Skip to main content

The Tea Party GOP is engaged in a concerted effort to keep African Americans from voting. This is not surprising given the Republican Party's animus towards people of color; likewise, Romney and Ryan are bereft of new ideas--save for a retread of the failed supply side, trickle down economics which led to the Great Recession. Voter suppression reflects both these realities.

While their efforts to demobilize voters by robbing them of basic rights through onerous and unnecessary restrictions on access to the franchise is par for the Southern Strategy 2.0, there is a core level of hypocrisy present in the Tea Party GOP's machinations that should be called out for the base ugliness which it embodies.

Republicans are quick to claim the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. and Abraham Lincoln.

However, the Republican Party is also the United States' de facto White political party: it lives off of the toxic fumes of "colorblind" racism and white identity politics.

Once more, history (and empirical reality) confounds and exposes the big lie that is the modus operandi of the Right.

The Tea Party GOP's efforts at robbing black folks of their constitutional right to vote is an affront to the legacies of both Martin Luther King Jr. and President Lincoln. The former fought and died in the Black Freedom Struggle; the Voting Rights Act was one of his crowning achievements. Lincoln defeated the Confederacy. This led to Reconstruction, what was one of the most radically democratic experiments in American history where men who were just a few years (or months) ago counted as human property would soon elect their own leaders (and kin) to Congress and the Senate.

King and Lincoln died to expand the franchise to millions of black Americans. The Tea Party GOP is working to steal the right to vote from black Americans so that Romney and Ryan can be elected to the White House. This is an ugly juxaposition: it directly contrasts a struggle for the Common Good with a selfish political exercise to install a plutocrat who will continue to represent the interests of the one percent at the expense of the rest of us.

There is another American icon that is claimed by the Tea Party GOP, one who has a "special relationship" with black conservatives. Frederick Douglass, radical abolitionist, intellectual, and freedom fighter, is consider a shining star, "one of their own" by black conservatives. In a twist of history, Douglass, this hero to black Republicans, would be disenfranchised by the very anti-voting access policies that the Tea Party GOP is implementing across the United States.

David Blight, one of America's great historians, called attention to this reality in a recent essay in the NY Times. Here, he unleashes rhetorical violence on the Republican Party and the white supremacist roots of their efforts to deny black folks (and others) the right to vote in the upcoming election:

By the mid-1840s, he had emerged as one of the greatest orators and writers in American history. But legally, Douglass began his public life by committing what today we would consider voter fraud, using an assumed name...

In Douglass’s greatest speech, the Fourth of July oration in 1852, he argued that often the only way to describe American hypocrisy about race was with “scorching irony,” “biting ridicule” and “withering sarcasm.” Today’s Republican Party seems deeply concerned with rooting out voter fraud of the kind Douglass practiced. So, with Douglass’s story as background, I have a modest proposal for it. In the 23 states where Republicans have either enacted voter-ID laws or shortened early voting hours in urban districts, and consistent with their current reigning ideology, they should adopt a simpler strategy of voter suppression.  

To those potentially millions of young, elderly, brown and black registered voters who, despite no evidence of voter fraud, they now insist must obtain government ID, why not merely offer money? Pay them not to vote. Give each a check for $711 in honor of Frederick Douglass. Buy their “freedom,” and the election. Call it the “Frederick Douglass Voter Voucher.”

Give people a choice: take the money and just not vote, or travel miles without easy transportation to obtain a driver’s license they do not need. It’s their “liberty”; let them decide how best to use it. Perhaps they will forget their history as much as the Republican Party seems to wish the nation would.

Black conservatives are one of the rotten legs supporting the racist stool that is the Tea Party GOP. As such, their silence is expected. It is part of a bargain which they have made. For many, it is a lucrative hustle that pays the bills and brings the marginally talented an outsized amount of attention and exposure.

This makes their choice to stand mute, or in some cases to serve as the human props and political blackface mask in support of efforts to demobilize African American voters, no less contemptible. Black conservatives want to claim Frederick Douglass, but they spit in the face of his legacy.

Ultimately, such contradictions cause no cognitive dissonance or upset. Black conservatives who stand silent on these matters, or commit the civic sin of supporting the disenfranchisement of black and brown folks (as well as the poor), demonstrate that they too are slaves to the psychic wages of Whiteness--and the material gains that come with the choice to be a political Judas, Kiplingesque middle man, or colonial administrator who can interpret the drums of the natives.

Black conservatives such as these are not the descendants of Frederick Douglass, a great man who beat down an evil white overseer and slave breaker named Covey, escaped to freedom, and became a legend for all time.

Rather, the black conservatives of the C.L. Bryant stripe, those Clarence Thomases, Herman Cains, Allen Wests, and other related ilk, were more likely to play the role of the mythic Black Confederate, fighting and dying in the service of their white masters to keep other African-Americans in chains and bondage.

In total, black conservatives and the Tea Party GOP need to get Frederick Douglass out of their collective mouth, for they are not heirs, in any way, to his honored legacy.

Originally posted to chaunceydevega on Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 10:56 AM PDT.

Also republished by Black Kos community, Community Spotlight, and Barriers and Bridges.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Frederick Douglas was an American hero, (14+ / 0-)

    a real icon for all Americans.   He would fight the tea party just as he fought slavery.

    I'm from the Elizabeth Warren Wing of the Democratic Party!

    by TomP on Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 10:59:43 AM PDT

    •  he would, a real hero whose name has (9+ / 0-)

      been misappropriated

    •  Well, he'd support (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      thankgodforairamerica

      those Tea Party folk championing the right to keep and bear arms. And he was kind of a natural rights theorist. So, my guess is that he might not be rushing to join any of the extant parties.

      •  he also had the good sense to see neo white right (10+ / 0-)

        populists who dislike black folks like him.

        the tea party gop are neo-John Birchers and neo-Confederates. They wouldn't have pulled the wool over his eyes if you get the allusion.

        •  As I said (0+ / 0-)

          He probably wouldn't be thrilled with any of the current parties.

          And, though I feel certain it may put various knickers in assorted twists, IMO the putative racism of the Tea Party is wildly oversold. To see them as Birchers and Confederates strikes me a willful self-deception fueled by the refusal to imagine that there could be anything important or useful to learn from their evident success.

          That racist meme has become so much part of the narrative in these precincts that it's probably beyond the pale even to suggest such a possibility. But from the time the TP appeared I've maintained (here on DK) that the left failed to either properly understand it or evaluate its significance. And I can't help but note that the TP is still with us, while OWS continues to fade into the shadows.

          So, yes, I get the allusion. Nevertheless, it's misplaced, IMO. Douglass does not fit neatly into some contemporary Progressive box.

          •  the data on the public opinion of the tea party (9+ / 0-)

            their founding by the koch brother birchers, the signs at their rallies, and the naked white nativism they espouse satisfies my white racial resentment bigotry test.

            a good percentage if not a majority of the tea party gop still believe that obama wasn't born in this country. never mind chris parker et al.'s research on the high levels of white racial resentment among said group.

            douglass would do a covey on them if they dared step to him.

            i have enough of an understanding of american political thought to avoid the easy lazy box of transposing contemporary political ideologies and framings backward in time; i also know that the man who wrote the 4th of july speech on slavery and the hypocrisy of the framers and the U.S. constitution as a project unfinished would "epically" own the tea party gop.

            be cautious, stereotypes are your enemy, i am not a liberal or progressive--as though that is a bad thing. i also thought ows was a flash in the pan that could not upset an increasingly anti-democratic elite class and neoliberal order.

            •  the data (0+ / 0-)

              I would like to see the data that traces the TPs actual founding to the Koch brothers. It seems clear that they have given parts of the movement some financial support, but at this point, I would have thought that few serious political observers took seriously the old charge that this was some astroturf creation of big money. The Bircher charge is, I believe, entirely unfounded. Sean Wilentz has made a claim of sorts based on what he takes to be certain similarities, but the evidence that Bircher views predominate the TP are, IMO, unsubstantiated.

              As for Douglass, again, what I said was that IMO he would be unlikely to wholeheartedly join in with any party now active--possibly for some of the same reasons that you are neither liberal or progressive. But I do imagine that he would nonetheless be pleased to vote for Mr. Obama.

          •  The teabag party began organized existence ... (4+ / 0-)

            ... in the seven days following Obama's inauguration, when grouchy old paranoid whites spent the day shouting at the enthusiastic young diverse crowd of millions on the screen.

            The entire reason for the teabag party's existence is racism.

            End of story.

            •  In case you're wondering, I am 53 and white n/t (3+ / 0-)
            •  The fact that (0+ / 0-)

              any American party, let alone a very small one, is organized largely by whites, grouchy or otherwise, isn't exactly evidence of racism, nor would be the fact that whatever crowd they yell at is diverse be evidence that their disagreement is over race.
              I have seen that characterization endlessly repeated, but the primary support for it is the bare fact that that the TP wants to see Obama out of office. That is not prima facie evidence that it is hatred of Obama's race that motivates them, as opposed to his policies. I note that the TP finds itself at odds with mainstream, traditional Republicans, largely white, who also wish to see Obama defeated and who began planning to see him vanquished the day after the election as well. Does this make them also racists, merely of some different stripe than the TP? I would argue that it does not.

              So, no, not remotely the end of the story.

              •  please stop, the data does not at all support (4+ / 0-)

                any of your claims. what is to be gained by such deflections? look at theda skocpol's new book on the tea party john birchers, or any of the research from u of w by chris parker. there is other stuff out there too. hell, look at their signs and "real america" nativist racist talk.

                •  Reading suggestions (0+ / 0-)

                  I've looked at Skocpol, who I have to confess I think is an almost complete fool--but this is also based on personal acquaintance from back in my grad school days. In any case, I thought the book was a travesty of the worst tendencies of academic sociology, married to a clear-cut agenda that directed the "research." The book was essentially political Lysenkoism--first decide your conclusions and then amass the "evidence." FWIW, I trained in academic political science. Skocpol's methodologies are laughable, and that would be true no matter what her political sympathies.

                  •  training is worth what the trained make of it... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Free Jazz at High Noon

                    ...I look forward to a demonstration of yours.

                    Cheers.

                  •  you clearly do not know what you are talking (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Free Jazz at High Noon

                    about to smear Skocpol that way. Wow.

                    •  Actually (0+ / 0-)

                      it is precisely because I know what I am talking about that I am competent to assess Skocpol. I don't find her particularly competent, but then I think most of what passes for political science research is piss-poor pseudo-science, and I was happy to no longer have been a member of the APSA by the time she was made president. However, my assertions regarding Skocpol are just bare opinion here, worthless without supporting analysis, and that's not going to happen in this immediate context. By the same token, I can't imagine that there is any DK audience for that kind of academic disquisition.

                      You cautioned me to be wary of stereotypes. Allow me to caution in turn against rushing to embrace so-called social science essentially because it agrees with views you had already arrived at.

                      •  You can offer a substantive take on her work, (0+ / 0-)

                        please do so. Disagreement is welcome. Your tone suggests utter dismissal of someone highly respected in the discipline--and as you noted former president of the APSA.

                        you called Theda a "fool." own it. what evidence do you have for these claims? personal beef or something substantive?

                        your dismissal of the obvious racism and white racial resentment at the heart of the New Right is mighty suspicious to begin with making your conclusions already questionable.

                        since the 1970s conservatism and racism have become increasingly intertwined; their leaders owned this fact and admitted to crafting the strategy. explain that one away if you can.

                        •  Conservatism and racism (0+ / 0-)

                          I find your own claim problematic. You offer the characterization "obvious" to describe racism and resentment that you claim is the very essence of something called the New Right. But that is a catch-all category into which any number of things get crammed. Nor does "conservatism" offer much of anything solid.
                          To begin with, there would need to be a demonstration that both defined these things and then showed racism to be at their hearts. I will tell you straight up that I do not think much of the simplistic equation of opposition to, say, racial hiring quotas to be prima facie racism.
                          To pick just one conservative, Wm Buckley opposed much of the civil rights agenda of the '60s and '70s, but his opposition was based largely on his understanding of the Constitution. He later changed his mind and concluded that some sort of affirmative action was necessary to remedy pervasive political discrimination. That was a political judgment on his part. But I think it would be absurd to claim that his original position was motivated by racism and that his revised opinion was due to his having been somehow cured of that racism.
                          I'm not looking to support Buckley (or, for that matter, any conservative position) merely to use him to illustrate that opposition to a position favorable to some group is not tantamount to hatred of that group. This, I believe, is about the level of discussion upon which the claims of Tea Party racism is founded.
                          For many years there were blue laws where I live that forced businesses to close on Sundays. These were clearly motivated by Christian beliefs about their day of worship. Those laws also had the effect of forcing pious Jews to close shops both Saturday and Sunday. Now, there are plenty of Christians who dislike Jews, but that still does not support the characterization of Sunday blue laws as essentially anti-semitic.
                          I've studied the Tea Party since its inception. I've done so as part of my work, in which I teach courses in political theory. To the extent that I can determine, I think it is mistaken to say that the movement is founded on racism. There may be some racists in the movement, but is not the Klan or anything even remotely like the Klan or the Aryan Nation, and to the extent that we dismiss these people as simply another bunch of ignorant racists who can be dismissed on that ground, I believe that we fail to fully understand the roots of a significant political movement.

                          •  if you claim to be a political theorist then (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Free Jazz at High Noon

                            you most certainly understand the idea that racism evolves and that the tea party is a herrenvolk group. it is childish to use the kkk as a barometer for white racism. it is a strawman. feagin, bonilla silva, omi and winant, goldberg and others can help you here. white racial resentment works through and is activated by "race neutral" concepts such as "small government." there is a great article out on white racial resentment and how romney's anti-welfare lie activates those sentiments for conservatives.

                            again, you called Theda a fool. you have little credibility until you explain such a claim.

                            i would also look at some of the empirical research on the Tea Party as well as its mighty interesting connection to the Koch family, one of whose elders helped to create the John Birch society.

                            the splc and other groups have documented the infiltration of the tea party by white nationalists. again, why hang your flag on such a pathetic and disreputable group of white reactionaries? sympathetic to them?

                            Buckley was a bigot. As we Goldwater. Check out the book when How in America Conservatism and Racism are One and the Same. Good empirical work and then we can talk.

          •  um, no. FAIL (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            chimpy, Free Jazz at High Noon

            The various signs at teabagger rallies, depicting Obama as a monkey, for example, utterly belie your comment.

            Not hatin' on you, just your trolling.

            "No man is rich enough to buy back his past." ~ Oscar Wilde

            by ozsea1 on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 08:55:13 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  IMO, he would have seen and separated himself (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        chimpy, Free Jazz at High Noon

        from and and all teabagging bullshit.

        RKBA would've been defended from another perspective altogether.

        Your comment and guesswork has a whiff of something off-putting.

        Misdirection.

        "No man is rich enough to buy back his past." ~ Oscar Wilde

        by ozsea1 on Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 05:30:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  uuh, what a weird comment, couldn't imagine (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Plantsmantx, ozsea1, chimpy

        that for a minute. Natural rights theories don't override his vision on what counts as white right-wing supremacist racism., which the tea-party and birthers display very openly.  

    •  Interesting, Frederick Douglass committed voter (5+ / 0-)

      fraud.  He had to vote under an assumed name in Massachussetts to establish an identity as a free black man back in the 1850's.  The NYT had an interesting story about this a few days ago.

      He also paid a $1.50 poll tax.  Douglass was the fourth name he used in order to evade his pursuers.  I think we can forgive him.

      Real plastic here; none of that new synthetic stuff made from chicken feathers. By the morning of 9/12/2001 the people of NYC had won the War on Terror.

      by triplepoint on Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 04:46:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The Boondocks Episode of "Catcher Freeman"... (6+ / 0-)

    ...for some reason entered my consciousness.

    I have no idea why that would be.

    When you are right you cannot be too radical; when you are wrong, you cannot be too conservative. --Martin Luther King Jr.

    by Egalitare on Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 11:22:15 AM PDT

  •  Black Republicans/Teabaggers Motto.... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    thankgodforairamerica, ozsea1

    ....Its all about the "Benjamins" baby!

    d1c07301I gotta get minez!

  •  Rev. C.L. Bryant Is A Hater & An ____ Apologist... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    thankgodforairamerica, ozsea1

    ...If you don't know who C.L. Bryant is, WATCH!

    •  watching this guy's videos makes my blood boil (0+ / 0-)

      Trayvon happens and this GUY can only talk about Jesse and Al, as if they're the Sun Gods of the black community. You gotta be kidding me. He brings Tawanna Brawley and Duke Lacrosse into this. You gotta be kidding me.

      And then you get to HOW he says it.....how he basically talks down to every black person not hypnotized by the conservative echo chamber and acts like they're either stupid or crazy......"oh i paid my dues".....Black People will continue to vote lockstep with Democrats for like 5,000 years if creeps like this guy are really the best they can come up with.

      "See? I'm not a racist! I have a black friend!"

      by TheHalfrican on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 10:41:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  hijacking revered figures is a favorite (4+ / 0-)

    tactic of r's.  glenn beck has been playing that nasty little trick for yrs, with gianormous-sized pics of g washington & b franklin situated behind him on stages/sets.

    the american nazi party used to do the same thing, btw, when they held their rallies prior to wwII.

    it gives renewed meaning to the saying "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."

  •  One of the most hypocritical of all has to be... (5+ / 0-)

    ...the Rice woman;

    Condolezza Rice

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/...

    My mom was a teacher—I have the greatest respect for the profession—we need great teachers—not poor or mediocre ones. We need to have high standards for our students—self-esteem comes from achievement not from lax standards and false praise. And we need to give parents greater choice—particularly poor parents whose kids—most often minorities—are trapped in failing neighborhood schools. This is the civil rights struggle of our day.
    And on a personal note—a little girl grows up in Jim Crow Birmingham—the most segregated big city in America—her parents can't take her to a movie theater or a restaurant—but they make her believe that even though she can't have a hamburger at the Woolworth's lunch counter—she can be President of the United States and she becomes the Secretary of State. Yes, America has a way of making the impossible seem inevitable in retrospect. But of course it has never been inevitable—it has taken leadership, courage and an unwavering faith in our values.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 03:42:29 PM PDT

    •  in her books/interview she talks about (10+ / 0-)

      how her father wasn't one of those "troublemakers" like Dr. King. If it weren't for men like Brother Dr. King she would not have had the career she did. Talk about a free rider.

      •  Proudly going along to get along (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Shockwave

        Well, someone had to move this country forward, so thanks Dr. King for your timely and effective trouble. Can I blame her father for keeping quiet any more than I blame all the white southerners who acquiesced to the same injustices? Even those less wealthy white workers who might have had some inkling Dr. King's fight for economic justice without respect to race? Can I blame him more than the nationwide lawmakers and opinion leaders who would have also let it all slide for some other generation to deal with? No, not more but still quite a lot.

        Why is there a Confederate Flag flying in Afghanistan?

        by chimpy on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 08:09:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  one claim is not exclusive of another (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ozsea1, chimpy

          i hold black free riders to a bit higher standard than others when other black folks are out there dying to get them their full rights. to each his own.

          •  Free riders of any stripe (0+ / 0-)

            Of course in that racially polarized society, even well-off black southerners would identify with other less fortunate black southerners. They'd see an obvious interest in removing racial barriers to their further success. They had a choice to leverage their initial financial success into bigger societal change, or lie low and eventually escape that broken society.

            Of course, those black southerners with stable lives leaving just the poor and working class to fight their shared battle is regrettable. But, as a white American I have to spread the blame to those who look more like me. Working class people of all races benefit from a society that respects and rewards labor. Even those of wealth benefit from a society that best employs the skills of all its people, irrespective of race, religion or family wealth. That's the society Dr. King was fighting for.

            Being black in the south would make it easier to see, but anyone with some information and some time and ability to reflect would see it too. And shame on anyone who saw the choice but let it go.

            Why is there a Confederate Flag flying in Afghanistan?

            by chimpy on Tue Sep 11, 2012 at 09:07:32 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Imagine that... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chimpy, Shockwave, ozsea1

      in a good-sized city like Birmingham, there wasn't a movie theater or even restaurant  a black person was allowed into. None.

      She laid it on a little thick for her fellow Republicans, didn't she?

  •  i loved how angry rev barber looked at the naacp (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, Larsstephens, chimpy

    when he mentioned romney having just quoted douglas

    it's a few minutes in-

    rev dr william barber at naacp convention

    thanks for the diary- i didn't know conservatives were trying to claim him as their own. i thought rev barber was just mad at romney for being an ass.

    angry isn't really the right word for the look on the reverend's face- maybe ferocious is better. it's right before he starts to unleash.

    "...i also also want a legally binding apology." -George Rockwell

    by thankgodforairamerica on Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 04:57:41 PM PDT

    •  There's an organization (0+ / 0-)

      of black Republicans called the Frederick Douglass Society. They made a little bit of news during the Republican convention by complaining about the lack of Republican outreach to black voters. They did this from their party-funded meeting way on the other side of Tampa Bay:).

  •  I'm tired of the counter argument to this... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean, chimpy, ozsea1

    I'm tired of the counter argument to this... Why, we need IDs to get on a plane or drive a car or blah blah blah. It's the first thing you hear in response, followed by how cheap IDs are.

    Getting my license cost me $20 and two plus hours of my time. We already have people making minimum wage who have to work 3 hours plus to even afford that ID. And you better believe they don't work at places that would be understanding of them missing that time. They're expendable at best.

    Last I checked driving and flying in planes were privileges. They're not rights. There's nothing in the Constitution that requires me to have a special photo ID... I don't get that argument.

    If these people truly believed they had the numbers on their side, they'd be signing people up to vote left and right.

    •  Not to mention (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calamity Jean, chimpy, ozsea1

      that you show ID when you register to vote. Once you've passed that hurdle, all you have to do is make sure that you make sure that you're the same person registered to vote. In New York, that means you furnish the same name, address, and DOB as the person you claim to be, as well as a matching signature. If one of a panel of 2 Democrats and 2 Republicans doesn't think that you're the same person, then you can be challenged and have to fill out a probationary ballot.

      Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað

      by milkbone on Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 09:38:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Clayton Bigsby. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Plantsmantx, ozsea1, TheHalfrican

    If Conservatism was so great you would think they could find a sane person to represent it. Since the only people who represent it seem to be insane. I'm waiting for the day conservatism is labeled a mental illness

    by SharksBreath on Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 07:29:10 PM PDT

  •  I suspect that he would have had a daguerrotype ID (0+ / 0-)

    He only employs his passion who can make no use of his reason. - Cicero

    by SpamNunn on Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 07:54:26 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for taking a deeper look... (6+ / 0-)

    ...at Blight's piece and the rest of your analysis, too. I mentioned him in a few paragraphs in Saturday's War on Voting.

    Frederick Douglass has been one of the few people I count as heroes since I was 14 and was introduced to his autobiography for the first time. That was the first serious book I ever read more than once.

    He was not, as is often stated today, a big supporter of Abraham Lincoln at the beginning. That came later. When Lincoln delivered his first inaugural speech in 1861, Douglass called him a "perfect slave hound" for his implicit support of the Fugitive Slave Act. As Lincoln listened to Douglass and moved at least someone in the direction the great Abolitionist proposed, they ended up working together and Douglass became a strong supporter.

    Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

    by Meteor Blades on Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 09:17:08 PM PDT

    •  This is why both Lincoln and Douglass (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Larsstephens, chimpy, ozsea1

      are personal heroes - Douglass just because of everything he had to endure to get where he got to be, and Lincoln, despite being a white male adult of his time who didn't have to change his views on race and slavery, but upon meeting and speaking with Douglass realized how wrong he was, and changed his and the nation's trajectory.

      Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað

      by milkbone on Mon Sep 10, 2012 at 09:41:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Click here for the mobile view of the site