In South Carolina, attorney general (Holder) says voting rights at risk

First: Does anyone listen to anything that this treasonous fraud says anymore?

Second: The man knows that the Obama campaign is in dire straights without the minority vote...even if these "minorities" shouldn't have any rights to vote to begin with.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, appearing at a Martin Luther King holiday rally in South Carolina, warned on Monday that voting rights laws are still at risk and said aggressive enforcement of those laws is "a moral imperative."

Weeks after his Justice Department blocked a South Carolina voter identification law it said would make it harder for tens of thousands of voters, mostly minorities, to cast a ballot, Holder said the principle of electoral equality was still endangered.

I say that we are required to have proper identification...does DHS come to mind? Why the hell is it suddenly okay to not require identification when it comes to something as sensitive as voting???

"The reality is that - in jurisdictions across the country - both overt and subtle forms of discrimination remain all too common," Holder, who is black, told hundreds of people attending an annual rally to honor King, the slain civil rights leader, on the steps of the South Carolina state capitol.

Oh, what's that? The race card? Not from the Obama camp! GASP!?! Typical.

The South Carolina law required voters to show a state-issued photo identification card to cast a ballot in an election. Republican supporters said it would prevent voter fraud, but Democratic critics argued it would make it harder for those without driver's licenses, many of them poor and black, to cast a ballot.

We're all REQUIRED BY LAW to have identification on us at all times. You go to jail without it. Now it's all too important to forget the law when it benefits the desperate reelection campaign of the Obama administration.

Source

What an obvious attempt at voter fraud. No ID, no vote. PERIOD! Without actual proof of who's voting, fraud will prevail. Sad state of affairs. Sad indeed.

reply to post by freakjive
One small quibble:

We're all REQUIRED BY LAW to have identification on us at all times. You go to jail without it. Now it's all too important to forget the law when it benefits the desperate reelection campaign of the Obama administration.

This is not correct. If you are detained by law enforcement for suspicion of criminal activity, you must identify yourself, but people are otherwise under no legal requirement to carry or provide identification upon request - regardless of what law enforcement entities may TELL you: remember, they are legally allowed to lie to secure self-incrimination or self-disclosure, etc.

If driving, you are required to carry any necessary paperwork, ID, etc., as mandated by your state. To purchase certain items, you may be required to provide necessary proofs. But on foot, in public, under no suspicion of a crime or otherwise being detained, you can be ID free and refuse to identify yourself. Now, be mindful you may also pay unfair penalties or abuses for such, but that does not make it a legal requirement.

Lets see: Buy beer------- Need ID Buy a gun------Need ID and a back ground. Buy a plane ticket------ To board ID Use a credit card----- show ID. To cash your own paycheck------ Show your ID. Police stop you-------- You better have your ID. Help select the next leader of the supposed free word, Hell come on in anybody can do that.

All this sorry excuse for a human being has to do is insure the Photo ID law is enforced and the standard regulations related to sign-up and eligibility requirements are followed TO THE LETTER. That is all we need to see enforced to know we have had a fair election, even if we personally hate how it turns out.

Of course those two things are what Holder HATES and plans to enforce other things to marginalize...so the idea of a fair and proper election is about as likely as a snow storm in Texas for the 4th of July.

How can we do anything serious toward fixing our house when the very leaders in charge of it all are still corrupt as anything our nation has ever seen??

reply to post by freakjive

That 'racist' should be thrown out of office and imprisoned, along with his,lying, foreign national POUS!

This goes deeper than election fraud. Re-read that article with the knowledge that yet again; one party is trying to make the other party out to be racist without calling them racists. Re-Read that article with the knowledge that they are trying to seperate the people over THEIR POLITICAL BS.

these two parties need to go. Im sorry. Ima propose the deletion of the republican and democratic party.

They cause too much trouble in this nation.

Lets see Barrie's drivers license
If he cant produce a legal documentable license he must walk away until he can provide

I do not believe there is anything within the constitution that requires a voter to have a state-issued ID.

Requiring citizens to do so would fall into the same category as Obama's healthcare plan.......a government mandate!

We have to be very careful not to look at this issue and make a judgment based on politics or superficial appearance. Just because it sounds like common sense to have to show an ID to vote, does not mean that it is constitutional.

If we allow our emotions or personal beliefs/thoughts to override the constitution, we leave ourselves open for even more drastic attacks on our civil liberties.

Originally posted by freakjive

The South Carolina law required voters to show a state-issued photo identification card to cast a ballot in an election. Republican supporters said it would prevent voter fraud, but Democratic critics argued it would make it harder for those without driver's licenses, many of them poor and black, to cast a ballot.

We're all REQUIRED BY LAW to have identification on us at all times. You go to jail without it. Now it's all too important to forget the law when it benefits the desperate reelection campaign of the Obama administration.

Source

edit on 1/16/2012 by freakjive because: (no reason given)

You hit the nail right on the head. I used to in the Greenville area of South Carolina for a few years and I know for a fact that

a) You must carry ID on you by law.

b) If you are unable to get a drivers license, you are to get a State issued ID Card. It is not expensive, and VERY EASY to get. As a matter of fact, I still have mine!!

So the Democrats argument holds no water on this issue. By Law you are required to have an ID, therefor these "poor black people" should already have one or they risk going to jail anytime they get asked for ID and can not provide it.

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by freakjive

 

One small quibble:

We're all REQUIRED BY LAW to have identification on us at all times. You go to jail without it. Now it's all too important to forget the law when it benefits the desperate reelection campaign of the Obama administration.

This is not correct. If you are detained by law enforcement for suspicion of criminal activity, you must identify yourself, but people are otherwise under no legal requirement to carry or provide identification upon request - regardless of what law enforcement entities may TELL you: remember, they are legally allowed to lie to secure self-incrimination or self-disclosure, etc.

Thanks for the clarification, Prae!

I had to go back and read into this after you made the point, as I was under the impression this was the case. I apologize if I mislead anyone.

In some jurisdictions you absolutely are required to have ID on you once you reach a certain age...but that's state/local territory, not federal. They can make it very easy to get around this loophole. Make IDs free. Charge for drivers license, if you must, but make the IDs free. That would rip the teeth right out of that racist POS Holder's argument. Doesn't matter if they're poor...the ID is free.

Obama knows he can't win without the illegal votes. Hence his guard dog's little hissy fit.

reply to post by freakjive
No worries...the cops have probably TOLD you this before.

But they've told lots of people lots of things before, as well. I suppose there could be some cities/counties/states that might have such a law on the books, but I've never actually heard of them if so, and with SCOTUS rulings, I'm not sure if their laws would stand up to challenge.

Take care.

reply to post by sheepslayer247


Thank you for your position. I agree.

And when you consider that the actual rate of voter fraud is something like .00005% ... That's about 635 (or is it 63.5?) votes out of about 127 million voters in the 2008 election...

The Truth about Voter Fraud

Each act of voter fraud risks five years in prison and a $10,000 fine - but yields at most one incremental vote.
...
There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often.
...
Many vivid anecdotes of purported voter fraud have been proven false or do not demonstrate fraud

This voter ID law is nothing but a means to intimidate and disenfranchise certain people. People who are likely to vote Democratic.

reply to post by freakjive

Originally posted by freakjive
The man knows that the Obama campaign is in dire straights without the minority vote...even if these "minorities" shouldn't have any rights to vote to begin with.

You don't think minorities have the right to vote? What are you talking about?

We're all REQUIRED BY LAW to have identification on us at all times. You go to jail without it.

:shk:

It's interesting to consider something in all this. In modern America, someone who has no ID has been blocked out of far more than voting, and I'd guess voting is the last of the concerns for those really falling into that category. Afterall all, among the other things they can't do are...

Hold a job
Cash a check
Hold a bank account
Board a plane
Buy a bus ticket
Drive a car
Buy alcohol or cigarettes (if under 25-40 depending on state guidline for 'must ID' garbage)
Get through a police encounter without arrest (to identify you at the jail, instead)
Enter or remain in any myriad of state/federal offices nation-wide for security reasons
...and much more

Now are we SERIOUSLY suggesting there is a measurable % of legal American citizens who are so removed from daily life as to have *NO* photo id to get through life with...yet would be burning with the desire to get out and vote??

Well, heck, I agree with others then. For that TINY % of hermits and drop outs from society who've made it this long without any form of Photo ID....we can certainly give them an ID 100% free. It isn't exactly going to break the national bank with millions of people.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
You don't think minorities have the right to vote? What are you talking about?

That's not at all what I was saying, BH. The minorities in quotations is referring to illegals who (happen to be minorities) do not have any rights to vote.

In regards to the law on carrying ID (And remember I reside in Indiana):

As of February 2011, there is no U.S. federal law requiring that an individual identify himself during a Terry stop, but Hiibel held that states may enact such laws,[20] and 24 states have done so.[21] The opinion in Hiibel implied that persons detained by police in jurisdictions with “stop and identify” laws listed are obligated to identify themselves,[22] and that persons detained in other jurisdictions are not.[23] The issue may not be that simple, however, for several reasons:

The wording of “stop and identify” laws varies considerably from state to state.

Noncompliance with a “stop and identify” law that does not explicitly impose a penalty may constitute violation of another law, such as one to the effect of “resisting, obstructing, or delaying a peace officer”.

State courts have made varying interpretations of both “stop and identify” and “obstructing” laws. [edit] Variations in “stop and identify” laws

Four states’ laws (Arizona, Indiana, Nevada, and Ohio) explicitly impose an obligation to provide identifying information.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I could not agree more!

What the GOP and many Republicans refuse to understand is that not only does this disenfranchise voters of lesser means, but it also disenfranchises Republicans that refuse to placate to a "papers please" style of government.

I have made it a priority to study the Nazi regime and what not, and I can tell you that it is this style of tactic that ends up separating citizens into many different groups, separates the value of their opinion and eventually leads to a society where people of any political ideology different than the "ruling class" have less of a say in the political process.

It seems to me that we are quickly evolving into a society in which these people will be treated as the black folks were and only be granted a percentage value of their vote...if any say at all!

According to a recent study, 900 dead people voted in South Carolina. If true, I believe there needs to be identification of voters before they vote to stop this illegal activity. It is illegal for dead people to vote. Of course it is not dead people voting, but people gaming the system placing extra invalid votes that get honored because South Carolina is not doing a proper job of identifying voters when they vote. They are trying to fix the problem here. They offered free voter id's to those who couldn't afford it along with free transportation to get the id if you are low income. Even then you could still vote without voter id by voting via abseetee ballot. I really don't see the big problem if the state is willing to pay for free id's to everyone who doesn't already have one or is at a low income.

If you're not low income, you probably already have a driver's license. The state is providing a means free of charge to properly identify people. The only people blocking this are those that feel they may lose if those 900 dead people are no longer voting for them. Of course money is tight even though South Carolina has a recent 900 million budget surplus. I think they can afford to spend a little for proper voter id's.

Of course maybe this is all pointless if millions of illegal aliens already have driver's licenses and would be allowed to vote anyway. 900 dead people voting, plus an unknown number of living people voting several times or illegally voting without legal status here. I believe there are over 11 million illegal aliens in the US. Most typical Americans don't even bother to go vote though.