# I Pit the ID-demanding GOP vote-suppressors (Part 1) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 12, 2012, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943 "2012-06-12T19:15:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 87
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1721 "2012-07-24T02:24:38Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Correlation doesn`t equal causation. An interesting tidbit. And when I posted that every other jurisdiction on the planet who has stricter requirements for Voter ID has higher turnout at the polls, I`m told it is because they have different cultures. Did the culture change in Georgia overnight along with the Voter ID law (assuming the stated facts are true)? So, I`m left wondering when does causation equal correlation. You got me mixed up with somebody else, apparently. Didn’t say anything about correlation/causation, nor anything about the culture in Georgia. Only that there is a perfectly obvious reason why there might be an increase in minority voting as a result of these laws being passed. It is considered good form hereabouts that a post directed towards a quote have some actual relevance to that quote. Just a hint. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1722 "2012-07-24T02:36:13Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > You got me mixed up with somebody else, apparently. Didn’t say anything about correlation/causation, nor anything about the culture in Georgia. Only that there is a perfectly obvious reason why there might be an increase in minority voting as a result of these laws being passed. It ain’t all about you, Sunshine. I’m responding to your post along with others. > [@](#): > > It is considered good form hereabouts that a post directed towards a quote have some actual relevance to that quote. Just a hint. If you read my post, you’ll determine that I wasn’t just replying to you. Hence the usage of, “I’m told”, rather than, “You told me”. I’ve also responded to questions that were posed to others, should I stop that, too? If you want a direct reply to your post here it is. If more people get out to vote because they are pissed off, then what are you complaining about? More people have voted and more of them are minorities and the poor and thus we have a government that better reflects the will of the people. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1723 "2012-07-24T03:01:03Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > …If more people get out to vote because they are pissed off, then what are you complaining about? … That they have good reason to be pissed off. Duh. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 11:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1724 "2012-07-24T11:15:11Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > What does this mean? What other interpretation is possible, except that he believes that less votes will be going to Obama, and that change is due to a reduction in voter fraud? Unless you would like to propose that these laws will create a mad enthusiasm for Romney? > > You want to imply that the obvious is not the obvious? Have you an alternative to offer? Electoral pixies, perhaps? I offered an alternative. You didn’t want to think about it, so your mind simply wouldn’t process it. The alternative: Obama’s already in trouble. Across the entire country, his numbers are getting weaker, because he’s got a terrible economy to deal with. Didn’t I say that? Yes. Didn’t you ignore that and substitute “pixies?” Yes. > [@](#): > > Google him, and you see he got a lot of attention for those remarks, most of them reflecting our common sense view. If that interpretation were wrong, we would most likely see a “clarification”, yes? No, no, as in no we don’t see any such “clarification”. Hence we may reasonably conclude that the said what he meant, and meant what he said. You can certainly argue that’s what he met. You cannot truthfully say that he admitted it, definitively. You can say things like, “What he said is essentially an admission…” with safety, because that line shows it’s not _literally_ an admission, but simply your conclusion. And what about **Skip** ’s claim that I also “admitted” it. You can’t try that dodge with me. I have explicitly “clarified” and denied the meaning **Skip** ascribes to me. And yet… he still charges forward and says I admitted it. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1725 "2012-07-24T13:30:47Z")
**elucidator** : Since you have indicated that it’s acceptable to say that you “admitted” something, based solely on the inference and reasoning of the person announcing the “admission:” You have some nerve complaining about the process by which Voter IS laws are passed, since you yourself admitted[sup]_[/sup] that the only reason Democrats fight against these laws is their wish to retain all the non-citizens and felons that routinely vote Democratic. [sup]_[/sup] For this new, broad version of “admitted,” which allows me to say this without elucidator having said any such thing. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1726 "2012-07-24T13:38:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > **elucidator** : > > Since you have indicated that it’s acceptable to say that you “admitted” something, based solely on the inference and reasoning of the person announcing the “admission:” > > You have some nerve complaining about the process by which Voter IS laws are passed, since you yourself admitted[sup]_[/sup] that the only reason Democrats fight against these laws is their wish to retain all the non-citizens and felons that routinely vote Democratic. > [sup]_[/sup] For this new, broad version of “admitted,” which allows me to say this without elucidator having said any such thing. So, Bricker, are you ready to apologize to me for lying about my position on gerrymandering? I mean your lie was so brazen, that I assume you’re alluding to it here. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1727 "2012-07-24T13:46:39Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > So, Bricker, are you ready to apologize to me for lying about my position on gerrymandering? > > I mean your lie was so brazen, that I assume you’re alluding to it here. Not at all. You can easily get my apology by linking to your previous posts that show how wrong I was. Why don’t you do that? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1728 "2012-07-24T13:55:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Not at all. You can easily get my apology by linking to your previous posts that show how wrong I was. Why don’t you do that? Because, you are offering an illogical and nonsensical method of proving you wrong. As far as I know there has never been a gerrymandering thread in GD. The fact that I didn’t interact in said thread, if it existed, and didn’t mention that Democrats are wrong too when the gerrymander, in a thread I never attended, doesn’t mean that I support Democratic party gerrymandering. Much like you don’t support raping tiny baby ducklings. Wait, actually you must. Because you’ve never posted in a duckling-raping thread that you are against it. :rolleyes: Bricker, I know you’re just lying about my position so you can bat your eyelashes and play stupid. But you’re not stupid and you’re not a great actor. So how about you apologize and move on. One also might note that you’re a complete hypocrite for accusing 'Luci or what you specifically have done. But then, evidence of you being a complete hypocrite isn’t exactly as rare as sasquach eggs. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1729 "2012-07-24T14:46:08Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Because, you are offering an illogical and nonsensical method of proving you wrong. > > As far as I know there has never been a gerrymandering thread in GD. The fact that I didn’t interact in said thread, if it existed, and didn’t mention that Democrats are wrong too when the gerrymander, in a thread I never attended, doesn’t mean that I support Democratic party gerrymandering. > > Much like you don’t support raping tiny baby ducklings. Wait, actually you must. Because you’ve never posted in a duckling-raping thread that you are against it. :rolleyes: > > Bricker, I know you’re just lying about my position so you can bat your eyelashes and play stupid. But you’re not stupid and you’re not a great actor. So how about you apologize and move on. > > One also might note that you’re a complete hypocrite for accusing 'Luci or what you specifically have done. But then, evidence of you being a complete hypocrite isn’t exactly as rare as sasquach eggs. Got a little amnesia, do you? I didn’t insist on seeing only your gerrymandering bona fides: > [@Bricker](#): > > So, where are those posts of yours in which you have really harsh words for Democrats gerrymandering? > > In fact, let’s expand it. Show me a couple of posts where you have really harsh words for Democrats for any reason… other than them agreeing with Republicans on a polcy. Any topic at all but policy agreement with Republicans. **You seem to think here was no real opportunity to speak up about Democratic gerrymandering, so let’s expand it. Any post where you really had harsh words for a Democratic politician, pundit, or proposal.** > > Go ahead. You forgot that one, huh? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1730 "2012-07-24T14:54:24Z")
What’s next, Lobohan? Here’s my guess: “As far as I know there has never been a thread in GD where Democrats were criticized. The fact that I didn’t interact in said thread, if it existed, and didn’t mention that Democrats are wrong too when the Democrats were criticized, in a thread I never attended, doesn’t mean that I support Democrats.” ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1731 "2012-07-24T15:01:16Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Got a little amnesia, do you? > > I didn’t insist on seeing only your gerrymandering bona fides: I’m sorry, liar, you actually did: [ > [@](#): > > Suuuuuuuure you don’t. Your criticisms of Democratic gerrymandering are legendary. > > There was the one, that day. And then that other one, the other day. Yeah, man. That was a good one. ]([http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15301034&postcount=1616](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15301034&postcount=1616)) > [@](#): > > You forgot that one, huh? You later moved the goalposts. Are you admitting that you’re doing that? Is your logical contention that if I find one thing I don’t agree with any one democratic lawmaker on, I suddenly don’t support Democratic gerrymandering? Bricker, your utter failure has driven you to incoherence. You need to admit you’re lying about me so you can get better. \<3 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1732 "2012-07-24T15:16:11Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > I’m sorry, liar, you actually did: > [URL=“[http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15301034&postcount=1616](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15301034&postcount=1616)”] > > You later moved the goalposts. Are you admitting that you’re doing that? > > Is your logical contention that if I find one thing I don’t agree with any one democratic lawmaker on, I suddenly don’t support Democratic gerrymandering? > > Bricker, your utter failure has driven you to incoherence. You need to admit you’re lying about me so you can get better. > > \<3 Yes, I moved the goalposts – in your direction! You objected to my demand that you produce posts criticizing gerrymandering Democrats, so I expanded it – doesn’t have to be gerrymandering now. It can be ANYTHING, except criticisms for Democrats who are agreeing with Republican policy. And you still can’t do that!!! And you can’t admit it. This is great. This is what I’ll start linking to from now on, Lobohan, everytime you open your mouth around me. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1733 "2012-07-24T15:21:50Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What’s next, Lobohan? > > Here’s my guess: “As far as I know there has never been a thread in GD where Democrats were criticized. The fact that I didn’t interact in said thread, if it existed, and didn’t mention that Democrats are wrong too when the Democrats were criticized, in a thread I never attended, doesn’t mean that I support Democrats.” This does not logically follow. I don’t support gerrymandering. I know districts need to be redrawn, and it should be done in as neutral a way as possible. And you’re lying about my position based on nothing more than the “fact” that I never previously, on this board decried “Democratic Party Gerrymandering.” Anyone can see that this isn’t sound. We don’t regularly have gerrymandering threads. And I haven’t been a part of those we did have (that I can recall, anyway). Of course the real takeaway here is that you’re trying to suggest that gerrymandering is a particularly Democratic Party problem. I haven’t heard that before. I assumed it is either relatively equal, or because Republicans like cheating (see the voter ID thread we’re in) it was more on the Republican side. Although I’d be open to information either way. It’s like you’ve forgotten how to think. Or at least are so shrill and angry that you’ve forgotten how to hide that you aren’t thinking. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1734 "2012-07-24T15:25:32Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, I moved the goalposts – in your direction! And I’d like you to retract your original claim. > [@](#): > > You objected to my demand that you produce posts criticizing gerrymandering Democrats, so I expanded it – doesn’t have to be gerrymandering now. It can be ANYTHING, except criticisms for Democrats who are agreeing with Republican policy. > > And you still can’t do that!!! > > And you can’t admit it. I’m saying that even if I don’t have anti Democratic Party posts here (and I surely do) it doesn’t have bearing on whether I believe that gerrymandering is okay if Democrats do it. It’s incoherent. You’re asking for my height to prove I didn’t watch an episode of Matlock on Thursday. The thing you are asking for doesn’t prove what you want proven. > [@](#): > > This is great. This is what I’ll start linking to from now on, Lobohan, everytime you open your mouth around me. Please do. You’re obviously trying to get back on the attack after slippy-sliding for days in your own shit. But don’t lie to do it. Try to win the argument on the merits. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1735 "2012-07-24T16:00:10Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I offered an alternative. You didn’t want to think about it, so your mind simply wouldn’t process it. > > The alternative: Obama’s already in trouble. Across the entire country, his numbers are getting weaker, because he’s got a terrible economy to deal with. > > Didn’t I say that? Yes. Didn’t you ignore that and substitute “pixies?” > > Yes… Well, sure except he didn’t mention any of that. He said “Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.” The subject of the sentence is voter ID. The subject of the sentence is most assuredly not the state of the economy, because it is not mentioned. Typing too fast for you? Let me know… And if he states that voter ID is “gonna allow Governor Romney to win”, he probably means that voter ID is going to allow Romney to win. See the quote marks? They’re there because that’s precisely what he said. The only conceivable interpretation is that he thinks that Obama will get less votes than Romney, due to voter ID restrictions. Rhetoric getting a bit too complex for you? Let me know… > [@](#): > > …You can certainly argue that’s what he met. You cannot truthfully say that he admitted it, definitively. You can say things like, “What he said is essentially an admission…” with safety, because that line shows it’s not _literally_ an admission, but simply your conclusion… Ah. So your complaint is not with the actual content, but with that one word, “admitted”. I suppose “gloated” might have been better. But to be perfectly neutral, “stated” would have been best, as it has no conclusion about the mind set of the speaker. So, he didn’t _admit_ that the point of the legislation was to tilt the playing field in favor of Republicans, he merely _alluded_ to it. Huge difference, being somewhere between a gnat’s eyelash and a butterfly fart. > [@](#): > > …And what about **Skip** ’s claim that I also “admitted” it. You can’t try that dodge with me. I have explicitly “clarified” and denied the meaning **Skip** ascribes to me. And yet… he still charges forward and says I admitted it. Not **Skip.** Me. Over here. The lefty hive mind exists only in your fevered imagination, we do not collude on our postings. The fact that we have very similar views as to your dishonesty and utter lack of scruple has one essential origin: your dishonesty and utter lack of scruples. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1736 "2012-07-24T16:11:39Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > The lefty hive mind exists only in your fevered imagination, we do not collude on our postings. The fact that we have very similar views as to your dishonesty and utter lack of scruple has one essential origin: your dishonesty and utter lack of scruples. Uh dude, I was just following your lead. My _Communist Party Dispatches_ didn’t arrive this week, so I wasn’t sure of our talking points. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1737 "2012-07-24T16:20:52Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > And I’d like you to retract your original claim. > > I’m saying that even if I don’t have anti Democratic Party posts here (and I surely do) it doesn’t have bearing on whether I believe that gerrymandering is okay if Democrats do it. > > It’s incoherent. You’re asking for my height to prove I didn’t watch an episode of Matlock on Thursday. The thing you are asking for doesn’t prove what you want proven. > > Please do. You’re obviously trying to get back on the attack after slippy-sliding for days in your own shit. > > But don’t lie to do it. Try to win the argument on the merits. Fine, forget gerrymandering. I’m sure you’ve never seen it mentioned, probably had to look up the word when I said it here. You’ve never been given a single opportunity to assess Democratic gerrymandering in your history here on the SDMB, and that explains why you’ve never criticized it. Now – what explains your lack of any examples of criticizing Democrats for other things? (Except, of course, for agreeing with Republicans). ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1738 "2012-07-24T16:23:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Fine, forget gerrymandering. I’m sure you’ve never seen it mentioned, probably had to look up the word when I said it here. You’ve never been given a single opportunity to assess Democratic gerrymandering in your history here on the SDMB, and that explains why you’ve never criticized it. Is that a retraction for your continuing lies about me and my position on gerrymandering? It doesn’t sound much like a retraction. > [@](#): > > Now – what explains your lack of any examples of criticizing Democrats for other things? (Except, of course, for agreeing with Republicans). I’m pretty sure I called John Edwards a douche at some point. Good enough? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1739 "2012-07-24T16:31:54Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Well, sure except he didn’t mention any of that. He said “Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.” The subject of the sentence is voter ID. The subject of the sentence is most assuredly not the state of the economy, because it is not mentioned. Typing too fast for you? Let me know… > > And if he states that voter ID is “gonna allow Governor Romney to win”, he probably means that voter ID is going to allow Romney to win. See the quote marks? They’re there because that’s precisely what he said. The only conceivable interpretation is that he thinks that Obama will get less votes than Romney, due to voter ID restrictions. Rhetoric getting a bit too complex for you? Let me know… No. Why is that the only conceivable interpretation, when I gave you another one? His was not a thesis statement. It did not mathematically lay out each of its assumptions. Merely because he did not explicitly say, “…along with a weakened economy and a foundering President Obama…” does not mean it’s excluded. Everyone in the audience knew the economy was weak and Obama is in trouble. In any event, this entire conversation is moot, as you admitted[sup]\*[/sup] before that the guy was being treated unfairly for his remarks by Democrats, who were seizing on it and twisting it to mean something he didn’t say. > [@](#): > > Ah. So your complaint is not with the actual content, but with that one word, “admitted”. I suppose “gloated” might have been better. But to be perfectly neutral, “stated” would have been best, as it has no conclusion about the mind set of the speaker. > > So, he didn’t _admit_ that the point of the legislation was to tilt the playing field in favor of Republicans, he merely _alluded_ to it. Huge difference, being somewhere between a gnat’s eyelash and a butterfly fart. I’d give you “alluded.” Because at least “alluded” recognizes what “stated” or “admitted” does not: that there is an inferential gap between what was SAID and what you’re claiming. An allusion may be debated. As you yourself have admitted[sup]\*[/sup] multiple times. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1740 "2012-07-24T16:40:52Z")
Leaving aside, for now, the sad spectacle of **Bricker** abandoning his last shred of dignity… What does Turzai actually believe? Does he really believe that the Dems are marching hordes of illegal voters to the polls? Or does he think his audience is so stupid that _they_ believe it, even if he doesn’t? How deep does this rot go? I fear I have been operating under outdated notions, such as the relative sanity of my political opponents. I have underestimated the depth and virulence of their hatred for Obama, and everything he represents to them. Not my father’s Oldsmobile, and not his Republican Party. What would Barry do? Not Barry Obama, Barry Goldwater. Kinda my “go to” guy when thinking about the honesty and integrity of Republicans. I have little doubt he would have favored voter ID laws, as I do, if honestly and sincerely applied. But I very much doubt he would have stood silently by as such laws were applied to create an unfair and undemocratic advantage for Republicans. He was not a perfect paragon of integrity, no politician can be, it is functionally impossible. But he stands head and shoulders above the people who have taken his place. He wouldn’t have scraped them off his boots, he’d throw the boots away. I remember reading about his vote against the Civil Rights bill, how he agonized over it, but finally decided that it was a “states rights” issue and his principles would not let him vote for making it a federal issue, however worthy the goal. I thought then, and think now, that he was tragically wrong, but at least I understand the reasoning. But not these people. I cannot grasp any of it, its insane, it is venomous and hateful. We need an honest conservative party, it is necessary, even if only as a Loyal Opposition. We need someone to counsel for prudence and caution. We need people who accept the inevitability of change but will offer guidance on careful consideration. This is legitimate, valid, useful. But even here, the madness abounds. \*\*Bricker \*\*remains our most intelligent and coherent conservative. And what a sad commentary that is! Bleeding Og, its come to this? Should we place an ad in other message boards, honest conservative wanted, must possess rudimentary awareness of scruples and dignity? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=86) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=88)