opinion web
Liberal Opinion General Opinion
David Limbaugh
David Limbaugh
12 Feb 2016
David Brooks and Obama's Ongoing Pant Crease

If you read The New York Times "conservative" columnist David Brooks, you might better grasp the chasm … Read More.

9 Feb 2016
Fear Not, My Secular Friends

It amuses me that certain people are convinced that Christians are angry scolds but totally miss the … Read More.

5 Feb 2016
Ted Cruz and the Body of Christ

There is a misplaced fear — shared, I'm sad to say, by many on the right — that Christian … Read More.

Holder's Corrupt Opposition to Voter ID Laws


Can anyone think of an innocuous reason that President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder oppose state voter ID laws?

Obama and Holder appear to view almost everything through the prism of race or, at the very least, use race as an excuse to justify otherwise very dubious policies, from immigration enforcement to voter intimidation actions to strong-arming banks to make loans via allegations of racism.

In December, along these lines, Holder criticized redistricting maps that had been drawn by the Texas Legislature and used the opportunity to call for an aggressive federal review of voter identification laws in not just Texas but other states.

But what does all this have to do with voter ID laws? Well, Republicans have been engaged in lobbying for state voter ID laws throughout the nation as an effort to enhance fair and lawful elections and prevent voter fraud. These laws are simple and transparent; they would require voters to present a government-issued form of identification as a condition to voting.

Predictably, Democrats — led by Obama and Holder — claim that the move is a GOP ruse to suppress minority voting. Holder called on the parties "to resist the temptation to suppress certain votes in the hope of attaining electoral success and, instead, achieve success by appealing to more voters."

Notice the automatic assumption and, in turn, barely veiled accusation of GOP racism. Notice further how utterly patronizing Holder's attitude is to minorities.

Is Holder's position that minorities are incapable of or ill-equipped at obtaining identification to vote? Why shouldn't people be required to prove they are who they say they are in order to participate in the electoral process?

I would think minorities would be offended at the suggestion that laws requiring them to prove their identity as a prerequisite to voting would somehow disadvantage them. I would think they would have every bit as much interest in ensuring fair, fraud-free elections as non-minorities.

It is sheer common sense that our election authorities should demand proof of the identity of all voters before allowing them to cast votes that will ultimately determine critical decisions affecting the future of their state and nation. I don't remember ever being allowed to vote, by the way, without presenting an ID, even though the precinct workers know me and I know them.

This isn't the least bit offensive, but even if it were, it wouldn't justify jeopardizing the integrity of elections.

Political correctness causes people to adopt absurd and indefensible positions, which is precisely how we should characterize efforts to resist voter ID laws.

Obama, Holder and the Democratic Party establishment don't even bother to counter the irrefutable argument that proof of ID is essential to reduce voter fraud. Instead, they just throw out the slanderous allegation that the GOP is trying to suppress the minority vote, which itself is born of the same type of categorical judgment about groups of people that lies at the heart of the sin of racism.

I am not a big fan of so-called bipartisanship, because I think it's a one-way street for Democrats, who only demand it when they want Republicans to cater to their demands, and not the other way around. I'm also realistic enough to recognize that today the parties are so far apart in their goals for the nation and the means to achieve them that we're just better off presenting our alternative cases to the people and letting them decide. But if there were ever an issue that screams out for bipartisanship, ensuring fair elections by verifying the identity of voters would have to be at the top of the list.

The administration's cavalier dismissiveness about the need for voter identification to improve ballot security has been exposed as the cynical fraud it is with the recent release of a video from filmmaker James O'Keefe. The video showed how easy it was for an associate of O'Keefe's to check in as Eric Holder in Holder's polling place without presenting identification, though he neither signed the poll book nor proceeded to cast a ballot. The poll worker, who obviously didn't know O'Keefe, much less Eric Holder, didn't even want to be bothered with the presentation of an ID. "As long as you're in here and you're on our list and that's who you say you are, we're OK," he said.

It's outrageous that Holder is accusing Republicans of wanting to suppress the minority vote through these laws. But it's not outrageous to suggest that Holder and his party, through their specious invocation of the race card to oppose these laws, have no legitimate basis to oppose them and indeed must have an ulterior reason for doing so — one that involves rigging the election process in their favor.

David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His latest book, "Crimes Against Liberty," was No. 1 on the New York Times best-seller list for nonfiction for its first two weeks. Follow him on Twitter @davidlimbaugh and his website at To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at



8 Comments | Post Comment
There is nothing more to this issue than trying to tip the election odds in one parties favor or another. Republicans are trying to suppress the minority vote, not because they don't like them, but because they tend to vote democrat. Thats the only reason this article was ever even written. And he dosen't like bipartisanship? Really? Yeah, people working together is really a bad thing. I didn't follow politics 15 years ago, but didn't Clinton work together with the Republicans and have a federal surplus? Only 2 presidents later and that dosen't even seem fathomable. GOP wants to balance the budget in 30 years, and Obama wants to, well, add tens of trillions to it. But yeah, lets try and fix these problems while playing these silly political games.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Mon Apr 9, 2012 5:16 PM
yup it is all about power and getting votes. Republicans want Americans to vote. Democrats want illegal aliens to vote because they tend to vote Democrat. It just isn't right that foreigners living illegally here can't vote, they live here too. What about the 200,000 people who registered to vote absentee by ACORN from a single address in Ohio? Obviously it would be wrong to deny them the right to vote, it was illegal but that shouldn't matter, they vote Democrat. Then there are the black panthers wielding night sticks and shouting racial slurs against non-blacks. No prosecution there, they were only trying to intimidate those who tend to vote Republican. If they were whites intimidating blacks they would have been hauled away that very day, but that wasn't the case so leave them be, they are after all encouraging democratic votes.
It seems consistent to me, Liberals want power by any means and Republicans want an honest vote. I for one want to see the vote early vote often mantra of the democratic machine in Chicago ended, instead it seems to have gone national.
Comment: #2
Posted by: C Moellers
Mon Apr 9, 2012 8:28 PM
Re: Chris McCoy

Nobody's trying to suppress minority voting. The claims of minority disenfranchisement the Democrats are touting are completely made up. Do you seriously believe that there are millions of people in America (aside from illegal aliens) who don't have any form of ID? Presumably, these would be poor people, who would qualify for all sorts of government programs. I guarantee that those programs require them to have ID.

There's only one reason the Democrats object to having ID required for voting, and that's because it will limit their ability to cheat.

As for Limbaugh's rejection of bipartisanship, what he was saying is that the definiton of bipartisan used by the Democrats these days is "Republicans doing what Democrats want." That being the case, there's no incentive for Republicans to try to work with them.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Jeff Gunn
Tue Apr 10, 2012 4:42 AM
I think that describing this as a racial issue is a bit of a stretch.
What I have difficulty understanding is why the party that believes it unwise to expend resources to fund a Social Safety Net, provide oversight of the Financial Services Industry, Protect the Environment and Consumers or support the Physical, Developmental and Educational Infrastructures on which our future as a nation depends feels that it is such a priority to deal with the non-issue of “voter fraud”.
Given the level of [well deserved] voter apathy in this country, I cannot imagine what would motivate an individual to go through the time, effort and expense of falsifying information simply for the privilege of casting a [second?] meaningless ballot in an election that, thanks to Citizens United, will ultimately be decided by the Madison Avenue tactics of our Corporate Overlords through their bloated and obscene SuperPACs.

I do not doubt that somewhere out there are a few idiots who might find it fun to “game” the system in this way [though prank phone calls would just as enjoyable and probably productive] but if you are looking for ways to preserve and enhance the integrity of the Electoral system I would expect that finding ways to limit the influence of“Big Money” and “Special Interests” would yield far greater results than efforts to inconvenience Senior Citizens, Non-Drivers, Low-End Wage-earners and Former Convicts [along with those who share similar names and physical characteristics].

Seriously, so much effort to prevent a handful of folks from voting Democrat? What are you worried about? If the Republicans lose, you can just kick it over to the Supreme Court. It's worked before.
Comment: #4
Posted by: ABarkus
Tue Apr 10, 2012 9:43 AM
ABarkus, your comment was a treat to read and has this old dog's tail wagging.
Comment: #5
Posted by: Steve
Tue Apr 10, 2012 9:55 AM
Re: ABarkus

"Given the level of [well deserved] voter apathy in this country, I cannot imagine what would motivate an individual to go through the time, effort and expense of falsifying information simply for the privilege of casting a [second?] meaningless ballot "

If that's what you think this is about, then you apparently have a pretty poor imagination.

It's not about "an individual" casting a "second" ballot. It's about preventing organized campaigns of election fraud, which are a specialty of Democrats.
Comment: #6
Posted by: Jeff Gunn
Thu Apr 12, 2012 4:11 AM
Re: Jeff Gunn
Regarding your critique of my limited imagination, I must agree.
if you believe that Democratic Election Fraud is what this is about, then your imagination is much more highly developed than mine.
And is there some reason why Election Fraud [if it exists to the extent that you suppose] would be strictly limited to Democrats? Are the Republicans somehow that much more noble, selfless and honorable than the loyal opposition?
If that is your belief then all I can say is... please enjoy your stay on BizarroWorld.
Send me a postcard why don't you.
And just for the record, if I were an illegal alien I seriously doubt that voting illegally for Democrats would be high on my "to do?" list.
But don't take it from me. I, apparently, have a pretty poor imagination.
Comment: #7
Posted by: ABarkus
Thu Apr 12, 2012 11:36 AM
Yeah ABarkus let's live in your fantasy world where we pretend that ACORN didn't register fraud voters and corrupt poltical machines like the Chicago Democrats from which Obama emerged haven't had dead people voting for years. One person, one vote should actually mean something. It is not individuals who go through the process of creating false identities, it is political machines. Are you that naive or do you know that you are promoting the lies and propaganda of your liberal masters?
Comment: #8
Posted by: Thetruth
Fri Apr 13, 2012 8:37 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right: comments policy
David Limbaugh
Feb. `16
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
31 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 1 2 3 4 5
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Deb Saunders
Debra J. SaundersUpdated 14 Feb 2016
Lawrence Kudlow
Lawrence KudlowUpdated 13 Feb 2016
Suzanne Fields
Suzanne FieldsUpdated 12 Feb 2016

7 Feb 2013 Obama's Imperiousness Doesn't Have a Permanent Shelf Life

22 May 2009 Still Politicizing Our Security

17 Oct 2011 Obama and Occupy Wall Street Are One