Tuesday open thread
An elegant solution for keeping track of reality.
How do you keep track of reality today?
April 10, 2012 - 7:53 AM
- Contact us |
- Customer care |
- Subscribe |
- Advertise |
- Submit news |
- Sign in
Don't Miss
Enter your photo in the Ultimate Fan contest by midnight to win a suite night at a Salem Red Sox game and a chance at a trip to Fenway Park.
April 10, 2012 - 7:53 AM
Join the conversation [ADD A COMMENT]
View our commenting policy and standards | Commenting FAQ | Report a problem
40 COMMENTS
Error submitting comment
Name is required
A valid email is required (test@test.com)
Comment is required
Add a comment
Your email address will not be published.
All fields are required to comment.
Friday, May 24, 2013
THE ROANOKE TIMES
An interesting unintended consequence of those voter ID laws.
http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2012/04/pennsylvania-asks-intrusive-questions.html
…Those who object for religious reasons to being photographed have the alternative of obtaining a non-photo ID from the state Department of Transportation. However questions are being raised about the intrusiveness of the affidavit that must be completed in order to obtain a non-photo ID. Applicants must answer 18 questions, including “Describe your religion,” “How many members are there of your religion?”; “What religious practices do you observe?”, and “Do other family members hold the same religious beliefs.”….
More regulations going berserk!
California has declared war on housing free choice. The Dem controlled government has declared war on the single family detached home in an effort to save the planet.
Through increased taxation and onerous residential housing codes, the CA liberals are planning to force people out of the suburbs into urban highrise multi-family apartments and condos near public transportation. This is an effort to reduces private ownership of individual homes and reduce auto use and destroy individual freedom, something liberals abhor.
If the liberals in CA have their way, 68% of new housing in Southern California by 2035 would be condos and apartment complexes.
This war against suburbia is the result of the 2006 Global Warming Solutions Act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the 2008 Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act affecting urban planning.
Anyone who has flown across America from coast to coast on a clear day as I have knows this country is vastly undeveloped. In fact 94% of the US is undeveloped. NJ is the most developed state and it is only 35% developed, all other states are less than that.
A squirrel could travel from the Blue Ridge Mountains of VA to the Mississippi River without ever touching the ground! There is no over population problem in America.
This is just more environmentalist efforts to gain control over individual freedoms. This attitude is already rapidly spreading beyond CA and moving east.
1 – I don’t have a problem with any of that. Do you?
@1 89Hoo, I’m conflicted about it. First, I don’t think anyone intended that to happen to the Amish. Although I suspect the reasons for these laws is intended to be voter suppression, the rationale offered is to keep people from voting illegally. One normally thinks of the Amish as being the good guys so it’s ironic one of the first group of “badies” caught were the “goodies”.
Second, as you know I am no respecter of religion so of course I think using the excuse “it’s against my religion” is stupid. I don’t care if it’s Muslim, Jew, or Christian or anything else.
Third, I don’t think anyone should have to justify to anyone (government included) their conscience.
So yeah, I’m conflicted.
@2 John R., why do we get all upset about some government regulation but not others? We have regulations in place that say felons can’t vote or own firearms. Those are regulations right?
Do you suppose it’s because regulations on housing hurt businesses while regulations on felons offers an inexpensive source of labor?
I’ve got a problem with it.
Gee, instead of looking for falling pieces of the sky, maybe you ought to look a little closer to the ground. Hoofbeats do not always mean zebras.
“homeownership is expected to drop to 1984 levels by 2020, to just 55 percent in California.
A Senate committee is looking at the state’s housing market to see if it can meet the demands of future population growth.
“The suburban housing market just isn’t there anymore; it used to be there,” Urban Law Institute researcher Arthur Nelson said.”
http://abclocal.go.com/kfsn/story?section=news/politics&id=8573188
Could it possibly be California is responding to a trend? No, of course not, it is a Communist/Socialist/Marxist/Kenyan Plot, count on it. Go CPUSA/Dems!
#4 Scott M…indeed photo voter ID is intended for voter suppression– the illegal kind of voting. Everybody see O’Keefe have the opportunity to vote as Eric Holter in the recent GOP Wash DC primary?
@8 BUD, I heard about it. From what I heard, the poll worker said for the person to go ahead and sign the poll book even though they didn’t have proper ID.
There is no doubt that person needs to be trained better! But I’d like to point out that’s a problem with the poll worker which isn’t addressed AT ALL by the photo-voter ID laws. That is, it doesn’t matter what safeguards you have in place from the voter’s perspective, if the person running the polls isn’t following the rules.
No I did not see that BUD, I saw O’Keefe commit voter fraud and lie about his identity though. Funny how you all want new laws for crimes only TPR’rs have been proven to have committed.
Although, in all honesty, I know you will need all the help and tricks you can muster…and then some, before the inevitable.
Were you all the same people arguing for the church as an employer dictating contraceptive coverage? Religious exemptions for companies but not for people since that interferes with your plans to block voters huh?
@7 Sandi, “Could it possibly be California is responding to a trend?”
That is a laugh! CA wants to start a trend through legislation!
This effort is solely for the purpose of destroying single family homes and force folks into apartment complexes and away from suburbia purely in the name of perceived environmental concerns.
“Metropolitan area [California] governments are adopting plans that would require most new housing to be built at 20 or more to the acre, which is at least five times the traditional quarter acre per house. State and regional planners also seek to radically restructure urban areas…”
See “California Declares War on Surburbia” WSJ, April 09, 2012:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303302504577323353434618474.html?KEYWORDS=california
This is designed to force people into high density highrise urban housing. The Association of Bay Area Governments wants to limit to just 3% any new housing built in the future beyond the “urban fringe”, that is the point where the countryside begins.
There are plenty of environmentalists around the country that agree with this movement.
#10 Sandi..you just lied.
If you truly saw the video at no time does O’keefe say he is Holter.
I t certainly could be that you and Mr. Cox are right John R. Then again, it could be that neither of you is. Correlation is not causation.
http://blogs.redding.com/bross/archives/2012/04/california-decl.html
“…whether you think global warming is the most urgent problem facing humanity or a hoax, California has added — ballpark — 5 million people each decade since before World War II. At some point don’t the crowds reach the size where simply building new suburbs over the next hill — and the next, and the next, and the next — just becomes impractical?”
And also: “Actually, the homogenous prevalence of low-density single-family suburban housing is the outcome of the very government “planning” process that Cox decries, as economist Ed Glaeser has noted (see “Triumph of the City”).”
http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-avenue/102536/low-density-suburbs-are-not-free-market-capitalism
I am getting very, very tired of being called a liar.
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/04/james-okeefe-shows-everyone-just-how-hard-voter-fraud
Why isn’t anybody treating the national debt as a curse? Or treating the debt as one of the greatest threats to our national security?
#10 – “Funny how you all want new laws for crimes only TPR’rs have been proven to have committed.”
How quickly one forgets the truth…or ignores it:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/30/west-virginia-sheriff-fal_n_1242248.html
No, I was thinking of this one:
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/02/04/418963/indiana-secretary-of-state-convicted-of-voter-fraud/
And this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChllDGERjaQ
What, about a voter ID with a picture would fix these problems?
17. Trevor Because it is not either at this time.
18. Michael – he was investigated and is convicted, what do you want?
#21 – What do I want? Nothing, Richard. I was simply pointing out Sandi’s incorrect statement.
To use the old tactic of the Left…if you are against voter ID, then you must be for voter fraud.
Richard, he wants desperately to tell us how the voter ID with a photo would have prevented that voter fraud…except he cannot.
Can someone tell me how requiring a pictureID suppresses votes. Can you give a little more detail than saying some political talking point like “It will unfairly target minorities and the poor”?
Also, when this topic came up a few weeks ago, a question was posed that no one answered. No one, liberal or conservative is arguing that you shouldn’t have to REGISTER to vote. Well, you have to have na ID to register. Why is carrying that ID with you to the polls so much more of a burden?
“It’s like deja vu, all over again”.
Here are the ID requirements to register to vote in Virginia:
http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/cms/documents/VoterRegistration/sbe_voter_app_DOJ-Printed.pdf
Here is some info on who would be disenfranchised and why:
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/04/04/458149/87-year-old-voter-disenfranchised-by-voter-id-despite-court-decision-striking-it-down/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-daily-nebraskan/problems-with-voter-id-requirements_b_1391224.html
http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20120325/OPINION/203250316/Voter-ID-laws-will-disenfranchise-voters
http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/many-5-million-voters-disenfranchised-voter
These are the documents Virginia will require to vote in 2012:
http://www.sbe.virginia.gov/cms/documents/FAQ_2008_Presidential_Primaries.pdf
So far, Virginia still realizes that not everyone eligible to vote has a photo ID from the DMV, can meet all of the stricter requirements to get one, has easy access to a DMV and has the money to pay for the ID and have it renewed.
The attempts to disenfranchise voters who do not have a photo ID issued by the DMV (or worse a valid driver’s license) will eliminate or greatly inconvenience far more people than any fraud has EVER been able to even accuse much less prove. Pro active and well trained registrars are a much better way to combat the minimum voter fraud that MIGHT be in the system and it should not affect eligible voters.
#23 – Seriously, Sandi? Voter ID had nothing to do with that case. It was simply an example of how voting fraud by Democrats does exist…despite what you and others say.
24. One good example is the elderly. Many have voted for years, but no longer have a driver’s license or picture ID. Do yo believe in forcing a 90 year old to go wait in line at the DMV to get a picture ID.
or
Many poor do not have a driver’s license or bank account. They have been register to vote for years, but because of the changing bank laws and fees, no longer have a bank account and cannot afford an auto. They have no picture ID. Why do you want to keep them from voting.
You assume that all voters are like you living a suburban lifestyle, that simply is not true. Many Americans do not drive, do not use banks, and do not maintain a picture ID.
ID required to buy smokes and booze…that’s OK.
ID required to cash a check…that’s OK.
ID required to fly…that’s OK.
The list goes on and on.
But ID required to vote? Oh, no…we can’t have that!
Voter ID not needed? Check out breitbart.com.
A video shows a young man entering a Washington, DC polling place on primary day April 3rd and giving AG Eric Holder’s name and address. He made no claim that he was Holder. The poll worker gives the young man Holder’s ballot to vote.
The young man then says he should show his ID, the poll worker replies, “You don’t need it. It’s all right. As long as you’re in here, you’re on our list, and that’s who you say you are, you’re okay.”
The young man responds “I would feel more comfortable if I just had my ID. Is it alright if I go get it?” and walks out.
Amusingly he adds on the way out, “I’ll be back Faster than you can say Furious…”, referring to the Fast and Furious gun scandal that has plagued Holder and the DOJ.
No photo ID needed? Right! Why are the Dems opposed to photo ID? So they can fix elections!
Yes Sandi, it is like deja vu all over again. Maybe next you can remind us of how it is people can manage to get out and actually go to the polls to vote every year, but it is too much of a hardship to make it to the DMV to get an ID card once every 16 years. (you only have to go in person every other renewal cycle). And we are really supposed to believe that people can’t afford to save the $4 per year required to renew your driver’s license every eight years (or the $2 per year required to renew an ID card every 5 years)?
It is deja vu all over again because so far all these excuses are just plain ol’ bull. It leads to the obvious question, what is the real motive behind not wanting to make sure people are actually who they say they are before letting them vote?
John R – Who would suspect a nice republican young man with a camera trying to vote? LOL
There is only one reason you guys want voter ID and it has nothing to do with voter fraud. (At least no fraud at the polls, just in your demands)
And yet you still haven’t given a reason why knowing that the people who are voting are legal entitled to vote is a bad thing. You have some baseless accusations, but little more. Gun ownership is a right too, maybe requiring gun purchasers to shoe ID is too onerous a burden on the poor and minorities.
The fact is, while you will continue to believe in the boogeyman of voter suppression through voter ID, the true thing there is only one reason for is why you guys are so scared of having voters show ID before the vote.
Richard, Check out the video.
The guy never tried to vote nor did he claim to be Holder. He simply asked if the poll worker had an Eric Holder listed and gave Holder’s address. The poll worker gave him a ballot.
Obviously voter fraud is easy and apparently of no concern to Dems. I wonder why?
In the last two or three election cycles, I produced my driver license as identification, and I have been a registered voter for years. To validate my claim, I had to verbally give my address to prove I was authentic. Is that wrong? I think not.
As someone said, we are required by state and federal laws to provide photo identification in purchasing alcohol, tobacco, or firearms. Yet, people are howling about having to provide identification to vote? What else is new about that?
People have fraudulent bought alcohol, tobacco, and firearms before.
Trainings and educations can only go so far.
#32 Folks HAVE answered, Chuck, except that your question doesn’t address the main reason for the legislation, voter suppression. We all know this is the real reason Republicans favor this so much.
Yes gdad, and we all know the BS reasons given aren’t why libs object to it. The fact is NOT that republicans want to illegally suppress minority votes. The fact of it is, liberals want illegal aliens and convicted felons to be able to vote unfettered because they know that those demographics largely favor the liberal platform. The fact is, democrats are scared to death that if people do start having to produce ID, what they now dismiss as the ‘voter fraud myt’h, might actually bite them at election time.
If you say I want to suppress the votes of minorities, women or poor people who are American citizens who are legally entitled to vote, you are either misinformed or a liar. However, if you say I want to suppress votes because I don’t think illegal aliens and convicted felons, or dead people for that matter, should be able to vote, then you are correct.
And BTW, no one HAS answered the question. They say people can’t get to the DMV or afford an ID, but when you point out that they only have to get there once every 10 to 16 years, while they have to go to the polls every year, or when you point out that it will cost them a whopping two dollars a year, they then, having no substantive answer, resort to name-calling and mud-slinging, as expected.
To add fuel to the fire here’s an article that may be helpful. I’ve NOT read it yet but can’t wait to.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2012/04/11/florida-disenfranchises-minority-voters/
Erika Wood of the New York Law School has a very long and detailed article in the New York Times about Florida’s troubled history of denying voting rights to minorities, especially black people, and about the fact that recent laws passed in that state will disenfranchise potentially hundreds of thousands of minority voters — and could possibly even swing the election. First, some of the history:….
#36 Actually, Chuck, for the most part convicted felons can pretty much get their voting rights restored in most places after finishing paying their dues. If you on’t want felons voting you’ll have to do more than require an ID. Voting percentages for most classes of felons are pretty darned low. I’d be happy to entertain any evidence you have that felons — especially felons who haven’t had their voting rights restored — have been willy nilly making the difference in elections.
As for voting fraud among illegal aliens, I see that like others you have no proof it happens with any regularity at all. It seems pretty clear to me that many Republicans simply want to suppress the vote. As Scott M. notes in #37, Florida for one has a VERY long history of suppressing legal voting. Like in 2000 when cleaning up the voting rolls resulted in the purging of thousands of LEGAL voters, 88 percent of them black and a large percentage in Dem counties. I wonder how that happened?
You may not believe this Michael, but everyone who votes does not “buy smokes and booze”, nor fly, and if you have an established banking relationship you do not have to show a photo ID to cash a check.
Chuck, the fact is, while you will continue to believe in the boogeyman of voter fraud, it has not been proven and certainly no proof that a photo ID will “fix” what is already not a problem. You want to fix what your sneaky little video perpetrates, then prove someone voted for someone else and prosecute them.
Have the registrars require some acceptable forms of ID and the matter is resolved. That is NOT what you want, you want to make it harder on some folks so they will give up and not vote. It is clear as crystal glass.
Illegal aliens, convicted felons and dead people are not voting. They just are not. And a picture ID would be attainable if they were so that too is a red herring. Prove your case and stop harassing innocent eligible voters.
Plenty of city dwellers, like my daughter, have never had a driver’s license. Plenty of 80-90 year-olds let their license lapse and have no picture ID. People who have moved a lot have lost birth certificates and other papers needed. Many 90+ year-olds do not even have a birth certificate to take to the DMV for an ID. You are fooling no one with the case you cannot make.
It is a felony to vote if you are ineligible and until they catch people doing it the only “need” to demand a picture ID from the DMV is in right wing minds.
#31 – “There is only one reason you guys want voter ID and it has nothing to do with voter fraud.”
And what would that reason be, Richard? Please tell me the one reason I want voter ID.