Eric Holder: Attorney General of the United States PWNED =)

reply to post by Eurisko2012


It's not only not perfect it's actually detrimental to one group that tend to vote one way and as such is purely a political tool, because there's no evidence at all of meaningful voter fraud occurring where people impersonate other voters.

So you're trying to solve a non-problem by creating a very real problem.

And the solution won't actually stop the fraud in question, as fake IDs are cheap and plentiful in the US.

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

It's not only not perfect it's actually detrimental to one group that tend to vote one way and as such is purely a political tool, because there's no evidence at all of meaningful voter fraud occurring where people impersonate other voters.

So you're trying to solve a non-problem by creating a very real problem.

And the solution won't actually stop the fraud in question, as fake IDs are cheap and plentiful in the US.

Acorn = Voter Fraud

Mandate Photo IDs if you want to vote.

They already fixed New Hampshire.

Thank you James O'Keefe.

reply to post by Eurisko2012


The voter fraud you're talking about wouldn't have been stopped by any voter ID law. So, again, it's a solution for a problem that doesn't exist, and you obviously have a political agenda.

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious

I'm talking about the New Hampshire video tapes.

Dead people were voting there.

How can a dead person hold up a Photo ID?

Anyway, they fixed it in New Hampshire. When they passed the - new - bill

they credited James O'Keefe!

reply to post by Eurisko2012


Dishonest much?
Dead people weren't voting. What happened was O'Keffe managed to get a voting card in the name of a dead person. But that's not proof of wide spread fraud. To use the gun nut arguement, this law won't prevent criminals from committing voter fraud. But it doesn't REALLY matter as the only voter fraud O'Keffe exposed was his own.

And you know very well that this sort of law would unfairly affect the very poor. People that you and O'Keffe would love to disenfranchse.

reply to post by DrMattMaddix


You do know that Holder/Obama/Clinton and Romney are all nwo bilderberg plants?

Just for a moment... forget this video... who cares at this point...

In the US, legally and per the US consitution, an individual is required to furnish a picture ID to purchase a 6 pack of beer and in many states a pack of cigarettes. One must present two or more IDs to get a drivers license. One must produce identification to buy car insurance and get a library card.

The law already requires an individual to register to vote, and (in the majority of cases contrary to arguments presented, once at the poll one must furnish an ID to prove your identify. Individuals who are not attempting to fraudulently misrepresent who they are most commonly present their drivers license.

Those who protest having to present an ID to vote can provide no legal basis for their "opinion".

The ruse of illegal IDs, which once was common amongest the millions of illegal aliens residing in this country is being countered by laws requiring employers to verify numbers and forms of identification. Being in the business, I was there as an executive and an eye witness as roughly half of the construction work force in Arizona fled the state, tools left suspended in the air, when employers began not only verifying new employees identificaiton, but also existing employees. Given time, the greater majority of these criminals using illegal IDs will be forced by laws requiring employers to verify identificaiton because they no longer will find employment.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by RealSpoke

 

Holder is currently suing a State for passing a voter ID law. That's why it's relevant. He's actively trying to negate all the States who have those laws.

It has not much to do with common sense, it's an attempt to do an end run around a recent SCOTUS decision that made such laws Constitutional and Legal. Again it's this Administration attempting to negate another branch of government. They don't like the Constitution and they are attempting to knock holes in it to give the Executive Branch more power and take power from the other co-equal Branches.

Obama actually said right in his last State of the Union that he was going to ask Congress to expand his powers. Scary dudes these guys. To get the system they want, they must get rid of the Constitution first. The President was never meant to have the power they have now. It eliminates the checks and balances that keep us from ending up with a de facto Dictator in the White House.

I keep telling you guys that Obama and his associates are hardcore marxist leninists.

We have to use an ID whenever we

use a credit card
buy tobacco, alcohol, firearms
get a pre-paid credit card (thanks patriot act)

it seems common place to show during elections....

If you are too inept to get an ID you shouldn't be here, thats just my two cents

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst


Yah and I bet you think ACORN didn't manufacture votes for Obama. Why do you think the Democrats don't want voter ID? Let me guess, you have no clue because you don't understand why illegals shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by VitriolAndAngst

 

Yah and I bet you think ACORN didn't manufacture votes for Obama. Why do you think the Democrats don't want voter ID? Let me guess, you have no clue because you don't understand why illegals shouldn't be allowed to vote.

That's a double hit for James O'Keefe!

He busted Acorn in multiple cities AND he showed us dead people voting in

New Hampshire!

reply to post by John_Rodger_Cornman


I agree with you on the Marxist thing. Some people still want to ignore it or dismiss it. Also, Obama is NWO for sure. He said he thinks people should have a "stake in the kind of World Order" he thinks everyone wants. It's out there in his own words for anyone who wants to hear.

I have a question for the union members on the board, or those knowledgable of union matters.

I live/work in an open shop state. Meaning a union eligible employee is not compelled to join the union which represents the work force. They are, however covered by the same union agreement as the dues paying union members. The local where I work held its general election for its officers this week, and as I drove past the union hall, and saw all of the folks in line to vote, I wondered if the election was open to all union eligible employees or if it was just for the dues paying members. So, the question is......(This question is not off topic. There is a point)

Does one have to provide proof of dues paying membership to a union local to vote for that local's officers when its elections are held?

reply to post by OldCurmudgeon


The point of this whole video was people trying to engage in voter fraud, deliberately. Not foreign nationals using the fake IDs they use for work to register to vote. Thus the whole, "dead people voting" malarkey.

I have no problem, if the cost of IDs is reduced to zero, having to provide state IDs to vote. None at all.

But, if you think about it for just two seconds, the only legal American voters a ID law would disenfranchise are really poor people. This would essentially remove the poorest of the poor from he voter rolls. That would be the outcome.

I also find is very ... cynical... of all the right wingers yammering on about voter ID laws when none of them raise any alarm over all the right wing robocalls and other dirty tricks that are also being used to rig elections. There's right-wing political operatives sitting in jail for these sorts of dirty tricks and none of you care... however, propose a law which would disenfranchise the poor and everyone jobs on board... it's very cynical... and pretty disgusting.

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious



I just want a fair election. I know it is too much to ask, but I want the person who gets the most votes to win; whether he/she is the one for who I voted or not. That's what all of us SHOULD want. there are dirty tricks on both sides. I personally am fed the f*&#K up with both parties, truth be known. No robocall from any candidate is going to sway my mind or vote. It turns me off to the whole process. I'm not sure what I am going to do this fall. I do not like Romney. I see him as Obama light, and I have no inclination to support the socialist incumbent. Good thing I have a few months to decide whether I will seven cast a ballot this year.

I'm disgusted with the whole process. Neither party gives a s!%t about me or you anyway.

reply to post by Hugues de Payens


It wasn't those sorts of robocalls...

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire (CNN) -- Allen Raymond is living proof that political dirty tricksters do exist.

The former Republican political operative went to federal prison after he pleaded guilty to charges of phone harassment. He jammed the phone lines of New Hampshire's Democratic Party on Election Day six years ago. "The concept was to disrupt lines of communication. That's a fancy way of saying, 'make it so the phones didn't work,' " Raymond said recently. "No calls going out. No calls going in." We're not going to give away exactly how Raymond did it. According to federal prosecutors, two top Republican Party officials tapped Raymond's Virginia-based telemarketing firm for the operation. Raymond then contracted out the job to a private phone bank in Idaho.

edition.cnn.com...

And on and on

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious


You're right....on and on and on....both sides.

Like I said. I am totally disgusted with both the left and right. It does not matter anyhow.

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. We have long past the time when politicians have cared about anything but lining their own pockets.

reply to post by Hugues de Payens


But see, this is the thing, I don't want to create arbitrary laws, attacking nonsense problems, that disenfranchise people based on their income...

A much bigger problem is party organised ... mischief... not poor people without IDs... make IDs free and we're on the same team about a new law... otherwise it discriminates based on income... which is undemocratic...

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious


Well Obvious... then I must say respectfully that it becomes fairly obvious you don't read many of my posts here on ATS. I have been 'crystal' clear since joining this site that in IMO, there are likely only a handful of 1/2 way honest politicians in Washington currently and that 'does not' include President Obama and AG Eric Holder.
Respectfully, I don't buy the typical Obama disinformation machine mumbo jumbo of 'its going to only hurt the poor people' if IDs are required to vote. It is nothing but unadulterated crap, and as a fact I challenge you to produce one historic fact (short of previous to blacks receiving the right to vote).
IF this were in fact true, it would have long ago been brought before the highest court who would have put both thumbs down as it is against the constitution and the law.
I have NEVER seen any support of any sort and it is as wrong as those who use the racism card constantly. Unproven, 100% opinionated and complete 100% bushwah.
I live in one of the poorest areas in the valley, and on a regular basis I see these folks who are on welfare, drawing unemployment, working at disgusting low waged jobs, riding bicycles, driving beat up cars, but always stopping in the Circle Ks and 7 Elevens and Wal Marts buying cigarettes and other tobacco products, alcohol and various other non-life sustaining items.
The poor will not suffer, this is as much disinforamtion as the GOP raving about voter fraud.

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious


In my humble opinion the "disenfranchisement" argument is utter BS. They may FEEL disenfranchised, but are they really? I see it as just another excuse used by the liberals to justify a person's lack of personal responsibility. If IDs are required to vote, those who REALLY want to exercise that right as a US citizen would find a way to provide proof of their citizenship to an official on election day instead of sitting back on their asses complaining about being "disenfranchised". I fully respect that some situations are unique and there are legitimate reasons why a person cannot get legal ID to provide proof of citizenship, but for the vast majority, I see it as a crock of s$!t.

The Democrats know for a fact they can buy votes; just like they have for the last 30-40 years, from those looking for an excuse to "blame the man" for their circumstances by providing those excuses. They are experts at it. How did the Democrats, one of the most racist organizations to ever exist in the US, become the protector of minorities and those who claim disenfranchisement of some sort or other?

But like I said in an earlier post, both parties make me nauseous. Neither gives two figs for you, me, or the other guy. They care not for our nation. Just their pockets.