Obama the Liar at it again...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

If you don't need a drivers license what's the motivation to get another ID? If you're poor you probably don't need one. Operate on cash, don't frequent liquor stores that check.

Doesn't mean you still don't vote.

A lot of minorities some do feel very disenfranchised…some don't.

Still, why do we need more legislation to fix a problem there's not evidence is significant? You still haven't addressed that.

-spence

"If you don't need a drivers license what's the motivation to get another ID?"

We have covered this, and you know that. There are lots of needs for a photo id besides driving. For God's sake, you yourself said that even though your mom didn't drive, eventually she needed a photo id. And what did she do? She went and got one. No big deal, right?

You refuse to answer my question. Why does the requirement of a photo id suppress more black votes than white votes? Because that is necessarily what liberals believe here, right?

There are only 2 possible answers. Either (1) the government makes it easier for whites to get the ids than it is for blacks (and no one is saying that), or (2) you think blacks are more likely to be too lazy to get the id, than whites. That is necessarily the foundation of the liberal notion that conservatives are trying to suppress minority votes here, and that's racist.

"A lot of minorities some do feel very disenfranchised" If that's true, and I concede it is, then it stands to reason that those disenfranchised citizens, who can't be bothered to get an id, will not likely vote either way. So there's no suppression.

Here's another thing. Many states have recently passed the voter id requirements. If the requirement is a blatant attempt to suppress the minority vote, then there must be ample data in those states to support that. Where is the data to show that after those states started requiring ids, that minority voting decreased by a larger amount than white voting?

I have never, not once, seen someone opposed to the id requirement, provide such data. I presume that no such data exists. Therefore, the liberal notion that conservatives are out to bring back Jim Crow laws, is BS designed to demonize the political opposition. Why? Because those Dems in the know, realize that they are in serious trouble in 2014. They are truly desperate. So instead of trying to honestly explain to us why their ideas are actually better, they play the race card. One day, that may blow up in their faces.

You, specifically, are utterly embarrassing yourself on this thread. You claim your Mom got an id for her own needs, and then you ask why anyone who doesn't drive would ever need an id? Anything, ANYTHING (even contradicting what you said earlier) to avoid having to admit that I'm right, and that your side is engaging in the ugliest kind of political smear tactics.

Bill Clinton is in favor of photo ids to vote. You're telling me that he wants to suppress the minority vote?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Bill Clinton is in favor of photo ids to vote. You're telling me that he wants to suppress the minority vote?

You should read what Clinton really said rather than what someone wants you to think he said.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

You should read what Clinton really said rather than what someone wants you to think he said.

-spence

From the Washington Times...

Clinton said, putting photos on Social Security cards would represent 'a way forward that eliminates error,' without having to 'paralyze and divide a country with significant challenges.'”

Now, since you keep refusing to answer my question, I'll make it a nice fill-in-the-blank.

"Conservatives want to require a photo id to vote. This would apply equally to all, regardless of color. Those who don't drive can get another government-issued id. Blacks and whites will have equal access to these id's. Yet, I, Spence, claim this will disproportionately effect blacks because __________________"

Stop saying that it's a racist plot just because Al Sharpton and Ed Schultz say so. Tell me in your own words, please, where the racism comes into play.

You really, really backed yourself into a corner here.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

From the Washington Times...

Clinton said, putting photos on Social Security cards would represent 'a way forward that eliminates error,' without having to 'paralyze and divide a country with significant challenges.'”

Now, since you keep refusing to answer my question, I'll make it a nice fill-in-the-blank.

"Conservatives want to require a photo id to vote. This would apply equally to all, regardless of color. Those who don't drive can get another government-issued id. Blacks and whites will have equal access to these id's. Yet, I, Spence, claim this will disproportionately effect blacks because __________________"

Stop saying that it's a racist plot just because Al Sharpton and Ed Schultz say so. Tell me in your own words, please, where the racism comes into play.

You really, really backed yourself into a corner here.

Actually no, you validated my assumption that you're opinion is based off of what someone else wants you to believe. Let's go to the tape...

“Any time you erect a barrier to political participation that disproportionately affects people based on their race or their physical capacity or their income — or whether they've got a car to drive far enough and can afford the gasoline to get to a place where they can get an approved photo ID — any time you do any of that ... it undermines the sprit of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act,”

Bill Clinton - 9/14

Jim, Clinton was speaking out against voter ID laws, but suggested that a photographic SS card could be a way to ease potential voter suppression caused by state laws.

I'm sorry to have to break this to you.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

...



Jim, Clinton was speaking out against voter ID laws, but suggested that a photographic SS card could be a way to ease potential voter suppression caused by state laws.

I'm sorry to have to break this to you.

-spence

You're not "breaking" anything to me. You are confirming what I said - that Clinton supports the notion of requiring a photo id (SS card) to vote. Why is getting a SS card with photo less likely to result in voter suppression, then a state id?

Finally Spence, you are repeatedly and cowardly dodging the only question that matters. Why does the requirement suppress more black votes than white votes.

I presume that you refuse to answer, because despite all your searching on The Huffington Post and The Daily Worker, you can't find anything that any of your fellow World Traveler posted that is on point. So you claim it's a racist policy, but you will offer absolutely zero evidence to support that. That's one hell of a solid position you have, when you have to duck a question as simple as "why do you think that"? Clearly you have given this a lot of thought, and considered both sides of the issue...

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You're not "breaking" anything to me. You are confirming what I said - that Clinton supports the notion of requiring a photo id (SS card) to vote. Why is getting a SS card with photo less likely to result in voter suppression, then a state id?

Ummmm, that's not what he was saying Jim...

Finally Spence, you are repeatedly and cowardly dodging the only question that matters. Why does the requirement suppress more black votes than white votes.

We've covered this many times...it impacts the poor and the poor are disproportionately minority. Please read the earlier posts...

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Ummmm, that's not what he was saying Jim...


We've covered this many times...it impacts the poor and the poor are disproportionately minority. Please read the earlier posts...

-spence

The poor, as non-drivers, would disproportionately need a government issued id. But why can't they just go get the id, like your Mom did? You are all over the place here...

I agree that more poor people would now need to get an id to vote, than rich people (as the rich would have driver's licenses). What you have not addressed, is why large numbers of the poor will refuse to get the photo id.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Ummmm, that's not what he was saying Jim...



-spence

Here is what he said...

"Clinton said, putting photos on Social Security cards would represent 'a way forward that eliminates error,' without having to 'paralyze and divide a country with significant challenges.'”

He explicitly said that a photo id (in the form of an SS card with photo) might be a good way to go, and that it wouldn't be divisive.

I honestly can't follow how you are suggesting that Clinton is not supporting the idea of a photo id to vote. The difference is, his photo id is a SS card.