Results 1 to 2 of 2
  1. #1 Too Dumb To Vote In Minnesota 
    Ancient Fire Breather Retread's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    I came to Texas as soon as I could
    At the Minnesota Supreme Court on July 17, the ACLU argued that Gopher State people aren’t smart enough to be allowed to vote in November on whether to approve a voter photo ID constitutional amendment. The group, which has sued to halt anti-vote-fraud measures in several other states, didn’t actually say that Minnesotans lack the brainpower to contend with tighter voter ID standards. The ACLU argued instead that the amendment language is too vague and the ballot wording is too simple. The upshot is that Minnesotans, like hapless minorities who the ACLU says are incapable of obtaining IDs, apparently are too clueless to be trusted with deciding this issue...

    In its brief, the ACLU complains that the requirement for all voters to show “substantially equivalent identity and eligibility verification” before voting “is so vague that it is anyone’s guess what effect it will ultimately have on Minnesota’s voting system….” Such as reducing the number of voters who are unqualified, illegal or dead?

    This is the same ACLU, remember, that has no problem with vagueness when it comes to adding the infinitely elastic term “sexual orientation” to civil rights and “hate crime” laws in order to advance a radical political agenda that will someday criminalize the Boy Scouts, Christianity and Orthodox Judaism if fully implemented. One man’s vagueness is another man’s legal hammer.

    The Minnesota Supreme Court is expected to rule on the photo ID measure by Labor Day, in time for the state to print the question – or not – on the November 6 ballot. Perhaps Minnesotans will be allowed to curb vote fraud in time for Al Franken’s re-election try in 2014. It won’t be as interesting, but it might produce a more honest election.

    Robert Knight [Senior Fellow, American Civil Rights Union], TownHall
    July 25, 2012
    It's not how old you are, it's how you got here.
    It's been a long road and not all of it was paved.
    A man is but a product of his thoughts. What he thinks, he becomes. Gandhi
    Reply With Quote  

  2. #2  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    You should see what the liberal Secretary of State Mark Ritchie is trying to change the title to in order to confuse voters in the hopes that they will skip voting on the measure (which then counts as a "no" vote). The state legislature created the clear and concise title "Photo identification required for voting," but Ritchie is trying to change it to "Changes to in-person and absentee voting and voter registration; provisional ballots." He's doing the same with the state's marriage amendment.
    Reply With Quote  

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts