NAACP petitions UN over GOP blocking the vote

[j_b]

NAACP warns black and Hispanic Americans could lose right to vote

 

The largest civil rights group in America, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), is petitioning the UN over what it sees as a concerted efforted to disenfranchise black and Latino voters ahead of next year's presidential election.

 

The organisation will this week present evidence to the UN high commissioner on human rights of what it contends is a conscious attempt to "block the vote" on the part of state legislatures across the US. Next March the NAACP will send a delegation of legal experts to Geneva to enlist the support of the UN human rights council.

 

The NAACP contends that the America in the throes of a consciously conceived and orchestrated move to strip black and other ethnic minority groups of the right to vote. William Barber, a member of the association's national board, said it was the "most vicious, co-ordinated and sinister attack to narrow participation in our democracy since the early 20th century".

 

[..]

 

The scale of the assault on voting rights is substantial, according to experts on electoral law. The Brennan Center for Justice, based at New York University law school, estimates that the new measures could bar as many as 5 million eligible voters from taking part in choosing the occupant of the White House next year.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/05/civil-rights-naacp-voter-warning

 

[j_b]

Isn't it edifying how those constantly posturing for "liberty" never have a problem with GOPers disenfranchising voters?

[j_b]

McConnell: National Popular Vote Is ‘Absurd, Dangerous’ Idea

When people go to the polls, we generally think that the person who gets the most votes should be the winner of the contest. Not necessarily, according to Sen. Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.), who called it an appealing idea, but attacked a plan to make it so “absurd and dangerous,”

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2011/12/09/senate-minority-leader-calls-national-popular-vote-absurd-dangerous-idea/?mod=google_news_blog

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

Great thread j_bot!

 

Having fun with your inane monologue?

 

[j_b]

"Democracy is generally defined as a form of government in which all adult citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives."

[rob]

[font:Impact]BALLS![/font]

[Crux]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/05/civil-rights-naacp-voter-warning

 

"In Texas, a law has been passed that prevents students from voting on the basis of their college ID cards, while allowing anyone to cast their ballot if they can show a permit to carry a concealed handgun."

 

Thank God them uppity types can't get dem permits, ifn ya know what I mean.

[Phil K]

So, yeah, election fraud by mass disenfranchisement of targeted groups of voters is just fine with the CC.com conservative brain trust.

 

Next question?

[rob]

"Hispanics are very loyal shoppers. You know, cause they don't have cars."

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

"Hispanics are very loyal shoppers. You know, cause they don't have cars."

 

 

nice jab, Rob!

[Fairweather]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/21/officials-plead-guilty-in-new-york-voter-fraud-case/

 

A total of four Democratic officials and political operatives have now pleaded guilty to voter fraud-related felony charges in an alleged scheme to steal a New York election. The latest guilty pleas expose the ease with which political insiders can apparently manipulate the electoral system and throw an election their way, by the forging of signatures of unsuspecting voters that are then cast as real votes...

 

 

 

 

[j_b]

and? Nice try to muddy the waters but electoral fraud (your example) is as old as voting and it is relatively common but it has nothing to do with VOTER fraud (“intentional corruption of the electoral process by the voter.”) that is invoked by regressives to disenfranchise millions of poor and minority voters through these despicable laws. There is almost no evidence of VOTER fraud at the federal and state level (the fed found ~8 individual cases per year on average) and trying to preventy these at the cost of barring millions from voting is transparent in its intentions.

 

It's also noted the nasty article you linked from the FOX propaganda network desperately and ineffectively tries to link ACORN with the officials involved in this instance of electoral fraud. Shame on you for spreading such noxious propaganda.

 

 

[tvashtarkatena]

Breaking the law and using the law to disenfranchise certain voters to rig elections in favor of one party over another are two completely different phenomena that have nothing to do with each other. The first is democracy working as it should (having the laws to begin with, then punishing the violators), the second is a concerted effort to break democracy entirely.

 

An unprincipled person might not be able to discern the difference. A principled one would never attempt to downplay the wrongness of the latter by citing an instance of the former.

[j_b]

Good way to put it, tvash.

[Fairweather]

Breaking the law and using the law to disenfranchise certain voters to rig elections in favor of one party over another are two completely different phenomena that have nothing to do with each other. The first is democracy working as it should (having the laws to begin with, then punishing the violators), the second is a concerted effort to break democracy entirely.

 

An unprincipled person might not be able to discern the difference. A principled one would never attempt to downplay the wrongness of the latter by citing an instance of the former.

 

Sure. Whatever helps you and yours sleep at night. The fact is that j_b's allegations remain unproven--and likely unprovable. Elsewhere in his wandering links, the felon-voter rights and id requirements are, in fact, laws which have arisen out of the democratic process itself--which explains his contempt. The allegations in the piece from Fox have this thing called evidence to back them up. A difficult concept for you and yours, I'm quite sure. Again, on one hand we have murky statistics bolstered by unfounded suspicion and, quite frankly, left-wing paranoia. On the other hand, we have a clear cut case of election fraud on a massive scale and the woe-is-us cadre (that's you and j_b) are still willing to look away. I might add that listening to someone who, by his own account, participated in questionable ethics after the 2004 governor's race renders his soapbox speech on principles null.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Fairweather

[tvashtarkatena]

Use FOX as your source and you've already lost the debate. Might as well cite Herman Cain's website to support your opinions on what's wrong with women in America.

 

And yes, I read the FOX headlines every damn day...for entertainment only, of course. It's the only 'news' channel that covers the disturbing trend of 9 year olds and retards being expelled from school for sexual harassment.

 

Sadly, I'm not even making that up. These stories began to appear immediately after the Cain harassment scandal broke LOL.

 

 

[Fairweather]

So the guilty pleas from four Democrats never happened? Because Fox reported it? Never mind the rest of the story, are you saying that it never happened? You're not as guilty of this, but just be sure to employ your journalistic standards when j_b starts a thread (like this one) with links to The Guardian, Huffington post, Common Dreams, etc.

[tvashtarkatena]

Your too stupid to get my point, so I won't bother to remake it.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

So the guilty pleas from four Democrats never happened? Because Fox reported it? Never mind the rest of the story, are you saying that it never happened? You're not as guilty of this, but just be sure to employ your journalistic standards when j_b starts a thread (like this one) with links to The Guardian, Huffington post, Common Dreams, etc.

 

No shit. j_bot's sources are about as worthless as any you can come up with.

[Fairweather]

Your too stupid to get my point, so I won't bother to remake it.

 

You're

 

 

 

[Off_White]

if you think that's a rebuttle, you're weaker than you think

 

[j_b]

The Politics of Voter Fraud

by Lorraine C. Minnite, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Political Science

Barnard College, Columbia University

 

 

Key findings

 

• Voter fraud is the “intentional corruption of the electoral process by the voter.” This definition covers knowingly and willingly giving false information to establish voter eligibility, and knowingly and willingly voting illegally or participating in a conspiracy to encourage illegal voting by others. All other forms of corruption of the electoral process and corruption committed by elected or election officials, candidates, party organizations, advocacy groups or campaign workers fall under the wider definition of election fraud.

 

• Voter fraud is extremely rare. At the federal level, records show that only 24 people were convicted of or pleaded guilty to illegal voting between 2002 and 2005, an average of eight people a year. The available state-level evidence of voter fraud, culled from interviews, reviews of newspaper coverage and court proceedings, while not definitive, is also negligible.

 

• The lack of evidence of voter fraud is not because of a failure to codify it. It is not as if the states have failed to detail the ways voters could corrupt elections. There are hundreds of examples drawn from state election codes and constitutions that illustrate the precision with which the states have criminalized voter and election fraud. I f we use the same standards for judging voter fraud crime rates as we do for other crimes, we must conclude that the lack of evidence of arrests, indictments or convictions for any of the practices defined as voter fraud means very little fraud is being committed.

 

• Most voter fraud allegations turn out to be something other than fraud. A review of news stories over a recent two year period found that reports of voter fraud were most often limited to local races and individual acts and fell into three categories: unsubstantiated or false claims by the loser of a close race, mischief and administrative or voter error.

 

• The more complex are the rules regulating voter registration and voting, the more likely voter mistakes, clerical errors, and the like will be wrongly identified as “fraud.” Voters play a limited role in the electoral process. Where they interact with the process they confront an array of rules that can trip them up. In addition, one consequence of expanding voting opportunities, i.e. permissive absentee voting systems, is a corresponding increase in opportunities for casting unintentionally illegal ballots if administrative tracking and auditing systems are flawed.

 

• There is a long history in America of elites using voter fraud allegations to restrict and shape the electorate. In the late nineteenth century when newly freed black Americans were swept into electoral politics, and where blacks were the majority of the electorate, it was the Democrats who were threatened by a loss of power, and it was the Democratic party that erected new rules said to be necessary to respond to alleged fraud by black voters. Today, the success of voter registration drives among minorities and low income people in recent years threatens to expand the base of the Democratic party and tip the balance of power away from the Republicans. Consequently, the use of baseless voter fraud allegations for partisan advantage has become the exclusive domain of Republican party activists.

 

http://www.bradblog.com/Docs/PoliticsofVoterFraudFinal.pdf

[j_b]

So the guilty pleas from four Democrats never happened? Because Fox reported it? Never mind the rest of the story, are you saying that it never happened? You're not as guilty of this, but just be sure to employ your journalistic standards when j_b starts a thread (like this one) with links to The Guardian, Huffington post, Common Dreams, etc.

 

No shit. j_bot's sources are about as worthless as any you can come up with.

 

why don't you try bringing it up when it is timely? I think I see a pattern here: KKK claiming something out of context because he is too much of a wimp to try making his case when the discussion is taking place.

Edited December 23, 2011 by j_b

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

why don't you bringing it up when it is timely?

 

Your grammar is as good as ttk's evidently.

[j_b]

 

why don't you bringing it up when it is timely?

 

Your grammar is as good as ttk's evidently.

 

versus your being a moron for not seeing there is a word missing?