Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Dems Lock Up Criminal Vote  
User currently offlineN766AS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 662 times:

The Democrats, ladies and gentlemen, are attempting to expand their base.

An alliance of "human rights" groups and Democratic lawmakers are advocating the right of ex-felons to vote. In Maryland, a representative of the NAALCP, the National Association for the Advancement of Liberal Colored People, testified last week before a legislative committee for a voter restoration act on behalf of ex-felons.

In Florida, the legislature is expected to vote this month on a bill proposed by a group of black lawmakers seeking to restore voting rights to convicted felons one year after their sentences are completed. In Washington state, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will eventually decide if Mohammed Shabaz Farrakhan, a black felon who ran for state representative shortly after his 1996 release, may cast a ballot despite the fact that he still owes 24G's (a little Soprano lingo there) in restitution for his theft victims.

Dennis Cronin, a Spokane, Washington, lawyer representing Mr. Farrakhan, said "It sure would have helped Algore in Florida if ex-felons could have voted." Wait a minute. Didn't some current incarcerated felons actually vote anyway? Didn't they sneak through the cracks?

Liberal newspaper after liberal newspaper has recounted the ballots in Florida and found that Algore still lost. So, since they can no longer make the claim that Algore "really won Florida if we counted all the votes," now they're saying, "If we could have just gotten the criminal vote, we would have won in Florida."

How do you Democrats feel about this? The law-abiding contingent isn't enough for you to win! This is the way to look at this: your party has to go out and secure ex-cons and give them the right to vote in order to win. "To hell with the law and the Constitution," your leaders are saying, "We're going to ink out that bit of the Constitution just like we did campaign finance reform."

They're not going to amend the Constitution the way they should, through the amendment process, because they know they can't get the required two thirds of states voting YES that an amendment requires. No, they're just going to pass a law saying ex-cons can vote.

An alliance of human rights groups and Democratic lawmakers want more voter reform! They want to expand the base to now include ex-felons! I have to laugh at this, folks, because it's universally accepted that these ex-cons will vote Democratic. Oh, goody, goody gum drops! Maybe now we can beat the Republicans!

-RL
----------------------

I just thought that was humorous. And scary.

Your thoughts on letting ex-cons vote?


14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMatt D From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 47
Reply 1, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 649 times:

Although you and I normally see eye to eye on just about all social issues, I must disagree with you on this one. Let me qualify this however.

I don't think that felons should be able to vote while still incarcerated. However, I do feel that once they have served their sentence to society, they should be entitled to their rights back, up to and including voting.

I do agree with what you said about the NAACP.

Scary stuff man.


User currently offlineN766AS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 646 times:

Well, you certainly have the right to that opinion, but where are we considering the Constitution?

Amendment XIV, Section 2 allows the States to disqualify convicted felons from voting (Richardson v. Ramirez affirms this...the Court actually sided with States' rights).


User currently offlineMatt D From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 47
Reply 3, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 643 times:

You do have a point......

User currently offlineN766AS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 641 times:

Now, of course, Amendment XIV does not apply in a State that allows felons to vote, but the same question remains...

I believe its a States' rights issue and not to be touched by the Federal government.


User currently offlineCPDC10-30 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 4785 posts, RR: 23
Reply 5, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 641 times:

You have way too much time on your hands...

User currently offlineHairyass From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 633 times:

N766AS you are a good man!
Thank you for this information. This is stupid and scarry! It will never happen, this makes them liberals look even more stupid!
Those Democrats are always looking for trouble, now thay want the trouble makers to vote for them.


User currently offlineN766AS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 630 times:

>You have way too much time on your hands...

So I suppose you do, too, if you respond to threads that have no concern to you up there in Canada.


Hairyass, the main point of the thread wasn't about the Dems (although it is still a valid point), rather States' rights. I'm just saying this so the Dems don't come here saying I'm bashing them, which I'm not. I just used that example to lead into my main question of letting felons vote.


User currently offlineHairyass From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 629 times:

Good point!
I feel that states rights are being trampled on. They are almost non-existint. Here in Illinois, you would think that Chicago was ran by Washington.

I think those liberals down in Florida are just sinking themselves further and further. Anyone who would touch this issue will loose all of there credibility.


User currently offlineNicolaki From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 625 times:

Get a life N766AS you are boring everyone...

User currently offlineN766AS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 623 times:

Nicolaki, I could care less... obviously members of the forum (American members) are participating.

I don't expect the issue of States' rights and the US Constitution to excite you. You can always (gasp!) not open the thread.

>They are almost non-existint. Here in Illinois, you would think that Chicago was ran by Washington.

Its pretty much the same all over the nation. The Federal government is pretty intrusive here in Washington, too, but I get the feeling it is welcomed by our left-of-center local government.

Makes me wonder... why doesn't the left actually try to repeal the 10th Amendment so they don't have to break the law?


User currently offlineWN boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 617 times:

I am not bored. I am actually quite interested. We should remember, however, that more than a few convicted felons were permitted to vote in Florida in the last election cycle. I wonder for whom they voted.

User currently offlineTupolev154B2 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1332 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 609 times:

BTW, what does it mean to be "dishonorably discharged" from the military? What circumstances would result in that? I know that those who were so cannot vote.

User currently offlineN766AS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 608 times:

Too bad they don't release those kinds of statistics, WN boy...
Also too bad the FOIA doesn't apply to state governments (unless Florida has its own- anyone know?)!


User currently offlineWN boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (13 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 606 times:

All states, to my knowledge, have a version of the Freedom of Information Act. In Texas, it is called the Open Records Act. I believe in Florida it is known as the Sunshine Act.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Dems Line Up Against "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" posted Thu Mar 8 2007 03:17:35 by AeroWesty
The Fat Police Lock Up A British Citizen posted Wed Feb 23 2005 05:03:56 by MD-90
AP: House Dems Consider Taxing Benefits posted Tue Jun 9 2009 11:59:03 by AirframeAS
Obama Administration's Numbers Just Don't Add Up posted Sun Jun 7 2009 22:32:48 by FreequentFlier
Thomas Cook & Virgin Linking Up? posted Thu Jun 4 2009 19:09:23 by MCO2BRS
Given Up Smoking - Support Reuired! posted Wed Jun 3 2009 13:01:59 by Sbworcs
US Gulf Coast Could See Severe "pop-up" Hurricanes posted Mon Jun 1 2009 15:55:54 by StasisLAX
Self Gloss: I'm Giving Up Soda posted Sat May 30 2009 13:53:31 by MCOflyer
Ferris Buellers Friends Home Goes Up For Sale. posted Wed May 27 2009 14:07:38 by DXing
My Girlfriend Broke Up With Me posted Tue May 26 2009 21:21:42 by Silver1SWA