And I took your post where you broke down and admitted fabricating other people’s admissions as evidence that you fabricate other people’s admissions.
Wow. That was your idea of being a peacemaker?
Were you on the job for General Custer at Little Bighorn? Might explain some things.
Make up?! Peace?!! STOP this talk immediately!!! Other conservatives have paid Bricker good money to keep the dumbest, most partisan, most predictable posters on the boards occupied in this one thread. The quality of all other threads has risen commensurately by not having Lobohan calling every other poster stupid and Elucidator not torturing the hamsters with countless content-free, 99.9% humor-free posts. We can’t go back!!!
Bricker, do you require a a higher fee? A bonus?
Well, clearly not, because it took this long for you to show up.
Could you tone down the Bricker-worship a notch or two? Even Marcus Bachmann thinks you’re over the top.
Oh no, he has already made it clear that he is fully aware that this a totally naked partisan hack. His position is that, yes, the law purposefully skews the results in his party’s favor, but the laws have been legally enacted and narrowly judged to be constitutional (except where they haven’t) and adds USA! USA! USA!. He also states that he is kept awake nights with fever dreams of non-citizens voting. In Florida. You’d be naive to think that his support for these laws are born of a love of Democracy any more than his opposition to abortion has any relationship to the sanctity of life.
You see, there was an election in Florida that was decided by a mere 537 votes (some would say by one Supreme Court Justice’s vote). Florida it seems has similar trouble sleeping, they recently identified 182,000 names that they suspected (dusky!) and wanted removed from the voter rolls. The Secretary of State scoffed and then resigned before doing such a thing. Florida then sheepishly tried to proceed with purging 2700 names that they were super, super, double sure were democracy killing scofflaws. Most of the county officials responded “as if!” and refused to do so. Bizarrely, there were two stout counties that actually proceeded to at least investigate, they found 500 legal voters and 40 possible ballot casting brigands.
So, back of the envelope; 2700 voters are in question with a positive rate of 40 per 500 names, assuming this was the case in 2000, and that these voters had all voted for Gore, some number of votes against G. W. Bush were illegally cast. 537+2700*40/500=753 This, ladies and gentleman, is Bricker’s sleep number; 753. Had Florida caged these scurrilous non-citizen voters, G. W. would have won by only 753 votes and all of the Sunshine Staters and America at large would slumber in the comforting arms of democratic certitude. Are there better ways to treat Bricker’s nighttime inconfidence? Depends.
Maybe a bit expected, but nicely done.
The guy’s doing an amazing job. Credit where credit is due! Other threads have been noticeably more intelligent and more pleasant. I will commend such work as I se fit!
A good day to you, sir!
Oh, come on. I am an involved, politically aware, fairly successful professional who was without a physical copy of my valid state-issued driver’s license for two months last year. Because it was 2011 and 99% of my bill-paying and banking is done online/electronically it was pretty easy to exist without a state issued ID.
I didn’t need an ID to:
[ul]
[li]Transfer my kid to a new school[/li][li]Work[/li][li]Shop (even paying with credit cards in a store)[/li][li]Bank (having banked at the same place for many, many years)[/li][li]Pay bills[/li][li]See my doctor[/li][li]Fill a prescription[/li][li]See a movie[/li][li]Hang out with friends[/li][li]Get around town[/li][li]etc[/ul][/li]The only time I needed an ID was when I wanted to buy some wine and since I rarely ever drink, it wasn’t a big deal. If you have a job, a place to live, your paycheck directly deposited in your account with a card linked to your account, don’t travel by air, and don’t drink too much you can get along just fine.
Even 25 - 30 years ago I can remember my mother, who didn’t drive, only needing her state issued photo ID to write a check at the grocery store or to withdraw money from inside the bank. Often, her employer (restaurant/hotel) would cash paychecks for the employees. She would deposit some cash in the bank (no ID needed) and since she was always off on Tuesdays - she and a friend would spend the day tooling around town paying bills, shopping, having lunch and visiting friends. Her bank account and mortgage were with the same local bank, she worked the same job, and for the course of her entire adult life she never needed an ID to vote.
It would be trivially easy for someone to become so accustomed to not using an ID that their ID expires and they put off getting a new one, especially someone who doesn’t drive. Then it becomes a burden to get a copy of your birth certificate, social security card and get to the DMV to get a new ID - and in some states like VA, you have to allow 15-30 days to receive your ID in the mail instead of instantly at the DMV.
Isn’t that kind of subjective, depending on whether you believe liberal/Democratic supported policies are good for the country or not?
As for “losing in the courts,” I thought there were still challenges in some states extant? And does Holder’s recent comments mean the DOJ might take a look?
Kind of like those people who can’t get an ID?
How many people would you think wouldn’t vote if you put a five hour labor tax on it?
It really seems that you just can’t visualize complex scenarios.
Well, as a general matter, I don’t believe liberal/Democratic supported policies are good for the country, but the weighing of the benefit here does not rest on that. As I have hinted before, it rests on the value of only legal voters voting. Voters being frightened away because they have to get ID is not reasonable.I don’t weigh it heavily.
The Supreme Court has spoken. Individual state courts may still find that some schemes violate state constitutions. Wisconsin is the only one that comes to mind.
The DOJ can only “take a look” in states that require DOJ approval because of past discrimination. And even then, a state disputing the DOJ finding can ask the federal court to overturn DOJ, which, given the existing federal caselaw of Crawford v Marion County, I don’t see much doubt on.
The state challenge won’t even be possible in Minnesota, which is doing it as a state constitutional amendment to be approved this fall.
90% of the people are already paying it, but not for that reason. What if 99% had ID’s? How about 99.9999%? What is the cut off in your mind for such a law to be acceptable?
Interesting that part of my day job is to diagnose root causes on systems failures. But before I go off and start a full root cause analysis, I usually investigate a few common things. Was there a change recently. Did someone change a related system. I can usually find the answer quickly rather than making up complex scenarios that only apply in unusual circumstances.
Like most things, people take the easiest path. In this case, most of the people who don’t have ID’s don’t have them because they can’t get them, rather it just isn’t worth the effort for them to get them.
And now comes Democratic DC Mayor Vincent Gray. His campaign was the beneficiary of a huge influx of illegal money.
Interestingly, he is not resigning.
Democrats don’t have to resign after stuff like this, right?
And with a resounding thud, the kitchen sink of liberal hypocrisy is finally thrown in. Wait, that can’t be! Twenty six pages of Bricker, and no liberal hypocrisy?
And besides, that news broke today? What, we’re supposed to on alert, rush down here to denounce, renounce, and condemn Whats-his-face?
Never said I was good at it! Besides, trying counts! Have that on good authority,
That explains a lot. But it’s not true…especially when it comes to humor. Balloons filled with lead lack that levity that makes balloons fun.
Perhaps you should try curling. Maybe you’d be awesome at doing it.
When you can prove that the number of citizens disenfranchised by the law is less than the number of fraudulent votes that would be stopped by the law.
We’ll wait.