So please don't think I'm going to do this too often, but
once in a while there surely will be a stimulus for a column, and this one is
it.
Yahoo, as we know, has allowed its leftist leanings to show
itself more and more in recent months. I've written to that, of course,
as their "news" feed, that is supposed to be somewhat neutral (if it
wants to call itself "news"), will offer ten stories, nine of which
lean hard left/anti-Trump and the other is some fluff piece about this or that
pop tart.
Today their tippy-top piece was about the Republicans in
North Carolina. It shouldn't have been, but it was. Here is the
headline:
"After
referendum, North Carolina GOP tries voter ID again"
Now,
what does that suggest to you? To me, it would sound like the Republicans
in the state are trying to re-institute a voter-ID law requiring that you prove
who you are in order to vote, right? The word "tries", though,
suggest that there would be a challenge and that the GOP was trying to do
something nefarious.
Well, here's
the thing. The referendum the headline refers to was one that was on the
ballot here in North Carolina a few weeks ago. the voters of the great
State of North Carolina voted overwhelmingly -- more than 55% -- to
authorize a requirement for voter ID in the state, in the form of authorizing a
constitutional amendment.
So the job
of the legislature is to implement that. Now, what the mechanics of that
are, I don't know, but obviously in the aftermath of the election, the
legislature is mandated to create a model to implement that requires voter ID.
The article
suggested that in the waning weeks of the legislative year, before a new and
less-Republican legislature takes office, the current legislature would try to
implement the new amendment as law before the no longer veto-proof majority
takes over. The governor, Roy Cooper, is a Democrat, you see, and might
veto such a move despite the -- did I mention this -- 55% majority vote
demanding voter ID be written into the State constitution.
I don't
know. I don't know what Yahoo has against requiring that people be
required to demonstrate who they are in order to cast a vote. I don't
know why they don't want North Carolina voters to be protected against the
weakening of our votes by illegals and non-citizens voting. I don't know
why it should be an issue to require the same demonstration of identity to vote
that is required to drive a car or buy beer.
Well, I do
know, actually. The ballot box has not always been kind to the
left. In 2016, all of Hillary's lead in fund-raising was not enough to
overcome the country's revulsion at what a crummy candidate she was, and how
she had no evident reason for running, and that she was demonstrably corrupt.
The left
would prefer that it not have to risk actually asking Americans to vote for
them, and just to take and hold power. Governing is really not the big
deal for them; power is. Whatever means are necessary to grab power, even
allowing hordes to storm our sacred borders, or to have people vote illegally
or vote often, well, my diluted vote is just collateral damage to them.
And even
when the people stand up against that and vote to amend our constitution to
mandate voter identification, we have Yahoo protesting away that showing who
you are in order to vote is somehow "racist", their go-to word for
everything (hint: they've cried wolf on that one a few too many times).
Well, I wish
the NC Republicans well and hope they can get the procedures legislated into
law quickly and reasonably.
I hope to
show up at the ballot in a year or two with a photo identification and actually
be asked for it.
Copyright 2018 by Robert Sutton
Like what you read here? There are over 1,000 posts from Bob at www.uberthoughtsUSA.com, and after four years of writing a new one daily, he still posts thoughts once in a while as "visiting columns", no longer the "prolific essayist" he was through 2018, but still around. Appearance, advertising, sponsorship and interview inquiries cheerfully welcomed at bsutton@alum.mit.edu or on Twitter at @rmosutton
Like what you read here? There are over 1,000 posts from Bob at www.uberthoughtsUSA.com, and after four years of writing a new one daily, he still posts thoughts once in a while as "visiting columns", no longer the "prolific essayist" he was through 2018, but still around. Appearance, advertising, sponsorship and interview inquiries cheerfully welcomed at bsutton@alum.mit.edu or on Twitter at @rmosutton
George here....
ReplyDeleteYou can do that today in Georgia. Our new governor-elect was the most recent secretary of state. He has been vilified by democrats as the embodiment of voter suppression. In fact, he simply upheld a law, passed in the '90s by both houses in the legislature - at the time majority democrats - and signed by our then governor, a democrat. This law provided for purging the voter rolls of stale registrations (i.e. people who had NOT voted in 3 elections, had been contacted repeatedly by the election board, and had never responded or registered again).
BTW, the charges of suppression are specious. The blatantly racist assumption that African Americans are too poor and uneducated to get an ID are belied by 1) the state will give you one for $5, 2) Georgia has the highest number of African American professionals in the US, 3) you need an ID to receive benefits from any one of many government programs, and 4) these same African Americans are rather angry at that assumption when you ask them.
Mr. Kemp, the governor-elect beat the democrat opponent by a solid 2.5%. Despite that she was calling voter fraud - a charge that rightly should be applied to democrats in parts of Florida....
The nonsense never ends. The democrats have benefited too often by using similar tactics.