Virginia Gov. Mcdonnell Signs Bill Mandating Photo Id To Vote

[heckofajobbrownie]

That really should have been the response to your little diatribe.

You lose your mind whenever someone suggests that the absolute dregs of American society be asked to take the tiniest bit of responsibility.

 

Is it any wonder they vote Democrat?

No doubt that's the reason for your obvious patronization.

WSS

 

"The absolute dregs of American society." Because ...why again? Because they don't have a photo ID? Your animus knows no bounds. One day you're going to realize that virtually your entire political philosophy is motivated by your hatred of poor people and minorities, and that's really not a sound basis for a political philosophy.

 

I'm kidding, of course. You're not going to realize that.

 

You simply can't respond to an actual argument based on facts and figures. You have to go to resentment. And then when it makes me laugh, because it's so useless, you always go to "I know you are but what am I?" I know you laughed at my response, but I should have laughed at yours! As if anyone who knew about these issues would ever score these discussions for you. You keep telling yourself that. It's me saying, "Here's what I think and why." Followed by you saying, "I don't like poor people." Rinse, lather, repeat.

 

Someone useful would answer the argument I made with arguments of their own. They'd make the case that in-person voter fraud was a real problem, based on some evidence they'd cite. Then they'd claim that there are legitimate reasons for all of the attempts to limit voting that I listed above, and explain what they are. Or they'd just be fair and say, "Yes, of course they're trying to limit Democratic turnout." But no.

 

Instead, you ignore all the facts, everything I wrote, what the arguments are, what the discussion is really about, and go straight to ...why don't you just accept our false premises and stop demagoguing this issue?

 

Classic Steve. But hey, can't get blood from a stone.

 

But let's back up: do you believe that people without a photo ID deserve to vote? It doesn't seem that you do. It seems you think this indicates a serious lack of character.

 

I'll grant you that there is a legitimate - and vital - state interest in providing clean and fair elections that can't be gamed by voter fraud. I'd just suggest to you - again, with facts and figures, which I know you hate - that in-person voter fraud, which is the only kind of fraud voter ID laws would stop, is not a major problem, or even a minor one. Because they keep looking for it and only come up with a handful of cases, and even those are often mistakes, not "voter fraud."

 

For instance, the Bush Justice Department put a whole unit on the case of "voter fraud" on the assumption that it's widespread and a real problem. John Ashcroft declared it a priority. They looked for five years. So surely they found lots of evidence of voter fraud, right?

 

Eh, not so much: "WASHINGTON, April 11 — Five years after the Bush administration began a crackdown on voter fraud, the Justice Department has turned up virtually no evidence of any organized effort to skew federal elections, according to court records and interviews.Although Republican activists have repeatedly said fraud is so widespread that it has corrupted the political process and, possibly, cost the party election victories, about 120 people have been charged and 86 convicted as of last year."

 

So again, if you write a law that says you have to show a voter ID in order to vote to combat a problem that is absolutely miniscule in its scope, with only a handful of cases every year, but there are millions of registered voters without a photo ID who are overwhelmingly Democratic voters, aren't Democrats correct when they allege that this is purely partisan exercise meant to lower Democratic turnout?

 

And if that doesn't convince you that it is, what about all of the other efforts to limits voting listed above? Does that convince you that it is? What say you.

 

I know, I know. Poor people suck and they watch Jerry Springer. But what about the actual issue?

[Legacy Fan]

Everything in WAS is partisan Heck. So lets ignore that because its irrelevant.

 

 

 

Why shouldn't you have an ID to vote?

[blowe]

I missed that. I apologize. Please forgive me.

 

I am a Jr at the university of Michigan studying mechanical engineering. I'm 21. I'm actually co-oping right now though.

 

 

I'll tell you what, next week time you say something stupid Cal, I'll point it out

 

You dodged the question. You stated that I make stupid comments, yet you can't come up with one? You probably think your response is incredibly clever too.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Everything in WAS is partisan Heck. So lets ignore that because its irrelevant.

 

 

 

Why shouldn't you have an ID to vote?

 

I don't get the first part. Everything in WAS in partisan? If you mean Washington, I couldn't disagree with your conclusion more. If you mean there's lots of politics in Washington then let's just call everything a wash because it's irrelevant, absolutely not. That's insane. The is such a thing as truth, and facts. There is also such a thing as the right to vote. When Republicans openly and wantonly seek to gain partisan advantage by restricting one of the most fundamental rights we have in this country they should be called out. If Democrats engaged in widespread voter fraud they'd deserve to be called out too. But there's no evidence of that. There's just lots of people who assume there is. But they assume lots of things that aren't true.

 

The second answer is that in the absence of any evidence of voter fraud there's no reason to require photo ID to vote, as it's achieving no objective other than to force hundreds of thousands of people to go get one in order to vote. Multiple courts agreed that the way this law was designed, months before an election, served no real purpose other than as an attempt to make voters go through hoops in order to vote. It was simply partisan gamesmanship.

 

Now, is this a huge hoop to go through? Now, no. But it does cost money and time. Now that the election is over and we're almost two years from the next one, and almost four from the next national election, there should be enough time to design programs to get people the required ID in the states that pass these laws, and to make it free for people who can't afford it. I'm not going to pretend that the Virginia law is a huge infringement years out. But let's not be idiots and pretend we can't see what's going on here. And let's not play the even dumber game where we throw up our hands and say "Both sides do it, so why bother?" when both sides don't do it. One side does it. It's repellent. Making it harder for people to vote - and you're mostly talking about poor and/or old people who don't drive, and young students who don't have IDs - is exclusive to the Republican Party.

 

And why? Because they're addressing a huge problem with in-person voter fraud? Please.

 

And here why it's important: because as we often discuss, even recently with the Monsanto stuff, people who don't have much in this country don't have very much political influence other than their right to vote. They don't have money. They don't hire lobbyists. They don't have PACs. They don't have much of a voice. And just about the only voice they do have is that they can vote. Yes, once every two years they can vote. One party wants to make it harder for some of these people to vote - make them get IDs, eliminate early voting so they'd have to take time off work, make them wait in long lines so they can't stay or get discouraged. Or they to make it so they can't vote at all - by limiting registration drives, or by scrubbing them for past criminal offenses, or by turning them away because they may be an old lady in the city who doesn't have a drivers license.

 

Now, feel free to show me all the ways that Democrats attempt to pass laws to make it harder for Republican-leaning citizens to vote. Go ahead. If everything is equally partisan, show me.

[DieHardBrownsFan]

I don't get the first part. Everything in WAS in partisan? If you mean Washington, I couldn't disagree with your conclusion more. If you mean there's lots of politics in Washington then let's just call everything a wash because it's irrelevant, absolutely not. That's insane. The is such a thing as truth, and facts. There is also such a thing as the right to vote. When Republicans openly and wantonly seek to gain partisan advantage by restricting one of the most fundamental rights we have in this country they should be called out. If Democrats engaged in widespread voter fraud they'd deserve to be called out too. But there's no evidence of that. There's just lots of people who assume there is. But they assume lots of things that aren't true.

 

The second answer is that in the absence of any evidence of voter fraud there's no reason to require photo ID to vote, as it's achieving no objective other than to force hundreds of thousands of people to go get one in order to vote. Multiple courts agreed that the way this law was designed, months before an election, served no real purpose other than as an attempt to make voters go through hoops in order to vote. It was simply partisan gamesmanship.

 

Now, is this a huge hoop to go through? Now, no. But it does cost money and time. Now that the election is over and we're almost two years from the next one, and almost four from the next national election, there should be enough time to design programs to get people the required ID in the states that pass these laws, and to make it free for people who can't afford it. I'm not going to pretend that the Virginia law is a huge infringement years out. But let's not be idiots and pretend we can't see what's going on here. And let's not play the even dumber game where we throw up our hands and say "Both sides do it, so why bother?" when both sides don't do it. One side does it. It's repellent. Making it harder for people to vote - and you're mostly talking about poor and/or old people who don't drive, and young students who don't have IDs - is exclusive to the Republican Party.

 

And why? Because they're addressing a huge problem with in-person voter fraud? Please.

 

And here why it's important: because as we often discuss, even recently with the Monsanto stuff, people who don't have much in this country don't have very much political influence other than their right to vote. They don't have money. They don't hire lobbyists. They don't have PACs. They don't have much of a voice. And just about the only voice they do have is that they can vote. Yes, once every two years they can vote. One party wants to make it harder for some of these people to vote - make them get IDs, eliminate early voting so they'd have to take time off work, make them wait in long lines so they can't stay or get discouraged. Or they to make it so they can't vote at all - by limiting registration drives, or by scrubbing them for past criminal offenses, or by turning them away because they may be an old lady in the city who doesn't have a drivers license.

 

Now, feel free to show me all the ways that Democrats attempt to pass laws to make it harder for Republican-leaning citizens to vote. Go ahead. If everything is equally partisan, show me.

 

Yawn.

[Legacy Fan]

Now, feel free to show me all the ways that Democrats attempt to pass laws to make it harder for Republican-leaning citizens to vote. Go ahead. If everything is equally partisan, show me.

By turning law abiding citizens into felons by ass-fucking the 2nd amendment.

 

That was easy.

 

State congressional re-districting?

 

You don't *really* think democrats are immune do you? Holy fuck.

 

It's two years from the next election and 4 from the next presidential one. Get a $10 ID. Sorry if that cuts into your Newport budget.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Oh, what a whiff. You didn't mention one thing that has to do with making it harder to register to vote, or to show up and vote. Of course, redistricting is a separate issue. That's designing districts for partisan advantage. Both parties do that. (And again, I'd argue that Republicans do it more cravenly, as they did during the Delay era.) But you didn't mention one law that Democrats are trying to pass that aims to reduce the voter turnout among Republicans. You made up something about gun control. Which was a long twisty to road that one day somehow ties back to voting, but doesn't pass the laugh test.

 

And then some crack about Newports. Well, at least we're getting closer to admitting it's about partisanship and resentment and not voter fraud. That's somewhat refreshing.

 

You want to try again? Or just admit that one party does this and the other party doesn't? It's not that hard. I can think of things Democrats do more than Republicans.

 

Also, two questions:

 

1) What problem are you trying to solve by making everyone get an ID?

 

2) Do you not agree that making a picture ID mandatory is likely to keep more legitimate votes from being cast than it is from stopping incidents of voter fraud?

 

And 3), why are we doing this on a Saturday?

[DieHardBrownsFan]

Oh, what a whiff. You didn't mention one thing that has to do with making it harder to register to vote, or to show up and vote. Of course, redistricting is a separate issue. That's designing districts for partisan advantage. Both parties do that. (And again, I'd argue that Republicans do it more cravenly, as they did during the Delay era.) But you didn't mention one law that Democrats are trying to pass that aims to reduce the voter turnout among Republicans. You made up something about gun control. Which was a long twisty to road that one day somehow ties back to voting, but doesn't pass the laugh test.

 

And then some crack about Newports. Well, at least we're getting closer to admitting it's about partisanship and resentment and not voter fraud. That's somewhat refreshing.

 

You want to try again? Or just admit that one party does this and the other party doesn't? It's not that hard. I can think of things Democrats do more than Republicans.

 

Also, two questions:

 

1) What problem are you trying to solve by making everyone get an ID?

 

2) Do you not agree that making a picture ID mandatory is likely to keep more legitimate votes from being cast than it is from stopping incidents of voter fraud?

 

And 3), why are we doing this on a Saturday?

 

ZZZZZZZZZZ, SNORE, ZZZZZZZZZ, SNORE

[MLD Woody]

ZZZZZZZZZZ, SNORE, ZZZZZZZZZ, SNORE

 

You have just been full of fantastic posts this thread, huh?

[Legacy Fan]

Oh, what a whiff. You didn't mention one thing that has to do with making it harder to register to vote, or to show up and vote. Of course, redistricting is a separate issue. That's designing districts for partisan advantage. Both parties do that. (And again, I'd argue that Republicans do it more cravenly, as they did during the Delay era.) But you didn't mention one law that Democrats are trying to pass that aims to reduce the voter turnout among Republicans. You made up something about gun control. Which was a long twisty to road that one day somehow ties back to voting, but doesn't pass the laugh test.

 

And then some crack about Newports. Well, at least we're getting closer to admitting it's about partisanship and resentment and not voter fraud. That's somewhat refreshing.

 

You want to try again? Or just admit that one party does this and the other party doesn't? It's not that hard. I can think of things Democrats do more than Republicans.

 

Also, two questions:

 

1) What problem are you trying to solve by making everyone get an ID?

 

2) Do you not agree that making a picture ID mandatory is likely to keep more legitimate votes from being cast than it is from stopping incidents of voter fraud?

 

And 3), why are we doing this on a Saturday?

For fuck's sake. I have to spend $35 and prove my residency to shoot a god damned bird every winter and you seem to think this is a burden for your base to vote for our leadership?

 

Fuck off. You have soooooo many valid points littered all over this board and then to get so damn negligent over a matter that is easily remedied. Why?

[Legacy Fan]

Oh, what a whiff. You didn't mention one thing that has to do with making it harder to register to vote, or to show up and vote. [/Quote]

Felons can vote? Noted.

Of course, redistricting is a separate issue. That's designing districts for partisan advantage. Both parties do that. (And again, I'd argue that Republicans do it more cravenly, as they did during the Delay era.)

again, i gave you what you asked for

But you didn't mention one law that Democrats are trying to pass that aims to reduce the voter turnout among Republicans. You made up something about gun control. [/Quote]

Gun control is/wastotally relevant to your Request.

Which was a long twisty to road that one day somehow ties back to voting, but doesn't pass the laugh test.

stop being such a pussy.

 

 

And then some crack about Newports. Well, at least we're getting closer to admitting it's about partisanship and resentment and not voter fraud. That's somewhat refreshing.

again. Pussy.

 

You want to try again? Or just admit that one party does this and the other party doesn't? It's not that hard. I can think of things Democrats do more than Republicans.

 

Also, two questions:

 

1) What problem are you trying to solve by making everyone get an ID?

You try again. Who said Anything about solving a problem. I was asking you about a problem. Where is the problem in obtaining an ID other than skipping out on a pack of Newports for the day? (Do you need any gauze?)

 

2) Do you not agree that making a picture ID mandatory is likely to keep more legitimate votes from being cast than it is from stopping incidents of voter fraud?

Again. I don't care. I never said voter fraud was a problem. Quit with the strawman bullshit and answer why it is such a huge god damn crisis to obtain a $ 10 ID.

 

And 3), why are we doing this on a Saturday?

huh?

[calfoxwc]

The times when heckbunker doesn't have a clue....

 

it's a bad Saturday. And any other day of the week.

[blowe]

You have just been full of fantastic posts this thread, huh?

 

I'm bathing in the irony of this post.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Felons can vote? Noted.

 

again, i gave you what you asked for

 

Gun control is/wastotally relevant to your Request.

stop being such a pussy.

 

 

again. Pussy.

 

 

You try again. Who said Anything about solving a problem. I was asking you about a problem. Where is the problem in obtaining an ID other than skipping out on a pack of Newports for the day? (Do you need any gauze?)

 

 

Again. I don't care. I never said voter fraud was a problem. Quit with the strawman bullshit and answer why it is such a huge god damn crisis to obtain a $ 10 ID.

 

huh?

 

Hoo boy. Um, okay. (Scratches Leg off list of people to have adult conversation with.)

 

Happy Easter.

 

PS - You still haven't named a Democratic law aimed at getting between Republicans and the voting booth. Pretending that background checks and assault weapons bans are really efforts to keep Republicans from voting is pretty laughable, Leg. You must know that.

 

I'll even give you an example of how they might do this: passing a law making it harder to vote absentee from overseas. That would be a good way to do it. Because absentee votes from overseas are largely military votes, which lean Republican.

 

Are there any types of laws like this that the Democrats are pushing to lower Republican vote totals? Come on. They both do it, right? You should be able to think of lots of them!

 

PPS - And if you agree that voter fraud isn't a problem, then why do you want to require an photo ID? That's the whole point of showing an ID at the polls! It's like you're saying that you don't think alien abduction is a problem, but everyone should pay $10 to have their ass protected from anal probes anyway.

[MLD Woody]

I'm bathing in the irony of this post.

 

Well you're an idiot then lol

 

 

Don't forger your own post as well

[Westside Steve]

Heck, would you be in favor of a drug test for voting purposes?

WSS

[MLD Woody]

Heck, would you be in favor of a drug test for voting purposes?

WSS

 

Depends

 

I'm still for the whole IQ/knowledge points based system

[heckofajobbrownie]

Heck, would you be in favor of a drug test for voting purposes?

WSS

 

No, of course not. You can't seriously think that's a good idea. So what are you getting at?

[DieHardBrownsFan]

Democrats want the voters to be stoned, illegals or felons.

[The Cysko Kid]

Democrats want the voters to be stoned, illegals or felons.

 

I find it hard to believe you lasted 22 years in the military. They like to put an emphasis on professionalism.

[DieHardBrownsFan]

I find it hard to believe you lasted 22 years in the military. They like to put an emphasis on professionalism.

 

 

You were in the Air Force, not the military.

 

Plus this was a joke you fucking dimwit.

[Westside Steve]

Depends

 

I'm still for the whole IQ/knowledge points based system

Fine with me.

Get Heck on board.....

WSS

[Legacy Fan]

Hoo boy. Um, okay. (Scratches Leg off list of people to have adult conversation with.)

 

Happy Easter.

 

PS - You still haven't named a Democratic law aimed at getting between Republicans and the voting booth. Pretending that background checks and assault weapons bans are really efforts to keep Republicans from voting is pretty laughable, Leg. You must know that.

 

I'll even give you an example of how they might do this: passing a law making it harder to vote absentee from overseas. That would be a good way to do it. Because absentee votes from overseas are largely military votes, which lean Republican.

 

Are there any types of laws like this that the Democrats are pushing to lower Republican vote totals? Come on. They both do it, right? You should be able to think of lots of them!

 

PPS - And if you agree that voter fraud isn't a problem, then why do you want to require an photo ID? That's the whole point of showing an ID at the polls! It's like you're saying that you don't think alien abduction is a problem, but everyone should pay $10 to have their ass protected from anal probes anyway.

It's probably for the best because it appears as though you truly think you can continue to act like a dismissive twat to everyone on the board without getting called out on it. Then pretend some faux-shock and moral highground when it happens. It's so stale.

 

So continue ignoring responses to your queries - and I'll reciprocate.

[heckofajobbrownie]

I apologize. Next time you answer non-sensically, with non-answers, like describing background checks and assault weapons bans as a means to disenfranchise Republican voters, and then add in "pussy" because you feel like you've been slighted and dismissed, I'll do my best to try and remember all your other answers and not that one.

 

Really, are you kidding me? Go back and read this thread from beginning to end. You're upset because you came up short, and got angry, and then you lashed out. It's not some big fucking mystery.

 

You got dismissed because what you wrote was dismissible. Sorry I don't come off gentle like Alan Colmes. Really.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Fine with me.

Get Heck on board.....

WSS

 

Yeah, no thanks.

 

Just for shits and giggles, tell me who you think shouldn't be allowed to vote.

[Legacy Fan]

I apologize. Next time you answer non-sensically, with non-answers, like describing background checks and assault weapons bans as a means to disenfranchise Republican voters, and then add in "pussy" because you feel like you've been slighted and dismissed, I'll do my best to try and remember all your other answers and not that one.

 

Really, are you kidding me? Go back and read this thread from beginning to end. You're upset because you came up short, and got angry, and then you lashed out. It's not some big fucking mystery.

 

You got dismissed because what you wrote was dismissible. Sorry I don't come off gentle like Alan Colmes. Really.

I've already done that once. No need to re-read, Alan. Just because you disagree with my response doesn't mean it came up short. That's something you ought to learn. And the "pussies" would probably come to an end. Targeting a largely Republican demographic with laws that would turn them into felons overnight thus making them ineligible to vote fits the bill no matter how many of your tears say it doesn't.

 

You still haven't answered why a person shouldnt have to prove their citizenship with a photo ID to participate in a process such as electing our nations leadership. That's the "big fucking mystery" (oh wait, it's not).

[Westside Steve]

Yeah, no thanks.

 

Just for shits and giggles, tell me who you think shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Well we can deal with my distaste for our current political system at some other time but for now:

There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that the 15,000,000 illegals should not be voting.

 

And the fact that there is a little bit of work, remember a very little, to get to the polls and vote is fine with me.

Lets not pretend that it is only fairness that makes you want to artificially bloat the numbers of illiterates criminals drug addicts welfare recipients etcetera.

( And before you launch into your canned speech remember its you who has been complaining that these groups need even more prodding to get to the voting booth. But thanks for finally agreeing with me.)

 

Do you think differently?

WSS

[The Cysko Kid]

I find it hard to believe you lasted 22 years in the military. They like to put an emphasis on professionalism.

 

 

You've got no problem saying the same to woody, do you? You're a bully, bullies are pussies, and it sounds like a bit of your own medicine made your pussy hurt.

[Westside Steve]

Just for the record, in Arizona the percentage of illegals is 6 percent.

The percentage of the workforce is 7.4 percent.

Heck and his people are outraged that folks there be asked to show identification.

 

Why do you suppose this is?

WSS

[MLD Woody]

You've got no problem saying the same to woody, do you? You're s bully, bullies are pussies, and it sounds like a bit of your own medicine made your pussy hurt.

 

He'd have to have an effect on me to be a bully