As the handwriting on the wall becomes ever more clear, the Democrats are already gearing up to cry "FOUL!" should Barak Obama lose the election. You've probably seen the Michael Moore inspired video from the Marxists at MoveOn.org. It features (surprise) foul mouthed senior citizens threatening civil war if America dares to send Barak Obama packing:
Now, liberals using course, vulgar, and even violent language is nothing new. Spend a few minutes at MSNBC and you'll get the picture - the hysterical rantings of Ed Schultz, Rachael Maddow and even Chris Mathews have become downright scary. But lately more mainstream liberals have gotten less and less inhibited, with even the president himself letting the world "bull---t" slip at a recent campaign stop. Hardly "presidential" behavior by anyone's measure (aside from the hardcore Left, that is):
But the larger issue is the blatantly false narrative being developed by Democrats that if Barak Obama loses, it will simply have to be that the Republicans cheated somehow. Naturally, anyone who has followed politics for the last 40 years (as I have) will find the idea of Democrats charging anyone with attempting to cheat almost laughable - ask a hundred people which party comes to mind when they here the phrase "vote fraud" and the overwhelming majority will blurt out "Democrats!"
More to the point - how, exactly, does one "suppress" my vote? I know that next Tuesday, November 6, is election day, so on that date, I will go to my polling place and cast my ballot. I took the time to register. I have a valid I.D. And no, I will not be so stupid as to fall for some bogus letter that tries to convince me that there is a "new date" for election day. So again, how will someone "suppress" my vote or "disenfranchise" me? Here in Minnesota one can actually vote with NO identification whatsoever, just by having someone "vouch" for you!
True, there is a ballot initiative this election that would require some sort of positive and/or photo I.D. in all future elections. And as usual, Democrats oppose the measure, claiming that simply requiring an I.D. will (you guessed it) "suppress" the vote altogether, and/or "disenfranchise" various groups of voters. But this is absurd on its face - you can't buy a six-pack of beer or get into an NC-17 movie without an I.D. Do YOU know anyone old enough to vote who does not already have multiple forms of identification? My mother had her I.D. when she voted in 2000, and she was 90 years old!
But no matter, the Left will trot out their usual hackneyed claim that "minorities" and "the elderly" will somehow be unable to figure out how to vote (it must gall them that they can't somehow work their old standby,"the children" into the mantra, but obviously, they can't vote anyway). But think about what their position says about how Democrats view those of you who happen to be minorities or old people - liberals truly believe that you are too stupid to figure out something as basic as registering to vote and filling out a ballot, or even how to get a proper I.D.
What is perhaps even more telling when it comes to attempting to intimidate voters, remember that a group of New Black Panthers showed up at a polling place in Philadelphia during the 2010 election, armed with police-style batons, and both Democrats and the liberal media were curiously silent. When Democrat Al Franken magically beat Republican Norm Coleman in what was one of the most controversial "reversals of fortune" in a recount ever, our George Soros backed Democrat Secretary of State could find no malfeasance.
Real voter intimidation is a crime. Real fraudulent voting by illegal aliens, felons, or other prohibited individuals is a crime. Stuffing ballot boxes, rigging voting machines, or otherwise tampering with ballots is a crime.
However, merely winning an (honest) election is not de facto evidence of a crime. But rest assured, if Mitt Romney wins, the charges by Democrats of "suppression" and "disenfranchising" will be coming (excuse the expression) Fast and Furious...