No, it’s not racist, xenophobic, or unconstitutional to ask voters for valid ID; Update: Obama blasted ruling
The Supreme Court gives us more good news this morning: Indiana’s voter ID law has been upheld.
Half of the states have passed similar laws.
The race-mongers and open borders lobby will be in an uproar. CQ summarizes:
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can require voters to show photo identification at the polls, in a closely watched case with important ramifications for the 2008 elections.
In a 6-3 decision, the justices upheld an earlier decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit.
Proponents of the Indiana law at issue in the case, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, said the state’s interest in preventing voter impersonation fraud outweighs whatever burden might be placed on a small number of people. Opponents argued that the Indiana law unfairly burdens poor and elderly voters, who tend to favor Democrats but are least likely to have driver’s licenses or passports.
The Justice Department sided with Indiana in the case, agreeing that the voter ID requirement is constitutional.
You may recall that the woman who challenged the voter ID law in Indiana was, um, fraudulently registered to vote in two states.
D’oh.
La Shawn Barber excoriates liberal black leaders who lobbied against voter ID laws.
SCOTUSblog has full coverage.
Allahpundit takes a closer look at the ruling’s rejoinder to the Left’s argument that ID requirements impose an undue burden. One of the lib justices betrays his own.
***
Update: Barack Obama plies the Left’s bogus undue burden argument:
Obama said he was disappointed today in the new Supreme Court decision that has upheld Indiana’s voter ID law, calling it “wrong,” and emphasizing that the law could suppress turnout among minorities and poorer voters.
“I am disappointed by today’s Supreme Court decision upholding Indiana’s photo identification law — one of the most restrictive in the nation,” Obama said in a written statement.
He referenced his decision to file an amicus brief when Indiana’s voter ID law was first challenged, saying he did it because he believed that “it places an unfair burden on Indiana residents who are poor, elderly, disabled, or members of minority groups.”
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Pirate's Cove
- SCOTUS Upholds Photo ID Law, DUmmies And Assorted Leftards Not Happy | McCain Blogs
- UrbanGrounds
- Democrat Vote Fraud dealt blow by Supreme Court | The TIW Blog
- Hot Air » Blog Archive » Supreme Court: No, of course voter ID laws aren’t unconstitutional
- Leaning Straight Up
- Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
- Baseball Crank
- ACLU Extremely Upset with Supreme Court Decision on Indiana Voter ID Law : Stop The ACLU
- Random-American » Supreme Court says states can demand photo ID for voting
- monoblogue
- Leaning Straight Up
- Liberty Pundit
- Plumb Bob Blog
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
iamsaved #77
Thanks … glad to see someone picked up on the analogy I was trying to make …
Rusty,
Yes, the homeless (US citizens only) have the right to vote; What they usually lack is the motivation. Just like those who refuse to get a POSITIVE PHOTO ID. If they were sincerely interested in voting, they would do whatever it took, within reason. Getting a photo ID at taxpayers expense is, I believe, within reason.
Have to admire the nerve of the mentally defective trolls on this board. Do they actually believe their own reasonings? How does a free ID card deprive anyone here who is an actual citizen? Seems to me there will still be abuses with fake ids and such.
Nice to see LaShawn Barber commenting on stuff other than the musically stuff like the Hansons. At least that’s why I haven’t checked her out in ages.
Wondering how just how this voter id prevents people who have think its ok to vote in several states though. It has been stated that thousands voted for President in 2004 in both Florida and NY? It is easy enough to check with computers and yet there appears to be no penalties incurred by the perps. What happened to one man, one vote and equal protection?
And how about that Wash. state thing with bogus recounts, lost ballots, newly found ballots, etc.? The dem was given that election too.
Don’t worry, rooster, it’s okay when they say it.
Super Mojado
#100 rooster wrote:
So wetback is an “affectionate” term, huh?
rooster, you are special.
Yep! It is here in California. Just like the term “Gringo” or “Ranchero Americano!”
While I agree with you on the premise of your argument that the name is uncalled for, I don’t see you or any other liberal for that matter denouncing Hispanics from calling anyone with a light colored skin a “gringo”. I lost count of the hundreds of times I’ve walked through Phoenix and heard that term used in a negative manner. Little do they know that this gringo has taken some Spanish in college and can understand the majority of the conversations they think are somewhat private.
Not that either case of obvious ethnic slurs are acceptable. I’m just curious why the attacks are only one way?
Alas, this off topic anyhow. Back to the crazy world of liberals arguing against common sense ID checks when the Constitution makes it clear only US Citizens are allowed to vote in the US.
Dear angry black woman,
I am not, and most times will not try to be politicaly correct just to appease the race master baiters like those on your side.
affectionately with hugs,
rooster
The case regarding slavery is precisely the point. When people realized that slavery was unjustifiable the people changed the establish law. They made “good” law better[or more gooder]. Now people understand that not all votes are ‘created’ equal. Therefore, we are fixing the “Good” law to make it better. These laws will ensure that all votes are indeed equal, AND REAL.
yay me!! that’ll lop 10% off the top of the democratic results, to be sure.
Also, the homeless alcoholics most definitely have ID– to buy booze. Again, motivation. If it is something they want, they will find a way.
Those who want to vote, will comply.
Well,the libs and trolls on here who wax all whiny about how this is going to deprive poor or black or whoever of the right to vote aren’t fooling anyone but themselves…the only reason NOT to require that an ID be shown is so that people not qualified to vote can do so…and since they believe they should implement their agenda ‘by any means necessary’, they can justify to themselves letting these people vote….even wetbacks
Anyone without enough gumption to have a legit photo ID is probably incapable of making an intelligent decision in the voting booth anyway. Read: “Tell me who to vote for.”
Let me correct one thing:
…of legal alive US Citizens.
I guess the only people in this country who don’t have an ID card of any sort are Democrats. No Republicans or Independents, right?
Get over yourself. An ID card is very easy to obtain. VERY easy. If you’re alive, voting age, a US citizen, etc.
All others need not apply.
Gringo and wetback are both seen as demeaning, derogatory and/or offensive terms. Granted, they are in our lexicon but neither can be construed as a term of endearment.
Right on! Slurs are wrong unless they are directed at gringos. They are even more accepted when directed at male gringos.
Just illustrate liberal stupidity by using what they use until it fades away, or they pass their hate crime laws against whites
slurs.When they enact laws forbidding affectionate terms, then you best shut up white boy!I can at least understand the Democrat position. Now that IDs are required the illegal alien vote will be that much harder to get. One more reason they’ll try to shove “comprehensive immigration reform” (Amnesty) down our throats before long. This time it won’t happen before the election as they know it is a vote killer.
#108 rooster wrote:
It’s not p.c. to not go around using racial slurs, such as “wet back.” But I’m not surprised you don’t know that…or anything else.
Anyway — have fun revelling in (and revealing) your ignorance and stupidity.
Kisses,
nyk
#115 Barry F.
Of course. However, rooster doesn’t understand logic (or…much else), but thanks for stating the obvious truth.
Hmmm. I wonder why lgm hasn’t answered my question?
Man, that’s what I get for going to lunch…I miss a great thread.
I’m all in favor of Voter ID laws. Over the weekend, I had to pick up something I ordered from Wal-Mart on-line. I had it shipped to a store at no cost.
When I picked it up, I had to show a valid photo ID. No ID? No purchase.
I need an ID to cash a check, buy alcohol, pick up tickets from a will-call window, get a job, write a check at the grocery store, cash my paycheck, and many other things.
Why is it the integrity of something like my internet purchase is more worthy of protection than the ballot box?
Those who cannot vote - be they illegal or felons - cannot vote because of choices they’ve made. The “system” didn’t make them cross the border against the law or commit a crime. The “system” does not make them create fake addresses, vote under the name(s) of dead people, etc.
The “system” is in place to protect my right as a law-abiding legal citizen of the US to cast a vote knowing it won’t be cancelled out by an illegal, fraudulent vote.
There is no reason why we cannot protect the ballot box and our elections.
None.
I’d fully support a program giving free IDs to seniors and those who can’t afford it. Althought, even if an ID is $30/year that comes out to $2.50/month out-of-pocket for an ID.
You cannot tell me all the people who would be “disenfranchised” by this do not hold jobs, do not make purchases, do not write/cash checks, etc.
It’s very simple ‘Concerned Citizen’…because he doesn’t like the fact we use demeaning terms to describe people who SHOULD be demeaned…people who enter the US illegally and then attempt to vote….even Hispanics I know here in Houston call them ‘mojados’ with equal contempt…and rightly so
#107 alaskangrizzly wrote:
Sigh. I specifically called out a commenter here for using the word wetback. My response was to point it out. This was scenario-specific. Not a thesis on racist terms overall. I promise to call out the next commenter here who uses “gringo” pejoratively, but until then…your post has nothing to do with mine.
Yep.
I assume you meant “not good law”. In which case, yes, slavery is not now good law.
No, it is not. The Constitution was not amended to make abortion legal, the way it was to make slavery illegal.
Mohamed Atta (sp?) had 3 drivers licences… guess he coulda voted 3 times, huh? Hey, 9/11 was an election day…
Time for national ID, already.
Rusty
Does this mean that you think nobody should have to produce any ID when buying a gun?
In fact, since gun ownership is a right, why should anyone even have to pay for one? The government should issue every American an assualt rifle at birth.
What ‘nyk’ apparently isn’t capable of comprehending is that the term wetback isn’t racially specific…it applies to ANY ethnic or nationality who enters the country here illegally…if he lived here in Houston where we have to deal with the problem on a daily basis,he might have more insight into the problem
DC allows people to draw a map of where you sleep if you don’t have a legal residence.
There should be no limitations on American citizens to vote. I don’t care if you’re homeless or in prison. You’re still an American citizen who deserves a say. These laws put that in jeopardy. Some people just can’t afford to wait in line at the DMV all day. And not everyone has a computer. These people are at risk of losing their vote. Just because I’m concerned for them doesn’t mean I am an accomplice to terrorists or trying to come up with new dastardly ways to have non-citizens vote.
And, as I’ve said before, this really won’t change much. The people the laws are targeting, illegals, are the people most compelled to have fake identification. It’s the people who aren’t compelled to have ID that are being targeted. And those people are likely to be American citizens.
Best of luck in trying to FIND any homeless people. If you find any, you can also ask them when is the last time they voted. Finally, you can ask them why they don’t simply get some ID. It’s not that difficult.
But they have enough time to wait in line to vote? The library has free access computers. Please give a REAL reason why someone can’t get an ID.
Yes, there should. First, it should be “American citizens” only. Second, that citizen should have to PROVE he/she is who he/she says she is. Third, if you are convicted of a felony, you give up some rights - no one forced you to be a felon.
I’m calling BS on this one. Unless someone works 7 days a week from 9 am - 5 pm without vacation time or lunch breaks, or flexibility, there is time to go to the DMV to get a license. I don’t doubt those who claim work is barring them from doing so find plenty of time to do other things…
I have a right to go to the ballot box believing my vote will count once, and not be cancelled out (or outvoted) by fraudulent votes cast.
Why do I and the millions of other law-abiding citizens not have the right to that security?
Voter fraud is inexcusable.
I’d also like to see the “purple finger” rule enacted here. Make it clear that you’re voting once and that’s it…
Really? None? I should be able to vote in NY, CA, and Florida?
There are limitations on all other other constitutional rights, even the ones spelled out in the Bill of Rights. Why should voting be singled out for different treatment?
So you are saying we should hand out drivers licenses in every box of corn flakes?
The whole point of the laws which we eviiil Republicans are trying to pass is that people with fake ID’s should be caught and prosecuted. But people like you don’t want that either.
Yes, your inflated self-regard is noted. As is your silly strawman argument.
So what is it about the derelicts, the indigent, the non-English speaking, etc. people that is so valued by the left? I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say that most people falling into those categories are not avid followers of the political scene and are unlikely to be formulating well reasoned conclusions about candidates and propositions on the ballot. Could it be the very fact that they really have no independent opinion that makes them so vulnerable to manipulation by activist liberals and therein lies their value?
And how is the result of that process in the national interest? How can any patriot on either side of the political spectrum argue that winning an election through cynical manipulation of otherwise uninterested people is good for our society and nation? Is that we have come to?
We already have achieved a situation where nearly 50% of the adults in this country pay no federal income taxes. Is our nation really well served by such a large group with no accountability for the economic and social policies of politicians and parties they support?
Our whole democratic heritage is devolving before our very eyes as voter fraud and manipulation of unaccountable voters is defended as acceptable political and electoral strategies.
How bad is it that Iraq has better security against vote fraud than we do? Maybe they can send some people over to instruct our politicians on how it’s done.
I did. Libraries and DMVs close you know. If someone works while those places are open, then what?
As for having enough time to vote, I was under the impression that voting was similar to jury duty. Protected from termination. The same can not be said for waiting in line at the DMV.
What? I walked by two dozen on my way to Subway. I live in a city, man. Homeless people aren’t exactly living in the shadows. And whether they vote or not has nothing to do with whether they have the right to vote or not. They obviously do have that right and it shouldn’t be taken away because many choose not to exercise it.
Hilarious comment from the article in CQ:
“Justice Stephen G. Breyer dissented separately, arguing the law is unconstitutional “because it imposes a disproportionate burden” on voters who lack valid photo identification.”
That’s exactly the point! Besides, this will be a boom to the government-issue ID business as mroe people rush to get them, right?
By that logic, I should be able to sneak into Mexico(for example) and vote in an election regardless of whether or not I have the proper identification. In fact, following that logic, I shouldn’t even be asked to identify myself. Good luck with that!
Then you take time off work to go there.
Again with the silly strawman. Nobody is “taking away” anything. And I doubt many homeless people are just too darn busy to get down to the DMV.
???
I’m glad your local DMV is always open. Let’s check my hometown’s (Yarmouth, MA) RMV schedule:
Monday - Friday,
8:30 am - 5:00 pm
Thursday,
8:30 am - 7:00 pm
That’s it. Hell, I’d have trouble getting identification with those hours.
DC’s hours of operation is a little better, but it depends largely on what part of the city is called home. There are quite a few DMVs that are closed on the weekends.
It’s not as easy for some people as you’d like to believe.
“In fact, since gun ownership is a right, why should anyone even have to pay for one? The government should issue every American an assualt rifle at birth.” (Flenser)
I like your thinking! We should buy everyone a house, car, plasma tv, etc… According to the Lib’s, these are all rights that everyone (legal or otherwise) have.
Oh, to live in your fantasy world! That time off of work is time that you’re not getting paid. Poor people can’t always swing that. It’s also time you risk being fired for being late to work or taking to long of a break.
It’s not a straw man. It’s a reality.
Rusty #134, good point.
Just imagine what this country would be like if those who didn’t contribute to society lost their voice & influence.
And Rusty continues to dig his hole deeper. He would rather 10 million Iranians have the ability come fly over and be able to vote without showing ID then have a few homeless people go to a DMV or public library and get an ID for free. (And many, I and would bet most, have ID anyhow since they need one to buy booze.)
Liberals for ya. Out with security to enforce existing laws about US Citizens being only able to vote if it has the potential to burden 0.000001% of the voting population into having to swing by the DMV.
Was typing and listening to Rush when the power went off(thankfully for only 1/2 hr.) Hmmmm.
Since grandson will be in Iraq or Afghanistan by Nov. (3rd tour) am working on this. The states e-mailing ballots to overseas military are Washington, Oregon, Montana, N. Dakota, Colorado, Mississippi, South Carolina, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Virginia, Delaware, and Florida. Not all of them will accept a return e-mail however, but want verification by fax or mail.
IMO overseas military e-mail ballots should be e-mailed and completed e-mailed ballots accepted by every state. There are no privacy issues here. The military has their personal information and it doesn’t need endless repetition.
Meanwhile I checked out
http://www.overseasvotefoundation.org
a Delaware 501(c)(3) nonprofit, nonpartisan public charity. Bob Carey, board member.
While that web site offers help, why should our military need assistance in this matter? The military vote could make a big difference in this election!
Gee Rusty … guess I’m lucky to live in AZ … we even have MVD locations that are open on Saturday … guess some states just are more in tune with the needs of their citizens … and before anyone asks … yes … we have a voter ID law in AZ …
Do you have a drivers license? If so, how did you manage to get it? I mean, you make the whole thing seem impossible.
And how many of these poor homeless people have such a busy work schedule that they cannot spare a few hours to go get ID?
I think the left fails to realize that the Constitution states that we have the right to cast a vote if we choose to. That doesn’t mean that the government has to make it pathetically easy, just reasonably so as to keep it fair. Nobody is being forced to do anything, but if you want to cast a vote, then you need to make the effort to get and ID.
Seriously, how ridiculous is this argument? What’s next, registering to vote puts an undue burden of people?
I’ve noted that most of my good friends commenting on the outrage of Democrat-enabled voter fraud are referring mostly to the illegal alien problem.
I yield to no one in my rage at the II invasion, and it has no more infuriating and malignant manifestation than them actually VOTING.
But, this is only a part of the problem. Everybody knows that voting fraud in urban neigborhoods is the oldest play in the Dem playbook. They invented wholesale corruption in street-level politics and city government. (”Some men” (Republicans), as Bob Dylan, observed, “rob you with a fountain pen.” You know, stock manipulations, etc. But the Dem’s do it the old-fashioned way with crooked voting and crooked politics.)
The whole basis of Dem dominance of our corrupt and decaying cities (Detroit, Philly, Baltimore, etc.) begins with precinct-level political fraud. Dead people voting, never-born people voting, dunks, criminals, and lunatics voting in busloads, and, worst of all, these sham citizens voting multiple times at multiple locations. Obviously, a reasonable ID requirement is the first line of defense against all of this civic corruption which is the bread and butter of the Democrat Party. The problem is much bigger than just voter fraud by illegal aliens.
Also, I try not to use personal stuff too much here since it’s anecdotal and therefore pretty useless, but I had a relative who was homeless for a long period of time. When he got his life back together, it was absolute Hell trying to get him identification. He basically disappeared for a while so he had to jump through many hoops to get his ID. It took over six months and cost him a significant amount of money since all the time he was waiting in line he should have been waiting tables.
So the people who are pretending that getting an ID is a piece of cake really don’t know what they’re talking about.
Who is living in the fantasy world? I have my money on the ignorant liberal claiming some people work so much they don’t have time to ever, EVER, EVER stop by a DMV or find a computer that has internet and get a license.
And people wonder why the left gets called the looney left sometimes. I swear.
On April 28th, 2008 at 2:58 pm, Concerned Citizen said:
Right, CC!
We’ve had voter photo-ID requirements in KY ever since I can remember, and I have yet to recall a time when anyone has complained about it being a henderance.
Right again! There are places throughout the rural area and county in which I live to get a free photo ID, including most county offices as well as several local businesses.
I’d be a little more willing to believe in Rusty’s alleged deep concern for the poor, if his entire opposition to ID was not based on a desire to protect the masses of illegals in this country. Those illegals do vastly more to hurt poor Americans than piddling ID laws.
But the words “liberal” and “hyprocrite” have been synomyns for a long time now.
I’ve known more than a few people who worked incredible hours, yet they all managed to get time to do the things they need to. Are you realistically telling me that if they were sick, they couldn’t get the time off. Please come back to reality.
I was a high school student with a part time job. Wasn’t hard for me. No one was depending on me to work 60 hours a week to get food on the table.
Ignatius, I agree that the voting shenanigans from political machines (on both sides of the aisle) are a problem. Since many of these machines are associated with cities, it makes sense that they’re associated with Dems. No one is arguing that these shenanigans are acceptable. But preventing American citizens from voting is unacceptable too.
Flenser, you’re being obtuse. I don’t want illegal immigrants to vote. I also don’t want American citizens to be denied a vote. So these laws don’t work for me.
And these laws aren’t going to prevent illegal aliens from voting. As I stated earlier, illegal aliens are the most compelled to have fake documents. If they don’t, they’re at risk.
The homeless, poor, and elderly are least compelled to have ID that hasn’t expired since they’re less likely to need it. They’re the ones being hosed here.
I certainly hope that geting ID is NOT a piece of cake. If it is, what’s the point?
Still waiting for Rusty to explain how we are supposed to distinguish citizens from non-citizens, without any ID.
Are you suggesting they fake sick to go to the DMV? And then get fired for lying?
Even if they were sick or take time off, they’re still losing money. Waiters don’t get compensated for calling in with the flu, and they don’t get paid to wait in line (like the anecdote I mentioned earlier). Some people can not afford to miss a day’s pay.
I’m not a legislator. Something should be done that minimizes the risk of American citizens being prevented from their right to vote. These laws don’t accomplish that.
Rusty, you’re being obtuse.
How do you propose to stop them, absent any voter ID? An attempt at an answer would be appreciated. Maybe sometime today.
And as I stated earlier, the REAL ID act and similar measures are intended to address fake ID’s. These measures are also opposed by Democrats. Why?
If they are “less likely to need it”, then how exactly are they “being hosed”?
Why is it that the ONLY people who have trouble getting a valid ID or who have trouble understanding how to fill out a ballot just happen to be Democrats?
I get ID’d at Target when I use my Visa card, so why shouldn’t I get ID’d when voting. It seems to more slightly more imporatnat than whatever I am buying at Target. Democrats just see many of their voter blocks (like the dead vote, the illegal immigrant vote, and the repeat voter) having trouble with the whole ID thing! Too bad! The party will soon be over on that kind of fraud.
And for those who say it will not stop voter fraud, they are right. But it will sure put a huge dent in it which is only a good thind (unless you are a Democrat arguing against this). If you have time to go and vote, you have time to go to the DMV and get an ID.
Rusty… “Something should be done that minimizes the risk of American citizens being prevented from their right to vote“.
Exactly! The government should provide FREE national ID. End of problem.
Simple - you just ask them. They wouldn’t lie about it, right?
I finally got tired of going to wait in line to vote, so when we moved, my wife and I signed up to permanently vote with an absentee ballot. I STILL had to provide proof of who I was in order to do that - in California, of all places!
Plus, I had to show them that I really did live where I said I did. What’s so hard about that? Of course, for the homeless, most cities of any size have homeless shelters that provide not only a place to sleep, but a mailing address, telephone and internet services, as well as transportation as needed. Problem solved.
Rusty, get real!
Yes, they do. Only in your crazy little world is this not true.
And you still haven’t answered why you’re a hypocrite on “rights of citizens” when it is a Constitutional right to own and bear a firearm but I still need an ID to buy a gun and must pass a background check to boot.
Where is your bleeding liberal heart in defense of these poor workers who work 100 hour weeks who can’t get to the DMV and get a state ID so they can buy a gun?
Yes, voting is a right as opposed to a discretionary privilege, BUT, it is a right reserved to United States citizens, hence it is acceptable, desirable and necessary that proper identification be required given the large [30 million] number of illegals living in the US.
Geez. At least pretend to be intellectually honest.
Something has been done. Your not liking it is immaterial.
No right is absolute. Not the right to free speech, not the right to keep and bear arms, not the right to freedom of assembly, not the right to be secure in your home and person.
I’d appreciate an explanation as to why you imagine voting rights to be in a different category.
Rusty
I’m going to assume that you are no longer a high school student. (Which is a generous assumption, based on your postings here.)
In every state I know of, drivers licenses expire and have to be renewed every four years or so. Have you EVER been a worker, and had to go to the DMV and get a drivers license renewed? If so, how did you manage it? Did you and your family go hungry as a result?
Yes! This observation succinctly captures the essence of the Supreme Court’s decision:
1. Democrats choose to game the voting system extending the franchise to Dead-Americans, Feline-Americans, Canine-Americans, Avian-Americans, Multiple-Personality-Americans, Cloned-Multistate-Americans, Cartoon-character-Americans, “Undocumented-Americans,” etc.;
2. States, concerned with said gaming of the system and its corrosive effect on the principle of “One person (or human), one vote” try to put the speed-brakes on it;
3. Predictably, Democrats cry, “Foul!”
Yet the louder they caterwaul about the decision, the louder Whittaker Chambers’ words ring back in return:
“Innocence has no need for outraged shrieks. Guilt does.”
Not necessarily; I’m a supporter of abortion for the sole reason that it’s a preferred means of liberal voluntary population control (i.e., “The Roe Effect” or “Lest the Breed Continue”). On the other hand, because they slaughter their own future generations in the womb for sake of convenience, it’s kind of understandable why liberals would want to open the flood gates to creative variations of “hyphenated Americans.”
So eventually, things will come full circle: Roe’s shelf life is limited, so the combined effect of its overturn with the current Court decision is that one day libs will have to generate new voters the old-fashioned way: by “Punishing their women with babies.”
How deliciously ironic.
Rulings like this are exactly why Obama Hussein and other Dimmicrats voted against Alito and Roberts. That is, they want Judicial Activism, we don’t! Sorry Obama, maybe your Pastor can rant about how this takes us back to the slavery days! And your buddy Ayers could plot a few bombings at DMV’s. Than you could argue that it is racist and dangerous to have to go to the DMV to get an ID!
This is a prime example of why the Supreme Court decided voter ID laws “only imposed a minimal and justified burden on voters.” Because a majority of Americans don’t work 60 hours a week. Also, it’s illegal to deny employees break time and/or lunch time. So there *is* opportunity there, Rusty, if they choose to get an ID.
Business Week says most who work long hours are, in fact “the best-educated and best-paid — college grads”, a change from 25 years ago.
And, ultimately, anyone can go get an ID - so no one is being discriminated against.
I believe if I were an illegal immigrant with an illegal photo id, I’d find other endeavors with which to risk blowing my cover before using it to vote - unless someone was willing to make it worth my while.
On April 28th, 2008 at 3:24 pm, flenser said:
Not to keep butting in here, but I completely agree with your question’s premise, flenser.
When I got out of school, my first job was with a community action agency that helped the poor, elderly and disabled in the region gain access to state and local government services.
As a part of our enrollment process, one of the first steps was to secure a photo ID for any client who did not have one. So I don’t see why or how anyone could possibly have a problem with obtaining or using a voter ID.
I mean, if they don’t have the time to secure a photo ID, then how will they find the time or opportunity to go vote.
As usual, Republicans stand on principles except when they imagine it’ll help their cause to abandon them. When the government puts a burden on its citizens, it should have some sort of need that justifies it. I would think that would be a basic tenet of conservatism. Yet in the Court’s decision, the evidence of in-person voter fraud is incredibly thin: dating back to the Boss Tweed era, or, more recently, one instance of in-person fraud in the 2004 Washington gubernatorial election. That’s it. If they had more compelling evidence, surely they would have offered it. If there isn’t more compelling, objective evidence, then it’s unnecessarily burdensome and probably racist; I guess it’s constitutional, per today’s decision, but only technically.
You mean Ann Coulter?
Correct. My license expired on my 21st birthday. I was in college so I got it renewed on my winter break.
When I get my new DC license in 2009, there won’t be a problem. I’m salaried. I have personal days. I am very lucky in that regard. The ones who don’t have the same benefits as me shouldn’t be punished.
EQ, although the law doesn’t discriminate against anyone, the pragmatic application of this law does. If people are working two or more jobs that don’t have vacation days or are working when their library and DMV is open, then they are being excluded from a right that every American citizen should benefit from equally.
As mentioned earlier, I have witnessed how difficult it can be to get government ID. I agree they shouldn’t be given out all willy-nilly. Otherwise, what’s the point?
But that shouldn’t exclude those people from being able to vote. It isn’t as easy as Flenser makes it sound.
American citizens should be allowed to vote, period. These laws make that harder, not easier. That is completely unacceptable.
#172 Kovacs wrote:
High-larious, Kovacs. Nice one.
Without some form of identification. how can you tell if the voter IS an American(United States) citizen? Ask them?
Please answer this question.
So now poor people shouldn’t be required to get drivers’ licenses? Or do anything that takes time?
May I point out that those slow DMV lines are in government offices? If you want to get ID faster, get fake ID, entreprenuers are motivated by profit which is enhanced by productivity…
Nana nana boo boo stick your heads in doo-doo. Oh, and Boo-freaking-hoo!!!! You two lost this one. BTW Rusty, if you’re a felon in prison you can’t vote anyway.
The guerilla
Rusty, I’ve been supporting myself since 1989. It wasn’t until 94 that I made more than 10K and even that was tough. Yet I still made time to get to the DMV out in California, fill out paperwork and get a state ID card.
If people cannot save up enough money every few years to take a bus or a cab to the DMV, they have worse problems than voting. If you want something, there is always a way to earn it.
There can be absolutely no argument against this ruling unless you are committed to either voter fraud or the total elimination of any personal responsibility.
For crying out loud, we’re not talking about any major inconvenience beyond a valid form of identification in order to vote. As people have pointed out, there are numerous other situations we all face every day that require ID…and for good reason. So therefore, voter fraud is the only argument against this ruling. If you want to vote and can do so legally, SUCK IT UP AND GET ID!
And non-American citizens should be denied the right to vote. One purpose of these laws is to help distinguish between the two.
Non-citizens voting violates the voting rights of Americans. For some reason this does not bother you, Rusty.
Rusty,
Realistically, how many people would be disenfranchised by requiring ID? Do you know of anybody? I think this is a situation that is technically possible, but will most likely will never happen.
BTW, the Ann Coulter case is ridiculous. This involved a local election and voting in the wrong precinct, not voting illegally or multiple times.
Except for those excluded by American law like felons. Or those voting two, three, or four times…
Those who violate laws and have penalties levied against them for doing so lose that right. By *their* choice.
Those who wish to commit vote fraud are not entitled to do so. They have no right to deny me a vote or to have their political preferences voted for repeatedly.
None.
If America has a right to create laws to protect the integrity of its national sovreignity, why can it not take measures to ensure the integrity of voting?
More sophisticated legal analysis from the left. If the security and integrity of elections in a democracy are not important enough to justify government action, we may as well strike every last law from the books.
Well! Now, ya can’t do that because it would then amount to profiling! How would you know who to ask, THAT is what the real question is…RUSTY???
Thank goodness for Massachusetts having some sense and allowing incarcerated felons to have the right to vote.
I keep harping on that family member who had to jump through hurdles to get an ID after a period of homelessness. He would be pretty disenfranchised by this, no?
Voting should not be something you earn. It’s a right that every American citizen inherently has when they become an adult. Once we get to people needing to earn the right to vote, democracy crumbles.
Forgive me for being cynical, but I’m guessing very few people work 24/7/365. That so many Americas work in such dismal conditions their tyrant bosses won’t let them take an hour or two to go to the DMV. It’s a stretch, and no American has the “right” to commit voter fraud.
They have an obligation to vote once, and under the name and address that are legally theirs.
Again, I ask - why is it *my* right to a legitimate vote (which is discredited by every fraudulent vote) less important than someone who is committing fraud? Or do I now have the right to vote 2, 3, 4 times for my candidate because it’s “wrong” to put measures in place to protect the ballot box?
The point, flenser, is that the Court didn’t offer any evidence that the security and integrity of elections is in danger. Right-wing paranoia doesn’t meet the standard–or shouldn’t, at least. Sorry bare facts are too sophisticated for you.
Still waiting for the answer to my question - without some sort of identification, how can you tell if the voter IS an American citizen?
Okay… Rusty… Come up with a better plan. I challenge you to create a better way for the laws of this country to be followed. Is it that you think the laws are subjective or only relative or that you just don’t get how a democracy works?
I think there are many people out there in the US who are too “lazy” to get their ID. This was the same thing that happened in Georgia. People were claiming they wouldn’t be able to get these voter ID cards when Georgia basically said they’d even send people out to voters’ homes to get their ID cards set up.
This is more of a matter of preventing voter fraud. What’s the problem here? Can people not pick up the phone, walk, drive, to get their ID’s all set up? This is just absurd. It may be a matter of inconvenience to them but it’s a matter of procedural integrity to the rest of us who think you should vote only once, show a proper ID, not get to vote in another state, and not be an illegal alien or felon (or both) to do so.
People used to make excuses not to vote, now they’re doing the same with these voter ID’s. Just screwy.
Voters being required to show ID helps prevent voter fraud. Yet, I wonder, how many of the 23,000 aliens who received New York driver licenses (before they stopped it) without the expiration dates matching the expiration of their visas registered to vote and will get handed a ballot in November. Eliot “John” Spitzer is gone but like a STD, that’s a gift that will keep on giving for awhile.
Precisely because he could have been anyone. If only they had known he was in your family Rusty. Seriously, he could have been al Qaeda, a Columbian drug lord, MS-13 - sure, you’re not Arab or Latino but the government can’t profile. It’s a drag, but not disenfranchising to have to get an ID. Did it take two years - that’s the usual time between elections.
Owning a gun should not be something you earn. It’s a right that every American citizen inherently has when they become an adult. Once we get people needing to earn the right to own a gun, Democracy crumbles.
But I guess the Second Amendment means nothing to you. Hypocrite. I have to have an ID to use that “right” given to me by the constitution. Plus pass a background check.
That’s like saying laws against homicide can’t be enacted until there’s a murder.
Clearly, the Court felt it was warranted to uphold the Voter ID law to ensure integrity in the voting box.
For you, Rusty, and others who oppose this, I ask once again:
Why is *my* right to a fair vote less important than the rights of criminals and the like to engage in fraudulent voting?
Today my husband started a new job. He had to show is ID and SS card otherwise he wouldn’t be put on the payroll. Oh, and my husband has never driven a car in his life (due to vision problems) yet he manages to get to the DMV when necessary to renew his ID. Silly how he thought he was doing what’s right and responsible, when so many think he’d be better off *not* getting the ID and claiming “intimidation” and “suppression”…
My grandmother, who will be 80 in May and who also never drove a car, manages to get to the DMV to get her ID too. She needs it to collect her winnings at the local casino.
Why is it that a getting a job, collecting your bingo money, buying alcohol and the like are so important we have to ensure the person engaging in such activities 1) is who he says he is, 2) lives where she says she lives, 3) is of age to purchase alcohol…
But the line is suddenly drawn at expecting the same at the ballot box?
If you oppose IDs for that, I guess it’s “intimidation” and “suppression” to expect anyone to go to the DMV for a road test or to obtain a license. Too much trouble, seeing as all Americans work 60 hour/week jobs without vacation, sick time, or any days off. Anyone caught driving without a license shouldn’t be prosecuted because, hey, we can’t *expect* them to do something as burdensome as obey our laws, huh?
If you are in Chicago or Milwaukee, I would say they could easily vote 20 times. Democratic buses will just bus them from precinct to precinct.
Let me get this straight …
1) Some people don’t have time to go get a government issued ID because of the hours the agency is open … which means …
2) Those same people also don’t have time to go register to vote since those offices are open the same or fewer hours than the government ID agency … so someone tell me …
3) How are those same people going to suddenly have time to go vote? …
The world doesn’t stop working just because it’s election day …
Just thought I would ask …
Good step in the right direction. The motor voter act is still nothing but a voting fraud machine. Once they tried to sign up my wife, who is a lawful permanent resident but cannot legally vote.
cpodug
I hope you are not holding your breath waiting for an answer from Rusty.
Or when you have thugs who go around slashing the tires on GOP-rented vans…they won’t get in that much trouble. Or have supporters engage in intimidation, vandalism, and harrassment. That works too.
Heck, until 2006, Wisconsin was one of the few states that didn’t require proof of residency to obtain an ID. Anyone could come here and get one. Illegal immigrants were coming from as far as New Jersey to get one.
Which is why, above, I said we need something like the “purple finger” - a clear and obvious mark made on everyone casting a ballot that would prevent them from voting again the same day. In addition to Voter ID.
When a right is important, you defend its integrity through just and equitable laws - which is what Voter ID does.
I’ve said before on other threads that I do enjoy debating Rusty and appreciate the level of respect given to me. So I expect an answer.