Eric Holder say Texas ID Law will disinfranchise minorities

I think they should have a national ID card that every citizen is required to carry. Just to prove they are a citizen. If you don't have a card then you get deported. It would be easy enough for everyone to get one of these cards.

 

Actually a chip in the back of the neck would be better, we would insert it at birth.

 

Part of the debate is fed v state-states believe they have a need for a law to govern local or state voting. The same local voting organizations support federal elections.

That question outstanding, should id be photo id or something less (like a utility bill). Regardless, proof of id is not a new concept and I question the rationale for not requiring Id for voting when its required for so many other reasons. Need to show an Id to buy tobacco, buy alcohol, need an Id to fly, need an Id to bank, to travel out of the country and even to buy a car or any cash transaction over $10K, to apply for welfare, foodstamps, purchase a firearm, get a marriage license and to get a drivers license. Oh, and to apply for Social Security or a job...so...

Maybe making people stick their fingers in indelible ink would be more appealing...or less inflamatory to the AG.

 

This is the biggest reason I want a photo id to vote. We give enough away to illegals without making it easy for them to vote.

Do I think a voter id law is going to eliminate voting fraud?? Heck no. No matter what you liberals think of minorities, I'm not stupid. The majority of fraud will be done through means that a photo id won't stop... such as gerrymandering, ballot tampering and whatever the latest scheme ACORN can think up will be.

Still, we should value our right to vote enough that we take some measure to protect it from the easy stuff.


Oh and here's some proof that minorities aren't all that stupid.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123327839569631609.html

But you probably still shouldn't let us have access to things like lottery tickets.

 

Nuff said. Case closed. This matter settled.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5p70YbRiPw

We are required to supply an I.D. for many many things we do in everyday life far less important than voting on the future of the nation. Why is it that liberals oppose it so strongly while conservative want this modest level of rigor???? The answer is the liberal hope to cash in on any fraud and conservatives hope to stop it to uphold some sort of integrity in the electoral process.

Eric Holder has proven himself less than worthy of his position on a host of levels. When Obummer becomes a one term president, we get the added bonus of no more Eric Holder. SWEET!!

 

I lost it with that line.

Lets stop sugar coating this. This is one side trying to beat the other side. That is the only reason this is coming up now...because it could potentially give repubs an advantage. If illegals gave repubs an advantage, they would not be trying to pass this now.

One thing is for sure, neither side cares about integrity.

 

If only those liberals would have not fought so hard for women to vote, this country would be in much better shape.

 

Don't forget minorities, too. We should go back to only allowing white property owners to vote. This is 'merica damnit!

 

So, everyone is for less government laws/regulations except to stop non problems like voter fraud. Good thing the economy is doing so well. It leaves plenty of time to focus on a non problem like voter fraud. This isn't a conservative issue, never has been, it is a neo-con issue.

 

I can't fathom having a mindset that thinks this is racist and unfair. I guess because I pay my taxes, don't break laws, and live here legally I don't give two hoots whether I'm IDed or not...I can see where I'd care if the above weren't true though.

I need an ID for cigarettes.
I need an ID for a bank account.
To get inside government buildings
To drive
To purchase alcohol
To go to the doctor
To use my own credit card

Who cares if you have to show it to vote. Same logic applies to drug testing welfare recipients. We are drug tested to work and pay into the program, why should you not be in order to draw out of it.

 

Is proof of identity required to sign up for federal assistance programs? If so, isn't that putting an unfair burden on the elderly and poor that desperately need those services the most?

 

How is signing up to receive assistance, to receive something worth money, even remotely the same as casting a vote? How is comparing the privilege of driving to the the same as the right to vote?

If comparing something lets at least compare similar things? ID to use a credit card, when there is proof of 100's of millions of dollars in credit card fraud, to ID to vote when there is no verifiable proof of voter fraud.

Once again, why do we NOW need to fix this non problem with new laws and regulations? Especially when everyone here is usually against meaningless laws and regulations.

If someone were really serious about casting an extra vote, voter fraud, how hard would it be to get a fake ID? Any college town serves them up like alcohol to a minor. Oh, that's right, you need a valid ID to buy alcohol because that prevents ineligible teens from buying it. Silly me.

 

Because this would just make too much sense. Logic like this gives liberals that uneasy feeling that maybe, just maybe they would lose votes, but by God, let's just keep handing this money out and win this next election. Could you imagine the civil unrest on the streets of Chicago if they made poor Shaniqua take a drug test to keep her gov't assistance, or having Jose show his ID to vote? Who would want to deal with the likes of that??

 

"I'll be back faster than you can say furious" best part of the whole video

 

what part of "Nuff said. Case closed. This matter settled", dont the liberals understand? You can continue to wax poetic if you like but you only expose your limited horizons.

 

I am not a liberal. Unfortunately, there don't seem to be many "less government" conservatives in this thread. That is probably why it has gone on for so long. Lot of neo-con BS though.

 

I thought one of the liberals arguments was that many of the poor and elderly dont have ID's because they dont own cars. Therefore, it is a burden for them to provide ID. But, it seems to me that they would already have many reasons that they would have to have an ID already. But, you knew that. Will I have to produce a valid ID to receive federal health care? Because if I do, that's really gonna cramp my style. Just sayin.

What are the liberals afraid of if there is no voter fraud? (and I'm not saying there is). You have to show ID to check out a book at the library, why not show an ID to vote? I really dont see any problem with it and have yet to hear a valid reason why its such an unjustified request.

 

^ this. You wont get an answer like I didnt get an answer from the libs. Why the fear? Whats the harm? It seems like the least possible rigor one would exect of such an important matter as voting. They didnt use logic and reason to arrive at their position so no ammount of logic or reason will work and reeling them into reality. Its tough to argue at their emotional level.

 

Like I said, I am not a liberal but I do not want any more laws and regulations, especially for non problems, than absolutely needed. Using your argument, why not have a national ID system. If you are a citizen, you need to have your ID on your person at all times. Heck, then we could easily identify and deport illegals. Every citizen would have an ID and could get their federal health care. So, am I to assume you are for a national ID required for all citizens?