SCOTUS Upholds ID to Vote Law
Apr 28, 2008 Political
For the longest time Republicans have been trying to pass laws that require people to show an identification card prior to being allowed to vote. This has met with resistance from the ACLU and the Democratic Party, both of whom state that an ID requirement will make it harder for people to vote. The claim is that the poor and the elderly are not likely to have a driver’s license so they would not be able to vote. This is hogwash because there are many forms of identification that may be used.
Many states offer an identification card from the motor vehicle administration. It is a state provided ID and may be used for voting. The argument goes that the elderly and the poor, particularly minorities, do not have these IDs and they have no means to get them. Again, this is hogwash. First of all very few people are without an ID. People need them to board planes, to cash checks and to get into some state and federal buildings. People who get welfare or have food stamps have to provide ID to use those hand outs so trust me, they have an ID. Those who are complaining because they do not have one would certainly get one if the government said they would give $100 dollar bills to people with an ID. Ids are not hard to get and most people have them. Those poor minorities that the Democrats cry about need ID to cash welfare checks (or to open a bank account for the direct deposit).
The real reason that Democrats and the ACLU oppose IDs to vote is because requiring an ID reduces the amount of fraud that takes place. People cannot vote as another person because they must have a photo ID. ID requirements mean that dead Democrats will no longer be allowed to vote and which will be a novelty for cities like Chicago and Baltimore.
The ACLU and the Democrats oppose this because removing the ability to cheat drastically reduces the chance that liberals win office.
Today, the Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s law requiring voters to show photo IDs at the polls. This is a common sense rule and does not conflict with the Constitution but the liberal idiots on the court were, of course, against the whole idea. Justice Souter wrote:
“Indiana’s ‘Voter ID Law’ threatens to impose nontrivial burdens on the voting right of tens of thousands of the State’s citizens,” wrote Souter, who predicted that “a significant percentage of those individuals are likely to be deterred from voting.” The Hill
He is, of course, wrong. I have already pointed out how the arguments against are wrong. I would also point out that these very liberals who say that we are imposing non trivial burdens on the voting rights of citizens have no objection to imposing non trivial burdens on the rights of people to keep and bear arms. If a person must show an ID to buy a gun and then go through a background check and this is seen as reasonable then why is it unreasonable to expect a person to show ID to vote?
I would like Justice Souter to explain this but he is preoccupied with his bout of rectal-cranial inversion.
What do you need an ID to do in this country?
- Apply for a passport
- Board an airplane
- Enter a federal building
- Open a bank account
- Buy alcohol
- Buy tobacco
- Cash a check
Certainly voting is more important than any of these things. Certainly our system of voting is important enough to be safeguarded from illegal activity.
The next important step will be for us to require proof of citizenship before one is allowed to register to vote. We have to prove it to get a job (which makes me wonder how so many ILLEGALS slip through the cracks) so proof of citizenship to register to vote only makes sense. The law says only citizens may vote so why not have a way of proving they are the only ones doing it?
One step at a time. This is the first and it is a good one.
Tags: democratic fraud, ID, requirement, Stop the ACLU, vote
Stop the ACLU Blogburst 12-16-2007
Dec 17, 2007 Stop the ACLU
Cross posted from Stop The ACLU
Its become a popular yearly tradition now to send the Anti-Christian Liars Union grinches a Christmas card. I personally think its ineffective, and that the money you waste on a stamp for the organization to toss in the shredder would be better served towards a good cause. So, I encourage you to save that money, dig a little deeper, and contribute to an organization that fights the ACLU and defends Christmas. The Alliance Defense Fund, and the ACLJ are both great organizations that defend Christmas each year. The Alliance Defense Fund does it for free. Why not help groups like that out this year?
However, from experience last year…I know that many will insist on sending the ACLU a Christmas card. After all, it is tradition. If that is how you want to make your message…we have some great greeting cards and postcards available at our online store. Plenty of other great Christmas gifts too.
Send your Christmas card to the ACLU at:
ACLU
125 Broad Street
18th Floor
New York , NY 10004
For great Christmas Card ideas visit Stop the ACLU at the top link.
Tags: cards, Christmas, Stop the ACLU
Stop the ACLU Blogburst 9-27-07
Sep 27, 2007 Stop the ACLU
Recently, the ACLU set their doomsday clock at six minutes before midnight! Once it reaches the ‘dark hour’ of midnight…we will be slaves to the ominous and evil ‘surveillance society’. This isn’t science fiction. This is typical scare tactics from the ACLU.
They prey upon the paranoid. This is how they get donations to fund their machine. They cry about “violators of that very liberty. They have a massive database of their own member’s private financial information they use for soliciting donations.
The group’s new data collection practices were implemented without the board’s approval or knowledge and were in violation of the ACLU’s privacy policy at the time, according to Michael Meyers, vice president of the organization and a frequent internal critic. He said he had learned about the new research by accident Nov. 7 during a meeting of the committee that is organizing the group’s Biennial Conference in July.
He objected to the practices, and the next day, the privacy policy on the group’s Web site was changed. “They took out all the language that would show that they were violating their own policy,” Meyers said. “In doing so, they sanctified their procedure while still keeping it secret.”
Now the ACLU are proudly defending Rep. Larry Craig on grounds of privacy. In another recent case they are defending a “pre-operative transsexual” anatomically male’s “right” to use the female public restroom. Terrence Jeffrey calls out the ‘privacy hypocrisy’ on this one.
“The government does not have a constitutionally sufficient justification for making private sex a crime,” said the ACLU. “It follows that an invitation to have private sex is constitutionally protected and may not be made a crime. This is so even where the proposition occurs in a public place, whether in a bar or a restroom.”
But then the ACLU went a step further, arguing that there is not only a right to solicit sex, but also to engage in it, in a public restroom.
“The Minnesota Supreme Court,” said the ACLU, “has already ruled that two men engaged in sexual activity in a department store restroom with the stall door closed had a reasonable expectation of privacy. They were, the Court held, therefore acting in a private, not a public place.”
The conflated logic of the ACLU’s bathroom briefs seems to be that someone entering a public restroom intending to use it for traditional purposes has no protection either from the gender sign posted at the door or from the otherwise vaunted right to privacy. Someone entering a public restroom intending to solicit and engage in sex, on the other hand, is protected by both the First Amendment and the right to privacy.
What else would you expect from a group that embraces an ideology that holds that partially born babies have no right to keep their skulls intact?
Indeed. As my good friend Glib Fortuna puts it:
This about sums up the ACLU’s worldview. To the ACLU, the only “freedom” the ACLU truly believes in is “ACLU and its partisans.
This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Stop the ACLU
Sometimes unrelated trackbacks to: Stop the ACLU, Perri Nelson’s Website, Rosemary’s Thoughts, The Random Yak, Woman Honor Thyself, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, The Pet Haven Blog, Nuke’s News & Views, Blue Star Chronicles, Webloggin, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Right Voices, Gone Hollywood, The Yankee Sailor, and Public Eye, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: freedom, hypocrisy, Link Fest, Privacy, sexual misbehavior, Stop the ACLU