Democracy in the Balance: Indiana Goes Jim Crow by Bob Fitrakis

[babsbunny]

Democracy in the Balance: Indiana Goes Jim Crow
>
> by Bob Fitrakis
>
> The Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling in favor of the
Hoosier state's Jim Crow
> voter identification law sanctions the continual
racist assault upon
> black voters and institutionalizes the
disenfranchisement of the poor.
> Not surprisingly, the axis of evil -- Justices Anton
Scalia, Clarence
> Thomas and Samuel Alito -- claim that "the law
should be upheld because
> its overall burden is minimal and justified."
>
> In a real democracy, the burden should be on the
state to enfranchise
> voters, not on the state to think of ways to keep
poor people and
> minorities from the polls. At the age of 18, all
eligible voters should
> be routinely registered to vote with a unique
identifier, similar to a
> social security number. Scalia, Thomas and Alito
love "state's rights"
> and "Jim Crow." As partisan Republican appointees,
their judicial
> opinions are blatantly partisan and their approach
to democracy, as it
> has been through most of American history, is to
shrink the electorate.
>
> The Supreme Court should have mandated that the
state provide, free of
> charge, voter IDs for every eligible citizen in
Indiana beginning with
> all graduating high school seniors. We increasingly
live in a police
> state, where the Patriot Act monitors you day and
night, and the NSA
> spies on you through the Echelon system. But Big
Brother can't figure
> out who's eligible to vote?
>
> Voting must become a constitutional right, and for
that matter, so
> should privacy. That way, backward Hoosiers kissing
the ass of
> right-wing Republicans would be prevented from
ushering in another Jim
> Crow era.
>
> We should salute Justices David Souter, Ruth Bader
Ginsburg and Stephen
> Breyer who upheld the principles of democracy.
Souter put it best, that
> the Indiana law "threatens to impose nontrivial
burdens on the voting
> rights of tens of thousands of state's citizens."
The other three
> justices, John Paul Stevens, John Roberts and
Anthony Kennedy, argued
> that the Indiana case failed to meet the heavy
burden required to
> prevail in a "facial challenge" of the law.
>
> So democracy remains in the balance. The problem is
those facial
> challenges won't come until the middle of the 2008
election, as once
> again Karl Rove and his racist pals objectively
disenfranchise millions
> of black voters. McCain is likely to be elected
president on the
> Hoosier state's racist and class-based apartheid law
and his dream of a
> 100-year Reich in Iraq will be foisted on the
American people and the
> world while the vast majority of Americans oppose
it, whose voices will
> never be heard.
>
> I'm with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright on this. God, our
concept and name
> for the force and principles for universal justice
will damn this law.

[AllentownJake]

1. Sad thing is

There are democrats applauding this because of their interest in a primary election. Not realizing that in November this hurts them.