Is there an acceptable level of voter fraud? Obama and Eric Holder think there is! Obama and the DOJ have sued several States which passed legislation mandating photo identification for all voters. The DOJ rationale is, “there are insufficient cases of provable voter fraud to warrant such a law”.
This is a textbook example of circular reasoning. What they are saying, in effect, is the states cannot implement the necessary safeguards that would, in every case, identify, apprehend and quantify illegal voters.
Let’s take the DOJ logic and use it as a solution for shoplifting. In order to reduce shoplifting to insignificant levels, the DOJ needs only to sue all merchants to prevent their use of security personnel, outlaw security cameras and ban the electronic merchandise scanners at store exits. Viola, overnight, there would be virtually no “provable” shoplifting! Problem solved? I don’t think so!
So, very much like the FDA, which has standards regulating the allowable level of rat droppings in our food supply, the DOJ has apparently set the standard for the allowable level of fraudulent votes. I don’t know about you, but I am not much in favor of eating rat droppings or allowing any voter fraud.
Keeping voter fraud alive and well appears to be a central theme for the Democrats. Why do you think that’s the case?
Mary Ann Lewis
Englewood, FL
