Romney’s promise to put porn filters on every computer

[9876543210]

grossnex,

Originally Posted by grossnex

Excellent post as always Brother Scoundrel.

Have to agree with that.

As far as the real numbers on voter purges, we'll have to wait & see.

What numbers don't make sense to you? Well, here's a few more. I live in a college town of about 200,000 (not very big). When the students get back the town grows by about 45,000 additional students and faculty. Those numbers aren't exact but have stayed roughly the same for quite a few years.

Last year our detested Governor and Republican State legislature decided they needed to do everything they could to suppress the vote. So everyone was going to have to have some type of new photo ID (which was going to cost the state millions as the cost couldn't be passed on to the voters, it would be considered a poll tax, illegal under federal law). Well, they couldn't do that, being "fiscal conservatives (yeah right!)" and all. So now they've proposed all kinds of alternatives just to see what they might be able to get away with. One of which is to disallow student IDs as a verifiable form of ID!

So there, potentially, are about 40,000 students in one town not allowed to vote. Make that about 300,000 state wide if the law is allowed to stand. And remember, most students vote Democratic so who is mostly affected?

Now take into consideration how many people don't have drivers licenses. This will definitely effect mainly urban and older voters. How many? Well, in my town, it wouldn't surprise me a bit that 10,000 people don't drive because they don't need to. They walk, take public transit or a taxi if they need to. 70 miles east in Milwaukee the number would be significantly higher. Add in the poor who can't afford a vehicle and insurance and my guess is that in Milwaukee alone there are probably 100,000 that don't have valid IDs to vote. So even in a relatively small state its easy to see how we could get to a half million suppressed voters.

And remember, Obama only won my state by a few points. Shave off a few points from the Democratic side and even an idiot like Romney can get elected.

And btw, whenever I see someone having problems with the numbers I eventually find out they're Republicans that don't understand basic math. You aren't one of those, are you?

There is a real need to verify the rolls because of illegal immigrants assuming the lives of Americans. I've worked with dozens of South Americans with fake Visas, or Social Security IDs so that they could get high paying Union jobs with benefits. What's to stop those same people from voting?

No! This is completely wrong! I've also worked with a few "illegals" over the years and the last thing they want to do is bring attention to themselves. What they want is to make a few bucks, send some of it home to their families and then, eventually, go home themselves (some do want to stay but not all). But getting caught voting illegally? Nope, no way. A really good way to go to jail and get shipped back home quickly. Sorry, that argument is completely ridiculous.

At the same time, I wouldn't put too much of the blame for this on Romney. He's the figure head of the Republican Party at the moment, but this is has been in the works for decades. The real culprits are the Republican National Committee & Republican donors who always want some bang for their buck. Not necessarily, but think the Koch Brothers.

Agreed, Romney is only part of the problem. From what I'm hearing there are about 18 multi-billionaires who are behind all of this with their front being Karl Rove and ALEC. Sheldon Adelson and the Chinese are also having a significant impact this year.

[2cheap]

I'm not sure why this has become a forum on voter suppression, but I'll put in my two cents.

Every American citizen that is competent to manage their own affairs has the right to vote.
Some states deny that right to convicted felons while others allow them to vote after they have served their time.
Every voter deserves to be secure in the belief that their vote counts.
Every vote submitted by a person who does not have that right eliminates a legitimate vote.

The left tries to say that voter fraud rarely, if ever, happens.
Their logic for that argument is similar to saying there are hardly any illegals in the US because you did a 360 and saw none.
They say the cost to implement voter ID is too much and that some will be unable to obtain ID and therefore will lose their right.
The cost is much less than feeding breakfast; lunch; and dinner to children who's parents can afford healthy food (which they don't complain about).
And which is worse? One person losing their voting rights over ID, or many more by illegal votes?
In one of the left's poster cases, a woman they held up as disenfranchised has easily recieved ID.
If they spent as much energy and time fighting to obtain IDs for the less than what, 1% or maybe .01% that have no ID in a world where ID is needed for so many things; these people would have ID.
The whole idea of disenfranchisement is a red herring.

We need to make sure that only the people allowed to choose the future course of our country are the ones voting.

BTW, if the left was really certain that people don't cheat and everyone has the right, they would offer a counter proposal of the "Purple Finger".

You vote, you get your index finger inked.
The ink does not wash off.
You cannot get on a bus and vote again somewhere else.
You can proudly show that you voted.

Sure, it doesn't solve the whole problem, but it is a start.

[scoundrel]

I allow a lot of latitude in a discussion because the whole point of GD&N is to explore ideas and just enjoy one another's company. We are the bar and piano of this bordello. But I do like all discussions to have a topic and to occasionally remember what that topic was. Also, we are all friends here; we can disagree, even vehemently disagree, (wouldn't it be dull if we didn't?) but it doesn't mean we can't still be friendly.

The relevence of the "voter purge" lies in whether or not it is all part of a Machievellian scheme to manipulate democracy. From one flank, we seek to deny the vote to people who don't like us. From the other flank, we play mood music (for example talking about porn filters) to manipulate the bovine herd who have no minds of their own and meeking eat the shit-sandwich which we have prepared for them.

While my own prejudices somewhat incline me to endorse this analysis, my common sense tells me that this is not the only possible view. It might be that, while clearly deluded, Mr Romney really believes that freely available porn on the internet is a bad thing which needs to be controlled. We can be sure that a lot of people think so, and that many of those people aren't necessarily the sort of people who would still Vote Republican even if the flagship policy was to slaughter the firstborn child of every family in America. Don't forget that there are also those who would still Vote Democrat regardless of what idiocy was being proposed by the propective Democratic candidate. It's called tribal loyalty. It is an inherent defect of democracy. No matter how genius-level clever I am (because I'm right), and how filter-feeding stupid you are (because you're wrong), I get one vote and you get one vote. Fascism is much more efficient, but sadly no one else will agree that I should be the Dictator.

The voter purge could be a legitimate review of the system to prevent electoral fraud, you know. In Britain this is a major problem, particularly the increasingly serious abuse of the postal vote system. Recent cases have tended to involve our Asian community, and the recurring theme has been that women are denied their right to vote in secret and their votes are cast for them against their own will by men in authority over them. I can discern no response from our own authorities to put a stop to this scandal; IMHO the postal vote should be restricted to the registered disabled only. People who live abroad can bloody well go to the Consulate if they want to vote and state on their voting slip which constituency they are from. If necessary, they can do so a few days early and their votes can be repatriated via the Diplomatic Bag and sent to their constituency's counting station in the UK. Postal votes are wide open to identity theft. I say all this to support the point, that Republicans aren't necessarily wrong to want to be vigilant against electoral fraud, and neither are Democrats necessarily wrong to scrutinise all Republican moves in this area with bitter suspicion. Between these two camps, there might eventually arise a sensible common position whereby the safeguards are strengthened but in a rational and unbiased way.

Now: what about this weird idea that all American computers should be manufactured with porn filters built into them?

[2cheap]

Speaking of computer voting and computer tabulation.
George Soros owns the company that has the contract to count our votes: http://www.westernjournalism.com/spa...s-in-november/

[tygrkhat40]

Originally Posted by 2cheap

The left tries to say that voter fraud rarely, if ever, happens.
Their logic for that argument is similar to saying there are hardly any illegals in the US because you did a 360 and saw none.

Several studies have shown that the claims of voter fraud by the right are non-existant. Yet, even when presented with the evidence of less than 10 cases of voter fraud over the past 20 years, the right still claims that the safeguards they demand be implemented.

[Mal Hombre]

I wonder if Mr Romney has considered that the main beneficiaries of His computer porn filter would be porn producers ?

[Navvet]

Originally Posted by Mal Hombre

I wonder if Mr Romney has considered that the main beneficiaries of His computer porn filter would be porn producers ?

You bring up a good point, Mal Hombre. Remember the experiment of prohibition, in the 1920s? It didn't stop Americans from drinking alcohol. Essentially, all it did was provide an enormous boost for organized crime. It was a boost that law enforcement agencies are still dealing with, over ninety years later.
Could the same thing happen if porn was restricted? There is no a definitive answer yet, but it isn't beyond the realm of possibility.