Absolute Moral Authority

Because plain old moral authority just wasn’t good enough — a mesablue production

It’s about time

Posted by mesablue on November 6, 2007

I went to the polls today — and had to show a valid ID before I could vote. Excellent.

Voter fraud in Michigan, more exactly, in Detroit, has been rampant in past elections.

The law requiring that voters be required to present a picture ID or sign an affidavit before voting was passed in 1996. Because of interference by the ACLU and NAACP, it wasn’t until July of this year that Michigan Supreme Court decided that the law was constitutional.

Predictably, against all outward appearances of no problems whatsoever, the NAACP had this to say:

NAACP: Detroit voting ‘messy’ due to ID requirement

DETROIT — Officials from the Detroit Branch NAACP monitoring voting this morning say the process is “messy” because of the new photo identification requirement.


Melvin “Butch” Hollowell, general counsel to the Detroit NAACP, said there was one report of a voter being turned away in the city for not having an ID. He didn’t have any more specifics and was investigating.


He also said there has been confusion in the Detroit City Clerk’s Office over which affidavits to give to voters when they don’t have a photo ID. He said that one of the NAACP monitors witnessed a voter instead being given an affidavit for a provisional ballot that is set aside for six days until a voter can prove his or her identity.

One report is “messy?” Give me a break.

But clerk officials said that there have been no problems with election workers giving out the wrong affidavits.


“There has been no confusion,” said Daniel Baxter, director of the Department of Elections.


In July, the Michigan Supreme Court decided that a 1996 law requiring voters to either show a picture ID or sign an affidavit is constitutional and enforceable.


Voters need a Michigan driver’s license, state-issued personal ID card or other acceptable form of ID. Those without photo ID at the polls must sign an affidavit attesting to that fact before they can receive a ballot that will be counted with all others.


Elsewhere, elections officials reported few problems with the launch of the ID requirement.


Secretary of State spokeswoman Kelly Chesney said Michigan election workers reported that “the process has been smooth and orderly.”


Chesterfield Township Clerk Kelly Jo Smolarek has experienced no problems today with the new voter identification law.


“Everyone has been very receptive,” Smolarek said. “We have not had one negative comment. In fact, some people are saying it is about time.”

Indeed.

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

Advertisements

9 Responses to “It’s about time”

  1. jonolan said

    Awwww. The poor oppressed little Black people who can’t seem to be bothered to get an ID may have had issues voting. Cry me river. Please! If you’ve “zeroed yourself out” by dropping from the system by not having ID then you deserve what you get because you’re hiding some form illegal behavior.

    Trust me, this will get worse in any vote involving Obama.

  2. kip said

    Jonolan, in case you have forgotten, this is the United States of America.

  3. ChenZhen said

    I’ve always considered this common sense, but hey…

  4. jonolan said

    Kip, yes it is! And here unlike other more debased nations we actually care about fraudulent voting – though we’ve managed to do it in the past. There is no valid excuse for not having a photo ID. On top of that the NAACP is making a production out of one report which was refuted.

    This is just another case of the mouthpieces for a minority crying prejudice in order to further some agenda.

  5. lauraw said

    Heh, we voted last night and helped defeat a proposal for the town to raise and squander ten million $ on ‘economic development’ without a plan.

    In recent years even tax-tolerant Connecticut residents have been feeling pretty abused by their various shifty municipal governments.

    The polls were busier than I’ve ever seen them, and the plan went down in flames with ‘NO’ getting 69% of the votes.

    Suck it, libs. Maybe if you hadn’t pissed us all off with several high profile money-wasting projects in the last few years we wouldn’t feel like we can’t trust you for five minutes with a burnt match.

    At least time this question was phrased properly. In the past they’ve pulled this shit where the phrasing means that responding ‘Yes’ on the referendum question actually means ‘No’ to the proposed action.

  6. mesablue said

    Lauraw, my town just did the same thing with three proposals that basically do the same thing. They worded it in such a way that if you weren’t careful, you would vote yes for something that you really didn’t want. This year was only a local election, so they figured on confusing enough people on a very light turnout and also getting their supporters to vote the right way. Seems to have worked. People voted all over the place and one of the proposals made it through. Scumbags.

  7. pjmomma said

    Maybe if you hadn’t pissed us all off with several high profile money-wasting projects in the last few years we wouldn’t feel like we can’t trust you for five minutes with a burnt match.

    you’re right lauraw. And just think how bad it’d be if the match was lit.

  8. lauraw said

    Sorry to hear that Mesa. I hate it when those rats win (they usually do).

    The way people mobilized on this one in my town was really heartening.

    The mayor acted all surprised afterwards too. Mwa ha ha.

  9. nice article. thanks \o/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: