Voter Fraud Never Happens . . .
The state of Texas and the Justice Department gave opening statements Monday in a trial over Texas’ new voter ID law, setting the stage for a legal battle over the federal Voting Rights Act.
. . . .
Testimony from witnesses began immediately after opening statements, with Texas calling Brian Keith Ingram, an official with the Texas Secretary of State’s Office. Ingram told the court he knew of at least four verified instances when someone voted who had recently passed away according to records and said there could be as many as 239 such instances.
“It’s more common than we thought, and it is troubling,” he said.
Under cross examination, Ingram said that there’s a possibility some of those instances are the result of clerical errors.
Believing that we always catch voter fraud requires us to believe that government is motivated to catch the bad guys, and that they always do. In other words, that government officials are always competent, motivated, and hardworking.
If you’re already sniggering behind your hand, you might be a conservative.
BONUS FACT: I know Brian Keith Ingram. I went to law school with a person by that name. He won the law school’s jalapeno-eating contest. But in the end, he lost.
The Racine, WI, had quite a bit of Vote Fraud. Check the MacIver Institute for information and for video.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:51 amkinda hard to prosecute voter fraud when you are denied to tools necessary to make the case is it not?
Rorschach (c5574d) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:58 amI read the line from the story to my wife. She referenced the jalapeno-eating contest and made the exact same joke in the exact same way.
I asked her if she had already read my post and she said no.
Great minds think alike, and sometimes, so does mine.
Patterico (feda6b) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:07 amIn a 6-3 decision in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the photo ID requirement, finding it closely related to Indiana’s legitimate state interest in preventing voter fraud, modernizing elections, and safeguarding voter confidence.
Justice John Paul Stevens, in the leading opinion, stated that the burdens placed on voters are limited to a small percentage of the population, and were offset by the state’s interest in reducing fraud.
When this case was heard before the SCOTUS, the plaintiff had no specific case of a person being disenfranchised and the defense had no specific case to cite of actual voter fraud. The SCOTUS then ruled based on the theoretical arguments.
Neo (d1c681) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:09 amBelieving that we always catch voter fraud requires us to believe that government is motivated to catch the bad guys, and that they always do.
This is demonstrably not the case with the Dems.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:12 am“Under cross examination, Ingram said that there’s a possibility some of those instances are the result of clerical errors.”
And for that, PA is set to disenfranchise a few hundred thousand.
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:17 amA few hundred thousand? Prove your figure.
Chuck Bartowski (3bccbd) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:28 amThe Democrats are most certainly motivated to combat the systematic disenfranchisement of African-Americans that happens…
tye (57db6a) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:29 am“Many of those without IDs would have to travel great distances to get them and some would struggle to pay for the documents they might need to obtain them,” Holder said in a speech to the NAACP on Tuesday, referring specifically to a law being implemented in Texas. “We call those poll taxes.”
Now, it’s a tax.
Neo (d1c681) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:30 am3/4 of a million PA voters don’t have the requisite ID.
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:36 amBut don’t fear it’s for a good cause:
“Voter ID – which is going to allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania – done” — PA House Republican leader Mike Turzai, to applause at a Republican State Committee meeting.
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:40 am3/4 of a million PA voters don’t have the requisite ID.
If only there was some way they could get the requisite ID….oh well, I guess there’s nothing they can do.
Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:43 am7, tye, you mean the Democrat party is going to fight to keep the dead and the frauduelent names on the voter rolls in case a Democrat or Obama needs the votes to steal the election?
PCD (1d8b6d) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:51 amRACISTS!!!
What? It wasn’t me. tye said it.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:52 amLast week, a penalty was a “tax.”
This week, showing a photo ID is a “tax.”
Does anybody have a valuation on showing a photo ID ?
Neo (d1c681) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:52 amI want to deduct it on my taxes next year.
10, PA, these very same people would have ID in an instant to see Obama in the flesh and maybe be that day’s sob story on the news.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:52 amRACISTS!!!!!!
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:52 am3/4 of a million PA voters don’t have the requisite ID.
Lemon.Wet.Good – So its an estimate. People concerned about maintaining the integrity of elections should make every effort to get those without the requisite IDs the required documents so that they can participate in society and elections rather than dreaming up wild conspiracy theories about process.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:54 am______________________________________________
If you’re already sniggering behind your hand, you might be a conservative.
And it would be a reaction not too different from reading that, as one example, various schools districts over the past several years have avoided handing out traditional grades of A,B,C,D,F, or disallowed traditional team sports from having designated winners, because the self-esteem of students will be hurt.
The left has dumbed down so much of society, and discomfort over preventing fraud on election day (because it will hurt the self-esteem of potential voters!) is merely one more aspect of that.
Mark (3cc14a) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:54 am12, Icy, tye saying, “racist” is like Red Foreman on That 70’s Show saying, “Dumbass”. It loses all effect and meaning eminating from those useless pie holes.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:54 amMedicare and medicaid both require some form of ID.
Holder is willing to claim 25% of african americans will be denied the right to vote. But no gritching about the denial of medical care.
joe (a00dc1) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:55 amAnd now, tye will carefully and thoroughly explain why it is so disproportionately difficult for African-Americans to obtain proper ID . . .
Either that, or he will follow his usual routine of lobbing endless and increasingly nasty ad homs at all of us in general, and JD & SPQR in particular. At this point it’s a coin toss as to which way he’ll go.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:57 am“3/4 of a million PA voters don’t have the requisite ID.”
Lemon.Wet.Good – How many of them are dead, or will that be determined on election day?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:59 amI presume that the concern about voter disenfranchisement is primarily concern for the very poor and marginalized portions of our society, right?
Without proper IDs, they can’t gain access to the many programs our bounteous government and our generous citizens have established for there aid, right?
I mean, it’s not primarily for those off-the-grid, rugged individualists, Idaho separatists and Paulian anti-federalists, is it?
Question: Can you get food stamps without IDs?
Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:02 amFree ID’s Are A Poll Tax!!!!!!!!!!!!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:05 amPeople concerned about maintaining the integrity of elections should make every effort to get those without the requisite IDs the required documents
— This, of course, is another fallacy, daleyrocks: the assertion (or assumption) that the vast majority of eligible voters without proper ID (whatever the actual number) need ‘assistance’ (read: ACORN, or some similar organization) in order to obtain it. More than likely most of them just need to get up off of their fat asses and do the necessary work.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:07 am“Voter ID – which is going to allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania – done” — PA House Republican leader Mike Turzai, to applause at a Republican State Committee meeting.
Comment by Lemon.Wet.Good — 7/11/2012 @ 8:40 am
— Hmmm . . . no dead people voting, nobody allowed to vote more than once? Yep, I’d say that gives Mitt a shot.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:12 am“People concerned about maintaining the integrity of elections should make every effort to get those without the requisite IDs the required documents so that they can participate in society and elections rather than dreaming up wild conspiracy theories about process.”
You’d think, but instead these pretenders and conspiracy theorists just give us the voter ID law knowing full well the consequences.
Lemon.Wet.Good (c6908d) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:14 amThat is cute. Those that oppose voter fraud are the conspiracy theorists, while those like tye and Lemon who support voter fraud are the realists. It is to laugh.
JD (318f81) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:20 amI am of the opinion that Congress screwed the pooch when it outlawed intelligence testing as a prerequisite for voting. Stupid people should not be allowed to vote. if you are too stupid to get your ID, you have no business voting.
Rorschach (c5574d) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:20 amMaybe THAT should be the test, Rorschach.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:23 amIn Ohio there were reports of a disproportionately small number of voting machines in highly Democratic minority precincts. Ken Blackwell anyone? Oh right… it doesn’t count if they’re democrats…
tye (57db6a) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:27 amYou’d think, but instead these pretenders and conspiracy theorists just give us the voter ID law knowing full well the consequences.
Comment by Lemon.Wet.Good — 7/11/2012 @ 9:14 am
— Lemony.Sniggers, I don’t think you quite caught the gist of what daleyrocks was getting at. He was suggesting that those of YOU that are concerned about “disenfranchisement” should stop yakking about it and go out to help these disadvantaged people obtain the necessary documentation.
Ya know . . . if you really care.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:31 amNo, it does count, tye.
But I don’t understand your response’s relevance. It reminds me so much of Brad Friedman’s blog, which occasionally cites legitimate election issues, but in a way that seems to be intended to dismiss other legitimate issues.
Poor counties often have very poor facilities. Schools, ballot boxes, fire departments, etc. That’s not OK with me, especially as pertains to elections.
I have no idea why this issue would serve as a rebuttal to the proven fact that election fraud is occurring and can be limited with voter ID. If anything, ensuring all voters have ID would be a boon to those who do not have them already, which I assume disproportionately affects the poor.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:31 amIn Ohio there were reports….
Yeah, I knew a guy who told me he read about this that one time….
Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:32 am“You’d think, but instead these pretenders and conspiracy theorists just give us the voter ID law knowing full well the consequences.”
Lemon.Wet.Good – Sure they do. The Supreme Court found in the case of Indiana’s voter ID law that there was no evidence that voter ID imposed a substantial burden on anyone, yet here we have folks of your ilk making sheer wild guesses about how many people it will disenfranchise.
Sheer wild guesses take precedence over the state’s demonstrated interest in fair elections is the argument you are making, which on its face looks pretty loony.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:32 amOkay, I will bite. Can you show us where the Sec of State determines how many voting machines there are, and where they are located? Aren’t those decisions made by local officials, Dems in this current iteration of Dem conspiracy theories?
JD (318f81) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:33 amConsider this, for every illegitimate vote you allow to occur because you will not allow us to verify ID, you disenfranchise someone who can prove they are a legitimate voter.
Rorschach (c5574d) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:34 am“Ya know . . . if you really care.”
Icy – They care so much it hurts. I can feel him from here.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:35 amI don’t understand, actually. What consequence other than criminals being less able to vote as people they aren’t? Or ineligible persons not being able to vote because they can’t obtain ID (such as with illegal immigrants)?
What’s the consequence? Are you talking about people lacking ID because they somehow never got one being harmed somehow? They need to get their ID so they can buy a car and get a good job and a checking account. It is important that this ID be free aside from the effort taken to get it, but it’s not doing anyone a disservice.
Look at our national debt. Our votes contribute to this debt. A stolen vote is worth as much as a car when you take into account the difference in deficits per capita between parties. It’s worth checking ID to secure and true the vote. Otherwise, we are letting people steal and cancel out legitimate votes in order to avoid a consequence that isn’t even bad.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:36 amJD, in states in which section 5 of the VRA applies, we have little input as to the number and location of voting machines and polling locations, we have to get approval from the Just-Us Dept for every little detail. How is that at all not discriminatory?
Rorschach (c5574d) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:36 amIn my experience, a lot of times corrupt precincts actually want to generate excuses for keeping polling stations open as late as possible. Then, the last couple of counties know exactly what the margin is. How many votes need to appear in someone’s trunk.
It’s sad, but it is simply a fact of life in the Chicago way.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:37 amIn the May primary in Texas’ 79th district there were 18 votes “cast” by people over 110 years old. All 18 of these people were born on Jan 1. Some were born n 1900 and some in 1901. An election in that district was decided by 19 votes.
http://www.caller.com/news/2012/jul/06/allegations-voter-fraud-jim-wells-brooks-counties/
There are apparently 325 “people” in that district registered to vote who are over 100.
crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:38 amJD,
Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:44 amMaybe it’s like the 2000 Florida butterfly ballots designed to fool Democrat voters into voting Republican, designed and approved by Democrats.
“The Supreme Court found in the case of Indiana’s voter ID law that there was no evidence that voter ID imposed a substantial burden on anyone, yet here we have folks of your ilk making sheer wild guesses about how many people it will disenfranchise.”
Not a constitutionally substantial one. Taking away early voting isn’t a constitutional burden either, but it does reduce the vote.
“What consequence other than criminals being less able to vote as people they aren’t?”
I’ll post it again:
“Voter ID – which is going to allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania – done” — PA House Republican leader Mike Turzai, to applause at a Republican State Committee meeting.
Lemon.Wet.Good (c6908d) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:46 am“You’d think, but instead these pretenders and conspiracy theorists just give us the voter ID law knowing full well the consequences.”
Lemon.Wet.Good – Consequences? Have you looked over any voter participation data from Indiana or Georgia since Voter ID went into effect? You are just embarrassing yourself now.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:47 am33- i don’t buy that voter fraud is happening to the level that it affects elections like voter suppression most certainly does.
tye (57db6a) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:48 amYour sophistry/butthurt/feigned concern about voting integrity is so cute.
JD (318f81) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:48 am#41,Comment by Dustin — 7/11/2012 @ 9:37 am
Sadly, I think you’re right, Sir.
Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:49 amTYe is going to run around with the goalposts, spitting out mendoucheous leftist canards, and acting the fool. SHOCKA
JD (318f81) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:50 amWe have a lot of extremely close elections and organizations like ACORN suffering many election fraud convictions and far more accusations. It is frankly implausible that it doesn’t affect elections.
I have no idea what voter suppression you are talking about, but of course, that too is unacceptable. Asking for identification before someone buys a beer, drives a car, accesses their savings account, or votes, is hardly suppression, for example.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:50 amHey, Machinist! Long time no see!
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:51 am47- your maturity or lack thereof astounds me.
tye (57db6a) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:53 amI’m around, Sir.
If requiring ID is suppressing votes then isn’t requiring ID to enter Court buildings or government offices denying justice and access to our leaders to these noble folks?
Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:54 amI have a feeling that a lot of things astound “tye”, like the wheel, lava lamps, and laser pointers on walls.
JD (318f81) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:56 amThat’s an outstanding argument, Machinist.
Look, being required to wear clothes while going to the polls and eat food to stay alive long enough to vote is not a poll tax. The fact that we need to verify you are entitled by your identity to the person’s vote you wish to cast is simply a matter of necessity.
Why does that bother anyone?
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:56 amNot original to me of course but it shows the hypocrisy.
Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:59 amOutside of the random anarchist, who DOESN’T have an ID card these days? The poor need an ID to collect just about any social service benefit. If the media digs deep enough, they’ll find some shut-in granny who lost her ID, but that’s pretty much it.
d_fitz (8ce625) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:01 amI hadn’t even considered the tax angle. So Obama is taxing people to be near him or other administration officials, or to access public government buildings and offices?
Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:02 amPeople who don’t exist, are deceased, illegal and thus not eligible, or people claiming to be multiple persons.
In other words, Voter ID suppresses the votes that ought to be suppressed.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:02 amOnly rich people need to go to court?
Machinist (b6f7da) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:03 amAnd instead of government paying $26 a gallon for naval biodiesel, they can have a program to help those who are entitled to ID and do not have it, for whatever reason.
Take the budget for this program and deduct it from the IRS’s budget. They’ll make do with 5% less, I imagine.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:04 am““Voter ID – which is going to allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania – done” — PA House Republican leader Mike Turzai, to applause at a Republican State Committee meeting.”
Lemon.Wet.Good – Keep reposting it if you like. Why do you believe it is significant? What do you think Turzai meant by his statement?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:04 am“Outside of the random anarchist, who DOESN’T have an ID card these days? ”
In PA, about 3/4 of a million voters.
“Why do you believe it is significant? ”
As I said above, don’t fear, all this trouble is for a good cause.
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:09 am33- i don’t buy that voter fraud is happening to the level that it affects elections like voter suppression most certainly does.
Comment by tye — 7/11/2012 @ 9:48 am
— Every fraudulent vote acts to suppress a legitimate vote.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:09 amI guess it’s wrong to allow Republicans to win by truing the voter rolls and verifying voter identities?
I think most well informed people realize that in very close election, fighting fraud will make the election more accurate and generally this accuracy will steer things away from the democrats that seem to benefit the most from voter fraud and also fight the hardest against legitimate election reform.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:10 amDuring 2008 we saw people BRAGGING about getting on a plane in California, flying to another state, registering to vote and casting a ballot the same day (early voting) and then flying to a different state the next day and doing the exact same thing.
My personal opinion is that vote by mail gives a greater potential for fraud than voter ID laws for several reasons. Someone having to vote in person can only vote as many times as polling places they can physically attend while the polls are open. A person voting by mail can cast a nearly unlimited number of ballots.
Vote by mail also enables voter intimidation where someone demands to see or mark the ballot for the voter.
Vote by mail is a very bad idea.
crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:11 amCitation needed. And members of velvet revolution are not valid.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:11 am“– Every fraudulent vote acts to suppress a legitimate vote.”
Yes but the question is how many of those there are? If one wanted to suppress a legitimate vote, you’d get much more bang for you buck by making registration and voting harder than by exposing yourself to a potential felony conviction.
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:11 amI absolutely agree.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:12 amAnd sorry, asking for ID doesn’t actually make voting harder. Most folks drive to the polls. They already needed ID. It’s just not a big deal, except to those who realize that it would greatly cut down on fraud and are upset about this.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:13 amLemon.Pledge.Pin sees vast Reich-Wing conspiracies being waged against likely Democratic voters.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:14 am“Citation needed. ”
PA state officials.
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:15 am“As I said above, don’t fear, all this trouble is for a good cause.”
Lemon.Wet.Good – Nonresponsive. Do you fear that Democrats cannot win fair elections? You have not produced any support for your claims of voter suppression.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:15 amIf you think it is an illegal poll tax to ask for ID before voting, but perfectly fine to require ID, a background check and a waiting period before buying a firearm, you probably are a liberal.
NJRob (479dc2) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:16 amHow about this?
Instead of ID, mark the voter roll with your finger print. The process can also mark fingers with indelible ink, much as with those historic photos of proud Iraqi voters.
If your fingerprint turns up more than once, you go to prison. If your fingerprint doesn’t match the print on file when the voter registers, you go to prison. They could scan it right there on the spot.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:17 am“PA state officials.”
Lemon.Wet.Good – Does thinkprogress work for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:17 am“Most folks drive to the polls. ”
Not folks without cars. Or in cities. Oh.
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:18 amYes but the question is how many of those there are? If one wanted to suppress a legitimate vote, you’d get much more bang for you buck by making registration and voting harder than by exposing yourself to a potential felony conviction.
— Yeah, and our side puts its money into offshore accounts, while your side just skips on paying taxes. We’re smarter than you! So, what’s your point?
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:19 amAlso, I have yet to see a real case where anyone was “suppressed” for not having or being able to obtain an ID. It just means they cast a provisional ballot that is followed up on later.
I would be willing to bet that if such an individual were told they won a car in a sweepstakes but had to present an ID to collect it, they would produce an ID pretty quickly.
Voters of every political stripe support voter ID, only the Democratic Party apparatus opposes it.
crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:21 amIt is demonstrably true that requiring a valid ID to vote will prevent the ineligible from voting.
To some people, this is a bug, not a feature.
Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:21 amAbout this Poll Tax nonsense, states provide FREE ID cards to people that don’t drive.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:22 amTroll. Everyone I know who uses mass transit also has a credit card and an ID. As Icy notes, it’s no problem getting a free one, unless they are lying about who they are.
Oh.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:24 am“Lemon.Wet.Good – Does thinkprogress work for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania?”
Do they run the PA dept of state website? Their news release, as reported in various press outlets, is the source for the number.
“Do you fear that Democrats cannot win fair elections?”
I know it is harder for democrats to win elections when their voters do not meet the qualifications that partisan activists for the other side cheer as responsible for their partisan victories.
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:24 am“Everyone I know who uses mass transit also has a credit card and an ID”
And no-one I know voted for Nixon. Funny how that works.
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:25 amAnd what do you think about my ID-free plan, Lemon? Your non driving city dwellers (such cities are more affluent, not less, btw), but oh well. Just take their fingerprint, compare to their registration, and if it’s invalid or if it turns out they are voting more than once, they don’t leave custody for a few years.
Is there any problem with this solution?
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:26 amLemon, how would you address the issue of voter fraud? Is this something you think is wrong? Do you really, truly think that requiring an ID would keep motivated people from voting?
How would you safeguard the voter rolls while at the same time allowing people without IDs to vote legally?
You seem to be full of snark; are there any ideas in there?
Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:29 amI know it is harder for democrats to win elections when their voters do not meet the qualifications that partisan activists for the other side cheer as responsible for their partisan victories.
Comment by Lemon.Wet.Good — 7/11/2012 @ 10:24 am
— You’re just gonna keep right on pounding this meme into the ground while ignoring my response, aren’t you.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:30 amSo they have to go back and re-register and give a fingerprint?
Look it’s all about tossing up roadblocks. Concerned that too many people coming from church and voting? End early voting on sundays. Not a constitutional burden, and there’s plenty of activists ready with the argument that ‘what you can’t just vote some other day’ to defend you on the internet. All you have to do is throw up more barriers, and make sure that these barriers have disproportionate partisan effect, and there you go — you can influence elections without risking a felony conviction.
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:31 amLet’s compare harms for a moment.
To the mythical trillions of orphans without ID, the harm is that they take a moment and get a free ID which opens up a world of opportunities such as access to roads, bank accounts, jobs, our court system, democrat fundraising galas, etc.
AKA no harm done. So why is anyone upset about this? Because they aren’t really upset about this… they are upset about presupposing fraudulent votes.
The other harm is cancelling a legitimate vote by allowing someone to vote repeatedly and fraudulently. This is an absolute affront to the concept of democracy and human rights.
So folks should weigh these harms and decided to embrace voter ID or some other method of ensuring identity of the voter.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:32 am“Lemon, how would you address the issue of voter fraud? ”
I don’t think it’s an issue. I do think there are various problems with our election system, but the type of problem that voter ID would solve is not one of them.
“Do you really, truly think that requiring an ID would keep motivated people from voting?”
In fact, it has!
“– You’re just gonna keep right on pounding this meme into the ground while ignoring my response, aren’t you.”
What meme? The guy said what everyone knows this is about: partisan gain.
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:33 am“To the mythical trillions of orphans without ID”
Versus the mythical trillions voting fraudulently. Oh my what a balance to strike, huh?
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:36 amI recall Brad Friedman threatening to ban me if I posted ‘disinformation’ like noting the dozens of Acorn member convictions for election fraud.
Not because I was wrong. But because the truth I was saying did not support the narrative that apparently was the greater truth. Brad had some kind of argument explaining how this makes sense (I admit I didn’t understand it, but he made a display at least).
I had even heard of Kimberlin at the time, btw. Had nothing to do with that.
I just find it amusing how hard the enemies of fair elections fight to demand we ignore things that are obviously wrong and easily fixed. They wind up finding absurd reasons. They are enemies of human rights.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:42 amIf Republicans were truly concerned about votes from “people who don’t exist, are deceased, illegal…”, then they should be asking how those names got on the voter rolls in the first place. Presumably, there are already laws regarding this, but apparently, in rare cases, errors occur and/or procedures aren’t followed. Fixing those problems is the solution. Requiring voters to have an ID, on the other hand, doesn’t address that issue at all.
Kman (5576bf) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:43 amComment by Pious Agnostic — 7/11/2012 @ 10:29 am
how would you address the issue of voter fraud?
Prosecute the perpetrators when caught; otherwise, ignore it, since it almost never happens.
Is this something you think is wrong?
Sure. But even when it does happen, it’s NEVER enough to change the results of an election. So, there’s “wrong” and then there’s “worrisome”.
Do you really, truly think that requiring an ID would keep motivated people from voting?
There’s no quicker way to drain away someone’s motivation than to smack them in the face with a wall that’s too tall to climb over.
How would you safeguard the voter rolls while at the same time allowing people without IDs to vote legally?
I hear the New Black Panther Party is looking for work.
You seem to be full of snark; are there any ideas in there?
Lemon.Sock.Puppy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:49 amIt’s my idea that 750,000 Pennsylvanians that want to vote have found it nigh impossible to obtain proper ID.
Fixing those problems incurs the wrath of Holder’s DOJ and the Left, Kmart
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:51 amNobody on the left has a problem with making sure the voter rolls are accurate.
But carrying an ID (the ID being the thing you check against the voter rolls) doesn’t increase the accuracy of the voter rolls. It does however prevent people from voting.
Kman (5576bf) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:53 amYou seem to be full of snark; are there any ideas in there?
It’s my idea that 750,000 Pennsylvanians that want to vote have found it nigh impossible to obtain proper ID.
Overt lie
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:55 amFixing those problems is the solution. Requiring voters to have an ID, on the other hand, doesn’t address that issue at all.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:55 amComment by Kman — 7/11/2012 @ 10:43 am
— Apparently, Kman thinks that all of these “don’t exist, deceased, illegal” voters have already obtained really good fake ID’s.
It’s my idea that 750,000 Pennsylvanians that want to vote have found it nigh impossible to obtain proper ID.
I would love to hear you explain why they have found it nigh impossible to obtain proper ID?
Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:56 amNobody on the left has a problem with making sure the voter rolls are accurate.
This statement does not match the rhetoric and actions of the Left.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:57 amNobody on the left has a problem with making sure the voter rolls are accurate.
— BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!!!!
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:57 amIt was a sock people. Pay attention.
Gazzer (fda6fb) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:58 am“Overt lie”
Totally.
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 10:58 amAnd, just because I don’t think it’s been explicitly stated, when I read this:
…I think, damn straight, if you can cut out voter fraud, then Gov. Romney has a better chance to win Pennsylvania than if they keep the current, corruption-prone system they had that allowed Democrats to manufacture votes.
That’s how I interpret this. What do you think Turzai is saying?
Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:01 am“Do they run the PA dept of state website? Their news release, as reported in various press outlets, is the source for the number.”
Lemon.Wet.Good – Which you still have not bothered to link, thank you very much. Here is a link to a July 5 story from CBS News which shows why the figure issued by the state of 758,000 is vastly inflated. It only matches those holding drivers licenses, which would include many elderly voters who no longer drive but hold other forms of eligible ID, young voters who do not yet have drivers licenses, and inactive voters.
Again, a virtually useless estimate with the fearmongering assumption that nothing can be done to obtain valid free ID by those who don’t have it and are interested in voting, assuming they are still alive and still living in Pennsylvania, more assumptions, between passage of the bill and implementation.
Fearmongering, not reason, is what Democrats use to fight fair elections.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:01 amThe DOJ is suing the state of Florida over this very issue, and Kbabble has the temerity to suggest that “nobody on the left has a problem”?
Typical lib reaction: when cornered, try to lie your way out of it.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:02 amAlso, is there any evidence that it would disproportionately disenfranchise minorities. Are Democrats and the state racially profiling potential voters? What’s up with that?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:03 amIf only there were some fearless leftist non-profits who focused on voting integrity.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:04 amIcy – facts cannot get in the way of kmart’s narrative.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:05 amYeah… what’s up with that?
Democrats really think minorities can’t get free, easy to obtain ID? Why? I think everybody can, regardless of race, and I also think they should.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:07 am“Lemon.Wet.Good – Which you still have not bothered to link, thank you very much. Here is a link to a July 5 story from CBS News which shows why the figure issued by the state of 758,000 is vastly inflated. ”
So you still think it’s from Thinkprogress, or do you agree I was right it was from the state?
“The DOJ is suing the state of Florida over this very issue, and Kbabble has the temerity to suggest that “nobody on the left has a problem”? ”
Indeed the main problem is that this is likely to be done as sloppily as Florida is, causing more problems than it would solve. Perhaps that’s the point.
“Fearmongering, not reason, is what Democrats use to fight fair elections.”
That’s how we get to the GOP thinking that the problems that voter ID is pretended to solve is why they lose.
Lemon.Wet.Good (6181a3) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:07 amI saw what you did there. I actually wrote “nobody on the left has a problem with making sure the voter rolls are accurate“. The DOJ’s contention is that the Florida badly-flawed purge of its voter rolls is inaccurate.
Kman (5576bf) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:09 amID is required to get into a govt building to file a suit, even to get into the convention center where they held the NAACP gathering,
narciso (ee31f1) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:16 am112- distorting your words is the official pastime of the republican party.
tye (57db6a) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:30 amLemon.Wet.Good – BS like the following gives people comfort that the long storied history of hanky panky in Philadelphia elections continues unabated, which of course means there is no need for simple reforms over elections to improve integrity such as Voter ID:
“Philadelphia election commissioners probe excessive vote counts
April 17, 2012|By Bob Warner, Inquirer Staff Writer
Philadelphia city commissioners are investigating an unusual series of over-votes in last year’s primary election – 83 voting divisions citywide where the official vote totals were bigger than the recorded number of voters who showed up.
In most locations, the discrepancies were small, just a handful of votes. In many instances, minor procedural mistakes could account for the anomalies.
But so far, the bulk of the over-voting has not been explained.
Until they understand what happened, the commissioners say, they cannot rule out the possibility of deliberate, illegal efforts to run up votes for favored candidates, with the perpetrators losing count as they tried to cover their tracks………………….”
http://articles.philly.com/2012-04-17/news/31355840_1_voting-machine-voting-divisions-poll-workers
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:36 am“So you still think it’s from Thinkprogress, or do you agree I was right it was from the state?”
Lemon.Wet.Good – I was trying to get you to provide a link for your claim, which I note that you still have not done, but some people are more dense than others.
Read my link and see how ridiculous that 758,000 estimate is and feel embarrassed.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:39 am112- distorting your words is the official pastime of the republican party.
Comment by tye — 7/11/2012 @ 11:30 am
— You’re labeling me a member of the Republican Party, now, are you?
Always trust in lies from tye.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 12:26 pm“Lemon.Wet.Good – I was trying to get you to provide a link for your claim, which I note that you still have not done, but some people are more dense than others.”
What does thinkprogress have to do with it? Google the PA dept of state, go to their newsroom. It’s the top one.
“Philadelphia city commissioners are investigating an unusual series of over-votes in last year’s primary election – 83 voting divisions citywide where the official vote totals were bigger than the recorded number of voters who showed up.
In most locations, the discrepancies were small, just a handful of votes. In many instances, minor procedural mistakes could account for the anomalies.”
Now tell me, do you imagine that voter ID addresses this problem?
Lemon.Wet.Good (64270f) — 7/11/2012 @ 12:29 pm“lemonwetgood” should reach out to Freidman, and his business partner, Kimberlin.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 12:30 pmIf voter ID does not stop every manner of cheating it should not be considered.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 12:32 pmVoter ID also won’t cure cancer. So what if it’s a painless and easy way to cut down on fraud that is obviously occurring? It’s not like every legitimate vote must count or anything.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 12:34 pmI saw what you did there. I actually wrote “nobody on the left has a problem with making sure the voter rolls are accurate“. The DOJ’s contention is that the Florida badly-flawed purge of its voter rolls is inaccurate.
Comment by Kman — 7/11/2012 @ 11:09 am
— Good for you; you saw what I did. And we all can see what the DOJ, under the aegis of its lefty loon leader is doing: denying Florida the right (hmm . . . ‘states rights’; well, he’s only been there for three and a half years — perhaps he’s only made it up to “r” in his law book studies) to purge its voter rolls, and using the “you’re not doing it the right way” excuse to justify their intrusion.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 12:36 pm“If voter ID does not stop every manner of cheating it should not be considered.”
It should at least stop the methods that are brought up in defense of voter ID!
Lemon.Wet.Good (64270f) — 7/11/2012 @ 12:54 pm“Now tell me, do you imagine that voter ID addresses this problem?”
Lemon.Wet.Good – Reread my comment. Not a claim I made, was it? You are not very good at this.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 12:57 pm“It should at least stop the methods that are brought up in defense of voter ID!”
Lemon.Wet.Good – Why are you against fair elections?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:00 pmThere are apparently 325 “people” in that district registered to vote who are over 100.
Comment by crosspatch — 7/11/2012 @ 9:38 am
Is it something in the water? In the barbecue sauce?
With all of the money that is being spent on litigation regarding voter ID laws they should stop the litigation and use the money to address the problem of voters withou ID’s. Voter registration drives are good things. Education to equip voters on what they need to do to vote seems to simply be the next logical step when necessary.
I don’t know how I would live in society without an ID.
Voter disenfranchisement works both when an eligible person is not allowed to vote and when an uneligible person is allowed to vote and cancel out a legitimate vote.
Voter disenfranchisement works in a slightly more subtle way when the electorate is lied to all of the time.
And I thought Texas was a religious state…we have a larger resurrection vote in Philly I think than in all of Texas.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:00 pm“Question: Can you get food stamps without IDs?”
– Pious Agnostic
The short answer is yes, at least in NM. While
“It is mandatory that the applicant’s identity be verified” it remains the case that
“Identity may be established through readily available documentary evidence, or, if this is not possible, through a collateral contact or home visit. Acceptable documentary evidence includes, but is not limited to, driver’s license; work or school ID; school records; ID for health benefits or for another assistance or social services program; voter registration card; wage stubs or marriage certificate. Any document that reasonably establishes the applicant’s identity must be accepted. No requirement for a specific type of document, such as a birth certificate, may be imposed.”
NM ADC 8.139.400.8(B)
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:02 pm“Lemon.Wet.Good – Reread my comment. Not a claim I made, was it? You are not very good at this.”
Let’s see:
“BS like the following gives people comfort that the long storied history of hanky panky in Philadelphia elections continues unabated, which of course means there is no need for simple reforms over elections to improve integrity such as Voter ID”
Nope. No claim at all.
Lemon.Wet.Good (64270f) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:02 pmPerhaps not a card carrying member… but are you still up in the air about who you’re voting for? If not… who is it? Obama?
tye (57db6a) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:07 pmNotice how “lemmingwetgood” just flits about, running around with the goalposts? Daley smacked down your specious 750,000 claim, and you just scooted on to your next meme.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:16 pmre: #127 –
The same holds true for most public assistance programs. The following is from the NM administrative code – the Eligibility and Verification Standards for Public Assistance Programs:
“Documentary evidence is the primary source of verification for information not established in prior case information or government data. Obtaining necessary verification through documentary evidence readily available to the applicant/recipient shall always be explored before collateral contacts, home visits, or sworn statements are used. Documentary evidence consists of a written confirmation of a household’s circumstances. Acceptable verification is not limited to any single type of document. The types of documents which may be accepted as verification are specified under the sections pertaining to non-financial, financial and allowances/deductions verification standards later in this chapter. The enumeration of certain types of documents is not meant to exclude other sources of information that the client might be able to provide. The caseworker shall provide applicants/recipients with receipts for verification documents provided subsequent to the interview.”
There are five other means of verification:
Prior case data not subject to change
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:16 pmGovernment Data
Collateral Contacts
Home Visits
Sworn Statements
There are five other means of verification:
Prior case data not subject to change
Government Data
Collateral Contacts
Home Visits
Sworn Statements
They are obviously racist.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:20 pm“Nope. No claim at all.”
Lemon.Wet.Good – Like I said, you are not very good at this at all.
In you pretzel logic, “hanky panky” = 100% Voter Fraud
Also “Improve” election integrity = 100% solved by Voter ID
Article cited also directly says cause of overvote not determined.
Sorry, no sale, nimrod.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:20 pmThe point of my previous comments being that, yeah, there are a lot of poor people out there who don’t have the standard ID that people may be assuming they must have to access Food Stamps – so many that the welfare departments themselves go out of their way to provide alternate avenues to verification of identity and income.
These sorts of voter ID laws will disparately impact the poor and uneducated, I think – whether people want to have that discussion or not.
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:20 pmLemon.Wet.Good – I don’t think you understand what voter suppression means.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:22 pm“so many that the welfare departments themselves go out of their way to provide alternate avenues to verification of identity and income.”
Leviticus – If welfare departments are providing verification of identity, are those satisfactory for election purposes. That is what I want to know, rather than hysteria over sheer wild azzed guesses about the number of people lacking IDs. Most state voting laws allow acceptance of various state issued IDs, not just drivers licenses. The racial profiling of the opponents of voter ID is disturbing to me on its face.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:27 pmI should have said offensive.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:28 pm“If welfare departments are providing verification of identity, are those satisfactory for election purposes.”
– daleyrocks
I suppose I should be asking you guys that question: would you be satisfied with a public-utility bill to prove residency, or do you want to see a cut-and-dried photo ID? Welfare agencies don’t need to see the photo ID; but welfare agencies have different goals than PA politicians.
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:30 pmThese sorts of voter ID laws will disparately impact the poor and uneducated, I think – whether people want to have that discussion or not.
That is a very paternalistic view, and rather condescending.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:31 pmAlternatively, what sort of identity documentation short of a photo ID would be satisfactory to you in the context of an election?
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:31 pmFree State ID
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:34 pm“That is a very paternalistic view, and rather condescending.”
– JD
Sorry.
Who do you think it’s going to affect? Are you going to submit that middle-class people have as many problems with verifying documentation as the poor?
Homeless people. Let’s start there. It’s incredibly, incredibly hard for a lot of homeless people – citizens, eligible voters – to obtain the kind of documentation/identification we’re talking about.
Let’s start with that population, to put this issue in perspective. That is, unless acknowledging the difficulties of the homeless is too paternalistic and condescending for your sensibilities.
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:35 pm“Notice how “lemmingwetgood” just flits about, running around with the goalposts?”
JD – Where did spointer go?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:38 pmThat seems inadequate.
Why not fingerprinting everyone when they vote? Free and easy.
I guess photo ID is a more moderate standard.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:39 pmSo they cannot be bothered to get a State ID, but they should just be given carte blanche to vote wherever they feel like. Everyone has to change their registration to reflect where they live, and what they use as their permanent address.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:40 pm“Homeless people. Let’s start there. It’s incredibly, incredibly hard for a lot of homeless people – citizens, eligible voters – to obtain the kind of documentation/identification we’re talking about.”
Leviticus – Where should homeless people be eligible to vote if they are interested in voting?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:41 pmHere’s a study on the barriers the homeless face in attempting to obtain photo ID.
We can start here, if you want.
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:41 pm“Article cited also directly says cause of overvote not determined.”
Indeed. And voter ID wouldn’t address it at all. So why is it even germane? Because right wingers like to promote this idea that democrats make elections a mess and voter ID is just a “fair” way to clean up the mess. When (1) it doesn’t clean the problems they raise and (2) creates new problems with a GOP partisan advantage.
“Leviticus – If welfare departments are providing verification of identity, are those satisfactory for election purposes. ”
No. That’s by design.
Lemon.Wet.Good (64270f) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:42 pm“Why not fingerprinting everyone when they vote? Free and easy.”
Fingerprinting is neither free nor easy.
Lemon.Wet.Good (64270f) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:43 pm“Leviticus – Where should homeless people be eligible to vote if they are interested in voting?”
– daleyrocks
Is that really your first answer? Do you acknowledge that this might be a problem or not?
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:43 pmFair voting is partisan?!
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:45 pm“fair”
Lemon.Wet.Good (64270f) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:46 pm“Indeed. And voter ID wouldn’t address it at all.”
Lemon.Wet.Good – Right. Since the causes of the overvotes have not been determined, it is possible for you to say with 100% certainty that Voter ID would not have improved the integrity of the election. Regular Einstein you are.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:47 pmHey. Photo ID laws risk disenfranchising the homeless. Problem or not?
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:50 pm“Since the causes of the overvotes have not been determined, it is possible for you to say with 100% certainty that Voter ID would not have improved the integrity of the election. ”
Go back and read the description of the problem:
Lemon.Wet.Good (64270f) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:50 pm“vote totals were bigger than the recorded number of voters who showed up.” Voter ID would be recorded at the point where they recorded the number of voters who showed up. It would not affect at all whether after they were recorded as showing up there were overvotes or not.
Not updating your registration risks disenfranchising people that move. Problem?
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:54 pmWhy does lemming support voter fraud?
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:55 pmYes! It’s a huge problem for the homeless to lack the ID they need to get a job and a home! Thank you. Obviously these folks should be encouraged to get an ID.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:56 pmI think instead of fighting common sense laws, the NLCHP should devote its resources to helping people obtain State ID’s.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 1:58 pm156-not for republicans who don’t give a hoot about the will of the people.
tye (57db6a) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:02 pmhomeless people are mostly crazy and they don’t file income taxes and even if they had an id nobody would want to touch it cause of the hepatitis
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:03 pmThe will of the people is the standard? Obamacare repealed tomorrow then.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:04 pmI would like ask lemon.wet.good,
Why isn’t it important to you to protect *my* vote?
Why am I, as a citizen, not worth the effort to ensure my vote has every effort made to be counted and have an impact on who my elected official is?
To suggest that another group of people deserve that protection over me – which is what you in essence, are doing – reeks of bigotry. Is that what you intend?
Dana (292dcf) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:07 pm“Is that really your first answer? Do you acknowledge that this might be a problem or not?”
Leviticus – It’s actually a question, not an answer. I think it has to be addressed before you can talk about potential solutions and I do agree it might be a problem.
Again, what concerns me is the constant “might be” type language from all the critics of measures such as Voter ID. Fact based analysis is in short supply.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:08 pmYou don’t know how our government works…we elect our officials to legislate. The voting public (preferably all who are eligible, much to the consternation of conservatives) may voice their displeasure on election day.
tye (57db6a) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:09 pm“I think instead of fighting common sense laws, the NLCHP should devote its resources to helping people obtain State ID’s.”
JD – Genius idea!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:09 pm“I think instead of fighting common sense laws, the NLCHP should devote its resources to helping people obtain State ID’s.”
The laws are so common sense they don’t solve the stated problems, and create new ones which the critics of the law should be the ones to solve. Yup. That’s our modern GOP partisan advantage at work.
Lemon.Wet.Good (64270f) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:09 pmHey. Photo ID laws risk disenfranchising the homeless. Problem or not?
Comment by Leviticus
By not enforcing a photo ID requirement risks disenfranchising my right to a protected vote.
It’s ironic, because a photo ID is just that and does *not* prove citizenship. To follow accordingly, a certified copy of a voter’s birth certificate and/or passport should be required.
After all, it is not the right of every individual to vote.
Dana (292dcf) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:10 pm(preferably all who are eligible, much to the consternation of conservatives)
Lie.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:12 pm“You don’t know how our government works…we elect our officials to legislate. The voting public (preferably many
allwho are ineligible to ensure victory, much to the consternation of conservatives) may voice their displeasure on election day.”tye – FTFY
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:12 pm“The laws are so common sense they don’t solve the stated problems, and create new ones which the critics of the law should be the ones to solve.”
Lemon.Wet.Good – Except the critics are only pointing out hypothetical problems, the solutions to which bring ancillary benefits if they prove to be real.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:15 pmIt’s not hypothetical to say that this law will have a disproportionate effect.
Lemon.Wet.Good (64270f) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:22 pm“I think instead of fighting common sense laws, the NLCHP should devote its resources to helping people obtain State ID’s.”
– JD
I think those “common sense laws” you’re referring to make more sense to some people than others. Which is what we’re supposed to be talking about, right?
“Leviticus – It’s actually a question, not an answer. I think it has to be addressed before you can talk about potential solutions and I do agree it might be a problem.”
– daleyrocks
Interesting (and I don’t mean that sarcastically or anything): you think that the issue you raised (the difficulties of proving residency as a homeless individual) has to be addressed before the question I raised (whether or not it’s problematic that photo ID laws might disenfranchise homeless people). I think that the issue I raised should be addressed before the issue that you raised. It’s an interesting pragmatic contrast.
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:23 pmPicture ID at banks has not stopped bank fraud, therefore requiring ID is racist. Picture ID has not stopped underage drinking therefore we should just let everyone buy Jaegermeister. Picture ID has not stopped fraud with scheduled pharmaceuticals therefore we should just remove all barriers.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:24 pmLeviticus – it is the voter’s responsibility to comply with the requirements to vote. One of those is being registered in the proper precinct, and in some States, providing ID to prove identity prior to voting. Do you think homeless people should be exempt, or just vote wherever they want?
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:28 pmWhy is a homeless person’s vote more important than protecting the integrity of Dana’s vote?
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:30 pm“I think that the issue I raised should be addressed before the issue that you raised. It’s an interesting pragmatic contrast.”
Leviticus – Perhaps it’s because the homeless people I have crossed paths with over the past decade mostly have had state issued ID. Their descent into homelessness has been a function of financial problems, substance abuse, emotional problems or a combination of those factors. Sometimes I get the feeling that liberals believe people are born into homelessness and never exit.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:32 pm“One of those is being registered in the proper precinct, and in some States, providing ID to prove identity prior to voting. Do you think homeless people should be exempt, or just vote wherever they want?”
– JD
I think, by way of starting a line-drawing discussion, that a homeless person should be able to show non-photo-ID documentation of residency (such as a note from a local shelter) and that that should suffice for the purposes of voting.
So to some extent, yes, I think homeless people should be exempt from some of the requirements that other people face, because the homeless face barriers to obtaining photo ID that others do not face.
Voting wherever they want obviously causes some issues – minor ones, to my mind, but that’s certainly debatable. One more unnecessary problem caused by geographic political districts…
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:36 pmif you have an id when you go vote they can keep track of when you’ve voted and nobody can pretend to be you and you can’t make pretend to be somebody else
if I had to make the rules for voting I think that’s how I’d do it
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:37 pm“Why is a homeless person’s vote more important than protecting the integrity of Dana’s vote?”
– JD
It’s not. Preserving the integrity of the homeless person’s vote just raises different questions than preserving the integrity of Dana’s vote. Are you assuming that the only way to protect the integrity of Dana’s vote is with a photo-ID law?
Leviticus (e923df) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:38 pmAre you assuming that the only way to protect the integrity of Dana’s vote is with a photo-ID law?
No, Counselor. I am not. And you know it.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:39 pmSo to some extent, yes, I think homeless people should be exempt from some of the requirements that other people face,
I cannot imagine how this could go wrong…
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:41 pmLeviticus…hi from New Orleans…
Homeless, in many ways, face many barriers that others do not face, sometimes barriers not of their own choosing. Society, in leaving them alone for the most part in their homelessness, still requires some guidelines when the homeless, just like anyone else, chooses to participate in that society by voting. Photo ID can be provided to the homeless when they register, provided they can prove the necessary information, just like anyone else in society. Does this make it hard? Yes, just as hard as it makes anyone else’s effort to vote. Voting is such an important part of the participation in society that the society has the need, right, and requirement to make voting sacrosanct, to protect the individual vote to the maximum needed to make the election process fair.
Thanks for your thoughtful responses….all the time….
reff (4dcda2) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:42 pmif you’re homeless you’re probably crazy and having a photo id can help keep you centered plus you can use it to pick at your scabs
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:42 pmWE saw how in 2000, they dismissed the votes of servicemen on spurious grounds, and at least down here, they let those whose names had been flagged, for illegal status, vote, leading about 2,000 who shouldn’t have voted, well past the margin of 537.
narciso (ee31f1) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:42 pmWhy not present a photo ID based on the address of the shelter?
All he needs is a mere note from a shelter? Couldn’t he *write* such a note?
Perhaps a better solution is to find a way to get the homeless an ID that is tied to them (with a fingerprint).
Dustin (73fead) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:44 pmLeviticus, and others:
Considering just how impossible it is to function in society without an ID, perhaps you ahve it backwards: Being poor isn’t why they don’t have IDs, but not having IDs is a reason why they can’t fend for themselves.
Maybe the voter ID laws (or any other law that puts an ID requirement between them and something they want) is a good thing in itself. It may be an indictment of US society that an ID is so necessary, but the fact remains that it is.
Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:46 pmIn short, it is a cruel thing to, on the margin, allow folks to persist in their counterproductive behavior. Make them get an ID. Out of kindness.
Kevin M (bf8ad7) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:47 pmIn rapidly reading through these comments, my sense is that some people who are commenting on the voter ID issue and specifically the “homeless” issue may not have a very clear understanding of the voting rules and laws that are currently in place. For instance, a homeless person’s lack of ID is the least of the issue. They must be registered. And, they must be registered in a jurisdiction to ascertain the polling place in which they should vote. They must be able to receive mail –or be contacted someplace— and get a voters card delivered.
The jurisdiction is what determines which candidates are running there and which local referendums and policy votes are on the ballot. A homeless person cannot just wander from place to place on election day and vote in the poll spot of his choosing or in multiple jurisdictions. Until recently, for example, a homeless person in Wilmette, IL might have fallen either into the 10th or the 9th congressional district. He would have to be registered in one (and only one) of those districts for him to vote at all and specifically to choose his U.S. Representative. If he was homeless, he likely would not have an electric bill to prove his location/jurisdiction.
It has always seemed to me that a concerted effort to get IDs for the poorest and homeless, which would enable them to register and vote with pride, and also to receive other benefits is a great idea. Why well intentioned people continue to try to push the “no ID required” route seems silly, counter productive, repressive, and not very fair to anyone.
The voter ID issue has more false flags, red herrings, strawmen, dishonesty, stretched memes and other assorted irrelevant diversions than any other issue I can think of. Finding a way for all citizens to have a valid photo ID in modern day America and be able to produce one in order to vote is not rocket science. It is really only common sense.
elissa (ac39c5) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:55 pmCorrect me if I’m wrong, but it is IMPOSSIBLE to disenfranchise a prospective voter for those states that have voter ID laws… You can always vote, it’s just whether it will be counted right away or have to be checked up as a provisional vote.
JFH (fdb435) — 7/11/2012 @ 2:56 pmin a lot of places provisional ballots never get counted unless there’s a recount or something like that
I think in *most* place that’s how it’s done actually
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:01 pmChange it maddeningly slow in this great nation, isn’t it?
I guess that’s better than a quick revolution.
I guess.
Patricia (e1d89d) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:05 pmWell, if that’s the standard, happyfeet, then every vote for the losing candidate or issue is, in effect, disenfranchised; right?!
JFH (fdb435) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:06 pmPerhaps not a card carrying member… but are you still up in the air about who you’re voting for? If not… who is it? Obama?
Comment by tye — 7/11/2012 @ 1:07 p
— The distinction between conservative & republican is, IMHO, one that is worth making. There is a reason why I have not joined that Party.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:08 pmI don’t know Mr. JFH all I know is they don’t count a provisional ballot necessarily but that also means that if you do a provisional ballot you’re a lot less likely get thrown in the jury duty pool either
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:08 pmWhat I am sick and tired of hearing is this arrogant patronizing toward minorities, the poor, and uneducated Americans.
Who the hell do you think you are to believe yourselves so much better and enlightened that you presume to know whether or not getting an identification is too Herculean a task for a minority, or uneducated American to manage?
Or, do you believe the color of your skin gives you the right to make that judgement?
Do you even stop consider for a moment that your stunningly patronizing judgments that equate wealth, education and skin color with the ability to overcome an assumed difficulty and/or the ability to problem solve, is a massive slap in the face of resourceful and intelligent Americans who just happen to be poor, or not white, or uneducated?
Does it ever even occur to you that the poor, uneducated, minority citizen will want to exercise their right to vote as much as you and thus, come hell or high water, will do what is necessary to make sure that happens? And believe it or not, skin color, wealth and education are not necessary to taking the initiative and make sure it happens. Your tsk-tsk pity and paternalistic patronizing “help” is not needed, and frankly, offends.
The level of bigotry exhibited here toward what must surely be labeled the Trifecta of Incompetency (minority, uneducated, poor) is staggering.
It’s a g**damn photo I.D. – stop acting like we’re Sisyphus being asked to push not only our big rock uphill, but our neighbors’ as well – while simultaneously balancing a ball on the end of our noses.
To the insulting commenters who just can’t seem to believe this Trifecta of Incompetence is just as capable and competent as they are, news flash: We’re off the plantation, we’re off the rez, we have cell phones and indoor plumbing (and even know how to use it!), some collars may be blue, but ultimately these are a capable, competent and determined people and fully able to comply with whatever requirements are required to preserve and keep safe every lawful voter’s rights to a protected vote.
Dana (292dcf) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:12 pmHomeless people. Let’s start there. It’s incredibly, incredibly hard for a lot of homeless people – citizens, eligible voters – to obtain the kind of documentation/identification we’re talking about.
— Not to mention the difficulty in mailing out a sample ballot to them! Perhaps the election commission should be required to put up billboards at the end of Meth Alley.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:13 pm“In rapidly reading through these comments, my sense is that some people who are commenting on the voter ID issue and specifically the “homeless” issue may not have a very clear understanding of the voting rules and laws that are currently in place.”
elissa – Ya think?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:13 pmI have always considered Dana’s vote to be more important than the vote of anybody else I know.
Anybody who says otherwise is a misogynistic, homophobic, racist idiot.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:15 pmBravo, Dana. Bravo. I think you have defined, perfectly, the intellectual divide between the Left and the Right.
Simon Jester (2708f4) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:16 pmI heart Dana.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:16 pm“if you’re homeless you’re probably crazy and having a photo id can help keep you centered plus you can use it to pick at your scabs”
Mr. Feets – Dirty gnarly fingernails work pretty good for picking scabs if you’re homeless and crazy and you don’t want to vote and go through the incredible hassle of getting a picture ID.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:21 pmDana: many years ago, Garry Trudeau ran a “Doonesbury” cartoon making fun of Santa Barbara. Santa Barbara didn’t want homeless people sleeping in the park for all kinds of reasons. It turned into quite an uproar at the time, and Trudeau slammed them mercilessly for being rich and unfeeling and haters of minorities.
It occurred to me that Trudeau could do a lot of good by opening up his very large personal estate in upstate NY as a campground for those people. After all, he has oodles of money. And quite a bit of seeming concern for how others treat the homeless.
But of course, it never happened. It’s always other people who have to give things up. Tom Wolfe wrote well about this kind of hypocrisy.
Simon Jester (2708f4) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:21 pm196; Well said, Dana!
It’s a way of keeping the “oppressed” on the plantation…
Kevin P. (97b78a) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:25 pmDana – now that you got that out of your system, go make me a sammich.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:25 pmOh right away, JD!
My knuckles are primed and ready!
Dana (292dcf) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:27 pmDana, I kind of wonder if the people to whom you prefer would feel that way regardless of general voting patterns? Just sayin’.
I mean, I didn’t see a lot of hue and cry from those quarters about overseas soldier ballots. Or was there and I missed it?
Simon Jester (2708f4) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:48 pmAgain, look at the link I posted earlier in the comment thread:
Texas election decided by 19 votes. 18 voters were “cast” by people who would have to have been over 110 years old. Around 300 on the county voter rolls who would be over 100 years old.
Also, the number of dead “votes” in the race that elected Al Franken were just astounding … and more astounding still … allowed to stand by the Democrat holding the office of Secretary of State.
crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:52 pm“Photo ID can be provided to the homeless when they register, provided they can prove the necessary information, just like anyone else in society. Does this make it hard? Yes, just as hard as it makes anyone else’s effort to vote. Voting is such an important part of the participation in society that the society has the need, right, and requirement to make voting sacrosanct, to protect the individual vote to the maximum needed to make the election process fair.
Thanks for your thoughtful responses….all the time….”
– reff
reff. Good to see you around, man.
If the debate we’re having hinges on a new kind of photo ID that can be obtained when people register to vote, then I’ve misunderstood the debate thus far. I think an ID like that is an acceptable step, a step in the right direction – for the reasons that Kevin M and others have pointed out (e.g. that providing accessible photo IDs to the homeless might be a good first step in breaking a dependency cycle). Depending on the level of documentary verification required to obtain such an ID upon registration, I think there would still be significant problems in insuring meaningful access to homeless populations.
Ultimately, I think there would have to be a controlled, one-stage relaxation of standards for the homeless in the ID-obtaining process – a stage where an ID could be obtained based on so little as the confirmation of an employer, or a pastor, or on the basis of a sworn affidavit. This relaxation could occur at a time and place far removed from polling places (to avoid the legitimate concerns of fraud which people here have raised), and would justify a hard-nosed mentality in turning away the unidentified at the door – having mitigated the (currently legitimate) argument that “I never had any way to obtain an ID.”
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:57 pmWell I don’t know about that, but one sees this;
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/12/felons-voting-illegally-franken-minnesota-study-finds/
narciso (ee31f1) — 7/11/2012 @ 3:59 pmelissa (@ 2:55 pm) has made more sense in this one comment than in 98% of the comments that preceded it.
Pious Agnostic (ee2c24) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:03 pm194- I understand that, but something tells me it has been a long time since you’ve voted for a Democratic candidate for a national office.
tye (57db6a) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:05 pmhey Mr. daley what else you can do is you can use the edge of that photo id to clean the residue of homelessness out from under your fingernails before you use them to pick at your scabs this way when you go vote you’re less likely to have infected skin lesions
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:24 pmDana @196,
Is that directed at me or Lemmon.Wet.Good or someone else? As strong as those accusations are, I’d appreciate it if you put a name to them.
I haven’t been patronizing anyone, despite what you or JD may think. I’ve pointed out that poor and/or uneducated populations often have trouble obtaining the sorts of documentary verification that the middle class takes for granted. I’ve pointed to the homeless – who often have no documentary identification whatsoever – as an example. As far as “minorities” go (the third spoke of your hysterically rhetorical “Trifecta of Incompetence”), the word “minority” had been used one (1) time in this thread (by tye @31) before you used it three (3) times in your own comment 165 comments later. If this debate is self-contained, then that’s not really a live issue.
And, of course, Simon has to weigh-in against tsk-tsking with a tsk-tsk of his own (and here I am, tsk-tsking in kind! A vicious cycle, to be sure…). “Tom Wolfe wrote well about this kind of hypocrisy”… and yet Tom Wolfe is likely worth millions of dollars. Where does the hypocrisy end!? We can’t all be Tommy Killian…
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:24 pmAny of our friends on the no i.d. side care to take on Dana in 194? Tye? Lemon?
Birdbath (ce2227) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:25 pmYou have a good day, dude. But let’s have a pact: let’s not fight. I swear, every time I post you have to snipe. Leave it alone.
I’m with Dana. You’re not. That’s okay.
Simon Jester (2708f4) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:26 pmCorrection: Dana at 196.
Birdbath (ce2227) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:26 pm“The voter ID issue has more false flags, red herrings, strawmen, dishonesty, stretched memes and other assorted irrelevant diversions than any other issue I can think of. Finding a way for all citizens to have a valid photo ID in modern day America and be able to produce one in order to vote is not rocket science. It is really only common sense.”
– elissa
Sweet. I’m all for that. Agree %100. Now how do you want to go about deciding who actually gets those awesome ID cards that “everyone” gets?
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:27 pm“But let’s have a pact: let’s not fight. I swear, every time I post you have to snipe. Leave it alone.”
– Simon Jester
You’re right. I’m sorry. Petty of me…
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:28 pm“Now how do you want to go about deciding who actually gets those awesome ID cards that “everyone” gets?”
I think it should be like the Publishers Clearinghouse Sweepstakes.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:29 pmto be fair to elissa, my comment @ 218 should have “all citizens” in quotation marks, not “everyone”
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:29 pmJust went on-line to visit the California DMV and saw their “register to vote!” portal. How convenient.
The Democrat Party is the Party of Losers, who go after the fringes of society… folks who can’t even work up the motivation to secure a photo ID or register to vote through legitimate means.
Colonel Haiku (9b0a55) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:30 pm“I’ve pointed out that poor and/or uneducated populations often have trouble obtaining the sorts of documentary verification that the middle class takes for granted. I’ve pointed to the homeless – who often have no documentary identification whatsoever – as an example.”
Leviticus – Correct me if I’m wrong, but have you pointed out that such people actually have trouble obtaining verification and identification or just hypothesized about it?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:32 pmI’ve said this before, but it’s worth saying again:
If anyone on the left says they oppose voter ID laws because they discriminate against minorities, they are lying.
The only reason they don’t want voter ID laws is so they can cheat more easily. That is the lone, sole reason. I don’t care how much they pout, stamp their little feet and scream “Racist.”
They care as much about minorities as the Grand Kleagle of the Ku Klux Klan except when it comes to voting. They like minority votes and they are going to do everything they can to get all they can by any means necessary. Especially cheating.
So let me be clear, so there is no confusion: The only reason any leftists oppose voter ID laws is because they prevent them from cheating in elections. If they try to argue otherwise, they are lying.
Ag80 (b2c81f) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:34 pm“Leviticus – Correct me if I’m wrong, but have you pointed out that such people actually have trouble obtaining verification and identification or just hypothesized about it?”
– daleyrocks
I linked a study @147.
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:41 pm“The Democrat Party is the Party of Losers, who go after the fringes of society… folks who can’t even work up the motivation to secure a photo ID or register to vote through legitimate means.”
Colonel – Are you suggesting we erect obstacles to Democrats driving buses to homeless shelters and hauling the residents off to the closest polling place, and possibly then the next closest polling place to vote, but never ever offering anything in return for voting of course?
That would be crazy talk, sir.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:45 pm“I linked a study @147.”
Leviticus – Sorry, I missed it. Will take a look.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:46 pmNo worries.
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:48 pmLeviticus,
I think the point I was attempting to make is crystal clear and requires to no further explanation or specifications.
Unfortunately, hysterical rhetoric is what this is about – this angst, and yes, hysteria about a segment of voters being required to present a photo i.d. to ensure one’s vote is protected. What a shame.
(And if you read my comment, you will see that I made no reference to homeless people.)
Dana (292dcf) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:55 pmNow note the sidebar on this organization, is it just a coincidence that it echoes administration policies,
http://wiki.nlchp.org/display/Manual/Foreclosure+Overview
narciso (ee31f1) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:56 pmYou’re right, narciso. It’s a big conspiracy to… help homeless citizens vote.
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/11/2012 @ 4:57 pmLeviticus – From the survey conducted by the people writing the report you linked:
“The survey asked providers to identify, of the clients they serve, the number that lack
photo identification each month. A total of 10.7% of clients lacked photo identification.”
Clients = Homeless people.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:01 pmThere wew 2812 votes cast in the Minnesota election by dead people that elected Al Frankin by less than 400 votes. More votes by the dead than the margin of victory and yet the Secretary of State allowed the votes to stand.
http://www.redstate.com/jrichardson/2009/06/04/minnesota-vote-fraud-2812-dead-voters/
crosspatch (6adcc9) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:01 pmCoincidence I’m sure, note the names Rucker, went on to be a Occupy organizer,
http://spectator.org/archives/2008/11/07/sos-in-minnesota
narciso (ee31f1) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:06 pm==Sweet. I’m all for that. Agree %100. Now how do you want to go about deciding who actually gets those awesome ID cards that “everyone” gets?==
Oh, Leviticus. That snark about a serious subject makes me sad. You are so much better than this. If it’s really a national problem then it deserves time and effort searching for reasonable, dignified, fair, and practical solutions for those people. If it’s just a political game to enable voter fraud as Ag80 suggests, then let’s quit pretending it’s about victimized minorities and disenfranchisement.
elissa (ac39c5) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:06 pm““The survey asked providers to identify, of the clients they serve, the number that lack
photo identification each month. A total of 10.7% of clients lacked photo identification.”
Clients = Homeless people.”
– daleyrocks
It’s a term that refers to the population served by the organization. Nothing sinister.
Non-profit legal centers will often refer to the people they advocate for as “clients” even though the people they advocate for don’t pay them. They do it because “client” is much cleaner than “the people they advocate for,” as this clusterf*ck of a sentence should make fairly clear.
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:07 pmLeviticus – If I recall correctly, the huge homeless crisis under President Bush with a 5% unemployment rate which disappeared under President Obama with a 10% unemployment rate, includes some very interesting definitions of homelessness from organizations such as NLCHP.
It’s much like Liz Warren’s shoddy scholarship in claiming medical costs were contributing causes of over 50% of personal bankruptcies.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:08 pmhow is that fair, elissa? I’ve been here debating this in good faith all afternoon. My comment was serious: I am %100 in favor of finding a way to get every American citizen a photo ID card, but the true argument is always going to be joined over what level of documentary verification you require for that ID card at the outset. That’s the discussion we should be having; I’m not opposed to ID, and I think it could do a lot of good, for the homeless in particular (as Kevin M has pointed out). I don’t want to disenfranchise citizens by requiring them to show documentation that they don’t have is all.
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:10 pm“It’s a term that refers to the population served by the organization. Nothing sinister.”
Leviticus – I was not implying anything sinister, only providing info for those who might not click on your link. The NLCHP surveyed orgs around the country serving homeless people. Those homeless people were the clients in the survey.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:11 pm“some very interesting definitions of homelessness from organizations such as NLCHP.”
– daleyrocks
“Interesting definitions” like what?
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:11 pmdaley @239 – I see. Thanks for the clarification.
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:12 pmOut for a couple hours. Soccer practice.
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:12 pmThe folks on the center-right and, in fact, ALL clear-thinking Americans need to continue pressing the fight to clean up voter rolls and for the photo-ID requirement. The majority of Americans are on our side.
Colonel Haiku (9b0a55) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:27 pm“– Not to mention the difficulty in mailing out a sample ballot to them! Perhaps the election commission should be required to put up billboards at the end of Meth Alley.”
Comment by Icy
Now that was just plain mean!
Colonel Haiku (9b0a55) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:32 pmWait! It’s a tax! Don’t I recall that the Feds don’t have jurisdiction over State taxes?
2nd Amendment Mother (c2be77) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:34 pmOne recalls that when there were 200,000 questionable ballots, SOS Brunner in Ohio, decided not to review them, Obama won by 30%, that year.
narciso (ee31f1) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:35 pm233- and redstate.com is a pretty reputable site with a long history of nonpartisanship so…
tye (57db6a) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:36 pmJimmy “JJ” Walker says he won’t be voting for 0bama… “sometimes you just gotta let a brother go”, says he.
Colonel Haiku (9b0a55) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:49 pmThis seems like a pretty good thread. Only skimmed it, but it seems like it’s working the way a comment section should.
Amiright?
And am I jinxing it by saying so?
Patterico (feda6b) — 7/11/2012 @ 5:55 pm250- I agree. Interesting reading.
196- I understand your general argument, but regardless of what one may think about the difficulty or ease of obtaining such a document the fact is that those who are more likely to have difficulty with such a task are disproportionately voting Democratic. By that fact alone the right’s very hard push for such documentation seems specious at best.
tye (57db6a) — 7/11/2012 @ 6:05 pm“Who the hell do you think you are to believe yourselves so much better and enlightened that you presume to know whether or not getting an identification is too Herculean a task for a minority, or uneducated American to manage?”
Even if it is the same barriers for all to climb, and equal numbers across all demographics are turned away, the impact is disproportionate in a partisan manner, because the underlying lack of ID is disproportionate in a partisan manner.
“Well I don’t know about that, but one sees this;
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/12/felons-voting-illegally-franken-minnesota-study-finds/”
Felon voting is another problem voter ID won’t solve.
“They like minority votes and they are going to do everything they can to get all they can by any means necessary. Especially cheating.”
It’s hard of some folks to imagine that minorities just have the same right to vote and vote against them and that’s why the left gets a lot of votes.
Lemon.Wet.Good (c6908d) — 7/11/2012 @ 6:10 pmtye:
The DNC and the Obama campaign are extremely good at raising money. Some of the richest people in the world contribute millions of dollars to both.
Maybe they could set aside a little of that money to finance canvasses and transportation for those poor people to obtain easily available state identifications.
That would be a just and noble cause regardless of how they choose to vote. If what you say is correct, it would benefit them at a cost that is negligible to what they spend on a day’s worth of advertising.
None of that was snark.
Ag80 (b2c81f) — 7/11/2012 @ 6:21 pmtye:
The DNC and the Obama campaign are extremely good at raising money. Some of the richest people in the world contribute millions of dollars to both.
Maybe they could set aside a little of that money to finance canvasses and transportation for those poor people to obtain easily available state identifications.
That would be a just and noble cause regardless of how they choose to vote. If what you say is correct, it would benefit them at a cost that is negligible to what they spend on a day’s worth of advertising.
None of that was snark.
Ag80 (b2c81f) — 7/11/2012 @ 6:21 pm“Maybe they could set aside a little of that money to finance canvasses and transportation for those poor people to obtain easily available state identifications.”
Raising the costs of democratic party organs ability to get votes is precisely the sort of partisan advantage that voter ID laws are set up deliver for the GOP.
Lemon.Wet.Good (d3d41b) — 7/11/2012 @ 6:25 pmThis is the same party, that dropped an indictment at NBPP with billy clubs outside a Philly polling
narciso (ee31f1) — 7/11/2012 @ 6:30 pmstation,
OK. Then maybe the Republican Party could do it.
Nonetheless, it would be a hardship to neither. And pretending the importance of casting valid ballots is somehow wrong is specious and laughable on its face.
Voter ID laws cannot deliver an advantage to one side or another. They can only prevent invalid ballots from being cast.
Ag80 (b2c81f) — 7/11/2012 @ 6:32 pmDid sphincter change his handle to lemon.wet.good?
peedoffamerican (ee1de0) — 7/11/2012 @ 6:34 pm“OK. Then maybe the Republican Party could do it.”
Why would the republican party expend its electoral resources helping a democratic leaning demographic vote?
Lemon.Wet.Good (d3d41b) — 7/11/2012 @ 6:37 pmInteresting. I looked into the numbers in Racine and Walker won that county in 2010 – not by much, but he won.
Now the day of the recall election there was a report that some labor unions in the state of Michigan were busing in voters to vote in Wisconsin’s recall. A person on one of the alleged convoy of buses who had planned to vote for Walker called into a radio station with a citizen report on what was happening.
Now this is sheer speculation, but the quickest way into Wisconsin from Michigan is through Chicagoland and North into Kenosha, then Racine. The person on the bus claimed that the buses were headed just across the state line, and not too far into the state; which would make Racine seem rather plausible.
It’s interesting, since the county where Racine is located was one of the few counties that went against Walker this time around compared to 2010.
Now I realize that this isn’t an issue for Walker, but for another state politician, for whom the vote was very close.
I’m not even certain if it’s at all possible for an out of state voter to vote in Wisconsin, not knowing the voting laws and enforcement there; but it does sound plausible with some hearsay evidence (maybe a bit more than hearsay) that the unions have attempted to sway the vote there, thinking that they only needed just enough votes to break the narrow defeat from 2010. That would sound like a reasonable strategy if I was a union organizer intent on illegally affecting the vote and perhaps not getting caught because of the fact that the previous election was so close there that no one would chalk it up to suspicion.
Brandon (d777af) — 7/11/2012 @ 6:46 pmBecause its the right thing to do. People are capable of doing that. Sometimes they are Republicans.
As a matter of fact, it’s just as easy as busing voters to the polls on election day, which I’m sure both sides spend campaign money on doing.
You do know that some Republicans do things like donate to charity, work in soup kitchens and homeless shelters and help on community projects such as Habitat for Humanity, don’t you? You do know that some people that disagree with you politically may actually do things to help people, You do know that people can act altruistically without the intervention of government, perhaps? It can and does happen.
Empathy is not a party distinction
Ag80 (b2c81f) — 7/11/2012 @ 6:51 pmSorry about the punctuation.
Ag80 (b2c81f) — 7/11/2012 @ 6:53 pmI’ve dealt with a lot of poor and uneducated populations and I’ve never seen anyone who could not produce ID for me. Frankly, I’ve seen more cases of producing more ID than they should have than too little.
The homeless I’ve dealt with had expired ID often, but they had ID.
SPQR (e534d0) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:01 pm“Empathy is not a party distinction”
I’m talking about the republican partisan organs. Not what “some republicans” do.
Lemon.Wet.Good (d3d41b) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:06 pm“The homeless I’ve dealt with had expired ID often, but they had ID.”
I’d be surprised if voter ID laws let you use expired ID.
Lemon.Wet.Good (d3d41b) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:07 pmLemon.Wet.Good, I bet a lot of the real world surprises you.
SPQR (e534d0) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:12 pmIllustrating how silly the claims of difficulty getting ID are.
Since of course its completely oppressive to condition a constitutional right on showing ID, you’ll support, Lemon.Wet.Good, the repeal of the Gun Control Act of 1968 which requires that I show government issued ID to purchase a firearm – a constitutional right.
SPQR (e534d0) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:15 pmAnd of course, Eric Holder has already demanded that the requirement to show government issued photo ID to get on an airliner be rescinded.
SPQR (e534d0) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:16 pmAnd the Secret Service will end the requirement to show government issued photo ID to get into President Obama’s campaign events.
Someone pointed out that DOJ security required reporters attending a press conference by Holder to brag about suing over voter ID laws to show photo ID.
SPQR (e534d0) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:18 pmRegardless, I am sick and tired of this whole “mean Republican” meme.
A valid vote is a valid vote. An invalid vote cancels mine.
If you want people to vote, get out and participate in voter registration drives. Walk the neighborhoods. Knock on doors. Talk to people.
I will.
And knock off the petty crap about one side having to spend more money than the other.
Good Lord, every politician of any consequence on both sides is richer than Midas, so the class warfare crap is getting old.
Give me a break.
Ag80 (b2c81f) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:21 pmSPQR….Louisiana law allows an expired driver’s license to remain a legal state ID….only problem is that businesses don’t know this, and won’t accept an expired license as an ID….law was originally done for retirees, but, since so many older retirees are still driving, doesn’t apply often….once had to go to the bank, and had my “lost, expired” copy of my license, and had to get the deputy on duty to explain to the manager of the law….
reff (4dcda2) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:22 pm‘Unexpectedly’ even that talking point doesn’t hold;
http://washingtonexaminer.com/carney-poor-mouthing-obama-is-outraising-romney-by-125m/article/2501905
narciso (ee31f1) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:23 pmLeviticus, we weren’t really talking about getting ID’s when you register to vote, but, if someone doesn’t have a state ID, why couldn’t that be done then? Seems like a good idea….
Problem is not just the homeless….the problem is that anyone can walk up to a precinct and “register” to vote on the day of the election in many states….sometimes it is a provisional ballot, sometimes not….but, it also means that anyone can do this 100 times on the day of an election, and never, NEVER, pull out an identification card of any type….only a matter of time….
reff (4dcda2) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:24 pm262- I am not trying to be a jerk in this particular instance but I gave a similar anecdotal example the other day regarding strangers striking up conversations and using the n word. I was summarily attacked by jd for using my personal experiences in an argument. I accept your anecdote; I think it would be interesting to hear in what context your experiences took place.
tye (57db6a) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:42 pm“the impact is disproportionate in a partisan manner, because the underlying lack of ID is disproportionate in a partisan manner.”
Lemon.Wet.Good – Actually, that’s only an assertion at this point with no evidence to support it.
If you have any evidence, please provide some.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 7:44 pmtye:
You do understand that you were relaying a personal anecdote meant to impugn a group or individual based on the opinions of strangers without knowing the intent of the strangers or their association with group you chose to impugn.
SPQR was relaying a personal anecdote based on experience that carries no judgment of the persons involved or the people he was expressing the anecdote to.
Ag80 (b2c81f) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:00 pmtye, the difference is that I’m an adult, a middle aged man, with experience(s) … and you are a seventh grader whose most significant experience is getting lunch at the school cafeteria.
SPQR (e534d0) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:01 pm262- I am not trying to be a jerk in this particular instance
Unlike all the other instances.
Patterico notes this was an interesting thread then tye decides to show his arse again.
Racists
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:02 pm“Leviticus – If I recall correctly, the huge homeless crisis under President Bush with a 5% unemployment rate which disappeared under President Obama with a 10% unemployment rate, includes some very interesting definitions of homelessness from organizations such as NLCHP.
It’s much like Liz Warren’s shoddy scholarship in claiming medical costs were contributing causes of over 50% of personal bankruptcies.”
Comment by daleyrocks
Liawatha make heap big wampum from foreclosures and distress sales when she live in Oklahoma territories…
Colonel Haiku (9b0a55) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:03 pmAg80- all I read was a bunch of tap dancing which adds up to a whole lot of nothing. The anecdotes were treated differently because you agree politically with spqr and put up with jd’s mindless drivel for the same reason.
tye (57db6a) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:19 pmWe’ve mentioned this before but you also need a photo ID to enter a federal facility, including tourist-type events like NOAA Heritage Week at the NOAA auditorium in Silver Spring MD.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:21 pm““Interesting definitions” like what?”
Leviticus – Would you tend to think of somebody who for whatever reason has to sleep in their car for a night as homeless? See the following from the NLCHP Annual Report:
“On any given night, there are approximately 840,000 homeless people in the United
States.
• Over the course of a year, between 2.3 and 3.5 million individuals, including over
1.35 million children, will experience homelessness.”
Consider the implications of the above two statements and look carefully over their documents for definitions of homelessness.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:24 pmPatterico,
Were you a participant in the jalapeno-eating contest?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:27 pm“Now that was just plain mean!
Comment by Colonel Haiku — 7/11/2012 @ 5:32 pm”
Colonel – Absolutely. Sucker wants to suppress the votes of users of other types of drugs!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:30 pm“Were you a participant in the jalapeno-eating contest?”
DRJ – Some of us less civilized types on the thread might sense a target rich comment opportunity on such a subject. I will not be the first to succumb to my baser instincts.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:34 pmWith respect to another type of suppression–JJJ has finally been located!. The lovely and talented Andrea Mitchell apparently located Jackson Junior in a treatment facility in Arizona. Details are still sketchy but the word is that he is being treated for alcohol abuse and a mood disorder.
No biggie though, reports Cheryl, one of the local ABC news hacks during the ten o’clock briadcast. Abraham Lincoln was also diagnosed with a mood disorder/depression. So there. It made me laugh.
elissa (ac39c5) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:38 pmDRJ – members of the MFM were required to present 2 forms of ID to cover the NAACP events today.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:39 pmAbraham Lincoln also killed like a billion vampires
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:39 pmHonest Abe didn’t try to buy a senate seat, tho.
elissa (ac39c5) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:40 pmI understand your general argument, but regardless of what one may think about the difficulty or ease of obtaining such a document the fact is that those who are more likely to have difficulty with such a task are disproportionately voting Democratic. By that fact alone the right’s very hard push for such documentation seems specious at best.
So, because a Democrat may have to be resourceful in getting a required photo i.d., Republican voters have to suck it up and have their votes put at risk by not implementing protocols to secure it? This is a value judgment of voters. And when an effort is made for the sake of one and not the other, it amounts to some form of discrimination.
I do not care whether Democrat or Republican is impacted by photo i.d. law. What is important is that the voting field is level with equal requirements across the board and *all* legal voters have their vote protected as effectively as possible. The commenter quoted makes the distinction.
Dana (292dcf) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:43 pmI just love this idea that a birth certificate or State ID is a partisan tool.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:45 pmpeople shouldn’t point out the pee in their neighbors pool
pdbuttons (1ad69e) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:49 pmwhen they got a dang ol’ log in their dang old puddle
==people shouldn’t point out the pee in their neighbors pool
when they got a dang ol’ log in their dang old puddle==
Is this a treasured colloquialism from another
elissa (ac39c5) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:53 pmregioncountryplanet?tye:
No, if you don’t see the difference you are not being true to yourself.
I sometimes disagree with SPQR and JD, Generally, though, we are on the same side of the fence.
The difference, though, is you have used your opportunity to post here to declare people, actually strangers, as racists or bigots based on your political beliefs and the words of others who you encounter.
That is called stereotyping, as you well know. It doesn’t help your arguments nor advance the cause that you seem to hold dear.
I have called you a racist before based on your postings. Unfortunately, I have to maintain that belief based on what you continue to post. If you don’t understand why, refer to dana’s post above.
Racism can be left and right. Minorities — or those we or the political class chooses to call minorities — are not your little lab rats to use to prove how noble you are. They are people.
When you use them as such, you make them objects. That is racism.
Ag80 (b2c81f) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:53 pm“Abraham Lincoln also killed like a billion vampires”
Mr. Feets – He got a bunch of Zombies in an Asylum movie too I think. He was ambidextrous that Mr. Lincoln.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 8:55 pm“Is this a treasured colloquialism from another region country planet?”
elissa – Don’t care, ima gonna steal it.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:00 pmit was a funny directed at hfeet
pdbuttons (1ad69e) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:02 pmplease use it
Mr. Buttons – I new that
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/11/2012 @ 9:59 pm“– Not to mention the difficulty in mailing out a sample ballot to them! Perhaps the election commission should be required to put up billboards at the end of Meth Alley.”
Comment by Icy
Now that was just plain mean!
Comment by Colonel Haiku — 7/11/2012 @ 5:32 pm
— That’s me! Playin’ mean.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:32 pm194- I understand that, but something tells me it has been a long time since you’ve voted for a Democratic candidate for a national office.
Comment by tye — 7/11/2012 @ 4:05 pm
— This may be true; however, I did continuously vote for Rebecca Rios at the state level because . . . well, once you google her pic you’ll probably figure it out.
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:36 pmShorthand Leviticus, tye & Squeeze.Lemon.Get.Wood:
Icy (642c3c) — 7/11/2012 @ 11:44 pm‘As long as even ONE voter is disenfranchised, we don’t care how many fraudulent votes are cast.’
293-correction… I called jd a bigot based on his own words.
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 5:55 am293-why don’t you point out specifically what I’ve said with links to my actual statements to prove your racism charge against me? At least I gave jd the courtesy of knowing exactly what he said to be labeled a bigot.
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 5:59 am400- I’m quite sure that none of us were arguing that.
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 6:18 amYou are a punchline, tye.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/12/2012 @ 6:23 amShouldn’t you be out somewhere protesting a black man’s pride in an accomplishment biff?
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 6:28 amI suspect he’s not merely stupid, JD, as with ‘stranded wind’ the Soros Org has done a good job
narciso (ee31f1) — 7/12/2012 @ 6:30 amof obfuscating why things happen, like the ‘scrub
lists’ in 2000, arose out of a very dodgy local election in 1997, it just took time to be implemented.
When all else fails, tye starts with the racist bigots nonsense. Since it fails all the time, this is becoming quite repetitive. And tiresome.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/12/2012 @ 6:30 amOr I am simply calling out a bigoted statement you made and you feel a bit ashamed now. Or if you don’t… well that is worse.
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 6:58 amThere was nothing bigoted about it, except to those that view the world through race-baiting identity politics lenses. Like you.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:05 amthis was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the time – when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:06 amYou called it moronic that Michelle Obama was proud of her country for nominating its first black man for a major party. You stand by that statement?
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:11 am312, tye, you moronic, racist troll. Michelle Obama was never proud of this country until HER HUSBAND was nominated for President.
You may go back to your usual uninformed race baiting.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:18 amYou were not being addressed. Leave jd to answer for itself.
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:20 amPcd… you calling me a moron is precious. I’d liken it to an illiterate running a library.
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:22 amthey fixed their own election, looted foundation funds directed for inner city schools, dumped patients at other hospitals, (that was her job at the U Chicago Medical School)
narciso (ee31f1) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:27 amOf course you have a link from an unbiased source to back all this up nabisco…
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:28 amTick tock nabisco (easy cheese will be your new nickname)….
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:31 amYou called it moronic that Michelle Obama was proud of her country for nominating its first black man for a major party. You stand by that statement?
Comment by tye — 7/12/2012 @ 7:11 am |Edit This
Again, not what she said. But closer.
JD (318f81) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:32 amAww… the wiitle wacist wants his bawl back…
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:34 amIn “tye’s” world, criticizing a statement from someone is racisty bigotye when the target of the criticism is black.
JD (318f81) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:36 amNow back to racist. You have to be a parody.
JD (318f81) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:37 amIt’s awfully coincidental that’s all;
On December 11, 1995—the first filing day for nominating petitions—Obama filed his nominating petitions with more than 3,000 signatures; perennial unsuccessful candidate Ulmer Lynch, Jr., also filed nominating petitions.[15] On December 18—the last filing day for nominating petitions—Palmer held a press conference to announce she was running for re-election to the Senate, accepting a draft by more than 100 supporters.[16] Palmer then drove to Springfield to file her nominating petitions; also filing nominating petitions on the last filing day were first-time candidates Gha-is Askia and Marc Ewell.[16] On December 26, Obama campaign volunteer Ron Davis filed objections to the legitimacy of the nominating petitions of Senator Palmer, Askia, Ewell and Lynch.[17][18]
On January 17, 1996, Palmer announced she was withdrawing her bid for re-election because she was around 200 signatures short of the 757 needed to earn a place on the ballot after almost two-thirds of the 1,580 signatures on her nominating petitions were found to be invalid.[18][19] The Chicago Board of Election Commissioners had previously sustained an objection to the nominating petitions of Lynch because of insufficient valid signatures and subsequently also sustained objections to the nominating petitions of Askia and Ewell because of insufficient valid signatures.[18][19]
Obama therefore won the Democratic nomination unopposed.[20]
narciso (ee31f1) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:39 amI am curious, “tye”. Is it racist when I criticize my Better Half?
JD (318f81) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:39 am321- if the statement for which you are criticizing them for is pride for a legitimate accomplishment for their race, yes. You may be dumber than the actual biff character. Definitely way more racist.
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:45 amNo, because it’s all about them,
narciso (ee31f1) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:46 amIs there any topic that does not cause “tye” to call people racist?
JD (318f81) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:48 amSpeaking in Milwaukee, Wisconsin today, would-be First Lady Michelle Obama said, “for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback.”
Then in Madison, she said, “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I’m really proud of my country, and not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.”
Nothing that happened in the last 40+ years made her proud to be an American. Nothing, other than Teh One beating Hillary, made her proud to be an American. For the first time in her adult life she was proud of the USA because Barcky got nominated.
It is obviously racist to point out how ridiculous that statement is.
JD (318f81) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:52 amThe first paragraph above was supposed to be a quote from here statements in 2008.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/12/2012 @ 8:24 am328- Thank the Lord! You finally agree. Now you can apologize and move on, hopefully changing your ways…
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 8:35 amSo, is it racist for me to criticize my Better Half? Who else are we not allowed to criticize?
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/12/2012 @ 8:40 amThat sounded more like rationalizing your admitted bigotry than an apology. Try again.
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 8:45 amIt’s just Whack A Troll, JD. Ask yourself: why does he post?
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 7/12/2012 @ 8:48 amI admitted nothing that you claim I did, tye. Typical dishonesty on your behalf. I was mocking you.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/12/2012 @ 9:14 amSo you retract? Even Robert Byrd quit the KKK… you have, just a few minutes after seeing the error of your ways, proverbially rejoined the group. For shame, sir… for shame!
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 9:21 amSo you retract? Even Robert Byrd quit the KKK… you have, just a few minutes after seeing the error of your ways, proverbially rejoined the group. For shame, sir… for shame!
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 9:21 amThe exaggerations of the DOJ of Voter ID laws on minorities are also getting shredded very nicely in the Texas trial according to Hans von Spakovsky.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/12/2012 @ 9:40 amtye, you truly are a clown. JD has pointed out to you that he is married to a woman that is of a different race than himself, yet you still label him a racist.
You harp, over and over, on anyone that dares criticize Michelle Obama’s disturbing (and apparently scripted!) statement, and it seems to be because you don’t even understand what she said. I’ve already corrected you once when you said she was expressing pride in her husband’s accomplishment — in actuality, she is declaring that moment in history to be the time when just enough white folk managed to overcome their innate prejudices and nominate a black man for POTUS. That isn’t a statement of personal pride, it’s a social critique — and not a very favorable one.
Icy (3615bd) — 7/12/2012 @ 9:58 amAgain today, as always, when a thread topic makes him uncomfortable by exposing the left, and he has no contribution or argument of value to add, tye decides to try yo push the host’s thread in another direction by insulting people and talking useless nonsense. We’re on to you, buddy! You really need to update your gig.
elissa (4cf3a6) — 7/12/2012 @ 10:00 am212.elissa (@ 2:55 pm) has made more sense in this one comment than in 98% of the comments that preceded it.
Comment by Pious Agnostic — 7/11/2012 @ 4:03 pm
Stopped in earlier, scanned briefly.
I’ve stayed late at work on a holiday (don’t remember if it was Christmas eve or NY eve) so a homeless person could take a shower so we could peel off his pus-soaked pants before I admitted him to the hospital, so don’t go into the “Rich MD doesn’t care about homeless” BS.
It would be great for all homeless people to have ID and to be competent enough to actually keep track of it, and those who can’t treated with a little more paternal concern without being paternalistic, as possible, to give them a better quality of life. In the “doing unto others as you would have them do unto you” dept., if I was homeless there are many things I would want help with that come before voting. In fact, (hyperbole warning if necessary) I would say that the only homeless people who are of clear enough mind to vote are those who first curse you out when you ask them if they want to vote…
Rights and responsibilities go together. Saying a 17 yo has a “right” to drive, for example, when they have panic disorder and freak-out when the light turns yellow on them is not a favor to any one. Yes, it is a very imperfect analogy (driving a car is more of a “privilege” than a “right”), but the point is that our actions have consequences, and before a person has the freedom to act in a given way, it is best that they also share in the responsibility of consequences for their act.
I think candidates who advertise “Pull the big lever with a D” (or R, but I’ve only seen the former) or the like should be ashamed of themselves.
If there was a way to do a mental status/intelligence/civic awareness test that was agreed upon as “Fair” to be qualified to vote I would be all for it.
If one wants any semblance of shared civic identity, everybody has to have confidence in the election system. Those who want no fraud have to help, with their action, to prevent disenfranchisement; those who want no disenfranchisement, with their action, need to help prevent fraud. Those who are not interested in insuring both, large and small pox on all of your houses. Disillusionment, suspicion, prejudice, and riots will be your lot.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/12/2012 @ 10:18 amJD has pointed out to you that he is married to a woman that is of a different race than himself, yet you still label him a racist.
Comment by Icy — 7/12/2012 @ 9:58 am
Just goes to show, Icy, how far some people will go to try to cover up the truth. [Sarcasm Alert]
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/12/2012 @ 11:37 amI think tye ought to be put on one of Sheriff Joe’s chaingangs right next to Kimberlin and Rauhauser.
If a Romney Administration doesn’t clean house at DOJ and then clean out the vote defrauders, then they don’t deserve reelection.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 7/12/2012 @ 12:11 pmShow me a picture of this alleged better half, bigot.
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 2:11 pmEff you. You are vile and disgusting. Other people here have seen pictures of her and my brown skinned little angels. Honest people. Good people. Unlike you.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/12/2012 @ 2:16 pmShow me a picture of this alleged better half, bigot.
Comment by tye — 7/12/2012 @ 2:11 pm
— Wow. Just, wow. tye, I would advise you to quit right now, while you’re way behind. JD wasn’t lying. Don’t let your jerkiness get you banned. Just focus on (and this might sound familiar) debating the issues!
Icy (3615bd) — 7/12/2012 @ 2:27 pm344- I can’t fathom her not being upset over what you wrote here. None of my business though. It doesn’t change the insensitivity of your statement.
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 2:36 pm346, tye, you are a complete idiot. Go help Obama loose the election.
PCD (6320b3) — 7/12/2012 @ 2:40 pmI wrote that someone made a moronic statement. Hyperbole beyond parody. And I explained why. You just babbled bigot and racist, because that is all you have got.
Icy – remember when it claimed to be searching for real debate? It still cracks me up.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/12/2012 @ 2:40 pmAsking for pictures of someone’s spouse is not a coincidental incident of trolling. It’s a psycho pressing a button.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/12/2012 @ 2:45 pmJD–I know you are fully capable of picking (and fighting) your own battles. But I am so very sorry that you have to put up with this vile, ignoramus who comes around to Patterico’s site and goes by the name of tye.
elissa (d64262) — 7/12/2012 @ 2:49 pm347- go look up the difference between lose and loose
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 3:06 pm350- I aologized to you when I made a mistake, now your turn elissa. Show me that you’re not another jerk like the rest of them…
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 3:07 pmApologized*
tye (57db6a) — 7/12/2012 @ 3:08 pmAfter screaming RACIST they tend to amp up their krazy. Tye is just like all the others that came before it.
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/12/2012 @ 3:20 pmDustin – yes
JD (f4e1b6) — 7/12/2012 @ 3:23 pmElissa – thanks. It sure is a hate-filled cretin.
I motion that tye be banned.
I second the motion.
All in favor, say “aye, no tye”.
If the vote doesn’t carry, I motion that tye be given the “comments don’t exist, ignore and carry on” treatment.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/12/2012 @ 3:45 pmaye no tye.
This blog is extremely lenient to trolls who smear people as racist, baselessly. But when someone starts asking about photos of family, they expose themselves as what Elissa aptly called vile.
Dustin (73fead) — 7/12/2012 @ 3:46 pmaye no tye.
Good faith is a precious commodity, and people like tye unfailingly erode it despite the best efforts of those around them to resist the effect.
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/12/2012 @ 3:56 pm“If one wants any semblance of shared civic identity, everybody has to have confidence in the election system. Those who want no fraud have to help, with their action, to prevent disenfranchisement; those who want no disenfranchisement, with their action, need to help prevent fraud.”
– MD in Philly
Well said. For the record, I think a photo ID, easily obtainable at a place and time far removed from the polling booth, serves both goals.
Leviticus (102f62) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:00 pmHey – he picked “tye” as an ID for a reason, probably Freudian, cuz he sure is being tye-some !
Alasdair (46e8d1) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:09 pmComment by narciso — 7/11/2012 @ 11:16 am
ID is required to get into a govt building to file a suit, even to get into the convention center where they held the NAACP gathering,
That’s to keep out terrorists. As we all know, anyone can get a bomb, but it is much harder to get fake IDs, so by checking names against a master list of terrorists, padded with many extra names, and without dates of birth, they can be kept out of the
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:27 pmbuildingairplane until they legally change their name.Comment by PCD — 7/12/2012 @ 7:18 am
Michelle Obama was never proud of this country until HER HUSBAND was nominated for President.
No, until he started winning primaries and caucuses, mostly caucuses. It was all those people involved with the campaign.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:29 pmComment by daleyrocks — 7/12/2012 @ 9:40 am
The exaggerations of the DOJ of Voter ID laws on minorities are also getting shredded very nicely in the Texas trial according to Hans von Spakovsky.
That’s why Holder switched over to the poll tax argument.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:30 pmMichelle Obama said that in February, 2008 while campaigning in Wisconsin before February 19, 2008 primary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconsin_Democratic_primary,_2008
The Wisconsin primary came after Senator Barack Obama had won the majority of delegates and votes in 8 straight primaries and caucuses; his wins in Wisconsin, and Hawaii extended his winning streak to 10 and reinforced his front runner status.[1]
But he hadn’t yet won the nomination.
She was clearly talking about the campaign.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/02/michelle-obam-1-2/
Obama campaign spox Bill Burton: “What she meant is that she’s really proud at this moment because for the first time in a long time, thousands of Americans who’ve never participated in politics before are coming out in record numbers to build a grassroots movement for change.”
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:36 pmThis can happen, but usually when the impersonator knows the voter being impersonated, and happens a lot more with absentee ballots.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:38 pm“That’s why Holder switched over to the poll tax argument.”
Sammy – He made the poll tax argument before the trial started and still claims it has a greatly disproportionate impact on minorities and a few other groups. That argument was shredded if you read the piece I linked. If there’s no burden, there’s no poll tax either.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:39 pmomment by Leviticus — 7/12/2012 @ 4:00 pm
Well said. For the record, I think a photo ID, easily obtainable at a place and time far removed from the polling booth, serves both goals.
This is the Twenty first century. There should be no need to physically possess and carry a document. Driver’s license pictures are online.
And signatures can be verified electronically.
All it takes is money.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:41 pm“She was clearly talking about the campaign.”
Sammy – BFD, does not negate the fact she said it was the FIRST time in her adult life she was proud of her country, which does say a lot about her.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:47 pm“There should be no need to physically possess and carry a document. Driver’s license pictures are online.”
We could do implantable RFID chips, which would also help with Obamacare.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:49 pmaye, no tye
Pious Agnostic (ee2c24) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:50 pmAye no tye.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:53 pmBye bye tye
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:54 pmhe’s not super-fun but he doesn’t bother me
he seems like he’s mostly going through the motions… like this blog is an assignment
I miss nishi
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:55 pmI’d also like to point out I’ve never seen a more clear plebiscite on this or any site.
Pious Agnostic (ee2c24) — 7/12/2012 @ 4:56 pmPlease put me in the “no more clown squeezins from tyena” camp.
Colonel Haiku (ab5d57) — 7/12/2012 @ 5:01 pmFor an unrepentant racist, tye is exceptionally irritating. And a racist. beef.
Ag80 (b2c81f) — 7/12/2012 @ 5:05 pmPious Agnostic – Well played, sir. I’ve never seen a troll called that before.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/12/2012 @ 5:07 pmdaley – I lol’d
Pious Agnostic (ee2c24) — 7/12/2012 @ 5:09 pmLeviticus!!!
Check your temperature, you’ve agreed with me on two things in a row!!!
Though, I must admit, both items are comnmon sense and at least one of the two is sweeping the site at the moment, (even though we have a new mystery in clarifying what a “plebiscite” is. I always thought it was something in dirty water that could cause lots of diarrhea.)
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/12/2012 @ 5:15 pm😉
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/12/2012 @ 5:16 pmMD, your definition is as good as mine, and fits tye to a “T”
Pious Agnostic (ee2c24) — 7/12/2012 @ 5:17 pm“daley – I lol’d”
PA – Couldn’t resist the set up. Heh!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/12/2012 @ 5:23 pmIt was brilliant, daley.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 7/12/2012 @ 5:51 pmEven though I was the one that brought up the possibility, I don’t want tye to be banned. What I want is for him to grow up and start debating honestly.
And yes, I realize how the scenario is most likely to play out.
Icy (3615bd) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:08 pmMD in Philly – TY
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/12/2012 @ 7:40 pmWhile I am a very conservative person, I really enjoy the debates where some of the more sane, left leaning people make good, well thought out arguments. Hat tip to Leviticus as one such person. Those debates cause me to think through my beliefs and sometimes adjust what I thought to include some of their perspective.
People like tye, on the other hand, just make me wish for a filter to block every post he makes. He may actually have a valid point or two on a rare occasion, but the typical spewing of venom and vitriol makes it not worth the effort of looking for them.
Tye, if you even bother to read this, you might consider growing up a bit before returning to polite society. And for the record, you do not have the right to demand pictures of strangers spouses or children just to satisfy your insecurities. The fact that you would even consider making such a demand puts you into the category of people I never want to meet in real life.
Jay H Curtis (804124) — 7/12/2012 @ 10:36 pmI say keep tye. WJM-TV never got rid of Ted Baxter, why should we get rid of tye?
Chuck Bartowski (3bccbd) — 7/13/2012 @ 2:32 pm362, Sammy, Obama got his opponents thrown off the ballot. He was the only one left on. That is not winning, that is whining and dishonesty. Then against Jack Ryan, Jack and Jeri (7 of 9) Ryan’s sealed divorce records mysteriously make it into the public domain. Sammy if that is what you consider winning, you belong in the same hole as Dan Rottenkowski and this Sandusky creep from Penn State.
PCD (6320b3) — 7/13/2012 @ 3:01 pmAye, no Tye. Let him keep Jimmy Hoffa, Sr. company in limbo of the lost.
PCD (6320b3) — 7/13/2012 @ 3:03 pmWe already have “The Jury Talks Back” … perhaps it is time for a “Patterico’s Contempt Cell” with tye as First Occupant ?
And our Federal First Occupant as second occupant ?
Alasdair (46e8d1) — 7/13/2012 @ 3:10 pmComment by daleyrocks — 7/12/2012 @ 4:47 pm
Sammy – BFD, does not negate the fact she said it was the FIRST time in her adult life she was proud of her country, which does say a lot about her.
What des BFD stand for?
Yes of course it says a lot about her.
What I’m curious about is why she said her ADULT life?
She didn’t have to use that word “adult” It comes to exclude something.
Did something make her proud of her country while she was a child? Or maybe it didn’t make her proud then,because she was too young, but when she heard about it she became proud.
Now she was born in 1964.
Let me see what could it be?
1) The Civil Rights Act of 1964?
2) The Eugene McCarthy campaign (The way she described the Obama campaign, that was most similar to it.
3) The Apollo 11 moon landing?
4) The Bicentennial celebration?
5) The victory of the U.S. hockey team in the 1980 winter Olympics?
Sammy Finkelman (d11d69) — 7/13/2012 @ 3:24 pm“What des BFD stand for?”
Sammy – It stand for Big F*cking Deal.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/13/2012 @ 3:36 pm“She didn’t have to use that word “adult” It comes to exclude something.”
Sammy – But she did. Keep spinning, but the interpretation which is obvious to most people is that between 1982 and 2008, Michelle found nothing her country did to be proud of, but I’m sure you will find a way to quibble with that view.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 7/13/2012 @ 3:42 pmWTF, Sammy!
Colonel Haiku (f48939) — 7/13/2012 @ 3:44 pmTTFN… goin’ swimmin’…
Colonel Haiku (f48939) — 7/13/2012 @ 3:45 pmComment by daleyrocks — 7/13/2012 @ 3:42 pm
Keep spinning, but the interpretation which is obvious to most people is that between 1982 and 2008, Michelle found nothing her country did to be proud of, but I’m sure you will find a way to quibble with that view. </.i<
No, that's correct.
Sammy Finkelman (8aae3e) — 7/13/2012 @ 4:20 pmWhat’s he got to do with it? Did he order the machines? No, he didn’t. Guess who runs the elections in those counties? The Democrat Party, that’s who. If there weren’t enough machines, it was their fault, not Blackwell’s.
But these “reports” have exactly as much basis as the “reports” that 0bama sold crack. What reports, you ask? The one I’m making right now. I just made it up this instant, and reported it right here! Just like these “reports” you’re talking about.
Milhouse (15b6fd) — 7/13/2012 @ 5:07 pmLets presume that lemon sucker has the facts that there are really 750,000 people in Pennsylvania, then he has identified the extent of voter fraud in that state because anybody can get ID if they are real people so even if we grant that %1 for some reason can not easily get ID,it still means that there are enough fake votes to change any election.
dunce (15d7dc) — 7/13/2012 @ 11:50 pmComment by daleyrocks — 7/11/2012 @ 11:36 am
April 17, 2012|By Bob Warner, Inquirer Staff Writer
Philadelphia city commissioners are investigating an unusual series of over-votes in last year’s primary election – 83 voting divisions citywide where the official vote totals were bigger than the recorded number of voters who showed up.
How would requiring people who never showed up to have ID do something about this?
It’s not like anybody is proposing that the ID be photocopied or any information taken down.
In most locations, the discrepancies were small, just a handful of votes. In many instances, minor procedural mistakes could account for the anomalies.
Obviously some votes wee cast without there being voters.
Sammy Finkelman (b645fc) — 7/14/2012 @ 7:34 pm73. in another thread: (car accidents by drivers, who, in an alternate universe, would never have been there)
Breaking news 8:26 PM ET July 14, 2012 (5:26 Pacific time)
U.S. to Let Florida Use Its Data for Voter Check
…Florida is not the first state to gain access to the SAVE database. The letter granting Florida permission to use it, which was dated July 9, says that five counties in Arizona are now doing so. Colorado has also sought access to the database as part of an effort to cleanse voter lists spearheaded by its Republican secretary of state, Scott Gessler. The program provides immigration status information from more than 100 million records maintained by the Department of Homeland Security.
According to the letter — signed by a Homeland Security official, Alejandro N. Mayorkas, the director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services — to verify the citizenship status of people registered to vote in Florida, officials must provide evidence, like an alien number, that the person is indeed a noncitizen. Those numbers are typically given to people who are living in the country legally as noncitizens.
Under federal law, such individuals are not permitted to vote. [*] The SAVE database can provide no information on illegal immigrants who may have registered to vote.
That restriction will prevent Florida from solely using driver’s license information, as it did when the state compiled its initial list of 182,000 voters believed to be noncitizens. That list was then pared down to 2,600, of which 107 were found to have been registered to vote illegally, according to The Orlando Sentinel.
Civil liberties and voters’ rights groups said on Saturday that while access to the database could provide more accurate information about ineligible voters, the presence of noncitizens on voter lists was likely negligible.
[*] Actually it is state law that prevents non-citizens from voting, but no state does. There may be some minor exceptions for local offices. New York City used to have “parent voters” for school board elections, for instance. Federal law regulates what kinds of exclusions from voting may not be used, especially for federal elections. Florida verifies legal residence when it issues drivers licenses and if someone is not a citizen, that’s when they would record the alien number. They went down from 182,000 to 2,600 for some kind of reason like they weren’t unique names. 107 out of 2,600 would be about 4% of non-citizens. It would also mean they started with the DMV list and not the voter list.
Sammy Finkelman (4a5e8f) — 7/14/2012 @ 9:17 pmIt might be not everyone is on the DMV list. Some of the people registered may be because of confusion.
Sammy Finkelman (4a5e8f) — 7/14/2012 @ 9:21 pmComment by PCD — 7/13/2012 @ 3:01 pm
362, Sammy, Obama got his opponents thrown off the ballot. He was the only one left on. That is not winning, that is whining and dishonesty. Then against Jack Ryan, Jack and Jeri (7 of 9) Ryan’s sealed divorce records mysteriously make it into the public domain. Sammy if that is what you consider winning, you belong in the same hole as Dan Rottenkowski and this Sandusky creep from Penn State.
Yes, but Michelle Obama in Feb. 2008 was talking about the 2008 Democratic election campaign, where that was not a factor.
In 2004, divorce records were (illegally) leaked for both Obama’s main opponent in the Democratic primary (where I think he started out polling third) and the eventual Republican nominee.
Then Alan Keyes was called into the rescue.
Sammy Finkelman (4a5e8f) — 7/14/2012 @ 9:27 pmHeya i am for the first time here. I found this board and I to find It really useful & it helped me out a lot. I’m hoping to present one thing again and aid others like you aided me.
how to get credit score (111cf9) — 7/25/2012 @ 8:57 am