In an attempt to alleviate rampant voter fraud discovered in previous elections, the state of Texas passed a new voter ID law in 2011, which the U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) brazenly blocked on Monday because it claims the law would disenfranchise minority voters.
It did not matter to the DOJ that an estimated 160,000 to 333,000 non-citizens were illegally registered to vote in Texas in 2008. But then again, this is the DOJ of Attorney General Holder — who was all about repressing the white vote when he dismissed the Black Panther Party case — because he thought it demeaned “my people.” With that in mind, no one should be surprised by Holder’s state-by-state whack-a-mole game to exterminate voter ID laws.
Because the Obama administration cannot run an honest election based on accomplishments, its lust for power has resulted in yet another Constitutional overreach by preventing individual states from doing their job to preserve ballot box integrity. In this attempt to dismantle voter ID laws state-by-state, the administration is, in essence, stealing away one of our most basic freedoms — the right for free and fair elections — for which many Americans have fought and died.
Is it bigoted or racist to expect that constitutional standards be upheld? Many on the left think so despite reputable research revealing that in states where voter ID is required, voter turnout improves.
One such study completed in 2006 by University of Missouri professor of economics and public affairs Jeffrey Milyo, found turnout in “Democratic-leaning counties actually increased” with the new photo ID requirements. There was no “significant evidence” that it decreased turnout in locations having higher percentages of “minority, poor or elderly voters.” Another study completed by the Universities of Nebraska and Delaware, “The Empirical Effects of Voter-ID Laws: Present or Absent,” came to a similar conclusion.
I could go on with many additional examples, but the truth matters little to those bent on twisting it to their own political advantage. Despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary, rivals of voter identification (ID) laws continue to participate in a careless exchange of rancorous rhetoric suggesting the requirement for voter ID is suppressive.
As I write, representatives from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) are sidestepping these undeniable truths, and crossing the ocean to file a voter ID law complaint with the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) in Geneva, Switzerland.
To the unaware, this “human rights” council’s roll call includes some extremely repressive regimes like Saudi Arabia, Cuba and China. Nonetheless, President Obama threw America’s hat into the ring for membership in 2009. Former President George W. Bush boycotted participation with the HRC because doing so would legitimize this ersatz human rights organization that has overlooked barbarisms in places like Sudan’s Darfur, Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka.
So let’s get real now. We need photo ID to get a job, cash a check, use a credit card, purchase alcohol and cigarettes, board a plane, buy medicines, watch an R-rated movie, get a passport, go to a bar, buy a house or car, buy a gun and rent an apartment. Laws are already on the books to prevent election fraud, and the Constitution puts the onus for the oversight of elections on individual states, which have the right to mandate voter ID.
Unless concerned citizens speak out by sending letters to their state’s governors demanding that they take rigorous action to ensure honest and fair elections by enforcing voter ID laws in every polling place, legitimate votes will be negated by unregistered voters, criminals, illegal aliens and the deceased. This is, after all, America — that special place on the planet where our constitutionally protected free and fair elections serve to keep us free.
Susan Stamper Brown is an opinion page columnist, motivational speaker and military advocate who writes about politics, the military, the economy and culture. Email Susan at writestamper@gmail.com or her website at susanstamperbrown.com.
Rich posted at 8:33 pm on Tue, Mar 13, 2012.
"...stealing away one of our most basic freedoms — the right for free and fair elections..."
That ship sailed years ago. Ask the gravestones on half the graves in Chicago. Elections are anything but free, almost never fair, and rarely do voters prevail no matter how they vote.
bobunf posted at 9:34 pm on Tue, Mar 13, 2012.
"an estimated 160,000 to 333,000 non-citizens were illegally registered to vote in Texas in 2008"
Do you have a reputable source for this absurd statement? Where are the prosecutions for such massive voter fraud? The Governor of Texas is a Republican, as is the Attorney General and most of the County Prosecutors.
You do know that the total number of non-citizens convicted of illegally voting in US elections is about 14? Out of literally trillions of votes cast in all types of elections in the last 236 years?
How many people should be prevented from voting so there is no repetition of this 14 illegally cast votes? A million? Ten million?
The voter ID nonsense is an attempt to suppress voting by undesirable citizens, particularly Latinos, Blacks, students and the poor.
The real cause of this activity is the one formally most kept out of sight: the growth of the power of minorities, especially Latinos, and the alarm which this has inspired in some conservative Whites.
Mike McClellan posted at 10:25 pm on Tue, Mar 13, 2012.
In theory, who should argue about producing a picture ID to vote.
But one part of the DOJ's argument is that more than a third of Texas counties don't have the DPS offices that provide the ID. And those counties are heavily Hispanic. So if Texas would provide the offices in those 81 counties, that problem would be alleviated.
But Stamper-Brown's opening sentence provides a premise for the entire column, what she characterizes as 'rampant voter fraud."
Well, no. The Texas AG who came up with the idea, Greg Abbott, did a review of Texas votes over several years. Total number of case of fraud? 26. And he concluded that 17 of them were "technical violations in which the voters were eligible, votes were properly cast, and no votes were changed."
In a state the size of Texas, 9 cases of genuine voter fraud hardly constitute "rampant voter fraud."
Rich posted at 10:34 pm on Tue, Mar 13, 2012.
The thing is, only 26 in several years? 9 genuine? In a state the size of Texas? Really? All that should tell you is that the elections have been fixed in Texas that long. It doesn't even make statistically impossible, it isn't even that probable. 9? That is so funny, so improbable and so ridiculous that I can't believe people fall for it.
Dale Whiting posted at 8:00 am on Wed, Mar 14, 2012.
Dear Editors,
Why do you persist in printing this hogwash? Isn't it clean that Stamper-Brown is a nut case? All she lacks for becoming the next Limbaugh is inflamatory rhetoric. And it would appear that she's working on that!
It only figures that she's a motivational speaker and "military" advocate.
Rational Human posted at 8:31 am on Wed, Mar 14, 2012.
You're not going to find many actual convictions for voter fraud anywhere in America because there is no real effort to investigate voter fraud in this country. There is no money available to police voter fraud. Anyone who is against having to show proper ID to vote is either crooked or retarded. To suggest that voter fraud is insignificant in America is about as stupid as suggesting that all politicians are honest. In Mexico everyone is required to show a picture voting ID card, issued by the government, in order to vote, but here in America that is somehow infringing on the rights of people to stuff the ballot box. bobunf and his Obamanation are against it for obvious reasons. It will prevent illegals from casting votes for those who wish to make them citizens. bobunf says, "The voter ID nonsense is an attempt to suppress voting by undesirable citizens, particularly Latinos, Blacks, students and the poor." Why? Is having proper identification so hard to do that these people can't do it? Do we even want a people so retarded or illegal that they can't figure out how to get proper id voting? I know the liberal/democrat/socialists want them to vote and to vote often as they can in each election. No id? Just keep coming back and say you are someone else if you don't have to provide any id to prove who you are. You can do that right now and no one will catch you. I think we should adopt many of Mexico's standards concerning illegal migrant removal and voting procedures. Not having voter ID laws infringes on the rights of legal, honest, hard working Americans to have a fair and honest election. I think you have it backwards bobunf. The lack of voter ID laws is an attempt to suppress votes cast by the majority of White voters in this country so that the minority votes count for more than they would under an honest system. One "Legal Citizen", One Vote!
Mike McClellan posted at 8:33 am on Wed, Mar 14, 2012.
Rich is right, of course -- a lack of evidence to prove "rampant voter fraud" proves it exists.
Just like a a lack of verifiable evidence of Sasquatch proves its/his/her existence.
Ditto for the Loch Ness Monster.
mnjcpa posted at 11:11 am on Wed, Mar 14, 2012.
Hogwash you say Dale? Your rebuttal is what is rubbish. We need more Rush Limbaugh's who point out liberal hypocrisy.
Everything we do today requires picture ID"s, from banking to travel so what's the big deal? It's pretty simple - the Democrat political thugs need every vote they can get this election - fraudulent or not.
Rational Human lays out a great outline and says it best - "Not having voter ID laws infringes on the rights of legal, honest, hard working Americans". Eric Holder is doing his best in last remaining days in office to help his boss stay in office.
bobunf posted at 12:42 pm on Wed, Mar 14, 2012.
"Everything we do today requires picture ID"s, from banking..."
jc, where do you bank? I never have to show picture ID at my bank - Wells Fargo.
If there's no problem (which there's not), why have a law? What happened to "Get the government off our backs?"
The problem with such laws is that it disenfranchises millions of perfectly eligible voters. A voter ID law that did not disenfranchise voters would get no support from the people who are currently ranting about voter fraud.
Preventing people from voting is as much a fraud as having an ineligible person vote. Where's the outrage about that?
The only proper policy is two fold: No ineligible person should vote; all eligible voters should be able to vote.
In case you didn't notice, the former is pretty well taken care of.
Rational Human posted at 3:09 pm on Wed, Mar 14, 2012.
Are you kidding us bobunf or are you really that stupid as to believe that precise identification isn't absolutely necessary to do banking here in America? You had to show a picture ID and probably two ID cards to even get a bank account in the first place, and everything you do there depends on your having a debit card and knowing the right code. A voter ID card wouldn't prevent anyone from voting provided they have a legal right to vote. They could give them away for free like they do in Mexico. All you have to do is prove who you are. Right now voter fraud is rampant and not even investigated unless it's so obvious to attract attention. A voter ID would be the only proper policy you speak of. No ineligible person should vote; all eligible voters should be able to vote. Ever try renting a car without proper ID? Can't be done. But anyone can vote as many times as they can get away with it whether legal or not. The so called voter rights I hear about has more to do with allowing voter fraud more than anything else.
Rational Human posted at 3:20 pm on Wed, Mar 14, 2012.
Perhaps it's the part where you have to be able to prove who you are that bothers the democrat/socialist. Hispanics and Blacks can't prove who they are at a higher percentage than poor Whites? Is that the problem? Really? No matter what the race or skin color, retarded people shouldn't be voting in the first place. If you are really so retarded that you can't even prove who you are, do you even have a clue who or what to vote for? Do we want these people to cast votes? Even retarded people have a right to their one vote. This is, after all, America. Just allow us to know who you are, so that we may be able protect our voting rights, and so that we might prevent people who aren't legal citizens or felons from casting votes.
samkat posted at 5:36 pm on Wed, Mar 14, 2012.
bunf: All I have to say is BS. I made a purchase at Fry's Electronics just this morning and used my credit card. The clerk asked for my photo ID. I actually thanked him for asking for it. He stated it is company policy when credit or debit cards are used. I am well aware that Wells Fargo caters to illegals so it is not surprising that they would not ask for ID. My banks do.
Dale: Unless you are now acting as the self appointed politically correct policeman, we are still allowed free speech. I may not necessarily agree with Ms. Brown's comments but she still has a right to submit her articles just as you are. I don't necessarily agree with your comments but again, you still have the same rights that everyone does.
I have no problem with showing photo ID and I daresay that anyone too lazy to secure a photo ID does not deserve to be allowed to vote. How did they manage to register in the first place?
Rich posted at 9:03 pm on Wed, Mar 14, 2012.
The power is the power to count the votes. And probably twice, in a small village was it accurate, Only 9 people in Texas did it wrong in the last decade. Are you nuts?
Rational Human posted at 9:14 pm on Wed, Mar 14, 2012.
I recall that when our country was first formed only people who owned land had the right to vote. Now you can have been a parasite welfare queen your entire life and you get a vote. Shouldn't you actually have a vested interest in this country to have a say in how it is run? If these liberal/socialist/democrats had their way the entire country of Mexico would have a vote in our national elections. When did Americans give their country away? What fools.
Slabside posted at 10:32 pm on Wed, Mar 14, 2012.
"Isn't it clean that Stamper-Brown is a nut case?" Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, pot.
bobunf posted at 1:53 am on Thu, Mar 15, 2012.
Democracies have figured out over the last 2½ centuries that one essential for stable government is the widest possible participation in decision making. It's a principle that's spread into business, many organized religions and most social endeavors because such participation results in better decisions.
There are reasons all modern democracies have abolished property requirements and removed barriers of race, gender, ethnicity and religion. Going backwards in this respect is not smart. Ask any businessman.
Also rationalh, wouldn't it be nice if you quit with the meaningless name calling. You write like a third grader.
Rational Human posted at 7:50 am on Thu, Mar 15, 2012.
"Democracies have figured out over the last 2½ centuries that one essential for stable government is the widest possible participation in decision making. It's a principle that's spread into business, many organized religions and most social endeavors because such participation results in better decisions."
And you say I write like a third grader? That entire paragraph, while almost grammatically correct, sounds like it was written by someone with a third grade education. Oh and I see you managed to throw the race card into too. Nice touch.
Giving the parasites control of your country's decision making results in better decision making? No, that is the way toward social redistribution of wealth and the end of prosperity for all. You have outed yourself for who you really are. This is the philosophy of those not bright enough to become producers of wealth. Not bright enough to make it? No problem. Marx has a way you too can get your rightful share by use of political power or by force to take it from those who have been feeding you. Of course, as always, killing the cash cow will ultimately result in your starvation, but don't worry that wont happen for a long time down the road, and we'll be long gone by then. bobunf, you are retarded. Don't like the name? Get a real education instead of spouting marxist mumbo jumbo that you read on some wealth redistribution web site. And drop the race baiting cause it's way out of style these days.
Rational Human posted at 8:10 am on Thu, Mar 15, 2012.
“The America of my time line is a laboratory example of what can happen to democracies, what has eventually happened to all perfect democracies throughout all histories. A perfect democracy, a ‘warm body’ democracy in which every adult may vote and all votes count equally, has no internal feedback for self-correction. It depends solely on the wisdom and self-restraint of citizens… which is opposed by the folly and lack of self-restraint of other citizens. What is supposed to happen in a democracy is that each sovereign citizen will always vote in the public interest for the safety and welfare of all. But what does happen is that he votes his own self-interest as he sees it… which for the majority translates as ‘Bread and Circuses.’
‘Bread and Circuses’ is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure. Democracy often works beautifully at first. But once a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader—the barbarians enter Rome.”
― Robert A. Heinlein
bobunf posted at 10:02 am on Thu, Mar 15, 2012.
Interesting to see where Rational got his political education - a science fiction writer.
Newt, Rational and Heinlein should get along well on the Moon.
VofReason posted at 1:00 pm on Thu, Mar 15, 2012.
Always get a chuckle when I visit this site. This author and Tom Patterson are wingnutts off their rocker, but the ice princess who explains to us why all Obama's decrees are good and right is the Oracle of Delphi. Guess it depends what kind of glasses you wear. So the arguement here against requiring ID to vote is that people are too stupid or lazy to produce ID to vote, but have no problem producing ID to by smokes or cash their checks. Yes makes perfect sense to me.
VofReason posted at 1:03 pm on Thu, Mar 15, 2012.
Boy maybe this author really is a nut like (republican- who would have thought?) Dale says. Next thing will be that she will come out of left field and say women cannot murder their babies or something. Sheesh......
gilbertgrandma posted at 3:38 pm on Thu, Mar 15, 2012.
Mike M states that over a third of the counties in Texas don't have an office that supplies an ID. Really? Then how do the people who live there buy alcohol, cigarettes, cash a check, order a product online, do any banking, rent a car, fly on an airplane, drive a car, etc.? The argument that it's too hard for some people to get an idea is so old it's laughable. You can't even function in today's society without one. This is merely an attempt to give the vote to people who are ineligible to vote.
gilbertgrandma posted at 3:53 pm on Thu, Mar 15, 2012.
Ooops......sorry.....I meant "get an ID" not "get and idea"......
mnjcpa posted at 3:53 pm on Thu, Mar 15, 2012.
Liberals can't stand having their ideas scrutinized so I love your sarcasm VofReason!
gilbertgrandma posted at 3:54 pm on Thu, Mar 15, 2012.
or "get an idea"........can't type today......better give up
Rational Human posted at 6:22 pm on Thu, Mar 15, 2012.
Good points gilbertgrandma and VofReason. How do these people function in our society if there are no local offices to supply them with legal licenses to drive. His statement that there aren't any is obviously flawed. Just another excuse to give illegals a vote.
"So the arguement here against requiring ID to vote is that people are too stupid or lazy to produce ID to vote, but have no problem producing ID to buy smokes or cash their checks." ya makes absolutely perfect sense to me too. Maybe El Retardo above can give us his insight into this phenomenon. In Mexico, where you cannot vote without proper photo ID, Mexicans seem to be able to produce proper ID to vote, but here in America they are too stupid? The argument that the Obamanation's AG makes is that minority people are too stupid to get proper ID so we should just let whoever vote regardless of their qualifications or how many times they vote.
Rational Human posted at 6:24 pm on Thu, Mar 15, 2012.
These jokes just get funnier and funnier guys. America actually voted this joke into the White House?
samkat posted at 6:53 pm on Thu, Mar 15, 2012.
vnoreason: You speak of murdering babies. Since there are over 10,500 unwanted children in the DPS system, have you fulfilled your conservative obligations by adopting one of more of them or is that out of reason for your limited commitment to your views?
bobunf posted at 1:10 am on Fri, Mar 16, 2012.
Since there are essentially no cases of ineligible people voting, what is the point of the point of the ID laws? To cause some eligible people not to be able to vote.
Gilbert and others find it so difficult to understand how anyone can not have the necessary ID to provide at the polling place. Let's try a few examples. In Arizona it's essentially not possible to register to vote without an Arizona Driver's License or an Arizona ID. I know, very determined people can manage, but that is a very tiny percentage who are that determined to subject themselves to the possibility of jury duty.
People who move from California and other states did not obtain these forms of identification for varying lengths of time during which they are not eligible to register to vote.
The families of poor people do not have cars and do not get driver's licences. As the children turn 18, they can't register to vote until, and if, they go through the process of getting an Arizona ID. They also don't use banks or credit cards so no ID needed.
Old people eventually lose the ability the drive and their driver's license expires. No ID, no voting.
There are issues with students who may have no driver's license or one issued in a different state (which won't work for registering to vote).
Most of these people would vote for Democrats. From these efforts at voter suppression cui bono?
gilbertgrandma posted at 8:03 am on Fri, Mar 16, 2012.
Bob, you're breaking my heart..........at various times in my life I have been a poor college student (in a different state from my home state), a military wife moving around to different states, a single mom on a very limited income, etc., etc. I have never been without a form of ID. Now I'm getting old, but even if I no longer drive, I will be able to get a state-issued ID. None of your arguments make sense to me - if a person cannot put any effort at all into getting an ID, how likely are they to even find the transportation to get to the polls to vote? Oh, that's right - the Democratic machine will have their bus pick them up and take them.
In_God_We_Trust posted at 9:06 am on Fri, Mar 16, 2012.
Since there are essentially no cases of investigation or prosecution of ineligible people voting, what is the point of the point of the ID laws? I see your point bob. Why force people to identify themselves when an insignificant number of lazy, uneducated, people who wont even support this country by offering to serve on a jury might be denied their vote?
bobunf has an unstated agenda for not wanting people to identify who they are before voting. These people are his base. He would like you to believe it's just too difficult for his base to acquire proper ID, but the truth is he wants them to be able to vote even if they have no right to a vote and he wants them to vote often. You would think he would want to help his base get the proper ID needed to vote so that they can have their vote, but that isn't enough. Why is it that the stupidest people in this country make up the democratic party base? Can you tell us the answer bob?
TeaPartyPatriot posted at 9:47 am on Fri, Mar 16, 2012.
There seem to be many differences between the republican and democratic parties, and this voter ID bill is one of them. Republicans seem to want everyone who is legally allowed to vote to have proper ID so that there can be no voting fraud. Democrats seem to support voter fraud. They pretend that there is no voter fraud when in fact there is a tremendous amount of fraud in every election. Check out this video done in a MN. NO WONDER OBAMA WON...
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=GqMVxeZhflI&feature=player_embedded>;#!
Lets see if this gets your attention and tells you how illegal aliens vote...
bobunf posted at 11:54 pm on Fri, Mar 16, 2012.
"Republicans seem to want everyone who is legally allowed to vote to have proper ID"
That's great with me, but I see the Republicans making much an effort to get ID to poor people, students, old people and people who move a lot.
But, just to keep things in perspective, you did notice that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott (R) spent $1.4 million investigating voter fraud but did not report any cases where a person tried to impersonate an eligible voter at a polling place— the only kind of fraud that photo ID laws would prevent
I also don't see Republicans supporting mechanisms to make voting more possible for people - like same day registration. Instead we have short deadlines for submitting voter registration forms, and for submitting applications for permanent early voting. How on Earth do six day deadlines prevent voter fraud?
One of the biggest voter suppression mechanisms involves the issue of felons. In the United States there are six million American ineligible to vote because of prior felony convictions. The United States is the only democracy in the world that regularly bans large numbers of felons from voting after they have discharged their sentences.
Rational Human posted at 4:34 pm on Sat, Mar 17, 2012.
Ballots cast in Houston using dead voters' names
Linda Kay Hill, a homemaker and Louisiana native, died Aug. 2, 2006, of a heart attack, her husband recalled, and is buried at Houston Memorial Gardens in Pearland. But Harris County voter records indicate she –- or someone using her identity –- cast a ballot in the November election that year. Linda Hill of Woodwick Street voted in person on Election Day, records show.
She is among the more than 4,000 people whose names are listed both on Harris County's voter rolls and also in a federal database of death records, a Texas Watchdog analysis has found.
"This is subverting the ballot," said John Fund, a Wall Street Journal columnist and author of Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy. "Just like you counterfeit dollars, we take it seriously, if you counterfeit votes we should take it equally seriously, and we should punish people seriously for trying to subvert democracy."
And 4,000 voters isn't chump change, even though the figure is a tiny fraction of Harris County's 1.9 million registered voters.
Elections have been decided by less: By fewer than 300 votes, Andres Pereira edged out Bruce Mosier to win the Democratic nomination for 190th District judge in March. Democrat Hubert Vo squeaked by Republican Talmadge Heflin in 2004 to win a state House seat by 33 votes, according to an official recount. And George W. Bush actually won Florida by 1,665 votes in 2000, according to a hand recount after the election commissioned by USA Today, the Miami Herald and Knight Ridder.
Hey El Retardo, is a dead person ineligible?
Stopping felons from voting is wrong? lol Is that a major part of your base bob? lol Of those 6 million felons how many would you estimate are going to vote democrat? 5.9 million? More? You fool no one. Maybe they should have their own political party. We can call it the criminal party. lol Very catchy name don't you think? fact is most of them that want to vote do vote as their is very little money spent trying to investigate voter fraud. Fact is that most of them choose not to vote, or I should say don't care one way or the other. It kind of goes with the criminal mentality. But it is your base. Protect your base bob.
mnjcpa posted at 7:28 pm on Sun, Mar 18, 2012.
Bobunf - just who are these "millions of disenfranchised citizens" that will be kept from voting? Probably the ones like in the video TeaPartyPatriot posted.
Help me understand how the rules of identification apply to me and not to those millions of voters? Maybe the next time I pay for something at a store or travel I should scream for being required to prove who I am.
Rational Human posted at 7:19 am on Tue, Mar 20, 2012.
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the NAACP, has gone to the United Nations -- specifically the U.N. Human Rights Council -- for, in the words of USA Today, "help battling what the organization views as forces attempting to push back voting rights."
Those "forces" are laws being passed by various states that require a photo ID for voting.
The NAACP move is so absurd and so self-destructive that one has to wonder why the organization has done this. According to the Freedom House 2011 assessment of freedom in the world, of the 41 members of the U.N. Human Rights Council, fewer than half are free countries. Ten are ranked "Not Free," and 12 "Partly Free." Among the "Not Free" members are Angola, China, Congo, Cuba, Jordan, Russia and Saudi Arabia. Those countries' elections, if they have them, are rigged, and prominent opponents are jailed, tortured and killed.
To bring a human rights complaint before countries in which there are almost no human rights is truly absurd. That the alleged human rights violation takes place in the freest country in the world further elevates the level of absurdity. And when the alleged violation is a law that requires all voters, irrespective of race, creed or color, to show photo identification before voting, we have gone beyond the absurd and entered a modern Twilight Zone.
The absurdity explains why what the NAACP doing is also self-destructive. It's one thing for a prominent individual or organization to make a mistake. But it is quite another to seem ludicrous, which is how the NAACP appears to everyone who is not on the left -- and perhaps even to thoughtful leftists.
Why, then, would the NAACP open itself to ridicule?
According to NAACP President Ben Jealous, the reason is that "We are here today because in the past 12 months, more U.S. states have passed more laws pushing more U.S. citizens out of the ballot box than in any year in the past century."
One can only say that if in the past 100 years, fewer blacks were disenfranchised than in the past 12 months, all the claims about Jim Crow laws disenfranchising blacks must have been wildly exaggerated. But, of course, this, too, is absurd.
http://townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/2012/03/20/creators_oped
Rational Human posted at 7:58 am on Tue, Mar 20, 2012.
If the NAACP calls on Satan for help, what does that make them? When Jimmy Hoffa called on the Mafia to help him, what did that make him? If you have to sleep with the devil to get what you want, isn't that enough to make you question whether your motives are just?