But first, show us your ID:
NAACP Demands Photo ID For Attendees to Join Protest Against Photo ID Laws.
There ain’t no cure.
Related.
But first, show us your ID:
NAACP Demands Photo ID For Attendees to Join Protest Against Photo ID Laws.
There ain’t no cure.
Related.
Was Marc Mayrand a Conservative appointee? Appointed CEO in 2007, so must be.
…” most of them aboriginals who live on reserves.”
Abos on Rez’s have a Status Card,complete with photo, so I can’t see why Mayrand would say most of the disenfranchised would be Rez Injuns. No RI would be without his “do anything” card, so what’s the perceived problem?
Some other ethnic community?
Full heartbreaking disclosure: during the last Provincial election, my son lost his ID,so I vouched for him at the polls.
When I asked him later how he’d voted, he replied,”NDP,I couldn’t vote for the damned Liberals”.
ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND votes tossed into Harpo’s dumpster of democratic reform.
If you thought ” robocall” was bad, this is like a hundred thousand times worse.
Injuns have an INAC registration number on their issue Certificate of Indian Status. Why can’t the elections people use that info?
Hypocrisy is a way of life for some, others are too stupid to know their problem.
This bureaucrat is another one, that soft racism of lower expectations.
Poor indigenous persons, so helpless they need our help.
Such that 90% of federal moneys vanish from the reserve.
So the chief electoral officer is clueless as to how voters might identify themselves as eligible to vote.
Would that be because to him all indians look the same? .
As noted the treaty status card is gold,my cousins use theirs everywhere they go.
I rather like the way the feds are kneecapping this minor tyrant, the more he bellows the more idiotic he is seen to be.
Question: Which is worse having 100,000 potential voters turned away because they lack ID or 100,000 bogus voters overturning the will of the legitimate voters. I know which side I am on.
” cause you’re too dumb to vote ”
Read the rules.
Besides the obvious idiocy, there is more.
Do keep all medications in prescription containers only.
Translation;
Displaying them in your hand and saying ” these are really good, REDS for your head “, will not help the cause.
Do not take any valuables with you
Translation;
Remember your grandchild’s baby momma ?
Do not intimidate,threaten,ostracize or degrade anyone
Translation;
If anyone noticed your script , just give them up, and STFU.
These ‘rules’ were not written for the ones that may not have ID.
They are there for the dumbass progressives that take up useless causes to make themselves feel better.
OK, I may be a bit wrong on that. A lot of the people that need to vote,but get upset that they cannot say ” I like Obama, give him my vote you POS, I know my rights, you want to feel one of them, up close and poisonal “, may overlook common sense every so often.
If you want to vote, GET ID.
The mid-terms are 8 months away, not 8 days away. You don’t need white a-holes to tell you how to behave or do you ???
The big one is about 32 months away.
OK, I’ll make it easier.
If you want to vote … baby daddy,this ain’t for you… you should start thinking about getting ID, you can produce about 3 more future presidents before you need to start getting ID. But don’t put it off.
This should go viral to show how stupid ppl are!
Fire Marc Mayrand.
Hypocrisy is the left’s modus operandi.
Let’s see; can’t get on a plane without ID, can’t drive without a drivers license (actually one can but it will result in a fine if one is driving safely), can’t get into the US without a passport but when it comes to voting no ID is needed.
Something is seriously wrong with this picture. When I’m walking and stopped by a cop, I refuse to show any identification and have challenged them a number of times to either arrest me or get the F out of my way. I make comments at plane lineups when people show their passports to get on a plane in Canada about the need for internal passports to travel in the former USSR (what I show is my FAC and this seems to cause consternation to the people checking ID).
During the last federal election I almost never got to vote because I have multiple addresses. My drivers license was still from Vancouver, my FAC doesn’t have an address on it, my BC college ID doesn’t have my picture on it, other pieces of ID had my office address on them and still others had my mail drop address and my local hospital photoID wasn’t on the acceptable list and I burned my BC health card as well as my social insurance card decades ago. I made a few comments when it took a trip home to get a BC Hydro bill which I noted was rather trivial to photoshop to any address.
When I renewed my drivers license it now has an address in the current federal riding I reside in but, if I’m asked to provide 2 pieces of identification with the same address I’d have a hard time doing so. It’s not just the homeless who have a problem with voting; so do the people who have multiple destinations for their mail.
I appreciate the difficulties faced by Loki and the son of don morris, but if the proposed law would disenfranchise them, it would be a small price to pay for a much needed and sensible measure of electoral reform.
I took particular note of the provision ending special polling places on university campuses, the home of the lowest of the low-information voters. At least one major polling station here in Halifax was located one block from the Dalhousie University campus, and one other one was located across the street from the Saint Mary’s University campus. Do you really want to be governed by people who can’t be bothered to walk across the street to vote or to locate their proper identification to vote?
No system will work perfectly. However, the choice is between two potential errors. The first, requiring voter ID, is that up to 100,000 votes may not be cast, assuming each and every one of those individuals affected actually wanted to vote (recent voter turnout being roughly 60%). The second, not requiring voter ID, is that a virtually limitless number of votes could be cast illegitimately or fraudulently by individuals strongly motivated to do so. The potential for the second scenario for overturning the will of legitimate voters being far greater, I would support the implementation of the first scenario.
Caught a bit of Rex Murphy on CBC radio yesterday who was discussing this topic. I don’t know where he got his information from but he said that many of the ‘vouched’ voters were “dubious”.
Silly question – Why do the leftist think that eliminating potential vote cheaters will hurt only the leftists? Somehow in their mind everyone vouched for is a leftist. Is there something they are not telling us?
Loki, we are all missing the obvious,
You can’t buy beer or cigarettes without a valid ID.
As a scrutineer at a recent past election, I saw a woman ‘vouch’ for a mentally retarded male relative after swearing an oath.
What point is there in having a law stating a person must be 18 years old to vote if their mental age is less than 18?
By this method, that woman literally got to cast two votes.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.