Proclivities wrote: 
Maybe he could be a porn star.

 cc_rider wrote: 
It's pretty unlikely he'll ever be elected to any political office anytime soon but there is probably some future for him on Reality TV or some cable news outlet.

 DaveInVA wrote: 
I heard a bit of that on the radio on the way to work today. I had to change it, I couldn't stand it. What a tool that guy is.

That said, I have a 'Carlos Danger For Mayor' tee shirt. 

Weiner chews out patron at Brooklyn bakery

 Red_Dragon wrote: 
Man. Talk about sending up a bat-signal. Keep it down, willya?

 Servo wrote: 
you're an idiot AND a jackass. there, I said it.

 islander wrote: 

 islander wrote: 
wait. what?

 islander wrote: 
Wait, what?

 mutepoint wrote: 
Schlabby is Winter mixed with Shelly long and cheap gin. 

mutepoint wrote:
is this a confession? were you really exo?

 ScottN wrote: 
  The fact of the matter is that voter suppression is carefully tailored by GOPs, for GOPs to keep voters who aren't going to vote their way from voting at all.

I remember when no more ID than a valid ticket and boarding pass was required to board an airplane; before the Bush/Cheney/GOP Big Government forced their way into the private sector and limited personal liberties.

I remember when showing proof of citizenship was not required, before two-faced, Big Government GOP politicians forced their way into the private sector and limited personal liberties.

I remember when driver's licenses had no photos, the drinking age was 18, and a matching signature was (and still is in some places) all that was necessary to withdraw money from the bank and to cast a vote.  None of the police state papers checkpoints that most Americans are blindly accepting, like lambs being led to the slaughter, were necessary in the past.  And 9-11 is the most cowardly excuse for any American to trade in the liberties of anonymity and unencumbered passage and more for the thin illusion of security.

The right to vote is a Constitutionally protected right of citizenship.  No politician has the right to abridge that right.  Not one single bit.

 kurtster wrote:No, most are recent (since 20008 and certainly sinc e since 2000.

Seniors, the disadvantaged, the poor and other DEM voters all have trouble accessing the DOT or wherever for a PHOTO ID.  It is a mark of the Rep party, middle class white and enfranchised in society who have ID's.  Voter fraud is NOT a problem in the USA and the REP's acknowledge this.  If you're a US citizen, resident and over the voting age and can prove it somehow you should be able to vote.  This is voter suppression (admitted to by some REP's).   Simple as that.

 buddy wrote: 
I had a point by point reply that I spent about 15 minutes composing.  The stupid editor dumped it.

I tried to reconstruct some of my comments, but did not put as much effort into them as the original points I made.

Jade is right.

It's also interesting to note that most of the American states that have recently implemented voter ID laws, or are considering them, provide for this same exception. That is, a voter may simply sign an affidavit in lieu of presenting a photo ID.  In other instances, a "free" ID is provided to anyone signing an affidavit stating that he or she needs an ID to vote.

Do I need to give a link for this?  (see Table 2)

 buddy wrote:You still can. Not a big deal, really. Yes, you will have to go through extra screenings, and sign an affidavite swearing you are whom you claim to be. And then you walk on the airplane. ID is not required. 

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
And what happened to not creating new laws (and new bureaucracies to enforce them) to solve all-but-nonexistent problems?

 

 oldslabsides wrote: 
Sure, because even when the laws are written specifically to avoid it, legislatures find ways to defund education by the exact amount that the lottery brought in last year. I will say that year 1 of the California lottery was a huge windfall for our college radio station because we were the only ones to apply

The Calif. law specifies the money is not to cover budget shortfalls but is to enhance the classroom. Funny, blackboards used to be in the budget but not anymore, now they're an enhancement. Ta-da! 

 kurtster wrote: 
There's an ocean of difference between "should" and "is constitutionally required to." I agree; it's odd leaving the house without my wallet. There's never any money in it, but it has my license. But in this country, we tend to bristle when someone wants "papers, please."

We're putting the requirement for voter fraud prevention onto the voters themselves, and the poorly-trained (sometimes) precinct worker. Satisfactory measures can be taken by county clerks to verify addresses and IDs when registering. It's rare enough and hard enough and illegal enough that better recordkeeping at the courthouse can beat common cheats, and uncommon cheats can beat a Photo ID law.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
Years ago we were told here that running a lottery would solve all of our education funding issues.  Funny, we still have the same issues after a decade or so of lottery.