IDBillzFan Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 Then these volunteer groups can make sure they get out to get their ID's. Will the volunteers help get them past the New Black Panthers, too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 And I'll ask you again, what about the restrictions which are currently in place? What about voter registration, and what about requiring voters to cast their votes at polling stations? Aren't these impediments to voting? Shouldn't these obstacles be removed by your logic? How many people would vote but do not because registering is an inconvenience or getting to a polling station during election hours is just too damn hard? How many eligible voters are being ignored right now with our current requirements? Why aren't you fighting for them? You oughta just be able to phone it in like American Idol. Except then we'd be disenfranchising people without phones. !@#$ me, I give up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) First of all, voting is a privlidge, not a right. We already have restrictions based on age, legal status, registration, etc. If something is a right, it's basic and general practice cannot be hampered by an overarching process and bureaucracy which doles out access. With that said, the franchise should only be extended to those with real skin in the game; IE. those who pay federal income taxes and those with military service histories. Edited July 25, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 You oughta just be able to phone it in like American Idol. Except then we'd be disenfranchising people without phones. !@#$ me, I give up. Have no fear. If you have no phone, the Government can help https://www.reachoutmobile.com/ http://www.assurancewireless.com/Public/Welcome.aspx https://www.safelinkwireless.com/Safelink/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 First of all, voting is a privlidge, not a right. We already have restrictions based on age, legal status, registration, etc. If something is a right, it's basic and general practice cannot be hampered by an overarching process and bureaucracy which doles out access. With that said, the franchise should only be extended to those with real skin in the game; IE. those who pay federal income taxes and those with military service histories. Actually, I'd argue it's a right. I'd also argue, like I do for most rights, that it implies responsibility. In this case, one of the responsibilities is to prove who you say you are when you cast your vote (another one being: for God's sake punch the stylus all the way THROUGH the paper and make your intent clear). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Actually, I'd argue it's a right. I'd also argue, like I do for most rights, that it implies responsibility. In this case, one of the responsibilities is to prove who you say you are when you cast your vote (another one being: for God's sake punch the stylus all the way THROUGH the paper and make your intent clear). It has been treated as a privlidge since the franchise was first established in this country. What are the differences between rights and privlidges? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 It has been treated as a privlidge since the franchise was first established in this country. What are the differences between rights and privlidges? Depends on which document you choose to read. Some would say that the only rights are "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". I...would come up with my own definition, which I'm having a hard time creating without being circular about it. I'll get back to you on that. And I'm aware it's been treated like a privilege from the first. I disagree with that, too. A participatory democracy (even if it is a democratic republic) in which all are not eligible to participate is not truly a democracy (and I'm going to ignore any strawman argument about letting three year olds vote - I don't think you'll make it, but there's at least one retard on this board who will. Probably JtSP.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 26, 2012 Share Posted July 26, 2012 Depends on which document you choose to read. Some would say that the only rights are "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". I...would come up with my own definition, which I'm having a hard time creating without being circular about it. I'll get back to you on that. And I'm aware it's been treated like a privilege from the first. I disagree with that, too. A participatory democracy (even if it is a democratic republic) in which all are not eligible to participate is not truly a democracy (and I'm going to ignore any strawman argument about letting three year olds vote - I don't think you'll make it, but there's at least one retard on this board who will. Probably JtSP.) If you think about it, "liberty" is incredibly inclusive when listed as a right. I'll lubricate the conversation by tossing out my definition for inspection and debate: Rights, as a concept, must be organic and independent. You cannot be said to have the right to something that first requirs the positive actions and efforts of another. If that other were to disappear, or cease applying efforts, your hold on whatever good or services they were providing would cease or disappear as well; therefor you cannot be said to have a right to it, unless you also can be said to have the right to force them to exist or to labor on your behalf. Rights also must be passive in their application. The right to freedom of speech requires no action from anyone other than the actor choosing to speak; and infact it is the restriction of that right which would require the positive action of another. The same can be said for religious beliefs and practice, general ownership of something created, improved, or purchased, or association. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Go ahead. Find one example of voter fraud. Go ahead. You can't. It's a manufactured problem so the GOP can disenfranchise minorities. Well, except for stories like this. But other than that, go ahead. Find something. In a story ignored by the national media, in April a Tunica County, Miss., jury convicted NAACP official Lessadolla Sowers on 10 counts of fraudulently casting absentee ballots. Sowers is identified on an NAACP website as a member of the Tunica County NAACP Executive Committee. Sowers received a five-year prison term for each of the 10 counts, but Circuit Court Judge Charles Webster permitted Sowers to serve those terms concurrently, according to the Tunica Times, the only media outlet to cover the sentencing. “This crime cuts against the fabric of our free society,” Judge Webster said. Sowers was found guilty of voting in the names of Carrie Collins, Walter Howard, Sheena Shelton, Alberta Pickett, Draper Cotton and Eddie Davis. She was also convicted of voting in the names of four dead persons: James L. Young, Dora Price, Dorothy Harris, and David Ross. In the trial, forensic scientist Bo Scales testified that Sowers’s DNA was found on the inner seals of five envelopes containing absentee ballots. Move along. Nothing to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Go ahead. Find one example of voter fraud. Go ahead. You can't. It's a manufactured problem so the GOP can disenfranchise minorities. Well, except for stories like this. But other than that, go ahead. Find something. Move along. Nothing to see. Clearly that judge and prosecutor are racists who are only interested in suppressing minority (specifically black) votes. Voter fraud is some made-up concept designed solely as a GOP talking point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Go ahead. Find one example of voter fraud. Go ahead. You can't. It's a manufactured problem so the GOP can disenfranchise minorities. Well, except for stories like this. But other than that, go ahead. Find something. Move along. Nothing to see. So 10 counts of voter fraud were caught, prosecuted and punished. A whopping ten. With gobs of people like this getting caught, no doubt we need tighter restrictions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 I know that my friends and I probably throughout my life participated in some level of cheating in high school and grade school, I would safely say at least 50 different times, and we never were caught a single time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 So 10 counts of voter fraud were caught, prosecuted and punished. A whopping ten. With gobs of people like this getting caught, no doubt we need tighter restrictions. So you simply don't care about the integrity of the electoral process... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 So you simply don't care about the integrity of the electoral process... That's a false choice if ever one was written on PPP (and they are...a lot) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 So you simply don't care about the integrity of the electoral process... You're not paying attention. It has nothing to do with the electoral process. It has to do with voter fraud. Show me one example of...no, wait...show me two examples of voter fraud. You can't. Okay, so maybe you can show me two...but that's not the point, even though that's been the point for the last eight pages... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 You're not paying attention. It has nothing to do with the electoral process. It has to do with voter fraud. Show me one example of...no, wait...show me two examples of voter fraud. You can't. Okay, so maybe you can show me two...but that's not the point, even though that's been the point for the last eight pages... Big Cat has been very clear on the issue for more than 10 pages. Requiring a photo ID to vote is completely unnecessary, racist, underhanded GOP tactics at their worst, but sensible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 You're not paying attention. It has nothing to do with the electoral process. It has to do with voter fraud. Show me one example of...no, wait...show me two examples of voter fraud. You can't. Okay, so maybe you can show me two...but that's not the point, even though that's been the point for the last eight pages... How will presenting an ID (nobody under the age of 21 has ever manipulated one of those before) have stopped this from happening? And how ever was she caught without the ID law? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 Big Cat has been very clear on the issue for more than 10 pages. Requiring a photo ID to vote is completely unnecessary, racist, underhanded GOP tactics at their worst, but sensible. Now that's just damn funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 That's a false choice if ever one was written on PPP (and they are...a lot) No, it's not. If you dismiss voter fraud as "no big deal, it's only ten ballots," you don't care about the integrity of the electoral process. Integrity's like a balloon; it doesn't matter how small the hole is, the air still escapes. If you can dismiss ten fraudulent votes as no big deal, you don't care about the integrity of the electoral process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 No, it's not. If you dismiss voter fraud as "no big deal, it's only ten ballots," you don't care about the integrity of the electoral process. Integrity's like a balloon; it doesn't matter how small the hole is, the air still escapes. If you can dismiss ten fraudulent votes as no big deal, you don't care about the integrity of the electoral process. Well, I'm still waiting (in vain, I know) for LA to explain how an ID law would have prevented this. I'm also curious as to how this was ever detected without the ID laws. The case does nothing to demonstrate the necessity for a reactionary ID law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts