Skip to comments.Holder's Corrupt Opposition to Voter ID Laws
Posted on 04/10/2012 4:08:48 AM PDT by Kaslin
Can anyone think of an innocuous reason that President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder oppose state voter ID laws?
Obama and Holder appear to view almost everything through the prism of race or, at the very least, use race as an excuse to justify otherwise very dubious policies, from immigration enforcement to voter intimidation actions to strong-arming banks to make loans via allegations of racism.
In December, along these lines, Holder criticized redistricting maps that had been drawn by the Texas Legislature and used the opportunity to call for an aggressive federal review of voter identification laws in not just Texas but other states.
But what does all this have to do with voter ID laws? Well, Republicans have been engaged in lobbying for state voter ID laws throughout the nation as an effort to enhance fair and lawful elections and prevent voter fraud. These laws are simple and transparent; they would require voters to present a government-issued form of identification as a condition to voting.
Predictably, Democrats -- led by Obama and Holder -- claim that the move is a GOP ruse to suppress minority voting. Holder called on the parties "to resist the temptation to suppress certain votes in the hope of attaining electoral success and, instead, achieve success by appealing to more voters."
Notice the automatic assumption and, in turn, barely veiled accusation of GOP racism. Notice further how utterly patronizing Holder's attitude is to minorities.
Is Holder's position that minorities are incapable of or ill-equipped at obtaining identification to vote? Why shouldn't people be required to prove they are who they say they are in order to participate in the electoral process?
I would think minorities would be offended at the suggestion that laws requiring them to prove their identity as a prerequisite to voting would somehow disadvantage them. I would think they would have every bit as much interest in ensuring fair, fraud-free elections as non-minorities.
It is sheer common sense that our election authorities should demand proof of the identity of all voters before allowing them to cast votes that will ultimately determine critical decisions affecting the future of their state and nation. I don't remember ever being allowed to vote, by the way, without presenting an ID, even though the precinct workers know me and I know them. This isn't the least bit offensive, but even if it were, it wouldn't justify jeopardizing the integrity of elections.
Political correctness causes people to adopt absurd and indefensible positions, which is precisely how we should characterize efforts to resist voter ID laws.
Obama, Holder and the Democratic Party establishment don't even bother to counter the irrefutable argument that proof of ID is essential to reduce voter fraud. Instead, they just throw out the slanderous allegation that the GOP is trying to suppress the minority vote, which itself is born of the same type of categorical judgment about groups of people that lies at the heart of the sin of racism.
I am not a big fan of so-called bipartisanship, because I think it's a one-way street for Democrats, who only demand it when they want Republicans to cater to their demands, and not the other way around. I'm also realistic enough to recognize that today the parties are so far apart in their goals for the nation and the means to achieve them that we're just better off presenting our alternative cases to the people and letting them decide. But if there were ever an issue that screams out for bipartisanship, ensuring fair elections by verifying the identity of voters would have to be at the top of the list.
The administration's cavalier dismissiveness about the need for voter identification to improve ballot security has been exposed as the cynical fraud it is with the recent release of a video from filmmaker James O'Keefe. The video showed how easy it was for an associate of O'Keefe's to check in as Eric Holder in Holder's polling place without presenting identification, though he neither signed the poll book nor proceeded to cast a ballot. The poll worker, who obviously didn't know O'Keefe, much less Eric Holder, didn't even want to be bothered with the presentation of an ID. "As long as you're in here and you're on our list and that's who you say you are, we're OK," he said.
It's outrageous that Holder is accusing Republicans of wanting to suppress the minority vote through these laws. But it's not outrageous to suggest that Holder and his party, through their specious invocation of the race card to oppose these laws, have no legitimate basis to oppose them and indeed must have an ulterior reason for doing so -- one that involves rigging the election process in their favor.
It probably is true that voter ID laws would suppress “minority” votes (and we know they are) because so many of them on the Dem side are cast by people ineligible to vote. But since whites are fast becoming a minority (as they already are in California, the above statement should soon have be amended by the racist 0-bama regime.
Video was near perfect. Perfection would have been using Scot Joplin’s rag used in The Sting (and for Charlie Chaplin movies) as a “fixed idea’” each time Holden picture was shown.
Holden is a joke!
Voter fraud and the Democratic party are one and inseparable.
Without the one, the other would cease to exist.
Obama and Holder plan to win in a Chicago Landslide.
Welcome to the USSA, comrades.
The minority whose vote they’re trying to protect is DEAD people!!!
The “Deceased-American” voting bloc.
Let’s see: It’s OK to ask for a photo ID to take an SAT but it’s not OK to ask for a photo ID to vote? The U.S., assisted by Holder and Bowbama, is upside down...
I agree. The dems know that without voter fraud they would lose most of their elections and that is why they protect it as if it where the holy grail of politics. The harder they fight against voter ID the more I am sure they are cheating elections.
If there should be a last minute injunction by a judge, implement it after filling out all of the proper paperwork allocating the proper budget, personal and notify all of the impacted voting personal. It could be enacted within 2 or 3 days to meet compliance.
After the voting takes place.
I just read something I didn’t know. Negative ads are banned under Mexico’s constitution....even if they’re true about someone’s corruption. Oh, yeah, we need to be more like Mexico! ALL cultures are not created equal.
Corrupt, poverty stricken, and politically correct....what a combo!
If Obama gets re-elected, I’d look for something like that here pretty soon...
Well there will be court cases over Holder’s corrupted interference. Maybe they will find some judges who are not corrupt. Probably not...but maybe.
I love irony...
“Well there will be court cases over Holders corrupted interference.”
Will there be a court case against Holder for dismissing the ‘08 New Black Panther voter intimidation case?
This regime’s “Just us” department does not support the voting rights of white people.
State sponsored racism at the top level of a world power’s government has not been seen like this since the Third Reich was in power.
Obama/Holder’s Negro Nazi party must be removed from office if this country is to remain a Free Republic.