RexRed
 
  1  
Tue 13 May, 2014 10:21 am
@coldjoint,
coldjoint wrote:

Nothing like high taxes and increasing regulations to drive business out of this country. You see Rex people actually earn money and want to keep it.


Yes they moved their unregulated, tax payer subsidized corporations to other countries and look at what they did!

http://www.greenoptimistic.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/air-pollution.jpg

Humans aren't causing global warming! (sarcasm)

Republicans are!
RexRed
 
  1  
Tue 13 May, 2014 10:37 am
Ann Coulter’s mockery of #BringBackOurGirls backfires
http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/ann-coulters-mocks-bring-back-our-girls-backfires-twitter
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Tue 13 May, 2014 10:46 am
@RexRed,
Quote:
Republicans are!


Someone has to make they money you think you are entitled to.
0 Replies
 
RexRed
 
  1  
Tue 13 May, 2014 12:03 pm
GOP vote scheme finally imploding: Why the end may be here
http://www.salon.com/2014/05/12/gop_vote_scheme_finally_imploding_why_the_end_may_be_here/
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Tue 13 May, 2014 12:12 pm
@RexRed,
This paragraph from your article says it all!
Quote:
As Canning detailed, however, if the 7th Circuit (and perhaps, eventually, the U.S. Supreme Court itself) follow the guidance offered by the Court’s majority during the 2008 case — which is often wildly and knowingly misinterpreted by blatantly partisan “voter fraud” fraudsters and other disingenuous proponents of Republican Photo ID laws – they may have a difficult time coming up with justification to overturn Adelman’s decision and reinstate Wisconsin’s law. After a full trial on the merits and several months of deliberation, Adelman found it “absolutely clear” that the restrictions imposed by Republicans in the Badger State would “prevent more legitimate votes from being cast than fraudulent votes.”


That's the primary issue; not voter fraud.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Tue 13 May, 2014 12:36 pm
@cicerone imposter,
So a state ID even offered for free would prevent people from voting? How do these people cash checks? How do they purchase adult beverages? How do they even prove who they are on a daily basis?

cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Tue 13 May, 2014 12:52 pm
@Baldimo,
It doesn't matter if it's "free" or it also includes a $$$. This is about the freedom to vote without any requirement to vote other than being a US citizen, at least 18 years old, and free of criminal charges.

Here's the basics.
Quote:
These extensions state that voting rights cannot be denied or abridged based on the following:

Birth - "All persons born or naturalized" "are citizens" of the United States and the U.S. state where they reside (14th Amendment, 1868)
"Race, color, or previous condition of servitude" - (15th Amendment, 1870)
"On account of sex" - (19th Amendment, 1920)
In Washington, D.C., presidential elections (23rd Amendment, 1961)
(For federal elections) "By reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax" - (24th Amendment, 1964)
(For state elections) Taxes - (14th Amendment; Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 (1966))
"Who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of age" (26th Amendment, 1971).
Requirement that a person reside in a jurisdiction for an extended period of time (14th Amendment; Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330 (1972))[4][5][5]
Baldimo
 
  0  
Tue 13 May, 2014 12:56 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Lack of Voter ID is a scam. If you can muster an ID for any other purpose, then you should provide one for voting.

I guess we will continue to disagree on this issue.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Tue 13 May, 2014 01:02 pm
Quote:
Pebble Mine: Emblematic of EPA Tyranny


Another way to kill jobs.
Quote:
An EPA memo from 2010 lists the pros and cons of preemptively deep sixing the project rather than strangling it in red tape by “traditional” (i.e., legal) means:

Listed under the many “pros” of ignoring the law is that a pre-emptive Pebble veto can serve as a “model of proactive watershed planning.” So much for Ms. McCarthy’s claim that this veto is a one-timer.

Only after all of this did EPA concoct its sham watershed study that provided the scientific cover for its veto. That study invented a hypothetical Pebble mine, then assumed outdated mining practices to predict environmental harm. The study included contributions from obvious opponents of the mine…. The EPA’s own peer-review experts ridiculed the study; one pronounced its key sections “pure hogwash.”

As with the Keystone XL pipeline, we may never know how much wealth — and consequently how many jobs — would have been created if the Feds, enemies of all constructive endeavor in this country, had not once again gotten in the way.

By a remarkable coincidence, too much wealth and too many jobs hurt Democrats electorally by undercutting their class warfare rhetoric and making fewer people dependent on their coercively financed handouts.

Before America is again a free country, the malignant and tyrannical EPA will have to be abolished.


http://moonbattery.com/graphics/environazi-flag.jpg
Quote:
The window dressing changes, but the underlying tyranny remains the same.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Tue 13 May, 2014 01:19 pm
@Baldimo,
You don't need to cash cheques if you have a bank account. I don't think I've ever shown ID to buy booze. They either refused me or served me, I tended to get served all the time once I hit 16 and a half.

If I'd not chosen to drive or travel outside the UK I could have got along very nicely without photo ID thank you very much.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Tue 13 May, 2014 01:27 pm
@Baldimo,
You're missing the whole point; it's not needed for any purpose. NONE.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Tue 13 May, 2014 01:33 pm
@izzythepush,
How do you create a bank account without an ID? Here in the US, federal law says you have to have an ID to establish that account. Sorry Izzy, but your UK experience has nothing to do with the US experience.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Tue 13 May, 2014 01:38 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I disagree. Secure elections is a good reason. Our elections here in the US are not secure and could be in danger in the future. The only reason to not support voter ID is to permit voter fraud. It has nothing to do with allowing people to vote. No one has said people can't vote. We would like them to present ID's to prove who they are in one of the most important functions in our US experiment. State offer free ID's to those who can't afford it and they also provide services for people to help prove who they are.

Stolen elections are the only reason to keep ID's out of the voter process. Provide them for free and there are no more issues.

0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Tue 13 May, 2014 01:38 pm
@Baldimo,
I didn't say I didn't have ID I said I didn't have photo ID. I had my birth certificate.

I don't need ID to vote and won't ever need it.

My experience invalidates what you're saying, which is the only reason you're ignoring it.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Tue 13 May, 2014 01:40 pm
@izzythepush,
Your experience is in the the UK, not the US. We don't have official ID's without pictures anymore.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Tue 13 May, 2014 01:44 pm
@Baldimo,
That may be right, but the discussion was about older people who probably didn't need photos for their ID back in the day.


What use does photo ID have for a birth certificate? People tend to change.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Tue 13 May, 2014 01:55 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:

So a state ID even offered for free would prevent people from voting? How do these people cash checks? How do they purchase adult beverages? How do they even prove who they are on a daily basis?



Why do you think someone has to have an ID to do all those things?
80 year olds that live in the same town they have all their life have no need to prove who they are to anyone they do business with.
parados
 
  2  
Tue 13 May, 2014 02:04 pm
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:

How do you create a bank account without an ID? Here in the US, federal law says you have to have an ID to establish that account. Sorry Izzy, but your UK experience has nothing to do with the US experience.

You don't seem to realize that some people have been using the same bank for 60 years.

Your requirement for opening an account isn't what you really have to do. You have to provide SS# when opening an account. You can use a utility bill to prove your address when opening an account. You have to sign the forms.

Opening an online account is even easier. You don't have to provide any ID other than SS, email and a signature form.

This is all Bank of America requires and then you have to sign a signature card and send it in.
Quote:


When you apply, you will need to provide information about yourself. For a faster application process, have the following information on hand when you begin your application:

Your Social Security Number
Your current residential address
Your email address
Your account number or debit card number to make your opening deposit into your new Bank of America account
Co-applicant's personal information (if applicable)


https://www.bankofamerica.com/deposits/manage/faq-applying-for-accounts.go
Baldimo
 
  1  
Tue 13 May, 2014 02:06 pm
@parados,
I need an ID to do all of those things. Federal law says you have to have an ID to open a back account. Most states have laws saying you have to show ID to purchase alcohol if you appear to be under 40. Cashing a check also has to do with safety. Sure an 80 year old lady who has lived in the same town her whole life wouldn't need an ID in town, but you are using a minority group to try and prove your point.

Moment-in-Time
 
  1  
Tue 13 May, 2014 02:15 pm
@cicerone imposter,
You are correct, Ci, there is no reason whatsoever to have a photo Id to vote. I have yet to present a voter ID and always participate every election. I registered once and that is sufficient, this applies to my husband and all my family. The changing demographic in America is undergoing a drastic change......couple that with the the perniciously hostile polices of the GOP sends Americans running away in droves from Republicans. Not only do some Red States with governors insist on voter ID they are making it even harder for posters to vote by closing the bathrooms for posters who wait on line an unduly long time....many voters get tired and go home, yet enough stood on line in 2012 to get Obama a second term. They're closing many poll places so that people have to travel further away than previously and this is done primarily in low-income and or minority communities, those most likely to vote Democratic.
_________
Study: More Voter Suppression Laws Are Proposed When More Racial Minorities Vote
BY AVIVA SHEN DECEMBER 19, 2013 AT 9:00 AM

CREDIT: AP
"States where more minorities turn out to vote are more likely to pass vote-suppressing laws, according to an analysis published by the American Political Science Association last week. These findings fly in the face of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent opinion gutting key provisions of the Voting Rights Act, in which Chief Justice John Roberts asserted that race-based disenfranchisement was a thing of the past.

"The study, conducted by University of Massachusetts Boston professors Keith Bentele and Erin O’Brien, examined restrictive voting laws proposed between 2006 and 2011. That included voter ID laws, proof of citizenship requirements, voter registration limits, early voting and absentee voting restrictions, and restrictions on felons’ voting rights. They found that “the more that minorities and lower-income individuals in a state voted, the more likely such restrictions were to be proposed.”

"The perception of voter fraud had some impact on states, but far less than racial and class considerations. Besides voter turnout, states with large African American populations and more low-income voters were also more likely to pass laws restricting voting in 2011, the heydey of election law changes. Republican leadership also made states more likely to pass vote-suppressing laws.

"The researchers also identified a recent intensification of voter suppression efforts in the past few years, chalking it up to “changing demographics; recent Republican electoral losses; an unforgiving internal shift within the party to the ideological right; and the party faithful’s response to vote fraud mythology.

"Without the Voting Rights Act’s protections, this trend in minority-heavy Republican-led states is likely to get worse. After the Supreme Court’s decision, several states immediately moved to restrict voting in the name of combating voter fraud, a phenomenon proven many times over to be virtually nonexistent. The states leading this charge — Arizona, Texas, and Florida — have seen massive growth in their non-white communities over the past few years, and are on track to become “majority-minority” in the next decade or so."

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/12/19/3082371/racial-voter-suppression-study/
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.13 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 08:42:45