Photo ID Requirement in Illinois... - Page 5

Phoenixx · 01-09-2012, 02:44 PM

[QUOTE=bitonti;4320839]fact there are more Registered Democrats in this nation than there are Registered Republicans.

it's not disputable. [/QUOTE]

No one is disputing it because its irrelevant.

The point that seemingly flew over your head is that it's not how people register that is important...

It's how people vote.

AlwaysGreenAlwaysWhite · 01-09-2012, 02:47 PM

[QUOTE=Phoenixx;4320857]No one is disputing it because its irrelevant.

The point that seemingly flew over your head is that it's not how people register that is important...

It's how people vote.[/QUOTE]

That doesn't jive with his viewpoint that everybody hates (R)

Why would he acknowledge it?

JetPotato · 01-09-2012, 02:59 PM

[QUOTE=bitonti;4320839]fact there are more Registered Democrats in this nation than there are Registered Republicans. [/QUOTE]

Registration is declining rapidly with both parties, and means little in this discussion...

[QUOTE=bitonti;4320839]
we can talk about morality and patriotism all day but voter fraud laws are an attempt to close that gap.[/QUOTE]

...except that this is the consequence of action that people like you fear most, and why it is fought tooth and nail by Dems or talked about "as no big deal" by those unwilling to admit to their partisanship.

It's the right thing to do. "There's no disputing it".

brady's a catcher · 01-09-2012, 04:04 PM

[QUOTE=piney;4320395]this is the end of the debate for me:

really? is there any proof of this happening?

We protect ourselves with voter fraud laws, not with treating everyone like they are suspect.

Again, I could really care less, but you guys are supposed to be the small gov't freedom lover's.

it is the poster child for every anti gov't person here. "We can't let the gov't do healthcare, look at the DMV!". So now though, the DMV is just fine.

no it isn't. It is a right. You guys should get that through your thick skulls. Voting is a right, freedom of speech is a right, we have a right to bear arms, none of these are privileges. They are my natural born rights.

guilty until proven innocent!!! Hooray

once at no cost.

age restricitons are in the constitution

I can still vote

none of these preclude me from voting though. The only one is if you are a felon. Which that too, is a little shady, but whatever.

if that is the case, no cost, no inconvenience and it isn't used as a tool to prevent people from voting because someone doesn't like how they vote I am okay with it, like I have been saying all along.

no cost, no inconvenience, then okay, cost and inconvenience then not okay. I don't believe I should have to pay to vote. even a nickel.

my final analysis. I need a month long break from this crazy hypocrisy filled insane forum.

So, ummm...month long ban...

[B]everyone who posted in here is a bonehead.[/B][/QUOTE]

I thought I was respectfully disagreeing with other posters and offering my opinion. Guess we have different definitions of 'bonehead". :rolleyes:

piney · 01-09-2012, 06:48 PM

[QUOTE=brady's a catcher;4321051]I thought I was respectfully disagreeing with other posters and offering my opinion. Guess we have different definitions of 'bonehead". :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

[I][U]self ban lifted[/U][/I]
it was a joke

in calling everyone who posts in this thread a bonehead, I was also calling myself one.

No offense meant, just expressing some frustration in a harmless way at being misinterpreted and accused of having a political agenda.

[I][U]self ban reinstated[/U][/I]

Warfish · 01-09-2012, 07:58 PM

[QUOTE=bitonti;4320839]fact there are more Registered Democrats in this nation than there are Registered Republicans.

it's not disputable.

we can talk about morality and patriotism all day but voter fraud laws are an attempt to close that gap.[/QUOTE]

It's an attempt to stop illegal/invalid voting.

If that hurts your party more then your opponent party, thats something you need to take up with your party.

For the record, Bit, I'm equally against DIEBOLD machines if DIEBOLD machines are fraudulent as well.

Consistency of ideals is a wonderful thing.

palmetto defender · 01-12-2012, 10:46 AM

South Carolina is now sueing Eric Holder and his henchmen relative to rejection of the Voter ID requirement.
As as part of the support listed in today's paper here was a report indicating 900 dead people in this state voted in the last major election - 2010. That's what they are able to verify - you know it's more.

MnJetFan · 01-12-2012, 02:56 PM

In most places they ask for a ID to cash a check. But it is illegal to ask for an ID for voting. Oh it is discrimination. No ID no vote!

southparkcpa · 01-13-2012, 02:00 PM

[QUOTE=MnJetFan;4327074]In most places they ask for a ID to cash a check. But it is illegal to ask for an ID for voting. Oh it is discrimination. No ID no vote![/QUOTE]

Why cant they just use their ID from "Paycheck Advance" incorporated?;)

1) because it is discrimination

2) Most of them dont work

parafly · 01-13-2012, 02:22 PM

[QUOTE=MnJetFan;4327074]In most places they ask for a ID to cash a check. But it is illegal to ask for an ID for voting. Oh it is discrimination. No ID no vote![/QUOTE]

Paying for goods with a check is a privilege not a right. Voting is a fundamental American right.

I am fine with having an ID requirement for voting [b]if there is no cost in obtaining an acceptable ID.[/b] If all options of an acceptable ID are those which have a monetary cost, the system becomes "pay to play" and discriminates against the poor.

Warfish · 01-13-2012, 02:32 PM

[QUOTE=parafly;4328565]Paying for goods with a check is a privilege not a right. Voting is a fundamental American right.

I am fine with having an ID requirement for voting [b]if there is no cost in obtaining an acceptable ID.[/b] If all options of an acceptable ID are those which have a monetary cost, the system becomes "pay to play" and discriminates against the poor.[/QUOTE]

Again, it goes to a larger question. Is their no responsabillity on the individual to identify themselves in some way?

Those against it, you do realize you are in-effect supporting voting without any verification that the person casting the vote is a citizen, or the pwerson they claim to be. Is THAT, of all things, what youw ant to be against policywise, and if so, why?

Because it's a "right"? Every right we have has some form of limitation or regulation involved in it's wielding by the individual, rightfully so. You cannot speak with 100% impunity, there are limits and liabillities. You cannot own guns without limits, certainly. You cannot practice religion without limits, etc, etc, etc.

At it's core, proof that you who you claim is fundamental to the very right to vote itself. If proof isn't required, you diminish the power of the vote, the worth of the right, itself.

And more, if proof of ID is too much burden for wielding of that right, what about having to register? Should registration be ended too, as too much a burden?

Again, I fall back on this.....are you really supporting the idea that proving who you are is too much of a burden, and that voting is better when such proof is not requested and no effort is made to fight potential fraud or illegal votes?

All because you think being able to prove who you are...is too costly? How do these amazingly poor people do anything else in life if they're unable to prove, in any form, who they are?

parafly · 01-13-2012, 02:42 PM

[QUOTE=Warfish;4328592]Again, it goes to a larger question. Is their no responsabillity on the individual to identify themselves in some way?[/QUOTE]

Again, I have no issue with placing responsibility on the individual to identify themselves.

[QUOTE]All because you think being able to prove who you are...is too costly? [/QUOTE]

Exactly. If you are an American citizen over the age of 18, you have a fundamental right[SIZE="1"]*[/SIZE] to vote.

[SIZE="1"]* No purchase necessary[/SIZE]

Warfish · 01-13-2012, 03:52 PM

[QUOTE=parafly;4328612]Again, I have no issue with placing responsibility on the individual to identify themselves.

Exactly. If you are an American citizen over the age of 18, you have a fundamental right[SIZE="1"]*[/SIZE] to vote.

[SIZE="1"]* No purchase necessary[/SIZE][/QUOTE]

And again, thats not accurate.

If you do not register (even if it costs you something to be able to, car ride to get form, stamp to mail it, internet access to do it online, etc) you do not have a right to vote.

If you are a convict, you do not have a right to vote.

If you're a resident of that jurisdiction, you do not have a right to vote.

Is adding "If you cannot prove who you are" asking so much?

I don't think it is. By taking both sides (you agree theys hould prove, but only if there is no cost, and everything that could be used as ID costs something at some point), you're really supporting the status quo, i.e. no id checking.

parafly · 01-13-2012, 04:45 PM

[QUOTE=Warfish;4328761]By taking both sides (you agree theys hould prove, but only if there is no cost, and everything that could be used as ID costs something at some point), you're really supporting the status quo, i.e. no id checking.[/QUOTE]

I support an improved system where accuracy is paramount and the poor are not disenfranchised.

I prefer the status quo over mandatory checking of relatively pricey ID's.

Warfish · 01-13-2012, 05:04 PM

[QUOTE=parafly;4328852]I support an improved system where accuracy is paramount and the poor are not disenfranchised.[/quote]

And I'd maintain that proving who one is as an entryway to expressing ones rights as a citizen is a basic responsabillity of every citizen. Being a citizen is not only about ones rights, but also ones responsabillities.

What improved system do you support that has improved accuracy, but no id check?

[quote]I prefer the status quo over mandatory checking of relatively pricey ID's.[/QUOTE]

Please, define (specificly) what you mean by "pricey".

parafly · 01-13-2012, 05:15 PM

[QUOTE=Warfish;4328904]And I'd maintain that proving who one is as an entryway to expressing ones rights as a citizen is a basic responsabillity of every citizen. Being a citizen is not only about ones rights, but also ones responsabillities.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, but there shouldn't be any monetary cost to the individual to adhere to this responsibility.

[QUOTE]What improved system do you support that has improved accuracy, but no id check?[/QUOTE]

Mandatory ID checks which can be obtained free of charge.

[QUOTE]Please, define (specificly) what you mean by "pricey".[/QUOTE]

Anything over $0.00 (to the individual) is too much to pay for the constitutional right to vote.

southparkcpa · 01-13-2012, 05:31 PM

[QUOTE=parafly;4328937]Agreed, but there shouldn't be any monetary cost to the individual to adhere to this responsibility.

Mandatory ID checks which can be obtained free of charge.

Anything over $0.00 (to the individual) is too much to pay for the constitutional right to vote.[/QUOTE]

I actually agree with parafly. All the WASTE in government, we should be able to do this BUT the reality is...the dems DONT really want it.

Phoenixx · 01-13-2012, 06:03 PM

[QUOTE=parafly;4328565]I am fine with having an ID requirement for voting [b]if there is no cost in obtaining an acceptable ID.[/b] [/QUOTE]

So then you side with the State of South Carolina and disagree with the tactics being employed by Eric Holder's Justice Department which invalidates the new SC law.

Good to hear.

01-09-2012, 06:48 PM	#85
piney hip deep in dirty diapers All League Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 3,618	[QUOTE=brady's a catcher;4321051]I thought I was respectfully disagreeing with other posters and offering my opinion. Guess we have different definitions of 'bonehead". :rolleyes:[/QUOTE] [I][U]self ban lifted[/U][/I] it was a joke in calling everyone who posts in this thread a bonehead, I was also calling myself one. No offense meant, just expressing some frustration in a harmless way at being misinterpreted and accused of having a political agenda. [I][U]self ban reinstated[/U][/I] Last edited by piney; 01-09-2012 at 06:50 PM.

01-09-2012, 02:44 PM	#81
Phoenixx Hall Of Fame Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Fairfield County, CT Posts: 6,870	[QUOTE=bitonti;4320839]fact there are more Registered Democrats in this nation than there are Registered Republicans. it's not disputable. [/QUOTE] No one is disputing it because its irrelevant. The point that seemingly flew over your head is that it's not how people register that is important... It's how people vote.

01-09-2012, 02:47 PM	#82
AlwaysGreenAlwaysWhite is all out of fuCks to give... All Pro Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 7,448	[QUOTE=Phoenixx;4320857]No one is disputing it because its irrelevant. The point that seemingly flew over your head is that it's not how people register that is important... It's how people vote.[/QUOTE] That doesn't jive with his viewpoint that everybody hates (R) Why would he acknowledge it?

01-09-2012, 02:59 PM	#83
JetPotato fermenting Hall Of Fame Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: New York, NY Posts: 12,130	[QUOTE=bitonti;4320839]fact there are more Registered Democrats in this nation than there are Registered Republicans. [/QUOTE] Registration is declining rapidly with both parties, and means little in this discussion... [QUOTE=bitonti;4320839] we can talk about morality and patriotism all day but voter fraud laws are an attempt to close that gap.[/QUOTE] ...except that this is the consequence of action that people like you fear most, and why it is fought tooth and nail by Dems or talked about "as no big deal" by those unwilling to admit to their partisanship. It's the right thing to do. "There's no disputing it".

01-09-2012, 04:04 PM	#84
brady's a catcher R.I.P Goofy Maloof All Pro Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Alexandria, VA Posts: 6,685	[QUOTE=piney;4320395]this is the end of the debate for me: really? is there any proof of this happening? We protect ourselves with voter fraud laws, not with treating everyone like they are suspect. Again, I could really care less, but you guys are supposed to be the small gov't freedom lover's. it is the poster child for every anti gov't person here. "We can't let the gov't do healthcare, look at the DMV!". So now though, the DMV is just fine. no it isn't. It is a right. You guys should get that through your thick skulls. Voting is a right, freedom of speech is a right, we have a right to bear arms, none of these are privileges. They are my natural born rights. guilty until proven innocent!!! Hooray once at no cost. age restricitons are in the constitution I can still vote none of these preclude me from voting though. The only one is if you are a felon. Which that too, is a little shady, but whatever. if that is the case, no cost, no inconvenience and it isn't used as a tool to prevent people from voting because someone doesn't like how they vote I am okay with it, like I have been saying all along. no cost, no inconvenience, then okay, cost and inconvenience then not okay. I don't believe I should have to pay to vote. even a nickel. my final analysis. I need a month long break from this crazy hypocrisy filled insane forum. So, ummm...month long ban... [B]everyone who posted in here is a bonehead.[/B][/QUOTE] I thought I was respectfully disagreeing with other posters and offering my opinion. Guess we have different definitions of 'bonehead". :rolleyes:

01-09-2012, 07:58 PM	#86
Warfish JetsInsider.com Legend Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 35,000	[QUOTE=bitonti;4320839]fact there are more Registered Democrats in this nation than there are Registered Republicans. it's not disputable. we can talk about morality and patriotism all day but voter fraud laws are an attempt to close that gap.[/QUOTE] It's an attempt to stop illegal/invalid voting. If that hurts your party more then your opponent party, thats something you need to take up with your party. For the record, Bit, I'm equally against DIEBOLD machines if DIEBOLD machines are fraudulent as well. Consistency of ideals is a wonderful thing.

01-12-2012, 10:46 AM	#87
palmetto defender All League Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 4,638	South Carolina is now sueing Eric Holder and his henchmen relative to rejection of the Voter ID requirement. As as part of the support listed in today's paper here was a report indicating 900 dead people in this state voted in the last major election - 2010. That's what they are able to verify - you know it's more.

01-12-2012, 02:56 PM	#88
MnJetFan All League Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 4,302	In most places they ask for a ID to cash a check. But it is illegal to ask for an ID for voting. Oh it is discrimination. No ID no vote!

01-13-2012, 02:00 PM	#89
southparkcpa I see the 88 to 97 period all over again. Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: NC Posts: 15,705	[QUOTE=MnJetFan;4327074]In most places they ask for a ID to cash a check. But it is illegal to ask for an ID for voting. Oh it is discrimination. No ID no vote![/QUOTE] Why cant they just use their ID from "Paycheck Advance" incorporated?;) 1) because it is discrimination 2) Most of them dont work

01-13-2012, 02:22 PM	#90
parafly so why side with anything? All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 6,282	[QUOTE=MnJetFan;4327074]In most places they ask for a ID to cash a check. But it is illegal to ask for an ID for voting. Oh it is discrimination. No ID no vote![/QUOTE] Paying for goods with a check is a privilege not a right. Voting is a fundamental American right. I am fine with having an ID requirement for voting [b]if there is no cost in obtaining an acceptable ID.[/b] If all options of an acceptable ID are those which have a monetary cost, the system becomes "pay to play" and discriminates against the poor.

01-13-2012, 02:32 PM	#91
Warfish JetsInsider.com Legend Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 35,000	[QUOTE=parafly;4328565]Paying for goods with a check is a privilege not a right. Voting is a fundamental American right. I am fine with having an ID requirement for voting [b]if there is no cost in obtaining an acceptable ID.[/b] If all options of an acceptable ID are those which have a monetary cost, the system becomes "pay to play" and discriminates against the poor.[/QUOTE] Again, it goes to a larger question. Is their no responsabillity on the individual to identify themselves in some way? Those against it, you do realize you are in-effect supporting voting without any verification that the person casting the vote is a citizen, or the pwerson they claim to be. Is THAT, of all things, what youw ant to be against policywise, and if so, why? Because it's a "right"? Every right we have has some form of limitation or regulation involved in it's wielding by the individual, rightfully so. You cannot speak with 100% impunity, there are limits and liabillities. You cannot own guns without limits, certainly. You cannot practice religion without limits, etc, etc, etc. At it's core, proof that you who you claim is fundamental to the very right to vote itself. If proof isn't required, you diminish the power of the vote, the worth of the right, itself. And more, if proof of ID is too much burden for wielding of that right, what about having to register? Should registration be ended too, as too much a burden? Again, I fall back on this.....are you really supporting the idea that proving who you are is too much of a burden, and that voting is better when such proof is not requested and no effort is made to fight potential fraud or illegal votes? All because you think being able to prove who you are...is too costly? How do these amazingly poor people do anything else in life if they're unable to prove, in any form, who they are?

01-13-2012, 02:42 PM	#92
parafly so why side with anything? All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 6,282	[QUOTE=Warfish;4328592]Again, it goes to a larger question. Is their no responsabillity on the individual to identify themselves in some way?[/QUOTE] Again, I have no issue with placing responsibility on the individual to identify themselves. [QUOTE]All because you think being able to prove who you are...is too costly? [/QUOTE] Exactly. If you are an American citizen over the age of 18, you have a fundamental right[SIZE="1"][/SIZE] to vote. [SIZE="1"] No purchase necessary[/SIZE]

01-13-2012, 03:52 PM	#93
Warfish JetsInsider.com Legend Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 35,000	[QUOTE=parafly;4328612]Again, I have no issue with placing responsibility on the individual to identify themselves. Exactly. If you are an American citizen over the age of 18, you have a fundamental right[SIZE="1"][/SIZE] to vote. [SIZE="1"] No purchase necessary[/SIZE][/QUOTE] And again, thats not accurate. If you do not register (even if it costs you something to be able to, car ride to get form, stamp to mail it, internet access to do it online, etc) you do not have a right to vote. If you are a convict, you do not have a right to vote. If you're a resident of that jurisdiction, you do not have a right to vote. Is adding "If you cannot prove who you are" asking so much? I don't think it is. By taking both sides (you agree theys hould prove, but only if there is no cost, and everything that could be used as ID costs something at some point), you're really supporting the status quo, i.e. no id checking.

01-13-2012, 04:45 PM	#94
parafly so why side with anything? All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 6,282	[QUOTE=Warfish;4328761]By taking both sides (you agree theys hould prove, but only if there is no cost, and everything that could be used as ID costs something at some point), you're really supporting the status quo, i.e. no id checking.[/QUOTE] I support an improved system where accuracy is paramount and the poor are not disenfranchised. I prefer the status quo over mandatory checking of relatively pricey ID's.

01-13-2012, 05:04 PM	#95
Warfish JetsInsider.com Legend Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 35,000	[QUOTE=parafly;4328852]I support an improved system where accuracy is paramount and the poor are not disenfranchised.[/quote] And I'd maintain that proving who one is as an entryway to expressing ones rights as a citizen is a basic responsabillity of every citizen. Being a citizen is not only about ones rights, but also ones responsabillities. What improved system do you support that has improved accuracy, but no id check? [quote]I prefer the status quo over mandatory checking of relatively pricey ID's.[/QUOTE] Please, define (specificly) what you mean by "pricey".

01-13-2012, 05:15 PM	#96
parafly so why side with anything? All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 6,282	[QUOTE=Warfish;4328904]And I'd maintain that proving who one is as an entryway to expressing ones rights as a citizen is a basic responsabillity of every citizen. Being a citizen is not only about ones rights, but also ones responsabillities.[/QUOTE] Agreed, but there shouldn't be any monetary cost to the individual to adhere to this responsibility. [QUOTE]What improved system do you support that has improved accuracy, but no id check?[/QUOTE] Mandatory ID checks which can be obtained free of charge. [QUOTE]Please, define (specificly) what you mean by "pricey".[/QUOTE] Anything over $0.00 (to the individual) is too much to pay for the constitutional right to vote.

01-13-2012, 05:31 PM	#97
southparkcpa I see the 88 to 97 period all over again. Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: NC Posts: 15,705	[QUOTE=parafly;4328937]Agreed, but there shouldn't be any monetary cost to the individual to adhere to this responsibility. Mandatory ID checks which can be obtained free of charge. Anything over $0.00 (to the individual) is too much to pay for the constitutional right to vote.[/QUOTE] I actually agree with parafly. All the WASTE in government, we should be able to do this BUT the reality is...the dems DONT really want it.

01-13-2012, 06:03 PM	#98
Phoenixx Hall Of Fame Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Fairfield County, CT Posts: 6,870	[QUOTE=parafly;4328565]I am fine with having an ID requirement for voting [b]if there is no cost in obtaining an acceptable ID.[/b] [/QUOTE] So then you side with the State of South Carolina and disagree with the tactics being employed by Eric Holder's Justice Department which invalidates the new SC law. Good to hear.