Justice Dept. Appointees Threaten Voting Rights
Justice Dept. Appointees Threaten Voting Rights
It is good to be back on Think Progress with you. This morning’s Washington Post reported that political appointees overruled career civil rights professionals on whether DOJ should pre-approve Georgia’s law requiring a photo ID to vote. The decision to overrule the career experts at DOJ also overturned what had been the standard practice in that Department since the Voting Rights Act was first passed 40 years ago.
Having read that troubling story I could not help but revisit the discussion on election reform we had about a month ago.
I was particularly unimpressed by one line of argument uncovered in the Post article. An Assistant Attorney General in the Department of Justice argued that the number of potential voters without a photo ID was “extremely small.†He went on to argue that those without such ID were more likely to be white than black.
My question is this: why would the Department of Justice of the United States of America want to make it harder for any voter, regardless of his or her race, to exercise the most basic right guaranteed people of this great country?
Thankfully, two courts – with judges appointed by Republicans and Democrats alike – have now seen through the proposed Georgia law on requiring photo IDs to vote. Those courts have rightly stayed implementation of that unfortunate law – notwithstanding the political posturing of political appointees in Justice. That gives me great hope that the law will never be implemented – and other states will refuse to follow Georgia’s lead on passing what amounts to a modern day poll tax.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Why can’t people understand that this is the most important issue. If we don’t get this right, nothing else matters. Thanks for your insight Sen. Daschle.
November 17th, 2005 at 3:36 pmgood afternoon….I’m not trying to be anti-voter but I don’t understand what the problem is about having valid identification to vote.
if a driver’s license isn’t possible, just a photo ID validating residence and identity and make it free if folks can’t afford the fee.
I’m perfectly willing to hear the argument against that option.
richb
November 17th, 2005 at 3:47 pmRichB, because it’s a solution in search of a problem. Absentee ballots don’t require an ID, and republicans use that form of voting disproportionately.
November 17th, 2005 at 3:53 pmA voters registration card has all of the necessary info on it Rich B. The goal by the neocons is to make voting a hassle, like they did in 04. Stealing two elections is not enough for the chickenhawks in office. They want to steal more. How else would Jeb Bush get elected?
November 17th, 2005 at 3:56 pmSorry Tom Daschle, but this is off subject:
“Until the public is willing to tell you where the insurgent is you’re not going to win this warâ€
-John Murtha, noting a statistic that 80% of Iraqis think attacks on coalition forces are justified.
November 17th, 2005 at 3:57 pm#2
November 17th, 2005 at 4:04 pmNothing’s “free”. Someone, somewhere, will need to pay for such a service. Most likely through raised taxes or higher fees on other items (like drivers license). Also, what identification is required to get a photo ID? The idea is that it identifies you as who you are. So, they need a birth certificate, social security card, paystub, and who knows what else.
The purpose of the move is not to secure voting: it is to take the priveledge of voting away from those who are entitled, but are not ‘doing well’. For the most part, it will be poor people who do not have ID. So they cannot vote? They cannot try to get in representatives who will address their needs?
And WHY then do we have the voter registration cards? They identify you as a voter. They have worked up until now (voting fraud is not the result of lack of ID’s – in fact, fake ID’s are still a common thing).
Transparency in the voting process should be at or near the top of the agenda for the Democrats.
How the large discrepancies between the exit polls last November and the “official” results are acceptable to any serious observer is a travesty. How Diebold, Sequoia and ES&S can remove transparency from the vote counting process with it’s clear conflicts of interest with little more than a whimper from Congress is proof of far deeper problems in our democracy. How minority distrcits in swing states were left with inadequate machines is clear evidence of what’s going on. The fact that the same dirty tricks that occured in Florida in 2000 happened again in 04′ should make us all shiver. How could so many legitimate voters be stricken from the voter rolls? How could they be intimidated away from casting their votes. Frankly, it’s bullshit and the Republicans will continue to steal elections as long as the Democrats don’t get serious about putting a stop to it. Aside from our utterly compromised media I can’t think of a bigger roadblock to the decay of our democracy. I’m disgusted by what’s gone on with the last two presidential elections.
Don’t be coy Senator, you know what’s happening here.
November 17th, 2005 at 4:05 pm#3
thanks Ryan, knew I could count on you for a different perspective…
appreciate it
richb
November 17th, 2005 at 4:18 pmI want a system that assures republicans will NEVER again steal an election. A recept,fingerprints or whatever it takes. Another ‘kathleen harris’ can NOT happen again. I’m am learning from this blogg all the aspects. Thanks to all.
November 17th, 2005 at 4:19 pmthe Georgia law pushes the same, tired argument that it’s to prevent dead people from voting—as if this was the most efficient means of voter fraud. Everyone knows that’s Diebold…
November 17th, 2005 at 4:26 pmOne of the posters above made a great point. Absentee voters do not have to provide identification like an id card. However, absentee voters do have to sign a binding agreement that your identification and registration info is correct and subject to legal penalties if information provided is false. Thus, there is no good reason why a similar statement couldn’t be placed on every ballot. It should be common knowledge that voter fraud is illegal, but signing off on an agreement would be a better alternative to presenting a card. A voter id card is a joke. It means re-educating everyone involved in the voting process, and causing confusion…..Sorry for the length.
November 17th, 2005 at 4:29 pmOops, sorry, excuse me, more off subject, sorry…
But Bahjeebers!, Kerry is STILL in campaign speech mode!
I actually DON’T support an immediate withdrawal blah blah blah…. -Kerry responding to Murtha
I’m still waiting for my “Kerry” bumper sticker here in Texas…(never came).
November 17th, 2005 at 4:30 pmSenator Daschle – Great to see your comments, thanks for weighing in on this issue! I would love to see progressives more active on this issue and others that are fundamental to our rights and powers and individual citizens.
I hope the Center also takes up the banner on removing re-districting from politicians hands. If we believe we can win the war of ideas, we should be pushing as hard as possible to get make as many elections as possible “targeted” and make the conservatives defend their ideas to a real mix of America, not just folks who already agree with them.
As long as you’re in the blogging mood, I would also love to see you address the issue (from firsthand experience) of whether or not Congress saw the same intelligence as the President in the runup to Iraq.
November 17th, 2005 at 4:31 pmYeah, that’s right, Murtha just buried Hastert as being unqualified to judge the war! Hee!!!
November 17th, 2005 at 4:32 pmRichB,
We are the ONLY civilized nation that deprives people who’ve finished serving their criminal sentences the right to vote. That is a CLEAR and intentional attack on the voting rights of the poor and minority americans. If a person has served their criminal sentences, and therefore paid their debt to society there is no reason they shouldn’t be permitted to vote once released. After all, they do pay taxes, so not permitting them to vote is a violation of their right to not be taxed without representation! A fundamental and founding principle of american society.
And who is most disenfranchised? Poor african american men who are often caught with drug offenses in their youth, and who as a result can never vote again their entire life. Not only is this discriminatory, as whites who use drugs do not have to pay a similar price, but it is also uncivilized.
Even RUSSIA permits former criminals to vote.
Voting policies are set up for fraud, and that fraud is disproportionately republican. And it’s getting worse daily as this new ‘poll tax’ shows.
November 17th, 2005 at 4:33 pmWell said, IraqVet. I left the south almost 20 years ago, and had hoped things would be better.
November 17th, 2005 at 4:36 pmMr. Daschle,
Once again, law makers want to make this about white versus black.
“An Assistant Attorney General in the Department of Justice argued that the number of potential voters without a photo ID was “extremely small.†He went on to argue that those without such ID were more likely to be white than black.”
This has nothing to do with color and has everything to do with economic standing. The people less inclined to have a photo id are poor people.
So, the more rich people you can get to vote republican, the less likely it will be the democrats will get enough votes.
The republicans would like nothing more than to have a one party system.
November 17th, 2005 at 4:38 pmI think Jay (#7) called it. What good does it do to argue over who gets to cast a vote if we can’t be sure that those votes aren’t being accurately added and reported?
November 17th, 2005 at 4:39 pm“overruled career civil rights professionals”
This link doesn’t work and that’s too bad. I’d really like to know exactly what a career civil rights professional is and why they are so smart that one should worry that they have been “overruled”. I’d be willing to bet that they are actually Professional Negro Victims. Who wants to bet?
Oh by the way…great little story about how a local NAACP Civil Rights Professional has switched to the Republican side of the aisle. HA!
NAACP chief makes switch to GOP
Published November 17, 2005
For decades, Republicans have struggled to reach out to black Americans. But now in Orange County, the GOP has to reach no further than the NAACP.
As of this week, Derrick Wallace, head of Orange County’s NAACP, has switched parties — to become a Republican.
“I’ve thought about this for two years,” Wallace said Tuesday afternoon, just a few hours after returning from the elections office. “This is not a decision I made yesterday.”
It is, however, a decision that rang out like a shot among political circles.
Republican Party leader Lew Oliver described himself as “extraordinarily pleased,” while Democratic leader Tim Shea said he was disappointed.
Wallace, a construction-company exec, was candid about the fact that his business life was a big part of his decision to change.
“It’s purely a business decision. Ninety percent of those I do business with are Republicans,” he said. “Opportunities that have come to my firm have been brought by Republicans.”
To that, Shea responded: “I’m a little confused. Are we talking about the National Association for the Advancement of Construction Professionals — or Colored People?”
Let me just say this to that you confused Negro idiot. What would you rather be known as….a construction professional who happens to be black or a professional Negro who happens to be in the construction business? Never mind…some colored folk are really afraid to come off that Liberal plantation.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/columnists/orl-maxwell1705nov17,0,2971218.column?coll=orl-news-col
November 17th, 2005 at 4:42 pmTom its great to have you back in discussion.
#7’sHow the large discrepancies between the exit polls last November and the “official†results are acceptable to any serious observer is a travesty. How Diebold, Sequoia and ES&S can remove transparency from the vote counting process with it’s clear conflicts of interest with little more than a whimper from Congress is proof of far deeper problems in our democracy………………………………………………………
Yes we have a deeper problem with our demoracy ,we are losing our very freedoms that our forefathers fought England for and set down for each of us.
Voting is one way we can safe guard our future freedoms but…only if the voting is open ,fair ,transparent otherwise wise its a sham
November 17th, 2005 at 4:43 pm#20: Please stay on-topic.
November 17th, 2005 at 4:48 pmGary #17, I enjoy your site. Good job. Will send your link to my/our fellow Illinoisians.
Let me know if you’d would like for me to link it on my site.
November 17th, 2005 at 5:02 pmI vote in Washington state as an absentee voter. The only thing required to determine my identity is my signature, which they seem to check closely. (For this year’s primary, I used my shabby shorthand signature instead of my professional one; they sent back a perjury form and asked me to confirm my identity.)
The signature system works for absentee, so it should work for polling places as well. If the state of Georgia want to require photo IDs, they should be required to furnish them to everyone, free of charge. If the number of potential voters without a photo ID is trult “extremely small” then this won’t cost much. Georgia could then be more secure (if this is the case) and not disenfranchise any of its citizens.
November 17th, 2005 at 5:07 pmAbsentee ballots make up a very small portion of all votes cast. The fact that it is unsecure is not a sufficient argument to allow insecure in-person voting.
Also, time consuming checking such as signature validation may be possible for absentee voting, but can’t realistically be done for the 100M+ votes cast on election days.
Fundamentally, I don’t see why having a photo ID is such a burden on our populace. VERY few people don’t have some form of photo ID, and those that don’t should be able to get them for free. Requiring a photo ID would all but eliminate in-person voter fraud.
This is one of those topics where Democrats end up looking like the party that’s interested in preserving voter fraud. People are far more concerned about cheating in elections than they are in whether granny has to spend an hour or two every few years getting a photo ID.
November 17th, 2005 at 5:22 pmEven RUSSIA permits former criminals to vote.
Comment by Commissar Neat
Funny thing about Russia Ryan. A monkey could vote (and probably does) and it doesn’t matter one way or the other. That’s one reason Russia is a criminal run third world shit-hole.
It doesn’t surprise me that you’d hold them up as something to be admired and emulated. Fuking loser.
November 17th, 2005 at 5:23 pm#20: Please stay on-topic.
Comment by JimB
I’m always on topic. Sorry if you can’s see that.
November 17th, 2005 at 5:25 pm#3
thanks Ryan, knew I could count on you for a different perspective…
appreciate it
richb
You can count on that little turd to lie his ass off. Now, ask him to prove what he said. He can’t, he just makes it up as he goes along. But then I’m sure that’s a perspective you are used to and appreciate. Everything good about Liberals is fiction.
November 17th, 2005 at 5:29 pmI say once again, we have too many voters as it is and if some loser can’t at least prove who he is what right does he have to be allowed to exercise this privilege. That’s right losers, voting is a privilege, not a right. Get over it and stay home on election day with the rest of the slackers.
November 17th, 2005 at 5:32 pmRyan, Smile real big now. So everyone can count the wrinkles on a horses ass. I still bet you’re the life of the party, after you leave.
November 17th, 2005 at 5:36 pmThis was only one part of a multi-pronged approach toward limiting the voting rights of individuals. We have witnessed so many voting irregularities in local precincts in the past elections; we have seen the faults of electronic voting, yet it is still being foisted upon the unwilling public (astonishingly, we have even heard the manufacturer of those machines openly boast that he would do all he could to see to it that his man won the election); the voter id cards are unnecessary, while they create another obstacle to the voter. Voters used to have to prove literacy, or pay a poll tax before they were allowed to vote, and this plan smacks of that kind of restriction of freedom. Voting should be made easier for people, not harder; let’s encourage people to vote; let’s educate everyone on the importance of one vote and when blocks of people don’t vote people like Bush & Co. are put in office by powerful friends with money, influence and even judicial input.
November 17th, 2005 at 5:46 pmAmericanPieHole,
At least I get invited to parties :)
November 17th, 2005 at 5:48 pmEvilCornbread,
I acknowledge that vote-by-mail id not the most secure system. Anyone capable of copying my signature could vote for me. I do not know of another, more secure way than signature-checking to ensure absentee voting. Anyone have any ideas?
As for your argument that signature checking is too time consuming, I respectfully disagree. 28 of the 39 counties in Washington vote entirely by mail, as does the whole state of Oregon. The addional personnel checking signatures is more than offset by having no polling places, and setting up and renting space is made unnecessary. The benefits outweight the costs.
It should also be noted that bith Oregon and Washington have seen increased voter turnout as they have moved to absentee systems.
If states do continue to support in-person voting, and if in-person fraud is in fact a problem, free state ids should be available.
November 17th, 2005 at 5:49 pmMizzRepublicansAreAlwaysWrong,
A Monkey voting won’t matter, you mean like the last elections where republican monkey votes weren’t necessary because Diebold stole the election. Yeah republicans sound REALLY different from russians – how again was that? You know russians allow free enterprise companies intertwined with presidential interests just like halliburton. From where I sit, there’s no difference other than most russians I’ve met are fluent in russian, whereas clearly you’re not fluent at anything but propaganda debunked nonsense.
Republicans lie, steal and cheat because they’re unpopular fascists. It’s the only way they can win elections – even MizzWrong admitted that republicans lie because americans can’t handle the truth. Which lie was it again, the lie that republicans tell the truth, or the lie that republicans lie because americans can’t handle the truth. Republicans lie so much, how do you all keep it straight? Oh that’s right you don’t!
Bahaha, IDIOTS!
November 17th, 2005 at 5:52 pmRyan, lets party tonight.
Chickenhawks will be the entertainment for the evening. We’ll watch them change each others dirty diapers in the south wing of Bellvue.
Oops, don’t know what I was thinkin, I couldn’t stand the sight.
Get out the blender and mix up your favorite cocktail and loose yourself in the glory of the destruction of the pug party.
Now thats a party. First drinks on me.
November 17th, 2005 at 5:55 pmJimB,
Absentee ballots are less secure, and it is a double standard. Since republicans vote absentee at a higher rate than democrats, their claims of voter fraud at the polls is just utter idiotic hypocrisy!
Republicans cannot prove widespread identity fraud at the polls, because it doesn’t exist. Rigged voting machines and insecure voting hardware CAN be proven, and in fact the GAO office issued a SCATHING report about it this month.
Republicans are creating a fanciful reason to discriminate against the poor, while ignoring their own extensive voter fraud campaign!
November 17th, 2005 at 5:56 pmSusan,
I’d like to join you, but actually I do have a dinner party I’m expected at. Something that I doubt the fat retarded republican shut ins can say :)
November 17th, 2005 at 5:57 pmEveryone voting in the next election should be required to leave 9 pints of their blood drawn at the polling place. That would provide DNA samples for eligibility and insure that each person only votes once. No write-ins under this proposal!
November 17th, 2005 at 5:58 pmWhen this story first came out, I think I read that the price for the ID would be $20. That’s a poll tax.
Nice to hear from you, Senator Daschle, you should write more often!
November 17th, 2005 at 6:01 pmMr. Daschle,
Please take a good long look at posting number 29.
“I say once again, we have too many voters as it is and if some loser can’t at least prove who he is what right does he have to be allowed to exercise this privilege. That’s right losers, voting is a privilege, not a right. Get over it and stay home on election day with the rest of the slackers.”
This is exactly how the right wing NeoCons think. They don’t want people voting. They just want to be able to have the out going president appoint the in coming president. You know, the same way that Castro will appoint his heir.
There is even a poster on this site that thinks the Bush “is the rightful heir” to the presidency.
The Democrats have got to stand up and get the moderate republicans to stand up also. We have go to stop these crazy people.
November 17th, 2005 at 6:03 pm#25
“VERY few people don’t have some form of photo ID, and those that don’t should be able to get them for free.”
An ID card in California costs $16. It is not free and never will be since they are already charging for them. Things get more expensive, not cheaper. That is called capitolism.
November 17th, 2005 at 6:05 pmRyan,
If everyone voted by absentee, then that difference would disappear. Advantage: neither party.
I do not deny that security is an issue. I don’t have a solution for that one.
November 17th, 2005 at 6:06 pmThis is exactly how the right wing NeoCons think.
Comment by Spudge Stick
I’m just agreeing with what Jimmy Carter said recently. I think most of you assholes are too damn stupid to be allowed to vote. Jimmy Peanut will be happy to hear you think he’s a neo con instead of a Liberal Fool.
November 17th, 2005 at 6:06 pmJimB,
How do you know? Republicans have already shown in Ohio they’re willing to cheat, and that the republicans in charge will not hold them accountable. How do you know that absentee is ‘advantage no-one’. From where I sit, republicans are willing to seek advantage at any cost.
November 17th, 2005 at 6:08 pmHehe, the republican psychotic and proven whacko pathological liar is calling someone else a fool – now THAT is funny!
November 17th, 2005 at 6:09 pmJimB,
Why is it free to vote absentee, but costs money to vote in person? Considering that absentee is LESS secure, isn’t this just a blatant and irresponsible attack on the poor?
Sure it is, just like every other KKK (MizzWrongType) whacko has tried to do since the founding of the country.
November 17th, 2005 at 6:11 pmVoting is a RIGHT, not a capitalist adventure!
November 17th, 2005 at 6:12 pmYou know…I have been here for a bit and I have some words for I-WRONG…
I see that you have a very opinionated view of things, but yet, I wonder…
Have YOU ever served your country? And are you able to lend a hand to the troops in our time of need?
If you have, where did you serve? And can I get a time frame? Because, it seems that you have a wonderful way of draping yourself in a diaper of red, white and blue, while sh*tting on the fabric of what it means?
Can you define patriotism? Or is it just a statement you learned on FOX? The manner of discourse leads me to believe that, while you have NO honor within you, you actually think that ALL soldiers WANT to be in Iraq?
Is the notion of a soldier having a will to decide his/her fate that disagrees with the current government an appalling idea? Well get used to it!
Our rights are for all people, and we have a moral obligation to stand up for those citizens who CANNOT or WILL NOT defend the constitution. within that premise we often have to protect azzholes like you, who magnify the perception of just how obnoxious Americans are thought to be…
So pardon me, if I do not buy the company line from the current administration. Because although I serve, I still have the right to object to any portion of the orders that conflict with my moral obligation as a human being…I have the regulation, you want read it…
But, cowards often hide behind a keyboard when a rifle is just as accessible…
November 17th, 2005 at 6:20 pmIraqVet,
No, MizzWrong is a Chickenhawk. He’s 35, single and lives in houston if the things he says about himself aren’t as big of a lie as everything else.
He’s so ignorant and retared, I bet he’s a 12 year old virgin on his sister’s barbie PC. It’s a more appropriate visual for his level of social development.
November 17th, 2005 at 6:22 pmGood to have you back Senator.
One of the things that’s always bothered me about these issues is how the media treats these stories with it’s now-standard he said/she said reporting. For example, the charges of ballot box stuffing and voting more than once versus actively preventing people from voting, as if they same thing is going on on both sides. Please, we know better.
November 17th, 2005 at 6:28 pm#41: In Washington they’re $20. However, if they were subsidized by taxpayers and free only to those of voting age who do not have another form of photo ID, the cost to the public should be very small. The state is covering it’s costs by charging $20 (or $16), not trying to make money. If the cards are subsized, there is no reason to charge.
#44: I would argue that it equal to either party. Democrats are just as able as Republicans, Libertarians and Greens to cheat. So gicen that the chances of cheating are equal, the issue becomes security- how does the government secure mail-in ballots? Nothing I can think of, besides fingerprinting your ballot, could work. I’m not claiming that absentee voting is the ultimate fix; it obviously has significant security issues.
#46: It costs less for the government. Both methods are free for voters.
November 17th, 2005 at 6:30 pmJimB,
1) Covering it’s costs? Voting is a RIGHT, not a pay if you can afford it privilege! Does that mean someone who’s out of work shouldn’t be allowed to vote? That’s classism, elitism and discrimination. SHAME ON YOU!
2) Fingerprints is ink, that’s no more secure as a signature…
3) The point is that republicans are arguing they need security, yet they are only focusing on items that hurt the poor, and presumably more poor who often vote as democrats.
This is a poll tax, discrimination, and bullshit.
November 17th, 2005 at 6:33 pmJimB,
Costs less? Huh? What kind of whacko idea is that?
If you think you’re an american, you’re seriously off your rocker! You are a fascist!
November 17th, 2005 at 6:35 pmJimB,
The problem is rigged Diebold machines, not ID cards. If the machines are stealing the votes (AS HAS BEEN PROVEN!), then what the hell does an ID even matter?
If you really want to solve this problem, then force DIEBOLD to open the source code to their system and to fix the outstanding CERT security warnings that our own country has reported!
November 17th, 2005 at 6:42 pmRyan, you’re missing something in my posts: voting does cost the govergment money. But it does not and should not cost the voter anything.
The process of distributing ballots, counting them, etc costs millions of dollars, funded by our taxes. There is no direct cost to the voter. The cost of making the photo ID, paying the photographer, paying for the facilities, etc, right now is not covered by our taxes. I think it should be. Then, and only then, could the government require photo ID since there would be no direct cost to the voter – ergo no poll tax. We agree that voting should be free, verifiable and secure. Why am I a fascist?
The beauty of any ballot in Washington (or at least King County) is that they are scantrons- all of them. Electronic, easy to tabulate, leaves a paper trail. The problem is that there is no sure-fire way to identify the voter, which is what were are discussing here.
Diebold machines must be banned, as they do not leave a paper trail and are readily succeptible to hacks as the great state of Ohio has proven.
November 17th, 2005 at 7:02 pmRyan, I didn’t know that MissWrongOne was from Houston.
Ha, ha, the Chicago White Sox beat the pants off of you!
On topic. Ban Diebold.
November 17th, 2005 at 7:03 pmAs you can likely tell, the cost of an election is of interest to me. Arnold’s special election cost taxpayers in California $350 million. That’s a lot of money that could have been spent in schools, healthcare and infrastructure. An inexpensive system that marginalizes nobody, is safe from fraud and leaves a paper trail is my ideal.
November 17th, 2005 at 7:08 pmJimB,
That makes no sense. You are costing the voter, because the tax is unaffordable to some segment of society, thereby barring them to vote based on socio-economic (and to some degree race) basis. We already collect general and progressive taxes to ensure voting is fair.
What you propose is good old fashioned poll tax bigotry. It’s unamerican, and it’s criminal.
November 17th, 2005 at 7:52 pmJimB,
I did miss your funding statement, I now see what you’re saying.
The ID issue is still moot, unless you ban absentee ballots, as it’s an unfair step that republicans are not subjecting themselves to do.
In otherwords, it’s still prejudicial.
November 17th, 2005 at 7:54 pmRyan – Finally, you got it! Took ya long enough.
November 17th, 2005 at 7:58 pmAnne,
Come again?
November 17th, 2005 at 8:04 pm#59: Finally, you understand. Where are numbers that support your assert that more Republicans vote by absentee than democrats? While I don’t doubt in some states that is true, in Washington, it’s the opposite.
November 17th, 2005 at 8:05 pmWashington state?
November 17th, 2005 at 8:24 pmA survey of Florida’s 67 counties shows that more than 700,000 Florida voters–or almost 1 in 8–voted absentee. George W. Bush, the governor’s brother, captured about 125,000 more absentee votes than his Democratic rival, Al Gore.
This is mirrored nationally in almost every state.
November 17th, 2005 at 8:26 pmAnother common republican tactic is to not mail absentee ballots to democrats – one of the reasons many democrats don’t trust them. This happened to thousands of ohio and florida democrats who complained about the fraudulent practices.
Republican dirty tricks are indefensible.
November 17th, 2005 at 8:30 pmOff topic, and sorry for that, but just so you all are aware, when questioned about what he’s personally doing for the troops, I-Right-I admits (from another thread) that he does nothing whatsoever for “our boys,” the troops he purports to be so concerned over. Just another blowhard who’s full of s**t. He can’t be taken seriously. Another bumper-sticker
*****
This administration does what every other administration does, use the military as it sees fit. Clinton for example used it as a social experiment putting fags and women in positions they were not wanted and would cause strife and harm. Cutting funding and their balls every chance he got. Whatever Bush has done he has earned the respect and love of our men at arms as you’d see if the assholes who run the media would interview them.
What difference does it make what I do as long as I’m not doing something that hurts their cause? ….like you…cocksucker. But lets put it this way, I support them in more ways than I’ll tell a loser like you. I love them and pay attention to them because I appreciate their service and sacrifice.
Leftist bastards like you only appreciate the body bags you try and trot out on the evening news. That’s why we call you the Filthy Left. That’s why we’re better than you and that’s why we win.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — November 17, 2005 @ 4:53 pm
November 17th, 2005 at 8:37 pmRingo,
It’s the standard paranoia and lies of republicans. Look under their skirt, and they’re always packing nothing but blanks.
You know the funniest part about that rant? It was Dick Cheney who was the defense cutter. This was already settled during the 2004 election, but republicans have no reading comprehension, and prefer to repeat debunked lies, so here we go again.
Here’s just a little bit of the REALITY that Republicans can never seem to stomach. From prospect.org:
“It was Congressman Cheney, after all — not Senator Kerry — who contradicted his own party during the height of the Cold War and called for President Ronald Reagan to “take a whack†at defense spending. It was Defense Secretary Cheney — not Senator Kerry — who in 1992 blocked critical intelligence reforms and bragged to Congress about gutting defense spending.”
“What Cheney leaves out of his stump speeches is the ironic fact that almost all of the cuts Kerry voted for were endorsed or originally proposed by Cheney himself. At issue is not the cuts themselves, but the hypocrisy of Cheney attacking an opponent who merely followed his lead.”
“Cheney accuses Kerry of calling for “major reductions or outright cancellations of many of our most important weapons systemsâ€; Bush ads attack the senator for voting “against 13 weapons systems for our troops†over 20 years. But it was Defense Secretary Cheney who gloated that he had “put an end to more than 100 systems†in less than three years. In December 1991, he bragged to the Washington Post that he was setting “an all-time record as Defense Secretary for canceling or stopping production†of weapons and equipment.”
“Cheney slams Kerry’s vote against the F-14 aircraft in October 1990; according to the Post, Cheney “asked Congress to kill†the F-14 in 1991 and had been “skeptical” of a proposal to continue production of the planes as early as 1990. Cheney hammers Kerry for voting against the F-16 aircraft and the Trident submarine, yet Kerry was merely endorsing cancellations proposed by Cheney — who, according to The Boston Globe, had “decided the military already [had] enough†of those weapons. Cheney accuses Kerry of voting against “even the Bradley Fighting Vehicle.” But in 1991 it was Cheney’s Pentagon that said it wanted “to terminate such Gulf War veterans as the . . . Bradley Fighting Vehicle.â€
At one point, Cheney told the Post he had terminated “the F-14, F-15 and F-16 fighters, the A-6, A-12, AV-8B and P-3 Navy and Marine planes, and the Army’s Apache helicopter and M-1A1 tank.†Five of these weapons systems are listed by the Bush campaign in its attempts to chastise Kerry for his anti-defense votes. Cheney was so successful at cutting weapons that The Boston Globe worried “The Army’s cupboard is left particularly bare . . . [it] will soon have virtually no major weapons in production.†”
And unfortunately the hypocrisy goes on, and on, and on!
November 17th, 2005 at 8:47 pmMizzWrong, go find a bridge and sacrifice yourself – that’s the best gift you could possibly give to humanity.
November 17th, 2005 at 8:47 pmDoes Texas have a greater number of wackos and wingnuts? Is there something in the air? The water?
November 17th, 2005 at 8:59 pmBad things happen to a lot of minds there in the state of Texas. I don’t think they are born that way – it must be environmental.
Texas has June bugs, toads that can swallow them whole and mosquitoes that can suck a buffalo dry in ten seconds. After that are horned (not horny) toads and politicians (rattlesnakes). The final creature has infected Washington.
November 17th, 2005 at 9:29 pmBLINDED BY FAITH!!!
November 17th, 2005 at 11:28 pmCAN THE BLIND LEAD THE BLIND?????
ASK YOUR PREACHER!
Texas is home to the show “Cheaters”. “Cheaters” a reality show that documents “cheaters” is based in Dallas.
Who woulda thunk that there are so many irresponsible, unreliable and morally delinquent folks in Texas. Lots of lesbians too.
November 17th, 2005 at 11:57 pmGood Morning All. We do not need a photo ID. You go to the polls, give them your name, they check it off, and you get a ballot and then you vote. What is the problem.
November 18th, 2005 at 8:14 amI feel I must apologize to Mr. Daschle for IRI’s extremely juvenile behavior.
Where I come from we are polite, even if we disagree, to our guests. It shows good breeding. Why would these important people come back if they are treated with absolutely no respect by schoolyard bullies?
We will stay focused and a few instigators will never detract us. These are mere “gnats” to have to slap away from our faces, but that will not deter us from our mission of progression and advancement of our civil liberties.
November 18th, 2005 at 9:38 amI feel I must apologize to Mr. Daschle for IRI’s extremely juvenile behavior. Where I come from we are polite, even if we disagree, to our guests.
Comment by progressive and proud
Where you come from they spit on the American flag and make bets about the number of American casualties. But go ahead and apologize to your fictitious guests. I’ll be right behind you to kick them in the ass if they offend me or my country.
November 18th, 2005 at 9:46 amWhere am I from then?
November 18th, 2005 at 10:02 am“If it were my republic you wouldn’t get to vote at all unless you were male and had a vested interest in the country. That means if you actually produced something besides treasonous rhetoric.
November 18th, 2005 at 10:37 amComment by I-RIGHT-I — November 2, 2005 @ 5:09 pm “
Where am I from then?
Comment by progressive and proud
The Island of French Utopia on the fringe of the insane.
November 18th, 2005 at 10:40 am“If it were my republic you wouldn’t get to vote at all unless you were male and had a vested interest in the country. That means if you actually produced something besides treasonous rhetoric.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — November 2, 2005 @ 5:09 pm “
Comment by mysticagent
Please notice that I didn’t exclude Blacks, Latinos, or Democrats. I might be inclined to include married women with children too but that would still be a bit counter productive to rebuilding the country.
November 18th, 2005 at 10:44 am#73
November 18th, 2005 at 10:47 amExactly. There is a registered voter list. When you vote, they check off your name. Period. The fraud can occur in registration (so…. don’t let dead friggin’ people register to vote). The MAIN voter fraud occurs in the counting of ballots or in hampering registered voters from getting to vote (by a wide array of methods). If someone registered a dead person and intended to vote as that dead person, it would not be beyond the criminality to produce false ID. Now, one voter voting twice is not going to make much difference. Voter fraud is usually a consolidated effort by many people, and thus a pooling of resources – and it is little more work to make a stack of fake ID’s than just one. An ID requirement is a hinderance: it is also just that, a REQUIREMENT. And, in most states, you do have to supply some measure of identification to register as a voter. Therefore, you have already been identified. The registration lists can be checked against a census list or the IRS list, and any apparent discrepancies can be sought out (via mail or phone) to validate that it is a living person, and the person they claim to be. The solution to halting voter fraud is not to make it more difficult for the voters. The burdon of security needs to be lain at the feet of the voting system: they system and those running the system need stricter oversight and control. THAT is how to reduce fraud.
#79
November 18th, 2005 at 10:51 amWell, good that you can admit your oversight. We both know what you think about those three particular groups of people.
Well, good that you can admit your oversight. We both know what you think about those three particular groups of people.
Comment by mysticagent
You bet, taken as a group, in general without considering the exceptions…they are a bunch of losers. My plan of including only those that contribute to our society goes about as far as one can go to guarantee only the exceptions get a say.
November 18th, 2005 at 11:33 amI-Wrong-I Everyone has a right to vote. I am a woman and I have just as much a right to vote as you.
November 18th, 2005 at 12:01 pmI-Wrong-I Everyone has a right to vote. I am a woman and I have just as much a right to vote as you.
Comment by Mary Poppin
People in general do not have a “right” to vote. Lots of people can’t vote. People under the age of 18, non-citizens, convicted felons to name a few. As a woman you have a right to vote only because the constitution was amended in 1920 to allow it. (big mistake in my opinion) Please see details of who was given the privilege of voting in early America.
Voting is a privilege like that of driving a car on public streets that can be taken away as opposed to a “right” that can not be. You have the right to a fair trial but you don’t have the right to elect your judge or sit on a jury. That’s a privilege.
http://www.crf-usa.org/bria/bria8_1.htm#voted
November 18th, 2005 at 12:14 pm#84 I have just as much a right to vote as you. The only one that should not have the right to vote is you.
Was it you that said women should be in the kitchen doing the cooking? I hope you are not married because I would feel sorry for your wife. You are a total hypocrite.
November 18th, 2005 at 1:01 pmWrong again, IRI. Guess again.
November 18th, 2005 at 1:17 pmConvicted felons CAN vote. Wrong again, IRI. I draw up orders for them to regain their rights daily, you troll. AND, what’s more, they usually vote republican. Bet you wouldn’t have guessed that would you?
You are showing us how smart you are and it is appreciated.
November 18th, 2005 at 1:20 pmConvicted felons CAN vote. Wrong again, IRI. I draw up orders for them to regain their rights daily, you troll. AND, what’s more, they usually vote republican. Bet you wouldn’t have guessed that would you?
You are showing us how smart you are and it is appreciated.
Comment by progressive and proud
I don’t count Vermont and Maine. They are two states run by women, homosexuals and communists. And how would you know how “most” of the losers you have locked up vote anyway? Do you open their ballot or what. Loser.
November 18th, 2005 at 1:35 pmHehe, republicans always say the stupid fascist rhetoric. It just shows they should be in straight jackets, not government.
Keep shining MizzWrong, there’s a padded room for you in your future :)
November 18th, 2005 at 1:45 pmOnly republicans don’t view voting as a right, that’s why the republican party should be outlawed as a subversive party and its leaders (and freaks like mizz wrong) jailed for subversion.
There are lots of independents who would be happy with forming a second major party..
November 18th, 2005 at 1:47 pmWas it you that said women should be in the kitchen doing the cooking? I hope you are not married because I would feel sorry for your wife. You are a total hypocrite.
Comment by Mary Poppin
Yep, I said that. Why is it hypocritical to want a home cooked meal after a hard day in the cotton fields?
Nope, not married. I was but the gal couldn’t cook worth a damn, was an out and out slob, lousy in bed yet still wanted me to pay her way and like it. I kicked her ass out only after she pulled a gun and threatened to kill my girlfriend.
I now have a Mexican maid and cook take care of the light work and a few professional ladies of the evening that I allow to do the heavy lifting. It seems to be working out just fine so don’t get your hopes up.
November 18th, 2005 at 1:47 pm#89 Why do you hate women ? Vermont and Maine are part of the US Last I check. What is your problem?
November 18th, 2005 at 1:50 pmSorry #92 is for #88
November 18th, 2005 at 1:51 pmIRI, felons all over the country can have their rights restored, they just can’t have a gun. How did you tie in Maine and Vermont? What is the significance?
Oh and by the way, I am in one of the REDDEST states around so your argument above is moot.
And, I don’t lock people up; that’s not my job. Without divulging too much, I know exactly how these people vote. And, yes, sorry to say, most of the felons I run across are republican. Oddly, a LOT of burglary, which strengthens Ryan Neat’s argument about elections.
IRI, you steal and I know you do. Whether it’s cheating on your taxes or spending your boss’s time arguing with strangers. You are a thief.
November 18th, 2005 at 1:55 pmTo EvilCornbread: I live in a County that votes 80% absentee and every single signature is matched with a minimum 3-point match. I spent days and days observing the ballot processing for the last Presidential election and I know it can be done.
Every vote needs to be counted and we cannot go back to poll taxes or other discouragements.
Thanks to Tom Daschle for your participation in our discussions!
November 18th, 2005 at 1:58 pm41% of Military Jobs are Currently Unfilled, MizzWrong, go sign up. You’ve clearly demostrated you have no value either on this blog, or in this country, so go do something useful for a change with your life…
November 18th, 2005 at 2:05 pm“Comment by progressive and proud ”
“IRI, felons all over the country can have their rights restored, they just can’t have a gun. How did you tie in Maine and Vermont? What is the significance?”
Main and Vermont allow felons to vote, even from jail. All other states reserve the right to keep the losers from voting. I agree with them. What you are talking about is clemency granted by the state governor that would restore a convict’s privilege to vote as well as other privileges afforded to a law abiding citizen.
“Oh and by the way, I am in one of the REDDEST states around so your argument above is moot. ”
Every state has it’s share of losers and it’s not by chance most of them work for some branch of government. I bet you’re a black gal too aren’t you?
“And, I don’t lock people up; that’s not my job. Without divulging too much, I know exactly how these people vote.”
So you monitor the way they vote. How LIBERAL of you.
“And, yes, sorry to say, most of the felons I run across are republican. Oddly, a LOT of burglary, which strengthens Ryan Neat’s argument about elections.”
You either live in a white trash state or work in a government office that deals with white collar criminals…or you are full of shit. But it makes sense to me that blacks in jail don’t give a damn about voting any more now that they are in the pokey than they did when they were on the streets. But Ryan doesn’t have an argument because everyone KNOWS Donks are past masters at voting fraud and stealing elections. That’s the way Kennedy beat Nixon by the way. It’s the way LBJ won every election he ever entered save his second term as president.
“IRI, you steal and I know you do. Whether it’s cheating on your taxes or spending your boss’s time arguing with strangers. You are a thief.”
Oh, just like that, now I’m a thief. How white of you to say so. I guess you single mother black chicks pulling down a small government check for sitting on your big ass all day causing other people trouble and wasting tax dollars have the RIGHT to make any kind of accusation you feel like. What is that? Part of your reparations? It’s kind of like issuing each other fraudulent handicap parking permits and taking SSI money for your neighbor’s little nappy headed bastards isn’t it?
November 18th, 2005 at 3:07 pm[...] Tom Daschle blogged on ThinkProgress yesterday about the problems with a Voter ID bill proposed in Georgia. He called it a “modern day poll-tax” that would make it harder for people to exercise their right to vote. [...]
November 18th, 2005 at 3:20 pm41% of Military Jobs are Currently Unfilled, MizzWrong, go sign up. You’ve clearly demostrated you have no value either on this blog, or in this country, so go do something useful for a change with your life…
November 18th, 2005 at 4:08 pm41% of Military Jobs are Currently Unfilled, MizzWrong, go sign up. You’ve clearly demostrated you have no value either on this blog, or in this country, so go do something useful for a change with your life…
Comment by Ryan “rectal cancer” Neat —
I’m over qualified to work for the government but I’d take a pay cut to be the guy who determines what to do with home grown America haters like you.
November 19th, 2005 at 8:29 amDear Mr. Daschle:
I have a burning question for you: why didn’t you support the Florida Black Caucus in their desire to have the 2000 Election Florida results investigated? Although it could have been any senator who signed the bill to enact the investigation, since you were the presiding Senate Minority Leader at the time, I would have expected you to stand up for a minority group.
I know it’s irrelevant at this point, but inquiring minds want to know.
Sincerely, Sturgis Rally Resident.
November 20th, 2005 at 4:56 pmI R I- You are killing me! I laughed so hard, coffee came out my nose. Vermont and Maine allow convicts to vote? Wow, they’re more insane than my state, California…dammit, I probably just gave Pelosi another grand idea….Blog on brother….
December 8th, 2005 at 4:45 am[...] I have been flabbergasted by the continuing news coming out of the Justice Department. I first wrote on this blog a few weeks ago to discuss the harmful impact that requiring photo IDs would have on the most basic right in this country – the right to vote. Just a couple of weeks later, I returned to Think Progress to discuss how political bureaucrats at the Department of Justice overrode the strong recommendation of experienced DOJ professionals who suggested that the Georgia photo ID law was inconsistent with requirements under the historically successful Voting Rights Act. We have since learned that political bureaucrats at Justice overrode the professionals on the Texas redistricting case, too. [...]
December 13th, 2005 at 1:53 pm[...] While President Bush proclaims his support for democracy around the world, his Justice Department is busy stifling it here at home. The Department of Justice recently approved Georgia’s plan to force voters to show a state-issued ID that can be obtained in only 59 of the state’s 159 counties, none of which are in the six counties with the highest percentage of African Americans. [...]
February 21st, 2006 at 6:10 pm[...] From ThinkProgress.org: While President Bush proclaims his support for democracy around the world, his Justice Department is busy stifling it here at home. The Department of Justice recently approved Georgia’s plan to force voters to show a state-issued ID that can be obtained in only 59 of the state’s 159 counties, none of which are in the six counties with the highest percentage of African Americans. This is especially troubling because of the apparent racist motivations of the bill’s backers. The chief sponsor of Georgia’s bill told the Justice Department that “if there are fewer black voters because of this bill, it will only be because there is less opportunity for fraud.†Even the Justice Department’s own experts believe this will disenfranchise eligible voters. Today, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell (D) announced that he would veto similar legislation in his state because “it would disenfranchise some of the state’s most vulnerable residents.†The Department of Justice used to focus on expanding minority voting rights — now they are approving plans to restrict them. There was a time when conservatives would balk at disenfranchising voters — today it’s standard practice. [...]
February 21st, 2006 at 10:00 pm[...] Georgia State Rep. Sue Burmeister (R-Augusta) doesn’t care about black people. While President Bush proclaims his support for democracy around the world, his Justice Department is busy stifling it here at home. The Department of Justice recently approved Georgia’s plan to force voters to show a state-issued ID that can be obtained in only 59 of the state’s 159 counties, none of which are in the six counties with the highest percentage of African Americans.The chief sponsor of Georgia’s bill told the Justice Department, that “if there are fewer black voters because of this bill, it will only be because there is less opportunity for fraud.†The Justice Department’s own experts, however, believe this will disenfranchise eligible voters. [...]
January 9th, 2007 at 8:43 pm