When I voted last November for the mayor of my city, they pulled that ID crap. So I was ready for them. I took my CCW ID instead, that threw the pole volunteer off, after all it was a picture ID so they had to accept it. Funny, they now want to try to enforce this, yet when a persons identity is stolen, well that’s no big deal in their eyes. And why just pick on the voters. What about all the other pathways along the way to being tallied can the votes be corrupted and have been in the past, especially with this administration. 

As for the corrupt SC, whatever Bush (repukelicans) wants to make it harder for the Democrats out there to vote, they are more than willing to set up this obstacle courses and make us jump through all kinds of hoops. After all they are Bush’s yes men.

Manni: 16 year terms are a bit to long even 8 years would be too long since the SC justices maintain a “yes man” mentality that seems to reign in the Bushco Inc.,especially for the very corrupt individuals. A life time job should never even be considered, as some of these jobs are now. What if you get a total incompetent, or someone who due to illness or age no longer is able to preform their jobs as they should be done What if they can’t understand what is going on, as some of the older people in government jobs in their 90’s who can no longer walk and have to be helped in every aspect of their daily care. No, lifetime appointments should not be legal, especially when it affects the lives of the people of America and how it runs.

This country needs a good house cleaning in many ways of how it is run, but making it harder on the voters should not be at the top of the list. The house of cards have all been stacked to one side, it’s time for it to collapse.

“...tell us how you REALLY feel!...”

there is no question that the law is a strange creature which operates with what seems to be strange logic to the uninitiated, BUT.....

The SC should have to conform to an ethics code which goes something like this:

each ruling or vote should have attached to it a POLITICAL “verdict” wherein the action of the court is examined on the basis of what the various political factions WANT a SC ruling to be and do, and when or if ANY Justice has cast his vote for one faction or another more than ONE THIRD of the time, he should be removed from the court as biased. An ethics standard like that would have removed Thomas in six months, would remove Scalia immediately, would never have let Roberts on the court in the first place since his POLITICAL bias is KNOWN.

There are BOUND to be honest men who can rule on the LAW, not on politics, and that is what Souter has turned out to be for the most part. And as a matter of pure fact, ALL of the Republican justices involved in the Bush v Gore decision ought to have been impeached immediately and removed. That action (one time, they ruled) stamped the GOP members of the Court as CRIMINALS, not Justices. They entered the political arena and created law which led to the destruction of democracy in the USA.

A lifetime appointment without review or removal for bias is just wrong. They OUGHT to be above that kind of behavior, but since I can tell you 96 per cent of the time how EVERY one of them will vote on every issue which has political implications, the proof is in; the are not justices, they are GOP lap dogs who deliver GOP votes on important matters, and they MAKE UP law to support their awful decisions.

The fact that they do a pretty good job on matters of law which have few if any political overtones only serves to show what phony racketeers they are, because as soon as their masters jerk their chains, they wag their tails and become law breakers instead of law makers.

The fact that I can say this, and I can predict what these criminals will do better than 96 per cent of the time is all you need to know. If the SC were doing its job correctly and decently and LEGALLY, then I COULDN’T complain about their decisions and I couldn’t support any claim that I can predict their criminal behavior.

And it has nothing to do with FEELINGS; it has to do with FACTS. Ask any honest lawyer (contradiction in terms? I don’t think so...) about Bush v Gore and he will tell you it was a travesty of justice, not in any way to be confused with integrity or even opinion by the crooks who voted to install the moron as President of the United States.

Great article Marie.

This is but ONE of the issues.  I agree with other commenters who have concluded that the electronic voting machines are a sham.

PT: “The Republicans for years have sought a permanent Republican majority.  Their problem is how to eliminate what they see as the rabble from the political process.”

**This is absolutely what they desire.  We ARE their problem and I’ll include the Paul supporters in this (even though they are republican).

Yet there are still other issues.  Many states don’t allow convicted felons to vote even AFTER they have paid their debt to society.  Why not?  Why should we deny them this?  Haven’t they paid in full?  Are they not citizens?  Might they be apt to vote democrat as well?

There has been a constant flagrant attempt to disenfranchise democratic voters through the years.  If it’s not one thing it’s another.  If one were to conglomerate all the “missed” votes how many would that be?  What would we have been able to accomplish as a nation and who would have been most likely to have been elected?  Certainly not what we’ve got.

You don’t expect a supremely corrupt court to deliver any verdict save a criminally corrupt one. This court will do just as they are told to do, and no more and no less. Count on it. It has been happening there for years, and you could predict EXACTLY what the votes would be and who would vote in what way.

To keep on pretending that these corrupt crooks are actual justices who care about the law is just stupid.

Oh, they find ways to vote “strangely” on relatively unimportant matters which don’t change anything much at all, but when push comes to shove, you and I both KNOW how these crooks will vote, so why pretend otherwise?

And don’t give me Roe . . . they don’t WANT to overturn Roe or they would have done so years ago. They need abortions available for themselves, their families, and more importantly, their bosses, and so they are not going to mess with that, but they surely will mess with any other politically motivated case and they will do as they are told to do, just like Bush does and Cheney does and the Republican members of congress do. If you want an independent decision based on fact, then you are covering the wrong group of people.

I don’t know of one single group of people in the world I hold in more contempt than I do this bunch of crooks, and Osama’s legions do not approach doing the kind of damage to our democracy that our own Supreme Court has already done.

In case you might have wondered, I find the members of the SC, ALL OF THEM, pitiful and lacking one iota of decency or integrity.