The PJ Tatler

A Disappointing MLK Column From One of The Last Liberals

Barry Rubin had a must-read article yesterday lamenting the fall of Cold War, patriotic, centrist liberalism in the Democratic Party and the rise of stealth Marxist “progressivism.” After reading it yesterday I hoped today that perhaps I might be able to highlight potential patriotic liberals for him — provide a bit of hope on this January morning.

Fox News’ Juan Williams came to mind and when I saw he had a column today for the holiday it appeared on first glance like a good opportunity to trumpet a rare diamond in the rough — the non-Marxist, Cold War Liberal.

But I can’t do that at all with this:

The increasingly critical role of Hispanic voters explains the enthusiasm in the GOP for drafting Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, a young Hispanic, as the party’s vice presidential candidate this year.

It also explains why the GOP is trying to depress Hispanic and black voter turnout. Racial politics has a long history in South Carolina — it is the state where Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was falsely accused of having fathered a black child out of wedlock. And who would have predicted that in the heat of the campaign, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) would be willing to appear on the same stage with the leading black Democrat in the state, Rep. James Clyburn.

Last year, South Carolina followed the lead of several other GOP-controlled states by enacting new laws to require voters to show government-issued photo identification to get into the polling booth. The new law has been blocked by the Justice Department under the 1965 Voting Rights Act, one of the most important victories of Dr. King and the Civil Rights Movement.

It was aimed at the sad history of black voter disenfranchisement — from poll taxes to literacy tests — that made politics a whites-only game in states such as South Carolina for most of our nation’s history.

A study by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University found that the new voter identification laws disproportionately affect minorities and young people. In other words, they prevent likely Democratic voters from voting. The study estimated that all these new state laws, taken together, could disenfranchise more than 5 million voters — 25 percent of African Americans don’t have the kind of photo identification that states like South Carolina now require for voting.

South Carolina’s own statistics indicate that 82,000 registered minority voters lack state-issued identification.

Make no mistake about it. This concerted effort by Republicans to disenfranchise Democratic voters is their brazen reaction to the rise of black and Hispanic voters as the lifeblood of the Democratic Party and Obama’s chances for reelection.

I believe if Dr. King were alive he’d be marching against this politically motivated assault on minority voting rights.

This uncharacteristically mean-spirited attack on the Republican Party can be rebutted with three questions:

1. If Dr. King were alive today would he be marching alongside the Marxist “community organizing” agitators ACORN whose systematic voter fraud efforts have made these new laws essential? (See chapter 13 of Matthew Vadum’s 400 page tome of a book Subversion Inc: How Obama’s ACORN Red Shirts are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers, the definitive investigative expose of the organization essential for Obama’s electoral success.)

2. I’m sorry, but would I be too out of line to call BS on this statistic “estimated” by this “study”? “25 percent of African Americans don’t have the kind of photo identification that states like South Carolina now require for voting.” Supposedly a quarter of blacks in this country do not have a government-issued photo ID? (Reminds me of how academia used to push the absurdity that 1 in 4 women will be raped at college.) If a quarter of blacks were too dumb to acquire a photo ID wouldn’t that be a bigger problem than their inability to vote for more Democrats?

3. Who do you think funds the Brennan Center for Justice so they can put out “studies” of this nature?

What a depressing thought to start the day with on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day from a writer for whom I’d come to expect better. My apologies for highlighting it.

But you’re not really a liberal if you’re basing your column on propaganda from a George Soros think tank, argue to enable Marxist community organizers greater ease to commit voter fraud, and smear your fellow Americans as Neo-Bull Connor racists in the process. And on Martin Luther King Jr. Day too.