I am not the one advocating disenfranchising voters... -----Original Message----- From: Scott Stroz [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2011 06:29 PM To: cf-community Subject: Re: How states are rigging the 2012 election
I have never said (in this thread or any other) that I 'believe in smaller government' nor do I think requiring people to show ID in order to vote qualifies as 'bigger government'. To me, its common sense (something that seems to be lacking in pretty much every political discussion) that before we allow someone to vote - which I feel is one of the most important things we can do as citizens - we use reasonable means to verify they are who they claim to be. I love when you make assumptions based on your feeling of absolutes..makes you look like such an ass. On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Eric Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > > There is plenty of other areas that they have and given that they > would have more information already, it would give them greater access > to our information. While I don't know of any specific examples, I am > sure they exist. For someone that believes in a smaller government, > you sure seem to like bigger government. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Stroz [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2011 08:32 AM > To: cf-community > Subject: Re: How states are rigging the 2012 election > > > You should take your own advice about reading before opening your > mouth Eric. > > I asked for documented proof of the government spying on people > because they have a state issued ID and you replied with a statement > about the 'illegal domestic wiretaps'. > > Scroll down...you will see it. > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Eric Roberts > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Who said because of having an id? I sure didn't. I said there was a >> history of government spying on the people. Please read before >> opening mouth Scott. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Scott Stroz [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 10:08 PM >> To: cf-community >> Subject: Re: How states are rigging the 2012 election >> >> >> I fail to see how that is government spying on people becasue they >> have a state issued ID. Try again. >> >> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Eric Roberts >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> You dont remember the illegal domestic wiretaps under the Bush >>> administration that Obama has continued? >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Scott Stroz [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 10:10 AM >>> To: cf-community >>> Subject: Re: How states are rigging the 2012 election >>> >>> >>> What recent history? >>> >>> Please show me one documented case where the gov't 'spied' on >>> someone becasue they had a state issued ID. >>> >>> On the flip side: How it paranoia to want to verify someone is who >>> they claim to be when they are casting a vote (arguably the single >>> most important thing we, as citizens, can do)? >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Eric Roberts >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Is it paranoid when recent history supports that? There has been >>>> more government interference into our lives...more illegal >>>> intrusions into our privacy ever since Bush took office than during >>>> any time in our >>> history. >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Scott Stroz [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 09:56 AM >>>> To: cf-community >>>> Subject: Re: How states are rigging the 2012 election >>>> >>>> >>>> Hrm...what is more paranoid? Wanting to require people show ID in >>>> order to vote, or thinking that having an ID means the government >>>> can spy >>> on you? >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Gruss Gott <[email protected]> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Jerry Barnes <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> "A conservative would argue for AT LEAST state's rights in this >>>>>> case because, at the end of the day, it's about being true to >> principles." >>>>>> >>>>>> It's strictly a state's rights issue right now. That is why all >>>>>> of the laws differ from each other. That is not to say that one >>>>>> day it will not become a federal issue. I hope not. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Exactly, and many states (and their citizens) are concerned about >>>>> the "slippery slope" when it comes to, say, the Census and/or >>>>> registering your guns. However most people agree with public >>>>> birth records (as well as marriage, residence of citizenship, etc). >>>>> >>>>> Thus states, countries, and cities should have a good record of >>>>> who is possibly a voter. >>>>> >>>>> If you walk into a polling place to vote and claim to be Jerry >>>>> Born-in-Barnesville they should be able to easily look you up. >>>>> And, just to ensure you're not trying to impersonate Jerry, they >>>>> might ask you for a recent energy or phone bill, the assumption >>>>> being that they know you were both there and you'd really have to >>>>> be special to trying to pull a fast one. They might even ask you >>>>> to have a neighbor or 2 vouche for you in case you don't have such > bill. >>>>> >>>>> But requiring an ID would therefore be unnecessary, punitive, and >>>>> generally paranoid to the point of delusi >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:339436 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
