*G - capitalize the first letter of a sentence.
*O - capitalize proper nouns.
*comma between "supporter" and "twit" - Lrn2clauses.
*R - capitalize proper nouns.
*You're - THIS was written specifically for YOU. Yes, you personally.
However, because our rulers have long ago given up any pretense of actually giving a damn about what their subjects want, they've passed ObamaCare in the middle of the night, using unprecedented trickery and loopholes, despite 70% of the country being against it.
But, even when the Socialist model, the inspiration for ObamaCare, is admitted to be a failure and steps are taken to return the healthcare system into private hands, nobody on this side of the pond gives a damn.
"In Britain, the government itself runs the hospitals and employs the doctors. We’ve all heard scare stories about how that works in practice; these stories are false. " - Paul Krugman, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/17/opinion/17krugman.html?_r=0
Yeah, the blood-soaked sheets, the discarded needles, and the 3-day-old corpses in hallways are just... figments of someone's imagination, right, Dr. Krugman?
Well-meaning idiots, or cryptomarxists willing to ignore any human suffering for the advancement of an agenda? You decide.
See, you're thinking like a sane human being who's concerned about making the most efficient system possible.
You're not thinking like a medical billing company with friends in Washington, who's salivating at all the extra business they would get with these new regulations.
You're not thinking like one of the many professional Medicare/Medicaid scammers, for whom a rising complexity means more loopholes to be exploited.
You're not thinking like an IRS official who's drooling over the prospect of getting several hundred or thousand of new agents under his control, and most likely a promotion commensurate with this new increase in responsibilities.
No one is interested in making a lean, efficient system that has no loopholes and enforces honesty.
"If honesty were suddenly introduced into American life, the whole system would collapse! No one would know what to do!" - George Carlin
"The Medicare program is a target for fraud because it is based on the "honor system" of billing. It was originally set-up to help honest doctors who helped the needy with medical services."
Let's take a system that's rife with fraud, and instead of fixing it, let's make it BIGGER. What could possibly go wrong?
On top of that, let's put out several thousand pages of new regulations, taxes, fees, and surcharges, and let's hire an additional 11,000+ IRS agents to monitor all that. Of COURSE costs will go down!
Those private insurance companies that have fraud rates in the 1%-2% neighborhood, compared to the Medic[are/aid] fraud rates in the ~20%? Let's impose price caps and other financial limitations on them, while forcing them to provide more and more coverage. Profits? Who needs them, when you're talking about "the greater good"? So, they'll go out of business, serves them right, those fat cats. Who cares if they were 10 times more efficient than government-run health insurance?
"In fiscal year 2010, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)—the agency that administers Medicare and Medicaid—estimated that these programs ade a total of over $70 billion in improper payments." Source: GAO testimony, March 9, 2011, retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/assets/130/125652.pdf
...ObamaCare - yet another RESOUNDING SUCCESS of this administration. On every account.
Or "happen to be" placed in areas like ends of runways, so hot jet exhaust washes over them.
Or "happen to be" placed on a building roof, conveniently next to the exhaust port of the HVAC system.
Or "happen to be" placed on a metal plate painted black, so it would retain an anomalous (compared to the surroundings) amount of heat.
And so on, and so on.
No, they don't need guns. Neither does the Dept. of Education, or FAA.
But it helps to promulgate the power of the federal government, and keeping citizens in line.
Want a good book on the subject? John Ross - "Unintended Consequences". It's out of print, but there are PDF's of it.
Of course people who invest hundreds of millions of dollars into the research, design, construction, and operation of nuclear reactors have NO CLUE what they're doing! They're just evil greedy morons out to make a buck and make everything around them glow in the dark!
...the stupidity of anti-nuke arguments - especially when they bring up Three Mile (where NOTHING HAPPENED, even according to the EPA who couldn't find any measurable increase in radiation - some steam got vented, basically) and Chernobyl (where an amazingly outdated design was put into operation because of cost-cutting measures (Communist thinking at its best) and failed because of a sequence of screw-ups, which is impossible under the current standards of design and operation) - never ceases to amaze me.
Chernobyl is NOT an argument - it's NOTHING like the current reactors.
Three Mile Island is NOT an argument - there was no radiation exposure, only coolant steam.
So there was this perfectly useful facility built specifically for the purpose of nuclear waste storage.
So the location was selected based on "data collected for nearly ten years" (Wikipedia). YM was picked since it was already located within a former nuclear test site (i.e. development potential for other types of structures or settlements was limited at best).
The facility was under construction, and proceeding well.
And then the shit hit the fan, in the form of Harry "Screw You All" Reid. "Following the 2006 mid-term Congressional elections, Democratic Nevada Senator Harry Reid, a long time opponent of the repository, became the Senate Majority Leader, putting him in a position to greatly affect the future of the project. Reid has said that he would continue to work to block completion of the project, and is quoted as having said: "Yucca Mountain is dead. It'll never happen."
Perhaps the most telling phrase in the entire Wiki article is this: "The US GAO stating that the closure was for policy not technical or safety reasons."
So, to summarize: we have a perfectly good facility that is DESIGNED for the purpose of nuclear waste storage. It's in an area that is a former nuclear test site, so there's not much we can build there anyway. It's almost complete, after CBO only knows how many millions of dollars spent. Yet because HARRY REID SAID SO, we're just going to throw it the hell out and continue storing nuclear waste "all over the place".
The political machinations of Reid and Obama vs logic.
The safety factor of storing nuclear waste in a designated, secure, safe, technologically advanced facility vs storing it in small batches in a multitude of sites.
The counter-terrorism factor of having one site to protect and monitor vs the need to protect & monitor hundreds of them.
The cost factor (not that Obama or Reid actually give a shit about taxpayer dollars, but still...) ...2012 is coming.
P.S. No, I didn't just get this info from Wikipedia. This issue has been "on the radar" on several blogs over the course of the last few years. Of course, the mainstream media will never, ever report it, but that doesn't mean that anyone who cares to find out more info can't Google "Yucca Mountain controversy" and go on from there.
Come on, this is the same bunch (lawmakers in general) that believes that stricter gun control will make criminals suddenly "straighten up and fly right" and not buy any more guns on the black market.
Wishful thinking made flesh. That's the bitter reality of the legislative process in today's United States.
And what was wrong with fiber-optic or the, hell, IDK, over 9000 other connection standards that have already been developed, real-world-tested and debugged, and have cheap, easily produced components?
But oh no, this is Apple.
Well, as long as the idiot public continues to purchase substandard products at a premium price (because people never learn), Apple will continue to get away with this BS. It's illogical, slightly funny, and really sad, but apparently "shiny white plastic > logical analysis of specifications, price, and suitability".
Publicity hounds... in the immortal words of Winnie The Pooh - "Tigga Please".
Who initiated a FOIA request resulting in 24,000 pages of E-mails disclosed? Who then admitted that while there was nothing specific they could even conjure up that they were looking for, they were "sure" that they'd find "something" (yeah, that's going to be unbiased reporting... at its finest), the project is so huge, but they're so committed to finding something, anything, that they don't have the staff and would like their readers to help out?
Who obsessed with SarahSarahTwentyFourSevenSarahAgain while Obama was breaking Constitutional law? Who tried to cover up their bloody shame by claiming that they were "looking for potentially historic E-mails of a future presidential candidate" - who did NOT announce her candidacy yet? (Seriously, my 6-year-old brother could come up with a better excuse than that).
Who ignored things like the QEII termination and the IMF events, as well as the brewing unrest in the Middle East, instead focusing on reporting every little detail of this woman's daily routine?
Who rented the house next door to the Palins in order to report on them? And who was, incidentally, bitching when a fence was put up in order to provide some privacy?
THE. F'ING. MEDIA.
Yeah, Sarah Palin's obsessed with the media. She sleeps at night and dreams of her E-mails being analysed word for word.
Back on Earth, however, it's the media that's 24/7 obsessed with her. Which makes one wonder, how scared are they that she's now such a priority target?
P.S. On a somewhat-related note, while "experts" were trumpeting the fact that Palin "writes on an 8th-grade level", did anyone bother to mention that The Great Communicator's most famous speech was at a whopping 7th-grade level? No? Shocking.
Apparently, it's OK to make the implication (and in some media outlets, the outright statement,) that Person A is a "moron" because their writing is at *this* level, yet Person B is a genius although their writing is a level lower. IDK, maybe it's the New New New Math, or something.
You're taking "his purpose" to mean "his *one and only* purpose". Read what the professor says. I can't delineate it any more clearly.
Re jury duty: has it ever occurred to you that some people actually do take their civic duty seriously? Alternately (and probably more realistically), if the media was watching your every move, would you want to risk skipping jury duty and then having headlines like "STUPID SARAH JUMPS JURY DUTY" splashed across every front page?
And while we're on the subject of "publicity hounds", who's following who around? Last time I checked, it was a shit-ton of media vans tailing her tour bus even though she did NOT invite any of them. But of yeah, because they're following her, she must have done something to deserve it. Classic guilt-by-inference.
"As of the 2008 election season, 24 states have voter photo ID laws. If you have a driver’s license, military ID, passport or certain other types of photo ID, you’re all set. If not, these states will provide you with a voter ID card for voting purposes free of charge." (http://www.ehow.com/how_4423238_get-voter-id-card.html)
But no, it's not enough that FREE ID's are provided. We have to deliver them personally, on a silver platter, tied off with a blue ribbon. God forbid anyone who's bitching about ID requirements actually types 18 letters into a search engine or makes a phone call. Too much effort.
Considering how many states do issue FREE voter ID cards (example: http://www.sos.ga.gov/gaphotoid/FAQ.html), and how many states have very liberal (in the Locke sense of the word, not the Liberal Party sense) terms of acceptable of non-voter-ID as acceptable proof of identity (anything from driver's licenses to utility bills to welfare cards), all one would need to do is lift a finger, dial a phone number, and get a card.
If you are a new voter who is registering by mail, you will be required to show identification when you go to vote for the first time. If you are already registered at the board of elections or a state agency, you should not have to show identification at the polls. It is advisable for all new voters to bring identification when voting for the first time. Acceptable IDs to to vote are:
Passport
Government ID card
Military ID card
Student ID card
Public housing ID card
Any ID specified by HAVA and New York State law as acceptable
Utility bill
Bank statement
Paycheck
Government check (Social Security, tax refund, military paycheck or paycheck stub)
Other government documents with your name and address including but not limited to: voter registration card, hunting, fishing, or trapping license or firearm permit.
So, if you work - your paycheck stub is OK. If you work for cash - your bank statement. If you don't work - government check. If you don't work and are in public housing - housing ID card. If you have a landline phone - your bill. If you don't have a landline phone - cell phone bill with matching address. And so on, and so on. Please, PLEASE show me ONE person who can have any semblance of normal function in society and yet somehow avoid having ANY form of ID.
If someone doesn't have ANY form of ID (how the HELL do they live? How do they drive / buy cigarettes / alcohol / drugs? How do they avoid being arrested if stopped by a cop? How do they receive welfare or own a home? Who the HELL in today's society doesn't have ANY ID?), and they're too damn lazy to even call up the state and ask for a voter ID card, do we really need to hold their hand all the way to the voting booth? Or can we acknowledge that sacrificing the rights of hundreds of thousands of legitimate voters (whose vote would be canceled by someone else's fraudulent one) for the sake of a tiny percentage of lazy/arrogant jackasses who can't function on the most basic level, is a terrible idea?
Or do we instead cling to the "screw the rights of millions, protect the rights of the few" doctrine and allow rampant vote fraud to take place?
For example the Texas ID law exempts registered gun owners and senior citizens from the ID requirement.
Registered gun owners = carry permit.
Senior citizens = AARP card or similar health-related ID.
But somehow, it's not OK to accept those forms of ID (both of which require at least some form of verification), but it's totally cool to show a utility bill or not even show anything at all.
Makes total sense.
What's next, outrage over members of the police and military (who also vote overwhelmingly conservative) who can substitute their police or military ID for other forms of ID? OH MY GOD WE CAN'T HAVE THAT.
Oh wait, it's not like all the overseas military members get ballots, anyway, since some states just can't handle the daunting task of putting some paper into envelopes and mailing them. http://www.wlsam.com/Article.asp?id=1985148&spid=
(Hey, gotta give Illinois credit, they were dealing with their Democrat (surprise!) governor lying through his teeth at the time. Handling yet another Democrat's massively illegal fuck-ups is far more important than the Constitutional rights of the men and women who are fighting and dying overseas.)
And those who do get to vote, assuming they don't hail from the ultra-blue Illinois or New York, can sleep soundly, knowing that Democrats would never do anything to get illegal votes that would cancel theirs out: http://www.rottenacorn.com/activityMap.html
Having to show ID for purchasing liquor is not an unfair tax.
Having to show ID for boarding an airplane is not an unfair tax.
Having to show ID for purchasing firearms is not an unfair tax.
Having to show ID to cross the international border is not an unfair tax.
Having to show ID to get a home loan is not an unfair tax.
Having to show ID to fill a prescription for controlled-substance drugs is not an unfair tax.
Yet, having to show ID to vote is an unfair poll tax.
I must have slept through the DoubleThink lessons.
Slashdot Mirror
*G - capitalize the first letter of a sentence.
*O - capitalize proper nouns.
*comma between "supporter" and "twit" - Lrn2clauses.
*R - capitalize proper nouns.
*You're - THIS was written specifically for YOU. Yes, you personally.
~~~~ Your Friendly Neighborhood Grammar Nazi.
So when a Democrat (e.g. Obama) does it, "his opinion is evolving". When a Republican does it, he's "flip-flopping". Cool. Got it.
This is nothing new.
However, because our rulers have long ago given up any pretense of actually giving a damn about what their subjects want, they've passed ObamaCare in the middle of the night, using unprecedented trickery and loopholes, despite 70% of the country being against it.
Oh, and meanwhile the UK government is quietly changing their healthcare system back into PRIVATE ownership, little by little, to avoid an uproar. I guess they got tired of hearing stories like these: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1253438/Mid-Staffordshire-NHS-hospital-routinely-neglected-patients.html?ITO=1490
But, even when the Socialist model, the inspiration for ObamaCare, is admitted to be a failure and steps are taken to return the healthcare system into private hands, nobody on this side of the pond gives a damn.
"In Britain, the government itself runs the hospitals and employs the doctors. We’ve all heard scare stories about how that works in practice; these stories are false. " - Paul Krugman, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/17/opinion/17krugman.html?_r=0
Yeah, the blood-soaked sheets, the discarded needles, and the 3-day-old corpses in hallways are just... figments of someone's imagination, right, Dr. Krugman?
Well-meaning idiots, or cryptomarxists willing to ignore any human suffering for the advancement of an agenda? You decide.
See, you're thinking like a sane human being who's concerned about making the most efficient system possible.
You're not thinking like a medical billing company with friends in Washington, who's salivating at all the extra business they would get with these new regulations. You're not thinking like one of the many professional Medicare/Medicaid scammers, for whom a rising complexity means more loopholes to be exploited. You're not thinking like an IRS official who's drooling over the prospect of getting several hundred or thousand of new agents under his control, and most likely a promotion commensurate with this new increase in responsibilities.
No one is interested in making a lean, efficient system that has no loopholes and enforces honesty.
"If honesty were suddenly introduced into American life, the whole system would collapse! No one would know what to do!" - George Carlin
Not surprising, for a system that allows treatment for endometriosis on a MALE patient...
BTW, when a government agency admits $ 70 billion dollars' worth of fraud - how much fraud is really there? Think about that.
"The Medicare program is a target for fraud because it is based on the "honor system" of billing. It was originally set-up to help honest doctors who helped the needy with medical services."
...ObamaCare - yet another RESOUNDING SUCCESS of this administration. On every account.
Let's take a system that's rife with fraud, and instead of fixing it, let's make it BIGGER. What could possibly go wrong?
On top of that, let's put out several thousand pages of new regulations, taxes, fees, and surcharges, and let's hire an additional 11,000+ IRS agents to monitor all that. Of COURSE costs will go down!
Those private insurance companies that have fraud rates in the 1%-2% neighborhood, compared to the Medic[are/aid] fraud rates in the ~20%? Let's impose price caps and other financial limitations on them, while forcing them to provide more and more coverage. Profits? Who needs them, when you're talking about "the greater good"? So, they'll go out of business, serves them right, those fat cats. Who cares if they were 10 times more efficient than government-run health insurance?
"In fiscal year 2010, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)—the agency that administers Medicare and Medicaid—estimated that these programs ade a total of over $70 billion in improper payments." Source: GAO testimony, March 9, 2011, retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/assets/130/125652.pdf
Or "happen to be" placed in areas like ends of runways, so hot jet exhaust washes over them. Or "happen to be" placed on a building roof, conveniently next to the exhaust port of the HVAC system. Or "happen to be" placed on a metal plate painted black, so it would retain an anomalous (compared to the surroundings) amount of heat. And so on, and so on.
No, they don't need guns. Neither does the Dept. of Education, or FAA. But it helps to promulgate the power of the federal government, and keeping citizens in line. Want a good book on the subject? John Ross - "Unintended Consequences". It's out of print, but there are PDF's of it.
Half-and-half, then, with Media Matters.
Of course people who invest hundreds of millions of dollars into the research, design, construction, and operation of nuclear reactors have NO CLUE what they're doing! They're just evil greedy morons out to make a buck and make everything around them glow in the dark!
...the stupidity of anti-nuke arguments - especially when they bring up Three Mile (where NOTHING HAPPENED, even according to the EPA who couldn't find any measurable increase in radiation - some steam got vented, basically) and Chernobyl (where an amazingly outdated design was put into operation because of cost-cutting measures (Communist thinking at its best) and failed because of a sequence of screw-ups, which is impossible under the current standards of design and operation) - never ceases to amaze me.
Chernobyl is NOT an argument - it's NOTHING like the current reactors.
Three Mile Island is NOT an argument - there was no radiation exposure, only coolant steam.
So there was this perfectly useful facility built specifically for the purpose of nuclear waste storage.
...2012 is coming.
So the location was selected based on "data collected for nearly ten years" (Wikipedia). YM was picked since it was already located within a former nuclear test site (i.e. development potential for other types of structures or settlements was limited at best).
The facility was under construction, and proceeding well.
And then the shit hit the fan, in the form of Harry "Screw You All" Reid.
"Following the 2006 mid-term Congressional elections, Democratic Nevada Senator Harry Reid, a long time opponent of the repository, became the Senate Majority Leader, putting him in a position to greatly affect the future of the project. Reid has said that he would continue to work to block completion of the project, and is quoted as having said: "Yucca Mountain is dead. It'll never happen."
Perhaps the most telling phrase in the entire Wiki article is this: "The US GAO stating that the closure was for policy not technical or safety reasons."
So, to summarize: we have a perfectly good facility that is DESIGNED for the purpose of nuclear waste storage. It's in an area that is a former nuclear test site, so there's not much we can build there anyway. It's almost complete, after CBO only knows how many millions of dollars spent. Yet because HARRY REID SAID SO, we're just going to throw it the hell out and continue storing nuclear waste "all over the place".
The political machinations of Reid and Obama vs logic.
The safety factor of storing nuclear waste in a designated, secure, safe, technologically advanced facility vs storing it in small batches in a multitude of sites.
The counter-terrorism factor of having one site to protect and monitor vs the need to protect & monitor hundreds of them.
The cost factor (not that Obama or Reid actually give a shit about taxpayer dollars, but still...)
P.S. No, I didn't just get this info from Wikipedia. This issue has been "on the radar" on several blogs over the course of the last few years. Of course, the mainstream media will never, ever report it, but that doesn't mean that anyone who cares to find out more info can't Google "Yucca Mountain controversy" and go on from there.
Lulz.
Too bad I posted already, this is definitely a +1 Funny material. Anyone with mod points left?
Come on, this is the same bunch (lawmakers in general) that believes that stricter gun control will make criminals suddenly "straighten up and fly right" and not buy any more guns on the black market.
Wishful thinking made flesh. That's the bitter reality of the legislative process in today's United States.
Electronic version of the John Bowman approach? (John Ross - "Unintended Consequences")
And what was wrong with fiber-optic or the, hell, IDK, over 9000 other connection standards that have already been developed, real-world-tested and debugged, and have cheap, easily produced components?
But oh no, this is Apple.
Well, as long as the idiot public continues to purchase substandard products at a premium price (because people never learn), Apple will continue to get away with this BS. It's illogical, slightly funny, and really sad, but apparently "shiny white plastic > logical analysis of specifications, price, and suitability".
Publicity hounds... in the immortal words of Winnie The Pooh - "Tigga Please".
Who initiated a FOIA request resulting in 24,000 pages of E-mails disclosed? Who then admitted that while there was nothing specific they could even conjure up that they were looking for, they were "sure" that they'd find "something" (yeah, that's going to be unbiased reporting... at its finest), the project is so huge, but they're so committed to finding something, anything, that they don't have the staff and would like their readers to help out?
Who obsessed with SarahSarahTwentyFourSevenSarahAgain while Obama was breaking Constitutional law? Who tried to cover up their bloody shame by claiming that they were "looking for potentially historic E-mails of a future presidential candidate" - who did NOT announce her candidacy yet? (Seriously, my 6-year-old brother could come up with a better excuse than that).
Who ignored things like the QEII termination and the IMF events, as well as the brewing unrest in the Middle East, instead focusing on reporting every little detail of this woman's daily routine?
Who rented the house next door to the Palins in order to report on them? And who was, incidentally, bitching when a fence was put up in order to provide some privacy?
THE. F'ING. MEDIA.
Yeah, Sarah Palin's obsessed with the media. She sleeps at night and dreams of her E-mails being analysed word for word.
Back on Earth, however, it's the media that's 24/7 obsessed with her. Which makes one wonder, how scared are they that she's now such a priority target?
P.S. On a somewhat-related note, while "experts" were trumpeting the fact that Palin "writes on an 8th-grade level", did anyone bother to mention that The Great Communicator's most famous speech was at a whopping 7th-grade level? No? Shocking.
Apparently, it's OK to make the implication (and in some media outlets, the outright statement,) that Person A is a "moron" because their writing is at *this* level, yet Person B is a genius although their writing is a level lower. IDK, maybe it's the New New New Math, or something.
You're taking "his purpose" to mean "his *one and only* purpose". Read what the professor says. I can't delineate it any more clearly.
Re jury duty: has it ever occurred to you that some people actually do take their civic duty seriously? Alternately (and probably more realistically), if the media was watching your every move, would you want to risk skipping jury duty and then having headlines like "STUPID SARAH JUMPS JURY DUTY" splashed across every front page?
And while we're on the subject of "publicity hounds", who's following who around? Last time I checked, it was a shit-ton of media vans tailing her tour bus even though she did NOT invite any of them. But of yeah, because they're following her, she must have done something to deserve it. Classic guilt-by-inference.
States. Do. Provide. Free. Voter ID.
Am I the only one who can use Google here?
"As of the 2008 election season, 24 states have voter photo ID laws. If you have a driver’s license, military ID, passport or certain other types of photo ID, you’re all set. If not, these states will provide you with a voter ID card for voting purposes free of charge." (http://www.ehow.com/how_4423238_get-voter-id-card.html)
But no, it's not enough that FREE ID's are provided. We have to deliver them personally, on a silver platter, tied off with a blue ribbon. God forbid anyone who's bitching about ID requirements actually types 18 letters into a search engine or makes a phone call. Too much effort.
10 seconds to Google: "how many states issue free voter ID"... favorite result so far: http://www.johnlocke.org/newsletters/research/2011-02-18-m0lcanosi54bel605me4poau57-regulation-update.html (oh the irony, I reference Locke and Google gives me a johnlocke.org result).
Here's another example, from New York this time: http://www.vote411.org/bystateresult.php?state=NY
ID Needed for Voting
If you are a new voter who is registering by mail, you will be required to show identification when you go to vote for the first time. If you are already registered at the board of elections or a state agency, you should not have to show identification at the polls. It is advisable for all new voters to bring identification when voting for the first time. Acceptable IDs to to vote are:
So, if you work - your paycheck stub is OK. If you work for cash - your bank statement. If you don't work - government check. If you don't work and are in public housing - housing ID card. If you have a landline phone - your bill. If you don't have a landline phone - cell phone bill with matching address. And so on, and so on. Please, PLEASE show me ONE person who can have any semblance of normal function in society and yet somehow avoid having ANY form of ID.
If someone doesn't have ANY form of ID (how the HELL do they live? How do they drive / buy cigarettes / alcohol / drugs? How do they avoid being arrested if stopped by a cop? How do they receive welfare or own a home? Who the HELL in today's society doesn't have ANY ID?), and they're too damn lazy to even call up the state and ask for a voter ID card, do we really need to hold their hand all the way to the voting booth? Or can we acknowledge that sacrificing the rights of hundreds of thousands of legitimate voters (whose vote would be canceled by someone else's fraudulent one) for the sake of a tiny percentage of lazy/arrogant jackasses who can't function on the most basic level, is a terrible idea?
Or do we instead cling to the "screw the rights of millions, protect the rights of the few" doctrine and allow rampant vote fraud to take place?
MOD PARENT UP
For example the Texas ID law exempts registered gun owners and senior citizens from the ID requirement.
Registered gun owners = carry permit.
Senior citizens = AARP card or similar health-related ID.
But somehow, it's not OK to accept those forms of ID (both of which require at least some form of verification), but it's totally cool to show a utility bill or not even show anything at all.
Makes total sense.
What's next, outrage over members of the police and military (who also vote overwhelmingly conservative) who can substitute their police or military ID for other forms of ID? OH MY GOD WE CAN'T HAVE THAT.
Oh wait, it's not like all the overseas military members get ballots, anyway, since some states just can't handle the daunting task of putting some paper into envelopes and mailing them. http://www.wlsam.com/Article.asp?id=1985148&spid=
(Hey, gotta give Illinois credit, they were dealing with their Democrat (surprise!) governor lying through his teeth at the time. Handling yet another Democrat's massively illegal fuck-ups is far more important than the Constitutional rights of the men and women who are fighting and dying overseas.)
And those who do get to vote, assuming they don't hail from the ultra-blue Illinois or New York, can sleep soundly, knowing that Democrats would never do anything to get illegal votes that would cancel theirs out: http://www.rottenacorn.com/activityMap.html
So...
Having to show ID for purchasing liquor is not an unfair tax.
Having to show ID for boarding an airplane is not an unfair tax.
Having to show ID for purchasing firearms is not an unfair tax.
Having to show ID to cross the international border is not an unfair tax.
Having to show ID to get a home loan is not an unfair tax.
Having to show ID to fill a prescription for controlled-substance drugs is not an unfair tax.
Yet, having to show ID to vote is an unfair poll tax.
I must have slept through the DoubleThink lessons.
Care to revise that Paul Revere statement?
http://www.npr.org/2011/06/06/137011636/how-accurate-were-palins-comments-on-paul-revere
^ that's not exactly a "right-wing" organization defending her, BTW.
Care to revise that bus tour statement?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/23/us-usa-palin-idUSTRE75M0N720110623
Care to acknowledge that maybe regurgitating the pre-chewed media talking points may not be the best way to win an argument?
Gee, lookitthat, 10 seconds' worth of Googling, and 90% of your bullshit is out the window. Your move.