Courts Block Minority V**er Suppression Laws in Wisconsin & Texas: USA Today, Oct. 9,2014 Washington-- The Supreme Court on Thursday night blocked Wisconsin from implementing its new...

Brian Devon

USA Today, Oct. 9,2014

Washington--

The Supreme Court on Thursday night blocked Wisconsin from implementing its new v**er identification law on the eve of next month's e******ns.

In a related action, a district court in Texas ruled that the state's v**er ID law is racially discriminatory and violates the V****g Rights Act.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Vacaman

Brian Devon wrote:

USA Today, Oct. 9,2014 br br Washington-- br br ... (show quote)

Apparently the Supreme Court is not supreme at all, and to assume that minorities could not possibly have ID's is r****t in it's self not to mention absurd. A person should have to show an ID TO V**E.

rumitoid

Brian Devon wrote:

USA Today, Oct. 9,2014 br br Washington-- br br ... (show quote)

Freedom almost equals the ability to freely v**e. The Right is looking how to suppress it. What are we to think?

CounterRevolutionary

Brian Devon wrote:

USA Today, Oct. 9,2014 br br Washington-- br br ... (show quote)

http://blog.heartland.org/2014/03/battling-fraud-the-v**er-i-d-way/
The Heartland Institute
"... A Pew Research Center study in 2012 found that at least 1.8 million dead people were still registered to v**e, laying fertile ground for v***r f***d. In spite of evidence that indicates the need for V**er ID, specific groups continue to compare that need to Jim Crow provisions that blocked people from v****g in the last century.

In April of 2012 intimidation resulted when Democrats threatened a boycott against Coca-Cola for financially supporting the then-pro-v**er-ID organization American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) that had helped state legislators draft some of the v**er-ID laws. [Ed: ALEC no longer supports v**er ID laws.]

V**er ID Laws are simple and easy laws to follow in those states which require a v**er to show government issued photo identifications at the polling places. All states are required to meet the minimum requirement set by the Help America V**e Act (HAVA) of 2002 which requires photo ID for those who register by mail and did not provide identification."

1.8 million dead v**ers on the books? That would be enough to throw a national e******n. All the Political Parties need to purge their v**er lists. It is not unreasonable to request a v**er's ID, is it?

Brian Devon

Vacaman wrote:

Apparently the Supreme Court is not supreme at all, and to assume that minorities could not possibly have ID's is r****t in it's self not to mention absurd. A person should have to show an ID TO V**E.

************
The Supreme Court is definitely supreme. That is why it has that name.

The only step beyond the Supreme Court is to pass a constitutional amendment---something incredibly hard to do in this nation---by design by the founders.

Since its founding this nation has moved, often unsteadily in a singular direction toward ever more inclusive v****g practices....moving from a nation where only property owning white males could v**e to one in which all demographics over the age of 18 get to participate in the v****g process.

As much as the GOP would like to repeal the 20th century, they can't.

They have been warned not to do so by our court system.

Deal with it.

rumitoid

CounterRevolutionary wrote:

http://blog.heartland.org/2014/03/battling-fraud-t... (show quote)

You want to suppress the dead v**e: did they lose their citizenship by some mishap? Talk about gross discrimination!

Please tell me you are not serious. Limiting v****g is somehow promoting a democracy. These limits are not just about IDs, which many states have gone out of their way to help and supply (and others have not, i.e., Tennessee). Demographic patterns of v****g that are mostly for the Democratic Party have been specifically targeted. See Texas and Wisconsin. Shortening the hours and days of early v****g has never been to my knowledge about limited finances. Ending same day registration, a habit of liberals, has never been a problem before. Cutting off or greatly limiting college participation is clearly an attempt to stifle or suppress v**es for Democrats. Just be honest. You are practicing totalitarian methods to help (on a temporary basis?) win the majority and you will quickly eliminate these gross violations of a democracy once in office, right?

CounterRevolutionary

Brian Devon wrote:

************ br The Supreme Court is definitely su... (show quote)

Since the Black community only consists of a small fraction of the population, one would assume that the vast majority of 1.8 million dead v**ers might lead to White v***r f***d. Nevertheless, we cannot assume which political party, or district, or even which race would favor fraud.

There are no winners here, not even the dead v**ers.

Bye the way, the Republican Party was the party of Abe Lincoln. The Heritage Foundation tonight offers a fascinating history lesson on Lincoln's Emancipation Act backed by the Constitution's original intent's definition of "the right to ownership of private property" as inclusive of one's self.

The Supreme Court's recognition of the right to own private property was abandoned under FDR in the Great Depression as the New Deal's attempted to infuse socialism into capitalism.

It is too bad that the Democrat Party does not know what the Democrat Party is all about.

Brian Devon

rumitoid wrote:

You want to suppress the dead v**e: did they lose ... (show quote)

************
Hey, if you don't like all this inclusiveness, take up your complaints with the courts. That's how we do things in this country.

Maybe in your country they do things differently.

rumitoid

Brian Devon wrote:

************
Hey, if you don't like all this inclusiveness, take up your complaints with the courts. That's how we do things in this country.

Maybe in your country they do things differently.

I think you either grossly misinterpreted what I said or you are being x2 obliquely in abstract agreement.

America Only Loc: From the right hand of God

Brian Devon wrote:

************
Hey, if you don't like all this inclusiveness, take up your complaints with the courts. That's how we do things in this country.

Maybe in your country they do things differently.

If all those that committed v**ers fraud were uncovered, and given a prison term and not be able to have any outside access to v**e, the next e******n would only have three democrat v**es and the rest would be anyone other than a democrat v**e.

Democraps in their own way pushed the reason for anyone to desire to have v**er id or any other reform to v****g...people know damned good and well that there is no way in Hell Obama was really v**ed in office...if a totally independent investigation took place and every single v**er was asked honestly who they v**ed for....s**t...Obama would have had lost the e******n by a few hundred million v**es. The v**es were r****d and the Democraptic party KNOWS the v**es were r****d.

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

America Only wrote:

If all those that committed v**ers fraud were unco... (show quote)

You know, a concerted effort has been made to address the "v***r f***d" allegations and only minor, local incidents were found. There has never been any proof provided of any rampant v***r f***d - because there isn't any, nor has there been. I know many people just could not understand how Mitt could have lost, unless there was massive fraud, but the fact is - he lost fair and square.

Repeating a lie often enough does NOT make it come true. It will certainly cause SOME people to believe it, but not everyone. Even the Government Accounting Office had determined that they v**er ID laws were disenfranchising the poor and minorities - the very people the GOP blamed for Mitt losing - go figure.

Retired669

CounterRevolutionary wrote:

Since the Black community only consists of a small... (show quote)

Can you prove dead people v**e? We all know what your party claims all the time and why. They don't stop and think it can't be them that sucks when they lose it must be v***r f***d when they lose. It appears they have convinced a number of low IQ types of that. :thumbup: :lol: :lol: :lol:

jasfourth401

Vacaman wrote:

Apparently the Supreme Court is not supreme at all, and to assume that minorities could not possibly have ID's is r****t in it's self not to mention absurd. A person should have to show an ID TO V**E.

I agree 100%. But in order for that to happen, the state has an obligation to offer everyone the required ID at no cost, and at a convenient location (like the local fire house, police station or post office). A simple solution.

PoppaGringo Loc: Muslim City, Mexifornia, B.R.

rumitoid wrote:

Freedom almost equals the ability to freely v**e. The Right is looking how to suppress it. What are we to think?

How is proving who one is suppressing the v**e? Perhaps you should be advocating no I.D. for welfare, food stamps, getting a driver's license, cashing a check and everything else requiring I.D. I notice people have no problem obtaining I.D. for those requirements. Even the DNC required photo I.D. to attend their convention.

Warlock

I would like to see exactly what these laws say! There has to be something racially ambiguous to give the Supremes the ability to override the implementation of them! I hear that both states are in Obama's cross hair as a result of notables in these states Perry in Texas and someone in power in Wisconsin! I am surprised that NC is on the table ready for evisceration due to the neck & neck run by Hag an (overripe pudenta!) & Tillis! I had heard or saw where Hagan was getting mega millions from Dems for TV spots! How are the detractors of these laws able to substantiate their claim that each and everyone of these laws are racially motivated. How can they quantify the results of an e******n they have no way to validate thzulu12
eir position on these new laws The real reason behind these new laws is to keep unqualified v**ers away from the polls > Without some type of regimentation and rule of law you have Anarchy!

Brian Devon wrote:

USA Today, Oct. 9,2014 br br Washington-- br br ... (show quote)