.

.

Monday, March 23, 2015

SUPREME COURT ACTUALLY LEAVES INTACT WISCONSIN’S VOTER ID LAW…


Well as they sometimes say, truth is stranger than fiction, and with that said it would seem that the U.S. Supreme Court, just today, actually has seen fit to leave intact a new Republican-backed law in Wisconsin that requires voters to present photo identification when they cast ballots. Is that amazing, or what?  The court declined to hear an appeal filed by that well-known communist front group, otherwise known as, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which was behind this most recent challenge of the law.  A law that simply makes good sense.

Voter identification laws have been put in place in a number of Republican-governed states over the very strong objections of many Democrats. You see, Democrats want to make sure the Republicans don’t disenfranchise the dead who may still wish to vote and strongly object to attempts being made to make it more difficult for the dead to vote.  But Republicans in Wisconsin, as well as in other states, say such rules are needed to prevent voter fraud. Democrats say the laws are intended to suppress the turnout of minorities and other groups that tend to vote for Democrats.

It was in October that the court temporarily blocked the Wisconsin law. And while it did not explain its reasoning at the time, possibly feeling that it didn’t really need to, it was assumed that the most likely reason was because the statute was being implemented at a time considered to be too close to the November election, which, or so it was claimed, could have caused confusion and disruption. The ACLU had pointed out in October that absentee ballots had been sent out before the November election without notifying voters of the identification requirements.

The Supreme Court has previously upheld the constitutionality of such voter ID laws. Wisconsin's is but one of several similar voter ID rules that have become a political and racial flashpoint across the United States.  A federal judge blocked the state's voter ID law in March 2012 soon after it took effect and entered a permanent injunction in April, supposedly finding that the measure would deter or prevent a substantial number of voters who lack photo identification from casting ballots, and therefore place an unnecessary burden on the poor and minorities.

Apparently Democrats, and groups such as the ACLU, seem to be of the opinion that the poor among us and those who may belong to our various minority communities, are simply too stupid to know how to go about the obtaining of a ‘free’ picture identification card.  But let’s be real, shall we, if there is one thing that these folks have acquired a real knack for, and what they are able to do better than anyone else, it’s knowing how to go about the getting of ‘free’ stuff.  So I feel quite comfortable that few, if any of these folks, would find it too difficult to obtain an ID card.

So, why should one require a photo identification card to, purchase alcohol, purchase cigarettes, open a bank account, apply for food stamps, apply for welfare, apply for Medicaid/Social Security, apply for unemployment or a job, rent/buy a house, apply for a mortgage, drive/buy/rent a car, get on an airplane, get married, purchase a gun, adopt a pet, rent a hotel room, apply for a hunting license, buy a cell phone, visit a casino, pick up a prescription, apply for a fishing license or to buy an “M” rated video game, and yet not require one to vote?  How idiotic is that?

No comments:

Post a Comment