Moonbat says Trump voters should be arrested

Good day all. It’s always amusing to watch Progressives in their natural habitat show the world their true colors. Totalitarian elitists who despise anyone who disagrees with them. In this case, we have Noah Berlatsky who thinks that all Trump voters are racists and should be arrested.

Now I’ve never heard of this bozo, and it took a while to find anything about him on the innerwebtubes. It seems he’s “famous” for writing something called Wonder Woman: Bondage and Feminism, whatever the Hell that is. I also found some pictures of him. Yeah, I wouldn’t let him anywhere near small children or puppies.

He wrote a piece titled “Trump voters motivated by racism may be violating the Constitution. Can they be stopped?” where, basically, he accuses anyone who is of northern European decent and voted for President Trump to be racists and that they should be prevented from voting. Here are the details from NBC News:

If the Trump era has taught us anything, it’s that large numbers of white people in the United States are motivated at least in part by racism in the voting booth. Donald Trump ran an openly racist campaign for president, calling Mexicans rapists and criminals, regularly retweeting white supremacists and at least initially balking at repudiating former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke. Trump made it clear in his campaign that “Make America Great Again” meant that America was greater when white people’s power was more sweeping and more secure. White voters approved of that message by a whopping 58 percent to 37 percent.

Oh this guy is a real prize winner. It seems that since President Trump wants to secure the borders, stop illegal immigration and deport illegal aliens, he’s a racist, and anyone who agrees with this is also a white racist. I wonder how this moonbat is going to explain all the Trump voters of recent African decent? My guess is he’s going to ignore them.

Terry Smith, a visiting professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law, offers a different response in his new book, “Whitelash: Unmasking White Grievance at the Ballot Box.” Rather than excuse racist voters or try to figure out how to live with their choices, he argues that racist voting is not just immoral, but illegal. The government, Smith says, has the ability, and the responsibility, to address it.

I followed the link above and it led to Cambridge Press. The “Reviews” are a who’s who of some of the most racist liberals you ever saw. I also looked up the “Book” on Amazon and it’s not due out for a few more days. Needless to say, I’m not linking to this waste of bytes under our Amazon associates account. Still, it should be fun fisking these nitwits.

This sounds radical. But Smith argues that it’s in line with the Constitution and with years of court rulings. For example, Smith points out that racist appeals in union elections are illegal and that an election in which one side uses racist appeals can be invalidated by the National Labor Relations Board. Similarly, in the 2016 case Peña v. Rodriguez, the Supreme Court ruled that when a juror expresses overt bigotry, the jury’s verdict should be invalidated.

I won’t bother going into my feelings towards Unions and the NLRB. I loathe them both. However, union racism is a problem with regards to workers who aren’t of northern European decent, and in some cases, preventing someone who has dark skin or eyes with Epicanthic folds from joining and being able to earn a living needs to be squashed hard.

As for dealing with a juror who is a stupid bigot? That comes under the heading of being an impartial juror. If you are predisposed to rule against someone, either in a criminal case or a civil case due to their skin color, you need to be dismissed. However, the two idiots here aren’t talking about this. What they want to do is prevent people who they decide are racists from voting in elections.

“When voters go to the booth, they’re not expressing a mere personal preference,” Smith told me. According to Smith, voters who pull the levers to harm black people are violating the Constitution. If the Constitution means that overt racist appeals undermine the legality of union elections, it stands to reason that they undermine the legality of other elections, as well.

Uh no. You can vote for someone for any reason. That is the hallmark of a free and open election process. But please, continue with your overt totalitarianism.

So how can you tell when voters are acting out of prejudice? Again, Smith says, employment discrimination law provides a useful analogy.

In discrimination cases, courts look for pretexts. If someone gives a reason for a hiring decision that is obviously false or makes little sense in context, the court has good reason to believe that prejudice or bias may have influenced the hiring decision.

And how is this to be used to punish those who don’t think the way you do? (If what goes on in those empty heads of yours can be called thinking)

Trump’s unprecedented, compulsive, easily documented lying during the 2016 campaign made him an irrational choice.

And here it comes! By the way, the link leads to the British paper, the Guardian, which is slightly to the left of the old Soviet periodical, Pravda.

It’s reasonable to conclude that voters were willing to swallow the falsehoods because they liked what they heard: overt racist appeals and incessant lies about rising crime rates.

Again with the Guardian. If you’re going to manufacture statistics, why not use an American source of misinformation, such as CNN, ABC, MSNBC or The New York Slimes? Frankly the crime rates in certain areas are going up. Oh, by the way, those are areas that are run by the Democrats.

Research has since suggested that plenty of Trump voters were indeed strongly motivated by racist resentment and anti-immigrant animus.

Wrong again Moonbat. People such as myself were motivated by a number of things. People crossing the border illegally for one. It doesn’t matter what their country of origin was, you don’t have a visa and cross in without permission, we don’t want you here and we want to ship you out asap. Now for those who jumped through all the hoops and came here legally? Welcome! Come on in. But that goes against what you believe so you ignore it like the good progressive totalitarian moonbat that you are. In any case, what is your cunning, Baldrick like plan for dealing with people who you’ve decided are racists?

The usual remedy for racial discrimination is censure or fines.

Actually, no, not unless there is actual harm done. Even then, some of these “Remedies” are constitutionally questionable.

It’s more difficult to censure voters who have violated their constitutional duties.

Excuse me? How does a voter violate their constitutional duty? Americans do not have constitutional duties, we have rights. Oh wait, I forgot. You are a moonbat and believe that people are granted privileges, and that voting is a privilege. Now we do have this thing called “Civic duty, such as serving on a jury.

Nullifying elections would be essentially impossible.

If it were possible, you would have done it and we would be suffering under the tender ministrations of Felonia von Pantsuit. Of course, the Progressive Liberal Elite has been working to nullify the election since about 9am Eastern time November 9th 2016.

But Smith argues that there are other options.

This should be interesting.

“I think we can dismantle some of the features of the electoral system that encourage racialized decision-making,” he says. “For instance, you only get a partisan gerrymander by moving people in and out of districts on the basis of their race.” Ending this practice at the state and federal levels would be a big step toward reducing the power of racism at the ballot box, as would ending the use of Voter IDs intended to disenfranchise black voters.

Ah! I see, you want to continue the Progressive practice of voter fraud. This is why people want to have you produce an ID when you vote. This crap about it disenfranchising people, specifically those of recent African decent is just that. Crap. We have to produce ID’s if we buy booze, smokes, get on a plane or enter certain government buildings. Getting an ID is simplicity itself. You have to be a complete loser not to be able to get one. Of course, most progressive elitists such as you to are complete losers, so yeah, I can see why you would feel put out getting an ID.

Even more ambitiously, Smith suggests expanding the Voting Rights Act to address the racist patterns of voting in Senate elections in the South.

And how the Hell are you going to do that? Oh, let me guess? If a Democrat loses, especially if he or she happens to be a black liberal progressive Democrat, (Yeah I know, repeating myself), then he or she lost because the voters are racist. It doesn’t have anything to do with the candidate being a total closet case.

Because the majority of white voters in the South vote Republican, and because they outnumber black voters, there isn’t a single Democratic senator from the Deep South other than Doug Jones in Alabama, who may well lose his seat in 2020.

I notice you aren’t considering Black Republican office holders here. Interesting.

Smith argues that we could remedy these disparate, racially motivated outcomes by creating Senate districts. Presumably, that would make it at least possible for black voters to elect a senator who would support their interests.

So much for the Constitution then. In case you never learned this in school, the Senators are supposed to represent their states. The representatives elected to the house represent the voters and their districts. Congratulations, you failed civics again.

This is clearly a very controversial proposal, and its constitutionality has been debated in the past. But given obvious disparities in representation in the South, it seems worth considering again.

I think we’re beginning to see what Smith’s “Cunning Plan” actually is. It’s returning the South to the Progressive Liberal Democrat camp, and he has no problem torching the Constitution to get his way. He’s all on board for packing the courts with “Right thinking judges” that will ignore the Constitution.

Democrats could also expand the number of seats on lower courts or even on the Supreme Court — another controversial proposal known as court-packing. If Democrats decide that responding to racist voting is a vital priority, they could, in time, take steps to do something about it.

Oh that’s rich. Let me guess what you two think should be done. Anyone who doesn’t vote Democrat, and happens to be white, should be stripped of their constitutional rights and sent to a reeducation center. If needed, they can also be “Disappeared.” As for court packing, that was first suggested by that great democrat president, (Sarcasm assumed), Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the first true American dictator.

Because the Supreme court kept overturning his New Deal laws, (Which were blatantly unconstitutional), FDR decided he was going to “Pack the court” with justices who would ignore the constitution and uphold his New Deal laws. The Democrats proposing this now have the same idea. Destroy the Rule of Law and install judges who will support the Democrat Agenda.

It’s difficult to address injustice, however, if you’re unwilling to say injustice exists. Politicians and pundits, Republican and Democratic alike, have been unwilling to reprimand voters or hold them accountable.

They don’t hold them accountable for two reasons. First, these are the people who voted them into office. Second, the voters can vote however they like, even if they vote in a way you don’t like. This is called a “Free Society.” As for injustice? Yes, it exists, and it’s usually the Government that is pushing it. Are you at all familiar with Asset Forfeiture? This is where the Government takes people’s property claiming it was used in a crime. Of course, they never actually charge or try anyone, and getting your property back is next to impossible. THAT is injustice, not that you care.

But voters are not well-intentioned innocents who are helplessly manipulated by malevolent leaders.

Not once they get out of the Political Reeducation System known as the Public schools and universities. After a few years, they begin to see how the world actually works, and figure out what people like you have in mind for them…Mostly.

They make important decisions as constitutional actors, for which they have moral responsibility.

Really? What responsibility would that be? Oh I see. You mean that responsible voting is voting the way you want them to. If they don’t, then they are criminals who must be punished.

Racist voting isn’t an accident. It’s a choice that may violate the principles of our Constitution and our legal system. We should say so, and then we should find ways to reduce the harm it causes.

Most of the so called “Racist Voters” vote Democrat. But in your world, they aren’t racists, they are “Right Thinking members of society.” As to “Violating the law and Constitution? No, it doesn’t. Of course, you and that totalitarian Moonbat Terry Smith have no problem stripping people of their rights if they don’t vote the way you want them to.

As far as I’m concerned, Terry Smith and the author of this pile of dripping manure, Noah Berlatsky are the true threats to freedom in this nation. That NBC actually allowed this drivel to be published on their web site tells me that they’re just fine with arresting people that don’t agree with the Socialist Progressive Totalitarian plan they want to institute. All I can say is, go ahead and try you Fascist pigs. You might want to reflect on the 20,000 people who showed up in Richmond, armed to the teeth to show their unhappiness with the current governor and legislature.

Thatisall

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...

~The Angry Webmaster~


Share Button