Link.  “For all the talk of liberal “progressiveness,” the voter-ID wars are a ridiculously antique sideshow for a high-tech society that processes terabytes of data every hour. Besides offering soapbox time to obsolete organizations that require improbable racist conspiracies and theoretical civil-rights hobgoblins to keep their fundraising letters lively, the war against voter ID is fought to keep voter fraud alive.”

A state judge on Thursday adopted a redistricting plan that will establish slightly different boundaries for New Mexico’s three congressional districts and made the fewest changes among the proposed alternatives.

The plan adopted by State District Judge James Hall makes the fewest changes to the existing districts. It has the support of Gov. Susana Martinez, other Republicans and a group of Democrats that include Rep. Brian Egolf of Santa Fe.

“Gov. Martinez believes this plan is fair, as it appropriately equalizes population without advantaging one political party over the other,” Martinez spokesman Scott Darnell said in a statement

full story here.

Philadelphia Inquirer on Voter ID: “The U.S. Department of Justice is taking a hard line with states that pass restrictive voting laws, which is good news for disadvantaged Americans who want their right to vote protected.”

Philadelphia Inquirer on armed New Black Panthers at a poll: “The Obama Justice Department decided not to pursue any penalties against Jackson, who was actually a certified poll watcher. . . .  That’s not to say small hate groups aren’t dangerous. But the scale of justice must be applied appropriately, and here it appears that it was.”

Talk Radio New Service.

Full editorial here.  1.6 percent = the yawning chasm.

Interesting video entitled “An Act of Outrage” from the Dewhurst for Texas Republican primary campaign for the open Texas Senate seat. 

The video shows the passions unleashed when the chief law enforcement official in the country – Attorney General Holder – inserts himself into the preclearance process and makes photo ID election administratin requirements a national racial issue instead of simply following the law of the land and Department precedent established over 20 years.

Another author at Heritage lays out why the Department of Justice simply got the analysis wrong on the deminimus burden placed on voters with regards to acquiring free voter IDs as well as the recent insistence by the Holder DOJ for actual voter fraud evidence where none was required by the Supreme Court.  

The Justice Department’s lawsuit against South Carolina has rekindled political war over state voter identification laws. While the merits of the suit will surely be hashed out in the political arena, the Supreme Court has in fact weighed in on the constitutional arguments offered by opponents of voter ID laws, and found them wanting.

In light of the issue’s prevalence, it’s worth revisiting that decision to see what the nation’s highest court had to say about voter ID laws.

Opponents of those laws usually make a pair of arguments against them: they claim the laws impose overly burdensome restrictions on voting, and that they are a solution in search of a problem, given the relatively low incidence of voter fraud. Neither of those arguments stands up to the Supreme Court’s thorough examination of the issue.

Full story at the link

Nice play of words in the Chicago Tribune.  Below is a snippet:

There are two African Americans representing South Carolina in the U.S. House of Representatives, One is Tim Scott, a freshman Republican. The other is 10-term Rep. James Clyburn, the current assistant Democratic leader. There are numerous minority members of the S.C. state legislature and Governor Nikki Haley who is Indian-American.

This is not your grandfather’s South Carolina. This is not the South Carolina of the then-segregationist and Dixiecrat presidential candidate Strom Thurmond. Yesterday’s South Carolina had segregated schools, lunch counters, restrooms and buses and a dominant Democratic Party. Today’s South Carolina is a modern, integrated, forward-looking, dual-party state.

video at the link describing future legal and political battles over voter ID.

Day two of the vigil waiting for the Attorney General Abbott’s withdrawal of the Texas voter ID submission followed by a prompt complaint filed with a 3 judge panel…found this worrisome article from PajamasMedia. 

The article quotes a source inside DOJ close to the review process who claims that Texas Attorney General Abbott is blowing the voter ID issue.  Not sure what to make of it but DOJ and Texas are playing mind games with each other.  After the South Carolina objection, Texas should be talking with its feet all the way to Court.

I truly hope there is a strategy other than: