The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://mail.texaschlforum.com/
texanron wrote:The line O'keefe used "I'll be back faster than you can say furious" was great!
The Department of Justice is in full-on spin mode over the James O’Keefe Project Veritas tape in which a young white man is offered Attorney General Eric Holder’s ballot. Desperate to prove that voter ID should not be presented in order to obtain a ballot, the DOJ fired back at O’Keefe and Project Veritas today, with a DOJ official telling tried-and-true media ally Talking Points Memo, “It’s no coincidence that these so-called examples of rampant voter fraud consistently turn out to be manufactured ones.”
This is nonsensical. Obviously this wasn’t an actual case of voter fraud—O’Keefe and Project Veritas didn’t want to break the law. And obviously the situation is manufactured—it’s the only way to show that voter fraud is easy and plausible, since we presumably don’t know when voter fraud takes place. That, in fact, is the point of the video: that voter fraud in this way is virtually undetectable and bears almost zero risk.
But the DOJ isn’t interested in the real point of the video. They know full well that voter fraud is simple when nobody has to show identification. They just don’t care, since they’re happy to watch political allies take advantage of the loopholes. Instead of targeting O’Keefe and Project Veritas for showing the American public the dangers of the current voter identification system, the Department of Justice and Holder are apparently interested only in preserving the absence of voter ID, no matter how many fraudulent ballots are actually cast.
Well, I would like to see modern-day examples of rampant voter disenfrachisement in States where voter ID laws have been passed.hi-power wrote:The DOJ response:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... aud-OKeefeIt’s no coincidence that these so-called examples of rampant voter fraud consistently turn out to be manufactured ones.”
Maybe I'm just being thick headed herehi-power wrote:The DOJ response:“It’s no coincidence that these so-called examples of rampant voter fraud consistently turn out to be manufactured ones.”
but wouldn't any voter fraud be manufactured? 
)
I'm tired of all the crying about 'the constituency can't all get ID's in time to be able to vote' .. which tells me there is more 'intent' going on here to 'manufacture' votes from the other side of this issue than they want us to be aware of. But that's just my ramblings... 
offtopic....Birdshot70 wrote:I'll be honest and wish more cashiers looked at my ID when I used my CC/Debit card to prove they are verifying who is using the card.
Credit card signatures are NEVER verified unless somebody (the legitimate card holder) claims the charge was fraudulent. By that time, it's too late.RoyGBiv wrote:offtopic....Birdshot70 wrote:I'll be honest and wish more cashiers looked at my ID when I used my CC/Debit card to prove they are verifying who is using the card.
I do not sign the back of my credit cards...
Instead... in the signature space I write.... ----CHECK ID---- with a Sharpie.
Not only do I want the cashier to check the ID of the guy holding my card, but, if that guy is not me, I don't want them to have an example of my signature to copy.
I'm seeing about 20 to 25% hit rate on being asked for my ID these days... But places like grocery stores and gas stations where the clerk never sees my card (swipe it myself) are the biggest part of my CC use...
/offtopic....
from: http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card- ... D-1282.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Credit and debit cardholders who believe that writing "See ID" or "Check ID" on the signature panel of their cards will help prevent fraud should think again. According to Visa and MasterCard, when a merchant sees "See ID" on the back of a card instead of a signature, that card should not be processed. But as merchants continue to implement technology where the customer does her own card swiping, well, who is really checking?
sjfcontrol wrote:Credit card signatures are NEVER verified unless somebody (the legitimate card holder) claims the charge was fraudulent. By that time, it's too late.
Especially with the new 'blink' technology where you don't even have to swipe it! 
Birdshot70 wrote:sjfcontrol wrote:Credit card signatures are NEVER verified unless somebody (the legitimate card holder) claims the charge was fraudulent. By that time, it's too late.
You don't need an ID for cash though...
BTW, did you know that the stores pay a lower fee to the credit card companies for the self swipe transaction than the teller swipe transaction???RoyGBiv wrote:But places like grocery stores and gas stations where the clerk never sees my card (swipe it myself) are the biggest part of my CC use...
I agree on the "Check ID" clarification. . . cards with that written on the back are technically not acceptable for transactions.sjfcontrol wrote:Credit card signatures are NEVER verified unless somebody (the legitimate card holder) claims the charge was fraudulent. By that time, it's too late.RoyGBiv wrote:offtopic....Birdshot70 wrote:I'll be honest and wish more cashiers looked at my ID when I used my CC/Debit card to prove they are verifying who is using the card.
I do not sign the back of my credit cards...
Instead... in the signature space I write.... ----CHECK ID---- with a Sharpie.
Not only do I want the cashier to check the ID of the guy holding my card, but, if that guy is not me, I don't want them to have an example of my signature to copy.
I'm seeing about 20 to 25% hit rate on being asked for my ID these days... But places like grocery stores and gas stations where the clerk never sees my card (swipe it myself) are the biggest part of my CC use...
/offtopic....
Also...from: http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card- ... D-1282.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Credit and debit cardholders who believe that writing "See ID" or "Check ID" on the signature panel of their cards will help prevent fraud should think again. According to Visa and MasterCard, when a merchant sees "See ID" on the back of a card instead of a signature, that card should not be processed. But as merchants continue to implement technology where the customer does her own card swiping, well, who is really checking?
