Rain On The Scarecrow
Just when you think Eric Holder can't sink any deeper, he does a swan dive right into the "controversy" surrounding voter-identification laws.
You see, the Dems are ginning up all the phony outrage they can over the fact that a number of states have had the audacity to pass laws requiring voters to show identification. Imagine that.
In Liberal land such laws are nothing more than a GOP voter suppression tactic meant to make it more difficult for the poor and elderly to get out to the polls. Forget about the fundamental importance of fair elections.
Sure, it can be challenging for some to secure proper identification, but that doesn't lessen the criticality of protecting the integrity of the voting process.
Integrity, in this context, has two characteristics—each vote cast must be legitimate, and every qualified person who wants to vote should be free to do so.
The poor, of course, are free to vote, and their potential difficulty in getting proper identification is relatively easily mitigated in a couple ways—via political parties, with their sophisticated get-out-the-vote initiatives, and/or with various government-sponsored programs.
We don't stop licensing drivers because it's disproportionately taxing for a relatively small percentage to get to the testing location. There's an overriding safety concern that trumps any such inclination. The solution, just like with elections, is to help those in need gain access, not expose the entire public to unsafe/unfair conditions. Common sense.
In making his not-so-subtle case against the Right, Attorney General Holder employs the standard issue Obama administration strawman argument.
Holder says, "The beauty of this nation, the strength of this nation, is its diversity, and when we try to exclude people from being involved in the process we weaken the fabric of this country."
Try to exclude people?
Of course, this is a specious argument meant to pit minorities and the poor against Republicans. Legitimate and reasonable safeguards against fraud have nothing to do with excluding qualified voters.
As usual, the scarecrow has no brain.
Holder makes another curious argument. He says, "You constantly hear about voter fraud, but you don't see huge amounts of fraud out there."
Setting aside the fact that there are innumerable documented cases of fraud and that we've seen an increasing number of elections decided by slimmer and slimmer margins (making them ripe for manipulation), is this really the argument our Attorney General is making? Wow.
You read about murder, but the actual percentage of people murdered is so small....
Anybody else find it odd that the Democrats want to regulate virtually every aspect of our lives, but are ambivalent (at best) when it comes to issues fundamental to what it means to be a sovereign nation—secure borders and legitimate elections?
When Holder is finally bounced out of office, he should expect a call.
Hello, Eric. This is Vladimir Putin. I've got a big election coming up; how would you like to be my....
You see, the Dems are ginning up all the phony outrage they can over the fact that a number of states have had the audacity to pass laws requiring voters to show identification. Imagine that.
In Liberal land such laws are nothing more than a GOP voter suppression tactic meant to make it more difficult for the poor and elderly to get out to the polls. Forget about the fundamental importance of fair elections.
Sure, it can be challenging for some to secure proper identification, but that doesn't lessen the criticality of protecting the integrity of the voting process.
Integrity, in this context, has two characteristics—each vote cast must be legitimate, and every qualified person who wants to vote should be free to do so.
The poor, of course, are free to vote, and their potential difficulty in getting proper identification is relatively easily mitigated in a couple ways—via political parties, with their sophisticated get-out-the-vote initiatives, and/or with various government-sponsored programs.
We don't stop licensing drivers because it's disproportionately taxing for a relatively small percentage to get to the testing location. There's an overriding safety concern that trumps any such inclination. The solution, just like with elections, is to help those in need gain access, not expose the entire public to unsafe/unfair conditions. Common sense.
In making his not-so-subtle case against the Right, Attorney General Holder employs the standard issue Obama administration strawman argument.
Holder says, "The beauty of this nation, the strength of this nation, is its diversity, and when we try to exclude people from being involved in the process we weaken the fabric of this country."
Try to exclude people?
Of course, this is a specious argument meant to pit minorities and the poor against Republicans. Legitimate and reasonable safeguards against fraud have nothing to do with excluding qualified voters.
As usual, the scarecrow has no brain.
Holder makes another curious argument. He says, "You constantly hear about voter fraud, but you don't see huge amounts of fraud out there."
Setting aside the fact that there are innumerable documented cases of fraud and that we've seen an increasing number of elections decided by slimmer and slimmer margins (making them ripe for manipulation), is this really the argument our Attorney General is making? Wow.
You read about murder, but the actual percentage of people murdered is so small....
Anybody else find it odd that the Democrats want to regulate virtually every aspect of our lives, but are ambivalent (at best) when it comes to issues fundamental to what it means to be a sovereign nation—secure borders and legitimate elections?
When Holder is finally bounced out of office, he should expect a call.
Hello, Eric. This is Vladimir Putin. I've got a big election coming up; how would you like to be my....
Interesting that the "disenfranchised" poor seem to have proper identification (Social security cards, drivers license, state I.D.) for various gub'ment programs...Methinks we're looking for a way around the issue of voter identification to get the (Democrat) illegal alien vote...hmmm.
Reply to this
Painfully obvious; isn't it?
Reply to this