What Voter Suppression? PA Lawsuit Plaintiff Receives I.D.

[dreadfulpenny00.livejournal.com]

This story is about a week old but I didn't see it posted here and it was just too good not to share.

Viviette Applewhite, the 93-year-old woman at the center of a voter-I.D. lawsuit in Pennsylvania was able to obtain her state-issued identification without issue. All she had to do was ride two city buses and present a Medicare card from the 1990s with her information. PennDOT clerks worked with her even though her birth certificate doesn't have the correct information (she was adopted) and her Social Security card was stolen several years ago.

While many on the Left are trying to claim the I.D. was issued so easily this time because she's part of a well-publicized lawsuit, the Philadelphia Inquirer was present when Ms. Applewhite received her identification and stated there was no indication that the clerk was aware of her role in a nationally-publicized lawsuit.

I'm getting sick and tired of the Democratic Party using the elderly and minorities as their scapegoats. Instead of actually trying to help Ms. Applewhite with a simple matter, they immediately jumped on the "voter suppression" bandwagon (which as of late has been heavily weighed-down with bullshit). And now, our "fearless" leader is using the military for the same purpose in Ohio. This is getting ridiculous!

Comments

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

From the first link: PennDOT’s licensing bureau director Janet Dolan said Friday that clerks are able to make exceptions to the document requirements and work with applicants.

I have a problem with this. Rules exist for a reason. There is no need, ever, to have exceptions to the rules. Either change the document requirements completely or do not change them at all. When people say "make exceptions" and "work with applicants", all I hear is "game the system" and "cheater slicks". I hate it when people cheat against the rules of a game; I also hate it when people break the law; despite the "good reason" they have for making the exception, I therefore cannot agree with it. (it would definitely be hypocritical of me to even contemplate it as a good thing.)

stated there was no indication that the clerk was aware of her role in a nationally-publicized lawsuit.

I would say that the clerk was most likely instructed to "take no notice" and just pass her along to get an ID from management. Same thing happens in a corporate environment all the time.

[brendala.livejournal.com]

Allowing rare exceptions isn't the end of the world. The woman in this story had a LOT of extenuating circumstances that weren't her fault. Yes, rules exist for a good reason. But for stuff as complicated as this, there needs to be some room to bend.

I used to work at FEMA. There were a lot of people who had trouble getting simple things like replacement IDs/SSN cards/birth certificates/etc because their homes and all their stuff was washed away in a massive hurricane. Some rules HAD to be bent for them because there was literally no way for them to obtain the necessary documentation.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

The woman in this story had a LOT of extenuating circumstances that weren't her fault

What I was told as a child: Extenuating circumstances are excuses for poor preparation.

But for stuff as complicated as this, there needs to be some room to bend.

I have to disagree. Rules, like one's moral or ethical beliefs, should never bend. As they like to point out in church, when God put down the 10 Commandments, He didn't put down wiggle room.

There were a lot of people who had trouble getting simple things like replacement IDs/SSN cards/birth certificates/etc because their homes and all their stuff was washed away in a massive hurricane. Some rules HAD to be bent for them because there was literally no way for them to obtain the necessary documentation.

To which my response to those people would be, as it is to similar people at my work, "Failure to prepare on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part." Before evacuating from the hurricane, they should have had all their documentation together and a kitbag ready to go. Had I been working for FEMA, I would have stamped DENIED in red ink on their app, tossed it back to them, and called out "NEXT!" There's a reason why I have three sets of my needed documentation stored in three separate places across the country.

[akilika.livejournal.com]

Yes, but you're also the person who feels that Protestants need to be killed out of hand, that unwanted babies should be raised for slave labor (does this include the Protestant ones, btw?), and... basically, every worldview you've ever espoused seems to be built around making Catholics and conservatives look bad, by dint of pretending to be one.

I'm just curious if you think that anyone actually believes you on anything, or ever did. Even without being a blatant sockpuppet, you've passed the bounds of credibility long ago.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

Yes, but you're also the person who feels that Protestants need to be killed out of hand,

When heretics refuse the Truth of God, what else do you do with them?
If it was holy for the Mother Church to do it centuries ago, it is holy now. What is holy does not change from century to century,

that unwanted babies should be raised for slave labor (does this include the Protestant ones, btw?)

Only if they're the 'anchor babies'.

basically, every worldview you've ever espoused seems to be built around making Catholics and conservatives look bad, by dint of pretending to be one

My views on Catholicism are directly informed not only by the fathers of the medieval Church, but from William Donohue and the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights (catholicleague.org)
The views I espoused on anchor babies derive from VDARE (vdare.com) and Occidental Dissent (occidentaldissent.com).
All of my views are shared by various peoples on Free Republic. (freerepublic.com)

I don't really see how that makes Catholics and conservatives "look bad". But really, I don't think you as an atheist have much room to talk; atheism and liberalism are completely inseparable, as it is impossible to be truly conservative without being Christian. See Edmund Burke, Kirk Russell, and Pat Robertson.

I'm just curious if you think that anyone actually believes you on anything, or ever did. Even without being a blatant sockpuppet, you've passed the bounds of credibility long ago

If I were actually a sockpuppet, I would have abandoned this identity a long time ago and created another one that was more "credible" to you. Since I have no interest in convincing you or anything else of anything at all, that should advise you that I am not a sockpuppet. I can guarantee you that if you met me in real life, you would find I am absolutely as rigid, fanatical, and absolutist on my positions there as I am here.

[ford-prefect42.livejournal.com]

Okay exiled. You can keep pretending that. We'll humor you some of the time. In any case, your absurd antics *do* amuse me. You really should seek help for your pathological lying though, I am certain that it isn't doing you any favors irl.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

1) Wrong gender.
2) I find it amusing that you felt you had to send your woman in to do your work for you.

[ford-prefect42.livejournal.com]

1) I have no reliable data regarding your gender. IPOF, I suspect that you are a pathetic girlfriendless male masturbating in your parent's basement exiled.

2) I didn't send anyone anywhere, she saw through your trollish insanity all on her own :)

[ford-prefect42.livejournal.com]

Incidentally, I went to the sites you listed, not *one* of them espouses anything even remotely resembling anything you've said. You're an amusing straw-man, you really need to stop listening to radical leftists about what right-wingers believe. Get what people want by talking to them, not those that are trying to score political points by creating straw-men.