do what everyone else does: present some sort of picture ID so everyone can make sure I’m actually me. Thankfully, I still have my club card from Teddy Bear Village (“the best place for hugs”), and it still gets me into various places with minimal effort. But I don’t make a fuss about rummaging for the card, even though I know the process is, on the whole, pointless when it’s directed at me. Presenting ID for Mucinex or Sudafed or whatever is based on the fact that a lot of people buy the stuff to make crystal meth—a drug I’ve never tried, but I’ve heard it does wonders for your teeth. Frankly, having to buy tons of over-the-counter remedies to make one under-the-counter drug seems like a lot of work. I stick to simple processes, like lying to my doctor about my unbearable back pain.
But among the many other mundane things in life I’ve learned to do without thinking too much is to always have my ID. To me, it’s like changing my sheets—something I do at least every two weeks. At forty-seven, I still get carded once in a while in bars, mainly because it’s customary for a bouncer to card everyone in order to keep his job, and that includes a middle-aged man in leather cutoffs.
So we live in a world where it’s completely tolerated, and acceptable, that you have photo identification for some Kabuki-style “everyone is the same” crowd control. It’s the post-9/11 world—and it’s the least you can do to offer some peace of mind to everyone else who has to put up with your shifty demeanor and furtive manner in public.
Well, what if you want to do something that’s pretty important,like vote? Shouldn’t you have an ID? Isn’t that what one would call a reasonable request? You need an ID to buy cigarettes, why not to cast a ballot—which is every bit as important as inhaling a Salem while riding on the back of a lawnmower you’ve nicknamed Squatdevil.
Not if you’re Eric Holder, or the administration he works for. In 2011, the Justice Department determined that the provisions of South Carolina’s Act R54, which would require voters to show photo identification to vote, is unconstitutional—for the state. In Holder’s angry muddled mind, South Carolina has not proven the law will not have “a discriminatory effect on minority voters.” Never mind that in a few other states where IDs are required, voting participation
went up
. That’s not the issue, of course. You are a racist—case closed. Holder has also done the same thing with Texas, again ignoring the fact that voting participation skyrocketed among blacks and Hispanics in Georgia once IDs were made available.
Talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations. Does Holder really believe minorities are incapable of getting a voter ID? The underlying notion is insidious, for it says you can’t depend on minorities to get photo identification. You’re just asking too much of them. You get a photo ID from Costco, for chrissake. Not that I really noticed, but thinking about it now, I’m pretty sure I see plenty of minorities in plenty of places where you need an ID.
And while Holder finds the idea of presenting IDs to vote a violation of your rights, he seems okay with the idea when you want to pay him a visit. As Robert Bluey pointed out in a harmless, modest stunt, you need a photo ID to visit the Department of Justice (which he did, without an appointment). He also pointedout, during this mini-exposé, that the groups supporting the crusade against voter ID laws (Center for American Progress and the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law) require IDs to enter the building. At the LCCRUL (great acronym, guys), there’s even a sign, Bluey notes, that reads ALL VISITORS MUST SHOW ID .
As always, if the tolerati doesn’t like what you’re doing—even if they’re not sure why—they are convinced it’s got to be racist. And yep, simply by requiring a photo identification so someone might vote means you are prejudiced
But among the many other mundane things in life I’ve learned to do without thinking too much is to always have my ID. To me, it’s like changing my sheets—something I do at least every two weeks. At forty-seven, I still get carded once in a while in bars, mainly because it’s customary for a bouncer to card everyone in order to keep his job, and that includes a middle-aged man in leather cutoffs.
So we live in a world where it’s completely tolerated, and acceptable, that you have photo identification for some Kabuki-style “everyone is the same” crowd control. It’s the post-9/11 world—and it’s the least you can do to offer some peace of mind to everyone else who has to put up with your shifty demeanor and furtive manner in public.
Well, what if you want to do something that’s pretty important,like vote? Shouldn’t you have an ID? Isn’t that what one would call a reasonable request? You need an ID to buy cigarettes, why not to cast a ballot—which is every bit as important as inhaling a Salem while riding on the back of a lawnmower you’ve nicknamed Squatdevil.
Not if you’re Eric Holder, or the administration he works for. In 2011, the Justice Department determined that the provisions of South Carolina’s Act R54, which would require voters to show photo identification to vote, is unconstitutional—for the state. In Holder’s angry muddled mind, South Carolina has not proven the law will not have “a discriminatory effect on minority voters.” Never mind that in a few other states where IDs are required, voting participation
went up
. That’s not the issue, of course. You are a racist—case closed. Holder has also done the same thing with Texas, again ignoring the fact that voting participation skyrocketed among blacks and Hispanics in Georgia once IDs were made available.
Talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations. Does Holder really believe minorities are incapable of getting a voter ID? The underlying notion is insidious, for it says you can’t depend on minorities to get photo identification. You’re just asking too much of them. You get a photo ID from Costco, for chrissake. Not that I really noticed, but thinking about it now, I’m pretty sure I see plenty of minorities in plenty of places where you need an ID.
And while Holder finds the idea of presenting IDs to vote a violation of your rights, he seems okay with the idea when you want to pay him a visit. As Robert Bluey pointed out in a harmless, modest stunt, you need a photo ID to visit the Department of Justice (which he did, without an appointment). He also pointedout, during this mini-exposé, that the groups supporting the crusade against voter ID laws (Center for American Progress and the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law) require IDs to enter the building. At the LCCRUL (great acronym, guys), there’s even a sign, Bluey notes, that reads ALL VISITORS MUST SHOW ID .
As always, if the tolerati doesn’t like what you’re doing—even if they’re not sure why—they are convinced it’s got to be racist. And yep, simply by requiring a photo identification so someone might vote means you are prejudiced
Similar Books
