There’s a big difference with people being excitable and rowdy and people behaving thuggishly to stop a meeting. This is what you don’t get. And while I’m sure people’s anger and fear is real, it is being stoked by professional liars in rightie media. Once again, corporate interests and lobbyists are seeing to it that the people’s interests are thwarted, and whether you like it or not, those people screaming about death panels and socialism at meetings are dupes and tools.

Regarding your suggestion of voter rolls and signatures, I would be 100% fine with that, as it’s how we currently ensure that each person casts only one vote.

Regarding if the meetings were limited to only the representative’s district, I would wager things wouldn’t turn out much differently. Remember, what you see in news clips and on you tube is in reality less than 5% of a town hall. All I’ve seen in a minute or two of some angry people venting, and nothing to indicate that it occurs for the entire duration. Your earlier link does not offer anything to change my mind, other than people might be coming from other locations, since they aren’t offered a town hall by their representative… certainly nothing to support the outlandish claims that they’re Republican plants or Union thugs.

While I’m at it, Pelosi’s mock indignation at the turn of events here, is in stark contrast to her reactions when there were issues with rowdy people at town hall’s a few years ago… in fact, she stated that it was proof of democracy in action, and she fully supported people standing up and disagreeing with the Republicans. Yet more hypocrisy from that side.

Personally, if it’s true that there are organizers out that are intending to only disrupt these town halls, then I’m disgusted with them. I’m not to that point yet, I still think that while there might be a small minority of trouble makers, most of the questions, shouting, applauding, and anger is honest and from the heart… on something that affects the entire nation greatly.

That’s what the photo ID solution is for. A U.S. representative is answerable to the people who vote for him. Meaning, the people who live in his congressional district. If the meeting is limited to people who live in his district, the crowd would be much more controllable and less likely to be a mass of “partisan plants.” However, if you don’t like the photo ID solution, we could have the voter rolls there and have everyone provide a signature, the way people do before they vote. How would that work for you?

Hope you can take some time out of your utopia to realize that just because I completely disagree with you, and others here, doesn’t make me stupid. If you can’t, then C’est la vie, I’ll survive without you.

Answer the question or be banned for being stupid.

In my state at least (Wisconsin), there was a movement to require photo ID’s to vote. That was quelled by Democrats with the cry of “Disenfranchising the poor who might not have the means to afford to obtain a state ID”, which was countered with funding in the bill to provide anyone without means a free photo Id, which was countered with more “poor disenfranchising”.

Interesting now, the democrats are asking for photo ID’s for entrance to Town Hall meetings and yet nothing for voting. This cry for Photo ID entrances by Doug is being repeated else where, and I know of one upcoming Town Hall in Milwaukee that is going to require Photo ID’s. The hypocrisy is stunning, absolutely stunning.