Who qualifies to be a legal citizen/voter?

[888888]

Mexico wants to prosecute him! There are actually some officials down there in that crime swamp that want to extradite him and prosecute him for crimes against their state. I blieve they intend to implicate him in some three hundred homicide cases involving the weapons in question.

Hey I know.....a good New Year's gift for Holder would be a pair of plane tickets to Mexico city! heh heh heh...can you imagine the chill he'd get opening that envelope?

do you think that people who the Mexican govt has not stopped from crossing their own border with a valid passport that have committed so many crimes and murders here in the USA should be documented and warrants for all and any Mexican official that hasn't done their jobs should be issued.

about as stupid as your statement justofficial. Hell why not go after them for allowing their heroin and other drugs to enter the USA that has killed so many people..

 

[gabriel]

after watching the voter registration fiasco in the south in the 60's, who would ever trust the states again?

 

[justoffal]

Sure...the actions of the DOJ in seeking to block the need for voter ID are all you need to know. Not everything is done by legislation my friend. Why do you think Our most recent presidents have begun the unconstitutional practice of using a shadow government run by appointed czars? Bush has his too...but Obie is the king of the Czar makers.

So now let me get this straight....first you tell me that asking for some kind of identification is not going to work and then you know for a fact that there is no fraud?

I mean...can you see the inconsistency of your own thought process here?

When you deal with that paradox we can continue on.

 

[justoffal]

Nah....it should actually have the opposite effect. I say get the kids while they are still in school and make the voter ID card something as highly prized as a driver's license.

BTW do you have a Driver's license? If so does it have a picture of you on it? Can it be easily forged?

You really need to answer these questions before we can continue...

JO

 

[justoffal]

The Drug tests? Absolutely..... I'd support that any day of the week...

On the LD tests though I do believe that it has been well established that they are not totally reliable.

Hey....I love the idea that some of the states are going to do random testing for the EBT systems......as it should be.

 

[justoffal]

Really? Then how do you explain the blanket refusal to accept any kind of ID system whatsoever? I mean this is their position right?

 

[justoffal]

Ahhh....now this was an excellent post. Factual, not partisan or angry but sensible and balanced between the needs of a nation and the needs of its constituents. As you say there is no easy answer.

Thanks for a worthy contribution to the thread.

 

[justoffal]

That's a fair comment and it does serve us well to remember the mistakes of the past. However let me pose a question to you.

Is your refrigerator open to the Public? If yes then I am fascinated by this and need to learn more from you. If no, then please explain why it is not.

 

[justoffal]

OH?

Let's pursue this beyond the simple accusation of being " full of it ".

I presume you agree with the left wing stance that there should be no voter ID for the polling places..
Is that correct? Am I representing your position accurately?

JO

 

[Lukey]

My question goes to the fact that no one has been able to come up with any evidence to suggest that an actual problem exists. So, for what reason would we require ID over and above what's been required in the past? And sure....some might suggest that the fact of a lot of people "feeling" that there's a problem - even though there's no actual evidence - is sufficient reason. But then, the easier and more conservative solution to THAT problem, is for "conservatives" to stop lying about there being a problem!

That's what kinda frosted me about the Supreme Court's decision allowing the State of Indiana to place additional requirements on voting. Republicans benefit from stricter voting requirements. Republicans lied that voter fraud is going down in Indiana. The Supreme Court said that since a lot of people believed the Republicans lies, Indiana can require voter ID. In essence, the Republicans were rewarded for their lies. That's not good, in the long run.

How would you ever gather "evidence" of voter fraud without an actual review of anyone's eligibility at the polling place? I would suggest the most likely "evidence" that there is a problem is the Democrats' insistence that we not be permitted to even discuss the notion that there might be a problem.

 

[justoffal]

Did I say anywhere that Mexico was not a corrupt Narco-state? Nope...I mean you can look through my post history to find such a statement but I don't think you will.

What I did say is that there are officials in Mexico who want to pin as many as three hundred murder charges on Holder. Now tell me what would it take for a failed narco-state that swims in blood and bodies and would normally be indifferent to such things to be pissed off enough to take that position.???

Rather than invalidate the seriousness of the wrongdoing don't you think it actually magnifies it?

JO

 

[justoffal]

heh heh ..... these guys want to have it both ways... First they want you to believe that there is no way to identify people and then at the same time they want you to believe that they know for a fact that there is no widespread voter fraud. It is a logical contradiction in terms...but...BUT if you insert the word racist, well then all of the obvious flaws in their thinking go away.

JO

 

[justoffal]

So now that it is even harder to be a fraudulent voter...how exactly is this a bad thing? Oh and also...where is this huge crowd of disaffected legal citizens who have been turned away from the polls because they were too poor to afford a few bucks for an ID Card? Do you know where I can find them? Or are these just the same ole same ole lazy people who really never go to the polling booth at all unless there's a government handout going on?

 

[NCmusicman]

OBAMA + HOLDER + ACORN = VOTER FRAUD


Holder plotting with ACORN-connected group to stop "Voter ID" laws
Add a comment



Jim Kouri, Law Enforcement Examiner
December 15, 2011

........... Project Vote and the “community organization” ACORN have both been linked to massive voter registration fraud. A total of 70 ACORN employees in 12 states have been convicted of voter registration fraud. And as documented in a July 2009 report by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, of the 1.3 million registrations Project Vote/ACORN submitted in the 2008 election cycle, more than one-third were invalid.

Moreover, Project Vote’s “Field Director,” Amy Busefink, who handled the online registration campaign for Colorado, entered an Alford plea to two gross misdemeanor counts of conspiracy to commit the crime of compensation for registration of voters in Nevada while working for ACORN. (An Alford plea is a guilty plea, where the defendant does not admit the act or assert innocence, but admits that sufficient evidence exists with which the prosecution could likely convince a judge or jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.)

“It is an affront to the rule of law and a threat to the integrity of our elections that the ACORN-front Project Vote is coordinating with the Holder Department of Justice on voting law,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Now we know why the Holder DOJ never bothered to fully investigate voter registration fraud by Project Vote/ACORN – because Project Vote and the Department of Justice seem to have implemented a joint litigation strategy in the run up to the 2012 elections.”


http://www.examiner.com/law-enforcement-in-national/holder-plotting-with-acorn-connected-group-to-stop-voter-id-laws-1

 

[ARMCX1]

This has become a very interesting debate in light of the news that many states are going to require photo ID for November 2012 with or without Eric Holder's consent.

Now it appears to me that there is a debate afoot that attempts to obfuscate the original definition of what an American Citizen is/is not.

Apparently the left has decided that the definition should be stretched to cover anybody who stops near the border to piss on a Bush...leaving their Urine behind means they have contributed something to this nation and are now entitled to be represented.

I say this is the weakest and veriest of total Bullshixt!

In a case such as this the logical extension of such blanket inclusiveness would make it Illegal for the MLK foundation to classify anyone as Black/non black.... because there would be no way to determine that category and therefore would they would be successfully sued every time they turned down a person who applied to them for assistance based on their racial category.

And furthermore why would anyone want a non vested person voting in a national or even a local election? It makes no sense. Simple residency does not make one a vested citizen though being born here does which sometimes seems to beg the logical argument that birth requires no effort on the part of the one born.

All organizations have qualifications or they would not exist and this follows with citizenship/voting rights. This nation is not a nation if it has no standards for citizenship other than simply standing on the ground that is within the boundaries of the nation.

This is a recipe for the demise of a nation not the rise of one.

What's to stop any group of people from simply coming to your municipality and then going to the voting booths to change your municipal laws? Why citizenship, membership of course. Are illegal aliens members simply by virtue of their presence? That is nonsense of course but this seems to be what the left wants the New Definition to become.

Your entire argument rests on the assertion that illegal aliens are voting in American elections. You probably won't find that happening at measurable prosecutable recorded levels.

If the definition of voting eligibility changes, it will have to pass voter approval and court challenges. So far, no legal voting entity has permitted illegal aliens to vote.

So, if there are no cases where illegal aliens have voted in American elections, and if there are no districts that have changed voting requirements, then your entire post lacks any supporting proof. That isn't to say it doesn't have it's nativist red meat appeal.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

If your big objection is a trumped up race card because supposedly blacks can't afford ID's, then provide free ID's for people who register to vote but have no other form of ID

Mahome are you for real? How would they prove they are citizens when they register to get the right to vote so you can issue an ID that allows them to vote?

Same way rich white people and all other American citizens do.....with their birth certificate. Even Obama has one.

 

[fairsheet]

How would you ever gather "evidence" of voter fraud without an actual review of anyone's eligibility at the polling place? I would suggest the most likely "evidence" that there is a problem is the Democrats' insistence that we not be permitted to even discuss the notion that there might be a problem.

This question has been and continues to be, discussed to a fair-thee-well. Your sniveling rightwing "victimhood" angle is pathetic. If the question wasn't being discussed and the Fox/GOP wasn't passing more restrictive voter ID laws as we speak, we wouldn't be discussing the issue now.

And....per the top poster's repeatedly shouted lie that Democrats are advocating for some sort of "no ID" regime, this is just part 'n' parcel of today's GOP-movementeerism. If your premise is founded on a lie, your angle is by definition, a lie.