Theres that list again, right off of Rush's website.

Voting. A basic right with which NO OBSTACLES should be evident. It's not fixing any prominent problem, how about a rational breakdown of the existing process and identify the step where there has been a material issue that was relevant to the outcome?

You know, fundamentals. I'm sure glad the right leaning states are focusing on the important stuff for us these days.

As long as it costs money to get a picture id in this country, it will never be a requirement to vote.

Dip, you'd be better off supporting the government creation of one id for everyone in this country, free of charge, paid for by tax dollars.

Until our govt. decides to go this route, this argument is a moot point. It's unconstitutional to require a photo id in order to vote...why?...because it costs money to get a valid photo id and that is viewed as a form of discrimination.

(03-13-2012 08:01 AM)bronconick Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 01:50 AM)WMU_Flyboy Wrote:  I just don't see what the big deal is to show some I.D.

Pretty much everyone has some anyway, and if they don't it takes literally 5 minutes to get one. It's perhaps the simplest and cheapest method to prevent voter fraud. Some of you act like they want your first born child or something.... Sheesh...

It's not to prevent voter fraud. It's to depress turnout.
Because what seems to happen is that the Republican dominated Wisconsin legislature passes a Voter-ID law, then follows it up by shutting down half of the DMV's in the state and restricts their hours to 9-5 or 10-4 as a "cost saving measure."

Then it becomes "Oh, you need to take a day off of work to get the stupid thing", not "it takes five minutes."

I'd start countering these laws with ones that make Election day a national holiday and allow people to leave their jobs to vote without punishment.

This is the voter fraud that needs to be caught and punished.

I won't ask if your serious because I know you are.

But on it's face it's ridiculous.

Rights have corresponding responsibilities.
To vote in the first place you must register. You don't receive that opportunity because you inhale and exhale.
Take the necessary steps to do both so that the bogey man on the other side must do so himself forcing a balancing of the exercising of the right to vote.
Not complicated and not difficult.

From what I read and hear regarding Union votes, you need to ID not only who you are but how you voted. Now that is grevious. Unless of course you can actually argue logically that people should be forced to say how they voted.

This is a political football only because some choose to.

I think it is pretty simple, straightforward and logical.

Can you argue the case on the fringes by being extreme? Sure.

Extreme and logical are incongruent. End of discussion. The days of Poll Tax are over for anyone with half a brain.

Quote:Theres that list again, right off of Rush's website.

Gawd you're a FU$KING MORON
If you go this Limbaugh's site you'll see he was not on yesterday. GOOD CATCH MAN!!!!!!

It was on Drudge yesterday. Drudge does nothing more than link articles. He linked it to an AP story. These days the AP is about as left leaning as the NY Times. The exact same AP article was on the Huffington Puffington Post and several other places.

(03-13-2012 09:32 AM)EA3 Wrote:  As long as it costs money to get a picture id in this country, it will never be a requirement to vote.

Dip, you'd be better off supporting the government creation of one id for everyone in this country, free of charge, paid for by tax dollars.

Until our govt. decides to go this route, this argument is a moot point. It's unconstitutional to require a photo id in order to vote...why?...because it costs money to get a valid photo id and that is viewed as a form of discrimination.

You are kidding right? It's the same ID needed to drive. And if you don't drive so what. Much to do about nothing.

Voting isnt the issue. Proving you are who you say you are is. No one has the right to alter an election result by casting more than one vote. Will or can it happen with picture ID. Yes. Can it be done as easily? Absolutely not. Unless those who oversee elections are in cahoots.

Again, it's not a difficult solution.

Maybe a free tatooing on ones forehead with numbers will work. Since "body art" is in these days I suggest simply using a three digit code.

Simple. Done.

Quote:Dip, you'd be better off supporting the government creation of one id for everyone in this country, free of charge, paid for by tax dollars.

The state will give you a photo ID free of charge.

(03-13-2012 09:39 AM)gobaseline Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 08:01 AM)bronconick Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 01:50 AM)WMU_Flyboy Wrote:  I just don't see what the big deal is to show some I.D.

Pretty much everyone has some anyway, and if they don't it takes literally 5 minutes to get one. It's perhaps the simplest and cheapest method to prevent voter fraud. Some of you act like they want your first born child or something.... Sheesh...

It's not to prevent voter fraud. It's to depress turnout.
Because what seems to happen is that the Republican dominated Wisconsin legislature passes a Voter-ID law, then follows it up by shutting down half of the DMV's in the state and restricts their hours to 9-5 or 10-4 as a "cost saving measure."

Then it becomes "Oh, you need to take a day off of work to get the stupid thing", not "it takes five minutes."

I'd start countering these laws with ones that make Election day a national holiday and allow people to leave their jobs to vote without punishment.

This is the voter fraud that needs to be caught and punished.

I won't ask if your serious because I know you are.

But on it's face it's ridiculous.

Rights have corresponding responsibilities.
To vote in the first place you must register. You don't receive that opportunity because you inhale and exhale.
Take the necessary steps to do both so that the bogey man on the other side must do so himself forcing a balancing of the exercising of the right to vote.
Not complicated and not difficult.

From what I read and hear regarding Union votes, you need to ID not only who you are but how you voted. Now that is grevious. Unless of course you can actually argue logically that people should be forced to say how they voted.

This is a political football only because some choose to.

I think it is pretty simple, straightforward and logical.

Can you argue the case on the fringes by being extreme? Sure.

Extreme and logical are incongruent. End of discussion. The days of Poll Tax are over for anyone with half a brain.

What's ridiculous is you thinking that there are hordes of people going around voting multiple times or whatever the hell non-existent issue you think is being caused by not having voter ID.

This is as stupid and pointless as Oklahoma passing an amendment forbidding Sharia Law. A solution looking for a problem.

(03-13-2012 09:56 AM)bronconick Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 09:39 AM)gobaseline Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 08:01 AM)bronconick Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 01:50 AM)WMU_Flyboy Wrote:  I just don't see what the big deal is to show some I.D.

Pretty much everyone has some anyway, and if they don't it takes literally 5 minutes to get one. It's perhaps the simplest and cheapest method to prevent voter fraud. Some of you act like they want your first born child or something.... Sheesh...

It's not to prevent voter fraud. It's to depress turnout.
Because what seems to happen is that the Republican dominated Wisconsin legislature passes a Voter-ID law, then follows it up by shutting down half of the DMV's in the state and restricts their hours to 9-5 or 10-4 as a "cost saving measure."

Then it becomes "Oh, you need to take a day off of work to get the stupid thing", not "it takes five minutes."

I'd start countering these laws with ones that make Election day a national holiday and allow people to leave their jobs to vote without punishment.

This is the voter fraud that needs to be caught and punished.

I won't ask if your serious because I know you are.

But on it's face it's ridiculous.

Rights have corresponding responsibilities.
To vote in the first place you must register. You don't receive that opportunity because you inhale and exhale.
Take the necessary steps to do both so that the bogey man on the other side must do so himself forcing a balancing of the exercising of the right to vote.
Not complicated and not difficult.

From what I read and hear regarding Union votes, you need to ID not only who you are but how you voted. Now that is grevious. Unless of course you can actually argue logically that people should be forced to say how they voted.

This is a political football only because some choose to.

I think it is pretty simple, straightforward and logical.

Can you argue the case on the fringes by being extreme? Sure.

Extreme and logical are incongruent. End of discussion. The days of Poll Tax are over for anyone with half a brain.

What's ridiculous is you thinking that there are hordes of people going around voting multiple times or whatever the hell non-existent issue you think is being caused by not having voter ID.

This is as stupid and pointless as Oklahoma passing an amendment forbidding Sharia Law. A solution looking for a problem.

I live in Illinois near Chicago for over 45 years. Nuff said, unless you choose to ignore factual history. I don't need to pull an Alex Karrass and insert my hat and head into a raging fire pit to light my cigar more than once to know not to let that happen again.

You? Knock yourself out. But that smell or burning flesh is you pal.

Connecting one stupid act of outlawing Shiria Law in Oklahoma to requesting the simple, logical and responsible act of showing a picture ID to verify you are BroncoNick is not analgous.

What other argument do you have? Union ID rules? Explain that.
And before you grab the lever and pull trying to equate my pointing out Shiria Law laws and voter ID as equivalent think again.

Your turn.

(03-13-2012 09:47 AM)gobaseline Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 09:32 AM)EA3 Wrote:  As long as it costs money to get a picture id in this country, it will never be a requirement to vote.

Dip, you'd be better off supporting the government creation of one id for everyone in this country, free of charge, paid for by tax dollars.

Until our govt. decides to go this route, this argument is a moot point. It's unconstitutional to require a photo id in order to vote...why?...because it costs money to get a valid photo id and that is viewed as a form of discrimination.

You are kidding right? It's the same ID needed to drive. And if you don't drive so what. Much to do about nothing.

Voting isnt the issue. Proving you are who you say you are is. No one has the right to alter an election result by casting more than one vote. Will or can it happen with picture ID. Yes. Can it be done as easily? Absolutely not. Unless those who oversee elections are in cahoots.

Again, it's not a difficult solution.

Maybe a free tatooing on ones forehead with numbers will work. Since "body art" is in these days I suggest simply using a three digit code.

Simple. Done.

Yes, requiring anyone to pay for id in order to vote is a form of discrimination. I'm not saying I agree with it, but that is the line of thinking.

http://www.michigan.gov/sos/0,1607,7-127...--,00.html

Yeah, you can get a free one IF you meet the criteria. Unfortunately there are people that won't meet the requirement and throw a fit about paying.

Lawsuit = denying a homeless 45 year old the right to vote because he trolls the streets, sleeps under bridges, panhandles for money at highway exits, visits shelters, and doesn't have an id and/or refuses to get one.

I'm all for requiring an id to vote. But unfortunately there are people who don't want or value the same things that I do. I'm fine with that.

There are holes in both sides of the argument. If there weren't, it would already be solved.

Make the photo ID free, with automatic voter registration, and readily available without the government red tape that the right likes to use as a lever, and we'd have a deal.

Anyone who thinks that state photo id's are fool proof and don't come with fraud risks of their own are purposely being naive. Why do you think I-9 verification requires TWO PIECES of id including a birth certificate or a passport?

^this

(03-13-2012 11:10 AM)DesertBronco Wrote:  Make the photo ID free, with automatic voter registration, and readily available without the government red tape that the right likes to use as a lever, and we'd have a deal.

Define 'automatic' and 'readily available'. I agree with this entirely once that is locked down.

(03-13-2012 09:46 AM)Chipdip Wrote:  

Quote:Theres that list again, right off of Rush's website.

Gawd you're a FU$KING MORON
If you go this Limbaugh's site you'll see he was not on yesterday. GOOD CATCH MAN!!!!!!

Nice, you can't copy from Rush soooooooo....

Quote:It was on Drudge yesterday.

Too easy, I knew you didn't come up with that yourself.

(03-13-2012 11:34 AM)broncofan1 Wrote:  

(03-13-2012 11:10 AM)DesertBronco Wrote:  Make the photo ID free, with automatic voter registration, and readily available without the government red tape that the right likes to use as a lever, and we'd have a deal.

Define 'automatic' and 'readily available'. I agree with this entirely once that is locked down.

I'll do that once you identify the existing process step by step and tag the steps that are prone to risk, and why an id will mitigate that risk as well as how a photo id doesn't introduce more risks that aren't in play in the process that doesn't have the voter produce a photo id.

Seriously, if the government officials think it's feasable to require people to carry a photo id to vote, then this day in age, it's feasable to ask that they have the roster of registered voters with a photo next to the name at the designated precinct, electronic or hard copy, if none is available then a provisional ballot should be issued.

Still not sure about absentee ballots, that's the real loophole.

Quote:Too easy, I knew you didn't come up with that yourself.

Ahhh, so any time news happens you are there????
"This is roving reporter Desert Bronco, I'm on the scene here in Denver
where Peyton Manning is in negotiations with John Elway. Peyton,
do you see yourself in a Bronco uniform soon, and will that phony putz
Tim Tebow be sent off on a mission to another team?"

"President's sperm stain found on Luinsky dress."

DB- Well, where did you find that loser?

Dip- Ummmm, it was on every channel and in every newspaper in America.

DB- Too easy, I knew you didn't come up with that yourself. :domokun:

Dip- Damn, can't pull anything over on you. :homer:

(03-13-2012 12:19 PM)Chipdip Wrote:  

Quote:Too easy, I knew you didn't come up with that yourself.

Ahhh, so any time news happens you are there????
"This is roving reporter Desert Bronco, I'm on the scene here in Denver
where Peyton Manning is in negotiations with John Elway. Peyton,
do you see yourself in a Bronco uniform soon, and will that phony putz
Tim Tebow be sent off on a mission to another team?"

"President's sperm stain found on Luinsky dress."

DB- Well, where did you find that loser?

Dip- Ummmm, it was on every channel and in every newspaper in America.

DB- Too easy, I knew you didn't come up with that yourself. :domokun:

Dip- Damn, can't pull anything over on you. :homer:

Drinking during business hours these days Dip?

Lunch break. Wife made a lovely turkey sandwich on a bed of lettuce, two baby dills, and sea salt almonds.

The Picture ID isn't working so well in Texas:

The U.S. Department of Justice rejected Texas’ application for preclearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of its voter ID law, saying the state did not prove that the bill would not have a discriminatory effect on minority voters.

States with a history of enacting voting rights restrictions designed to disenfranchise minority votes must have laws that change voting procedure “precleared” by the Department of Justice to ensure such laws are fair to minority voters. The requirement has always drawn the ire of conservatives and the Roberts Court has indicated it wants to revisit the requirements of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

According to Texas’ own data, a Hispanic registered voter is at least 46.5% and potentially more than 120% more likely than a non-Hispanic registered voter to lack the required identification. From the Department of Justice:

“[A]n applicant for an election identification certificate will have to travel to a driver’s license office. This raises three discrete issues. First, according to the most recent American Community Survey three-year estimates, 7.3 percent of Hispanic or Latino households do not have an available vehicle, as compared with only 3.8 percent of non-Hispanic white households that lack an available vehicle. Statistically significant correlations exist between the Hispanic voting-age population percentage of a county, and the percentage of occupied housing units without a vehicle.”

“Second, in 81 of the state’s 254 counties, there are no operational driver’s license offices. The disparity in the rates between Hispanics and non-Hispanics with regard to the possession of either a driver’s license or personal identification card issued by DPS is particularly stark in counties without driver’s license offices. According to the September 2011 data, 10.0 percent of Hispanics in counties without driver’s license offices do not have either form of identification, compared to 5.5 percent of non-Hispanics. According to the January 2012 data, that comparison is 14.6 percent of Hispanics in counties without driver’s license offices, as compared to 8.8 percent of non-Hispanics. During the legislative hearings, one senator stated that some voters in his district could have to travel up to 176 miles roundtrip in order to reach a driver’s license office. The legislature tabled amendments that would have, for example, provided reimbursement to voters who live below the poverty line for travel expenses incurred in applying for the requisite identification.”

For its part Texas was anticipating the rejection (meaning they acknowledge this voter ID law does disproportionately impact minority voters) and plans to continue on with a lawsuit it filed last month to have the bill implemented immediately. The Justice Department has until April 9 to respond to the suit.


Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/doj-rejects-...z1p1iaZWqG

Voting is discriminatory and it should be!

http://video.wjbf.com/v/44372175/sc-dmv-...to-ids.htm

When the Dems in South Carolina said that the problem was transportation. That poor people had difficulty getting to the DMV (but they can get to the polls????), the governor of SC set up a 1 day program where a government vehicle would come to your house, pick you up, take you to the DMV, where you would get a free ID. The vehicle would wait for you. None the less, the excuses still poured in.

Only 22 people used it IN THE ENTIRE STATE. Most of the calls to the DMV (675) simply asked how to get the card.

http://thetandd.com/news/local/state-and...mode=story