25 replies to this topic

[freedom78]

Wow, I am miles apart from Freedom on this issue.  I would fully support stricter criteria on who gets to vote.  Namely if you've been unemployed for an extended period, require social assistance or lack a high school diploma, I don't think you should be out voting.  I believe that being vested in the outcome besides personal benefits at others expense should count for something.  Some 18 year old drop out sleeping in until noon shouldn't have the same voice as a 45 year old who works 40+ hours a week, has a mortgage and bills to pay.  

 

The notion of allowing people who aren't a citizen to vote is ludicrous to me.  Someone who isn't an American and can bounce back to their native country doesn't have the same interests as someone who has made this country their home.

 

You wave the libertarian flag a lot and not too long ago accused me of being "not too keen on individual freedom", and yet you want to deny the single most fundamental civil right based on socio-economic class?  We've already denied people their civil rights for racial and sexual reasons, not to mention sexuality (though it's not about voting)...why not class, as well?

 

You don't think someone who got laid off is "vested in the outcome"?  That person probably lost his/her job so they could continue overpaying those at the top and so that Wall Street could boost their stock price.  If anything, the people the system fails are those whose vote should count.  And would your system of "unemployment" also include stay-at-home parents?  I suppose someone who sacrifices career to raise children has no real "interest" in the outcomes of our society, right?  What about the unemployed wealthy?  Should Mitt Romney be allowed to vote?  By my count, he's been unemployed for 8 years!

 

"Bouncing back" is also incredibly relative.  Going from El Paso to Juarez (thank you "The Bridge") is a bit different than going from NYC to China or from Chicago to India.  I can't move across town without months of planning and thousands of dollars of costs, so I can't imagine moving from country to country.  How would those with refugee status fit into this?  They can bounce back to be murdered...do they too lack a vested interest?  What about dual citizens?  I have a colleague who is dual UK/American.  He's British, but has an American wife and two children.  He can "bounce back" at any time...should he be denied his voting rights because he can immediately move to another country?

 

See, the problem with drawing these lines around who gets to vote and who doesn't is that those who draw the lines will always draw them in their favor, discriminating against groups they disapprove of or who will vote the other way.  We have a long history of drawing these lines and we should be ashamed of every damned time we did so.  That's why we shouldn't draw them again, even if it's under the guise of making the system better or voters more informed.  I can easily make an argument that the average voter is largely uninformed and that we should require a basic civics "test" to be able to vote.  But we've done that before; it was called a "literacy test" under ol' Jim Crow and it wasn't used to make voters more informed but to deny people the right to vote.  So, as much as I'd love to have a more informed electorate, I know that restricting voting is the last thing I'd do to get it.     

 

I also think it's wrong to provide Driver's Licenses to illegals.  Besides maybe Canada, no other nation in the world has the ludicrous immigration policy we have in the US.  I have a co-worker who was born in China and legally immigrated to the US for her Masters and now works for the same Fortune 500 as me.  She's unable to accept any other jobs in the company because she'd have to reset her green card application to the new position and would reset her position in line.  Meanwhile some uneducated person hops the border and could be fast tracked to a legal status.  That's fundamentally wrong and rewards people for bad behavior. 

 

Talk about a tangent...when I initially responded to Art's post, I noted that I'd support it for those legally allowed to do so.  That means they're not illegal immigrants (I noted those with permanent resident status), but legal resident aliens.  This isn't at all about illegal versus legal immigrants; it's about whether non-citizens WHO ARE HERE LEGALLY should be permitted to vote or at least have a way to earn the right other than by becoming citizens which, as Zimbo noted, can take decades.  You're worried about rewarding people for bad behavior, but this is about rewarding them for good behavior.  A legal non-citizen resident, assuming they haven't broken other laws, has been a responsible part of our society, citizen or not, and should be rewarded for putting into our society by having some say in how it is governed.

 

 

What next, are we going to offer amnesty to Senior Executives who embezzled millions as long as they declare their past transgressions.

 

No, but we'll give them golden parachutes to compensate them for being fired for gross incompetence and we'll send the worst of the worst to white collar resort prison, rather than blue collar pound-me-in-the-ass prison. 
 

I can't write a check without providing an ID.  2 years ago I went back to Ohio to renew my driver's license as it had expired while I was living in Texas and they wouldn't renew it without my SS card, birth certificate and proof from my bank that I had a local account.  Yet some illegal in New Mexico is able to provide a copy of their Comcast bill and have full faith and credit in all 50 states.  My girlfriend is a teacher in Philly and was telling me yesterday how half of her time is dedicated to one student whose parents only speak Spanish and his only exposure to English is at school.  Philly has slashed their budget and nearly all extracurriculars, so having special classes for the children of illegals isn't remotely an option.  So American students are having the quality of their education harmed because Democrats want to attract latino voters. 

 

Are you the asshole in line in front of me writing checks?  Check writers should not be allowed to vote.

 

School budget slashing isn't about Spanish speakers; it's about a shitty economy and reduced tax revenues the last decade.  I don't know about Pennsylvania's situations specifically, but I know that here in Indiana our repeated Republican governors have used ideology and revenue as the basis to slash those same budgets, claiming "fiscal responsibility" while murdering the quality of education and hurting a group they don't like --- teachers.

 

If voting is our most sacred right, something I could certainly see the reasoning in, why the hell would we allow people who aren't Americans and who disregard our laws have a say in who makes, enforces and interprets our laws? 

 

Again, this isn't about illegals who disregard our laws but about legal residents, who have followed our laws.  I'm curious to know if you feel differently about legal versus illegal immigrants?  To stereotype, every Quizno's (sandwich place...not sure if it's national) I've been to in the last decade has been owned and run by Indians.  They're certainly here legally, they're business owners, they're taxpayers, and they certainly do not fall into your list of deadbeats who shouldn't vote because they don't have an "interest" in the outcomes of our society.  Like millions of immigrants, I can imagine they came here for an opportunity.  But it may still take them decades to earn citizenship, during which time they'll be following laws to which they could not contribute.  No taxation without representation, right? 

[PERM BANNED]

Legal or illegal, asking someone to provide proof of citizenship at the time of registration isn't a burden. The alleged "disenfranchised" voters are almost exclusively in major urban areas. Early voting exists in almost every state. If you can't get a state ID it's because you don't want to, not because the system is stacked against you.

I happen to take pride in being an American citizen. I don't support dual citizenship. Most people who immigrate are forced to renounce their citizenship before they can become a U.S. citizen. That people skirt this or find loopholes doesn't change that. I can't be a resident and vote in two states, why do we allow people to have dual citizenship.

That's great that there are millions of hard working people waiting to become a US citizen. Paying taxes and waiting in line is part of the process. That we allow our government employees to unionize and work 3 hours a day in between coffee breaks is a separate issue. Remove public unions and hold public employees accountable for their performance and you'll see the wait times plummet.

I know we're miles apart on this issue. But I'm tired of seeing lazy, entitled failures claim they're not represented. Almost 50% of people in America pay no federal taxes and the amount and percentage on social assistance continues to increase. There's a reason why these people almost universally vote democratic - they're promised something at someone else's expense.

JFK's ideas of actually caring about your country and working for it rather than yourself is completely lost. The left preaches community, but all their social policies reward the stupid and lazy and punish the successful. That it's even considered in some circles that getting an education or voting are a public service is outrageous to me. When Romney's sons claimed they were serving their country by working on his campaign, I wanted to barf.

If I were emperor for the day, every person would have to earn citizenship. Just because some woman gave birth to you on American soil doesn't make you an American citizen. You want to earn citizen status, serve 2 years in some govt organization ranging from the peace corp to the post office to the military. Then you can have a right to vote.

You talk about fixing voting, yet if we allowed all these illegals and poor immigrants to vote, who are they going to vote for? The party that says we'll hand everything to you and don't worry about the budget or the one that says we're only going to take you if you can contribute to our economy. I can't do anything about the poor white trash in the WV mountains. But as Bill Maher pointed out a couple weeks ago, we can stop the flood of people infiltrating western democracy and using our own rules against us.

People that come here to work should be grateful that they're not living in Juarez, Shanghai or New Delhi. They can wait a few years and pay their dues before we roll out the carpet for them. They're not citizens, ergo they don't have a voice in our nation anymore than I have in theirs.

And no, I only use credit cards. But this bullshit notion that having ID is a burden needs to end.

[freedom78]

Legal or illegal, asking someone to provide proof of citizenship at the time of registration isn't a burden. The alleged "disenfranchised" voters are almost exclusively in major urban areas. Early voting exists in almost every state. If you can't get a state ID it's because you don't want to, not because the system is stacked against you.

I happen to take pride in being an American citizen. I don't support dual citizenship. Most people who immigrate are forced to renounce their citizenship before they can become a U.S. citizen. That people skirt this or find loopholes doesn't change that. I can't be a resident and vote in two states, why do we allow people to have dual citizenship.

That's great that there are millions of hard working people waiting to become a US citizen. Paying taxes and waiting in line is part of the process. That we allow our government employees to unionize and work 3 hours a day in between coffee breaks is a separate issue. Remove public unions and hold public employees accountable for their performance and you'll see the wait times plummet.

I know we're miles apart on this issue. But I'm tired of seeing lazy, entitled failures claim they're not represented. Almost 50% of people in America pay no federal taxes and the amount and percentage on social assistance continues to increase. There's a reason why these people almost universally vote democratic - they're promised something at someone else's expense.

JFK's ideas of actually caring about your country and working for it rather than yourself is completely lost. The left preaches community, but all their social policies reward the stupid and lazy and punish the successful. That it's even considered in some circles that getting an education or voting are a public service is outrageous to me. When Romney's sons claimed they were serving their country by working on his campaign, I wanted to barf.

If I were emperor for the day, every person would have to warn citizenship. Just because some woman gave birth to you on American soil doesn't make you an American citizen. You want to earn citizen status, serve 2 years in some govt organization ranging from the peace corp to the post office to the military. Then you can have a right to vote.

You talk about fixing voting, yet if we allowed all these illegals and poor immigrants to vote, who are they going to vote for? The party that says we'll hand everything to you and don't worry about the budget or the one that says we're only going to take you if you can contribute to our economy. I can't do anything about the poor white trash in the WV mountains. But as Bill Maher pointed out a couple weeks ago, we can stop the flood of people infiltrating western democracy and using our own rules against us.

People that come here to work should be grateful that they're not living in Juarez, Shanghai or New Delhi. They can wait a few years and pay their dues before we roll out the carpet for them. They're not citizens, ergo they don't gsve a voice in our nation anymore than I have in theirs.

And no, I only use credit cards. But this bullshit notion that having ID is a burden needs to end.

 

No one said that proving citizenship when registering was a burden.  Only that voter ID laws, which are about showing ID at the polls, rather than during registration, don't address the citizenship issue because non-citizens can legally obtain ID.  If the people who approve the registration in the first place didn't prove they're non-citizens, then the poll worker will have to rely on the fact that they are registered and have ID.  Thus, voter ID laws do almost nothing to prevent non-citizens from voting. 

 

But everyone knows that voter ID laws are there entirely for the purpose of disenfranchising blacks, the poor, the elderly, etc.  Republicans know it, and that's why they push for it.  Democrats know it, so they're against it.  I'm very open to the possibility that if such a law worked to the Democrats benefit then they might do the same.  I don't like either party because they put politics and winning above outcomes.  Because those who lack such an ID will overwhelmingly be from urban areas, it's nothing more than a way to cut the Democratic voting bloc and help Republican candidates.  You can argue it's not a major burden, but that's missing the point.  If you're the party that has to lean on disenfranchisement to win, then you don't deserve anyone's vote.  Republicans love the free market, except in elections where they want to rig the system.

 

Now, despite those disagreements, I don't think we're necessarily miles apart.  I also am proud of my country and am not a big fan of dual citizenship.  Quite simply, what if you're a dual citizen of two countries who go to war with one another?  If you're in the military of one, aren't you inherently committing treason against the other?  I think making a choice for one or the other is a better option.  I'm sure there are innumerable other legal/entitlement reasons why this is a bad idea, as well.

 

I also strongly believe that you should care for your country and work to better it.  I am NOT a fan of welfare/unemployment benefits without some connection to real work.  If you're what we call the working poor, then I fully sympathize with your condition.  There should be no WORKING poor in any civilized society.  But as far as the long-term unemployed, I have no issue at all tying benefits to work and I would favor major public works projects for those unable to find employment, private or public, on their own.  I'm honestly not sure why we don't do this anymore.  We all know that our infrastructure in this country is hurting, so why not take the millions who are unemployed and create some work?  We already pay unemployment benefits, so the cost is already taken care of for the most part.  This would entail having some projects ready to be worked in every state and perhaps down to the county level.  Instead of money for nothing, how about money for some work that we, as a society, need to have done?  While we're at it, how about those fuckin' Romney boys get their hands dirty, before they inherit their millions apiece.  They live in a society that let's people become fabulously wealthy...how about a little real work to show your country some love?

[artcinco]

Bernie wuz robbed!

 

Des Moines Register calls for audit of Iowa results: 'Something smells in the Democratic Party'

[artcinco]

The Iowa Democratic Party Chair Refusing To Review Caucus Results Is A HUGE Hillary Supporter

[freedom78]

I haven't been following this too closely, but the look of impropriety is just as bad as impropriety, these days.  I say audit.

 

Of course, this is much more likely in a caucus system, where the principle of the secret ballot doesn't quite apply.  While I really like the democratic aspects of caucusing, the voting has troubles.

[Adolf Hitler]

I'm with Flagg on pretty much all those issues. He'd really be outraged if he lived in Caifornia where everything revolves around Latino shit.

 

If you cant speak English in school then go back to Tijuana, Pakistan, and wherever else they came from. American children shouldn't have to twiddle their thumbs in class because Juan and Chico don't know what's going on. It's an outrage. This shit is going too far and there's eventually going to be a violent backlash to all this shit being forced down our throats. Why should I have to read a menu, billboard, etc. in Spanish?

 

I said this years ago....I want people across the entire country to have to experience this bullshit. It's funny how those most in favor of it are those furthest from the problem. Drop a few million more Mexicans in the Midwest and east coast. and the people loving it now will start having conniption fits. 

 

Long John Silver's recently went out of business here. I wonder if it had anything to do with the fact it took about five minutes for the Mexican lady to understand you wanted an order of fish and hush puppies? This is just the tip of the iceberg. Maybe Trump can send em up to Indiana for a couple years before shipping them back to Mexico. 

 

 

 

See, the problem with drawing these lines around who gets to vote and who doesn't is that those who draw the lines will always draw them in their favor, discriminating against groups they disapprove of or who will vote the other way.  We have a long history of drawing these lines and we should be ashamed of every damned time we did so.  That's why we shouldn't draw them again, even if it's under the guise of making the system better or voters more informed.  I can easily make an argument that the average voter is largely uninformed and that we should require a basic civics "test" to be able to vote.  But we've done that before; it was called a "literacy test" under ol' Jim Crow and it wasn't used to make voters more informed but to deny people the right to vote.  So, as much as I'd love to have a more informed electorate, I know that restricting voting is the last thing I'd do to get it.  

These are good points but I agree with Flagg. Just a simple IQ test and if you cant pass it, no vote.

 

 

 

 I am NOT a fan of welfare/unemployment benefits without some connection to real work.

Then you're really on my side of the fence if you truly believe that. That's what this problem revolves around. We had this conversation years ago. I'm not a drug addict anymore but I can still offer to introduce you to those same people. Nothing but entire households full of people on welfare and SSI and NONE of them are disabled. In fact, they laugh about getting these free checks. One of my former drug dealers even had a stack of EBT cards. They were other peoples cards but some people would trade the option to buy food for drugs. He kept the cards.  Great system.

 

Be a drug dealer AND get free checks from the government? You actually wonder why they come here in droves? It's not to pick tomatoes I can tell you that much.

 

 

 

 

Instead of money for nothing, how about money for some work that we, as a society, need to have done?

Sounds great. Let's first deal with this problem, then put Americans who are on welfare and SSI but not really disabled working these infrastructure jobs.

 

I suggested this same thing years ago. I have a feeling I'll be suggesting it again in a few years. No one wants to deal with these issues. Its people opposed to it against people who either pretend to support it or support it as long as their neighborhood doesn't feel the impact.  Gridlock til the cows come home.....milked by illegals of course.

[Adolf Hitler]

Had a lovely experience earlier this evening. I bought five packs of Marlboros at a convenience store on my way home and it took three attempts for the clerk to understand which Marlboros I wanted. I wound up having to point at the specific row the Marlboro reds were on. Needless to say I wont be going there again but that's beside the point.  Like I said earlier, its everywhere here. Like 10 years ago there used to be those Cali-mexico and Mexifornia jokes. It's not funny anymore.

 

This shit never would've been tolerated years ago. Now everyone is supposed to prance around acting like it's peaches and cream. 

[Adolf Hitler]

That post yesterday may have come off a tad harsh towards freedom. Wasn't meant that way. It just amazes me to see anyone support any aspect of this illegal immigration issue.

[freedom78]

That post yesterday may have come off a tad harsh towards freedom. Wasn't meant that way. It just amazes me to see anyone support any aspect of this illegal immigration issue.

 

If you took my lack of response as indicative of having offended my liberal sensibilities, no worries.  It's just that the conversation was from October, so after weighing the mental costs of jumping back in I decided against it.  Though, in response to THIS comment, I am trying to figure out what I said that was supportive of illegal immigration.

[Adolf Hitler]

I realize it was a bumped thread...plus we've been on this illegal merry go round before. It wasn't your lack of response since I didn't even think you had been on since I posted it. I logged in to post that cig purchase and read it again. 

 

I live in one of the areas hit the worst on this issue. I assume L.A. is the worst but the CA central valley has to be near the top of the list. Its known for its agriculture and meth production, two things that are guaranteed to lure them in continuously. Also drive by the welfare office on Crows Landing and its a sight to behold. They tore down the old one years ago and built a much bigger one there and I can assure you its not because there was a recent influx of white people.

 

If Trump is smart he will campaign here and mention nothing but this issue. There are many people here frustrated by this.