patsfan13

You need to talk to PFiVa, his suggestion not mine.

__________________
"Some guys play in all-star games, some guys don't. I don't know who picks all those all-star teams. In all honesty, I don't know who picks the combine, for that matter," Belichick said. "How does (Miami-Ohio offensive lineman Brandon) Brooks not get invited to the combine? How did Vollmer not get invited to the combine? I don't know. We can't really worry about that. We just have to try to evaluate them the best we can."

Wolfpack

Ding ding ding! Congratulations on stumbling on what I've been saying all along is a major problem.

Mrs.PatsFanInVa

On the contrary, if you had bothered to read not only what he said but what you quoted him as saying, you'd realize he'd explained why you could not do away with absentee ballots.

Wolfpack

Students living away from home can vote in whatever state their are living in at school (at least that's the way it was for me), Mrs.

And while I do see in the Constitution where it says everyone has the right to vote, Mrs., I can't find the part that says it's the government's responsibility to pick everyone up at their homes, Mrs., personally escort them to the voting booths, hold their hands the entire way, and then bring them back home, Mrs., tuck them into bed, read them a nighttime story and then turn the lights out.

Mrs.PatsFanInVa

Nor do I....that's why they have absentee balloting - for people who either are away from home or are unable to leave home or unable to leave home without a good deal of help and assistance.

Thank you for recognizing that part.

PatsFanInVa

Please link to any federal or state law that states the above.

Over the years a number of ways to establish identity have been incorporated into the state laws. They have not been shown to be deficient.

Now, with no problem in evidence, we light upon a "solution": Disenfranchise people who are disproportionately minority, disproportionately urban, disproportionately poorer, and disproportionately older.

In all but the last, these are Democratic voters. And inasmuch as the older voters are also the poorer among the older voters, even that category skews Democratic.

This is demonstrably the intent of the disenfranchisement proposals. You know it, I know it, and anybody paying attention knows it. It's what "will allow Mitt Romney to win Pennsylvania," as one Pennsylvania pubbie put it.

Now then, we have in this thread the actual example of voter fraud that people are trying to get away with: Behind-the-scenes voter fraud.

Said behind-the-scenes fraud is empowered by our system of absentee voting. Yet pubbies have no qualms about absentee voting. The reason is that even though it is more likely a breeding grounds of fraud, absentee voting is also a kind of voting that favors pubbies, because the military historically skews republican.

Once again: You know this, I know this, and everybody paying attention knows this.

The militant, radical disenfranchisement initiatives are nothing else than an attempt by Pubbie operatives to steal the election in the states they control.

PFnV

Wolfpack

I'm not aware of any such laws currently on the books, but it sure seems to me that the Missus wouldn't be happy with anything less than the scenario I've described above.
Is there some reason why you think those people shouldn't have photo ID's? Considering all the things we cannot do in today's society without photo ID, it's clear the only one interested in disenfranchising those people is you.

If you can take the time to register to vote and if you can take the time to cast a vote, then you can take the time to have your picture taken once every 8 years.

PatsFanInVa

I didn't see her say anything remotely approaching your caricature.

It "sure seems to you" that way, because you want it to seem that way -- primarily to other readers.

But you really did kick this guy's butt



They have a constitutional right to vote.

Making the bar for voting possession of a document they don't have and aren't required to have as a citizen, means you are impeding their formerly unimpeded right to vote.

It's as if you said "You're free to speak your opinion, but only if you pay $35 to the freedom-of-speech both at the DMV."

You cannot demonstrate harm resulting from people voting w/o ID cards. This means that you are disenfranchising people for no reason.

We can easily demonstrate that the disenfranchised skew minority and Democratic.

Without regard to intent or party affiliation, the Voting Rights Act establishes that if the effect of a law is to disproportionately suppress a minority's voting rights, it is illegal.

Please restrict your critique in this regard to things we have Consitutional rights to do. If you need a photo ID to get drunk and watch nude dancers in a strip club, I don't care. You can make a law with a much lower bar in the case of buying cigs or watching strippers. However, everybody has a compelling interest in voting, not just smokers or strip club fans. Everybody has a right to do so, upon achieving the age of 18. The state needs a compelling interest to disenfranchise that person, and the bar is very high.

This is certainly appropos of nothing. I have no such interest, and in that you have no backup to suggest this is true, can only consider it a personal attack -- a sad substitute for an actual argument.

PFnV


If you can take the time to register to vote and if you can take the time to cast a vote, then you can take the time to have your picture taken once every 8 years.[/QUOTE]

Harry Boy

Dear God why do I have to keep saying this "the left wing is against voter ID because drunks, junkies, felons, hookers, public masturbaters, private masturbaters, illegal aliens, bums, perverts etc etc WILL NOT GET VOTER ID'S and all of these people will "VOTE LEFT WING"

Does anybody really think that those people in our society would actually vote for Romney...........

__________________
Harry Boy (Genius)

In The Absence Of Law And Order Society Will Surely Destroy Itself