jehovahs witness protection: Trayvon's girlfriend damn sure wouldn't be allowed to vote.
patentguy: netweavr: The "single wrong answer" criteria would probably have gotten a lot of people who just brain-farted on something.You're starting to understand. The person grading might miss an error by a white voter while making sure to find any technical error by a black voter. It's not the test, it's the grader.
NutWrench: 1. Draw a line around the number or letter of this sentence.I assume this one is supposed to make you run out the clock, while you scratch your head, saying WTF.
Johnson: How does one "1. draw a line around the number or letter of this sentence" when they ask you to "circle" something later on? (examples #4 and #5 are good...)If you circle the "1." you fail because you did not follow the directions, you drew a circle, not a line.If you draw a line THROUGH it you fail because you were supposed to draw that line AROUND it.If you draw a square around it, you fail because you drew a square, not a line./no voting for you no matter what you put down.//repeat WarGames reference mentioned already
Anderson's Pooper: My proposed test for the 2012 Presidential Election1. Are you planning on voting for Romney because Obama is black?2. Are you planning to vote for Obama because he will give you a phone?If you answer "Yes" to either of the above you shouldn't be allowed to vote.
video man: ZAZ: Some of those seemed like a written version of a sobriety test, not a literacy test."Say the alphabet backwards.""Z... A... Officer, I can't do this sober."I've memorized the ZYX's. I can rattle them off with a BAC in excess of .10
semiotix: I'm a little annoyed with this particular post, history under Rebecca Onion being one of the very few things Slate has done competently lately. And, in fact, until now, it's been GREAT.But the Slate post links to a page on the Civil Rights Movement Veteran webpage which contains this page which in turn contains two links. One, marked "circa 1964?" is the one shown in the article. Here's what it looks like:[s18.postimg.org image 488x365]The other link is marked "circa 1963" (note, no "?") and looks like this:[s22.postimg.org image 386x359]Notice how one looks like it was typed or printed in 1963, and the other looks like it came off a mid-1990s word processor?Now, literacy tests existed. Tests about the Constitution, etc., existed. And they were used in exactly the way you'd think--there's no controversy about that whatsoever. But it's entirely possible that the thing shown in this Slate article isn't even a transcription of a real document--it smells a bit wrong, and (argument from authority alert) I'm a twentieth-century American historian. It's almost too cute, and the white registrar turning black voters away from the polls in 1964 Louisiana didn't need to be cute.So, this is dangerous--because if this one fishy document gets debunked, all of a sudden the AM radio dial is going to light up with people talking about how blacks never had any trouble voting AT ALL, and the VRA was just those damn liberals trying to mess with honest folks' constitutional rights, etc. etc.
gweilo8888: Not saying it proves it to be real, but two seconds on Google finds the exact same document in print as a real test in "Gateways to Democracy: An Introduction to American Government , 2nd ed.", published byCengage Learning:http://bit.ly/13cPgmNThat makes it a bit more believable than a random blog.
Krieghund: thamike: Oh, good. Another one for the collection.[i915.photobucket.com image 850x394][i915.photobucket.com image 850x186][i915.photobucket.com image 850x390][i915.photobucket.com image 850x543][i915.photobucket.com image 850x390]Seriously, get a life.If you don't like a poster, ignore them or flag them as a troll. If you're planning on reposting every instance of JWP saying something idiotic, you'll be here all day.
Archimedes' Principal: Question #30: What is this I don't even.
Dman33: Johnson: How does one "1. draw a line around the number or letter of this sentence" when they ask you to "circle" something later on? (examples #4 and #5 are good...)If you circle the "1." you fail because you did not follow the directions, you drew a circle, not a line.If you draw a line THROUGH it you fail because you were supposed to draw that line AROUND it.If you draw a square around it, you fail because you drew a square, not a line./no voting for you no matter what you put down.//repeat WarGames reference mentioned alreadyI consider myself rather intelligent but it was shiat like that which totally threw me off on this test. There is NO WAY I could ever pass it. Half of the questions do not even make sense!How in the world could one draw a LINE AROUND something? A LINE?? Unpossible!
leonel: No way you can do this in 10 minutes! 24 would take me a minute alone to think up words that look the same back and forth! RACECAR would probably disqualify me since it could be interpreted as two words.
bwilson27: mithras_angel:Or, just go for the shorter route... Only repost the things from JWP that aren't idiotic.Saves quite a lot of time.Or just do like I did a long time ago and make him one of 3 troll assholes on permanent ignore.... So I don't have to see you idiots blathering about him all farking day long.
JAGChem82: Anderson's Pooper: My proposed test for the 2012 Presidential Election1. Are you planning on voting for Romney because Obama is black?2. Are you planning to vote for Obama because he will give you a phone?If you answer "Yes" to either of the above you shouldn't be allowed to vote.1. No, I voted for Obama because Romney's a damn fool.2. I didn't need a free phone from the government because I wanted a cooler one for myself, so I bought my own.Now, a question for you: Do you think that sucking up to your rich Republican overlords will get you a blowjob from them?
Smelly Pirate Hooker: Voter turnout for the 2012 primaries in most states was under 20% (per elections.gmu.edu)
100 Watt Walrus: jehovahs witness protection: Trayvon's girlfriend damn sure wouldn't be allowed to vote.Relevance? Or do you just take any opportunity you can to take a swipe at people you think are beneath you?
semiotix: So, this is dangerous--because if this one fishy document gets debunked,
Fark_Guy_Rob: I actually think a test before being able to vote would be a great thing; but it shouldn't be designed to test someone's reading comprehension...it should be about the most basic issues that are relevant for whatever election is happening. If you can't correctly identify 3/5 political stances of the person you are voting for....should you really be voting?I firmly believe this push we have for 'everyone' to vote is the worst possible thing you could do. It's not about race or education - I have a master's degree - but I don't follow politics. I haven't studied political science or economics or law or anything else that might be important for our elected officials. Oh sure - I want 'more jobs' and 'less taxes' and 'more freedom' and 'lower crime' - but so does everyone else. Not only do I not have any idea on *how* to get those things, I don't follow politics enough to even summarize the issues, much less how different politicians stand on them.I have no business voting. So I don't.But I have so many friends who are as clueless (or more so) - who don't just vote; but strongly identify with a political group and encourage others to vote. Most often, you can identify someone like this from their Facebook wall.Oh well - it'll never happen.
gfid: Smelly Pirate Hooker: Voter turnout for the 2012 primaries in most states was under 20% (per elections.gmu.edu)In a number of states you're not allowed to vote in a primary unless you're registered with that party.
NotoriousW.O.P: Yes. Then again, I'm white.
lordargent: Johnson: It is quite simple: Put your pencil point down at any spot around the selected object. While applying light pressure, draw a line AROUND the object. Lift pencil.A line is a straight one dimensional figure with no width that extends to infinity. From a geometrical standpoint, it is technically impossible.You can't draw a line around something because a line has no curvature (unless you're warping the fabric of space). // I mean, if you really want to get technical, you can't even draw a line (only the representation of one) since a line extends to infinity.// If you want to get pedantic, you can draw a line segment (which a layman will generally call a "line").
detroitdoesntsuckthatbad: So much nicer not registering to vote. I never have to worry about things I can't change anyway.
If you like these links, you'll love
More Farking, less working
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Nov 20 2017 12:26:02
Runtime: 0.394 sec (393 ms)