SHARE

AL SHARPTON COMING TO SOUTH CAROLINA TO PROTEST STATE’S “VOTER DENIED” LAW

The Rev. Al Sharpton – who passionately pronounces words like “indignation” and “degradation” – will bring his angry black man shtick to South Carolina next week to rail on a new state law that he believes is racist.

Sharpton will be joined by fellow poverty pimp U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) at a Columbia, S.C. forum celebrating National Voter Registration Day, although the real purpose of this event is to bash the Palmetto State’s new voter ID law.

“Voter ID laws are nothing more than Voter Denied laws, and I am pleased Reverend Sharpton is coming to Columbia to highlight this travesty,” Clyburn’s office said in a statement.

Next week’s event will take place at the Drew Wellness Center – an $8.8 million inner city recreational boondoggle in Columbia, S.C. that has been losing an average of $539,000 a year for the past five years.

Talk about a fitting venue, huh?

Anyway, this website has consistently opposed South Carolina’s voter ID law – which we maintain is a costly “solution” in search of a nonexistent problem.  Having said that, the administration of Barack Obama is unnecessarily politicizing this issue along racial lines – which is ironic when you consider that lots of white people could also potentially be affected by this new law.

Will we hear about the plight of any of these crackers from Sharpton or Clyburn?

Of course not …

And let’s face it, the author of this utterly pointless legislation – S.C. Rep. Alan Clemmons – gave Sharpton and Clyburn all the ammunition they needed when he replied “amen” to a racist email sent from one of his fellow Republicans.

(For the latest on that saga, click here).

As we predicted it would be, South Carolina’s voter ID law was blocked by the U.S. Justice Department (USDOJ) – which retains the right to “pre-clear” such changes before they take effect given South Carolina’s less-than-stellar record of enfranchising minorities. And while USDOJ’s lawyers reportedly didn’t find anything discriminatory or unconstitutional – the agency’s political appointees decided to move forward with the case anyway.

That’s further evidence of the need to drop this ridiculous pre-clearance nonsense … although given Clemmons’ comments that isn’t going to happen anytime soon.

***