A similar stipulation was made in the Indiana case.
But why should I waste time typing an explanation? If it helps you, you’ll believe it; if it doesn’t, you’ll dismiss it out of hand.
How many laws did Charlie Rangel break? Also, he was punished the by the house, right?
I thought you just wanted two. Bricker, my friend. Let me explain this to you.
Your stance is stupid and has no rational basis. I don’t become more or less partisan based on posts* I don’t make* on this board. And a lack of posts isn’t a logical way to establish this. Look at what I say. Like how I use what you say to prove that you’re a liar.
Okay, buddy?
You’ve been intimately involved in this thread. If you didn’t read them the first time, I’m not going to sift through 36 (?) pages just to have you ignore them a second time. But I did notice that you didn’t address the actual points I made concerning what the government is obligated to do. So, please, enlighten me to what the Great Shecky Green thinks about the role of government. I’ll wait.
Bwahahahaha.
Yeah, sure.
The only time you criticize is for acting like a Republican, but that doesn’t prove a thing. It’s coincidence. You never saw those threads, any of them.
Heh heh.
I’d love to know if anyone’s reading this and believes Lobohan.
[Quote=Bricker]
Welcome, kids, to Harrison Bergeon Elementary School. Come in, sit down, and here’s your trophy for being the top student! Yes, yes, all of you get a trophy; no need to push.
[/QUOTE]
If it were named after Harrison Bergeron, it would be honoring the individual who tried to use his relative strength to exert dictatorial control over everyone else. I assume you have an authoritarian bent and would prefer that, but I’m not sure you actually read the story, given your confusion.
I don’t have a problem bitching about the implementation, but you act like the Republicans are the only ones in government. I’d advise that rather than bitching about them, ask why the opposition is so ineffective in their ability to get things done that would help people (assuming that the help is needed given that 90% don’t need it currently).
If it helped me, you wouldn’t tell me. If it really hurt my case, no power on Earth could stop you. Who you kidding?
Glad to help! You see, in these situations, you got two groups: the majority (the guys that are more numerous) and the minority (the guys who aren’t). I’ll take a minute, give you time to absorb and digest.
Ready? OK, follow closely: as a general thing if the guys in the majority don’t want the guys in the minority doing something, they can’t do it. Read it again, if you need to.
The only Vonnegut they know is that one, the only Beatles they know is Taxman, they know all about the Beach Boys, and nothing about Zappa. Weirdos.
He has a point, Lobo. There is a distinct bias in the posts you didn’t make, and you refuse to reveal what is in those posts you didn’t make. He’s pretty much got you.
According to a PBS report, the Pennsylvania government itself estimates that over 750,000 citizens lack photo-id and will be ineligible to vote, including Wilola Lee:
[QUOTE=Wilola Lee]
(Sixty-year-old Wilola Lee of Philadelphia says she’s voted in almost every presidential election since the '70s. She’s a retired employee of the city’s board of education who spent several years working at her local polling station.
But, in November, under the voter identification law passed in Pennsylvania, Lee may not be able to cast a ballot. The new law requires all eligible voters to have a state-approved form of identification issued by PennDOT, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. And the requirements for approval are strict.
Wilola Lee already has a number of identification cards.)
This is the only I.D. that I really have to identify myself, and it’s the Social Security card. Then I have the personal Pennsylvania I.D. card.
(the one document required by the law to get a state-issued I.D., her original birth certificate … was destroyed in a fire.)
I have been trying to get my birth certificate for the past 10 years, over 10 years. So I did send to Georgia, where I was born at, in order to obtain a birth certificate. But they sent me a delayed birth certificate without a seal on it, and come to find out it’s just only an application.
[/QUOTE]
Sorry if this report has already been mentioned. I don’t read the thread: Life is too short to bother with the noise of Brick and the Idiots.
And on the subject of things the state of Pennsylvania is willing to admit:
Wilola Lee says, “I have been trying to get my birth certificate for the past 10 years, over 10 years. So I did send to Georgia, where I was born at, in order to obtain a birth certificate. But they sent me a delayed birth certificate without a seal on it, and come to find out it’s just only an application.”
Oh, NO! They sent me an application. What so ever am I to do?!
People who get ID’s: Picks up pen. Fills in and mails applications.
People who can’t seem to figure it out on their own: <collapses to the floor weeping uncontrollably while waiting for the government to resolve their crisis.>
Did you miss the part where she already has a SS card AND a Pennsylvnia ID card? Why does she need a birth certificate from another state?
Well, that’s democracy for you. The majority want to make sure that only those eligible to vote are actually voting.
Because that’s where she was born… How else would someone prove they are eligible to vote, other than having a birth or naturalisation certificate?
And you believe that? Really and truly, you believe it, that this is their sole motivation? And further believe that the only reason the Dems are fighting this is because they gain an enormous advantage from the huge numbers of illegal voters?
Reason I ask, as you may have read, I’m kinda wondering how many of the supporters of this horsehit have totally drunk the kool-aid. How many of you guys are certifiable, and truly believe what the tighty rightys seem willing to insinuate and suggest, but not actually say. Even that Turzai guy, he’ll sidle up to it, he’ll hint, nod and wink at it, but won’t actually come out and say it. Not even Bricker, to his credit.
So, how about you? So far, nobody here has the balls/is crazy enough to say it, how about you? Wanna be the alpha lemming?
Because those other forms of ID are not deemed sufficient to get the required ID? From reading these Pennsylvania sites, I’m not entirely sure.
http://www.dmv.state.pa.us/voter/voteridlaw.shtml
http://www.dmv.state.pa.us/pdotforms/fact_sheets/pub195us.pdf
From the first link:
I certainly agree this is one of the worst sites I’ve seen. I can make a stab at determining what section 102(z.5)(2) of the Pennsylvania Election Code (25 P.S. § 2602(z.5)(2) is based upon the following paragraphs, but why not link to it directly? Bad design.
And what is really confusing is this statement: ‘-Identification issued by the United States Government that includes my name, a photograph, and an expiration date that is not expired.*’ that then says later on to get a Pennsylvania ID to vote present a ‘Valid U.S. Passport’ plus the SS card. But is that not what you have just declared you don’t have? Or is a passport not an identification issues by the United States government? Does this also mean that a passport is, or is not, a valid form of ID for voting purposes?
While I agree with the type of ID they are trying to implement, I do believe that a person should not have to have a lawyer present to figure out what the rules are. This is either negligence of a high order or deliberately obtuse language.
No, I think they have found something that is perfectly within the rules that will help their side to win, at least in the short term. They have been told that they may not have an uneven playing field, that they must supply the required ID to anyone who can’t afford to pay for it at no cost.
So, the system has worked. Instead of the partisan system they attempted to get, you have a fair system that reflects what the majority of people in these states want. The politicians have done what most politicians always do, which is to attempt to get elected, and remain in power. The judiciary has ensured they are doing so in a fair manner.
Personally, I don’t really care what the motivations of a politician are, I care about what they do. That is what affects me. The result here, that those who vote are entitled to, is a good result, and the downside is so tiny as to be irrelevant.
So, when you say it will “help their side to win”, does that mean that you believe that the Dems have some electoral advantage from illegal voters? Didn’t ask you about the system working, or the will of the people, or any of that. I’m asking if you believe that the Dems benefit from illegal voting in some tangible way.
And when you read that some thousands of voters will be unable to comply, you think they are lying?
And if you believe either or both of these things, have you any evidence to support such a notion?
I think there’s a significant amount of people who won’t bother to get ID, for whatever reason, and that many of them are potential Democratic party voters.
Lying or mistaken, yes.
For the second, that the ID is required to be provided for free to anyone who qualifies, and who is considered too poor to pay for it.
For the first, I don’t actually agree with your point, but my evidence for my belief is posts by you and others saying so.
Now, my belief on how this could play out, based on observing it from the outside, is this. That it will increase the percentage vote for the Republicans at the next election. That, after that, when people realise they are unable to vote - as they have not taken the required steps to make themselves eligible - they will take those steps, and will vote Democratic in the future. I expect that the Democrats and their supporters will help people to get ID, helping them both to vote, and with their day to day life.
I think this will, long term, be bad for the Republicans, and good for the 10% of people currently lacking ID. I get the impression from your posts that this is what you want, and therefore I can only see your objection to it as being short term partisan foolishness.