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.

(CNN) NewsFlash The Supreme Court ensures our next president will be Lynyrd Skynyrd   (cnn.com) divider line 637
    More: NewsFlash, Voting Rights Act, supreme courts  
•       •       •

28167 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jun 2013 at 10:37 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-25 10:47:07 AM

Cythraul: They will tomorrow!


James!: Tomorrow.


My point is more that Scalia punted on the issue of gay marriage last week when he said that the court can't make moral judgments on the state of the country. But, right here, we are judging how far the country has progressed.
 
2013-06-25 10:47:08 AM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: I understand the reason but to single out the South doesn't make a huge amount of sense and was begging to be declared unconstitutional.


it makes sense in that the south has a history of suppressing minority voting rights. and anyone who thinks that we live in a "post-racist" society is either an idiot or a liar.
 
2013-06-25 10:47:16 AM

Rev. Skarekroe: I don't get it.

 
2013-06-25 10:47:19 AM

MCStymie: Have to wonder what a Skynyrd cover of "True Colors" would sound like, though.


No, you don't. It's Lynyrd Skynyrd. Ergo, it would be shiat.
 
2013-06-25 10:47:29 AM
Vote for Kang or Chodos either way your screwed.
 
2013-06-25 10:47:52 AM

MCStymie: skullkrusher: Hobodeluxe: I see your true colors shining through

That's Cyndi Lauper, not Skynyrd.

Have to wonder what a Skynyrd cover of "True Colors" would sound like, though.


That could work.
 
2013-06-25 10:48:05 AM
What Gays can vote?
 
2013-06-25 10:48:13 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: I don't think he is running.


I'm pretty sure he died in a plane crash.
 
2013-06-25 10:48:31 AM

James!: Life, Liberty and the pursuit of FREEBIRD!!


This made me laugh. I am ashamed.
 
2013-06-25 10:48:46 AM

FlashHarry: To The Escape Zeppelin!: I understand the reason but to single out the South doesn't make a huge amount of sense and was begging to be declared unconstitutional.

it makes sense in that the south has a history of suppressing minority voting rights. and anyone who thinks that we live in a "post-racist" society is either an idiot or a liar.


I think it should've been expanded to cover the entire country.
 
2013-06-25 10:48:47 AM

Lexx: Basically, the deep south can now enact laws which restrict voter eligibility, and they don't have to clear these laws before-hand with the feds.


Hell, we can't even get a law to stick that says you have to show ID to register in this here blue state.  I need ID to buy allergy medicine, but I can just wander into any polling place on the day of the election, claim to live there, and I'm in.  Sheesh.
 
2013-06-25 10:48:57 AM

DamnYankees: This one? Jesus mods, we have a great discussion going in a whole other one which is wasted now.


We only care about teh fuhnnies here.
 
2013-06-25 10:49:11 AM

MCStymie: skullkrusher: Hobodeluxe: I see your true colors shining through

That's Cyndi Lauper, not Skynyrd.

Have to wonder what a Skynyrd cover of "True Colors" would sound like, though.


surprisingly, Me First and the Gimme Gimmes have not done that one.
 
2013-06-25 10:49:17 AM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: Lexx: Basically, the deep south can now enact laws which restrict voter eligibility, and they don't have to clear these laws before-hand with the feds.

But North Dakota could pass the same law and not have to clear it with the feds before hand. I understand the reason but to single out the South doesn't make a huge amount of sense and was begging to be declared unconstitutional.


In all fairness, it wasn't singling out the south, it was singling out states with past history of voter suppression.
 
2013-06-25 10:49:18 AM
Our country has changed, and while any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions

And it is, of course, better for nine five Supreme Court justices to ensure that it "speaks to current conditions" (or, in Constitution-speak, is "appropriate legislation") than for Congress to do so.

98-0 in Senate
390-33 in House

. . .

5-4 in Supreme Court, too bad.
 
2013-06-25 10:49:30 AM

Jon H: What Gays can vote?


We can't if we fail the 'straight test' at our local polling place.
 
2013-06-25 10:49:38 AM

djh0101010: Lexx: Basically, the deep south can now enact laws which restrict voter eligibility, and they don't have to clear these laws before-hand with the feds.

Hell, we can't even get a law to stick that says you have to show ID to register in this here blue state.  I need ID to buy allergy medicine, but I can just wander into any polling place on the day of the election, claim to live there, and I'm in.  Sheesh.


No registration card?
 
2013-06-25 10:49:41 AM

bdub77: As someone who lives in NC, my general impression is that this country is really going down hill. This is not helping my feelings on the matter.


It's swiftly coming up on the time when I'm expected to have kids, and I'm seriously considering raising them somewhere other than the United States.
 
2013-06-25 10:50:10 AM
FTFA "But opponents of the provision counter that it should not be enforced in areas where it can be argued that racial discrimination no longer exists."

Where is this bastion of tolerance and equality?
 
2013-06-25 10:50:14 AM

djh0101010: Lexx: Basically, the deep south can now enact laws which restrict voter eligibility, and they don't have to clear these laws before-hand with the feds.

Hell, we can't even get a law to stick that says you have to show ID to register in this here blue state.  I need ID to buy allergy medicine, but I can just wander into any polling place on the day of the election, claim to live there, and I'm in.  Sheesh.


Sure, you can make an ID card required.  You just have to make sure it's free and readily available.
 
2013-06-25 10:50:25 AM
Who wants to bet this is what will happen tomorrow?

5 Justice Conservative Majority: Even though Congress duly passed the VRA 7 years ago, in our judgment what they passed is out of date and we need to overturn it.

5 Justice Conservative Majority: We must uphold DOMA because regardless of our personal moral opinions it was a law duly passed by Congress only 17 years ago.
 
2013-06-25 10:51:15 AM

FlashHarry: To The Escape Zeppelin!: I understand the reason but to single out the South doesn't make a huge amount of sense and was begging to be declared unconstitutional.

it makes sense in that the south has a history of suppressing minority voting rights. and anyone who thinks that we live in a "post-racist" society is either an idiot or a liar.


My point was that racism and suppressing voting rights is not something limited to the South. If you really think it's a worthwhile law then it should be applied to the whole country.
 
2013-06-25 10:51:17 AM

skullkrusher: Hobodeluxe: I see your true colors shining through

That's Cyndi Lauper, not Skynyrd.


Like there's a difference..
 
2013-06-25 10:51:22 AM

qorkfiend: bdub77: As someone who lives in NC, my general impression is that this country is really going down hill. This is not helping my feelings on the matter.

It's swiftly coming up on the time when I'm expected to have kids, and I'm seriously considering raising them somewhere other than the United States.


Too many Mexicans?
 
2013-06-25 10:51:25 AM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: Lexx: Basically, the deep south can now enact laws which restrict voter eligibility, and they don't have to clear these laws before-hand with the feds.

But North Dakota could pass the same law and not have to clear it with the feds before hand. I understand the reason but to single out the South doesn't make a huge amount of sense and was begging to be declared unconstitutional.


Since when does the south has a problem with having one set of rules for one group and a different set of rules for another?
 
2013-06-25 10:51:37 AM
Simple solution: Pass a federal law that doesn't discriminate against those states. Make *all* states subject to federal approval of federal election procedure. We in Ohio could use that intervention.
 
2013-06-25 10:51:52 AM

DamnYankees: Who wants to bet this is what will happen tomorrow?

5 Justice Conservative Majority: Even though Congress duly passed the VRA 7 years ago, in our judgment what they passed is out of date and we need to overturn it.

5 Justice Conservative Majority: We must uphold DOMA because regardless of our personal moral opinions it was a law duly passed by Congress only 17 years ago.


I will headdesk if that happens.
 
2013-06-25 10:51:53 AM
It is not SCOTUS's place to decide which states Re racist. Congress should make EVERY state require federal approval before changing voting laws.

Do you really think Arizona and Wisconsin are immune to voting shenanigans? That's absurd.
 
2013-06-25 10:51:55 AM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: My point was that racism and suppressing voting rights is not something limited to the South. If you really think it's a worthwhile law then it should be applied to the whole country.


Then appeal to Congress to do that. The court is simply substituting its judgment for Congress's here. It's the height of judicial activism.
 
2013-06-25 10:52:10 AM

Lucky LaRue: skullkrusher: Hobodeluxe: I see your true colors shining through

That's Cyndi Lauper, not Skynyrd.

Like there's a difference..


One looks like they were in a horrific plane wreck and the other is Skynyrd.
 
2013-06-25 10:52:18 AM
wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net
 
2013-06-25 10:52:26 AM
The Court has determined that the old formula for determing which states should have extra scrutiny is out of date, and has asked Congress to come up with a new one.  So once Congress does that, the Voting Rights Act can be enforced again.

/lol
 
2013-06-25 10:53:18 AM

Parmenius: Simple solution: Pass a federal law that doesn't discriminate against those states. Make *all* states subject to federal approval of federal election procedure. We in Ohio could use that intervention.


I still don't think it'll fly. Pass an amendment. Or sue states for violating the Constitutional rights of their citizens in effect if not by direct action
 
2013-06-25 10:53:24 AM

Cythraul: bdub77: As someone who lives in NC, my general impression is that this country is really going down hill. This is not helping my feelings on the matter.

Currently in Raleigh, I feel your pain.


Hiddenite, NC. Group hug.
 
2013-06-25 10:53:31 AM

Rabid Badger Beaver Weasel: taxandspend:

[beta.images.theglobeandmail.com image 620x350]

Accidentally Approves


/FTFY


Man writes awkwardly worded song about people getting to know each other instead of judging. Gets branded a racist.
 
2013-06-25 10:53:33 AM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: Lexx: Basically, the deep south can now enact laws which restrict voter eligibility, and they don't have to clear these laws before-hand with the feds.

But North Dakota could pass the same law and not have to clear it with the feds before hand. I understand the reason but to single out the South doesn't make a huge amount of sense and was begging to be declared unconstitutional.


More to the point it's not fair that to use data from the 1960's when making the decision whether or not a State needs more oversight. The part of the law that the Court says in Unconstitutional is the part that says which States get Federal oversight, if Congress updates that section the rest of the law is unchanged.
 
2013-06-25 10:53:45 AM
Hey, uh, random parameter in the URL?
 
2013-06-25 10:53:45 AM

Primitive Screwhead: But opponents of the provision counter that it should not be enforced in areas where it can be argued that racial discrimination no longer exists.

[images.sodahead.com image 350x272]


The racial makeup of the county was 89.80% White, 7.40% Black

I'm sure everything is A-ok down in Shelby County, Alabama in terms of race and voting.
 
2013-06-25 10:53:54 AM

DamnYankees: Who wants to bet this is what will happen tomorrow?

5 Justice Conservative Majority: Even though Congress duly passed the VRA 7 years ago, in our judgment what they passed is out of date and we need to overturn it.

5 Justice Conservative Majority: We must uphold DOMA because regardless of our personal moral opinions it was a law duly passed by Congress only 17 years ago.


What justices still need to write an opinion? You should be able to make a pretty good guess this late in the term.
 
2013-06-25 10:54:10 AM

skullkrusher: Or sue states for violating the Constitutional rights of their citizens in effect if not by direct action


You can still do this. The whole point of pre-clearence though is that this takes a lot of time. It can take years to litigate a case. Meanwhile, elections are ongoing and people are disenfranchised.
 
2013-06-25 10:54:29 AM
They should just get to the gay stuff already.
 
2013-06-25 10:54:51 AM
Preclearance has a rejection rate of 0.16%. FISA has a rejection rate of 0.03% and is considered a "rubber stamp."
 
2013-06-25 10:54:57 AM

Voiceofreason01: More to the point it's not fair that to use data from the 1960's when making the decision whether or not a State needs more oversight.


Who says? You? Congress has the power to do this, and they decided that historical patterns of Jim Crow and segregation were still relevant.
 
2013-06-25 10:55:12 AM

Mrtraveler01: FlashHarry: To The Escape Zeppelin!: I understand the reason but to single out the South doesn't make a huge amount of sense and was begging to be declared unconstitutional.

it makes sense in that the south has a history of suppressing minority voting rights. and anyone who thinks that we live in a "post-racist" society is either an idiot or a liar.

I think it should've been expanded to cover the entire country.


I think it's unconstitutional because it was so selective. I wouldn't have a problem if it covered every state.
 
2013-06-25 10:55:14 AM

BalugaJoe: They should just get to the gay stuff already.


Tomorrow!
 
2013-06-25 10:55:34 AM
Ginsburg: "Throwing out preclearance... is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet."
 
2013-06-25 10:55:48 AM

DamnYankees: skullkrusher: Or sue states for violating the Constitutional rights of their citizens in effect if not by direct action

You can still do this. The whole point of pre-clearence though is that this takes a lot of time. It can take years to litigate a case. Meanwhile, elections are ongoing and people are disenfranchised.


I don't think the Feds have  the Constitutional authority for such oversight. Expediency doesn't make the founding document irrelevant. This is probably another example of bad for the country but still the right decision (like Citizens United). Of course, IANAL but I have my GED on the wall
 
2013-06-25 10:56:03 AM

Carth: DamnYankees: Who wants to bet this is what will happen tomorrow?

5 Justice Conservative Majority: Even though Congress duly passed the VRA 7 years ago, in our judgment what they passed is out of date and we need to overturn it.

5 Justice Conservative Majority: We must uphold DOMA because regardless of our personal moral opinions it was a law duly passed by Congress only 17 years ago.

What justices still need to write an opinion? You should be able to make a pretty good guess this late in the term.


SCOTUSblog is guessing Roberts wrote Perry and Kennedy wrote Windsor. Scalia picked up the last one which apparently revolves around whether an attorney's advice is property.
 
2013-06-25 10:56:26 AM

runin800m: I think it's unconstitutional because it was so selective. I wouldn't have a problem if it covered every state.


On what basis? What's the basis to rule that Congress can't make certain laws more applicable to area X than area Y? It is unconstitutional to pass a law relating to coastal flooding that only applies to coastal states?
 
2013-06-25 10:56:53 AM

globalwarmingpraiser: Rabid Badger Beaver Weasel: taxandspend:

[beta.images.theglobeandmail.com image 620x350]

Accidentally Approves


/FTFY

Man writes awkwardly worded song about people getting to know each other instead of judging. Gets accidentally branded a racist.


/FTFY2
 
Displayed 50 of 637 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report