i think the term is "appeal to emotion"... trying to bypass logic and common sense with emotionally charged stories and melodrama.

Also, you have not shown any connection between not being able to show proof of citizenship a person's race, remember your argument was that they are doing it to stop blacks from voting because they are evil racists.

you can make statistics say ANYTHING that you want. The bottom line is that many whites are denied voting too, this is not a race issue as you make it out to be.

Oh noes, the stupid people filled their forms WRONG and got denied! RACISM! RACISM![/sarcasm]

Seriously, how can applicant error be blamed on racism? and people can be reinstated, if anything this is an argument to modernize the system to make it QUICKER so that people could correct errors like that in time to vote.

The link you posted:

1. Defines voter fraud as an INDIVIDUAL impersonating ANOTHER individual for the sake of voting to defraud an election. They have other definitions for other things, including "fraud" which is when a voting machine has been tampered to tally incorrectly.

2. Does not take into account that maybe the reason voter fraud is rare (according to them) is exactly BECAUSE we have voter registrations and anti fraud systems in place.

3. I am all for IMPROVING the METHODS of anti voter fruad... I realise that not all "security" is secure. Just like when the airport staff asks "did you pack your own bags" or "are you a terrorist?" (they ask foreign nationals on entery, I know because I had to answer NO to that question many times coming into the US.)

There are certainly ASPECTS of voter "security" that do not actually do anything to prevent fraud and are thus useless. But that does not mean that all voter ID efforts, especially not PRE-Clearance, should be halted.

KB, my cousin was Roy Wilkins, I doubt you have heard of him but at one time he was Chairman of the NAACP. That was background not bragging. Do your history my friend, who was playing those games you write of? If I remember correctly it was the democrat party in the south, the same party that freely accepts KKK members into their ranks when it helped keep them in the majority. The purpose of voter registration is to ensure that every American has the ability to exercise their right to vote. My wife is a naturalized citizen but my daughter is not so only one of the two can vote. There is a reason we have those laws, yes laws! The same type of laws that say non-citizens are not allowed to contribute to a candidate. ACORN is under indictment in 17 states for voter fraud. This news comes to you via the right wing media, New York Times. We have people that want to be elected and they don't care how. The rules are in place so it is fair for all. You have to check a box that says under penalty of perjury you affirm that you are a legal citizen of the United States.

Please don't tell me you have not seen results of election fraud, the 125% of the registered voters voting in a county. The dead voting in Chicago, that famous phrase, vote early and vote often.

The cynical phrases "Vote early -- and often" and "Vote early -- and vote often" are variously attributed to three different Chicagoans: Al Capone, the famous gangster; Richard J. Daley, mayor from 1955 to 1976; and William Hale Thompson, mayor from 1915-1923 and 1931-1935. All three were notorious for their corruption and their manipulation of the democratic process. It is most likely that Thompson invented the phrase, and Capone and Daley later repeated it.

People are still registered to vote that are dead, ACORN was getting people to register as many as seven times with different addresses so they could vote as many times as they could for their candidate. The rule is one person one vote. How about the 2000 election when a democrat was caught in Miami with a voting machine and blank ballots in his trunk? Seattle July 2007 Felony charges filed against 7 in state's biggest case of voter-registration fraud.

New York Times May 5 2009 Acorn submitted 91,002 completed forms in Clark County, which includes Las Vegas, of which 23,186 turned out to be valid new voters who voted in November, according to data provided by Mr. Miller’s office.

Mr. Miller investigated Acorn at the behest of the Clark County registrar of voters, Larry Lomax, who noted a high number of forms turned in featuring the names of famous football players and cartoon characters.

You say you are well informed yet you never heard of any of this? If a person is elected fairly then I support that winner until they are out of office no matter which party they belong, if I believe they won by cheating then I want them out of office.

the top of what? The news article stated that Mr. Conyers from Mi asked for the investigation and later changed his mind. There is no record of it going any further than that.

I expected exactly what we got. How is that hope and change working for you?

So does this mean you are not hoping for change?

you've made that claim in the past.

lil bit presumptious on your part, no?  hell, i mighta heard about a whole lotta people douglass to dubois to little to lewis and jordan.

yup.

i dunno what it was, but i'm hoping for your sake, you're not trying to suggest that roy wilkins would support georgia republicans' use of hysterical fear-mongering to promote policy that's as flawed as it is unnecessary at risk of disenfranchising and discouraging voters of that state.

if i remember correctly, it was democrats truman and humphery who took on the racists in their own party in their efforts to end american apartheid.  democrat lyndon johnson who--no matter his other failings--was the driving force behind the 1964 civil rights acts.  and it was nixon who courted thurmond to make the republican party a welcome place for racism and reagan who confirmed it by his speech in philadelphia mississippi. 

Yes, most of that is completely true. Mr. Truman was a member of the KKk, yet he publically fought against racism. Mr. Johnson was part of the southern democrats that supported racism and when Mr. Kennedy died he made it his goal to get all the policies passed the Mr. Kennedy could not. Keep in mind that the Democrats held the majority in the Congress both houses, yet he needed the republicans to get it passed even with all the arm twisting he did on his side of the isle. Democrats held the majority in both houses until Mr. Reagan’s second term in office. Republicans held a slim majority for 12 years and then they blew it. Senator Thurmond left the democrat party because it was not racist enough for him and he started a third party. Lost badly and came back as a republican. His racism was okay as a democrat, he had to renounce racism to get into the Republican Party and then all of a sudden the democrats noticed he was a racist. Yet, Senator Byrd has not been forced to renounce racism to stay in the democrat party. He is considered an honored statesman. Why is that? No matter that he was a high ranking official of the KKK, and any steps away from the KKK until its demise was done with a wink and a nod. So after 48 years of making laws in this country what have the democrats done for civil rights? They could not pass the civil rights act of 1864 oh wait that was the last time there was a republican majority. 100 years later they passed the civil rights act of 1964 but only because of the republicans. Funny how you missed that part of it.

I thought the person most celebrated for the civil rights movement was marthin luthar king... who was a republican fight against the democrats and their aparthide laws.

To call members of the KKK the force behind the civil rights movement is both absurd and insulting. 

it's purely speculation, of course, but wilkins was an intelligent man and certainly musta had cogent reasons for switching parties; in light of the republican party's shameful southern strategy (which was nothing short of employing racists like thurmond to draw in his constituency of hate-based voters) i sincerely doubt he'd have jumped back today.

that last sentence is so ridiculously ambiguous, it's impossible to determine who "they" are.   either way, you've pretty much summed up the rationale for nixon's southern strategy and offered a very accurate explanation as to how and why the party of lincoln became the party of lincoln rockwell.

about the kindest response i can offer is this:  you're either deluded or have no regard for truth. 

i'd prefer the former because i'm willing to accept your purported relationship to roy wilkins as fact and i'm pained by the thought of you dishonoring the memory of a member of your own family.

on one hand, we have your bizarre speculation; on the other, the authority of mr wilkins' own autobiographic record and words including this comment on the 1964 republican convention and its nominee: "a man came out of the beer halls of Munich, and rallied the forces of Rightism in Germany...all the same elements are there in San Francisco now."

your cousin knew full well his allies (liberals from both parties who came together to enact the civil rights acts of 1957 and 1964) and his enemies (racists from both parties who did their damnedest to prevent their enactment).

referring to nixon's 1969 decision to delay the desegregation of mississippi schools--as a quid pro quo demonstration of what the gop's southern strategy was really all about--roy wilkins said: "it's almost enough to make you vomit"

he was wrong, of course. 

no almost enough about it.