Your Taxes at Work
Last week (before the Korean mess), while everybody’s eyes were glued to the soft porn presented by an ex-congressman and those who kept making his nasty messages public, the vote franchise took another beating in court. The ACLU and the Ninth Circus... er, ah, Circuit Court of Appeals in California struck down a law introduced in Arizona requiring that one must show photo identification before voting.
Some will try to tell you that this is a victory against a new set of Jim Crow laws.
Let us first review what Jim Crow laws were: they were regional restrictions on voters, by means of either a poll tax or a literacy test, designed to keep the poor and uneducated from making decisions for themselves, as citizens, toward their community and their nation. Mostly, the Jim Crow laws were designed to keep the poor blacks poor and out of the loop. These laws were struck down by Congress with the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
But things have changed, and not for the better.
Today, image, perception is everything. Somebody thinks that he’s being discriminated against based on race, or based on nationality, or based on religious preference, the ACLU is there to attack the perceived wrongdoer (unless the offended party is Christian. Christians are on their own), regardless of the law’s actual phrasing or intent. And, in this recent case, the intent of the law was to protect the voting rights of those who have the right to vote, against those who would diminish the worth of the individual vote. And the intent of the ACLU and the Ninth Circuit was to flip that right on its head, by killing a voter protection law.
It was a simple law. Present a photo identification card which indicates you are a lawfully registered voter, and you will be given a ballot. Don’t show ID, don’t vote.
The ACLU’s argument is, poor folks can’t afford to get photo IDs, so they will be unduly discriminated against. The problem with this argument is, in every state I know of, there has been provision for financial aid, if you will, for those of us who couldn’t afford a driver’s license or some other form of identification. Those IDs are subsidized by your tax dollars, when you get your driver’s license and your automobile license tags. If such photo cards become mandatory for the vote, so be it. They will continue to be subsidized by taxpayers, so that even folks like me can prove to the election judges that I am who I say I am, and I have a right to my political opinion. I have a birth certificate and a 44-year-old Social Security card, plus I can provide proof of residency (a rental stub, a letter from DCFS regarding my food stamps, whatever), and they can see I yam what I yam. Because I can demonstrate I am a lawful, law-abiding citizen, I can walk into the Department of Motor Vehicles (or whichever state agency is designated to provide free ID) and ask for a voter-ID card, and they will be required to issue one to me. So, no franchise lost, there.
The only people who will lose the franchise are those who should have no vote in the first place, like felons, illegal immigrants and dead people -- and, the occasional citizen who refuses to include himself in a database for fear that the CIA will find him and start beaming those messages into his head again. In other words, today’s Democratic party base.
The vote is reserved (in theory) for responsible, informed citizens. But when illegitimate claims are made on the system, it undoes the vote. One corpse voting equals one legitimate vote nullified. If our system, as massively full of corruption and even legal loopholes, does not get the gunk out of its works via voter ID and/or other methods, then we will continue to see the erosion of actual citizen franchise.
It seems that the ACLU has a lot to answer for, here. The organization takes tax dollars, turns around, and undermines the very rights of the people who finance it, by suing the people’s local, state, and federal governments. They get you coming and going.
Your tax dollars and your vote cry for justice. They’re being stolen, while you subsidize the thieves.
Suggested Reading (background):
Stop The ACLU: ACLU and 9th Circus Strikes Down Arizona Voter ID Law
Some will try to tell you that this is a victory against a new set of Jim Crow laws.
Let us first review what Jim Crow laws were: they were regional restrictions on voters, by means of either a poll tax or a literacy test, designed to keep the poor and uneducated from making decisions for themselves, as citizens, toward their community and their nation. Mostly, the Jim Crow laws were designed to keep the poor blacks poor and out of the loop. These laws were struck down by Congress with the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
But things have changed, and not for the better.
Today, image, perception is everything. Somebody thinks that he’s being discriminated against based on race, or based on nationality, or based on religious preference, the ACLU is there to attack the perceived wrongdoer (unless the offended party is Christian. Christians are on their own), regardless of the law’s actual phrasing or intent. And, in this recent case, the intent of the law was to protect the voting rights of those who have the right to vote, against those who would diminish the worth of the individual vote. And the intent of the ACLU and the Ninth Circuit was to flip that right on its head, by killing a voter protection law.
It was a simple law. Present a photo identification card which indicates you are a lawfully registered voter, and you will be given a ballot. Don’t show ID, don’t vote.
The ACLU’s argument is, poor folks can’t afford to get photo IDs, so they will be unduly discriminated against. The problem with this argument is, in every state I know of, there has been provision for financial aid, if you will, for those of us who couldn’t afford a driver’s license or some other form of identification. Those IDs are subsidized by your tax dollars, when you get your driver’s license and your automobile license tags. If such photo cards become mandatory for the vote, so be it. They will continue to be subsidized by taxpayers, so that even folks like me can prove to the election judges that I am who I say I am, and I have a right to my political opinion. I have a birth certificate and a 44-year-old Social Security card, plus I can provide proof of residency (a rental stub, a letter from DCFS regarding my food stamps, whatever), and they can see I yam what I yam. Because I can demonstrate I am a lawful, law-abiding citizen, I can walk into the Department of Motor Vehicles (or whichever state agency is designated to provide free ID) and ask for a voter-ID card, and they will be required to issue one to me. So, no franchise lost, there.
The only people who will lose the franchise are those who should have no vote in the first place, like felons, illegal immigrants and dead people -- and, the occasional citizen who refuses to include himself in a database for fear that the CIA will find him and start beaming those messages into his head again. In other words, today’s Democratic party base.
The vote is reserved (in theory) for responsible, informed citizens. But when illegitimate claims are made on the system, it undoes the vote. One corpse voting equals one legitimate vote nullified. If our system, as massively full of corruption and even legal loopholes, does not get the gunk out of its works via voter ID and/or other methods, then we will continue to see the erosion of actual citizen franchise.
It seems that the ACLU has a lot to answer for, here. The organization takes tax dollars, turns around, and undermines the very rights of the people who finance it, by suing the people’s local, state, and federal governments. They get you coming and going.
Your tax dollars and your vote cry for justice. They’re being stolen, while you subsidize the thieves.
Suggested Reading (background):
Stop The ACLU: ACLU and 9th Circus Strikes Down Arizona Voter ID Law
Comments