COMMON SENSE UNDER CHALLENGE – AT 11:58 A.M. ET:  Making sure an election is legitimate includes making sure that those who vote are actually eligible to vote.  Oh, unless you come from Chicago, where the dearly departed get to serve their country again each election day, by voting at least twice...without ever even asking for a thank-you.  From American Thinker:

Only citizens of the United States can legally vote in federal elections. So Michigan Secretary of State Ruth Johnson added a yes/no question on ballot applications that asks: "Are you a United States citizen?"

According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Michigan, this simple requirement is "an election day disaster in the making." So the ACLU did what it usually does, which is to sue.

Filed on behalf of the UAW International, which includes the radical Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Latin Americans for Social and Economic Development (LA SED), a county election official, and several voters, the ACLU's Sept. 17 lawsuit charges that the citizenship question was not approved through proper channels and violates the 1965 Voting Rights Act because two townships it affects come under federal jurisdiction.

Also, the ACLU contends that this question was not asked of all voters in the August primary, and that including the question on the form could cause long lines on Election Day.

Really? If you're a U.S. citizen, what would keep you from checking the right box? How long could it take? If you're not a U.S. citizen, what would you be doing at a polling place, unless you were trying to vote illegally?

"We can all agree that it should be easier to vote and harder to cheat," said Kary L. Moss, ACLU of Michigan executive director, in a press release, "but cynical voter suppression tactics should not be tolerated."

To the ACLU and its liberal allies, commonsense voter ID laws constitute "suppression tactics."

COMMENT:  There's no doubt that there's illegal voting going on, especially in some big cities.  It has to be stopped.  It seems to me that the steps taken so far in a number of states, like requiring potential voters to have a valid I.D., easily and legitimately available, are very reasonable. 

Could it possibly be that some political forces actually favor illegal voting, if it means giving their side a greater chance to win?  Naw.  No one does that.  That's right, isn't it?

September 29,  2012