Arizona

I didn’t vote in yesterday’s Arizona Primary. Not because I didn’t want to. or I was lazy. It was my day off. Not because of the reports of lines taking hours to vote.

Because I couldn’t. I was Not Allowed to Vote!

I’m a registered Independent. I was not welcome at the party.

KPHO-TV: The largest group of registered voters in Arizona cannot vote in Tuesday’s Presidential Preference Election.

Voters registered without a party preference now make up the largest voting bloc in Arizona.

According to the Arizona Secretary of State, more than 3 million people are registered to vote in Arizona.

Of those, 1.2 million are registered as Independent.

“The idea that you should be forced to take part in a party to be able to participate in the system is the most un-American thing I can think of,” said former Phoenix Mayor Paul Johnson. “They system today totally discriminates against Independents.”

Johnson has pushed for Arizona to move to a top-two system that would put all candidates on a single ballot, without party preference.

Arizona is one of 24 states where voters must register with a party to vote in the state’s primary.

So I stayed home.

Trump crushed my candidate Ted Cruz.

But the only satisfaction I got from yesterday was not really good in the long run. That of telling the all the little wide-eyed, rose-colored, almost-hippie like Bernie Zombies that the fix was in and being proven correct as Hillary crushed Uncle Bernie here in AZ.

The problem with a Dishonest Socialist (besides the whole Socialist thing) is that they are Dishonest. Hillary is the Dishonest Socialist. Unlike Uncle Bernie who has been a honest Socialist all his life.

He believes in it. His minions believe in his dream of “free stuff”.

Hillary, on the other hand is just power-mad evil personified.

She’s the Sith Lord of Socialists.

The Bernie Zombies who were all fresh faced and excited yesterday, are silent today.

Maybe they learned a lesson about power, but I doubt it.

While the victory in Arizona was needed, the loss of any delegates in Utah handed a blow to the Trump campaign as he seeks to avoid a contested convention in Cleveland in July. As it stands, Trump has 739 out of the 1,237 delegates needed, according to Real Clear Politics’ count. In comparison, with Utah’s 40 delegates, Cruz will have a total of 465 delegates.

So the Establishment will likely get there Brokered, smoke-filled Backroom, Convention.

And Hillary will benefit greatly from it.

And America will die. Once and For all.

But as Yogi Berra once said, “It ain’t over until it’s over”

And there is still Hope (just not the Obama type Hope, I hope).

Like Trump, Clinton’s luck changed after Arizona as well.

Speaking to his supports after losing in Arizona, Sanders contended that the race wasn’t over yet and predicted that he would pick up a victory later in the night — and in Utah and Idaho he was correct.

“I am enormously grateful to the people of Utah and Idaho for the tremendous voter turnouts that gave us victories with extremely large margins,” Sanders said in a statement following his victories. “The impressive numbers of young people and working-class people who participated in the process are exactly what the political revolution is all about. These decisive victories in Idaho and Utah give me confidence that we will continue to win major victories in the coming contests.”

Idaho’s 23 delegates and Utah’s 33 delegates will be split proportionally between Clinton and Sanders as was Arizona’s 75 delegates.

Idaho’s Democratic caucuses were open to anyone, regardless of party affiliation, who is eligible to vote in November’s general election and didn’t vote in the GOP primary which was held earlier in March.

Amazing hings can happen when you LET people vote.

Would things have been different if Independents like me were allowed to vote?

We’ll never know. There were potentially a million voters who weren’t invited to The Party. 🙂

 

 

 

Vote Often

While Barack Obama may believe that climate change is the greatest national security threat facing our nation, a strong case could be made that the president’s own political party actually presents a much more, clear and present danger to the survival of the United States of America.

This week Hillary Clinton, the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party for president, announced that she believed that a law should be enacted establishing automatic voter registration upon reaching the age of eighteen.

But Mrs. Clinton is adamantly opposed to any voter identification requirements, accusing Republicans of trying to prevent millions of Americans from exercising that most basic of American rights.

Probably the most important of our Constitutional guarantees as an American citizen, the right to vote and determine our future, yet Mrs. Clinton is more interested in making it easier for anyone to vote, including illegal aliens, convicted felons, and the deceased, than to protect that important right only for Americans. The facts are that the overwhelming majority of voter fraud cases that have occurred in recent elections involve Democrats committing the fraud.

The right to vote that veterans have fought and bled to preserve and protect for American citizens, yet Mrs. Clinton’s position and a position voiced by most Democrats, weakens our election process and certainly is a threat to our national security.

In addition, countless members of the Democrat Party repeatedly try to infringe upon American’s Second Amendment rights, the very right that guarantees our right to vote, by offering any number of strict gun control laws and legislation every chance they get. Including back door efforts by this administration to circumvent the Constitution, the Congress, and the very will of the people.

Secretary of State Clinton oversaw the State Department during the Benghazi attacks which occurred on the anniversary of the worst terrorist attack to happen in American history.

Instead of stepping up and working to find the causes of this tragedy and look for answers to help prevent another such attack, Secretary Clinton goes into political self-preservation mode and blames it on an amateur video clip.

Other Democrats fall in line to protect their future candidate for president and place roadblocks in front of committees investigating Benghazi. It seems politics and protecting Hillary for the party is more important than the truth and protecting Americans.

Barack Obama champions his administration for not leaving an American serviceman behind with a choreographed ceremony on the White House lawn, but only after trading five dangerous terrorists for an Army deserter. Yet the Obama Administration was AWOL when it came to providing help to those Americans fighting courageously on a rooftop in Benghazi and most assuredly left them behind.

The president weakens our military through Defense Department budget cuts and controversial social experimentation by allowing gays to serve openly in the military, and their directives to open Special Operations and other combat arms positions to women. Which includes lowering the standards if necessary to make it possible for women to wear the coveted Green Beret or the Navy Trident.

And he continues in his quest to close down the Guantanamo Bay detention facility where the worst of the worst Islamic terrorists are being held securely away from American shores. All the while releasing terrorist after terrorist from GITMO who have returned to Jihad, killing innocent people and American soldiers.

Followed blindly and supported by Democrats in Congress and the Senate, Barack Obama passed the Affordable Care Act which has been eroding and destroying the world’s best health care system ever since. With coverage diminishing and premiums skyrocketing Americans are rapidly turning against the president’s signature legislative accomplishment, if it can be called an accomplishment.

Considering all of the things done by Democrats to weaken the United States of America, it seems the president is completely wrong in his assessment of what’s the most dangerous national security threat facing this country.

All one has to do is look at him and his party’s decisions since he took office and it’s patently obvious that the Democratic Party itself poses the gravest threat to America’s national security. (townhall)

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino
Political Cartoons by Nate Beeler
Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Brazil Nuts

Dependency: A Brazilian economist has shown a near-exact correlation between last Sunday’s presidential election voting choices and each state’s welfare ratios. Sure enough, handouts are the lifeblood of the left.

Much of the attention in Brazil’s presidential election has been on the surprise rise of Aecio Neves, the center-right candidate who bolted to second place in the space of a week in the first round of Brazil’s election last Sunday, putting him in a face-off against leftist incumbent Dilma Rousseff at the end of the month.

Neves won 34% of the vote, Rousseff took 42% and green party candidate Marina Silva took about 20% — and on Thursday, Silva endorsed Neves, making it a contest of free-market ideas vs. big-government statism.

But what’s even more telling is an old story — shown in an infographic by popular Brazilian economist Ricardo Amorim.

In a Twitter post, Amorim showed a near-exact correlation among Brazil’s states’ welfare dependency and their votes for leftist Workers Party incumbent Rousseff.

Virtually every state that went for Rousseff has at least 25% of the population dependent on Brazil’s Bolsa Familia welfare program of cash for single mothers, given for keeping children vaccinated and in school.

States with less than 25% of the population on Bolsa Familia overwhelmingly went for Neves and his policies of growth.

The World Bank and others praise Bolsa Familia’s “poverty alleviation.” Problem is, “some experts warn that a wide majority cannot get out of this dependence relationship with the government,” as the U.K. Guardian put it.

And whether it’s best for a country that aspires to become a global economic powerhouse to have a quarter of the population — 50 million people — dependent on welfare and producing nothing is questionable.

The cash payouts amount to a half percentage of GDP and 2.5% of government spending. Money spent on welfare is money that can’t be put to use in creating jobs.

Amorim points out that Brazil’s 2% average GDP between 2011 and 2013 is the second lowest in all Latin America, topping only El Salvador, another country with a sizable welfare population — and millions of illegal immigrants in the U.S.

Fact is, the left cannot survive without a vast class of dependents. And once in, dependents have difficulty getting out.

So Brazil’s election may come down to a question of whether it wants to be a an economic powerhouse — or a handout republic.

https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2014/07/05/in-dependence-2014/

 

The Dole: New data on federal public assistance programs show we’ve reached an ignominious milestone: More than 100 million Americans are getting some form of “means-tested” welfare assistance.

The Census Bureau found 51 million on food stamps at the end of 2012 and 83 million on Medicaid, with tens of millions of households getting both. Another 4 million were on unemployment insurance.

The percentage of American households on welfare has reached 35%. If we include other forms of government assistance such as Medicare and Social Security, almost half of all households are getting a check or other form of government assistance. The tipping point is getting closer and closer. (IBD)

And it’s not for a lack of trying on the Democrats part.

Dependence is good for the country, after all. Remember, Unemployment is Job Stimulus! 🙂

We are from the Government and we are here to help you…. 🙂

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Gary McCoy

 

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Job Creation Myth

Remember when ObamaCare was going to CREATE jobs? When unemployment was good for economic growth (“Unemployment Benefits ‘One of the Most Important Stimuli for the Economy”) well now we have the latest in the Democrat Ideological Job Creation Myths.

Illegal Aliens!! (aka Future Welfare Voting Democrats).

When asked whether legalizing illegal immigrants would help unemployed Americans, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D.-Md.) responded by pointing to testimony from the director of the Congressional Budget Office that Van Hollen said indicated enactment of the Senate immigration bill (which gave illegal aliens a “path to citizenship’) would “reduce the deficit and increase long-term economic growth.”

Van Hollen responded: “I think what we need to do is pass comprehensive immigration reform, and I just came from a hearing with the non-partisan director of the Congressional Budget Office, who testified that if you passed the Senate bipartisan bill, you will reduce the deficit and increase long-term economic growth in the United States,” Van Hollen replied.

This would be the latest in the “CBO says…” line of  Democrat ‘arguments’ for their ideological needs.

Mind you ever since the CBO gave the Dems the green light on ObamaCare (with fake the false numbers provided by the Dems) the CBO has been whithering bad to the Democrats.

But THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA.

So the CBO is good when they agree with The Agenda, and are ignored when they don’t.

Just like most Democrat Agenda items. The ‘evidence’ is always in their favor and any evidence to the contrary is a lie, “racist” or some other form of contempt is heaped upon it.

It’s all too predictable really.

After all, Foster parents have the ability to collect more than $7,400 per month, considering that they can house six immigrants at any given time.

So Illegal Aliens are a stimulus. Just like Unemployment. So what we need is even more of them!

Don’t worry, be happy. We are from the Government and we are here to help you! 🙂

Political Cartoons by Chip Bok

 

The Final Arbiters

Thomas Jefferson: When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another, and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated …. — Letter to C. Hammond, July 1821

The Health and Human Services Department earlier this year exposed just how vast the government’s data collection efforts will be on millions of Americans as a result of ObamaCare.

Big Brother will be watching you! And he will know everything…. (and the Supreme Court is the final arbiter -see later farther down)

Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., asked HHS to provide “a complete list of agencies that will interact with the Federal Data Services Hub.” The Hub is a central feature of ObamaCare, since it will be used by the new insurance exchanges to determine eligibility for benefits, exemptions from the federal mandate, and how much to grant in federal insurance subsidies.

In response, the HHS said the ObamaCare data hub will “interact” with seven other federal agencies: Social Security Administration, the IRS, the Department of Homeland Security, the Veterans Administration, Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Defense and — believe it or not — the Peace Corps. Plus the Hub will plug into state Medicaid databases.

And what sort of data will be “routed through” the Hub? Social Security numbers, income, family size, citizenship and immigration status, incarceration status, and enrollment status in other health plans, according to the HHS.

“The federal government is planning to quietly enact what could be the largest consolidation of personal data in the history of the republic,” noted Stephen Parente, a University of Minnesota finance professor.

Not to worry, says the Obama administration. “The hub will not store consumer information, but will securely transmit data between state and federal systems to verify consumer application information,” it claimed in an online fact sheet .

And no one will steal or hack anything. 🙂 No Wiki-Snowden… 🙂

But a regulatory notice filed by the administration in February tells a different story.

That filing describes a new “system of records” that will store names, birth dates, Social Security numbers, taxpayer status, gender, ethnicity, email addresses, telephone numbers on the millions of people expected to apply for coverage at the ObamaCare exchanges, as well as “tax return information from the IRS, income information from the Social Security Administration, and financial information from other third-party sources.”

They will also store data from businesses buying coverage through an exchange, including a “list of qualified employees and their tax ID numbers,” and keep it all on file for 10 years.

In addition, the filing says the federal government can disclose this information “without the consent of the individual” to a wide range of people, including “agency contractors, consultants, or grantees” who “need to have access to the records” to help run ObamaCare, as well as law enforcement officials to “investigate potential fraud.”

Rep. Diane Black, R-Tenn., complained that just months before ObamaCare officially starts, the Obama administration still hasn’t answered “even the most basic questions about the Data Hub,” such as who will have access to what information, or what training and clearances will be required.

Beyond these concerns is the government’s rather sorry record in protecting confidential information.

Late last year, for example, a hacker was able to gain access to a South Carolina database that contained Social Security numbers and bank account data on 3.6 million people.

A Government Accountability Office report found that weaknesses in IRS security systems “continue to jeopardize the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the financial and sensitive taxpayer information.”

A separate inspector general audit found that the IRS inadvertently disclosed information on thousands of taxpayers between 2009 and 2010. In 2011, the Social Security Administration accidentally released names, birth dates and Social Security numbers of tens of thousands of Americans.

If these government agencies can’t protect data kept on their own servers, how much more vulnerable will these databases be when they’re constantly getting tapped by the ObamaCare Data Hub?

In any case, creating even richer and more comprehensive databases on Americans will create a powerful incentive to abuse them among those looking to score political points by revealing private information or criminals who want to steal identities.

A recent CNN poll found that 62% of Americans say “government is so large and powerful that it threatens the rights and freedoms of ordinary Americans.”

What will the public think once ObamaCare and its vast data machine is in full force? (IBD)

More likely, what will they be allowed to think?

The Imperial Judiciary

A House, Senate and president together defending traditional marriage is ruled unconstitutional. Can a Roe v. Wade-like “right” to same-sex marriage — pulverizing religious liberty — be far behind?

Under ObamaCare, the Obama administration is already trying to force religious institutions to violate their precepts and fund abortions, or be found in violation of law. There is little, if any, distance between that kind of disregard for religious freedom and forcing churches to marry same-sex couples — a new kind of “shotgun wedding” for the 21st century.

That is where the imperial judiciary quite clearly intends to take us, running over anything standing in the way. As Justice Scalia’s scathing dissent in Wednesday’s 5-to-4 U.S. v. Windsor ruling observes: “In the majority’s telling, this story is black-and-white: Hate your neighbor or come along with us.”

Justice Anthony Kennedy — Ronald Reagan’s biggest, longest-lasting mistake — joined with the high court’s four liberals, charging in his decision that large majorities of both houses of Congress, not to mention President Bill Clinton, in 1996 chose “to demean those persons who are in a lawful same-sex marriage” today.

The court declared Congress “cannot deny the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.” It takes the judicial elite to construe the Bill of Rights’ safeguard against being “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” as a license to keep elected officials from acting to protect man’s oldest institution from being revolutionized.

As Scalia noted, the court was “eager — hungry — to tell everyone its view of the legal question at the heart of this case” — so much so that it, unprecedentedly, took on a case in which the five justices actually “agree that the court below got it right.”

The result is “a Supreme Court standing (or rather enthroned) at the apex of government, empowered to decide all constitutional questions, always and everywhere ‘primary’ in its role.”

“The most important moral, political, and cultural decisions affecting our lives are steadily being removed from democratic control” Judget Bork 1996 (!)

Thomas Jefferson: If [as the Federalists say] “the judiciary is the last resort in relation to the other departments of the government,” … , then indeed is our Constitution a complete felo de so. … The Constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they may please. It should be remembered, as an axiom of eternal truth in politics, that whatever power in any government is independent, is absolute also; in theory only, at first, while the spirit of the people is up, but in practice, as fast as that relaxes. Independence can be trusted nowhere but with the people in mass. They are inherently independent of all but moral law … Letter to Judge Spencer Roane, Nov. 1819

Thomas Jefferson: You seem to consider the judges the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges … and their power [are] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and are not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves … . When the legislative or executive functionaries act unconstitutionally, they are responsible to the people in their elective capacity. The exemption of the judges from that is quite dangerous enough. I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves. ….Letter to Mr. Jarvis, Sept, 1820

“The Teahouse of the August Moon”. Glenn Ford plays an American officer attempting to explain democracy to the Japanese after World War II. He says, “democracy is where the people have the right to make the wrong decisions.” The statement is the essence of democracy. If elected officials make the wrong decision on behalf of the people voters can rectify the situation by electing replacement officials to make the right decisions. If non-elected officials make the wrong decisions the people have no recourse other than overthrowing the government.

People don’t become infallible just because they hold a high government office even if they are absolute monarchs who have supposedly been chosen by their deities to run the government. Those of us who are familiar with the history of the Supreme Court known that it is extremely fallible. The Supreme Court has made some extremely bad decisions, particularly.when it has gotten involved in social issues with decisions involving social theories rather than law.

The decision in Dred Scott v. Sanford is easily the worst decision in the history of the Supreme Court. The Court attempted to use the case to deal with the divisive social issue of slavery. Chief Justice Roger Taney’s ruling inflamed northern public opinion against slavery which many northerners regarded as immoral. The decision insured that slavery would be a major issue in the 1860 presidential election. The decision didn’t cause the Civil War, but provided the catalyst to turn the controversy over slavery and broader economic issues into a war.

The 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision is the Court’s second worst decision. The Court’s acceptance of the questionable social concept of “separate but equal” condemned generations of black southerners to mistreatment including rape and murder. The Court refused to admit that “separate but equal” was nonsense until the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision.

“Separate but equal’ wasn’t the only nonsense theory the Court accepted in the late 19th Century. The Court prevented state government from protecting workers from exploitive employers by accepting a nonsense theory called “freedom of contract”. Under this theory, government protection of workers supposedly prevented their “free” ability to contract with employers. The Court ignored the fact that workers weren’t in a position to negotiate. They had to accept bad working conditions or risk possible starvation. (Free Republic)

So with the trend of making the Supreme Court the final arbiter of everything makes them supremely powerful and that is a very dangerous game.

After all, the people Boo-ing and Hissing the Supreme Court the day before on the Voting Rights Acts are the ones dancing in the street and celebrating the next day!
And Vice  Versa.
If that doesn’t mean the whole thing is unstable what does?
Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

 Political Cartoons by Steve Breen

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

 Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson

The Future is Here

Today is a simple choice.

You can choose Freedom for the Individual  over Slavery to The Government.

Capitalism/Free Enterprise over European Socialism.

Independence over Dependence.

Hope over Fear

Or Not!

It’s your choice. But also remember it’s your children’s future as well.

So chose well. For yourself and for them.

Now on to the The Ministry of Truth: So how early today will they declare Obama the winner in an attempt to suppress the vote and get what THEY want?? 🙂

And they are intentionally suppressing the Military vote because they would vote for Romney overwhelmingly.

And anyone seen the Black Panthers yet? 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Mi Casa Su Casa

Surprise! The Pro-Illegal Justice Department thinks Sheriff Joe is being mean to Hispanics. Gee, you needed years for Pro-Illegal liberals to come up with a report that says that?

This is the Justice Department that is actively suing the State of Arizona for wanting to enforce Federal Immigration Laws (much less than what they accuse their favorite Hispanic ‘Nazi’ of). The very same Justice Department that is trying Fast and Furiously to cover up as much of “Fast & Furious” as possible.

The very same that refused to sentence already convicted Blank Panthers of Voter intimidation.

Oh, by the way, it’s been a year now since Agent Brian Terry was killed by a gun the ATF not only let be walked into Mexico, be demanded that it be walked into Mexico!

This is the Pro-Illegal Justice Department that refuses to even arrest most illegals, thus “arrests of illegals are down at the border” they’ll tout as there accomplishment.

It’s “down” so much that they can drop the number of troops on the border to virtually nil.

After all, “it’s more secure now than it has ever been” according to Big Sis.

Have you tossed your cookies yet?

Then you hear this:

Department of Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano has directed ICE to prepare for a mass influx of immigrants into the United States, calling for the plan to deal with the “shelter” and “processing” of large numbers of people.

“The Department of Homeland Security wants a plan to deal with sudden mass migrations of immigrants to the U.S.,” reports Government Security News .

“DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, according to a statement by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, recently directed ICE to develop a national-level mass migration plan. The plan will outline how to address the health care, sheltering, processing, transition and disposition of large numbers of undocumented individuals who might arrive in the U.S. as the result of a mass migration, said ICE on Dec. 13.”

Part of the preparations for sheltering and processing an influx of people includes the construction and manning of detention camps.

Anyone smell rotten bovine fecal matter? And you know that something disgustingly political is coming.

Vote for Democrats, We aren’t Racists!

We’re going to crush the major resistance to our ignoring of border protection so get ready to rush the border and get your freebies.

“Discrimination undermines law enforcement and erodes the public trust,” Napolitano said

Willfully refusing to enforce the law and actively working do just that erodes “public trust” also Janet? But you don’t care about that now do you?

And don’t forget to vote Democrat! 🙂

Welcome all illegals to your United States. Our home is your home.”-Sherriff Joe on Obama’s Justice Department

Mi Casa Su Casa! 🙂

Border we don’t need no stinkin’ borders. Borders are for violent, discriminatory racists!

And you think you’re safe if your already here (and not in the Democrat’s demographics):

The White House is signing off on a controversial new law that would authorize the U.S. military to arrest and indefinitely detain alleged al Qaeda members or other terrorist operatives captured on American soil.

Terrorist? Someone who disagrees with his the Government? 🙂

“By signing this defense spending bill, President Obama will go down in history as the president who enshrined indefinite detention without trial in U.S. law,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “In the past, Obama has lauded the importance of being on the right side of history, but today he is definitely on the wrong side.”

But they can come over the border without any enforcement.

So you may be a “terrorist” for advocating we enforce the Border. After all, only racists want to enforce it.

Vote for Democrats, We aren’t Racists!

It is no surprise Democrats, led by Barack Obama and his Attorney General Eric Holder are against voter i.d. laws. After all, dead people can’t vote if you ask them to identify themselves. Voter fraud in every election is a concern, but with Obama’s past ties to ACORN and Holder’s abuse of Justice Department power, 2012 is looking like a battle for the ages when it comes to voting requirements and preventing abuse.

In the name of “civil rights,” he’s declared war on a nationwide movement to ensure the integrity of the electoral process.

Just this year, eight states have passed new photo-ID laws; more than half now have some form of ID requirement for voting. But Holder has already sicced Justice’s Civil Rights Division on new voter-ID laws in South Carolina and Texas to see if there’s any “disproportionate impact” on minorities. He’s also objecting to reforms in “early voting” in places like Florida, which recently tightened its electoral window.

Liberals have long insisted that voter fraud is a “myth,” and voter-ID laws a plot to suppress turnout among “people who are more likely to vote Democratic, particularly the young, the poor, the elderly and minorities,” in the words of The New York Times.

Now that’s chutzpah coming from New York City, where the organized-crime ring known as Tammany Hall regularly and proudly stole municipal and statewide elections well into the 20th century with its army of “repeaters” — men who altered their appearances by shaving or changing their clothes so they could “vote early and often” — and other tactics.

Nor is it history. Just this week, the chairman of the Indiana Democratic Party resigned in the wake of election-fraud allegations involving forged ballot-petition signatures that are now under investigation.

Nor is it “merely” registration fraud. The Commission on Federal Election Reform, created after the 2004 election and co-chaired by Jimmy Carter and James Baker, uncovered examples of vote-buying, repeat voting and absentee-ballot fraud. As Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in upholding Indiana’s voter-ID law in 2008, “flagrant examples of such fraud have been documented throughout this nation’s history by respected historians and journalists.”

So, while Holder intones that unfettered access to the ballot box “must be viewed not only as a legal issue but a moral imperative,” his real agenda is surely politics: Fraud generally benefits Democratic candidates.

From this point forward, we will here the argument that “Republicans want to prevent minorities from voting and want to go back to the days of slavery. Republicans wanting you to show i.d. at the polls is proof! Minorities in poor communities don’t have access to identification. They’re taking away your right to vote.” (Katie Pavlich)

Vote for a Democrat, We aren’t a Racist!