RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote

RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Alumbrado -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (4/29/2008 4:12:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Who's being disenfranchised? See Ken's reply as above [8\|] . As for your self-description as a 'moderate'... if this were the case, I doubt you would rant against 'liberals' and 'left-wingers' as often as you do on these boards. Unless, of course, you ranted against 'conservatives' and 'right-wingers' as much. All the more power to you, obviously... just don't kid yourself :-) . Unless of course, you are deliberately ignoring the posts where someone attacks both sides equally harshly, in order to objectify them with the 'No true Scotsman' logical fallacy... but no one here would ever do that, would they?[8\|]

Zensee -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (4/29/2008 4:17:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 I guess the Dems wont get to enjoy those illegal aliens votes anymore.... Guess the Republicans can kiss the dead people in Florida vote goodbye too... Z.

Alumbrado -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (4/29/2008 4:30:01 PM)
Errrrmmm...JFK wasn't a Republican...and I think it was dead people in Chicago.

Owner59 -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (4/29/2008 4:47:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol There are exceptions, of course; you can quote examples all you like, sappy left-wing thinkers are more intellectually honest, on average, than their more rabid right-wing counterparts. Can't be helped, it's just the way it is [:D] . Nothing wrong with saying it, you know. PS: are you consulting for your Ted Kennedy obsession? Kitten, you seem to be unable to grasp the fact that there are a lot more opinions than "left" and "Right." I don't see why anyonewould be against honest and fair elections. We certainly don't want "dead people" voting like they do in Chicago do we? And it's a federal felony for someone who's not allowed to vote to even try. And it's a federal felony to prevent a legally registered voter from casting a ballot but I seem to have missed the federal prosecutors going after Katherine Harris and Jeb Bush. Even the most conservative estimates I've ever seen means both are due for 2500 or so consecutive sentences. I want fair and honest elections and that includes stopping all the real shit the GOP pulls every election and once that is down to the sorts of numbers we're talking about here then I'm all for spending money stopping this particular problem. Until then maybe the states and feds should spend money and other resources putting an end to voter intimidation and harrassment as well as such well documented practices as county election boards intentionally sending fewer machines to minority or democratic leaning precincts. As to the ID requirement, if the ID card is free and some way is provided for those without transportation or who are home bound to get the ID then it's really no big deal. However if it is only issued at a driver's license facility at driver's license costs that is an unacceptable impediment to voting which is how its going to be done in both GA and IN. "And it's a federal felony to prevent a legally registered voter from casting a ballot but I seem to have missed the federal prosecutors going after Katherine Harris and Jeb Bush" John Ashcroft,..... and then Alberto Gonzales(remember him?he-he)as head of the DOJ. Nuff said Btw,the there have been people prosecuted and jailed,all republican.

Owner59 -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (4/29/2008 4:51:21 PM)
Leave it to the lame to bring up something that was supposed to have happen almost half a century ago,to justify their recent maleficence

FatDomDaddy -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (4/29/2008 5:32:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 But want anyone and everyone to be able to by firearms and ammo without any scrutiny, back check or even a registration of any sort..And we know how many tragedies and problems this causes. What??? Most on the right support the Second Amendment to the US Consititution in TOTAL Owner.... A well REGULATED militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. The Right doesn't want felons to have fire arms. The Right doesn't want criminals to have them either. Nor does the Right want illegal weapons sold. We even support backround checks and waiting periods. So what in the world are you talking about???

Archer -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (4/29/2008 5:44:56 PM)
kittensol as proof that this issue has been around for awhile being battled back and forth. Jan 25 2000 Virginia Senate passes Voter ID law http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-505044.html Nov 24 2004 NM Albuquerque Journal, http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-5211740_ITM 2005 National Commission on Federal Election Reform headed by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker includes piture ID as one of it's reccomendations. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/18/AR2005091801364.html "The most controversial recommendation calls for all voters to produce a standard photo identification card before being allowed to vote. The commission proposes that, by 2010, voters be required to use either the Real ID card, which Congress this spring mandated as the driver's license of the future in all states. For about 12 percent of eligible voters who do not have a driver's license, the commission says states should provide at no cost an identification card that contains the same key information." So basicly it's 2-3 years later and the states have made their attempts to bring into being the reccomendations of the National Commission on Federal Election Reform and the Supream Court has heard at leat 3 challanges so far this is simply the latest ruleing on the issue having struck down one of Georgia's attempts earlier, after which Georgia rewrote their law and it seems to have now addressed the issue the court had with it earlier.

MmeGigs -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (4/29/2008 6:10:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou How does requiring identification restrict these people? Poor, older people don't have driver's licenses or identification? There are people who are eligible to vote who don't have a driver's license or state issued ID. Most of those fall into demographics that generally vote D rather than R. Those are facts. That the ID laws will prevent some of these folks from voting is speculation - we have no idea how many people without state issued ID are actual or likely voters. That these laws are necessary to prevent voter fraud is likewise speculation - there's no indication that there has been fraud occuring that the ID laws would address. That enacting these laws would benefit the R's is also speculation - there are few demographic groups that are reliably red or blue, and there's no reason to think that the votes of this small group of people would go to the D's in sufficient proportion to make much difference. Conceptually, I'm in favor of voter ID laws, even national ID laws, but I'd like to see them put on hold until they contain provisions allowing us to be reasonably sure that people aren't being disenfranchised. There are reasons some folks don't have ID. If I'm on a fixed income, I don't drive, and I don't have enough money to cover food and shelter, I'm not going to spend $$ renewing my driver's license. I'd be all for requiring an ID to vote if there was a provision to waive the fees for poor folks. I'd also like to see some provision for homeless folks to get an ID so that they can vote. You can't get an ID if you're homeless because you need an address. In some states, getting an ID requires a birth certificate or other identifying paperwork. There are some folks who don't have that and can't get it - it's come up with some of the changes states have tried to make to identify illegal aliens.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (4/29/2008 7:19:33 PM)
~FR~ Our founding fathers had to risk death to gain the right to vote, and someone cannot get to the DMV to register to vote? Something very wrong there. If a citizen wants to exercise their rights, they will, otherwise it is spoon feeding them their rights. ID's help prevent voter fraud on both sides. Someone is always going to cry foul, because it is a big game between cheerleaders for the Dems and Reps. Funny the state aid office is just beside the DMV in my county, and people are able to get there for financial assistance.

FatDomDaddy -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (5/1/2008 8:04:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Leave it to the lame to bring up something that was supposed to have happen almost half a century ago,to justify their recent maleficence Like the lame won't say a poor person is unable to get an age of majority card from the MVA/DMV? Please.... Leave your personal attacks to private mail and answer the simple question of why a thumb print or a picture ID shouln'r be used to insure one person, one vote???

thornhappy -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (5/1/2008 8:13:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf ~FR~ Our founding fathers had to risk death to gain the right to vote, and someone cannot get to the DMV to register to vote? Something very wrong there. If a citizen wants to exercise their rights, they will, otherwise it is spoon feeding them their rights. ID's help prevent voter fraud on both sides. Someone is always going to cry foul, because it is a big game between cheerleaders for the Dems and Reps. Funny the state aid office is just beside the DMV in my county, and people are able to get there for financial assistance. What's the proposed solution for citizens without birth certificates? There were a whole lot of blacks in the south who were born at home (being essentially banned from the hospitals at the time) and they weren't given birth certificates. thornhappy

burningdesires47 -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (5/1/2008 8:43:36 PM)
alright I'll weigh in on this.... At least in Michigan, the Secretary of State deals with a hell of a lot more than driver's licenses. Even a DMV office set up for driver's licenses still has to abide by federal disability accommodation laws regarding ramps, braille forms, assistance filling out forms (including supplying interpreters for non-English-speaking customers), etc. I understand that may not be the case in all states. Why you would have different offices to go to for all of the things the secretary of state offices do, I don't know, but then some people are kinda stupid. Last I checked, you don't have to have a picture ID to get a state ID. Altho maybe you do.... I vaguely remember taking in a yearbook from school, I just don't remember if they made me use it. But really, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense... "We're going to make you have a picture ID to get a picture ID..." what? Anyone on state or federal aide--indeed, all these "disenfranchised" people of low and fixed income--have to show picture ID to get our social security and food stamp and medical benefits--and since the feds have started offering direct deposit of benefits into a checking account, those people have IDs to get their accounts.... So yeah, we pretty much all have IDs. Even in the more civilized areas, "walking while black" or even just walking while poor is a crime worth being stopped for, and it's necessary to have one's walking papers--no matter how many times you tell a cop it's not a law to carry ID on you at all times, they will still cuff you and take you to the station until the 72 hours/10 days is up or they can find someone to bring you your ID... Trust me, we have IDs. If someone born without a birth certificate hasn't had to figure out a way to deal with that problem yet THIS long into their life, then it's because they choose not to. And then the issue is not just getting them an ID, but getting them to register to vote to begin with, among other things. PS: "fixed income" just means not being on an hourly wage. Anyone with a salary, even if it's $500,000 a year is still a fixed income.... Next useless term please?

cyberdude611 -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (5/1/2008 8:55:46 PM)
Dont most have to show ID to buy beer? I mean some stores near where I live have the policy to ID every single person even if they look 80 years old. No ID...no booze.

Owner59 -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (5/1/2008 10:08:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: burningdesires47 alright I'll weigh in on this.... At least in Michigan, the Secretary of State deals with a hell of a lot more than driver's licenses. Even a DMV office set up for driver's licenses still has to abide by federal disability accommodation laws regarding ramps, braille forms, assistance filling out forms (including supplying interpreters for non-English-speaking customers), etc. I understand that may not be the case in all states. Why you would have different offices to go to for all of the things the secretary of state offices do, I don't know, but then some people are kinda stupid. Last I checked, you don't have to have a picture ID to get a state ID. Altho maybe you do.... I vaguely remember taking in a yearbook from school, I just don't remember if they made me use it. But really, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense... "We're going to make you have a picture ID to get a picture ID..." what? Anyone on state or federal aide--indeed, all these "disenfranchised" people of low and fixed income--have to show picture ID to get our social security and food stamp and medical benefits--and since the feds have started offering direct deposit of benefits into a checking account, those people have IDs to get their accounts.... So yeah, we pretty much all have IDs. Even in the more civilized areas, "walking while black" or even just walking while poor is a crime worth being stopped for, and it's necessary to have one's walking papers--no matter how many times you tell a cop it's not a law to carry ID on you at all times, they will still cuff you and take you to the station until the 72 hours/10 days is up or they can find someone to bring you your ID... Trust me, we have IDs. If someone born without a birth certificate hasn't had to figure out a way to deal with that problem yet THIS long into their life, then it's because they choose not to. And then the issue is not just getting them an ID, but getting them to register to vote to begin with, among other things. PS: "fixed income" just means not being on an hourly wage. Anyone with a salary, even if it's $500,000 a year is still a fixed income.... Next useless term please? What if the person doesn`t drive,can`t or doesn`t want to get a DL? What if they don`t have a car or access to one and/or can`t afford cab fare to get to the DMV office? What if they`re home bound or can`t physically get to the DMV office? And WTF likes going to the DMV in the 1st place?Going to the dentist is better than going to the DMV ,here in Jersey. There are plenty of people who don`t have official ID for whatever reason.They`ve lost their papers or they were destroyed.They`re elderly and lost them along the way and can`t afford or know how to get new ones. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ And for your snarky comment about useless terms,.....there is such a thing as people who live on a fixed amount of money. People who can`t or don`t work (retired,disabled,indigent,ill) and have a certain "fixed" income and no more. Most people(healthy ones) can get a better paying job,work a 2nd-3rd-4th job,put the wife to work,get a loan,etc. The term "fixed income" refers to the folks who don`t have those options. Some day little girl,you`ll be an elderly frail women,living on a fixed income.If you`re lucky,you`ll have food,clothes,a home and some mad money to have fun with. But there are millions and millions of folks who live on the very edge and sometimes have to choose between food and medicine or food and heating oil or food and rent. Whether you give a shit or not,these people really do exist.Pray you don`t join them. Those are the folks that these laws target.This is the demographic that votes democratic and the people(conservatives) behind these shit laws, know it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ There is no voter fraud problem.More people get struck by lightning than commit voter fraud. People pretending to be acting for a higher cause in this ,are full of shit. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ They made the pol tax illegal decades ago,which was less than 5 bucks back then. How much money and time will it take for someone to get an official state photo ID? This is another form of pol tax,designed to disenfranchise legit voters. I see plenty of posters who want to make it harder for Americans to vote. We should be making it easier.

popeye1250 -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (5/1/2008 11:22:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 Dont most have to show ID to buy beer? I mean some stores near where I live have the policy to ID every single person even if they look 80 years old. No ID...no booze. Gee, that's right too! See? This "I.D" stuff being "too difficult" for some people is just a lame-brained excuse!

DomKen -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (5/1/2008 11:23:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 Dont most have to show ID to buy beer? I mean some stores near where I live have the policy to ID every single person even if they look 80 years old. No ID...no booze. Nope. I haven't been carded in at least 10 years.

pantera -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (5/2/2008 4:02:18 AM)
Ideally you would have to have, not only a photo ID, but a voting license after you pass a test ... the same should be required for having kids

Irishknight -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (5/2/2008 8:16:23 AM)
Wow. Apparently there are Democrats who don't know people who own a car. I thought that they were the "enlightened liberals." Its amazing how so many will cry voter fraud when they lose an election but then claim it doesn't exist when a law is upheld that could help prevent it. The word "disingenuous" has become a mostly liberal catch phrase to argue against anything that they don't agree with. Who is living up to it more now? I believe that maybe we should make public service a condition of voting. Serve in the military, the peace corps, build houses with Jimmy Carter but EARN it. Then maybe people on both sides would see that reality lies between the left and right wing retardedness.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (5/2/2008 8:34:25 AM)
Where are people born in this country, that do not have birth certificates? That minority would be EXTREMELY small. Also, there is a way to be identified as you, as long as you are willing to do what needs to be done. Those that take liberty and rights seriously, will often do whatever needs to be done, to exercise them. How many of those blacks no longer have birth certificates or the proper paperwork to show who they are? I would like some sources please. quote: ORIGINAL: thornhappy quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf ~FR~ Our founding fathers had to risk death to gain the right to vote, and someone cannot get to the DMV to register to vote? Something very wrong there. If a citizen wants to exercise their rights, they will, otherwise it is spoon feeding them their rights. ID's help prevent voter fraud on both sides. Someone is always going to cry foul, because it is a big game between cheerleaders for the Dems and Reps. Funny the state aid office is just beside the DMV in my county, and people are able to get there for financial assistance. What's the proposed solution for citizens without birth certificates? There were a whole lot of blacks in the south who were born at home (being essentially banned from the hospitals at the time) and they weren't given birth certificates. thornhappy

Archer -> RE: Supreme Court says states CAN require ID to vote (5/2/2008 8:43:57 AM)
Live Births are registered with the County records dept by Doctors and so the idea that home births don'tget certificates of live births is rediculously flawed. When the childgets their first doctor's check the doctor sends paperwork to the county naming the parents and the child. Thus home births are leagally recorded as well. Thise Birth Certificates are then sent to the address of the parents.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875