Ed Rendell was on the Morning Joe show today bemoaning the dubious fact that 760,000 Pennsylvania inhabitants did not have a photo ID's and would therefore be unable to vote in the fall election. That upset poor Mika Brzezinski who has been out of sorts lately either because only Mayor Bloomberg has called for anti-gun legislation or she is trying to cut back on the sauce. As much as my heart aches for Ed and Mika it really is time someone told them that voter ID laws are the law of the land. Quit moping kids. In 2008 the Supreme Court upheld Indiana's ID law which has served as a model for other states. While Eric Holder may be able to stall implementation in states covered by the Voting Rights Act of 1965, he has no authority to do so in the Keystone state. Unless the state court strikes it down Ed and his disenfranchised Democrats had better get their lazy butts to the DMV and get their pictures taken.
It's a source of pride to me that Indiana was the first state to enact voter ID legislation but it hasn't stopped voter registration fraud. Only the "largely nonexistent voter fraud" so dear to Mika, Ed, and Eric allowed Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama on the Indiana ballot. Four Democratic are awaiting trial for largely nonexistent voter fraud in St. Joseph County. In retrospect I think the impetus for voter photo ID's came from that landmark piece of legislation, the Motor Voter bill. As long as the DMV is registering them, let them take their pictures and we won't have all this whining when someone tries to vote for his dead cat.
If Mika and Ed are upset Harold Meyerson of the Washington Post is so agitated he hardly makes sense but I suppose his readers are used to that. Meyerson envisions a scenario where Romney is elected by a thin margin, so thin that it equals the number of voters who could not vote because they were too lazy to get a valid ID. "If voter suppression goes forward and Romney narrowly prevails, consider the consequences. An overwhelmingly and increasingly white Republican Party, based in the South, will owe its power to discrimination against black and Latino voters, much like the old segregationist Dixiecrats."
And where did the Dixiecrats come from? They were Democrats. Meyerson like most Democrats never quite gets the history right or omits part of it. Yes, we know FDR began to desegregate the federal government albiet rather timidly but the omission is Woodrow Wilson was responsible for most of the segregation. Why the Republican party would be based in the south isn't clear either considering Indiana, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin are well north of the Mason Dixon line.
According to Meyerson if such an event did occur the United States would lose all moral standing in the world. Oh the high price of honest elections! The US would be the moral equivalent of pre Mandela South Africa. Thankfully Meyerson knows what to do.
"And what should Democrats do if Romney comes to power on the strength of racially suppressed votes? Such an outcome and such a presidency, I’d hope they contend, would be illegitimate — a betrayal of our laws and traditions, of our very essence as a democratic republic. Mass demonstrations would be in order. So would a congressional refusal to confirm any of Romney’s appointments. A presidency premised on a racist restriction of the franchise creates a political and constitutional crisis, and responding to it with resigned acceptance or inaction would negate America’s hard-won commitment to democracy and equality."
Obama is going to lose. Meyerson, Ed, and Mika are merely trying to provide him an excuse.