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)   SCOTUS: Yeah, we're the Supreme Court of the United States of America, so we've got slightly better things to do than worry about whether you can wear your Gadsden Flag t-shirt, tri-corner hat and "Nobama" button when you go vote   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 139
    More: Obvious, U.S. Supreme Court, Supreme Court, Minnesota North Stars, Minnesota, United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, Polaris, election officials, election law  
•       •       •

3447 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Dec 2013 at 12:51 PM (48 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-17 11:34:52 AM  
I predict there will be many calls for immediate armed insurrection and a violent overthrow of the socialists in DC by True Patriots who'd totally charge the battlements but, y'know, my back's been acting up and the wife just got laid off what for the Piggly-Wiggly and SpeedTV is rerunning the 1989 Goody's Headache Powders 400 so...
 
2013-12-17 11:42:16 AM  
Why would anyone even bother with all the costs associated with bringing this to the USSC? What a stupid case.
 
2013-12-17 11:48:59 AM  
I don't see a problem with the first two, but the Nobama button can be considered campaigning, which you aren't allowed to do within 100 feet of the voting booth.  Which has been the case in forever, so put your button away, go pull the level for your desired candidate and then put it back on when you leave.  Obama isn't taking away your free speech, these rules have existed far longer than he's been in officer (maybe even longer than he's been alive)
 
2013-12-17 12:01:09 PM  

ManateeGag: these rules have existed far longer than he's been in officer (maybe even longer than he's been alive)


Yet more evidence that he has a time machine.
 
2013-12-17 12:05:09 PM  
"The government simply presumes that political speech on apparel automatically harms potential voters," he said.
"Consequently, every Minnesotan who walks into a polling place, wearing clothes, is subject to prosecution if the clothes worn are viewed as 'political,' " he said.



Once again Teatards reduce themselves to relying on false equivalencies to further their cause..

So vote naked then??

Morans..
 
2013-12-17 12:05:34 PM  
Sorry, Teabaggers--no voter intimidation for you.  No can haz.
 
2013-12-17 12:11:43 PM  

DamnYankees: Why would anyone even bother with all the costs associated with bringing this to the USSC?


Freedom isn't free.

/Costs a buck o five
 
2013-12-17 12:12:02 PM  

markie_farkie: "The government simply presumes that political speech on apparel automatically harms potential voters," he said.
"Consequently, every Minnesotan who walks into a polling place, wearing clothes, is subject to prosecution if the clothes worn are viewed as 'political,' " he said.


Once again Teatards reduce themselves to relying on false equivalencies to further their cause..

So vote naked then??

Morans..


they seriously work in worst case scenarios, don't they?
 
2013-12-17 12:12:12 PM  

markie_farkie: "The government simply presumes that political speech on apparel automatically harms potential voters," he said.
"Consequently, every Minnesotan who walks into a polling place, wearing clothes, is subject to prosecution if the clothes worn are viewed as 'political,' " he said.


Once again Teatards reduce themselves to relying on false equivalencies to further their cause..

So vote naked then??

Morans..


See?  That's why this is a nefarious Democratic plot!  Naked voting would MASSIVELY increase  voter turnout among Democratic constituencies like young people and College students while causing massive voter suppression among the obese and elderly, aka the Republican base
 
2013-12-17 12:19:00 PM  
Well, now how are The Tea Party Patriots supposed to combat the widespread voter fraud that they imagine exists?
 
2013-12-17 12:22:25 PM  
If a button is going to sway your vote on the way into the voting booth, you shouldn't be voting...
 
2013-12-17 12:28:09 PM  
This almost sounds like someone got their pride stepped on and is pissed off over it.
 
2013-12-17 12:31:28 PM  

DamnYankees: Why would anyone even bother with all the costs associated with bringing this to the USSC? What a stupid case.



FTA: "State officials say the statute barring political messages is a reasonable regulation of speech at a polling place. It imposes a neutral requirement that applies to everyone equally, they say. "


Tea Partiers don't seem to be very fond of having to play by the same rules as everyone else.
 
2013-12-17 12:34:08 PM  
Tea Party people are just pissed that they have to take their cosplay stuff off before they go vote.
 
2013-12-17 12:37:06 PM  
I'm sure these Teabaggers would be thrilled if Black Panthers stood outside the polling places without any political buttons.
 
2013-12-17 12:37:15 PM  
Typical libtards. They're happy to crush the first amendment rights of conservatives, but stationing several scary black men outside polling places is A-OK.
 
2013-12-17 12:37:52 PM  

Bareefer Obonghit: I'm sure these Teabaggers would be thrilled if Black Panthers stood outside the polling places without any political buttons.


*shakes tiny fist*
 
2013-12-17 12:38:48 PM  

FloydA: DamnYankees: Why would anyone even bother with all the costs associated with bringing this to the USSC? What a stupid case.


FTA: "State officials say the statute barring political messages is a reasonable regulation of speech at a polling place. It imposes a neutral requirement that applies to everyone equally, they say. "


Tea Partiers don't seem to be very fond of having to play by the same rules as everyone else.


Whilst I agree with SCOTUS and the federal courts in this instance, yours is not a good reasoning for a restriction of rights. If something is a violation of rights, it doesn't make it right just because the government does it to everybody.
 
2013-12-17 12:46:54 PM  
Yup, if we're going to be dicks to people wearing pro-Obama shirts, we should also be dicks to people wearing anti-Obama shirts.
It comes off as kind of silly, but I can see the reasons for wanting to avoid that particular slippery slope.  Not too much of a burden to ask people to dress ambiguously when they go to a polling location.

/ For troll lulz though, some teabagger should argue that he only owns politically charged clothing and that this law combined with laws against public nudity combine to form an unconstitutional voting tax.
 
2013-12-17 12:49:38 PM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: Bareefer Obonghit: I'm sure these Teabaggers would be thrilled if Black Panthers stood outside the polling places without any political buttons.

*shakes tiny fist*


*raises intimidating black fist above head and lowers head solemnly*
 
2013-12-17 12:53:08 PM  

serial_crusher: Yup, if we're going to be dicks to people wearing pro-Obama shirts, we should also be dicks to people wearing anti-Obama shirts.
It comes off as kind of silly, but I can see the reasons for wanting to avoid that particular slippery slope.  Not too much of a burden to ask people to dress ambiguously when they go to a polling location.

/ For troll lulz though, some teabagger should argue that he only owns politically charged clothing and that this law combined with laws against public nudity combine to form an unconstitutional voting tax.


As I recall, it was a weird sort of grey area in CT when Lind McMahon was running for office - whether or not WWE-branded clothing was considered political because it's her company.

But really, this whole "no political clothing when you vote" thing has been the case forever, and applies to everyone. How is this even an issue? WHY is it an issue?  The laws need to be tight, though, because voter intimidation is a bad thing. As it is, I always laugh at the idiots standing just as close as they legally can to the polls, holding signs.  Oooh. A sign! Who cares enough to vote, but heads to the polls without knowing who they are voting for? Trying to change people's minds at the polls makes as much sense as door to door religious campaigns.  "Well, I was born as raised Jewish, but you make a good point, Mormon. I'm going to convert now."  I don't imagine that happens often, if ever. Maybe once in history?
 
2013-12-17 12:54:43 PM  
In this one very very rare case, the tea party is right.

Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech is not a suggestion.
 
2013-12-17 12:54:46 PM  

DamnYankees: Why would anyone even bother with all the costs associated with bringing this to the USSC? What a stupid case.


Because the President's a Democrat.
 
2013-12-17 12:56:40 PM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: Typical libtards. They're happy to crush the first amendment rights of conservatives, but stationing several scary black men outside polling places is A-OK.


i.imgur.com
 
2013-12-17 12:56:57 PM  
Didn't a bunch of hardcore Tea Partiers declare last month that Obama had to step down by Black Friday "or else"?
I guess the "or else" was "or else we'll complain more about stuff".

Also, I wear my Alice Cooper For President shirt every election day.
 
2013-12-17 12:58:17 PM  

serial_crusher: Yup, if we're going to be dicks to people wearing pro-Obama shirts, we should also be dicks to people wearing anti-Obama shirts.
It comes off as kind of silly, but I can see the reasons for wanting to avoid that particular slippery slope.  Not too much of a burden to ask people to dress ambiguously when they go to a polling location.

/ For troll lulz though, some teabagger should argue that he only owns politically charged clothing and that this law combined with laws against public nudity combine to form an unconstitutional voting tax.


I am for letting everyone where whatever they want but if you talk politics in line you get kicked out.  Is seeing a shirt on someone in line going to change your vote any more than the tripple deep lines of signs that ring every polling place completely such that everyone has to practically step over them to gain access to the polls?
 
2013-12-17 01:01:58 PM  

Warlordtrooper: In this one very very rare case, the tea party is right.

Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech is not a suggestion.


Just for giggles here, tell us all the cases where the tea party is wrong.
 
2013-12-17 01:02:08 PM  
Can you still wear this special jewelry when voting in Texas?

api.ning.com
 
2013-12-17 01:03:10 PM  
0.tqn.com
 
2013-12-17 01:03:24 PM  
"The Eighth Circuit's decision ... eviscerates any protection of the right to self-expression in the polling place and requires all individuals to essentially wear colorless coveralls to avoid prosecution

Something tells me this is what convinced them not to take this up. The idiotic hyperbole can't help.
 
2013-12-17 01:04:34 PM  
My official voting shirt:

6dollar.threadpitinc.netdna-cdn.com

// 3 elections with it so far and no problems.
 
2013-12-17 01:05:06 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Something tells me this is what convinced them not to take this up. The idiotic hyperbole can't help.


Never stop's 'em, though.  Derp get smacked down?  You didn't bring enough derp!
 
2013-12-17 01:05:15 PM  

Warlordtrooper: In this one very very rare case, the tea party is right.

Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech is not a suggestion.


Yay!  We can yell FIRE in a crowded theater, just for the lulz, again.
 
2013-12-17 01:07:11 PM  

Warlordtrooper: In this one very very rare case, the tea party is right.

Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech is not a suggestion.


Because 'freedom'...right?  Remember, you have the right to speak...not necessarily to be heard.
 
2013-12-17 01:07:33 PM  
ACTIVIST JUDGES!
 
2013-12-17 01:07:51 PM  
Good. This is less about voters going in to vote wearing an Obama T-shirt and leaving, and more about having 20 frothing idiots with placards and "voters guides" spending all election day sitting next to voting booths and trying to change a few minds at the last moment.  Keep those people in the parking lot.
 
2013-12-17 01:08:03 PM  
How bout this?

You can go in wearing your NOBAMA button, in return, I can wear my "Only Retards vote for the Tea Party" button and call it even.
 
2013-12-17 01:09:28 PM  

Dinobot: How bout this?

You can go in wearing your NOBAMA button, in return, I can wear my "Only Retards vote for the Tea Party" button and call it even.


I'm just being facetious -- I'm ok with the ruling as is.
 
2013-12-17 01:09:30 PM  

serial_crusher: For troll lulz though, some teabagger should argue that he only owns politically charged clothing and that this law combined with laws against public nudity combine to form an unconstitutional voting tax.


Except that the "ban" doesn't extend to the article of clothing. So you can still show up to vote for Norm Coleman (IT'S REAL TO ME, DAMMIT) in a blinding-yellow Gadsden flag t-shirt, camo pants with "Fartbama Sucks and he's a Kenyan Socialist, too" across the ass, jump boots ("Romney" and "Ryan" on the heels), and your "Blaxed Enough Already" trucker hat (with red-white-and-blue TruckNuts hanging off the back), you'll just need to cover up the political messages within 100ft of the polling place.
 
2013-12-17 01:10:23 PM  

Vlad_the_Inaner: Yay! We can yell FIRE in a crowded theater, just for the lulz, again.


You know that was an example from Schenck v. United States, where a man was convicted of obstructing the draft for handing out pamphlets urging people not to register with the draft, with the fire quote being used to justify taking away his free speech rights, and is widely criticized today?
 
2013-12-17 01:10:26 PM  
Vote by mail, were whatever your innards desire
 
2013-12-17 01:11:56 PM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: and is widely criticized today


criticized by one side of the argument does not constitute "widely"
 
2013-12-17 01:12:56 PM  

Saiga410: serial_crusher: Yup, if we're going to be dicks to people wearing pro-Obama shirts, we should also be dicks to people wearing anti-Obama shirts.
It comes off as kind of silly, but I can see the reasons for wanting to avoid that particular slippery slope.  Not too much of a burden to ask people to dress ambiguously when they go to a polling location.

/ For troll lulz though, some teabagger should argue that he only owns politically charged clothing and that this law combined with laws against public nudity combine to form an unconstitutional voting tax.

I am for letting everyone where whatever they want but if you talk politics in line you get kicked out.  Is seeing a shirt on someone in line going to change your vote any more than the tripple deep lines of signs that ring every polling place completely such that everyone has to practically step over them to gain access to the polls?


I agree.  I see those laws less as a step to prevent voter intimidation or coercion and more as an attempt to prevent assholes from bothering everybody.  Precisely measuring the 100 foot border from the polling location is just a side effect of the fact that we can't just make it illegal to be an asshole everywhere, so assholes still find a way to be assholes.
 
2013-12-17 01:13:12 PM  

BMFPitt: My official voting shirt:

[6dollar.threadpitinc.netdna-cdn.com image 300x342]

// 3 elections with it so far and no problems.


unless someone named Camacho runs for President, you should be ok.
 
2013-12-17 01:13:32 PM  
I thought there was a brilliant, albeit cynical solution to electioneering.

Evansville Indiana, 2012 - Mandatory 50ft of "buffer zone" from the doorways to a polling place. A line of cheap cones (like middle school PE class) defined the boarder. The precinct I was at had a Democrat and a Republican inside, ready to yell at supporters who crossed the cone line. If you watched the antics and signs, you could figure out who was who.

Mutually assured tattletales.
 
2013-12-17 01:14:49 PM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: Typical libtards. They're happy to crush the first amendment rights of conservatives, but stationing several scary black men outside polling places is A-OK.


Or inside...

abcnews.go.com
 
2013-12-17 01:16:17 PM  

ArkAngel: FloydA: DamnYankees: Why would anyone even bother with all the costs associated with bringing this to the USSC? What a stupid case.


FTA: "State officials say the statute barring political messages is a reasonable regulation of speech at a polling place. It imposes a neutral requirement that applies to everyone equally, they say. "


Tea Partiers don't seem to be very fond of having to play by the same rules as everyone else.

Whilst I agree with SCOTUS and the federal courts in this instance, yours is not a good reasoning for a restriction of rights. If something is a violation of rights, it doesn't make it right just because the government does it to everybody.


You're missing the point. Free expression may be limited in certain ways (time, place, and manner restrictions, for example), but any such limitation must be content-neutral.
 
2013-12-17 01:16:55 PM  

Saiga410: I am for letting everyone where whatever they want but if you talk politics in line you get kicked out. Is seeing a shirt on someone in line going to change your vote any more than the tripple deep lines of signs that ring every polling place completely such that everyone has to practically step over them to gain access to the polls?


As a side note, those signs are so strange to me. I grasp the idea of name familiarity, but that's ALL they provide, and if one guy was doing it, sure. But since everyone does, and you usually see opponents side by side, and most of the signs have the same general look, color scheme, and design, how effective can they even be?  Tell me something about the person, what they stand for.

It just strikes me as poor advertising.

Though I did enjoy when Wiener and Hickey ran together.  Wiener/Hickey signs were endlessly hilarious to the part of my brain that works much like a 12-year-old boy's.
 
2013-12-17 01:18:47 PM  

Lost Thought 00: criticized by one side of the argument does not constitute "widely"


Are you kidding? The court later overturned their own standard.
 
2013-12-17 01:19:06 PM  

Raging Whore Moans: ACTIVIST JUDGES!


RINOS!
 
Displayed 50 of 139 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report