1 posted on
10/06/2006 5:05:46 AM PDT by
radar101
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 next last
To: radar101
The 9th circus is like a bad joke that won't go away.
2 posted on
10/06/2006 5:07:28 AM PDT by
Drango
(Born free, now expensive.)
To: radar101
That one was expected. Hope a higher court will overrule them before Nov.
5 posted on
10/06/2006 5:09:44 AM PDT by
mware
(Americans in armchairs doing the job of the media.)
To: radar101
How do we get the 9th Circuit judges OFF the bench?
To: radar101
Who would have 'thunk' they would so something like this.
To: radar101
Meanwhile, here in NJ when I go to renew my driver's license next month, I have been informed that I will need to present MORE identification than just my expiring license (which has my picture, signature, name and current address on it), the renewal form mailed to me (with my name and current address on it, and my current US Passport. These three together will not be sufficient to identify me. I will need one more document, and I will need to provide some additional different document as proof of my address.
ML/NJ
9 posted on
10/06/2006 5:14:00 AM PDT by
ml/nj
To: radar101
What is the (alleged) basis for this ruling?
10 posted on
10/06/2006 5:15:24 AM PDT by
Jim Noble
(Who you gonna call?)
To: radar101
Why is the left always against HONEST ELECTIONS? So they will be denied an opportunity to commit mass inner city voter fraud??? And whine and bawl like crybabys?
12 posted on
10/06/2006 5:19:16 AM PDT by
tkathy
(The Real Republican (RR) way is sticking to the issues and not finger pointing.)
To: radar101
Is it true that Vicente Fox appointed all the judges on the 9th Circuit?
15 posted on
10/06/2006 5:22:30 AM PDT by
F.J. Mitchell
(Dim's October surprise: Design engineer, Wyle E. Coyote. Oct Suprise kit provided by Acme Inc.)
To: radar101
9th circus...dunno why they even exist.
Proceed directly to SCOTUS.
20 posted on
10/06/2006 5:29:07 AM PDT by
evad
(sarcasm may be introduced at any moment of any post)
To: radar101
9th circuit declares: "It's unconstitutional to enforce the law."
24 posted on
10/06/2006 5:47:16 AM PDT by
Lunatic Fringe
(Say "NO" to the Trans-Texas Corridor)
To: radar101
29 posted on
10/06/2006 6:03:25 AM PDT by
newzjunkey
(Support Arnold-McClintock or embrace high taxes, gay weddings with Angelides.)
To: radar101
Sick.
"Poor" people can't scrape up $50 a YEAR to pay the license/ID fee? Give me a BREAK!
That's what this ruling is, I'm sure. It's for "fear of disenfranchising the financially poor voter, that can't afford an ID".
Where's the puke bucket?
To: radar101
If picture ID for voting cannot be justified then no photo ID's can be justified anywhere.
No more drivers licenses.
No more university ID's.
No more badges at businesses (violating individual rights),
32 posted on
10/06/2006 6:13:30 AM PDT by
Mark Felton
("Wisdom is supreme...and though it cost all you have, get understanding" -- Proverbs 4)
To: radar101
Politicization of the courts is a characteristic of a third world country.
As are gargantuan debts that will never be repaid.
BUMP
35 posted on
10/06/2006 6:21:57 AM PDT by
capitalist229
(Get Democrats out of our pockets and Republicans out of our bedrooms.)
To: radar101
Its time to just start ignoring these courts.
46 posted on
10/06/2006 6:51:58 AM PDT by
nonliberal
(Graduate: Curtis E. LeMay School of International Relations)
To: radar101
Here's an interesting question: Rather than the havng the moonbat left attack laws that require proper ID to vote, why can't we on the right commence lawsuits that challenge laws or practices that allow people to vote without providing proof of eligibility. Seems to me that if illegal aliens, legal non-citizens, and felons are allowed to vote, then my rights as a legal voter have been diminished in violation of the "one man, one vote" doctrine.
To: radar101
Goddard knows Nappy has lost her mind as well as many others. He has never stood against these fools before to the point of doing anything that matters. Will he this time? Goddard IS NOT a couple cards short of a full deck, so he needs to do the right thing and stop pandering to his pathetic party leader. Show some spine, Goddard...
To: radar101
They say that voter 'disenfranchisement' occurs if someone who should be able to vote doesn't get to. How do we get them to understand that if 1 person who shouldn't be able to vote does get to, a legal voter has been robbed of their vote...
62 posted on
10/06/2006 7:45:57 AM PDT by
LearnsFromMistakes
(Member VRWC - Volvo-owning right-wing conspiracy)
To: radar101
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has blocked enforcement of a state law that requires voters to show identification and would-be voters to submit proof of citizenship when registering to vote.Of course. Without illegal votes for democrats, even California might go Conservative. Allowing citizenship ID and a validation of legal voting would be suicide for the democrat party.
To: radar101
66 posted on
10/06/2006 8:16:00 AM PDT by
RDTF
(Iraq: terrorist flypaper)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-48 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson