In response to:
I guess Holder feels that "the Media" is smarter than black and hispanic voters?
Since when does the color of my skin mean I don't have the BRAINS to get a FREE I.D. from my state?
I'm sick of Holder and others thinking I'm stupid because I'm Black or Hispanic. An idiot can get an I.D. STOP calling me and my family stupid!
Earlier today, Attorney General Eric Holder addressed the NAACP Nation Convention at the George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston, Texas. What did media need in order to attend? That's right, government issued photo identification (and a second form of identification too!), something both Holder and the NAACP stand firmly against when it comes to voting. Holder's DOJ is currently suing Texas for "discriminatory" voter ID laws. From the press release:
All media must present government-issued photo I.D. (such as a driver’s license) as well as valid media credentials. Members of the media must RSVP to receive press...
Is this honestly that difficult a concept? If you make it hard enough for poor people to vote, then they just won't vote. It isn't like they have to do it. So the more requirements, the less likely the poor are represented.
Voting doesn't happen frequently and I find it hard to believe that if people TRULY wanted to vote, regardless of their race, age or financial status, they wouldn't find a way to get their I.D.'s and get to the polls.
Voter ID laws damage the efficacy of the system far more than they help it.
Rights don't guarentee you don't have to put any effort into it.
There has been evidence of fraudulent voting. Whether they sway elections or not is irrelevant. As for swaying elections, who knows for sure if they are or not because it's so hard to detect voter fraud considering that until now, in most states we haven't had to prove who we are.
As it stands ALL PEOPLE need I.D.'s to do many functions that aren't just limited to whites or affluent people. This is why I find it so hard to believe the studies that I've read. Also, as I mentioned, if someone TRULY wants to vote, they'll make it happen.
You haven't actually shopped for insurance on the individual market have you?
First, you can't really have a pre-existing condition. Prior to the ACA passage, you'd be denied everywhere you applied. If you were fortunate to have a job where an employer provided insurance, your condition would not be covered for a year.
Secondly, depending on how much the employer pays, insurance for a family of four with a moderate deductible can range from $500-800 monthly or higher for HMOs. This is not affordable for many folks.
I thank God every day that a:) I still have a job and b.) make enough to afford it.
Too bad we're in the worst recovery ever recorded and business owners polled show about 75% of them will avoid hiring if possible due to the ACA.
Not only that, but I've NEVER worked for an employer where I was asked about my health or any pre-existing conditions. The only time I ever had the pre-existing condition limitation apply was when I purchased individual coverage.
Also, if you think that under ACA, a family of four will have their coverage be any cheaper, you're sadly mistaken. My husband and several friends have already seen their premiums increase due to the ACA.