Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS
You nailed it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Yes he nailed it with "appear". The rhetoric intentionally tries to make it "appear" that Republicans are trying to make it harder for minorities and the poor to vote. Requiring identification should not make it harder to vote. If you cannot get identification, you have a problem, legal or otherwise, that you need to fix or it will be harder for you to do a lot of things besides vote--including run-ins with the law which minorities and poor people are more prone to have.
The same applies to other progressive rhetoric such as the "war on women," which is total nonsense, and minimum wage which very briefly "helps" but is soon neutralized by the inevitable rise in prices and loss of jobs, and equal pay for women for which there is already a long-standing federal law requiring equal pay for same or similar work--the overall discrepancy is mostly a result of the types of work women generally do as opposed to the types men generally do. But the raising of the "issues," as lame and useless as they mostly are, is meant not to solve problems, but to make it "appear" that Republicans want to make it more difficult for women, minorities, and the poor. Progressive legislation has been the dominant factor in moving government and its affect on society for the past 70 years. So if women, and minorities, and the poor are still having a harder time, it is the progressive movement that has made it so, not what "appears" to be opposition against it.
Threaded Mode