Democrats & Liberals Archives

Hoffa, Poor Voters, and the Lucky Duckies

I’m starting to think the thing the right wing found most offensive about Jimmy Hoffa’s weekend speech was not the phony call to violence the media promoted. The real threat there is that Hoffa was encouraging working class Americans to vote.

The problem with the wave of Republican victories last November was not just the ridiculously worthless GOP House majority. Another huge problem is the GOP power at the state legislature level.

It's a week old now but you have to read Ari Berman's article the GOP War on Voting:

All told, a dozen states have approved new obstacles to voting. Kansas and Alabama now require would-be voters to provide proof of citizenship before registering. Florida and Texas made it harder for groups like the League of Women Voters to register new voters. Maine repealed Election Day voter registration, which had been on the books since 1973. Five states - Florida, Georgia, Ohio, Tennessee and West Virginia - cut short their early voting periods. Florida and Iowa barred all ex-felons from the polls, disenfranchising thousands of previously eligible voters. And six states controlled by Republican governors and legislatures - Alabama, Kansas, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin - will require voters to produce a government-issued ID before casting ballots. More than 10 percent of U.S. citizens lack such identification, and the numbers are even higher among constituencies that traditionally lean Democratic - including 18 percent of young voters and 25 percent of African-Americans.

The GOP has been worried about a non-existent voting threat for years while at the same time being an integral cause of the real problem: tens of thousands (perhaps hundreds of thousands) of people are excluded from voting nation wide each election.

Just like with the crackdown on ACORN, they wrap their real agenda up in a phony outrage while the real threat to the right is simply registering too many of the wrong people to vote. This is why after the right wing realized they'd been duped by Fox and Drudge about Hoffa's "call to violence" they still were mad as hell. Why? Because Hoffa was talking about getting poor, working class Americans to vote. Nothing infuriates the right more.

The right believes poor people should not vote. That may sound extreme but their actions as well as their words show it. Don't think for an instant that the opinion of Matthew Vadum is only his own. This is shared by many on the right. I have a right wing friend who expressed that same opinion years before Vadum. There are more out there like this who just won't say it in public. The more we allow that opinion to stand the more these folks will come out of the closet.

If you want to find more right wingers calling for preventing the poor from voting you'll have to look for a different idea. Most pretend to be fine with the poor voting. It's the non-tax payers that worry them.

This is related to the right wing myth that a large number of Americans pay no taxes. What they mean is a large number of Americans pay no federal income taxes. The truth is even the poorest Americans pay multiple forms of federal taxes and they pay a ton of state taxes. They just don't pay income taxes because they don't earn enough income.

I think the right fails to realize a major reason 47% of Americans (the lucky duckies) pay no income taxes is because of the Bush tax cuts increased the size of this pool from 25% in 2000 to over 32% by 2007. Now they fight to protect the Bush tax cuts from expiring on the rich while calling for increasing taxes on the poor.

This is your modern American right wing: It should be hard or next to impossible for the poor to vote. If they want to vote they should stop being poor and pay more taxes.


Posted by Adam Ducker at September 8, 2011 9:17 AM
Comments
Comment #328842

Individual rights for them not for the rest of us, Adam, why would you think the right wing extremist would be inclusive on this issue.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 8, 2011 9:34 AM
Comment #328846

The statements you made above are negative and baseless so they cannot be argued against.

Everybody in every state can get an ID. Most, if not all, states issue a drivers license style ID with a pix on it. That is a start. The charge that thousands of people did not get to rightfully vote is absurd. Even in Philly where the NPP were keeping some people from entering the voting establishment there were very few. The reason most people don get to vote is they don’t follow the law in the registration process.

“Florida and Iowa barred all ex-felons from the polls, disenfranchising thousands of previously eligible voters.”

Ex-felons not being allowed to vote? When did they, in general, have that right when they became felons or ex-felons? They lose that right unless a judicial proceeding re-establishes their rights. Very, very few pursue that course. Somebody is blowin’ smoke and it isn’t me.

Posted by: tom humes at September 8, 2011 11:41 AM
Comment #328847

Tom Humes:

“Everybody in every state can get an ID.”

That’s debatable but the point is not whether they can get it. It’s whether they have it or not already. If they don’t have it then that is another hoop they must jump through to vote. The right excels at inventing ways to make it harder to vote in order to tackle a nearly non-existent voter fraud problem.

“The charge that thousands of people did not get to rightfully vote is absurd.”

Is it? I don’t mean to say they are intentionally disenfranchised each time. I’ve worked polling places multiple times now and I’ve seen a little bit of the chaos that can occur. Making voting easier and more inclusive does not have to come at the expense of elections integrity. Yet the GOP’s solution is always to make it harder and less inclusive.

“Even in Philly where the NPP were keeping some people from entering the voting establishment there were very few.”

For the record, no single person was ever shown to have been prevented from voting in Philly despite what it appeared was going in with the NBPP thugs.

“When did they, in general, have that right when they became felons or ex-felons?”

There is no reason to make it harder to vote if you a felon that has served your time and are no longer on probation. Florida reversed course on these laws for a short time but have returned again to this bad practice.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at September 8, 2011 12:02 PM
Comment #328855

States have rights to establish voting rules in their state. If a state attempts to violate a persons right to vote we have federal protections. Show us the lawbreaking and let’s report it to the proper government authorities.

Is Adam suggesting that the states are breaking any laws or violating the constitution?

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 8, 2011 2:01 PM
Comment #328856

Adam, everyone has to have a state Id to 1, Get a job, most employers require an ID when applying, at least in Ohio. 2, ID required for applying for unemployment, welfare , Check cashing and a verity of other things. So the fallisy that people can’t get one or can’t afford one is total BS. A ID is only $10.00 in Ohio and good for 4 or 5 years.

Posted by: KAP at September 8, 2011 2:18 PM
Comment #328858

Adam, I was wrong on the ID price it’s $8.50 for 4 or 5 years.

Posted by: KAP at September 8, 2011 2:28 PM
Comment #328865

Royal Flush: “Is Adam suggesting that the states are breaking any laws or violating the constitution?”

I doubt it. The legal authority to pass a law doesn’t make it a correct law though.

I would believe the GOP cared more for election integrity if voter fraud wasn’t almost non-existent and those hurt most by the GOP voter laws weren’t significant Democratic voting blocs such as minorities, young voters, and the elderly.

KAP: “…everyone has to have a state Id…”

An estimated 21 million Americans do not have a photo ID. This says nothing about those that could easily get one if they needed but we’re talking a significant chunk of Americans.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at September 8, 2011 3:28 PM
Comment #328867

KAP,

Any requirement that a citizen purchase an ID before voting is a poll tax and as such is prohibited by the 24th amendment.

Posted by: Warped Reality at September 8, 2011 3:49 PM
Comment #328868

Adam, The article states that 21 million americans don’t have a CURRENT ID card, which means that they must have an expired card and that they were to lazy to get it renewed or it took away funds from one habit or another. Having an ID is fundamental especially when one is required for so many things and when so many illegals are in this country which is about 12 million. To require an ID to vote, keeps inelligable voters from voting and honest people honest. My question to you is, How do those people who do not have a state ID cash checks, apply for jobs, welfare, or open bank accounts?

Posted by: KAP at September 8, 2011 3:52 PM
Comment #328869

Warped, read above comment to Adam.

Posted by: KAP at September 8, 2011 3:54 PM
Comment #328870

Inflamatory language from Republican Conservatives or Liberal Democrats hag no place in a civil debate. WE liberals cannot continue to blast Repulicans when we find their words hateful or nasty, and then defend liberals who use similar language. Tell Mr. Hoffa to clean up his verbiage or close his mouth.

Posted by: Terry at September 8, 2011 3:57 PM
Comment #328871

21 million. How many are babies to a couple of years old? The number reeks of distortion.

I have worked the polls for a number of years. If John Doe came in to vote and he says his name is Joe Bleau and has no photo ID, how is the best way to handle it? John Doe could then go vote as JD and as a result vote twice. This has happened particularly in large precints in large cities where people don’t know everybody who walks in. Voter fraud has been around for a long time. I personally believe that a photo ID does a lot for cutting down on the fraud. Your argument that a photo ID is unavailable to a number of people is nonsense. Registering to vote on election day is another way to commit voter fraud. If John Doe registers to vote in precint one and votes, then goes to p2 and registers and votes even as another person, then continues to p3 and repeats himself, then he has voted three times under three names and without photo ID will never be caught. That is the way it is done in one way. Then there is the situation where controllers in the election process have a way of having unpurged rolls that have persons who have passed on still on the ledger. Those controllers then have those dead people vote.

Bottom line is that photo ID is a huge step towards lessening voter fraud.

Posted by: tom humes at September 8, 2011 3:57 PM
Comment #328872

Adam, seeing how only half of Americans bother to vote, how many of those 21 million who do not have a photo ID do you think actually vote?

Just how bad does a person really want to vote if they are not willing to prove they have the right to vote?

And, are you also concerned that people without ID are not able to legally use their 2nd Amendment right?

Posted by: kctim at September 8, 2011 4:00 PM
Comment #328882

I find it strange to hear all the complaints about people being denied the right to vote based upon their lack of positive identification.

All over the nation we have organizations who make it their business to drive folks to rallies, community meetings and to the polls among other activities. This is commendable and is practiced by both political parties.

We have PAC’s and others who contribute hundreds of millions to encourage people to vote. This is commendable.

Can anyone really believe that these same organizations can’t help those who wish to vote obtain the identification necessary to do that?

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 8, 2011 4:50 PM
Comment #328884

TH,

Voter fraud has been around for a long time. I personally believe that a photo ID does a lot for cutting down on the fraud…Bottom line is that photo ID is a huge step towards lessening voter fraud.

Do you have any evidence that voter fraud is a serious problem (outside of your imagination)?

If John Doe came in to vote and he says his name is Joe Bleau and has no photo ID, how is the best way to handle it?

Is “Joe Bleau” registered to vote?

KAP,

Adam, The article states that 21 million americans don’t have a CURRENT ID card, which means that they must have an expired card and that they were to lazy to get it renewed or it took away funds from one habit or another. Having an ID is fundamental especially when one is required for so many things and when so many illegals are in this country which is about 12 million. To require an ID to vote, keeps inelligable voters from voting and honest people honest. My question to you is, How do those people who do not have a state ID cash checks, apply for jobs, welfare, or open bank accounts?

Who cares? Requiring people to pay for a photo ID is a poll tax, which is why it’s unconstitutional.

From Adam Ducker’s NYT editorial, I found this piece from the Brennan center which is very relevant to this topic.

Posted by: Warped Reality at September 8, 2011 4:57 PM
Comment #328886

Great article, Adam.

These righties know damn well they’re completely in the wrong on this.
But as you say:

they wrap their real agenda up in a phony outrage while the real threat to the right is simply registering too many of the wrong people to vote.

I couldn’t agree more!

Regarding this:

This is related to the right wing myth that a large number of Americans pay no taxes. What they mean is a large number of Americans pay no federal income taxes. The truth is even the poorest Americans pay multiple forms of federal taxes and they pay a ton of state taxes. They just don’t pay income taxes because they don’t earn enough income.

I posted these in the center column for Roy a day ago. I think you might find them interesting too:

Four Ways Government Policy Favors the Rich and Keeps the Rest of Us Poor

Study: CEO pay tops taxes at many big U.S. firms

And here’s the list:

Top 25 Corporate Tax Dodgers

Posted by: Adrienne at September 8, 2011 4:58 PM
Comment #328887

Terry:

Inflamatory language from Republican Conservatives or Liberal Democrats hag no place in a civil debate. WE liberals cannot continue to blast Repulicans when we find their words hateful or nasty, and then defend liberals who use similar language. Tell Mr. Hoffa to clean up his verbiage or close his mouth.

No one is stopping you from doing that, Terry. Go ahead and maintain perfect politeness as people on the right walk all over you if you wish, but don’t expect this of everyone else on the left. Many of us are sick to death of attempting to be courteous in the face of that constant hatefulness and nastiness coming from the right.

As for Mr. Hoffa, he knows that often the only way to deal with a bully is to talk/hit right back — and since his job is to represent a huge number people whose jobs have been coming under unrelenting attack for decades on end by the rightwing plutocracy, his verbiage suited that situation perfectly.

Posted by: Adrienne at September 8, 2011 5:07 PM
Comment #328890

KAP: “How do those people who do not have a state ID cash checks, apply for jobs, welfare, or open bank accounts?”

I don’t know. Maybe they don’t. The study doesn’t examine those things.

Tom Humes: “21 million. How many are babies to a couple of years old? The number reeks of distortion.”

The important number is 11% of the population. From the study: The 21 million figure comes from using 2000 census calculations of the citizen voting-age population, this translates to more than 21 million American adult citizens nationwide who do not possess valid government photo ID.

Tom HumeS: “Bottom line is that photo ID is a huge step towards lessening voter fraud.”

There is very little evidence of voter fraud where a person fraudulently casts a vote. Photo IDs may stop what little there is of that going on while making it harder for millions of Americans to vote.

Kctim: “Adam, seeing how only half of Americans bother to vote, how many of those 21 million who do not have a photo ID do you think actually vote?”

Won’t bother, or are prevented in some way? We can’t be sure. If the GOP has their way we know how it will be. Remember, the GOP says voting is a matter of great personal responsibly. If you can’t jump through all the hoops they put up to prevent you from voting, well, then better luck next time, loser.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at September 8, 2011 5:22 PM
Comment #328891

Terry
Hoffa is a perfect example of the point you are trying to make. He is up for re-election and is spouting very dangerous things just to win that election. So-called labor would do itself a huge favor by electing Pope.

I agree with your point, but as you can see, “we are good, they are EVIL” will rule the day.
I’m afraid that is what happens when one can no longer defend their positions.

Sadly, I think it’s going to get a whole lot worse.

Posted by: kctim at September 8, 2011 5:38 PM
Comment #328893


This is one example of the Republican thinking on the subject: everyone should have a VOTER ID CARD because some of the 9/11 attackers had FAKE ID’S.

How much money is spent on propaganda to misinform those who do not vote?

Posted by: jlw at September 8, 2011 5:48 PM
Comment #328894

“How much money is spent on propaganda to misinform those who do not vote?”

Probably a little less than the propaganda to scare people into voting a certain way and then busing them in to vote as told. Whether they have the right to vote or not.
And a whole lot less than the propaganda telling people they will get “free” healthcare forever if they vote a certain way.

Posted by: kctim at September 8, 2011 5:55 PM
Comment #328896

“I’m starting to think the thing the right wing found most offensive about Jimmy Hoffa’s weekend speech was not the phony call to violence the media promoted. The real threat there is that Hoffa was encouraging working class Americans to vote.”

You are wrong Adam. What I find most offensve about Jimmy Hoffa’s speech is that it might incite incidents like this.
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/09/08/union-thug-alert-day-of-rage-festivities-start-early-in-longview-wa/

Posted by: tdobson at September 8, 2011 6:29 PM
Comment #328898

Warped, Since when is it a poll tax to require a person to show ID? I’m sure you had to show ID when you and your buddies went out partying at the local pubs. Requiring a person to have a state ID is not a poll tax and requiring them to show ID before voting prevents voter fraud. ID is required to apply for a job, get on welfare, to cash checks, to open bank accounts, and even at times to prove who you are when using a debit card at a store. So your poll tax is nothing more then BS.

Posted by: KAP at September 8, 2011 6:31 PM
Comment #328902

Tdobson: “What I find most offensve about Jimmy Hoffa’s speech is that it might incite incidents like this.”

Except that this incident has nothing to do with politics and was in no way shaped by Hoffa’s statements. From now on are you going to blame every incident with unions on Hoffa’s call for voters to vote out the TEA Party? That doesn’t make much sense but I won’t be shocked if you do.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at September 8, 2011 8:00 PM
Comment #328904
I’m sure you had to show ID when you and your buddies went out partying at the local pubs.

I like my liver too much to drink alcohol. In any case, there’s no version of the 24th amendment for alcohol.

Requiring a person to have a state ID is not a poll tax and requiring them to show ID before voting prevents voter fraud.
If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck; it’s a duck. ID’s cost money and can only be obtained in person at a select few locations; locations that may not be accessible to many Americans.
ID is required to apply for a job, get on welfare, to cash checks, to open bank accounts, and even at times to prove who you are when using a debit card at a store.
None of these activities have nothing whatsoever to do with voting and are completely irrelevant to the fact that ID requirements are just a sly way of instituting a poll tax.
So your poll tax is nothing more then BS.
Perhaps you could explain the practical difference between these ID laws and the poll taxes of Jim Crow? Posted by: Warped Reality at September 8, 2011 8:06 PM
Comment #328906

Warped, Having to have an ID to get a job, cash a check, or apply for welfare or checking to see if you are old enough to buy a beer or cigaretts or having to have a drivers permit. Your right they don’t have anything to do with voting but you still need a F’n ID to do them and requiring that same F’n ID at a voting both is NOT a poll tax.

Posted by: KAP at September 8, 2011 8:19 PM
Comment #328907

Warped, Having to have an ID to get a job, cash a check, or apply for welfare or checking to see if you are old enough to buy a beer or cigaretts or having to have a drivers permit. Your right they don’t have anything to do with voting but you still need a F’n ID to do them and requiring that same F’n ID at a voting both is NOT a poll tax.

Posted by: KAP at September 8, 2011 8:20 PM
Comment #328908

Using your assumptions then, when you mix apples and oranges you could get an orple?

That is all the sense you make with your poll tax thingamajig. People generally live close enough to a facility that makes ID cards.

So get your head into the proper thinking position.

Posted by: tom humes at September 8, 2011 8:28 PM
Comment #328911

KAP & TH,

Having to have an ID to get a job, cash a check, or apply for welfare or checking to see if you are old enough to buy a beer or cigaretts or having to have a drivers permit.

None of these things are Constitutionally protected rights; they are merely privileges.

People generally live close enough to a facility that makes ID cards.
“Generally” isn’t good enough. In order for it not to be a poll tax, everyone (ie 100% of the electorate, not 99.9%) needs to live near one of those facilities. Only one example of some hermit living far away from the rest of civilization without an ID is needed to demonstrate that these ID laws are a poll tax.

I’ll leave you guys with this excerpt from an amendment to the Arkansas State Constitution adopted in 1893:

Every male citizen of the United States…who shall exhibit a poll tax receipt or other evidence that he has paid his poll tax at the time of collecting taxes next preceding such election shall be allowed to vote at any election In the state of Arkansas Provided that persons who make satisfactory proof that they have attained the age of twenty one years since the time of assessing taxes next preceding said election and possesses the other necessary qualifications shall be permitted to vote and provided further that the said tax receipt shall be so marked by dated stamp or written endorsement by the judges of election to whom it may be first presented as to prevent the holder thereof from voting more than once at any election

My Source

Now, doesn’t that justification that I put in bold sound familiar?

Posted by: Warped Reality at September 8, 2011 9:22 PM
Comment #328912

Warped, To drive a car LEGALLY you need a permit and that -permit acts as your ID. What has that got to do with being a poll tax. Using that same ID to show the poll worker that you are the person that is registered to vote in that district is NOT a poll tax. Do you have a student ID? Can you use that ID at another college? If not why NOT? Why are you so up tight on showing Identification? It is an everyday occurance in many aspects of life. I can see your point if we were charged a fee to vote over and above the state fees for the ID, you still pay a fee in each state to get that permit to drive or just a state ID.

Posted by: KAP at September 8, 2011 9:39 PM
Comment #328916

Terry, Why don’t you tell the repubs to read the whole quote before they act so offended. You seem to think that this false outrage should be meant with a whimper and an apology for their inability to get reliable information from the right wing media hacks. It is they who should apologize to Hoffa for misquoting him after all.

KCtim why don’t you read the whole quote instead of falling for the right wing slime, such as Faux news, and their editing of the quote. Where is your outrage at the right wing media that intentionally misinformed you and millions of others that seem to be on the edge of rage of this nonsense?

Instead of ID that hasn’t been needed for years and years why not just have them dip their thumb into some purple ink repubs it was good enough in Iraq. I mean really guys if you have registered to vote, have the paperwork why would you need to show anything else? Here in Colorado the ballot is mailed to my house, I vote and send it back. I don’t think we even have a polling station to go to anymore.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 8, 2011 11:04 PM
Comment #328918
You are wrong Adam. What I find most offensve about Jimmy Hoffa’s speech is that it might incite incidents like this.

Tdobson imagine my surprise in reading this after complimenting you in the previous thread for seeing through this nonsense. Are you guys really that far gone that you cannot see how Malkin is leading you around by your nose? What does it take guys for otherwise intelligent people to be so easily led around doing the bidding of these propagandist when the facts are simple, clear and there for everyone to see. And you call the union guys thugs! Who do you think your kidding.

If you guys think that you are not the people of Germany in the early ‘30’s then you are sadly mistaken. The propagandist are pulling your stings guys and you have no clue that they are doing so. Give them credit, but you guys really need to stop drinking the kool aid.

You are doing yourselves, your family and your country a disservice by falling for this nonsense.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 8, 2011 11:22 PM
Comment #328920

I also get my ballot mailed to me J2, but before I get the ballot I get a verification notice in which I have to put either the last 4 digits of my SS# or ID/drivers permit number to verify who I am and that I am still at the same address. I do not mind proveing who I am.

Posted by: KAP at September 9, 2011 12:00 AM
Comment #328921
What has that got to do with being a poll tax.

Obtaining an ID imposes both a monetary and temporal expense on a potential voter, which is simply unacceptable.

To drive a car LEGALLY you need a permit and that -permit acts as your ID
I’m not arguing that unlicensed people should be able to drive cars on public roads. Please drop this unrelated issue because there are plenty of people who don’t drive cars on public roads.
Using that same ID to show the poll worker that you are the person that is registered to vote in that district is NOT a poll tax.
Because of your lifestyle, you have already gone through all the hurdles to get an ID, congratulations. Just because you did it doesn’t mean you have the right to impose such a requirement on others.
Do you have a student ID?
I have a driver’s license, passport, SS card, student ID & my birth certificate in my closet. I have all these documents because I was lucky enough to be born into a privileged situation that has allowed me easy access to those documents. Other people are not so lucky. I’m not worried about losing my own right to vote, but I am worried about my fellow Americans.
Can you use that ID at another college? If not why NOT?
I have used my Stony Brook University ID to gain admittance to the library at New York University.
Why are you so up tight on showing Identification? It is an everyday occurance in many aspects of life.
Because I fear government intrusion into my life and the lives of my fellow Americans
if we were charged a fee to vote over and above the state fees for the ID
Any nonzero monetary barrier to obtaining an ID is a poll tax. Otherwise, we could have a regime where the government charges a million dollars for an ID thereby disenfranchising all non-millionaires.
you still pay a fee in each state to get that permit to drive or just a state ID.
Once again, not everyone drives or has a compelling reason to purchase an ID; this means these laws put an undue burden on voters that is equivalent to a poll tax.


BTW, I lost my University ID last week and had to pay 25 bucks to get it replaced on Friday (that was painful). This reminds me that it is very conceivable for someone to misplace their ID a day or two before the election without enough time to purchase a replacement. Do you advocate disenfranchising those unlucky people?

Posted by: Warped Reality at September 9, 2011 12:19 AM
Comment #328923

Warped, In Ohio I can get a replacement ID in less then an hour at a very low cost. Everyone who is a CITIZEN of this country should be able to vote, I am not denying that. I have no problem with showing ID to prove I am who I say I am. We can argue showing ID for any reason such as buying alchol as a extra tax or cashing a check as an extra fee to do so or your University ID as an extra tax to learn. Your University ID is to prove you belong at that school much like using your ID to prove you are who you say you are at that polling booth. What would stop me from registring in my fathers name, both grandfathers and uncle and voting in each of their names in different precints? All of whom are dead by the way. Or what would stop an Illegal in this country from voting?

Posted by: KAP at September 9, 2011 2:39 AM
Comment #328927

J2
I did better than read the whole quote J2, I actually listened to it. The wording and vague association was calculated and intentional, meant only to instill anger and gain votes during an election.
Reading the quote only supports that idea. IF he had meant ‘vote them out,’ he could have easily said that.
Personally, I don’t give a crap about hoffa, he is a waste of good air. But when we have been preached to non-stop about crosshairs, targeting and reloading, (all said to garner support and get votes, btw) by the very people defending hoffa now, the hypocrisy must be pointed out.

Seeing how Adam is afraid to answer, perhaps you will J2. Do you have the same amount of concern for people who must show ID to exercise their 2nd Amendment right? For all the hoops they must jump through?

Posted by: kctim at September 9, 2011 9:19 AM
Comment #328931

Kctim: “Seeing how Adam is afraid to answer…”

Really? Is that how you do it?

“Do you have the same amount of concern for people who must show ID to exercise their 2nd Amendment right?”

Are you kidding? I thought it wasn’t even a serious question or I would have written back earlier. I guess the question becomes: Do you think owning a gun is as important as voting in elections? I wouldn’t say so. Additionally, the right to bare arms is separate from the fact that guns are in most cases a luxury item like tobacco or television. The GOP may want to make voting a luxury, I don’t know.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at September 9, 2011 9:47 AM
Comment #328935

Sorry Adam, but ‘how I do it’ is by cherishing ALL of our rights, not just the ones I personally agree with. That is why the question is very straightforward and can only ‘become’ something else if one does not believe in all of our rights and must ‘interpret’ things in order to justify it to themselves.

So yes, I do believe our 2nd Amendment right is just as important as our right to vote.

“the right to bare arms is separate from the fact that guns are in most cases a luxury item like tobacco or television”

That can only be true if one ignores the words “keep” and “shall not be infringed,” which you seem to have intentionally left out.

But, tell you what, in keeping with the spirit of treating rights as luxury items, how about we use another luxury item called the electronic voting machine, and make it so that you have to have a form of ID to use it?

Voting is a right, not a luxury. To keep and bare arms is a right, not a luxury. Believing it is ok to demand ID for one but not the other is hypocritical.

Posted by: kctim at September 9, 2011 12:49 PM
Comment #328936

Oh, and Adam, you are correct, there was no call for the “is afraid to answer” comment.

I apologize.

Posted by: kctim at September 9, 2011 12:50 PM
Comment #328942
The wording and vague association was calculated and intentional, meant only to instill anger and gain votes during an election. Reading the quote only supports that idea. IF he had meant ‘vote them out,’ he could have easily said that.

SO was the editing by Faux and Malkin and the rest of the right wing propaganda hacks, kctim, but I see no outrage from you guys on the right. Why haven’t you protested to Faux over such shoddy journalistic practices?

This speech is a non issue over wrong interpretations by those grasping at straws, kctim. If the wording and association was vague don’t you think Faux would have used the entire bit so their viewers could “decide for themselves” seeings they claim to be fair and balanced?

Posted by: j2t2 at September 9, 2011 2:26 PM
Comment #328945
What would stop me from registring in my fathers name, both grandfathers and uncle and voting in each of their names in different precints?

You are moving the goalposts. We are discussing the requirement that a voter bring an ID with him/her to the polling place on election day. We are not talking about verifying people’s identity when they register to vote for the first time.

In Ohio I can get a replacement ID in less then an hour at a very low cost.
Low cost is not the same as zero cost. Historically, most poll taxes were very low (1 dollar was common), yet that did not justify their imposition. Also, your claim of “less than an hour” is probably relying on your access to private automobile transportation and your choice to live in a portion of Cleveland well served by government offices. Some people live without automobiles and in very rural areas far away from the rest of human civilization. If the election is on Tuesday and someone loses his/her ID over the weekend, there’s probably a good chance he/she won’t be able to replace it on Monday. Never mind the fact that replacing it on Monday will probably entail taking time off from work, which is something he/she might not be able to do. Posted by: Warped Reality at September 9, 2011 3:38 PM
Comment #328946

J2
I don’t watch Fox and even if I did, it would be as pointless as complaining to MSNBC about Maddow or Current about oberbore.

What I did was actually listen to the speech itself and when you take into account the breaks, pauses, mannerism and reason for the speech, it is very clear that he was not talking about voting, but wanted it to fall back on when he got the attention he knew ‘take them out’ would bring.
It was free publicity, but dangerous.

Posted by: kctim at September 9, 2011 3:40 PM
Comment #328948

Whistleblower fired after revealing Wisconsin ‘voter suppression’

Quote from the link:

A Wisconsin state employee has been fired after he revealed that a Department of Transportation official had instructed workers to not notify citizens that IDs necessary for voting could be obtained for free.
Posted by: Adrienne at September 9, 2011 3:42 PM
Comment #328949

Kctim: “Voting is a right, not a luxury. To keep and bare arms is a right, not a luxury. Believing it is ok to demand ID for one but not the other is hypocritical.”

It’s not hypocritical at all. You’re simply arguing that if it’s fair to place hoops around getting a gun then it’s fair to place hoops around voting or the opposite. This is faulty simply because bad gun ownership has much more of a negative impact on our society than bad voting. The upsides and downsides are not at all equal.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at September 9, 2011 5:36 PM
Comment #328950

So kctim you believe that this portion of the speech by Hoffa Jr. was a coded message to the Teamsters to “take them out” meaning Tea Party members? Or was it a coded message to all unions members? Just how does that work?

I saw the speech and didn’t see any of the wink wink you say was present. It was very clear especially when you consider it was a warm up speech for Obama, that it was voting he was specifically talking about. After all that is what he said. The violence is only in the minds of the tea party and the provocateurs that have made them look foolish.

So you hold no anger towards Faux because it would do no good? How ever you did see the speech through some right wing source kctim. Did they edit it like Faux and Malkin?


Posted by: j2t2 at September 9, 2011 5:42 PM
Comment #328951

Adrienne, if I may, what am I missing?

Here is the memo that supposedly reveals voter suppression:

“While you should certainly help customers who come in asking for a free ID to check the appropriate box, you should refrain from offering the free version to customers who do not ask for it,” Krieser told Division of Motor Vehicle employees.

You come in and ask for a free voting ID, you get one. You come in to renew your current ID, you are not bothered about getting a second ID. Something that would be a waste of time and money.

Why would a person go to the DOT to get a free voting ID and not ask for it? How would they even get one if they didn’t ask for it?

Is there another link on there somewhere that shows employees were told to deny or charge when asked asked specifically about the free IDs?

Posted by: kctim at September 9, 2011 5:44 PM
Comment #328952
Why would a person go to the DOT to get a free voting ID and not ask for it?

Not a native English speaker? Deaf & Mute? Unfamiliarity with the RMV branch? The possibilities are endless.

Posted by: Warped Reality at September 9, 2011 6:03 PM
Comment #328957
Adrienne, if I may, what am I missing?

That they’re trying to make some people pay a poll tax, even though poll taxes are illegal.

Posted by: Adrienne at September 9, 2011 8:16 PM
Comment #328966


Were tea party people just winking when they showed up at political events with weapons.

What kind of winking was Rick Perry doing while waving a Colt 45 in the air and spouting tea party rhetoric. Nothing excites a tea partier more than the idiotic half brother of George Bush waving a gun in the air.

Unions did not start this confrontation, nor did they introduce the threat of violence into today’s political scene. Both distinctions belong to the right wing.

For a Libertarian view of Rick Perry, and the intelligence of Republican voters, check out The Necromantic Cat website.

It is no secret that conservatives don’t believe that poor people of any color should be allowed to vote. Jim Crow poll taxes and literacy tests disenfranchised both poor whites and blacks. They had a tremendous impact in reducing the number of voters and thus enabling the continuation of the Jim Crow Era.

Posted by: jlw at September 9, 2011 11:17 PM
Comment #328976


The 19Th Amendment giving women the right to vote was ratified August 18, 1920.

I was finally ratified by:

Virginia in 1952

Alabama in 1953

Florida in 1969

South Carolina in 1969

Georgia in 1970

Louisiana in 1970

North Carolina in 1971

Mississippi in 1984

Mississippi has the distinction of being the first state to ratify the 18Th Amendment outlawing alcohol and the last to ratify a woman’s right to vote.

The 21St Amendment was ratified by Article 5 states convention.

Posted by: jlw at September 10, 2011 2:24 AM
Comment #328977

warped

“Who cares? Requiring people to pay for a photo ID is a poll tax, which is why it’s unconstitutional.”


nonsense, in most places carrying an ID and using it to indentify yourself is required by law. if you are stopped on the street by a police officer you are required to provide ID. all this handwringing on the left about requiring ID is nothing more than a red herring.

in california illegal aliens do vote. how often is unknown. when bob dornan lost his seat to loretta sanchez, it was proven that non citizens had voted, although it was determined that not enough to change the outcome. the ID requirement is quite legal and should be standard everywhere. if a citizen has a problem getting an ID then we should help them.


http://wc.arizona.edu/papers/91/108/04_2_m.html

Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 7:40 AM
Comment #328978

adam


yes i’m sure hoffas’ remark was not meant literally, and will not have any effect on the behavior of union members in his or any other.

http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20110908/BIZ/709089868/1005/biz

funny how when a conservative says something that can be considered remotely violent we here all this talk about civility, and when gabrielle giffords was shot it was opined that all the rightwing hate speech had brought it on. we needed to be careful not to use words that might incite violent acts, yet these same liberals give hoffa a pass. what hypocracy.

Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 8:00 AM
Comment #328979

Dbs: “…funny how when a conservative says something that can be considered remotely violent we here all this talk about civility … yet these same liberals give hoffa a pass. what hypocrisy.”

Oh please. The TEA Party:

1. Invoked revolutionary war as a theme.
2. Openly carried fire arms at protests
3. Used signs that said they were exercising their 1st so they didn’t need the 2nd
4. Used signs saying they were unarmed…this time.
5. Used signs that said the tree of liberty needed watering.
6. Used signs that said their trigger was the 2nd amendment.
6. Made statements like, “Don’t retreat, reload.”
7. Made statements about muskets and bayonets.
8. Sent out maps of politicians targeted with cross hairs over their location.

BUT…Hoffa said “take them out” and it’s the same? Come on. The TEA Party couldn’t run fast enough from the culture they had created in their protests after Giffords was shot. Now that you feel sufficiently distanced from the violence you seek to use that as a way to silence the left? Stop it.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at September 10, 2011 9:06 AM
Comment #328982

adam


are you kidding? you respond with…..”you guys are bigger ones”……really? IMO adam, hoffa can say whatever he chooses. free speech belongs to everyone, regardless of how stupid, or inflammatory thier comments. what i find amazing is that you’re not willing to hold your own to the same standards. that IMO is true hypocracy.

Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 9:35 AM
Comment #328983

adam

BTW…..i think the actual comment was “take those sonofabicthes out”. nothing inflammatory about that eh? LOL!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 9:37 AM
Comment #328988

Warped Reality wrote:

“Who cares? Requiring people to pay for a photo ID is a poll tax, which is why it’s unconstitutional.”

dbs replied:

nonsense, in most places carrying an ID and using it to indentify yourself is required by law. if you are stopped on the street by a police officer you are required to provide ID. all this handwringing on the left about requiring ID is nothing more than a red herring.

dbs, stop being intentionally obtuse. All it takes is very simple logic to understand what Warped and I have said here. From the moment any state passes a law requiring an ID in order to vote, that state is automatically required to give EVERYONE of voting age an ID completely free of charge. Otherwise it is a POLL TAX — and poll taxes are ILLEGAL.

Posted by: Adrienne at September 10, 2011 11:59 AM
Comment #328989

dbs:

i think the actual comment was “take those sonofabicthes out”. nothing inflammatory about that eh?

Here’s the actual comment:

“Everybody here has a vote. If we go back and we keep the eye on the prize. Let’s take these sons of bitches out and give America back to America where we belong.”

Is it rude? Sure it is. But Republicans and Teapublicans have proven time and again that they don’t give a rats ass about rudeness.
But Inflamatory? A call for violence? No. Hoffa was clearly talking about VOTING.

Posted by: Adrienne at September 10, 2011 12:09 PM
Comment #328992

adrienne


“From the moment any state passes a law requiring an ID in order to vote, that state is automatically required to give EVERYONE of voting age an ID completely free of charge. Otherwise it is a POLL TAX — and poll taxes are ILLEGAL.”


nonsense….people are REQUIRED BY LAW to carry identification. end of story. to ask that it be shown at the polls is not a poll tax. it is you who are obfuscating.

“Is it rude? Sure it is. But Republicans and Teapublicans have proven time and again that they don’t give a rats ass about rudeness.
But Inflamatory? A call for violence? No. Hoffa was clearly talking about VOTING.”


sure he was. you make excuses for your own, while you condemn your opponents for the same behavior, and heated rhetoric. i won’t wait for you to condemn the criminal behavior by the longshoremen in washington, because i know in your world the end always seems to justifies the means. criminal vandalism, taking some guards hostage, it’s all justified right?


Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 12:38 PM
Comment #328994

dbs,

An opinion piece in a student-run college newspaper isn’t much of an authority. Read This:

In California in 1996, 924 noncitizens allegedly voted in Orange and Los Angeles Counties,
including 624 allegedly ineligible voters identified by the Task Force of the U.S. House of Representatives investigating the Dornan/Sanchez election. The allegations were based largely on attempts to match immigration lists to voter rolls, but only 71 voters matched name, date of birth,
and signature; other matches were less reliable. Most of the identified voters were processed by one
nonprofit group registering individuals proceeding through the naturalization process; many were
registered immediately after passing an INS citizenship interview, and after receiving a letter indicating that they had become naturalized. At least 372 of the voters were apparently officially sworn
in before Election Day. There are no reports of which we are aware that any noncitizens registered
or voted knowing that they were ineligible. Even assuming there were no matching errors, and 20
leaving aside the critical question of intent, if all 552 remaining individuals were in fact noncitizens
when they cast their votes, the overall noncitizen voting rate would have been 0.017%.

One problem uncovered in that race was that the INS database of newly naturalized citizens was quite out of date.

More information:

According to the law, Dornan was required to make specific claims…he spelled out his allegations in a February 7, 1997 letter…His claims were directly controverted by the Orange County Registrar of Voters…most of Dornan’s claims were unsubstantiated and based on his own sloppy data-gathering methods. For example, one of Dornan’s claims that as many as 700 votes were “suspect” because they were cast by large groups of voters who shared a common address. This list of voters was derived from a single analysis of voter files that generated a subset of 127 addresses where more than six people were registered to vote. The Los Angeles Times interviewed people who lived at sixty of those addresses and found, “No evidence of illegal or nonexistant voters at any of them.”
Posted by: Warped Reality at September 10, 2011 12:51 PM
Comment #328997
nonsense….people are REQUIRED BY LAW to carry identification. end of story.

That’s complete nonsense.

Posted by: Warped Reality at September 10, 2011 1:05 PM
Comment #328998

Warped is absolutely right.
There is no law requiring people to carry ID in America — most especially when they’ve done nothing illegal. So, if states are insisting people produce ID in order to vote, then those ID’s must be free of charge.

Posted by: Adrienne at September 10, 2011 1:13 PM
Comment #328999

warped

i owned a home in the area at the time. it was local news, and i was very close to the entire incident. nativo lopez at the time was doing other illegal things such as offering to raffle off a camaro to get people to register to vote, which is illegal .the area and many surrounding areas are virtually third world countries. they ARE voting. how widespread it is, or at what percentage is another story. all they have to do is fill out a mail in voter registration form. when you go to the polls you tell them your name, and your address, and they cross reference it. that is it.


this a$$hole had his hands all over that election, and continues his handiwork to this day.

http://www.ocregister.com/news/lopez-256135-nativo-indicted.html

i have no problem with anyone voting, as long as they are a citizen, and only vote once. do you have a problem with making sure those who vote are eligable?


Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 1:22 PM
Comment #329000
i have no problem with anyone voting, as long as they are a citizen, and only vote once. do you have a problem with making sure those who vote are eligable?


If they have been through a voter registration process for the state they live in then they are eligible to vote. ID is a repub voter suppression tactic.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 10, 2011 1:35 PM
Comment #329001

adrienne

“So, if states are insisting people produce ID in order to vote, then those ID’s must be free of charge.”

i can live with that. can you live with the ID requirement if they are provided free of charge?

Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 1:36 PM
Comment #329002

j2t2

what problem do you have with insuring that only US citizens vote in elections?

Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 1:41 PM
Comment #329003

warped


“The statute, as drafted and as construed by the state court, is unconstitutionally vague on its face within the meaning of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by failing to clarify what is contemplated by the requirement that a suspect provide a “credible and reliable” identification. As such, the statute vests virtually complete discretion in the hands of the police to determine whether the suspect has satisfied the statute and must be permitted to go on his way in the absence of probable cause to arrest. Pp. 355-361.”

how hard is it for a police officer to find probable cause. i was in a bar in huntington beach during the OP pro back in 1988, and two officers walked in. i was doing absolutely nothing. they asked me to step out back. they then asked me for ID. how well do you think it would have gone if i had said i had none, and proceeded to argue my point? asking for ID as proof of citizenship when voting is perfectly reasonable. as i told adrienne i’m ok with providing it for free.

Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 1:56 PM
Comment #329004

warped

one other thing. it seems as if the court was also saying that the law needed to state officialy what would constitute a legal form of ID.

Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 2:02 PM
Comment #329005

dbs:

can you live with the ID requirement if they are provided free of charge?

I agree with j2:

If they have been through a voter registration process for the state they live in then they are eligible to vote. ID is a repub voter suppression tactic.

What these states are doing at the demands of the right smacks of “show me your papers” authoritarianism. It is clearly a despicable attempt at suppressing the vote for poor, elderly, and disabled Americans because these people tend to vote left.

Posted by: Adrienne at September 10, 2011 2:09 PM
Comment #329006

Why the red herring dbs? As part of the voter registration process non citizens are weeded out. Putting additional hurdles in the path of one of our most cherished freedoms should be something we could all agree upon. To think that conservatives want the government to interfere with registered voters tells us something IMHO. Conservatives like to claim small government as the own but when they use the government to violate the constitutional rights of fellow Americans we see there true colors.

What we all need to understand is both parties are involved in voter suppression, not just the repubs. The repubs attempt voter registration on a more sizable scale with caging and ID’s while the dems do it on a smaller scale by slashing tires. Either way is unacceptable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression

Posted by: j2t2 at September 10, 2011 2:10 PM
Comment #329017


As a former union member, I am aware of what union people are capable of when they feel threatened or provoked. They have been threatened and provoked. They are, for the most part, just common people and if you threaten peoples livelihood, threaten their children’s welfare, they will react, sometimes violently.

The right would dearly love to provoke unions into acts of violence. They are doing their best to do so.

There are both good and bad aspects within every human and every human organization.

Posted by: jlw at September 10, 2011 4:29 PM
Comment #329018

Dbs: “…what i find amazing is that you’re not willing to hold your own to the same standards.”

What is amazing is you would believe that Hoffa somehow met the standard you’re talking about. He said nothing even remotely as inflammatory as you seem to think he did. This is why I argue the right is more inflamed by poor people voting than what Hoffa said.

Posted by: Adam Ducker at September 10, 2011 4:43 PM
Comment #329019

adrienne

so let’s see if i have this right. you say the IDs should be free of charge if required at the polls, or it’s a poll tax. i say i’m ok with free IDs. you then change gears and claim that asking someone to prove who they are at the polls is somehow akin to nazi security asking jews for thier papers.

j2t2

“Conservatives like to claim small government as the own but when they use the government to violate the constitutional rights of fellow Americans we see there true colors.”


how is asking someone to show ID at the polls depriving them of thier constitutional rights? especially if they can recieve it free of charge. sounds to me like you and adrienne don’t care if illegal aliens, and noncitizens vote.

jlw


“As a former union member, I am aware of what union people are capable of when they feel threatened or provoked.”

wow should i be frightened?


“They are, for the most part, just common people and if you threaten peoples livelihood, threaten their children’s welfare, they will react, sometimes violently.”


if those on the right get fed up with being over regulated, having thier personal freedoms infringed on more and more, , and felt thier livelyhoods, and way of life was threatened by the leftist nanny state now in control, and commit violence against this governance will you understand, and make excuses for them too. or do you believe the rule of law and doing things the right way?


“There are both good and bad aspects within every human and every human organization.”


yes, and there is also a rule of law. those who held those guards hostage, and the others who commited felony vandalism should be arrested and prosecuted.

Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 4:52 PM
Comment #329020

adam

that’s fine. go ahead and give him a pass. the fact that you can’t be honest about his remarks shows what a myopic view of the world you hold.

Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 4:56 PM
Comment #329024

The Real problem for Republicans is that despite all they say about their being the popular party that knows the will of the people, they are on the wrong side of many policy questions with most voters, and if they tried to get on the right side, they are a afraid many of their base voters would abandon them.

This constant attempt to limit voting rights is a transparent attempt to cut into main Democratic constituencies that Republicans know they have nothing to offer to.

The best idea for the party would be to reconsider it’s positions over the long term, but they’re less interested in making their positions the positions of a mainstream party, and more interested in trying to force the acceptance of their positions by the mainstream.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 10, 2011 6:00 PM
Comment #329028

Stephen If we all took your advice we wouldn’t need elections because there would be only one party thankfully a vast majority of people don’t take your advice.

Posted by: KAP at September 10, 2011 6:15 PM
Comment #329032

KAP

if your ever gonna be in logan county look let me know.

Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 7:05 PM
Comment #329033
how is asking someone to show ID at the polls depriving them of thier constitutional rights? especially if they can recieve it free of charge. sounds to me like you and adrienne don’t care if illegal aliens, and noncitizens vote.

It is a violation of their rights only when then cannot vote because they do not have the right ID, The registration process identifies eligible voters. Either or but not both should be acceptable especially when the cases of voter fraud are negligible. By putting extra unnecessary steps into the process it increases the chances for more fraud.

Not only that but those that vote by mail have the advantage of not being asked for ID when they vote. It seems you want to discriminate against only those that must go to the polling location. Colorado requires an ID when going to a polling location but not by mail, clearly discriminatory,IMHO.

DO you know of cases where illegals have voted in elections? I think the issue of illegals voting is just a smoke screen dbs.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 10, 2011 7:13 PM
Comment #329034

Likewise dbs if your ever in Cuyahoga cty.

Posted by: KAP at September 10, 2011 7:28 PM
Comment #329035

j2t2

like i said, there was a high profile case back in 1996 where i lived. i don’t want anybody who is legally allowed to vote denied that right. at the same time i want to make sure no one votes that is in eligible. i don’t think that is unreasonable.

Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 8:29 PM
Comment #329036

KAP

thanks for the invite as well. we’ll have to do some grilling and have a few cold ones.

Posted by: dbs at September 10, 2011 8:32 PM
Comment #329038

dbs, sounds good!!

Posted by: KAP at September 10, 2011 8:51 PM
Comment #329048
like i said, there was a high profile case back in 1996 where i lived.

I was thinking more along the lines of real and true cases not conservative mythology dbs. The one you mention was the sore loser Bob Dornan flying fast and loose with accusations but no facts, it was without merit.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 11, 2011 9:18 AM
Comment #329051

j2t2


“I was thinking more along the lines of real and true cases not conservative mythology dbs.”

wow….i guess i the fact i was there, and was close to the actual event was just a dream. that distrct was right next to mine. i read about, and followed it in the paper on a daily basis. you’re right nothing shady went on, and nativo (larry) lopez who was behind much of the controversy is an upstanding individual.


http://www.opposingviews.com/i/nativo-lopez-indicted-by-grand-jury-jailed


http://totalbuzz.ocregister.com/2010/03/26/nativo-lopez-headed-to-trial-after-incident/32645/


http://totalbuzz.ocregister.com/2011/06/22/activist-nativo-lopez-pleads-guilty-to-voter-fraud/55539/

Posted by: dbs at September 11, 2011 10:23 AM
Comment #329056

dbs illegals voting not voter fraud. This guy was found guilty of registering at his office instead of at his home.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 11, 2011 1:07 PM
Comment #329059

j2t2

that’s just the latest issue, and only a fraction of some of the other questionable things he’s been involved in.

BTW, are you ok with illegal aliens and noncitizens voting? a simple yes or no will suffice.

Posted by: dbs at September 11, 2011 1:41 PM
Comment #329062


1996?

dbs, this is 2011 and Republicans are passing poll taxes while claiming there is a lot fraudulent voting. If that is the case, it should be easy for you to supply the evidence.

So, are you going to resort to “are you ok with illegal aliens and noncitizens” or are you actually going to show some evidence proving the Republican claims of wide scale voter fraud?

It seems to me that you are falling back on, Ok, so I can’t produce evidence but this is a good thing to do anyway. I guess if it reduces the number of poor, especially minorities, voting it’s got to be a good thing.

This is just another attempt at voter suppression. I hope this backfires big time on conservatives and they have to eat Jim Crow.

Posted by: jlw at September 11, 2011 3:09 PM
Comment #329066

jlw


are you ok with illegal aliens, and non citizens voting?


“I guess if it reduces the number of poor, especially minorities, voting it’s got to be a good thing.”


yawn!!!!! i don’t care who votes so long as they are legally eligible to do so.


“this is 2011 and Republicans are passing poll taxes while claiming there is a lot fraudulent voting.”


so….do you have evidence that poll taxes are being charged? if you do there should also be the records of those prosecuted, because poll taxes are illegal. so where’s YOUR proof?

Posted by: dbs at September 11, 2011 3:43 PM
Comment #329070
BTW, are you ok with illegal aliens and noncitizens voting? a simple yes or no will suffice.

No I am not ok with anyone that is not a legally registered voter voting. I am not ok with a legally registered voting more than one time per in an election. I am not ok with obstructing any LRV (legally registered voter) from voting. I believe the repubs concerted effort to keep people from voting by the various techniques they have employed recently.

Here is a non partisan link to some information on the conservative mythology of voter fraud.


http://www.truthaboutfraud.org/pdf/TruthAboutVoterFraud.pdf

Posted by: j2t2 at September 11, 2011 4:23 PM
Comment #329084
i was in a bar in huntington beach during the OP pro back in 1988, and two officers walked in. i was doing absolutely nothing. they asked me to step out back. they then asked me for ID. how well do you think it would have gone if i had said i had none, and proceeded to argue my point? asking for ID as proof of citizenship when voting is perfectly reasonable. as i told adrienne i’m ok with providing it for free.

Because you are a nice guy and wished to cooperate you waived your rights, but that means nothing. If you stood your ground and refused to produce a method of verifying your identity, the police officer would have no legal standing to arrest you. Actually, this is the same issue we argued about over that law that was passed in AZ that required their police officers to request identification from anyone in “lawful contact” with the police.

On the other hand, there are states with stop and identify statutes, which were ruled constitutional by the USSC. These statutes require individuals to tell police their identity on certain occasions, but it is not necessary to furnish any evidence to prove that identity. However, giving a false identity is a separate crime and you can be prosecuted for it if the police ever find out. Nonetheless, the extent of these laws vary from state to state, Massachusetts has no such law, so I am free to remain anonymous in any interaction I have with the police there.

Posted by: Warped Reality at September 11, 2011 11:38 PM
Comment #329097

Adam
It is a hypocritical position. Your fear of people exercising their 2nd Amendment right is no more viable than those who fear the negative results concerning our rights, by those who vote for more and more government intrusion into our personal lives.
The upside for one, is the downside for another.

J2
The way it works is by spouting rhetoric to garner emotional support from your drones while leaving an ‘out’ to justify it to the critics of such aggressive words. Hence all the talk about an army, being at war and taking out those who dare not fall in lockstep.
And no, I do not believe hoffa was hoping for violence, but as long as he wins re-election, he also is not going to care if or when it happens.

“So you hold no anger towards Faux because it would do no good?”

Why would I hold anger towards them or any other opinion shows? The fact is, they all only give you the parts that support their personal opinions or they tell the listening drones what was ‘really’ meant.

I do not believe what I listened to was edited, especially since it contained all the leftist talking point excuses.

Posted by: kctim at September 12, 2011 10:26 AM
Comment #329098

Adrienne
“That they’re trying to make some people pay a poll tax, even though poll taxes are illegal”

But where in the memo does it say to charge people who come in asking for a free ID?

Posted by: kctim at September 12, 2011 10:30 AM
Comment #329101
Why would I hold anger towards them or any other opinion shows?

Because it is called the faux news channel. It was aired as news not opinion, kctim. It was on The Megyn Kelly news program not one of the propagandist shows.

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/david/fox-news-concerned-about-hate-speech-obama-s

I do not believe what I listened to was edited, especially since it contained all the leftist talking point excuses.

Perhaps not but the heavily edited version that appeared on Faux originally was edited watch the edited version and you will see why you should renounce Faux.

Here is a local Faux station accepting responsibility for it’s actions.

http://www.fox19.com/story/15414901/reality-check-hoffas-comments-edited-by-fox-news


Ya know kctim if the speech was as you claim why would Faux have to edit it as they did? Even local Faux stations can see the evil intentions of the cable news outlet, why can’t those on the right?

Posted by: j2t2 at September 12, 2011 11:22 AM
Comment #329103

J2
I don’t care why FOX, MSNBC, CNN, current etc… does anything. I don’t care. I don’t care. And people on the opposite side of what they are saying will always claim they have some kind of ‘evil intentions’ to take over the world or something.

Taking a stab in the dark, I will say that FOX and ‘those on the right’ do not see it the same way you do for the same reason MSNBC, CNN, current etc… and the leftists clamor to target sights and don’t retreat, reload: they all have a political axe to grind.
If I am not mistaken, FOX did end up playing the whole quote, didn’t they? Has the MSM ever put the scary right wing quotes in context?

Only time will tell J2. Hoffa was campaigning and he was using his intentionally vague rhetoric to fire up votes. If it worked, there will be problems at Tea Party rallies next year. If it was just for votes, there will be no problems at all. Judging by the recent union activity, I think we know what to expect.

Posted by: kctim at September 12, 2011 1:52 PM
Comment #329105

Of course you don’t care kctim, who the heck wants accurate truthful news when they can get heavily editing versions that allow them to substitute their ideological beliefs for facts. Why bother with the truth when extremist propaganda is available. Look how easy many Faux news followers and right wing hack sites have followed the propagandist line despite knowing they have received false information. But you condone this type of propaganda because “it isn’t evil when we do it”. Once again Germany, good people listening to propaganda 1930’s, doomed to repeat history.


Faux gets a free ride from the right wing for inciting ignorance of the truth yet you question the “mainstream media”. Perhaps their new motto should be “We edit you decide”.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 12, 2011 2:15 PM
Comment #329127

kctim:

But where in the memo does it say to charge people who come in asking for a free ID?


Wisc. DMV workers ordered to not offer voter IDs

A leaked memo written by a high-ranking Wisconsin Dept. of Transportation official stipulates that DMV workers are not to offer the voter ID, leaving it to the patron to explicitly ask for the free ID, then fill out the proper paperwork.

“While you should certainly help customers who come in asking for a free ID to check the appropriate box, you should refrain from offering the free version to customers who do not ask for it,” Steve Krieser, executive secretary for the Wisconsin Dept. of Transportation, wrote to employees.

That constitutes a poll tax on some of the people. The guy who wrote the memo intending to counteract this memo was subsequently fired from his job.
Hope this clears things up for you.

Posted by: Adrienne at September 12, 2011 7:55 PM
Comment #329138

adrienne


“While you should certainly help customers who come in asking for a free ID to check the appropriate box, you should refrain from offering the free version to customers who do not ask for it”

sounds to me like they aren’t trying to stop someone from receiving a free voter ID, just not bringing it up when someone is willing to pay for an ID. sounds purely about protecting revenue, not about stpping people from voting.far from being a poll tax.

Posted by: dbs at September 13, 2011 5:33 AM
Comment #329142

Adrienne
If that is all we have to go by, then it appears the guy was let go for spreading hype or something.
You have to pay for the driver ID so why also offer them a free voting ID? That would be a huge waste.

Customers who do not ask for the free ID are not there to get the free ID.
Customers who do ask for the ID are being helped and are NOT being charged.

I’m sorry, but calling this voter suppression is a huge stretch.

Posted by: kctim at September 13, 2011 9:23 AM
Comment #329144

J2
I don’t care because ALL the networks are guilty and it would be a complete waste of my time to dwell on it. Accurate and truthful news is only possible if people are willing to hold all responsible. FOX does not cater to the leftists so leftists see FOX as “extremist propaganda.” MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, Current etc… do not cater to those on the right, so ‘righties’ see them pushing extreme leftist propaganda.

The right called hoffa on saying ‘take them out’ instead of ‘vote them out.’
The left magically knows what people “really” mean when leftists say stupid things, so they are claiming hoffa “really” meant vote them out, and they willfully ignore hoffa referencing this is a war and we have an army, in order to falsely claim it was about voting.

You see J2, I don’t care because “it isn’t evil when we do it” has been the leftists motto for as long as I can remember and I know trying to fix the media is a total waste of time.

And as far as “We edit you decide?”
I’ll take that over “We decide, you listen and obey,” any day of the week.

Posted by: kctim at September 13, 2011 9:47 AM
Comment #329154

kctim, such a good reason “all the networks are guilty”. Yet when caught red handed editing a speech, that distorts the speech to a point millions of Americans are in a tizzy over it as if it were real, should they not hear the wrath of those that depend upon them for reliable and truthful information?

The left doesn’t need to “magically know” kctim the speech says it. There is no magic involved it wasn’t implied “vote” was directly stated. just before the take out the SOB’s. Your spinning here kctim.

The right called Hoffa Jr. on Faux BS not on the truth of what his speech said. Only to save face did the righties claim such nonsense as we have seen in this thread. What you telling me is this is ok because “the other side does it”?

While you might prefer “we edit you decide” you are in fact allowing yourself to be led around with the rest of the right wing sheeple who cannot comprehend the fact that Faux intentionally misled you.


Posted by: j2t2 at September 13, 2011 12:43 PM
Comment #329165

J2
Millions of leftists were in a ‘tizzy’ over the targets on the map. The MSM talked about them non-stop and did everything they could to make it seem like everyone to the right of Lenin wanted to see Democrats shot.
There was no ‘wrath’ from the leftists who depend on them for reliable and truthful information. In fact, the derogatory and hateful rhetoric from the leftists has only gotten worse.

And now you expect me to condemn people for not thinking that a man talking about being at war, loving to fight, having an army to take back America and taking out his enemy, really meant ‘vote’ them out?

Tell you what, I will do exactly that, just as soon as the leftists quit trying to label me as a racist brainwashed redneck for simply believing in personal responsibility and individual rights.

Until then, I am going to call it as it is and right now it is that I believe hoffa’s words are going to come back and bite the leftists in the ass in the near future.

Posted by: kctim at September 13, 2011 3:10 PM
Comment #329256


Kctim, I guess I would be a brainwashed leftist hillbilly. I don’t think I am being brainwashed and I doubt that you think you are being brainwashed. Perhaps we all are being brainwashed to a certain degree.

Posted by: jlw at September 14, 2011 4:14 PM
Comment #329303

jlw
My point is that they are pushing a political agenda and people use their own when deciding whether to support or condemn what FOX and the MSM say. Because of this, I do not care what they say.

As an example, how many leftists do you think are going to condemn the latest talking point that Perry wants a theocracy?

Posted by: kctim at September 15, 2011 11:28 AM
Comment #329365

kctim, what MSM outlet reported “Perry wants a theocracy”
as factual news not opinion? Or opinion for that matter.

It seems to me you are comparing apples and oranges as you continue to make excuses for the far right propagandist we call Faux news.

Perhaps the leftist were in a tizzy because the right wing authoritarian fascist totalitarian conservatives were in a rage kctim, look at the militias and their increasing use of violence and violent rhetoric in the past 5 years.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/26762

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/04/us-surge-rightwing-extremist-groups

Tell you what, I will do exactly that, just as soon as the leftists quit trying to label me as a racist brainwashed redneck for simply believing in personal responsibility and individual rights.

Jeez,kc this deal seems a bit vague to me, what leftist have called you a racist brainwashed redneck for starters? I think many on the right are decent people, at least most of the conservatives I have meant, I use the people of Germany in the early ‘30’s as an example to show how otherwise decent people can be tricked into following a movement that leads them down the wrong path.

While some may try to lump all righties into the same group I haven’t really seen that on WB except by the righties themselves, is this one of those cases or do you have specifics as to the racist brainwashed redneck thing. Now some on the right can be considered racist brainwashed rednecks I’m sure but not all, not most. Are you sure they were referring to you?

It seems you like to labels those on the left whether it be a liberal, a progressive, a socialist, a communist or just a left leaning moderate as leftist, with the term being used derogatorily by some on the right. Now I don’t suppose you do it to harm or insult as much as you do it to easily group us together and I think they same may be true for us lefties when we comment about righties. Far right extremist, authoritarian, fascist to moderate conservative to right leaning moderate sometimes just get grouped together for ease of conversion. Sometimes they don’t when the discussion is about some on the right not all on the right.

Anyway Hoffa Jr, was specific when he said “we have the vote” it is the only way to take the SOB”s out that counts. Many conservatives understand this I know because we can see them trying to suppress the vote.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 16, 2011 2:28 PM
Comment #329371

oops “ease of conversion”

should be “ease of conversation”

I know, I know Freudian slip….:)

Posted by: j2t2 at September 16, 2011 4:00 PM
Comment #329431


We are dealing with a political party, the GOP, which says that raising taxes on the wealthy is class warfare and restricting the poor from voting is good for the country.

Kctim, I think every voter has a right to know of Rick Perry’s and other Republican candidates, association with right wing advocates of a Christian theocracy.

When you court the theocracy movement, invite them into the governors office, have them pray over you, seek their endorsement, attend a Christians only rally, sponsored by the theocracy movement, with theocracy speakers, endorse and pass theocracy legislation, walk and quack like the theocracy, you are either an advocate of theocracy or a Republican politician.

Posted by: jlw at September 18, 2011 3:43 PM
Comment #330870

Take care of your boots
Every winter we will find a pair supra tk societyof beloved boots for our main shoes in winter.sometimes,the boots are high TK Society quality and have not been worn out till the next year,but we can not wear them out because we did not take care of them that they look ugly.do you feel pity?usually,boots in our online shop are high quality and fashionable,you can wear
supra muska skytopthem the next if you take care of them.you should

Posted by: rtfgy at October 22, 2011 3:56 AM
Post a comment