In A Just World…
By Mitch Berg
…the Cubs would win the Series, the people of Myanmar Burma would toss off their military junta for their crimes of neglect…
…and the people of the Fifth District would shake their heads, realize “Oh, Crap – Keith Ellison is one crappy representative!”, and carry Barb Davis White to Washington on their shoulders.
But this is the real world – so Barb’s gotta work for it.
Not just a “real world”, mind you, but a “real world” where the local mainstream media is completely in the bag for the DFL. As a result, GOP candidates can expect boundless hatchet–jobbery…
…while Democrats can expect to get their message out pretty much as they want to; the Strib, at least on its editorial pages, is a PR firm for the DFL in all but name.
So last week, the Strib uncritically ran Rep. Ellison’s fairly vapid attack on the Supreme Court’s upholding of Indiana’s voter ID laws.
Barb Davis-White promptly wrote a rebuttal. And she’s waiting for the Strib to print it.
And waiting.
And waiting…
Well, I’ll print it here – and if you’re a blogger who assails the Strib, I hope you will, too. I’m not going to inset my comments – but I will add emphasis to parts I think are particularly important:
The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 opinion, has ruled that it is not too burdensome to ask citizens to show a picture id when voting. Now, most people would say that this is common sense. In fact, a Rasmussen poll found that 82 percent of Americans, including 75 percent of Democrats, believe that “people should be required to show a driver’s license or some other form of photo ID before they are allowed to vote.” The civil rights of every American are violated when the fraudent votes are counted in an election. The integrity of the ballot box is just as important to the credibility of elections as access to it.
Representative Ellison does not appear to be blessed with the common sense that the legislatures in Indiana and several other states have. His recent editorial in the Star Tribune spits out in the style of a first year law student accusations of “disenfranchising voters and likens it to a “poll tax.” He even brings up the concurrence of Justice Scalia, obviously in an attempt to obfuscate the fact that the court’s most liberal justice wrote the court opinion. As Justice Stevens points out, “Because Indiana’s [identification] cards are free, the inconvenience of going to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, gathering required documents, and posing for a photograph does not qualify as a substantial burden.” Again, common sense that is lost on Mr. Ellison.
In a democracy, the voters, through their elected officials, have a right to pass laws to protect the integrity of their democracy. There are countless stories where ACORN, a liberal activist group, has been found guilty of voter fraud, from submitting false voter registration forms in Kansas City to bribing voters with cigarettes in Milwaukee.
We face many threats to our liberties, and these right to vote is an important one not to be taken lightly. But when you watch what voters in most of the world go through to exercise their franchise, including brave Iraqis who defy sniper fire and suicide bombers, is it too much to ask that our voters show an ID?
Ellison’s reponse is vacuous demigoguery – good enough for a DFL meeting, but not good enough for an elected official that represents a big, diverse district.
May 15th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Barb Davis White will be joining members of SD45 at Bruegger’s Bagels this Saturday for the monthly coffee and chat at 9:00 AM. Location is Winnetka Ave and 36th in New Hope. All are welcome All are welcome, and I look forward to a lively conversation with this impressive candidate. Details may be found at the SD45 website.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
Mitch:
Why do you think the approval numbers for a particular policy are “particularly important” in deciding whether a legal case was correctly decided by the Supreme Court? The judges are not supposed to rule based on the popularity of a given policy, only whether it does not violate a Constitutional principle. I know, it is only judicial activism when the courts try to help black people vote.
May 15th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Why do “black people” need help from the courts to vote? Are they incapable of doing the most rudimentary tasks? Are they incapable of getting an ID-which might even come in handy for other reasons besides voting? Are they supposed to get by with no rules applied to them because of their color? Are there no white people without ID’s at present? Seriously, I don’t get it. Is there nothing to be expected of a full adult citizen in this country? Are they children? What is it?! Sickening. What works for every other race should apply or forget it! If you can’t even stir yourself to get a free ID, how much do you really care anyway…or is there something in it for you? Free cigarettes or some other pathetic bribe. Criminy.
May 15th, 2008 at 6:22 pm
Why do you think the approval numbers for a particular policy are “particularly important” in deciding whether a legal case was correctly decided by the Supreme Court?
In and of themselves, and legally? They’re not.
Just a sign that most Americans, including most liberals, don’t really think that a non-intrusive ID policy to safeguard the integrity of the vote is either onerous or a threat to democracy.
The judges are not supposed to rule based on the popularity of a given policy, only whether it does not violate a Constitutional principle.
And the Indiana law apparently does not!
I know, it is only judicial activism when the courts try to help black people vote.
Even by your rather dubious standards, Rick, that’s a noxious sentiment to jam into my mouth.
May 15th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
RickDFL,
If you’re going to call someone a racist, at least have the cojones to do it straight out.
May 15th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
RickDFL paraphrased:
A straw man, something true, and then a very obvious play of the race card.
Nice one *cough* loser *cough*.
May 16th, 2008 at 1:10 am
only whether it does not violate a Constitutional principle.
Opinion, not fact. The supreme court’s mission is to decide whether or not a law as decided by a lower court is “constitutional”. The meaning of ‘constitutional’ is a hot subject within the court itself.
Don’t try and steal bases, RickDFL.
May 16th, 2008 at 9:04 am
Colleen wrote:
“Why do “black people” need help from the courts to vote?”. Because for almost 100 years after the Civil War, African-Americans, despite their clear legal right to vote, were systematically deprived of that right through various legal methods.
That is why any law that restricts access to the vote ought to pass the strict scrutiny standard. That is:
“First, it must be justified by a compelling governmental interest. . . the concept generally refers to something necessary or crucial, as opposed to something merely preferred. . .
Second, the law or policy must be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal or interest. . .
Finally, the law or policy must be the least restrictive means for achieving that interest.”
The Indiana law makes it disproportionately harder for the poor generally and African-Americans to vote. This barrier is set up to solve a problem (illegal voting) that the State admits has not occurred. Moreover, it is obvious to any political observer that the bill is a partisan attempt by Republican legislators to lower black turnout because blacks do not vote for them.
“Is there nothing to be expected of a full adult citizen in this country?”
Not of registered voters who wish to vote. It is a fundamental Constitutional right and the basis of our democracy. We don’t need your permission and you do not get to make us jump through pointless hoops.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:51 am
“The Indiana law makes it disproportionately harder for the poor generally and African-Americans to vote.”
Bullshit. There are more than enough community and private services available to ANYONE willing to take advantage of them, to enable a person to get transported from their place of residence, to a government office in order to get their picture taken (FOR FREE), and back home again.
Just because you have the RIGHT to do something doesn’t mean it has to be EASY.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:30 am
Another lie from commissar RickDFL. Never prosecuting an individual for voter fraud does not mean that the state has ceded that voter fraud has not occurred.
“First, it must be justified by a compelling governmental interest. . . the concept generally refers to something necessary or crucial, as opposed to something merely preferred. . .
Second, the law or policy must be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal or interest. . .
Finally, the law or policy must be the least restrictive means for achieving that interest.”
JP Stevens wrote for the majority:
‘the application of the statute to the vast majority of Indiana voters is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.’
May 16th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Bill C:
“Just because you have the RIGHT to do something doesn’t mean it has to be EASY.”
Bullshit right back at you. You are exactly wrong. Because voting is a fundamental right, the government can not make it harder, esp. in ways that disproportionately black people, except for very good reasons. The government can not go around making it harder to vote just because it wants to. It certainly can not make it harder for some people to vote because it does not like the way those people vote, which is clearly the case in Indiana. No one should have to ride a bus, stand in line, fill out some form, and get a ID so that they can vote, just because you think it would be fun to force them to.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:41 am
test
May 16th, 2008 at 11:48 am
A normal person would rationally decide that the government must strike a balance between a) ensuring there are few obstacles to voting and b) ensuring the integrity of the voting process, that is, that every vote counted is cast by a person legally allowed to do vote. RickDFL thinks that the ‘fundamental’ right to vote is more important than my ‘fundamental’ right to free and fair elections.
May 16th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Terry:
A rational person would recognize that the government has already ensured the integrity of the voting process and protected your right to free and fair elections. That is why there is no evidence of significant voter fraud.
You just don’t like how some people vote, so you want to make it harder for them to vote.
May 16th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
That is why there is no evidence of significant voter fraud.
Milwaukee and Seattle.
You just don’t like how some people vote, so you want to make it harder for them to vote.
Again with the gutless accusations.
Puerile even by your standards.
Knock it off. Seriously.
May 16th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
That is why there is no evidence of significant voter fraud.
I see… It is only voter fraud if it is splashed on the pages of DFL-NYT and can be pinned on Republicans. Any other fraud ignored and unreported by the DFL-MSM is insignificant.
May 16th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Mitch:
“Again with the gutless accusations”
Blacks are the most heavily Democratic voting block in the country. You are a partisan Republican. I cast no aspersions on you when I say you do not like the way they vote.
I think the Indiana voter law, clearly makes it harder for blacks and the poor to vote. I cast no aspersions on you when I say so.
I think you support a policy because it gives your side a partisan advantage. It is not a nice thing to say about you, but it is hardly outside the realm of common political discourse. Indeed, such charges are the lifeblood of our discourse.
May 16th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
I think you support a policy because it gives your side a partisan advantage.
Then you think incorrectly.
Remember – when dealing with the constitution, what’s fair for Peter now will come back to screw him in 20, 30 or 50 years.
I think the Indiana voter law, clearly makes it harder for blacks and the poor to vote.
And how is that?
May 16th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
“And how is that?”
God, I hate it when you people play dumb (of course, many of you *cough* Troy *cough* are not playing). The reasons are obvious and well discussed in the media. Feel free to start here:
http://www.slate.com/id/2181573/
“Studies generally show that somewhere in the range of 10 percent of voting-age citizens—or more than 20 million people—lack a government-issued photo ID. Many of these people do not drive and do not have a license, the most common form of government-issued ID. Lower-income, minority, and young and old voters are far more likely to be in this group.
. . .The process of assembling the necessary documents and taking the other requisite steps involves substantial time and resources. An Indiana applicant for a nondriver’s photo ID must obtain a certified birth certificate issued by the state or county of birth, which can require payment of a fee. And because some Indiana citizens were born in states or counties that require a photo ID to get the birth certificate—including Marion County, the largest county in Indiana—a person who seeks a birth certificate in order to get a photo ID could find himself trapped in an unending bureaucratic loop. Predictably, applicants often wind up making multiple trips to the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles.
. . Imagine what it is like for a single parent with an hourly wage job and no car to take time off from work, get a child to day care, take another bus, and transfer perhaps yet again to get to the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles, wait in lengthy lines, and take two buses to return at the end of the day—and potentially to have to do so more than once—all to obtain a government-issued photo ID needed only on Election Day.”
I thought a trip to the DMV was supposed to be the GOP version of hell. Now you treat it like a trip to Candyland.
May 16th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
all to obtain a government-issued photo ID needed only on Election Day
If you want to excercise your right to vote, than YES! that is the LEAST you could do! Once in your lifetime! Who ever said that freedom was FREE? Oh yeah, those that never had to fight for it and expect it to be HANDED to them with the rest of the government handouts.
May 16th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
Feel free to call me “dumb” anytime you wish, RickDFL, especially while you’re “almost” calling other people racists. I’m sure when reasonable folks read whatever else you written, they’ll realize how much salt with which that opinion needs to be seasoned. And then, to avoid salt poisoning, reject it.
May 16th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
No one should have to ride a bus, stand in line, fill out some form, and get a ID so that they can vote, just because you think it would be fun to force them to.
Oh yes they should have to, to prevent people from BREAKING THE LAW.
You don’t care about proven voter fraud because you know god damned good and well that by a LARGE margin it is perpetrated by leftist democrats who don’t care about the rule of law and want their agenda enacted by any means possible. ACORN is the organzation who gets convicted of voter fraud, not the NRA, or pro-choice, or taxpayers rights organizations.
The left is the side of “the ends justify the means”, not the right.
May 16th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Bill C:
“to prevent people from BREAKING THE LAW”
If you have an example of voter fraud, that a Voter ID law would have been necessary or even useful to prevent feel free to cite it.
The ACORN cases all involve people submitting improper voter registration cards in order to get paid more, not because anyone wanted to vote under those registrations. Since no one tried to vote, the ID requirement would not prevent anything.
Think about it. Why would anyone go to the time, money, and risk of trying to engage in voter fraud when you could easily generate more additional legitimate voters for the same amount of effort?
May 16th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
justplainangry:
“Who ever said that freedom was FREE?”
http://www.homeofheroes.com/moh/citations_1940_wwii/montieth.html
I am sure his last thought was – “at least I die knowing one day some single mom working minimum wage with kids to feed will have to take of work, get a sitter, and take the bus ride to the DMV to get an ID that will help prevent non-existent voter fraud.”
It is exactly because so many have sacrificed so much to defend our right to vote that real patriots are appalled when unnecessary barriers are put in front of people exercising those dearly bought freedoms. That for which the men at Omaha Beach died for is not yours to piss away.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Did RickDFL just claim that heroes died on Omaha Beach so that people who cannot be troubled to go to the DMV _one_time_ can vote with maximum ease, and also so that we would never protect our voting process against possible fraud?
Lame.
May 16th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Where in the HELL to begin with the crap RickDFL has ladled out here! Blacks couldn’t vote over a HUNDRED years ago and the present has what to do with that?! Can citizens of any other race manage? In your sensitive concern for the poor black people and their hardship, you make them look so freakin lame it’s hard to believe you aren’t laughing up your sleeve when you type that crap. Bottom line is that you know there are LOTS of illegals, lots of felons and other assorted no-goods that will vote Dem…but only if they don’t have to prove they are legit. Bottom frickin’ line. Don’t even bother painting this as the usual leftist fairytale concern for the downtrodden.
The black single mom you speak of can just as easily be the black single mom that can manage to hit the clubs and the crack-house no problem. Lots of young black men are unemployed, so what else do they have to do of an afternoon? Otherwise, gainfully employed, hardworking people of ALL colors will have some ID and we all know it.
May 16th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
RickDFL wrote:
it is obvious to any political observer that the bill is a partisan attempt by Republican legislators to lower black turnout because blacks do not vote for them.
Gee, I’m a political observer and I do not think it is a partisan attempt to lower black turnout. Another — let’s be polite and call it an untruth — by commissar RickDFL.
In the same comment RickDFL wrote:
“Is there nothing to be expected of a full adult citizen in this country?”
Not of registered voters who wish to vote. It is a fundamental Constitutional right and the basis of our democracy. We don’t need your permission and you do not get to make us jump through pointless hoops.
He must have lost track of the argument he was making because later in this thread he wrote:
“The ACORN cases all involve people submitting improper voter registration cards in order to get paid more, not because anyone wanted to vote under those registrations.”
So RickDFL’s argument is that it’s not voter fraud to register people to vote based on fraudulent documents. But once a voter has been registered by fraudulent means it is their fundamental right to vote. But no none should ever doubt that the election is fair or suspect that fraudulent votes have been cast.
RickDFL is either incredibly dense or he’s a writer for a union newsletter.
May 17th, 2008 at 5:10 am
Think about it. Why would anyone go to the time, money, and risk of trying to engage in voter fraud when you could easily generate more additional legitimate voters for the same amount of effort?
Ask Richard Daley. He was so successful, he even got the dead to vote for him.
May 17th, 2008 at 5:22 am
. . .The process of assembling the necessary documents and taking the other requisite steps involves substantial time and resources. An Indiana applicant for a nondriver’s photo ID must obtain a certified birth certificate issued by the state or county of birth, which can require payment of a fee. And because some Indiana citizens were born in states or counties that require a photo ID to get the birth certificate—including Marion County, the largest county in Indiana—a person who seeks a birth certificate in order to get a photo ID could find himself trapped in an unending bureaucratic loop. Predictably, applicants often wind up making multiple trips to the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles.
Never thought I’d see the day when a liberal complains that a government bureaucracy is too large and troublesome.
This from a commenter that supports unlimited government health care.
If it is too much trouble, Rick, which party’s fault is that?
May 17th, 2008 at 5:29 am
You just don’t like how some people vote, so you want to make it harder for them to vote.
And you support anything to ensure that your side always wins…lying, cheating, stealing while calling elections “fair.”
You would scream as if you had hot wax pouring on your groin if the Right engaged in any such fraud.
May 17th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Paul: As for Daley, more legend than fact, he never needed to steal votes. For example in the 1960 Presidential race –
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1960
“More to the point, Illinois was the site of the most extensive challenge process, which fell short despite repeated efforts spearheaded by Cook County state’s attorney, Benjamin Adamowski, a Republican, who also lost his re-election bid. Despite demonstrating net errors favoring both Nixon and Adamowski (some precincts–40% in Nixon’s case–showed errors favoring them, a factor suggesting error, rather than fraud), the totals found fell short of reversing the results for either candidate. The Republican-dominated State Board of Elections unanimously rejected the challenge to the results. Furthermore, there were signs of possible irregularities in downstate areas controlled by Republicans, which Democrats never seriously pressed, since the Republican challenges went nowhere”.
As for the DMV, I don’t think anyone is to blame. The burdens are necessary and appropriate for issuing IDs and Driver’s licenses. They just just an unneeded burden for those who only wish to vote.
May 17th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Colleen:
“Blacks couldn’t vote over a HUNDRED years ago and the present has what to do with that?!” You ignorant moron. Why do you think the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was passed. Because as recently as forty three years ago, black were killed for trying to register to vote.
May 17th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Terry:
False registrations are a serious crime, just not one that could be prevented by requiring someone to present an ID when they vote.
May 17th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Really, RickDFL, you have to try and keep your arguments straight. Are you insisting that voter fraud does not happen, or that it somehow all balances out in the end?
Are false registrations a serious crime or not important because the people who may have made false registrations ‘were only in it for the money’?
If the right to vote is so sacred to you, why don’t you want to take any measures to ensure that the ballot choice of a legal, registered voter is not adulterated with fake votes?
May 17th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
As for the DMV, I don’t think anyone is to blame. The burdens are necessary and appropriate for issuing IDs and Driver’s licenses. They just just an unneeded burden for those who only wish to vote.
Fine.
Don’t you EVER complain about voting irregularities, you two-faced mothaf****r.
May 18th, 2008 at 9:03 am
Terry:
Your inability to understand has more to do with your ignorance than anything else.
“Are you insisting that voter fraud does not happen”
False voter registrations are sometimes submitted, sometimes felons immproperly vote. Neither is a case where a Voter ID law would prevent the crime. From the Slate article: “There is no dispute that Indiana’s photo-ID requirement addresses one, and only one, species of fraud—so-called “in-person impersonation fraud,” which would occur if an ineligible voter were to come to the polls and attempt to cast a ballot by falsely claiming the identity of an eligible voter. In the entire history of Indiana, the total number of reported instances of this kind of fraud is zero. Nor is there reliable evidence that in-person impersonation fraud has occurred anywhere else in the country.”
Are false registrations a serious crime or not important because the people who may have made false registrations ‘were only in it for the money’?
They are important, but they do not result in people voting who should not.
If the right to vote is so sacred to you, why don’t you want to take any measures to ensure that the ballot choice of a legal, registered voter is not adulterated with fake votes?
I believe in taking all measures necessary to prevent actual fraud, I do not believe in taken extra steps to prevent non-existent fraud, esp. when those steps add real burdens to people’s ability to vote.
May 18th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
You are understood, RickDFL, to be a fool. I don’t think anyone is ignorant of that fact.
May 18th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
Paul:
7:48 PM is obviously past your bedtime. Next time you feel the need to post that late, go see your Mommy instead. She will give you a cookie and tuck you into bed with you blanket.