Voting Laws

[SuperScout]

The Supreme Court yesterday ruled that Arizona can require voters to provide photo identification when they cast their ballots next month. [What a brilliant idea: trying to maintain the sanctity of the voting oprocess!] The justices cautioned that they were not issuing a ruling on the constitutionality of Arizona's law. "As we have noted, the facts in these cases are hotly contested," the court said in an unsigned five-page order.

The court said it would review the legal challenge to Arizona's Proposition 200, approved by the state's voters in 2004. The law requires voters to prove citizenship when registering to vote and to show photo IDs when they go to the polls. The law was meant to make sure illegal aliens weren't casting ballots. [OOOps, that could be a blow to da dims' chances of winning political races in Arizona!]

Opponents of the law [Gosh, let me guess: what political party would this be???] contend it discourages some people from voting, including the elderly, poor and disadvantaged who don't always carry IDs. The Supreme Court yesterday ruled that Arizona can require voters to provide photo identification when they cast their ballots next month. [Really? So we're supposed to believe that old folks, poor folks, and other folks don't carry ID's? Do they present any facts to back up this absurd assumption?]

The justices cautioned that they were not issuing a ruling on the constitutionality of Arizona's law. "As we have noted, the facts in these cases are hotly contested," the court said in an unsigned five-page order.

A federal judge ruled the state could enforce the law. But the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals later blocked it from taking effect for the Nov. 7 election. Courts in Georgia and Missouri recently have blocked similar laws. In his bid to allow the state to go forward, Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard told the justices that "voter registration at the polls is an emerging issue of national importance. States have a compelling interest in curbing fraud and protecting the integrity of elections." [Voted as The Statement of Truth in 2006!]

[Jerry D]

The people keep voting for Picture ID voteing and the lawyers and ACLU keep telling us how they are protecting our rights. ?

[SuperScout]

Believing that the ACLU is protecting my rights is akin to believing in Santa Claus, except that he is more plausible.

[reconeil]

Regarding LEGITIMATELY REGISTERING TO VOTE & THEN LEGITIMATELY VOTING in America,...
A Photo ID proves pretty-much NOTHING other than such
are actually The Persons registering to vote and then voting.

Sure, such a step in right direction and about a thousand
percent better than mail-in registrations, and/or where anyone
can even register their dogs or cats, if so inclined.
But,...SO WHAT???

Why not simply do as used to be for new voters, and/or that
which ACTUALLY proved one was first old enough to vote and also
place or land of birth. A Birth Certificate (naturally an original)
ACTUALLY proves such, plus also that one is natural born
American Citizen and/or those whom most likely
CAN LEGALLY VOTE in America.

For those not born in America and wishing to first time vote
in America, besides similarly showing A Birth Certificate same
legitimate immigrants once had to show a nice green bordered
Certificate of Naturalization. WHY NOT NOW???

Hey,...WHAT'S THE HANG-UP & THE-BIG-DEAL??
Plus,...WHY NOT SIMILARLY & SANELY OBEY LAWS of THE LAND NOWADAYS????????

Are We still: "A Government Of The People, By The People and For The People"?
Or,...just a Government Ruled By The Politician and For The Politician (foreign politicians inclusive)?
Sure-as-hell-seems the later to me,...and has FOR QUITE SOME TIME!!!

Neil

[SuperScout]

Last Tuesday, I participated as a volunteer worker in the first of three days of early voting. This event was about the seventh time that the electronic voting machines have been used. Some of the people showing up to vote looked at the machines like deer staring into the headlights, and the system had to be explained to them all over again. Not surprisingly, the most obtuse ones were asking questions that made it self-evident that they were part of da dims.

About 1/4 of the voters arrived without the voter certificates, but did have a photo ID in the form of a driver's license. Once we checked their name against the data base, they were allowed to vote; no name in the database, no vote, with or without ID. A more standard ID system, such as I've advocated for years, would solve many of the problems of voter fraud, driver's license, donor parts etc.

[reconeil]

All the valid ID's aside,....
Did any new or first time voters have to prove they were
actually American Citizens? I doubt it very much, since such
proof of birthplace or citizenship no longer even required for
registering to vote in America.

Also, and whether: "Da dims" or not,...were same U.S. Citizen:
"Dims" or Mexican, Honduran, Salvadoran or Iranian ; "Dims"

Therefore,...the very best that I can say about Our Voting System,
is that For The American Citizenry IT SUCKS ,...and for all foreign
nationals (enemy inclusive) and most all of America's Ruling Elite...
it's apparently The Greatest Voting System POSSIBLE.

Neil

[Jerry D]

Agreed Brice ole' Jolly Saint Nick is actually based on a real person, Saint Nicholas, the 4th century saint , was born near Myra, a port on the Mediterranean Sea serving the busy sea lanes that linked the seaports of Egypt, Greece, and Rome. I still don't believe in the ACLU or the SPLC either. Both are more interested in taking away rights then protecting them.