Showing posts with label voter fraud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label voter fraud. Show all posts

Friday, April 13, 2012

Dan "Doc" Severson On Photo ID...

I'm sorry-- you can't argue with this, and still be taken seriously:



Friday, February 13, 2009

Memo to Mark Ritchie: Voter Fraud Happens:

I heard Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie (D-ACORN) proclaim this morning on KNSI-AM that voter fraud is not a problem in the state of Minnesota. Furthermore, Mark Ritchie proclaims that requiring voter ID is akin to Stalinist tactics and an affront to the right to privacy (this coming from an avowed socialist, mind you)

But lest you think that Ritchie has a point, that voter fraud is a non-factor in Minnesota's electoral process, let's take a gander at our neighbors to our south, shall we?
CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa - Twelve people in Linn County have been charged with election misconduct after officials say they voted in November after losing their right to vote because they are a convicted felon. Convicted felons are not allowed to vote in Iowa until they complete their sentence.

Linn County Auditor Joel Miller says another 46 people are being investigated for voter registration fraud. He says they are suspected of giving a false address when they voted on Election Day.

The voters were mailed a registration card after the election. If the card is returned unanswered, election workers try to reach them again. If they are unsuccessful, the county attorney or secretary of state is notified for possible investigation.
For Mark Ritchie's and others' edification, Iowa, like Minnesota, has same-day voter registration. Iowa, like Minneosota, doesn't require photo ID.

Still think that there's no room for voter fraud in Minnesota's current election rules?

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Dumb and Dumberer

That's how the democrats like their voters, apparently. A Republican-sponsored bill that would require photo ID failed in a Minnesota House committee today, on a vote that went largely along party lines. So what were the objections to a bill that would introduce enhanced integrity into the Minnesota voting process?

Low-income Minnesotans would be able to get a Minnesota photo ID for free under the legislation. Emmer, a Delano Republican, says he's proposing the bill because he's concerned about voter fraud in Minnesota and other places across the country.

"We believe in bringing forth this legislation that important reforms are necessary to remove doubts about our elections and to help citizens in the state of Minnesota look upon the process of casting their vote as an inspiring experience and not an ordeal," he said.

Three citizens testified in support of the bill along with n official with the office of Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer, who's also a Republican.

Some of the citizens testified they were concerned that illegal immigrants were voting when they shouldn't be. None of them said they challenged the residency of those in question at the polling places. One supporter of the legislation, Diana Bratlie, said the proposal shouldn't be a hardship for voters since many already have the necessary paperwork. She also suggested that citizens should be responsible enough to plan ahead for the first Tuesday in November.

"The election days have been set for the millenium. It should not surprise anyone that Election Day is coming up. They should have plenty of time to get their birth certificate," Bratlie said.

But of course, the "dumb and dumberer" contingent of nannystaters wailed and gnashed their teeth at such a notion!

DFL Rep. Keith Ellison, of Minneapolis, said the bill is a "nefarious attempt" by Republicans to make it more difficult for people of color, the poor and the elderly to vote.

"This is voter suppression pure and simple. The people who are proposing this don't want to try to persuade Americans to vote for their point of view, they just want to stop Americans from being able to vote at all," he said.

A question: Was Keith Ellison born this ignorant, or did he have to work at it? Do the democrats actually think so little of their constituency that they believe that they are intellectually incapable or just too damned lazy to get off their asses and go out and get a picture ID--one that would be FREE under the legislation? Does Keith Ellison think that "people of color, the poor, and the elderly" are that friggen irresponsible and incompetent that they can't take the bus to the local driver's license station and get a FREE (to them) state identification card should they want to vote? As I commented here,
"...exactly what is wrong with identifying yourself when voting? Baseless? I don’t think so. That pointy headed perfesser who testified today stated that the level of voter fraud in Minnesota is “statistically insigificant”… well, even a “statistically insignificant” number of fraudulent votes can have a very significant effect on an election, especially when the margin of victory (a/la Coleman & Franken) is only a few hundred votes (or for that matter 770 votes) or less.


Why are democrats so afraid of introducing measures that will increase the integrity of both the process and the outcome? Is it because introducing integrity substantially decreases their chances of stealing an election?"

In the end, it is difficult for one to reach an alternative conclusion.

Sunday, January 06, 2008

Another bloc of dem voters!

Just waiting in the wings...

Translation from here, via Brussels Journal:

American presidential elections are not “home affairs.” American decisions have repercussions all over the globe. The American mortgage crisis affects banks in Europe. The insatiable American demand for oil makes the Arabian sheiks rich. The American refusal to care for the environment causes the North Pole ice to melt and coastal areas in Asia to flood. A weakened dollar and an immense budget deficit affect the global economy.

Hence, the world should be given the right to vote. Because the current situation is a blatant case of taxation without representation, against which the Americans rebelled in 1776. But of course the world will not be allowed to vote. The best we can hope for is that the Americans choose a leader who is deeply aware of the U.S.’s responsibility, as a superpower, for the rest of mankind.

The international community was able to limit America’s hegemony somewhat through organisations for international consultation, agreements and the corresponding judicial apparatus. But that system is in crisis, partly through the actions of the current American president.

So liberal Europeans are demanding the right to vote in U.S. elections.

Well, democrats have had proven track records with dead voters and illegal immigrants, so why not let the Europeans have their say as well?

Perhaps the democrats should hold their next debate in Amsterdam.