quote Originally posted by mptighe: Just the fact that he refers to black people as "the blacks" shows where his opinion comes from. His describing of the people that mugged him and the "animal like grin" are also tells. Honestly, as someone who has friends from every walk, race, sexual preference, socilal class, etc I can honestly say I probably wouldn't enjoy the company of a few people that post regularly here. Loafer seems to be someone I would probably avoid, as his ignorant classifying of people would probably lead to us not getting along. You and I would have disagreements, but I think we'd still get along just fine for the most part. I can't say the same for him or some of the others.

OK, I guess I should have described the man's smile that mugged me as friendly and compassionate - a shining example of a civilized human being. Would that been more politcally correct for you? Maybe as blacks are so rare around here I should even feel privileged to have been chosen by the select few of them to mug me? Maybe I should have commended the three of them for being "real go getters" for being motivated to go out and rob me?

I guess so in your mind.

[This message has been edited by loafer87gt (edited 11-01-2012).]

quote Originally posted by mptighe: Just the fact that he refers to black people as "the blacks" shows where his opinion comes from. His describing of the people that mugged him and the "animal like grin" are also tells. Honestly, as someone who has friends from every walk, race, sexual preference, socilal class, etc I can honestly say I probably wouldn't enjoy the company of a few people that post regularly here. Loafer seems to be someone I would probably avoid, as his ignorant classifying of people would probably lead to us not getting along. You and I would have disagreements, but I think we'd still get along just fine for the most part. I can't say the same for him or some of the others.

I totally agree with you. He could definitely show a bit more class. I was mearly refering to this thread, but I can see where he is a little too blatant in others.

And FYI (to the forum) I have always defended equal rights here. Believe you me, if anyone of you were to become blatantly racist while in my company, I would NOT keep my big trap shut. I would first ask nicely, then...

They say it's racist because white aristocratic liberals believe that all black people are poor and only poor people are black. White aristocratic liberals also believe that blacks are dumb, and they also believe that they need their white aristocratic liberal intellect to help them live their lives.

But even though the white aristocratic liberals were the ones who actually first implemented a national ID card (Social Security), they realized that they failed at implementing it properly and that not everyone has one. They also think that blacks are unable to figure out that they need to go to a DMV to get a free (in most states) valid identification card.

And then of course, there's also the other part of the argument and that is that the white aristocratic liberals believe that people in general are too dumb to know what they really want, and by demanding a valid photo ID, this prevents them from whole-sale voter fraud in the swing states. They believe that having Obama as president is the right thing to do... even if we don't quite realize it yet.

They say it's racist because thats the ONLY way Obama got elected the last time. A bunch of unemployed, homeless, bums in the U.S that had nothing better to do with their time decided to elect a piece of crap to office and this time, they know that they are screwed if an I.D is needed.....meanwhile, the working class was out busting their ass and had no time to get to the voting booths. I GUARANTEE more employed will be taking time off work for the voting this time around so that piece of dog crap isn't around next term.

[This message has been edited by Jackdaniels (edited 11-01-2012).]

The feces is now getting really really deep 'round here.

(sniff sniff) "You smell that? You know what thet is Brick?" (no Big Daddy--I don't smell nothin) "Boy,That's mendacity you smell and it's thick as front porch honeysuckle on a still summer evening"

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 11-01-2012).]

quote Originally posted by 2.5: Seems to some. But do you think they are? Or even if one party seems to be pushing the idea, can you honestly say it is a bad idea to require an id to vote? Or give a legitimate reason? This seems like something that should have been required since day one.

Again what kind of ID are we talking about? What kind of ID is required and is it simple and inexpensive to obtain?

DO I think proof of citizenship should be required to vote? Hell yes...but do those arguing that certain jurisdictions have made it unnecessarily difficult to obtain an ID that is acceptable to new laws have a point? I think so.

quote Originally posted by Jackdaniels: .....meanwhile, the working class was out busting their ass and had no time to get to the voting booths. I GUARANTEE more employed will be taking time off work for the voting this time around

The polls are open from 8 AM to 8 PM up here during an election. Is it not that way down there?

quote Originally posted by newf: Again what kind of ID are we talking about? What kind of ID is required and is it simple and inexpensive to obtain? DO I think proof of citizenship should be required to vote? Hell yes...but do those arguing that certain jurisdictions have made it unnecessarily difficult to obtain an ID that is acceptable to new laws have a point? I think so.

The kind that is acceptable for employment, cash checking, voting, etc...

Any state ID is simple, and inexpensive to obtain.

How is it unnecessarily difficult to obtain a state ID? It was required in Michigan 22 years ago when I turned 18. It is very easy, and cheap to get a state ID. A pack of smokes or two should do it. Those on welfare, the areas most likely complaining, should be required to show ID to obtain food stamps and the such.

It boggles the mind that there is even a concern over this. After how many elections have past in America's long history, and we cannot even get this right?

Those that do not have ID... get off ya azzes, get an ID, vote!~ The stupid, it hurts.

quote Originally posted by Tony Kania: The kind that is acceptable for employment, cash checking, voting, etc... Any state ID is simple, and inexpensive to obtain. How is it unnecessarily difficult to obtain a state ID? It was required in Michigan 22 years ago when I turned 18. It is very easy, and cheap to get a state ID. A pack of smokes or two should do it. Those on welfare, the areas most likely complaining, should be required to show ID to obtain food stamps and the such. It boggles the mind that there is even a concern over this. After how many elections have past in America's long history, and we cannot even get this right? Those that do not have ID... get off ya azzes, get an ID, vote!~ The stupid, it hurts.

Seems that everyone affected isn't 40 years old......

"Nearly one in five citizens over 65 — about 8 million — lacks a current, government-issued photo ID, a 2006 Brennan Center study found. Most people prove their eligibility to vote with a driver's license, but people over 65 often give up their license and don't replace it with the state-issued ID that some states offer non-driving residents. People over 65 also are more likely to lack birth certificates because they were born before recording births was standard procedure."

feel free to read ... http://www.aarp.org/politic...older-americans.html

http://www.866ourvote.org/p...-is-easy-think-again

You tell those millions of lazy-azz seniors duuude.

[This message has been edited by newf (edited 11-01-2012).]

Well, then they only had 65 plus years to get one.

I do believe that by next election it should be mandatory. I would be willing to give them four more years to obtain one. But, this should have been handled by those in charge long before Carter. This should not even be a thread IMHO.

Down here they've had the DMV's open on Saturdays (crazy, right?) in order to get people legit and registered - I believe they said the cost is like $5 if you've got it, free if you're on government assistance of some kind.

They can't say it's unfair.

quote Originally posted by newf: Seems that everyone affected isn't 40 years old...... "Nearly one in five citizens over 65 — about 8 million — lacks a current, government-issued photo ID, a 2006 Brennan Center study found. Most people prove their eligibility to vote with a driver's license, but people over 65 often give up their license and don't replace it with the state-issued ID that some states offer non-driving residents. People over 65 also are more likely to lack birth certificates because they were born before recording births was standard procedure." feel free to read ... http://www.aarp.org/politic...older-americans.html http://www.866ourvote.org/p...-is-easy-think-again You tell those millions of lazy-azz seniors duuude.

I really find that hard to believe. One in five? Almost everyone over 67 is receiving Social Security benefits and has an ID card although it isn't a photo Id. Most places that ID number is plenty good enough for voter registration and to pay taxes (which even retired folks have to pay).

[This message has been edited by spark1 (edited 11-02-2012).]

quote Originally posted by newf: Seems that everyone affected isn't 40 years old...... "Nearly one in five citizens over 65 — about 8 million — lacks a current, government-issued photo ID, a 2006 Brennan Center study found. Most people prove their eligibility to vote with a driver's license, but people over 65 often give up their license and don't replace it with the state-issued ID that some states offer non-driving residents. People over 65 also are more likely to lack birth certificates because they were born before recording births was standard procedure." feel free to read ... http://www.aarp.org/politic...older-americans.html http://www.866ourvote.org/p...-is-easy-think-again You tell those millions of lazy-azz seniors duuude.

Most states are offering them for free to people who cannot afford them. The other states are offering them for anywhere from $5 to $25 dollars for an ID that they only have to get once.

Here in Texas in 2007, they passed a law changing the education requirements for a specific profession. Instead of giving the schools ample notice, they gave 90 days to increase their curriculums by about 70%. Now, most people agreed that the increase was a good thing, but the forced way of introducing the change had a seriously negative impact on the schools and a third of them closed.

I agree that ID should be required, but this is a big country with a lot of people in it. Give a little more time for people to accommodate the new regulation. I think it's the how more than the what that is making people upset. In all honesty, the people that are the most outraged probably have the most to gain politically by trying to block the legislature, just like how the people pushing the hardest for the change have the most to gain politically by getting it passed. This is all a game to them guys. Try not to get too sucked into it.

[This message has been edited by mptighe (edited 11-02-2012).]

I simply don't see how anyone can lose anything by this.
How difficult can it be to get a valid ID and who in the world would want any election to be decided by anyone not constitutionally qualified to vote?
I'm a conservative. I would rather see a conservative candidate lose an election than win it on the basis that a single vote was cast for him by someone not legally qualified to vote. I felt that way in the past and will always feel that way in the future.
Winning at any cost or by any means is simply a price too high to pay.

I was thinking they could set the ID required date for 2015 but start checking now. They would have a good survey of those that don't have it and the exposure. There is no need to capture who didn't, just a count.

The people could still vote until 2015 without it. By then most people will get the hint they need to get some form of ID and can't claim is was some brick wall intended to keep them from voting. Yep, there will be people that will claim they don't have any while hiding their purse or wallet but most won't bother to go that far.

its not about the ID - it is about changing the election rules just prior to an election.

I agree ID should be required. why did these states not fix this in 2001? 2002? 2005? 2006? 2009? and so on.....
fix it in december, have it take effect in january - done. good for next election.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: its not about the ID - it is about changing the election rules just prior to an election. I agree ID should be required. why did these states not fix this in 2001? 2002? 2005? 2006? 2009? and so on..... fix it in december, have it take effect in january - done. good for next election.

I agree and I've heard the same arguments about voter fraud in every election since Kennedy beat Nixon. After an election there are always more important things to do.

The problem seems to be that there are 50 + jurisdictions deciding how to identify voters. Most of the people deciding the ID requirements have a vested interest in not making any changes since they were elected using existing ID methods.

All these problems could be eliminated if the States would just comply with the Real ID Act of 2005. The effective date of that act keeps being pushed back and is now January, 2013. That date will likely be pushed back further regardless of who wins the election.

quote Originally posted by loafer87gt: Glad my location renders my opinion irrelevant. Yes we do have black people here. I found this out shortly after moving to to the "city" when I was walking home one night and robbed at gunpoint by a group of three of them right along a busy (for us Saskatchewan hicks!) freeway. I will never forget the animal like grin on the face of the one fellow pointing the gun at me, and to this day I still regret not pushing him into the moving traffic. So yes, we have blacks here. And yes, I will openly admit I don't trust them one damn bit after that formulative experience. And I didn't state that the blacks were going to riot. YOUR people stated they were going to riot. They took to Twitter, the Blogosphere, Facebook - you name it - all brazingly declaring how they were going to let America burn should Obama not get re-elected. You may think it is funny, but I think people should be extremely concerned about these people should they not get the results they want from the 2012 election. You may not have to worry as you are one of them, but what about the other innocent bystanders caught in their wrath of their black angst? Anyhow, got to go. I have polar bear digging through the trash can outside my igloo.

LOL--what was that supposed to do? Prove your innocense or your racism? I only saw racism.

Sorry you got mugged but, all "the blacks" didn't mug you. Your life would be happier if you let that go.

Exactly--there's no "perfect" time to do it anymore than there is a "perfect" time to fix SS, but there's never a better time than the present to fix anything.

I truly can't see why so many are so afraid of this. Everyone on both sides here seem to be saying it should be done, but then turn around and question why it should be done this year?

Guess what? The same ones will say the same thing next year and the year after.
I'll ask it again.
Why?
Anybody?

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Exactly--there's no "perfect" time to do it anymore than there is a "perfect" time to fix SS, but there's never a better time than the present to fix anything. I truly can't see why so many are so afraid of this. Everyone on both sides here seem to be saying it should be done, but then turn around and question why it should be done this year? Guess what? The same ones will say the same thing next year and the year after. I'll ask it again. Why? Anybody?

can most certianly can "do it now" and just not have it take effect until next cycle so it is not changing the rules just prior to an election.
just like they could have done it in 2000 and not have it take effect until 2001, and so on.

Just do it soon. I don't care if it's now or right after the election. Do it soon.

quote Originally posted by newf: Seems that everyone affected isn't 40 years old...... "Nearly one in five citizens over 65 — about 8 million — lacks a current, government-issued photo ID, a 2006 Brennan Center study found. Most people prove their eligibility to vote with a driver's license, but people over 65 often give up their license and don't replace it with the state-issued ID that some states offer non-driving residents. People over 65 also are more likely to lack birth certificates because they were born before recording births was standard procedure." feel free to read ... http://www.aarp.org/politic...older-americans.html http://www.866ourvote.org/p...-is-easy-think-again You tell those millions of lazy-azz seniors duuude.

Give me a break. Any US citizen who is 65+ and doesn't have some form of ID must have been living in Canada for the past 6 decades or some other isolated part of the world that isn't part of the US. I'm 65 now and have had an ID for more than 50 years. Those that don't have an ID must have spent the 1960s stoned or escaped the draft by moving overseas. When you turn 18 you registered for the draft. There is no excuse except you are too stupid and need to completely drop out of society and move to Canada.

Newf, you have a 16 year olds mentalitythinking that once you get to be 65 you give up driving or living. That only happens north of the border.

The one in five over 65 who don’t have ID probably don’t want the authorities to know who they are.

quote Originally posted by Old Lar: Give me a break. Any US citizen who is 65+ and doesn't have some form of ID must have been living in Canada for the past 6 decades or some other isolated part of the world that isn't part of the US. I'm 65 now and have had an ID for more than 50 years. Those that don't have an ID must have spent the 1960s stoned or escaped the draft by moving overseas. When you turn 18 you registered for the draft. There is no excuse except you are too stupid and need to completely drop out of society and move to Canada. Newf, you have a 16 year olds mentalitythinking that once you get to be 65 you give up driving or living. That only happens north of the border.

Nice try but I (nor anyone from Canada wrote the article I suspect). Feel free to prove the info wrong and continue to bait and hate.

[This message has been edited by newf (edited 11-02-2012).]

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: can most certianly can "do it now" and just not have it take effect until next cycle so it is not changing the rules just prior to an election. just like they could have done it in 2000 and not have it take effect until 2001, and so on.

Again--what damn difference does it make when it's done?
Not one soul has ventured anything close to a viable and believable answer yet.
If done now, it would have absolutely no more effect on anyone than it would have if it were done 2-3-4-5-6-7-8 years ago.
WHAT, is the big deal?
I don't expect it to be done immediately and don't really care, but I don't see what difference it makes as far as the time frame goes.

quote Originally posted by Old Lar: must have been living in Canada for the past 6 decades or some other isolated part of the world There is no excuse except you are too stupid and need to completely drop out of society and move to Canada. a 16 year olds mentalitythinking that once you get to be 65 you give up driving or living. That only happens north of the border.

Just because you happen to disagree with Newf doesn't mean you need to slag all of Canada. Makes you look a little silly.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Just because you happen to disagree with Newf doesn't mean you need to slag all of Canada. Makes you look a little silly.

Well, true enough but it begs the question--Which parts of Canada would it be OK for him to slag?

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Well, true enough but it begs the question--Which parts of Canada would it be OK for him to slag?

How about none?

I hate getting involved in American/Canadian pissing matches on the forum as us Canucks are considerably outnumbered here. It totally farks up my ratings.

[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 11-03-2012).]

None??
Aw c'mon--ya gotta at least leave Ottawa open--and you can poke fun at Wash DC all ya want.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: None?? Aw c'mon--ya gotta at least leave Ottawa open...

Tell ya what, feel free to tear a strip off Toronto. All they've got is a tower, and they think mighty highly of themselves.

quote Originally posted by newf: Seems that everyone affected isn't 40 years old...... "Nearly one in five citizens over 65 — about 8 million — lacks a current, government-issued photo ID, a 2006 Brennan Center study found. Most people prove their eligibility to vote with a driver's license, but people over 65 often give up their license and don't replace it with the state-issued ID that some states offer non-driving residents. People over 65 also are more likely to lack birth certificates because they were born before recording births was standard procedure." feel free to read ... http://www.aarp.org/politic...older-americans.html http://www.866ourvote.org/p...-is-easy-think-again You tell those millions of lazy-azz seniors duuude.

It would seem if that is true that Democrats would like the fact? Since more seniors are conservative. Which brings to mind how they get the idea that it is a certain party backed idea trying to get more votes.

--

"Young Americans Are More Moderate; Older Americans, More Conservative
...
Given that the adults aged 18 to 29 in 2000 make up the majority of 30- to 49-year-olds in 2011, it appears that conservative views take hold as Americans age, which may also explain the even higher rates of conservatism among 50- to 64-year-olds and seniors. However, in addition to these age patterns, it appears that conservatism has increased overall since 2002 because of heightened conservatism among all age groups of Americans 30 and older."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/...eological-Group.aspx