Unlike rigged elections in places like Cuba, Afghanistan, Kenya, Venezuela and many other middle east countries, America has - throughout most of our history- maintained the moral standards that have allowed for fair and trustworthy elections. People still believe that the results given on election day are legitimate.
It seems, however, that recent elections (in my lifetime at least) have been getting closer and closer than ever. And with all the things related to the internet and new ways of communicating today, more and more people are questioning some of the methods used on election day. Most of the rumors you read about are proved wrong, but in this day and age where its easier than ever to take someone's identity, why is it so hard to believe that voter fraud could be perpetrated? Maybe it's not as technically devious as the internet -- maybe it's good enough to just pay a bunch a people, put them on a bus and drop them off at a voting spot -- or felons and illegal aliens that find their way into a voting booth. Stakes have never been higher, so why not safe guard against possible fraud and preserve the integrity of our elections?
Why not require voters to show an ID to safe guard our voting rights?As sensible as that question is, it's tremendously offensive if you're a hard core liberal who feels certain rights are being infringed upon by requiring someone to how a picture ID. Cries of "disenfranchisement" are shouted on cable news shows, opinion pages of today's remaining newspapers and by left-leaning non-profits and union organizations.
About a dozen states (with Republican governors) have or are considering changing voter registration by requiring proof of identification. Most are being fought feverishly in court.
So why is requiring a photo ID such a threat to Democrats? Why do Democrats think it harms minorities and the elderly?
So they should have picture IDs. What's the problem?
Polls indicate that most Republicans support the voter ID law. Men and women support it. Blacks support it. Elderly support it. So, if most people support the concept of voter IDs, why are judges around the country challenging the law? Why is the Justice Department, led by Eric Holder, challenging the citizens of Florida, Ohio, Maine, Texas and North Carolina and questioning the constitutionality of the law?
The difference is that Democrats look at minorities and the elderly as being helpless. Their mantra requires them to "defend the helpless, the poor, the downtrodden and the old" against the evil Republicans who are disenfranchising voters by rendering their vote mute. I would think these people would be insulted by this type of pandering, but maybe they've become so dependent on government assistance that they are truly becoming "helpless." I hope I'm wrong, but you start to wonder if they think they'll lose their benefits if they start to rock the boat.
That's the "be nice... " answer to my question.
A less diplomatic answer is that Democrats are worried about losing their power. Minorities are their power, their fuel that puts them in office and keeps them in power. A recent example can be found in Florida where the Justice Department has ruled that the state cannot remove illegal voters by purging them from the voting list. The warning from the Justice Department claimed the procedure violated the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which protects minorities. Apparently illegal aliens, too.
Once again the Obama Administration is sticking its nose into state rights, by preventing Florida from trying to ensure a legitimate voter registration roll. The Supreme Court just ruled that the Justice Department went too far by declaring Arizona can stop illegal immigrants if they suspect there is something wrong. Stopping Florida's "voter scrub" is another attempt at drumming up Democratic support even if it means keeping illegal voters on board.
The whole idea that voter IDs are a burden is ridiculous. The other day, I had to show my driver's license to get into the local YMCA to play racquetball. No problem, I thought. But apparently for some it's too much to expect that they have an ID to vote.
Boarding a plane
Buying a car
Getting a passport
Getting a driver's license
Buying alcohol
Buying cigarettes
Applying for food stamps
Cashing a check
Renting an apartment (sometimes)
Purchase a firearm
Getting a marriage license
BUT NOT TO VOTE.
Most recently, House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi claimed that the attempts by Republicans to hold Eric Holder in contempt over his involvement in "Operation Fast and Furious" was in response to voter suppression. Pelosi, in a press briefing the other day linked the contempt charge by saying (incredulously) "They're going after Eric Holder because he is supporting measures to overturn these voter suppression initiatives in the states. This is no accident. it is no coincidence. It is a plan on the part of Republics, to suppress voters."
Nancy Pelosi has said some dumb things before, but this one puts her WAY ahead! What is she talking about?
We cannot challenge Holder (or Obama for that matter) without being accused of some racial bias towards them being black. As a result, our attempts to make Eric Holder accountable come across as racist. No reasonable man or woman should let Pelosi's mad ramblings confuse the issue. The Democrats are unable to defend their position and are caught doing the very thing they claim to defend. I call that hypocritical.
As an example, note the requirement of the Democratic Party at the Massachusetts Democratic Convention being held last month. As part of the convention, the pre- program mailed to attendees says "Registration and Credentials: A PHOTO ID WILL BE REQUIRED TO ENTER THE MASS MUTUAL CENTER." Add it to the list above, I guess, and let the crazies ramble on.
Enough with the tired excuses coming from Democrats about voter ID laws. Be honest, you need every vote you can get to put your badass in office. And you don't care if they're illegal, dead, in jail or living in another state.
It's time to require voter ID.
No comments:
Post a Comment