Skip to comments.EDITORIAL: Democrats want to see your photo ID - At Saturday's presidential preference caucus
Posted on 01/15/2008 7:57:18 AM PST by Nevadan
We're used to Democrats saying one thing and doing another, but the hypocrisy that will unfold at some local presidential caucus sites Saturday will surprise even hardened cynics.
For decades, Democrats have stood against strengthening voter identification standards at polling sites. Modest identification reforms have been enacted in about half the states, with a handful of them requiring photo identification to prevent election fraud and uphold the integrity of balloting.
Although Americans need photo ID to write checks, use credit cards, board airplanes and even collect welfare benefits, Democrats have argued that lower-income and minority citizens are less likely to possess acceptable identification, and therefore more likely to be denied their right to vote.
The party and loyal special interests have spent millions of dollars on court challenges against photo ID laws, comparing them to poll taxes -- even when governments issue photo identification free of charge. The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on the issue last week and could decide the constitutionality of photo identification laws once and for all.
But for Saturday's much-anticipated caucus, the state party is poised to demand that Strip workers -- many of them minority, low-income citizens -- furnish ID to participate in the "at-large" sites set up near major hotels to accommodate them.
Neighborhood caucus sites will have the registration rolls for their precincts. But because registered Democrats from all corners of the county will be working on the Strip on Saturday, the state party must check at-large participants against a massive voter database. That requires identification -- signatures alone won't do. Some Strip workers will have no alternative but to provide photo identification.
The very inconvenience that supposedly disenfranchises voters is necessary to protect the validity of a party caucus, where people openly debate the merits and shortcomings of candidates for president?
It reminds us of last year's Democratic efforts to impose the card-check system on union elections that would otherwise be decided by secret ballot. Party leaders insisted that having labor groups solicit and collect votes in person would not result in harassment and intimidation. Meanwhile, in congressional leadership elections, Democrats were so fearful of suffering political retribution for publicly revealing their allegiances that they voted in secret.
During tonight's Democratic debate at Cashman Center, you might hear candidates call for energy independence ... then rule out opening coastal areas and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil and gas exploration. You might hear candidates demand more affordable health care ... then propose costly new regulations and government mandates. You might hear candidates command better job protections for workers and higher wages for the middle class ... then advocate huge tax increases on the wealthy investors who provide capital and create jobs.
In its defense, the Democratic Party is a private organization that's free to decide who can join and under what circumstances they can participate. But you can bet that when state party leaders celebrate the conclusion of this week's caucus events, they'll be having their cake and eating it, too.
Paraphrasing Ann Coulter,
Democrats.... if they had any brains they'd be Republicans!
It's New Mexico's turn now. Richardson is home to push his billion dollar health care program starting this afternoon. Open wide, gag, and hold on to your wallet.
It is purely a matter of Democrats protecting illegal voters when they protest against ID in order to vote. And that's the name of that tune.
You are too stupid to get photo ID.
How about a Nevada scramble, Mr. S.? Time to hand them a petard.
Hillary doesn’t want members of the Service Workers Union that has endorsed Obama, to get into the caucuses to vote for him. The Clintonistas leave nothing to chance. But they’ll be totally fine with having illegals vote for Hillary in November and will fight to the death anyone who wants to check their IDs.
Naw. It's always been about fraud, and winning at any cost. American Dems would rather cheat and win than play fair and lose.
Actually, I don't blame them for trying. Hard to expect scoundrels to not try. I blame the media for parroting the party line for so many years, rather than looking into the matter in detail.
Lest any Freeper forget, for the last two elections there have been thousands of 100% turnouts in all-black precincts in Miami, Detroit, Philadelphia, St Louis. These are all in battleground swing states. I think Philly even had a couple of 102% turnouts recorded.
Actually, I think that sort of thing would lead to a pulled post or pulled thread...when I've suggested similar stuff, thhe threads got pulled and the reason given was "No thanks."
So, I'm asking for opinions from the mod and the current list holder.
“That requires identification — signatures alone won’t do. “
So, um, they support ID for voters now - right??!
...my head hurts.... cONfUsINg!
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.