RUSH: This next story, I just marvel. I literally marvel at the alliance that there is between the Democrat Party and the Drive-By Media. This is a story in the New York Times. The headline really says it all, but I'll give you some details. "Waiting Times at Ballot Boxes Draw Scrutiny -- With studies suggesting that long lines at the polls cost Democrats hundreds of thousands of votes in November, party leaders are beginning a push to make voting and voter registration easier, setting up a likely new conflict with Republicans over a deeply polarizing issue."
So long lines at your polling place, that's just not fair to Democrats. That is making it harder for Democrats to get votes. Those long lines cost the Democrats hundreds of thousands of votes. Why, if there hadn't been long lines, why, the Democrats mighta won this by an additional two percentage points. Oh, yeah, the long lines, they're all Democrat voters. There aren't any Republicans in there. The people really, really desirous to vote, the people that show up and wait in line a long time, obviously they're voting for Democrats. Nobody would do that to vote for a Republican. If there were long lines for Republicans to vote, the New York Times would have a story on how we can make the lines longer.
Now, this article is motivated by three things. First -- and this is the key -- and, remember, it's the New York Times, so there's always an agenda behind this stuff. This is not news. The biggest thing anybody could learn is that stories in the New York Times today are not news. They are related to the achievement of the next phase of the Obama agenda. Every story for the most part, particularly domestic political stories, are nothing more than telltale indicators of what it is Obama wants next. In other words, here we are on February 5th and we get a story in the New York Times about long lines at the polling place. Why don't we get this story two days after the election? If long lines at polling places was a problem, why now? Why February 5th? There isn't an election any time soon.
So what is this all about? Well, you have come to the right place. This article is motivated by three things. First, the Supreme Court is about to rule on the Voting Rights Act in a few weeks, so the New York Times is leaning on them. The New York Times knows that the justices of the Supreme Court value the opinion of reporters and editors at the New York Times. And so the Times is getting its marker down on what it wants the court to do in relationship to this Voting Rights Act case that's coming up. And without getting into specifics, what they want the justices to do is find it possible, make it possible for more Democrats to vote, make it easier for more Democrats to vote.
Notice there's nothing here about Republicans being in these long lines. The whole premise of the story, long lines equal long waits, equals people leaving the line and going home and not voting, which equals lost votes for the Democrats, which equals, "We can't have that." And so the Voting Rights Act case, without getting into specifics of it, the New York Times is putting down a marker for the justices so that they can keep in mind what's really important about the Voting Rights Act, and that is to do whatever is necessary in their ruling to make it possible for fraud to continue, to make it possible for registration and voting on the same day, same place, to take place, to happen, or whatever is necessary to facilitate Democrats winning elections.
The second thing involved in this story, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat, New York, is sponsoring a Senate voting bill at the behest of Obama which will address the problems of access to voting. Kirsten Gillibrand has determined somehow that many Democrats are finding it more difficult than ever to vote, so she has a piece of legislation to make it easier for them to vote.
Well, but there is an access problem, otherwise there wouldn't be long lines, don't you see. Plus, the Republicans keep making noise about photo ID, and we need to settle that once and for all, and we need to settle that in the Voting Rights Act. We need to make sure there is never, ever gonna be anything like a photo ID requirement. Never, ever gonna make sure there's a federal photo ID requirement to vote. Lastly, this is all part of the Democrats' push to allow more ballot stuffing by extending Election Day for weeks and doing away with the voter ID requirement in general. And if Congress will not do these things, then Obama will have to bypass Congress and do away with these restrictions by executive order.
Now, in this story, the New York Times cites a professor who says, quote, "Voting is one of the most sacred rights you have. They should make it as painless as possible," implying that it's really painful now to vote. It's really hard. It's too hard. The Republicans are out there demanding everybody have a picture. The Republicans are demanding that everybody who vote actually be a citizen. The Republicans are demanding that everybody who vote actually be registered. That's too hard. And it's undemocratic. And the justices have gotta sweep all these restrictions away.
Now, is voting any more of a sacred right than owning a gun? Because these same people want to make that as painful as possible. Same people, same people want to make owning a gun as painful as they can make it, and voting as painless as they can make it. " "With studies suggesting that long lines at the polls cost Democrats hundreds of thousands of votes in November, party leaders are beginning a push to make voting and voter registration easier, setting up a likely new conflict with Republicans." Now, what does voter registration have to do with long lines to vote? Voter registration doesn't have anything to do with Election Day. But it will. Because if they get their way you're gonna be able to do both on the spot. On the spot registration, you register, then you go vote, same thing, same time. Yep. That's the next phase.
I thought also the last two presidential elections had pretty close to record turnout. Am I wrong about that? I am wrong about that? Well, the last was lower than the first one but relative to other elections is pretty high. My point is that, are you aware of people not being able to vote who wanted to vote? I'm not, either. I didn't hear any stories about that. That's my whole point. Why do we get this story now, February 5th? Long lines hurt the Democrats? This is all about existing legislation. Well, proposed legislation by Senator Gillibrand and the Supreme Court decision and same day registration and voting.
"White House officials have told Congressional leaders that the president plans to press for action on Capitol Hill, and Democrats say they expect him to highlight the issue in his State of the Union address next week. Democrats in the House and Senate have already introduced bills that would require states to provide online voter registration and allow at least 15 days of early voting." So that's why we have this story.