Everybody can V O T E in Arizona!

[JoeBlam]

Come on down! Already voted in another state? No problem. From another country? GREAT grab a ballot...if you're from Mehico, grab a handful! Yep, it's our new tourist-attraction in the Grand Canyon State....Everybody gets a say....vote early and OFTEN baby!

None of the Supremes live out here....none of them are in the center-lane of the Chihuahua Express....doesn't matter, they voted 7-2 against us trying to defend our ballot boxes....since we can't defend our own border either, what the hell, eh?

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, which doesn't require such documentation, trumps Arizona's Proposition 200 passed in 2004. Arizona officials say their law is needed to stop non-Americans from voting in elections, while opponents see it as an attack on minorities, immigrants and the elderly.

Read more: Supreme Court: Arizona citizenship proof law illegal | Fox News

 

[Mad Scientist]

This is great news! The American southwest will be Mexico again!

 

[JoeBlam]

This is great news! The American southwest will be Mexico again!

Yep, Montezuma's Revenge part dos...

 

[SteadyMercury]

I don't get it, how can anyone vote often? You have to register to vote and are assigned a specific voting location, then you have to show up with some form of identification, then you are crossed off as having voted. As far as I know you can't apply ten times for absentee ballots under the same name then send them all in.

What am I missing? How would someone get a handful of ballots?

 

[JoeBlam]

I don't get it, how can anyone vote often? You have to register to vote and are assigned a specific voting location, then you have to show up with some form of identification, then you are crossed off as having voted. As far as I know you can't apply ten times for absentee ballots under the same name then send them all in.

What am I missing? How would someone get a handful of ballots?

You been living in a cave? We can't ask if somebody is an AMERICAN to register them to vote. Therefore they can register multiple times, under multiple names, in multiple precincts, and there's no way to stop it because we can no longer ask for ID before they're handed a ballot. And even if we could ask for an ID, that's no problem because once they get a checking account, they can get a picture ID from the state. We stopped them from getting drivers licenses finally so that's the next thing the 9th Circuit will rule against.

 

[SteadyMercury]

You been living in a cave? We can't ask if somebody is an AMERICAN to register them to vote.

Sure we can, and we do. From your own link:

The federal "motor voter" law, enacted in 1993 to expand voter registration, requires states to offer voter registration when a resident applies for a driver's license or certain benefits. Another provision of that law -- the one at issue before the court -- requires states to allow would-be voters to fill out mail-in registration cards and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but it doesn't require them to show proof.

This law being struck down is the one requiring people to provide proof of US Citizenship, not whether they can ask.

Therefore they can register multiple times, under multiple names, in multiple precincts, and there's no way to stop it because we can no longer ask for ID before they're handed a ballot.

Are you sure you aren't confusing being required to show ID with being required to prove citizenship? I don't see anywhere in this ruling that says a state cannot ask for proof of identity.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Supreme Court strikes down Arizona law requiring proof of citizenship to vote - U.S. News

Citizenship is a requirement to vote in any federal election, and the federal registration form requires people to state, under penalty of perjury, that they are American citizens. States can use their own forms, but they must be equivalent to the federal form.

The Arizona law, known as Proposition 200, adopted by Arizona voters in 2004, went further than the federal form by requiring applicants to provide proof of citizenship. Arizona has used the law to reject 30,000 voter applications, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

Why are you saying we can't ask whether they are a US citizen when they register to vote, when it sounds like we are in fact required to ask?

So I still don't understand why you are worried about people easily voting dozens of times.

 

[JoeBlam]

I LIVE HERE, HAVE LIVED HERE SINCE 1974....WHAT I'VE TOLD YOU ARE THE FACTS...I'M NOT INTERESTED IN CONVINCING YOU OF ANYTHING BECAUSE YOU'LL BE ASKING THE SAME QUESTIONS IN A DIFFERENT WAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN....THE FEDS ALSO OWE US ALMOST HALF A BILLION DOLLARS FOR WAREHOUSING THEIR CAPTIVES AND WON'T PAY US. WHEN YOU HEAR WE'VE BECOME THE FIRST TO SECEDE FROM THE UNION, YOU'LL KNOW WHY. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW???

BTW....any NSA asshole reading this can stick his PRISM where the sun don't shine.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Steady,

Don't worry about it. It is just another trumped up Right wing issue with no substance. Everything you posted is correct. You have to produce ID. You have to swear under oath that you are a citizen. You have to register. Arizona is trying to narrow down the rolls of people who should not be voting, until they consist only of real Americans, who are memebers of the John Birch Society and the NRA.

 

[JoeBlam]

Steady,

Don't worry about it. It is just another trumped up Right wing issue with no substance. Everything you posted is correct. You have to produce ID. You have to swear under oath that you are a citizen. You have to register. Arizona is trying to narrow down the rolls of people who should not be voting, until they consist only of real Americans, who are memebers of the John Birch Society and the NRA.

You're a piece of shit liar.

 

[SteadyMercury]

I LIVE HERE, HAVE LIVED HERE SINCE 1974....WHAT I'VE TOLD YOU ARE THE FACTS...I'M NOT INTERESTED IN CONVINCING YOU OF ANYTHING BECAUSE YOU'LL BE ASKING THE SAME QUESTIONS IN A DIFFERENT WAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN....

So you are just falling back on the "because I said so" argument?

You can type in all caps all you want, it doesn't change that:

1) This ruling did not prohibit the state of Arizona from asking whether someone is a US citizen
2) This ruling did not prohibit the state of Arizona from asking for proof of identification

The ruling was about Arizona requiring voters to prove citizenship. It appears you don't understand what your own thread is about.

THE FEDS ALSO OWE US ALMOST HALF A BILLION DOLLARS FOR WAREHOUSING THEIR CAPTIVES AND WON'T PAY US. WHEN YOU HEAR WE'VE BECOME THE FIRST TO SECEDE FROM THE UNION, YOU'LL KNOW WHY.

We're seceding from the union? When? Nobody told me. Will we be forced to prove citizenship in ArizonaLand when we vote for the first President of Arizona? Can I nominate Charles Barkley? How about Alice Cooper?

CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW???

Calm down, you're making a scene.

 

[JoeBlam]

Fuck off, moron. Read the decison by the USSC and stop pestering me with shit like "they can ask them but they don't have to answer".....seriously, I'm done with your stupid comments.....

 

[tjvh]

Steady,

Don't worry about it. It is just another trumped up Right wing issue with no substance. Everything you posted is correct. You have to produce ID. You have to swear under oath that you are a citizen. You have to register. Arizona is trying to narrow down the rolls of people who should not be voting, until they consist only of real Americans, who are memebers of the John Birch Society and the NRA.

You have to swear under oath that you're a citizen? I suppose illegals will respect that little gem just as they respected our immigration Laws when they entered the U.S. illegally. What fantasy world are you residing in?

 

[JoeBlam]

Calm down, you're making a scene.

Okay that was funny.

 

[Katzndogz]

I don't get it, how can anyone vote often? You have to register to vote and are assigned a specific voting location, then you have to show up with some form of identification, then you are crossed off as having voted. As far as I know you can't apply ten times for absentee ballots under the same name then send them all in.

What am I missing? How would someone get a handful of ballots?

Ask Melowese Richardson, she voted six times.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Fuck off, moron. Read the decison by the USSC

It is right here: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-71_7l48.pdf

We conclude that the fairest reading of the statute is that a state-imposed requirement of evidence of citizenship not required by the Federal Form is “inconsistent with” the NVRA’s mandate that States “accept and use” the Federal Form. Siebold, supra, at 397. If this reading prevails, the Elections Clause requires that Arizona’s rule give way.

They decided Arizona cannot force people to prove their citizenship. They made no judgement on whether Arizona can continue to adhere to the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 which required an applicant aver, under penalty of perjury, that he is a
citizen.

stop pestering me with shit like "they can ask them but they don't have to answer".

You must have me confused with another poster, I never said that. I believe they are required to answer.

seriously, I'm done with your stupid comments.....

I guess everyone has their own way of dealing with being caught making shit up eh? You just gonna turtle up eh?

 

[Vandalshandle]

I'm crushed. I suspect that Joe is unhappy with me.....

 

[JoeBlam]

blahblahblahblahblah

As I predicted you're repeating the same shit over and over again and then you wonder why I won't continue answering it. I'm aware you want every stinkin illegal that's wandered in here to vote for your pet RATS...well, we'll continue to fight you on that...the rule of law means nothing to you so when we stop recognizing ANY federal law, it will be time for you to scamper over to Kali, or up to N.Mexico where you can chant "Viva La Raza" and do the hat dance or whatever the fuck you call it they play with accordians....God I hate that music.

UPDATE: Scalia clarified it's just the post card part of Clinturd's "motor voter" treason that needs to be more specific so we can snag these invaders before they can cast a vote:

While the court was clear in stating that states cannot add additional identification requirements to the federal forms on their own, it was also clear that the same actions can be taken by state governments if they get the approval of the federal government and the federal courts.

Arizona can ask the federal government to include the extra documents as a state-specific requirement, Scalia said, and take any decision made by the government on that request back to court. Other states have already done so, Scalia said.

The Election Assistance Commission "recently approved a state-specific instruction for Louisiana requiring applicants who lack a Louisiana driver's license, ID card or Social Security number to attach additional documentation to the completed federal form," Scalia said.

Read more: Supreme Court: Arizona law requiring citizenship proof for voters is illegal | Fox News

 

[Vandalshandle]

Valium is your friend, Joe!

 

[JoeBlam]

Valium is your friend, Joe!

Don't forget to write if you find work.