Federal Workers Offended by Obama's Partisan/Misleading Email Sent to All Government Work Inboxes Blaming House of Representatives for Shutdown

David Bellow Exclusive:

Crossing the line? President Obama sent a partisan/non-factual email to all Federal employees blaming the Republican controlled House of Representatives for the shutdown and claiming that the Senate and the President have nothing to do with the government shutdown. (see Obama's email below)

Federal Workers are not allowed to send partisan/political emails to other government workers using their government email accounts while they are on duty. They do not expect to read any partisan emails either, especially from the government. The government leaders understand this and anything that is sent out is typically always non controversial and non-partisan. That was not the case this week. Imagine the surprise that many federal workers got when they clocked into work and got a partisan email from President Obama blaming the House of Representatives for the Shutdown and claiming that the Senate and President had nothing to do with the shutdown. The email made no mention that it takes three to shutdown the government. The House and Senate and President all have to agree on a budget in order to keep the government going. The shutdown is just as much the Senate's fault for not approving what the House passed as it is the House's fault for not approving what the Senate passed. If you read the email from President Obama you would think that it is only the fault of the House of Representatives because they are not going along with the good plan from the Senate. Oh, and the email made no mention of the threats to veto the House bill. Yes, as much as the President denied his role in this shutdown in the email to all federal workers, the shutdown is just as much his fault because he has threatened to veto everything the House has offered. Also there was no mention of the fact that he, and not Congress, made the decision to shut down the WWII memorial from even allowing veterans to visit it. This memorial does not even need to be "funded" in order to allow people to freely walk to it and look at it.

Below are some of the most outrageous, partisan quotes that Obama sent in a letter to all federal workers via their government work email inboxes: (my comments are in red)

"This shutdown was completely preventable. It should not have happened. And the House of Representatives can end it as soon as it follows the Senate's lead, and funds your work in the United States Government without trying to attach highly controversial and partisan measures in the process." (the Senate and President can also end it as soon as they follow the House's lead. The President forgot to mention that)

"I will continue to do everything in my power to get the House of Representatives to allow our Government to reopen as quickly as possible, and make sure you receive the pay that you have earned." (Ah yes, it is only the House that is not allowing the government to keep running. So the Senate and President have nothing to do with it?)

"more than 50 current or former Federal employees have received the Nobel Prize for their efforts." (Not sure how this has anything to do with the Shutdown, but they also gave war starting Obama the Nobel Peace Prize, so really how credible is one of those awards nowadays?)

"It was grants from the Department of Energy that helped businesses unlock new sources of renewable energy" (like the money given to Solyndra the solar panel company that took taxpayer money and went bankrupt while the executives of the company made millions?)

Click on the document bellow to see the full letter that President Obama sent on October 1st, 2013 to all federal workers. The particular letter below was sent to all Department of Justice workers from President Obama via Attorney General Eric Holder:

Holder Sues Texas over Voter ID: Barry Smitherman Responds to USDOJ Challenge

AUSTIN – Barry Smitherman, Railroad Commission Chairman and conservative Republican candidate for Texas Attorney General issued the following statement in response to United States Attorney General Eric Holder’s statement that he will challenge Texas Voter ID law:

“Eric Holder and the Obama Justice Department continue their unrelenting attacks on the State of Texas, ignoring the facts and the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision (Shelby County, AL vs Holder USAG) that there is presently no evidence of minority voter suppression in Texas. We must stand up against the Obama Justice Department and its politicized attempt to subvert the Texas Voter ID law. Eric Holder's actions fly in the face of the highest court in the land and the laws of the Great State of Texas, and will not be allowed to stand.”

- See more at: http://www.texasgopvote.com/issues/stop-big-government/statement-barry-smitherman-response-usdoj-challenge-texas-voter-id-law-005792#sthash.LyhumWiO.dpuf

AUSTIN – Barry Smitherman, conservative Republican candidate for Texas Attorney General issued the following statement in response to United States Attorney General Eric Holder’s statement that he will challenge Texas Voter ID law:
“Eric Holder and the Obama Justice Department continue their unrelenting attacks on the State of Texas, ignoring the facts and the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision (Shelby County, AL vs Holder USAG) that there is presently no evidence of minority voter suppression in Texas. We must stand up against the Obama Justice Department and its politicized attempt to subvert the Texas Voter ID law. Eric Holder's actions fly in the face of the highest court in the land and the laws of the Great State of Texas, and will not be allowed to stand.”
- See more at: http://www.texasgopvote.com/issues/stop-big-government/statement-barry-smitherman-response-usdoj-challenge-texas-voter-id-law-005792#sthash.LyhumWiO.dpuf

AUSTIN – Barry Smitherman, conservative Republican candidate for Texas Attorney General issued the following statement in response to United States Attorney General Eric Holder’s statement that he will challenge Texas Voter ID law:
“Eric Holder and the Obama Justice Department continue their unrelenting attacks on the State of Texas, ignoring the facts and the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision (Shelby County, AL vs Holder USAG) that there is presently no evidence of minority voter suppression in Texas. We must stand up against the Obama Justice Department and its politicized attempt to subvert the Texas Voter ID law. Eric Holder's actions fly in the face of the highest court in the land and the laws of the Great State of Texas, and will not be allowed to stand.”
- See more at: http://www.texasgopvote.com/issues/stop-big-government/statement-barry-smitherman-response-usdoj-challenge-texas-voter-id-law-005792#sthash.LyhumWiO.d

AUSTIN – Barry Smitherman, conservative Republican candidate for Texas Attorney General issued the following statement in response to United States Attorney General Eric Holder’s statement that he will challenge Texas Voter ID law:
“Eric Holder and the Obama Justice Department continue their unrelenting attacks on the State of Texas, ignoring the facts and the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision (Shelby County, AL vs Holder USAG) that there is presently no evidence of minority voter suppression in Texas. We must stand up against the Obama Justice Department and its politicized attempt to subvert the Texas Voter ID law. Eric Holder's actions fly in the face of the highest court in the land and the laws of the Great State of Texas, and will not be allowed to stand.”
- See more at: http://www.texasgopvote.com/issues/stop-big-government/statement-barry-smitherman-response-usdoj-challenge-texas-voter-id-law-005792#sthash.LyhumWiO.dpuf

AUSTIN – Barry Smitherman, conservative Republican candidate for Texas Attorney General issued the following statement in response to United States Attorney General Eric Holder’s statement that he will challenge Texas Voter ID law:
“Eric Holder and the Obama Justice Department continue their unrelenting attacks on the State of Texas, ignoring the facts and the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision (Shelby County, AL vs Holder USAG) that there is presently no evidence of minority voter suppression in Texas. We must stand up against the Obama Justice Department and its politicized attempt to subvert the Texas Voter ID law. Eric Holder's actions fly in the face of the highest court in the land and the laws of the Great State of Texas, and will not be allowed to stand.”
- See more at: http://www.texasgopvote.com/issues/stop-big-government/statement-barry-smitherman-response-usdoj-challenge-texas-voter-id-law-005792#sthash.LyhumWiO.dpuf

Holder Sues Louisiana over School Choice Vouchers. Holders Wants to Keep Blacks in Failing Schools

from NOLA.com

The U.S. Justice Department is suing Louisiana in New Orleans federal court to block 2014-15 vouchers for students in public school systems that are under federal desegregation orders. The first year of private school vouchers "impeded the desegregation process," the federal government says.
Thirty-four school systems could be affected, including those of Jefferson, Plaquemines, St. John the Baptist and St. Tammany parishes. Under the lawsuit, the state would be barred from assigning students in those systems  to private schools unless a federal judge agreed to it. A court hearing is tentatively set for Sept. 19.
The statewide voucher program, officially called the Louisiana Scholarship Program, lets low-income students in public schools graded C, D or F attend private schools at taxpayer expense. This year, 22 of the 34 systems under desegregation orders are sending some students to private schools on vouchers.
Last year, at least 570 students were affected; the program has expanded since then. The federal petition would require the state to analyze this year's vouchers to see how they affected school desegregation. (Read the petition.)
The Justice Department's primary argument is that letting students leave for vouchered private schools can disrupt the racial balance in public school systems that desegregation orders are meant to protect. Those orders almost  always set rules for student transfers with the school system.
Federal analysis found that last year's Louisiana vouchers increased racial imbalance in 34 historically segregated public schools in 13 systems. The Justice Department goes so far as to charge that in some of those schools, "the loss of students through the voucher program reversed much of the progress made toward integration."
In Tangipahoa Parish, for instance, Independence Elementary School lost five white students to voucher schools, the petition states. The consequent change in the percent of enrolled white students "reinforc(ed) the racial identity of the school as a black school."
While the federal petition would let courts approve vouchers in those school systems next year, Brian Blackwell, attorney for the Louisiana Association of Educators, said it likely would take a lot of time, effort and evidence to persuade the judges.
State Education Superintendent John White took issue with the suit's primary argument and its characterization of the program. Almost all the students using vouchers are black, he said. Given that framework, "it's a little ridiculous" to argue that students' departure to voucher schools makes their home school systems less white, he said. He also thought it ironic that rules set up to combat racism were being called on to keep black students in failing schools.

read more here: http://www.nola.com/education/index.ssf/2013/08/us_government_files_to_block_s.html

Black Rep. James White Criticizes Holder and GOP Rep. Sensenbrenner for implying that Texas Restricts Minority Voting Rights

James White

State Representative James White has sent a letter to Republican Congressman James (Jim) Sensenbrenner blasting Sensenbrenner and Eric Holder, and demanding that they stop messing with the 10th Amendment rights of Texas.

Rep. James White, a Texas Tea Party Conservative, knows quite a bit about the voting rights of minorities in Texas because, well, he is a minority in Texas.

James "Jim" Sensenbrenner

Specifically, Rep. White chastized Republican Rep. Sensenbrenner for saying it is ok to put Texas under the unfair preclearance microscope of the Voting Rights Act while at the same time Sensenbrenner does not want his own state of Wisconsin to be under preclearance. White further pointed out that Texas is not under preclearance because it had been struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional unless Congress could fix the way states are determined to have the need to be under preclearance. White suggested the Congressman actually pass a new VRA to fix the problems instead of trying to target Texas and get around the Supreme Court's decision.

Eric Holder

White also blasted Attorney General Eric Holder. White, a minority elected official in east Texas,
says that statistics show the minority vote is not being restricted in southern states. White even pointed out that black voter turnout was higher than white voter turnout in recent elections. White then suggested that, instead of suing Texas, Holder should investigate harassment by the IRS toward groups that provide an opportunity for people to exercise their 1st Amendment rights.

Elbert Guillory

Recently, Elbert Guillory, a black State Senator from the southern state of Louisiana, made a viral video explaining why he switched to the Republican Party. In the video, Guillory even blasted and exposed the Democrat Party as being the party of the KKK and the party that has historically discriminated against blacks and minorities while the Republicans freed blacks and gave them rights and elected the first blacks to public office.






The following is a press release from State Rep. James White regarding the situation with Holder and Sensenbrenner:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 15, 2013

State Representative James White Criticizes Holder and Sensenbrenner for Going After Texas

State Representative James White (R-Hillister) recently sent a letter to Republican Wisconsin Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner criticizing him for supporting Attorney General Eric Holder's move to put Texas back under the Section 5 preclearance requirements of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) after the Supreme Court struck down procedures in Section 4 that determine which states are subject to these requirements. Instead of encouraging Congress to update those procedures, as the Supreme Court directed, Holder is opting to use the "bail-in" provision of Section 3, which allows the federal government to apply the preclearance requirements to states where there are allegations of intentional discrimination. Representative White deplored this politicization of the judicial system. "Holder's decision to attack Texas's laws is a violation of its sovereignty and the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution," White said. "Instead of suing Texas, Holder should investigate harassment by the IRS toward groups that provide an opportunity for people to exercise their 1st Amendment rights."

White questioned Sensenbrenner's inconsistent advocacy of Holder's attempt to apply the VRA to Texas. "Why are you advocating the targeted enforcement of a provision of this law without suggesting that same level of scrutiny apply to your home state?" White asked. He noted that the Supreme Court did not throw out the VRA in its entirety but sent it back to Congress for it to update the procedures that determine which states should be subject to Section 5 preclearance. White continued, "Instead of aiding and abetting political harassment from the Holder Justice Department, it seems to me your focus should be on improving the VRA and ensuring that voters in Wisconsin have the optimum access to the ballot box."

White shared compelling data to demonstrate that the Justice Department's tactics are misguided and overtly political. In 2012, the national black voter turnout rate was higher than the white voter turnout rate. The Southern states primarily targeted with VRA preclearance have seen increases in minority voter registration levels, election turnout rates, and representation among elected officials since the enactment of the VRA, and these figures are on par with other regions of the country. White explained, "These facts raise serious doubts about the validity of allegations of intentional discrimination by states like Texas toward minorities."

White acknowledged that the VRA is a successful piece of social policy because it focused on expanding individual liberty. "I stand proudly on the shoulders of those before me that fought for this precious right," White said. "However, the recent application of the VRA has interfered with 10th Amendment rights. Instead of promoting the popular will of all the people, politicos have gamed the system for partisan gain." The Court did not ditch the VRA, it just told Congress to fix it. "Please," White asked Sensenbrenner, "refrain from supporting this politicized Justice Department's obstruction of the voting process. I urge you to go to work to reform this great piece of legislation that protects all voters from sea to shining sea and ensure that the march for individual liberty continues throughout this next great American century."

Supreme Court STRIKES DOWN Racist Voting Rights Act Provision - NO MORE DOJ PRECLEARANCE for Redistricting and Voter ID

The Supreme Court of the United States has declared a key provision of the Voting Rights Act. I have long declared and written many articles explaining why Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is racist, discriminatory and unconstitutional. SCOTUS did not strike down Section 5, but they effectively dismantled Section 5 by striking down Section 4.

Section 5 of the voting rights act requires certain states and counties to get preclearance from Eric Holder's racist Department of Justice before they can make ANY changes to anything involving elections.

Section 5 was not struck down, but section 4 was. Section 4 is the formula that determines which states and counties get singles out for Section 5 preclearance. Because the formula was thrown out, section 5, although not voided, is completely disabled until Congress votes to creates a new formula to replace the unconstitutional formula that was just thrown out.

NO MORE PRE CLEARANCE BY DOJ! Voter ID Laws and Redistricting NO LONGER BLOCKED

This ruling means there is currently NO MORE DOJ PRECLEARANCE required and anything that is pending review by the DOJ can go into effect. Texas can redistrict without oversight by Holder. Other states get to redistrict without oversight and it was discriminatory to require Texas to get Holder's approval first. South Carolina can implement their voter id law and so can Texas. It was wrong to allow other states to have the same voter id law but block South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama and Texas just because Eric Holder wants to. Texas GOP no longer has to be forced to keep the Republican Primary election the way Eric Holder wants it. We can now make our own primary election dates and procedures. When I was a State Republican Executive Committeeman I argued for standing up against the DOJ and even said we should sue them because what they were doing was unconstitutional.Needless to say the party just went along with the DOJ and didn't stand up to them. Oh well. Thankfully some people did stand up to the DOJ and that led to the Supreme Court issuing this ruling today. This is a huge win for equality and ending racism and discrimination. ALL races have been able to freely vote in any and all elections for decades and the law was very outdated and no longer useful. For far too long the DOJ Preclearance was used to promote certain races over others in elections.

Chief Justice John Roberts argued that these states and the conditions in them have "changed dramatically" over the years.

"The tests and devices that blocked ballot access have been forbidden nationwide for over 40 years. Yet the Act has not eased (Section 5's) restrictions or narrowed the scope of (Section 4's) coverage formula along the way. Instead those extraordinary and unprecedented features have been reauthorized as if nothing has changed, and they have grown even stronger," he wrote.


Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott issued the following statement on today’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling regarding the Voting Rights Act:

“The U.S. Constitution establishes one United States — not a divided nation with different laws applying to different states. Laws that apply unequally to just some states have no place in our nation. Today’s ruling ensures that Texas is no longer one of just a few states that must seek approval from the federal government before its election laws can take effect.

“Today's ruling does not abolish the Voting Rights Act. All states, including Texas, continue to be subject to Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution, which prohibit racial discrimination nationwide.

“With today’s decision, the State’s voter ID law will take effect immediately. Redistricting maps passed by the Legislature may also take effect without approval from the federal government.”

Texas Senator Ted Cruz made posted this statement today on his Facebook page: 

"Today, the Supreme Court recognized the enormous progress made toward voting equality in the United States since the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965. The Court rightly decided that the statutory standards used decades ago to subject de...mocratically-elected state legislatures to second-guessing by unelected federal bureaucrats no longer survives constitutional scrutiny.

Today's decision also validates the hard work and personal sacrifice made by my late friend and former Texas solicitor general, Greg Coleman. Greg's tireless and brilliant advocacy on this issue no doubt paved the way for this result, and I am grateful for his principled legacy."

read my previous articles on this subject:

Voting Rights Act vs. Texas in Supreme Court Over Voter ID and Redistricting - Section 5 Unconstitutional

State of Texas Sues DOJ & Challenges Voting Rights Act Section 5 Constitutionality

Should Republican Party of Texas Sue DOJ over Voting Rights Act Preclearance Constitutionality?

US Supreme Court Hears Texas Redistricting – Voting Rights Act Section 5 might be Found Unconstitutional – Late Decision Might Mean 2 Texas Primary Election Dates instead of 1…. again