Uh Oh. Since you’re voting for the wrong kind of candidates I’m afraid you have a moral obligation to turn yourself in and plead for leniency (unless you can show an old John Birch membership card or some such). If you don’t believe me, ask Bricker. But if you ask me, feel free to drop that ballot in the post without ID anyway as long as you’don’t fear eternal damnation from the Pentecostal Gods.
Philosophy wasn’t my strong suit, but I think Bricker’s position is that “moral precepts” and “cynical legalisms” are synonyms, so anyone who doesn’t accept that, or doesn’t endorse GOP voter suppression, is amoral. Several of us amoral anti-suppressors are planning a cross-country trip on the Ilk Bus. Since you’re female, I’m sure we’re happy to let you ride along even if Bricker hasn’t branded you amoral yet … as long as you’re immoral.
Oh – No guns allowed on the Ilk Bus. This should keep us ideologically pure since suppressors like Bricker and other Republiopaths generally “need” guns to feel safe around people who vote for [del]rational[/del] amoral candidates.
Stepping aside from trivial issues like morality and eternal verities, I call to focus our attention on the truly crucial issue of voter confidence and the crunchy goodness of voter id laws to support and bolster that all-important factor.
Given the latest reports from the GAO, strict voter id laws will have a measurable effect on upcoming elections. The effect will be felt almost entirely on one side of the political spectrum. Some of those, we may rest assured, will be quite close.
Much has been made here about the effect on voter fraud of super-dooper close elections that might, theoretically and at the very bounds of rational thought, have the effect of swaying an election from its legitimate result. Much clutching of pearls and gasps of horror.
But here we have some actual numbers to crunch away with, not some abstract rationalization. These laws* will *affect elections, these laws will cost the Dems votes.
Where then is voter confidence, if the legislatures can legally put their thumbs on the scales of justice? I can only imagine the moral quandary of Republicans who must face the dreadful prospect of having won an election unfairly! They will gasp in horror and dismay that they might have party to such a…sordid result.
We can expect Democrats will be equally upset, if not more so.
Perhaps the esteemed Counselor can explain to us how this is beneficial to voter confidence, when our very legislatures enact laws that make voter confidence a sad jest? If we are expected to tie ourselves in anxious knots over a handful of possible votes affecting a super-dooper close election, how are we to respond to this report?
Winston Churchill: “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” (from a House of Commons speech on Nov. 11, 1947) .
I had an asshole libertarian/anarchist try to use that to compel his listeners to admit that government is a bad idea, by its very nature – “See? It’s admitted outright in that quote!” What this asshole overlooks is that libertarian and anarchist systems are included in “all those other forms” that Churchill alluded to.
I will find it enlightening that the period in time in which the US has been the most democratic is also the time in which you attribute to plutocracy. I find it eternally hilarious that you don’t even notice this yourself.
On the other hand, you refer to periods of slavery, denial of suffrage, military occupation, and total war as democracy that “wasn’t all that bad”.
I’d say there are a large number of the poor who won’t be able to vote because the barriers to getting and ID are too great. This fact is precisely why the party hacks behind the voting “rights” outfits are outright scoundrels. Why aren’t they working hard to lower the government imposed barriers to gaining ID? Not having ID effectively keeps a person on the outskirts of society, but they do not care. These people only exist in so far as they are a conglomeration of particles that operates a button every two years.
Where are they when the person would like to start a business? Get a driver’s license to get a job? Become a hairdresser? Keep the fruits of their labor? Make decisions on whether to purchase mandated healthcare or spend money on saving their kids from govt schools?
Govt steps on the faces of these people everyday, and they are nowhere. They show up every two years with big party money and storefronts with printed placards.
Uh, I’m pretty sure most people against voter ID are for getting IDs to those that don’t have it.
The point of Voter ID laws is to keep people from voting now. Getting them IDs over the next few years doesn’t keep cunts like the GOP from stealing elections in the short term. And said cunts aren’t likely to institute easy access to IDs after they’ve stolen the election.
Which is why this is a big deal, laudable goals like increased access to IDs won’t happen at all when evil cunts like the GOP get their druthers.
Well, why not? It’s a theory on how humans should get together to govern themselves. Its answer is, “Not at all,” but it is, nevertheless, a theory on governance.
Aw, now, sure, there are at least a few. I’ve met a couple.
Exactly so. Anarchism doesn’t even really exist; if it were somehow magically instituted on a large scale, it would cease to exist in mere minutes. It has been tried, in very limited instances, such as small associations or clubs. It collapses the minute one guy swipes what another guy thinks is his property.
Um, then why don’t they place the resources behind getting people access to IDs instead of behind partisan outfits whose goals are to a) gin up fear of whitey going back to his old ways and b) heard their cattle into the voting booth?
