Posted on 02/22/2025 6:51:10 AM PST by madison10
Friday, February 21, 2025 Walberg: People who can't afford a $200 Passport, "they shouldn't be voting" (audio)
Link to Audio: https://youtu.be/0nyXqHWegxs
A constituent provided me raw audio of Walberg's event in Bedford Township yesterday, and gave me permission to share it publicly. I have posted it unedited to YouTube (link above) against a background photo that was also taken at that event, with a portion of my transcript of a standout moment from that event.
I think Walberg is getting worse. He's incredibly rude to constituents throughout that audio. Walberg says grotesque, divisive, and cruel things constantly. He says nonsensical things too, such as:
(03:30 mark)
Walberg: “I don’t know how to produce an algorithm, but DOGE does. They know how to produce an algorithm that gets to the base, and then is able to go out to the systems, and other lines, and ultimately bring it back to a conclusion that says this is what’s happening. That’s how they were able to find that there are people 200 years of age, allegedly, still getting IRS checks, Social Security checks. They’ve been capable of doing that. I don’t know how to do that.” Someone seated close to the audio recording device, can be heard voicing quiet sounds of approval of Walberg's nonsense throughout the event.
I have not been able to attend any of Walberg's government events in over 3 years, since November 12, 2021. The events are still secretive, and held during working hours. I learned of this event in advance thanks to a Republican who ran for Bedford Township Trustee in 2024, who received an email about the event and posted that publicly online. That posting got shared around and eventually shared with me and my friends. So, this event seemed to be more well-attended than most of Walberg's events. Some of my friends who were able to attend told me afterwards that there were about 100 people in attendance, mostly of retirement age. I still have a regular job during the day.
The thing that upsets me the most about Tim Walberg is all of his Anti-Democracy stuff. That was the #1 item on my "Ten Worsts of Tim Walberg" report last year. The first big public sign of that was in Bedford Township on May 4, 2021, when Walberg plainly said, "I don't support democracy". That quote became the subject of a series of billboards, and a series of claims from Walberg and his allies that he had been taken out of context; yet they never provided any context or their own, and never attempted to suggest that the opposite was true - As if Walberg was a champion of Democracy. So, yesterday Walberg returned to Bedford Township, to spread more of anti-democracy talk, in more cruel and specific terms than last time. Taking a deeper look beyond those words - What does it mean for the state of things when a politician can afford to behave in such an offensive manner towards a room full of constituents, with no concern for losing their votes?:
(46:25 mark)
Walberg’s staffer, Dustin Krasny, read constituent’s written question: “What will SAVE Act’s effect have on women, seniors, and poor voters? Isn’t this repetitive law, and aimed at voter suppression?”
[12 seconds of silence as Walberg presumably pulled out his ID as a prop]
Walberg: “How many ways do I have to show this? How many places do I need to show this? [9 second pause] - Is it suppression of my freedoms? If I were wanting to purchase a six pack, did I have to show this?”
Constituent: “That’s not a passport or a birth certificate.”
[6 second pause]
Walberg: “You’re talking of voting.”
Constituent: “Yeah!”
Walberg: “Showing – showing the fact that you are an American citizen in order to vote.”
Constituent: “But a $200 Passport, some people can’t afford.”
Walberg: “Well, then they shouldn’t be voting.”
[Sudden uproar among audience – exchange continued, I didn't transcribe all of it]
(49:30 mark)
Walberg: “We don’t have floods everywhere. And if we had an organization – governmental organization that got in, and helped those people get up and running again, not like FEMA – We wouldn’t have the lengthy time. But you always some problems. If we have a tornado, which we’ve had in Monroe County, and all of our records get blown away, and now I’ve gotta go – I’m gonna move somewhere else in the country, that’s a different story, but there are a limited number of people that do that. That’s why we need government officials on the ground, helping people who are legal to find that as quickly as possible. Some, if it happens around the election time, they may lose that opportunity. We wanna reduce that. But, just for those few people, to let it continue to go that we have states that don’t require a proof of citizenship for people to vote, that’s wrong."
at February 21, 2025
There is extraneous opinion in there, BUT the key is where Walberg says if a person cannot get a $200 passport they cannot vote. It is the SAVE Act, sponsored by several Republicans, that requires a passport to vote. Women would have to provide proof of oorher names. This is insane, and like a poll tax. Even if the passport only costs $35, NO ONE should have to pay to
To post an opinion article and not state your opinion of it is odd.
Are you for or against what he is saying..otherwise, the thread really makes no sense.
Ooher=other
I disagree. People who don’t pay taxes shouldn’t vote.
Does this Walberg have a first name?
I agree with that, but no one should have to BUY a passport.
Timothy.
I disagree. Voting is a right that cannot be infringed once a person has proven their citizenship. I support ID, in order to vote, but an ID should be required.
That would be like saying that you have to have a passport to own a gun.
Yes, the author of the post was a bit rude.
Yes.
> People who don’t pay taxes shouldn’t vote. <
Instead I’d argue that everyone should pay taxes. Too many voters pay nothing. They have no skin in the game.
Perhaps the minimum payment should be $50 or $100. Writing out that check will wake a lot of people up.
A passport is for travelling abroad. It is not for living a normal life in the U.S. I have a passport because my wife’s family is in Canada and my Driver’s License is not RealID. It came in handy even before RealID was a thing because shortly before my father-in-law’s death I received a speeding ticket. The local cop took my license, gave me a piece of paper and said “This is your driver’s license until this is resolved.” (I was going 32 in 15 mph school zone, so special rules applied.) The Passport saved the day for air travel.
While a Passport shows Citizenship, it doesn’t show current address, so folks with passports in Chicago can continue to bus into Wisconsin to mess up elections.
People who don’t pay taxes shouldn’t vote.Only homeowners should vote. Otherwise, they have no skin in the game.
What’s wrong with real ID driver’s licenses? I had to provide a certified BC to get one.costs only slightly more than a regular license the first time and regular renewals after that.
If you can’t afford a $200 Passport you sure as heel can’t afford to travel over seas.
DUH light comes on
You should have a valid Government ID to vote — one that verifies you are a US citizen.
And, yeah, ideally you should have some skin-in-the-game too. Someone who is a perpetual client of Government sevices should not be voting. But this latter is just my 2 cents.
I got a RealID. All I had to do was show my birth certificate and I don’t think it cost more here. No big deal.
Why?
To travel, you need a passport. I've bought every passport I've ever owned.
Agree if you mean to vote, a real ID driver license or state ID should suffice.
Those aren't free either.
Perhaps a free voter ID card with biometrics, and duplicate biometrics are flagged as voter fraud if they are used to attempt to vote multiple times, with instant arrest/detention...
People who are directly funded by the government shouldn’t vote, it’s a conflict of interest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.