Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  1    2  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: Fed Court Rules With Some Common Sense for Ohio

Maximum Peach





Posts: 8384
(8385 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/14/2008 at 10:58 PM
Why do we let secondary agencies register voters in the first place?

quote:
Ohio must set up a way to verify all new voters
Federal appeals court rules the system must be in place before Friday

CINCINNATI - A federal appeals court on Tuesday ordered Ohio's top elections official to set up a system by Friday to verify the eligibility of new voters and make the information available to the state's 88 county election boards.

The full 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati upheld a lower court ruling that Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner must use other government records to check thousands of new voters for registration fraud.

A three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit had disagreed last week, but the full court's ruling overturns that decision.

Ohio Republicans had sued Brunner, a Democrat. Her spokesman had no immediate comment Tuesday.

666,000 registrations since January
About 666,000 Ohioans have registered to vote since January, with many doing so before the contested Democratic primary election last March between Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Since then, Ohio Republicans have filed a series of challenges to the registrations and Brunner's administration of election rules. They have helped voters file lawsuits against local boards of election over registration rules, absentee ballot requests and a weeklong period that allowed registration and voting on the same day.

Brunner previously said there was no way to set up the system with such speed.

Last week, a three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit had sided with Brunner, but after hearing an appeal the full panel sided with the GOP and U.S. District Judge George C. Smith in Columbus. Smith had ordered Brunner to develop a way to verify voter registration information and make it available to local election boards.

Brunner argued that it would take two to three days to create the necessary computer programs, and said nothing in the federal Help America Vote Act required her to do what the district court ordered.

GOP alleges partisan agenda
Tuesday's order directs Brunner to verify new registrations by comparing that information with data from the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles or the Social Security Administration.

Ohio Republican Chairman Bob Bennett accused Brunner of pursuing a partisan agenda and said "her delay in providing this matching system leaves little time for election officials to act on questionable registrations."

Bennett said Brunner was destroying the public's trust in Ohio's elections system.

"Her shameful actions to disenfranchise Republican absentee voters, block the transparency of early voting and refuse the proper verification of newly registered voters have rightfully damaged her credibility as a nonpartisan election administrator," he said.

Polling in the state shows Obama, now the Democratic presidential nominee, slightly ahead of Republican challenger John McCain. Both campaigns have worked hard in the state, which has 20 electoral votes and gave President Bush a second term in 2004.





http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27188603

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 
Replies:

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2779
(2781 all sites)
Registered: 1/20/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/14/2008 at 11:35 PM
quote:
quote:
Why do we let secondary agencies register voters in the first place?


Because registering new voters is an absolutely essential part of the democratic process and it should be celebrated and encouraged rather than attacked and exploited for partisan purposes.

Make no mistake, these attacks on ACORN are part of a targeted effort by the McCain Campaign (even though this probably makes John McCain's skin crawl) to deter newly registered voters - young people and black folks, to be precise - from casting votes.

So some ignorant volunteers got lazy and forged some registrations for some quick cash. How does that possibly offset the societal good that comes from gaining countless thousands of new voters? This is voter registration fraud, it's not vote fraud. And would someone please tell me how registering Mickey Mouse to vote is going to benefit one candidate over the other, or just exactly how he intends to vote with those giant fat fingers?


I agree that educating voters about their rights and helping to register first time voters is important, but how do you know that McCain is discouraging the young and black vote? I don't believe we should be so quick to dismiss the gravity of the issue. Further, we don't know if it's voter fraud until the absentee ballots are compared to voter registrations. That's when we can figure out which ones were potentially fraudulent.

To me, this seems like a pretty serious issue. If there are going to be entities which accept the responsibility for engaging new voters, then they should be well-monitored and held to certain standards.


Mike

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 46740
(46741 all sites)
Registered: 7/8/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/14/2008 at 11:38 PM
And yet, anyone who even sniffs at anything at all questionable about anything having to do with the election process in Florida in 2000 or Ohio in 2004, they're a crazy, moonbat, liberal leftist traitor with a designer tinfoil hat.

And the beat goes on...

 

____________________
"Live every week like it's Shark Week." - Tracy Jordan

 

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2779
(2781 all sites)
Registered: 1/20/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/14/2008 at 11:45 PM
quote:
And yet, anyone who even sniffs at anything at all questionable about anything having to do with the election process in Florida in 2000 or Ohio in 2004, they're a crazy, moonbat, liberal leftist traitor with a designer tinfoil hat.

And the beat goes on...


Is this directed at me, or is it in response to my post? If so, you have sort of lost me here.


Mike

 

____________________

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8384
(8385 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 03:10 AM
quote:
quote:
Why do we let secondary agencies register voters in the first place?


Because registering new voters is an absolutely essential part of the democratic process and it should be celebrated and encouraged rather than attacked and exploited for partisan purposes.

Make no mistake, these attacks on ACORN are part of a targeted effort by the McCain Campaign (even though this probably makes John McCain's skin crawl) to deter newly registered voters - young people and black folks, to be precise - from casting votes.

So some ignorant volunteers got lazy and forged some registrations for some quick cash. How does that possibly offset the societal good that comes from gaining countless thousands of new voters? This is voter registration fraud, it's not vote fraud. And would someone please tell me how registering Mickey Mouse to vote is going to benefit one candidate over the other, or just exactly how he intends to vote with those giant fat fingers?

I beg to differ. The point of the question was why turn over such an important thing to secondary sources in the first place. Why is it that people who want to vote can't simply register at the correct government offices? They could bring the correct identification, have that verified, and ensure that questions don't arise downstream. Why isn't that better than this last minute confusion?

As to "registering new voters is an absolutely essential part of the democratic process", what good does it do to have voters registered who won't make the effort to go to government offices and do it properly? Sure, outreach by those voting officials could also be part of the process, having registration opportunities at libraries, schools, and other more local establishments. That already happens. But if a person doesn't have the motivation to show up in person to register, and bring proper identification, then why do you consider them "essential"?

This rush for quantity versus quality seems to ignore one of the foundations of how a good democracy functions in the first place. It requires informed and knowledgeable citizens who care about their communities and feel they are stakeholders in them. Blindly saying "vote" to anyone who can fog a mirror only dilutes the people who fit that description with the most shallow of individuals, who usually have more self-interest in mind rather than the good of the whole.

Is it any wonder that our democracy is failing badly when our most important franchise is treated more as a numbers game than an act with gravity and consequences? And why is it that the Democrats seem to have cornered the market on this "register at all costs, without conditions, without identification" mentality? What possible "societial good" comes from letting the lazy, the uninformed, the disinterested, or the self-interested vote?

Is that really the characteristics you want in your country? I'll bet you'd place higher standards on who you'd want as a neighbor. I guess it doesn't really matter, because this is what we seem to have more and more of in this country - and the results speak for themselves.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured

uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,

so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 06:54 AM
quote:
quote:
And yet, anyone who even sniffs at anything at all questionable about anything having to do with the election process in Florida in 2000 or Ohio in 2004, they're a crazy, moonbat, liberal leftist traitor with a designer tinfoil hat.

And the beat goes on...


Is this directed at me, or is it in response to my post? If so, you have sort of lost me here.


Mike


I dont think its directed at you, Mike. Its the overall issue. Remember back during those times, when the Dems were hollering about voter fraud (which turned out to be correct), we were all dismissed out of hand as being bitter etc. The phrase, "you lost, get over it" was coined at that time. Anyone who dared to question the outcome of that election was crazy, moonbat, liberal leftest etc.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 46740
(46741 all sites)
Registered: 7/8/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 08:36 AM
quote:
quote:
And yet, anyone who even sniffs at anything at all questionable about anything having to do with the election process in Florida in 2000 or Ohio in 2004, they're a crazy, moonbat, liberal leftist traitor with a designer tinfoil hat.

And the beat goes on...


Is this directed at me, or is it in response to my post? If so, you have sort of lost me here.


Mike


No, Mike, it was just a general observation on the whole situation. Not looking for a quarrel with you at all.

 

____________________
"Live every week like it's Shark Week." - Tracy Jordan

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 13728
(13982 all sites)
Registered: 2/10/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 08:52 AM
quote:
And yet, anyone who even sniffs at anything at all questionable about anything having to do with the election process in Florida in 2000 or Ohio in 2004, they're a crazy, moonbat, liberal leftist traitor with a designer tinfoil hat.

And the beat goes on...


I like searching out cool phrases and witty euphemisms and such on this website.

I majored in English for a while, just like Dean and I have an appreciation for words...

"...crazy, moonbat (moonbat? ) liberal leftist traitor with a DESIGNER TINFOIL HAT."



and leave spacemonkey out of this. He's a neutral party.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 46740
(46741 all sites)
Registered: 7/8/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 08:57 AM
LOL - the Right has been calling liberals "moonbats" for a few years now. It's the polar opposite of "wingnut."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonbat

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wingnut_(politics)

 

____________________
"Live every week like it's Shark Week." - Tracy Jordan

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8384
(8385 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 09:23 AM
I guess I've been out of the loop.

I've never heard the term "moonbat" before.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured

uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,

so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3866
(3866 all sites)
Registered: 3/18/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 09:25 AM
I'd rather be a liberal moonbat than an ASSHAT, another one of my favorite words.
 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3636
(3636 all sites)
Registered: 5/1/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 09:41 AM
Excellent post Rich...it's discouraging to me that people vote having little knowledge of the issues or candidates' positions. Encouraging these people to register and vote is nothing more than advancing one's own agenda, not supporting democracy or any other patriotic ideal.

I know we banned literacy tests etc. years ago, but IMO we should have some sort of test to ensure votes are informed.

 

____________________
Walk down on the street and leave, my blues at home

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 12503
(12493 all sites)
Registered: 4/4/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 09:49 AM
quote:
I'd rather be a liberal moonbat than an ASSHAT, another one of my favorite words.










[Edited on 10/15/2008 by gondicar]

 

____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3866
(3866 all sites)
Registered: 3/18/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 10:14 AM
LMAO!!
 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 11:01 AM
Excellent points, mglowenstein

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 27533
(27822 all sites)
Registered: 2/18/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 11:05 AM
First of all, I wish Ohio and other states would get their acts together and get a standard for registering and for votiing. Here we have to provide necessary documentation to register....picture ID....and present it when we go to the polls. It's easy to get a photo ID even if you don't have a driver's license so it's not a problem. Then you're crossed off the print out so you can't vote again. We also have paper ballots that are scanned by machines so there is a tangible record of the votes.

I know there is a problem but I see blowing it out of proportion in a toss up state as laying the groundwork for a challenge if McCain loses the state. The GOP operatives seem to target the states with the weakest laws that make them vulnerable and then inflame public opinion.

 

____________________
Sometimes we can't choose the music life gives us - but we damn sure can choose how we dance!


 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3866
(3866 all sites)
Registered: 3/18/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 11:08 AM
quote:
quote:
Excellent post Rich...it's discouraging to me that people vote having little knowledge of the issues or candidates' positions. Encouraging these people to register and vote is nothing more than advancing one's own agenda, not supporting democracy or any other patriotic ideal.

I know we banned literacy tests etc. years ago, but IMO we should have some sort of test to ensure votes are informed.


I don't understand this in the least, nor do I agree with one inkling of Fuji's post. The bolded line is so disgusting to me in particular. You say "these people" - what people are you talking about exactly? Just the dumb ones who have no knowledge of the candidates' positions? News flash - the vast, vast majority of citizens fall into this category. And how in the name of god is registering voters advancing any one agenda, or one candidate, over another? Registering new voters is not only one of our foremost patriotic ideals (think back to the heroic efforts of civil rights workers in the south in the 1960s) but it is absolutely essential to the survival of our Democracy to engage as many citizens as possible in the democratic process, regardless of education, race, or class. This is a simple fact, and it shocks me that some would be so cynical as to reject it.

A Democracy needs to remove barriers to vote, not put them up - under any circumstances. You should be able to vote if you've never heard of McCain and you heard Obama was a terrorist. If you can't read, if you're completely ignorant of the political process, if you're lazy and dumb and only showed up to vote because it was on your way back from McDonald's breakfast, you're still absolutely as entitled to cast a ballot as you or I. And thank God for that.

quote:
This rush for quantity versus quality seems to ignore one of the foundations of how a good democracy functions in the first place. It requires informed and knowledgeable citizens who care about their communities and feel they are stakeholders in them. Blindly saying "vote" to anyone who can fog a mirror only dilutes the people who fit that description with the most shallow of individuals, who usually have more self-interest in mind rather than the good of the whole.


When you say quality, what you're impying is that we should discriminate based on your ideal characteristics for a voter. Again, thank god this is not the case - thank god for equal protection under the law. Want to talk about self-interest? Let's talk about the folks who are voting for McCain because they're afraid Obama is going to raise their taxes or take their guns. Self-interest is a huge determining factor for many voters, for better or worse - always has been and always will be.

quote:
Is it any wonder that our democracy is failing badly when our most important franchise is treated more as a numbers game than an act with gravity and consequences? And why is it that the Democrats seem to have cornered the market on this "register at all costs, without conditions, without identification" mentality? What possible "societial good" comes from letting the lazy, the uninformed, the disinterested, or the self-interested vote?


I didn't realize our democracy was failing badly. I look around and I see people more energized about the election and about politics then ever before. I see people genuinely excited about their candidate. I see shocking numbers of first time voters set to participate in this election. Not sure what you're talking about with our failed democracy.

You ask why the Democrats are interested in registering new voters... Flip side - why aren't Republicans interested in doing the same? Why are they focusing efforts on blocking and deterring new voters? Again? The answer is absolutely plain as day. As is the answer to your question about the societal good - the more people vote, the more representative, and by extension, the more valid our democracy becomes.

Put this partisan nonsense and the specifics of this election aside - can we really not agree that registering new voters should be unilaterally encouraged by all parties? Sad if we can't. And it's why I spoke of my fear of widespread vote fraud and deterrence - the misinformation campaigns in certain counties have already begun, telling newly registered voters that if they show up to vote and have outstanding parking tickets, they'll be arrested, or that there are fees associated with the process, or, when election day comes, simply showing up at the polling place, putting boots down and preventing certain people from exercising their god-given rights as Americans. With 3 weeks to go, it's obviously already beginning, but I have to believe this new wave of voters will do their part and will not be deterred by intimidation tactics and misinformation. That Tuesday in November stands to be a great day for Democracy, regardless of outcome, and we should all hope it isn't sullied by those who try to stamp out the absolute most fundamental right of our citizenry for their own ends.


[Edited on 10/15/2008 by mglowenstein]


Thank you, mglowenstein. I get so frustrated by people talking about how much they love America who turn around and say that our democracy sucks, the candidates are stupid, etc. etc. I think this year has been great for American democracy, which was potentially on life support after the voter frauds and the Patriot Act, the consolidation of power in the executive branch, etc. But if this year has taught me anything, it's to NEVER GIVE UP on a country with a Constitution as inspiring as ours.

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3636
(3636 all sites)
Registered: 5/1/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 11:22 AM
MG, we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think, for instance, that someone who's never heard of McCain should be able to vote. I know you're being extreme to make a point, but I disagree with the point.

My extreme response is that no one should be able to vote unless they can articulate at least three intelligent things about each candidate. Pick one major issue and explain each candidate's platform about it. That's right EACH candidate, not just the one they support. I also believe every voter should have to pass a basic test of how our government works. I don't mean recite the constitution, but explain the three branches of the federal gov't, tell me what the Supreme Court does, the difference between a Senator and a Governor. Anyone who can't do that doesn't vote. Period. Voting is a right, but it carries the responsibility to be INFORMED not vote the way someone tells you to, or the way your father did, or the way your friends do.

Who would you rather have voting? Your completely ignorant voter or my barely knowledgeable one?

And it is advancing an agenda to encourage someone to register and vote that wouldn't otherwise. It's advancing an agenda because they are NOT reaching out to everyone, they're reaching out to people they think will vote the way they want them to. When a group like Acorn targets low income areas, areas with heavy minority populations, etc. isn't obvious they are registering people that will vote for Obama? Why aren't they at country clubs making sure the stay home mommies are registered and have childcare on election day so they can get to the polls? Don't tell me this is some idealistic grass roots movement, when they know 95% of the people they register will vote with them. It's a partisan effort to ensure that if this election hinges on a few votes the way the 2000 did, it goes their way and that I'm sorry, I disagree with, even though I prefer Obama to McCain.

 

____________________
Walk down on the street and leave, my blues at home

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3866
(3866 all sites)
Registered: 3/18/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 11:28 AM
quote:
MG, we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think, for instance, that someone who's never heard of McCain should be able to vote. I know you're being extreme to make a point, but I disagree with the point.

My extreme response is that no one should be able to vote unless they can articulate at least three intelligent things about each candidate. Pick one major issue and explain each candidate's platform about it. That's right EACH candidate, not just the one they support. I also believe every voter should have to pass a basic test of how our government works. I don't mean recite the constitution, but explain the three branches of the federal gov't, tell me what the Supreme Court does, the difference between a Senator and a Governor. Anyone who can't do that doesn't vote. Period. Voting is a right, but it carries the responsibility to be INFORMED not vote the way someone tells you to, or the way your father did, or the way your friends do.

Who would you rather have voting? Your completely ignorant voter or my barely knowledgeable one?

And it is advancing an agenda to encourage someone to register and vote that wouldn't otherwise. It's advancing an agenda because they are NOT reaching out to everyone, they're reaching out to people they think will vote the way they want them to. When a group like Acorn targets low income areas, areas with heavy minority populations, etc. isn't obvious they are registering people that will vote for Obama? Why aren't they at country clubs making sure the stay home mommies are registered and have childcare on election day so they can get to the polls? Don't tell me this is some idealistic grass roots movement, when they know 95% of the people they register will vote with them. It's a partisan effort to ensure that if this election hinges on a few votes the way the 2000 did, it goes their way and that I'm sorry, I disagree with, even though I prefer Obama to McCain.


First off, to enact your standard, you would have to amend the definition of "citizenship", which is kind of dicey.

Second, by your standard, the candidate, and the Party, that usually does best with better-educated citizens would generally be the winner.

Looks like you're advocating for a pretty long-term Democratic majority. Just a fact, Jack!

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 11:34 AM
quote:
My extreme response is that no one should be able to vote unless they can articulate at least three intelligent things about each candidate.


So you favor a type of "poll tax"? If intelligence is the barometer, Im afraid we are screwed right off the bat.

quote:
Pick one major issue and explain each candidate's platform about it.


Good luck with that.

quote:
That's right EACH candidate, not just the one they support.


Thats like saying you need to look at every car before you buy one. Theres many reasons why someone wouldnt entertain a particular candidate.

quote:
I also believe every voter should have to pass a basic test of how our government works. I don't mean recite the constitution, but explain the three branches of the federal gov't, tell me what the Supreme Court does, the difference between a Senator and a Governor.


Cheney believes he is not part of the Executive Branch. Palin didnt know what the VP does. Neither of them should vote.

quote:
Voting is a right, but it carries the responsibility to be INFORMED not vote the way someone tells you to, or the way your father did, or the way your friends do.


Voting is a privilege. You can lose your ability to vote.

quote:
Who would you rather have voting? Your completely ignorant voter or my barely knowledgeable one?


I see what you are saying, but realisitically, there wouldnt be hardly anyone voting.

quote:
And it is advancing an agenda to encourage someone to register and vote that wouldn't otherwise.


Just the agenda of Democracy.

quote:
It's advancing an agenda because they are NOT reaching out to everyone, they're reaching out to people they think will vote the way they want them to.


I was at a job fair the other day as a recruiter and they had a "get out the vote" sign up for unregistered voters. There was no bias, they were just encouraging people to use their "voice" by voting. My .02

quote:
When a group like Acorn targets low income areas, areas with heavy minority populations, etc. isn't obvious they are registering people that will vote for Obama? Why aren't they at country clubs making sure the stay home mommies are registered and have childcare on election day so they can get to the polls? Don't tell me this is some idealistic grass roots movement, when they know 95% of the people they register will vote with them. It's a partisan effort to ensure that if this election hinges on a few votes the way the 2000 did, it goes their way and that I'm sorry, I disagree with, even though I prefer Obama to McCain.


All voter registration sign up groups do that, not just ACORN.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 27533
(27822 all sites)
Registered: 2/18/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 12:15 PM
So we're not supposed to let low income people and minorities vote? Parties target areas where there are problems....they don't go into areas that have it together already.

 

____________________
Sometimes we can't choose the music life gives us - but we damn sure can choose how we dance!


 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 12503
(12493 all sites)
Registered: 4/4/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 12:29 PM
quote:
My extreme response is that no one should be able to vote unless they can articulate at least three intelligent things about each candidate. Pick one major issue and explain each candidate's platform about it. That's right EACH candidate, not just the one they support.


Noble idea, but runs totally contrary to the fundamentals of our democracy, IMO.

Are you talking about this being the standard for electing POTUS, or would you extend this to all offices and issues on a ballet...US congress, state legislature, school committee, city council/town selectmen, etc. Because I gotta tell ya, in local elections I may have a candidate I like and know nothing about the others, and applying your standard above I should not be allowed to vote. And when it comes to voting on issues (like bond measures, local spending initiatives, etc.) some people simply vote against spending on principal, knowing next to nothing about the specifics of the particular measure. Should people like that not be allowed to vote? How would you "test" them?

Also, some people vote along party lines no matter what. If someone decided to ignore the candidates and vote party affiliation because they like a particular party's philosophy and/or platform, by applying your standard above that person should not be allowed to vote for the candidate from the party they are aligned with.

Bottom line is people base their vote on whatever reason they want, and that is how it should be, IMO. As I said, your thought is a noble one, but in reality granting the right to vote based on the ability to articulate a specific level of knowledge about every candiate's positions on issues just seems a bit ludacris to me.

 

____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8384
(8385 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 12:36 PM
Boy, some of you can really take a simple point and build a mountain of stuff around it. With this kind of expertise in empire building, it appears there are some budding politicians here. Then again, I've been known to get on a rant from time to time...

All I said was that if someone is too lazy to show up to election offices to register, provide proper identification to prove who there are, then they are probably lacking in other regards of good citizenship as well. This doesn't suggest limits on anyone. Repeat: no limits or special qualifications. Just a simple display of motivation and concern, demonstrating enough interest to take a little personal time and show that your vote is meaningful to you - not just some secondary organization with their own agenda.

If you ran a business, you'd hire people with higher qualifications than just anyone you can randomly pick up. You'd pick friends by applying higher criteria. When you were a kid, did you choose up sides by closing your eyes and say "I'll take anyone"? Yet you wish to lower the bar so low on voter registration as to dredge up any and all. Those who care and those who don't. Those who contribute and those who take. Those who are serious about their communities and those who think its an imposition just to prove they are citizens before they vote.

If you don't thnk these declining values are not reflected in the quality of our society and how well our government works, we must be living in very different places.




[Edited on 10/15/2008 by Fujirich]

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured

uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,

so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4433
(4433 all sites)
Registered: 2/27/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 01:01 PM
"Why do we let secondary agencies register voters in the first place?"

So democrats can steal elections. If they were ever honest they'd never be elected.

 

____________________
As a patriot and a loyal member of the opposition I pledge to offer our new President the very same benefit of the doubt and unwavering support that the left offered George Bush over the last eight years.

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3636
(3636 all sites)
Registered: 5/1/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 10/15/2008 at 01:06 PM
You all made fair and valid points criticizing my viewpoint. I understand them, and in some cases agree. Please remember most of my rant was intentionally extreme....But IMO, the get out the vote effort in this election is not about the noble idea of greater participation, it's about making sure Obama gets every vote they can muster in case it's close. I guess I just feel that too many people are voting based on limited knowledge or false information without doing any homework of their own. And that's true of both sides.

 

____________________
Walk down on the street and leave, my blues at home

 
<<  1    2  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software

Privacy | Terms of Service | Report Infringement | Personal Data Management | Contact Us
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com