RSS70% of Americans Support Voter ID Laws, Including 51% of Blacks … Why Are Democrats Lawmakers & Obama Against the Will of the American People and Preventing Voter Fraud?
So I guess Democrat law makers and co-called Black leaders would tell you that 70% of Americans are racist.
According to a recent Fox News Poll, 70% of Americans polled agree that there should be voter ID laws passed that required an valid state or federal photo identification in order to be allowed to vote. The survey found that a majority of every demographic supported such a law, including 91% of Republicans, 66% of Independents and even 55% of Democrats. However, many Democratic lawmakers, Black activists and organizations are opposed to strict voter identification laws, claiming they are largely unnecessary and discourage minority voting. They even claim those that would want such a law are hateful, racist and only looking to suppress the minority vote. Of course one needs a valid state or federal ID to cash a check, board an airplane, buy alcohol, obtain a driver’s license at the DMV, any banking transaction including opening an account, obtain SSI disability, buy a gun, donating blood, buy cigarettes, get a US passport, attain unemployment benefits, obtaining a carry gun permit, adopt a child and even buy Sudafed from your local pharmacy. But some how requiring one to do something as important as vote is a burden to minorities. Here is the money line to the poll, 51% of African Americans support voter ID laws, while 46% oppose the laws. Does this mean that the 51% of blacks are racist?
Seven in 10 registered voters are in favor of identification laws in order to root out fraud at the ballot box, according to a Fox News poll released this week.
The survey found majority support in every major demographic, including black voters and Democrats.
The 70 percent who support voter ID laws remains largely unchanged in the past few years. Another 27 percent believe the laws are unnecessary.
The issue has resurfaced recently as Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said Republicans should not go too crazy over the law because they are offending people, African-Americans in particular.
He later clarified he believes the laws should not be a defining issue for Republicans, and they should be left up to the states to decide. A total of 31 states have active voter identification laws, while a handful of others have recently been struck down in state courts.
The survey found majorities of every demographic support the law. Ninety-one percent of Republicans offer support, and 66 percent of independents feel the same.
Doesn’t make one wonder why when pretty much everything in this country requires a photo ID, including to buy, own and carry a gun (a right protected in the US Constitution) that making sure that there are fair elections with no fraud would be opposed by Democrats? So are they pro-voter fraud? But then again, this is coming from the party that is perfectly fine with letting illegals into the United States and then letting them out of jail after committing crimes. If individuals think that minorities cannot some how get a photo ID, maybe something needs to be looked into that as a problem, rather than calling voter ID laws racist.
As stated at TPPN, “All in all, the case against voter ID laws is not only flimsy, it’s downright laughable in its ridiculousness.”
Barack Obama White House Told Former Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to Lie to American People About Social Security Adding to National Debt
TURBO TAX TIMMY SAYS OBAMA WHITE HOUSE TOLD HIM TO LIE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE …
In his memoir ‘Stress Test’ former Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner says the Obama White House wanted him to mislead and lie to Americans about the long term costs of Social Security on Sunday talk shows. SOUND FAMILIAR? According to Geithner, the White House communications director specifically told him not to say that Social Security contributes to the national deficit in an upcoming appearance on the Sunday morning talk shows, even though he believes it does, because it might inflame and anger the Democratic base. What, say it isn’t so … the Obama Administration wanted their minions to lie to the American people?!? ‘Pfeiffer said the line was a ‘dog whistle’ to the left, signaling that we [Democrats] intended to protect Social Security. Lies, lies and more lies from the Obama administration that makes everything about politics.
However, before we give Geithner any medals for his truthfulness, maybe he would like to explain why he did not resign? It is a crime what this administration has perpetrated upon the American people. If a Republican presidency had been caught in this many lies and scandals, the MSM would have drummed them out of office.
The White House wanted Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to lie on Sunday talk shows to downplay the part Social Security played in driving the deficit, it was revealed today.
Geithner writes in his memoir Stress Test, out today, that the White House communications director asked him to downplay the long term cost of Social Security spending to mollify the Democratic Party’s base.
‘I remember during one Roosevelt Room prep session before I appeared on the Sunday shows, I objected when Dan Pfeiffer wanted me to say Social Security didn’t contribute to the deficit. It wasn’t a main driver of our future deficits, but it did contribute,’ he says.
‘Pfeiffer said the line was a ‘dog whistle’ to the left, a phrase I had never heard before. He had to explain that the phrase was code to the Democratic base, signaling that we intended to protect Social Security.’
UREAL … How many more lies must the Obama administration be caught in before “We the People” disregard everything that they say?
Hillary Clinton’s State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists … But, Hillary Called the Abduction of the Girls by Boko Haram was “Abominable, It’s Criminal, It’s an Act of Terrorism”
HOW PRESIDENTIAL … Hillary Clinton, I was for not calling Boko Haram terrorists, before I was for it.
Former Secretary of State and 2016 Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has a lot of explaining to do. In the wake of the Muslim Islamist terror group Boko Haram kidnapping nearly 300 girls and threatening to sell them into human sex slavery, Hillary Clinton like many jumped on the bandwagon of outrage. On Wednesday, Hillary Clinton called the abduction of the girls by Boko Haram was “abominable, it’s criminal, it’s an act of terrorism and it really merits the fullest response possible, first and foremost from the government of Nigeria. Clinton went on to say that as Secretary of State she had numerous meetings with Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan and had urged the Nigerian government to do more on counter-terrorism.
Oh contraire mon frère … Hillary Clinton supposedly urged the Nigerian government to do more on counter-terrorism, but as reported at The Daily Beast, Hillary’s State Department refused to brand Boko Haram as terrorists. According to accounts by Josh Rogin, what Hillary Clinton failed to mention was that her own State Department refused to place Boko Haram on the list of foreign terrorist organizations in 2011, after the group bombed the U.N. headquarters in Abuja. The refusal of branding Boko Haram as terrorists came despite the urging of the Justice Department, the FBI, the CIA, and over a dozen senators and congressmen.But of course naming a new group to the terrorist list would have gone against Obama’s reelection talking points that al Qaeda was on the run.
As the folks at Hot Air opines,“Sound familiar? … Now Hillary wants to fight Boko Haram with hashtags. Too bad she didn’t fight them with real resources when she had the chance.”
Under Hillary Clinton, the State Department repeatedly declined to fully go after the terror group responsible for kidnapping hundreds of girls.
The State Department under Hillary Clinton fought hard against placing the al Qaeda-linked militant group Boko Haram on its official list of foreign terrorist organizations for two years. And now, lawmakers and former U.S. officials are saying that the decision may have hampered the American government’s ability to confront the Nigerian group that shocked the world by abducting hundreds of innocent girls.
In the past week, Clinton, who made protecting women and girls a key pillar of her tenure at the State Department, has been a vocal advocate for the 200 Nigerian girls kidnapped by Boko Haram, the loosely organized group of militants terrorizing northern Nigeria. Her May 4 tweet about the girls, using the hashtag #BringOurGirlsBack, was cited across the media and widely credited for raising awareness of their plight.
What Clinton didn’t mention was that her own State Department refused to place Boko Haram on the list of foreign terrorist organizations in 2011, after the group bombed the U.N. headquarters in Abuja. The refusal came despite the urging of the Justice Department, the FBI, the CIA, and over a dozen senators and congressmen.
But of course Clinton’s response to these questions will be, we have 300 girls threatened to be sold into sex slavery, what difference does it make that Boko Haram are terrorists.
House Votes To Hold IRS Official Lois Lerner in Contempt of Congress in IRS Targeting Tea Party Scandal
The House of Representatives voted to hold IRS official Lois Lerner in contempt of Congress by a 231 to 187 vote. Lerner has invoked her 5th Amendment rights against self-incrimination not once, but twice at Congressional hearings. Many believe that Lerner waived her 5th Amendment rights by testifying in front of a Congressional hearing by making an opening statement and then going silent. The matter will now be referred to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and the contempt charge will then be referred to a grand jury. However, it is unknown how the Eric Holder Justice Department will proceed, if at all. If ever convicted, Lerner could face between one and 12 months in jail and a fine of up to $100,000. Lois Lerner has since left the IRS, but not without being able to keep her whopping six figure pension.
Wasn’t the Obama administration supposed to be the most transparent presidency ever?
The House of Representatives voted Wednesday to hold a former Internal Revenue Service official in contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate with an ongoing investigation into the agency’s special targeting of groups with “tea party” or “patriot” in their names that were seeking tax-exempt status.
On a 231 to 187 vote, the House approved a contempt citation against Lois G. Lerner, whose admission last year that the tax-enforcement agency had targeted conservative groups infuriated lawmakers in both parties, led to an overhaul of the IRS and Lerner’s eventual retirement from government service.
The House also passed a resolution Wednesday that called on Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups. House lawmakers voted 250 to 168 to pass the resolution in which 26 Democrats joined all voting Republicans to approve it.
CBS News-DC: US Attorney To Oversee Lerner Contempt Case Appointed By Obama.
The matter now goes to Ronald Machen, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. Federal law says Machen has a “duty” to bring the matter before a grand jury. But a report by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service said it was unclear whether the duty is mandatory or discretionary. Machen was appointed to his job by President Barack Obama.
“We will carefully review the report from the speaker of the House and take whatever action is appropriate,” Machen’s office said in a statement.
The vote calling on the Justice Department to appoint a special counsel was 250 to 168, with all Republicans voting in favor and most Democrats voting against.
Attorney General Eric Holder has denied previous requests to appoint a special counsel, saying it was unwarranted.
UPDATE I: Democrat House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi misses Lois Lerner vote for fundraiser.
Brit Hume & Former California Democratic Rep. Jane Harman Get into Heated Debate Over Benghazi on FOX News Sunday
Democrats cannot explain away the fabricated and intentionally misleading Benghazi talking points without going into hysterics.
Fox News contributor Brit Hume and former Congresswoman Jane Harman (D – CA) went at it on Fox News Sunday after Harmon delivered an arrogant and dismissive lecture on the Benghazi talking. points. Hume pressed Harman to name a single person in the administration who credibly believed that the Benghazi attack was connected to an anti-Islam video. And predictably, she could not do so. Host Chris Wallace interjected and said, “Ben Rhodes talks about the video five times in this memo, five times.” Harmon would finish by saying, “my view on this, having been around at the time, was that this was not deliberately misleading. It turned out to be wrong, but it was not deliberate.” Wrong, it was deliberate.
“You’re right, there wasn’t a conspiracy in the United States to mount the Benghazi attack,” Hume said. “That’s not the question.”
“The question was whether in the aftermath of the attack, when the administration sent its U.N. ambassador out to explain it to everybody, and she did so falsely, that there wasn’t a conspiracy to create the false talking points that she used,” the Fox News senior political analyst continued. “I’m not talking about the CIA talking points, I’m talking about the talking points used on that program that day, which were monumentally misleading, that since have been shown to be false, and based on no intelligence of any consequence that we know of.”
Harman continued, however, to insist that the administration did not deliberately craft misleading talking points.
“My view on this, having been around at the time, was that this was not deliberately misleading,” the former Democratic congresswoman replied. “It turned out to be wrong, but it was not deliberate.”
