Posted on 12/26/2011 8:30:05 PM PST by EricTheRed_VocalMinority
It's the most ridiculous and uncontroversial issue in the world, but leave it to a liberal/Democrat to make it serious and controversial. According to them, demanding an official picture I.D. to vote "disenfranchises" poor people. And we all know, they tell us, that most poor people are minorities?
How? No freaking idea.
But this, apparently, is why most Republicans -- nay, most Americans -- believe that voter I.D. is just plain common sense.
Because it is.
Think of all the things you have to do in your lives that require an official photo I.D.: from driving a car to boarding an airplane to renting a video to borrowing a library book to buying a bottle of liquor or pack of cigarettes. I've never heard of a single example of a minority, poor or otherwise, complaining about being barred from any of these activities because access to such I.D.'s were financially or otherwise prohibitive.
Yet for some reason, the notion that engaging in the very important civic activity of voting should require a proper state issued and most likely free (i.e., taxpayer-funded) voter I.D., is raaaacist. Right?
Wrong, according to liberal/Democrats who never waste a moment poisoning an important issue with wholly unsubstantiated claims of discrimination against minorities and other poor people.
As the 2012 presidential election approaches, Eric Holder, arguably the most despicable and politically abusive Attorney General in U.S. history, is playing the worn out race card to prevent states from implementing voter I.D. An editorial in last Friday's WSJ reads in part:
The Obama Administration's re-election mobilization continues: Witness Eric Holder's attempt to play the race card and perhaps twist the law in a campaign against voter identification laws.
In the Attorney General's telling, the movement in the states to require voters to show some ID is a revival of minority disenfranchisement a la Jim Crow. A growing number of minorities, he said in a speech last week, are now worried about "the same disparities, divisions and problems" that beset the country in 1965 and "many Americans, for the first time in their lives . . . now have reason to believe that we are failing to live up" to the promise of democracy for all.
If you haven't heard about this national crisis, perhaps that's because you don't travel in Mr. Holder's political circles. He is merely repeating the howls of groups like the NAACP and the George Soros-funded Brennan Center, which claim without evidence that voter ID laws hurt minorities. ...
Mr. Holder says the Civil Rights Division led by Thomas Perez will review the policies and impartially "apply the law." If that's true, Mr. Perez's job should be easy: In 2005, Justice approved a nearly identical law in Georgia. In 2008's Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, the Supreme Court likewise ruled 6-3 that an Indiana law requiring photo ID at the ballot box was constitutional.
The court's liberal lion, then-Justice John Paul Stevens, wrote for the majority that Indiana's law "is unquestionably relevant to the State's interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process." Indiana offered free voter ID cards to all citizens, so the inconvenience of picking up an ID at the Department of Motor Vehicles wasn't an undue burden and was reasonably balanced by the state's interest in reducing fraud, Justice Stevens wrote.
That isn't good enough for Mr. Holder, who says his department's priority is to "expand the franchise." But expand it for whom, exactly? The vast majority of voters already have the necessary photo ID, which they need to get through airport security or register for a grocery-store savings card.
Of course it's not good enough for Holder, or any liberal/Democrat because the whole issue is based on a lie. In other words, they're all F.O.C.
Directly related to this lie about "minority voter suppression" is another thing Democrats are F.O.C. about: Voter fraud. This crime, libs/Dems will tell you, is a Republican tactic. You all remember the Bush-Gore fiasco of 2000, right? How did Bush ultimately win? Republican voter fraud. But that wasn't enough. When Bush won decisively in 2004 against John Kerry, how did the Dems explain that? Republican vote fraud.
Yet, the vast majority of election fraud convictions of recent years has been committed byDemocrats. Just last week four Democrats in New York state pled guilty to voter fraud in a 2009 primary. And the week before that, the chairman of Indiana's Democrat Party resigned as investigations into voter fraud in the 2008 presidential primary got underway.
And in 2010, Obama's tight buds at ACORN -- i.e., Democrats -- have been convicted in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida, Washington state, and elsewhere.
And need we rehash the way the bitter partisan Democrat Al Franken squeezed his way into the Senate in the state of Minnesota in 2008?
Make no mistake: Democrat opposition to voter I.D. is all because it makes voter fraud significantly more difficult to get away with. And Democrats need fraudulent votes to win elections. They need felons to vote. They need illegal immigrants to vote. They need dead people to vote. And they apparently need Mickey Mouse and Adolf Hitler to vote as well. All the while accusing Republicans of engaging in voter fraud!
So pardon me for saying so, Eric Holder, but you and your race-baiting minions of liberals/Democrats are F.O.C.
*F.O.C. = Full of cr@p (But you probably figured that out by now)
We get everything we want and we fix it so no one else can do that. We know that that is what voter ID is about.
The whites' really big secret. I exposed it on another thread, the special 800 number that only we have to ask for and get anything we want and to deny others; before the telephone it was a special telegraph, drum, or smoke signal.
Every year I call the educational testing organizations and instruct them to double white scores and reduce black scores by thirty percent.
In 2000 I told Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris that I don't want any black votes to count -- and get rid of that make up! You'll look a lot better without it!
There I feel much better now.
The evil, discriminatory voter ID law in Tennessee makes it easier to vote than it is to buy a beer. Nearly any type of picture ID, even if expired is all it takes. If you want to buy a beer, it must be a current DL
“Every year I call the educational testing organizations and instruct them to double white scores and reduce black scores by thirty percent.”
You dumb ass. Everyone knows those scores are rigged!
Let us talk reality for a moment..
The paperwork required to get food stamps, one of the most basic ‘poor’ assistance in the United States, requires birth certificates for the recipients, valid government issued photo id, finger printing, and a social security card. If married, you need to have a copy of your marriage certificate as well.
If this ‘photo voter id’ law disenfranchises poor people, then how many millions don’t qualify for food stamps or other basic government assistance?
It is all smoke and mirrors, as requiring valid government issued photo ID prevents voting by the dead, proxy voting for the disabled, and of course the most infamous method, random picking of names from the list out in front of the polling place. At least here in California, there’s a handy list of names, updated frequently throughout the day, as to whom has voted. Go on up, pick a name, and memorize the address, and you too can vote as many times as you wish.
bears repeating.
¡
Voter I.D. is just plain common sense.However democrats can’t use dead people names for a vote nor can one vote often if the law was passed.
Dems love third world rulings.
I would not continue to equate driving and voting. Rights are not privileges. I, too, become concerned at restrictions on rights. OTOH what we currently allow (fraud) the gummint is taking MY right to vote away by putting a process in place that is NOT actually voting (if my vote Is stolen through fraud). The Rats don’t seem to have a problem stealing MY vote.
Make no mistake: Democrat opposition to voter ID is all because it makes voter fraud significantly more difficult to get away with.
That hits the nail on the head! We have stated exactly that on FR several times.
Democrats NEED fraudulent votes to win elections.
Just a quibble with this point. In some (close) elections, true. In others, they can win without fraud, but fraud can't hurt them and will garner a larger victory. So they calculate that since their chances of getting caught are minuscule, they'll cheat because they can.
...the vast majority of election fraud convictions of recent years has been committed by Democrats.
Not only recent years, but for over a century. One reason is that urban areas are more conducive than more sparsely populated areas to perpetrating fraud (since people are generally more likely to be unfamiliar with one another) and Democrats tend to predominate in urban areas. Furthermore, election fraud convictions represent only a tiny minority of election fraud schemes that actually do occur.
2000 in Florida was an instance in which the usual voter fraud failed. The reason: POd Cuban Americans. The Elian Gonzalez raid got them so riled up against the Dems that their votes narrowly tipped the scales, barely countering the dead people voting in Dade, Broward and adjacent urban areas.
The lessons Holder learns from this: Don’t PO Cubans in Florida, but keep the voter fraud coming.
Yes, it failed in the sense that Bush still eked out a 600 or so vote plurality over Gore in the state. But it didn't fail in the sense that the masterminds of the fraud were charged criminally.
The perps of the fraud still had the gall to charge that potential minority individuals were denied access to vote, that they were "disenfranchised." And they also got some elderly Jewish ladies in Florida to claim that the format of the butterfly ballot confused them into voting for Pat Buchanan when they intended to vote for Gore - in a county in which the Board of Elections was controlled by the 'Rats! As Eric the Red says, they were F. O. C.!!!
Eric Holder is so interested in promoting honesty and integrity in the elections process that he acted to block the prosecution of the Philadelphia New Black Panthers charged with voter intimidation in 2008 in connection with the presidential election won by his boss, Zero.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.