It's time for changes..... lots of them.
POSTED BY: 6ixStringJack
UPDATED: Tuesday, September 9, 2025 15:58
VIEWED: 6785
PAGE 5 of 9
S'wenyways, Fivver
Here's the Supreme Court ruling summary (found in the ruling itself)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&v
ol=383&invol=663
(a) Once the franchise is granted to the electorate, lines which determine who may vote may not be drawn so as to cause invidious discrimination. Pp. 665-667.
(b) Fee payments or wealth, like race, creed, or color, are unrelated to the citizen's ability to participate intelligently in the electoral process. Pp. 666-668.
(c) The interest of the State, when it comes to voting registration, is limited to the fixing of standards related to the applicant's qualifications as a voter. P. 668.
(d) Lines drawn on the basis of wealth or property, like those of race, are traditionally disfavored. P. 668.
(e) Classifications which might impinge on fundamental rights and liberties - such as the franchise - must be closely scrutinized. P. 670.
As I mentioned, the ruling is sufficiently broad so as to indicate the state many not discriminate against groups of people in terms of those who may or may not vote. If you read further - I invite you to - you'll notice that there are many, many rulings the Court took as precedent to broadly apply the equal right to vote across many circumstances.
***************************************************************
And Rap's claim: "If Idaho made a law saying only lawyers could vote for President, then that's how they'd chose, and ain't a damn thing Washington D.C. could do about it" - clearly wrong.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here's the relevant point I'm talking about:
(a) Once the franchise is granted to the electorate
A state legislature DOES NOT have to grant the franchise to the electorate. The legislature is free to pick any method they want of choosing presidential electors.
I live in Georgia. If the legislature enacts a law that there will be no general election for president in the state and the electors will be chosed by the senate then I have no right to vote for president. Once again, the constitution leaves the method of choosing electors to each state. You, I, Rap have no constitutional right to vote for president BUT Once the franchise is granted to the electorate, all of the amendments on race, sex, poll tax, etc come into play.
Your right to vote for president comes to you from the legislature of the state where you live, not the US constitution.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
From the ruling...
While the right to vote in federal elections is conferred by Art. I, 2, of the Constitution (United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299, 314 -315), ...
There are many similar statements scattered throughout the ruling applied to different circumstances - but all in all, used by the Court in its ruling to broadly define the right to vote under the Constitution. It's kinda' why I invited you to read the ruling, because there were many statements that just couldn't be included in such a short summary.
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Those statements mean nothing as far as mandating voting as the only method to be used to choose electors, only that if voting is the method selected by the legislature then these laws apply. Go back and read that article again. It expressly grants the power of how to choose electors to the state legislature.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
I get the feeling that a lot of folks imbued Sen. Obama with their own desires and didn't really pay much attention to his actual platform. Folks are now expecting things to happen that he has never supported or promised.
I just caught the South Park episode last night on an encore. That was funny as hell. I wonder how long ago they made that, and I'd love to see the alternate episode if Obama lost (I assume there is an alternate episode and that Parker and Stone weren't privy to information that we weren't)
Mr. Marsh told his boss to F himself and gave him the finger about an inch from his face over and over again. When his boss said "Hey! I voted for Obama too!" while wearing an Obama shirt, Marsh said "He wasn't talking about change for people like you!" and he gave him the finger again. All of this happened at an Obama party where everyone was so hammered half of them woke up in the hospital (the other half of the ER visitors had tried to kill themselves with their McCain shirts on when they thought the world was coming to an end). When Mr. Marsh woke up on his couch, his pants were gone, his knee was bloody and after touching his head a couple times after the extreme hangover was taking its toll he said "Hey... Where's my pants?". Then he looked over and saw the TV stand with nothing but the cables on it and said "Where's my TV?" Then Stan came downstairs and told him that his boss called and he was fired. "Goddamnit! Obama said there was going to be change! I knew I should have voted for McCain!" he said, as he kicked shit around his destroyed living room.
As the credits rolled, he was out on the street begging people for change.
"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Obama campaigned on change...rah rah rah!
Now he's filling his Administration with Clintonista party hacks like Emmanuel and Podesta. Where's the change? Where's the hope? Where's the new way of doing things? What a crock!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:
Obama campaigned on change...rah rah rah!
Now he's filling his Administration with Clintonista party hacks like Emmanuel and Podesta. Where's the change? Where's the hope? Where's the new way of doing things? What a crock!
Oh, that's just Obama adding GRAVITAS to his cabinet.
Remember hearing THAT word like 5000 times 8 yrs ago ?
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Fivver
"Those statements mean nothing as far as mandating voting as the only method to be used to choose electors, only that if voting is the method selected by the legislature then these laws apply."
That it does. But Rap's point was that states could arbitrarily decide WHO gets to vote. And he was wrong, as usual.
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Fivver
"
That it does. But Rap's point was that states could arbitrarily decide WHO gets to vote. And he was wrong, as usual.
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
I'm not wrong. There is no right for citizens to vote for who is U.S. President. There simply does not exist any such right in the Constitution.
End of discussion.
It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
ok, my wishes?
1:Us Constitutional Ban on Abortion.( because i love little kids.)
2: for him to not cut spending on the military by 25 percent, when the wolves are knocking at the gate.
3:Freeze a lot of all government spending(for the rest, see #2) they want to raise more taxes and spend more money? aren't we out of money? as a nation?
4:respect the military and not treat us with either a: comptempt( no social experiments please) or B: Let us do our job.(Kill People and blow stuff up.) Don't send us after the wrong people, but for gods sake let us do what we need to do against the bad guys. we're the ones who've been fighting the terrorist for nearly eight years, and since he's had no military experiance whatsoever he needs to listen to us.yes, i know about civilian control of the military and everything, and once he gets sworn in he's my boss, but for god's sake the man wants to " put more boots on the ground and Boost Ship Building" ( army Times)during the time of two major ground conflicts. Lets recap:two major ground conflicts, and he wants to build ships? are the terrorist building a secret navy i dont know about? and at 25% less budjet?so were gonna beat the secret terrorist fleet with carbord ships?
awesome as always,
Lester
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME