If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mega 949)   If your star witness got his information from Wikipedia, you may want to rethink your legal strategy. THIS INCLUDES YOU, U.S. Department of Justice   (mega949.com) divider line 116
    More: Fail, U.S. Department of Justice, Wikipedia, vote-by-mails, expert witnesses, East Texas, Texas Legislature, Texas, crossexaminations  
•       •       •

9738 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Jul 2012 at 11:50 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



116 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-07-13 09:08:47 AM  

who the fark is this website? try posting again with a reliable source derpmitter

let's start with

feds could not produce a single person, or provide the name of a single person, who will legitimately be unable to vote due to voter i.d.


THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Poll tax, grok it.
 
2012-07-13 09:39:12 AM  
Anyone defending poll taxes is anti-American and/or racist and/or a complete asshole. Unfortunately that include a ton of people in this country, which explains a lot.
 
2012-07-13 11:28:58 AM  
Here is a link to another article that seems to be legit.

http://www.statesman.com/news/texas-politics/harvard-professor-texas- v oter-id-law-would-disproportionately-2415809.html
 
2012-07-13 11:55:24 AM  
feds could not produce a single person, or provide the name of a single person, who will legitimately be unable to vote due to voter i.d.

They don't really have to.
 
2012-07-13 11:58:23 AM  

Kazan: THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Poll tax, grok it.




Anyone claiming positive identification is the same as a poll tax is being pretty reactionary.
 
2012-07-13 11:58:26 AM  
In summary: DERP.
 
2012-07-13 11:58:35 AM  
Did I read the article right and they shot down the wikipedia sourcing with phone surveys?
 
2012-07-13 11:58:37 AM  
Uh oh... you posted something that seems to be in favor of voter ID requirements. Around here that makes you slightly to the right of Hitler, and that automatically invalidates all arguments.

"Under cross examination, Rodriguez admitted that she has a birth certificate, a voter registration card, and a Social Security Card, and only two of those three forms of i.d. are required to obtain a free voter i.d. card offered by the DPS. Rodriguez testified that she 'doesn't have time' to go the DPS office to obtain the voter i.d. card, but she testified she had plenty of time to fly more than 1500 miles to Baltimore, catch a train to Washington DC, and sit for hours in a federal courtroom to testify about how unfair the Texas voter i.d. law is."

LOL.
 
2012-07-13 12:00:00 PM  
Is this the place where I point out that dead people are a large part of the democrat constituency?

/ I keed, I keed

// is you is, or is you ain't my constituency?
 
2012-07-13 12:00:19 PM  
Rodriguez testified that she 'doesn't have time' to go the DPS office to obtain the voter i.d. card, but she testified she had plenty of time to fly more than 1500 miles to Baltimore, catch a train to Washington DC, and sit for hours in a federal courtroom to testify about how unfair the Texas voter i.d. law is.


*facepalm*
 
2012-07-13 12:00:20 PM  

The First Four Katy Perry Albums: Uh oh... you posted something that seems to be in favor of voter ID requirements. Around here that makes you slightly to the right of Hitler, and that automatically invalidates all arguments.

"Under cross examination, Rodriguez admitted that she has a birth certificate, a voter registration card, and a Social Security Card, and only two of those three forms of i.d. are required to obtain a free voter i.d. card offered by the DPS. Rodriguez testified that she 'doesn't have time' to go the DPS office to obtain the voter i.d. card, but she testified she had plenty of time to fly more than 1500 miles to Baltimore, catch a train to Washington DC, and sit for hours in a federal courtroom to testify about how unfair the Texas voter i.d. law is."

LOL.


Yeah. "Can't be bothered to do civic-duty stuff. Gotta go to a protest!"
 
2012-07-13 12:00:40 PM  
I'm sure this account is slanted, but assuming the facts as presented are correct, I don't see how this isn't a major case of FAIL on the part of the DOJ lawyers.

(Unless they're saving the big stuff for the Supreme Court, which seems risky.)
 
2012-07-13 12:01:27 PM  
i remember something called U.S. Supreme Court Reporter
 
2012-07-13 12:01:55 PM  
Notice there's a subtle shift in context before Wiki is mentioned in the article:

Paragraph 1, talking about testimony by Kousser on the stand:
Another Department of Justice 'expert' testified that the Legislature 'intended' to discriminate against minorities when it passed the Voter I.D. bill. But J. Morgan Kousser's comments under cross examination show he knows little to nothing about the Texas Legislature (he referred to State Sen. Leticia Van De Putte as the enate Minority Leader, a position that doesn't exist in the Texas Legislature) and lawyers for the state pointed out that he said the U.S. Supreme Court ruling which upheld a similar voter i.d. law in Indiana, a decision which was written by Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, Scalia, Rehnquist, and Thomas, was written so the five, laughably, could 'promote white supremacy.'

Now, paragraph 2, talking about a book written by Kousser:
Kousser also claimed in a book that Republicans are 'not legitimate representatives' of minority communities, and that any African American or Hispanic who supports voter i.d. 'has been manipulated and misled by Republicans.

Which means that paragraph 3, when they talk about Wiki, would seem to apply to the book, and not testimony on the stand:
In fact, Kousser admitted that he got many of the 'facts' used to buttress these bizarre claims from 'Wikipedia,' an on line encyclopedia that anybody, including Kousser himself, can upload information onto.

Nice try, Subs.
 
2012-07-13 12:02:04 PM  

Kazan: THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Poll tax, grok it.



"Don't have to."
 
2012-07-13 12:04:19 PM  
It would be refreshing if there were at least one word of truth in that FA.

The US District Court has not yet ruled on this case (closing arguments were just presented this morning) and other news sources make no mention of the DOJ attorney flubbing his case. Texas sued the DOJ and they must prove that their law isn't discriminatory, not just that the DOJs numbers are wrong and that the sources of those numbers are unreliable.
 
2012-07-13 12:07:38 PM  
Clearly a site that keeps referring to experts as 'experts' and facts as 'facts' wouldn't just be pushing an agenda.... no, I truly believe that this link takes me to an accurate and complete analysis of the trial and wouldn't be intentionally misrepresenting or concealing any part of it in a cynical attempt at deceptive persuasion.
 
2012-07-13 12:09:44 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: Anyone defending poll taxes is anti-American and/or racist and/or a complete asshole. Unfortunately that include a ton of people in this country, which explains a lot.


I'm still on the fence on these laws (though I live in a state that requires me produce ID to vote), but it sounds like Texas is providing free IDs to anybody who can provide a birth certificate, voter registration card, or Social Security card. In order to register to vote, residents must provide either a Driver License number or Social Security number. So anybody who registers to vote should have either a photo ID or a Social Security card (which is free to obtain). So anybody who has registered to vote should also have the documentation needed to acquire a free voter ID.
 
2012-07-13 12:09:50 PM  

bongmiester: Rodriguez testified that she 'doesn't have time' to go the DPS office to obtain the voter i.d. card, but she testified she had plenty of time to fly more than 1500 miles to Baltimore, catch a train to Washington DC, and sit for hours in a federal courtroom to testify about how unfair the Texas voter i.d. law is.


*facepalm*


in her defense, if getting a voter id requires a trip to the DMV, her argument is still valid.
 
2012-07-13 12:10:21 PM  

JackieRabbit: It would be refreshing if there were at least one word of truth in that FA.

The US District Court has not yet ruled on this case (closing arguments were just presented this morning) and other news sources make no mention of the DOJ attorney flubbing his case. Texas sued the DOJ and they must prove that their law isn't discriminatory, not just that the DOJs numbers are wrong and that the sources of those numbers are unreliable.


Well, since the Supreme Court already upheld Indiana's VoterID law, it would seem that Texas will be on stronger ground, precedent wise than the DOJ is.
 
2012-07-13 12:11:21 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: Anyone defending poll taxes is anti-American and/or racist and/or a complete asshole. Unfortunately that include a ton of people in this country, which explains a lot.


Especially since the problem that voter I.Ds are supposed to fix doesn't even exist.

At least the racist laws in Arizona are supposed to combat the real problem of illegal immigration.
 
2012-07-13 12:11:56 PM  

Kazan: who the fark is this website? try posting again with a reliable source derpmitter

let's start with

feds could not produce a single person, or provide the name of a single person, who will legitimately be unable to vote due to voter i.d.

THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Poll tax, grok it.


How is a free ID a "tax"?
 
2012-07-13 12:13:42 PM  

Mr Guy: Kazan: THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Poll tax, grok it.



Anyone claiming positive identification is the same as a poll tax is being pretty reactionary.


um.. no

give me doughnuts: Kazan: who the fark is this website? try posting again with a reliable source derpmitter

let's start with

feds could not produce a single person, or provide the name of a single person, who will legitimately be unable to vote due to voter i.d.

THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Poll tax, grok it.

How is a free ID a "tax"?


look at Wisconsin

"we created a free ID, but we closed your only place to get it within a 3 hours drive"
 
2012-07-13 12:14:29 PM  
Testimony has concluded in the trial of Texas 'Voter I.D.' law

The article makes no mention of a ruling, only that testimony has concluded. Yeesh, it's in the first farking sentence.
 
2012-07-13 12:15:15 PM  
Jesus, first we had to free the slaves, now we have to let them vote for free. These disenfranchised minorities just want free stuff.
 
2012-07-13 12:15:27 PM  

Kazan: Mr Guy: Kazan: THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Poll tax, grok it.



Anyone claiming positive identification is the same as a poll tax is being pretty reactionary.

um.. no

give me doughnuts: Kazan: who the fark is this website? try posting again with a reliable source derpmitter

let's start with

feds could not produce a single person, or provide the name of a single person, who will legitimately be unable to vote due to voter i.d.

THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Poll tax, grok it.

How is a free ID a "tax"?

look at Wisconsin

"we created a free ID, but we closed your only place to get it within a 3 hours drive"


Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?
 
2012-07-13 12:17:43 PM  

weiserfireman: JackieRabbit: It would be refreshing if there were at least one word of truth in that FA.

The US District Court has not yet ruled on this case (closing arguments were just presented this morning) and other news sources make no mention of the DOJ attorney flubbing his case. Texas sued the DOJ and they must prove that their law isn't discriminatory, not just that the DOJs numbers are wrong and that the sources of those numbers are unreliable.

Well, since the Supreme Court already upheld Indiana's VoterID law, it would seem that Texas will be on stronger ground, precedent wise than the DOJ is.


True, but the SCOTUS only ruled that the one state's law (Indiana's? trying to remember) was constitutional, not all of them and upheld the DoJ's authority to strike them down if they violate the Voting Rights Act. In other words, the Court let the process stand as is: the DoJ's decisions in such matters can be challenged in court.

It may well be that the district court will side with Texas. I know nothing about their ID law other than what I read, which seems reasonable. But Texas has a long history of discriminating against minorities. It's one of the worst state in the country in this regard. And they are arguing in front of the DC district court, which tends to be rather liberal in its rulings.
 
2012-07-13 12:20:57 PM  
Voting requires me to go to the voting poll... this takes either gas to put in the car, or food in my belly so I can walk, and in essence, amounts to a poll tax. They should just call me and ask for my vote... which requires me to own a phone and there a phone poll tax. *sigh* I just can't win.
 
2012-07-13 12:21:48 PM  

give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?


because it isn't actually free

Kazan: "we created a free ID, but we closed your only place to get it within a 3 hours drive"


"... so you have to take a day off work [which you cannot afford] and drive 6 hours..."
 
2012-07-13 12:25:28 PM  

Kazan: give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

because it isn't actually free

Kazan: "we created a free ID, but we closed your only place to get it within a 3 hours drive"

"... so you have to take a day off work [which you cannot afford] and drive 6 hours..."


A program can be implemented abusively without being inherently abusive. That's how the system works. Demonstrate abuse, then fix.
 
2012-07-13 12:26:50 PM  

Kazan: give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

because it isn't actually free

Kazan: "we created a free ID, but we closed your only place to get it within a 3 hours drive"

"... so you have to take a day off work [which you cannot afford] and drive 6 hours..."


So......you think reimbursement for your gas and lost wages should be inluded? God help you folks that lived in the same places before automobiles....and still managed to show up. Seriously, except for the most remote parts, who is a three hour drive from a DMV or county courthouse or recorders office?
 
2012-07-13 12:27:37 PM  

Kazan: give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

because it isn't actually free

Kazan: "we created a free ID, but we closed your only place to get it within a 3 hours drive"

"... so you have to take a day off work [which you cannot afford] and drive 6 hours..."



If they can drive somewhere, then they are already is possession of all the ID they need to vote.
 
2012-07-13 12:28:30 PM  
It's so cute how people think that the voting process is ACTUALLY still being used as a way to elect leaders, instead of having them "pre-ordained" to be the next in line.
 
2012-07-13 12:30:07 PM  

weiserfireman: Well, since the Supreme Court already upheld Indiana's VoterID law, it would seem that Texas will be on stronger ground, precedent wise than the DOJ is.


Your argument is predicated on the notion that the current SCOTUS gives any deference to precedent.

And since it doesn't, your argument is pretty flimsy.

And, as was eloquently stated, supra

alowishus: Especially since the problem that voter I.Ds are supposed to fix doesn't even exist.

 
2012-07-13 12:33:06 PM  
Poll tax of $140.
 
2012-07-13 12:34:31 PM  
It's too easy to be eligible to vote. All you have to do is be born in this country and manage to stay alive for 18 years.

I had a dog that managed to do that.
 
2012-07-13 12:36:30 PM  

Theaetetus: Notice there's a subtle shift in context before Wiki is mentioned in the article:


Nice try, Subs.


to be fair, the 'expert' is testifying as an expert (someone with specialized knowledge of a particular field such that his/her knowledge is beyond that of the average person)...his book is going to be a part of his knowledge base with establishes him as an expert... proving his book is basically a load of crap, gathered from unsubstantiated data....well yeah, that sort of shoots a hole in his testimony and raises serious questions about his 'expert' status in the subject matter he is testifying about.

I am really tired of hearing about how racist the right is; seriously the racist tag is now an acceptable talking point on anything the right tries to do. STOP ACTING LIKE A VICTIM.

What is wrong with being required to establish you are who you say you are with respect to being able to vote?
 
2012-07-13 12:36:35 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: feds could not produce a single person, or provide the name of a single person, who will legitimately be unable to vote due to voter i.d.

They don't really have to.


They kind of do since the supreme court ruled on this already just 6 years ago...
 
2012-07-13 12:38:29 PM  
The "I can count to potato" girl will be eligible to vote in a couple of years. While she may be smarted than a lot of the GOP base, do you really think she is going to make an informed decision?
 
2012-07-13 12:39:09 PM  

aspAddict: It's so cute how people think that the voting process is ACTUALLY still being used as a way to elect leaders, instead of having them "pre-ordained" to be the next in line.


Yes, we've long since done away with such tawdry institutions as the Electoral Colleges. Elector Counts with their American Runeswords, forged by British Dwarfs and further ensorcelled by French Elfs rule with benign cruelty from their fastnesses across the nation, their court jesters reciting Thomas Paine for their ongoing entertainment. Yet, deep within the icy wastes of Canada, the minions of Chaos - 'Mounties', savage warriors astride equally savage Moose; Quebecois, a dark and secretive society of sorcerous socialists; and the brutal and vicious Seal Tribes of Greenland, known for their striking visual performance art and tea cakes - and many more, lurk at the borders, awaiting the day they find themselves united by a great War Leader, to strike deep into the heartland and plunder Snacky Cakes and Meth from the unwitting heartland inhabitants that languish in the false security of a superstitious process long since bereft of any true power.
 
2012-07-13 12:40:20 PM  

give me doughnuts: I had a dog that managed to do that.


Give us a call when he can read the ballot.

Or have thumbs so he can hold it, in order to read it.

Or sign the ledger.

Sure, maybe he knows the thing over his head that keeps the sun and rain off is a Roof, that sandpaper is Rough, and that the greatest slugger of all time was Ruth, but that doesn't mean he's worthy of suffrage.

Maybe he should have said DiMaggio.
 
2012-07-13 12:40:55 PM  
...but I am not smart enough to hit the "r" key, instead of the "d" key.

Index finger for "huRR"
Middle finger for "Durr"
 
2012-07-13 12:41:27 PM  
Seems like fail all around.
Texas waste time and money creating a law that the majority of people abide by anyway.
Federal Gov. waste time and money to check it out, then waste more time to have SCOTUS say looks good.
 
2012-07-13 12:41:52 PM  
Nobody would be disenfranchised by the voter ID laws? Ok, but the laws are still being written to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
 
2012-07-13 12:41:55 PM  

Mr Guy: Kazan: THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Poll tax, grok it.



Anyone claiming positive identification is the same as a poll tax is being pretty reactionary.


Ok, not a poll tax, how about just outright voter suppression? What if say a state passed a voter ID law, closed DMVs in areas with the highest amount of people who would need to get an ID and also instruct DMV workers not to inform citizens that the ID to vote is free...

Oh wait, WI did that.


give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?


When its policy not to tell people they can get it for free?
 
2012-07-13 12:42:12 PM  

Deucednuisance: weiserfireman: Well, since the Supreme Court already upheld Indiana's VoterID law, it would seem that Texas will be on stronger ground, precedent wise than the DOJ is.

Your argument is predicated on the notion that the current SCOTUS gives any deference to precedent.

And since it doesn't, your argument is pretty flimsy.

And, as was eloquently stated, supra

alowishus: Especially since the problem that voter I.Ds are supposed to fix doesn't even exist.


I am not worried about SCOTUS following precedent. They only follow it out of custom, to make things flow smoother. Their job is to make precedent. But the District and Circuit courts have to follow clear SCOTUS precedents
 
2012-07-13 12:44:23 PM  

Cyno01: Mr Guy: Kazan: THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Poll tax, grok it.



Anyone claiming positive identification is the same as a poll tax is being pretty reactionary.

Ok, not a poll tax, how about just outright voter suppression? What if say a state passed a voter ID law, closed DMVs in areas with the highest amount of people who would need to get an ID and also instruct DMV workers not to inform citizens that the ID to vote is free...

Oh wait, WI did that.


give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

When its policy not to tell people they can get it for free?


Still free. Try again.
 
2012-07-13 12:45:27 PM  

weiserfireman: But the District and Circuit courts have to follow clear SCOTUS precedents


Well, that ain't necessarily so, either. But I take your point.

I've just got a real problem with how the current Court goes about its business.
 
2012-07-13 12:46:05 PM  
It's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist, but unless election workers are charging money to either register or cast a ballot, stop calling it a "poll tax." It just makes you look foolish.
 
2012-07-13 12:46:36 PM  

give me doughnuts: Try again


OK.

"Externalities" are "Costs".

Your move.
 
2012-07-13 12:46:46 PM  

give me doughnuts: Kazan: give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

because it isn't actually free

Kazan: "we created a free ID, but we closed your only place to get it within a 3 hours drive"

"... so you have to take a day off work [which you cannot afford] and drive 6 hours..."


If they can drive somewhere, then they are already is possession of all the ID they need to vote.


*Rolleyes*

have a friend drive them.
 
2012-07-13 12:48:16 PM  
DERP (noun, I guess?): The word used in place of coherently expressing one's opinions and/or objections to another's statement. Often used in a gun-and-run manor.

Example:

Person 1: Here are several sources for my information.
Person 2: DERP! lololol
Person 1: Okay, did you read this? Do you have information supporting your claim?
Person 2: ...
Person 1: Gah.
 
2012-07-13 12:48:18 PM  

Mr Guy: Kazan: THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Poll tax, grok it.



Anyone claiming positive identification is the same as a poll tax is being pretty reactionary.


Not to mention just plain retarded
 
2012-07-13 12:50:31 PM  

Joe Blowme: Not to mention just plain retarded


Careful with that axe, Eugene.
 
2012-07-13 12:53:17 PM  

Deucednuisance: Joe Blowme: Not to mention just plain retarded

Careful with that axe, Eugene.


a very fine song indeed
 
2012-07-13 12:54:18 PM  

Cyno01: Mr Guy: Kazan: THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Ok, not a poll tax, how about just outright voter suppression? What if say a state passed a voter ID law, closed DMVs in areas with the highest amount of people who would need to get an ID and also instruct DMV workers not to inform citizens that the ID to vote is free...

Oh wait, WI did that.


I hate to ask, but do you have a citation for such a claim? Is there possibly an unrelated reason a DMV was closed? Was there another DMV in the same area and so maybe you are making a strawman argument? I seriously doubt DMVs were closed in areas without another branch being within the same geographical area...so basically instead of a 5 minute bus ride, it was a 15 minute bus ride. As to instructing DMV workers to not inform citizens...seeing as how most DMV employees are union employees, I seriously doubt this claim.



give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

When its policy not to tell people they can get it for free?


the classic no personal responsibility answer..."No I didn't ask if the ID was fee, but...but...but they didn't tell me it was free...now I has a sad"
 
2012-07-13 12:54:22 PM  

WhyKnot: Theaetetus: Notice there's a subtle shift in context before Wiki is mentioned in the article:

Nice try, Subs.

to be fair, the 'expert' is testifying as an expert (someone with specialized knowledge of a particular field such that his/her knowledge is beyond that of the average person)...his book is going to be a part of his knowledge base with establishes him as an expert... proving his book is basically a load of crap, gathered from unsubstantiated data....well yeah, that sort of shoots a hole in his testimony and raises serious questions about his 'expert' status in the subject matter he is testifying about.


Really? Have you checked the Wiki pages he mentions in his book? Have you followed their citations? No?
Then how can you say that it's "gathered from unsubstantiated data"? In fact, your entire complaint here seems to be based on unsubstantiated hearsay in this already-debunked article. Doesn't that raise serious questions about the validity of your criticism?

Frankly, it's more than a bit hypocritical of you to be calling things "unsubstantiated" when you, yourself, have never confirmed that they actually are.
 
2012-07-13 12:57:30 PM  

Theaetetus: WhyKnot: Theaetetus: Notice there's a subtle shift in context before Wiki is mentioned in the article:

Nice try, Subs.

to be fair, the 'expert' is testifying as an expert (someone with specialized knowledge of a particular field such that his/her knowledge is beyond that of the average person)...his book is going to be a part of his knowledge base with establishes him as an expert... proving his book is basically a load of crap, gathered from unsubstantiated data....well yeah, that sort of shoots a hole in his testimony and raises serious questions about his 'expert' status in the subject matter he is testifying about.

Really? Have you checked the Wiki pages he mentions in his book? Have you followed their citations? No?
Then how can you say that it's "gathered from unsubstantiated data"? In fact, your entire complaint here seems to be based on unsubstantiated hearsay in this already-debunked article. Doesn't that raise serious questions about the validity of your criticism?

Frankly, it's more than a bit hypocritical of you to be calling things "unsubstantiated" when you, yourself, have never confirmed that they actually are.


You cant even source wiki in a college paper so his citing them is laughable.
 
2012-07-13 12:58:08 PM  

BitwiseShift: Poll tax of $140.


Jim? Jim Crow, is that you? Damn, boy, I haven't heard a peep out of you since 2008. You been busy keepin' the colored down in Alabama or somethin'?
 
2012-07-13 01:00:58 PM  

Cyno01: Mr Guy: Kazan: THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Poll tax, grok it.



Anyone claiming positive identification is the same as a poll tax is being pretty reactionary.

Ok, not a poll tax, how about just outright voter suppression? What if say a state passed a voter ID law, closed DMVs in areas with the highest amount of people who would need to get an ID and also instruct DMV workers not to inform citizens that the ID to vote is free...

Oh wait, WI did that.


give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

When its policy not to tell people they can get it for free?


So you'd be okay with just prosecute people with intent to abuse the law, and quit claiming the law in inherently bad.

Good, then we agree. It's not abusive to require IDs, but states can be abusive with implementing it. Fight the abuses.
 
2012-07-13 01:02:18 PM  

Theaetetus: WhyKnot: Theaetetus: Notice there's a subtle shift in context before Wiki is mentioned in the article:

Nice try, Subs.

to be fair, the 'expert' is testifying as an expert (someone with specialized knowledge of a particular field such that his/her knowledge is beyond that of the average person)...his book is going to be a part of his knowledge base with establishes him as an expert... proving his book is basically a load of crap, gathered from unsubstantiated data....well yeah, that sort of shoots a hole in his testimony and raises serious questions about his 'expert' status in the subject matter he is testifying about.

Really? Have you checked the Wiki pages he mentions in his book? Have you followed their citations? No?
Then how can you say that it's "gathered from unsubstantiated data"? In fact, your entire complaint here seems to be based on unsubstantiated hearsay in this already-debunked article. Doesn't that raise serious questions about the validity of your criticism?

Frankly, it's more than a bit hypocritical of you to be calling things "unsubstantiated" when you, yourself, have never confirmed that they actually are.


would't wikipedia have been his secondary source, meaning that he should have looked through wikipedia, accessed their source material and then siting their links as his primary source...meaning that his 'facts' wouldn't have come from wikipedia?

Hey, if you want to believe that wiki articles are 'facts', go for it.
 
2012-07-13 01:05:08 PM  
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-07-13 01:06:55 PM  

Joe Blowme: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 400x303]


exactly!

Why are people opposed to preventing voter fraud?
 
2012-07-13 01:07:27 PM  

Terrified Asexual Forcemeat: Jesus, first we had to free the slaves, now we have to let them vote for free. These disenfranchised minorities just want free stuff.


That's it. I finally understand what Derpville hates about minorities. Derpville loves it's stupid. It's dumbness. It has gone to great lengths and great expense to build up that much stupidity.

And all of these groups are insisting on free-dumb. It's class warfare. It's the redistribution of stupidity.
 
2012-07-13 01:11:16 PM  

WhyKnot: Cyno01: Mr Guy: Kazan: THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Ok, not a poll tax, how about just outright voter suppression? What if say a state passed a voter ID law, closed DMVs in areas with the highest amount of people who would need to get an ID and also instruct DMV workers not to inform citizens that the ID to vote is free...

Oh wait, WI did that.

I hate to ask, but do you have a citation for such a claim? Is there possibly an unrelated reason a DMV was closed? Was there another DMV in the same area and so maybe you are making a strawman argument? I seriously doubt DMVs were closed in areas without another branch being within the same geographical area...so basically instead of a 5 minute bus ride, it was a 15 minute bus ride. As to instructing DMV workers to not inform citizens...seeing as how most DMV employees are union employees, I seriously doubt this claim.



give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

When its policy not to tell people they can get it for free?

the classic no personal responsibility answer..."No I didn't ask if the ID was fee, but...but...but they didn't tell me it was free...now I has a sad"


No, but its a little different when a directive is handed down telling employees to specifically NOT tell people about it.

DMV Closings in democratic districts.

Not informing people voting IDs are free.

It seems unbelievable because it is so out there, but its actually happening, this sort of stuff makes you start picturing the WI GOP twirling a Snidely Whiplash like mustache.
 
2012-07-13 01:11:36 PM  

Kazan: give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

because it isn't actually free

Kazan: "we created a free ID, but we closed your only place to get it within a 3 hours drive"

"... so you have to take a day off work [which you cannot afford] and drive 6 hours..."


where is this person with a supposed 6hr drive? Why couldn't the DoJ find them when you could?
 
2012-07-13 01:19:31 PM  

give me doughnuts: It's too easy to be eligible to vote. All you have to do is be born in this country and manage to stay alive for 18 years.

I had a dog that managed to do that.


I expect it voted Democrat at least once then...
 
2012-07-13 01:20:34 PM  

JackieRabbit: BitwiseShift: Poll tax of $140.

Jim? Jim Crow, is that you? Damn, boy, I haven't heard a peep out of you since 2008. You been busy keepin' the colored down in Alabama or somethin'?


WHO YOU CALLIN' BOY?!?!?!?!
 
2012-07-13 01:22:34 PM  

Cyno01: WhyKnot: Cyno01: Mr Guy: Kazan: THEY DON'T HAVE IT.


No, but its a little different when a directive is handed down telling employees to specifically NOT tell people about it.

DMV Closings in democratic districts.

Not informing people voting IDs are free.

It seems unbelievable because it is so out there, but its actually happening, this sort of stuff makes you start picturing the WI GOP twirling a Snidely Whiplash like mustache.


Thank you.

The not telling people about the free voter IDs is shady...no going to lie. If the issue is about making sure people have the proper ID, there is zero reason to tell employees not to tell people about it.

With respect to the closing of offices, I am less inclined to find shady dealings. In a state that is actually trying to reduce it expenditures (unlike CA where we are just going to attempt to tax our way to a balanced budget), the closures are economically motivated...hell, many of the sites are "temporary sites".

I really dislike politics...shady shady people on both sides...turning community against community.
 
2012-07-13 01:23:14 PM  

Cyno01: WhyKnot: Cyno01: Mr Guy: Kazan: THEY DON'T HAVE IT.

Ok, not a poll tax, how about just outright voter suppression? What if say a state passed a voter ID law, closed DMVs in areas with the highest amount of people who would need to get an ID and also instruct DMV workers not to inform citizens that the ID to vote is free...

Oh wait, WI did that.

I hate to ask, but do you have a citation for such a claim? Is there possibly an unrelated reason a DMV was closed? Was there another DMV in the same area and so maybe you are making a strawman argument? I seriously doubt DMVs were closed in areas without another branch being within the same geographical area...so basically instead of a 5 minute bus ride, it was a 15 minute bus ride. As to instructing DMV workers to not inform citizens...seeing as how most DMV employees are union employees, I seriously doubt this claim.



give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

When its policy not to tell people they can get it for free?

the classic no personal responsibility answer..."No I didn't ask if the ID was fee, but...but...but they didn't tell me it was free...now I has a sad"

No, but its a little different when a directive is handed down telling employees to specifically NOT tell people about it.

DMV Closings in democratic districts.

Not informing people voting IDs are free.

It seems unbelievable because it is so out there, but its actually happening, this sort of stuff makes you start picturing the WI GOP twirling a Snidely Whiplash like mustache.


That article says the next DMV is only 30 minutes away and they extended the hour.

Got something better?

This seems like a case of Wiki inception. Where a problem exists and cited because it keeps getting repeated.
 
2012-07-13 01:29:42 PM  
Here's the truth: There has never been a documented case of widespread voter fraud committed by citizens at the polling place. All election fraud is committed away from the polls by politicians and election officials. We often here the stories about how many dead people voted for the Daleys in Chicago, but we seem to have forgotten that those ballots stuffed into the box after the polls closed.

Think about it. Would you waste YOUR time to vote under someone else's identity? I know I couldn't be bothered and I have never met anyone who could.
 
2012-07-13 01:33:30 PM  
The good news is, maybe we can start removing Texans from the House of Representatives, and also reduce the amount of electoral votes they have:

". But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State."
 
2012-07-13 01:45:51 PM  

stonicus: Voting requires me to go to the voting poll... this takes either gas to put in the car, or food in my belly so I can walk, and in essence, amounts to a poll tax. They should just call me and ask for my vote... which requires me to own a phone and there a phone poll tax. *sigh* I just can't win.


"And even if they send a man around to my door, i have to own a house or a mailbox or a tent flap first, and I have to live long enough to vote, so feeding and surviving the harsh Texan elements cost me money, It's a TAX!"

Honestly, the first three posters on this thread made me think that they were college interns paid the minimum wage by some party purely for the purposes of making every political discussion look like the other side was always wrong and their party was full of saints struggling vainly to hold off the ravenous maw of evil other party.
 
2012-07-13 01:47:03 PM  

Mrbogey: Kazan: give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

because it isn't actually free

Kazan: "we created a free ID, but we closed your only place to get it within a 3 hours drive"

"... so you have to take a day off work [which you cannot afford] and drive 6 hours..."

where is this person with a supposed 6hr drive? Why couldn't the DoJ find them when you could?


in Wisconsin


WhyKnot: CA where we are just going to attempt to tax our way to a balanced budget


part of california's issues is insufficient taxation. voter initiative to limit taxation, the a bunch of voter initiative mandated spending. you cannot have both.
 
2012-07-13 01:51:25 PM  

WhyKnot: Theaetetus: WhyKnot: Theaetetus: Notice there's a subtle shift in context before Wiki is mentioned in the article:

Nice try, Subs.

to be fair, the 'expert' is testifying as an expert (someone with specialized knowledge of a particular field such that his/her knowledge is beyond that of the average person)...his book is going to be a part of his knowledge base with establishes him as an expert... proving his book is basically a load of crap, gathered from unsubstantiated data....well yeah, that sort of shoots a hole in his testimony and raises serious questions about his 'expert' status in the subject matter he is testifying about.

Really? Have you checked the Wiki pages he mentions in his book? Have you followed their citations? No?
Then how can you say that it's "gathered from unsubstantiated data"? In fact, your entire complaint here seems to be based on unsubstantiated hearsay in this already-debunked article. Doesn't that raise serious questions about the validity of your criticism?

Frankly, it's more than a bit hypocritical of you to be calling things "unsubstantiated" when you, yourself, have never confirmed that they actually are.

would't wikipedia have been his secondary source, meaning that he should have looked through wikipedia, accessed their source material and then siting their links as his primary source...meaning that his 'facts' wouldn't have come from wikipedia?

Hey, if you want to believe that wiki articles are 'facts', go for it.


Wouldn't it have been nice if you actually read my post, rather than looking like an idiot?
 
2012-07-13 01:52:56 PM  
More importantly, WhyKnot, you're continuing with your hypocrisy. You have never read his book. You have never looked at his list of sources or footnotes. You haven't looked at the wiki pages that the article mentions. And yet you're whining about stuff being unsubstantiated.
'Nuff said.
 
2012-07-13 01:53:41 PM  

caramba421: The good news is, maybe we can start removing Texans from the House of Representatives, and also reduce the amount of electoral votes they have:

". But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State."


But only three-fifths for the colored and the wetbacks, right?
 
2012-07-13 01:56:49 PM  
I am an expert, just let me Google that issue - because everything on the interwebs is true
 
2012-07-13 01:58:12 PM  

give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?


I HAD TO SPEND $40 IN GAS TO GET A "FREE" ID. I HAD TO TAKE AN UNPAID DAY OFF WORK TO GET A "FREE" ID.

stop being such a dick, and accept this bullshiat for what it is.
 
2012-07-13 02:04:33 PM  

WhyKnot: I really dislike politics...shady shady people on both sides...turning community against community.


I completely agree with this statement. I have no problem with differing philosophies, goals, expectations for the future, etc., but why do both sides always have to run with an "all or nothing" approach to getting things done? Why can't people accept that things are never truly black or white? Compromise. Isn't that what an educated government is supposed to be about?
 
2012-07-13 02:06:29 PM  

vudutek: give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

I HAD TO SPEND $40 IN GAS TO GET A "FREE" ID. I HAD TO TAKE AN UNPAID DAY OFF WORK TO GET A "FREE" ID.

stop being such a dick, and accept this bullshiat for what it is.


Stop being a moran and admit you don't know what the hell a "poll tax" actually is.
 
2012-07-13 02:07:39 PM  

Theaetetus: More importantly, WhyKnot, you're continuing with your hypocrisy. You have never read his book. You have never looked at his list of sources or footnotes. You haven't looked at the wiki pages that the article mentions. And yet you're whining about stuff being unsubstantiated.
'Nuff said.


From the article:

"In fact, Kousser admitted that he got many of the 'facts' used to buttress these bizarre claims from 'Wikipedia,'"

Why would he say wikipedia if actually pulled from the primary? I am just working from what the article said.
 
2012-07-13 02:09:03 PM  

vudutek: give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

I HAD TO SPEND $40 IN GAS TO GET A "FREE" ID. I HAD TO TAKE AN UNPAID DAY OFF WORK TO GET A "FREE" ID.

stop being such a dick, and accept this bullshiat for what it is.


If you're burning gas to drive to get the ID, then you already have all the ID you need to vote.
If you have a job, then you already have all the ID you need to vote.

Once again, stop being such a moran.
 
2012-07-13 02:10:25 PM  

Kazan: Mrbogey: Kazan: give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?


part of california's issues is insufficient taxation. voter initiative to limit taxation, the a bunch of voter initiative mandated spending. you cannot have both.


I hear ya. Our problem is also a legislature that is in the pocket of the public employee unions...but let's not have that discussion now.
 
2012-07-13 02:16:05 PM  

give me doughnuts: vudutek: give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

I HAD TO SPEND $40 IN GAS TO GET A "FREE" ID. I HAD TO TAKE AN UNPAID DAY OFF WORK TO GET A "FREE" ID.

stop being such a dick, and accept this bullshiat for what it is.

If you're burning gas to drive to get the ID, then you already have all the ID you need to vote.
If you have a job, then you already have all the ID you need to vote.

Once again, stop being such a moran.


I would offer him something along the line of "spending $40 on a bus ticket to get the ID" (which I'm not sure if ID is required for post-9/11 bus travel), but having a job should certainly cover the ID requirement. Of course, if he's getting paid under the table to avoid the ID requirement, then he should be able to easily afford the bus ticket from money that he didn't spend paying his taxes.

I'm pretty sure that he's just in the mood to be argumentative, though.
 
2012-07-13 02:20:51 PM  

Theaetetus: More importantly, WhyKnot, you're continuing with your hypocrisy. You have never read his book. You have never looked at his list of sources or footnotes. You haven't looked at the wiki pages that the article mentions. And yet you're whining about stuff being unsubstantiated.
'Nuff said.


Why are you white knighting the DoJ? Oh I know, because Holder and Obama are democrats.

Let's not worry about the feds refusal to enforce boarders (yes I understand bush did the same, and I didn't like it then).....that Holder doesn't care about actual voter intimidation by the Black Panthers...let's not worry about the Fast and Furious gun program...let's not talk about the actual hate speech put forth by democrats against republican ...let's not worry about the doubt standard associated with criticism of sitting presidents depending upon their skin color and political affiliation....no, we should absolutely be worries about states saying that people should provide a photo ID to vote.
 
2012-07-13 02:40:10 PM  
Wow, liberal butthurt is strong.

Liberals are dumb, end of story.
 
2012-07-13 02:40:24 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: feds could not produce a single person, or provide the name of a single person, who will legitimately be unable to vote due to voter i.d.

They don't really have to.


Yeah, what's with that silly "evidence" thingy that's supposed to be presented in courts anyway.

Among the people who the DOJ listed as 'lacking the required documentation needed to vote' are Former President George W. Bush, San Antonio State Senator Leticia Van de Putte, and Licia Ellis, who's husband, Houston state Senator Rodney Ellis, on Wednesday blasted the voter i.d. law as 'just like the racist murder of James Byrd' who was dragged to death in east Texas in 1998.

Oh, you mean THAT evidence. I like your style. I encourage you to keep it up. *snert*
 
2012-07-13 02:46:36 PM  

JackieRabbit: caramba421: The good news is, maybe we can start removing Texans from the House of Representatives, and also reduce the amount of electoral votes they have:

". But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State."

But only three-fifths for the colored and the wetbacks, right?


I adhere strictly to Originalism. Since Mexicans aren't in the Constitution explicitly, they don't exist.
 
2012-07-13 02:52:10 PM  

Kazan: Mrbogey: Kazan: give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

because it isn't actually free

Kazan: "we created a free ID, but we closed your only place to get it within a 3 hours drive"

"... so you have to take a day off work [which you cannot afford] and drive 6 hours..."

where is this person with a supposed 6hr drive? Why couldn't the DoJ find them when you could?

in Wisconsin.


Who?
 
2012-07-13 02:52:57 PM  

WhyKnot: I am just working from what the article said.


In other words, your post is:

WhyKnot: a load of crap, gathered from unsubstantiated data

 
2012-07-13 02:56:29 PM  
It seems to me that since no voter fraud seems to happen by voters that the necessity for a voter ID is pointless--seriously, are there any cases?

ID is not necessary for many things in this world. If you don't drive, you don't need a license. If you don't have a job, you don't need an ID, and there are many of unemployed people right now. You don't need a bank account, so you don't need an ID to open one. I didn't have a birth certificate until I was 16.

You don't need an ID to exist, even if it's improbable that people don't have any, and if the state is going to require you to have an ID to vote, they better make damn certain that it's the easiest process ever, since anything else will potentially disenfranchise people. Hell, they should do everything short of coming to your door.

It doesn't even matter if it doesn't actually, at the time, disenfranchise anyone. It only matters if it could, potentially.
 
2012-07-13 03:05:22 PM  
OKAY FARKERS, HERE COME THE FACTS:

There are between 12 and 20 million illegal aliens in this country, and most of them vote.

"-----citation needed!"

I don't need one citation, I'll give you 3.4 million; go to google and key in "illegal alien voting;" you will find about 3+ million references.

Since Obama beat McCain by 69 million to 59 million, it is a fair shot, we take away the illegal alien vote and it would be a mighty tight race. This year's election promises to be even tighter, so he is doing all he can to fatten up the rolls with people likely to vote for him.

"Poll tax---" my ass! Nobody survives in this country without documents, and no one suggests minorities are less likely to drive than anyone else. People in subsidized housing have cars; homeless people on the street have cars in many cases.

It's all just a scam to steal the election.

And the suckers fall for it more often than not.
 
2012-07-13 03:09:21 PM  

austerity101: It seems to me that since no voter fraud seems to happen by voters that the necessity for a voter ID is pointless--seriously, are there any cases?

ID is not necessary for many things in this world. If you don't drive, you don't need a license. If you don't have a job, you don't need an ID, and there are many of unemployed people right now. You don't need a bank account, so you don't need an ID to open one. I didn't have a birth certificate until I was 16.

You don't need an ID to exist, even if it's improbable that people don't have any, and if the state is going to require you to have an ID to vote, they better make damn certain that it's the easiest process ever, since anything else will potentially disenfranchise people. Hell, they should do everything short of coming to your door.

It doesn't even matter if it doesn't actually, at the time, disenfranchise anyone. It only matters if it could, potentially.


For the whole "this never happens" crowd.

Students are more straightforward. At Marquette University in Milwaukee, where the campus newspaper polled 1,000 of them, 174 said they voted two, three or four times.

One told The Times he voted twice for Bush--once at a polling place on the Marquette campus and then by absentee ballot in Florida, where he would have been among those who gave Bush his whisper-thin margin.

"It's easy to vote more than once," the student said. "No one seems to care."
 
2012-07-13 03:11:25 PM  
 
2012-07-13 03:16:34 PM  

Theaetetus: WhyKnot: I am just working from what the article said.

In other words, your post is:
WhyKnot: a load of crap, gathered from unsubstantiated data



expert witness for Attorney General Holder, Kousser also testified:

"I tell my students not to trust Wikipedia. I should not have."

Trial Transcript, Tuesday, July 10, 2012, Vol. II at p. 99-100
 
2012-07-13 03:20:02 PM  

austerity101:

You don't need an ID to exist, even if it's improbable that people don't have any, and if the state is going to require you to have an ID to vote, they better make damn certain that it's the easiest process ever, since anything else will potentially disenfranchise people. Hell, they should do everything short of coming to your door.


The only items required to get the FREE voter ID card in Texas are your voter registration card and a social security card (which is free to obtain). In order to get a voter registration card you need to have a Driver License (valid ID for voting) or a Social Security Number. So if you are registered to vote, you have all the requirements needed to obtain a FREE voter ID card.

It doesn't even matter if it doesn't actually, at the time, disenfranchise anyone. It only matters if it could, potentially.

Every time I've gone to vote, the workers at the poll have had the voter list sitting open on the table in front of them. I merely walk up, give them my name and address and they flip to the correct page where I sign (with no matching signature present). All I would need to do is give my neighbor's name or read one of the names from the open roll and I've just potentially disenfranchised that person. If they do decide to vote as well then they have to file a provisional ballot and show ID to prove their vote is legitimate and mine is not. That's why we need Voter ID laws. After all, "it doesn't even matter if it doesn't actually, at the time, disenfranchise anyone. It only matters if it could, potentially.
 
2012-07-13 03:23:47 PM  

olddinosaur: I don't need one citation, I'll give you 3.4 million; go to google and key in "illegal alien voting;" you will find about 3+ million references.


I just did this. After 12 pages, I gave up. I didn't find one single reputable source to support your ludicrous claim. Not one. All of the hits were from right wing "news" and propaganda sites.

Tell us this: if illegal aliens are voting by the millions, why is it that every single election we have anymore is so close? If illegals were out in force voting on election day, because they tend to vote Democrat almost exclusively, Democrats would win with good margins.

A real fact: the Bush administration was "convinced" that illegal voter fraud was rampant and instructed the Attorney General to aggressively go after and prosecute people voting illegally. In the three years (2002 through 2005) before the DoJ decided that this was a waste of its time, it found only 14 non-citizens that voted illegally. In each case, the individuals were confused when they were interrogated and truly did not know that they were allowed to vote.

And try this from a report from the Brennen Center for Justice, which had been asked to study the issue:

"We are not aware of any documented cases in which individual noncitizens have either intentionally registered to vote or voted while knowing that they were ineligible. Given that the penalty (not only criminal prosecution, but deportation) is so severe, and the payoff (one incremental vote) is so minimal for any individual voter, it makes sense that extremely few noncitizens would attempt to vote, knowing that doing so is illegal.

Although there are a few recorded examples in which noncitizens have apparently registered or voted, investigators have concluded that they were likely not aware that doing so was improper. In one highly publicized case, for example, noncitizens were given voter registration forms by a group helping them through the naturalization process, immediately after successfully completing citizenship interviews with federal officials and receiving letters beginning "Congratulations, your application for citizenship has been approved." Though the actual swearing-in ceremonies were still up to 90 days away, these individuals most likely mistakenly thought it their obligation and privilege to complete the paperwork, and did not intentionally fabricate their citizenship status in front of federal officials who knew that they were noncitizens.

Far more common than these incidents of noncitizen voting are allegations of noncitizen voting that prove wholly unfounded. These claims are often premised on matching lists of voters from one place to another, but as with each of the examples above, upon closer inspection, the match process shows error. The interpretation may be flawed, as when two list entries under the same name indicate different individuals. Or the lists themselves may be flawed, with an individual marked due to a clerical error as voting when she did not in fact cast a ballot.

Government citizenship records - as the government itself acknowledges - are also replete with errors or incomplete information. Naturalization documentation may find its way into the government files slowly, or not at all, leaving outdated or inaccurate information for investigators looking for fraud. And this, in turn, leads to flawed accusations that noncitizens have been voting, when the voters in question have in fact become fully naturalized American citizens."

Those claiming that illegals are voting and ruining elections are either full of shiat or easily manipulated by right wing propagandists.
 
2012-07-13 03:25:17 PM  

rugman11: austerity101:

You don't need an ID to exist, even if it's improbable that people don't have any, and if the state is going to require you to have an ID to vote, they better make damn certain that it's the easiest process ever, since anything else will potentially disenfranchise people. Hell, they should do everything short of coming to your door.

The only items required to get the FREE voter ID card in Texas are your voter registration card and a social security card (which is free to obtain). In order to get a voter registration card you need to have a Driver License (valid ID for voting) or a Social Security Number. So if you are registered to vote, you have all the requirements needed to obtain a FREE voter ID card.

It doesn't even matter if it doesn't actually, at the time, disenfranchise anyone. It only matters if it could, potentially.

Every time I've gone to vote, the workers at the poll have had the voter list sitting open on the table in front of them. I merely walk up, give them my name and address and they flip to the correct page where I sign (with no matching signature present). All I would need to do is give my neighbor's name or read one of the names from the open roll and I've just potentially disenfranchised that person. If they do decide to vote as well then they have to file a provisional ballot and show ID to prove their vote is legitimate and mine is not. That's why we need Voter ID laws. After all, "it doesn't even matter if it doesn't actually, at the time, disenfranchise anyone. It only matters if it could, potentially.


This X100. The ending is probably the most brilliant hook I've seen yet.
 
2012-07-13 03:29:56 PM  
I can actually think of two people off the top of my head who will be disenfranchised by the Voter ID law. One is my mother, and it's her fault entirely (her DL is expired and she can't get an ID because of outstanding warrants for tickets she not only didn't pay but didn't make arrangements to perform community service or something similar). The other is a friend of the family who was born at home back in the '30s or so and never issued a birth certificate, and was never able to get a SS card in large part because of that.

Of course, they're both white, so they don't fit the narrative anyway.

On a more general note, what prompts cries of disenfranchisement around here can get pretty ridiculous. During the midterm elections, there was one polling station (I think at a community center) that closed half their parking lot for repaving during early voting. Cue outcry. What made it particularly idiotic was that the polling place was located in a part of town where most people don't drive anyway.
 
2012-07-13 03:41:33 PM  

give me doughnuts: Stop being a moran and admit you don't know what the hell a "poll tax" actually is.


I said : "Careful with that axe, Eugene"!

WhyKnot: .that Holder doesn't care about actual voter intimidation by the Black Panthers


Oh, dear. You are undone.

JohnAnnArbor: Students are more straightforward. At Marquette University in Milwaukee, where the campus newspaper polled 1,000 of them, 174 said they voted two, three or four times.

One told The Times he voted twice for Bush--once at a polling place on the Marquette campus and then by absentee ballot in Florida, where he would have been among those who gave Bush his whisper-thin margin.

"It's easy to vote more than once," the student said. "No one seems to care."


How would an ID law have prevented this?
 
2012-07-13 03:49:45 PM  

give me doughnuts: vudutek: give me doughnuts: Answer the question: How is a free ID a "tax"?

I HAD TO SPEND $40 IN GAS TO GET A "FREE" ID. I HAD TO TAKE AN UNPAID DAY OFF WORK TO GET A "FREE" ID.

stop being such a dick, and accept this bullshiat for what it is.

If you're burning gas to drive to get the ID, then you already have all the ID you need to vote.
If you have a job, then you already have all the ID you need to vote.

Once again, stop being such a moran.


I think the problem here is that people have latched onto the most well-known of the Jim Crow laws, i.e. the Poll Tax, when it's not really the best equivalency to use. Yes, there's probably some cost involved on a second- or third-removed way (take a day off of work, etc.) but it's not precisely a tax.

A better equivalency to use would be that of the Literacy Test. It may not cost anything directly, but the design of the law is specifically aimed at stopping a certain subset of people from voting by imposing a requirement which is unduly difficult for that subset (e.g. get to the DMV when you have no car to use and have to work on all the days DMV is open) while being easy on the established voters.

Basically, this is "Literacy Tests 2.0". That's why it'll be struck down.
 
2012-07-13 04:11:35 PM  

JackieRabbit: Tell us this: if illegal aliens are voting by the millions, why is it that every single election we have anymore is so close?


They can't read?
 
2012-07-13 04:21:05 PM  

StaleCoffee: JackieRabbit: Tell us this: if illegal aliens are voting by the millions, why is it that every single election we have anymore is so close?

They can't read?


Perhaps it could be that they would be loses that otherwise put it into the W column because of illegals? How else do you figure a party that represents 1/4 of the views if the nation is beating out an opposing view representing 1/2 the nation(these numbers are rounded mind you)? Other than laziness to go to the poll.
 
2012-07-13 05:01:23 PM  

WhyKnot: Theaetetus: Notice there's a subtle shift in context before Wiki is mentioned in the article:


Nice try, Subs.

to be fair, the 'expert' is testifying as an expert (someone with specialized knowledge of a particular field such that his/her knowledge is beyond that of the average person)...his book is going to be a part of his knowledge base with establishes him as an expert... proving his book is basically a load of crap, gathered from unsubstantiated data....well yeah, that sort of shoots a hole in his testimony and raises serious questions about his 'expert' status in the subject matter he is testifying about.

I am really tired of hearing about how racist the right is; seriously the racist tag is now an acceptable talking point on anything the right tries to do. STOP ACTING LIKE A VICTIM.

What is wrong with being required to establish you are who you say you are with respect to being able to vote?


In this instance, the right isn't being racist. They're being discriminatory.

Against likely democratic voters.

/Karl Rove has the "numbers"
//As does "Thor Herne"
///Look up that second name and learn what astroturf is all about.
 
2012-07-13 05:07:18 PM  

olddinosaur: OKAY FARKERS, HERE COME THE FACTS:

There are between 12 and 20 million illegal aliens in this country, and most of them vote.

"-----citation needed!"

I don't need one citation, I'll give you 3.4 million; go to google and key in "illegal alien voting;" you will find about 3+ million references.

Since Obama beat McCain by 69 million to 59 million, it is a fair shot, we take away the illegal alien vote and it would be a mighty tight race. This year's election promises to be even tighter, so he is doing all he can to fatten up the rolls with people likely to vote for him.

"Poll tax---" my ass! Nobody survives in this country without documents, and no one suggests minorities are less likely to drive than anyone else. People in subsidized housing have cars; homeless people on the street have cars in many cases.

It's all just a scam to steal the election.

And the suckers fall for it more often than not.


3+ million references on google just means 3+ million instances of Right Wing Echo Chamber Butt Hurt about an issue that no law enforcement entity in the nation has actually been able to document in any meaningful fashion.
 
2012-07-13 05:30:56 PM  

rugman11: Marcus Aurelius: Anyone defending poll taxes is anti-American and/or racist and/or a complete asshole. Unfortunately that include a ton of people in this country, which explains a lot.

I'm still on the fence on these laws (though I live in a state that requires me produce ID to vote), but it sounds like Texas is providing free IDs to anybody who can provide a birth certificate, voter registration card, or Social Security card. In order to register to vote, residents must provide either a Driver License number or Social Security number. So anybody who registers to vote should have either a photo ID or a Social Security card (which is free to obtain). So anybody who has registered to vote should also have the documentation needed to acquire a free voter ID.


Actually, Texas DPS does not give out free photo IDs unless you're a veteran. Until last week, my job involved providing information and support for people trying to get Texas driver licenses, so I'm acutely familiar with both the ID requirements and the wide variety of reasons someone might not have any of the required ID: Here's a link to the requirements to apply for a Texas ID card:

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/DriverLicense/applyforID.htm

Also, Texas doesn't accept social security cards as a primary or secondary form of ID:

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/DriverLicense/identificationrequirement s. htm

(Also, you actually do need an official government-issued ID to get a social security card; they changed the requirements a while back.)

And you can currently register to vote without any form of ID:

http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/pamphlets/largepamp.shtml

Voter registrations do not expire; once you register to vote, you remain registered to vote, and you don't have to re-register unless you move out of the county in which you currently reside. You don't have to have an official state ID to register to vote in Texas -- I registered without one, and showed a utility bill the first time I voted here.

There are any number of reasons someone might not have an official Texas DL/ID. Maybe they're so poor they can't afford the $16/$24 application fee, in which case the story ends right there. But that's not a huge amount of money, so sure, that's going to be pretty uncommon.

Other possibilities -- maybe they never had one, maybe they lost it, maybe it expired more than two years ago, maybe they got pulled for DUI and it was confiscated, maybe their wallet was stolen. If they also don't have any of the forms of photo ID that the DPS accepts, they *must* have one of the following three things:

- Original or certified copy of a birth certificate issued by the appropriate State Bureau of Vital Statistics or equivalent agency from a U.S. state, U.S. territory, the District of Columbia, or a Canadian province. A birth record issued by a hospital is not acceptable under this category.

- Original or certified copy of U.S. Dept. of State Certification of Birth Abroad (issued to U. S. citizens born abroad) (Form FS-240, DS-1350, or FS-545)

- Original or certified copy of court order with name and date of birth (DOB) indicating an official change of name and/or gender from a U.S. state, U.S. territory, the District of Columbia, or Canadian province

At this point, anyone who can't get a certified copy of one of those documents is screwed. Most people haven't had sex changes or legally changed their names, and there are plenty of reasons someone might not be able to get a certified copy of their birth certificate if they didn't already have one.

First off, maybe they can't afford that either, but again, it's not all that expensive. Even if they can afford it, if they don't have the required ID to request one and they don't have an immediate relative (husband/wife, child, parent or grandparent) who can request one on their behalf, there's no quick way to get one. (Even if you do have ID, it can take a while if you're trying to get one from out of state. For example, you can order a Texas birth certificate online and pay extra for overnight delivery, but the state takes a *minimum* of 10-15 days to process the request before it ships the certificate. The only way to get a Texas birth certificate quickly is to go to the vital records office in person.)

A surprising number of people -- especially if they're elderly, indigent, Native American, or were born on a farm out in the middle of nowhere -- just plain never had their birth officially recorded. Ordinarily they'd be able to get a birth certificate issued -- eventually -- but if their parents are deceased and the state can't find any record of their birth, they're in trouble. Lots of Hispanic and Asian people were born in the US to parents who weren't citizens; and I talked to plenty of people who were born at home so there were no hospital records; others who found out the hospital had closed years ago and no one knew what had happened to the records. One woman found out they couldn't verify her existence because the county courthouse had burned down before things were computerized.

I don't have a problem with requiring ID to vote (though honestly, why don't they just put your damn photo on the voter ID card?), what I have a problem with is the fact that the states pulling this crap are wasting legislative time on a non-issue. Non-citizens are not turning out to vote in droves, and forged voter registration cards are not a widespread issue. It's a Republican smokescreen, pure and simple, intended to trick credulous voters into thinking they're actually doing anything whatsoever other than sucking corporate cock.

/Pay no attention to the legislators behind the curtain!
 
2012-07-13 05:58:08 PM  
Let's not forget the law itself is based on fraud. Bush era DOJ evidence gathering showed that there were 87 cases "nationwide", during the last election, and most of them were simple mistakes. To make likely Demoncrat voters go through hassles to vote is unconstitutional
 
2012-07-13 07:02:04 PM  

iheartscotch: // is you is, or is you ain't my constituency?


Ah do believe that's "constitchency".

/don't want Fop goddammit
//i'm a Dapper Dan man
 
2012-07-13 10:35:54 PM  

WhyKnot: Theaetetus: WhyKnot: I am just working from what the article said.

In other words, your post is:
WhyKnot: a load of crap, gathered from unsubstantiated data


expert witness for Attorney General Holder, Kousser also testified:

"I tell my students not to trust Wikipedia. I should not have."

Trial Transcript, Tuesday, July 10, 2012, Vol. II at p. 99-100


Amusing! Seriously, if you actually start checking the citation sources for a Wikipedia article (depending on the topic), you'll be surprised how often those links take you to dead sites or sites of "questionable integrity."
 
2012-07-13 11:58:36 PM  
Professor Stephen Ansolabehere? Did he perchance present his findings on Dethklock to the Tribunal?
 
2012-07-14 12:34:55 AM  

X-boxershorts: olddinosaur: OKAY FARKERS, HERE COME THE FACTS:

There are between 12 and 20 million illegal aliens in this country, and most of them vote.

"-----citation needed!"

I don't need one citation, I'll give you 3.4 million; go to google and key in "illegal alien voting;" you will find about 3+ million references.

Since Obama beat McCain by 69 million to 59 million, it is a fair shot, we take away the illegal alien vote and it would be a mighty tight race. This year's election promises to be even tighter, so he is doing all he can to fatten up the rolls with people likely to vote for him.

"Poll tax---" my ass! Nobody survives in this country without documents, and no one suggests minorities are less likely to drive than anyone else. People in subsidized housing have cars; homeless people on the street have cars in many cases.

It's all just a scam to steal the election.

And the suckers fall for it more often than not.

3+ million references on google just means 3+ million instances of Right Wing Echo Chamber Butt Hurt about an issue that no law enforcement entity in the nation has actually been able to document in any meaningful fashion.


I mean to add....

And the suckers fall for it.
 
2012-07-14 12:41:34 AM  
<b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7211330/78055375#c78055375" target="_blank">X-boxershorts</a>:</b> <i>law enforcement entity in the nation has actually been able to document in any meaningful fashion.</i>

Excepting the border patrol. Who now have lots of film to corroborate their estimates. Thx administration. I also know about 1000 illegals and I'm 1 guy. I guess you can lalala and say it's not a big problem because I haven't been shown all the people who don't want to be identified, but that's your bag. Doesn't change the reality.
 
2012-07-14 12:50:15 AM  

Jack9: <b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7211330/78055375#c78055375" target="_blank">X-boxershorts</a>:</b> <i>law enforcement entity in the nation has actually been able to document in any meaningful fashion.</i>

Excepting the border patrol. Who now have lots of film to corroborate their estimates. Thx administration. I also know about 1000 illegals and I'm 1 guy. I guess you can lalala and say it's not a big problem because I haven't been shown all the people who don't want to be identified, but that's your bag. Doesn't change the reality.


You act as if illegal immigration is some new problem. It's been with us since 1776 dude.

Still, the Bush administration spent 5 years and millions of dollars looking for proof.

Nada. Zip. Nothing.

You are the one that lalala's when confronted with the reality that voter fraud is a false flag issue being pumped up by conservative interests and that in state after state, these laws result in impediments to legal citizens right to vote, legal citizens who are most likely to vote democrat. It's voter caging on a national scale.

Republicans couldn't win an election without it, and they know this. Their record of governance is so pathetic.
 
2012-07-14 01:38:19 AM  

WhyKnot: Let's not worry about the feds refusal to enforce boarders


I had no idea there was a war on hostels.
 
2012-07-14 02:00:24 AM  

gglibertine: One woman found out they couldn't verify her existence because the county courthouse had burned down before things were computerized.


That issue has been around as long as centralized records, at least as far back as the Domesday Book and probably back into Roman and even Hebrew times. I'm really surprised that as a species used to seeing and dealing with "shiat happens" every day, that we're so resistant to giving a break to anyone who has shiat happen to them that hasn't yet happened to us.

Grave_Girl: One is my mother, and it's her fault entirely (her DL is expired and she can't get an ID because of outstanding warrants for tickets she not only didn't pay but didn't make arrangements to perform community service or something similar).


She's might have been convicted of a felony failure to appear by now, and might be ineligible to vote anyway.
 
Displayed 116 of 116 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report