The simplest way to understand the Obama Administration’s attack yesterday (March 13) on Texas’ new voter ID law: it is blatantly in the business of Electing A New People—and, to that end, voter fraud is almost as helpful as illegal immigration.
Fox News reported:
On Monday, the Justice Department's head of the civil rights division, Tom Perez, sent a six-page letter to Texas' director of elections saying that Texas has not "sustained its burden" under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to show that the new law will not have a discriminatory effect on minority voters. About 11 percent of Hispanic voters reportedly lack state-issued identification…
"According to the state's own data, a Hispanic registered voter is at least 46.5 percent, and potentially 120.0 percent, more likely than a non-Hispanic registered voter to lack this identification," Perez wrote.[Justice Department files objection to Texas voter ID law, March 12, 2012. Links added by VDARE.com]
To put this in perspective:
Simple enough, right? Just produce a state issued driver’s license, federally issued passport or government identity card.
Do the Obamaniacs think Hispanics don’t drink? Fly?
In states throughout the U.S., Republican legislatures have been working to pass sensible laws that would require the showing of photo identification before voting.
Sounds reasonable, right?
Just before Holiday, Holder’s DOJ filed against South Carolina’s voter ID law. [SC voter ID law rejected by Justice Department, December 23, 2011] And then on the holiest of American Holy Days, Holder denounced other states daring to consider similar legislation:
Attorney General Eric Holder used Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy on the anniversary of the civil rights leader’s birthday Monday to emphasize the Obama administration’s dedication to protecting the American people from discriminatory voting practices.
“Despite our nation’s record of progress, and long tradition of extending voting rights – today, a growing number of citizens are worried about the same disparities, divisions, and problems that Dr. King fought throughout his life to address and overcome,” Holder said at an MLK Day event in Columbia, S.C.
Holder’s remarks in the Palmetto State come just weeks after the Justice Department blocked the state’s new voter ID law from taking effect, citing an unfair burden on minority voters.
Citing the “drumbeat of concern” he has encountered from Americans across the country about discrimination in the election systems, the attorney general vowed that the Justice Department was more committed than ever before to enforcing the Voting Rights Act.
Martin Luther King Jr. cited by Eric Holder on voting issues Politico.com, January 16, 2012[Links added by VDARE.com]
Voter fraud is rampant. [12 charged with voter fraud in Georgia election March 13, 2012, Possible Voter Fraud Lights Up Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee's District, March 12, 2012]?
To Holder, the greater imperative isn’t preventing voter fraud. The greater imperative is ensuring that racial minorities are maximized at the ballot box.
Earlier in December, Holder cited that champion of racial justice Rep. John Lewis as the impetus behind the DOJ’s drive to fight voter ID laws:
Mr. Holder quoted with approval a speech by Representative John Lewis, a Georgia Democrat and longtime civil rights activist, who recently declared that voting rights were “under attack” in “a deliberate and systematic attempt to prevent millions of elderly voters, young voters, students, minority and low-income voters from exercising their constitutional right to engage in the democratic process.”[Holder Signals Tough Review of New State Laws on Voting, By Charlie Savage, NYT, December 13, 2011]
This is the same John Lewis who slandered Tea Party members by saying, without any proof, that they used racial epithets and spat upon him in 2010.
Lewis, Holder, and their boss Barack Obama, have no desire to live in a “post-racial” world. Their power is predicated upon a perpetuation of the narrative that “white racism” is America’s only problem—and that enhancing minority voting is the supreme good. That the state of South Carolina would dare pass draconian voter ID laws—obviously a precursor to the return of the poll tax and literacy test—is a direct challenge to this narrative.
Does the Holder’s DOJ have the legal authority to stop the states from implementing a voter ID law? Didn’t the US Supreme Court’s Crawford vs. Marion County Election Board decision in 2008 uphold a states right to pass voter ID laws?
The Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s voter-identification law on Monday, declaring that a requirement to produce photo identification is not unconstitutional and that the state has a “valid interest” in improving election procedures as well as deterring fraud.
Supreme Court Upholds Voter Identification Law in Indiana By David Stout, NYT, April 29, 2008
When you think of all the various organizations whose primary goal is the subversion of traditional American society and the founding stock of that nation who made traditional American society possible, you have to place the DOJ near or at the top of the list.
Voter ID laws are nondiscriminatory (besides the US Supreme Court upholding Indiana’s law, a court has also upheld a law passed in Georgia on voter ID), yet Holder’s only motivation in life seems to be finding examples of white racism wherever they might lurk.
Just take a look at the DOJ website, where every press release is a self-congratulatory note of weeding out racism from the bountiful post-racial garden of modern America.
Conversely, the increasing regularity of Black-on-white flash mob attacks, in Philadelphia and other major American cities, are of no concern to the DOJ. But it’s those evil white bigots who dare notice and comment on these assaults that warrant a DOJ file.
To gauge quite how partisan this “Civil Rights” claptrap has gotten in our permanent government:
A U.S. District Court judge has rejected a challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 — filled when the Department of Justice barred the city of Kinston, N.C. from holding nonpartisan elections — reasoning that lack of access to party affiliation would discriminate against minority voters who otherwise wouldn’t know how to find Democratic candidates on a ballot.
Federal judge: For blacks, ‘voting rights’ include identifying Democrats on ballots, By Caroline May, December 26, 2011
Note: “lack of access to party affiliation would discriminate against minority voters who otherwise wouldn’t know how to find Democratic candidates on a ballot.”
But for any aspiring patriot politician reading this, note also the reaction that Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer received after the simple photo snapped of her raising an angry, defiant finger toward President Obama.
Similarly, any governor who challenged Holder and defended the constitutionality of voter ID would become a star overnight.
What are they waiting for?
Paul Kersey[Email him] is the author of the blog SBPDL, and has published the books SBPDL Year One, Hollywood in Blackface and Captain America and Whiteness: The Dilemma of the Superhero.