Make Sure You Have Valid Photo ID!

[Cuchulain]

Florida's disgraced former GOP chairman says the party had meetings about "keeping blacks from voting"

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/27/fla_...d_black_votes/

[onmyknees]

Florida's disgraced former GOP chairman says the party had meetings about "keeping blacks from voting"

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/27/fla_...d_black_votes/

You wouldn't nor shouldn't give this guy the time of day....the operative word being here "disgraced", he's a dirt bag... but since he's singing your song...why not use him as a character witness? The problem is this guy has no character, but he suddenly appears on your witness list. He's easily impeachable as a witness.

Some Clarity....voter ID laws have been discussed in many State legislatures for over a decade, as far back as 2003....in fact that year, Alabama, Colorado, Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota all opted for ID laws. In 2004/05 it was Indiana, New Mexico and Washington; Georgia to the point where over 33 states have some sort of voter integrity laws, and we never heard a peep about it until recently. Unless of course you all were sounding the Constitutional alarm back in your closet in 2002 and we just couldn't hear you. But now we have a razor tight election, where every vote in certain swing states is critical and with less Dem enthusiasm than 2008 ..... what better way to gin up a large portion of Obama's base than cries of racism ? And why not...it had such smashing success in 2010 !

And this nonsense about voter ID laws being a solution to a problem that doesn't exist......That's the same narrative you all were feeding us on illegal immigration 20 years ago. Illegl Immigration problem...what illegal immigration problem? Or should I have used the word "undocumented" for fear of the race card?

[Prospero]

You wouldn't nor shouldn't give this guy the time of day....the operative word being here "disgraced", he's a dirt bag... but since he's singing your song...why not use him as a character witness? The problem is this guy has no character, but he suddenly appears on your witness list. He's easily impeachable as a witness.

Some Clarity....voter ID laws have been discussed in many State legislatures for over a decade, as far back as 2003....in fact that year, Alabama, Colorado, Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota all opted for ID laws. In 2004/05 it was Indiana, New Mexico and Washington; Georgia to the point where over 33 states have some sort of voter integrity laws, and we never heard a peep about it until recently. Unless of course you all were sounding the Constitutional alarm back in your closet in 2002 and we just couldn't hear you. But now we have a razor tight election, where every vote in certain swing states is critical and with less Dem enthusiasm than 2008 ..... what better way to gin up a large portion of Obama's base than cries of racism ? And why not...it had such smashing success in 2010 !

And this nonsense about voter ID laws being a solution to a problem that doesn't exist......That's the same narrative you all were feeding us on illegal immigration 20 years ago. Illegl Immigration problem...what illegal immigration problem? Or should I have used the word "undocumented" for fear of the race card?

Read the hard facts as outlined by Ronald Dworkin OMK....

[trish]

When the court asked Pennsylvania to present one case of in-person voter fraud, the State couldn't do it. Pennsylvania couldn't point to a single case. Not one voting Mickey Mouse, not one voting dead dude, not one voting pet. Not one case of in-person voter fraud in all of Pennsylvania. In-person voter fraud is rarer than hummingbirds at the South Pole. Voter ID however will disenfranchise millions of elderly voters, poor voters, minority voters and student voters. Indeed Voter ID laws were designed to suppress the vote of just these sectors. Don't take my word for it, take Mike Turzai's word for it. Voter ID laws are a solution for a problem all right; but in-person voter fraud IS NOT A PROBLEM.

[buttslinger]

Watch tomorrow night
For Mitt to tout
his extensive knowlege
of foreign banking policies
in Switzerland
And the Cayman Islands.

anyway, Mitt walks funny
I'm just going to say it
VOTE OBAMA

[trish]

Usually, I just respond to other people's threads, but there's something important that needs addressed.

If you live in Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Lousiana, Michigan, Pennsylvania, South Dakota or Tennessee and want to vote this year, make sure you have current valid photo ID, as it is now required in these states. Make sure your friends and family have ID as well.

This is especially critical if you live in one of these states that could go either way in this year's election. (Let's face it, we already know how Georgia, Kansas and Tennessee will be voting)

Also, if you live in Florida, make sure you are still registered to vote. They've been purging people from the rolls for political reasons.

Pass it along.

(Yes, this should probably go in the politics forum, but who actually goes there?)

Various superpacs are now engaged in a disinformation campaign (billboards in poor neighborhoods advertising the wrong date for the election, billboards in Spanish telling Latino voters in Pennsylvania they need an official ID on Election Day to vote even though the voter ID law failed in that state, calling elderly registered democrats they can vote right now on the phone etc.). Whoever your choice, make sure your vote isn't suppressed. Don't be fooled. Check the laws in your State. Be prepared to vote, and help others to do the same. Then VOTE.

Election Day is Tuesday November 6.

[BigDF]

So lets spend $11 for every $7 we take in. It's ok, theres a machine in the back room that makes money. What could possibly go wrong?

That is not what I'm saying at all. It's funny how soon people forget about the recent past. We actually had a budget surplus in 2000 or thereabouts. To lay the blame for the deficit we have now on our present President without acknowledging the past is vile.

The GOP candidate is harping on his business experience as a CEO making him a viable candidate for President, because he knows how to save money and create jobs. While I find that somewhat debatable, the bottom line is that neither of those are the President's job which is to lead and administer this country fairly and within the bounds of our constitution. Since it appears to me he doesn't understand that, I'm going to re hire the incumbent.

[Faldur]

Faldur - love to have your thoughtful response to my post of the essay by the Harvard Law Professor?

Just for you Prosp I went back and read your article. "Thoughtful response", think I loose there no mater what my opinion.

Its a good article, informative, and I'm sorry biased. One fact you can take to the bank is republicans and democrats will do anything to get elected and stay in office. And I do mean anything. Unfortunate how the article overlooks all of the actions of democrats to maintain political control and only looks at the republicans. Re-districting is one of the oldest ploys used in politics to ensure positive election results for incumbents. But that subject doesn't seem to be of concern.

I did get a laugh out of the "Roberts court" comment as far as being so far right. I think most conservatives would love to see this guy retired and sitting on a beach somewhere.

In our country the states decide the laws they live under for the most part. The citizens have the power to petition when their local and state government fails to do the will of the people. A classic example, in February my state passed a law allowing same sex marriage. The opponents to this law went into action and collected enough signatures to force the law to a referendum of the people. The referendum should pass with about 60% to 40% and the will of the people of our state will be heard, gay marriage will be allowed. (And yes I voted in favor of it). Likewise the legislature refuses to address the will of the people on marijuana. So again we have a referendum on the ballot that should pass by the about the same margin. (I voted against this one, recovering addict)

Bottom line, when you live in the US, if you don't like your states requirements for voting get involved and change it. If the people in your state do not share your common beliefs you have one of two choices, either just deal with it or move to a state where your beliefs are shared.

I just don't see the issue here.

[buttslinger]

FOREIGN AFFAIRS

I was just reading that the rest of the world is AMAZED that a choice between Romney and Obama could even be imaginable
Seventy Five Percent of world leaders want to work with Obama, Eight Percent like Romney.
It's no wonder the republicans want to outlaw PBS.


A little message to the transgendered folks out there.....

The republican vision of the world doesn't include you.

GO FORWARD

VOTE

[Prospero]

Hi Faldur. Respect to you for reading the article.

Did you read the full version I posted in the politics strand or the abbreviated version here.

Re-districting as you dub it is, indeed, a time honored fiddle. The Conservatives in the Uk are trying to do it at present (but are currently blocked by their partners in the coalition The liberal Democrats in a squabble over reform of our House Of Lords).
Bias? Well the good professor is addressing quite specifically the attempt to limit votes by Republican administrations in recent weeks. He does concede i think that one democrat controlled state has tried to do the same.

But the bigger issue is the bill that would go through if the GOP win to remove legal restraint on this - introduced to fore those states previously proven to be discriminatory from continuing to discriminate against ethnic minorities.

In his fuller article he also talks about the future make-up of the Supreme Court after the elction with the likelihood that the Conservative bias it presently has being deepened if a Romey administration replaces retiring Judges (such as Ruth Ginzburg) with younger right wingers. Of course should Obama win then she would probably be replaced by someone of a more liberal bent (thus preserving the present imbalance still in favour of the right!) A long term greater rightwing bias and domination would permit the certain repeal of women's abortion rights and other (in my view) reactionary measures by the Right.

Dworkin offers, I think you agree, a very well argued and coherent argument from one side of the political spectrum.

I'd love to to see similar coherence from the other.