Re: Looks like Republicans don't want Veterans to vote after all

On May 6, 1:08=A0pm, "Bill Bonde ( 'the oblique allusion in lieu of the
frontal attack' )"  <tributyltinpa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Bob Ward wrote:
> > Where, in all of this, was that mentioned and/or do***ented?
>
> If you read the lawsuit over this, it was essentially a spill over
> from the fight in the state legislature, Republicans wanting to
> make sure that voters were the people who they claimed to be and
> could legitimately vote, Democrats figuring they would best be
> served by letting anyone who wanted to vote vote, even if they were
> dead or a dog or an illegal alien or had already voted several
> hundred times in other precincts.
>
Okay, now name a single dead person or dog who showed up to vote at a
local precinct in any recent US election.  You can't.  There is
apparently zero voter fraud that would be prevented by this law.

However, the 24th Amendment clearly talks about, and SCOTUS decisions
since have affirmed, that the obstacles to voting should be minimal--
signature, proof of residence, voter registration, that's about it.
There is not any minimum amount of money required to vote.  Look it
up.  The decision last week completely ignores the 24th Amendment--
literally.  Despite three or four different opinions, the Justices
never mentioned the damn thing!  It's incredible!  Not to mention
pathetic.

No, voter fraud largely takes place on the absentee ballot stuffing.
In Georgia, the same voter ID law actually eased strictures on mail-in
ballots.  Huh.  These ID laws prevent nothing except a certain class
of legitimate voters from exercising their franchise.

Anyway, the best way to insure one person, one vote at the polls is to
dip a specific finger in ink.  Bright pink, or possibly tie-dye.


Mr C