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.

(AZCentral)   Arizona comes up with a way to spend less money, give more voters the chance to vote and look good doing it. Today is opposite day, right?   (azcentral.com) divider line 29
    More: Dumbass, state Attorney General Tom Horne, University of New Zealand, National Voter Registration Act, election officials, accounting software, local election, Maricopa County, suffrages  
•       •       •

1392 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Oct 2013 at 1:10 PM (45 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



29 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-10-08 12:27:58 PM
warmsouthernbreeze.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-10-08 12:31:36 PM
Tom Horne? Too bad we don't have a "Philandering racist thief and bully" tag. Here's a guy so corrupt that even Sheriff Joe's buddy Bill Montgomery thinks he's creepy.
 
2013-10-08 01:16:27 PM
Render unto Caesar and all that.
 
2013-10-08 01:18:27 PM
Done in one.
 
2013-10-08 01:23:40 PM
TFA: The move is expected to affect 900 people and cost an extra $250,000 in Maricopa County alone.


That's some fine, efficient small government conservatism there, Arizona.
 
2013-10-08 01:23:48 PM
And all them federal registered vote's cast will be used to fuel Sheriff Joes prison sandwich heater.

/Papers Please, or you will be shot!
 
2013-10-08 01:31:22 PM
That can't be legal, can it?

Because that just seems illegal somehow. It's like they're trying to suppress voting intentionally, and that's got to be against the law, right?
 
2013-10-08 01:31:53 PM
Well that's... not an unreasonable compromise as far as the executive branch officials are concerned.

Still a bad law, though.
 
2013-10-08 01:32:08 PM
How does this law comply this requirement: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."?
 
2013-10-08 01:40:00 PM

max_pooper: How does this law comply this requirement: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."?


Just off the cuff here, but....

It doesn't.
 
2013-10-08 01:47:19 PM
FTA: Both Wercinski and Alessandra Soler, executive director of the Arizona Civil Liberties Union, noted that a voter's signature on the federal form is an oath that the individual is a U.S. citizen. That should be proof enough of citizenship, they argue.

I disagree.  People lie their asses off all the time.  I see nothing wrong with requiring photo identification at the polls.

Having said that, if photo identification is a requirement to vote, then getting that photo identification should be easy and free.  That means that you're going to spend some money to send officials out to remote communities so that people don't have to travel 100 miles by bus to the nearest DMV office.  So either you're going to need to build remote offices in places like Meadview and Kayenta or you're going to need a fleet of small busses or vans that can act as mobile offices.  Or just allow small towns to offer photo ids down at the town hall.  And even after all that, you're still going to need door-to-door service for people with disabilities.
 
2013-10-08 02:10:32 PM

Dinjiin: FTA: Both Wercinski and Alessandra Soler, executive director of the Arizona Civil Liberties Union, noted that a voter's signature on the federal form is an oath that the individual is a U.S. citizen. That should be proof enough of citizenship, they argue.

I disagree.  People lie their asses off all the time.  I see nothing wrong with requiring photo identification at the polls.

Having said that, if photo identification is a requirement to vote, then getting that photo identification should be easy and free.  That means that you're going to spend some money to send officials out to remote communities so that people don't have to travel 100 miles by bus to the nearest DMV office.  So either you're going to need to build remote offices in places like Meadview and Kayenta or you're going to need a fleet of small busses or vans that can act as mobile offices.  Or just allow small towns to offer photo ids down at the town hall.  And even after all that, you're still going to need door-to-door service for people with disabilities.


Let me know as soon as this is a big enough issue that it requires solving.  Right now, by the numbers, it is a solution in search of a problem at best, and a deliberate attempt to disenfranchise voting blocks unlikely to support GOP candidates.

In AZ, that's about 30% of the population, just based off race.
 
2013-10-08 02:13:33 PM

Dinjiin: FTA: Both Wercinski and Alessandra Soler, executive director of the Arizona Civil Liberties Union, noted that a voter's signature on the federal form is an oath that the individual is a U.S. citizen. That should be proof enough of citizenship, they argue.

I disagree.  People lie their asses off all the time.  I see nothing wrong with requiring photo identification at the polls.

Having said that, if photo identification is a requirement to vote, then getting that photo identification should be easy and free.  That means that you're going to spend some money to send officials out to remote communities so that people don't have to travel 100 miles by bus to the nearest DMV office.  So either you're going to need to build remote offices in places like Meadview and Kayenta or you're going to need a fleet of small busses or vans that can act as mobile offices.  Or just allow small towns to offer photo ids down at the town hall.  And even after all that, you're still going to need door-to-door service for people with disabilities.


It is not "should be easy and free" it is required that it be easy and free or it runs afoul of the 24th amendment at least as to federal elections.
 
2013-10-08 02:21:41 PM

Dinjiin: FTA: Both Wercinski and Alessandra Soler, executive director of the Arizona Civil Liberties Union, noted that a voter's signature on the federal form is an oath that the individual is a U.S. citizen. That should be proof enough of citizenship, they argue.

I disagree.  People lie their asses off all the time.  I see nothing wrong with requiring photo identification at the polls.

Having said that, if photo identification is a requirement to vote, then getting that photo identification should be easy and free.  That means that you're going to spend some money to send officials out to remote communities so that people don't have to travel 100 miles by bus to the nearest DMV office.  So either you're going to need to build remote offices in places like Meadview and Kayenta or you're going to need a fleet of small busses or vans that can act as mobile offices.  Or just allow small towns to offer photo ids down at the town hall.  And even after all that, you're still going to need door-to-door service for people with disabilities.


Preeettty much. Make getting an ID *EASY* and not a task difficult for people out of the way to do, then there goes a lot of complaints about ID. Still need to work on making easier for people to obtain the proper documentation...

The thing about ID proponents, is they dont understand that voter ID stuff is usually combined with efforts to shut down DMVs and other similar locations in urban (read: poor) areas...
 
2013-10-08 02:40:26 PM

JimmyTheHutt: Right now, by the numbers, it is a solution in search of a problem at best, and a deliberate attempt to disenfranchise voting blocks unlikely to support GOP candidates.


Agreed.  It seems that in every state where a photo ID requirement has been pushed so far, there have been no related plans to make accessibility to identification enrollment easier.  So it is total disenfranchisement.

Summercat: The thing about ID proponents, is they dont understand that voter ID stuff is usually combined with efforts to shut down DMVs and other similar locations in urban (read: poor) areas...


Which comes down to a question as to why the DMV should be the sole issuer of state identification.  Individual cities and towns should be able to provide them as well.
 
2013-10-08 02:41:22 PM
Are European countries racist when they require voter ID to vote? Why is it that when the US tries to act more like Europe in this area, the left screams racism? I thought the left wanted the US to be more like Europe? Maybe the left knows that they would get less votes, not from minorities, but from dead people, people who vote multiple times, and people who aren't even supposed to be in the country in the first place.
 
2013-10-08 02:43:19 PM

Meliorist: Are European countries racist when they require voter ID to vote? Why is it that when the US tries to act more like Europe in this area, the left screams racism? I thought the left wanted the US to be more like Europe? Maybe the left knows that they would get less votes, not from minorities, but from dead people, people who vote multiple times, and people who aren't even supposed to be in the country in the first place.


I say you's dumb.
 
2013-10-08 02:49:54 PM

gnosis301: Meliorist: Are European countries racist when they require voter ID to vote? Why is it that when the US tries to act more like Europe in this area, the left screams racism? I thought the left wanted the US to be more like Europe? Maybe the left knows that they would get less votes, not from minorities, but from dead people, people who vote multiple times, and people who aren't even supposed to be in the country in the first place.

I say you's dumb.


Is that the best you have got? A four word response with a grammatical error?
 
2013-10-08 02:52:22 PM

Meliorist: Are European countries racist when they require voter ID to vote? Why is it that when the US tries to act more like Europe in this area, the left screams racism? I thought the left wanted the US to be more like Europe? Maybe the left knows that they would get less votes, not from minorities, but from dead people, people who vote multiple times, and people who aren't even supposed to be in the country in the first place.


yes but they also have IDs for health care and other positive things. We know your only reason for desiring them is to keep people from voting.
 
2013-10-08 02:55:57 PM

gnosis301: Meliorist: Are European countries racist when they require voter ID to vote? Why is it that when the US tries to act more like Europe in this area, the left screams racism? I thought the left wanted the US to be more like Europe? Maybe the left knows that they would get less votes, not from minorities, but from dead people, people who vote multiple times, and people who aren't even supposed to be in the country in the first place.

I say you's dumb.


I say, "Prove what you are accusing of is an ongoing issue that voting ID would solve. You may not use hypotheticals or examples that exist solely to demonstrate the issue, you must cite actual incidents of voting fraud that IDs would stop."
 
2013-10-08 03:01:26 PM
Your headline had me there for a minute, stubby. I read the article 3 times and couldn't figure out how it met ANY of your standards, then I realized 'opposite day' meant your headline. Here I thought it meant that AZ was doing some good for a change... :-P
 
2013-10-08 03:55:47 PM
 
2013-10-08 04:16:04 PM

Meliorist: Is that the best you have got? A four word response with a grammatical error?


It's because I don't think your serious.
 
2013-10-08 04:40:02 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: The Latest Voter Suppression Fad: Two Tiers


That...could end up sticking.
 
2013-10-08 10:26:31 PM

gnosis301: Meliorist: Is that the best you have got? A four word response with a grammatical error?

It's because I don't think your

(sic) serious.

1) Do European countries require voter identification?
2) Are non-US countries that require voter ID racist for requiring it?
3) Do you think that black people are incapable of getting ID?
4) How does your answer to number 3 reflect your opinion of black people?
5) Have you thought of these questions before, or do you immediately dismiss them as being dumb or not serious?
 
2013-10-09 12:57:38 AM

Meliorist: Are European countries racist when they require voter ID to vote? Why is it that when the US tries to act more like Europe in this area, the left screams racism? I thought the left wanted the US to be more like Europe? Maybe the left knows that they would get less votes, not from minorities, but from dead people, people who vote multiple times, and people who aren't even supposed to be in the country in the first place.


In Switzerland you're not required to have photo i.d. to vote.
 
2013-10-09 02:41:22 AM

Meliorist: gnosis301: Meliorist: Is that the best you have got? A four word response with a grammatical error?

It's because I don't think your (sic) serious.

1) Do European countries require voter identification?  Irrelevant.
2) Are non-US countries that require voter ID racist for requiring it?  Not necessarily. Context is the key: in the US, they're explicitly targeted towards making it harder for Democratic demographics (such as minorities, the poor, students, and combinations thereof) to vote.
3) Do you think that black people are incapable of getting ID? Voter ID laws are almost inevitably coupled with actions that make it harder for poor people and/or minorities to get ID and vote. Such as closing DMV offices near minority-heavy areas, or limiting their hours so people who have to work constantly just to survive don't have time to wait hours in line..
4) How does your answer to number 3 reflect your opinion of black people? It reflects that I realize a disproportionate number of them are in poverty. Much of this can be attributed to the generations of institutionalized racism that came before, and the fact that there are roadblocks ensuring that almost NOBODY can lift themselves out of poverty anymore. The 'rags to riches' American dream is long dead; if you were born poor, you're almost definitely going to STAY poor.
5) Have you thought of these questions before, or do you immediately dismiss them as being dumb or not serious?  I dismiss them as coming from someone who is ill-informed, if not deliberately misinformed.

 
2013-10-09 04:21:19 AM

coco ebert: Meliorist: Are European countries racist when they require voter ID to vote? Why is it that when the US tries to act more like Europe in this area, the left screams racism? I thought the left wanted the US to be more like Europe? Maybe the left knows that they would get less votes, not from minorities, but from dead people, people who vote multiple times, and people who aren't even supposed to be in the country in the first place.

In Switzerland you're not required to have photo i.d. to vote.


I didn't mean every country in Europe required it. Many countries do and I was referring to them. Sorry if I wasn't clear.


LordJiro: Meliorist: gnosis301: Meliorist: Is that the best you have got? A four word response with a grammatical error?

It's because I don't think your (sic) serious.

1) Do European countries require voter identification?  Irrelevant.


It absolutely is relevant. It shows that it is perfectly reasonable to require voter ID and not be racist. I almost never hear someone on the left say that the right can have worthy motives. Look at the Boobies in this thread to see how the left refers to the right, yet many countries the left adores have a stricter policy than what is proposed here.

2) Are non-US countries that require voter ID racist for requiring it?  Not necessarily. Context is the key: in the US, they're explicitly targeted towards making it harder for Democratic demographics (such as minorities, the poor, students, and combinations thereof) to vote.

...dead people, illegal immigrants, and people who vote multiple times.  Besides, why is it such a big deal to get photo ID? ID is required to buy alcohol, cigarettes, rent a hotel or car, board a plane, drive a car, and so many other things. If people are so disengaged from society that they can't do something as important and simple as get an ID, why do you think they would cast an informed vote?

3) Do you think that black people are incapable of getting ID? Voter ID laws are almost inevitably coupled with actions that make it harder for poor people and/or minorities to get ID and vote. Such as closing DMV offices near minority-heavy areas, or limiting their hours so people who have to work constantly just to survive don't have time to wait hours in line..

You do know that the wealthier a person is, the less free time they have, right? People have to work hard to earn lots of money, yet they still manage to do the most basic necessities like getting an ID. Since this article is about Arizona, here is the list of DMV locations:  http://www.azdot.gov/mvd/hours-and-locations. Which minority-heavy areas are not represented?

4) How does your answer to number 3 reflect your opinion of black people? It reflects that I realize a disproportionate number of them are in poverty. Much of this can be attributed to the generations of institutionalized racism that came before, and the fact that there are roadblocks ensuring that almost NOBODY can lift themselves out of poverty anymore. The 'rags to riches' American dream is long dead; if you were born poor, you're almost definitely going to STAY poor.

I know people from very modest backgrounds, yet they can all manage to get an ID. As an aside, one of the best ways to go from poverty to extreme wealth is to start your own business. Yet people such as the guy who founded Home Depot says he couldn't start that business today because of all of the regulations. If you want to help improve social mobility, get rid of the laws that hurt small businesses. Also get rid of the laws that encourage people to be single mothers, as having a father is another good way to avoid poverty.

5) Have you thought of these questions before, or do you immediately dismiss them as being dumb or not serious?  I dismiss them as coming from someone who is ill-informed, if not deliberately misinformed.

So someone who wants to have voter ID must be misinformed about what their own motivations are, right?
 
2013-10-09 02:14:48 PM

Meliorist: Yet people such as the guy who founded Home Depot says he couldn't start that business today because of all of the regulations.


I call B.S. on that one.

There are hundreds of thousands of small businesses out there today who seem able to navigate the maze of regulations on the books.  The small business that I'm part owner of has a number of external specialists, including lawyers and accountants, who help us navigate through it all.  It is the cost of doing business.


Meliorist: You do know that the wealthier a person is, the less free time they have, right?


How so?  Once you get beyond the pay differences of part time versus full time work, most people tend to work a similar number of hours.  There are plenty of people making six figures who pull down the same 40 hours a week as people making five figures.

If anything, wealth would be a loose indication of education, which in turn is a loose indicator of family size.  Smart successful people tend to have smaller families, or are more able to hire help, which results in more personal time while away from work. 

I'd guess that if charted, a free time versus wealth chart would look something like a bell curve.
 
Displayed 29 of 29 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report