Left's Hierarchy of 'Rights'

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
well… I suppose Afghanistan was justified, or at least more so than Iraq. So that is one okay war blue team, and one red.

Let’s not pretend Iraq is the only war we’ve been in that was questionable. [/quote]

As far as I can tell NO one was ever saying anything about that. Certainly I’m not though it seems as if strawmen are attempting to be built.

My point was neither party is actually wanting people to be left alone and for limited taxation. Not one iota. Trying to be like “well, Democrats are bad boys as well” completely misses the point of my post.

[quote]H factor wrote:

We will keep getting this shit as long as we keep pretending one is better than the other and talk in terms of “the left” and “the right.” [/quote]

As far as the two major parties (with a handful of individual exceptions in each) in America, I agree.

However, there are differences in the individual philosophies of those that lean left and right in general, and I think it is important to discuss those.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]H factor wrote:

We will keep getting this shit as long as we keep pretending one is better than the other and talk in terms of “the left” and “the right.” [/quote]

As far as the two major parties (with a handful of individual exceptions in each) in America, I agree.

However, there are differences in the individual philosophies of those that lean left and right in general, and I think it is important to discuss those. [/quote]

I wouldn’t disagree, but our current options for elected officials are Democrats and Republicans. This is where our focus (imo) needs to be. It must be hammered home that voting for one of these two parties is a continuation of the failed big government policies of the past 30 years.

BOTH sides work tirelessly to convince everyone that they are not the problem. Neither is actually serious about small government. They are attempting to dupe people by setting up these false match ups and running away from their past with shit like RINO’s and all that take your eye off the ball talk.

We don’t have a conservative party and we don’t have a liberal party. We have two parties who talk about small government while they are out of power and govern via big government when they are in power. We have a nation who is fed up with Democrats and Republicans (according to the putrid polling by both parties) and yet in 2014 and 2016 we will almost predominantly vote for nothing but an R or a D.

I’m not going to be as active in 2014 as I have in the past, but I am still going to try desperately to convince people not to point their ire simply at Democrats or Republicans because they both represent the problem.

Maybe, MAYBE in my lifetime we will decide not to do the same thing yet again. Maybe not. Either way I’ll keep sounding the annoying horn.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
However, there are differences in the individual philosophies of those that lean left and right in general, and I think it is important to discuss those. [/quote]

Yes, but so long as people keep saying Democrats are for rights when most of them don’t seem to understand that pushing rights of some people at the expense of the rights of some other people is a trade-off of rights at best, and a very dangerous path to follow, and people keep saying that Republicans want a small government when they never actually do this whenever they hold power, (and countless other things but those are the most immediate in my mind), then you wouldn’t even get anywhere with these kinds of discussions.

Because they’re still not focusing on the right differences. Most of these are just people sticking for their team without really knowing why they stick for their teams besides the fact that the other side is the enemy and the enemy must be stopped.

Except no one knows exactly why the other side is the enemy besides some a bunch of silly arguments.

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

They don’t want non-citizens to vote or for people to be able to cast more than one ballot. Neither do 75% of Americans according to Rasmussen. And there are already 19 million more drivers licenses than there are registered voters. The argument that voter ID laws hinder US citizens from voting is nonsense. You need ID to buy a beer. No one suggests that alcohol ID requirements prevent Democrats from obtaining alcohol.[/quote]

The counter point is several fold though. 1 counter is that it simply doesn’t happen on a statistically significant scale. There were a few examples of it actually happening, and republicans decided to act on it like some sort of ace card weeks prior to elections. It was a gambit used in an attempt to disenfranchise people, and it was clearly such a gambit because if it were truly such a big problem then they would have continued beating that drum and implemented something.

Don’t you think that if there were mass fraud that it would be in everyones interest to fix it and implement voter I.D. during down time, not right before an election? It’s downright shameful, and undemocratic. It also brings a lot of negative attention towards minority voters. It sparks up false feelings over a non issue.

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

They don’t want non-citizens to vote or for people to be able to cast more than one ballot. Neither do 75% of Americans according to Rasmussen. And there are already 19 million more drivers licenses than there are registered voters. The argument that voter ID laws hinder US citizens from voting is nonsense. You need ID to buy a beer. No one suggests that alcohol ID requirements prevent Democrats from obtaining alcohol.[/quote]

The counter point is several fold though. 1 counter is that it simply doesn’t happen on a statistically significant scale. There were a few examples of it actually happening, and republicans decided to act on it like some sort of ace card weeks prior to elections. It was a gambit used in an attempt to disenfranchise people, and it was clearly such a gambit because if it were truly such a big problem then they would have continued beating that drum and implemented something.

Don’t you think that if there were mass fraud that it would be in everyones interest to fix it and implement voter I.D. during down time, not right before an election? It’s downright shameful, and undemocratic. It also brings a lot of negative attention towards minority voters. It sparks up false feelings over a non issue. [/quote]

m.townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/03/19/fraud-local-nbc-investigation-discovers-dozens-of-illegal-voters-in-florida-n1811547

The fact that you describe it as a ‘non issue’ doesn’t make it so. As I said, Rasmussen polling shows that 75% of Americans support voter ID laws.

Fraud: Local NBC Investigation Discovers Dozens of Illegal Voters in Florida
Mar. 19, 2014

It is an article of faith on the Left that voter fraud does not exist beyond the imaginations of racist right-wingers, hellbent on imposing “unconstitutional” voter ID laws fashioned to “suppress” minority turnout in elections. These objections are race-baiting nonsense; they’re unsupported by both empirical evidence and Supreme Court precedent. The high court upheld Indiana’s law in a 6-3 decision in 2008. The ruling was authored by uber-liberal Justice John Paul Stevens. And after Georgia implemented its own law in 2007 (which survived a legal challenge), minority voter participation increasedin the next two election cycles. ABC News has called voter fraud a “rare but real” phenomenon, evidenced by a number of relatively high-profile convictions in recent years. Congress defunded the left-wing group ACORN (for whom Barack Obama once organized) over widespread voter registration fraud and other outrages. The watchdog group True the Vote – whose founder’s businesses and family have been harassed by the IRS and other federal agencies – documents voter fraud prosecutions in 46 states since 2000. Which brings us to a report that aired earlier this month on NBC’s local affiliate in Ft. Myers, Florida. WBBH-TV reporter Andy Pierrotti managed to track down dozens of local residents who were (a) both non-US citizens and (b) registered to vote in the swing state. Many of them had illegally voted in recent elections.

“We don’t know how widespread this problem is because elections offices don’t keep track of where non-citizens live,” Pierrotti reports, “So we decided to do something that they’d never tried to do before: We found them on our own.” The investigation began by examining state forms on which residents had declined jury duty by checking a box indicating that they weren’t US citizens, and were therefore ineligible to serve. Pierrotti then cross-referenced those results with local voter rolls, identifying at least 94 people who were registered to vote in the state of Florida. Next, he visited some of these people at their homes, where they admitted that they weren’t citizens and professed ignorance as to how they were registered to vote in the first place. But voting records confirmed that they’d exercised their “right” to vote that, as non-citizens, they do not actually possess. The NBC 2 team interviewed a number of these illegal voters on camera, including a Jamaican national who simply attested that he was a US citizen on a voter registration form, and – voila! – he joined the American electorate. It was a felony, but it was that easy. And if a news crew hadn’t connected the dots, no one would have ever known. This passage in the report is crucial:

REPORTER: County supervisors of elections tell me they have no way to verify citizenship. Under the 1992 “Motor Voter” law, they’re not required to ask for proof.
HARRINGTON: We have no policing authority. We don’t have any way of bouncing that information off of any other database.

REPORTER: The only way supervisors of elections can investigate voter fraud is if they get a tip, so that’s what our list became.

HARRINGTON: It could be very serious. It could change the whole complexion of an election.

Here’s the problem: This handful of wrongs are now being looked at and dealt with, but it took an enterprising and creative journalist to uncover them. These are 94 cases he uncovered in his own backyard alone, using just one narrow method. How many people in this country are registered to vote, and actually do vote, who are not US citizens? We don’t know. It is lunacy that election supervisors “have no way to verify citizenship” in many places, even at the point of registration. It’s further lunacy that we would not require every potential voter to produce valid proof of citizenship before casting a ballot, from coast to coast. These steps are so basic, so fundamentally fair, and so rudimentary that it’s difficult to accept that an entire political party is dead-set against these voter integrity efforts for reasons that are not nefarious. Only US citizens are allowed to participate in US elections under the law. Citizens who don’t have proper identification ought to be able to obtain them quickly and easily. That’s the reasonable recourse for the “suppression” non-problem. But every single person who wants to vote should prove that they’re doing so legally. That’s not racism; that’s painfully basic common sense. Oh, and it’s overwhelmingly supported by Americans of all political stripes.

Parting thought: A quick calculation, as a point of reference. This local reporter found 94 illegally registered voters in one small region using one narrow verification method. If you extrapolate his number over Florida’s 67 counties, that’s nearly 6,300 people. In 2000, the United States Presidency was determined by 537 Florida votes.

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

They don’t want non-citizens to vote or for people to be able to cast more than one ballot. Neither do 75% of Americans according to Rasmussen. And there are already 19 million more drivers licenses than there are registered voters. The argument that voter ID laws hinder US citizens from voting is nonsense. You need ID to buy a beer. No one suggests that alcohol ID requirements prevent Democrats from obtaining alcohol.[/quote]

The counter point is several fold though. 1 counter is that it simply doesn’t happen on a statistically significant scale. There were a few examples of it actually happening, and republicans decided to act on it like some sort of ace card weeks prior to elections. It was a gambit used in an attempt to disenfranchise people, and it was clearly such a gambit because if it were truly such a big problem then they would have continued beating that drum and implemented something.

Don’t you think that if there were mass fraud that it would be in everyones interest to fix it and implement voter I.D. during down time, not right before an election? It’s downright shameful, and undemocratic. It also brings a lot of negative attention towards minority voters. It sparks up false feelings over a non issue. [/quote]

m.townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/03/19/fraud-local-nbc-investigation-discovers-dozens-of-illegal-voters-in-florida-n1811547

The fact that you describe it as a ‘non issue’ doesn’t make it so. As I said, Rasmussen polling shows that 75% of Americans support voter ID laws.
[/quote]

Americans want it yes. But you see the lack of effort to get it done. It’s just going to be another thing your party beats it’s drum about come next election, and they will do jack shit about it now… Now is the time to fix it if it is indeed the problem they have made it to be. 75% of people want cake and ice cream, more want to end war and world hunger… Point is, whose doing anything about it since it’s such a big deal?

The point is your party would disenfranchise people like the elderly and minorities for the sake of a few dozen votes, which would have zero impact in the big picture of an election. There are probably more internal mistakes that miscount or discount votes than actual fraud that takes place. Yet your party would wait until the last minute of an election to make it an issue for the sake of preventing people from voting.

End of the day Republicans don’t want to spend the sort of money to implement voter I.D. They just want to rile people up about it come election day. Think they will do it again next election? I do.

[quote]Severiano wrote:

Americans want it yes. But you see the lack of effort to get it done. It’s just going to be another thing your party beats it’s drum about come next election, and they will do jack shit about it now…

[/quote]

Just because you don’t hear about it now doesn’t mean no one is doing anything.

As I’m sure you’re aware Republicans are pushing for voter ID laws whilst Democrats are trying to stop them.

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

Americans want it yes. But you see the lack of effort to get it done. It’s just going to be another thing your party beats it’s drum about come next election, and they will do jack shit about it now…

[/quote]

Just because you don’t hear about it now doesn’t mean no one is doing anything.

As I’m sure you’re aware Republicans are pushing for voter ID laws whilst Democrats are trying to stop them.
[/quote]

Because nobody is doing anything about it. Nobody wants to spend the kind of money to implement such a thing unless it puts money into the pockets of one of their friends.

If they want more accurate voting they could do things like improve the process to limit counting mistakes which would have greater impact than the tens of millions it would cost to prevent a few dozen fraudulent votes.

The bullshit smells strongly. How much money would it cost to get every voter in the country a new I.D.? How much money would it cost to implement such a system?

It would probably be more efficient and cost effective to improve things like ballot design so they are less confusing/ misleading for voters as well as more accurate counting methods. Hell, I’d be for that along with a finger print I.D. that matches a federal database… But whose doing it now rather than right before an election? Will it be affordable, or will this process further disenfranchise people? It’s a simple strategy which attempts to prevent minority Dems from voting.

Like I said everyone wants world peace, cake and ice cream.

If you don’t see this for what it is, you’re being willfully ignorant.

[quote]Severiano wrote:

The point is your party would disenfranchise people like the elderly and minorities for the sake of a few dozen votes, which would have zero impact in the big picture of an election.

[/quote]

You’re grasping at straws and ignoring the evidence I’ve posted. And disenfranchising the elderly would harm Republican results. Which is besides the point as voter ID laws don’t disenfranchise anyone.

What are you basing that on?

Nonsense.

[quote]

End of the day Republicans don’t want to spend the sort of money to implement voter I.D. They just want to rile people up about it come election day. Think they will do it again next election? I do. [/quote]

Read the article I posted.

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

The point is your party would disenfranchise people like the elderly and minorities for the sake of a few dozen votes, which would have zero impact in the big picture of an election.

[/quote]

You’re grasping at straws and ignoring the evidence I’ve posted. And disenfranchising the elderly would harm Republican results. Which is besides the point as voter ID laws don’t disenfranchise anyone.

What are you basing that on?

Nonsense.

[quote]

End of the day Republicans don’t want to spend the sort of money to implement voter I.D. They just want to rile people up about it come election day. Think they will do it again next election? I do. [/quote]

Read the article I posted.[/quote]

Funny how it’s about the principal rather than what really happens with voter fraud. There are more absentee ballot fraud than in person fraud AND IT STILL HARDLY HAPPENS. But fixing the in person fraud would disenfranchise more democratic voters which is why Repubs target that. There are repubs on video explaining this is a strategy to get people elected.

As for the voting and elections in Florida, it’s not the first time odd things have happened in Fl when it comes to voting.

It’s pretty plain to see it’s a strategy of divide and conquer, the strategy of getting people to not vote by any means.

1 in 15,000,000 votes are fraudulent. So, lets spend however many tens of millions of dollars to fix this huge problem which is leading to the wrong people getting elected… Just don’t bitch when there’s a tax hike because you want to spend money so efficiently.

[quote]Severiano wrote:

Funny how it’s about the principal rather than what really happens with voter fraud.
[/quote]

And why, exactly, is it a bad thing all of a sudden to reason from principle than pragmatism? I would call it a strength rather than a weakness. That’s a bullshit line if I’ve ever heard one. I would say the emphasis on pragmatic expediency is one of the thing ruining our political landscape.

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

Funny how it’s about the principal rather than what really happens with voter fraud.
[/quote]

And why, exactly, is it a bad thing all of a sudden to reason from principle than pragmatism? I would call it a strength rather than a weakness. That’s a bullshit line if I’ve ever heard one. I would say the emphasis on pragmatic expediency is one of the thing ruining our political landscape.[/quote]

You didn’t read me right. If it really were about principal then Repubs would have gone after absentee ballots with just as much, if not more fervor. But they didn’t.

Also, whats with all the republican effort to limit things like the days, times, and locations? The end in mind is to prevent dems from voting.

It’s so clearly messed up and foul I’m surprised any of you would try to make an excuse for it. It’s pretty much a shameful thing. There really isn’t any reason or excuse for it in our country. If people really are patriots to the country and the spirit they wouldn’t stand for it.

But really there IS no pragmatism. It’s just gambits and games, trying to win by any means possible, even by undermining the very democratic principals they are supposed to protect.

[quote]Severiano wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Severiano wrote:

Americans want it yes. But you see the lack of effort to get it done. It’s just going to be another thing your party beats it’s drum about come next election, and they will do jack shit about it now…

[/quote]

Just because you don’t hear about it now doesn’t mean no one is doing anything.

As I’m sure you’re aware Republicans are pushing for voter ID laws whilst Democrats are trying to stop them.
[/quote]

Because nobody is doing anything about it. Nobody wants to spend the kind of money to implement such a thing unless it puts money into the pockets of one of their friends.

If they want more accurate voting they could do things like improve the process to limit counting mistakes which would have greater impact than the tens of millions it would cost to prevent a few dozen fraudulent votes.

The bullshit smells strongly. How much money would it cost to get every voter in the country a new I.D.? How much money would it cost to implement such a system?

It would probably be more efficient and cost effective to improve things like ballot design so they are less confusing/ misleading for voters as well as more accurate counting methods. Hell, I’d be for that along with a finger print I.D. that matches a federal database… But whose doing it now rather than right before an election? Will it be affordable, or will this process further disenfranchise people? It’s a simple strategy which attempts to prevent minority Dems from voting.

Like I said everyone wants world peace, cake and ice cream.

If you don’t see this for what it is, you’re being willfully ignorant. [/quote]
Bringing up money seems a little weak in the face of what he’s already said here

I haven’t followed the voter ID thing much. What you say about some Republicans using hype around it to win an election makes sense - that wouldn’t surprise me.

Question: is it true that Democrats oppose this, even during non election down times? This would not surprise me, insofar as they think they will get more votes from fraud than there opposition would

[quote]squating_bear wrote:

Question: is it true that Democrats oppose this, even during non election down times? This would not surprise me, insofar as they think they will get more votes from fraud than there opposition would[/quote]

Honest question:

Do you see anything in the world with as much money involved as an election in the US that isn’t rife with backroom deals, fraud, and otherwise misappropriation of that money?

How on Earth anyone who can think actually believes there isn’t rampant fraud with every election, given how much people spend to win these government jobs, is beyond me.

[quote]squating_bear wrote:
Question: is it true that Democrats oppose this, even during non election down times? This would not surprise me, insofar as they think they will get more votes from fraud than there opposition would[/quote]

The argument the Democrats put out is that there are many poor people who don’t have the time/means of getting their hands on a driver’s license/other forms of good I.D.

Thus, voter I.D. laws effectively disenfranchise the poor.

It’s a fair argument. The only problem is that it’s not really supported by any independent studies. No real evidence is given to support the claim besides anecdotal evidence afaik.

The claims that the Republicans are using it to attempt to get some Democratic votes off the table may be true too, look at the video Severiano posted. While it’s obviously a cut and so we don’t have context, I do wonder why he would specifically point that out unless they intended to use voter I.D. in some way to help Romney’s political prospects.

But I think most of them are just being honest about the whole thing.

The lack of evidence is the issue. No one, to my knowledge, has done anything to prove either side’s claims. So everyone’s just pissing in the dark, really.

[quote]magick wrote:

The lack of evidence is the issue. No one, to my knowledge, has done anything to prove either side’s claims. So everyone’s just pissing in the dark, really.[/quote]

If me and 4 other people go to 5 poles and vote 5 times each, and not any single time do we have to prove who we are, how would anyone ever know?

How can anyone prove fraud when we have no way of measuring?

The last 3 times I’ve gone to vote the old woman or old man has marked off the JOHN DOE that lives two streets over from me because we have the same first name and same letter in last. I’ve had to correct them all three times.

Well, what ID must the poor provide for welfare/entitlement benefits?

Bill Clinton urges adding photos to Social Security cards for voter identification