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.

(UPI)   Third-world nation with thriving drug manufacturing trade and long history of political corruption strongly objects to presence of UN observers during elections. Wait, did we say "third-world nation"? Sorry, we meant Tennessee   (upi.com) divider line 36
    More: Obvious, UN observers, corruption, third world  
•       •       •

4438 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Apr 2014 at 10:38 AM (36 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-04-12 12:01:29 PM  
3 votes:
Felons can get elected to congress, there is no reason why they shouldn't be able to vote
2014-04-12 11:38:10 AM  
3 votes:

Carousel Beast: FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.


Honestly, you sound more like you're asking for a political sparring partner, and I'm not interested. On the off chance you do have an open mind and want to know more, I'll answer. I'm more of an independent vote-for-the-person guy, but:

Not everybody in America lives in a city, has more than two cents of disposable income, or needs to drive. These folks don't have easy access to ID-providing facilities, money to buy IDs, or a need for an ID for any other purpose.

There are actually a lot of these folks and in a Venn diagram they tend to heavily overlap two groups: the poor, and minorities. These groups historically tend to vote Democrat.

Republicans have a long history of trying to disenfranchise these groups. Sometimes they've done it by beating people. Sometimes, by placing polling stations in places the poor and minorities find hard to reach. And frequently, by legislating various and unconstitutional or doubtfully constitutional impediments to voting.

These latter include property-ownership requirements, "literacy tests," and various state-ID requirements. Independent observers for decades have remarked on how, in practice, these tests and requirements are only required of non-white voters.

Meanwhile, repeated studies conducted by politically-politically neutral groups across various states have established that the actual incidents of voter fraud preventable by ID are low to none. And by "low," I mean a study involving millions of votes in Chicago found two instances. Two.

The push for ID voting under the guise of preventing fraud is a cynical smokescreen. It's about robbing the political opposition of votes by disenfranchising select groups of American citizens who are unlikely to vote for the party demanding ID requirements. Plain AND simple.

But yell a thing loudly and often enough, and there's a percentage of people you can fool all the time. Really, though, there are few Republican voters who don't understand what this is truly about. And it's disgusting that any American of any political stripe would go along with it, since it is the most undemocratic, un-American of political ploys. It's the kind of bullshiat-- peerage, rule of the landed gentry sort of crap-- this country was founded in opposition to.

As usual, the party waving the biggest American flag they can find is the one trying to hide the most un-American actions beneath it.
2014-04-12 10:57:30 AM  
3 votes:

SlothB77: This is why the UN has no credibility. The crimean vote morally equivalent to tennessee.


Except it was the OSCE monitoring elections in Tennessee.  And the UN General Assembly declared the referendum in Crimea invalid.  And the UN Security Council would have declared it invalid if not for Russia's veto.  And no one at the UN has made any claim about moral equivalency.  Nor did the UN send in observers to Crimea.  But yeah other than that you're right.
2014-04-12 10:47:42 AM  
3 votes:
If everything is above-board, who the fark cares who is watching the elections?  Sounds as if TN has something to hide.
2014-04-12 10:06:46 AM  
3 votes:
Too bad that our treaties and laws executed to carry out treaty obligations supersede state law.
2014-04-12 01:35:35 PM  
2 votes:

Benevolent Misanthrope: I simply don't get the whole "OMGZ!  Requiring an ID to vote is VOTER DISENFRANCHISEMENT!!!  It's EEEEEVIL!!!"  Here where I live in Canada, the libbiest lib country that ever libbed, apparently, there is no such thing as voter registration.  You show your ID.  That's it.  (That's Alberta.  I have no idea what other provinces do.)  Even when I lived in the US, I didn't understand why requiring a state-issued ID to vote was a bad thing, or any different from requiring people to register.  All the arguments were pretty dumb, IMHO, and were basically, "BECAUSE WE SAID SO!  THE EEEVIL GUMMMINT IS REFUSING TO ISSUE ID!!!  WHARRRGARBLE!!11eleven"


It's because you have little or no history of disenfranchising significant segments if the population in order to skew voting results in favor of white people.

Instead of screaming uniformed opinions in country-specific threads, why not go read a little on the history of Jim Crow and voting abuses brought to light under the Civil Rights era.
2014-04-12 12:12:08 PM  
2 votes:

TomD9938: XveryYpettyZ: that's not the reason for the push for voter ID.  It's to suppress the vote of people who don't vote for Republicans.

That assumes that people who vote Republican are inherently responsible citizens.


I love a conceited twat who thinks of himself that way.

These voter ID laws are a product of, by and for the Republican party to keep "darkies" and poor people from voting.
2014-04-12 12:04:16 PM  
2 votes:

ReapTheChaos: Trocadero: Carousel Beast: brimed03: ReapTheChaos: Yogimus: Carousel Beast: FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.

Even the most exaggerated claims of voter fraud are only a miniscule percentage of folks that have no means of identification.

The percentage of registered voters who have no valid ID are just as minuscule.

*sigh* Because, of course, in certain Republistan states you can't *be* a "registered voter" without valid ID.

You knew that, of course. You just hope to hook someone who didn't catch it.

Again, why is that wrong? So long as the State is providing free, validated identification, why do you object to ensuring the identity of the people forming the government?

But they don't. That costs money, that costs labor to staff the DMV/whatever to issue it, and w/ the extra security measures added after 9/11, it costs more money than before. And if Republicans have proven anything, it's that they love spending tax money on programs to help poor minorities vote more often.

While I can't speak for every state, here in Texas it is 100% free to people who need one. Link


By mail? Or do they need to show up somewhere? Will the state send someone to help the illiterate or those needing translations? Will the state furnish transportation to those in rural areas to the regional ID facilities? Does the state advertise any of this information in places where you'd the poor and minorities who are most likely to not know about such information?

It's all well and good to put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig. Republicans should be able to appreciate that metaphor.
2014-04-12 11:58:34 AM  
2 votes:

Carousel Beast: FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.


Because, based on the rarity of the crime and the KNOWN impact on minority voter turnout, it's closet Jim Crow and anyone with a shred of honesty knows it.

If there was a shred of evidence that double-voting or non-citizen or felon voting was actually something other than vanishingly rare, I would be on your side.  But these voter ID laws are far more caustic to democracy than they are helpful to it.  If the cure is worse than the disease, you have prescribed the wrong cure.

Go ahead, look into voter fraud.  Lots of people have, especially people who wanted to find it to justify these laws.  Know what they have found?  It certainly happens.... but not by the hundreds or even dozens, we're talking single digits per 600,000 person district per cycle.  But that's not the reason for the push for voter ID.  It's to suppress the vote of people who don't vote for Republicans.
2014-04-12 11:53:33 AM  
2 votes:

MyRandomName: brimed03: ReapTheChaos: Yogimus: Carousel Beast: FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.

Even the most exaggerated claims of voter fraud are only a miniscule percentage of folks that have no means of identification.

The percentage of registered voters who have no valid ID are just as minuscule.

*sigh* Because, of course, in certain Republistan states you can't *be* a "registered voter" without valid ID.

You knew that, of course. You just hope to hook someone who didn't catch it.

Are you aware of the 35k votes found voting in two different states, illegally?

Still shocks me how liberals claim there is no voter fraud when they take away every tool to detect voter fraud.

A shows up and votes as B
B shows up, cant vote, A is long gone and no way to identify them
No conviction based on no arrest.
Liberals "see no conviction, ergo no voter fraud!"


Citation? And FoxNoise does not count. Find me a recognized, independent, non-partisan study and we'll talk.

Until then, go back to watching Bill O'Wrongly and Nancy Graceless.
2014-04-12 11:07:48 AM  
2 votes:

toadist: MNguy: If everything is above-board, who the fark cares who is watching the elections?  Sounds as if TN has something to hide.

Nobody really cares.    But forces who are anti-voter ID are kind of like PETA.   They do dumb things just to attract attention.

And Like PETA sometimes you just need to ban them from showing up.


And that, folks, is what far-right Republicans call "democracy!"

Let's all give him a big hand, shall we? No? Just one finger then. OK.
2014-04-12 10:53:48 AM  
2 votes:

Yogimus: Carousel Beast: FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.

Even the most exaggerated claims of voter fraud are only a miniscule percentage of folks that have no means of identification.


The percentage of registered voters who have no valid ID are just as minuscule.
2014-04-12 03:01:36 PM  
1 votes:

Carousel Beast: FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.


Funny how it's only "lefties" who want no restrictions on voting. About the only possible justification for ID-required I can think of is to keep the non-citizens out of the polls.

As far as I know, ID is verified when you register or re-register. You don't need ID to vote, because that's what the registry is for.

Anyway, until you agree on a national ID card requirement, that is free to everyone, payed for by taxes, then you have no business insisting that voting requires an ID. Unless of course you are a republican trying to game elections. Then you'll push hard for it in every swing jurisdiction you can. And you'll get all your partisan right-wing constituents to agree with you.
2014-04-12 02:30:48 PM  
1 votes:
Benevolent Misanthrope: I simply don't get the whole "OMGZ!  Requiring an ID to vote is VOTER DISENFRANCHISEMENT!!!  It's EEEEEVIL!!!"  Here where I live in Canada, the libbiest lib country that ever libbed, apparently, there is no such thing as voter registration.  You show your ID.  That's it.  (That's Alberta.  I have no idea what other provinces do.)  Even when I lived in the US, I didn't understand why requiring a state-issued ID to vote was a bad thing, or any different from requiring people to register.  All the arguments were pretty dumb, IMHO, and were basically, "BECAUSE WE SAID SO!  THE EEEVIL GUMMMINT IS REFUSING TO ISSUE ID!!!  WHARRRGARBLE!!11eleven"

Actually, according to Elections Alberta's website, you can vote without ID if you are on the list of electors. Are you talking about municipal or provincial elections or did I misread something?

The problem with requiring a state issue-id is that they cost money and take serious effort to obtain. ID's are not free, and not everyone has them in poorer communities. For some of the most marginalized people, that's money that's they don't have. If they live in a rural community, getting to the local government office can be an absolute pain. Also, if they have had their ID stolen, it can be exceptionally difficult to obtain that first piece of ID.  If they are disabled, its another pain in the ass as well.

The net effect of all of this is reduced voted turnout among the poor and marginalized. The functional effect is that it represents a very minor barrier to voting for the middle class, but a significant one to the poorest and most marginalized in the society.

If this was done to prevent rampant voter fraud, that might be understandable.  However, studies from elections offices, most government offices and independent organizations show that this type of casual voter fraud is exceedingly rare.

These laws are always seems to be made/proposed by the party that traditionally doesn't get the votes of the very poor (minorities, students, the disabled).  Since voting fraud isn't a thing, the only real motive  isdisenfranchisement of the poor, which is kind of a big deal.
2014-04-12 12:51:29 PM  
1 votes:
MyRandomName - Are you aware of the 35k votes found voting in two different states, illegally? Still shocks me how liberals claim there is no voter fraud when they take away every tool to detect voter fraud.

And it still shocks me that conservatives want to have a hissy fit about 0.01% of the population engaging in voter fraud. But hey, if it gives you something other than starvation, inequity, and a total lack of hope for 35% of the population to be outraged about, then go right ahead. I am sure those other little pesky problems will fix themselves.

/I bet you are concerned with the 0.03% of welfare fraud as a massive drain on rich peo.... I mean the government as well. Gods forbid five people actually cheat the government in any given locale while corporations that made billions last year get tax dollar subsidies. Hell, some of them didn't even pay taxes last year. How can you complain about welfare when you do not fund it?
2014-04-12 12:22:00 PM  
1 votes:
Carousel Beast:
Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

As a Leftie, I'll answer:  no.
The fact is, voter identification laws operate, in practice, to suppress minority (read: Democrat) votes.  Therefore, Republicans favor them and Dems do not.  It doesn't really have anything to do with principles; those arguments are a masquerade.
2014-04-12 12:10:21 PM  
1 votes:

Animatronik: The U.N. isn't there to prevent election fraud, they want to accumulate data as to how requiring IDs discriminates against certain classes of voters.

So a.) this is nothing like monitoring elections where ballot box tampering, election fraud, and corruption are suspected and b.) it's virtually guaranteed that th U.N. team has already decided that they know what the problem is, it's a foregone conclusion that they'll generate a report designed to support the conclusion they've already reached about voter I.D. laws. No objective scrutiny whatsoever.


Um.... passing laws to make it harder for certain classes of people or residents of certain locations to vote is a form of fraud.  You don't have to directly stuff the ballot boxes if you just control who shows up to vote.
2014-04-12 12:07:05 PM  
1 votes:

jaybeezey: MNguy: If everything is above-board, who the fark cares who is watching the elections?  Sounds as if TN has something to hide.

If everything is above board, it shouldn't be a problem to have identification to vote. It sounds like democrats have something to hide.


Communist.
2014-04-12 11:58:59 AM  
1 votes:
Where the hell were these guy's during the Florida mess?
2014-04-12 11:51:43 AM  
1 votes:

Carousel Beast: FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.


Many people railing about illegal aliens frequently do so because they're seeing people of color. So they want to "protect"the voting process by preventing these people from voting, and I'm being generous towards them by phrasing their motivations that way.

Having lived in large cities, I've not experienced much overt racism, but a couple of times, I've been yelled at to go back to where I came from in the place I came from.
2014-04-12 11:49:22 AM  
1 votes:

letrole: AliceBToklasLives: Yes, the Security Council veto a good reason to consider the UN a joke.  Totally agree.  I wonder what country has, over the last 40 years, used their veto power the most?


Which proves what, exactly? That the actions of the UN are subject to political maneuvering apart from adherence to some sort of spurious international law? That even in your reply, you chose to allude to the fact that, somebody, wonder who that could be, has used the veto...


STOP MAKING MY POINTS FOR ME.


DEBATE DOES NOT WORK LIKE THAT.


ABTL, look at his Fark handle and let this argument go. I have yet to see a serious discussion from letrole in any Fark thread. He just enjoys farking with people.
2014-04-12 11:40:26 AM  
1 votes:

Carousel Beast: brimed03: ReapTheChaos: Yogimus: Carousel Beast: FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.

Even the most exaggerated claims of voter fraud are only a miniscule percentage of folks that have no means of identification.

The percentage of registered voters who have no valid ID are just as minuscule.

*sigh* Because, of course, in certain Republistan states you can't *be* a "registered voter" without valid ID.

You knew that, of course. You just hope to hook someone who didn't catch it.

Again, why is that wrong? So long as the State is providing free, validated identification, why do you object to ensuring the identity of the people forming the government?


Answered below in response to another of your posts ITT. Pretty sure you're not really interested, though; just trolling for an argument.

I've said my piece for those who will listen. You'll have to look elsewhere for your fight.
2014-04-12 11:35:08 AM  
1 votes:

MyRandomName: MNguy: If everything is above-board, who the fark cares who is watching the elections?  Sounds as if TN has something to hide.

Hey. Thats the Sam excuse used by the NSA and other law enforcement. Good job!


The government shouldn't have the same (or more) rights than individuals to privacy, or any right to privacy, for that matter, and, unlike the cases you love to cite with the NSA, the UN had probable cause to investigate here.

Also: Citation on your 35K claim please.
2014-04-12 11:25:48 AM  
1 votes:

Carousel Beast: brimed03: ReapTheChaos: Yogimus: Carousel Beast: FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.

Even the most exaggerated claims of voter fraud are only a miniscule percentage of folks that have no means of identification.

The percentage of registered voters who have no valid ID are just as minuscule.

*sigh* Because, of course, in certain Republistan states you can't *be* a "registered voter" without valid ID.

You knew that, of course. You just hope to hook someone who didn't catch it.

Again, why is that wrong? So long as the State is providing free, validated identification, why do you object to ensuring the identity of the people forming the government?


That's a pretty big "so long as."

http://www.lawyerscommittee.org/page?id=0046

Your right to vote should not be dependent on transportation, the requirement for which one could argue makes anything "not free," the ability of the government to disseminate information or, worse, the prejudices of pollworkers.
2014-04-12 11:25:13 AM  
1 votes:

Carousel Beast: brimed03: ReapTheChaos: Yogimus: Carousel Beast: FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.

Even the most exaggerated claims of voter fraud are only a miniscule percentage of folks that have no means of identification.

The percentage of registered voters who have no valid ID are just as minuscule.

*sigh* Because, of course, in certain Republistan states you can't *be* a "registered voter" without valid ID.

You knew that, of course. You just hope to hook someone who didn't catch it.

Again, why is that wrong? So long as the State is providing free, validated identification, why do you object to ensuring the identity of the people forming the government?


But they don't. That costs money, that costs labor to staff the DMV/whatever to issue it, and w/ the extra security measures added after 9/11, it costs more money than before. And if Republicans have proven anything, it's that they love spending tax money on programs to help poor minorities vote more often.
2014-04-12 11:24:05 AM  
1 votes:

AliceBToklasLives: Yes, the Security Council veto a good reason to consider the UN a joke.  Totally agree.  I wonder what country has, over the last 40 years, used their veto power the most?



Which proves what, exactly? That the actions of the UN are subject to political maneuvering apart from adherence to some sort of spurious international law? That even in your reply, you chose to allude to the fact that, somebody, wonder who that could be, has used the veto...


STOP MAKING MY POINTS FOR ME.


DEBATE DOES NOT WORK LIKE THAT.
2014-04-12 11:13:36 AM  
1 votes:

Carousel Beast: FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.


You are trading a few false positives for a few hundred false negatives.

Republican officials have made the intent perfectly clear.

These measures are linked to curtailing access to polls in other ways (restrictions on registration, reduces hours, etc).
2014-04-12 11:04:47 AM  
1 votes:

ReapTheChaos: Yogimus: Carousel Beast: FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.

Even the most exaggerated claims of voter fraud are only a miniscule percentage of folks that have no means of identification.

The percentage of registered voters who have no valid ID are just as minuscule.


*sigh* Because, of course, in certain Republistan states you can't *be* a "registered voter" without valid ID.

You knew that, of course. You just hope to hook someone who didn't catch it.
2014-04-12 11:01:10 AM  
1 votes:
Does the UN know how big of a joke everyone thinks they are?
2014-04-12 10:59:46 AM  
1 votes:

AliceBToklasLives: "Any representative of the United Nations appearing without a treaty ratified by the United States Senate stating that the United Nations can monitor elections in this state, shall not monitor elections in this state."

They do realize that the United Nations is itself the result of a treaty ratified by the United States Senate, right?  According to the Constitution, treaties are the highest law of the land, making the UN Charter the highest law of the land.

/that said, of the US Senate has failed to ratify many basic international treaties


-5/10.

That's not your trolling score; that's your intelligent joke score.
2014-04-12 10:49:53 AM  
1 votes:
Except it's the OSCE, not the UN, monitoring elections in TN.  Same story, we signed the damn treaties.
2014-04-12 10:48:52 AM  
1 votes:

Carousel Beast: FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.


Even the most exaggerated claims of voter fraud are only a miniscule percentage of folks that have no means of identification.
2014-04-12 10:46:41 AM  
1 votes:
FTFA: 44 observers from Europe's Organization for Security and Cooperation were sent to the United States in 2012 to determine if photo identification requirements, including those in Tennessee, affected voter turnout.

Can any of Fark's lefties give me a valid reason why ensuring only people actually allowed to vote do vote is a bad thing? Seriously, voting is the cornerstone of our entire society; yet every time someone mentions we might want to look into vote fraud, you guys scream like suck pigs. WTF?

Doesn't mater is it's dead people voting in Chicago or Diebold supposedly tampering with machines, our voting should be something we strive to be perfect on.
2014-04-12 10:46:25 AM  
1 votes:
"Any representative of the United Nations appearing without a treaty ratified by the United States Senate stating that the United Nations can monitor elections in this state, shall not monitor elections in this state."

They do realize that the United Nations is itself the result of a treaty ratified by the United States Senate, right?  According to the Constitution, treaties are the highest law of the land, making the UN Charter the highest law of the land.

/that said, of the US Senate has failed to ratify many basic international treaties
2014-04-12 10:42:51 AM  
1 votes:
Wait, did we say "third-world nation"? Sorry, we meant Tennessee... but i repeat myself.
2014-04-12 08:50:04 AM  
1 votes:
So... the objection is to the use of the word "nation" instead of "state"?
 
Displayed 36 of 36 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report