Say it ain't so, Bill. This from the The Wall Street Journal:
The last time Bill Clinton tried to play the race card, it blew up his wife's primary campaign in South Carolina. Well, the Voice is back, this time portraying the nationwide movement to pass voter ID laws as the return of Jim Crow.
"There has never been in my lifetime, since we got rid of the poll tax and all the other Jim Crow burdens on voting, the determined effort to limit the franchise that we see today," the former President warned a student group last month.
I find this simply astonishing. How can any reasonable person find the Voter ID question worthy of debate?
Anyone with common sense must be able to appreciate that voting must be conducted in an orderly manner, and that only citizens who have registered to vote and have satisfied the minimal requirements of age, etc. are to be allowed into the voting booth. Given the propensity to fraud, it is therefore necessary to verify the identities of those who present themselves at the polling place. To do this, voters must be required to present a government-issued photo ID card, a driver's license being only one example of such. It is a reasonable requirement and any reasonable person should be able to see it as such.
Why are liberals so stupid? The darker surmise, of course, is that they are not stupid but cunning and unprincipled: they want voter fraud. They want to win at all costs, fraud or no fraud.
And please notice how leftists like Clinton will not hesitate to commit a tort on the English language if it serves their purpose. Clinton implies that an identity check would limit the franchise of blacks. Preposterous. There is also the slam against blacks. Those of my acquaintance don't live under bridges and they do manage to do things like cash checks.
Clinton famously stumbled over the meaning of 'is.' Apparently he is equally challenged by the meaning of 'franchise.'
Recent Comments