Photo-IDs Keep the Voting Process Honest

Standard

Soon the U.S. Supreme court will hear a case that will determine the constitutionality of requiring a government-issued photo ID to vote. The case they will hear was brought by the Democratic party in Indiana. Indiana, it seems has the strictest voter-ID laws in the country and the Democratic party is claiming that requiring a photo-ID places a particular burden on the poor and the elderly (two groups who’s votes the Democrats feel they ‘own’).

The problem of poor and elderly CITIZENS (emphasis intended) acquiring a photo ID is a very small problem that can be easily overcome by state and/or city governments; simply issue free voter ID cards to those who qualify for either status. As generous as the American people are and as generous as corporations are, the cost (or at least a substantial portion of the cost) of such a program would probably easily be underwritten by donations.

I suspect that the poor and the elderly are not the real problem however, I suspect that they are being used by the Democratic party (mainly the Democratic party) as ‘strawmen’ so the party workers can drag as many people to the polls as possible — people including those who are currently deceased and those who are here illegally and have no right to vote. Without the requirement of a photo-ID, all these illegal voters have to do is sign the names on their phony voter registration cards (assuming even that is required) and pull the proper lever.

There are those who will, because of that last paragraph, label me as a Republican but they will be wrong. I stand within neither party (or in any other party). I’m simply an American who understands that many, if not most, politicians are lowlifes who will do anything (with very few limits) to get votes. Historically, the Democratic party has been guilty of most of the vote-buying tactics and their current stand against a common sense principle like requiring a voter to positively identify himself or herself tells me I’m right when I accuse them of being guilty again.

It seems to me that the clearest and most solid argument for voter-ID can be made by reviewing the facts concerning illegal immigration. Thanks to our lax border enforcement over the last ten years or so (perhaps farther back than that) we have God knows how many millions of illegal immigrants here in the United States; and they are not without organization. There are many groups who stand up for their “rights” — even though common sense will tell you that they have no rights under our constitution — and these advocates of the illegals dream of having them cast votes for the candidates who support their causes. With a government-issued photo-ID as a requirement to vote, their dreams will not be easily realized.

Let me be clear, I’m not claiming that the case going before the Supreme Court is directly related to anything other than the poor and the elderly; but I am emphasizing that we are in a situation, created by our own government, where a “win” for the poor and the elderly (unless it is a tightly structured win) will also be a win for those crooked politicians and eager political workers who want to,effectively, steal the votes of legal voters. I can only hope that the justices will at least consider the impact they can have on the age-old problem of voter fraud when they render their decision.

News Links:

New York Times: Justices Agree to Hear Case About Voter ID Laws

USA Today: High court to hear challenge to voter identification law

From the Blogosphere

World Affairs Board: Supreme Court and Voter I.D. Discrimination Case

Opening Arguments: No evidence required

News and commentary by: Whymrhymer can also be found at the Blogger News Network and at The American Chronicle Family of Journals

Ahmadinejad ‘Scorched’ at Columbia

Standard

Kudos (or mega-kudos, as Rush Limbaugh might say) to Columbia University’s President Lee Bollinger for giving Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the type of introduction he deserved: harsh, critical and insulting.

Bollinger received a lot of criticism for inviting Ahmadinejad to speak at the University but it appears now that Bollinger not only had an ulterior motive but also has a great understanding of the true spirit of American freedom. We are a free country where even, to quote Bollinger’s portrayal of Ahmadinejad during his introduction, “petty and cruel dictator(s)” are free to be heard. The bottom line appears to be that Bollinger’s motive for inviting Ahmadinejad to Columbia was simply to expose him for the fraud and liar that he is. Mission well accomplished.

At one point in his introduction, Bollinger brought up the Holocaust and Ahmadinejad’s public statements and actions regarding the Holocaust and then ‘scorched’ Ahmadinejad with his opinions of those statements and actions:

“In a December 2005 state television broadcast, you described the Holocaust as the fabricated legend. One year later, you held a two-day conference of Holocaust deniers. . . . When you come to a place like this, it makes you simply ridiculous. The truth is that the Holocaust is the most documented event in human history. You are either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated, will you cease this outrage?”

In response, the visibly angered Iranian president backtracked on his statements about the Holocaust; he now claims that he is not “passing judgment on whether the Holocaust occurred.” He then added a new dimension to the Holocaust; Ahmadinejad now claims that the Holocaust is being used a justification for Israeli mistreatment of the Palestinians.

First I’ve heard of it!

One of the biggest lies of the day was Ahmadinejad’s response to an audience question about the execution of homosexuals in Iran; his response: “In Iran we don’t have homosexuals like in your country … I don’t know who’s told you that we have this.”

Wow! If Iran did not have any homosexuals, why would it need the laws that call for the execution of males for the crime of ‘penetration” with another male — but for those laws hundreds of Iran’s ‘non-existent’ homosexuals would be alive today.

Bollenger’s invitation, it turns out, exposed the Iranian leader for who and what he is and gave us (and the rest of the world) an additional justification for doubting Ahmadinejad when he asks the world to believe him, when he insists that his nuclear program is purely for peaceful purposes. Can you trust this man? You be the judge!

News Links:

CTV Canada: Ahmadinejad called ‘petty’ and ‘cruel’ at forum

Bloomberg: Demonstrators Protest Ahmadinejad Speech at Columbia (Update3)

From the Blogs:

Idealist*dc: Ahmadinejad @ Columbia U

The Van Der Galiƫn Gazette: President of Columbia Blasts Ahmadinejad to His Face

News and commentary by: Whymrhymer can also be found at the Blogger News Network and at The American Chronicle Family of Journals