Why are They Continually Trying to Convince Me that Minorities are Incompetent and Lazy?
By: Jim Byrd
Why are they continually trying to convince me that minorities are incompetent, unable to perform the simplest of tasks that their Caucasian counterparts can, and just plain lazy? They have also convinced minorities that they are incapable of functioning, or navigating society and the various whatnots of existence without their chivalrous assistance, and the price is small–just their vote.
They tell me that minorities cannot use a bank, rent a storage unit, write a check, cash a check, get married, drive a car, fly on a plane, rent a Post Office box, stay at a hotel, rent an apartment, buy a house, buy a gun, get a job, get a credit card, buy alcohol, get married, apply for welfare, apply for food stamps, be admitted to a hospital, use the public library, get insurance, get a business license, apply for social security, ship with UPS, buy Allegra D at a pharmacy, buy Drano, and transact any government business.
Now I have discovered that minorities cannot enter Eric Holder’s Department of Justice to exercise their 1st Amendment right to “petition the government for a redress of grievances” without official photo identification.
Who are “they” that are continually trying to convince me that minorities are incompetent, unable to perform the simplest of tasks that their Caucasian counterparts can, and are just plain lazy? “They” are prejudicial racists, including, but not limited to, Barack Obama, Eric Holder, the Democratic Party, and various garden-variety incendiary organizations, such as LULAC and the NAACP who claim to represent the majority of minorities. And let’s not forget the capricious and insurrectionist sect of the judiciary.
In May 2011, Texas passed an election law requiring voters to present government issued photo IDs to be able to vote. Voter ID laws serve one purpose and one purpose only: to prevent voter fraud. This list of valid photo IDs that Texas will accept are a driver’s license, a Texas issued ID card, a passport, a gun permit, a military ID, etc. Quiet onerous, indeed.
On March 12, 2012, Barack Obama’s Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division objected to the Texas voter ID law. This Justice Department is teaming with cowards, crippled by racism, prejudice, and a radical leftist ideology. This is the same Civil Rights Division that dismissed the case against the New Black Panther Party for threatening with billy clubs white voters who attempted to vote at a predominantly black polling place. The complaint against Texas is from the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, Thomas Perez. He is flanked by several new deputy chiefs that slithered over from the NAACP and the ACLU.
An important annotation is the fact that Perez is currently the president of Casa de Maryland. Casa de Maryland is another rights group that conjures up rights for illegal immigrants, is a member of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, and also operates five day labor centers in the state of Maryland. As with all day labor centers, they are predominately utilized by illegal aliens seeking day employment. One of the primary sources of funding for Casa de Maryland is the Open Society Institute, which is owned by George Soros.
Prior to Perez’s tenure as overseer of an unconcealed racist and prejudiced Civil Rights Division, the Department of Justice had previously approved several states’ voter ID laws, and the ones they did not approve were approved in a court of law. Texas law is consistent with other state voter ID laws. And as astonishing as it seems, after Georgia’s voter ID law was challenged in court by the ACLU and the NAACP, and their suit being unceremoniously tossed out by a federal judge, Georgia’s minority voting participation increased significantly.
They, or Obama’s Justice Department, claim that Texas law is discriminatory to minorities under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. They claim it “disproportionately harms” Hispanic voters. It’s discriminatory because the Justice Department believes that minorities cannot perform any of the above enumerated citizen related activities, including acquiring an official photo ID, which conveniently, Texas provides for free. Perhaps Barack Obama and Eric Holder should, at the very least, take a cursory glance at Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, which the Supreme Court ruled on in 2008 in a 6-3 decision in favor of the voter ID law enacted by the state of Indiana. John Paul Stevens, one of the court’s liberal justices, wrote the majority opinion paralleling the state’s purpose of preventing voter fraud, and that the requirement of presenting a valid photo ID is not an undue burden:
There is no question about the legitimacy or importance of the State’s interest in counting only the votes of eligible voters. Moreover, the interest in orderly administration and accurate recordkeeping provides a sufficient justification for carefully identifying all voters participating in the election process. While the most effective method of preventing election fraud may well be debatable, the propriety of doing so is perfectly clear.
The plaintiffs in this case, the Democratic Party and an assortment of interest groups that were representing the interests of minorities and the Democratic Party’s votes, argued that having to obtain a free state ID card was an undue burden on minorities. But when showtime came, the plaintiffs could not present a single witness not able to meet Indiana’s voter ID requirements. Also jumping into the fracas by filing an amicus brief was The Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law, the self-anointed “non-partisan public policy and law institute,” which is ironically funded by billionaire Bolshevik aficionado George Soros.
With the courts overwhelmingly siding with state voter ID laws, the NAACP, a league of race hustlers, has decided to take the voter ID disenfranchisement circus to the United Nations Human Rights Council. To make their case, they are dragging two potential victims of disenfranchisement all the way to Geneva, Switzerland. One is a crack cocaine dealer that was sentenced to 24 years in prison, and the other too lazy to travel a few blocks to pick up a free ID card from the state of Texas.
Potential victim number one, Austin Alex, a student at Texas Christian University in Ft. Worth, Texas, is the lazy one. Alex and the NAACP are distraught over the strenuous and onerous effort required for him to travel a few blocks to pick up his free Texas official photo ID. Austin only has an out of state driver’s license; with moving from another state, registering for school, etc, and traveling to Geneva, how could he possibly be expected to find the time or energy to pick up a free photo ID to be able to vote?
Potential victim number two, Kemba Smith, pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine, and was sentenced to 24 years in federal prison. She was pardoned by Bill Clinton after serving almost 7 years. Kemba is concerned that she won’t be able to vote if she moves back to her home state of Virginia if she has to verify who she is at the polling place of her choice. Virginia has a law that felons cannot vote, and if she has to prove who she is at the voting booth, she will be turned away. The fundamentals of her case are that her human rights would be violated if she cannot sneak into a voting booth unaccounted for. Even though she was pardoned by Clinton, a presidential pardon does not erase her conviction, merely forgives it, and her loss of the civil right to vote because of her federal felony conviction can only be erased by the state in which she resides. So it seems that the NAACP and Kemba Smith are asking the Human Rights council to allow her to be able to break a state law regarding felons not being able to vote by letting her vote without identifying herself and thus exposing her felony conviction. Kemba Smith is a dichotomy for me, as I actually sympathize with Kemba regarding her 24-year prison sentence and her commendable contributions to society since her release. She was convicted by virtue of conspiracy law rather than actual participation, and mandatory federal sentencing, which are draconian, unconstitutional, and the laws they represent exceed the purview of the federal government. It is her association with the NAACP, and presenting such an unscrupulous cause to such a fraudulent and defective United Nations, which negate her accomplishments.
But before either of these two manufactured martyrs enter the United Nations building in Geneva, these two pawns of the NAACP will have to present valid and official photo IDs to pass the threshold.
This band of increasingly extraneous demagogues will present their case to the United Nations Human Rights Council. This ragtag aggregation of oppressors, tyrants, and despots parading around as a who’s who of human rights advocates–Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Congo, Angola, Malaysia, China, and of course, Russia–will be adjudicating. According to Freedom House, the majority of the Human Rights Council is comprised of countries that are not free, and since this is regarding voting rights, their case will be pled in front of countries, as Dennis Prager stated, whose “elections, if they have them, are rigged, and prominent opponents are jailed, tortured and killed.” And don’t forget that the Human Rights Council just adopted a report that commended Muammar Gaddafi and Libya for an accomplished human rights record.
Why is the NAACP so opposed to voter ID laws? Why are they spewing racist propaganda against legitimate and prudent voting ID laws? Why are they traveling to Geneva with these two manufactured martyrs with them? Because there exists no legitimate reason for the NAACP to exist. Their business model is based on racism, and when they can’t find racism, they manufacture racism. They have pounced from one manufactured racial crisis to another. The liberals, the Democrats, the judges, the media, all have to continually be agitated to keep the funding flowing. And in the case of Texas voter ID law, even though the Justice Department has identified that it will be Hispanics who will be disenfranchised, the NAACP has created racism for its constituents as well in Texas. Hilary Shelton, the vitriolic senior vice president of the NAACP, can create racism anywhere, anytime simply by lying. She defended the Geneva trip with a remarkably stupid statement regarding voter ID laws:
It’s trickery, it’s a sleight-of-hand. We’re seeing it happen here and we don’t want it to happen to you, and we are utilizing the U.N. as a tool to make sure that we are able to share that with those countries all over the world. This really is a tactic that undercuts the growth of your democracy…undercuts the integrity of our government, if you allow it to happen.
What this arrogant bag of wind should do for perspective is emigrate to perhaps Saudi Arabia, then boldly march up to a voting booth without a male guardian, and try to cast a vote. Also, if Shelton should decide to drive herself to the voting booth, as women are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia, there would be no trickery and sleight-of-hand as her transgressions could result in being pummeled with stones.
So who exactly will be disenfranchised by the Texas voter ID law? Who will be unable to cast their votes for the Democrats? It’s not minorities, and especially not Hispanics. Hilary Shelton of the NAACP stated, “It’s trickery, it’s a sleight-of-hand.” But this statement defines the actions of the Justice Department quite nicely regarding their opposition of the Texas voter ID law. According to the Heritage Foundation, the math employed by the Justice Department is “clear in its intentions, fuzzy in its methodology and wrong in its conclusions.”
According to the 2010 Census, Hispanics make up 37.6 percent of the population in Texas, but 21.8 percent of registered voters in Texas are Hispanic. This skewed percentage is the result of a large number of Hispanics in Texas being here illegally. The Justice Department claims that 6.2 percent of Hispanics registered to vote do not have driver’s licenses, as opposed to 4.3 percent of non-Hispanics. According to worldwide standards and accepted mathematics, this is a 1.9 percentage difference. But according to Barack Obama’s Justice Department, a “Hispanic voter is 46.5 percent more likely than a non-Hispanic voter to lack” an ID. And according to the actual data gathered that the Justice Department chose to ignore, three times as many non-Hispanic registered voters are without IDs; thus, the voter ID law will affect Caucasians and other registered voters much more severely.
What this country has deteriorated into since Barack Obama was elected president is an entire cabinet, including the Justice Department, that views all axioms, civility, reason, facts, and the Constitution as Quixotic windmills to be blindly charged wielding prejudice and discrimination as weapons, and injustice as their armor.
Jim Byrd's website is A Skewed View.