Beerball Posted August 30, 2016 Share Posted August 30, 2016 Way too chippy among several of you. I'm trying really hard to let this thing keep going, because, I do think that there is value in the conversations taking place. If it devolves one of us will zap the thread and maybe a poster or two along the way. Keep it civil. Stop the insults. They aren't appropriate and they aren't funny. Whatever point you thought you were making suffered because of it. Stop the eye rolls. I've 3 grown children and I've seen enough of them to last a lifetime. If you want respect then show respectl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 30, 2016 Share Posted August 30, 2016 The laws of unintended consequences. We see it all the time and certainly not analogous to only race relations but pretty much all broad policy. That's fair. If you look for racism first, you will always find racism first. That's why I contend that NFL's investigation of Manny Lawson is racist at its heart. That's also fair and also Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted August 30, 2016 Share Posted August 30, 2016 (edited) What? Are you suggesting that here in this country and at this time that the screening process of voter registration includes turning over illegal immigrants that attempt to register to vote and then prosecuting and deporting them? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: It has literally never happened and our own DOJ has threatened to sue states that pursue cleansing of illegal voter registration. Your government is literally protecting those that register improperly. From the article below. Yet no U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO) appears to have initiated any effort to prosecute aliens for voting. Nor has the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) initiated the deportation of aliens who have registered or voted illegally, which it can do independently of a prosecution by the USAO or state prosecutors. and In Florida, state officials developed a preliminary list of about 180,000, later refined to 2,700 apparent registration discrepancies, which was sent to local electoral officials for further review and inquiry. It also was refused assistance from DHS. When the federal Department of Justice (DOJ) threatened suit, many counties declined to take action on the questioned names; but some counties pressed forward, resulting in identification of nearly 100 noncitizens according to media reports. DOJ's lawsuit was dismissed in a federal district court, prompting DHS to agree to provide access to SAVE records. Despite the dismissal, DOJ has issued subpoenas for the records of those counties that were not deterred by the legal action. http://cis.org/non-citizen-voters-diluting-the-rights-and-privileges-of-citizenship I'm not suggesting any such thing. I'm suggesting that it's a stretch to believe that thousands of illegal immigrants (or other illegal voters) are taking the risk of registering to vote. Even if the risk of being caught is miniscule, do you think most illegal immigrants know that or, even if they do, are willing to run that risk for essentially no benefit? Highly unlikely and the "data" you've provided certainly does not prove otherwise. I would also note that it's furnished by an organization whose mission appears to be to whip up anti-immigrant fear and loathing. And I know this is heresy, but would it really be so bad if there are illegal immigrants in this country who are voting in our elections? They live here, have jobs here, pay rent and taxes here, many have families here. What would be the damage to the republic if they are allowed to vote (other than the fact that they would probably tend to vote for Democrats, of course)? And is preventing this horror important enough that we should enact laws that cause collateral damage to the voting rights of actual American citizens? Edited August 30, 2016 by mannc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted August 30, 2016 Author Share Posted August 30, 2016 I'm not suggesting any such thing. I'm suggesting that it's a stretch to believe that thousands of illegal immigrants (or other illegal voters) are taking the risk of registering to vote. Even if the risk of being caught is miniscule, do you think most illegal immigrants know that or, even if they do, are willing to run that risk for essentially no benefit? Highly unlikely and the "data" you've provided certainly does not prove otherwise. I would also note that its furnished an organization whose mission appears to be to whip up anti-immigrant fear and loathing. And I know this is heresy, but would it really be so bad if there are illegal immigrants in this country who are voting in our elections? They live here, have jobs here, pay rent and taxes here, many have families here. What would be the damage to the republic if they are allowed to vote (other than the fact that they would probably tend to vote for Democrats, of course)? And is preventing this horror important enough that we should enact laws that cause collateral damage to the voting rights of actual American citizens? His source has serious credibility issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted August 30, 2016 Share Posted August 30, 2016 And voting as a illegal immigrant in a national election should be an crime resulting in being expelled. State and local are different situations since some jurisdictions are allowing it. Just curious? What state and local jurisdictions are allowing illegal immigrants to vote? You may be mixing up the fact that some jurisdictions allow driver licences for illegals but never heard of allowing them to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 30, 2016 Share Posted August 30, 2016 Just curious? What state and local jurisdictions are allowing illegal immigrants to vote? You may be mixing up the fact that some jurisdictions allow driver licences for illegals but never heard of allowing them to vote. It's happens .00000000013% of the time!!!! Look it up!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punching Bag Posted August 30, 2016 Share Posted August 30, 2016 Just curious? What state and local jurisdictions are allowing illegal immigrants to vote? You may be mixing up the fact that some jurisdictions allow driver licences for illegals but never heard of allowing them to vote. No I am not mixing up the two; I read articles in past about jurisdictions which are against US INS laws allowing illegals to vote in local elections. Not have links now since I have not read recently and all of them would be on different computer anyways. When I worked for 2000 US Census I read many articles from Census on juridictions doing this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted August 31, 2016 Share Posted August 31, 2016 Wait...a 73-page political thread on the football board, and I missed it? Well then, since nobody seems to have been banned for merely telling the truth yet, I am going to: At it's root level this is purely NOT a political issue. Kap knows he's in trouble. He's looking for a way to make sure he doesn't lose most of his money by riding the pine. He wants to be traded, and keep his contract. And/or, he wants the reason he gets released to be about "his beliefs" , and not about his play, which may result in him not getting league minimum from his next team, and, soften the blows from the fans of the team that takes him. The only problem: he's coming from San Francisco, not going there. If there was 1 town in the NFL that would handily eat Kap's crap, sign him, and then self-congratulate themselves for being "courageous" it's SF. Yeah, this is merely a silly, political canard, cooked up by an agent, and who knows? believed wholeheartedly?, or cynically put forward? by Kap. It's fun when one's political views...just so happen to coincide with what personally enriches them...and are then covered in a veneer of vapid, self-applied "virtue". Then, when others see them for what they are, and criticize them for being a phony, money grabbing, douchy scam? One tries to silence these critics by calling them "immoral", "racist", "sexist", etc. (Hmm, seems like we have a pattern here, doesn't it?) Speaking of thin veneers of virtue: Kap and his agent probably hatched this plan while hanging out at Al Gore's beach-front property(you know, the property that was supposed to be covered in water by 2016, according to Gore in 2006). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 31, 2016 Share Posted August 31, 2016 Just curious? What state and local jurisdictions are allowing illegal immigrants to vote? You may be mixing up the fact that some jurisdictions allow driver licences for illegals but never heard of allowing them to vote. It's happens .00000000013% of the time!!!! Look it up!!!! In 2012 Presidential, 2013 Gubernatorial (Christ that's a difficult word to type ), and 2014 Midterm's there was a table with a few individuals registering that same day without photo ID, just a utility bill as proof of residency. And I'm so sure that after the votes were tallied and winners declared that somebody went back and verified the votes were legit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Linen Posted August 31, 2016 Share Posted August 31, 2016 https://www.facebook.com/Stonekettle/posts/1084172264951509 I really didn't like that right up. The country has to be the nation Colin can respect? Thats a little nutso to me - it really is that simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted August 31, 2016 Share Posted August 31, 2016 No I am not mixing up the two; I read articles in past about jurisdictions which are against US INS laws allowing illegals to vote in local elections. Not have links now since I have not read recently and all of them would be on different computer anyways. When I worked for 2000 US Census I read many articles from Census on juridictions doing this. If the rate is at the level that Kelly the Dog stated in post #1449 is it appropriate/reasonable to come up with rules that negatively affects many more people who want to vote. Or another way of making this point is that the benefit doesn't come close to matching the cost. In the situation you are describing that illegals can vote in a local election why is it so wrong if the community supports that particular position? What is the harm? Taxes are being paid (sales taxes) by that group so why shouldn't they have a say if the local community allows it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted August 31, 2016 Share Posted August 31, 2016 Actually, a high percentage of ND's substantial native American population lives on reservations, which do not contain any DMV offices and are generally a long way away from such offices. Again, it doesn't make voting impossible; it just makes it more difficult for a group that coincidentally tends to vote Democratic. Making it more difficult means less of those folks will vote. Can you think of a single reason that a United States Passport should not be a sufficient form of voter ID? This is wrong as well. Can't anyone use the internet?? Bring one of the following IDs with you to your voting location to vote: ND Driver’s license ND non-driver’s license ID Tribal ID Long-Term Care Certificate (only valid if you don’t have a driver’s license, non-driver’s ID, or tribal ID) Passport or military ID (only valid for voters in the military or living outside the US who don’t have a driver’s license, non-driver’s ID, or tribal ID) So, to recap: tribal ID=OK. Military ID=OK. So ND is actually pretty easy to provide voter ID. As for the passport question--it's meaningless. Who is left out on that list of acceptable IDs? The non military, non driving, non American Indian, non long term care international traveler? You're kidding, right? There are probably fewer passport holders in that state than African Americans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 31, 2016 Share Posted August 31, 2016 This is wrong as well. Can't anyone use the internet?? Yes, they can, and typically they keep using it over and over it until they ultimately find the answer that fits their way of thinking, no matter how ridiculous it might be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 31, 2016 Share Posted August 31, 2016 If the rate is at the level that Kelly the Dog stated in post #1449 is it appropriate/reasonable to come up with rules that negatively affects many more people who want to vote. Or another way of making this point is that the benefit doesn't come close to matching the cost. I was joking but the number, found by a couple non-partisan investigations, found it to be extremely low. People should watch this. It's rather awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted August 31, 2016 Author Share Posted August 31, 2016 I was joking but the number, found by a couple non-partisan investigations, found it to be extremely low. People should watch this. It's rather awesome. Saw it earlier this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted August 31, 2016 Share Posted August 31, 2016 <p> This is wrong as well. Can't anyone use the internet?? Bring one of the following IDs with you to your voting location to vote: ND Drivers license ND non-drivers license ID Tribal ID Long-Term Care Certificate (only valid if you dont have a drivers license, non-drivers ID, or tribal ID) Passport or military ID (only valid for voters in the military or living outside the US who dont have a drivers license, non-drivers ID, or tribal ID) So, to recap: tribal ID=OK. Military ID=OK. So ND is actually pretty easy to provide voter ID. As for the passport question--it's meaningless. Who is left out on that list of acceptable IDs? The non military, non driving, non American Indian, non long term care international traveler? You're kidding, right? There are probably fewer passport holders in that state than African Americans. Maybe that's why earlier this month a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction, blocking enforcement of the North Dakota law. Among other things, he found zero evidence of voter fraud in the state. Doesn't anyone know how to use the Internet any more? Yes, they can, and typically they keep using it over and over it until they ultimately find the answer that fits their way of thinking, no matter how ridiculous it might be. I think you spoke too soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted August 31, 2016 Share Posted August 31, 2016 Maybe that's why earlier this month a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction, blocking enforcement of the North Dakota law. Among other things, he found zero evidence of voter fraud in the state. Doesn't anyone know how to use the Internet any more? I think you spoke too soon. 90% of the residents are white and the state nearly always votes Republican. So who is behind this scheme to suppress voting? What would be the point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted August 31, 2016 Share Posted August 31, 2016 90% of the residents are white and the state nearly always votes Republican. So who is behind this scheme to suppress voting? What would be the point? Nice deflection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted August 31, 2016 Share Posted August 31, 2016 (edited) Not sure if this has been posted yet (i'm not searching through 40 pages), but this is some interesting context about the song that's the crux of the issue: the Star-Spangled Banner. http://www.theroot.com/articles/history/2016/07/star-spangled-bigotry-the-hidden-racist-history-of-the-national-anthem/ Also, https://theintercept.com/2016/08/28/colin-kaepernick-is-righter-than-you-know-the-national-anthem-is-a-celebration-of-slavery/ Edited August 31, 2016 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted August 31, 2016 Author Share Posted August 31, 2016 Not sure if this has been posted yet (i'm not searching through 40 pages), but this is some interesting context about the song that's the crux of the issue: the Star-Spangled Banner. http://www.theroot.com/articles/history/2016/07/star-spangled-bigotry-the-hidden-racist-history-of-the-national-anthem/ Posted some history about Francis Scott Key as well as the 3rd verse. Rather ironic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts