Damned racists sonsabitches won't vote for Lord God B Hussein Obama! I think I'ma declare a jihad!
As a racially insensitive White Male Oppressor, I'm several steps past fed up with the racism of Barack Obama, his allies and supporters. Even leaving out the infamous Rev Wright, Obama himself and his campaign organization have directly gone to racial nonsense repeatedly. Why, saying anything about his Fannie friend Franklin Raines is racist. Sarah Palin saying anything about Bill Ayers and Obama is apparently racist as well.…
Article comments
126 - Dan(Miller)
Re comment #125,
Actually, it makes me very sad.Dan(Miller)
127 - bliffle
Dan(Miller) starts slipping into Daves intellectually careless habits:
So what's the theft of one million dollars, and a cover up? It's all for a good and just cause. Besides, the fraudulent voter registrations are meaningless and completely innocent; just social justice work, of which we should all be proud.
No theft proven: it's an allegation in a civil lawsuit.
No coverup: it's all out in the open.
No fraudulent registrations by ACORN have been proven.
You know as well as I that ACORN has no way to know if registrations brought to them by canvassers are valid or not, and even if they did it would be illegal of ACORN to suppress any registrations given to them.
It is up to the state to validate offered registrations.
Dans repetitions of National Republican Committee slanders about ACORN threatens to cast him into the same category as Dave: a partisan whose willingness to repeat groundless rumors remorselessly makes him utterly unreliable and not worth reading.
Careful, Dan, lest you render yourself irrelevant.
128 - Dan(Miller)
Bliffle,
Perhaps if you had read the linked article, you would not have argued Unless the linked article is a a tissue of lies, which I have no basis to assume, there was in fact a cover up which persisted for almost eight years, and there was theft.According to the article linked in my Comment #123,
As to the registrations it is, of course, up to the States to verify registrations. The problem is that with the equivalent of a spam attack of Mickey Mouse registrations this late in the game, the process becomes difficult if not impossible. ACORN has responsibilities as well, including quality control and supervision of its employees. That seems to be lacking. If you were in the business of manufacturing widgets, would you simply reject the notion of quality control and take the position "buyer beware?" I don't think so.
Dan(Miller)
129 - handyguy
For those who have not yet heard, the Supreme Court has sided with Ohio state voting officials [currently Democrats] and against the GOP complaints that led to the possibility of over 200,000 newly registered voters having to go through extra hassles and possible disqualification.
Also, from the lead editorial in today's NY Times, regarding Acorn:
...for all of the McCain campaign’s manufactured fury about vote theft (and similar claims from the Republican Party over the years) there is virtually no evidence " anywhere in the country, going back many elections " of people showing up at the polls and voting when they are not entitled to.
Meanwhile, Republicans aren’t saying anything about another more serious voter-registration scandal: the fact that about one-third of eligible voters are not registered. The racial gaps are significant and particularly disturbing.
According to a study by Project Vote, a voting-rights group, in 2006, 71 percent of eligible whites were registered, compared with 61 percent of blacks, 54 percent of Latinos and 49 percent of Asian-Americans.
Much of the blame for this lies with overly restrictive registration rules.
The answer is for government to do a better job of registering people to vote.
The real threats to the fabric of democracy are the unreasonable barriers that stand in the way of eligible voters casting ballots.
130 - Dan(Miller)
Handyguy,
Actually, the Supreme Court in a per curiam opinion seems to have concluded that the Republican Party lacked standing. It declined to reach the merits of the case. I have been trying to find a copy of the opinion, thus far with no success. If and when I do, I shall try to figure out what, if anything, it means.
Dan(Miller)
131 - handyguy
Ohio Republicans could be fairly described as deliberately subverting the intent of HAVA. Local officials were to use federal databases [e.g. Social Security] to speed up the process of registering, make it easier for people - not to find additional red-tape obstructions to keep them from registering.
Most of the 200,000 'problem' registrations were actually problems with the federal databases - inaccurate spelling etc. This is being touted as a valid reason to question a registration - never the intention of the law.
In recent years, Republicans have repeatedly tried to put obstacles in the way of increased voter registration. Democrats have pushed for more people to register.
Read the figures of unregistered eligible voters cited in the Times editorial. Is it your preference that those people remain unregistered? Should every dotted-i and crossed-t become a reason to invalidate registrations?
I think we should all be able to agree that all eligible voters should be encouraged to register and it should be made simple and easy to do. Reasonable safeguards against fraud are fine, too. But not deliberate attempts to discourage registration or invalidate honest registrations.
This is not an issue that should divide so starkly by party. If our Republican friends would prefer that fewer poor and minority citizens vote, they should say so, instead of hiding behind specious arguments.
132 - Clavos
If our Republican friends would prefer that fewer poor and minority citizens vote, they should say so, instead of hiding behind specious arguments.
Fair enough.
Especially if Democrats would admit that the underlying motivation for signing up "poor and minority citizens," is not civic responsibility and selflessness in working to increase voter registrations, so much as it is a tactic to increase the number of Democratic voters.
133 - Cindy D
I'm not a Democrat. But even so, I must say Clav, you have found us out.
MUAHHHAAAHAHA!
We who feel the poor and minorities should register are just using them to achieve our evil ends.
Like, um, well, increasing their income, their health and well-being, their general quality of life, and other evil stuff!!
134 - handyguy
If the result of registering everyone who is eligible, and increasing turnout, is that more conservatives and Republicans get elected, so be it.
It's the hypocrisy of the arguments that gets to me. Reminds me of another argument that illogically splits along ideological lines: global warming.
It should be possible, must be possible, is possible to remove the most obvious elements of self-interest from policy and agree on what is really fair. No?
But the first step is getting rid of echo-chamber, conspiracy-theory arguments that seem to always take the form: "They" are doing X to poor "Us."
135 - Clavos
Like, um, well, increasing their income, their health and well-being, their general quality of life, and other evil stuff!!
We were talking about registering them to vote. How does that do those marvelous things you describe above?
And how does keeping them on welfare subsistence payments, food stamps, AFDC and Medicaid (which is what actually happens, in spite of all the high flying rhetoric) "increase their income and general quality of life?"
136 - Cindy D
Clav,
Edging the world toward more equanimity is one reason WHY I am voting Democrat in this election. So, of course, I want Democrats to register.
I talked to people to encourage them to vote Democrat in this coming election. Why the hell else would I be knocking on doors and calling on phones on behalf of my candidate of choice?
I am happy that anyone wants to vote and I encourage anyone voting. But, why shouldn't I encourage the vote of people with whom I share a common goal/cause?
How is that not civic minded--when my entire vote is based on civic-mindedness?
I guess it isn't the same reason you vote. Maybe you can't understand that solidarity. It's inseparable to me.
137 - Dan(Miller)
Ummm Clav, you comment,
But, you see, that is not the point. The purpose is to make our "liberal" friends feel good about themselves and each other. How could you be so cruel and heartless as to want to deny them this simple pleasure?Dan(Miller)
138 - RJ Elliott
"now we've implemented draconian legislation which means you have to be able to produce identification along with your voter's card in order to vote."
So, that's your definition of "draconian" ???
If I had my way, you'd have to score at least 105 on an IQ test, and pass with at least an 80% on an exam about the US Constitution before you could vote.
If implemented, I suspect turnout would be about 10%, in present-day America ... and the front runners would be Ron Paul and Ralph Nader ...
139 - Franco
#136 " Cindy D
your statements in your post #136 dose no answer Clavos' question, which is a good one and I would like to hear your answer as well.
Here was his question....
"We were talking about registering them to vote. How does that do those marvelous things you describe above?"
And his question was in direct reponce to your following statement.
"Like, um, well, increasing their income, their health and well-being, their general quality of life, and other evil stuff!!
140 - Dan(Miller)
Even CBS is becoming racist. Here is a link to an article entitled Obama Whopper on McCain Health Care Plan Who would have thought that the respected CBS organization would stoop so low as to publish such tripe. An article
suggestingstating that Senator Obama lied? What's the world coming to?Dan(Miller)
141 - handyguy
We were talking about registering them to vote. How does that do those marvelous things you describe above?
And how does keeping them on welfare subsistence payments, food stamps, AFDC and Medicaid (which is what actually happens, in spite of all the high flying rhetoric) "increase their income and general quality of life?"
If nasty cheap shots like this are all you can think of to say, maybe the discussion is not worth having after all.
But I will try:
Maybe, just maybe, it's a condescending over-generalization to lump all low-income voters into a welfare-dependent state of mind with no ambition to have a better life for themselves or their kids. I believe that maybe, just maybe there are a few exceptions to that.
Voting is empowerment. It's not everything, but it's a step away from apathy and despair. People who have gotten the message from society that they are worthless need the encouragement to take that step. They don't need people like you to talk them back down.
Shame on you for scraping the bottom with your rhetoric. Just six or seven months ago you were admiring Obama's hopeful vision. Now this? Very sad, my friend.
142 - Clavos
Just six or seven months ago you were admiring Obama's hopeful vision.
Not quite, handy. Six or seven months ago, I was admiring obama's presence, oratorical ability and apparent intelligence.
I still admire all those things, but now I also know that he will force people to give up some of what they earned and hand it to those who have not earned it. That idea is horrible to me; it is literally anathema. I deplore it. I realize that, at heart, Obama is quite left wing in a socialistic sense, and I don't like it.
He has also announced he will raise corporate taxes. With the country in the throes of the most severe economic crisis in 80 years, raising ANY taxes is the absolute worst thing to do, but raising corporate taxes, driving even more corporations offshore, and making all of them less competitive in the global marketplace is sheer folly.
And, as you know, I'm not making this up. Obama has said himself, repeatedly, that that's what he plans to do: "spread the wealth around."
Forcibly.
143 - RJ Elliott
Louis Farrakhan, the racist, anti-Semitic, and anti-American black nationalist Muslim, had this to say about Barack Hussein Obama:
Did You Know? - Obama attended Farrakhan's "Million Man March" in 1995. (No? What, are you depending on the NYT and MSNBC for your news? Jesus...just Google it...)
144 - Cindy D
RE: #137
Clav comments and Dan (Miller) agrees,
And how does keeping them [my emphasis] on welfare subsistence payments, food stamps, AFDC and Medicaid (which is what actually happens, in spite of all the high flying rhetoric) "increase their income and general quality of life?"
Please defend your position with any facts at all. I've looked into welfare, etc. as late as December, 2007 and I find you are simply re-expressing a bias that isn't supportable by facts.
Or carry on with your low-brow rhetoric, as you wish.
145 - bliffle
RJ,
You seem to put a lot of confidence in Farrakhan. Are you a black muslim?
146 - Jordan Richardson
Did You Know? - Obama attended Farrakhan's "Million Man March" in 1995.
And?
147 - Jordan Richardson
Are you a black muslim?
That or he still thinks it's the 90s.
148 - Cindy D
RE# 139
Franco,
In the words of the esteemed John Kenneth Galbraith, "Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable."
Therefore, we might agree that I have a choice between one of two candidates. Unless you have any other ideas.
One seems to have a better understanding of the predicaments of those who are at the lowest income quintiles of society and the other is "just a middle class guy, who doesn't know how many homes he owns."
One has proven himself familiar with the plight of the poor by working as a community organizer and the other is a guy who's net worth is estimated to be 35-100 million dollars yet says "rich is not defined by income" in his view.
Now to your question: How does registering people to vote (who are likely to vote Democrat) help them achieve higher pay, a better standard of living, etc.?
The Democratic candidate has a platform that expresses an understanding of their needs.
Is this some sort of trick question?
149 - Clavos
Cindy #136,
Since "equanimity" means "evenness of mind," as in "he looked on the world with equanimity," I'm afraid I didn't understand your comment at all.
You speak of your goal and civic-mindedness, but I'm unclear as to what your goal is, and why it's pursuit is civic-minded.
In #144 you say:
Please defend your position with any facts at all. I've looked into welfare, etc. as late as December, 2007 and I find you are simply re-expressing a bias that isn't supportable by facts.
I'm once again unable to understand your point. Are you saying there aren't people in the underclass who spend their entire lives living on entitlements from the government? If so, what is your evidence to refute?
My original point, which I stand by, is that ACORN's and other left wing organizations' hidden goal for their ostensibly "civic-minded" and "selfless" zeal to enroll the poor and minorities as new voters is because they know that most poor and minority people will vote Democratic. Thus, recruiting them swells the Democratic voter rolls, and is, I contend, the real goal of ACORN, etc., not civic-mindedness and selflessness, as they would like us to believe.
It's a political tactic, plain and simple.
150 - Pablo
RjElliott post 138 you said:
"If I had my way, you would have to score at least 105 on an IQ test, and pass with at least an 80% on an exam about the US Constitution before you could vote."
Uhh if we did that, YOU would not be able to vote dude. I unlike you, believe that humans regardless of ignorance (YOURS) have a basic human right to have a say in their government. Your just another typical right wing fascist.
151 - jamminsue
Per this statement:
"In #144 you say:
Please defend your position with any facts at all. I've looked into welfare, etc. as late as December, 2007 and I find you are simply re-expressing a bias that isn't supportable by facts.
I'm once again unable to understand your point. Are you saying there aren't people in the underclass who spend their entire lives living on entitlements from the government? If so, what is your evidence to refute?"
You only get 5 years of TANF aid, then you are done, at least that is what it was awhile back, I have not checked in a few years. So if it still is this way, how can anyone be a lifelong welfare person?
152 - bliffle
Clavos says:
He has also announced he will raise corporate taxes. With the country in the throes of the most severe economic crisis in 80 years, raising ANY taxes is the absolute worst thing to do, but raising corporate taxes, driving even more corporations offshore, and making all of them less competitive in the global marketplace is sheer folly.
This seems contradicted by the facts, which seem to indicate that 8 years of tax cuts have PRODUCED "the most severe economic crisis in 80 years".
153 - Clavos
This seems contradicted by the facts, which seem to indicate that 8 years of tax cuts have PRODUCED "the most severe economic crisis in 80 years".
First, the tax cuts were for individuals, not corporations. In point of fact, the US has the second highest corporate tax rates among developed nations.
Second, it wasn't the tax cuts that produced the current crisis, as you well know. It was a number of things (none of them tax cuts); it was, among other things, massive overspending by the Bush administration and the clowns in Congress.
Go ahead. Raise corporate taxes even more. Watch the exodus overseas of American corporations accelerate, watch prices go up to pay for the tax increase, watch unemployment increase as those corporations that stay are forced to cut back to offset those increased taxes.
154 - Cindy D
RE # 149
Clav,
You're right, I used the wrong word. Thanks for the correction. Substitute: equatability
(By the way, I am disappointed in you. You missed my hyphen in lowbrow. Perhaps you were letting that slip out of kindness.)
WELFARE: See #151 by jamminsue. on the 5 year limit.
But, even when the program was AFDC before it was changed to TANF in 1996, myths about welfare were more common than facts:
Myth: People on welfare are usually black, teenage mothers who stay on ten years at a time.
Fact: Most welfare recipients are non-black, adult and on welfare less than two years at a time. (link)
See Myths and Facts About Welfare. for refutation of the following myths:
The general public views poverty as the result of personal failures and deficiencies. This perception rests on several myths. Little attention is focused on societal factors such as inadequate education, transportation, child care, and mental health problems.
Myth: Poverty Results From a Lack of Responsibility
Fact: Poverty Results From Low Wages
Myth: A Huge Chunk of My Tax Dollars Supports Welfare Recipients
Fact: Welfare Costs 1 Percent of the Federal Budget
Myth: People on Welfare Become Permanently Dependent on the Support
Fact: Movement off Welfare Rolls Is Frequent
---
My goal: Advancing the well-being of the community. The whole community. In order to move toward a free society that works. That we may use our brilliant human talent to serve that society.
Friedman's theories, which have had an extraordinary influence on the way we see capitalism, have proven themselves flawed. They have failed. We should have listened to Galbraith.
Attitudes won't change any time soon. The herd is always far behind in seeing reality--and will prefer to chant it's mantra despite all evidence and reason.
---
It's a political tactic, plain and simple.
An organization that is focused on helping the poor, registers poor voters, not to help the poor, but to create a larger Democratic base which will help the poor, when a Democrat gets elected.
Okay Clav, sounds good, they're just trying to register Democrats.
155 - DaveNalle
Cindy, the flaw in your reasoning is that Democrats have no interest in actually helping the poor. As years of Democrat programs have demonstrated their desire is to control the poor, keep them relatively poor and make them dependent on the Democratic party and the state for the programs and opportunities which are offered to them. Their goal is to direct them into low-paying service industry and government jobs where they will remain loyal and dependent on their masters for an eternity.
Dave
156 - bliffle
As bad as the dems may be, as characterized by Dave, the neo-republicans have been even worse toward poor people. Witness the last 8 years.
Oh, except for the occasional exception (like when they drag some guy out of the shadows who started poor and now has a lot of money) to prop up their potemkin capitalism.
157 - DaveNalle
Bliffle, I'd argue that neglecting the poor and working class and just leaving them alone to sink or swim on their own is better than exploiting them for votes and keeping them in a poor and dependent condition.
Dave
158 - Cindy D
Dave,
See my comment at # 148. The part about having two choices.
159 - moon
Folks always assume that THEY will not be the ones negatively affected when the excrement hits the fan.
It might be time for my tasteless Jews in the one limousine in Berlin story, again....
RJ's suggestion about applying an IQ test and a test on the Constitution might actually have some validity--perhaps not for voting, as nobody's votes are really counted anyway--but for posting on sites like this one.
But then, maybe an MMPI would be better as a test instrument, as it identifies sociopaths.
160 - Cindy D
Dave,
You ignore the facts, we've been not only neglecting the poor, we've been creating them.
Hard to swim while neocons are tossing you rocks.
161 - RJ Elliott
Comment #150:
You're pretty much Exhibit A in what I'm talking about, Pablo.
162 - Clavos
"Right wing fascist" is a tautology.
163 - RJ Elliott
Re: Comment #154:
From The Urban Institute's 1999 report:
Welfare recipients are (or at least, were):
Hispanic - 21.8% (somewhat higher than their percentage of the population)
White, non-Hispanic - 41.7% (significantly lower than their percentage of the population)
Non-White, non-Hispanic (primarily blacks) - 36.6% (vastly higher than their percentage of the population)
Female: 96.4% (vastly higher than their percentage in the population)
Male: 3.6% (vastly lower than their percentage in the population)
Age 18-25 - 30.5% (vastly higher than their percentage in the population)
Marital Status Never Married - 44.1% (vastly higher than their percentage in the population)
Education high school dropout - 40.7% (vastly higher than their percentage in the population)
[Please view the report for more relevant stats...]
So, while it's true that "most" welfare recipients are not "teenage black women with a bunch of illegitimate children," it is true that young unmarried black women with children are vastly more likely to be on welfare than pretty much any other demographic group in the country. At least, according to The Urban Institute, in 1999.