• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Texas Voter-Identification Law Is Blocked by Justice Department as Biased

How does celebrating the culture of one's ancestors make you less patriotic?

If you don't already understand it, then I'm not going to be waste my time trying to explain it to you.
 
I don't care how it's used. The only information I am legally required to provide is the number of people at the address. Nothing more.
Actually, you are required to answer all questions on the census form (Title 13, Section 221) but they don't enforce it. The point is, the reason they collect the data is to stop discrimination....but then maybe you are not interested in stopping that.
 
How does celebrating the culture of one's ancestors make you less patriotic?

If you don't already understand it, then I'm not going to be waste my time trying to explain it to you.

I stumped Tigger.

See, when corner a moronic argument on all sides with logic and reason, it has no where to go.
 
I stumped Tigger.

See, when corner a moronic argument on all sides with logic and reason, it has no where to go.

No, you didn't stump me. I just wasn't interested in wasting my time explaining it to you. Apparently you're going to make me waste the time anyway, so here goes nothing....

It's about loyalties and where one's heart lies as much as one's head. It's about driving around town on the day that the US Men's National Soccer team plays Mexico and realizing that half of the people in town are rooting for Mexico even though they've never been there and are living in Central Massachusetts. It's about thumbing your nose at the country that is providing your livelihood and your well-being while longing for a place you never knew to begin with. It's disloyalty. It's giving aid and comfort (at least in your heart) to the enemies of this nation.

Does that explain it sufficiently or should I go on?
 
Does that explain it sufficiently or should I go on?

Explain how eating tacos and listening to mariachi music means you're not loyal to USA.

Or how does wearing green and drinking beer while singing pub songs make you not appreciate this country.

Or eating with chop sticks make you less American.

Or getting emotional while listening to an Italian opera?

If you really hate diversity so much, this is not the country for you...

BTW - a French film won Best Picture this year. How do you like them apples?
 
I've actually come up with a system that I believe would work very well....

90 days before each election every candidate and the groups promoting/against all the ballot questions would be required to provide their information (Resume, Biography, Platforms, Voting Records, etc... for candidates and Position Papers for ballot questions) free of charge to all the Libraries and Town Halls in their appropriate districts.

30 days before the election a 50 question, multiple-choice exam would be available for all potential voters based on the information provided by the candidates and groups. A minimum passing score would be 75%. Failing to take or pass the exam would void your voter registration for that year. Three consecutive years of voiding would void your voter registration PERMANENTLY.

I find it amusing you have no idea how idiotic and corruptible that concept is.
 
Actually, I'm looking for the one GEPer who will stand up and say "Because of this we need a National ID card that every citizen must carry with them at all times and produce on demand to any LEO.

Tigger, your true to your authoritarianism, I'll give ya that.

Man, I can't wait to get my national ID so I can walk proudly down any street in America just waiting for a Law Enforcement Officer to stop me to see my ID.

Seems like something I've seen in movies...where there's totalitarian, dictator, fascist...kind of places and people are frequently asked for their papers.

O'boy...just can't wait.

Oh, man, I probably won't be stopped or asked. Know why? I'm a white guy!
 
It's possible, but you can't prove it. There's probably enough of it on both sides that if you threw out all the illegal votes, you'd end up with about the same result. I just don't buy the assertion that ONLY Democrats do it. That's nonsensical.

I didnt make that assertion. But, I dont buy the assertion that requiring people to prove their identity is discimination either. Yet, only the states have to prove themselves. The federal govt gets to judge however it wants with no such proof.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Tigger

I've actually come up with a system that I believe would work very well....

90 days before each election every candidate and the groups promoting/against all the ballot questions would be required to provide their information (Resume, Biography, Platforms, Voting Records, etc... for candidates and Position Papers for ballot questions) free of charge to all the Libraries and Town Halls in their appropriate districts.

30 days before the election a 50 question, multiple-choice exam would be available for all potential voters based on the information provided by the candidates and groups. A minimum passing score would be 75%. Failing to take or pass the exam would void your voter registration for that year. Three consecutive years of voiding would void your voter registration PERMANENTLY.
As demonstrated during the debates, Rick Perry would have been disenfranchised as both a candidate and a voter!
 
Last edited:
Seems to me the only "bias" would be with people who don't have a valid photo ID. If they get a photo ID then there will be no "bias". Seems to me.
 
First let me say, I have always been asked for an ID here in Texas to vote.
There was a statement on the news that more than 50% of Hispanics did not have some sort of ID.
I found this unbelievable, as I have never met or worked with anyone who did not carry some type of ID.
Even the people I knew were illegal, had ID's. ( how else do they buy their beer)
If we had a 100% voter rate, this would not be an issue, But we have between a 35-45% voter rate.
This means any good statistician could get you a list of who is least likely to show up to vote.
Proxies could be substituted wholesale, and maybe change the outcome of an election.
Keep in mind, a few hundred votes in the right precinct, could throw a state one way or another.

You must be pulling your ID to show it to the sign in desk without being asked. Maybe, like me, you saw the people ahead of you in line showing their drivers licenses so you showed yours. I saw people ahead of me showing ID at the sign in table, then my wife showed hers, then I just told them my name. They did not ask to see my ID. It's not required.
 
I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw this happen a few years back in my town.

We had tickets to a nightclub music show. My wife didn't bring her purse and we are in our 50s at the time. They would not let her in without a photo ID even though we had already purchased tickets. I had to go home and get her ID.
 
I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw this happen a few years back in my town.

We had tickets to a nightclub music show. My wife didn't bring her purse and we are in our 50s at the time. They would not let her in without a photo ID even though we had already purchased tickets. I had to go home and get her ID.

I guess you weren't in Miami. If you went to a nightclub here and gave them an ID showing that you were over 50, they'd tell you to hit the bricks. :lol:
 
Seems to me the only "bias" would be with people who don't have a valid photo ID. If they get a photo ID then there will be no "bias". Seems to me.
- 11% of Americans (21 million American adult citizens in 2000) don't have picture IDs according to a survey conducted by Brennan Center for Justice, NYU, 2006

- 18% of all seniors don't have picture IDs (seniors traditionally have been the most consistent voting group)

- 25% of African-Americans don't have picture IDs (in 2008, the rate of black turnout virtually equaled that of whites for the first time)

- young adults aged 18 to 24 (in 2008, turnout of under-24-year-olds reached its highest rate since 1992)

"Neal N. Bloeme" would have us believe that on the surface requiring photo ID is some innocuous request to prevent voter fraud - what is left unsaid is that it would come at the expense of disenfranchising 11% of American voters!

Do conservative "friends" actually contend that voter fraud is so widespread that it warrants dispensing with 11% of the electorate?

Would they have us believe that it is just a matter of coincidence that African-Americans and young adults aged 18 to 24, traditional Democratic supporters, are those groups most negatively affected by requiring photo?

Why aren't these so-called "watchdogs" of the voting booth willing to go one step farther by advocating a national form of citizen identification, which would not only limit voter fraud but ensure that 11% of American voters are not adversely effected?

The fact that it hasn't happened, particularily in a state like Texas where over 50% of the population in non-White, speaks volumes.

http://www.npr.org/2012/01/28/146006...some-wont-vote
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom