Friday, December 23, 2011

About the Voter ID laws

So, people claim the dead rise on election day. Well, it's been known to happen, but how often do the dead renew their voter registrations?

Apparently, demanding that people show a photo ID is supposed to reduce voter fraud. Well, sorry, but it just ain't so. Why? Because this "voter fraud" you keep hearing about simply does not exist. It's not that ineligible voters aren't voting, but rather, that people simply aren't casting ballots for people who don't exist.

I'm not sure how it's done in other states (or even in other districts here in Texas)...but every election I've ever voted in, which has been quite a few since I became eligible over a decade ago, has had election officials sitting at a table with big print-outs in front of them. In order to vote, one must have possessed either a voter registration card or a photo identification card.

In order to vote in any of these elections, a person must accomplish the following:
1) Be a registered voter.
2) Have a registered address of residence within the specific precinct.
3) Possess either a state-issued photo identification card, OR a valid voter registration card.

When you walk to the table, you must show one of the cards aforementioned, so your name may be checked against the rolls of registered voters.

In order to vote "multiple times" in such a situation not requiring a photo ID, a person must do the following:
1) Obtain a voter registration card in the name of someone else.
2) Ensure that such a person is a registered voter in the precinct.
3) Ensure that such a person has not already voted.

So yeah, that's pretty much it. In order to commit voter fraud in the manner this law is supposed to protect us from, you'd have to jump through a shitload of hoops. You'd have to collect a bunch of voter registration cards, travel to each precinct, hope the person is still on the voter rolls, and hope you don't get recognized.

The first part is the real kicker, seeing as how voter registration cards get sent to the voter's physical address of record. You'd have to be robbing a lot of mail boxes.

Now let's see who this disenfranchises...

1) The elderly.
2) Those with no other need for a photo ID.
3) Those whose photo ID cards have been confiscated by the state.

Let's say I'm 80 years old. I'm disabled and cannot drive. I get SSI direct-deposited to my bank account. My kids handle all my shit. No need to pay for an ID card...unless, of course, I want to vote. Too old to matter? Well, that's only five years older than the front-runner for the GOP election!

Let's say I'm a day laborer and have been for the past five years because the job market sucks donkey balls, and I live in an area that negates the need for an automobile. I have no need to pay for an ID card...unless, of course, I want to vote.

Let's say I've been pulled over by state troopers looking to increase the state's revenue, and I refuse to waive my 4th Amendment rights. My driver's license that I've paid for has been confiscated and replaced with "yellow papers" for the next month, and a court-ordered provisional driver's license for the remainder of the arbitrary suspension of my normal driver's license, regardless of whether I'm ever even prosecuted for the alleged offense. If I want to vote, I'm required to pay for an ID card...even though I've already done so.

Do most people have a valid and current state-issued ID? Absolutely yes, for reasons not related to voting. Does every legal voter possess a state-issued photo ID? No. Is voter fraud running rough-shod over this nation, as a result of not having a law requiring a photo ID? Absolutely not, and insinuating that it is, is simply retarded.

Now, the most important question to ask...DOES THE POSSESSION OF A STATE-ISSUED PHOTOGRAPHIC IDENTIFICATION CARD COST MONEY? Of course, it does. If one is required to expend money for the purposes of voting, that constitutes a "poll tax" and is quite simply illegal. There is no ifs, ands, or buts about it. It's unconstitutional to require a poll tax in order to vote.

Thursday, December 15, 2011

What the NDAA means to me...

The "NDAA" I'm referring to, of course, is the National Defense Authorization Act. Yes, the same one that's had the internets all abuzz for the past week or so, because it declares all of the United States to be part of the "battlefield" in the so-called "War on Terror".

People claim that it only applies to Al Qaeda sympathizers, but I call bullshit on this claim. The language is overly broad, and allows for just about anything to be construed as a "belligerent act".

Thanks to the horrific legal precedents set forth by the Bush and Obama administrations, the qualifications for being labeled a "terrorist" pretty much consists of anyone voicing an opinion going against the grain of our government's standard propaganda.

Bush and Obama have both acted in a manner that provided legal precedent excusing the violation of constitutional rights for American citizens abroad, imprisoning and/or killing these American citizens (including children), because they were captured or killed "on the battlefield" in the "Global War on Terror".

Well, the latest NDAA (btw, congress & president pass and sign one every year and have done so for decades) allows for the inclusion of the United States of America to be considered part of the "battlefield" in our "war on terror". That's right, even your own personal bathroom is considered part of the "War on Terror".

Remember how you jokingly made remarks about "screw that terrorist", when we killed Awlaki and his kid via drone strikes, when all he did was make DVDs expressing opinions? Remember how you made jokes about the Obama family Christmas tree ornaments, so you could "hang one from a tree in the privacy of your own living room"? Remember how you said "FUCK THE POLICE" after that ticket you got for not wearing your seatbelt? Remember that Gadsen Flag sticker on the back of your truck? Remember that time you bought that AR15, and mentioned something about how the 2nd Amendment wasn't about duck hunting?

Do you remember the MIAC report? Howsabout the multiple official state government memos and brochures saying that potential domestic terrorists may be identified because they oppose abortion, support the constitution, own "large caches of firearms and/or ammunition", or even merely wear Levi's 501 button-fly jeans?

Well, folks, let me give you a hint. Those in power don't give a flying rat's ass about your petitions. They don't care about who you vote for, because they know they are the majority. Did I mention that more than 90% of our senate voted in favor of this bill, as did the majority of the house? Writing my congressman ain't gonna change it. My congressman voted against this bill already. What good would writing someone else's congressman do? It's not like he can count on our votes!

No, let's look at things realistically. 70 years ago, the Nazi government took power and started enforcing a police state. If you spoke out against the government, you were brutalized, both on the streets and in the courts. They made it a point to demonize certain segments of society...and then they passed laws stripping the rights of these certain segments, claiming they were "enemies of the state".

These segments included gypsies, homosexuals, Jews, political dissidents, and the handicapped.

They were rounded up on trucks at gunpoint, loaded into cattle-cars, and shipped to extermination camps. Sadly, EVERYTHING they did was "legal" according to the sovereign laws of the nation. While the Nazis were tried, sentenced, and hanged according to the London Charter of 1945, their actions were perfectly legal according to the laws of Germany.

That's something to think about...

Thankfully, this nation has prolific users of the interwebz. We have knowledge available to us that was unheard of 70 years ago. On this year's "Black Friday" (the shopping day after Thanksgiving), BATFE/FBI background checks for purchases of new firearms by private individuals spiked to an all-time spite of the fact that private firearms sales have been rising steadily since Obama got the nomination.

The registered hunters of "fighting age" (18-38) in Wisconson, if organized, would comprise the world's largest light infantry force...surpassing that of even the official US military. That, of course, is just one state. We haven't even started talking about Texas yet.

I've given up on fear, I'm just getting bored. The worst they can do is kill us, right?