Obama issues call to oppose Justice official

Let's see if we have Obama's thinking right. He apparently has no problem that people -- white, black, brown -- need a photo i.d. to board a plane, sometimes to cash a check, get a senior pass for the CTA, get in the health club, or use the charge card at Target. But there's no reason to have a photo i.d. to carry out that one aspect of American life where there has been so much fraud, casting a vote. Now why would that bother a Democrat?

You obviously have blurred the line with what it means to be a consumer and a citizen. Yes we have laws and regulations that require photo id to attempt to do many things in this country. Did you know that a photo ID is not required to obtain a passport? Why? Because the government cannot restrict the rights of individuals who choose to not obtain photo identification. If the government wishes to construct a policy in which photo ids are a required piece of our daily lives then they should provide them free of charge. They should also provide them in voting centers and other avenues they wish to require us to prove who we are. Why won't this happen? Because not only is it insane, but it's cost ineffective. You should think twice before wanting so bad to relinquish your basic rights to choose who leads this country anonymously before you open your mouth.

Cynthia: None of the activities you mentioned - boarding a plane, purchasing stuff at Target, etc are constitutionally protected rights. Voting, however is, and any obstacles that are placed before that right should be seriously considered and talked about before being implemented.

Let's be clear about what Barack Obama is rejecting -- he is rejecting the racist antics of a government official who is suppose to be in the business of protecting our civil and constitutional rights. The right to vote is an inalienable right guaranteed by our constitution -- one that cannot be taken away, transferred, or legislated away -- with identification requirements. By definition then, the right to vote must be open and accessible to all walks of Americans guaranteed this right by our U.S. Constitution, and not all walks of life require valid identification. So when you suggest "requirements" to exercise your "right to vote" that are inequitable, or that make the "guaranteed" right to vote less accessible to poor people, illiterate people, or other disenfranchised citizens, who may have no means or need to obtain a valid photo ID, you are, IN FACT, denying an inalienable right that is guaranteed to us. It is this suggestion that Obama opposes, along with the racist rhetoric coming from Tanner. And as far as voter fraud goes, there are many ways to ensure that people who are eligible to vote are actually doing the voting and many states offer alternatives to state ID now to ensure this. Also, statistically, voter fraud is largely linked to improper counting methods and mechanisms, misinformation disseminated in poor counties and on-site at voting locations. The percentages of voter fraud linked to improper identification are marginal at best.

I don't agree with the push to remove Justice Department Voting Section Chief, John Tanner. What I understood him to say was that, since minority voters' life expectancy is less than that of whites, their voting rights are disproportionately less affected than those of elderly whites. Since black people die first, who cares if they can vote after they're dead? He has the right to say it, and as long as he discharges his duties, he should be able to speak. That is what "free speech" means to me.

If Tanner is to be removed, it should be for something he has done, rather than something he has said. For instance, if his insistence on voter identification cards was illegal or unconstitutional years ago, why has it taken until now (when the forces of political correctness squawk) for anyone to call for his ouster? I do not think the people who now attack Tanner are correct in their approach, and rushing to pillory someone for his opinion is the hallmark of a closed society, not one where there can be a free exchange of ideas. Inflammatory and unfair ideas are the hallmark of a democracy, in my opinion.

I call your attention to an interesting and paradoxical set of recent circumstance: it was at a John Kerry speech that a guy was tasered. Kerry did not jump off the stage to stand between the speaker and the taser. Kerry did not say, "If you wish to arrest him, you'll have to arrest me, also." Instead, he stood at the lectern and asked the storm troopers to play nicely. They did not listen.

And Bill Maher recently had a dissenter / heckler thrown out of his auditorium. Bill does not feel it appropriate for someone who disagrees with him to interrupt his act, which consists of pretending to care about free speech. At least the Republicans are open about their disdain for free speech. I think we should hear all the vile and hidden thoughts so that we can have a sound basis for forming opinions and judging the character of our would-be leaders.

"And Bill Maher recently had a dissenter / heckler thrown out of his auditorium. Bill does not feel it appropriate for someone who disagrees with him to interrupt his act, which consists of pretending to care about free speech."

I was watching the show live and was appalled at the heckler. Maher is of course completely right in this, "free speech" does not give one the right to interrupt a live program for their jollies. Its his show, not theirs. And those idiots deserve to have their asses kicked even if I agreed with their message 100%.

As for the "Don't taze me, bro" incident, I haven't seen the footage before the altercation, but it seemed to me that security swooped in on A PUBLIC FORUM, let me repeat that PUBLIC FORUM HELD AT A PUBLIC UNIVERSITY, when the questioner brought up Skull & Bones.

Free speech refers to the right to petition the government and not to be censored by the government. Maher is not the government, nor is Bill O'Reilly. Are you going to try to make a federal case of it the next time Bill O'Reilly cuts off the microphone of one of his "guests?"

As for the actual issue at hand, Nathan | October 23, 2007 3:18 PM lays it out quite well. Voter fraud cases are often executed for purely partisan reasons, demonstrated by the Gonzalez attorney firings scandal, and that incident made it clear that the reason prosecutors weren't pursuing voter fraud claims by Republicans hard enough is because there is no "there" there.

Please keep flogging this dead horse, it may jump yet.

I thought requiring someone to purchase a photo ID or they can't vote is equal to a poll tax and illegal.

I really do not know if Tanner is right or wrong in his statistics, he should have thought about what he was saying before he said it. Someone in that position should have known comments like that would offend people...not a lot of common sense there.

Perry,

You are obviously an educated man who thinks before reacting, I like and respect that, however your generalized comment in the end, "At least the Republicans are open about their disdain for free speech." is not only inaccurate but probably biased. I think for far too long race and other minority issues have been blown out of proportion and put in the spot light entirely too often. The rest of this is not targeted directly at you.

Obviously there is a problem but simply pointing out the problem does nothing but remind everyone that for some reason Americans hate each other. This creates a domino effect I believe, teaching young people that discriminatory hate is a normal part of society so that they can pass it on to their kids someday.

There was NO reason for Tanner to point out what may be painfully true but wrong. It helps no one. If like he says "rules requiring photo identification for people to vote don't especially disenfranchise minority voters" because they die first, then why should it matter if our constitutional right to vote is allowed without the requirement of a photo ID? Those people won't be around anyway, they are dead, remember?

The whole thing is a mess to me. Personally I don't like the idea of having someone who could make such remarks publicly, who obviously sees no harm in them, being in such a position of power. But that is just my opinion. Who cares about red or blue or black or white, it should be about common sense and good will towards all right? And let’s get over this stupid game of labeling Democrats and Republicans, what a generalized load of crap. That is like a Democrat saying that Republicans are nothing but war hungry corporate Jesus lovers. I know plenty of Republicans who are apposed to the war right now, who don’t go to church, and live in poverty. Open your eyes, look around, you might learn something.

Lets get the issue Voter ID cards straight. the only reason to have them is to supress the votes of poor minorities and the elderly, people who cannot easily get off work or out of the house to go and fill out some other form at the DMV and get yet another ID so they can vote.

Anything, I repeat anything that supresses voter turnout helps republicans and they know this. I suggest reading "Armed Madhouse" by Greg Palast, it's at your library or border's books. He details how the RNC stole 2000 and 2004. They want to use voter id cards like a new poll tax, that requires extra expense to vote. Obama knows this as he dealt with it in chicago.

Republicans used voter id cards, broken voter machines or two few voter machines placed in Dem districts, the tossing out of provisional and absentee ballots anytime someone's name sounded too ethnic, and worst of all "vote caging", where they would send out 1st class letters to Dem addresses in poor minority neighborhoods, to soldiers they knew were in Iraq, and when the letters came back returned, they'd just challenge the votes, which is highly illegal. So if you're a soldier in Iraq, and you voted for John Kerry absentee, you may have thought your vote counted, but it didnt.

The three heads of the Ohio State Elections board were all indicted and convicted of election fraud after 2004 yet hardly anyone mentions it.

Republicans try to convince us that VOTER fraud is the issue, but it's not. Voter fraud is when someone tries to go to a poll and cast more than one vote, or vote without being a citizen.

How many illegal aliens are going to risk getting detained by showing up to a poll to vote? How many people are going to try and show up to three or four different polls and vote four times, and even if they did how much impact is that going to have?

Do you know how many cases the justice department has tried in all the Bush years for VOTER fraud? 6. 5 were overturned as being poeple who accidentally registred to vote twice.

Election fraud, on the other hand, is rampant under Republican control. They gerrymander the districts, they send people to the wrong polls so they're forced to vote provisional and then the Republican Sec. of State simply declares, as is his right, not to count provisional ballots.

The best answer to all of this, is VOTE EARLY!!!! Go to early voting booths in your area that typically open two weeks early. If there's a problem at the booth you still have time to report the issue and make fixes before the vote comes due.

if you wait until the last day, you risk them making you wait all day so you'll simply go away, or make you produce an ID you didn't bother to get, or whatever other scheme they can think of.

Vote smart. Also check out this youtube video, it's classic and great.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5c0eLVYbnI4

Perry -- now I must respond to your comments. If Tanner were a private citizen making such comments, I would agree with you, but he is a government official PAID by US to represent US. Bill Maher and John Kerry do not work for the government -- he does -- and he should be held to a higher standard. And he absolutely has a responsibility to watch his speech carefully and to act and speak in the best interests of ALL people he represents. If he has to rely on the so-called poor health care provided in poor, minority communities to make a point in favor of a policy that further disenfranchises the disenfranchised, shame on him and fools who listen to him. His statements were not meant to be represent any so-called "exchanges of ideas" because he was not espousing ideas -- he was relying on sound-bite stats to bolster his bullsh*t argument. Furthermore, to call for his removal is correct and it IS for something he has done, or rather, for what he has failed to do -- he has failed in his role as a representative of our government to come up with sound voting rights laws that ensure that voting rights laws are properly enforced, and all citizens have free and unfettered access to vote. He has instead taken the antics used by politicians hoping to create yet another culture of fear (that renegades are taking advantage of our so-called lax voting laws), has shrouded them in the authority of the Justice Dept., and has tried to pass them off as new while using faulty logic and suspect statistics. And thanks to our uninformed and disengaged public, he might succeed.

'THIS IS NOT A NEWS MEDIA THIS IS YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS DEPARTMENT IN THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT"

HOW DARE HE, AND HE SHOULD BE FIRED. NO BRAINER THERE AND YOU KNOW THERE WERE NO ELDERLY AFRICAN AMERICANS OR BLACKS IN THE AUDIENCE. OH THERE WAS ONE, WHO BROUGHT HIM A GLASS OF WATER SO HE COULD KEEP ON EATING HIS SHOE.

John Tanner is right Obama is wrong. All students from grade school through college have student ID's.All drivers must have a valid drivers license. All gun owners have to have a FOID card.
You need a Sam's club ID to go to Sam's Club.
I have been a precinct committeeman and an election judge when I wasn't a committeeman for some 40 years. It has been my experience election judges want to know that you are a registered voter or not period.This hysterics from the civil rights movement is just that. Black leaders like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton want to keep African Americans dependent on them or they will lose their cushy positions. Intelligent African Americans like Condalessa Rice and Justice Clarence Thomas are not fooled by this reverse Jim Crowism.
If you vote you should carry your voter's ID with you this is not a poll tax.
White people, Hispancis,Asians and all people who are citizens of the United States should be able to vote. But, the rules are the rules and all should get a voters ID end of story. Jerry White,Springfield, IL

WHAT IS WRONG TO SHOW ID TO VOTE. THIS JUST A SAMPLE WHAT YOU WILL GET WITH OBAMA AS YOUR LEADER.
OBAMA WILL NOT RUN THE COUNTRY ,JESSIE JACKSON ,&AL SHARPSON WILL.
I HAVE A LETTER THAT JESSIE JACKSON THRETIN THESE SUPPER DELIGATE TO COME TO OBAMA OR THY WONT GET ELECED.