Photo ID's, Lying Eyes, Racism, Cognitive Dissonance

https://thinkprogress.org/new-study-confirms-that-voter-id-laws-are-very-racist-c338792c3f04/

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/how-voter-id-laws-discriminate-study/517218/

I only included links to two articles assuring us that requiring IDs to vote is RACIST!, but there are hundreds more, plus I've had it explained to me like 100 times on NPR.

According to the dominant media in this country the racism of requiring IDs to vote is a FACT -- at least as proven as Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW ... human caused).

So assuming that blacks are unable to acquire IDs in sufficient numbers for this to be an issue, then that MUST also mean that blacks are unfairly excluded from obtaining internet by an FCC rule. It isn't just the internet ... they can't ship UPS packages, get on planes, check into many hotels, use a credit card in many places, or a host of other things. It is enough to make one believe that there truly IS "white privilege" in this nation, and blacks are unable to get an ID, thus being excluded from a huge part of life in America!

Assuming this is the case as we are assured it is, we can only assume that righting this wrong and helping this vast number of blacks to get an ID is no doubt one of the top priorities of many "progressive" organizations in the US. Could you name one?

I did some searches ... I came up with"Vote Riders", an organization ONLY focused on getting IDs for voters in states that require them. Otherwise it appears that nobody cares.

How can this be? If there are a large number of blacks without IDs, this is a national tragedy, and it can be easily remedied by getting them IDs. Perhaps a study on what strange cultural phenomenon it is that causes them to have such difficulty in obtaining basic documents allowing them to live their lives in the modern world is in order.

If we do not believe this, then we are being asked by the dominant media and political party to believe and repeat the lie that having an ID to vote is "racist". Blacks would therefore be capable of getting IDs, and in fact would HAVE IDs, and the voter ID issue would be a fabrication.

A quick look at Wikipedia shows us that Canada, Mexico, and a good deal of the world require ID to vote. I especially like the Swiss options ...

Switzerland
In Swiss cantons (i.e. the subnational political level in Switzerland) that still use the Landsgemeinde or cantonal assembly; Historically, or in Appenzell until the admission of women, the only proof of citizenship necessary for men to enter the voting area was to show their ceremonial sword or Swiss military sidearm (bayonet); this gave proof that you were a freeman allowed to bear arms and to vote. Women, and men who choose to do so, may show their voting card instead.[13]

So our dominant media and party is saying that all these other countries are racist, or are they simply lying to us?

I think we all know the answer -- for the left, consistency is NOT an issue! Political expediency and power is all that counts, and they are assured that the preponderance of voter fraud is on their side, therefore, they are neither going to try to reduce it, or do anything to figure out how large it is! IT IS IN THEIR FAVOR, and that is really all that counts!

Their position is completely non-factual, and the fact that they are effectively calling most of the other developed countries on the planet "racist" is beside the point. They are certain that they are gaining SOME percentage of fraudulent votes, and it MAY be large ... without IDs, it is pretty much impossible to determine, which is fine by them The result is IN THEIR FAVOR ... and that ultimately is all that matters to a Democrat.

A Worthy Ammo Grrrll, Voter Fraud

Thoughts from the ammo line | Power Line:

"Ammo Grrrl" is a weekly feature on Power Line ... this weeks is worth reading as she talks of a foolish college age foray into S Chicago as a "Poll Watcher"  ... it is informational and entertaining, just read it.

She mentions a study on 5.7 million illegals voting in 2008, here is the article on it if you are interested.

Very hard to even imagine "facts" on this topic -- it is like estimating how many rats you have around if you see one running. According to Pew Research, there are like 11 million illegals in the US as of 2015. Also according to Pew, 56% of eligible voters vote in the US. So illegals would be a little less likely to vote. I suppose that it would also mean that ACTUAL legal US voters are even less likely to vote, because like 5 or 6 million of those supposed "voters" are actually illegal votes.

It sounds like over 20 states have already indicated that they refuse to send data in for the federal investigation of voter fraud ... if one used the same logic used by the media every time Trump refuses to show some information; "if he doesn't want to share it, he must be guilty", then I guess that would be "proof" of some guilty states.

My view is that without picture voter ID, there is no way at all to even begin to imagine the level of fraud. The US is one of the few developed countries not requiring voter ID -- both Canada and Mexico do. This "Poltifact" is a rather funny demonstration of how left these "fact checkers" really are. If "Politifact" claims that BO is only "half right", it means that he is lying through his teeth as usual.

The fact that Democrats fight voter ID tells me all I need to know about voter fraud -- it is massive and VERY important to Democrats!

The Truth Lament Strolls On

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/02/04/opinion/sunday/why-nobody-cares-the-president-is-lying.html?mc=aud_dev&mcid=fb-nytimes&mccr=FebPostElectionSubs&mcdt=2017-02&subid=FebPostElectionSubs&ad-keywords=AudDevGate&referer=http://m.facebook.com

I've been observing for a very long time that the concept of "truth" in the West has fallen on hard times. Knowledge of Philosophy and Theology are at all time lows. Very few can tell much about the relation between fact, dialectic and rhetoric, understanding of which would help the author of this column a good deal.

During his first week in office, Mr. Trump reiterated the unfounded charge that millions of people had voted illegally. When challenged on the evident falsehood, Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, seemed to argue that Mr. Trump’s belief that something was true qualified as evidence. The press secretary also declined to answer a straightforward question about the unemployment rate, suggesting that the number will henceforth be whatever the Trump administration wants it to be.

So in a nation where many states have no voter id, what would qualify as "evidence". Here is some from a 2012 Pew Study:

• About 24 million voter registrations are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate.
• More than 1.8 million dead people are listed as voters.
• Approximately 2.75 million people are registered in more than one state.

So that is an OPPORTUNITY of 27 million. If 10% of the opportunity voted, that would be 2.7 million. Up to now, nobody has really looked for voter fraud, nor do we still have a good mechanism. My son voted in Colorado, when I voted in MN, there was his name right above mine. MN requires no voter ID ... anyone that knows his name and the fact that he is registered could have walked in, voted as him, and be completely secure against prosecution and likely detection (they would have to do a cross-check between MN and CO). 

Of course, if one knows about fact, dialectic and rhetoric, they realize that is NOT the point. What Trump engages in, what the linked column engages in is rhetoric -- unidirectional convincing speech. If the author of the column and I engaged in a debate, that would be dialectic, and in both, we may or may not attempt to use "facts". I used a few (assuming you accept Pew as a source) in my response to his rhetorical response to Trump's rhetoric in which BOTH of them conclude that "the number will we what **I** say it is!" ... NY Times columnist asserts zero, Trump and minions assert "millions". 

NY Times columnist asserts that he is believable and Trump is not based on -- er, well, "bluster". A very common tool of rhetoricians.  

The Russian dissident and chess grandmaster Garry Kasparov drew upon long familiarity with that process when he tweeted: “The point of modern propaganda isn’t only to misinform or push an agenda. It is to exhaust your critical thinking, to annihilate truth.”

Exactly, always has been, always will be. What difference did it make if W Bush was a great national guard fighter pilot or a mediocre one? None, but the idea of it was enough to take down Dan Rather. What difference did it make if someone "leaked" that Valeria Plame, who drove into CIA HQ everyday actually worked there? None ... but it occupied a lot of media pages for over a year anyway.

The point of rhetoric since Plato and Aristotle has been to convince humans at a level "beyond factual" ... because humans actually never do anything for purely rational and factual reasons, and they never have. As long as "your side" is winning, the standard human tendency is to never even observe the difference between factual basis and rhetoric.

When "your tribe" loses and you understand nothing about truth, philosophy, dialectics or rhetoric, you are suddenly adrift. Your "moorings" are slipped, and it is obvious to you that "the others" have somehow changed.

This may explain one of the more revealing moments from after the election, when one of Mr. Trump’s campaign surrogates, Scottie Nell Hughes, was asked to defend the clearly false statement by Mr. Trump that millions of votes had been cast illegally. She answered by explaining that everybody now had their own way of interpreting whether a fact was true or not.

It turns out that everybody has always had their own way of interpreting wether a "fact" was true or not -- it's just that the column author recently notices that less people than he thought were navigating the shoals of truth and falsehood based on the rhetoric of the NY Times.

Trump Is Right on Voter Fraud

Donald Trump Voter Fraud Warning: He’s Right & Media Are Wrong to Dismiss It | National Review:

Not a very long read, but a very worthy one. Voter fraud is WELL documented in A LOT of places, if it looks like a Democrat is going to lose, or if they DO lose, we even hear quite a lot about it all of a sudden. Remember Diebold?

Even Democrats admit it is common when they get careless ...

Chris Matthews, the liberal MSNBC host who comes from Pennsylvania, vehemently opposes requiring ID at polling places. But he agrees that voter fraud is a Philadelphia tradition. In 2011, on his show Hardball, he explained a common scheme:

People call up, see if you voted or you’re not going to vote. Then all of a sudden somebody does come and vote for you. This is an old strategy in big-city politics. . . . I know all about it in North Philly — it’s what went on, and I believe it still goes on.

Pretty much everyone else in the world that votes requires an ID to vote. Democrats are well on the way to making that unconstitutional here. This isn't really a very hard position to understand if you care to. The author of the column, John Fund, wrote a good book on the subject a good while back "Stealing Elections" ... you really don't want to look into it if you agree with BO that Trump is crazy to suggest such a thing.

'via Blog this'