Struck down portion of Voting Rights Act was discriminatory
by Pete_Borden
 Politics
July 08, 2013 09:01 AM | 1304 views | 15 15 comments | 13 13 recommendations | email to a friend | print | permalink

The liberals have already started whining about the Supreme Court’s action in overturning part of the unconstitutional, Voting Rights Act.  VRA came into existence on the false pretense of protecting a non-existent right.  There is no guarantee of the right to vote on a federal level.  Elections are the province of the states, or the counties, not the federal government.  There is, at present, no such thing as a federal election.  At any rate, the VRA was not nullified, only a portion, which was at the time it was enacted, and has remained discriminatory and judgmental in their truest sense, was nullified.

Already the liberal talking heads are trying to say that it will cause large scale disenfranchisement of minority voters.  How do they say this is going to happen?   Well, according to their warped thinking, requiring a person to prove they are qualified to vote amounts to discrimination.

Cutting to the chase, their argument is that requiring voter I.D. will keep all the minorities and the poor from voting.  Utter and complete hogwash is what that is!

What they are trying to convince you is that these folks have never driven a car, got on a train or plane, been to a hospital, cashed a check or opened a checking account, applied for or used a credit card, registered a car, voted in a Union election, donated blood, rented an apartment, had utilities turned on, checked out a library book, applied for any welfare programs (i.e. food stamps, student breakfast programs, etc.) or bought a beer or a pack of cigarettes.  That is a partial list of things that require an I.D. Do you know anyone, of voting age, who has not done any of those things?  Me either.

So, if an ID is such an integral part of everyday life, how come it becomes a burden to show it at election time?  The truth is it does not. It is not a burden. At least, it is not a burden if you are a legal citizen of this country. Those who are of age to possess an I. D. do not possess one. are those who are in this country illegally and should not be able to vote.

The problem is that some of the liberals do not want voter I.D. for the simple reason that it does restrict the votes to those who are legally qualified to vote.  They know that the illegal aliens who vote will always vote for the liberal candidate, who promises “free ice cream at somebody else’s expense.”

It is interesting to note that in those areas not requiring voter I. D., in connection with the last Presidential election, there were reports of precincts where the actual number of votes cast exceeded the number of registered voters. There were confessions by people that they voted more than once, some with the help of election officials. Why are these areas not being subjected to investigation under the same VRA?  What about the areas where the New Black Panthers intimidated non black people trying to vote?  Why are those areas not being investigated?  Where is the difference in the New Black Panthers interfering with non-black people trying to vote and the Ku Klux Klan interfering with black people trying to vote?

This is not the South of 1965 when racial discrimination was still prevalent. Any claim that it is still prevalent must, of necessity, be accompanied by more than accusations and innuendos, given the number of minorities serving in elected offices across the breadth of the south.  To continue the discriminatory provisions of the VRA against certain states and not others would be a travesty.

The Supreme Court did the right thing, in spite of what the liberal talking heads and the liberal press may tell you.
Comments
(15)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Lib in Cobb
|
July 12, 2013
@Devlin Adams

"Black Conservative", a self-contradiction?
Lib in Cobb
|
July 12, 2013
The GOP, aka Grand Old Problems, has and still is pursuing troublesome platforms, for example,

anti-abortion, anti-women's rights, anti-immigration, anti-voters rights, anti-gun control, anti-equality for all, anti-poor, anti-middle class, anti-healthcare, anti-union.

To compound the above foolishness, Repubs can't find a candidate who is less than a lunatic to run in 2016, examples: Rick Perry, Rand Paul.

OK Pete, we the thinking population, lost a portion of The Voting Rights Act, we will recover.

The conservative population is destined for extinction, because you won't change. The conservative population continues to follow the lead of the right wing extremists. There is an "ill wind" blowing within the GOP and it is going to swallow the entire party. So you and any others who wish to, can celebrate what you perceive to be a victory. I can only say good luck, because you are going to need it and a lot more. The GOP in its current form will one day be studied in our history as an elected body who legislated their way into obscurity.
Lib in Cobb
|
July 11, 2013
@DA King or Devlin Adams: What name you are using doesn't matter. I neglected to mention in my earlier post. I cannot give you the names, addresses, etc. of those people who were prevented from voting, because there was little to none. This was one of the reasons why multiple courts ruled against the GOP and in favor of those who use their heads, that would be us, the Liberals.

Thank you and have a nice day.
Kevin Foley
|
July 11, 2013
@ D.A. (aka Devlin Adams) - Know what my worst nightmare is? Ill-informed louts in the voting booth.

Be sure to read my column Friday.
Devlin Adams
|
July 11, 2013
Foley/Lib. That would be funny, if it were not such a pathetic attempt to draw attention away from the fact that you been busted. Typical liberal trick. Obama uses it all the time.

Here's the fly in the ointment. Unless he is using a phony picture, D. A. King is caucasian, while I happen to be a liberal white boy' worst nightmare, an educated Southern Black Conservative.

Play nice, you hear?
Lib in Cobb
|
July 11, 2013
@DA King/Devlin Adams/Legal Alien: It was not me or the Democrats attempting to limit the rights of voters, it was The GOP. It was and is incumbent upon those bringing the case to prove their point. The GOP did not have proof of voter fraud and they wanted the courts to make a rushed judgment based on a total lack of facts. If the GOP felt that voter fraud was such a widespread problem why did they wait until just a few months before election day to make their case? In every situation which was brought before the courts, "the whistle nuts" lost. The GOP was scared out of their panties that President Obama was going to be re-elected and they were willing to lie, cheat and steal to prevent that.

If the GOP wants to win the next presidential election, find a worthwhile candidate who is not part of the right wing fringe element. Mittens won the last nomination only because he was the best of a very bad lot, excluding Jon Huntsman.

You should think before you post.

Foley and I are two different people. Do you really believe there is only one Liberal in Cobb? You are a sad little man.

Devlin Adams
|
July 10, 2013
Hey look, Foley is downf or the count this time. See he is talkng to himself.
Kevin Foley
|
July 10, 2013
@Lib - Wait. Devlin Adams is actually D.A. King? Whoa. I never made the connection. Why does he call himself Devlin Adams here and D.A. King over there? Do you know if he manifests any other personalities?

Devlin Adams
|
July 10, 2013
Lib/Kevin, if you are going to continue the pretext that you are not the same person, you really need to quit regurgitating the exact same crap with the exact same phrasing and writing technique.

Produce some evidence of anyone who was otherwise qualified to vote, and who was turned down because of the lack of an ID. Specifics will do, in place of your wild unfounded accusation. State, city, precint, date and name of person turned down will do for a start.

Can't do that? Somehow that does not surprise me.
Devlin Adams
|
July 10, 2013
Get off it, Foley. You never had to do any of those things either, so what makes you any more qualified to address the matter than Borden.

The truth is that during the last Presidential election, I did wait in line for over 3 hours to vote. I could have gone to the head of the line because of my age, but chose not to.

Poll taxes and literacy tests are things of the past, as are your arguments against voter ID.
Lib in Cobb
|
July 10, 2013
@DA: It seems you are denying the purpose of the GOP and their last minute drive in swing states for voter ID legislation. Deny all you want, the majority of the voters and the courts disagree with you.

The GOP had badly flawed candidates in 2008 and 2012 and that's why the GOP lost in both elections. Don't let the facts get the way of the truth.

Speaking of "recycled trash". I look forward to your next article moaning about the immigration system while making NO suggestions toward a solution.

The GOP continues down the same path that gave them badly flawed candidates. Who is going to be the next badly flawed sacrifice?

Have a nice day.
Kevin Foley
|
July 09, 2013
Spoken like a man who never had to take a literacy test, pay a poll tax before voting or, more recently, stand in a 6-hour line to vote.
Devlin ADams
|
July 09, 2013
To Lib in Cobb: Thank you for your recycled liberal trash, Kevin.
Lib in Cobb
|
July 09, 2013
@Mr.Bill: Multiple very worthwhile organizations have tested the theory of voter fraud. What was found after significant research was that we are more likely to be struck by lightening than encounter voter fraud. Voter fraud was an excuse that the GOP was making during the presidential campaign of 2012. The GOP was attempting to push through a voter ID program particularly in swing states where there resided a significant minority population. The GOP as a whole was not attempting to push a voter ID program years in advance of the 2012 election but only months.

Judge Debra Todd, PA Supreme Court Justice said it best, "What's the rush". The rush was, the GOP was attempting to have obvious Obama supporters deemed ineligible to vote with only 55 days in advance of the election which President Obama won easily.

The GOP knew they were going to need all the help they could get at the polls, so they attempted to disenfranchise Democratic voters.

The GOP knew they were in trouble in 2012 because they had a badly flawed candidate, with badly flawed policies and a running dope with no ideas at all. Considering these lousy choices, the GOP decided this weak attempt at disenfranchising the poor, the elderly, the infirmed and the minority voters was worthwhile.

I will now ask. Do you think that having better candidates might help the GOP in the next presidential election? As Governor Jindal has stated, "We have to stop being the stupid party".

misterbill
|
July 08, 2013
Pete,

I am in agreement with your article--I particularly like the description, "non existent right".

I also understand that this may seriously harm unauthorized residents from voting for a candidate of one party's choice.

PS Is "unauthorized resident" more politically correct than undocumented worker??
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides