If you don’t need an ID to vote why do you need one to buy a booze or cigarettes? It’s seems a poor choice voting effect far more people than a poor choice buying booze or smokes. Just saying… But Eric “Racist”Holder say that a voter ID disenfranchised minority votes? Why? Is Holder saying that minorities are too stupid to go get a picture ID? Is Holder putting forth the idea that even if they drive a car they either 1.) Are driving without a license or 2.) To stupid to have it with them when they drive to the voting location? And why is it 25% of Blacks do not have an ID? How many are under 18? How many are felons that can’t vote? The reason I’ve always heard is that Blacks don’t like being called for jury duty and with an ID you stand a good chance of that happening. Anyway – the idiot… Holder: Minority rights under threat from voter ID laws
Holder also pointed up the example of redistricting in Texas for elections to the state legislature and US Congress. He said that electoral maps “were manipulated to give the appearance of minority while minimising minority electoral strength”. “In December, we objected to South Carolina’s voter ID law after finding, based on the state’s own data, that the proposed change would place an unfair burden on non-white voters. In March we objected to a photo ID requirement in Texas because it would have a disproportionate impact on Hispanic voters,” he said.
I’ve covered this before but it bears repeating… Obama and Holder claim that requiring an ID to vote disenfranchises minority voters, so based on that logic it disenfranchises minorities that want to buy cigarettes, booze, cash a check or any of the plethora of things you need to provide an ID for?
So why should stores that sell or offer these products face fines if they provide them to people without an ID? Would they not be disenfranchising them if they require one? I’d love to see some merchant file a lawsuit if they are ever busted selling smokes or booze to some under age person – put it to the courts. Plead that they don’t want to disenfranchise a customer, especially if that customer is a minority. But yet Democrats require an ID to attend their convention in Massachusetts. MA DEMOCRATS: NO ENTRY TO CONVENTION WITHOUT PHOTO ID
In recent years, Democrats have argued that requiring voters to show photo IDs prior to voting is an egregious act of voter suppression. Ben Jealous, of the NAACP, has gone so far as to argue that such requirements are tantamount to modern-day Jim Crow laws. In the world they inhabit, lots of voters don’t have access to photo IDs, so requiring voters to provide this will “disenfranchise” them and leave them out of the democratic process. Funny they don’t feel that way for their own party conventions. On Saturday, Massachusetts delegates will meet in their state’s Democrat party convention. The votes of these delegates will determine whether there are primary elections for their party nominations. With so much at state, Democrats have decided to implement Voter ID requirements:
I guess that’s makes the Democrat racist as that are trying to disenfranchise voters of all walks of life in their party by requiring a photo ID… or are they just hypocrites? Yep that’s what it is – they pick and choose their outrage and never follow their own rhetoric. Typical libtards.
But wait there’s more… MooCow requires an Id to come to her book signing as if the word needs another garden book especially from one that does do her actual gardening.
On Friday, June 8th, those wishing to attend the event must purchase a copy of the First Lady’s book at the location and leave it at the store, according to the employee. At the same time, customers must also submit their social security number and show an official photo ID (driver’s license, passport) to a Secret Service agent, and they will be issued a wristband to the First Lady’s event on June 12.( Emphasis added)