READER COMMENTS ON

"90-Year Old Grandmother of PA Borough President Can't Vote Under New GOP Photo ID Law"

(17 Responses so far...)





COMMENT #1 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 4/23/2012 @ 4:50 pm PT...





Unfortunately, despite our extended coverage, far too many citizens have been duped into believing that photo ID laws are intended to prevent "voter fraud." In truth, the only type of "voter fraud" that polling place photo ID restrictions can prevent is in-person voter impersonation --- a form of voter fraud that is as scarce as hen's teeth. Photo ID laws have only one purpose --- to disenfranchise the poor, minorities, students --- people who generally do not vote for the GOP. The GOP is now seeking to directly deceive voters in MN by the photo ID scam. It is critical that citizens in all states learn the truth about photo ID and then join the effort to fend off the GOP's war on democracy.

COMMENT #2 [Permalink]

... Ralph Dratman said on 4/24/2012 @ 7:49 am PT...





These efforts at disenfranchisement are only the crudest and most disgusting attempts by the GOP to grab power. We have been assaulted with this garbage thrown straight at our heads for the past 40 years by the same gang of criminal stooges. I am too depressed (for personal reasons) to continue the fight. I hope crowds of younger people with lots of energy will take my place.

COMMENT #3 [Permalink]

... Joe in Syracuse said on 4/24/2012 @ 11:55 am PT...





Makes one wonder Brad just how they go about getting all these state legislatures to push the same agenda in the same election year. I know its been their goal for decades to disenfranchise democratic voters but where are they getting this from?

Obviously the Koch brothers have had an influence as we've seen in their collective bargaining assault but there must be some coordination going on at higher party levels to push these voter ID laws. All i can picture is Jabba the Hut surrounded by the likes of Mitch Mcconnell, John Boehner, Eric Cantor, etc. taking their marching orders.

COMMENT #4 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 4/24/2012 @ 11:20 pm PT...





Joe in Syracuse asked @ 3: Makes one wonder Brad just how they go about getting all these state legislatures to push the same agenda in the same election year. I know its been their goal for decades to disenfranchise democratic voters but where are they getting this from? Yes, they've been pushing it for decades, but the recent push started, in earnest, as I see it, after the 2004 election when a concerted, organized and well-financed effort flipped the concerns about GOP election fraud in Ohio to (phony) concerns about Dem voter fraud in Ohio. Read my many many articles on the American Center for Voting Rights (ACVR) which I covered as they appeared out of nowhere in 2005. Those stories are all indexed here: https://BradBlog.com/ACVR

...and the group was eventually found to be at the heart of the US Attorney Purge in 2006. With the "outside" ACVR effort was the effort inside the Bush DoJ to allow these Photo ID restriction laws to pass muster under the Voting Rights Act and, finally, they got their approval from the Bush SCOTUS in 2008 on Indiana's version of the law. With that approval from SCOTUS, all they needed was a year like 2010 when Republicans were able to take control of both legislatures and executive branches in state after state. They got it in 2010 and they've been able to push these laws through, finally, with SCOTUS approval and complete control of legislatures and governships and instructions on how to write the legislation from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and the deal is done. ACVR came straight out of the Bush White House (as I showed in my years of coverage). And so did everything else that has followed since.

COMMENT #5 [Permalink]

... Steve in Pittsburgh said on 4/25/2012 @ 7:03 am PT...





I love how one of the rules is: "4) Do NOT post knowing dis-information. If we determine that you are purposely and knowingly posting well-debunked information in order to confuse or deceive readers, the comment will be removed, and you will too after fair warning." Your entire representation of the Voter ID legislation is purposely misleading. I could go point by point and illustrate, but I think an article written in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette will clarify things: http://www.post-gazette....er-fraud-is-real-224753/

COMMENT #6 [Permalink]

... Plum Sites said on 4/25/2012 @ 7:04 am PT...





Mrs. Block's problem can be easily solved. Since she never legally changed her name, she is still technically known by her maiden name and easily get an ID in her maiden name now. I don't know why she chose and not to update her name decades ago; I would be curious to find out, as she uses her maiden name when she uses Social Security (since that is the name on the card). I'm also curious why she chose to never get an ID or passport. She is not just getting an ID; she's also doing a legal name change. On top of that, she is using a marriage license that is not in English. First, she must change her name with the Social Security Administration, just like all of us married ladies do. SSA has tranlators on staff; she simply needs to request that one be present when she schedules her appointment. With the correct SS card, she'll have no trouble getting an ID. I applaud her for fulfilling her civic duties! I just wanted to clear up the confusion on this particular instance.

COMMENT #7 [Permalink]

... Enzo said on 4/25/2012 @ 9:34 am PT...





The solution is simple, get an ID. Why can't minorities and old people get an ID like everyone else? You need an ID to get a library card, buy alcohol, get on an airplane, to get government benefits, and to function in life. If they don't need an ID to vote, then stop asking me for ID to do these activities. No one is keeping anyone down. Is it really asking too much for someone to go get a freakin' ID?????? Are minorities and old people really too dumb to do that?

COMMENT #8 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 4/25/2012 @ 10:25 am PT...





Enzo whiffed @ 7 with: The solution is simple, get an ID. Why can't minorities and old people get an ID like everyone else? You need an ID to get a library card, buy alcohol, get on an airplane, to get government benefits, and to function in life. If they don't need an ID to vote, then stop asking me for ID to do these activities. No one is keeping anyone down. Is it really asking too much for someone to go get a freakin' ID?????? Are minorities and old people really too dumb to do that? Don't know what "old people [are] really too dumb to do", but apparently you're too dumb to read the article above before you comment on it and make a jackass of yourself. Fail. Big time. Go read it now and then get back to us. Okay? BTW, no, you don't need a Photo ID to enjoy most of the PRIVILEGES you mentioned (eg. Don't need a Photo ID to "get on an airplane" or to "get a library card" or to "buy alcohol"). So are Enzos really too dumb to know that? On the other hand, voting is a RIGHT, not a privilege and though you, apparently, don't mind undermining our Constitutional American values by allowing Big Government to strip away the rights of the citizenry, I'll fight for them anyway. You're welcome.

COMMENT #9 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 4/25/2012 @ 10:59 am PT...





Steve in Pittsburgh @ 5 Your entire representation of the Voter ID legislation is purposely misleading. I could go point by point and illustrate, but I think an article written in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette will clarify things: http://www.post-gazette....er-fraud-is-real-224753/ There's a reason for that "knowing dis-information" rule. If we didn't have it, I'd have to ban you immediately, Steve. My guess is you actually believe the disinformation you've just linked us to. So since you failed to offer the "point by point" rebuttal you say you "could" have offered, I'll be more courteous than that and actually give you a point-by-point rebuttal to the nonsense you've linked us to. Well, to at least a few of the points. Could rebut each and every graf of that silliness. For a start, however, perhaps you were too disinformed to notice, but in the entire article you linked to, there is NOT ONE example of a case of fraud that would have been prevented by polling place Photo ID restrictions. Not one. You have been duped. But let's run through just a few of the points in that article. If there are any you feel I didn't speak to, just let me know! The state chairman of Indiana's Democratic Party resigned Monday as a probe of election fraud in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary widened. The "election fraud" in question here is actually ballot petition fraud to get both Obama and Hillary Clinton on the 2008 primary ballot there. Polling place Photo ID restrictions would have nothing to do with stopping it. The 500 allegedly fraudulent signatures on those petitions is an almost identical case to the one being investigated in VA where Newt Gingrich is admits to 1,500 fraudulent signatures on his (unsuccessful) petition to get on the VA GOP Presidential Primary ballot. Yet Democrats say that measures to guard against vote fraud are racist Republican plots to disenfranchise minority voters. They are right. Well, plots to disenfranchise minority voters, elderly voters and student voters. I have no opinion on whether the plot is "racist" or not. An NAACP official was convicted on 10 counts of absentee voter fraud in Tunica County, Miss., in July. And, as I'm sure you know, but the author forget to tell you, polling place Photo ID restrictions do absolutely nothing to deter "absentee voter fraud" either. Laws requiring photo IDs suppress minority voting, Democrats charge. The facts say otherwise. In Georgia, black voter turnout for the midterm election in 2006 was 42.9 percent. After Georgia passed photo ID, black turnout in the 2010 midterm rose to 50.4 percent. Black turnout also rose in Indiana and Mississippi after photo IDs were required. Little wonder the author of that column didn't include any links in it. For a start, Mississippi does not yet require Photo IDs to vote. So he's just wrong on the facts. The rest of his argument there is a bit sleazier. I haven't seen black turnout in GA in 2010, but my guess is he's referring to black turnout in 2008, since that's the false talking point used most often by the GOP voter fraud fraudsters. They point to the increase in minority turnout in '08 there, though it increased everywhere thanks to Obama on the top of the ticket. What they don't tell you is that it increase more elsewhere, including in states like Mississippi which didn't have a Photo ID restriction law at the time. In short, you've been played for a fool by this guy. You need a photo ID to get on an airplane or an Amtrak train; to open a bank account, withdraw money from it, or cash a check; to pick up movie and concert tickets; to go into a federal building; to buy alcohol and to apply for food stamps. All of that is simply untrue. As I responded to your kindred spirit Enzo above, almost all of the PRIVILEGES listed above, do not require Photo ID, though they will make your life a bit easier if you have one in some of the cases. Here's just one response to the ubiquitous "Photo ID needed to get on an airplane" myth. Voting, on the other hand, is a RIGHT, as opposed to a privilege. You may want to look up the difference. Either way, once again, you've been played for a fool by the folks hoping that you would be their stooge. So far, you haven't disappointed them! Fraud of the magnitude which swings elections typically combines absentee ballot fraud and voter registration fraud. At least 55 employees or associates of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now have been convicted of registration fraud in 11 states, says Matthew Vadum of the Capital Research Center, who's written a book about ACORN. Oh, look! The author must have hoped you didn't notice, but he just admitted that the real concerns are "absentee ballot fraud and voter registration fraud", none of which have anything to do with polling place Photo ID restrictions. (For the record, when one does not register in person, they are already required to show ID at the polling place when voting for the first time under federal law --- that would be the Help America Vote Act of 2002.) And to help make his fraudulent case, the author cites discredited "voter fraud" fraudster Matthew Vadum! Neato! Now go read that story and learn how Vadum is also playing you (and presumably the author of the column) for a stooge! Hope some of that's helpful. Haven't replied to each graf, but as I said, if you have any questions --- or any evidence of polling place impersonation, the only type of voter fraud that could possibly be deterred by polling place Photo ID laws --- let me know! And, oh, yeah --- welcome to The BRAD BLOG!

COMMENT #10 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 4/25/2012 @ 12:49 pm PT...





Plum Sites @ 6 said: Mrs. Block's problem can be easily solved. Since she never legally changed her name, she is still technically known by her maiden name and easily get an ID in her maiden name now. I don't know why she chose and not to update her name decades ago What is it with you guys who can't seem to read?! Go back and read the article. You've got it ALL wrong. Now, even if you didn't, why should a 91-year old who has voted all her life have to go through the process of LEGALLY CHANGING HER NAME to vote?! Do you all hate our RIGHTS and FREEDOMS that much? Really??

COMMENT #11 [Permalink]

... Patrick said on 4/25/2012 @ 2:26 pm PT...





I Call BULLSHIT on this story. You need an ID for pretty much everything in life these days. You need on to use a credit card some times, you need it to buy advil cold and sinus at the pharmacy, need one at the doctors office, etc.. There are just too many times one needs a photo ID. If you dont have one then maybe the issue is you. I dont understand why people are afraid to show ID at the poll when you have to confirm who you are with name and address in the first place. Go get your tinfoil hats on

COMMENT #12 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 4/26/2012 @ 12:31 am PT...





Patrick @ 11 dropped in to charm us with: I Call BULLSHIT on this story. You need an ID for pretty much everything in life these days. True, it can make your life easier if you have one. But no, you don't "need" for for "pretty much everything". The corporations are smart enough to not want to turn away 21 million potential customers. For example, boarding a plane with a Photo ID is easier than if you don't have one. But Southwest doesn't simply tell 21 million Americans without Photo ID to get lost. You didn't know that? Probably should have before "calling bullshit". If you dont have one then maybe the

issue is you. Or that you're 90 and don't drive anymore. Or that you live in a large city and never drove. Or that you're disabled and never drove either. So if those are "issues" that disqualifies someone from voting in your mind then, um, I'm "calling bullshit" on you. I dont understand why people are afraid to show ID at the poll when you have to confirm who you are with name and address in the first place. Go get your tinfoil hats on Nobody's actually "afraid to show ID at the poll". If you happen to own one, there's nothing scary at all about it. If you don't, you'll be disenfranchised. And, oh, it's not about showing your "name and address". Most state's already require that. It's about narrow state-issued Photo ID meant to keep people (the wrong kind of people) from voting. Otherwise, state's like South Carolina which already required either a state-issued Drivers License, a state-issued ID, or a state-issued voter registration card would not have removed only the voter registration card from the list of acceptable ID. But surely you knew all of that before "calling bullshit", right? Sigh...

COMMENT #13 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 4/26/2012 @ 4:59 pm PT...





Steve in Pittsburgh @5: I wouldn't say that you violated our rules by knowingly publishing disinformation. It's obvious that neither you nor the author of the article you linked to has a clue about photo ID laws and "voter fraud." There is only one type of "voter fraud" that can be prevented by polling place photo ID laws --- in person voter impersonation. That form of fraud is virtually non-existent. See, U.S. Senate Hearings on New GOP Voter Suppression Laws [Part 1 of 2] - Photo ID Restrictions and the Disastrous Return of Hans von Spakovsky

COMMENT #14 [Permalink]

... Mary Halyoke said on 4/26/2012 @ 6:58 pm PT...





Voter fraud is VERY serious and must be stopped. It happens across the spectrum..from GOP to DEMS.

It isn't difficult for a sincere/honest voter to get a Photo ID. Proper indentification will help prevent the following: http://www.youtube.com/w...IlPk0&feature=relmfu Or how about this one? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLSjL--qvsw And this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaUsT9MLMlA And this... http://www.youtube.com/w...GwOM&feature=related The UNCUT videos..PROOF of fraud..are abundant. One more thing; why is it suddenly necessary for a company in ***SPAIN** be hired/appointed to COUNT AMERICAN ELECTION VOTE TALLIES? Hello??? Please, read this. There is more information (reputable) on the net; http://maxkeiser.com/201...sults-reporting-company/ I would like to see our nation remain a 'Republic'..and not dictated by Obama..or the likes of him. Obama INC. are destroyers.

COMMENT #15 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 4/26/2012 @ 11:05 pm PT...





Mary Halyoke @ 14 said: It isn't difficult for a sincere/honest voter to get a Photo ID. Proper indentification will help prevent the following: Gullible much, Mary? The videos you've posted are from con-man and federal criminal James O'Keefe. They feature manufactured "voter fraud" events. Surely after O'Keefe's ACORN "pimp" hoax videos you know better than to buy anything he tells you, no? Apparently not. Now, do you have any examples, --- even one will do, out of the hundreds of millions of votes cast in just the past four years --- of actual in-person voter fraud? Let us know! The legislators who forced the disenfranchising polling place Photo ID laws haven't been able to come up with any, but maybe you'll have something they haven't heard of. As far as the difficulty for someone who doesn't have a Photo ID to get one, your evidence that it "isn't difficult" is what exactly? Did you even bother to read the story you are commenting on? (My guess is no.) Do yourself a favor. Read it, and click on a few of those links to a few of those stories of citizens seeing their voting rights stolen away by the Big Government that you appear to support. One more thing; why is it suddenly necessary for a company in ***SPAIN** be hired/appointed to COUNT AMERICAN ELECTION VOTE TALLIES? Hello??? Hello! You seem like a nice, but very very (very) gullible lady. No, the company you refer to, Scytl, does not count ANY American votes. You have been lied to. That said, there is no reason to be comfortable about either Scytl (I explain why, right here) or about any vote counted in this country by the private companies who have taken over our elections and do tally your votes in complete secrecy (and, hint, NONE of them are Obama supporters --- quite the contrary.) Feel better now? Welcome to The BRAD BLOG.

COMMENT #16 [Permalink]

... Ernest A. Canning said on 4/27/2012 @ 11:30 am PT...





Sad to see there are still people out there, like Mary Halyoke, who cannot distinguish between a scam manufactured by James O'Keefe, a convicted federal criminal, and solid evidence demonstrating that in person voter impersonation does not exist. Did you know, Mary, that even as it upheld Indiana's photo ID law against a constitutional challenge, the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged that there was no evidence of so much as a single case of actual, in-person impersonation voter fraud occurring at any time since Indiana was admitted into the union in 1816? Oh, and do you realize, Mary, that Indiana's photo ID law failed to prevent its former Republican Secretary of State, Charlie White, from committing three counts of felony voter fraud when he both ran for office and voted in a district where he no longer resided?

COMMENT #17 [Permalink]

... betterthannosn said on 4/27/2012 @ 11:52 am PT...

