The Instigator
Solarman1969
Pro (for)
Losing
24 Points
The Contender
TheLetterK
Con (against)
Winning
30 Points

The anti-Voter ID stance by the (D) party shows clearly the THEY are the party of FRAUD and DECEIT!

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/11/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,254 times Debate No: 1699
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (55)
Votes (18)

 

Solarman1969

Pro

Please, one of you libs/dems/progressives out there PLEASE explain how you could be OPPOSED to having a valid state photo identification in order to vote.

Please explain why YOUR PARTY compltely opposes this while the republicans and conservatives are 100% FOR it.

the democrat party has only survived with ouright fraud and deceipt for years.

the state of Illinois passed a voted ID law and the ACLU sued today, as they have every time.

to see my reasoning for the prosecution of the ACLU, under RICO statutes, please see my other debate

SOLARMAN
TheLetterK

Con

While I am not a "lib/dem/progressive", or even a member of the Democratic party, I do happen to oppose photo ID requirements for voting. As such, I'll take the "Against" position. Personally, I feel that it is important to ensure that all legitimate voters are not disenfranchised. That includes people who might or might not find it convenient to hold photo identification (for example, the elderly who are unable to drive). I also believe that we should do all in our power to increase voter participation--a goal that is not aided by adopting draconian restrictions on voter identification.
Debate Round No. 1
Solarman1969

Pro

All the excuses and lies that the democrat liars put forth are just that

Oh gee! the poor! the elderly!

the stupid!

the ingnorant!

the dead!

the retarted!

the ineligible!

the illegal aliens!

Really the LAST one is what it is all about

the democrats are wrong on everything and need new voters, as people who are educated would NEVER vote for them

thus, they have always relied on FRAUD , and CHEATING to win elections

sometimes (like last time with Kerry) they just lose so bad they cant bring out the lawyers to try and steal the election

By OPPOSING the basic concept of VOTER ID (nearly everyone who is legitimate has a drivers license or passport) , they clearly show that they want

(1) multiple votes
(2) illegal aliens
(3) dead people

and other FRAUD and ILLEGAL VOTES

Their claims that it would make life difficult for legitimate voters are simply false

there are provisions made to deal with the poor and elderly in every VOTER ID bill , to ensure that ANYONE who wants to vote can have the opportunity

Blanket Voter ID

http://www.ncsl.org...

Twenty-five states have broader voter identification requirements than what HAVA mandates. In these states, all voters are asked to show identification prior to voting. Seven of these states specify that voters must show a photo ID; the other eighteen states accept additional forms of identification that do not necessarily include a photo (Table 1). In no state is a voter who cannot produce identification turned away from the polls—all states have some sort of recourse for voters without identification to cast a vote. However, in Georgia and Indiana, voters without ID vote a provisional ballot, and must return to election officials within a few days and show a photo ID in order for their ballots to be counted. For specifics on what forms of identification are acceptable and the options available to voters who cannot present identification, see Table 2.

With the new FRAUD called Motor Voter, the democrats have enabled millions of illegals to vote- as well as other ineligible cases, such as multiple and false names and dead people

the mail votes also tend to be ripe with fraud

In addition, despite their high minded talk, the democrats are constantly trying to DISENFRANSCHISE republican votes, such as the military who vote from overseas and vote like 80% republican

The fact that NO republican opposes this measure and ALL democrats do makes it clear who is the party of fraud and deceit.

In addtion, there are NO PENALTIES for committing vote fraud

NONE

Thus, this is what I propose

(1) Valid Photo ID to vote

(2) penalties (jail time and fines) for voter fraud

(3) PERMANENT LOSS of vote to individuals convicted of fraud

(4) Loss of voting priveledge for anyone on welfare

SOLARMAN
TheLetterK

Con

TheLetterK forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Solarman1969

Pro

Looks like this kid took a hike

any other of you dems want to argue AGAINST ID when voting

To me it is a loser of an argument and not defensible, unless you want illegal voting to go on from

dead people
illegal aliens
fraudulent people
multiple votes
homeless, mentally deranged and felons

etc.

Of course you dems know you NEED these votes so Im sure you will forward on some of the typical ACLU type arguments against the obvious

lets hope this election aint close so the dems cant cheat and get it

they sure came close in '00
TheLetterK

Con

There is little point in continuing this, I think that anyone who bothers to read my opponent's rants will understand why I feel this way.
Debate Round No. 3
55 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
What was Thomas Jefferson's immigration policy?

You deny several facts here:

1) In the absence of the welfare state, immigration is a blessing. It always has been. It is the existence of the welfare state that necessitates borders, which necessitate defense, which necessitates expropriation of wealth to fund it, etc.

2) The language someone speaks has absolutely no bearing on national sovereignty. Your assertion to the contrary is the most absurd (of many absurd) statements you've made on Debate.org. Do you know what national sovereignty means? It has nothing to do with monoculturalism. In fact, the very idea of "national sovereignty" is a liberal idea. Conservatives are for state sovereignty and individual sovereignty. Sovereign individuals may speak the language of their choice.

3) You praise nationalism and then blame nationalism as the cause of war. Yes, nationalism is a cause of war -- but nationalism is produced by the welfare state. Have you read Mises? Reagan was a fan. Why are you so intent on defending the welfare state and then calling yourself a conservative? And "greed"? What's wrong with greed? You sound like a true left-liberal here. Then again, since you bring up the subject of religion, you do have a Christless, anti-capitalist religion listed on your profile; one that teaches the Marxist doctrine that "desire is the origin of suffering." So maybe I shouldn't be so routinely shocked by your left-liberalism and defense of big government.

It is the liberal xenophobe who blames problems on other individuals and their individuality. "It's the fault of the gays, the immigrants," etc. But the Federal Reserve is never even questioned.

"We" need to combat evil? Read Ayn Rand. "We" is the ugliest word in the English language. If YOU feel that "evil" needs to be combated, then fine: PAY FOR IT YOURSELF AND KEEP YOUR HANDS OUT OF MY POCKETS.
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
Heres where you clearly stray from the Conservative viewpoint

lets pick apart your points

How the heck do "open borders" break down the family? That makes no sense at all. Relatively open borders (with security precautions) are the hallmark of a free society.

The country HAS borders , does it not?

We HAVE an immigration policy , do we not?

the fact that we have IGNORED the influx over our southern border for years has come to a crisis stage , at least here in CA and the southwest.

LANUGAGE is the primary reason why the illegals are a threat to the sovereignty of this nation

70% of he radio stations are spanish in LA

100 hospitals have closed , and more are threatened

Again, you go back to the froniter days when there was about 1/1000 the popultation that there is now

In part, I agree with their point that we did steal the land to begin with , but NONETHELESS, Mexico is a corrupt backwards nation run by drug lords and we DO NOT want that exported here.

the ENGLISH language must be kept as of primary import in the USA , if we are going to maintain a coherent nation

point 2 "It is only the welfare state that leads to territorial disputes and war."

This is patently not true

It is (1) nationalism , (2) racism (3) religion, and (4) greed that lead to war.

All of Europe is a GIANT nanny welfare state- the people are dumb and happy and only RIOT and STRIKE when a conservative like Sarkozy threatens to take benefits away to try and balance the deficits

point 3 "And what does "gay propaganda" have to do with socialism? Socialist societies have historically had little/no tolerance for homosexuality."

the left OPENLY promotes homosexuality and ANYTHING other than the family

this is a hallmark of the communist./ socialist utopia, where the STATE is the primary caregiver, not mom and dad, for children.

Again, you see war as a tool of the elites to control, I do not, we need to combat evil
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
How the heck do "open borders" break down the family? That makes no sense at all. Relatively open borders (with security precautions) are the hallmark of a free society. It is only the welfare state that leads to territorial disputes and war. See Mises. The founders had no immigration policy at all; and indeed there need not be one if the welfare/warfare state were ended. In 1880, no one had any desire to suicide bomb us, and no one could come here to get free education and food stamps. That's when we were a free country.

And what does "gay propaganda" have to do with socialism? Socialist societies have historically had little/no tolerance for homosexuality.

The perpetual warfare state and fiat-money central banking are what's ushering us towards socialism. Not abortion, immigration, or homosexuality.
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
wrong .

both open borders and abortion on demand/ breaking down the family have EVERYTHING to do with the commie/ fascist / socialist plans for taking down America

they MUST destroy the family and American culture first

Inasmuch as the mexicans are good family people and have babies, however, the two policies are colliding

I think the democrats are going to learn that sooner or later the hispanics will be conservatives, not liberals

thats becuase they are catholics and dont like gay propaganda

Planned parenthood , naral and the far left abortion baby killer nuts are all HARD CORE socialists - every one of them
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
Although I support neither "open borders" nor "abortion on demand," neither have ANYTHING WHATSOEVER to do with socialism. Solarman's foreign policy, however, is thoroughly socialist.
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
he will be Romneys VP and we will CRUSH Hildebeest

I hope its Obama, but the EVIL KLINGTONG MACHINE is inthe process of running him over

wanna take bets?
Posted by lindsay 9 years ago
lindsay
hey solarman, fred thompson seems to be looking better and better these days! you think he'll win the primary?

hahahahaha

obama '08
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
well i can say one thing for SURE

the democrats are NOT conservatives!

thats for sure!

open borders- abortion on demand- socialism run amuk -

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!
Posted by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
When did that become what conservative meant?

Isn't conservativism supposed to be in line with what the founding fathers thought?

In the American sense, the answer is YES. Otherwise, what are we conserving? Wilsonianism? No thank you!!!
Posted by Solarman1969 9 years ago
Solarman1969
conservative does NOT equal "non interventionist"

conservative= protect and create freedom and liberty

people who want to suppress freedom and liberty need to be suppressed or eliminated.
18 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by DucoNihilum 9 years ago
DucoNihilum
Solarman1969TheLetterKTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by liberalconservative 9 years ago
liberalconservative
Solarman1969TheLetterKTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Black.Nite17 9 years ago
Black.Nite17
Solarman1969TheLetterKTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by lindsay 9 years ago
lindsay
Solarman1969TheLetterKTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Greendonut 9 years ago
Greendonut
Solarman1969TheLetterKTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by mrmatt505 9 years ago
mrmatt505
Solarman1969TheLetterKTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
Solarman1969TheLetterKTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Pricetag 9 years ago
Pricetag
Solarman1969TheLetterKTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by djcdjc 9 years ago
djcdjc
Solarman1969TheLetterKTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by clsmooth 9 years ago
clsmooth
Solarman1969TheLetterKTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03