ChangoLanzao

This is another Fox News factoid which, as far as I can tell, is false. HERE is a discussion of that issue you should read.

I believe this is a TeaParty allegation/factoid. Show us the final report.

What about 2012 report by the S. Carolina dept of motor vehicles report that found 953 dead people had voted. That is false. It was a hoax. The claim was that 953 dead people voted. The election commission investigated 207 of the ballots. No evidence of voter fraud emerged.

There is a lot of evidence of absentee fraud, such as the mayoral election in Miami that was invalidated by a court because of the more than 5000 fraudulent absentee votes. I don't think that case had anything to do with in-person voter fraud. I agree that election fraud has been a problem, but that's not what this discussion is about. Encumbering voters who show up in-person at the polls to cast their votes doesn't address election fraud - it is a method to perpetrate voter suppression and disenfranchisement.

Dude! You just violated the Third Commandment. ??? Number 3: “You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth;" I don't understand what you mean. Fourth - you like to throw the lord's name around I meant the fourth ... you sure do like to throw the lord's name around for just about any reason.

Lefties will want to read more: CLICKY

I saw four people standing. It was a bullshit speech. He should run for President. I would vote for him I encourage you to write him in!

I saw four people standing. It was a bullshit speech. He should run for President.

CLICKY!Even the Republican inspector of elections for Radnor Township said she believes the law is politically motivated! How does she know? Did she check IDs? Send her an email and ask her.

This is why it's best to leave the decision to be made between a woman and her doctor. In private.

CLICKY!Even the Republican inspector of elections for Radnor Township said she believes the law is politically motivated!

Much less disgusting than those who use the force of law to provide too much information at the wrong time in order to impose their political and religious beliefs on them.

I agree. Don't waste too much of your time fighting the heathens that post here. Keep in mind that everyone will stand before the Lord Jesus Christ. Some will do it as a choice and some will do it as a consequence. Dude! You just violated the Third Commandment.

You don't like a civilized society that BUTTS OUT of an individuals health care decisions? Since when does "conservative philosophy" embrace governmental interference in a person's medical decisions? I thought you people were against that kind of thing. Isn't that why y'all are so scared of single payer? You prefer corporate tools making these decisions, not the wicked scary government that is the source of all evil. Critical thinking is fading out in a hurry. Proven in the above post BBBBWWWWAAAAKKKKK I hear a right wing parrot!!! How exciting!!! Where are todays talking points as handed down from your masters? Did you not get todays memo? Parrots pretending to have critical thinking skills, where there clearly are none, are rather silly. Just the kind of people the Koch brothers can count on!

This isn't an elementary school where "Well look what HEEEE did" is a valid response to justify someone elses failure. Nowhere have I said that Obama is a good president, I merely said that Romney, based on these actions wouldn't be either. In typical Romney flip-flop fashion, he went back against what he originally stated and tried to make it better by saying that England is in fact ready to host the Olympics. At least he is consistently inconsistent. I heard that he's planning on retroactively cancelling his trip to London.

How do you mean? Because if you want to go back into US history you will find real disenfranchisement ...not just a little inconvenience. Indeed. A poll tax is "just a little inconvenient" for those who can afford it. Voter I.D. is not required everywhere in order to cast a vote at the ballot box. I've never had to show an I.D. to vote. I tell them my name, they look it up and add a check mark and hand me a ballot. I have never had them tell me that I already voted. It wouldn't inconvenience me at all if I had to show an I.D. I would not feel oppressed by a voter I.D. requirement. However, there are thousands of people who would be seriously inconvenienced by new voter I.D. requirements, for many reasons. The people who are systematically pushing for new voter I.D. laws around the country know this. They also know that the laws will inconvenience particular demographic groups more than others. They consider most of the people in these groups as "lazy" people. That makes it all O.K. because nobody likes "lazy" people. Apparently they have convinced you that only "lazy" people will be discouraged from voting by the "little inconvenience" of getting a voter I.D. So it seems to me as if you're just fine with the voter I.D. requirement despite the fact that they have admitted that they cannot base the need for it on evidence that in-person voter fraud is taking place to any significant extent. You think it's justified simply because it sounds like a good idea. You say that this isn't "real disenfranchisement". I guess you think that it's perfectly OK to disenfranchise "lazy" people because that's not "real disenfranchisement". One thing that you will notice if you look back into U.S. history is that it used to be a lot easier to disenfranchise groups of people. At various times in the past it was perfectly reasonable to disenfranchise Native Americans, slaves, paupers, people who own no property, people who won't pay a poll tax, and women. Nowadays we all agree that the Constitution guarantees all of those groups the right to vote. But what about "lazy" people? Well, nobody's going to complain about a voter I.D. law which, on it's face, seems like a good idea and only slightly inconveniences "lazy" people. The added bonus, of course, is that most (not all) "lazy" people (defined as those for whom it's a "little inconvenient" to obtain a voter I.D.) just happen to lean Democrat. This is just "real disenfranchisement" by another name. Perhaps we should call it "stealth disenfranchisement".

They feel the same way about us. All we can do is present our view the best we can so that history records all sides of the issue.

The point is that there's no reason to believe that voting fraud is happening to the overall detriment of conservatives. What Republicans are doing, without evidence that there is significant in-person voter fraud occurring, is to make it as difficult as possible for people who will have difficulty jumping through the hoops to cast their vote. It's blatant, it's obvious, and they know what they are doing.

I don't like racists.

Bravo! An excellent use of my tax dollars. CLICKY

I agree that the law seems reasonable. However, the law is not necessary. It doesn't solve an existing problem and it does potentially disenfranchise many citizens. It isn't justifiable on constitutional grounds. It also violates the voting rights act.

Incorporate your penis. Problem solved!

Utter nonsense. Keep your religion to yourself.

It's good to hear the people of South Dakota are fighting against prospective mothers being coerced into their decision on abortion by making their doctor tell them that they're terminating the life of a whole separate, unique, living human being, that people who do are more likely to kill themselves as a result, and to come back three days later.

I think you mean a poll tax. I'm pretty sure a pole tax has something to do with This.