Convicted Felon gets 42% of vote against Obama & delegates to Democratic Convention

Its political and therefore related to the dream act. And its hilarious too! Need to get this guys position on immigration:


| According to the Associated Press, one of the most bizarre political outcomes occurred in the West Virginia primary when a hitherto unknown presidential candidate named Keith Judd won 40 percent of the vote to President Obama's 60 percent.

What makes the results in West Virginia intriguing is that Judd is not even a resident of West Virginia. He is currently residing in the Federal Correctional Institution in Beaumont, Texas for threats he made at the University of New Mexico in 1999. Judd was able to get his name on the West Virginia ballot by paying a $2,500 filing fee and filling out some forms.

There are a number of takeaways from this result.

First, it appears that President Obama is very unpopular in West Virginia. This may have something to do with his promise to bankrupt the coal industry as a way to combat global warming, which Hot Air reported during the 2008 campaign.

Second, West Virginia might want to look at reforming its somewhat lax ballot laws. As a convicted felon, Judd cannot actually serve in any public office, not to speak of the presidency of the United States. He has won a certain degree of fame, perhaps all 15 minutes of it, by playing a joke on the president of the United States.

What is even more embarrassing is Judd will get delegates to the Democratic National Convention

Curiously, the people who are most outraged at the result are not Democratic partisans of President Obama. The Daily Paul suggests that had everyone who had voted for Judd as a protest vote had instead voted for Ron Paul in the Republican Primary, Paul would have won his first and only state. The embarrassment would therefore have been Mitt Romney's and not Obama's.
http://news.yahoo.com/convicted-felo...163600893.html

I wonder if he'd get elected could he pardon himself.

I think it might DA User's dad.

LOL, this had me laughing for 15 minutes straight

is that a ferret on his shoulder?

Negative.

Cool. We all need to laugh. :- )

What I don't get is if a convicted felon can run for office, why can't a dreamer?

There are Statute of Limitations for most crimes. Although Immigration Violations are civil offenses (except repeated EWI), there is no Statute of Limitations available. It's unfair if you ask me. There are far more severe offenses (both criminal and civil) that are pardoned if a pre-defined number of years have passed without prosecution.

The only avenue for immigrants is the registry provision. If you have been here continuously since January 1, 1971, you get a Green Card and all violations are pardoned. Unlike Statute of Limitations for other Criminal and Civil offenses, this relief is not based on the number of years have passed; rather, it's based on a fixed date - which is logically flawed IMO. None of us were even born anywhere close to the current registry date of Jan 1, 1971. This registry provision was originally intended to be updated in every 25 years or so. So that the newer generations can take advantage of the original intent of provision.

Roxana Bacon in her 2010 memo mentioned that USCIS can exercise a "discretionary option" to move forward the registry date from January 1, 1972. This should NOT require congressional approval. She knows the law and those were her words!

The registry provision in the Immigration Law is what comes the closest to Statute Of Limitation.

the picture scared me for a second