The Big Cat

I really, really hate to be the turd in the punch bowl here, but as Bills fans, shouldn't we expect a major acquisition like Mario Williams to flame out?--most likely because of injury? He's already missed substantial time in two seasons, including last year--his second straight year on IR. Have I missed something? Where were the doom and gloomers to make these points for me when we signed the guy? Is anyone else concerned by this?

Surely you aren't equating private funds with the voting process...

Well, considering it's a question I've answered no less than three times already in this thread, I figured might as well cut to the chase.

What specifically do you have trouble recalling? Please, I beg you. Add me to your ignore list.

I cried when we beat the Pats* last year. I think I'd be an absolute mess if they won the big one.

I just think it's awful darn funny that after the 2000 election, GOP sympathizers stayed pretty mum on the issue of voter reform, then it SUDDENLY became a problem when...you know...HE was elected.

No love for Amy Goodman and Democracy Now?

I am. It's the nature of my business. It's rare that it would happen, but if we get a client who's in crisis at 3:00 a.m. on a Tuesday, we don't put our phone's on silent and go back to bed--we're up and tending to their needs. It's not because we're "important," it's the nature of what my firm gets paid to do... That's why I was in the office at 5:40 this morning...

What we're debating is the necessity of the law. I'm fully on aboard with the rationale behind it, but I'm not okay with creating solutions to problems that don't exist. I was also under the impression that the ilk demanding voter reform felt the same way about government intervention with non-problem solutions. I'm wondering why that attitude has suddenly changed...

I didn't read a single post in this thread so I apologize if this is redundant: But any talk of # this or that is totally moot--at least so says our head coach, publicly, a lot. Gailey has repeatedly said that they only "assign numbers to them" because they have to for media purposes.

People should have to present ID to vote. We agree on this. BUt it's not a law right now. And there's no evidence to suggest that the current system has led to a fundamental failure to hold voter fraud in check. I find it strange that so many posters here who (rightly) rail against big government are suddenly at arms for the government to solve a problem that doesn't really exist, to preempt a problem with regulation seems to fundamentally fly in the face of the political beliefs that voter-reform advocates so frequently espouse.

Myself included. But not because it's a problem.

For all I know there have been dozens of attempts. Thanks to my locks, we'll never know. If my doors were open all the time you'd be on point.

and if it was a real concern of the Obama camp, expect Biden to resign his post and be replaced by...

My favorite part of this exchange is that it happened MOMENTS after I finished watching:

I came here for an argument!

Right, except in this case there'a A LOT OF SMOKE and a single blade of grass engulfed in flames somewhere, according to investigations into voter fraud. IIRC, there was monetary incentives for organizations to register as many voters as possible, leading the voter registration organizations to fraudulent register the LA Lakers roster, etc. I could be wrong about this, but there's a reason to register that leads to fraud.

We have no--ZERO--safeguards against voter fraud!?

I don't believe I'm arguing for that at all, actually. In fact, I think there are myriad ways to make the voting process more transparent and honest, and I don't think asking for an ID is an extreme or disenfranchising method. What bothers me is that people keep equating voter registration fraud with actual voter fraud.

And I've got no system in place to determine whether or not somebody's sneaking into my room at night and plucking out my hairs one by one, but I'm not wringing my hands trying to come up with a solution to stop it...

I'm not denying the possibility of it happening. But the fact of the matter is there's no evidence support that it IS happening. If you can prove otherwise--that fraudulent votes are being cast in great numbers--then so be it. But all the data I've seen suggests the opposite.

I don't think anyone's denying the problem of voter registration mishaps. The day the dog actually casts a vote is the day we start panicking...

You think so, huh?

Flanders' formula for youthful living is two slices of white bread and water. That's about as exciting as a Romney/Condi ticket. To your point: not aiming to rev up the base and ONLY stealing swing votes is like ordering a hot dog with ketchup, mustard, relish and onions, hold the hot dog.

I see you found a way to argue. Too bad you didn't think it through first!