Racism in the Press

Collapse overnight? A bit of an exaggeration, dont'cha think?

They are less than 8% of the Texas labor force and just over 8% of the population. The rest is subjective.

 

It exist in Obama's old minister he went to for 20 years. racism isn't a one way street. Not by a long shot.

 

This is exactly what the 14th States:

What was it I said it said:

Do you see the one little word "of" in there? What you don't see is your failed paraphrase of the word "under". What is so hard about using the actual wording of the 14th? Does it then make your claims fallacy?

Trying to invoke Reagan? Why not invoke Rep. Farnsworth (1867)

Now you know why we got the EP Clause in the 14th.

Then doesn't this nullify your original claim, since all states allow mail in ballots? This alone from you makes your argument completely MOOT.

It is the persons responsibility to ensure their vote is exorcised. It is not the govt responsibility to ensure that people exercise their vote. The USC simply states one can not be denied, or their right abridged, by the qualifying amendments in the USC.

Maybe voting should be open year round, so not to impose any restrictions. If the govt allows for numerous ways to cast a vote, surely there can also be limitations and time frames. A state can impose any restriction it chooses at its own levels, provided those restrictions are within the USC and their own State Constitutions. A state may also expand their voting rights to non-citizens, something the USC doesn't allow at the Federal Level.

If there are numerous ways to vote, mail-in ballots being the easiest, then how is that dis-enfranchising anybody? Look to your own example. You seem to argue base on your own appeal to emotion than any reality.

Nothing but political BS by claiming disenfranchisement.

 

Actually Hispanics are almost all of the state's labor force. How many of those are illegals is pure guesswork since the entire state is pretty much in the sanctuary mode where they are concerned. Houston actually is a sanctuary city. (Shrug); not that I particularly mind as far as they go. Most of them are damn fine people and they or their children eventually make damn fine citizens. It's that fact that a porous border system is rather stupid for a nation suffering from high unemployment in general and that has self-announced groups around the world that WANT to hurt its people and infrastructure.

 

So lets continue your claimed %

So Democrats and Independents are closet racists.

Hispanics vote 25% - 40% for Republicans, always been that way. 95% voted for Obama in 2008, that number dropped in 2012. Blacks % is roughly the same as Hispanics in voting for republicans as averaged out, 5% - 32% for Republicans.

 

They are roughly 40% of the labor force, as they are also roughly 40% of the states population.

OK

Subjective at best.

The best case then would be for Mexico to continue to improve its own economy. As I stated, illegals, wherever they are from, will never be completely gone from our society, the number can be lowered though, extensively.

 

he's citing some isolated study done by who-knows-who done on who-knows-who and who-knows-where or when or what was even asked and pretending it represents all republicans. liberal genius at work (sarcasm)

scratch that... it wasnt even a study it was some article on some random website that says the author compiled stats from "a few different sources" but doesnt list any of them.
heres his link
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_43.html
correct me if im wrong but it looks made up to me

 

wrong link
http://prospect.org/article/rising-tide-anti-black-racism

 

I'm not here to do that. The truth is in front of you, yet you seek to divert from it.

That is my point.

- - - Updated - - -

And the truth shall prevail.

 

Machine pols hate the Voter Id thing; it makes it slightly tougher to commit fraud. Democrats want to go back to the glory days of Tammany Hall and Boss Tweed, Pendergast, and Daley Sr., when street gangs won elections, not eligible citizens.

 

Lets see this source. Show us you arent just making the (*)(*)(*)(*) up as you go along.

 

Why not invoke the Declaration of Independence where the very purpose of government is to "secure" the Rights of the People from being violated by other persons.

Several points.

The US Constitution does not prohibit non-citizens from voting in elections but it does protect the Right of Citizens to vote. There are no clauses in the US Constitution that prohibit non-citizens from voting. The laws that prohibit non-citizens from voting are statutory laws passed by Congress that the Constitution does not prohibit.

In the states I'm aware of where absentee ballots are allowed but that still have polling locations there are conditions related to requesting an absentee ballot and it cannot be done simply because the person doesn't want to go to the polls. Most cases require that the person certify that they will not be at the location of their local poll (where they are registered) on the day of the vote. They also require that the person submit an application for the absentee ballot for every election so it is on a case-by-case basis.

There are pragmatic limitations when it comes to "early voting" as the ballot must be "finalized" so that all of the measures and candidates that are to be voted on have been identified and can be published on the ballot. Usually the final ballot becomes "finalized" slightly more than a month before the election date which allows time for printing and distribution. There is no logical reason to not allow early voting once the ballot is finalized and time is allowed for publication of the ballot.

There is no logical reason for "voter identification" requirements as there has never been any significant identified problem of voter identification fraud at the polls. It is so rare that most states don't even have a single case during any election cycle and few states even have one or two out of millions of votes being cast.

The greatest problems are "multiple voting" where a person votes at more than one polling location but that is completely unrelated to voter identification or voter registration, also unrelated to identification of the person, where an unqualified person (e.g. ex-felon) registers to vote and that should be caught based upon review of the registration prior to the election cycle.

 

I would suggest you question the member that provided this information.

As for my source on this statement "Then my source was incorrect and I would actually commend North Carolina as I don't believe a person should be required to carry identification of any kind" I am that source as I don't believe that we should ever be required to carry identification just to prove who we are.

This, of course, does not apply to such things as "drivers licenses" where we must show proof of the fact that we are legally allowed to drive on the public roads when we do that.

I don't believe in a government identification requirement solely for the purpose of personal identification where no other valid reason is required. This includes voter identification because there is no valid reason for requiring a person to present identification to vote. There isn't a problem in the United States with voter identification fraud being committed at the polls so no identification should be required.

If there was a problem it's one thing but every study done and every fact we know shows that there isn't a problem related to voter identification at the polls. Where we do have a problem is in requiring government issued ID because studies show 11% of all voting age US citizens don't have that idenification currently. Why would anyone want to disenfranchise 11% of American citizens from voting based upon a requirement in law that is completely unnecessary?

 

Lets complete the sentence and change to the actual context of the phrase, shall we:

You have a very bad habit of trying to poorly paraphrase and change the context of quotes to imply your ideological fallacies.

You got something right!

Anybody can mail a ballot in, there are few if any restrictions to it.

Early voting can be done by mail. Undue influence can still be done at the polls on election day.

Because it's not significant enough?

How is it unrelated? If the person is registered for one location and then votes in other locations, wouldn't his ID deny him that ability? Other locations allow you to vote, they simply give you a provisional ballot, that ballot sometimes does get counted to include the original voting location, i.e. 2 different counties or a city and town, etc.

 

So we have your opinion.

Whats wrong with showing proof that we are within the law when voting? No different then your example.

Sure there is, look to your DL example, same exact thinga requirement of the law.

They are not disenfranchised at all, they have numerous ways to vote, absentee/mail-in being one of them. They can sign a simple affidavit at their polling location, etc. They can even register to vote by mail.

 

The information CONTRADICTS your assertion. We were looking for YOUR source of YOUR information

We are still waiting for you to provide that source. Believe its been asked for by a few different posters now. You keep responding to the request without simply fulfilling the request. With your reluctance, we can just assume you are making the (*)(*)(*)(*) up as you go along, as suspected.

 

Consensus based on everything except personal...political...religious bias with an outcome that is required to be in the best interest of the nation. It is incumbent of the president to rise above the BS and demand legislation which better manages the nation. Unfortunately we can't remove the bias and presidents seem to be self-serving so I'd say we're SOL...

 

Taxcutter says:
A valid reason to disqualify government from making the determination.

 

I think he just made it up and much too dishonest to admit it.

 

Why would I go back to find a source of incorrect information?

Why not address the real issue which is the fact that Voter ID laws are Jim Crow voting laws created by Republicans to disenfranchise poor minority citizens of the United States. There is virtually no evidence of voter ID fraud at the polls so there is no rationalization for voter ID laws because a problem doesn't exist that would necessitate them.

 

In the 1870s, Democrats gradually regained power in the Southern legislatures, sometimes as a result of elections in which paramilitary groups intimidated opponents, attacking blacks or preventing them from voting. Gubernatorial elections were close and disputed in Louisiana for years, with extreme violence unleashed during the campaigns. In 1877, a national compromise to gain Southern support in the presidential election resulted in the last of the federal troops being withdrawn from the South. White Democrats had regained political power in every Southern state.[4] These conservative, white, Democratic Redeemer governments legislated Jim Crow laws, segregating black people from the white population.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_Laws

Wiki says Democrats started it

 

Let me see, when the Democrats were defending the horrible Obamacare website they were able to make the argument that anyone who wanted it could go grab all their paperwork and head down to DSS, they also stated that paying a $4k fine for not getting insurance was reasonable,

BUT

spending $15 on an ID is unreasonable.

I think your outrage consistency needs some serious work, especially considering that by cosigning this "outrage" you're effectively calling blacks and minorities incompetent and stupid.

 

Except North Carolina isn't a "Southern State". That's why they call it NORTH Carolina my friend.



It shares its border with Virginia, Kentucky and the Northern-Eastern States aren't that far away either. (About a few hours by car, give or take. And maybe 1-3 by Plane)

And as for South Carolina? On its borders: Georgia, Alabama, Florida and nearly adjunct to them: Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi and Louisiana.

The reason for the Photo IDS is that they're(and should be) required by Federal Law. If you don't have them, don't participate in government-run affairs.

 

Government represents People and this is what we got...like it or not. People are the root problem and this will not improve in my lifetime. Too many of us are stupid, lazy, greedy and self-serving and sadly this represents a majority of Americans...it's no wonder to me at all why as a nation we have become so incompetent...

 

There seems to be a lack of incentive for us to become and/or remain anything other than "stupid, lazy, greedy and self-serving". Hell, we even have political parties molding a government into a form that focuses on rewarding those characteristics (and worse). What else should we expect?