I'm not a term-limits fan, either. It tends to be a Bandaid solution to much bigger issues. And most people want them just because they don't like the candidates in office.
They can bite you in the butt when the alternatives are much worse than the incumbent. Because the pros and cons balance out, I go with the non-regulation of what people want option.
If there is ONE, Scrappy, who is kept from voting by government regulation, it is unconstitutional. You do understand that the U.S. Constitution is about rights of an individual, not the majority, right? It doesn't matter if most, or the vast majority of people, won't be inconvenienced. It only takes one, and this law can't pass that test. Legitimate voters are already being stopped by voter ID. That means it's unconstitutional on its face.
To wit, the [Pennsylvania House Majority Leader][1] said out loud this week that the purpose of voter ID is to help Romney, and presumably other Republicans, get elected:
> This week, the House Majority Leader in the Pennsylvania Congress, Rep. Mike Turzai (R), made headlines when he explained the reasoning behind the state's new law requiring certain forms of ID at the polls. Voter ID, he explained bluntly, "is going to allow Gov. (Mitt) Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania."
What, sadly, makes more sense are corporate funders and industrialists like the Koch Brothers trying to convince people ready to believe anything that voter ID is actually designed to stop voter fraud, when what they're really hoping is that it manages to intimidate voters away from the polls who might vote against them.
Now, I think that's a dumb strategy, and hope that it won't work. But that doesn't mean that the motive behind it shouldn't be exposed and challenged until the cows come home. And it's really remarkable that so-called small government conservatives would get behind such a nakedly political ploy to *regulate* basic constitutional rights with absolutely no evidence that it will change anything, or that there is a problem that it might actually fix. Not to mention, what it's going to cost the states to defend it and/or implement it.
Face it, scrappy, y'all are being used. Big time. You should be furious about people assuming that you can't think for yourself or figure out how to check facts. It's a serious insult to your intellect.
Scrappy, to my knowledge, some ACORN workers (not the organization itself) were accused of tampering with some voter-registration—a problem that voter ID laws don't address (as Todd explains separately).
And as much as I understand that ACORN has become a major whipping boy for Rush and the people who blindly parrot anything he says, saying that some bad ACORN workers tarnishes the whole organization is like saying a handful of Republican white supremacists means all of y'all are racists. The logic doesn't hold.
I am fully convinced you can do better than these posts so far. A hint is to look for primary information and factcheck what you post. So far, your record of posting facts is very shabby.
Try to challenge us with real information. Otherwise, you're wasting your time.
ACORN? What are you talking about, scrappy? Not making a lot of sense here.
Why in the world would anyone want to stop community organizing? This isn't communist Russia; this is America. We can organize all we want.
And you're wrong about why people don't have IDs. There are many reasons. You need to take off the you-blinders: Just because something doesn't apply to you doesn't make it true for everyone.
Again, though, what part of expensive unneeded government regulation of a constitutional right with no evidence of need don't you understand???
Do you seriously call yourself conservative if this doesn't concern you? I swear, this issue shines the brightest light on anti-regulatory hypocrisy of any issue I've ever seen.
Over decades, this state has spent unbelievable time, money and resources fighting to keep qualified voters from voting; isn't it time we move on and leave that kind of crap in the past?
It is what it is, and we all know—especially the folks pushing voter ID the hardest (and fooling so many into thinking there is actually a voter fraud problem in the U.S.) Y'all need to learn to question who and why people are taking advantage of your fears like that. It's an insult to you and to us all.
See this [JFP story from last fall][1] about the potential costs of voter ID to Mississippi residents. This is the angle politicians avoided like the plague. Or one of them.
donnaladd says...
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
On Eight Years is Enough
Posted 11 July 2012, 11:58 a.m.
donnaladd says...
Which story are you commenting on? You have this on your profile page? Can you cut and paste under the story you're commenting under
On drcrow
Posted 11 July 2012, 11:42 a.m. Suggest removal
donnaladd says...
I'm not a term-limits fan, either. It tends to be a Bandaid solution to much bigger issues. And most people want them just because they don't like the candidates in office.
They can bite you in the butt when the alternatives are much worse than the incumbent. Because the pros and cons balance out, I go with the non-regulation of what people want option.
On Eight Years is Enough
Posted 11 July 2012, 11:38 a.m. Suggest removal
donnaladd says...
LOL. Our cats would stalk this thing.
On Finally... A Fish-Shaped Cat Litter Box
Posted 10 July 2012, 6:01 p.m. Suggest removal
donnaladd says...
If there is ONE, Scrappy, who is kept from voting by government regulation, it is unconstitutional. You do understand that the U.S. Constitution is about rights of an individual, not the majority, right? It doesn't matter if most, or the vast majority of people, won't be inconvenienced. It only takes one, and this law can't pass that test. Legitimate voters are already being stopped by voter ID. That means it's unconstitutional on its face.
On Voter Fraud Problem?
Posted 10 July 2012, 11:03 a.m. Suggest removal
donnaladd says...
To wit, the [Pennsylvania House Majority Leader][1] said out loud this week that the purpose of voter ID is to help Romney, and presumably other Republicans, get elected:
> This week, the House Majority Leader in the Pennsylvania Congress, Rep. Mike Turzai (R), made headlines when he explained the reasoning behind the state's new law requiring certain forms of ID at the polls. Voter ID, he explained bluntly, "is going to allow Gov. (Mitt) Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania."
[1]: http://www.prwatch.org/node/11617
On Voter Fraud Problem?
Posted 10 July 2012, 10:45 a.m. Suggest removal
donnaladd says...
What, sadly, makes more sense are corporate funders and industrialists like the Koch Brothers trying to convince people ready to believe anything that voter ID is actually designed to stop voter fraud, when what they're really hoping is that it manages to intimidate voters away from the polls who might vote against them.
Now, I think that's a dumb strategy, and hope that it won't work. But that doesn't mean that the motive behind it shouldn't be exposed and challenged until the cows come home. And it's really remarkable that so-called small government conservatives would get behind such a nakedly political ploy to *regulate* basic constitutional rights with absolutely no evidence that it will change anything, or that there is a problem that it might actually fix. Not to mention, what it's going to cost the states to defend it and/or implement it.
Face it, scrappy, y'all are being used. Big time. You should be furious about people assuming that you can't think for yourself or figure out how to check facts. It's a serious insult to your intellect.
On Voter Fraud Problem?
Posted 10 July 2012, 10:38 a.m. Suggest removal
donnaladd says...
Scrappy, to my knowledge, some ACORN workers (not the organization itself) were accused of tampering with some voter-registration—a problem that voter ID laws don't address (as Todd explains separately).
And as much as I understand that ACORN has become a major whipping boy for Rush and the people who blindly parrot anything he says, saying that some bad ACORN workers tarnishes the whole organization is like saying a handful of Republican white supremacists means all of y'all are racists. The logic doesn't hold.
I am fully convinced you can do better than these posts so far. A hint is to look for primary information and factcheck what you post. So far, your record of posting facts is very shabby.
Try to challenge us with real information. Otherwise, you're wasting your time.
On Voter Fraud Problem?
Posted 10 July 2012, 10:34 a.m. Suggest removal
donnaladd says...
ACORN? What are you talking about, scrappy? Not making a lot of sense here.
Why in the world would anyone want to stop community organizing? This isn't communist Russia; this is America. We can organize all we want.
And you're wrong about why people don't have IDs. There are many reasons. You need to take off the you-blinders: Just because something doesn't apply to you doesn't make it true for everyone.
Again, though, what part of expensive unneeded government regulation of a constitutional right with no evidence of need don't you understand???
Do you seriously call yourself conservative if this doesn't concern you? I swear, this issue shines the brightest light on anti-regulatory hypocrisy of any issue I've ever seen.
Over decades, this state has spent unbelievable time, money and resources fighting to keep qualified voters from voting; isn't it time we move on and leave that kind of crap in the past?
It is what it is, and we all know—especially the folks pushing voter ID the hardest (and fooling so many into thinking there is actually a voter fraud problem in the U.S.) Y'all need to learn to question who and why people are taking advantage of your fears like that. It's an insult to you and to us all.
On Voter Fraud Problem?
Posted 9 July 2012, 4:52 p.m. Suggest removal
donnaladd says...
See this [JFP story from last fall][1] about the potential costs of voter ID to Mississippi residents. This is the angle politicians avoided like the plague. Or one of them.
[1]: http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/news/20…
On State Facing Voter ID Hurdles
Posted 8 July 2012, 6:08 p.m. Suggest removal