Voter ID

Actually I went back and looked again. Most of the links were a 'read more' link, meaning it just opened the full article and did not go further.

 

Liberals don't want voter ID because they will fail to win the popular vote or any elections. They have been corrupting the system for a long time and hate the idea of accountability. They would rather cheat and win and elect criminal elements into the government than actually elect officials who Americans can trust. It's a lot like organized crime.

 

I don't give anyone my SSN number, unless it is required by an agency that is linked to tax reporting, passport, employment or possibly linked to a background check. It's really that simple. ID cards (state) should just verify who you are, and if you are a citizen and resident of said state. It's a simple yes or no answer. You should be required to show a SS card to ATTAIN a state ID, but it should not list your number. As for medical, I believe HIPPA prohibits that.

 

NO, you should NOT be required to present an SSN to get a state ID. My mother had her SSN from many years ago. It had in bold print, across the front, NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION. When the SSN idea was on the table, the legislators debated the pros and cons.

You have a birth certificate in order to get a driver's license and your ID should not be based upon the SSN.

 

I cannot speak for liberals since I'm not a liberal, but I spoke out against it when I spoke at the regular meetings of organizations like the Conservative Union and the John Birch Society.

Since voting is a privilege and not a Right, I would suppose that, under our Constitution, who can and cannot vote needs to be worked out between state and federal governments. That, sir, has no relevance to my personal Liberty, Privacy or Freedom. I'd appreciate it IF you had the courage to acknowledge that. Insinuating things that are not true in order to bolster your case does not bode well for the credibility of your argument.

AS has been proven in this thread, hordes of illegal voters isn't happening. So all you really have is fear mongering. You should read the thread.

 

Sorry, I meant to say birth certificate. That's what is required for DL. That suffices. Even more so.

 

Unfortunately sanctuary states like CA don't verify citizenship. "Are you a citizen?" YES, NO. Alrighty then!

 

Nor are the states required to ask people if they are citizens. Do you want me to cite you the United States Supreme Court on that one?

The reason this is NOT a right v left issue is that National ID has always been about control. Period. The left wants to maintain National ID because they need it to control firearms. The right wants it on the pretext of controlling people. Both sides demand it though it is about as effective as a eunuch in a brothel... except to limit Liberty and invade the privacy Rights of individuals.

Conservatives, up through Ronald Reagan, were quick to admonish the masses that you do NOT want a massive sized government. They said the government big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take all you have.

Harold W. Handley of Indiana used it in his annual message to the Indiana General Assembly in 1961; Barry Goldwater was quoted using it in his 1964 run for president; and Gerald Ford is on record using it in an address to a joint session of Congress on August 12, 1974. It was attributed to Ford as early as 1954, however, and Ford's assistant, Robert Hartmann, said that Ford claimed to have heard the quotation "early in his political career" from Harvard McClain at the Economic Club of Chicago. Other sources state:

“A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.” Gerald Ford

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/4056-a-government-big-enough-to-give-you-everything-you-want

"Remember that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take away everything you have." Barry Goldwater

http://www.searchquotes.com/search/A_Government_Big_Enough_To_Give_You_Everything/




Read more: http://www.searchquotes.com/search/A_Government_Big_Enough_To_Give_You_Everything/#ixzz4hSCXjvuw

Well, you can always follow the quote and it's disputed who said it first - or exactly what they said, but every major conservative in my lifetime echoed that sentiment until the Tea Party Republicans surfaced and I'm constantly arguing with them over the foundational principles of this nation - especially the Declaration of Independence (where they howl like mad dogs and claim its insignificance and meaning to our culture and foundational principles.)

The masses who hijacked "conservatism" want an absolute POLICE STATE consistent with authoritarianism and well beyond the limited form of government called for in the Constitution. Eventually, the courts are going to rule on this. And first, it was only land owners that could vote, then all citizens could vote (except women), then women, blacks, etc., etc. National ID is not going to stop that trend. Giving up your Right to Privacy will not stop the inevitable AND it destroys your ability to resist unconstitutional government. From a purely strategic standpoint, you could not do any worse to yourself in the cause of Freedom, Liberty and Limited Government unless you loaded and handed a gun to your enemy. Globalists want to jeopardize all your Rights via National ID. No amount of arguing or political jockeying can alter or change that reality.

 

Properly identifying yourself to vote isn't a totalitarian effort to resist constitutional government. It's an assurance that an illegal invader isn't diluting a citizen's right for self governance, particularly when one party blatantly and openly encourages illegals to vote their hack partisan way.

 

The deal is, and it has been explained to you over and over, what you are fretting over is NOT a problem. You are advocating a totalitarian "solution" to a problem that does not exist.

My stance is, if I have a Right to do something, I'm not asking permission to do it.

 

1) Two wrongs don't make a right

2) I would not agree to produce ID for many things on the list because if I have a Right to do it, I do not need permission. For example, I got divorced once. The standard boilerplate language I had to use on the Final Order and Decree stated:

The Plaintiff shall have the right to remarry

Why would I then ask for the government's permission for a marriage license?

While you're trying to find more and more reasons to institute the ultimate POLICE STATE, I'm all for reversing that trend. Tell you what though. Since the side you're on supported National ID, if you will now repeal it and issue STATE ID instead of the Hitler inspired National ID, without the SSN requirement, I might consider listening to you. If not, good luck in the NEW WORLD ORDER.

 

And if you don't have a right (not a citizen), then you don't. All that is being asked to do is verify that you are. Allowing illegals and those not eligible to vote disenfranchises those who do have that right.

 

So many are services for the poor they claim can't get an ID even though we know they're using the services.

 

I've yet to ever hear a response to this, even though I've posted that so many times I quit repeating it. Deaf ears, and there is no logical argument to offer. Crickets.

 

Because it's all Bushwa. The folks they claim are disenfranchised are the ones using the Government services needing a photo ID.

 

I understand entirely the precept you are alluding to. The founders felt that having skin in the game was important. Liberals have built a base on the premise that we are JUST a Democracy where the majority can take from the producers 'just because they can'. They are dead wrong.

 

Voting is a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT...those other things are NOT

 

The Bill of Rights is the unalienable Rights of man codified. We have a guy here in Georgia that plays all sides of the political spectrum - an anti-immigrant spokesman, Neal Boortz, who says there is no right to vote in a federal election:

http://www.redandblack.com/news/boo...cle_5c22787f-365f-5ee6-aa60-4dafbc2e0eb6.html

http://tammybruce.com/tam-wire/ther...o-vote-in-a-presidential-election-neal-boortz

The Constitution says, in the twenty sixth Amendment for example that the right cannot be denied on account of age, but I don't know where the Constitution confers such a right. IF it exists, it is definitely a government created right, unlike the Bill of Rights.

 

States have the authority to allow whomever they want to vote in state elections. Unless such a requirement of citizenship exists at the state level (like in a state constitution or a specific statute) that is state's prerogative. The Constitution is not so clear at first glance since the "right" is controlled by the government.

 

Under a de jure / lawful / constitutional Republican form of government such as ours, youre birth certificate and a utility bill should be enough information for any bureaucrat.

And yes, you have been answered. Just because the status quo exists does not mean it is right.

 

Voting is a Constitutional right reserved for citizens of these United States. I see no problem with attempting to verify a person's citizenship at the time a ballot is cast. Why would that be problematic?

 

Because Democrats will stuff the ballot box with anyone's vote that is willing to be pandered to. Including the dead.

 

Where did Congress confer a "right" to vote that is limited to citizens? Cite the Constitution please. I don't even think a federal statute exists at the federal level, but we've been over this how many times now?????

Did you bother to read post #168 on this thread???

 

Statutorily, it's a violation in all 50 states, subject to criminal penalties. It's high time for all states to enforce these laws.

 

As well as:

The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) requires that persons registering to vote in federal elections affirm that they are United States Citizens. Failure to do so is a crime punishable under the following statutes:

• Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 611, it is a crime – punishable by a fine and up to one year in prison – for an alien to vote in a federal election.
• Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1227, any alien who has voted in violation of any Federal, State, or local constitutional provision, statute, ordinance, or regulation is deportable.
• Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-10(2) any false statement concerning an applicant’s citizenship status that is made on a registration form submitted to election authorities is a crime.
• Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 911 knowing and willful false assertions of United States citizenship in order to vote are punishable by up to three years in prison.
• Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1015(f) it is a criminal offense for an individual to make a false statement or claim that he or she is a citizen of the United States in order to register or to vote.