It seems photo voter ID and Planned Parenthood have been in the news quite a bit lately. On Tuesday I gave a presentation at Duke University School of Law on voter ID. I discussed both topics. How are they related?
One of the favorite canards of voter ID opponents is that voter ID is an intentional scheme to harm black voters. The theory supposes since black voters tend to have photo identification less frequently, then state laws requiring voter ID are a deliberate plot to harm black voters.
Consider the nonsense of Virginia Senator Mamie Locke. After the Virginia Senate passed voter ID this week, she called it “so 1866,” thinking she was describing a year where blacks couldn’t vote and whites could. In fact, 1866 saw precisely the opposite. White confederates were disenfranchised and freedmen enjoyed the franchise. The reconstruction constitutions decades later stripped blacks of voting rights. But in 1866, all was relatively well. Locke’s racially charged history is both unfortunate, and wrong.
As I said at Duke, I’ve participated in legislative efforts to pass voter ID, and nowhere was there any hint of a deliberate effort to harm black voters.
Regardless, the left goes wild over the prospect of racist conspiracies driving support of voter ID.
So let’s consider the “Negro Project.” This is a real racist conspiracy. Here we have a deliberate plan to harm blacks, not just black voters. You now know the “Negro Project” as Planned Parenthood. As I said at Duke University today:
It would be like alleging that the abortion advocacy group Planned Parenthood got involved in the issue because they wanted to decrease the population of African Americans in the country, so they focused on promoting access to abortion and sterilization of American blacks. Of course anyone who knows about Planned Parenthood’s founder, the eugenicist Margaret Sanger, knows this is exactly what she was up to. She started the “Negro Project,” her words, and set out to sterilize large segments of the black community and supported abortion among blacks to prevent them from “breeding like weeds,” again her words, and to eliminate “defectives, delinquents and dependents,” again, her words.
Maybe Virginia State Senator Mamie Locke can aim her accusations of historic racist intent at Planned Parenthood and leave voter ID alone. Hampton has a Planned Parenthood office. Locke can summon all the usual race hucksters to picket, and demand answers about the deliberate acts of Planned Parenthood in facilitating hundreds of thousands of abortions of African-Americans to curtail the “weed-like breeding.”
Of course we know that won’t happen because imaginary racist conspiracies are so much more appealing than actual ones. And some sacred cows of the Left get a pass on a nasty, murderous, and most of all, real racist history.
“Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it; those who fail to learn history correctly – why, they are simply doomed.” – Achem Dro’hm, “The Illusion of Historical Fact”, C.Y. 4971
(Gene Roddenberry’s Andromeda, “To Loose the Fateful Lightning” (Season 1, episode 2))
FYI Roddenberry was a secular humanist: “In an interview in the April/May 1991 issue of The Humanist magazine, Roddenberry admits that his affinity for humanism long predates his formal affiliation with the organization. He ‘would have come out sooner’ he states, but ‘learned fairly early in life that great honesty about things could give you trouble, cause you problems.’”
“One of the favorite canards of voter ID opponents is that voter ID is an intentional scheme to harm black voters.”
Very simple solution:
1. Voter ID required unless you are black.
2. All who vote get the purple Iragi finger.
Who could complain? Even the ink union gets a bonus.
Why not a purple face treatment so they can’t go around and vote at numerous places? There’s a good voter ID, yep one purple face per vote and it doesn;t wah off for three days!
Let’s face it. Voter ID laws blatantly and maliciously discriminate against Barack Obama’s most reliable voting blocks: convicted felons, cartoon characters & the dead.
The Left doesn’t argue fairly; though it employs reason and argument it is not itself vulnerable to the most simple comparisons. The Left, and particularly the black Left, love to trot out examples of white racism from decades or even hundreds of years ago like a piece of the true cross.
Do what you have done and it is ignored as “not current.” Just like the Democratic Party never empowered racist institutions in its history. They have changed people will say. But make that same argument about a white dominated America and the truth not so hidden in the black press is that white folks haven’t changed. Their racism has either gone underground or survives unwittingly by the grand boon of “white privilege.”
The Left doesn’t argue fairly using consistent principles applied to all, but turns like a weather vane according what wind will make the Left look best. Debate in America has become depraved.
The Left doesn’t argue fairly using consistent principles applied to all, but turns like a weather vane according what wind will make the Left look best. Debate in America has become depraved.
I agree. But I would also add that it’s because they can’t argue fairly or consistently without severely undermining their own chosen positions on most issues. They are remarkably reactionary and irrationally defensive about it. They don’t deal in “good arguments” and “bad arguments” but rather “good people” (them) and “bad people” (those who don’t totally agree with or kowtow to them). The “good people” will always be right no matter how wrong their statements or actions while the rest of us will always be “wrong” (if not downright evil) no matter how obvious or logical our arguments might be.
I think you’ve hit it right on the head: one’s social position comes with morality automatically attached and once attached that person can ironically indulge in hate speech, racial advocacy and bigotry while denying even a hint of such things to those who lack that social position.
This provides an automatic dispensation to minorities, feminists, Muslims and gays, all of whom fit into the faddist contemporary umbrella of the Liberal Left as the eternally exploited, oppressed and denied. This is why a Conservative political ad of a Chinese woman on a bicycle riding past rice fields and speaking with an accent, though having nothing to do with racism, is seen as racist by the Left while formally organizing around race as is the case with the Association of Black Journalists, the Congressional Black Caucus and the National Council of La Raza (the race) is perfectly A-Okay.
If a white person started a White Congressional Caucus they’d be taken to the cleaners. The argument would go that there already IS a de facto white caucus but this is a false argument as there is a difference between cultural interests and demography and formally declaring a racial agenda. This argument is used to cozen racial organizations across the country in response to the de facto white racial superiority by way of “white privilege,” Racism 2.0 and other weird arguments the Left trots out to excuse their own agenda of the ends justifying the means. Does there need to be a white NBA or black hockey association?
Neither entity is formally organized around race but by the arguments of the Left, one can see racism by it’s shadow and not by its presence. Needless to say the Left would view the NHL and NBA from totally different perspectives though both are simply cultural barometers and nothing else, certainly not racial organizations by the mere demographic misrepresentation of a certain race.
If the Left ever turns its attention to the NBA and NFL and NHL, watch out. They will never do this because it would expose them and show how the best man for the job is the American way and not the most oppressed. The Left would delight in bringing affirmative action to the NHL while sobbing tears over dispossessing black players in the NBA and NFL. The Dem Party, once a fine organization, has become the Doublethink Party and carries the banner of the most dangerous ideology to ever assault America, race and gender-based political correctness and Marxist Critical Pedagogy.
“The Dem Party, once a fine organization, has become the Doublethink Party …”
I quite agree with your Orwellian analysis. Leftist academics and media talking heads have fulfilled Orwell’s prophecy:
“Who controls the Present controls the Past.
Who controls the Past controls the Future.”
“The Left doesn’t argue fairly.” Because the left is built on lies. Not a single issue the left pushes is legitmate: affirmative action, voter ID, abortion, welfare, etc, everything is a lie. But because they own the MSM, academics, and most federal and state jobs, they get a pass on honesty.
This argument form also occurs when they discuss the Second Amendment. Some lefties claim that the Second Amendment applies only to muzzle loaders because that was the only available technology of the time. However, I have never heard the same argument to limit religion (Mormonism was developed after the Bill of Rights) or speech (microphones, television, etc.)
When a lib gives me the Second Amendment argument, I counter with the First Amendment holding to the same principle. The inevitable reply is that it is not the same and that my trying to compare the two is testimony to my ignorance.
Of course, the irony really being that Sanger wasn’t an advocate of abortion (although she was present and assisted at some early in her life). Something which I find amusing when the Sanger award is presented to an abortion advocate.
• It is the most barbaric method [of family planning], the killing of babies — infanticide — abortion.
o Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, in My Fight for Birth Control, 1931
•…we explained simply what contraception was; that abortion was the wrong way — no matter how early it was performed it was taking a life; that contraception was the better way, the safer way — it took a little time, a little trouble, but was well worth while in the long run, because life had not yet begun.
o Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, in An Autobiography, 1938
•While there are cases where even the law recognizes an abortion as justifiable if recommended by a physician, I assert that the hundreds of thousands of abortions performed in America each year are a disgrace to civilization.
oMargaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, Woman and the New Race, Chapter 10.
•When motherhood becomes the fruit of a deep yearning, not the result of ignorance or accident, its children will become the foundation of a new race. There will be no killing of babies in the womb by abortion, nor through neglect in foundling homes, nor will there be infanticide. (ETA: Note she defined abortion as infanticide)
o Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, Woman and the New Race (1920).
Very good post.
So whatever Sanger thought, and she was among the now thoroughly discredited adherents of eugenics, the idea of birth control available to women is a good one.
When I was in university this was where most young women went when they wanted birth control, STD issues, or general GYN issues that needed addressing. All good.
Actually the Sanger quotes are pretty much in line with my own. I am not in favor of elective abortion. It is legal in the US so needs do be done in a responsible way. Whatever and don’t want to go more into that.
The small contribution by the Kumar foundation to PP should not be seen as related to that. It has to do with breast cancer screening which is a very dynamic issue now in medicine. The trend is now to decrease broad based community screening which has not been proven to decrease mortality. Instead focus is now on hospital based multidisciplinary centers . This is a medical issue in flux and it will take time to figure out the best strategy.
Politics trumps medical science. PP does abortions. Money given for mammograms to PP supports abortions. That is the political line. This relates more directly to breast cancer and I suspect that the money had nothing to do with the abortion issue but more to do with an unproven community mammography program.
Politics and medicine do not mix well but there is no other choice. That is where the resources are.
Racism is no longer an issue here. We are way past that.
I’d “High Five” ya if I didn’t loath the practice so completely. You’ve turned into on of my heroes.
Keep up the good work.
JW
Requiring photo ID’s for voting is a great idea! Most states require photo driver’s licenses, all US passports require a photo, many high schools and colleges issue photo ID’s for students and faculty. Most states will issue photo ID cards at no charge for those needing identification but do not drive a car. The TSA requires airline passengers to produce a photo ID to board a flight.
Photo ID’s are nothing new, even credit cards have holder’s pictures on them these days.
Voter fraud steals the right of representation by cheating. Unfortunately we wink at voter fraud; charges are rarely investigated and prosecutions of those committing the fraud are unlikely.
One way to ensure honest elections is by use of photo ID’s. I, for one, would like to see voter fraud vigorously prosecuted and the guilty sentenced to long prison terms at hard labor.
Unfortunately, the politicians who get elected thanks to voter fraud are the last people to take steps to prevent it.
Good points Joseph.
I’ve had some sort of photo I.D. for more than half my life (drivers license, college I.D., work, even video store membership!)yet to the left a photo I.D. is some new fangled modern thing out of reach of “regular folks.”
Come on. It’s getting ridiculous.
I just wish some of my ancestors had picked their own damned cotton!
Excellent point! I have often wondered what the nation would be like if the slave trade had never begun. And, for the record, I’m finding that there hasn’t been a single nation on Earth’s history that did not engage in slavery. From the middle east to China/Southeast Asia, the Indian Continent, ROME, GREECE, the Mayans, even the American Indians. Yup.
Yet somehow it’s supposed to be this strangely unique US issue. I suppose that could be because of the very existence of the Constitution. But to ignore that this nation had its growing pains is also to ignore that this nation was the first and so far the only one to establish a law banning the practice.
Yet here we are. Gee, could some other mechanism be operating here? (rhetorical/cynical)
Alaska became US territory in 1867 just as the abolition, voting, and equal protection amendments were sorta being ratified. One of the first big hassles the US had with the Indians here was making them abolish slavery. The Tlingit Indians of Southeast Alaska traded and slaved all along the Northwest Coast. The Russians practically enslaved the Aleut of the Aleutian Chain and impressed them into their service hunting the otters, which were the primary trade goods between first the Russians and Chinese and later as American traders began to call on the Russian settlements, the Russians traded staples for otter, which the Americans went on to trade with the Chinese. The ships were mostly out of New England, ran on crew shares, and for voyages that often ran to four years, the AVERAGE profit was 4000%. It was called the Golden Round Trade which took the place of the Triangle Trade in rum, slaves and manufactured goods that became much less lucrative after slave importation was abolished in the US in 1808. Don’t you just love the irony of New Englander posing themselves as the pure light of the World when the fortunes were made off rum and slaves and the slave based otter trade then junior went to Hahvud or Yale rather than to sea and they’ve been trying to tell the rest of the Country what to do ever since.
Yes it’s “funny” how the 2 nations, America and England, that did the most to spread enlightenment around the world by way of their institutions were the most conspicuous in ending slavery. Meanwhile immigrants from those areas of the world that had to be forced to end slavery bewilderingly call those Western nations oppressors.
Therefore the irony isn’t that both America and England indulged in slavery, after all, they simply swam in the sea they shared with an entire world of slavery. The irony is that they are the most pilloried for slavery and those who did nothing to end slavery, such as Islam and Africa, get a pass. At least there were elements within England and America that saw the error of the ways of their brothers; there was no such movement elsewhere.
Once again, there is no context, proportion or sense of fair play from the Rainbow Coalition because it does not suit them; such considerations are banished to their easy targets to live up to. On the political Left, what’s good for the goose is NEVER good for the gander.
Good post. Let’s be honest about his though. Voter fraud doesn’t seem to be a huge problem, the number of documented cases being miniscule and the number of convictions even smaller, but it is a problem. But if requiring people to present valid identification results in lower participation of low information types, who vote for the Dems when they bother to vote, so much the better!
It “doesn’t seem to be a problem” because it’s very seldom investigated, prosecuted, or reported.
It occurs almost entirely in Democrat controlled areas, so nobody local is going to peek under any skirts. Even in Red/Purple states that have Blue cities and doughnut cities, a Republican Administration won’t look very hard because the places where the fraud takes place are mostly minority controlled, so the screams of racism will be loud, long, and Nationwide. Big Blue cities can turn most any state Purple by just hanging on to their “spare” votes and dumping them after the votes are counted in the suburban and rural parts of the state. That’s why they’re always having power outages and ballot shortages in minority precincts; it gives them time to figure out how many votes they need. Since Motor Voter the lists are so polluted that there are far more “registered” voters than actual voters in most urban precincts. All they need is time to go over the lists to see who hasn’t voted, load up the vans and give everybody the name with which to vote. My only problem with requiring ID, is that it will be like locks; it will only keep dogs and honest people from voting, and maybe not even the dogs. The doughnut cities and college towns where voter fraud is rampant are lawless places occupied by largely feral humans, some silly law isn’t going to have much effect on their behavior.
Honest people won’t steal, lock or no lock. Determined thieves will still get in, but a strong door and lock slows them down so that they steal less than they otherwise might. And locks do prevent some casual thieves from being tempted by too easy an opportunity to steal.
We will never get rid of vote fraud entirely; it’s a numbers game, and it’s all about downsizing the margin of fraud. The object is to be able to defeat a Democrat candidate, or a Democrat-backed referendum, without having to get a huge supermajority to overcome that margin of fraud. To that end, I favor any measures that will make it more time-consuming, complex, difficult, and expensive to commit vote fraud, or that make vote fraud easier to prove.
Because it’s pretty much impossible to prove in the current system. Turnout is generally so low a significant amount of fraud is possible before you run into a situation where the number of ballots exceeds the population. And even if you do know there are extra ballots how do you find the people who cast them?
It’s a bit like a blind man denying the existence of color, simply because he doesn’t see it.
And what about the undocumented and/or non-prosecuted cases? I remember reading a few elections ago that St. Louis had more ballots than registered voters. As far as I know, they counted ‘em all. Then there were the tens of thousands of snow-birders who were registered in their states of primary residence and Florida. Since they almost all were from NY, NJ and CT, I’m betting the vast majority were registered Democrats. Double dippers in those numbers would have the potential to swing a state like Florida.
Voter fraud and electoral shenanigans aren’t exclusive to Democrats, of course, but they are by a long stretch the leading practitioners. And if they don’t fear a one-man/one-vote, legal, honest count, why is there such caterwauling about an obvious, common-sense safeguard of the franchise? Better they expend their time and effort making sure their constituency have the required ID.
I’d be willing to bet that those Northeastern Dems who were down in Florida for the winter voted in the primary as Republican. Just about every one of them voted for Mitt Romney, knowing he will be the easiest Republican to defeat come November.
They believe they’ve been given free rein to label anything they choose as racism.
But, I’m always cynically amused when I read about different tribes in Africa or Haitians and how they refuse to get along with one another.
I wonder what kind of racism that is…
Let’s stop pretending that the left really cares about racism when they make this argument. They care about winning the argument and they dust off whatever will suffice to this end. Obama wants to spend more on the poor – it’s the Christian thing to do. Want to make sure Democratic voters make it to the polls – charge racism. Want to increase dependence on government – claim fairness. Keep campaign contributions coming from Planned Parenthood – invoke reproductive rights.
Conservatives tend to believe in principles like small government, low taxes, etc. Liberals are all about advocacy for their permanently aggrieved victim groups. The only principle that unites them is “where’s mine?” The mistake conservatives make over and over is assuming that liberals are making a principled argument. No, friends, they are simply trying to control the terms of the discussion and win the debate. Charges of hypocrisy are of no consequence to them, since principle and truth take a back seat to winning. Point out inconsistency and hypocrisy in a liberal and the reaction you get will be; oops, you caught me. I’ll have to be more careful in the future. What they do in this circumstance is change the subject, make a counter-charge, or call you names.
Anything that empowers the individual citizen runs contrary to democrat and liberal values. Voter ID ensures that the value of each and every individual’s vote is the same…It ensures equality…therefore, it cannot be allowed.
Liberals are about voting blocks, not individual voters. They are about corraling tribes…and colonizing them into those voting blocks. Groups are numbers…so the individual is really useless…therefore his individual rights irrelevent.
Liberals realize that they as a political party need a type of affirmative action too…An unfair leg up at the polls via voter fraud is a small price to pay for the greater good of ensuring that the “right” people are elected and in
chargee.
I’ve been fascinated that the Progressive insistence that voter ID is bad because blacks and Latinos are too stupid/lazy/poor to obtain one (for free in Indiana if it’s for voting and not for driving) is not “racism.”
I mean, wow.
“Affirmative Action” is another “You’re too stupid to compete intellectually with white people” move by the Lefties.
I’ve been fascinated that so-called small government conservatives seem to always need to make new laws to solve problems that only exist in their minds. If you want to legislate a Voter ID law, why not first show Americans a study indicating that Voter fraud is an actual problem that needs addressing? If you want to be the party of reason, then please show us some instead of asking everyone to accept that a new laws is necessary based on your “feelings” or some chain email you got from a friend about illegals wearing disguises to cast votes.
Everybody who is in a position to accumulate the evidence of vote fraud is either afraid to do so, or is corrupt in the first place (like Eric Holder). If the state governments are prevented from demanding valid identification in the first place, and if the boards of election and the attorneys general never audit for vote fraud, then there will never be any hard evidence to justify the need for safeguards. “See? We didn’t find vote fraud [because we shut our eyes to it], so that shows there isn’t any!”
We demand that financial institutions be audited, even when there is no known history of past financial shenanigans. They can’t just say, “Well, we don’t have evidence that anybody embezzled from this institution or cooked the books in the past, so why do we need to be audited?” Elections are the same way.
Fact is, whenever there are elections, people will try to subvert them. It happens all over the world. The US accuses other countries of corrupt or invalid elections, but our own are a cesspool, and have been so for a long time.
After the infamous trial-of-the-century aka “The O.J. Trial”, for the first time in my life, I asked myself, “Can black people be racists?”.
After Barry Hussein was elected, I got my answer.
Dear Mr. Adams,
Ive been reading your book, nearly finished it, Injustice, and I ran across your reference to Zimbabwe and South Africa….holding up South Africa as a model and Zimbabwe as a warning. What you have been describing in the book is right in line with the mainstream ANC party in South Africa. The vote fraud is there on the local level, the old tribal chief politics…with an extra side of racism. And the rejection of race neutral law enforcement at all levels.
What I am getting at is that, South Africa is a good image of what we see in the US localities where we have minority majority districts as well as from the Obama DOJ.
You seem to have a vague understanding of South Africa, and tinged with rose tinted glasses and romanticism. This is forgiveable, and you are by far not the only one of whom this is true. But I just thought in an otherwise fantastic book, it was something that stood out. Certainly it was unecessary, or perhaps you threw it in there to soften up the squishes some more.
We even see government and legal bullying and murders of white farmers which arent investigated properly on a large scale in South Africa.
The correct analogy is with South Africa, not the boogeyman of Zimbabwe. South Africa is bad enough, Zimbabwe is a farce.
In South Africa you have hate groups and their leaders being legitimized by the ANC as respectable people who should be apart of the zeitgeist, instead of ostracized from polite society as pariahs. Just like the Nation of Islam are wink, winked at by Tavis Smiley in his PBS affiliated State of the Black Union. Obama and his Rev. Wright Black Liberation Theology Doctrine of Racial Hate.
Just wanted to comment on this point. Otherwise, your book has been a real on the ground inside the organization fountain of knowledge. Thank you for standing up for principles and later writing this book to expose the truth. You have my deepest respect.
Best
EV
I worked with South African aircraft mechanics in Mali, Burkina Faso in 2008, respectively.
Each of these 8 South African mechanics have 10-30 years mechanics experience. Not the single or even twin Cessna’s but commercial size aircraft.
Each person has a family, children some grandchildren back home in S A.
The unfortunate reason these folks worked thousands of miles, the other end of the continent from their family for months on end is their melanin. Or lack thereof.
The more we ‘progress’ the more we seem to voluntarily devolve.. for ‘fairness’ ‘equality’ or other nonsensical, suicidal-like result.
It’s payback time in South Africa, just like in Mississippi.
I had a (now deceased( homeless acquaintance who was once docked as “Non-White Caucasian.” (Mister Butch in Boston, if you care to know)
If there ever was a moment that showed how absurd this racial circus is, that was it.
In NYC every year, as long as the data has been collected, the majority of African American babies are aborted. When the Romans suppressed a revolt, they decimated the rebels: killed one out of ten. In NYC, more than one out of every two black babies are aborted. The black population of NYC is declining, and black neighborhoods are full of old and middle aged people – few kids. This in the citadel of liberalism, where the politicians line up to support Planned Parenthood and harass abortion alternative centers. Planned Parenthood puts its clinics in black neighborhoods. “Where do you go duck hunting? Where the ducks are.” The “Negro Project” is alive and well.
If your statistics are anywhere near the trith then it is a scandal that should be attacked from every media outlet. The churches have an especial obligation here, since the right to marry and raise a family is a fundamental human right.
As for those who harass abortion alternative centres, they should be harassed in return. It may well be that Nargaret Sanger made the comments attributed to her by another correspondent. However, her more fundamental tenes are identical with those of Marie Stopes in England. What no-ne seems to have noticed is the fundamental flaw in such thinking, viz. the supposition that it was impossible to redeem or regenerate the so-called degenerates, imbeciles, etc. In too many cases it amounted to punishing the victims of rape while letting the rapists off scot-free. Had America’s medical profession(and its churches, usually so vocal against other things they regard as sin) been as loudly vocal in practice against the abortion of black babies such an abomination would never have been seen. Alas, the spirit of that false prophet of eugenics, Madison Grant, whom Hitler admired, still seems to haunt New York City. It is long past time this unholy ghost was exorcised, and if that means every Planned Parenthood centre being shut down then so be it. In the meantime, start educating the black community that abortion is NOT the answer.
The guy who wrote Angela’s Ashes also wrote another memoir- ’tis. He covers life in New York City. Including multiple vote-casting.
Last time I checked, the Irish were fair-skinned.
He mentioned it casually, as a funny story. The whole group of people he knew, and then some, voted multiple times.
I bring a photo, and voter reg, just on the theory that I’m not paying attention, and that they’ve finally managed to pass photo-voter laws.
Hillary Clinton professes to be a great admirer of Margaret Sanger, once comparing her to Thomas Jefferson. Go figure!
“Today eugenics is suggested by the most diverse minds as the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems.” Margaret Sanger
My black, liberal friends ignore this and other truths that are just too hard for them to accept.
Democrats oppose voter ID because they want 20 million Hispanic ILLEGAL aliens to vote. African-Americans have become a side show. In fact, African Americans almost by definition amply “documented” and all have or can easily obtain free government ID. Conversely, there are ALMOST NO ILLEGAL ALIENS of African background.
Democrats and Republicans have since the 1960s been in a tacit conspiracy to allow massive illegal immigration from Mexico and elsewhere, each for their own purposes and constituents (as voting cattle and union members for Democrats, cheap labor for Republican constituencies). In the process, African Americans were REPLACED by Hispanics as the main non-white ethnic/racial group.
Black organizations probably had more REAL influence at the time of Martin Luther King, Jr. They have now declined to little more than support troops for the Democratic Party establishment. Specific black interests are rarely talked about. Instead, every politician on the make goes kowtowing to “The Race” (La Raza), Univision and other ethnic shake-down artists. The Democrats’ true message to black America is: “So long – it was nice knowing you, but we have moved on.”
Seems that the very first time I voted in November of 1972, I had to prove who I was. I was 18 and we had just gotten the right to vote at that age. I have always been a proponent of voter ID, even then when I was a liberal.
When I voted in 1996 after coming home following a career in the Navy, I showed up at my polling place and my Mother was a volunteer there. She said, I need to see your ID with address on it.
So to all the naysayers, I say this, it is not discriminatory in any way. It ensures the sanctity of our Constitutional Republic. Unfortunately, there are those who seek to take that away from us. That includes the current sitting president, the attorney general and the majority in the United States Senate.
Democrats oppose voter ID for one reason only, because it makes it harder (a lot harder!) to stuff the ballot box with phony, illegal votes. Period.