Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 15, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size

Top Leaderboard, Site wide

A Victory Lap for Obamacare




Paul Robeson: A Life


Truthdig Bazaar
Acts of War: Iraq and Afghanistan in Seven Plays

Acts of War: Iraq and Afghanistan in Seven Plays

By Karen Malpede (Editor); Michael Messina (Editor); Bob Shuman (Editor); Chris Hedges (Foreword)

Empire of Illusion

Empire of Illusion

By Chris Hedges

more items

 
Report

Exposing the GOP’s Voter Suppression Campaign

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Jun 5, 2008
Schumer and Obama
AP photo / Lauren Victoria Burke

Starting early: Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama listens as Sen. Charles Schumer testifies before a Judiciary Committee hearing last June on legislation to prevent voter fraud.

By Bill Boyarsky

If Barack Obama, the presumed Democratic presidential nominee, is to defeat John McCain, he’d better get started organizing teams of election law attorneys and other specialists to guard against efforts already underway to disenfranchise Democratic voters.

State laws imposing strict voter identification requirements have proliferated. They will be used by Republicans in battleground states to challenge low-income voters, usually blacks and Latinos, needed by Obama. Nonresident college students, another part of the Obama constituency, will probably also be challenged.

This means the election may have to be decided in state courtrooms and by local election boards around the country. Scenes we remember from Florida’s 2000 election could be repeated in many places.

Hilary O. Shelton, director of the NAACP’s Washington Bureau, told a House committee in February that ” ... The NAACP, as well as representatives from almost every other civil and voting rights organization, all report an increase in the number of Americans—primarily racial and ethnic minority Americans—who say they have been denied their constitutional right to register and vote.”

This is called voter suppression. Republicans used it with great success in Florida in 2000 and in Ohio four years later. Those contests, won by President Bush, featured shortages of voting machines in minority areas; lost, discarded or rejected ballots; and many challenges to voter eligibility. In 2004, the Bush administration added to the mix by demanding prosecution of ACORN, a grassroots group that works to register poor people to vote. U.S. attorneys who wouldn’t go along were fired in one of the administration’s nastier scandals.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
This year, Republican voter suppression seems to be taking a new and more sophisticated turn. Republican-led state legislatures are adopting strict laws requiring voters to present identification at the polls. In April, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s tough law, which requires government-issued identification, such as a driver’s license, a passport, or a state or military ID card. 

Robert Barnes wrote in The Washington Post, “The ruling bodes well for other states that require photo ID and for states that are considering doing so.”

The Web site electionline.org reports that Florida and Georgia, in addition to Indiana, require photo IDs. In four states, polling officials ask for—but don’t require—photo IDs. Eighteen states require either photo or non-photo IDs, and their requirements vary wildly. It’s challenging to read just the summaries of these state laws on electionline.org. 

Worse yet, most of these laws are administered by partisan state election officers and county officials who may owe their loyalty to some local party or neigborhood political boss—or who may simply be governed by their own prejudices or ignorance.

Professor Richard L. Hasen of Los Angeles’ Loyola Law School, one of the nation’s foremost election law scholars, said in a Stanford Law Review article that 33 chief state election officers were chosen in partisan elections. “In many ways, save technological improvements in the casting and counting of votes, the situation is worse than it was in 2000. Election administration today is more partisan and more contentious than it was before the public had ever heard of ‘dimpled chads,’ ” Hasen said.

I asked Hasen what form he thought voter suppression would take in 2008. He said he didn’t think we were likely to see a “mass campaign against minority voters.” That, as the U.S. attorneys’ scandal showed, was the Republican game plan in 2004.

Rather, he said, there will be “individual instances” of voter suppression. These will take place in countless polling places, be initially judged by local election officials, and then move up to the state chief election officers, mostly partisan, and finally to the courts, often run by political judges. In other words, political hacks administering incomprehensible laws.

“The most successful way of keeping minority voting down is [using] the law,” Hasen said.

To counter such moves, he said, candidates needing minority votes, such as Obama, must put field workers and election lawyers into the field to educate voters on the complexities of their local laws. They must make sure voters have the required ID. And they must be ready to go to court in an instant when someone spots a dirty trick. “These kind of things have to happen now,” he said.

An area of immediate concern should be the Western battleground states of Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico, with a total of 19 electoral votes. Latino voter turnout will be important there, and intensive get-out-the-vote efforts by the Obama campaign are planned in Latino communities in those states. But Antonio Gonzalez, president of the Southwestern Voter Registration Education Project, told me that anti-immigrant sentiment may hurt the turnout.

In Colorado, for example, he said that 15 to 20 percent of the Latino community is foreign-born, where once it was 10 percent. In New Mexico, he said, the foreign-born Latino population has risen from 5 percent a few years ago to 10 to 15 percent today. Clearly, a combination of Republicans and anti-immigrant activists—sometimes the same people—could put together a strong voter intimidation campaign targeted at Hispanics.

Dirty tricks could be one of this year’s most important election stories. So far, it’s been too complicated and distant for a political media hooked on instant thrills. Only a few bloggers are on the story, such as New York University media professor Mark Crispin Miller and journalist Brad Friedman. Loyola Law School’s Professor Hasen offers an excellent combination of information and analysis.

At this point, what’s more important than the coverage is that Barack Obama and his staff hustle election specialists to the battleground states. There’s not much glory in nosing around a Colorado county courthouse—but that’s where this election may be decided.


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Dagny, September 4, 2009 at 6:39 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Hi guys. A smiling face is half the meal.
I am from Brunei and too bad know English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: “Some competitions stretch down the eyeliner of hairstyle as even psychologically curly without peaking through and long answer up the fund-raiser around any leading causing with drug birth sample if ambidextrous.”

Thank grin Dagny.

Report this

By Bboy57, June 10, 2008 at 11:36 pm Link to this comment

This article is fantastic! It’s like the infomercials (commercials) that they used to run, “the more you know”.
I love the fact that truth dig is a central online present day real news agency , that doesn’t whitwash the issues as they pertain to the overall landscape of current politics that are shaping our future.
This vote “fixing” fraud is a real issue on out political front today. Not only for our nation but the global community as well.
I for one want to see politicians or corporations, hung out to dry who are implicated in ANY TYPE of voter fraud.

Report this

By Louise, June 10, 2008 at 6:31 pm Link to this comment

Right now, the Kucinich resolution to IMPEACH George W. Bush is being read on the floor of the House for the second time.

The House may vote on this as early as Wednesday. [tomorrow]

It is vital we let our representative know, that before we vote in November we have to see where they stand on bringing George W. Bush to accountability. Send e-mails to your representative as soon as possible. And phone their office Wednesday morning. And send e-mails to the members of the House Judiciary Committee.

Report this

By Brian Nemes, June 10, 2008 at 12:19 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Item 1) The Supreme Court already ruled that you don’t need to show proof of voter fraud to justify the requirment that voters have photo ID. As long as it’s reasonable to believe that photo ID can help prevent voter fraud its perfectly legal to require it. Whether there’s widespred voter fraud because of the current lack of a photo ID requirement is completely irrelevant so sayeth the Supreme Court.

Item 2) There is no consitutional right to vote in presidential elections. US citizens don’t elect presidents the electoral college does. The govts of the individual states choose how their electoral college members are chosen and how they vote. The fact that a majority of the states use a popular vote to help determine how their electoral representatives vote does not create a constitutional right. State legislations could vote tomorrow to do away with the popular vote for president in their respective states tomorrow and it would be completely legal and constitutional. It’s shocking how ignorant people are of the constitution and what it actually says and the rights it conveys.

Report this

By Techdir, June 10, 2008 at 10:48 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I find it distressing that the canard of voter supression in Florida in 2000 continues. Fraud has existed ever since voting began. However, Florida law in 2000 was very clear and unambiguous. Each voting district was responsible for choosing the type of system, from those approved by the State of Florida, to be used in their district. The four which became the central issue of the recount and allegations of disenfranchisement were all Democratic Party controlled districts with Democratic majorities on the Boards of Canvassers. The populations of each were majority registered Democrats. The Democrats chose the punch card machines and a Democratic Party member was even responsible for creating the famous punch card ballot. In addition, at least one district held a test election and declared both the ballot and machines acceptable. If disenfranchisement did indeed happen, then it was Democrats who caused the problem for their own voters as many criticisms were levelled at both the type of system and the ballot.
I also find it troubling that few have a problem with the disenfranchisement of many Florida based members of our military that were serving overseas. The Clinton/Gore administration obstructed the absentee ballots from service men and women by delaying delivery and the like, issues that were covered at the time by Florida newspapers. It is also seldom noted that the major TV networks “called” Florida for Gore an hour before all polling stations in Florida closed. Whether or not this did have a negative effect and to what degree is not really key because in Carter’s re-election bid the major networks called the election for Reagan before the polls in California closed and the Democrats screamed bloody murder. This reaction by the DNC caused NBC, CBS, ABC and others to promise never to call an election before all polls closed. It was claimed by the DNC that voters stayed home once the election was “called”.
When all is said and done, the pivot point of the 2000 election was the fact that for the first time in 28 years a major party candidate failed to win his home state. Tennessee sent Gore to the House and then the Senate but when it came to the White House they said “no thanks”. That was the little man behind the curtain.

Report this

By Archtraveler, June 9, 2008 at 8:57 pm Link to this comment

You know, I tried to vote by absentee ballot during the Primaries here in Texas.  I called the county tax office, had the form sent to me, filled out the entire form with all of my information(they don’t just send you a ballot), mailed it back, and then never received a ballot to vote.  I believe it to be Voter Suppression by Democrats!  By God, there should be a Congressional Inquiry about this!  Let’s waste a few million tax dollars and expose this pervasive evil that attempts to stamp out any resistance to the Democrats!!!

But seriously folks, we’re talking about human beings here that comprise all sides of this problem; from the well-meaning senile techno-phobic retirees who volunteer at polling stations to the voters who cannot read or write English and only vote according to what someone told them, if they can even figure out how to vote at all.  In between, there’s a whole spectrum of fallible humans involved.  When you factor in the tens of millions involved, it doesn’t take a conspiracy to produce miscounts, faulty machines, lost ballots, or inconveniencing of some of the population.

I would also add that anyone who is naive enough to think that Democrats don’t manipulate the voting process as well, should all have their voting rights taken away out of stupidity.

Report this

By cyrena, June 9, 2008 at 4:21 pm Link to this comment

Well jeff29, it started like this:

You claimed (along with a few others) that there was this really bad problem with voter fraud among what you call ‘illegal aliens’ (I generally call them non-citizens or undocumented residents/workers since I don’t believe any ‘person’ is *illegal*).

Be that as it may, you claim that the need for voters to show ID is because there is a major problem with these non-US citizens voting in US elections. Another poster, (I believe troublesum) made the statement that there was NOT a problem with non-citizens voting, and there never had been. I agreed, because of course this is true. It has NOT ever been a problem, nor is it now.

Since you claimed that it WAS, (and because I know that it is not, and that it has in fact been well investigated and documented to prove that it is not) I suggested that you should direct us to some substantiation for your claims. YOU WERE the one making these claims, so the burden of proof of such was on you.

Well, you couldn’t resist sending back a wise-assed direction for me to look it up on the internet. Why would I do that, when I already know that NO SUCH ISSUES EXIST, and that anything on the internet would be propaganda – the same as what you’re claiming.

Needless to say, you CANNOT provide proof of such a thing, and so that was my entire point. Anytime propagandists, shills, trolls, and anything of that nature, make ludicrous claims that are not true, they should be required to provide proof of such. Especially when the claims create hardships on the accused, be it an individual, or a group.

In this case, it’s an entire group of citizens who are basically being denied their legitimate rights to vote, because of a created threat. (like georgies ‘war on terra’) The ‘claim’ is that there is a ‘threat’ because non-citizens can access the US elections. And so the ‘supposed’ way to prevent that, is to force everyone to show a photo ID when they vote, even though not all people have a need for a photo ID. Not all people drive or attend school, or have jobs that issue photo IDs. The US has huge populations, in rural areas as well as the inner cities, of people who do not drive, and therefore do not need these ID’s. FORCING them to acquire one, (and the expense involved) is a violation of their civil rights. That’s one of the reasons that the whole ‘national identity card’ thing has never been instituted. It’s Undemocratic, and a violation of the principles embodied in the Constitution.

MEANTIME, it doesn’t do anything to prevent other non-citizens from voting, if all they needed to do was show an ID. This country has several MILLION ‘legal’ aliens. People that have come here from other countries, and have acquired permanent or temporary residency, via the Immigration and Naturalization services. BUT, they CANNOT VOTE in our elections! Yes, they have their ‘green cards’ and guess what else? THEY HAVE DRIVERS LICENCES AS WELL! Still doesn’t mean they can vote. Could they try? I suppose, but that would be stupid, since the EVERYBODY has to be REGISTERED first. If they try to register, they won’t be allowed to register, because they aren’t legal US citizens, (unless they become naturalized..that takes years). That’s how I know that there is no problem with voter fraud from non-US citizens. It’s kind of a no-brainer.

That’s why we also know that the requirement for a photo ID ONLY applies to citizens who actually ARE eligible to vote, and so it becomes a way to accomplish wide spread voter suppression, because not all of them have easy access to such.

Report this

By cyrena, June 9, 2008 at 3:28 pm Link to this comment

Larry,

The way the absentee ballot works is what makes the whole ID thing ridiculous.

With an absentee ballot, everything is done by mail. One can register by mail, (or on the internet). Then, the appropriate office sends out a voter registration card. One can then opt for absentee voting if one chooses. This is especially helpful for those who are handicapped, don’t have transportation, (huge rural populations could use this, but I don’t think they do) or if one travels frequently and can’t be at home on voting day. Or, if one has a job that doesn’t allow them to leave work on voting day, even though the law says that they’re supposed to.

Then, once one is registered as an absentee voter, all the rest is done by mail. They voter receives all of their election information by mail, as well as their ballots, and generally that occurs anywhere from 4 to 6 weeks prior to the election. Then, the voter can fill out their ballot, put it back in the envelope, make sure to sign the back of the envelope, (or the ballot will not be counted) put a stamp on it, and mail it back. The ballot much be returned no later than 5:00pm on the day of the actual election, but can be returned any time after the voter has received. So, you’ve got 4-6 weeks, depending on the area where one lives.

NO ID. The information is already on the rosters, and in the data base.
No gas, no driving, no hassles, no voter fraud. If you screw it up, (and there’s time) you mail the screwed-up one back to the place, and they’ll send you a new one, appropriately marked as the 2nd ballot.

So you see. It’s totally ridiculous to force this ID thing, and even more ridiculous to equate voting with buying beer or cigarettes, or renting videos. Voting in our supposedly democratic system is a RIGHT for all legal citizens of the US. It is as much a RIGHT as paying taxes is an obligation. Now does the IRS confuse you with somebody else when you send them money? Probably not. Is the IRS interested in having you provide proof some sort of ID (photo or otherwise) when you pay them, or collect a refund from them? I’ve never had that happen.

Again. One citizen gets ONE vote. That citizen must be REGISTERED before that citizen can vote. That’s the only way a person can vote.  How likely is it that millions of registered voter-citizens simply turn over their own ONE ballot, to some other non-citizen, so that person can vote in their place?

How likely is it that some non-citizen voter is going to show up at the polls and ask for a ballot in MY name? They would have to know my name and address to give to the poll worker, before they got a ballot.

That’s why voter fraud is not now, nor has it ever been, a problem in US elections, at least not voter fraud by NON-citizens. Plenty of it by the repugs, like alicebrown has mentioned, but not from non-citizens.

Report this

By Jeff29, June 9, 2008 at 2:27 pm Link to this comment

Again with the troll accusations, huh?  I guess when you can’t attack the message, you attack the messenger.  I have been reading Truthdig and posting for over a year now, although I just recently registered as a member.  You might need to recalibrate your troll radar, because it let you down on this one, unless (going back to my previous post) a troll is anyone who disagrees with you.

As far as substantiation, why am I required to provide a bibliography, yet you can post whatever you want without reference?

You can keep saying the same things, but it doesn’t change the fact that it’s not hard for an illegal to vote:  Get a fake SSN, get a driver’s license with the fake SSN, register to vote.  It’s also not hard to vote in multiple states.

Report this

By Larry, June 9, 2008 at 11:10 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It is a ridiculous argument.  I am always stunned that no one askes me for my ID when I go to vote. You have to show an ID to buy beer, buy cigarettes and cash a check.  the left bellyaches about this requirement, but how many citizens are out there without some form of valid identification?  I would venture that in reality it is very few given the number of circumstances where one is required.  Let’s see some hard statistics on this.  By the way, how does it work for an absentee ballot?

Report this

By ender, June 9, 2008 at 7:44 am Link to this comment

I suspect that even the Forth Reich Cabal currently running our adminstrative branch realize they have gone to far in destroying our economy, and may irreparably harm the dollar, and thus themselves, if the continue the fiasco in Iraq much longer.  I suspect they will not use the voting machine fixes to get McCain elected, and will save them for another election.  McCain is too much of an outsider, regardless of how much Rove arse he’s willing to enlip, for them to really trust him to implement their ‘final solution’ and suspend elections and take over the nation.

Whether they do that in the last days of the Shrub presidency remains to be seen but again, we may not be of much use to them if we stop believing in our national religion of conspicuous consumerism.

Report this

By alicecbrown, June 9, 2008 at 7:26 am Link to this comment

Yes, Bev Harris does a great service to this country, even though she is very unpleasant to deal with.  I don’t think she even realizes it, as we liberals can be very intolerant of one another.  By all means, volunteer to be a poll watcher, an analyst: she has all sorts of jobs you can do.  I’m planning to register as an absentee voter in Canton, so I can be front and center in Florida or any of those states where the crooks, aka polling officials allow any of the following:
1. Diebold machines, by any name
2. Widespread Invalidation of registrations
3.  Deliberate undersupplying of voting machines
4. Arbitrary uses of Voter ID (poll tax, anyone?)
5. Where registrations have been thrown away in the past in garbage bags
6. Ohio
I’m sure you can come up with other ways the Repulsicans will steal the election in Nov. No wonder they aren’t worried: we’re too dumb and spineless to stop them.

Report this

By AnnMullins, June 8, 2008 at 10:43 pm Link to this comment

What you need to get an ID:
1. Birth certificate: Requires a phone call to a state records office and a fee of up to $50. If you know what is on a birth certificate (mother’s maiden name etc), you can get a copy whether or not it is yours. This may be the hardest step or the easiest document to fake.
2. 2nd form of ID, like a utility bill or lease agreement or college/work id. Sometimes a third.
3. Transportation to a DMV.
4. Sometimes hours of time waiting your turn.
5. Fee.

How many people is this hard for? Physically disabled, extremely poor, parents without time or money, transients, people who never had a birth certificate. Does anybody know?

Would funds and volunteer transportation help?

Report this

By mike112769, June 8, 2008 at 10:23 pm Link to this comment

I hate to agree with Republicans on most things, but I don’t have a problem with showing my I.D. If I have to show it to buy a beer, why not when I vote? I believe some form of I.D. is mandatory in most states anyway. Voter fraud DOES happen. Maybe some of you wouldn’t be so against this if someone used YOUR name to vote. Everyone is yelling about a close election as if it makes a difference if Obama or McCain gets in. They are both pretty much the same. Typical politicians who will promise about ANYTHING to get in office. Democrats and Republicans are working toward the same goals, they just want a different path to get there. Crying about showing an I.D. is ludicrous when there are much bigger issues to worry about. If you don’t have an I.D. I have two things to say. First, why don’t you? Second, go get one.

Report this

By cyrena, June 8, 2008 at 6:17 pm Link to this comment

“I apologize if I have made posts contrary to your opinions..”

No need for apologies at all Jeff29. Posts that are contrary to OPINIONS are to be expected on public forums. Because, EVERYONE is entitled to their OPINIONS, you just can’t swap opinions out for FACTS!

And, you can skip all of the standard troll sacasm that you’ve obviously picked up from your ‘team’. (Do they assign your names and numbers for you to use in your campaign?)

The fact of the matter is that if you really had any substantiation, you could have followed your own 3 steps, copied the appropriate link(s) and posted them here, for all of us to read.

So, just so we all know what the deal is here, (before you even collect your first troll paycheck) trolls are easily spotted.

As for the issue with non-citizen voting, I’ll say this again:

In the US election system, a person much be REGISTERED to vote, in order to do that. Registration for the GE is always closed down at least 30 days before the election is held.

This virtually assures that non-citizens cannot vote. And, why would non-citizens even TRY to vote? What’s in it for them?

Report this

By Jeff29, June 8, 2008 at 2:58 pm Link to this comment

Wow, I have elicited a response from the Great Cyrena.  I apologize if I have made posts contrary to your opinions; I’m sorry if I have interrupted your Lib-fest; I have trespassed on your cyber-property, I have not stayed on my side of the internet.  So because I actually watch, read, and challenge people with opposing views, I am a troll.

You want some substantiation?  Follow three easy steps:
1)  Go to google.
2)  Search “Illegal Alien (insert anything related to voting).
3)  Read.

There is just as much information supporting voter fraud as there is voter suppression, you just have to look a bit harder as you won’t find it in the mainstream media.  Of course, cyrena, as well-informed as you are, you already knew this; you just don’t want to address it.

Report this

By cyrena, June 8, 2008 at 2:10 pm Link to this comment

Jeff, do you actually have anything more than rhetoric to make the claim that there is a problem with illegal residents voting in US elections?

Because, until you can substantiate that will something, you’re really just trolling and talking shit. It is NOT a problem, and you just saying that it is doesn’t cut it.

The election system requires voters to REGISTER to vote. One cannot just walk into a polling place on election day, and vote. Illegal residents do not register to vote. EVEN IF THEY DID, a photo ID at the polls isn’t going to change anything, once their names come to be on the roster, as registered voters.

You’re trolling here son.

Report this

By Jeff29, June 8, 2008 at 1:58 pm Link to this comment

“There isn’t now nor has there ever been a problem with illegal aliens trying to vote anywhere in the US.”  This is not a problem for you because you like how they vote.  If, however, you are saying that there are not numerous cases of illegals voting, you are just plain wrong.

“Personally I think it would be a good idea for people in other countries to vote in our presidential elections.”  Now it all makes sense.

“Since we refuse to abide by international law we should probably give them a chance to save themselves from destruction.”  What legal and Constitutional international law would that be?

Report this

By troublesum, June 8, 2008 at 1:42 pm Link to this comment

There isn’t now nor has there ever been a problem with illegal aliens trying to vote anywhere in the US.  Republicans didn’t come up with this idea because illegal aliens were trying to vote.  They saw it as an opportunity to suppress democratic votes.  Its a solution to a problem that does not exist.  What you have with the voter ID laws is a rare opportunity to practice voter suppression from a legal standpoint rather than engaging in the illegal methods you usually employ.  Personally I think it would be a good idea for people in other countries to vote in our presidential elections.  Since we refuse to abide by international law we should probably give them a chance to save themselves from destruction.

Report this

By Jeff29, June 8, 2008 at 1:14 pm Link to this comment

Again, you avoid the hard question.

Report this

By troublesum, June 8, 2008 at 12:40 pm Link to this comment

Republicans have made it a partisan issue.  The political director of the republican party in Texas last year said that this will make about a -3% difference in the number of legitimate democratic voters.  That’s about 1.6 million legal voters nation wide.  There aren’t enough of you to win elections honestly.  Democracy doesn’t work well for you.

Report this

By Jeff29, June 8, 2008 at 12:22 pm Link to this comment

It’s obvious that the Libs and Dems have made this an issue of pure partisanship and not logic.

If you want to engage in an activity that is only available to U.S. citizens, how can it be unreasonable to expect you to prove that you are a U.S. citizen?  No one is willing to really address this.  Then again, my Truthdig experience has been that most posters avoid responding to comments that are hard to answer.  Many of you would make great politicians.

Report this

By cyrena, June 8, 2008 at 9:38 am Link to this comment

•  “If the biggest state in the union doesn’t require a Id, why do some other states require one? The only reason would be to disenfranchise citizens from voting. You can supply all the “spin” you want but requiring an Id to vote is not necessary, and never has been.”

BobZ, this is the bottom line. Period.

An ID has NEVER been required to vote, because there is no need for one, not in the largest state of the Union, nor in any of the other states of the Union. The ONLY thing that has EVER been required in some of these states, is the voter registration card, which IS free, and doesn’t have a photo on it. I remember that when I lived in Texas, I was asked to show my voter registration card at the polls when I showed up to vote, and they cross-checked it with their roster. After the first time, I just made it a point to have the thing already in my hand, when I got in line. In my own state of California, (not the largest, but large enough) this ID is not even requested. And for the millions who vote by mail/absentee vote, it’s obviously not required either. The voters SIGNATURE, on the back of the ballot, (just as the voters SIGNATURE on the poll rosters in Texas) are proof enough.

The original system developed several decades ago, required that a citizen be REGISTERED to vote. This prevents any fraud, and it’s been proven over and over again, that REAL incidents of so-called ‘voter fraud’ are minimal, and are NOT perpetrated by those who don’t have the legal rights to cast a vote in US elections. The only ‘voter-fraud’ perpetrated has been by those seeking to steal elections by thwarting or otherwise skewing real election results. (ie, repuglicans – think Florida, 2000, and Ohio, 2004 for just 2 examples of that).

And, if we wanna go back even further, we can look at the ‘black codes’ that even AFTER civil rights legislation was passed, still required only black folks, to take extensive ‘exams’ before being allowed to vote. This was particularly prevalent in the south. Some of these ‘voter requirement exams’ were the equivalent to a constitutional law bar exam.

The irony here is that the ignorant who uphold these onerous new violations of the legitimate rights of all citizens want to claim that it is to prevent illegal residents from voting. That is totally ludicrous, since the illegal resident is not at ALL anxious to bring any attention to themselves, and damn sure isn’t take a chance on doing something that would.

And yes. It IS a major problem for many, many, poor people to obtain these photo identifications. $15.00 may be the cost in SOME states, though the cost in MY state is $35.00. Several years ago, shortly after returning home to California, my purse was stolen. It contained my Texas DL, along with my other ID. Since I’d been away from California for over 20 years, (and had needed to turn in my original CA DL for the TX one) I was no longer in the CA DL data base. SO, in order to acquire a new CA DL, I had to first obtain a certified copy of my birth from the CA Bureau of Vital Statistics. THAT was $22.00, plus another $12.00 because I needed it quickly. Once I received the certified copy of my birth in Los Angeles 47 years earlier, I was able to then take the bus to the nearest DMV to pay another $35.00 for the license. About 4 weeks later, I received the required documentation that allows me to operate a motor vehicle, and by extension, also proves that I was born in the USA, since I had to provide that proof in order to obtain this approval to operate a motor vehicle. That was NOT the intent of the founders, in respect to voting, and for me –at the time- it WAS an onerous burden. I’d recently lost my job and had NO INCOME, so all of these fees were problematic. To require that of any other citizen can be EQUALLY burdensome for many, which is exactly what the GOP operatives count on.

Report this

By troublesum, June 8, 2008 at 6:05 am Link to this comment

Trying to fix something which isn’t broken.  Voter ID laws: http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/10/supreme_court_considers_voter_id_law

Report this

By troublesum, June 8, 2008 at 4:45 am Link to this comment

One case in particular that I remember in one of the recent primaries was a case of a whole group of nuns from a local convent were denied the right to vote because they didn’t have ID’s even though the election officials knew who they were.  This is retarded.  (Of course they wanted to vote in the democratic primary)

Report this

By Jeff29, June 7, 2008 at 9:29 pm Link to this comment

OK Bob, make the ID cards free, I couldn’t care less.  Although I think it’s a slap in the face to the millions who have died for your right to vote for you to say that $15 is too high of a price to pay.

As for guns, “That involves making a purchase of a dangerous weapon that can be used for illegal purposes”.  That is such a weak argument.  Voting without an ID can also be used for illegal purposes, but as long as it’s a purpose you agree with, I guess that’s OK.

What’s funny about this whole thing, is the implication that there are no poor Republicans.  Have you ever lived in the “fly-over” states.  There are plenty of poor Republicans, they just don’t whine about every little thing that is wrong in their lives with the expectation that the government should fix everything.  Oh yeah, and they’ve figured out how to get an ID card and are willing to make a sacrifice in order to exercise their right to vote.

I don’t know what the exact demographics are, but the poor Democrats are certainly able to raise a lot more money for their candidates than the rich Republicans.  How is that?

Report this

By BobZ, June 7, 2008 at 9:11 pm Link to this comment

It should not cost any citizen $ 15.00 or any amount of money in order to vote, and the arguments about getting a gun are not valid. That involves making a purchase of a dangerous weapon that can be used for illegal purposes. The waiting periods are not onerous. Requiring an Id to vote is onerous, especially when almost all incidence of voter fraud have been perpetrated on low income groups who are the least likely to have the types of identification required in some of the worst states. This whole effort by Republican’s to require id to vote is just one more effort to try and steal elections they can’t win by legitimate means.

Report this

By Jeff29, June 7, 2008 at 8:59 pm Link to this comment

BobZ said, “Voter Id requirements are set up to prevent low income folks who may not have a drivers license or the funds to get an Id, from voting.”  Are you serious?  How about Voter ID requirements are set up to prevent non-citizen folks from voting?

The fact is, the Founders found the right to bear arms a more fundamental right than voting, and you folks have no problem requiring ID’s, waiting periods, and background checks for that.

According to troublesum’s logic, “This has already resulted in people not being allowed to vote in the primaries even though election officials in those places had good reason to believe that they were legal residents and registered voters.”  A gun store owner should be able to say, “I have good reason to believe that this guy is a responsible, up-standing citizen, so I’ll just let him buy a gun without ID.

This discussion is so mind-bogglingly ridiculous, it’s hard to believe some of the things I am actually reading.  The fact is U.S. citizens have right to vote in elections in the U.S.; without requiring ID, explain to me how you can guarantee that a non-citizen does not vote.  Do we just take their word for it?  For every story or “voter suppression” that you can cite, I can cite a story about people who are not registered and sometimes not even citizens being allowed to vote.

Frankly, if a person is not willing to go through the effort of getting an ID and registering to vote, that is an indication that the right to vote is not really that important to them.  The right to vote is a right that has been bought with blood, is a $15 ID card really too much to ask?

Report this

By BobZ, June 7, 2008 at 7:46 pm Link to this comment

If the biggest state in the union doesn’t require a Id, why do some other states require one? The only reason would be to disenfranchise citizens from voting. You can supply all the “spin” you want but requiring an Id to vote is not necessary, and never has been. This is strictly a Republican tactic to ensure they remain in power in those states. It looks like Obama will need a lot of attorney’s to make sure everyone who wants to vote gets to vote.

Report this

By tyler, June 7, 2008 at 6:21 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Oh, and anyone who says that low income families can’t afford id is retarded.

Report this

By tyler, June 7, 2008 at 6:15 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

i gotta agree with jeff29.  seriously folks, we all know when the elections are, is it too much to ask of a legal citizen to go out and get a valid ID?  who are those citizens that don’t have one?  the video store example is a perfect one, no ID, no rent.  voting in an election is a little more serious than renting a video, so it only makes sense.  i don’t know how anyone could argue that.  i personally wouldnt want illegal citizens voting in OUR election, even if they are voting the same as me.  its not their right.  so for all the morons who dont have ID, which baffles me anyway that you could fully function in society without one, GO GET SOME!

and alice brown, go fly a kite.

Report this

By BobZ, June 7, 2008 at 6:13 pm Link to this comment

My family and I have been voting in the state of California for decades and have never had to show an Id. The example of renting a DVD is ludicrous - the vendor merely wants to make sure he gets paid. Voter Id requirements are set up to prevent low income folks who may not have a drivers license or the funds to get an Id, from voting. This requirement is sickening for a country that prides itself on equality of opportunity. Voting is the most important act a citizen does and we should be doing everything possible to make it easier to vote not harder.

Report this

By americahappens1, June 7, 2008 at 4:30 pm Link to this comment

The media revolution has arrived….

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=35185726

Report this

By troublesum, June 7, 2008 at 2:42 pm Link to this comment

Jeff29
It is not fraud but voter suppression to require ID because it is aimed at groups who usually vote democratic.  Repubicans are not going to have a problem presenting an ID.  This is something that can be worked on so that eventually all people who are regular voters will have ID.  The problem is that any state can now demand that voters present an ID in the upcomming election before many eligible voters have gotten one.  This has already resulted in people not being allowed to vote in the primaries even though election officials in those places had good reason to believe that they were legal residents and registered voters.  Of course they were democrats.

Report this

By Jeff29, June 7, 2008 at 1:27 pm Link to this comment

This is hilariously sad.  The Constitution grants all citizens the right to vote, yet it is considered by most Truthdiggers to be voter fraud or disenfranchisement to require the voters to provide basic proof that they are citizens.  Someone please explain this.

I have to show ID in order to rent a DVD, yet many Libs claim that it is unreasonable to require ID in order to vote for President of the united States.

Ridiculous.

Report this

By GrammaConcept, June 7, 2008 at 10:06 am Link to this comment

Cyrena…..Your analysis is so brilliant and concise, while fully integrating the human element into the meaning of the message, that I Have to Thank You! for your efforts, and also say I will be forwarding it to some of my more misty friends..

Troublesum:....The photo connected to your link is really good therapy even if one did not even know who these people are….Thank you…

Most of the responses on this thread are so insightful and humane that I am honestly moved…..

Courage, Friends!...An old saying: “Live in fear and fear will live in you”...
Each does whatever he/she must do to confront evil….
From the I Ching comes another illuminated thought:
“The best way to fight evil is to make energetic progress in the good”....

Take care of each other.

We Strive On…

Report this

By Alice Brown, June 7, 2008 at 9:15 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Do any of you think that the people who are really in power are putting into action measures that will take our sociopath president away if he TRIES to start WWIII or kill another thousands of people through his own insane actions?

Shouldn’t there be something done now that the American masses have awakened to the hideous damage these madmen have created?  Do we have to continue to watch this train wreck?  And who will be the last soldier to die for nothing but his will to power?

Report this

By troublesum, June 7, 2008 at 7:41 am Link to this comment

Bush will attack Iran if he thinks it will help McCain, but these things are hard to gauge.  It could have the opposite effect.  There were all sorts of wild rumors around in 2004 - they were going to cancel the elections - they were going to stage a terrorist attack.  I think Bush and Cheney will limp out of the white house in January glad to be private citizens again.  They are bruised and battered with no fight left.
Clinton’s advisor on terrorism (Clark) was on one of the tv networks yesterday saying that we should have a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission”  like they had in South Africa after apartheid was abolished.  The neocons should have to appear before the commission, admit their guilt, and ask for forgiveness before being allowed back into “polite society.”  They should be forgiven, he said, but not before admitting guilt and asking for forgiveness.

Report this

By troublesum, June 7, 2008 at 6:57 am Link to this comment

This is beautiful.  A photo for the history books:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24958624/displaymode/1107/s/2/framenumber/5/

Report this

By cyrena, June 7, 2008 at 6:13 am Link to this comment

JPS..we should ALL be aware of this:

“And now they’re backed into a corner.  In the hope and glee that change is just around the corner, don’t forget that to get around that corner we will have to get by the posse of rabid rodents trapped in it.”

It won’t be pretty. You’re absolutely correct…time in running out on them, (as it eventually did on Hitler) and the thing about these totalitarian movements, is that they rarely (if ever in the purest examples of them) prepare for a ‘successor’. That seems to be a characteristic specific to the totalitarian ideology. Other tyrannical/despotic or dictatorships often do; especially the monarchies and the theocracies. But overall, the totalitarian structures never consider successors. They either plan to dominate the globe forever, or take it all down with them at the end, whenever that end becomes inevitable. 

A few in this cabal have already begun to jump ship and simply split, (which is what I would have honestly expected from far more of them – at least in the lower ranks). But most of them have NOT! They may be gone from view, but they’re still working frantically behind the scenes, and that scares me, because they are the ones trapped in the corner, that would as soon go out with the effort, and take everybody else with them.

You’re right. Very dangerous times ahead. The other thing that scares me is that even when these dictators ARE finally run out of dodge, they often leave behind large parts of their apparatuses, especially with the military regimes. Pinochet’s (and other military regimes) managed to remain in the midst of the structure, even after he and the top offenders were removed and/or fled.

So, that’s something to think about as well. There needs to be a really CLEAN sweep of the entire apparatus, specifically in DC. Kind of drastic, but that’s what revolutions are. Time for a counter-coup.

Report this

By jackpine savage, June 7, 2008 at 5:23 am Link to this comment

Somewhere down below, Ed Harges mentioned the Daniel Pipes interview.  He then gives a succinct summation of our presidents psychological state.  G.W. Bush would be just the kind of guy to start a war because he felt like We the People didn’t like him as well as we should.

Everything that man has ever done has been an attempt to impress his father and win familial approval.  We have a mentally unstable man sitting in the world’s most powerful office.  Nixon was crazy and maybe a little paranoid, but he wasn’t unstable. 

The next six months are a dangerous time.  Our unstable president is backed by a cabal that has been dreaming of their plans for world domination for decades.  This is it…their last chance.  They don’t feel like they’ve messed up anything; you’ve messed it up, i’ve messed it up, but they probably think that they can turn it around with one more act.

And now they’re backed into a corner.  In the hope and glee that change is just around the corner, don’t forget that to get around that corner we will have to get by the posse of rabid rodents trapped in it.

Unfortunately, they’re too big and protected to toss a sheet over and bash to death with a shovel.

Report this

By cyrena, June 7, 2008 at 5:11 am Link to this comment

Nf writes:

•  “The way democracy works for socialists like Obama (and Clinton) is to simply promise the non-taxpaying class more free handouts from the treasury to be paid for by the middle and wealthier class. Bush is not exempt from this - having put through the subsidized prescription plan for the elderly.  It is down to who can promise more - further escalating class warfare in this country.”

I think you’re correct about the escalation of class warfare in this country, but the reasons you site here are a façade, and not connected to what is allegedly ‘promised’, because the ‘promises’ have been a façade.

The alleged subsidized prescription plan for the elderly, (which is really supposed to be for anyone who has already begun to receive their social security benefits) doesn’t ‘subsidize’ the elderly or any other non-taxing class of the general. It subsidizes the insurance industries and big pharma. I don’t know of a single person, (including myself) who has ‘benefited’ from the prescription drug plan. The plan requires that one pay a monthly premium, ranging anywhere from $23.00 a month to $200.00, and the ‘benefits’ are provided according to how much of premium one pays.

Say for instance you can only afford the ‘cheaipe’ plan..the one that cost’s $23.00 a month. Well, that will give you a $7.00 discount off of your $142.00 medication. Whoppee! Now if you can afford one of the higher end ‘plans’, like one of the $200.00 a month premiums, then you might get an $84.00 ‘discount’ on the same medication. Since the SAME entity is getting both your insurance premiums as well as the money that you pay for the prescription, it’s a win-win for THEM, (that would be that NON- tax paying class otherwise known as The Corporations) and a lose-lose for the old folks. Now of course these same old folks only have the ‘privilege’ of being ripped off in this particular manner, because they’ve already been among the tax-paying class for decades, until they got too old and/or broke down to work any longer, which means that they stopped paying the traditional income taxes.

Meantime, all of the other suckers who are still slaving away and paying theirs in the form of income taxes, make the assumption, (because that’s the way the con-artists frame it for the masses) that these other folks are ‘getting something’ that they don’t have, even though they aren’t.

Ergo, class warfare over the presumed benefits of others of the same class, while Uncle Corp takes all the loot. That’s not exactly ‘socialist’. It’s Corporatist. And yeah, with the exception of Obama, who is very new to this, and therefore not yet tied to the scam, the old Dems (Clintons) who are really neo-libs, and no different than the neo-cons that have taken over the repugs are one and the same as the Corporatists.

BUT, they’ve managed to convince YOU, that they are ‘socialists’ so that you can fight with your own class, and not notice that they’re ripping ALL of us off. Of course the current Cable of extortionists and thieves has perfected the scam beyond anyone’s wildest imagination, but it’s been around for quite a while now. It started with Regan, and we’ve been catching hell ever since. It’s just that it took this final blow from the Cabal to complete the process of turning the classes into the masses.

Report this

By troublesum, June 6, 2008 at 8:34 pm Link to this comment

Nader would have to win for them to delcare martial law.  Obama isn’t a threat to anyone.

Report this

By Donna Glowacki, June 6, 2008 at 8:22 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Yes, an overwhelming turn out may keep the cheats from another theft.  Yes, monitoring the voter precinct activity may help prevent abuse of individual voters.  But the Repugs have stolen the 2000, 2004, and many congressional seats in 2006.  The Stalinesque punks who took control in 2000 will do ANYTHING to steal the 2008 election.  RFK Jr. and Greg Palast, the investigative reporter who expose the caging scheme to disenfranchise voters, are conducting a nationwide study.  In New Mexico they have uncovered the disenfranchisement of over 100,000 voters.  We must all check with our local city clerk’s offices well before November to ensure that our voter registration is active.  Otherwise, you could be turned away at the polls. Provisional ballots are a hoax, and aren’t counted. Nor should anyone vote by mail.  The Repugs who control most Secretary of States offices don’t count mailed ballots either.

As a last resort,the Repug thugs will pull an “event” to declare martial law if by some miracle, Obama outwits the fix.  It may be the attack of Iran, or an internal event.  The people must be prepared to participate in a National Strike to shut down the goverment in that event or accept life in a police state.

Report this

By Truthdig Webmaster, June 6, 2008 at 7:47 pm Link to this comment

GrammaConcept: The ‘respond’ feature will hopefully be back soon but has been suspended temporarily because of some recurring site-loading speed holdups. We’re working through them now. Thanks for your feedback.

Report this

By GrammaConcept, June 6, 2008 at 7:23 pm Link to this comment

My appreciation for your taking the time to ‘explain’ is Vast…

This clarity is Sooo necessary….It’s called communication…
Thank you.

I do wonder, though, what happened to the ‘respond’ feature…I’ve been away…
oh well.

Report this
Purple Girl's avatar

By Purple Girl, June 6, 2008 at 3:56 pm Link to this comment

The Michigan Primary was rigged by the ‘Top Dem’s’ as a means to provide Clinton with It as an Ace in Her Pocket.
I have great suspecions regarding the Clintons Now. I voted for Bill both times in the ‘90’s- WAS an avid supporter & Defender. Hillary and her ‘machine’ has facilitated My Recovery.
Her willingness to help derail his Presidency to allow Her to run in 2012 is not beyond belief. I have Absolutely No Repect for that Woman any more.Her Votes, her Complacency, Her Lies, Her Outrages statements (‘Obliterate Iran’ & the RFK reference) and her blanant manipulation of the Womens movement for her Own Personal Gains.She did to the Womens Movement what the ‘moral majority ’ has done to the truely Faithful. Undermined their causes,betrayed their confidence and maligned their name.
I don’t Like her, Don’t trust her and frankly have No Respect for her any longer!
I have no doubt she would use her tactics to undermine Obama’s Presidential Bid for her Own Benefit.She is Dispictable.
Note I was a Kucinich Supporter originally- She lost Me as soon as she began to vote WITH this adminstration!She is a covert operative for th eNeo CONS - Dick In Drag!

Report this

By Truthdig Webmaster, June 6, 2008 at 3:00 pm Link to this comment

PART TWO:

That said, the comments are intended to provide as close to a self-regulated community of fellow readers as possible – and we’d like nothing more than to have as little involvement in the editing process on the boards as possible – largely because it’s a time-consuming process, and again, we’re a small team—we’re also clearly invested in updating the site and keeping other aspects running smoothly.

And no, there isn’t a window to pop up when you report a comment that allows you to explain why you’re reporting it. Once a comment is flagged that will show up on our end as an alert to our team. Then, one of us (or more) will read the potentially problematic comment and may choose to delete it if it has, in fact, crossed any lines as they’re described in our comment policy (a link to which is featured below every comment window along with the terms and conditions link): http://www.truthdig.com/about/comment_policy/

We don’t need readers to specify exactly why they report a comment because, since we hammered out the comment guidelines in the first place, we’re all well aware of what they are. So the reason why a reader might have flagged a comment should be pretty easy for us to detect immediately upon reading the comment itself in order to warrant taking it down.

If not, or if there’s some confusion, looking at the entire thread in which the comment in question is situated is usually the next step. If it’s not at all clear why it was flagged to our trained eyes, then it might have been a mistake or the product of some other factor (personal conflicts between users, etc.). We can see who does the flagging—that’s made available only on our (editors’) end so that it’s possible for us to see when someone may be using the flagging function for other purposes than what it’s intended for.

No one user can run riot through the site, either, closing comments him- or herself; they have to be flagged by more than one user to be closed. If multiple distinct users flag a comment, then it closes. If one person flags it, it doesn’t close but carries a flag alert that the editorial team can see. If it no longer shows up on the page, it’s usually the case that a couple different readers flagged it and it’s being reviewed. This is, again, fairly basic and standard for sites like ours.

That’s how it works—it’s a necessary, if complex, side of the site, and we’re always refining the system. So feel free to send your feedback (there is a feedback form here: http://www.truthdig.com/contact/?bn) about any of this. Again, we’re always working toward making the comment boards as user-created and -moderated as is possible within the limits of our responsibility as a publication.

Hopefully this clears up some recurring questions about comments, etc. And again, we will soon put up a Comment FAQ section for future reference.

Finally, more general questions like this may be answered on the boards under this more general webmaster name, as it’s one we can all use to communicate to readers in real time, no matter who is or isn’t working from our group on any given day. Sending feedback via the feedback form (linked above) may prompt more individualized responses from our team members.  Thanks!

Report this

By Truthdig Webmaster, June 6, 2008 at 2:39 pm Link to this comment

alicecbrown:

A shorter version of this was posted on another story page—we’ll reproduce it here, with some additional info as well, in response to your comment on this page. This is long, so it’ll be posted in 2 parts. It’ll also form the basis for our upcoming Comment FAQ section – stay tuned for that.

PART ONE:
Flagging, or reporting, comments is one way that fellow Truthdig users/commenters can alert us to flaming, trolling, etc. on the boards. We are a small team and thus rely on the reporting function to let us know when conversations and debates between commenters are tipping over from “lively debate” territory into the realm of the offensive, and/or when personal attacks, etc. are happening. That’s a pretty standard feature for a Web site with both editorial content and comments sharing real estate on the site’s pages.

More on comment reporting in a moment, but first, on a more general note: The idea behind comment moderation is that Truthdig is a publication that we’re responsible for, and the comment boards represent part of that responsibility. See our terms and conditions page for more details on that: http://www.truthdig.com/user_agreement/

Also, even though the line between where the editorial content we officially pay for, pick up and sponsor, copyright, etc. (i.e., the blog sections written by our editors, along with our cartoons, original and syndicated reports, etc.) ends and the comments begin would seem fairly obvious to most Web-savvy sorts by now, that’s not always the case—and thus comments can be misconstrued as “representing” the site’s official stance on any issue, which isn’t the case.

Next, comments on Truthdig are more akin to the letters to the editor from ‘old media’ than they are the personal blog space that each commenter can use as a kind of virtual soapbox – that’s what personal blogs, primarily written, edited and moderated by the bloggers themselves, are for. Truthdig is in some ways a hybrid between blog and online magazine, but the paradigm for comments borrows more from the magazine model than the blog model as we’ve developed it. This is another reason why comments are edited—again along the lines of the letters-to-the-editor model. (Salon.com even calls their comments “letters,” perhaps to reflect this approach as well.)

While some would advocate no comment moderation at all, it’s been our experience, and that of other sites like ours, that some moderation is necessary. Why?

Well, first of all, it guards against “spambots” and others who can game the comment system enough to circumvent even highly sensitive built-in spam detectors and turn the comment boards into ad space for themselves, their company and/or their cause. That’s one sure-fire way to alienate all the other legitimate commenters quickly.

Also, once commenters start in with personal insults, trolling, etc., other readers react by letting us know that they can’t get a word in edgewise, that they used to feel like the boards were a place they could reliably have intelligent and respectful exchanges with others, and that different “flaming” factions are making the boards too combative and unpleasant for them to want to participate.

We’re all for challenging our writers’ and commenters’ _ideas_, but the level of discourse goes downhill fast once the challenges become personal and once users take advantage of the relative anonymity of the Internet to say things they’d never consider OK to say in any other setting.

(END PART ONE)

Report this

By felicity, June 6, 2008 at 1:46 pm Link to this comment

I’ve wondered why Republicans have been trying to get us out of the UN for years.  Now I know.  The UN has a team in place assigned to go around the world monitoring elections.  Clear everybody?

Report this

By troublesum, June 6, 2008 at 1:35 pm Link to this comment

Let’s hope the military would refuse to carry out his orders if he decides to bomb Iran in the event of an Obama victory.  They know he has no support amoung the people.  Hopefully they would wait for the new administration to come in.

Report this
skmacksk's avatar

By skmacksk, June 6, 2008 at 1:26 pm Link to this comment

The party of Lincoln is engaged in the subversion of the Republic from within:

Suspension of habeas corpus
Spying on citizens without warrant
Kidnap and torture
Rehabilitation of the bill of attainder
Assertion of the “Unitary Executive”: dictatorship by euphemism
Voter suppression
Evasion of oversight

This is just a brief list of the crimes of the Bush Restoration; they are a menace to Constitutional governance. The ensorcellment of the Republican Party by the Neo-conservative political psychosis appears complete; it may not be able to emancipate itself, from this totalitarian malady. The war on the commons, on the res publica (the public thing), is the reality of this political derangement.
That we need two, or more functioning parties, in this country, is reified by our experience of the last eight years. We must have functioning parties whose fealty is to the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, Bill of Rights, the Geneva Conventions, and the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights, at a minimum!
The Neo-Conservative ethos, an amalgam of bastardized Social Darwinism, a dog eat dog ethic, garnished by Christian moralizing is now, perhaps , in eclipse, abetted by the abysmal political failure of its masters. The question is Empire or Republic!

Report this

By Ed Harges, June 6, 2008 at 12:12 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Maybe we’re toast even if Obama wins.

The well-connected Daniel Pipes, among the vilest of the neocons, says that if Obama wins, Bush will attack Iran before leaving office.

And that, my friends, could well precipitate the absolute, final, crashing RUIN of the United States of America.

Yes, it’s Bush’s final revenge on the public that loathes him: “So, you don’t think I was a good president? Well, I’ll show you. I’ll f*** you over so good you’ll never forget it!”

http://tv.nationalreview.com/uncommonknowledge/post/?q=YjNlYjdjNmExZGQ3ZDM2ZDNiYWQ5MmFjMDhkZDcyNmE=

[thanks to antiwar.com for alerting us all to this]

Report this

By alicecbrown, June 6, 2008 at 11:56 am Link to this comment

Hi, folks, as we discuss the totalitarian mindset and willful ignorance of the Repulsicans who have put this nation on a deathspin into the dustbin of History, may I also point out to you that this site is on the slippery slope of censorship?

the fact that a comment can be summarily removed without explanation, that there is no policy posted detailing precisely what English words could be written here that are unacceptable, or what thoughts could be expressed that are deemed censorable is a good example of arbitrary totalitarianism and/or despotism, take you pick.

I have not had my own comments removed (yet), but if anyone is enslaved, so am I.  extrapolate from that.

Report this
martin weiss's avatar

By martin weiss, June 6, 2008 at 11:44 am Link to this comment

Too bad the Republicans don’t believe in America.

Report this

By troublesum, June 6, 2008 at 10:51 am Link to this comment

Things will be so bad McCain will vote for Obama.

Report this
Blackspeare's avatar

By Blackspeare, June 6, 2008 at 10:20 am Link to this comment

Voter suppression and vote fixing only work when the election is close.  By the time November comes around the USA will be in such dire economic straits that don’t be surprised if BHO wins by the biggest landslide yet!

Whether you call it fate, kismet or karma BHO was in the right place at the right time.  You have to feel a certain sympathy for HRC who knew that the Democratic candidate was essentially a shoe-in and there was nothing in her way, but along comes BHO——ironic is an understatement!  Though I personally like HRC, the era of the Clintons is over and history has turned the page.

However, she can make a name for herself in the Senate if she so desires, but I have a feeling that being so close to the presidency that she could almost taste it will have a lasting and chilling effect upon her and besides she’s no spring chicken——this was her last hurrah.

Report this

By LARmarch5, June 6, 2008 at 9:52 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It used to be that we lamented how few registered voters turned out to vote. Now the Republicans want to make it harder to vote. This will hopefully backfire once a prominant Republican gets challenged at the polls by one of the “good soldiers” of the Right. Then all heck will break loose. Kind of like when Trent Lott had to sue the insurance company to pay for Katrina damage to his own house.

Report this

By insider, June 6, 2008 at 6:17 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Bev Harris should be brought in as a consultant on the upcoming election.  She has a wealth of knowledge on voter fraud and has researched it for years.  Harris has the answers.

Report this

By jhm, June 6, 2008 at 4:48 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Unfortunately, US election laws do not meet minimum standards of fairness and uniformity required for international inspection or certification.

Report this

By americahappens1, June 5, 2008 at 11:36 pm Link to this comment

please check this out. it is redefining our media.

http://www.americahappens.com

Report this

By Bboy, June 5, 2008 at 11:01 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Rather, he said, there will be “individual instances” of voter suppression. These will take place in countless polling places, be initially judged by local election officials, and then move up to the state chief election officers, mostly partisan, and finally to the courts, often run by political judges. In other words, political hacks administering incomprehensible laws.”

This is the way the PRI party in Mexico stayed in power for eighty-some years without much (supposed)opposition. Even though in ‘88 the socialists definately won that election. The Masons in both countries overrode that. That’s what they specialise in. Fraud and incomprehensability. Isn’t it grand?!

Report this

By americahappens1, June 5, 2008 at 9:33 pm Link to this comment

If the following show existed back in the 2000 elections, those 500 something votes could have swung to the left instead of the right.

Please check out the following links and get involved. It’s the way YOU can become involved in the media.

http://www.americahappens.com

and

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=35185726

Report this

By nf, June 5, 2008 at 7:54 pm Link to this comment

The way democracy works for socialists like Obama (and Clinton) is to simply promise the non-taxpaying class more free handouts from the treasury to be paid for by the middle and wealthier class. Bush is not exempt from this - having put through the subsidized prescription plan for the elderly.  It is down to who can promise more - further escalating class warfare in this country.

Report this

By Sol, June 5, 2008 at 7:18 pm Link to this comment

Of course I totally agree. The problem is that the people that can make those decisions are not interested in your suggestion, unfortunately. If the coming election turns the same as 2004 I think there will be turmoil.

Report this

By Sol, June 5, 2008 at 7:15 pm Link to this comment

Absolutely Tres. It is really too bad the US is in such a great decline economically and morally. What amazes me the most is that American people do not seem to mind at all throwing billions into the war machine and when it comes to get 12 billion dollars to pay for children healthcare, major discussions happen in Congress and the president even vetoes the bill!!! Wow this is a very bad sign. Once in the war economy, the abyss is just around the corner. I for one witness all of this with great sadness.

Report this

By troublesum, June 5, 2008 at 6:39 pm Link to this comment

I have a feeling you are very worried.  There’s a feeling of inevitability about Obama.  His time has come.  Republicans look so pathetic planning their voter suppression campaign.  Democracy doesn’t work well for you, does it?

Report this

By nf, June 5, 2008 at 5:42 pm Link to this comment

Nothing to worry about here. As soon as working people realize that Obama will raise taxes on their incomes to pay for health insurance for those that don’t, their votes will go to McCain.  People generally vote on economics and once again the democrat nominee has already declared his affection for increased taxes to be spent by a democrat congress on programs that are counter=productive.

Report this

By Archtraveler, June 5, 2008 at 4:32 pm Link to this comment

How convenient that excuses are already being formulated in the event that Obama doesn’t win.  Voter suppression, intimidation, and fraud has been going on in this country since the early 18th century.  Neither the Democratic nor Republican parties can claim moral high ground on this issue either.

Was the 2000 election erroneous? Sure was, but you can place some of that blame on the Florida voters themselves whose inability to follow the most basic of instructions on how to punch a chad was too much to handle.  When Kerry lost in 2004, he lost by a lot more than any voting machine fraud could account for, and that is why he didn’t challenge it.

Report this

By tres, June 5, 2008 at 4:28 pm Link to this comment

Exactly. And the US Govt invades another nations to bring democracy. Better to make sure people can vote at home.

Report this

By Old Man in California, June 5, 2008 at 4:18 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

In the fifth paragraph, it reads:

“Those contests, won by President Bush, featured shortages of voting machines in minority areas; lost, discarded or rejected ballots; and many challenges to voter eligibility.”

To correct that sentence, please substitute “stolen by Governor Bush” for “won by President Bush”.  For that is the truth.

Report this

By Sol, June 5, 2008 at 3:54 pm Link to this comment

As a Canadian citizen, I never thought I would in my lifetime read that American elections are rigged. The richest, most powerful nation on Earth, now needs observers from the UN to make sure their elections are fair. Hard to believe. I now understand how the most advanced nation in the 1930s exterminated 6 million jews. What a shame! This display of lack of character and democratic values is, to say the least, disturbing. No wonder most young people could not careless about politics and social issues! We take away from them any possible hope of a future of peace and human respect. The US no longer has any moral to criticize any elections around the world. Mugabe is looking pretty good afterall.

Report this

By i,Q, June 5, 2008 at 2:37 pm Link to this comment

There is an unimaginably simple solution for adding accountability to the ease of use of electronic machines:

Require the machines to output a receipt with your selections for you to verify then sign in the presence of a “witness.” Put those signed receipts in a lock box. Later, if the electronic tally seems off, go to the lock box and cross check the results.

Simple.

Report this

By i,Q, June 5, 2008 at 2:27 pm Link to this comment

Are there any Td readers from CO besides me? i’d love to coordinate efforts to fight this kind of voter treatment.

If you click on my moniker, it will take you to YourAlliance.org, a site we are building to help organize our efforts. By the end of the day we should have a contact info submission form up and running. So if you’re motivated, send us your email and a note. This .org is brand spanking new, so bear with us as we get the cogs turning!

Report this

By Karen, June 5, 2008 at 2:17 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Go watch the HBO documentary “Hacking Democracy” on youtube.  Bev Harris deserves enormous praise!!

It’s not just voter suppression that is a danger, electronic voting machines remain a big threat to a fair election. 

Let’s not forget, Kerry had a team of lawyers ready to expose voting fraud, but he capitulated before they could investigate even the precinct in Florida that had a vote for Kerry of -16,000 (that’s MINUS!).  The documentary shows how easy it is to hack electronic voting machines.  And this, supposedly, is the greatest democracy on Earth!

Report this

By troublesum, June 5, 2008 at 2:01 pm Link to this comment

There aren’t enough rich white men in the country for republicans to win national elections honestly so they have to come up with a “game plan” for fraud and they carry it out without the slightest embarrassment.  No less a public figure than the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist took an active role in preventing Blacks from voting in Arizona elections for many years before becomming CJ.  And he did it with pride.  Excuse me, I mean the honorable William Renquist.  If there is evidence of wide spread fraud in this year’s election I don’t think Obama will give up without a fight the way Kerry did.

Report this
Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook