tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post482988419818977472..comments2024-03-28T23:39:08.616-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: Voter ID Laws: Scam or Accountability?David Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger111125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-77246146058166817852015-08-07T12:52:52.281-07:002015-08-07T12:52:52.281-07:00If in a voter ID proposal there were other viable ...If in a voter ID proposal there were other viable alternatives then it would be something I could support. For instance while Elections Canada requests photoID, they also state that over 50 forms of id are also acceptable, including prescription bottles, vehicle registration, bank statements, cheques or leases, etc. They will also accept a neighbour vouching for you at the polls. <br /> <br />The point being is that every Republican voter id proposal I've seen have said a state issued photo id or nothing else. By letting the person use two of a wide variety of alternative id's that are commonly accessible, especially to the eldery or the poor, that would handle most objections to voter id laws. <br /> <br />For a full list of what is allowed for ID's in Canadian elections see: http://www.elections.ca/content2.aspx?section=id&document=index&lang=eLarry C. Lyonshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04315424229764736078noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-66249769633831127502014-11-03T06:02:44.998-08:002014-11-03T06:02:44.998-08:00Randy: if the ID is free, then, it's fine?
Ma...Randy: if the ID is free, then, it's fine?<br /><br />Many of the states had provisions for free IDs for folks who could not afford them.Derek Ballinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14339768053965063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-86463813489880611402014-11-03T06:01:22.167-08:002014-11-03T06:01:22.167-08:00Jr565: Our Constitution forbids poll taxes. Perio...Jr565: Our Constitution forbids poll taxes. Period. Compelling a voter to buy something in order to vote is unconstitutional. Period. <br />That the poll tax may be what you consider low, and that the intended and observed result is to rob the vote from a disproportionate share of the politically powerless may not matter to you, but the clear unconstitutional nature of it should. rewinnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14008105385364113371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-82057231851937308642014-11-03T05:59:22.851-08:002014-11-03T05:59:22.851-08:00Kwillow how "frightening" is it to get a...Kwillow how "frightening" is it to get an ID card from the dept of motor vehicles? How hard is it? You wait on line. You take a picture. You pay a small fee and then you get an ID card.jr565https://www.blogger.com/profile/06250384040393259866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-37476412784735564392014-11-03T05:56:44.615-08:002014-11-03T05:56:44.615-08:00Kwillow wrote:
"If the states insisting on vo...Kwillow wrote:<br />"If the states insisting on voter ID actually, you know, issued official IDs, which were free and easy to get, I might think they were honest. They don't. They make voting for non-white men as difficult, even frightening, as possible for everyone else."<br />Examples? If the states where voting requires ID are predominantly white, then wouldn't they have to go through the same requirement? <br />How then does it impact minorities worse? The left has this opinion of minorities that they are so helpless they can't even function on a basic level and get the same ID that everyone in the country gets for reasons other than voting. And it's not hard. And it's not expensive.<br />If anyone wanted to cash a check at a check cashing place, they'd already have said ID. If anyone went to a bar, they'd have that ID. <br />And dems should be pushing for getting iD's into people's hands who for whatever reason don't have them, since they will be impacted in a society that requires such ID's for basic functions if they don't have them. <br />jr565https://www.blogger.com/profile/06250384040393259866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-36618575415890916632014-11-03T05:47:30.760-08:002014-11-03T05:47:30.760-08:00Brin likes to pretend he's not an ideologue.
...Brin likes to pretend he's not an ideologue. <br />" Fact, more than half of those statistical metrics improved markedly under Clinton and Obama. Nothing I said here has anything at all to do with left or right. It is simple outcomes appraisal."<br />But then follows it up with his crack On Fox News viewers. same old leftist ideologue tactic. Pretend to be the grown up in the room while smearing opponents with ad hominem.<br /><br />As far as Clinton v Bush. Republicans don't deny they Bush spent too much. Obama has spent more. And Clinton actually ran the economy center right. He was the one that deregulated the banks, remember. All the people in his cabinet were friends of Wall Street. <br />So, if you want to take credit for Clintons economy and assign it to democrats, let's at least acknowledge that he didn't run the economy from the left. You are actually supporting those policies you say you abhor.jr565https://www.blogger.com/profile/06250384040393259866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-36836131791302481192014-10-28T10:00:25.141-07:002014-10-28T10:00:25.141-07:00interesting, though I disagree.
onwardinteresting, though I disagree.<br /><br />onwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-22627174485408885842014-10-28T09:48:56.773-07:002014-10-28T09:48:56.773-07:00We should keep some kind of means to identify citi...We should keep some kind of means to identify citizens on the government end of things. Looks may change but fingerprints, ear print (or whatever that's called, dental print, and genes and so on never change. The last one would also be very interesting information from a scientific standpoint. Then again gene tests take time which makes them non ideal for identification of a person on the spot. Unfortunately keeping information on regular people is somehow considered to be treating them as criminals, but there are many reasons you might want to keep such information on everyone for their own protection and regulate how it's used with laws.Fredrik Dungehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10202218250123641549noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-70734262134530325702014-10-28T02:52:23.522-07:002014-10-28T02:52:23.522-07:00To answer your question before moving on:
I'...To answer your question before moving on: <br /><br />I've been watching that same Supreme court you refer to defer to the states' judgement in any case where there wasn't current evidence of a protected class having their right infringed (Bush v Gore, Shelby County v Holder, SCOTUS' refusal to grant cert in the Texas Voter ID laws which means that Texas' Voter ID laws stand).Derek Ballinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14339768053965063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-44349949047234173492014-10-27T21:09:46.763-07:002014-10-27T21:09:46.763-07:00Malarkey and double malarkey. Then you do not und...Malarkey and double malarkey. Then you do not understand constructive interpretation of the law. For example, Ghandi and King taught about the sliding scales of civil disobedience. CD has been incorporated into some (not enough) actual law, like whistle blower protections...<br /><br />... but its biggest incorporation has been in precedent and emphasis of rulings by judges, juries, grand juries and prosecutors, ALL of whom now consider a sliding scale of how earnest the protestor is versus the amount of damage or inconvenience that they cause. <br /><br />Likewise, the last 40 years is filled with expansions of protective laws to include those who had been left out of the original language. May I ask where the heck you have been?<br /><br />Never mind... I am moving on to the next posting. Follow me there if you like...<br /><br /><br />onwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-30709654668702526412014-10-27T19:34:18.954-07:002014-10-27T19:34:18.954-07:00David:
I don't need to watch a movie. I study...David:<br /><br />I don't need to watch a movie. I study political science (specifically Constitutional Law) for fun, and have been doing so for years. <br /><br />The Reconstruction amendments specify classes of individuals whose rights to vote cannot be infringed but -- just like the ADA or the ERA -- if you're discriminating against a class that isn't protected, it's not technically discrimination.Derek Ballinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14339768053965063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-64511369767021747532014-10-27T18:17:54.129-07:002014-10-27T18:17:54.129-07:00Kwillow, thanks for sumarizing my point perfectly....Kwillow, thanks for sumarizing my point perfectly.<br /><br />Now onward to a fairly big posting.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-82776437034442910332014-10-27T18:04:49.420-07:002014-10-27T18:04:49.420-07:00Repubs do any and everything in their power to che...Repubs do any and everything in their power to cheat, lie and steal elections. Naturally they assume Dems do the same, but that isn't the case.<br /><br />If the states insisting on voter ID actually, you know, <i>issued</i> official IDs, which were free and easy to get, I might think they were honest. They don't. They make voting for non-white men as difficult, even frightening, as possible for everyone else.Kathyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03176801494652946278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-49632896700611212362014-10-27T16:33:11.948-07:002014-10-27T16:33:11.948-07:00Sociotard, that anomalous CA election might result...Sociotard, that anomalous CA election might result in the Republican winner very quickly declaring himself to be a democrat, in order to win re-election, which would otherwise be hopeless.<br /><br />Derek watch LINCOLN. The 13th and some other amendments give Congress broad powers to legislate to enforce rights. They could probably banish gerrymandering with one sweep of a hand.<br /><br />Joel G, confederates will ALWAYS drift toward secession whenever someone they don’t like gets “their” presidency.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-76094017120494607132014-10-27T15:33:49.018-07:002014-10-27T15:33:49.018-07:00Duncan, (to Tony)
"Voting along the line??
Do...Duncan, (to Tony)<br /><i>"Voting along the line??<br />Don't understand your comment"</i><br /><br />In Australia, Senate voting is in single, state-wide, multi-member electorates, with the top six candidates per-state getting the six available places in each election.<br /><br />There are usually 70-120 candidates on a Senate ballot for a given state. With "Instant Run-off Voting" (preference voting), you have to number all those 70-120 names. So decades ago they created a simpler system called "Above The Line". Named parties would be listed in the top portion of the Senate ballot, each party registers a preference distribution with the Electoral Commission. So if you vote "Above The Line", you put a "1" by your preferred party, and your vote is distributed according to the preferences of the party you select.<br /><br />However, unlike the Lower House ballot, and unlike the "Below The Line" option for the Senate ballot, they didn't allow people to do their own preferences Above The Line (by numbering the parties by order of preference.)<br /><br />Your choice is number <i>all</i> candidates Below The Line from say 1-100, or just select <i>one</i> party Above The Line and accept their preferences. Frustrating.<br /><br />People who want to be able to preference vote Above The Line call it the "Along The Line" option.Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-11477304702879058702014-10-27T14:59:45.143-07:002014-10-27T14:59:45.143-07:00All,
Are there any Federal rules in the US (Consti...All,<br />Are there any Federal rules in the US (Constitution or otherwise) that prevent states from independently going to IRV or Approval voting for at least State/County elections? And are there any Federal rules preventing them from introducing IRV/similar for Federal elections in that state?<br /><br />Re: "Open primaries"<br />Apparently the term "Open primaries" specifically refers to allowing non-party members to vote in the separate party-primaries. What David means by "open primaries" is usually all-party/all-voter primaries, leading to a "top two" run-off, which is a different system. When anyone uses the term "open primaries" they should probably explain exactly what they're referring to.<br /><br />Duncan,<br />Re: Scotland.<br />I wanted Scotland to vote for independence because I suspected that, once it got to the exact details, Scotland would have ended up with just a greater devolution and not full independence. Now any devolution, no matter how small, will be hampered by "The Scottish people have already spoken on this and they're tired of hearing from the losers bringing it up over and over..." [That's what happened in Australia, so I was hoping a Scottish win would open the Republic issue up again in Australia (and possibly Canada, NZ, etc.)]Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-35789979225562269292014-10-27T14:49:27.483-07:002014-10-27T14:49:27.483-07:00We appear to be arguing past each other. You'v...<br />We appear to be arguing past each other. You've chosen to talk about debt default & secession as moral issues, whereas I've been discussing these topics as practical issues.<br /><br />Morally speaking, I agree with Robert and Paul about the importance of oath, word and promise keeping in maintaining world-wide social, political & financial stability.<br /><br />Practically speaking though, these occurrences are extremely common. People renege on debt, promissory notes & (all types of) promises on a regular basis, so much so that at least 50% of all charges generated by my now-defunct medical practice were considered legally uncollectable; and, of course, children & juvenile offspring 'secede' from their parents on a daily basis without any intent of paying off the debts that their parents incurred for them (even though many try to return home at a later date).<br /><br />Best.<br />___<br />PS: You're not going to find every right itemized in the US Constitution as certain rights are considered 'self-evident'.<br /><br />locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-75643702934892416352014-10-27T14:38:19.015-07:002014-10-27T14:38:19.015-07:00Forgive my haste, and snark. It was a good reason ...Forgive my haste, and snark. It was a good reason to re-read the text of those amendments, where I learn I truly don't have a right to vote. Interesting.Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-66812697838640852392014-10-27T14:14:03.229-07:002014-10-27T14:14:03.229-07:00Rob H,
"and then demanding to re-enter the Un...Rob H,<br /><i>"and then demanding to re-enter the Union if a Republican that matches their viewpoint were to come into power."</i><br /><br />There's a qualitative difference in demanding to leave, and demanding to enter.<br /><br />Joining (or re-joining) the US requires approval from the <b>US Congress</b>, where they would no longer have any representatives. It is going to be a hell of a lot easier to leave than to get back in. And that's a good thing. That's how it should work. If you have a state where the majority are so childish that they want to take their whole state out of the US because the President belongs to the wrong party, or the wrong race, do you really want to keep that state?<br /><br />You want to punish them for leaving, because you see them as traitors.<br /><br />I want to encourage them to go, <i>because I see them as traitors</i>.<br /><br />So no, none of this bullshit...<br /><br /><i>"It may also include tolls on all imports and exports transported by highway, and even not allowing certain countries to fly to a landlocked mini-nation that seceded so to maintain national security of the greater United States."</i><br /><br />... Because I don't want there to be <i>any excuse</i> for them to not leave if they want. I don't want them to be able to blame anyone else for their staying, "we want to leave, but <i>They</i> won't let us!"<br /><br />No war, no sanctions, no trade issues, no transport issues. Defence, currency, citizenship all worked out over a 20 year transitional agreement. I wouldn't even make them take a share of the public debt. At all. Not even per-capita, let alone 1/50th. None.<br /><br />No excuses. Just go. We'll even help you pack. We'll pay for storage for your stuff while you settle in. Just go.<br /><br />[Aside: Your comments over debt make the same mistake that most of the Fox-educated Right make, you treat it like a home loan. It's not. Something like 70% of US debt is "owed" to itself. And a big part of that is "owed" to the Social Security Trust Fund. It doesn't make a lot of difference to the US's net wealth whether Alabama is inside the US or outside. And since most of the states with the loudest talk of secession are also the net-welfare states, they are not actually helping the US pay for its debt, therefore it would be a net-savings to the US if they left. And by eliminating the issue, it again takes away one more excuse for them to stay.]Paul451https://www.blogger.com/profile/12119086761190994938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-21529195423025731922014-10-27T13:39:03.711-07:002014-10-27T13:39:03.711-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-73202349525289327092014-10-27T12:58:57.936-07:002014-10-27T12:58:57.936-07:00I's love it if the red states seceded and name...I's love it if the red states seceded and named the resulting nation "Reagan." It would just be so appropriate. Let me see - a doddering old racist who cannot remember what lies he told for political gain this morning? Check. Flag waiving patriot that avoids any chance of personal involvement in combat? Check. Divorced after having affairs? Check. Yep, sounds like the new South has indeed found its' likeness in its' namesake. <br /><br />But in all seriousness, if the red states do secede, then the blue states will have to deal with them on the battlefield anyway. About the time the former red states realize what a financial pickle they are in from not getting lots of blue states' tax dollars anymore will also be the time that the official TV broadcaster of the new nation - Fox - will start its calls for a preemptive strike on America "For our own good." <br /><br />Texas has always been a crappy neighbor, as I was taught in my New Mexico State History classes in junior high. That would not change when Texas had nukes. <br /><br />No, they way to defeat the fascists next door is the old fashioned way. Wait until their kids grow up and move to the big cities to get an education.matthewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17757867868731829206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-74779112574945340942014-10-27T12:56:05.791-07:002014-10-27T12:56:05.791-07:00"much like more level heads in Scotland voted..."much like more level heads in Scotland voted to remain a part of Great Britain."<br /><br />More like the pinheads voted to remain<br /><br />The NO campaign outspent the yes campaign by at least 10:1<br /><br />How much of that money came from the people of Scotland??<br /><br />With the current lurch to the right in England the Scots are going to regret that voteDuncan Cairncrossnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-32875454133154839202014-10-27T12:53:25.849-07:002014-10-27T12:53:25.849-07:00"Nor will Argentina get away with reneging on..."Nor will Argentina get away with reneging on its debts. It tries, but each time it is called accountable on it." <br /><br />I'm not so sure about that<br />Argentina had "gotten away" with renegotiating its debt until some US companies that had bought up the debt with pennies on the dollar bribed a US judge<br /><br />Besides should a sovereign nation bear responsibility for debts that were created while that nation was under foreign control??<br /><br />A lot of people would say no<br /><br />Duncan Cairncrossnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-69300296726643022922014-10-27T12:10:33.851-07:002014-10-27T12:10:33.851-07:00Do you honestly think, Locum, that China will say ...Do you honestly think, Locum, that China will say "sure, you can renege on your debts, Texas!" or that the Texan citizens who had their U.S. government bonds transferred to be Texan government bonds will accept their government saying "fuck you, bond holders, we're not paying"? If there is a contract or treaty or the like that Texas signed or agreed to in getting independence from the U.S. without war, and the Sovereign Nation of Texas then reneges on it, then this will snowball.<br /><br />Nor will Argentina get away with reneging on its debts. It tries, but each time it is called accountable on it. <br /><br />About the only nation that did is Iceland, seeing that nation turned around, said "we are not responsible for debts that private financial companies accrued and claims that our taxpaying citizens should be responsible for. No." And seeing it wasn't national debt, but private debt, Iceland was able to get away with this to an extent.<br /><br />What's Texas going to do, build a huge private bank that absorbs all that debt, declares solvency, and then claim "it's all the private financial industry's fault, we're not to blame so fuck you world and the U.S.!"<br /><br />Right.<br /><br />Besides. This isn't about allowing the U.S. to fragment into individual nation-states that start warring on each other over resources and the like. This is about pointing out the responsibilities and liabilities that would come as a result of declaring independence, so that more level heads choose to remain a part of the United States - much like more level heads in Scotland voted to remain a part of Great Britain.<br /><br />Rob H.Acacia H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07678539067303911329noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-38513118218073297782014-10-27T11:21:04.829-07:002014-10-27T11:21:04.829-07:00Honouring thy debts is a lovely high-minded ideal,...<br /><br />Honouring thy debts is a lovely high-minded ideal, as is 'debt sharing', but both are highly impractical, as evidenced by both divorce & corporate bankruptcy laws, because you can't get blood from a turnip, labour from a corpse or honour from a non-entity.<br /><br />Like you, I'd expect the 'State of Texas' to honour its debts as a condition of Union membership, but not so for the 'Sovereign Nation of Texas', just I would not count on collecting any old outstanding debts from a defunct Enron, a bankrupt Detroit or a brand-new Argentinian entity. <br /><br />And, for the record, a 'right' is whatever I choose to say it is, assuming that I and my compatriots have the authority to back it up, so much so that any documentation to the contrary is either worth amending or pissing on.<br /><br /><br />Bestlocumranchnoreply@blogger.com