The Big Cat

Dios mio, I don't even know what we're talking about anymore

It does. Why do you ask?

You need to go back and read the report I posted yesterday that details circumstances beyond would be voters control. It's not a matter of convenience. Then, go back and re-read the link I posted from this discussion wherei say the exact opposite of what you just wrote. Actually I haven't. Responsibility, yes in that one holds himself accountable. Obligation, no in that no external force REQUIRES one to vote. Can it not be both right AND responsibility?

I don't know what you mean but "100,000 legit votes invalidated by fraud," and how did we get back to "slightly more inconvenient?" That was never my argument, and I've provided an excess of reports that show PEOPLE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO VOTE because of the laws--it has nothing to do with dragging one's ass anywhere. This thread would be a lot shorter if people stopped arguing with points they've made on my behalf. http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/147528-voter-id-requirement-may-affect-black-voter-turnout-dems-fear/page__view__findpost__p__2516610

An all-inclusive luxury box at the 2014 home opener.

What if they're born in a prison, nobody knows it, they're tucked away in a basement for 20 years and during that time they miss two opportunities to vote? I think we're done here. I don't trust that you're just plain curious about where I stand on this issue.

I think if one has paid his/her debt to society, then he/she has paid his/her debt to society. I don't know what kind of 'gotcha-moment' you're trying to back me into here, but if you're going to draw a distinction between "rationale" and "how I feel," then your line of questioning is inherently a setup... I told you: I believe voting is a right. Therefore, nobody should be precluded from the process, unless--at the time of an election--you're serving a sentence, thus you've been removed from society and don't get to participate. As I mentioned above, once you're out, you're out. As a convicted felon out of jail, you pay your taxes, etc., so you should be re-enveloped into the voting process. What answer were you looking for?

Concurrent with elections, not other sentences, doy.

Is voting a right, an obligation or a privilege? Right, yes. Obligation, no. Privilege, no. Without getting into a philosophical debate about the penal system, I believe every citizen (except for those concurrently serving jail sentences), should be given, at no cost, an opportunity to vote. See above. I believe voting's a right.

Jesus. Of course I'm not saying that. God damn. These modifications will prevent people from voting. Therefore, these modifications are not the answer. At least Tom's finger dying technique doesn't preclude people from the process...don't know how it would work with early voting, or as EII mentioned, absentee voting...

Bet me?

And how will "inconveniencing" (read: preventing) those people guarantee integrity in the process? Shouldn't those votes be sacrificed if and only if it guarantees no voter fraud? And if doesn't guarantee no voter fraud, then why are we shaving those votes in the first place?

When you've got no sensible leg to stand on, resort to personal attacks. Classic LABILLZ. CLASSIC!

I see. People who support the new restrictions: dumbasses. People who oppose the new restrictions: also dumbasses. Which one were you again?

Dumbasses like the GOP themselves, right?

Not the case. I don't think this method is the best way to ensure accuracy because it's a.) not foolproof and b.) will prevent people from voting. Saving votes by killing them is NOT the best course of action, and you know it.

We've had safeguards against those for years. It's all about meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Right, so the information you asked for demanded and have now been given (as of the last link) over 33 million times is not good enough by some nonexistent, nebulous standard that you've had to twist your way into justifying. What stake do you have in this game, anyways?

This is great. I wish it wasn't so easy to call these shots from a mile away, but keep requalifying what birth certificates data/facts you deem valid. SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE! I DON'T LIKE THAT EVIDENCE! YOU'RE STUPID! Round and round we go. Also, Dick Jauronimo, I never said this anything to do with race, but don't let that stop you from making yourself feel clever by arguing with points that nobody made. In fact it is as simple as yes or no. Will these new laws prevent people from voting? The answer: yes. I've provided the information you asked for, but I'm sure the next steps will be for me to go out and gather the data myself, because nobody can be trusted. But, for further reading: knock yourselves out.

A simple 'yes' would have sufficed.

I understand he's a mountain of a man. If he get it together...

So you fully acknowledge then that some people will be unable to obtain ID's.

No response to the NPR report? Shocking.

Preach on, my good friend, and you've got yourself a lifelong disciple!

http://www.npr.org/2012/01/28/146006217/why-new-photo-id-laws-mean-some-wont-vote Now go ahead and bash the source and discredit all their data/evidence. You guys are like !@#$ing birthers when presented with information your political thick-headedness deems invalid. But have at it anyways, all you partisan looney tunes. I'll keep waiting for someone to explain why THIS is the way to fix the system.

To what end?