It’s like Bricker’s account has been hacked by Starving Artist. We’ve had the “I’m only mean because you guys were mean first”, now this…
Can paper towel tubes be far behind?
Do you actually believe there’s any substance or truth to this claim, on a large scale? If so, perhaps I will start another thread to debate it, because I find it to be an interesting topic.
I’m not really sure how you are relating that to my post.
Its just a conservative attempt to present themselves as the party of ideas while the liberals mostly engage in ad hominem attacks.
Just promise me there won’t be any Chinese Finger Trap imagery between the two of them.
No. But it’s true much more often than not amongst the hard-left crowd.
Probably wouldn’t have, had you not mentioned it.
It wasn’t directed against you. It was a mix of your post reminding me of Bricker’s penchant in this thread (see voter confidence), and Republicans in general, to continue a line of attack that’s been proved to be false.
That and I wanted to use my new word.
The concern about voter confidence has not been proven false.
You’re assertion that voter ID will improve confidence has…repeatedly. Though, to be fair, I see you in a lot of different threads and it’s not a trait that you exhibit often.
Given the types of fraud that we are seeing (absentee ballots vs. anything a voter ID would solve) I would liken voter ID laws to treating a patient’s paper cut while ignoring his sucking chest wound.
The choice of priorities is suspicious and the lack of effort to prevent fraud through absentee ballots (traditionally a strong source of Republican votes) is damning.
It certainly hasn’t been proven true, which is the correct criteria for judging a claim.
In any case, if there is a true problem with voter confidence due to the lack of an ID law, it’s only because of a Republican campaign to mislead the public on the issue. It would be better addressed by halting the campaign of lies and explaining that this kind of fraud is nearly or completely non-existent.
The concern about Bigfoot’s existence has not been proven false.
This therefore justifies spending millions of dollars on my Bigfoot early warning system.
Jeez, it’s like you’re just phoning it in these days. Do you have the flu or something?
It’s been proven worrisome enough for the legislatures to act, and worrisome enough for the strong majority of the public to support Voter ID laws… which is the correct criteria for passing a law.
I would much rather spend a few million on a Bigfoot Early Warning System than live in a country where you are in charge, by fiat, whenever you don’t like the decisions reached by the operation of representative democracy.
You offer up Bigfoot as an example of something that is so ludicrous as to be definitively false. But the key here is: you don’t get to decide for the public what the correct balance of risk and expenditure is, even on Bigfoot. If you believe the public is wrong, in a representative democracy, you don’t get to assume the mantle of Emergency Leader and change the laws to suit you.
So you’re saying that legislators acting on a problem proves that it’s real? What planet do you live on?
I already explained, and it’s been explained repeatedly in this thread, that the public has been misled about the problem, and please don’t go down the road of accusing me of disrespecting the public, we’ve also gone over that repeatedly. Most people are to busy and are having to tough a time surviving to be able to do the research themselves. If they’re misled, it’s not because they’re lazy or stupid, it’s because their representatives are being deliberately negligent in their duties and misinforming the public.
Show us some real proof that the type of fraud addressed by this law is a real problem. Proof that people think it’s a problem IS NOT PROOF that it’s a real problem that needs to be addressed at the cost of time, money, inconvenience, and the discouragement of people trying to legitimately vote. You’re to smart to really believe that.
If you use “public confidence” as a criteria, then whoever has the biggest most successful propaganda operation can pass just about anything that doesn’t have obvious negative effects on most voters. And they can sometimes even get those things passed if the public is misled enough.
This thread is about what is and what isn’t good policy, not what’s strictly legal depending on how much you can mislead the public.
Our representatives have an ethical and moral duty to provide us with correct information.
Since you phrase it that way – no.
The “correct” criteria for passing a law is to address an issue or a problem, not a perceptual failure or a deliberately created fantasy. Especially not a deliberately created fantasy that serves one party’s self interest.
By your reasoning, if we hyped up the ‘aliens are landing and probing our rectums OMG!!’ hysteria sufficiently, it would be “correct” to begin passing laws against hyperspace travel and requiring all non-Earth aliens to take out medical malpractice insurance.
He’s saying that if we disagree with a law then we disrespect the American system or even the American citizenry. He knows as well as we do that that’s bullshit.
Such as a country where people susceptible to voting a way you don’t like should be deterred from voting at all? :dubious: That kind of country?
Have you *really *thought through how you wish to present yourself here?
Wow. So by that criteria, the Japanese American interment during WWII was the correct thing to do, as was the Holocaust.
Do you seriously believe that any idea, no matter how terrible and unjust, should be made law if enough people are worried about it?
What if 51% o the public doesn’t trust lawyers? Would it be a good idea to ban the professional practice of law? Could there be any proposed law that 51% of voters and the legislature support, that is not unConstitutional, that is a bad idea?
Hard to fucking believe that someone could get a law degree thinking that any law that the majority wants to pass is by definition just. I’m quite positive that you could get a law passed in most states prohibiting the construction of mosques. In asshole-land, that’s a just law. I’m also sure that you could get a healthy majority to require the recitation of the Lord’s Prayer in public schools. Would it be just? Only in asshole-land.