Eric Holder tells NAACP that whites want to take away their voting rights.

[EinsteinsGhost]

Originally Posted by Cavaturaccioli

Because (I just know you're being deliberately obtuse, but I'm disposed just now to humor you) a social security card lacks a photograph. I haven't become insensitive to government (wasteful) spending. I've become benumbed by it. In any case, any added expenditure is well worth it in the defense of democracy -and democracy is just what is imperiled if the ineligible can vote.

And how exactly am I being obtuse? You're the one who claimed SSN is a national ID. So, I asked, why not use it? And if your issue with it now is that it doesn't have photo ID, then why the heck did you propose it in the first place?

So, how about a national id?

Originally Posted by DRob4JC

Maybe we could just print ballots in English and use that money (saved from the extra ink and/or processing for computer ballots) for voter ID purposes. Or would requiring American citizens to read English ballots block one's ability to vote ...

It is always interesting to see "Real and Patriotic Americans" propose the idea of requiring one language for all, so they can go chest thumping about personal freedoms. Wait... not just interesting, but also amusing.

[Loveshiscountry]

Originally Posted by TriMT7

Well, to be fair to Mr. Holder, the original 2012 handbook for white people DID have "strip black people of their voting rights" as a goal for 2012. But I believe after the committee met for revisions, it was left out of the final draft because they could only get a plurality, and not a supermajority, approval.

We'll see when the first copies of this year's handbook are delivered at the end of the month.

You have a copy? I got booted off the list because I listen to race music.

[Cavaturaccioli]

Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost

And how exactly am I being obtuse? You're the one who claimed SSN is a national ID. So, I asked, why not use it? And if your issue with it now is that it doesn't have photo ID, then why the heck did you propose it in the first place?

So, how about a national id?


It is always interesting to see "Real and Patriotic Americans" propose the idea of requiring one language for all, so they can go chest thumping about personal freedoms. Wait... not just interesting, but also amusing.

I didn't. You posited the notion of a National ID as a logical progression from requiring a voter ID card. I merely woke you up to the fact that we already have one. An ID card without a photo is next to useless in cobatting voter fraud.

If you're born here you learn English in school. If you're born elsewhere and immigrate legally, you have to demonstrate proficiency in English as a condition of having citizenship bestowed upon you. In either case, you have no legitimate beef against having to understand English in order to vote.

[Bulldogdad]

Originally Posted by Skinny Puppy

Perhaps the government.


The government makes the laws.

If the OP said Holder implied then the OP could have an argument, but tells has an explicit meaning. Holder never made such statements and the OP has no facts to back it up. But hey, who needs facts right.

You do realize the Government is made up of people who actually make the laws. Right can we agree on that basic premise?

That being agreed upon, unless you think robots make up the government then we'll have to stop.

Next are we to assume then that minority people that partially make up these governments are voting for these oppressive voter ID laws? We can probably safely assume most are not. Hence who are these Government people that are passing these laws that Holder finds illegal? Well if not minorities and not Robots. Well then that only leaves the White majority.

Facts presented, OP link validated. Turn out the lights the party is over.