Guess who supported voter ID? Nelson Mandela
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Sunday, Dec. 22, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
To “progressives” who insist that any push for voter identification is a subterfuge to disenfranchise the poor, minorities and the elderly, we present a staunch proponent for IDs, whose support should be clear even to them:
That's right. The late South African president championed voter ID at a rally in 1998 as the African National Congress conducted its re-election. Fists clenched and enthusiastic, Mr. Mandela is shown wearing a T-shirt that proclaims “Get an ID. Register. Vote.” in a picture posted by The Daily Caller.
Additionally, South Africa's Constitution, signed by Mandela, “supports a rigorous election integrity process,” according to Media Trackers.
Closer to home, Pennsylvania's own voter ID law is being challenged in the courts. But consider: The state law would require voters to show a driver's license, passport, military-issued card or similar identification at the polls. South Africa permits only three forms of official identification and these exclude passports and driver's licenses.
There's also no online registration, no same-day registration and no mail-in registration in South Africa, writes Hans von Spakovsky for The Heritage Foundation.
Nevertheless, “progressives” will twist Mandela's support for ensuring the integrity of the South African vote. Revisionists always find a way to rewrite history. But the very words that he thought significant enough to wear on his shirt do not lie.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- ‘Un-American’? That’s Harry Reid, the Senate’s lowly smear artist
- The market speaks: Cadillac dealers reject another electric folly
- Market perversions: Chrysler retreats
- Sunday pops
- THE BOX
- The new SAT: Rigor gets a pass
- The CBO exposes the fallacies of hiking the minimum wage
- Fixing Ford City’s water leaks: Time is money
- Greensburg Tuesday takes
- More reefer sanity
- Pittsburgh Tuesday takes