If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   New curbs on voter registration could hurt President Obama, make sense   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 359
    More: Spiffy, President Obama, Republican George W. Bush, voter registration, League of Women Voters, New York University School of Law, Brian Darling, Djokovic, Rock the Vote  
•       •       •

3085 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Apr 2012 at 7:15 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



359 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-21 06:09:25 PM

Silly Jesus: There is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election.


I'm sorry, WHAT?
 
2012-04-21 06:11:10 PM
Stupid Talking Point Jesus 2012-04-21 06:02:21 PM


There is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election

Where the hell did this talking point come from?

Where did you get it?
 
2012-04-21 06:17:56 PM

Silly Jesus: There is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election.


15th, 19th, and 24th, amendments, you dolt.
 
2012-04-21 06:24:47 PM

GAT_00: Silly Jesus: There is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election.

I'm sorry, WHAT?


Salon article on the topic

Some group calling themselves, I think it was, um, SCOTUS, said this in BUSH V GORE..."The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States,"

Jesse Jackson Jr., among others, has proposed legislation to change this through a Constitutional Amendment.

Here is a group whose sole purpose is getting this changed. They also have more information on the topic

As much as you seem to know about everything, I'm genuinely shocked that you were unaware of this.

If my resources weren't enough, I can provide plenty more, or you can use the Google. It's not exactly a secret. There are a myriad of legal papers on the topic.
 
2012-04-21 06:25:32 PM

GAT_00: Richard Saunders: GAT_00: One: voter IDs are illegal in 12 states by the Voting Rights Act.... As it is illegal in those states, it should be illegal nationwide by equal protection

Except not.

/state's rights

Yeah, that argument isn't worth anything when the VRA has stood up for 40 years. Federal government has the right to regulate nationwide.


Might makes right?
 
2012-04-21 06:26:52 PM

SilentStrider: Silly Jesus: There is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election.

15th, 19th, and 24th, amendments, you dolt.


SCOTUS - "The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States,"

I'm not the dolt. Evidently the Supreme Court, among others, is/are. See my above post in response to the renowned legal scholar GAT_00.
 
2012-04-21 06:27:34 PM

Kittypie070: Stupid Talking Point Jesus 2012-04-21 06:02:21 PM


There is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election

Where the hell did this talking point come from?

Where did you get it?


I guess you could call it a SCOTUS talking point.
 
2012-04-21 06:27:52 PM
GAT_OO

It's stood for forty years as a matter of convenience to those who benefit.

/don't wanna argue
//just sayin'
 
2012-04-21 06:28:36 PM

Richard Saunders: GAT_00: Richard Saunders: GAT_00: One: voter IDs are illegal in 12 states by the Voting Rights Act.... As it is illegal in those states, it should be illegal nationwide by equal protection

Except not.

/state's rights

Yeah, that argument isn't worth anything when the VRA has stood up for 40 years. Federal government has the right to regulate nationwide.

Might makes right?


States suppressing voting is ok?
 
2012-04-21 06:38:43 PM

Kittypie070: Stupid Talking Point Jesus 2012-04-21 06:02:21 PM


There is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election

Where the hell did this talking point come from?

Where did you get it?


I don't know, but I'm guessing its not very hygenic.
 
2012-04-21 06:43:29 PM

SilentStrider: Kittypie070: Stupid Talking Point Jesus 2012-04-21 06:02:21 PM


There is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election

Where the hell did this talking point come from?

Where did you get it?

I don't know, but I'm guessing its not very hygenic.


O.o
 
2012-04-21 06:43:57 PM
this is 100 percent designed by republicans to disenfranchise democrats. it has nothing to do with voter fraud -- something that rarely, if ever, happens.

yes, there is always some voter registration fraud, which inevitably happens when you hire people to register voters and pay them per registration. you report the "mickey mouse" registrations and then throw them out. this is what acorn did, and it was shut down for it.

this is simply a semi-legal way for republicans do do their usual thing of posting notices in urban areas saying, "make sure your rent is paid or you can't vote!" or "make sure to vote on november 7th!" when the vote is on the 6th. that sort of thing.

basically, they're lying, cheating farking scumbag assholes who hate america.
 
2012-04-21 06:51:30 PM

Silly Jesus: If my resources weren't enough, I can provide plenty more, or you can use the Google. It's not exactly a secret. There are a myriad of legal papers on the topic.


Except the 14th says that without crime or treason as a disqualifier, you have the right to vote.
 
2012-04-21 06:54:22 PM

FlashHarry: this is 100 percent designed by republicans to disenfranchise democrats. it has nothing to do with voter fraud -- something that rarely, if ever, happens.

yes, there is always some voter registration fraud, which inevitably happens when you hire people to register voters and pay them per registration. you report the "mickey mouse" registrations and then throw them out. this is what acorn did, and it was shut down for it.

this is simply a semi-legal way for republicans do do their usual thing of posting notices in urban areas saying, "make sure your rent is paid or you can't vote!" or "make sure to vote on november 7th!" when the vote is on the 6th. that sort of thing.

basically, they're lying, cheating farking scumbag assholes who hate america.


How about we have a minimum standard for voting so that people who think that their rent is tied to the presidential election don't get a say in determining who the most powerful man in the world will be?

McDonald's has higher standards.

I propose the U.S. citizenship test as the standard. Are you smart enough to vote?
 
2012-04-21 06:56:00 PM

GAT_00: Silly Jesus: If my resources weren't enough, I can provide plenty more, or you can use the Google. It's not exactly a secret. There are a myriad of legal papers on the topic.

Except the 14th says that without crime or treason as a disqualifier, you have the right to vote.


You should immediately bring that to the attention of SCOTUS, Jesse Jackson Jr., and the Harvard Law School, among others.
 
2012-04-21 07:00:18 PM

Silly Jesus: FlashHarry: this is 100 percent designed by republicans to disenfranchise democrats. it has nothing to do with voter fraud -- something that rarely, if ever, happens.

yes, there is always some voter registration fraud, which inevitably happens when you hire people to register voters and pay them per registration. you report the "mickey mouse" registrations and then throw them out. this is what acorn did, and it was shut down for it.

this is simply a semi-legal way for republicans do do their usual thing of posting notices in urban areas saying, "make sure your rent is paid or you can't vote!" or "make sure to vote on november 7th!" when the vote is on the 6th. that sort of thing.

basically, they're lying, cheating farking scumbag assholes who hate america.

How about we have a minimum standard for voting so that people who think that their rent is tied to the presidential election don't get a say in determining who the most powerful man in the world will be?

McDonald's has higher standards.

I propose the U.S. citizenship test as the standard. Are you smart enough to vote?


Agreed.
 
2012-04-21 07:00:43 PM

Silly Jesus: GAT_00: Silly Jesus: If my resources weren't enough, I can provide plenty more, or you can use the Google. It's not exactly a secret. There are a myriad of legal papers on the topic.

Except the 14th says that without crime or treason as a disqualifier, you have the right to vote.

You should immediately bring that to the attention of SCOTUS, Jesse Jackson Jr., and the Harvard Law School, among others.


Well, you can't cite Bush v. Gore as a precedent because the USSC specifically said it cannot be used as precedent for anything.
 
2012-04-21 07:05:40 PM

FlashHarry: yes, there is always some voter registration fraud, which inevitably happens when you hire people to register voters and pay them per registration. you report the "mickey mouse" registrations and then throw them out. this is what acorn did, and it was shut down for it.


Actually, people filled those out as jokes (or maybe deliberate attempts at fraud) and returned them to Acorn. Acorn was required by law to return them to the board of elections as completed, and went ahead and flagged the fishy ones as fishy, because while they were required to turn them in, they wanted to ensure it was easy for the department of elections to find and void the fake ones. They were not required to do that.

Acorn was shut down because they registered poor, black voters and republicans waged a propaganda war against them because that population overwhelmingly voted democratic.
 
2012-04-21 07:06:55 PM

GAT_00: Silly Jesus: There is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election.

I'm sorry, WHAT?


He's right. There's no right to vote in federal elections. We have gotten that right in the back door through the equal protection clause. But, for ridiculous example, if all the states decided that representatives and the President should be elected via random lottery, that would be constitutional as far as I can tell.

Dumb, but constitutional.
 
2012-04-21 07:21:45 PM
Voter disenfranchisement is "spiffy" because it helps your side, at least this time, huh subby? That tells me all I need to know of you.
 
2012-04-21 07:25:53 PM
Well, low voter turnout generally favors Republicans, so it does make a certain sort of sense.
 
2012-04-21 07:27:28 PM

Silly Jesus: FlashHarry: this is 100 percent designed by republicans to disenfranchise democrats. it has nothing to do with voter fraud -- something that rarely, if ever, happens.

yes, there is always some voter registration fraud, which inevitably happens when you hire people to register voters and pay them per registration. you report the "mickey mouse" registrations and then throw them out. this is what acorn did, and it was shut down for it.

this is simply a semi-legal way for republicans do do their usual thing of posting notices in urban areas saying, "make sure your rent is paid or you can't vote!" or "make sure to vote on november 7th!" when the vote is on the 6th. that sort of thing.

basically, they're lying, cheating farking scumbag assholes who hate america.

How about we have a minimum standard for voting so that people who think that their rent is tied to the presidential election don't get a say in determining who the most powerful man in the world will be?

McDonald's has higher standards.

I propose the U.S. citizenship test as the standard. Are you smart enough to vote?


How about discarding anyone that thinks supply-side economics works? Those tards are the greatest threat this nation has ever faced.
 
2012-04-21 07:31:19 PM
I hate how all the articles on this always say "Laws to prevent voter fraud" as though this is a lofty goal on the parts of the state legislatures. This is a conservative media bias. Truly it should read, "In a move that Republicans claim to be to stop voter fraud while Democrats claim is to simply disenfranchise underprivileged voters..." That's a fair and balanced way of reporting this issue.

Lamestream conservative media at work on this one.
 
2012-04-21 07:35:09 PM
This is what happens when a bunch of petulant dogmatists, who think that any failure to have their desires satisfied in full force is the product of conspiracy, are allowed anywhere near substantive policymaking. Voter fraud is such a minimal consideration in electoral politics relative to disenfranchisement. However, I guess we have to keep up with the time-honored American tradition of pathological fixation on the mere speculative presence of cheaters and unjust enrichment, to the near-exclusion of doing essentially anything to improve people's lives. What a country.
 
2012-04-21 07:39:11 PM
shiat, I can't vote multiple times now? I thought I could buffalo those poor people dumb shiats that have to let me vote without ID, .as long I registered to vote at least 20 times. Now I can't even do that, as easily.
 
2012-04-21 07:40:02 PM

GAT_00: Silly Jesus: GAT_00: Silly Jesus: If my resources weren't enough, I can provide plenty more, or you can use the Google. It's not exactly a secret. There are a myriad of legal papers on the topic.

Except the 14th says that without crime or treason as a disqualifier, you have the right to vote.

You should immediately bring that to the attention of SCOTUS, Jesse Jackson Jr., and the Harvard Law School, among others.

Well, you can't cite Bush v. Gore as a precedent because the USSC specifically said it cannot be used as precedent for anything.


Was the quoted sentence only factual in the Bush V Gore case then? That wouldn't make much sense. Not to mention the congressmen who are trying to get amendments voted on that would remedy what SCOTUS articulated. Are they trying to get amendments passed that solely apply to one sentence in one ruling?
 
2012-04-21 07:40:08 PM

SpikeStrip: thought voter id's were free. and don't they allow for all sorts of proof of id?


well, you have to take time off work to go to the DMV, which would also require money for the bus, and the added fact that at least in Wisconsin, they limited hours to DMVs in inner city districts, thus making transport even harder.

as far as proof of ID, they suspiciously disallowed stuff like student ID (liberals) while allowing vet ID (conservative) to be used here in wisconsin.

they can find instances of registration fraud, but not voter. If there were signifcant instances of VOTER fraud, you know conservatives would be parading them on the news 24/7 while passing these laws. These laws are primarily meant to disenfranchise blocks that don't vote republican.

Period.
 
2012-04-21 07:41:44 PM
Ah, more of this "you have no right to vote" crap. Yeah, elections for Senators and the President used to be very indirect, and barely traceable to the general white male property-owning public. But a number of Constitutional amendments and state laws later, and you have a right to vote. If there was no fundamental right to vote (which can be regulated i.e. felons) then there would be point to laws prohibiting interference with voting. By creating a legally sanctioned situation protected from interference, states have created a right to vote governable by time, place and manner, as other rights (like speech) are. The question over an 'explicit right to vote' is an academic exercise in navelgazing. And yes, the SCOTUS did explicitly say that Bush v. Gore could not be used as precedent. Probably with very good reason. So any attempt to conjoin proposed voter registration restrictions with such navelgazing is pure bullshiat--no one proposing such restrictions is citing or arguing from the basis that there is no fundamental right to vote. Because they might be dumb but they aren't stupid.
 
2012-04-21 07:45:09 PM

Silly Jesus: There is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election. Having a standard for voting is not violating anyone's "rights", because there is no "right." There are rules that strike out reasons for not allowing someone to vote (being black, being a woman etc.) but there are no laws, constitutional or otherwise, guaranteeing everyone a right to vote in a federal election.

How are these folks able to register to vote and get to the polls, but unable to obtain a free ID? Not sure that I see the difference in the burden. Why not let people vote by phone and discontinue voter registration? I'm sure that registering to vote and getting to the polls has inconvenienced someone before. And we wouldn't want to inconvenience anyone in selecting the most powerful man/woman in the world. Certainly not to any greater degree than we inconvenience them in getting a library card. I think it's perfectly reasonable that we have a higher standard for obtaining a library card than we do for voting for the president, don't you?


My polling place is within walking distance to my house. The DMV is several miles away, down a very busy street that does not have continuous sidewalks. Polling places are close to the resident; DMVs are wherever they've not yet been shuttered.
 
2012-04-21 07:46:45 PM

SilentStrider: Silly Jesus: There is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election.

15th, 19th, and 24th, amendments, you dolt.


Beyond that, the Constitution explicitly says in Article I, Section 2, Clause 1 that the representatives in the House shall be chosen "by the people," and the 17th Amendment provided similar language for the Senate. The only election which you don't have a constitutional right to vote in is the presidential election.
 
2012-04-21 07:47:07 PM

cptjeff: nvmac: As a true non-partisan, I don't see the giant conspiracy from either side. Having said this, voting and never being asked to show your identification has always seemed odd to me. In my county, you have to sign a book, but my signature from the last election is in the book right next to where I'm supposed to sign, so that would be easy to mimic on the spot.

I certainly wouldn't want anyone else to corrupt my fence-sitting, middle-of-the-road, FARK Independent™ non-committal votes.

That's because you have one. Lots of seniors don't drive, and have no valid government ID. So do lots of poor black people. That ID costs money, something a lot of those demographics don't have much of.

I'm sorry, but it's a problem. These voter ID laws are pretty much explicitly designed to depress turnout among those demographics, which tend to vote democratic.

Show me a proven case of somebody actually committing this sort of voter fraud, and then we can weigh whether or not that's worth disenfranchising millions of voters.



A lot of seniors vote absentee or with the help of a local charity, church or senior organization are provided with a shuttle to get up to go vote and then play bingo. And in a few states a valid identification card issued by the state is free. Voter id laws don't prevent anyone of any race from voting. They are designed to protect that only one vote per person, prevent those who are not US citizens from voting and those who have already deceased from voting again...and again...and again.
 
2012-04-21 07:47:33 PM

Somacandra: If there was no fundamental right to vote (which can be regulated i.e. felons) then there would be point to laws prohibiting interference with voting.


I'm not actually aware of any laws which prohibit interference with voting as voting, rather than as a manifestation of the equal protection clause.
 
2012-04-21 07:47:44 PM

SpikeStrip: thought voter id's were free. and don't they allow for all sorts of proof of id?


No. I live in PA. We have a new photo ID law coming into play for the general election. As a student going to school in PA who is nonmilitary, the following IDs may be used: PA driver's license, passport, school ID with photo/name/expiration date, or a free PennDOT ID*.

I'm from NJ (~20 min from my school) so first option is out. Fortunately I have a passport, though I didn't until last November for a reason totally unrelated to voting. I go to one of the largest private schools in the nation and our IDs have no expiration date on them at all, so they are currently not valid. And the kicker is that the "free PennDOT photo ID" they offer is only given if you get rid of your out of state driver's license. Yeah, fark no.

If not for my passport, I'd be hoping against hope that my school issues new IDs in the next several months, or I'd be unable to vote at all at where I am currently registered.

Anti fraud laws are supposed to keep it as easy to vote as it was before for people who have a legitimate place voting. Refusing to offer free IDs unless you trash your driver's license is about as farking onerous as you can get.
 
2012-04-21 07:50:53 PM
Voter registration won't help or hurt anyone except maybe the people running the polls.
 
2012-04-21 07:53:50 PM

Somacandra: Ah, more of this "you have no right to vote" crap. Yeah, elections for Senators and the President used to be very indirect, and barely traceable to the general white male property-owning public. But a number of Constitutional amendments and state laws later, and you have a right to vote. If there was no fundamental right to vote (which can be regulated i.e. felons) then there would be point to laws prohibiting interference with voting. By creating a legally sanctioned situation protected from interference, states have created a right to vote governable by time, place and manner, as other rights (like speech) are. The question over an 'explicit right to vote' is an academic exercise in navelgazing. And yes, the SCOTUS did explicitly say that Bush v. Gore could not be used as precedent. Probably with very good reason. So any attempt to conjoin proposed voter registration restrictions with such navelgazing is pure bullshiat--no one proposing such restrictions is citing or arguing from the basis that there is no fundamental right to vote. Because they might be dumb but they aren't stupid.


"The Equal Protection Clause does not protect the right of all citizens to vote, but rather the right of all qualified citizens to vote" (Alexander v. Daley, 90 F. Supp. 2d, 35, 66 ) "To be qualified, you must belong to a `state' within the meaning of Article I and the Seventeenth Amendment and must be granted the right to vote by the state."

The amendments tell us only what qualifications we CAN NOT use.
 
2012-04-21 07:54:13 PM
And yet, there's a 99.9999999% chance that Amercun's will put another goddamn millionaire (or billionaire) in the driver's seat this fall.

/ stupid farking coontry.
 
2012-04-21 07:56:07 PM

DamnYankees: But, for ridiculous example, if all the states decided that representatives and the President should be elected via random lottery, that would be constitutional as far as I can tell.

Dumb, but constitutional.


...technically, wouldn't it have to be the delegates to the Electoral College, rather than the president?
 
2012-04-21 07:56:51 PM

atomic-age: Silly Jesus: There is no constitutional right to vote in a federal election. Having a standard for voting is not violating anyone's "rights", because there is no "right." There are rules that strike out reasons for not allowing someone to vote (being black, being a woman etc.) but there are no laws, constitutional or otherwise, guaranteeing everyone a right to vote in a federal election.

How are these folks able to register to vote and get to the polls, but unable to obtain a free ID? Not sure that I see the difference in the burden. Why not let people vote by phone and discontinue voter registration? I'm sure that registering to vote and getting to the polls has inconvenienced someone before. And we wouldn't want to inconvenience anyone in selecting the most powerful man/woman in the world. Certainly not to any greater degree than we inconvenience them in getting a library card. I think it's perfectly reasonable that we have a higher standard for obtaining a library card than we do for voting for the president, don't you?

My polling place is within walking distance to my house. The DMV is several miles away, down a very busy street that does not have continuous sidewalks. Polling places are close to the resident; DMVs are wherever they've not yet been shuttered.


My polling place is several miles away, down a very busy street that does not have a continuous sidewalk. I guess I've been disenfranchised.
 
2012-04-21 08:00:04 PM
There are two theoretically possible ways to rig an election at the ballot box. (There's also shiat like gerrymandering, spreading misinformation about what day people vote, etc.)

The first is to fraudulently claim to be a registered voter. And do it a lot of times. And get a bunch of people to do it with you who are willing to risk felony convictions when they're caught. Because even for municipal office, if it's anything higher than Town Meeting you're going to need hundreds of votes. (And if it is Town Meeting, why rig an election when you'll probably win just by bothering to campaign?) This almost never happens. It happened in the 19th century, when monitoring was weaker and population sizes much smaller. It doesn't happen today.

The second is to handle it on the vote COUNTING side. Rig a voting machine. "find" ballots which happen to overwhelmingly favor your candidate in the trunk of your car. This kind of fraud is much easier to perform. Allegations of it occurring are thrown around today, but in the historical record, there are much more recent examples. For instance, "Landslide" Lyndon Johnson first won election to the senate in this manner in 1948. JFK carried Illinois in 1960 in this way, gaining victory through alliance with Chicago's political machine... or maybe he didn't because *downstate* Illinois was also cheating, only for his opponent.

More recent allegations surround Diebold in the 2004 presidential elections, the 2011 supreme court election in Wisconsin, and the 2012 Maine GOP caucuses. I'm not sure if this still happens or if it's all losing candidates and their supporters blowing smoke. But it seems like a much easier way to rig an election, and voter ID laws do absolutely nothing to prevent it.
 
2012-04-21 08:00:04 PM

abb3w: DamnYankees: But, for ridiculous example, if all the states decided that representatives and the President should be elected via random lottery, that would be constitutional as far as I can tell.

Dumb, but constitutional.

...technically, wouldn't it have to be the delegates to the Electoral College, rather than the president?


That is technically correct - the best kind of correct.
 
2012-04-21 08:01:13 PM
Voter ID laws don't impact the elderly because they vote by mail. Or their caretakers vote for them by mail. Or their children, who vote for them by mail because the form showed up this year despite them being dead.

I think before we have new ID rules we need to do after the polling samples to ask people if they actually voted. I think the rates of voting fraud have never actually been tested and it's a bogey man.
 
2012-04-21 08:01:49 PM
You know we're closing in on an election that the GOP is setup to lose when voter fraud becomes a huge issue.
 
2012-04-21 08:02:02 PM

Nick Nostril: And yet, there's a 99.9999999% chance that Amercun's will put another goddamn millionaire (or billionaire) in the driver's seat this fall.

/ stupid farking coontry.


so vote republican?

obama wasn't a millionaire until his book sold well (a book he actually wrote himself, by the way - not ghost-wrote like most political "biographies.")

mitt, on the other hand, was the privileged son of a governor and corporate CEO who was born into money. not quite the same thing.

i'm not saying mittens wasn't good at his job. clearly if you get a $20m/year "retirement," you're good at what you do. unfortunately, mitt's job was to buy companies, fire the workforce, and send their jobs overseas to make them profitable.
 
2012-04-21 08:02:15 PM
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-04-21 08:08:40 PM

wildcardjack: I think the rates of voting fraud have never actually been tested and it's a bogey man.


You're half right.
 
2012-04-21 08:10:48 PM

cptjeff: That ID costs money,


No it doesn't. If you're getting an ID for the purposes of voting, it's free or else the requirement is unconstitutional as a poll tax.

/no issue with voter ID laws with the condition on the above line.
 
2012-04-21 08:12:12 PM

GAT_00: nvmac: As a true non-partisan, I don't see the giant conspiracy from either side. Having said this, voting and never being asked to show your identification has always seemed odd to me. In my county, you have to sign a book, but my signature from the last election is in the book right next to where I'm supposed to sign, so that would be easy to mimic on the spot.

I certainly wouldn't want anyone else to corrupt my fence-sitting, middle-of-the-road, FARK Independent™ non-committal votes.

One: voter IDs are illegal in 12 states by the Voting Rights Act. They were used then and they are being used now to restrict people they did not want voting. Then it was simply blacks. Today it is blacks, Latinos and college students, since all of those groups vote Democratic. As it is illegal in those states, it should be illegal nationwide by equal protection. It is also a poll tax, something else illegal.
Two: voter fraud is a gigantic made up boogeyman. It simply doesn't exist, no matter how much Republicans keep telling you otherwise.


Hey, at least conservatives have evolved a bit when it comes to voting.

"The axiom on which many of the arguments supporting the original version of the Civil Rights bill were based was Universal Suffrage. Everyone in America is entitled to the vote, period. No right is prior to that, no obligation subordinate to it; from this premise all else proceeds.

That, of course, is demagogy. Twenty-year-olds do not generally have the vote, and it is not seriously argued that the difference between 20 and 21-year-olds is the difference between slavery and freedom. The residents of the District of Columbia do not vote: and the population of D.C. increases by geometric proportion. Millions who have the vote do not care to exercise it; millions who have it do not know how to exercise it and do not care to learn. The great majority of the Negroes of the South who do not vote do not care to vote, and would not know for what to vote if they could. Overwhelming numbers of White people in the South do not vote. Universal suffrage is not the beginning of wisdom or the beginning of freedom. Reasonable limitations upon the vote are not exclusively the recommendations of tyrants or oligarchists (was Jefferson either?)."

--William F. Buckley (the guy people still refer to as the "thinking man's conservative")
 
2012-04-21 08:15:08 PM
Here is what I don't get...who is supposed to check these id's?? The old lady that sits behind the table? She's supposed to be the expert on a real or fake id and have the power to turn me away if she isn't convinced my drivers licence is real? fark that.
 
2012-04-21 08:16:37 PM
When exactly did America stop being a force for democracy?

My guess is 1950 or so.
 
2012-04-21 08:17:04 PM

cptjeff: That's because you have one. Lots of seniors don't drive, and have no valid government ID. So do lots of poor black people.


And disabled people.
 
Displayed 50 of 359 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report