Let’s Abolish All ID Requirements
by Big Dog on Dec 18, 2011 at 06:15 Political
The criminal gun runner Eric Holder is waging war against states that have enacted voter ID laws. These laws require people to show an ID before they can vote. How dare these states force people to prove they are who they claim to be?
According to Democrat Congressman John Lewis voter ID laws [are]:
…”a deliberate and systematic attempt to prevent millions of elderly voters, young voters, students, minority and low-income voters from exercising their constitutional right to engage in the democratic process. New York Post
Since we require people to show an ID to get on a plane, rent a car, cash a check, buy certain OTC medications, buy controlled prescription drugs, enter a government building, buy alcohol or tobacco, get a driver’s license, receive medical care, open a bank account, buy a firearm, rent a hotel room, and receive government welfare it is logical to extend Lewis’ argument to these items and assert that requiring IDs for these things prevents millions of the young, the elderly, college students (don’t colleges issue a student ID), and minority and low income folks from participating in any of the events I listed. That is but a small list of things that an ID is required for so the list of things that excludes these groups is much bigger.
And our government is aware of the disparity. Since government thinks it is necessary to show an ID for these things but also believes that making people show an ID is a way to prevent some folks from doing things then we can conclude that the government does not want everyone to be able to participate in all facets of society.
Eric Holder, John Lewis and everyone else who thinks that voter ID requirements are designed to disenfranchise people are idiots. There is no other way to put it, they are idiots.
Voter ID does not disenfranchise anyone. Almost everyone has an ID. The college students have college IDs, many have a driver’s license and others have some sort of ID that allowed them to sign up for welfare. You can bet that anyone who receives a government check has some form of ID and does not believe it to be an imposition because they know, no ID, no welfare.
Perhaps the next time I enter a government building and they ask for an ID I should tell them they are discriminating against me. Maybe the next time someone (I look to old for it to be me) buys alcohol and an ID is requested that person should file a lawsuit for discrimination. The state requires those who sell alcohol to ID anyone who buys the product if they look too young.
Why should a person have to prove they are old enough to buy alcohol but not have to prove their identity before they vote?
Because the lack of voter ID helps Democrats and as long as something benefits them they care little about the rule of law.
With Eric Holder this is particularly true. The New Black Panther case and Fast and Furious are prime examples of where they ignored or broke the law in order to advance a liberal cause or protect a liberal demographic.
I support voter ID requirements and if a person is too lazy to get an ID then that person should not be allowed to vote. Can’t afford one? Give up a week’s worth of smokes or forgo the alcohol for a while and save that money for an ID.
Having an ID to vote is as much a national security issue as is requiring an ID to board a plane.
Anyone who opposes ID laws does not care about national security and is opposing freedom and the rule of law.
And they are idiots.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: crimes, discrimination, eric holder, fast and furious, john lewis, voter fraud, voter id laws
Your talk about abolishing all ID requirements ignores the fact that this is about a special voter ID, not removing all ID requirements from voting.
I know from working Arkansas elections that our state wants us to request a photo ID. If they don’t have one they can use a utility bill or a government check or some other document with their name and address on it. If they do not have one and they are not marked “must show ID” in the rolls then they are allowed to vote. If they are marked “must show ID” and they can’t then they vote provisionally.
So what is wrong with that process? Why make a requirement for a special ID? You act like the opposite of voter ID is no ID at all.
You fail to see the fraud associated with some of these acts. A picture ID should be required. Democrats are looking to allow voting based on someone walking in and claiming to be someone. We have seen too many instances of people voting many times, dead people voting and now phony signatures on the petition that got Obama on one state’s ballot.
I don’t care what kind of PICTURE ID but one must be required. If it is acceptable to board a plane then it can be used to vote.
“You fail to see the fraud associated with some of these acts.”
You’re right there. Where is it? I can’t find it.
You can find examples everywhere
We have mechanisms at the state level to cut down on fraud. It works. Once in a while you’ll see a case where it doesn’t. Find me one factual argument suggesting random voter fraud is part of a larger problem worthy of tackling with a photo ID requirement.
Unfortunately, those mechanisms require people with partisan views to follow rules. Frankin’s election was rife with fraud. How many times do ballots have to magically appear before you see it is fraud? Or am I to understand that it is only if ballots magically appear for a Republican that it is fraud?
Show me where there is a problem with showing ID to vote. It stops the multiple votes that take place each and every election. You only complain about it when you think it affects Dems. When Dems win, there is no problem. I also challenge you to show how asking for ID hurts anyone.
“Frankin’s election was rife with fraud.”
Imaginary fraud. He won a close and contested election.
“How many times do ballots have to magically appear before you see it is fraud?”
Remind me what a voter ID will do to stop magic ballots. The point is not that election fraud is rare, but that voters casting fraudulent ballots is rare.
“Show me where there is a problem with showing ID to vote.”
Millions of Americans do not have a photo ID for one reason or another. Show me where rare cases of voters casting fraudulent ballots builds a case for making it harder for 10% of Americans to vote.
Then if they want to vote they will need to get one. It is a matter of personal responsibility. No one is saying they can’t vote so if they want to do so they will need to get an ID. If government said it would give 100 dollar bills each month to people with IDs all these folks would get one and not complain.
Frankin’s election was stolen. He lost the election and then ballots appeared. If these ballots were not cast with a valid ID they do not count.
It does not matter how many people it affects, if it is the right thing to do then they need to comply or not vote.
The number of people who vote more than once is high and in many places dead people vote. IDs would stop this. To say it is insignificant is ignoring the issue that any impropriety casts doubt on the election. See your thoughts on Florida 2000.
“The number of people who vote more than once is high and in many places dead people vote.”
Prove it. There are studies estimating how many people don’t have ID’s. Show me evidence that the number is high.
“See your thoughts on Florida 2000.”
What was the issue with 2000? Voter disenfranchisement. The right knows it can win a close election if it’s harder for elderly, minorities, and college students to vote. Don’t pretend to care about election integrity. If you did you wouldn’t be behind meaningless legislation that won’t fix the real voting problems but will create more.
It is certainly not too much for us citizens to ask for–a system of legitimacy in our voting process.
Typical, typical Left argument…cast aspersions, claim the Right has no integrity, that it only wants Republicans to vote! When logic and common sense don’t work for you, try calling the other side names and/or claiming they have ulterior motives.
First, seniors are smart! They’ve seen the results of Liberals ruling–big gov’t OUT OF CONTROL, focusing on ALL THE WRONG THINGS. Seniors WILL VOTE for freedom, i.e. small government, no wasteful spending on B.S.! Second, this country, should do ‘everything it can’ to ensure a legitimate voting process. Simply, because it’s the ‘right’ thing to do. No pun intended!
ANY evidence of voter fraud (doesn’t have to be “high”), even it if were very slight, makes the case for having a voter ID requirement. Without it, our country has no chance of surviving – certaily not remaining the beacon of freedom for the world. We already have (for GOOD reasons) mass mistrust of government and the powers that be….who make all the rules to suit themselves. If the public can’t trust the voting system, we are in very dire straits.
Then, your suggestion/ better idea for fixing the “real voting problems” is??? So, then, you do realize we have voting problems!
“FREEDOM is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be FOUGHT FOR, PROTECTED, and handed on for them to do the same.”
The reports on voter fraud get skewed when one considers that many allegations do not get investigated due to resources. This WaPo editorial discusses some of the actual numbers in Kansas and also discusses how the election of Franken was successful because of illegal votes, ie voter fraud.
This dispels your assertion that Franken won fair and square. It also demonstrates that no matter how insignificant it seems, voter fraud affects the integrity of the system.
You tell me not to act like I care about the voter process. This is a nice way to deflect but the reality is I care very much. I want people to prove they are who they claim to be before they take place in one of the most important civil functions of society. You would rather allow illegals and felons (or anyone else not allowed) to vote and you do not care if people vote more than once. You don’t care because these people benefit Democrats. If all these folks voted Republican you would be demanding IDs.
Here is a great analyisis of the issue.
The reality is, if you care about it being fair no amount of fraud would be tolerable. As for the 2000 election, there were some irregularities but how many of the stories were manufactured? It made no difference. The greatest disenfranchisement came when a major network calle dthe race for Gore before the panhandle polls had closed (they are in central time zone) and the place is very Republican. Many people went home rather than wait in line. It was deliberate because exit polling showed Gore losing. You don’t hear much about this becuase it does not help Democrats.
First of all that study of felons is questionable. Second, there’s no proof how felons voted if they did vote. Third, a voter ID would not stop them.
“This dispels your assertion that Franken won fair and square.”
Wrong. All you need to know about the phony Minnesota Majority study is here.
“The reality is, if you care about it being fair no amount of fraud would be tolerable.”
Like every situation tends to be, this is a matter of a finite resource. We see no evidence of widespread voter fraud. You’re always calling for making it harder to vote to stop a problem that is exaggerated by your side. You would take away early voting, same day registration, require a photo ID, etc. Show me one study proving voter fraud that partisan in nature and ripped to shreds by examination.
Every study you show that gives your conclusions is partisan and flawed. Like Ogre said, you get your report and I get mine and they disagree and we can keep doing that. The reality is you won’t believe anything that differs from your point of view and I won’t either.
Only one of us can be right and you are entitled to be wrong. Voter ID would stop a lot of fraud.
It should be harder to vote. It is a civic duty and if you don’t want to work a bit at it then you don’t deserve it. people died to preserve that right the least people can do is work a bit to exercise it.
You want to make it easier so that anyone can vote at any time. NO! You should not be able to register the day of voting. There are years between elections and the Motor Voter law made it easy. If you don’t do it then you can’t on election day, period. A lot of folks avoid registering so they don’t get jury duty. Then don’t whine when you can’t vote.
BTW, when you get jury duty, you have to show an ID…
“Like Ogre said, you get your report and I get mine and they disagree and we can keep doing that.”
Ogre only says that because he doesn’t care for facts that disagree with his opinion.
“Voter ID would stop a lot of fraud.”
That’s impossible since there isn’t a lot of fraud to stop.
“You want to make it easier so that anyone can vote at any time.”
I don’t know about that but I do know that certain steps can be taken to limit barriers to voting that do not harm the integrity of the election. I know you don’t agree since you think large numbers of people are voting multiple times and dead people are voting and people are claiming to be somebody else when they vote. You have no evidence other than flawed studies, but that’s good enough for you.
“BTW, when you get jury duty, you have to show an ID…”
No matter how many things you list needing a photo ID, you still cannot account for the fact that millions of Americans have no birth certificate and no photo ID and they get by just fine.
Of course you call things that disagree facts when they are actually the conclusions of someone with whom you agree. You do not like “facts” that disagree with you.
Fact, IDs will reduse the amount of voter fraud, regardless of by how much. Fact, voter fraud exists. Fact, elections have been changed because of voter fraud. Fact, it is never fraud when it benefits a Democrat. Fact, it is always fraud to you guys when a Republican wins.
You and that piano guy who used to come here are very good at twisting things. Fact, none of this has worked. Obamacare will cost nearly 1.5 trillion dollars based on CBO report despite the regime claims to the contrary and we got this from a guy who might have been on a ballot due to fraud.
Is it true that you define fair as anything that benefits Democrats regardless of the law?
It is up to states to decide how their elections are run. If they say an ID is required what gives the feds the right to say otherwise? Ever heard of the Constitution?
Adam, there are so many things that a person needs ID for- cashing checks, obtaining SS benefits, etc- that having no ID in this day and age is a deliberate thumbing of the nose at authorities- if you want to go carjack someone, do not take your ID- if you want to buy drugs, do not take your ID- if you want to shoot someone, do not take your ID- I could go on all day, but the bottom line is that everyone has some ID- they might just not want to use it.
Oh yeah- if you want to commit voter fraud, do not bring your ID-
“Fact, IDs will reduce the amount of voter fraud, regardless of by how much.”
It will also reduce the number of people who vote, and you couldn’t care less by how much. You’d rather prevent 1 bad vote from being cast than protect the voting rights of hundreds of Americans.
“Of course you call things that disagree facts when they are actually the conclusions of someone with whom you agree.”
If they are “facts” by a partisan outlets, questioned by reasonable experts looking at the situation, then yes I tend to think those aren’t facts.
“It is up to states to decide how their elections are run.”
Not any more. They screwed up too much during Jim Crow to have a complete say over their own elections.
“You and that piano guy who used to come here are very good at twisting things.”
Don’t forget you forced Darrell to stop commenting here because you thought he was smearing you on a forum when in fact he had defended you on that same forum as a person who allowed debate on your blog.
Yeah, one bad vote:
You neglect to mention that Darrell, while claiming that I allowed debate also said he did not trust me and that is why he was copying things and posting them elsewhere. I had never given him a reason not to trust me and have never deleted anyone’s comments except those that were full of vulgarities (mostly from Meathead) and I often only redacted the vulgar words.
So when you tell the story please include all the details.
States screwed it up during Jim Crow? Hell, the feds are screwing it up now. You have yet to show that hundreds of Americans would be affected. How many people without an ID actually vote and how do they register to vote without an ID?
Looks like the Supreme Court agrees with me…
And how is this a burden?