Opinions Please
 

This article condemns the GOP for trying to block democrat voters from the polls. I read it and feel they are simply trying to have voters be more qualified to vote. Two specifically that caught my eye are blocking felons and people without proper ID. I see that as a good thing. What am I missing?

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...oting-20110830


Well, my dog is done doing his thing, so back to bed for me. See y'all tomorrow.

Villager II~ I read as much of the linked article as I could possibly stomach. I really don't think you are missing a thing. I agree with you!

What you may be missing is the fact that Ari Berman, the author of
the Rolling Stone article, was a member of JournoList - an email group of approximately 400 progressive and socialist journalists, academics and new media activists who were caught discussing how to shape the news to advance Barack Obama's campaign and agenda and stop Sarah Palin, John McCain and the Republican Party. Many of Obama's staff and appointments were also on the email list. In the above description, the word "jounalist" is used loosely.

Didn't read the link......I never do cuz they are always slanted towards the posters point of view. But what you are probably missing is that voting is a right and the GOP is continually attempting to make it more difficult to excercise that right. It is a well known fact that low voter turn-out favors the GOP. So what better way to lower turn-out than to put up roadblocks. :cus:

Dale, if you don't, or as you said, "never do" read the links, how can you comment or contribute intelligently to the discussion the poster is offering?

I ii

I can always comment, how intelligent that comment is is for the reader to determine. Those on the right would say I'm not very intelligent at all. :cus:

Not going to comment with that one.:cus:

What about Acorn harassing the voters at the booths?

Maybe the ones who comment on your intelligence aren't taking the time to read your entire posts. Without reading (or listening) to what someone is saying, it isn't really intelligent to comment on their views. If someone doesn't read and then comments, IMHO, their comments should be disregarded.

Most of his posts are one sentence long. And usually short ones.

Even without reading the link, I think you should be able to answer a really simple question.

You know that there are many times in your life you have to present proper identification in order to process a transaction, of some kind, for goods or services.

Do you think in order to vote in an American election that you should be required to show the proper identification to prove you have that privilege?

Because that is the crux of the article.

Please disregard this post. :cus:

There are restrictions on all rights..
Free Speech.. fire in a crowded theatre; threats; slander
2nd Amendment gun rights; loaded; permits; automatic weapons
etc
If I need to present an ID to get a gun permit, why shouldn't I have to present an ID to vote?

I don't disagree with the premise. However, in Wisconsin for example you must have a photo ID. Many low income and elderly people do not have photo ID's. The State has a program to provide them free but the Governor has instructed the department that issues the ID's to NOT let that program be known unless asked. They also closed several agencies that issure the ID's in Democratic leaning geographic areas. I think this is an example of putting up roadblocks to voting and the motivation certainly isn't to prevent felon or others ineligible to vote from voting. Do you dismiss this as being untrue? :cus:

See villagegolfer......more than one sentance. :cus:

I Positively believe in proper identification to vote. Too much fraud. That's how Kennedy won.

Dale, low income and elderly people have to have the proper ID to receive Social Security benefits and/or other benefits from other government agencies. It is the same ID that is required to vote.

Wisconsin is one of seven states that I could find which will, or are currently, requiring what would be considered "strict photo ID" to vote. Seven others require photo ID but have exceptions.

And if I may ask, who is this "they" you are talking about? "They also closed several agencies..." The state legislators?
http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=16602

I am going to have to leave the site for a few days and take a look at myself very closely. I have agreed with you three times in three days. Now I'm scarred.

JimJoe, just where in the 2d Amendment does it way you can't not own a fully automatic weapon?

Anyone can own a fullly automatic weapon. Here's all you have to do.

1. To be transferrable for private ownership, it must have been made before May 19, 1986.
2. You must live in one of the civilized states that permit machinegun ownership.
3. Individual ownership does require a law enforcement signature, vertifying there is no state or local law that would prohibit ownership. It may be signed by the Chief of Police, Sheriff where you reside, or The Head of the State Police or a District Attorney. It IS NOT a permission slip ! They MUST review your application and sign it unless they supply you a lawful reason for non-ownership. The best reason to state on the transfer is INVESTMENT.
4. You pay in advance for the machinegun and the serial number is listed on the form.
5. After LE sign off, your Class 3 dealer signs it, you attach 2 Passport photos and 2 sets of FBI finger-print cards and your $ 200 .
6. You wait an average of 3 months from then to get approval.
7. Approval for transfer comes back to the dealer and he calls you to come & get your machinegun.
8. The exception to the LE signature is IF you have an LLC or Corporation to register the machinegun to, a LE signature is not required. These are faster and get done in 30 to 45 days.

Basically, if you can pass a NICS check and are in a legal state, you are all set.

Hope that solves some of the mystery about machineguns !

Is it worth the hassle, not for me, besides who can afford the ammunition need to feed one of these at todays cost.

Darn spell check nows nothing about gramaerer.

Did I say you could not own automatic weapons or have free speech. etc..
No.. I said there are reasonable regulations just like voter ID laws.. to make sure the exercise of our rights do not infringe upon the rights of others.

Isn't that something......I've always wondered who "they" are? They say this, they say that....it's a term so often used without knowledge of who "they" really are. In this case, it is the Scott Walker administration. :cus:

And the point is.................? I am certain that Dems believe that they can skirt many voting rules by ignorning the photo ID issue. Otherwise, they would have the likes of ACORN, black panthers, ACLU volunteers, hollywood stars George Soros Jesse jackson and many others promoting the photo ID rule including Steve Speilberg making a video free promo for the Dems.

In reality the so called poor folks for some reason at at any given time have to produce a photo ID card to garner entitlements. Please let's get real here


I also believe that they need to make adjustments to the elctoral college. Presently popular votes mean a candidate wins all of the State's electoral votes. I believe a candidate is entitled to the electoral votes for any district he/she win within a state. this has the effect of making it more of a grass root inititative

The point is Republicans will do just about anything to try to avoid a level playing field. :cus:

What a laugh. Republicans have never had a level playing field. Lamestream media has seen to that.:cool:

Suppressing the vote
 

It has always been to the advantage of the Republican party to have as few people voting as possible. It is no coincidence that the voter suppression laws are being passed in red states and I do include Wisconsin in that group.

It was a Republican idea to mandate voting machines with no paper trail and no access to the computer program code by election boards or anyone else.

Well I guess we could hire Acorn thugs to suppress the votes. Oh no, the Democrats do that!!!! Where is my head????

The Media
 

I agree that the media is left of center. I think that it has something to do with the fact that they read and write books. The Republicans are countering that slant. They have given us Sean, Rush, and Fox News. Who needs books when you have "Fair and Balanced".

They read and write books? Oh, I see now, all republicans are cavemen without the capacity to read and write.Yea, that makes sense.chilout

Let's make this discussion generic. Do you agree or disagree that what is of paramount importance is that the country establishes a voting system that cannot be manipulative at least to a point where we really have one vote per citizen, an alive one at that. We criticize third world countries for their rigged voting systems and ours is not much better.

Perhaps if some are against a photo ID we could go the way of Iraq and dip voters thumbs in hard to wash ink to identify that they have already voted.

having said that do you agree or disagree that a candidate should be entitled to district's electoral votes he/she earned rather than handing over the enteire state votes to a single candidate?

I want to be proud and confident in our voting system and will agree to changes such as the photo ID that protect its legitimacy. I also agree that a candidate is entitled to the electoral votes for the district he/she wins because its more grass roots.

Walk me through this, Rubicon.
1. Do you agree or disagree that what is of paramount importance is that the country establishes a voting system that cannot be manipulative at least to a point where we really have one vote per citizen, an alive one at that. We criticize third world countries for their rigged voting systems and ours is not much better.

Why do you believe that? I don't think I agree with that statement. Am I missing something?

I do not ever remember showing my ID before I voted.

One Such Book
 

Sinclair Lewis once said in It Can't Happen Here:
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."

Whose political party does this more closely resemble, mine or yours? Fascism in Europe made unions illegal and punished dissent severely.

Of course there are intelligent Republicans. When you watch FOX, ask yourself these questions; Does tort reform really benefit me, or limit my options? Will the recognition of global warming cost corporations money? What other opinions are FOX forming for me that will save big business big money? Putting down trade unions? Calling Social Security a "Ponzi Scheme"? Forcing the states to buy voting machines that leave no paper trail?

First off, who cares what Sinclair Lewis says.
There is very little, if any, man made Global Warming. Real scientists recognize that the earth is cycling warm and cooling for centuries.
Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme. It will tumble when 78 million Baby Boomers retire.
Trade Unions have served their purpose and are now just thugs.

Anything else?

yes there is something else. I disagree with everything you just posted. But that should come as no surprise.

How's that Kool-Aid taste? :cus:

Like a pesty little bug, I ignore it.

There can be no plausible reason for objecting to the showing of valid identification in order to vote, which is the most sacred privilege and duty of citizenship.

The only logical reason to object to this is to want to somehow scam the system.

What other reason can there be? I find it hard to believe that there's an argument to this being a requirement to vote.

I think you have this one wrong....it was the 2 Black Panthers....not Acorn.