Irony? You decide.
Most (but not all) Democrats and their allied groups consider government-issued photo identification (usually a driver’s license) as a voting requirement to be almost the equivalent of waterboarding.
Yet, at the Democrats’ own national convention starting today in Charlotte, North Carolina, you apparently need a photo ID or the equivalent to obtain credentials to enter the venue.
The Democratic National Convention website specifically sets forth that attendees need a “state-issued ID” to pick up convention credentials, the Twitchy.com website revealed.
The Charlotte2012.com website also explains that pedestrians walking in a so-called restricted area during the convention will also have to show a “standard issued government ID.”
As noted in a prior Inquisitr article, the Obama administration’s Justice Department is also fighting several states tooth and nail about their photo ID laws, yet you need a photo ID to enter the Justice Department building in Washington. Moreover, even though organized labor provides huge cash support and manpower to Democrat political campaigns, generally a photo ID is required to vote in union elections.
Despite an adverse ruling from a federal court on the Texas photo ID law last week, isn’t the hyperbolic opposition to photo ID as a voting requirement over the top? It assumes that legal voters of any group of Americans lack the capacity to obtain the appropriate identification, even in some states that provide it free of charge.
Back in 2008, the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of the state of Indiana’s photo ID law, so courts that rule otherwise are in general in conflict with the high court. Subsequent to the implementation of Georgia’s photo ID law, voter participation actually increased. About 17 states have photo ID voting laws on the books.
A Washington Post poll has indicated that 74 percent of Americans support photo ID to vote.
To operate successfully in day-to-day life, you need a photo ID. No one seems to have a problem showing ID to get on a plane, opening up a checking account or cashing a check, picking up a package at the post office or UPS, checking into a motel, completing a credit card transaction, getting a beer at the ballpark, buying cigarettes (for those foolish enough to still smoke), and so forth. There has been no groundswell of opposition to producing a photo ID for these purposes.
Photo ID by itself, of course, isn’t by any means an all-purpose solution to vote fraud, which is a fundamental form of voter disenfranchisement. For example, our country’s lax procedures for absentee ballots also needs to be addressed too.
Out in the real world (and away from the political/legal propaganda bubble), do you think it’s difficult for a legal voter, i.e. a US citizen, to obtain a government-issued photo ID? Should the Democratic National Convention require a government-issued ID to get in to the Time Warner Cable Arena?