The GOP Blasts "Obama's War on Women". More projecting?

It’s a pretty good tactic. Think “liberal media” or “socialist Democrats” or “the elites”. Sure, we can’t help but laugh/cry when we hear these things, but plenty of reasonable people have bought it to some degree.

Please tell me how wanting some form of picture ID for voters will “disenfranchise minority, poor, young and elderly voters.”

I just saw some statistics that showed about 40% of unmarried women didn’t vote. A lot of us are complaining about the right, but a lot of young people and apparently women don’t vote. We could probably change some stuff if we weren’t so apathetic lol.

What the? And the GOP sponsored Texas law requiring women to get a first trimester sonogram if they want an abortion isn’t war on women?
Hopefully women are smart enough to figure it out.

Edit: Some voting statistics.

@Blackberry How interesting. I wonder – did they look at men as well, to see if it was married vs unmarried women, or people? And, how much of this is just that young people are less likely to vote, and are incidentally also more likely to be unmarried?

@Aethelflaed Good question, but it doesn’t appear they have.

Yeah, because democrats are all about honesty…..?

Every politician is a liar.

Good God, yes.

I can’t help but wonder what world you live in. The entire ‘War on Women’ rhetoric was started by the Democrats. Now that it’s backfiring on them, your panicking to find a way out.

The Democrats are the only ones trying to divide us by economic class. Trying to pit us against each other. 1% vs 99%, ring a bell?

The voter ID issue is especially ridiculous. Georgia passed a similar law and turnout increased. Especially for Hispanic and black voters. It would seem Democrats should do some research before making stupid arguments. Of course if they did, they wouldn’t be Democrats.

When all else fails call them Nazis. Nazi Germany was a socialist state. Enough said.

“Republicans have charged that President Obama is waging a war on women.”

You have got to be kidding me. I don’t even know what to say to that. Just when I think they’ve reached the pinnacle of insanity, they manage to top themselves.

@tom_g Thanks.

@CaptainHarley The bulk of people who do not have the required form of ID are senior citizens who no longer drive, college students (there student ID used to be fine, but not according to the new GOP disenfranchisement drive), minorities and the poor who cannot afford a car. Many of these people will find it difficult to impossible to get the required form of ID. Interestingly, a gun permit is acceptable ID even without a photo driver’s license. There is virtually zero evidence of voter fraud, so this entire charade amounts to solving the huge unicorn problem. It is aimed squarely at electioneering; suppressing vote among demographics that “vote wrong”.

@Blackberry Getting young women to vote sounds like an important outreach.

@LuckyGuy Just about every state where the radical right swept into power in 2010 is not hard at work waging war on women.

@Blackberry Fascinating statistics. Thanks for posting them.

@cheebdragon THat’s a convenient lie to cover lying and excuse it. If you want to label someone a liar, prove it.

@marinelife It’s about as egregious an instance of projecting as I have seen.

@Jaxk I live in the evidence based world, not the faith based one. Faith in falsehoods produces some very strange results. Let’s review your lies.

The entire ‘War on Women’ rhetoric was started by the Democrats. Now that it’s backfiring on them, your [sic] panicking to find a way out. That is utterly laughable. Democrats made Limbaugh launch into a three day tirade of lies about Sandra Fluke. Democrats magically control Limbaugh’s mouth. Yeah, riiiiiight. Democrats magically forced Republican legislatures and governors all across America to pass thans-vaginal probe ultrasound laws and attack the very idea of birth control. Riiiiight.

And on class warfare, since the Con Man revolution of 1980, the middle class has shrunk almost 50%. Income for the top 1% has gone up by almost 300%. The top 400 tax payers now own more financial wealth that the bottom 50%. And that’s the GOP’s idea of Democrats declaring war on the wealthy. How absurd does something have to get before you’ll parrot the talking point?

As to voter turnout in Georgia, that claim follows a tried and true GOP method of argument. It the facts aren’t on your side, “simply lie”;http://www.brennancenter.org/blog/archives/analyzing_minority_turnout_after_voter_id/

As to Nazi parallel, if you had bothered to read the question details, you would have seen that I explained how socialism was combined with corporatism in Hitler’s Germany—just as the GOP is seeking to do here.

@ETpro

You confuse evidence with ideology. You rely on deception and misdirection to try and make people think you have point where none exists. Let’s take a real look.

The Democrats created birth control issue by when they knew it was a religious rights issue. Specifically to say the Republicans were waging a war on women. They were losing support and needed a hook. When Rush made his comment Democrats went crazy. Of course this merely made thier hypocrisy so apparent that even the least informed in America could see through it. Well maybe not the least informed, you missed it. Then you launch into a tirade about basically saying the right is waging a war on women when your question is asking just the opposite. More than a little misdirection.

The middle class has been shrinking since before 1980. I know that doesn’t fit your ideology. Too bad. The middle class has been shrinking due to the loss of manufacturing. A direct result of the massive regulation that has driven it overseas. Try analyzing the problem instead of just parroting talking points.

As for voter turnout. it has increased as a percentage of population. The Hispanic population doubled in Georgia between 2000 and 2010. Voter registration as well as voter turn out more than doubled during the same period. The vast majority after the 2007 voter ID law. You can try and manipulate the data or try to misdirect but it won’t change the facts. Not that you’ve ever been concerned about the facts.

Socialism is where industry is owned by the public or government (communism). Fascism is where industry is privately owned but government controlled. The Democrats have been pushing both for the last three years (much longer actually) but focusing mainly on the fascism model. Private ownership, free markets, and competition is known as capitalism. That is the preferred route of the Republicans. Not to mention the route that has made us great.

Are people under the impression that the War on Women just started in the past month or so? Or that the term, War on Women, has just come about in the past couple of weeks? Because I feel like it’s worth mentioning that this has been going on, non-stop, since this congress came into session in 2011, and that the term “war on women” was first used in February of 2011. This isn’t a couple of laws restricting access to birth control and abortion, it’s literally over a thousand legislative attempts since 2011 started, over one hundred of them successful, at both the state and federal levels.

lol

@Jaxk First and foremost, the Nazi’s were not even close to a socialist state. They called themselves that much in the same way North Korea calls themselves the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea. While the modern Republican party doesn’t even pale in comparison to the Nazi’s, they would be closer to them than Democrats in the general philosophy they follow and the tactics they generally (not always and not uniquely) employ. Again, I’m not saying Republicans are Nazi’s, or are even close to them, but this is basic history/social-studies… the EXTREME conservative polarity is Nazi’s, the EXTREME liberal polarity is Stalinist Communism. Don’t try to argue this, I’m telling you.. any history professional would laugh in your face if you even attempted it.

Also @Jaxk The middle class has been shrinking since 1980, you’re correct. Why don’t you take a look at who took office in 1980, and which party has been predominantly in control for the last 30 years?

Also @Jaxk Photo ID’s are not the issue. Things such as extreme prejudice for disqualifying voters are. For instance, if some of the laws under consideration were in place in Ohio right now, I would not be eligible to vote. I move rather frequently still, staying within my city of Columbus, but going to new apartments or town homes every year or two. This was also the case during my time in college, where I had to move every year due to changing room mates or financial issues. As a result, my license still has my “home” address of my mothers home up in Toledo Ohio. This not matching my district or my current “address”, would have disqualified me from voting under the new laws being considered.

How is that not disenfranchising college students, who (go figure) tend to vote Democratic? As a college student under these laws, I would have been forced to absentee vote for my home town of Toledo, where I hadn’t lived in years.. yet would’ve been unable to vote in my own town, where I lived, worked, went to class.. for 5 years. Other ridiculous voter laws.. the Republicans want to make it so that poll workers can’t tell you that you’re at the wrong voting location. They would have to let you vote, knowing full well that your vote would be thrown out for having been cast at the wrong location.. Literally it would be illegal for them to inform you. My current voting location is in a middle school, next to an elementary school that also does voting. My first time voting here I went to the elementary school on accident, and were it not for the thoughtful redirection of a poll worker.. my vote wouldn’t have counted that day.

Frankly this voter stuff makes me sick. Most states already require a picture ID. It’s just another red herring by the Republicans.

And the Democrats definitely didn’t start the Birth Control issue. This thing has been on the books for 3 years since the passage of the healthcare act. Now all of a sudden, you get guys like Rick Santorum speaking up and calling it a “violation of religious freedoms.” ????? Give me a God damn break.

Let me get this right Republicans… You don’t want to allow healthcare to cover birth control.. And you don’t want to teach anything but abstinence only sex ed in schools (a proven failure)... and you don’t want women to be able to get abortions because they won’t be able to afford a child…. and then you don’t want to pay for the womans or her childs health care… or the welfare after she has the child and has to forfeit a job or an education.

Swell… Good luck winning women’s votes with that one.

@tedd

I’m on my way out the door so I’ll make this short. According to the NY times the middle class has been shrinking since 1970 (about 4 decades). I know you all want to blame Reagan for this but it doesn’t work. It fits much more closely with the demise of manufacturing and the massive influx of regulation. Sorry.

As for your definition of Nazis, I’ll stand by what I said. Your belief on what every history teacher would say, not withstanding.

37 states already require a picture ID so you got this one right. And everyone of them will provide the voter ID card free. If you move a lot you can change your address in person, online or by mail according to Ohio DMV. It’s in everyone’s best interest to have you voting in your own precinct or through an absentee ballot.instead of voting for local issues where you don’t live and shouldn’t have any say.

As for the health care bill, it doesn’t address contraceptives. It gives the Secretary of Health the power to define what is minimum coverage for the mandate. She only recently decided to make contraceptives part of the minimum coverage after discussions with Obama. That is what started the whole debate and they started it knowing it would create an uproar.

In general you were wrong about almost everything.

@Jaxk Hey you said 1980, I merely pointed out the obvious things that happened in 1980 and since then. And I could definitely agree with the middle class shrinking having a lot to do with the manufacturing going downhill, but I vehemently disagree that regulation is to blame (at least not soley). By the same token (or a bigger token) you have Republican legislation that made it easier, and even preferable, for companies to shift jobs overseas. Tax breaks for companies that send jobs overseas, being the easy political tag-line.

As far as the Nazi’s, I also stand by what I say. I could point to the first thing the Nazi’s did when they took power… wipe out the communists… aka the epitome of socialists. There are easy comparisons between the Nazi’s and the hardcore communist/socialist states, the easiest being brutal dictorial leadership. But both of them being socialist, is most definitely not one of their similarities.

You said ”It’s in everyone’s best interest to have you voting in your own precinct or through an absentee ballot.instead of voting for local issues where you don’t live and shouldn’t have any say.” ... I couldn’t agree more. The Republican bills I’ve seen would make it so you A)Have to have 100% accurate ID, and B)Have to have lived in a district for a year (or more in some areas) in order to vote there.. among other things…. How many college students can show that they lived in one residence at their school for a year or more? I couldn’t have for the first 4 years of my college career. Hence I would’ve been ineligible to vote in any election in the town which I lived, and would continue to live. Instead, the Republicans would’ve had me voting absentee in my home town of Toledo… A city where I didn’t live, and as you put it “shouldn’t have a say.”

And what about the rules Republicans are proposing that would outlaw poll workers from telling you that you were in the wrong polling location? What POSSIBLE purpose of avoiding vote fraud could that have?

As far as contraceptives, it didn’t become an issue until Republicans seized upon a handful of pontiff’s voicing concerns, and turned it into “Obama’s war on religion!!!” And yes, most definitely the Democrats will stand up to that outrageous allegation, and point out the extreme attack on women’s rights that Republicans are pushing in the name of “Freedom of Religion.” And you know what we will probably never agree on that issue… But wanna make a bet who the majority of women are going to side with come November?

In general, I don’t like you.

@tedd

Can I assume then that I won’t be getting your vote for Miss Congeniality?

@Jaxk Well that depends…. have you got any funfetti cupcakes?

@ETpro Every politician is a liar

@Jaxk Right-wing equals wrong-headed once again. I have absolutely no confusion regarding the meaning of evidence and ideology. My understanding of both words matches closely with that provided by a good dictionary. I’m sure you know what both words mean as well, so can we set that ad hominem aside? And if you wish to frame your answers on the premise that anyone who disagrees with you is so stupid they can’t even understand basic English, then the gloves are off. I feel free to shoot holes in such arguments with both barrels loaded with double-R buckshot.

Your first error in premise is that it is cheating to push legislation that makes a candidate or political party openly declare what was already in their secret heart. Doing so is not MAKING the GOP take an unpopular stand. It is simply demonstrating that they hold a political position that is extremely unpopular. I know the GOP likes all games rigged in a heads-I-win, tails-you lose fashion. But there is no clause in the US Constitution requiring that anyone opposing the GOP must shoot themselves in the foot and tie both hands behind their back before the fight begins.

Regarding the GOP War on Women, you wrote “_Of course this merely made thier [sic] hypocrisy so apparent that even the least informed in America could see through it._” Polls would tend to disagree. Of course, polls get back into that pesky evidence stuff. Less than 3% of Planned Parenthood’s services have anything to do with abortion, and no federal funds are used to support those services. . For many inner-city women, Planned Parenthood is the sole provider of cancer screening and family planning advice, Here’s a brief list of the fronts that the “GOP’s War on Women”: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/15/yes-there-is-republican-war-on-women-voters/ is currently targeting.

Regarding my question, you then wrote, “_Then you launch into a tirade about basically saying the right is waging a war on women when your question is asking just the opposite. More than a little misdirection._” Wrong again. There is a link in the OP so that if you are unaware of the meaning of “projection” as used, you can look it up and understand what the OP is asking. The question is focused squarely on what you claim it is not. Have we entered the Hall of Mirrors where everything is seen in reverse view?

One of the specifics of the Health Care Reform Act is that women who leave a job, or are fired or laid off, may keep their existing health care insurance for up to 18 months. That’s COBRA. Now I think this is a good thing. Republicans are incensed by it. According to GOPers, people who aren’t rich enough to buy a private policy costing a king’s ransom should just die. It’s the only Christian thing to do. Otherwise, they are taking up a bit of money that the Greedy Oligarch Pigs could have to themselves. It’s just not fair.

I did see the reference you listed to the study claiming that the middle class shrinkage began in 1970. However, that disagrees with a number of resources I have previously seen.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/27/magazine/27wwln-idealab-t.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/09/8-surprising-facts-about_n_675545.html#s121657&title=Income_Inequality_Is
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2012/01/13/a-shrinking-middle-class-means-a-shrinking-economy/

Also, I have my own experience as a measure. I was a mid-level executive in a US corporation that provided automation to electronics manufacturers. Our domestic market was solid right up until 1985, when numerous US electronics manufacturers suddenly off-shored their entire manufacturing operation. “_Manufacturing Matters_”:http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Matters-Myth-Post-Industrial-Economy/dp/0465043852 was written in 1987. It looked at the fallacy of the Reagan Administration tropes used to push off-shoring of manufacturing. The Administration’s stated premise was that the US was transitioning from the age of manufacturing to the information age; just as we had previously transitioned from the agricultural age to the manufacturing age. Of course, that was utter baloney. We never abandoned agriculture, we automated it. We are still the world’s largest exporter of food. And the notion that we would earn fabulous rewards teaching the rest of the world to manufacture at 6-sigma quality levels when we no longer did any manufacturing ourselves was sheer idiocy. You cannot get paid huge sums to teach what you no longer know how to do.

Reagan’s boys simply wanted to externalize as much cost as possible from US corporations so executive pay could go through the roof. In 1980, the average US CEO made about 30 times what a worker earned. That was high compared to Japan (11x) and Germany (12x) but sustainable. Today, CEOs earn 300 to 500 times as much as the workers they supervise. That transfer of wealth is what the off-shoring movement was intended to allow. All the white papers and studies cranked out by the 50-state network of far-right think tanks with this and that justification were just smokescreen to cover the Greedy Oligarch Pig war on the middle class. There is definitely a class war going on, but the middle class didn’t start it, and they have only recently awakened to the fact they have been under attack from the far-right would be oligarchs now for 30 years.

There are definitely abuses on both sides. Labor unions are a valuable asset when properly constituted. If they function like the trade guilds of old, ensuring that their members are properly trained and uphold the standards of artisanship required by the guild, then they do great good. And history in the age of the robber barons has shown that there is a need for organized labor to curb the abuses of an all-powerful management. I’d love to see changes to how unions are constituted today. But not until the GOP drops their war on workers. In a war, one doesn’t unilaterally disarm and expect that will result in everyone gathering around the campfire to sing Kumbaya

@cheebdragon That’s a common lie used to justify political chicanery. When ANY politician lies, call them out on it. But son’t excuse it by a sweeping generalization.

It points to a violent mindset and irresponsible use of the word war. I bet that none of the ad creators actually fought in a real war, but they might be quite experienced in violent video games where killing people seems like fun.

It’s interesting how translators sometimes cheat. Whenever Bush talked about war on terrorism or war on drugs, the German translation always was fight against terrorism and drugs.

A phrase like ‘war on women’ is a disgrace. Let alone the accusation. Where are the decent Republicans taking back their party?

@mattbrowne To be fair to Republicans, I believe Democrats accused them of waging a War on Women first. That all came from a long strong of legislation at both the state and federal level trying to limit women’s access to health care, contraception, abortion, etc.

@ETpro – I think Democrats should be careful about the word war too. I noticed that they don’t use talk about a war on terror that often.

I agree with Matt and don’t believe that the Republicans are actually warring against women. The truth is that they hold democracy in contempt and have a regressive attitude towards women. I expect if they got what they really wanted they would insist that women return to the home, leave the work force except where they act as secretaries and or concubines, and rescind women’s right to vote. I expect that they are closer to the Taliban in their regard for women than the average American.

@Ron_C If that isn’t a War on Women and their rigts in America today, then it’s hard to conceive what a political class war is.

@ETpro the apparent goal of the Republican core is control, punish dissenters, use religion as a tool to control the masses, and insure that the top 400 or so families are protected from the rabble. If there is a war it is against the remaining middle class and the poor. Women’s rights and health are just tools to gain and keep control of the masses..

@Ron_C That’s exactly how I see it.

@ETpro Wow. Just….wow. If I wasn’t so disturbed by the hypocrisy thought this question, the irony would be pretty fucking hilarious.

@cheebdragon Could you rephrase that in standard English so I have some idea what you are trying to say?

@ETpro you bitch about how republicans are lying and falsely accusing democrats….and yet, you seem to have no problem spouting off lies & accusations about republicans. It’s almost like ironic hate-mongering.

@cheebdragon If you’d like to list things I said that are inaccurate, I’d be glad to review. I freely admit I am not always right. But just claiming I spout lies with no specific list of them is the height of hate mongering. There’s no defense against it other than to point out that it’s a charge without any specifics. You’re under arrest for being a criminal. No further details needed. No defense is possible.

@cheebdragon I’ll admit that @ETpro and I are frequently on the same page and I can’t understand your complaint either.

Frankly, all I’ve seen from the republicans are direct attacks on women’s rights and the sovereignty over their bodies and direct attacks on freedom of assembly, unions, and support for excess medical and martial spending. Please enumerate your complaints for the rest of us.

If it’s okay with you I’ll let you respond to one issue at a time because long posts are lame, and I have to pick up my kid soon anyway. Let’s start at the beginning….

1.”The GOP is pushing legislation in 31 states to disenfranchise minority, poor, young and elderly voters—demographics who generally vote Democratic.” – Really? You can’t even buy a fucking lighter in most places without a god damned photo ID…..you can’t buy tobacco, alcohol, you can’t open a bank account, return items without receipts, use a credit card, cash a paycheck or any kind of check, board an airplane, rent a car, get a library card, pick up a package from UPS, visit a doctor, pick-up prescriptions…..the list goes on, and on, and on…..
”Many of these people will find it difficult to impossible to get the required form of ID.” – So difficult!
Please explain the truth behind your statement, because it would appear that the entire world is out to get these people if it were true, or is it just a huge GOP conspiracy?

@cheebdragon College students have been able to vote with their student ID for ages. No more. There have been virtually no documented cases of voter fraud.

Florida COPers scaled back early voting and pushed through a law that anyone conducting voter registration drives has to turn in the signed forms within 48 hours or face very stiff fines. THe League of Women VOters, Rock the Vote and other mainstream organizations that used to register voters have had to suspend operations in Florida because there is too much risk a weekend or holiday will catch them with no hope of complying.

All the changes have been aimed at the young, the elderly, and minorities. THese are all groups that generally lean Democratic, so they have to be hindered. It’s as pure a case of electioneering as I have seen come along since poll taxes and leteracy tests that Dixiecrats used to use were outlawed.

If the nearest DMV is 20 miles from a poor person and they do not drive, getting an ID is difficult. A woman in her 80s who had voted in the same precinct all her life was turned away because she had no driver’s license. She can’t get one, because she doesn’t have a birth certificate. Every poll worker at the precinct knew here, but she is stuck.

If there were evidence of widespread voter fraud, then I would be backing voter ID laws. There is not. Laws all of a sudden in 31 states solving a problem that doesn’t exist? And all the laws are carefully structured so they target primarily groups that do not vote Republican. It stinks.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67555.html

Here in Massachusetts, the poll workers have a list of the names and addresses of all registered voters in their precinct. You can show anything to prove you live at a given address. They check the box by your name, indicating that you’ve voted. If someone else claiming to be the person with your name and address shows up, they know one or the other of you are lying, and they sort it out. There is a perfect solution that makes voter fraud impossible without poll worker collusion, and both parties have observers on hand to ensure against that.

@ETpro

Sorry, I wasn’t going to get back into this but your response makes it impossible for me to stay silent. There are two ways to reduce the cases of voter fraud. One is to make voter fraud more difficult to commit and the other is to make voter fraud more difficult to catch. Democrats seem to prefer the latter. I wonder why but let’s put that aside.

I am curious as to how the ID law makes it more difficult for your protected groups. It would seem the difficulty is the same whether you are white, black, brown, or grey. In fact none of your post shows anything that would indicate actual voter suppression. Just a bunch of anecdotal opinion and isolated statistics. The only evidence I can find shows that voter turnout after the ID laws would indicate that it increases voter turnout significantly among blacks and minorities. Rather than anecdotal evidence or talking points, you may want to actually look at what happens.

Democrats have been making these claims for years with no evidence of any suppression. The lady doth protest to much methinks.

@Jaxk ”. Come and get them if you want them!” That’s the point. Voter fraud is virtually non-existent. Therefore you have to ask yourself, “why all of these new law?” The absolute only reason is to reduce the number of likely voters.

Why would you want to do that” Even the republicans acknowledge that the lower the voter turn out the more likely a republican will win. Pretty simple.

@Ron_C

Since the data shows it does not reduce the number of voters, I can’t buy into your conspiracy theory. The only reason to do this is to reduce the likelihood of voter fraud. Apparently something you don’t want.

@Ron_C What “data” shows that? ALEC pushed for these changes to the laws in all states controlled by Republicans. They supplied sample legislation. And their own internal communications say that the intent is to decrease the number of Americans able to participate in the elective process; and that they think suppressing participation by certain voting blocks is a good idea worthy of pursuit.

Im curious, are these supposedly suppressed, elderly voters, more or less, the same elderly that democrats have been scaring with their ”2011 Lie of the year”?

“virtually no documented cases of voter fraud”…..(“virtually” sounds pretty fucking dubious, IMHO) Is the opinion piece article your only source? something slightly more credible would be great.

moving on…....you said “According to GOPers, people who aren’t rich enough to buy a private policy costing a king’s ransom should just die”….Really now? who said that? when did they say it? by all means, please enlighten me, because this one has “hate-mongering hypocrite”, written all over it.

@Jaxk the only data we have on the voter rejection is minimal because there has not been a major election with the 23 new state laws in effect. I am not normally a conspiracy theorist because I don’t believe that Americans are smart enough of sneaky enough to keep a secret. The idea behind the “voter fraud” laws is not a secret. Republican strategists from Nixon’s advisers down to the Koch brothers have stated that the best way for republicans to win was to limit the vote. It is not a secret, it’s a fact.

@Ron_C

I’m not sure that saying “it’s a fact” makes it a fact. But let’s get past that. The first voter ID laws were passed in 2003. There have been elections since then and studies have shown no decrease in voter turnout and in fact show increases. If the intention was to suppress voter turnout, it was poorly planned and executed since it didn’t happen.

Also I should note that the Carter-Baker Commission (2005) came to the conclusion that Real IDs be used for voting. Neither Nixon nor the Koch brothers were involved in this commission. Maybe we should stick to evidence rather than just trying to impugn the motives of people based on pure speculation.

@Jaxk exactly!

If it’s a fact, please prove it, back up your statements and accusations. If you dont have anything honest to say, dont say anything at all. ;p

Wikipedia has a pretty good entry about the rise of voter I.D. In every case, it was the Republican governor or state legislature that instituted those laws. They are doing it here in my state of Pennsylvania. This is part of an over-all assault on the voting process. A couple years ago they brought in voting machines, this year is it voter I.D. I suspect that eventually they will want to limit voting to male property owners.

I just find it ironic that a party that mentions freedom in every speech involves itself in limiting freedoms especially for women, the elderly, and non-white races.

@Ron_C

I guess you got me there. If a Republican prosed it, recommended it, voted for it, or even read it, that’s proof positive that it’s bad. Now we are only left to speculate what evil intent they had for doing so.

@Jaxk “f a Republican prosed it, recommended it, voted for it,...” Just ask yourself, why is this issue so important to them?

I know that there are sleazebags on both sides of the isle. I also know that the Tea Party and conservative Republicans are not friends to everyday working people. The voting issue, anti-abortion, and other woman’s issues are simply distractions so you don’t see what the politicians are actually doing. As bad as the left is, they are opposing the theft of Social Security, privatizing medicare, and selling the commons to the highest bidder.

Why would anyone vote for a person to hold office in a government they pledge to eliminate?

If you want to look at a government with perfect freedom for the upper class and the rule of unrestricted capitalism, look as Somalia. There is no government to interfere with free enterprise pirates, or puts limits on war lords. That is apparently what people like Ron Paul want for this country. That and a little theocracy for the Santorum crowd.

@Ron_C

It’s an issue like all others. I would think after the 200 election and the Frankin election, it would be clear that people of all stripes have skepticism in our voting system. Shoring up the integrity of the system benefits everyone. The Carter-Baker commission was chaired by none other than Jimmy Carter. I doubt he was trying to eliminate Democratic voters.

Your warped view of what Republicans (or conservatives) want, is driving your hatred to unimaginable levels. There is a concept of ‘Limited Government’. That is between no government and all government. It is in fact what the founding fathers created. Limited government still leaves a lot of control to the states which exercise that control on a more local level. Kinda strikes me as a good system. Somewhere between Somalia and N.Korea.

There is a good book (Ameritopia) that explains why the founding fathers choose the system they did. You may want to read it. It is an easy read with a lot of good background.

@Jaxk I don’t hate republicans, I was once a republican. I guess you could call me a Eisenhower Republican. I believed that government had a duty to tie the nation together, he started the Interstate Highway system. I also believe that the military industrial complex power is a blow to democracy and instigator of needless wars. So in that respect, I was also a libertarian.

The point is that when Reagan was running for president, the party left me, I did not leave the party.

I did all the right things, went to school, college, military, started my own business. All of that time I had to fight an intrusive Republican regime that camouflaged their power take over in the rhetoric of freedom, and religion. The current batch of tea party and neocon republicans have ruined the country, the economy, and ever civil discourse. I don’t see a way out of this except for an eventual violent civil war. Ironically it will be about the same as the previous ones where the slave states (now called right to work) will fight the east and west coast liberal democratic states.

I suspect that the south will win this time because they are heavily armed and crazy enough to inflect real damage against democracy.

@Ron_C If they win they lose. Their policies will destroy them. Therein lies the problem with letting them drive the ship of state.

@cheebdragon Politifact.com must really want to seem unbiased. But the fact is Paul Ryan’s plan to replace Medicare with a voucher system does end medicare as we know it. I am 68 years old now. When I last shopped for a good health insurance policy for myself, I was 62 and Blue Cross wanted $2.500 a month. That is with no preexisting conditions except high blood pressure, which is perfectly managed with very inexpensive medication. I exercise daily and am as healthy as a horse. My last hospitalization at the time was back when I was 20 years old, and had my appendicitis removed.

Imagine yourself being retirement age and getting a Paul Ryan voucher. Imagine going out to buy private medical insurance if you have diabetes, are overweight, smoke, have had a previous heart attack, or cancer… Your voucher would be utterly worthless. Unless you were independently wealthy, no private insurer would sell you a policy for any conceivable value that voucher would carry.

Politifact is perfectly willing to lie to seem unbiased. And they most certainly did on this one. If Ryan’s budget goes through, Medicare will shortly he a distant dream like so many other things that used to be better, but are gone now.