posted April 28, 2008 02:57 PM            

Gone are illegal aliens voting for demoscats

Gone are the dead voting for demoscats

Gone are the unregistered voting for demoscats

Gone are those voting under different names numerous times in the same election.

April 28, 2008
Indiana Voter ID Law Upheld

In a huge victory for fair and honest elections, the Supreme Court upheld an Indiana law requiring a photo ID to vote:

In a splintered 6-3 ruling, the court upheld Indiana's strict photo ID requirement, which Democrats and civil rights groups said would deter poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots. Its backers said it was needed to deter fraud.

It was the most important voting rights case since the Bush v. Gore dispute that sealed the 2000 election for George W. Bush.

The law "is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting 'the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,'" Justice John Paul Stevens said in an opinion that was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy.

Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas also agreed with the outcome, but wrote separately.

Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter dissented.

More than 20 states require some form of identification at the polls. Courts have upheld voter ID laws in Arizona, Georgia and Michigan, but struck down Missouri's. Monday's decision comes a week before Indiana's presidential primary.

Most of the left opposed the measure because it puts a crimp in the long time practice of labor unions and other Democratic party constituencies of stuffing ballot boxes with fake registrants who go from precinct to precinct casting votes.

Having to show an ID will solve that problem. And the excuse that it will depress the turnout of minorities and seniors is ill-founded because the law allows for those who can't afford a state ID to get one at a substantially reduced cost.

posted April 28, 2008 03:29 PM            

What a great equal opportunity that you rejoice Jwhop.

Why am I not enjoying the wine with you?

How do we make the legals with no photo id participate now?
Before May 6?

posted April 28, 2008 05:07 PM            

Equal opportunity. Let them go to the DMV or where ever and get the ID...just like everyone else.

Let me tell you who won't be getting those ID's.

The dead who vote in large numbers in some voting districts..demoscat voting districts.

Illegal aliens in this country illegally won't be getting those ID's and voting for demoscats.

Those who vote multiple times under different names won't be getting multiple ID's to use in demoscat voting districts.

And who is against voter ID. Well, none other than leftist demoscats who have been committing voter fraud for years...and now won't be.

Another foolish post from you Mannu. You're making your way rapidly to the top of that "list".

posted April 28, 2008 08:51 PM              

This Supreme Court Ruling is fair and good for exactly the reasons mentioned above.

However it must be noted for those who are yet unaware: Those who are considered "poor" in this country (public welfare recipients, etc.) all DO ALREADY have picture ID's so they will NOT be excluded. These picture ID's are now a basic requirement in order to receive public assistance in the form of food stamps, medical cards, and monetary funds...

Most illegal Aliens ALSO have picture ID's for this matter, LOL!

ANYONE "physically living" can acquire a legal picture ID for about $12 at the DMV.

But many states have gone a step further with this and now moved to a system that social services automatically takes a fingerprint and picture of each and every adult applicant as well. These are compared to the ID's provided by the applicants to assure each individual is whom they say they are prior to receiving assistance. In California this is a REQUIREMENT.

To collect Social Security (in regards to the "elderly") a photo ID is also a REQUIREMENT.

So in reality this simply weeds out multiple voting and fake or no longer "living" voters.

It is as it is meant to be and is to be commended!

Mannu, you said:
"How do we make the legals with no photo id participate now?
Before May 6?"

In case you've not yet noticed... You cannot make anyone vote. If someone is set in their heart to vote, they will do it.
This means they will get off their booties and acquire a valid photo ID prior.

My thoughts are this: If a person is too lazy to even take the time too acquire a picture ID no doubt they have also been too lazy to educate themselves on the candidates running in the election. I don't want them to vote. We have enough ill educated people already voting, LOL!

You yourself, mentioned people should be required to take some sort of test or quiz verifying a basic issues knowledge prior to voting, did you not?

So yadayada back atcha'..
heee..heee...

posted April 28, 2008 08:59 PM            

Because I didn't vote so far, I will never vote.

Because I was in coma all along , I will never wake up.

If the supreme court of the country can make such irrational decisions, I can imagine the state of the rest of the country.
Something key is missing in the media report.

posted April 28, 2008 09:10 PM            

Those who are eligible to vote and have the desire to vote will get themsleves registered to vote, get the proper ID and vote.

They manage to do other things...like shop, movies and all the rest. So, if following the law, the law which is reasonable is too much for them to bear then perhaps they should forget about voting.

posted April 28, 2008 10:05 PM            

Not only is getting the proper ID quick but it's not as though this is something brand new. They've known for some time the law was changed. The Supreme Court just confirmed the Constitutionality of the law.

posted April 29, 2008 03:02 AM              

They do 3 day passports as common practice here in Cali and MANY State departments of motor vehicals issue basic ID and drivers licenses the same day as you apply! This has been the case since the nineteen-ninties...

Nevada, Oregon, California, etc...
Just depends on which local DMV you choose some have the equipment to do so and others send off the info and hand you a slip of paper.

Mannu you said;
"if the supreme court of the country can make such irrational decisions"

Did you miss something larger in this picture?

This has been Indiana law for a very long time. Passed by the state of Indiana, voted for by the people of Indiana, represented by the people Indiana voted into office.... *confused
(The Indiana law was passed in 2005)

The supreme court simply said that this law is valid and will be upheld.
Meaning: enforced

If people are just now "hearing" about this law due to this news article or supreme court ruling then they are in alot more trouble than they realized, LOL!

Perhaps they should invest some time in actually educating themselves about the electoral process before they register to vote.

More than 20 states require some form of identification at the polls. Courts have upheld voter ID laws in Arizona, Georgia and Michigan, etc. This is nothing new accept that Indiana has now joined the supreme court hearing club, in honor of fair and honest elections.

Note to self: I distinctly recall learning these processes back in Jr. High School and it was a requirement to learn basic laws and how to follow them. We were also given life resources in order to keep up to date on this knowledge. The average bear does have access to a FREE public library too..
How is it that adults in this country missed this?

Edited to add:

The state of Indiana provides IDs free of charge to people without driver's licenses.

It also allows voters who lack photo ID's to cast a provisional ballot and then show up within 10 days at their county courthouse to produce identification or otherwise attest to their identity.

The law does not apply to absentee balloting, where election experts agree the threat of fraud is higher.

So really, what's the issue here?
How does this effect you at all

Are you angry because you wanted to vote twice?

Did you intend on using a deceased persons name in place of, or in addition to your own?

Did you have intentions of using a fake name?

These things are ILLEGAL...

posted April 29, 2008 10:16 PM            

If I can trust you with that, now I am convinced its no issue really.

Thank you Mfis.

posted April 29, 2008 11:31 PM              

For any who are interested in verifying these facts:
Here is the direct link to -> INDIANA’S PHOTO ID LAW
Compliments of Indiana's Government Website

Quote listed under exceptions: "cast an in-person ballot without photo identification as long as they submit an affidavit at the clerk’s office within 10 days." (It's about 3/4 of the way down the page)

So along with those drinks your mixing...
I'll be pleased to accept an apology for having been referred to as a "fool"
(Third post down for reference)

posted April 30, 2008 02:20 PM            

What would I have done if you weren't hanging around here at LL all these years?

You Are, Therefore I Am

Yfis - you proved that you are even a greater fool. sorry no apologies