Liberals have called voter ID requirements racist, over, and over. The fact is that IDs are required for a number of activities. It could be argued that for an adult to function in society a State ID is an absolute must.
Tobacco, spray paint, guns, alcohol, driving, cigarette lighters, heck even Blockbuster memberships required a valid ID. Yet voting, perhaps the most sacred thing a citizen can do in this country, should be allowed without requiring an ID?
How does such a thought even begin to make sense? The Liberal news would like you to believe that minorities are too ignorant to obtain an ID. Or perhaps they are too poor to obtain an ID? If that’s the case how do they do any number of other daily activities that require an ID? It does make one wonder.
Could it be that the only people that think this is white Liberals? The whole idea that blacks and other minorities are incapable of accessing the internet or going to the DMV is extremely racist. It’s ironic that the Democrats would suggest that just because you are of a certain color or ethnic background you are incapable of performing such a basic task as obtaining an ID.
Check out this video where this topic is brought up to the general public.
What could the motive behind such a narrative be? Is it really protecting the rights of a disenfranchised group of Americans? Or perhaps it’s just another way to allow a demographic to vote that would otherwise not be allowed to participate in elections under current law.
There have already been laws passed to allow illegal aliens the right to vote. Illegal aliens are becoming part of the new Democrat voter base. These are attempts to destroy America as we know it. One of the perks of being an American citizen is the right to vote, but if that right can be obtained without even being a citizen, what is the point of citizenship?
If the Democrats have their way America will cease to exist as a Nation at all. It will become a welfare State, allowing everyone to determine our laws, policies, and leaders, whether you are here legally or not.
Liberal states may be under attack at the Supreme Court level for what Jeff Sessions called,
[contradictions to] longstanding statutory provisions that protect certain executive branch discussions from disclosure…
More at Foxnews.com,
Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday lit into federal judges for what he called a dramatic uptick in “outrageous” decisions threatening to interfere with the separation of powers by exposing internal White House deliberations.
In a fiery speech to the conservative Heritage Foundation in Washington, Sessions warned that “once we go down this road in American government, there is no turning back.” He vowed to take “these discovery fights to the Supreme Court in emergency postures. … We intend to fight this, and we intend to win.”
Sessions specifically singled out New York district court judge Jesse M. Furman, who ruled that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross could be questioned in an ongoing lawsuit concerning the legality of the Trump administration’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.
Perhaps Sessions can help bring back some sanity to some states by diffusing attempts to control the executive branch of the government through lawsuits.