Romney's Finest Hour: Redeem Self By Denouncing Pennsylvania Voter Suppression Law

-A +A
0

Regardless of the outcome of the case in Pennsylvania, and even of the presidential election, wouldn't it be remarkable in Romney issues a statement calling for the restrictive laws to be struck down?


[Black Star News Editorial]

He Can Prove He Cares About American Values

Mitt
Romney can still redeem himself from his shameful statements denouncing
the Obama administration's response to the crises in Libya and Egypt.

A candidate has the right to criticize perceived deficiencies in his or her opponent's foreign policy approach.

Romney's
timing was awful. The attack on the consulate in Benghazi led to the
death of ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, three other Americans and
reportedly scores of Libyan guards. The attack on the Cairo embassy continues at lower intensity.

Romney
also falsely alleged that the Obama administration "sided" with the
attackers. Hours before the attack, having learned of the incendiary
video "Innocence of Muslims" which reportedly portrays the prophet
Muhammad as an adulterer and pedophile the embassy issued a statement.
It acknowledged the filmmakers' right to free speech. It also,
correctly, noted the film was produced by "misguided individuals" who
intended to "hurt the religious feelings of Muslims."

Embassy
officials hoped to pre-empt an attack. It didn't work. Romney concluded
that this was evidence of the Obama administration issuing an "apology"
and "siding" with the attackers. It's as disgraceful as when Sarah Palin
infamously claimed during the 2008 campaign that Obama used to "pal
around with terrorists."

Romney claimed he made the early statement because "It's never too soon to stand up for American values and interests."

But the damage was done. President Obama said Romney had a tendency to "shoot first and aim later."

How can Romney redeem some modicum of respectability?

For
months some Republican legislators and governors have been devising
schemes to suppress the vote come November 6, with new restrictive photo
identification requirements at polling stations. According to an
account in The Wall Street Journal an estimated 25% of African Americans
lack the required photo identifications.  
 
By one estimate more
than 758,000 voters voters in Pennsylvania lack photo identifications.
 
The
numbers almost mirror the 600,000 margin of victory for Obama in 2008
in the state. Pennsylvania is critical with its 21 electoral college
votes.

Republicans claim they are merely engaged in trying to
weed out voter fraud. Yet there have been no reports or documentation of
significant cheating over the past several years.

So what's the
Republican party machinery really up to? The mission was best summed by
Mike Turzai, the Pennsylvania House majority leader, who bragged during a
committee meeting in the summer that the new restrictions will "allow
Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania."

Romney can demonstrate that he wants to win fair and square, not by voter suppression, which is equal to stealing the election. He can denounce the laws in all the states where they have been enacted.

The State Supreme Court in Pennsylvania today hears the case initiated by opponents of the restrictive law. Candidate Romney weighed in on the healthcare law when it was before the U.S. Supreme Court demanding that it be struck down. 
He was on the losing side in that fight.

Regardless
of the outcome of the case in Pennsylvania, and even of the
presidential election, wouldn't it be remarkable if Romney issues a
statement calling for the restrictive laws to be struck down?

This is Romney's opportunity to show that he really does care about "American values and interests."

This could be Mitt Romney's finest hour.

"Speaking Truth To Empower."


Also Check Out...

It Is A Home Thing, Hope You
FRENCH FIRM LOSES BID TO OWN
Living in the City
El Puente Artists And Los Sures
TNC's Fifth "Dream Up
LIBERIANS RALLY IN RESPONSE TO