is no.

They document how felons like Sabrina Ruth Hall illegally voted for Franken. When she was asked on camera if her vote might have helped Franken, she unashamedly replied, “I don’t know, but I hope it did.”  Naturally, Eric Holder has failed to prosecute Hall under 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-10(2), a statute which criminalizes casting an illegitimate ballot in a federal election.

But Holder isn’t alone in failing to uphold the rule of law.  The authors also call out John Kingrey, the head of the Minnesota County Attorneys Association.  Minnesota actually makes it a crime for a prosecutor to fail to investigate when presented with sworn evidence of voter fraud.  Why didn’t Kingrey advocate investigations into the rampant election fraud in 2008?  According to Kingrey, that course of action “diverted resources from the job that we want to do.” Kingrey was more interested in engagement on legislation related to bong water.

Von Spakovsky and Fund document how the left is outgunning conservatives on election process weaponry.  While the Minnesota recount was occurring, GOP lawyers were armed with clipboards and pens.  In contrast, for Franken’s team “scanners, laptops, and other mobile devices were used to keep track of every single disputed ballot in every county in Minnesota. Decisions made by local election boards were immediately uploaded to a cloud database set up by the campaign so that [Franken’s team] knew exactly what vote totals were for each candidate …  at every point in time.”

The authors also describe the vast and well-funded apparatus of vote fraud deniers and their litigation counterparts like the NAACP LDF, the Brennan Center for Justice, and the wholly partisan League of Women Voters.

Sometimes the activities of the partisans take comic turns, as happened to the League of Women Voters (LWV) in a challenge to the Indiana voter ID law.  The LWV had produced a “victim” who could not vote because she purportedly lacked photo ID.  It turns out that she couldn’t vote in Indiana because she had produced a Florida driver’s license, was registered to vote in Florida, and had declared a Florida homestead exemption.  Such is the stuff that partisans like the League of Women Voters will use to attack election integrity measures, as documented in Who’s Counting.

Another comic episode occurred in Georgia when the ACLU challenge to voter ID was floundering because they couldn’t find a plaintiff who actually lacked voter ID!  Daniel Levitas of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project sent out an all-points-bulletin to left-wing groups and anyone who would listen: “URGENT REQUEST FOR HELP IN THE PHOTO ID CASE.”  Please, send plaintiffs.

None appeared.

Artur Davis appears in Who’s Counting.  Davis is the African-American former congressman who had a conversion experience on voter ID, because he saw voter fraud up close in his congressional district.  He also was privy to the lies used to attack voter ID.  My own book Injustice documents a wicked case of voter fraud which occurred in his district that the Justice Department explicitly refused to investigate because the perpetrators were black, and DOJ lawyers said so plainly.  Davis grew tired of the lies and orthodoxy about voter ID, and quit the Democrat Party and became a voter ID supporter.

Pages: 1 2 | Comments bullet bullet