08-30-2012, 02:44 PM #201
“Nothing in this opinion remotely suggests that section 5 bars all covered jurisdictions from implementing photo ID laws,” the court ruled. “To the contrary, under our reasoning today, such laws might well be precleared if they ensure (1) that all prospective voters can easily obtain free photo ID, and (2) that any underlying documents required to obtain that ID are truly free of charge.”
Bolded for emphasis. The court ruled that underlying documents should also be free. Interesting. That means you need to provide free IDs. You also need to provide free birth certificates. The costs continue to mount for this nonsense to pass...
08-30-2012, 02:47 PM #202
From liberal Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens writing the 6-3 majority upholding the Indiana photo ID law:
“That flagrant examples of [voter] fraud…have been documented throughout this Nation’s history by respected historians and journalists…demonstrate[s] that not only is the risk of voter fraud real but that it could affect the outcome of a close election.”
Go read the majority opinion.
Of course, Justice Steven eats up the BS fed to him from Fox news.
Don't you think it's ironic to attack one for using a Fox news story and then cite extreme and unapologetic left wing sources in TheNation and Talkingpointsmemo?
Let me know if this is admissible evidence:
Also, the right wing group (sarcasm) American University found that less than one half of 0.5% of votes don't currently have ID in states where laws have gone into effect.
Last, "In Georgia, which enacted a photo ID law before the 2008 election, the number of African American voters increased after the new law went into effect. “According to Census Bureau surveys,” von Spakovsky writes, “65 percent of the black voting-age population voted in the 2008 election, compared with only 54.4 percent in 2004, an increase of more than ten percentage points.”
I know you want to keep pushing that this is a GOP issue, though this is impossible given the numbers and a Rasmussen poll in 2008 which found that only 22% oppose voter ID laws. So why don't you answer your own question put to those opposing the law: Why does the DNC oppose these laws? Could it be that most fraud is to their benefit?
Conservatives have long wondered why so many elections are close and/or go to the democrat candidate since it is well know that the majority of voters self identify as conservative/republican. One would think that having that demographic majority would yield a majority of GOP winners. Since this is not the case, is it not reasonable to ask why the disparity?
Last edited by Ultima Ratio; 08-30-2012 at 02:51 PM.Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.
08-30-2012, 02:56 PM #203
I wasn't referencing the article, only the segment where the state did not find evidence of voter fraud. You can find that information all over the place, that just happened to be the first relevant Google result I found. I don't even read that website.
Gee, maybe the first black candidate for President had something to do with increased voter turnout. Effect does not equal causality.
Most voters don't identify as Republican. Except for a brief surge in our post-9/11 world, that hasn't been the case for 20 years.
08-30-2012, 03:07 PM #204
Referring to the hack video you posted you have now said:
This is all anyone should have to see about voter ID to see that the motivations behind the law have absolutely nothing to do with "cleaning up" the voting process. It's a cockblock of the vote, nothing more.
I can't tell you his intent, only the way his words come off... That the PA Voter ID law will win the state for Romney and that it has a positive impact for the GOP and a negative impact on Democrats.[/QUOTE
Again, let me suggest that you hear what you want to hear, appropriating this issue, the evidence and quotes to a preconceived narrative/meme.Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.
08-30-2012, 03:13 PM #205Most voters don't identify as Republican. Except for a brief surge in our post-9/11 world, that hasn't been the case for 20 years.
This is from 2009, but shows that 2x identify as conservative than liberal.Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.
08-30-2012, 03:15 PM #206Gee, maybe the first black candidate for President had something to do with increased voter turnout. Effect does not equal causality.Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.
08-30-2012, 03:18 PM #207
On the thread topic: Does any one still see Paul Ryan as a straight-shooter or a moderate after last night's speech?
08-30-2012, 03:20 PM #208
08-30-2012, 03:27 PM #209
Did it ever occur to you that the reason Republicans aren't winning national elections is because of people like me? People who used to vote Republican consistently but became so disenfranchised with the party over the past decade that they can no longer tolerate their stance on issues such as gay rights (didn't matter when nobody was going to vote in same-sex marriage) or abortion (before they started trying to restrict womens' options)? Add in the GOP's staunch support of the Patriot Act (not that the Dems are much better), their fiscal irresponsibility, and their desire to continue ballooning the defense budget and I no longer have any reason to vote for the party as a whole.
Those people may still call themselves "conservatives" but the GOP has spent so much time leaving an awful taste in our mouths that we can no longer consistently vote GOP in good conscience. It's no coincidence that the "Indepedent" moniker has been gaining traction in recent years while the GOP's numbers have declined. The Republican Party continues to slide further right and continues to disenchant people who don't share some of their more insane viewpoints.
08-30-2012, 03:32 PM #210
I mean, come on.
edit: I found that, technically speaking, Ryan's statement is true... but it's disingenuous to the point of lying. In December of 2008, GM shut down SUV production in Janesville, costing the area over 2,000 jobs.
Four months later in April of 2009, Isuzu shut down their part of the plant, which cost a whopping 57 jobs.
But I believe both announcements preceded Obama's inauguration.
08-30-2012, 03:33 PM #211
08-30-2012, 03:39 PM #212Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.
08-30-2012, 03:54 PM #213
A little levity from a libertarian website (Whether the author is or not I can't know. And even if I knew, that wouldn't entitle me to claim to know anything more *wink)
"Looks like some racist judge loves him some poll taxes. Because he’s racist. And wants to disenfranchise the millions upon millions of people studies from “non-partisan” and “independent” leftwing groups have shown will lose their franchise if they are required to engage in the onerous, unfair, and frankly racisty, polltaxy indignation of having to show a photo ID proving that they are who they are should they wish to vote.After all, it is much easier for our own Justice Department to sue to allow anybody who wants to to vote — several times, in fact, or even while dead, or not a citizen, or not human — than it is to get photo ideas [sic] to people without them. Which is an insurmountable obstacle.Moreso, it is just and fair to sue on behalf of these poor photo-less wretches yearning to be free. And decidedly non-racist, too boot. And decidedly non-polltaxy. Which is how we know that this judge is a racist — having upheld this racist polltax that unfairly and in a very racist way requires people to show ID before voting for other people’s ****."
Forgive the quoted swear word, but it seems this cite's guidelines/rules have already been bent/broken by one of their promulgators, wink*Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.
08-30-2012, 04:00 PM #214
We have no issues with swear words on this site. If you want to use one that we "don't allow", it will simply appear starred out. That's why the word filters are there in the first place.
08-30-2012, 04:05 PM #215
Sadly enough, I'm pretty sure this bill is going to pass in MN. The only hope I have is that Federal Judges will continue to shoot them down, as what happened today with the Texas bill.
On the other hand, I think MN has a damned good shot at stemming the flow of anti-marriage amendments that have been sweeping the country and I'll be damned proud of the state if we do it. I'm seeing more and more of those orange "Don't Restrict Marriage" signs plunked down in front lawns (including my own).
But in the case of Voter ID laws, I think that's a losing battle in the polling booth. Sigh.
08-30-2012, 06:56 PM #216
- Liked 1,929 Times in 1,131 Posts
08-30-2012, 07:57 PM #217
Missed the point on that. The point is that it's not like a poll tax as was suggested. No ID is full proof, but it certainly cuts down fraud, or are you suggesting driver ID, ID to buy a guy be done away with because they can be faked?
FYI - if you're honest here, you're going to realize that this massive concentration of time and campaigning is for a gain that is so minimal you should be ashamed of the pretentious tact you've taken. But by all means - post numbers. Not opinions. Facts. Burden of proof is on you.
"tating that a number of election precincts in Philadelphia that are reliably Democratic have produced results which showed that more than 100 percent of registered voters cast ballots in some years in districts where turnout is normally low. It is true that these areas are also largely African-American, but that does not make such results more explicable or less suspicious.Does anyone really believe Philadelphia is the only place in America where there is a reasonable suspicion of fraud? The Supreme Court doesn’t. In 2008, it upheld an Indiana law requiring voter ID saying that it posed no undue burden on voters. And in his majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that “not only is the risk of voter fraud real but...it could affect the outcome of a close election.”"
Or are all articles I post that say something is true acceptable as facts?
Self-righteous? Condescending? Since I've never engaged you, I would think we'd have a fresh start civilly. Brock flew off the handle and said some pretty insulting things before my rejoinder.
How do you know?
Igain, see the piece linked above and the portion I've copied above. Even with this, you will still believe that this is about racism with this video as the smoking gun. Why? Because you WANT to believe that the GOP is racist. If they weren't your head would explode.
08-30-2012, 08:24 PM #218
- Liked 812 Times in 512 Posts
- Blog Entries
08-30-2012, 08:51 PM #219
- Liked 812 Times in 512 Posts
- Blog Entries
08-30-2012, 09:13 PM #220
Is anyone watching Clint Eastwood lose his **** on TV? This is weird.