Voter ID

saintfan · 08-24-2012, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by halloween 65

Is the Mexicans coming acoss out borders by the 1000's getting our jobs gonna be able to vote? Probably!!

We give 'em everything else. Why not give 'em the right to vote? After all, our men and women only DIED for the privilege.

halloween 65 · 08-24-2012, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by saintfan

We give 'em everything else. Why not give 'em the right to vote? After all, our men and women only DIED for the privilege.

It ticks me off that as an American citizen {BORN AND RAISED IN THIS GREAT COUNTRY} that I pay 1000's of $$ in taxes each and every year and some illigal alian comes to this country and pays 0, zilch, nada for x amount of years and has more benifits that I pay for. Seems like someone has their priorities a$$ backwards.

Cruize · 08-24-2012, 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by saintfan

There is NO REASON in this world that someone who is eligible to vote should be able to or required to prove it. Period. The "it's too close to an election" defense is standard and isn't valid because it will ALWAYS be too close to an election.

You see it as a tactic. Maybe it is. At the end of the day the point I'm making is true. ANY person voting in this country should be able to establish their qualifications to do so for the very reasons you suggest. Being 'elderly', 'poor', or a 'student' is irrelevant. That's just silly in my humble opinion. My grandparents and for that matter their parents had ID. There were people who were born in the late 1800s! I know plenty of the poor and tons of students who can properly identify themselves too. I'm sorry man. That just doesn't wash.

And yes, if you haven't heard the racist argument then I believe it is you who are being disingenuous. If you want Obama to win, fine. Don't rely on illegal aliens to stuff the ballot box.

As usual, some of you miss the point and focus on the small stuff and do your best to deflect from the points of fact. I HAVEN'T seen anybody on the shows I take the time to watch say it's racist. Do they exist? I'm sure. I personally try to avoid such extremism in my news and entertainment. I KNOW Fox News tries to label anyone not agreeing with the Republican gospel as a racist, socialist, freeloader or a terrorist. It's obviously what formed your "opinions."

Being elderly and no longer driving or being poor and not being able to afford an ID is not irrevelant. Just because you and I are blessed for it not to be a restriction on us, doesn't mean there isn't good, lifelong Americans not so fortunate.

Illegals stuffing the ballot box? LOL. Now I know you get your opinions off of Fox. As I pointed out in the PA case, an elderly person who has voted for 50 years, currently can't vote. A DOCUMENTED LEGAL, LIFELONG TAXPAYING CITIZEN, doesn't have the ID NOW REQUIRED to vote under the new law. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your partisanship.

The bottom line is, ALTHOUGH NO CASES OF VOTER FRAUD can be presented in the REPUBLICAN states where the new restrictions are in place, states which happen to be SWING STATES in an election less than three months away, with a prominant REPUBLICAN ADMITTING ON TAPE that the only reason for the new laws is to SWING THE ELECTION, you can deflect, theorize, and voice your partisan excuses. But, the ONLY reason for the voter ID laws at this time is an attempt to suppress the vote and steal an election.

saintfan · 08-24-2012, 09:32 PM

Originally Posted by Cruize

As usual, some of you miss the point and focus on the small stuff and do your best to deflect from the points of fact. I HAVEN'T seen anybody on the shows I take the time to watch say it's racist. Do they exist? I'm sure. I personally try to avoid such extremism in my news and entertainment. I KNOW Fox News tries to label anyone not agreeing with the Republican gospel as a racist, socialist, freeloader or a terrorist. It's obviously what formed your "opinions."

Being elderly and no longer driving or being poor and not being able to afford an ID is not irrevelant. Just because you and I are blessed for it not to be a restriction on us, doesn't mean there isn't good, lifelong Americans not so fortunate.

Illegals stuffing the ballot box? LOL. Now I know you get your opinions off of Fox. As I pointed out in the PA case, an elderly person who has voted for 50 years, currently can't vote. A DOCUMENTED LEGAL, LIFELONG TAXPAYING CITIZEN, doesn't have the ID NOW REQUIRED to vote under the new law. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your partisanship.

The bottom line is, ALTHOUGH NO CASES OF VOTER FRAUD can be presented in the REPUBLICAN states where the new restrictions are in place, states which happen to be SWING STATES in an election less than three months away, with a prominant REPUBLICAN ADMITTING ON TAPE that the only reason for the new laws is to SWING THE ELECTION, you can deflect, theorize, and voice your partisan excuses. But, the ONLY reason for the voter ID laws at this time is an attempt to suppress the vote and steal an election.

Seriously. If you haven't heard the "Voters Laws are Racist" then you're not paying attention. It's not 'extreme' news even at all. It's very much mainstream, and that you try to avoid it doesn't just make it go away. The freaking Huffington Post tops page one of Google search on the subject. You may want it to be fringe, but it is far FAR from it. And it isn't FOX news, so you can't blame that network for it.

Now, being elderly first: You think being old means you can't get an ID? You'd be wrong, and I know a lot of old people who'd kick your ass even for suggesting it. IT IS AN EXCUSE, and most old people don't make it. As for being poor, the states who have such laws in place provide IDs FOR FREE, so there goes the poor argument. Are these really the 'not so fortunate'? How do these old or poor people prove who they are when they go see a doctor? How did they get (assuming they have) an SS number? I see old people digging in gardens, walking down the street, driving cars, eating out, going on vacations, visiting with family and friends, grocery shopping, and on and on. For that matter I see the poor doing many of the same things. No sir. It isn't difficult to get an ID. Being old or poor isn't an excuse the old or poor make. It is an excuse people against voting laws use for them. It doesn't wash man.

You don't think illegals vote? In Florida, of the 30,000 people called to served for jury duty over a two year period through their VOTER REGISTRATION, 3% were illegal immigrants. So, just in Florida, and just over a two year period, that's nearly a thousand voters, and any sensible person would rightfully assume that isn't all of them. Those are just the ones they caught. Those numbers didn't come from Fox by the way, but even if they did you're MORE than welcome to attempt to disprove them. Don't try. You can't. You will lose because illegals ARE voting in droves, by the tens of thousands, whether you have your head in the sand or not.

Further, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in 2010 said that, in fact, voters need not even prove they are a U.S. Citizen to register to vote, MUCH LESS REQUIRE AN ID!!!!!!! You can "LOL" until you're purple. It's a problem. It's a BIG problem. It's VERY REAL. FOX News IS NOT making it up...ahhhhh...but you'll be hard pressed to find anything about it on CNN.COM to be sure. Once again, that the liberal mainstream media isn't reporting on it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. You're simply going to have to extend your sources.

The law in Pennsylvania says if you don't have a current driver's license, you can get a FREE ID. All you need is your SS card, a birth certificate, and two documents that verify your address. And you know what? Those are the exact documents the City of Brentwood, California required of me before they allowed me to register my daughter for public school. Go figure huh. One article I read said it took too much "time and money" for people to "assemble the documentation". Seriously. How much 'time' and 'money' does it truly take? Maybe you have to send a couple letters, but probably not, and then you just need a couple bills with your name and address. Opponents call it a poll tax. Hog wash.

Moreover, there are few convictions of voter fraud to speak of, as you noted, because the liberals run the courts and, just as I pointed out here in San Francisco, attempt to make it all but impossible to prosecute offenders because they want that vote. That's just fact. If you think I'm making it up, look it up for yourself.

Oh and one other thing on Pennsylvania: ONE HUNDRED AND SIXY SEVEN THOUSAND of these old, poor students haven't voted in the last 5 years anyway. Still think the law is abusive? One of the plaintiffs was told she could vote 'absentee'. STILL think the evil conservatives are trying to fix an election with a law that was enacted SIX MONTHS before November? Still? Really?

And why in the hell won't Homeland Security simply provide Florida with immigration documents? I think we need to bring that to the table while we're at it, because it damn sure matters, don't you think? I can make an educated guess as to why, and it has little to do with the 'security' of our home land...

Now, let me ask you, political agenda aside if we can do that: What part of an American wanting to protect our right to vote, our most precious asset, and reserve that right for people who are actually legal Americans, is partisan to you? Do you simply think I'm trying to get Romney elected by arguing this point? Sir you couldn't be MORE mistaken. Old people can get IDs. Poor people can get them. Students can get them. It isn't racist because it applies to everyone. How is it these old and poor people who are so unable to get about, or these poor people who can't afford a way to get somewhere to get an ID, actually manage to get to the polls in the first place?

I'm not trying to get anybody elected by desiring to protect my vote. You either believe that or you don't. My question to you is why don't YOU want to protect that precious right as much as I do?

SmashMouth · 08-25-2012, 10:30 AM

Originally Posted by Cruize

As usual, some of you miss the point and focus on the small stuff and do your best to deflect from the points of fact. I HAVEN'T seen anybody on the shows I take the time to watch say it's racist. Do they exist? I'm sure. I personally try to avoid such extremism in my news and entertainment. I KNOW Fox News tries to label anyone not agreeing with the Republican gospel as a racist, socialist, freeloader or a terrorist. It's obviously what formed your "opinions."

Being elderly and no longer driving or being poor and not being able to afford an ID is not irrevelant. Just because you and I are blessed for it not to be a restriction on us, doesn't mean there isn't good, lifelong Americans not so fortunate.

Illegals stuffing the ballot box? LOL. Now I know you get your opinions off of Fox. As I pointed out in the PA case, an elderly person who has voted for 50 years, currently can't vote. A DOCUMENTED LEGAL, LIFELONG TAXPAYING CITIZEN, doesn't have the ID NOW REQUIRED to vote under the new law. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your partisanship.

The bottom line is, ALTHOUGH NO CASES OF VOTER FRAUD can be presented in the REPUBLICAN states where the new restrictions are in place, states which happen to be SWING STATES in an election less than three months away, with a prominant REPUBLICAN ADMITTING ON TAPE that the only reason for the new laws is to SWING THE ELECTION, you can deflect, theorize, and voice your partisan excuses. But, the ONLY reason for the voter ID laws at this time is an attempt to suppress the vote and steal an election.

Speaking of stealing an election.... Glad you asked...

It looks increasingly likely that at least one member of the United States Senate may owe his seat in the world’s greatest deliberative body not to his charisma or the persuasiveness of his message but to voter fraud.

As the Wall Street Journal's John Fund reports, Minnesota Democrat Al Franken’s narrow, 312-vote victory in 2008 over incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman may have come as the result of people being allowed to vote who, under existing law, shouldn’t have been.

[See who gave the most to Franken.]

The certification of Franken as the victor came only after a series of recounts dragging out for almost half a year. It also sparked an investigation by Minnesota Majority, a conservative watchdog group that compared the list of those recorded as having voted in the election against what Fund calls “criminal rap sheets.” The group found, in what appears to clearly warrant further and official inquiry, that

… At least 341 convicted felons voted in Minneapolis's Hennepin County, the state's largest, and another 52 voted illegally in St. Paul's Ramsey County, the state's second largest. Dan McGrath, head of Minnesota Majority, says that only conclusive matches were included in the group's totals. The number of felons voting in those two counties alone exceeds Mr. Franken's victory margin.

Thus far no one is calling for the results to be overturned. Indeed Dan McGrath, who spearheaded the inquiry, told Fox News, "We aren't trying to change the result of the last election. That legally can't be done." He added: “We are just trying to make sure the integrity of the next election isn't compromised."

McGrath’s point is a good one. The only question is how the integrity of U.S. elections can be maintained when senior policymakers inside the United States Department of Justice, through their actions and instructions to their staffs, do not seem to believe that voter fraud exists or, if it does, that it is not worth investigating.

One way, if the politicians in Washington continue to impede the process of keeping the roles clean, might be for states to treat a voter’s registration the same way that drivers’ licenses, passports, hunting and fishing licenses, concealed-carry permits, and other official documents are treated and require that it be renewed on a regular schedule every few years.

No one objects in principle to the need to have drivers’ licenses or passports renewed, even if they have to stand in line someplace to get it done. Annoying? Yes. Time consuming? Absolutely. But the requirement for renewal is in no way an impediment, constitutionally or otherwise, to getting it done. It seems perfectly reasonable, therefore, to ask people to do the same with their voter registration.

Voter registration does not need to be for life. Unclean roles jeopardize their integrity and the security of the franchise. It is just as damaging to the rights of us all to have people voting who are not allowed to be as it is to prevent people entitled to vote from casting ballots.

The failure to keep the voter roles clean--to remove from them the names of voters who have died, who have been convicted of felonies, or who have moved from the place of residence they occupied when they registered--cheapens the process, turning it into a game of who can best beat the system, as the election results from the 2008 Minnesota Senate race suggest.

Whether it is a matter of the time and expense involved or a deliberate decision “to look the other way,” no one can be secure in the value of their own vote when the potential for fraud continues to exist on such a massive scale. Requiring re-registration once every five years or so would keep the lists clean–or at least make them cleaner than they are now--as anyone who failed to re-register would be dropped from the roles.

Al Franken May Have Won His Senate Seat Through Voter Fraud - Peter Roff (usnews.com)

saintfan · 08-25-2012, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by SmashMouth

Speaking of stealing an election.... Glad you asked...

It looks increasingly likely that at least one member of the United States Senate may owe his seat in the world’s greatest deliberative body not to his charisma or the persuasiveness of his message but to voter fraud.

As the Wall Street Journal's John Fund reports, Minnesota Democrat Al Franken’s narrow, 312-vote victory in 2008 over incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman may have come as the result of people being allowed to vote who, under existing law, shouldn’t have been.

[See who gave the most to Franken.]

The certification of Franken as the victor came only after a series of recounts dragging out for almost half a year. It also sparked an investigation by Minnesota Majority, a conservative watchdog group that compared the list of those recorded as having voted in the election against what Fund calls “criminal rap sheets.” The group found, in what appears to clearly warrant further and official inquiry, that

… At least 341 convicted felons voted in Minneapolis's Hennepin County, the state's largest, and another 52 voted illegally in St. Paul's Ramsey County, the state's second largest. Dan McGrath, head of Minnesota Majority, says that only conclusive matches were included in the group's totals. The number of felons voting in those two counties alone exceeds Mr. Franken's victory margin.

Thus far no one is calling for the results to be overturned. Indeed Dan McGrath, who spearheaded the inquiry, told Fox News, "We aren't trying to change the result of the last election. That legally can't be done." He added: “We are just trying to make sure the integrity of the next election isn't compromised."

McGrath’s point is a good one. The only question is how the integrity of U.S. elections can be maintained when senior policymakers inside the United States Department of Justice, through their actions and instructions to their staffs, do not seem to believe that voter fraud exists or, if it does, that it is not worth investigating.

One way, if the politicians in Washington continue to impede the process of keeping the roles clean, might be for states to treat a voter’s registration the same way that drivers’ licenses, passports, hunting and fishing licenses, concealed-carry permits, and other official documents are treated and require that it be renewed on a regular schedule every few years.

No one objects in principle to the need to have drivers’ licenses or passports renewed, even if they have to stand in line someplace to get it done. Annoying? Yes. Time consuming? Absolutely. But the requirement for renewal is in no way an impediment, constitutionally or otherwise, to getting it done. It seems perfectly reasonable, therefore, to ask people to do the same with their voter registration.

Voter registration does not need to be for life. Unclean roles jeopardize their integrity and the security of the franchise. It is just as damaging to the rights of us all to have people voting who are not allowed to be as it is to prevent people entitled to vote from casting ballots.

The failure to keep the voter roles clean--to remove from them the names of voters who have died, who have been convicted of felonies, or who have moved from the place of residence they occupied when they registered--cheapens the process, turning it into a game of who can best beat the system, as the election results from the 2008 Minnesota Senate race suggest.

Whether it is a matter of the time and expense involved or a deliberate decision “to look the other way,” no one can be secure in the value of their own vote when the potential for fraud continues to exist on such a massive scale. Requiring re-registration once every five years or so would keep the lists clean–or at least make them cleaner than they are now--as anyone who failed to re-register would be dropped from the roles.

Al Franken May Have Won His Senate Seat Through Voter Fraud - Peter Roff (usnews.com)

Doesn't anyone wonder why this isn't on CNN? Why doesn't Rolling Stone do a piece this when they are willing to do one on the "myth" of voter fraud - and to cite ONLY liberal institutions as their sources along the way.

People are being duped. It's just that simple. And too many American's aren't willing to investigate on their own. In this particular debate, anyone who spends 30 minutes to an hour on the internet looking for the truth will find it, and then they will have to ask themselves why their news sources aren't reporting on it - if they're truly interested in what's really going on I mean.

08-24-2012, 06:12 PM	#11
saintfan Site Donor Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 9,563 Blog Entries: 5	Re: Voter ID Originally Posted by halloween 65 Is the Mexicans coming acoss out borders by the 1000's getting our jobs gonna be able to vote? Probably!! We give 'em everything else. Why not give 'em the right to vote? After all, our men and women only DIED for the privilege. Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook!

08-24-2012, 06:19 PM	#12
halloween 65 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Grand Haven, Michigan by way of a little Mississippi River town in Louisiana Posts: 1,475	Re: Voter ID Originally Posted by saintfan We give 'em everything else. Why not give 'em the right to vote? After all, our men and women only DIED for the privilege. It ticks me off that as an American citizen {BORN AND RAISED IN THIS GREAT COUNTRY} that I pay 1000's of $$ in taxes each and every year and some illigal alian comes to this country and pays 0, zilch, nada for x amount of years and has more benifits that I pay for. Seems like someone has their priorities a$$ backwards. Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook!

08-24-2012, 07:17 PM	#13
Cruize 1000 Posts + Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 1,105	Re: Voter ID Originally Posted by saintfan There is NO REASON in this world that someone who is eligible to vote should be able to or required to prove it. Period. The "it's too close to an election" defense is standard and isn't valid because it will ALWAYS be too close to an election. You see it as a tactic. Maybe it is. At the end of the day the point I'm making is true. ANY person voting in this country should be able to establish their qualifications to do so for the very reasons you suggest. Being 'elderly', 'poor', or a 'student' is irrelevant. That's just silly in my humble opinion. My grandparents and for that matter their parents had ID. There were people who were born in the late 1800s! I know plenty of the poor and tons of students who can properly identify themselves too. I'm sorry man. That just doesn't wash. And yes, if you haven't heard the racist argument then I believe it is you who are being disingenuous. If you want Obama to win, fine. Don't rely on illegal aliens to stuff the ballot box. As usual, some of you miss the point and focus on the small stuff and do your best to deflect from the points of fact. I HAVEN'T seen anybody on the shows I take the time to watch say it's racist. Do they exist? I'm sure. I personally try to avoid such extremism in my news and entertainment. I KNOW Fox News tries to label anyone not agreeing with the Republican gospel as a racist, socialist, freeloader or a terrorist. It's obviously what formed your "opinions." Being elderly and no longer driving or being poor and not being able to afford an ID is not irrevelant. Just because you and I are blessed for it not to be a restriction on us, doesn't mean there isn't good, lifelong Americans not so fortunate. Illegals stuffing the ballot box? LOL. Now I know you get your opinions off of Fox. As I pointed out in the PA case, an elderly person who has voted for 50 years, currently can't vote. A DOCUMENTED LEGAL, LIFELONG TAXPAYING CITIZEN, doesn't have the ID NOW REQUIRED to vote under the new law. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your partisanship. The bottom line is, ALTHOUGH NO CASES OF VOTER FRAUD can be presented in the REPUBLICAN states where the new restrictions are in place, states which happen to be SWING STATES in an election less than three months away, with a prominant REPUBLICAN ADMITTING ON TAPE that the only reason for the new laws is to SWING THE ELECTION, you can deflect, theorize, and voice your partisan excuses. But, the ONLY reason for the voter ID laws at this time is an attempt to suppress the vote and steal an election. Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook!
Cruize 1000 Posts + Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 1,105

08-24-2012, 09:32 PM	#14
saintfan Site Donor Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 9,563 Blog Entries: 5	Re: Voter ID Originally Posted by Cruize As usual, some of you miss the point and focus on the small stuff and do your best to deflect from the points of fact. I HAVEN'T seen anybody on the shows I take the time to watch say it's racist. Do they exist? I'm sure. I personally try to avoid such extremism in my news and entertainment. I KNOW Fox News tries to label anyone not agreeing with the Republican gospel as a racist, socialist, freeloader or a terrorist. It's obviously what formed your "opinions." Being elderly and no longer driving or being poor and not being able to afford an ID is not irrevelant. Just because you and I are blessed for it not to be a restriction on us, doesn't mean there isn't good, lifelong Americans not so fortunate. Illegals stuffing the ballot box? LOL. Now I know you get your opinions off of Fox. As I pointed out in the PA case, an elderly person who has voted for 50 years, currently can't vote. A DOCUMENTED LEGAL, LIFELONG TAXPAYING CITIZEN, doesn't have the ID NOW REQUIRED to vote under the new law. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your partisanship. The bottom line is, ALTHOUGH NO CASES OF VOTER FRAUD can be presented in the REPUBLICAN states where the new restrictions are in place, states which happen to be SWING STATES in an election less than three months away, with a prominant REPUBLICAN ADMITTING ON TAPE that the only reason for the new laws is to SWING THE ELECTION, you can deflect, theorize, and voice your partisan excuses. But, the ONLY reason for the voter ID laws at this time is an attempt to suppress the vote and steal an election. Seriously. If you haven't heard the "Voters Laws are Racist" then you're not paying attention. It's not 'extreme' news even at all. It's very much mainstream, and that you try to avoid it doesn't just make it go away. The freaking Huffington Post tops page one of Google search on the subject. You may want it to be fringe, but it is far FAR from it. And it isn't FOX news, so you can't blame that network for it. Now, being elderly first: You think being old means you can't get an ID? You'd be wrong, and I know a lot of old people who'd kick your ass even for suggesting it. IT IS AN EXCUSE, and most old people don't make it. As for being poor, the states who have such laws in place provide IDs FOR FREE, so there goes the poor argument. Are these really the 'not so fortunate'? How do these old or poor people prove who they are when they go see a doctor? How did they get (assuming they have) an SS number? I see old people digging in gardens, walking down the street, driving cars, eating out, going on vacations, visiting with family and friends, grocery shopping, and on and on. For that matter I see the poor doing many of the same things. No sir. It isn't difficult to get an ID. Being old or poor isn't an excuse the old or poor make. It is an excuse people against voting laws use for them. It doesn't wash man. You don't think illegals vote? In Florida, of the 30,000 people called to served for jury duty over a two year period through their VOTER REGISTRATION, 3% were illegal immigrants. So, just in Florida, and just over a two year period, that's nearly a thousand voters, and any sensible person would rightfully assume that isn't all of them. Those are just the ones they caught. Those numbers didn't come from Fox by the way, but even if they did you're MORE than welcome to attempt to disprove them. Don't try. You can't. You will lose because illegals ARE voting in droves, by the tens of thousands, whether you have your head in the sand or not. Further, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in 2010 said that, in fact, voters need not even prove they are a U.S. Citizen to register to vote, MUCH LESS REQUIRE AN ID!!!!!!! You can "LOL" until you're purple. It's a problem. It's a BIG problem. It's VERY REAL. FOX News IS NOT making it up...ahhhhh...but you'll be hard pressed to find anything about it on CNN.COM to be sure. Once again, that the liberal mainstream media isn't reporting on it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. You're simply going to have to extend your sources. The law in Pennsylvania says if you don't have a current driver's license, you can get a FREE ID. All you need is your SS card, a birth certificate, and two documents that verify your address. And you know what? Those are the exact documents the City of Brentwood, California required of me before they allowed me to register my daughter for public school. Go figure huh. One article I read said it took too much "time and money" for people to "assemble the documentation". Seriously. How much 'time' and 'money' does it truly take? Maybe you have to send a couple letters, but probably not, and then you just need a couple bills with your name and address. Opponents call it a poll tax. Hog wash. Moreover, there are few convictions of voter fraud to speak of, as you noted, because the liberals run the courts and, just as I pointed out here in San Francisco, attempt to make it all but impossible to prosecute offenders because they want that vote. That's just fact. If you think I'm making it up, look it up for yourself. Oh and one other thing on Pennsylvania: ONE HUNDRED AND SIXY SEVEN THOUSAND of these old, poor students haven't voted in the last 5 years anyway. Still think the law is abusive? One of the plaintiffs was told she could vote 'absentee'. STILL think the evil conservatives are trying to fix an election with a law that was enacted SIX MONTHS before November? Still? Really? And why in the hell won't Homeland Security simply provide Florida with immigration documents? I think we need to bring that to the table while we're at it, because it damn sure matters, don't you think? I can make an educated guess as to why, and it has little to do with the 'security' of our home land... Now, let me ask you, political agenda aside if we can do that: What part of an American wanting to protect our right to vote, our most precious asset, and reserve that right for people who are actually legal Americans, is partisan to you? Do you simply think I'm trying to get Romney elected by arguing this point? Sir you couldn't be MORE mistaken. Old people can get IDs. Poor people can get them. Students can get them. It isn't racist because it applies to everyone. How is it these old and poor people who are so unable to get about, or these poor people who can't afford a way to get somewhere to get an ID, actually manage to get to the polls in the first place? I'm not trying to get anybody elected by desiring to protect my vote. You either believe that or you don't. My question to you is why don't YOU want to protect that precious right as much as I do? Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook! SmashMouth likes this.
	Trust in Allah, but tie up your camel... Last edited by saintfan; 08-24-2012 at 10:20 PM..

08-25-2012, 10:30 AM	#15
SmashMouth I donated, did you? Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 14,401 Blog Entries: 22	Re: Voter ID Originally Posted by Cruize As usual, some of you miss the point and focus on the small stuff and do your best to deflect from the points of fact. I HAVEN'T seen anybody on the shows I take the time to watch say it's racist. Do they exist? I'm sure. I personally try to avoid such extremism in my news and entertainment. I KNOW Fox News tries to label anyone not agreeing with the Republican gospel as a racist, socialist, freeloader or a terrorist. It's obviously what formed your "opinions." Being elderly and no longer driving or being poor and not being able to afford an ID is not irrevelant. Just because you and I are blessed for it not to be a restriction on us, doesn't mean there isn't good, lifelong Americans not so fortunate. Illegals stuffing the ballot box? LOL. Now I know you get your opinions off of Fox. As I pointed out in the PA case, an elderly person who has voted for 50 years, currently can't vote. A DOCUMENTED LEGAL, LIFELONG TAXPAYING CITIZEN, doesn't have the ID NOW REQUIRED to vote under the new law. But hey, don't let the facts get in the way of your partisanship. The bottom line is, ALTHOUGH NO CASES OF VOTER FRAUD can be presented in the REPUBLICAN states where the new restrictions are in place, states which happen to be SWING STATES in an election less than three months away, with a prominant REPUBLICAN ADMITTING ON TAPE that the only reason for the new laws is to SWING THE ELECTION, you can deflect, theorize, and voice your partisan excuses. But, the ONLY reason for the voter ID laws at this time is an attempt to suppress the vote and steal an election. Speaking of stealing an election.... Glad you asked... It looks increasingly likely that at least one member of the United States Senate may owe his seat in the world’s greatest deliberative body not to his charisma or the persuasiveness of his message but to voter fraud. As the Wall Street Journal's John Fund reports, Minnesota Democrat Al Franken’s narrow, 312-vote victory in 2008 over incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman may have come as the result of people being allowed to vote who, under existing law, shouldn’t have been. [See who gave the most to Franken.] The certification of Franken as the victor came only after a series of recounts dragging out for almost half a year. It also sparked an investigation by Minnesota Majority, a conservative watchdog group that compared the list of those recorded as having voted in the election against what Fund calls “criminal rap sheets.” The group found, in what appears to clearly warrant further and official inquiry, that … At least 341 convicted felons voted in Minneapolis's Hennepin County, the state's largest, and another 52 voted illegally in St. Paul's Ramsey County, the state's second largest. Dan McGrath, head of Minnesota Majority, says that only conclusive matches were included in the group's totals. The number of felons voting in those two counties alone exceeds Mr. Franken's victory margin. Thus far no one is calling for the results to be overturned. Indeed Dan McGrath, who spearheaded the inquiry, told Fox News, "We aren't trying to change the result of the last election. That legally can't be done." He added: “We are just trying to make sure the integrity of the next election isn't compromised." McGrath’s point is a good one. The only question is how the integrity of U.S. elections can be maintained when senior policymakers inside the United States Department of Justice, through their actions and instructions to their staffs, do not seem to believe that voter fraud exists or, if it does, that it is not worth investigating. One way, if the politicians in Washington continue to impede the process of keeping the roles clean, might be for states to treat a voter’s registration the same way that drivers’ licenses, passports, hunting and fishing licenses, concealed-carry permits, and other official documents are treated and require that it be renewed on a regular schedule every few years. No one objects in principle to the need to have drivers’ licenses or passports renewed, even if they have to stand in line someplace to get it done. Annoying? Yes. Time consuming? Absolutely. But the requirement for renewal is in no way an impediment, constitutionally or otherwise, to getting it done. It seems perfectly reasonable, therefore, to ask people to do the same with their voter registration. Voter registration does not need to be for life. Unclean roles jeopardize their integrity and the security of the franchise. It is just as damaging to the rights of us all to have people voting who are not allowed to be as it is to prevent people entitled to vote from casting ballots. The failure to keep the voter roles clean--to remove from them the names of voters who have died, who have been convicted of felonies, or who have moved from the place of residence they occupied when they registered--cheapens the process, turning it into a game of who can best beat the system, as the election results from the 2008 Minnesota Senate race suggest. Whether it is a matter of the time and expense involved or a deliberate decision “to look the other way,” no one can be secure in the value of their own vote when the potential for fraud continues to exist on such a massive scale. Requiring re-registration once every five years or so would keep the lists clean–or at least make them cleaner than they are now--as anyone who failed to re-register would be dropped from the roles. Al Franken May Have Won His Senate Seat Through Voter Fraud - Peter Roff (usnews.com) Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook! saintfan likes this.
	Said Pope Benedict: "WOW ... that ring is bigger than mine!!!"

Latest Blogs
Hipocrisy in the mainstream media Last Blog: 05-11-2013 By: SmashMouth Rookie free agent Class 2013 Last Blog: 05-08-2013 By: crawgator Upon further review: OLB Eric Martin, Nebraska Last Blog: 04-29-2013 By: hagan714

08-25-2012, 12:11 PM	#16
saintfan Site Donor Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 9,563 Blog Entries: 5	Re: Voter ID Originally Posted by SmashMouth Speaking of stealing an election.... Glad you asked... It looks increasingly likely that at least one member of the United States Senate may owe his seat in the world’s greatest deliberative body not to his charisma or the persuasiveness of his message but to voter fraud. As the Wall Street Journal's John Fund reports, Minnesota Democrat Al Franken’s narrow, 312-vote victory in 2008 over incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman may have come as the result of people being allowed to vote who, under existing law, shouldn’t have been. [See who gave the most to Franken.] The certification of Franken as the victor came only after a series of recounts dragging out for almost half a year. It also sparked an investigation by Minnesota Majority, a conservative watchdog group that compared the list of those recorded as having voted in the election against what Fund calls “criminal rap sheets.” The group found, in what appears to clearly warrant further and official inquiry, that … At least 341 convicted felons voted in Minneapolis's Hennepin County, the state's largest, and another 52 voted illegally in St. Paul's Ramsey County, the state's second largest. Dan McGrath, head of Minnesota Majority, says that only conclusive matches were included in the group's totals. The number of felons voting in those two counties alone exceeds Mr. Franken's victory margin. Thus far no one is calling for the results to be overturned. Indeed Dan McGrath, who spearheaded the inquiry, told Fox News, "We aren't trying to change the result of the last election. That legally can't be done." He added: “We are just trying to make sure the integrity of the next election isn't compromised." McGrath’s point is a good one. The only question is how the integrity of U.S. elections can be maintained when senior policymakers inside the United States Department of Justice, through their actions and instructions to their staffs, do not seem to believe that voter fraud exists or, if it does, that it is not worth investigating. One way, if the politicians in Washington continue to impede the process of keeping the roles clean, might be for states to treat a voter’s registration the same way that drivers’ licenses, passports, hunting and fishing licenses, concealed-carry permits, and other official documents are treated and require that it be renewed on a regular schedule every few years. No one objects in principle to the need to have drivers’ licenses or passports renewed, even if they have to stand in line someplace to get it done. Annoying? Yes. Time consuming? Absolutely. But the requirement for renewal is in no way an impediment, constitutionally or otherwise, to getting it done. It seems perfectly reasonable, therefore, to ask people to do the same with their voter registration. Voter registration does not need to be for life. Unclean roles jeopardize their integrity and the security of the franchise. It is just as damaging to the rights of us all to have people voting who are not allowed to be as it is to prevent people entitled to vote from casting ballots. The failure to keep the voter roles clean--to remove from them the names of voters who have died, who have been convicted of felonies, or who have moved from the place of residence they occupied when they registered--cheapens the process, turning it into a game of who can best beat the system, as the election results from the 2008 Minnesota Senate race suggest. Whether it is a matter of the time and expense involved or a deliberate decision “to look the other way,” no one can be secure in the value of their own vote when the potential for fraud continues to exist on such a massive scale. Requiring re-registration once every five years or so would keep the lists clean–or at least make them cleaner than they are now--as anyone who failed to re-register would be dropped from the roles. Al Franken May Have Won His Senate Seat Through Voter Fraud - Peter Roff (usnews.com) Doesn't anyone wonder why this isn't on CNN? Why doesn't Rolling Stone do a piece this when they are willing to do one on the "myth" of voter fraud - and to cite ONLY liberal institutions as their sources along the way. People are being duped. It's just that simple. And too many American's aren't willing to investigate on their own. In this particular debate, anyone who spends 30 minutes to an hour on the internet looking for the truth will find it, and then they will have to ask themselves why their news sources aren't reporting on it - if they're truly interested in what's really going on I mean. Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook!
	Trust in Allah, but tie up your camel...

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode