Firstly, Judge Evans ("Let's not beat around the bush," Evans wrote. "The Indiana voter photo
ID law is a not-too-thinly-veiled attempt to discourage election-day
turnout by certain folks believed to skew Democratic.") sounds like a barking moonbat.

Secondly, if photo-id is so 'unfair', why are businesses and government offices allowed to require it?

Makes you wonder why the democrats are against any attempt to stem voter fraud, not.

DSG

Evans wrote. "The Indiana voter photo ID law is a not-too-thinly-veiled attempt to discourage election-day turnout by certain folks believed to skew Democratic."

And why is that? I'm just a stupid conservative, so please explain to my thick skull because I don't see the "not-too-thinly-veiled" you're talking about. Are you saying that Democrats don't have driver licences? or is it that Dems are all ugly and don't like the way they look, so they don't have photo ID's? Or is that they believe that have no soul because a picture was taken? I mean really please tell me!

as an election judge:

1.I don't need a photo of you to tell me your skin is black, you're stand in front of me.

2. You have to tell me your name, and sign it on the line.....why is wrong for me to double check that you are who you say you are?

3. After you tell me your name.....I have no way of knowing how you voted, and could never link your name to one political party or the other!

so please, all wise and all knowing judge......explain it to us simple folk. 

Wow what a story, what is the difference between showing a valid photo ID to vote and this little memo the trucking company I am contracted to just sent me;

Defense contractors, government
facilities, hazardous material shippers, and others are requesting that only
BCOs who can be certified as U.S. citizens or prove legal immigration status be
allowed to access their facilities to haul their loads. With the global war on
terror and continued focus on security we expect these customer requirements to
increase. Landstar can not easily verify citizenship or legal resident status of
independent contractors, thus we can not certify to customers the status of each
BCO.

We strongly suggest all BCOs and
operators carry documentation that will demonstrate citizenship or legal
resident status should a customer seek to verify. Not knowing what each customer
may require, documents that may satisfy this requirement include: a United
States passport, original or certified birth certificate (raised seal),
hazardous materials endorsement issued after May 30, 2005 or a certificate of
U.S. citizenship or proof of legal immigration status.

BCO stands for Business Capacity Owner IE, someone doing contract work for Landstar

Now then interestingly, what was left off of this list is the photo ID which by federal regulation I am supposed to carry with me, my CDL, Commercial Drivers License that has a photo of me along with my address, vital statistics and is linked by computer to all the state and federal databases which gives a police officer anywhere in the US and Canada the ability to learn if that is me or not in roughly 30 seconds.

Interesting to know that some states are requiring you to have in you possession better ID to vote than they do for loading a Commercial vehicle in this time of continued focus on security because of the global war on terrorism.

The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price,
peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of
soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.

Theodore Roosevelt

Why is it that only liberals are against Voter ID Laws? It makes one wonder. Duh?

YESSSSSS!!!!!!!        ;^D

I have found that it is now common practice to be asked for ID when using a credit card at all shops in airports...and I always say "thank you".  The ONLY people who will be offended by this request are those who shouldn't be charging/writing checks/voting etc. 

During the last election, I was visiting relatives in Florida, a state that asked for, but was not requiring, photo ID at the voting precincts. I saw many elderly people enter the voting location, some using walkers, and every one of them was able to produce a photo ID. It is a totally ridiculous argument that old people will not be able to vote because of this requirement. 

How can Democrats or the ACLU (one and the same???) keep a straight face when making such statements?!?!   Why is it when it comes to following any rule of law, whether it concerns immigration or voting, they are first to express (loudly) their objections? 

And, most importantly, the point of the MSM not covering this story, but covering the Georgia court decision that denied ID requirements, is just one more "nail in their coffin" - how many years do you think it will take before there is no NYT or LAT or Globe???

Just to amplify on my previous posting of a simple "YESSSS!!!," I've ALWAYS reached for my wallet when entering a polling place. And it always galled me when they told me it was unnecessary here. But I would show my ID anyway.

It's such a habit, as others are pointing out here. Especially when the subject is something as important as voter fraud. If I'd been an election judge BEFORE this law was passed, someone would have had to really explain the logic of NOT requiring ID to vote. And they'd have never convinced me it was right.

All we've had to do previously was give a name, and sign next to it on the voter rolls. No checking to see if the signature was valid, not even a copy of the last signature used. And no purging of old names, either. I saw names I knew had moved out of the area YEARS ago, still carried on the local voter records. ANYONE (including me) could have laid claim to that name, signed, and voted.

Glad to see we "fly-over hick" Hoosiers may have come up with a solution that will actually stand up in court! So far, that is....