Holder, Obama, and the rest of the progressives keep pretending this is about voter rights, and that forcing people to present a photo ID is a type of voter intimidation that should not be allowed to stand. Keep in mind, this is the same Attorney General that spoke up in support of Obama's murder of an American citizen because Obama, absent any constitutional due process, review by any court of law, or investigation by an agency outside the White House, decided by himself that the individual posed a threat to the U.S. such that summarily killing him was necessary and appropriate. And this is the same administration, again via AG Holder, who refused to prosecute the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation when they stood outside a polling place dressed in militant gear and wielding clubs. I'm pretty sure dressing up in all black and wielding a club outside a polling place is more intimidating to voters than asking them for a photo ID at the door. And if our government can kill Americans without due process, the surely a state can require the showing of a photo ID in order to vote.
The real reason they are fighting this, and doing so only in Texas, is to help shore up the Hispanic vote. It's the same reason they sued Arizona over their illegal immigration legislation that merely mirrored the federal law which the Obama administration still has not gotten around to enforcing. Texas has a large Hispanic population, and this is one of the voting blocks that Obama hasn't entirely won over; one that he feels he can win over with a little effort. Obama and Holder know that many of the Hispanics in Texas don't currently have a driver's license or state-issued photo ID. So, requiring them to have a photo ID before voting means that many of them will not vote. By standing up for the Hispanics in Texas who don't have a photo ID, by telling them that their state is violating their rights, and by telling them that they should be able to vote without expending any effort obtaining a photo ID, Obama and Holder are hoping to improve their popularity among that minority group.
It's not a bad strategy politically, although, like most other initiatives they undertake, they won't just be honest about why they are suing Texas. They have to put forth these phony reasons and pretend they are merely fighting for the rights of the little man when, in reality, they are simply engaging in outright political gamesmanship in an effort to boost their numbers among the large Hispanic population in Texas.
First of all, there is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits a state from requiring a photo ID in order to vote. It's not so unduly burdensome that it effectively prevents people from asserting their constitutional right to vote. It may cost $10 or $15 to get an ID, and it requires people to go to a DMV or other state agency office to have their picture taken and provide basic background data like address, phone number, height, and eye color. Second, requiring a photo ID actually enhances the voting system - it makes it harder to fraudulently vote by adding an additional step for poll workers to confirm that the person voting is who he says he is.
The progressives are saying that voter fraud is not a problem, so no additional confirmation step is necessary. A quick Google search of "voter fraud" reveals that, while perhaps not at Iranian levels, voter fraud does exist across this country. Common sense dictates that requiring a photo ID will cut down on this fraud. How soon they forget their own arguments about voter fraud following GW Bush's win over Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election. I guess we are to believe that all voter fraud has been eliminated since that election ages ago.
There's really no downside to the photo ID requirement, except for those too lazy or disinterested to go and get the ID, and perhaps for those in the democratic party who wish they didn't have to actually win over the Hispanic vote on the merits of their own beliefs. They are more interested these days in cleverly stealing votes than actually obtaining them through honest means.
We show our photo ID's all the time, and it presents no great barrier to us in obtaining various goods and services. The list above provides a litany of everyday things that require a photo ID - at this point in our nation's history, a photo ID is pretty much an indispensable item that just about everyone has and anyone can easily get.
Obama can kill American citizens on a whim without casting a single glance at the Constitution. But try and make someone show their driver's license when they vote and all hell breaks loose in the Attorney General's office as they scramble to address this great injustice. The progressives are so full of bull on this that I'm surprised anyone actually buys what they are selling. Unfortunately, you don't need to have a photo ID to buy that load of horsepuckey!
No comments:
Post a Comment