Comments


  • Who's most likely not to have an ID? The minorities. At this time the Hispanic people. I believe he's scared that this time he won't have the 25% of Hispanic voters he had last time. That since he didn't fulfil last time the 25% will vote for someone else or for no one.

    March 15, 2012 at 2:05 a.m.

  • Actually, before we can really talk about the 'required picture ID' that is proposed, we need to hear from the State why they failed to provide the appropriate documentation when they presented their scheme to the DOJ. This might have been a non-issue if they had been diligent with their paperwork.

    I am beginning to think some of this stuff is truly not all that important to republicans. How many times have we heard in the last few months how the republican candidates have failed to file the appropriate paperwork to get on the ballots in some states. Now this. It must be a republican paperwork problem!

    March 14, 2012 at 5:55 p.m.

  • Voting may well be one of the most important things we as citizens will ever do. Democrats will argue that Bush II ruined our country. Republicans are saying the same about Obama. Honestly, I just don't see the problem with requiring an ID to vote. Both sides have always felt that elections have been stolen or that voter fraud was involved. Why not take a step towards eliminating that issue? We have almost (8) months before the general election. Plenty of time for anyone that wants to vote to get an ID if they need one. I would hazard a guess that nearly everyone has one anyway.

    March 14, 2012 at 5:28 p.m.

  • Who is this "ObaMao" and what is this "fellow travelers" about? Then we have others saying that President Obama does not have this countries best interest at heart. If someone were to question these individuals patriotism you have to wonder if they might feel you were being unfair in judging them so harshly. Sounds like Joe McCarty is alive and well.

    I have heard the phrase "show me your papers" in the past. It was being asked by some guy in a black leather trench coat. That "Bill of Rights" thing is starting to get in their way.

    March 14, 2012 at 1:10 a.m.

  • You want to talk about Obama's record? Fine! Let's do it. But we will also have to talk the many republicans who were elected on a promise of jobs and the economy and have not passed ONE jobs bill! They have, nationwide, proposed and/or passed ove 1100 bills having to do with women's health! What is with this sudden interest in women's health? It is a smoke screen to repeal abortion!

    Look, we are not stupid! We follow what is going just as well as folks on the other side. It is for many about the color of Obama's skin. He's been accused of everything under the sun, without merit.

    I am sorry I angered you, but I am tired of the empty yapping by folks with no facts to validate it! I am really sorry that the field of candidates for the other side is lacking, but this is what you have to work with.

    It is going to be a long damn election season!

    March 13, 2012 at 10:26 p.m.

  • I do wonder about something though. There may, or may not, be voter fraud. More than likely there is, but by which party, or both?
    I have a strong feeling that it's not so bad that it could actually change the outcome in a red state.
    So why the hysteria, unless the powers that be, don't have conficence in their own party in the upcoming elections?
    How much you wanna bet that a different kind of voter fraud is on the horizon and the GOP want everyone looking toward the Democrats, while they pull off the largest voter fraud in the history of the Country.

    March 13, 2012 at 10:15 p.m.

  • Wow! For the first time EVER a post of yours has angered me. In the first place, I am NOT a republican -- I am a member of no political party, but I am closer to the libertarians than anything else. I agree that the republicans are probably not going to have anyone on the ballot who can beat BO and I think that will be tragic for the nation.

    "You guys are scared spitless that the black guy is going to win again, aren't you"

    THIS is why I wish Obama was white. Then a person could have an honest disagreement about his politics, his policies, his economics, his forign policies, his walking on the Constitution, etc. and it not be said that it's all because of the color of his skin. If Hillary Clinton had won the Democratic nomination and the election, and people disagreed with her policies, would you then claim that they were scared spitless of a woman? I think you'd get past the gender thing and recognize that the disagreement had nothing to do with her sex. Yet, you can't get around the race thing. ANY disagreement with Obama can only be because he is black. And, it's not just you. Other liberals call disagreement "code words" for racism or they say they can read between the lines and find the racism there. YOU are the ones concentrating on his race. You defend him based on race, not politics or policies or economics.

    This voter ID thing has y'all in a tizzy. Look at what you said: "...nor do I understand why it has taken the republicans 50 years to get excited over it." I rather suspect the reason it's becoming a big deal now is the massive influx of people into this country in the last decade or so who have NO business being here, moreso than the color of Obama's skin. These illegals are obtaining almost all the rights and privileges of American citizenship while remaining loyal to a foreign country. They receive education for their kids at taxpayer expense, health care at taxpayer expense -- they must not be allowed to vote, too. THAT bothers me and many others. We want to see all citizens enfranchised to vote, but NOT ONE illegal. It has nothing to do with changing demographics, but rather legalities and rights of citizenship. But we will never be believed by those who see all disagreement with the president as racial in nature. Why is it becoming a big deal NOW rather than some time in the past? I don't have an answer for that other than there IS an election looming. We want to make sure it's honest. Would you have been more comfortable if the laws had been passed twelve or sixteen years ago? Heck, I'd think that after the fiasco in Florida when Bush II won after weeks of examining hanging chads and almost every ballot cast in the state, DEMOCRATS would be yelling for honest elections that everyone could be confident with. Y'all know our hearts better than we do ourselves -- according to y'all.

    March 13, 2012 at 10:11 p.m.

  • No, I don't know for a fact that there has never been voter fraud. I am sure there has been. I do not believe it warrants the action taken by the repbulican party, nor do I understand why it has taken the republicans 50 years to get all excited over it.

    You need to chat with your buddies about the reason for the voter fraud crap. You think it is about approval ratings? Really? You guys are scared spitless that the black guy is going to win again, aren't you?

    Wow! Just WOW! If the republicans spend just half of their time fielding a decent candidate that they have spend on promoting the boogy man, no telling what they could accomplish!

    Good luck.

    March 13, 2012 at 9:13 p.m.

  • Edith...You asked if there is a DOCUMENTED case of voter fraud in Texas in the last ten years. Off the top of my bald head, I can't answer that. I simply do not know. I doubt if it could be proven this long after an election. Now, perhaps YOU can enlighten us about something: Do you KNOW for a fact that there HASN'T been fraud of some kind at one time or another over the last decade? Even (especially?) if there indeed has been no fraud, kindly explain how an ounce of prevention can be a bad thing. I believe that ensuring the election process is honest and accurate is a very good thing.

    To answer your question as to why BO would be interested in enabling voter fraud, perhaps he has been looking at his disapproval ratings in the latest polls and figures that if he could somehow get some people to vote who shouldn't, they just might vote for him. I say this without a shred of proof, but since I believe our president does not have the best interests of America at heart, he might not be above having his DOJ pull some dirty tricks.

    March 13, 2012 at 7:42 p.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    March 13, 2012 at 7:34 p.m.

  • Please explain President Obama's interest in enabling voter fraud.

    I'm listening, Observer.

    March 13, 2012 at 7:05 p.m.

  • The one thing ObaMao and his fellow travelers will never admit is that their interest is in enabling voter fraud, as long as it works to their advantage.

    March 13, 2012 at 5:53 p.m.