Vinton Today

The Voter ID Discussion?
It would seem that the liberal/progressive argument is, no restrictions to voter participation regardless of who they are or say they are or when and if they register properly.
In my opinion, at least, there is no doubt that voter fraud occurs all over our national jurisdiction --likely not in many of our small precincts in Iowa, but certainly elsewhere -- more easily in our larger metropolitan areas,and very likey would be difficult to determine and difficult to prosecute.
So, then the question is --- if it is suspected that voter fraud benefited Republicans where would the left/progressives be on requiring voter ID??? Indeed, what say you? If Conservatives were voted in due to voter fraud what say you??? Hmmmm!? Please read the previous discussions and make your own conclusions. A backbone is needed to save our Republic. Stand up or you will surely be run over. Oh! And do not bring up the election between Gore and Bush that was decided in a court of law. Sorry! You lost, but not because of fraudulent voting.
Regards,
John Stiegelmeyer Vinton, Iowa

Comments

Submit a Comment

JS August 8, 2012, 9:30 pm It seems all those that ignore voter fraud -- Protest too much. This smells to high heaven. One vote incorrectly/illegally/fraudulently cast is too many.

DS August 7, 2012, 10:13 pm Yes voter fraud happens this is the latest example. Here non-citizens tried to vote. http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/08/07/voters-turned-away-as-citizenship-box-creates-confusion-at-the-polls/

Here famous fact checker not so objective. Not surprised.

http://freebeacon.com/fisking-fiskes-record/

MH August 7, 2012, 9:40 pm John suggested reading the latest from David Horowitz ---- So, I started by browsing excerpts from his book on Amazon.com ---- Then, I went to BookTV.com to watch a 1-hour talk Horowitz gave promoting his new book. ---- I recommend watching this video, but first, google the following phrase: lying touching nose ---- you'll see several links to studies about how to tell if someone is lying -- and one is touching the base of the nose while talking ---- THEN watch the BookTV.com David Horowitz video from June, 2012 ---- absolutely amazing how many times this guy touches his nose and face!

RS August 7, 2012, 7:26 pm Dick, You should read your article before posting. The website you posted actually substaniates those of use who have been saying that there is a conserted effort to supress the vote. According to article Michigan put on a citizenship box on the primary ballot but the election workers were not supposed to keep someone from voting because they did not check the box but some did anyway and that is what caused confusion and people not be able to vote NOT voter fraud. Thanks for helping to make our case.

RS August 7, 2012, 7:15 pm Mark,
I thought that earlier post with your name on it was a little out of character but my two posts speak to the "dead voter issue" in Florida and an explanation about how dead voters are taken off here in Iowa. Still good information for people to know.

TRMH August 7, 2012, 6:07 pm The comment above with the tag: ---- By: Mark on August 7th 12:51pm ----- was NOT made by me - Something is wrong here!

Comment has been deleted...thanks for notifying us...

DS August 7, 2012, 5:40 pm Yes I do believ voter fraud happens. Studies have proven it does including many felons illegaly voting in Florida. Here is another example of what is going on. http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/08/07/voters-turned-away-as-citizenship-box-creates-confusion-at-the-polls/

RS August 7, 2012, 4:33 pm Took a little digging but this is straight from the Iowa Secretary of State's voter registration book. As you can see it requires some kind of proof that the person is actually dead. This handbook was update in July 2012 and can be found at sos.iowa.gov/elections/pdf/auditors/eah/voterreg.pdf

DEC – Deceased
Use when a voter dies. Acceptable proof of death is:
o Notice of death from the state registrar of vital statistics forwarded by the SoS through the I-VOTERS’ DPH Search module,
o A written statement from a member of the voter’s household,
o A newspaper obituary,

Apparently in Florida, they were not following this kind of system and purging live people and that is why the US Government got involved to make Florida slow down and make sure the people they are purging are actually dead. I think that is a reasonable request and especially if I was one of the ones they might deem dead. Hope this helps

RS August 7, 2012, 4:14 pm There is nothing wrong with purging dead voters but Gov. Scott is not just doing that but purging people who are still alive and that's the problem. Once you have been declared dead and your not, proving you are still alive is quite a task. I have been told by the county auditors office that here in Iowa there has to be proof that someone is dead. I am not sure what that is or what I did 14 years ago when my husband died to get his name off the voter rolls but it is not just someone saying oh George is dead. And even though I do not like getting voter lists to call with dead people, I can see why you just can't take someone off because someone says that the person is dead. That is the way I would want it, a check and balance system. People seemed to be looking for a perfect system and there is never going to be a voting system with flaws.

RS August 7, 2012, 10:54 am John, In your question you answer it. Why are so many of you who disputed the hearsay evidence of "Buddy"?

BECAUSE IT IS HEARSAY. Since when do we change the law of the entire country on someone's HERESAY.

No one is saying there is not voter fraud but the argument is that FACTS not HERESAY says that the problem is not a large enough issue to spend millions of dollars trying to fix a problem that is insignificant. No matter what restrictions is place on voter fraud those intent on doing so will find a way. We have laws against murder but everyday people are murdered.

JS August 6, 2012, 9:08 pm Very interesting. Suggest a read of The New Leviathan by David Horowitz and Jacob Laksin. I am only on page 66 but already ACORN has been stated to be suspected of voter fraud. SIEU (union) likewise. Why are so many of you who disputed the hearsay evidence of "Buddy" so adament in stating that there is no problem??? A recent AP story in our State's newspapers stated the that it was hard for college students to get an ID to qualify to vote. For God sakes if they can't prove they are 18 how can they legally buy a beer??? All the distractor arguments seem so bogus. Sorry for the misspells. Voting is a privilege that must be protected. As James Coburn has stated our Constitution is a statement of NO's not YES's. Government is the servent of the people not the other way around.
Regards,
John S.

AB August 5, 2012, 12:02 pm Speaking of voter fraud, here's how the GOP plays that game.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/military.asp

AB August 4, 2012, 9:04 pm given that there has yet to be shown any significant volume of voter fraud, the true motives can only be concluded to be to prevent people from voting who are not likely to vote for conservative candidates, as those are the people most affected (not the fraudulent voters, because there are not a significant number of those).

The whole debate is rather silly. Conservatives would be much better off spending the money for voter registration initiatives on their own voter turnout campaigns if they really want to make a difference. This is just another example of what they accuse the Democrats of: spending public money frivolously for a hidden agenda, in this case suppressing voter rights.

MH August 4, 2012, 6:05 pm For John: Without any credible evidence of widespread voter fraud, your question "What if voter fraud helped conservative candidates?" makes no more sense than "What if voter fraud helped liberal candidates?" No conclusions can be made without more data. ---- Have you contacted the USDOJ with your information about a specific incident of voter fraud? If not, Voter fraud complaints may be directed to any of the local U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, the local FBI offices or the Public Integrity Section (202-514-1412.) -- (You might ask if they have any data on which candidates stood to gain from the actions of those convicted of voter fraud.) ---- According to the U.S. Department of Justice Fact Sheet: Protecting Voting Rights and Prosecuting Voter Fraud -- http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2008/July/08-crt-585.html ---- : "Since the Attorney General’s Ballot Access and voting Integrity Initiative was launched in 2002, over 140 individuals have been charged with election fraud offenses. Over 100 people have been convicted of voter fraud in that time frame. -- Over 360 election fraud investigations have been started since the initiative began in 2002. There are now approximately 90 investigations ongoing throughout the country." ---- This document corroborates the information from my earlier post from www.factcheck.org and their reference to a New York Times news item about USDOJ voter fraud investigations and convictions. -- Again, these documents were created by the Bush era U.S. Department of Justice. ---- I am not against Voter ID if it is implemented fairly. - There is, however, ample evidence of voting rights being denied to minorities by manipulation of state and local voting laws. (See U.S. Constitution - amendments 14 and 24). ----

JT August 3, 2012, 1:58 pm Voter fraud occurs everywhere, and it has even occurred right here in Vinton, and very recently, to wit: Patrick Lyons in 2011. The present system is naively constructed to put the burden of not voting illegally on the individual voter's personal integrity, rather than a verification process of any kind to ensure their lawful eligibility. This is where the present system fails. Relying on a convicted felon to be truthful is like the trusting the fox to guard the hen house. Reagan said it best about the Russian's: Trust, BUT VERIFY. We seem to have a lot of resistance about any method of simple transparency regaring voter eligibility verification, and one has to wonder what the true motive of those who would keep it this really is.

JS August 2, 2012, 10:19 pm One more thought. I offered in a previous post (please look it up) where a street thug whose street name reported to me was "Buddy" by my favorite retailer voted four times illegally in Chicago for a bribe of $100. Most on the leftis/progressive/marxist position in the comments section was not as outraged as I was. Why? Here is proof- although heresay that illegal voting did indeed occure. But, there were still those whose ignored the deal. I don't care whose received these votes! They were illegal and the perps should be prosecuted and jailed. And yet the the lefttist/progressives/marxist persist in -- no problem -- its too hard to prove you are who you say you are. Voting is our most precious privilege why should we not protect it? Sorry for any misspellings my spell checker does not work here.

JS August 2, 2012, 9:17 pm All respondants have seen the writting of one Rosemary. This is indeed the rhetoric of the left/progressive/marxist. Do not address the issue - go after the message. Critcize, marginalize, demonize. If there is demonstrative voter fraud where ever it occurs stamp it out -- it does not matter which party it benefits. It is illegal and fraudulant!!! And, it dilutes your legal vote. sorry if some of my spelling is off -- right now I do not have a spell checker. So what's my excuse -- just don't want to pick up a dictionary --- and I am a product of public schooling. Geez! A sense of humor helps it all this posturing.
Regards,
to all

DS August 2, 2012, 4:05 pm I am truly sorry Rosemary. I, by no means, meant to flatter you. That was not my intent at all and the furthest thing from my mind. I was just demonstrating absurdity by being absurd. Have a nice day and I look forward to your response.

R August 2, 2012, 12:20 pm It is said that copying someone is one of the highest forms of flattery. thank you Darren!!
At least I wrote something original instead of "stealing" someone else's words.
-Rosemary Schwartz

DS August 2, 2012, 11:01 am Rosemary, What do you mean the use of true and real facts to support your argument? Why let facts get in the way? They cannot use the facts because facts do not support their claims. How did we get here? I offer this scenario. In an office somewhere in DC or New York, Democrat operatives like James Carville, Harry Reid, Dick Durbin, or George Soros are having a discussion on how to keep Mitt Romney from being elected. “If we could only get a bunch more names in the system to build a percentage of non-eligibles who can vote for the President, we can steal this election,” they lament. In the back of the room is an over-anxious minion with his hand waving wildly to get the attention and is finally acknowledged. “I know!I know! let's start a rumor that poor people can't afford government ID’s to scare people into believing that the “Republic” is in danger and then try to crucify anyone who wants to create creditability in the voting registration process so that we can leverage all of those names we got registered so that we can steal this election. I will even write it on a blog and get it out over the internet.” “Great idea!” says Carville or Reid. “We will get our buddies Chris Matthews and Stephanopoulos to talk about it on TV.” Soros says, “Count Moveon.org in. We have to stop Romney!!” That is how it starts. Left leaning people start seeing it on the internet and you know if it is on the internet it has to be true, but only if it substantiates the left’s view. And you know if Chris Mathews or Stephanopouls says it we know it is true. They never say anything that is not true. After it is reported on every other network except Fox, the people watching has already read on the internet, watched it on TV, that requesting ID to vote is the scourge of our Democracy. Now the stage is set for legislators across the country to remove voter laws to save us!! Facts that ID’s are required in multiple other facets of everyone’s lives, like getting a cell phone or collecting government welfare, is not relevant. We have to stop Romney and will do anything including fabricating a problem that does not exist to be successful in this pursuit. Let the insults begin!! Your words, my cause. Never enter a battle of wits unarmed. Pointless bantering. Give it a rest,please.

MH August 1, 2012, 6:11 pm Reply to Dick Solomon: ----- Dead voters in a database are not evidence of voter fraud - every database has some invalid data. - The average age in Florida is deceased, so we shouldn't be suprised. - Republicans are notorious for misinformation - Democrats are notorious for misinformation - What are your OBJECTIVE sources of information that make you mistrust the voting process? - What evidence of voter fraud exists that requires us to spend hundreds of millions of dollars (nationally) to establish Voter ID's?

RS August 1, 2012, 2:55 pm Mark & Tony,
What do you mean the use of true and real facts to support your argument? Why let facts get in the way? They cannot use the facts because facts do not support their claims. How did we get here? I offer this scenario.
In an office somewhere in DC or New York, Republican operatives like Karl Rove, Dick Armey, Rupert Murdock, or the Koch Brothers are having a discussion on how to keep President Obama from being re-elected. “If we could only keep a percentage of people who voted for the President from voting, we could stop him,” they lament.
In the back of the room is an over-anxious minion with his hand waving wildly to get the attention and is finally acknowledged. “I know!I know! let's start a rumor that there is massive voter fraud to scare people into believing that the “Republic” is in danger and then enact voter suppression laws to keep a percentage of people voting for the President away from the polls. I will even write it on a blog and get it out over the internet.”
“Great idea!” says Rove or Armey. “We will get our buddies Rush and Glenn to talk about it on the radio.” Murdock says, “Count Fox in. We have to stop Obama!!”
That is how it starts. Right leaning people start seeing it on the internet and you know if it is on the internet it has to be true, but only if it substantiates the right’s view. And you know if Rush or Glenn Beck says it we know it is true. They never say anything that is not true. After it is reported on Fox News, the people watching has already read on the internet, listened to it on the radio that voter fraud is the scourge of our Democracy.
Now the stage is set for legislators across the country to introduce restrictive voter laws to save us!! Facts that there is little voter fraud compared to the millions of votes cast means nothing. We have to stop Obama and will do anything including fabricating a problem that does not exist to be successful in this pursuit.
Let the insults begin!!

AB August 1, 2012, 12:31 pm One wonders what evidence is being used to form the opinion that there is not doubt that voter fraud is happening all over the place. However, I would also ask: "if it is suspected that unfair voter laws that burden the poor and elderly benefited Democrats where would the right/conservatives be on requiring voter ID???"

JH July 31, 2012, 2:27 pm John, your conclusion is well founded
-Jim Hilliard

DS July 31, 2012, 2:05 pm NYT is notorious for misinformation. Factcheck is notorious for using them. Florida can't even purge dead voters from the registry without a legal battle with Eric Holder. Something is amiss and it is the responsibility of the government to provide a voting process that The People can trust. I don't trust it. Many people don't trust the voting process. I don't care which party it may benefit, they need to fix it and voter ID is a good start.

MH July 30, 2012, 5:49 pm From www.factcheck.org -----
Election fraud does exist, but hasn’t been shown to be widespread. The New York Times reported in 2007 that a five-year crackdown on such fraud by the BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S JUSTICE DEPARTMENT had produced 70 convictions at the federal level, including 40 campaign workers or government workers convicted of vote-buying, intimidation or ballot forgery, and 23 cases of multiple voting or voting by ineligible voters. But the Times described these as unconnected incidents and said the Justice Department had turned up no evidence of "any organized effort to skew federal elections."

Opinion To the Editor: What if voter fraud helped conservative candidates?

Read more from this category

The queen and the dog, and Vinton Today’s comment policy

200th anniversary of the beginning of the War of 1812

Comments