REAL ID and MAGA

[Anonymous]

Oh - and many more access points statewide for accessing your state birth certificate, state ID, and even passports.

[Anonymous]

I had to get additional copies of my son's birth certificate from PA. They warned it could take several weeks, it came within days.

It's always wise to have several copies available. Sometimes you have to turn it over and wait for it to be returned. I don't like not having one on hand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Boy, when MAGA is required to prove age and residency in order to get a Real ID, they throw a fit. Doesn't matter if they've had 20 years to do it . . .but voter ID, that is just fine!

You're getting this from what - a few comments on a tweet? Please. Now tell us about the years and years of Democrats crying and whining about the very idea of having to show ID to vote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many of my MAGA relatives were very unhappy about REAL ID and decided to step down to regular ID because they rarely fly. Didn't want to get all the paperwork.

They are idiots just as much as the folks that don't think an ID should be required when voting are. "All the paperwork"?? Seriously? Folks need to get their acts together.

Well, the people screaming about voter ID seem to think it is a problem. Funny, people seem readily able to get the "paperwork" together for their SS benefits.

I have done both and SS requires fewer documents. SS already knows who you are. I didn’t need a utility bill or to show my house deed to get Social Security. The DMV would not accept my current unexpired drivers license as proof of identity even though their brochure lists it. I’m trying to figure out how to get my youngest Real ID when he doesn’t have a lease or pay utilities. He’s still a student.

If he is under 18, you as his parent establish his residency and identity for him, basically. You are listed on his birth certificate, and you present your ID and your residency proof, and say that he lives with you.



At least that is how it worked in MD.

Same in California.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boy, when MAGA is required to prove age and residency in order to get a Real ID, they throw a fit. Doesn't matter if they've had 20 years to do it . . .but voter ID, that is just fine!

You're getting this from what - a few comments on a tweet? Please. Now tell us about the years and years of Democrats crying and whining about the very idea of having to show ID to vote.

It is well established that many "red" states opposed Real ID.

Fifteen states have passed binding legislation prohibiting participation in the Real ID program: Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Virginia, Washington, Oregon, and Missouri. Ten other states have enacted resolutions in opposition to Real ID: Arkansas, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, South Dakota and Tennessee.

I'm curious if they will agree to it now that the Trump administration is telling them to do it, though.

[Anonymous]

The opposition to REAL ID is legitimate. It is a states' rights issue. The federal government should not dictate standards for state identification cards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The opposition to REAL ID is legitimate. It is a states' rights issue. The federal government should not dictate standards for state identification cards.

Well then background checks for firearms is a states' rights issue also.

You wanna play sanctuary state on everything you disapprove of? Back atcha.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The opposition to REAL ID is legitimate. It is a states' rights issue. The federal government should not dictate standards for state identification cards.

Well then background checks for firearms is a states' rights issue also.

You wanna play sanctuary state on everything you disapprove of? Back atcha.

DP

Good try, but no. If you were educated you’d know that the 2nd amendment is clear, firearms is a Federal issue. You’d also know that anything not spelled out as a Federal issue, automatically becomes a State issue. It’s the reason Roe v Wade was overturned, and given back to the States to decide.

Back atcha indeed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The opposition to REAL ID is legitimate. It is a states' rights issue. The federal government should not dictate standards for state identification cards.

Well then background checks for firearms is a states' rights issue also.

You wanna play sanctuary state on everything you disapprove of? Back atcha.

DP

Good try, but no. If you were educated you’d know that the 2nd amendment is clear, firearms is a Federal issue. You’d also know that anything not spelled out as a Federal issue, automatically becomes a State issue. It’s the reason Roe v Wade was overturned, and given back to the States to decide.

Back atcha indeed.

Real ID is a federal issue. Does the Constitution not spell out via one of the amendments the requirements to vote in a presidential election? Can't do that without the checks set forth in Real ID. So, they're setting up voter ID to fulfill that constitutional mandate.

Back atcha

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cognitive dissonance. MAGA wants every one else scrutinized, surveilled and investigated but bristles at the prospect of having the same done to them.

Did you have a problem with Tulsi Gabbard being put on the federal terror watch list after she decimated Kamala Harris in a debate?

Was there ever any evidence provided that Tulsi Gabbard was put on a terrorist watchlist? She made that claim but I've never seen any actual evidence of it.

As we've seen, many people in this administration tend to make a lot of wild "eating cats and dogs" claims which don't have evidence to back them up.

She stated that in a congressional hearing. So she would have pergured herself. She's a former U.S. Representative for the State of Hawaii. Do you think she would perjure herself?

Maybe some democrat should pursue it publicly and challenge her on that assertion. None has? Why not? Seems like low hanging fruit. Anyone? Anyone?

🤣🤣🤣 That’s a clown question, bro.

She lied throughout her entire testimony.

—DP

P.S. I seriously think this should get nominated for “the best of DCUM!” Pure comedy gold. 🏆

[Anonymous]

Real ID is a federal issue. Does the Constitution not spell out via one of the amendments the requirements to vote in a presidential election? Can't do that without the checks set forth in Real ID. So, they're setting up voter ID to fulfill that constitutional mandate.

This could be done without dictating the requirements for state-issued identification cards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Real ID is a federal issue. Does the Constitution not spell out via one of the amendments the requirements to vote in a presidential election? Can't do that without the checks set forth in Real ID. So, they're setting up voter ID to fulfill that constitutional mandate.

This could be done without dictating the requirements for state-issued identification cards.

I think we need to have Free Passports for all US citizens. And the cost to get copies of your documents needed also needs to be federally funded.

That would eliminate the concerns that requiring proof of citizenship in order to vote is a type of poll tax, right?

And have each post office staffed to process the passport applications, and have mobile services run by people associated with Medicaid or SSI/SSDI to help people who are homebound to get their passport as well (mobile notaries, wifi connection, help people order their documents from other states, whatever is needed.)

[Anonymous]

Actually it looks like technically, you could apply for a passport fee waiver, but the form to apply is very intimidating.

https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/i-912.pdf

I think passports should just be free of charge, if they are required in order to vote in a federal election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The opposition to REAL ID is legitimate. It is a states' rights issue. The federal government should not dictate standards for state identification cards.

You can still get a driver's license without real id, you just can't use your driver's license for federal stuff without real id

[Anonymous]

If you have a passport, why do you need a real id?