Voter ID, why Democrats don't want it

[exreo]

I am not pushing for any additional ID, just that we be able to show something viable that says we are who we say we are. I have been in similar situations that you are in. Must be our age group.

I understand what you mean RoBoTeq, but I think the I.D. had to be the same as for E-Verify and that means the I.D. has to be current. I have 3 pieces of I.D. (WA DL, and 2 passports) with my picture and name on them, but I don't think that would cut the mustard with this TX voter I.D. requirement. I can't get a job anywhere that uses E-verify either because the I.D. must be current. The feds made the requirement for I.D. to be current after they upped the cost of a passport to $115. I actually think for first time passports the cost is $145.

[jtrammel]

Again your wanting tougher voter registrations is not about ending voter fraud which I have shown is a non problem.

It is about limiting votes for Obama.

Plain and simple. You just don't want to come right out and state it.

You are not fooling anyone.

Continuing to argue the point is only destroying your credibilty even more.

We conservatives don't need to limit Obama's votes this election because he doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting re-elected. 8 out of 10 that voted for him in 2008 either won't vote this election or will vote republican. The reason being is he is NOT a good president.

[mcjo tech]

We conservatives don't need to limit Obama's votes this election because he doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting re-elected. 8 out of 10 that voted for him in 2008 either won't vote this election or will vote republican. The reason being is he is NOT a good president.

Well we will see in November.

I'm positive Mitty will be our man.

Yeah Right.

And besides even if it is Mitty you still don't have a conservative in the White House.

What you will have though is a Mormon in the White House.

[jtrammel]

Well we will see in November.

I'm positive Mitty will be our man.

Yeah Right.

And besides even if it is Mitty you still don't have a conservative in the White House.

What you will have though is a Mormon in the White House.

Better than a Moron

[exreo]

Yep, U.S. passports are $110 to renew and $135 for first timers. When the powers that be demand to see photo I.D. now days, they are hitting you in the wallet pretty hard. But, the democrats are so dishonest that you don't know if they are trying to defend illegals to be able to vote or the poor who would have a hard time getting the I.D. Democrats lie most of the time. That is also just my humble opinion.

[mcjo tech]

Better than a Moron

You know what they say:

Careful what you wish for.

[exreo]

Better than a Moron

Haha.

[Gcanno]

I have absolutely no objection to the verification of voting status, though this is an all too familiar tactic in my view to deny Americans their Rights.if they do not support certain political interests. The Argument can go on and on forever here in this thread. History will tell you many of the opposite arguments are empty and unproven by facts. Facts that the very same people who c who make such arguments dismiss and attack also.

Why can't the Greatest Country on Earth achieve something as simple as to guarantee every citizen the right to vote.

Why are elections held in one Day, for something so Important why can't we make it a Friday,Saturday,Sunday and make Monday a National Holiday to allow people to participate in the process. I can think of no greater way to justify a Holiday.

We can also spend the remainder the week verifying the Votes to make sure everything is legit. I find you will get the same people just trying another tactic to continue the denial of rights in an effort to advance their agenda .

[netsalt]

Interesting thread, I asked a question about statistics and no one has posted any viable statistics showing that voter fraud is rampant and that ID will solve it. I also asked why this is important now - crickets .......... I have been accused of being racist and reported i guess even though I was just stating the obvious http://www.gallup.com/poll/150386/re...tion-2008.aspx . The only thing I might add to the old, rich, white statement is married - of which I belong to all of the above groups (except maybe rich!). This whole voter regulation thing reeks of a partisan effort to stifle non favorable votes. Voter ID, changing the number of days for voting, gerrymandering the districts, all done by one political party but no this is not political it is for the good of the country -reminds me of the Bush wire-tapping stuff. Is this the same party that is screaming for deregulation? I guess that deregulation is only for the "job creators" not us common folk.

[RoBoTeq]

Just depends if you're the pot-smoking type of libertarian or non-smoking type. Most libertarians want to grow their own pot farm in their back yard IMHO.

Even though I remain a registered Republican, I am closer to thinking Libertarian without some of the far out stuff they promote. Even the far out stuff should be up to the individual American citizen, or at the very most a local or state government.

While I don't particularly want to intentionally grow another weed in my yard, it is just un-American to not be able to do so without being made a criminal for it. U.S. government is so focused on regulating our every move, yet the faction of that same government does not want to regulate the honesty of our voting system. WHY? Get rid of all of the regulations that prevent us from farting in the wrong tune and focus on keeping corruption out of our election system so we can have somewhat of an honest government.

[RoBoTeq]

I've made my point.

As I have stated your real agenda is crystal clear.

You can dance around it all you want but again you are not fooling anyone.

I'm done.

I know that you actually think that you have some sort of elitist right to claim you know I have some agenda other than what I am posting, but as usual, you are completely wrong. I post what I mean, and I mean what I post. There is nothing hidden in my posting, it is all out there in the open.

In contrast, you have made inane statements about vague minorities, students and elderly being persecuted by having to prove who they are in order to cast their vote for a political agenda, but you have not substantiated why you believe that minorities are somehow so inferior to other Americans that they cannot even prove who they are, that students don't have to prove who they are to be students or that elderly Americans at some point lose their identity and their ability to prove who they are.

We all know why you have not substantiated your claims. You can't.

[George2]

I really cannot think of any reason why anyone would support allowing votes to be cast for anything without having control over whether or not those who are voting actually have a right to vote. Unless there is an intention to commit voter fraud, why would any American eligible to vote not want to make certain that those who are not eligible to vote be allowed to diminish the votes of American's who are?

Well, here is the best reason that Democrats could come up with; http://news.yahoo.com/court-decision...-election.html

My question is this; "Why would any American citizen who is involved in the American political process not have some form of identification?" WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE? AND WHY ARE THEY TYPICALLY THOSE WHO VOTE DEMOCRAT?

Maybe it's just me, but it seems that the Democrats are saying that it is mostly Americans who, for whatever their personal reasons, do not want to be identified. Are these people ashamed of voting Democrat? If so, why? Just what Americans who are responsible enough citizens do not have any way to identify who they are or if they are indeed even Americans? Does this not pretty much not make taking away voting rights from citizens who have committed crimes null and void? How do we prevent the millions of illegal aliens who have committed the crime of entering and living in the U.S. from casting votes for those who will allow them to stay in the U.S.?

Very well said...............it is totally unbelievable that a I.D. is not required.

How do these people (without a I.D.) fly, drive or cash a check? Are there that many people that don't have a I.D. that it will infringe on thier rights? And, besides, if they really want to vote, how hard would it be to register for a I.D.?

If they are here illegally, they shouldn't vote. I'll even go as far as saying; anyone on welfare shouldn't vote. I think you (all) can fiqure why this is a true statement!

[RoBoTeq]

I understand what you mean RoBoTeq, but I think the I.D. had to be the same as for E-Verify and that means the I.D. has to be current. I have 3 pieces of I.D. (WA DL, and 2 passports) with my picture and name on them, but I don't think that would cut the mustard with this TX voter I.D. requirement. I can't get a job anywhere that uses E-verify either because the I.D. must be current. The feds made the requirement for I.D. to be current after they upped the cost of a passport to $115. I actually think for first time passports the cost is $145.

I am not familiar with the particulars of Texas's proposal for voter ID, but if it makes it more difficult than just showing standard proof of identification then I would not be for it. I am no more for making it more difficult for any American citizen to vote than I am for allowing votes to be cast for registered Americans who are dead or incarcerated or votes to be cast by those who are not American citizens and who are in the U.S. illegally.

On a side note, while I support those American citizens who are incarcerated not have the right to vote while doing time, I believe that once an American has done their time for a crime that they should be reinstated as citizens with full rights of citizenship restored. Illegal immigrants are illegal and need to be removed from the U.S. immediately if not sooner. If this disrupts their family, that is a choice that they made when they illegally entered the U.S. This applies to Obama's family of illegal immigrants as well.