Holder wants you to vote…all of you!

Imagine if you could just show up at the polls and vote whether you were who you claimed to be or not. It happens in many states because there has been no way for the volunteers working at the polls to verify that you are in fact who you claim to be. Would you want someone to vote in your place?

If you choose to buy a pack of cigarettes you can be required to provide photo ID to prove that you are of legal age to buy them and that you match the photo. Would you be offended if you couldn’t vote without proving who you are? Apparently Eric Holder doesn’t like the idea of having to prove you are a legal voter. Shouldn’t anyone who resides in this country be allowed to vote? According to our laws unregistered voters, illegal aliens and convicted felons are not entitled to vote.

Holder to South Carolina: photo ID law is discrimination

Eric Holder’s Justice Department blocked South Carolina’s new photo ID voter law just before Christmas because they believe the law would discriminate against minorities and the poor. Poor folks and minorities face the requirement to produce photo ID to purchase alcohol and tobacco, isn’t that discrimination by Attorney General Eric Holder’s measure?

Eric Holder

The Chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party Dick Harpootlain said, “I think this is an effort to diminish minority and poor people’s involvement in the electoral policies and politics.” Does he believe that minorities and the poor don’t have valid photo IDs? How do they drive? How do they open a bank account? Clearly Mr. Harpootlain is after votes for his party any way he can get them. Dead people vote in Chicago, so why not allow illegal aliens, unregistered voters and criminals to vote?

The leading dealer of the “race card” Eric Holder has stated that he opposed any attempt to require ID to vote and stated we should “Call on our political parties to resist the temptation to suppress certain votes in the hope of attaining electoral success.”

Why would requiring an ID suppress votes, unless you had something to hide? Surely if you’re wanted by the police you’re not likely to be flashing your photo ID around. If you’re a convicted felon you probably aren’t going to head to the polls to break the law by attempting to vote. Holder is the chief law enforcement officer in the nation and would prefer that those that cannot legally vote be allowed to exercise one of our most cherished rights to garner more votes for his party. Holder should not only be chastised for ignoring U.S. laws, but impeached as Attorney General.

David Norcross, president of the Republican National Lawyers Association, made a valid point when he commented that a photo ID is required to enter any federal building and many office buildings. “You need it to get welfare, you need it to get on an airplane, take the SAT, buy liquor, buy cigarettes. It’s sort of ubiquitous. And it’s crazy to exclude voting from the list of things you need it for.”

It’s only to in the voting booth that Holder finds photo IDs a form of discrimination. In a sense Holder is right, if what we are discriminating against is voter fraud.

Indiana’s voter ID law is far more stringent than South Carolina’s and received approval of the Supreme Court, leading to the 15 states that now require or plan to require photo IDs to vote.

You get a solid view of how far outside the mainstream Holder is when you realize that many Democratic congressmen have supported the use of photo IDs at the polls, but the coop de gras is the fact that former President Jimmy Carter is in favor of photo IDs.  Holder’s views have placed him to the left of Jimmy Carter on a number of occasions; perhaps it’s time Holder consider emigrating to Havana.

Harpooltlian says, “They can’t get a photo ID because typically you have to have a birth certificate to get an official state ID. Many people don’t have the ability to pay the $35 here.” So how do they get their welfare, purchase restricted items or enter government facilities? Harpootlian isn’t arguing against the $35 charge to obtain a birth certificate, only the requirement for photo IDs at the polls. Harpootlian and Holder could care less about the difficulty in obtaining a photo ID, only that folks they believe will vote Democratic will be ineligible. Laws be damned.

Perhaps Holder should review Georgia’s voter ID law that has already been upheld by the courts.  Georgia went the extra mile to remove any roadblocks to legitimate voters exercising their constitutional right to vote by offering help to anyone with an excuse for not having a photo ID.

Rep. Phil Gingrey said the State of Georgia told people, “Look, we will literally send a van and a photographer to the home of anybody that can say they can’t get a picture made and a photo ID and we will do it … at the state’s cost and the taxpayer cost and not at the individual cost.”

What percent of the voting public does Holder believe don’t drive? According to government reports nearly 99.8 percent of all voters drive and this statistic was quoted regularly by Liberals in their push to allow voters to register at the same time their driver’s license was issued or renewed.

South Carolina has offered the same type of service to voters if they have any issues obtaining a photo ID. Should a voter have a valid and reasonable impediment to getting a photo ID they will be allowed to vote. When you show up to vote, you fill out an affidavit in which you swear you are who you say you are. You describe what that reasonable impediment was and you will be allowed to vote. The only reason you would not be allowed to vote would be if a local election officials have some evidence that your affidavit is false and that’s a very high burden; but apparently it’s not high enough for Mr. Holder.

The Democratic National Committee’s website refers to the photo ID push as “GOP tactics” and says: “Photo ID mandates are the most pervasive new restriction on the right to vote. … They are costly and unnecessary and they disenfranchise voters.” The site also claims that, “voter fraud is rare.” That claim is patently false. In fact voter fraud has and continues to be widespread.

“We did a quick study,” Norcross said. “In last 10 years, there have been voter fraud convictions in 46 states.”

Just this past April a local executive committee member of the NAACP was sentenced to five years in jail for voter fraud in Toneka County, Mississippi.

States are moving in the direction of voter ID laws and it’s certain the courts will back them up. Holder, as Attorney General, has the authority to block any voter law that he deems is discriminatory, at least until the courts step in. Court action doesn’t happen overnight and unless and until Holder’s actions are overturned states cannot act on the will of their citizens.  Holder only needs the illegal voters to be allowed to vote through the 2012 elections; after that he’s just hoping to still be employed.

Rhode Island Democrats with a majority Democratic legislature proposed and overwhelmingly approved the use of photo IDs at the polls.

Mississippi, with one of the largest African-American populations, just held a referendum in which 62 percent voted in favor of photo IDs.

Eric Holder is focused on one thing and that’s the fact that the predominate cases of illegal voting and voter fraud have taken place in favor of Democratic candidates or matters supported by Liberals. Do you think Holder would oppose attempts to restrict the voting of those making more than 200 thousand a year?

Ultimately Holder’s actions will be reversed by the courts, but until that happens the Attorney General’s will shall override that of the public and will encourage fraudulent voting in favor of the Democratic Party. At what point do we send Holder to prison for encouraging the breaking our laws? How many times can the race card or the poor card be used to twist the laws of our nation to suit the goals of one political party? Eric Holder has made a mockery out of our laws and yet he still remains the U.S. Attorney General. Why hasn’t anyone acted to remove Holder, a man who flaunts our laws, sends guns to Mexican drug cartels and promotes racial divisions?