Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas Governor


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas Governor Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/20/2008 8:11:04 PM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline 		You're right that yuppies and national parks have little to do with the thread.


_____________________________



(in reply to slaveboyforyou)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/20/2008 8:13:44 PM   
Alumbrado


Posts: 5560
Status: offline 		I did like the Schweddy balls NPR segment though...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7kwcwJ-pdA

(in reply to slaveboyforyou)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/20/2008 8:21:32 PM   
DomAviator


Posts: 1253
Joined: 4/22/2008
Status: offline 		Considering that its illegal to not have ID in the first place... what is the harm in requiring voters to have it? Ya know, I really dont get the democratic anger over this ID thing. Whether it is a drivers license, or a state issued "non driver ID" you must have an ID... Vagrancy issues aside, how in the hell can you do anything in life without ID?  Frankly, if someone is such a loser that they dont drive, dont have a bank account, dont own anything of any substance, and essentially have no identity, no roots to the community, etc do we really want them voting? For christs sake you cant even pick up a moneygram or hock something in a pawnshop without ID much less lead a normal life. The only reason someone without ID would need to vote is if they were committing voter fraud, or if they were a felon and were hence not supposed to vote anyway....

(in reply to Alumbrado)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/20/2008 8:30:26 PM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline

(in reply to DomAviator)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/20/2008 10:26:15 PM   
Irishknight


Posts: 2016
Joined: 9/30/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bipolarber

Seriously... the GOP stoops to cheating to try and hold onto power as their failed policies grow ever more hated by the American public as more and more die for little to nothing, the country is rammed into recession, and nothing is done to solve our energy problems. First it was "redistricting" and now this. Now we find out that the McCain campagin is being financed (by $16 million dollars) by the Saudis. Elect the GOP again, and you sell America out to foreign control.

Swear to God, republicans are the most unamerican, disloyal, traitorous creeps to ever walk the Earth. You fuck with the elections, you take money from and sell power to dictators, and you may as well be in leauge with Castro, IMO.

Suck it, republicans.


Hate politics seems to be status quo for so many people.  Its garbage like this that made me leave the Democrats.  I have been affiliated with no party for the last ten years because this kind of hate filled drivel is ridiculous.  I did actually register republican to piss off my mother-in-law and her less than sane sister.  It kept them away for almost six beautiful months.

But ... since you brought it up....  William Jefferson Clinton financed much of his campaign with money that came from China.  I suppose we are all speaking Chinese and serving the communists?  Well maybe Billary is.
Last election cycle, numerous voting machine ARRIVED at their polling places with votes for Kerry on them but that was a mistake because it wasn't a republican  Had it been voted for Bush, someone would have been burned at the steak by people spewing hate.
"Redistricting" is done by both sides.
There have been cases throughout the country of dead people voting on Democratic tickets as well as Republican.  There is also an insane move to try to stop any attempts to keep illegals from voting by the democrats.  that is no different than election tampering.
I find it amazing that when someone holds a different point of view from yours, they are disloyal and unamerican.  Apparently, in the land of the free only people with your opinion deserve any respect.  Democrats and republicans play all of the same tricks but each side has the audacity to call the other side dirty or filthy for it. 
Try taking your meds and looking into reality some time.

(in reply to bipolarber)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 4:52:17 AM   
Alumbrado


Posts: 5560
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomAviator

Considering that its illegal to not have ID in the first place... what is the harm in requiring voters to have it? Ya know, I really dont get the democratic anger over this ID thing. Whether it is a drivers license, or a state issued "non driver ID" you must have an ID... Vagrancy issues aside, how in the hell can you do anything in life without ID?  Frankly, if someone is such a loser that they dont drive, dont have a bank account, dont own anything of any substance, and essentially have no identity, no roots to the community, etc do we really want them voting? For christs sake you cant even pick up a moneygram or hock something in a pawnshop without ID much less lead a normal life. The only reason someone without ID would need to vote is if they were committing voter fraud, or if they were a felon and were hence not supposed to vote anyway....



Since the USSC struck down vagrancy ordinances a long time ago, how is it illegal merely to be without ID? 
And where in the Constitution does it say anything about a means test for voters?  Oh, wait...didn't the USSC strike that down as unconstitutional too?

(in reply to DomAviator)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 7:16:12 AM   
lronitulstahp


Posts: 5392
Joined: 10/17/2007
Status: offline 		             OP...with all due respect i don't see how asking someone to present ID is a bad thing.  In any other country i've been, a person (adult) MUST carry ID at all times.  It's not about disenfranchisement, it's about security, a protection in case of emergency( picture a 15 car pileup...all the passengers without ID...a nightmare to contact families, get emergency treatment...etc) 
       
quote:

  Kansas Governor vetoes republican effort to deny legitimate voters their due rights of enfranchisement. 
 
         What better way to prove if a person is legitimate?  It's not a test, or a pledge of any sort....it's basic identification proof. 

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 8:06:14 AM   
hizgeorgiapeach


Posts: 1672
Status: offline 		Call me a Radical (wouldn't be the first time, by any means lol) but frankly - I shouldn't feel like I Have to Prove who I am all the time.
 
I carry a driver's licence, which Serves as proof of identification - because Driving is a Privilage instead of a Right.  But gee, I carry a Pilot's Licence as well, which is Federally issued, but which people won't Accept as proof of identification because *gasp* it doesn't have my blinkin picture on it!  And as far as the DL being proof of ID - males don't have a problem as frequently (I won't say it's Never a problem, because it potentially could be) but hell - for a woman, if you happen to change your hair style radically it can Significantly change how you Look, and people start questioning whether it's Valid.  I've had that happen Several times over the past couple of years - when going from brunette to blond, they questioned whether my id was valid because I was brunette in the photo, but blond when they looked at ME; when I went from blond back to brunette, same problem in reverse, because my DL had come up for renewal while I was blond; when I went from quite long hair (down well past my shoulders) to short spikey hair - whole thing all over again, because the lack of length changed how the shape of my face looked; if I happen to have my dentures in or out, makes a difference, cause they change the shape of my face.

_____________________________

Rhi
Light travels faster than sound, which is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.
Essential Scentsations

(in reply to lronitulstahp)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 8:07:11 AM   
orfunboi


Posts: 1223
Joined: 10/22/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomAviator

Considering that its illegal to not have ID in the first place... what is the harm in requiring voters to have it? Ya know, I really dont get the democratic anger over this ID thing. Whether it is a drivers license, or a state issued "non driver ID" you must have an ID... Vagrancy issues aside, how in the hell can you do anything in life without ID?  Frankly, if someone is such a loser that they dont drive, dont have a bank account, dont own anything of any substance, and essentially have no identity, no roots to the community, etc do we really want them voting? For christs sake you cant even pick up a moneygram or hock something in a pawnshop without ID much less lead a normal life. The only reason someone without ID would need to vote is if they were committing voter fraud, or if they were a felon and were hence not supposed to vote anyway....


Well it can't be fraud in this case, because she said "HB 2019 seeks to solve a problem of voter fraud which does not exist in our state due to the tireless efforts of our local election officials,” the governor added"

Not sure why, but it kinda reminded me of the idoit who claimed there are no homosexuals in Iraq.

All in all, I have to wonder also, why it is considered so unfair to request ID to vote? It makes them look guilty of something, for sure.....

(in reply to DomAviator)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 9:20:54 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline 		 There`s many good reasons why folks don`t like this.

Many folks and countys don`t want government telling them what to do and forcing un-funded mandates.

There are plenty of folks who`s voted legally for years,that will say it`s to much bother to have to get/do one more thing ,and many won`t.

Folks with no extra time or money,the folks that are the target of this suppression technique,poor(er) older,home-bound,or homeless folks,working families,etc.Folks who don`t have time to balance the check book or open mail.This are the people who will be discouraged.

We should be doing the very opposite of discouraging people or making any more trouble/tasks for them.

In my state,there`s no law saying one must carry ID.It`s a presumption of innocents thing.

The same should be true for voters.We should presume that they are who they say they are.If they`re registered to vote,that should be enough.

Considering that there`s no evidence of voter fraud to begin with,these anti-democratic laws only serve to place yet another hurdle towards voter participation.

There`s also the big government '1984' themes were people would prefer the government not have a data base on every citizen.Add to that electronic voting machines and the potential abuse of cross referencing with a national ID,etc.

Voting is supposed to be anonymous and without central government looking over your shoulder.Either in person or electronically.

This ID thing brings us closer to a central government dictating who and who can not vote.Not a good thing or their function.



Ben Franklin:

Those who would give up essential Liberty...to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.


Unless people have gotten a little smarter or more honest over time(they haven`t),that quote is as true today as it was in 1755.



< Message edited by Owner59 -- 5/21/2008 9:26:28 AM >

(in reply to slaveboyforyou)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 9:43:40 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

Considering that there`s no evidence of voter fraud to begin with,these anti-democratic laws only serve to place yet another hurdle towards voter participation.
Considering that there is no requirement for an ID - it makes having evidence of voter fraud difficult. 

quote:

In my state,there`s no law saying one must carry ID.It`s a presumption of innocents thing.
Why do you feel showing an ID is a presumption of guilt? Having that attitude at other ID requirements may, excludes you from drinking, boarding a plane, cashing a check, or using a non-picture credit card at a retail store. Do you avoid these "presumption of" guilt facilities for the same reason?

It makes sense to require a picture ID to get into COSTCO but walk in a vote by just declaring your name is too big a hurdle.

quote:

Those who would give up essential Liberty...to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
What liberty? What safety? What relevance?

Requiring an ID to vote means you've given up the ability to participate in voter fraud. The cost/access argument is fundamentally rationalization. What Senior Citizen doesn't have a ID card, if for no other reason, than to participate in the local services and Medicaid?

quote:

Many folks and countys don`t want government telling them what to do and forcing un-funded mandates


Where are these people? Certainly they aren't the same people who think our politicians know better what to do with the income then they do? They can't be the same people who allow the government telling them they MUST wear helmets on motor cycles and seat belts in cars, MUST have their children attend public school, MUST pay into a bankrupt Social Security system with no hope of receiving any benefits, MUST worship the religion of global warming. In fact this government says you MUST have a valid Social Security number/card.

What the government doesn't do is apply that MUST to voting.

Not that it is worth much, not that there is a distinction between the parties or candidates, but it seems insuring one vote per person is a reasonable goal. I wonder why you think that position is "Partisan"?

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 9:56:03 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: orfunboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomAviator

Considering that its illegal to not have ID in the first place... what is the harm in requiring voters to have it? Ya know, I really dont get the democratic anger over this ID thing. Whether it is a drivers license, or a state issued "non driver ID" you must have an ID... Vagrancy issues aside, how in the hell can you do anything in life without ID?  Frankly, if someone is such a loser that they dont drive, dont have a bank account, dont own anything of any substance, and essentially have no identity, no roots to the community, etc do we really want them voting? For christs sake you cant even pick up a moneygram or hock something in a pawnshop without ID much less lead a normal life. The only reason someone without ID would need to vote is if they were committing voter fraud, or if they were a felon and were hence not supposed to vote anyway....


Well it can't be fraud in this case, because she said "HB 2019 seeks to solve a problem of voter fraud which does not exist in our state due to the tireless efforts of our local election officials,” the governor added"

Not sure why, but it kinda reminded me of the idoit who claimed there are no homosexuals in Iraq.

All in all, I have to wonder also, why it is considered so unfair to request ID to vote? It makes them look guilty of something, for sure.....


Not to add facts to the jaded and apathetic discourse....

But the state election boards and committees are made up of people from both parties.From the top, all the way down to each polling place,there are people there to check the others.If there are problems,they get hashed out,county by county.The process is transparent,usually and non-partisan,accept in Florida.

But there`s no evidence of any significant voter fraud.

Out of about 34 billion votes cast over the last ten years ,local,county, state and federal,from the school board and dog catcher, to governors/presidents and judges,there`s been about a dozen cases of voter fraud.None organized.

Name me any entity ,organization,government agency ,company, business ,group or outfit that has as good a record as that.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What`s that saying? "If something works,don`t fuck with it".

How true is that?lol

There`s a reason why republicans are fucking with a system that works well.They`re trying to game the system to their benefit.

The governor,at least in this one state,at least for now,has stopped this republican ploy.


Added:

But there`s dozens of documented examples of "election fraud",where partisan groups seek to and succeed is tricking,blocking or tossing a voter(without their knowledge)off the rolls by the tens of thousands.

Makes a few jokers voting twice here or there seem kinda small potatoes, in comparison.

< Message edited by Owner59 -- 5/21/2008 10:05:25 AM >

(in reply to orfunboi)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 10:16:55 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

There`s a reason why republicans are fucking with a system that works well.They`re trying to game the system to their benefit.


The equivalent, and equally ridiculous, statement would be that Democrats don't want anything insuring one vote per person because it would have a negative impact on their chance of winning.

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 10:19:43 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

There`s a reason why republicans are fucking with a system that works well.They`re trying to game the system to their benefit.


The equivalent, and equally ridiculous, statement would be that Democrats don't want anything insuring one vote per person because it would have a negative impact on their chance of winning.



examples?

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 10:19:48 AM   
Irishknight


Posts: 2016
Joined: 9/30/2007
Status: offline 		Again, I guess that there was no voter fraud in Ohio.  But wait, that was what the dems claimed lost Kerry th election last time.  Either it was or it wasn't, you can't have it both ways.

There are no recorded cases of me catching an STD but I still take precautions against it.  Prevention could have kept 9/11 from happening but we were too worried about convenience for that to be allowed.  How many people are dead because we didn't prevent something that we knew was a possibility? 

I think that this is just someone trying to hold on to an excuse they have used for the past 2 elections.  We all know that Bush was never elected (twice) except by voter fraud that now doesn't exist.

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 10:22:58 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

Actually, he does. I've listened to it. To your ears it's "useful information". To someone who isn't quite so biased it's far-left propaganda, it's trash - and I'm expected to help pay for it.


Yeah,we all know that reality has a liberal bias....

Best tune it out....

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 10:29:08 AM   
Irishknight


Posts: 2016
Joined: 9/30/2007
Status: offline 		I always thought that those classical music shows were leaning pretty far to the left.  Lets send in the music police.

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 10:33:13 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

There`s a reason why republicans are fucking with a system that works well.They`re trying to game the system to their benefit.


The equivalent, and equally ridiculous, statement would be that Democrats don't want anything insuring one vote per person because it would have a negative impact on their chance of winning.



examples?



Of what, showing how if a picture voter ID was required that people could only vote once? You mistaken me for someone who sees integrity in either political party and supports it. You made the claim that requiring an ID is Republican, and referenced the desire to require an ID is "fucking with a system". How is requiring and verifying a person's ID indicative of "fucking with a system" except, I guess, a system of fraud. It would seem that eliminating that entirely with an ID would alleviate the suspicion on both sides, except to those with another agenda, and  knowing it would negatively impact that agenda.

How about an example of the "disenfranchised"? What segment of society, what person for that matter in 2008, goes about their life for 364 days, actually 365 this year, having and showing an ID for all manner of routine things but can't provide one on one day to show to qualify themselves as voter? 

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 10:37:21 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Irishknight

Again, I guess that there was no voter fraud in Ohio.  But wait, that was what the dems claimed lost Kerry th election last time.  Either it was or it wasn't, you can't have it both ways.

There are no recorded cases of me catching an STD but I still take precautions against it.  Prevention could have kept 9/11 from happening but we were too worried about convenience for that to be allowed.  How many people are dead because we didn't prevent something that we knew was a possibility? 

I think that this is just someone trying to hold on to an excuse they have used for the past 2 elections.  We all know that Bush was never elected (twice) except by voter fraud that now doesn't exist.


Voter fraud and election fraud are different things and have different laws concerning them.

Voter fraud is a single voter attempting to vote more than once.Again,something that rarely happens.

Election fraud is where parties seek to steal or toss multiple votes,like in the thousands and tens of thousands.
Something that we know the republicans do and have done.

One is micro,the other macro.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I also don`t buy the "both parties do it" shpeel, unless you can show example after example.

Anyone who`s interested, google the words democratic and election fraud,and the words republican ,and election fraud.Same with voter fraud.

Added:

Who says that precautions shouldn`t and arent to be taken?

There are plenty of precautions and safeguards already,to add yet more.

There`s no need for a state/government/big brother ID to vote.The states do a great job of keeping it fair and safe now.

This will end up discouraging legit folks from voting,all to stop a problem that doesn`t exist.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As to your chances of contracting a STD,could you do better than a 12 in 34 billion chance?

You can still get the clap or any STD,even with protection.

Tell me,would you give up sex,in order to never contract a STD?

Sounds as silly as forcing folks to get a state photo ID, to mend a non-existent problem.

< Message edited by Owner59 -- 5/21/2008 10:55:59 AM >

(in reply to Irishknight)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas... - 5/21/2008 10:37:41 AM   
lronitulstahp


Posts: 5392
Joined: 10/17/2007
Status: offline
quote:

You mistaken me for someone who sees integrity in either political party and supports it.  
  oooh...May i borrow this please?????

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Partisan voter supression law gets vetoed by Kansas Governor Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109