Villainous Company

In WA state, we were simultaneously registered to vote when we registered our cars. WTF? We were already registered for absentee ballots
in CA and told WA state this, and to take our names off their state registry.

They were shocked.

Yeah, in a pig's eye. We didn't ask to be registered, it was automatic. THAT is scary.

THEN in the Seelection of 2000 where the Chimp was anointed by the Supreme Court (a liberal bastion of judges at the time, I might add), all of a sudden, military absentee ballots went missing.

The Engineer and I registered and voted WEEKS before the Seelection. His was never counted, as he was told that they couldn't find him, so they sent him another application in February of 2001. Uh, how could they send him an application if they couldn't find him?

This was Gray Davis' California of rolling blackouts.

Is the ACLU considered an appendage of the Federal Government/Justice Dept., or is it a stand alone type of non-profit? :)

Wouldn't their undue influence be considered,...."Lobbying" ? Just wondering.

Their apparent ability to affect such far-reaching outcomes with the Justice Dept. would seem to overshadow the antics of people like Jack Abramahoff in terms of the actual impact on our lives, but since large sums of money (to us poor plebes and the nitwit network nabobs) did not appear to change hands, I guess there is no jazz to all this.

Now, if we could only somehow link this to Paris Hilton......

"Is the ACLU considered an appendage..."

Yep, Don, that pretty much nails it. Although, the specifics of said appendage appear to be interchangeable between that which is sat upon and that which wields a *thousand tiny warriors*.

Cricket, is that a new state to which you refer? Because the only Washington State I've seen is a university outside of Spokane.....

When I was living in Arkansas, the county in which I was registered to vote used a "scantron"-type ballot. I think this is what should be used in ALL elections. No hanging chads, votes easily counted by scan machines, and ever-so-conveniently, recountable. Now, the county in which I'm registered in Texas uses eSlate electronic voting machines (I actually had a phone interview with them years ago for a tech support job...). I live in a "purple" county, so I think election officials aren't weighted too heavily in one particular direction. All I get is a little slip of paper with some code on it. Anyhow, there is absolutely paper trail of how I voted. I don't like that.

Heh. Nope.
I guess I got into the habit of referring to it since people tended to be dazed and confused between DC and Washington.

No different than when gerrymandering was fine and dandy when the Dems were doing it.

When the R's finally gained enough momentum to have the redistricting work in their favor, it suddenly became UNFAIR!

I'd say that, as you aptly point out, as long as things go Nan's way, she won't question anything...or complain about anything.

Here in AZ we still have these gigantic paper ballots. You take a felt tip marker and fill in the blank next to your candidate's name. Pretty simple and pretty easy to count, too.

As far as there not being a paper trail? Paper trails haven't prevented fraud for the last two centuries. Why would they, now? Just like in Washington when those boxes of, "misplaced," ballots suddenly appeared? They could, "disappear," them in a similar manner.

I understand your being suspicious about the electronic method, but I'm suspicious of the paper ballots as well.

Dear Don Brouhaha,

Since you seem to be somewhat ignorant of legal matters, please allow me to enlighten you.
(I read 'The Idiots Guide to Passing the Bar Exam' so I've got this legal junk down pat.)

The ACLU is nothing more than a non-profit, benevolent association of un-biasd members of the legal community who's sole intrests is making sure that injustice(s) doesn't fall through the cracks.

According to reliable sources such as the NYT, CNN, CBS, TASS, ITAR, CAIR and others the ACLU is compossed of a bi-partisan conglomorate of loosely knit members who only complain about blatant, un-just Government policies.
They have neither the time nor the resources to be the nit-picking, rabid, liberal moonbats that they are depicted as since all of their work is done at their own expense, and on their own personal time.

They are the Salt of the Earth. If you don't believe me, just ask them.

Anyway, I remember well the 2000 Florida elections and the 40,000 Military absentee ballots that were cast out.
I aslo remember, after it was all said and done, it was discovered that approximately 2800 names on the Florida voter registration were from New York City.
Further digging revealed that these particular "voters" punched the ticket up to 5 different times in various precincts.
It also was discovered, especially in the Miami area, that an unusual amount of dead people were voting.

The fact that these things seemed to happen mostly in Democratic strongholds is beside the point. (A small percentage of the New Yorkers were Republicans).

The Point is that the ACLU needs Government support and funding just to keep their financial heads above water.
The only reason they targeted the Republican New Yorkers and not the Democrat ones is simply a matter of economics.

It was nothing personal or biased, they just couldn't afford it, poor guys.

I hope that this profound Legal Enlightenment helps you in some small way.
You seem to have a slight grasp of certain legal issues and perhaps you should consider persuing it as a career.
Who knows? You could someday become a court clerk or even a para-legal.
Anything's possible.

Joatmoaf,

Are you....mocking me? :D

No Sir, by no means.

I was just using your mention of the ACLU as a pretext to show off my vast, some would say, encyclopedic, knowledge of the judicial system and all things legal.
(Just don't call my bluff and no one will be the wiser)

I'm so smart I'm practically retarded :)

"Funny, isn't it?"

You mean funny as in peculiar, not amusing, huh?

"Did you try to discourage minority voters while you worked for the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division?" "I don't recall, and attorney-client privilege permits me not to answer anyway. So go pound sand."

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/17364767.htm

*sigh*

Could this be why he doesn't remember?

A former top official in the Justice Department's civil rights division testified Tuesday before a U.S. Senate committee that "nobody killed any investigation" into Indian voting rights in Minnesota in advance of the 2004 elections.

Bradley J. Schlozman, a former principal deputy assistant attorney general and acting assistant attorney general for the civil rights division, told the Senate Judiciary Committee that no interference took place. He also denied having anything to do with putting former U.S. Attorney for Minnesota Tom Heffelfinger on a list to be fired after Heffelfinger suggested an investigation into an Indian voting rights case.

Heffelfinger, who resigned in February 2006, has said repeatedly that no one at the Justice Department ever suggested that he should leave, nor did anyone complain to him about his advocacy for American Indian issues.

He said he followed department policy in fall 2004 when he recommended that the department's civil rights division investigate whether the state's policy of refusing tribal identification cards for voter registration purposes was a violation of the Help America Vote Act.

He said the department never reported back to him, but he didn't consider that unusual.

The matter was resolved before the election when Chief U.S. District Judge James Rosenbaum ruled in a lawsuit that the state should accept the tribal IDs.

But Joseph Rich, a former head of the voting rights section, told the Los Angeles Times that he believed Heffelfinger's concern for Indian voting rights "is at least part of the reason" he was targeted to be fired. [Ed note: Notice that this is completely contradicted BY WHAT HEFFELFINGER HIMSELF SAYS... BUT WHY WOULD THE LA TIMES BOTHER TO CHECK WITH THE ACTUAL SOURCE?] The Star Tribune published that article Thursday. Rich told the Times that Schlozman told him not to do anything with Heffelfinger's concerns without Schlozman's approval because of their "special sensitivity."

Rich said that when he suggested talking to Hennepin County officials, he was told to deal only with Minnesota Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer, a Republican, effectively ending his effort to investigate.

Schlozman, who is now an associate counsel at Justice headquarters, told the panel that Rich's comments to the Times were "completely inaccurate."

Typical.

"WHY WOULD THE LA TIMES BOTHER TO CHECK WITH THE ACTUAL SOURCE?"

Must be because the LA Times is part of that world-wide liberal conspiracy to bring down the entire United States government and permit Islamic terrorist-fascists to rape our under-age daughters and then make them wear a chadoor and ban scantily-clad buxom NFL cheerleaders from appearing on TV. Heck - everybody knows THAT!!! At least Islamic terrorist-fascists are against gay marriage too, so they can't be ALL bad.

Was that an answer?

You're changing the subject to distract from the fact that there are real issues about this administration using the "voter fraud" red herring as a cover for discouraging minority (and hence most likely Dem) voters. "Typical."

Yeah, confirmation bias would just be too simple an answer.

It has to be those evil Chinese toy loving Randian minions of the richest 1%.

Oh, don't forget the Joooooos.

Oh good grief...

You need a license to drive. My youngest child was issued a Social Security number before she was in school or I could not do my 1040. One has to produce id to pass a check at Wal-Mart. So, producing id to vote, one of the most precious of rights guaranteed to United States citizens is not IMO too much to expect.

My state attempted to introduce an id provision into law with the conditions that it would be free of charge to the recipient (but not the taxpayer of course), it would be processed and provided for at the home of the individual if necessary, and would be held to the same standard of id as a state drivers license. So this was deemed to be not a reasonable or good faith effort on the part of the state to bring equal opportunity to id's and integrity to the voting process. Go figure.

Of course folks should be happy that I am not KING, as I would have no problem with issuing a national id card to you and if you are a threat to the greater good, inserting an RFID tag into your carcass too.

Hey Occam, can I borrow your razor? I need to save someone.

Make that shave someone...

You're changing the subject to distract from the fact that there are real issues about this administration using the "voter fraud" red herring as a cover for discouraging minority (and hence most likely Dem) voters. "Typical."

Posted by: An Incredulous Reader

No, you're changing the subject to distract from the fact that the Democrats have no problem with voter fraud if they may have benefited from it.

Discouraging minority voting how? I very clearly recall that there was a huge scandal in South Dakota, when there was DEMOCRAT voter fraud on the indian reservations. Thune, who later defeated Tom Daschle, didn't protest it then, but he had the right to.

The Dems don't object to voter ID's because they don't want people, "disenfranchised," they object to ID's because it reduces their opportunities to rig elections...in their favor.

Sonny,

Dude there's so much extraneous and dense BS to remove you'll need something more along the lines of my pick axe.

I have a chain saw you can use, Sonny.....

A pick axe and and a chain saw! I think I... love you guys... *sniff*

Now where did I leave that ACME™ RFID-tagging injection gun?

In reality, voter cards are about the only reliable way to insure against fraud.
A picture I.D. with an encrypted chip of unique personal info is the way to go.

Like my D.o.D., CAC card. It has everything on it.
I can log on to certain computers, but not others. I can view certain websites, and others I can't.
I can get into one secure area but not another and it all depends on my security clearance and my actual need to know, or be, in that area.

As far as a voter I.D. goes, I can see problems with privacy issues on that idea, but then again they wouldn't really have to put your whole life on the chip.

At first I had a huge problem when we transitioned to the CACs and it was mainly over the privacy thing. But after they worked most (not all) of the glitches out I started to recognized the time saving convenience of them.
Plus they are VERY secure.

2 weeks ago I worked for 4 days at the NSA skiff of JIATF.
Due to the nature of their mission this is the most secure section of all the military and government agencies in Florida except maybe CENTCOM.
2 years ago, before my CAC, I would have had 2 armed Marines assigned to me for the duration.
The Jarheads don't play when it comes to security escort duty. They even follow you into the head and watch you take a piss.

With the CAC however, I just needed to be escorted through the compound to the NSA skiff, turned over to them, and allowed to do my work.
I had 2 GS-13s help me for a while and 1 GS-13 was my escort, which meant I had the run of the place as long as he could see me.

None of that would have even been considered, let alone possible, without the CAC card.
Everyting about me, my clearance level, time in service, reliability, dependability and maybe the number of hairs on my butt, are on that 7 layer encrypted chip.

A voter I.D. doesn't need all of those measures, but when the detractors make their protests they try to make it sound like it's going to be a Big Brother card like the CAC.

A point of fact is that it costs about $40,000 to do a thorough Top Secret security clearance check, about half that for a Secret, and the Agency or orginization requesting the check has to pay for it.
In other words, voter I.D.s won't be Big Brother cards. It's way too expensive.

A voter I.D. would solve so many problems that have plagued our elections.

No more "dual citizenship" voting because they will all be linked to the National register.

No more voting from the grave.

No more Clinton like antics of giving citizenship to 12 million illegals right before elections in hopes of gaining the edge.

And more importantly, no more "lost" or dis-allowed military absentee ballots at just the right crucial moment.

Consequently it would slow down to a trickle all of the legal challenges that happen after elections don't go the way someone wanted.

Institute the voter I.D. with a paper trail back up and a system like that would be almost infallible.

Maybe that's why so many Democrats don't like it.

"Institute the voter I.D. with a paper trail back up and a system like that would be almost infallible."

Whoa! Another kindred soul.

I remember well walking thru places I shall not mention with armed Marines for escorts during my days as a DOD rep for a BACC in and around the DC area. Then the trips to the head, as you say with the armed escorts. I discovered they do not appreciate Bob Hope’s style of off the cuff humor in those situations. I had high level clearances, but some places just ain’t suitable for mortals like me, even with my clearances. And the good ole three man team(one being an armed Marine... hard to get away from those guys) back in the day on the good old CV(A)-66 bird farm when having to go into the *mumble, cough, cough* missile magazines.

When I hear all the comotion and whining concerning why voter id's are an invasion of privacy or that having voter id's is reviving the bad old days of poll taxes and such, I want to call BS on it. There are too many ways to make it work for all citizens including the shut-ins,and the poor. But even more than the mechanics of a voter ID, my thoughts run towards the expense in lives, effort, and treasure of American citizens over the past 231 some odd years to secure our right to choose our leaders via the vote. So, I’m sorry but I just can't get worked up over a perceived loss of privacy when all we're really talking about is a bio-metric encoding (fingerprint or retina scan info) on a card, much like the GA. driver's license that I have had for close to 9 years now. It uses bio-metric encoding and anti-forgery techniques for validation.

A tamper-proof voter ID is an idea whose time has arrived.

All in all, this ole boy is more concerned with commercial databases compiling data on me than the government. The profit motivation of a commercial endeavor usually brings results, not so much so for Big Brother.

Maybe Sonny could use some help with those RFID-tagging guns.

I can see it now... Folks, don't forget to tune in for the Huntin' with BtheHun and Sonny for Feral Voters at the Polls Special the second Tuesday of every even year on the Outdoor channel. =8-}