[Hoot Gibson]

http://www.politifact.com/georgia/statem...quivalent/

I cite a source not exactly in agreement with me in using the phrase "poll tax." However, if the idea is that a poll tax is a poll tax is a poll tax, and the motive is to suppress voter turnout, then Politifact's "Mostly False" is less than spot on.

Dems want a turnout that favors them, as do 'pubs. That is no red herring. In Vince Lombardi politics, winning is the only thing, and neither Dems nor Pubs get to put on the halo and claim angels sing if their side wins.

Buying Vaseline lotion for cracked hands is more of a burden for the poor than the non-poor. Any added requirements to vote place more of a burden on the poor and elderly, and we all know it, and we all know what demographics are thereby suppressed.

When a liberal source such as Politifacts labels a claim "Mostly False," it is a real understatement for you to say that it is not "exactly in agreement with you using the phrase 'poll tax'."

It is ridiculous to argue that voter ID laws are "poll taxes." The article that you cited said that the highest cost for a photo ID is $33.50 - but that is in the extremely liberal state of Oregon. When most of those poor people who you contend are being subjected to poll taxes are reaping far more benefits from taxpayers than they pay in taxes, $5 to $15 (or nothing) seems like the least they can do to help ensure fair elections - and Politifact neglected to list the states that provide free photo IDs for the asking. I also question how many of the states cited in the article actually require photo IDs to vote. I thought that states enacting voter photo ID laws generally included a provision for free photo IDs to counter ridiculous arguments like the one that you are making.