But:
Boy, when you stretch out for a connection between too utterly disparate points, you really stretch!
Used to think Anthony Weiner was sort of OK, when I thought about him at all. Now, as you can see by the appropriate thread, I renounce, denounce, and condemn. Hence, I am immune to questions about liberal hypocrisy.
Neener-neener.
Shit, totally forgot! This was the post that convinced me, against all my liberal hypocrisy and bias.
I simply could not withstand the cool, crisp reasoning.
I’ve done some reading on Goldwater and, you know, I think you’re probably right.
How about the means to take care of themselves? It takes two forms of ID to get a job. It takes tons of paperwork to start a business. This argument you are making gives credence to the accusation that Democrats are actually trying to make people dependent. Place barriers in front of people trying to succeed, remove barriers for people trying to get benefits.
Old news, yesterdays rock stars. The Republicans have gone way past the voter id shtick, that only promised a bit of trimming for the Dem vote. Like Nate Silver said, maybe two percent. A few years back, that would have been enough. But the Republicans are panicking, they have to plug every hole . Stop early voting, curb voter registration, make the voting place as tiresome and difficult as possible. In those neighborhoods where the unreliable people live. No reason the better class of people have to put with that shit, they’re the real Americans, after all. Rest of us just live here at their sufferance.
I can understand why you want to keep yourself to voter id, its the only place in the stinking list of crap that you can justify with a straight face, and even then you have to scare us with phantoms and boogymen.
The last really good trick (and by “good” I crafty, slimy, and underhanded) they had was lining it up so that anti-gay marriage stuff was on the ballots to draw out the troglodytes. Maybe you’re not ashamed of that, but I’m’ashamed for you. But it looks like that trick isn’t going to work again. Ooopsy!
What else you got, besides trying to cripple the opposition? Tell me why the League of Women Voters is a socialist plot, tell me whats un-American about early voting, tell me what’s socialist about keeping the polls open so everybody votes.
How deep into the muck are you willing to go, adaher?
That was Rick Scott down here in Florida, and that got struck down. Condemn the GOP all you want, in many cases it’s justified. But much of what they are doing is legal, and popular. Have a little more faith in our courts to protect us from the excesses. I have faith in the courts to protect us from Democratic excesses.
Why?
CMC fnord!
Not in my experience. Not at McDonald’s, not at a law firm.
What in hole you talking about, “Florida”? Its all over the place, don’t you get the news where you live? North Carolina just took full retard to eleven! You don’t know about this stuff, or hoping I don’t?
Sheesh, BG, I thought you worked at an anarcho-syndicalist bookstore and vegan restaraunt. Either way, I’m deeply disappointed.
Glutton, in your experience, employers are breaking the law.
It’s called the I-9 form, and every employee is required to fill one out. Please tell us again which companies are foregoing this legal requirement.
And what does that have to do with one party or the other? The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which created that requirement, was bipartisan, and jointly sponsored by a Republican and a Democrat.
My point is that if ID is truly an onerous barrier, then it’s stopping people from making a living, a far more serious problem for the average person than the inability to vote.
But it’s not actually an onerous barrier, which is why almost everyone has ID. The only people that don’t have ID don’t need it in their every day lives. But that doesn’t mean they can’t easily get it, and they would get it the very next day if they needed it to cash a check or something.
Is it that you are innocently unaware of all the other vote suppression efforts, like in NC and TX, or simply refuse to consider them? Seems to me, they rather give away the game. And, you may well note, they are presented as a package, all of these efforts in one swell foop, a single unified set of legislation rushed through as quickly as possible.
Yet you insist on only paying attention to one subset, voter id.
Let me put this baldly: it appears to me that the main thrust of these laws is to lower the voter turnout amongst people who would be expected to vote more for Dems. Do you deny this? And if you do, can you offer us some more innocent explanation?
The point of the laws is to tighten up the electoral system to give people more confidence in it. An illegal vote disenfranchises a voter as surely as simply turning him away at the polls.
Sometimes they go too far, and that’s why we have courts. The courts have done a great job of sifting out the reasonable from the unreasonable.
Besides, these laws supposedly have the worst effect on the elderly, and those are GOP voters these days.
Don’t they already have ID? They should have no problem getting one according to you so this isn’t really a problem. Or is this a case of your own ox being gored?
Well, most of the white ones, anyway.
It was earlier claimed that most people getting caught committing voter fraud are Republicans trying to test the system. However, they usually get caught because they bragged about it. What if instead of this, there was an organized effort by Republicans to steal and election through the use of in person voter fraud?
Wouldn’t it be pretty easy to pull off?