Posted by
Doctor Demex on Tuesday, September 26, 2006 9:05:45 PM
[ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED SEPTEMBER 21, 2006]
Fulton County Superior Court Judge
T. Jackson Bedford, Jr., recently struck down a Georgia law requiring
voters to show government-issued photo identification at the polls. The
ID requirement was intended to prevent voter fraud, particularly in an
age when there are increasing concerns about illegal immigration and
border security. But the judge wrote that such a requirement
violates the Georgia constitution because it would deny the right to
vote to people who would be otherwise qualified but for that one small
detail of actually proving who they say they are. Hizzoner also
went so far as to opine forcefully, "This cannot be."
Proponents of the law cited an
Atlanta Journal-Constitution article stating 5,000 dead people were
listed as having voted in the last eight statewide elections before
2000.
The plaintiffs' lawyer, former
Georgia governor Roy Barnes (Democrat, of course), said that requiring
voters to show identification is "the most sinister scheme I've ever
seen." This speaks volumes about how pure he must have been as
governor. Besides, he said, voting fraud occurs mostly in
absentee balloting where there is no need for voter
identification. Apparently Judge Bedford did not notice that Gov.
Barnes was arguing against his own position when he admitted that voter
fraud increases when voter identification is not required. This why the
Democratic Party supports absentee ballots for everyone and no voter
identification for anyone. As we learned in the 2004 presidential
election, however, Democrats will go to almost any lengths to disallow
the absentee ballots of soldiers overseas, because those ballots are
more likely to be unfavorable to Democrats. This is just one more
bit of evidence that Democrats are more willing to use
end-justifies-the-means tactics to win elections than Republicans are,
if for no other reason than that Republicans are more likely to believe
in H*ll.
In the end, Judge Bedford agreed
with the plaintiffs that a photo ID requirement places too much of a
burden on voters. In other words, the right to vote is so
important that it trumps the integrity of the election process.
This is in the same logical league with other suicidal liberal
positions, like defending the right to press freedom by publishing
information that would hurt the defenders of that right and aid the
most implacable enemies of that right. Or like demanding that we
treat captured enemy combatants like honored guests so that our
soldiers won't be mistreated when captured. Or like demanding
that we release enemy combatants back into the field where they will be
so grateful for our benevolence that they will think twice before
murdering another 3,000 innocent civilians. Or like demanding
that we change what we are so that our enemies will like us. Or
like cutting defense capability in favor of social programs, so that no
one will have to go back to work before the jihad reaches Martin Luther
King Drive.
Apparently it is better that five
thousand dead voters fraudulently elect the wrong candidate than that a
single law-abiding citizen be denied, by his own negligence, to vote
for the right one.