Monday, June 20, 2011

Some rights need special papers, some don't

Ann Althouse takes apart E.J. Dionne Jr.'s latest freak-out about the evils of Voter ID laws.

WaPo's E.J. Dionne Jr. is getting histrionic about voter ID laws in his piece called "How States Are Rigging the 2012 Election.

Complete with the obligatory Jim Crow comment and conspiracy theories of conservative racism.

Althouse concludes with: "he himself propagates racism in the form of an assumption that black people have trouble performing the simplest task."

Though I found this bit of Dionne's particularly telling:

Sometimes the partisan motivation is so clear that if Stephen Colbert reported on what’s transpiring, his audience would assume he was making it up. In Texas, for example, the law allows concealed handgun licenses as identification but not student IDs. And guess what? Nationwide exit polls show that John McCain carried households in which someone owned a gun by 25 percentage points but lost voters in households without a gun by 32 points.

Yes, that's right. Dionne is saying that because the Right is more supportive of gun rights, that a government ID required by law in order to carry a firearm has to be biased..

He draws a direct equivalence between University ID's and Carry Permits. Why accept one and not the other?

It's not like an ID from a Texas university would be valid proof of one's residency, or citizenship. Or is even a form of identification from the government. Try using college ID to get a home loan or to fly. Or buy a drink.

While on the other hand a Texas carry permit proves that you are a citizen, old enough to vote, and clearly states one's residency. Oh, and it is also issued by the state.

But other than, no difference!

Here's the real point Dionee misses. He's all angry at the mere thought of asking a person for ID, let alone government ID to vote because he feels it will disenfranchise people from expressing a fundamental right.

Well what does he thing of carry permits?
And the hoops someone has to jump through to get one?
What about May Issue states where expressing Second Amendment rights are dependent on a policeman deeming you worthy?

Or is he a staunch Constitutional Carry advocate?

A commenter Jay at Atlhouse sums it up nicely:

So when I have to provide a passport type photo graph, $14 for fingerprints, and a certificate saying I passed a gun safety course (cost $30) in order to carry a concealed handgun, that isn't a poll tax, right?

Again, that comment's not from Dione's article which is a fever swamp of Left wing talking points on how the Republicans are insanely racist, how there's no real voter fraud ever (unless it's republican!), and the young and elderly and minorities are unable to get government ID's.

It's interesting that the Dems consider people unwilling or unable to get basic identification a critical voting block.

To repeat: want to bet that these principled leftists are staunch Constitutional Carry supporters?

If they believe that a person should be able to vote without having to show ID why shouldn't it be legal to carry a firearm without any special ID?

And this isn't even going into the NICS background check.

No comments: