• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US Supreme Court strikes down voting rights act clause

NIMBY said:
Do you believe it was done on a technicality? And that a technicality should be allowed on an overarching issue like voting? And that states should now be allowed to hurry in with previously determined illegal voting laws before said technicality can be resolved?
Click to expand...

I believe that a court of law should decide things based on a law -- common law, state law, Federal law, Constitutional law, natural law, some clearly stated and widely accepted principle that isn't out of left field. Discarding a law because of an opinion on its relevance in today's world falls under none of those headings.
 
ernst barkmann said:
my jefferson statement has to do with those who say jefferson was NOT christian, well this proves them wrong.
Click to expand...

yes, I know ... he just wasn't an in-your-face-you-gotta-believe-what-I-believe Christian ...
 
Fenton said:
Never heard that expression ?

I'm guessing it's just one small bit of a exponential amount of knowledge you lack.

But you said I was " dumb " so lets address that claim.

The vast majority of Democrats that voted for Obama in 2008 were taken in by a media construct and a camapign that produced a concept not a leader.

They chose to ignore his past radical affiliations and lack of experience and also felt the time for a black candidate had come, regardless of experience and qualifications.

Well we learned fairly quickly how important experience was, and struggled for 4 years as more and more Americans became acquainted with Government assistance.

In 2012 his campaign and the media pushed the false constructs and narratives like the Republicans war on woman and singled in on Romneys character, because there was absolutley no accomplishment they could point to to validate a second term for Obama.

If you believed those narratives, if you voted for a man who had added 6 trillion to our structural debt and had his FED pump unlimited QE into the financial markets while people struggled with chronic unemployment then well, your'e just not that bright.

There is no way around it, our future had been decided by the least of us and its panning out exactly like I thought it would in 2008.

Multiple scandals, a economy on life suppprt and people who lack character and integrity making excuses for it.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that you were so offended by being called dumb when you go around calling everyone who disagrees with you dumb ... Fenton, there's no sense trying to have a conversation with someone who confuses baseless assertions with facts ... How do you know why people voted as they did or why they support who they do? Think about it ... if they don't see things the way you do, they were fooled ... Really Fenton? Come on ... BTW, you must've been beside yourself from 2000 to 2008 ... I do have to smile that the so-called experienced guy took us to the brink of a depression and the so-called inexperienced guy prevented it ... LOL ... Fenton, have the last word ... as I said, you're not one with whom to have a reasonable conversation ... take care ...
 
windowdressing said:
I'm surprised that you were so offended by being called dumb when
you go around calling everyone who disagrees with you dumb ... Fenton, there's no sense trying to have a conversation with someone who confuses baseless assertions with facts ... How do you know why people voted as they did or why they support who they do? Think about it ... if they don't see things the way you do, they were fooled ... Really Fenton? Come on ... BTW, you must've been beside yourself from 2000 to 2008 ... I do have to smile that the so-called experienced guy took us to the brink of a depression and the so-called inexperienced guy prevented it ... LOL ... Fenton, have the last word ... as I said, you're not one with whom to have a reasonable conversation ... take care ...
Click to expand...

I just had to correct your error and yes, if you blindly buy into the false narratives that this administration uses to stay in power, your just not that intelligent.

What do you want me to say ? You want me to lie ?

Millions of people had the abillity to vet this President properly so there's really no excuse for casting a vote in his favor.
 
apdst said:
By that logic, any law can be thrown out, because a judge thinks it's unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

When that judge is part of a SCOTUS majority that is exactly what happens. SCOTUS makes law not because it is right but because it speaks last.
 
I'm really sick and tired of the supreme court not understanding their job. Instead of striking it down on constitutional grounds like they should have done, they instead struck it down on the basis that it is outdated. All they ever have to do is stand by the constitution and yet they never do. They don't even do it in cases like this where it is clearly unconstitutional, but instead just make up some stupid basis to strike it down. Pathetic.
 
Interestingly enough, I happened to read the Voter's Rights Act a few days before the ruling. My initial reaction was this law no longer applied and needed to be removed. I'm not so sure that SCOTUS had Constitutional reasons to do so. Probably should have been repealed legislatively. Though I agree with the outcome, I'm not so sure I agree with the process.
 
Henrin said:
I'm really sick and tired of the supreme court not understanding their job. Instead of striking it down on constitutional grounds like they should have done, they instead struck it down on the basis that it is outdated. All they ever have to do is stand by the constitution and yet they never do. They don't even do it in cases like this where it is clearly unconstitutional, but instead just make up some stupid basis to strike it down. Pathetic.
Click to expand...

And I agree. And the concern I have is the requirements invented by these 15 Southern states in order to get a voter ID. These states haven proven in the past what illegal ends they are willing to go to with the intent of denying a voter ID to intended constituencies.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
the voting rights act has been renewed multiple times since it was first signed into law, including the most recent renewal in 2006. so why is it that the states have only started to complain about it now, specifically provision number 4, the part of the law that was struck down?
Click to expand...
A lot of time has passed since it was previously renewed. The 1982 reauthorization occurred after just 17 years. By 2006, 41 years had passed.
 
Henrin said:
I'm really sick and tired of the supreme court not understanding their job. Instead of striking it down on constitutional grounds like they should have done, they instead struck it down on the basis that it is outdated.
Click to expand...
Read the 10th amendment.

Next.
 
Samhain said:
Striking section 4 also removes the ability to enforce penalties for gerrymandering along perceived racial lines.
Click to expand...

I thought it was equal representation - NOT equal representation based on race, creed or political affiliation. It seems politicians enjoy redrawing district lines based on those ideas - especially race.

It seems democrats continually attempting to redraw district lines to even out white vs minority and where I'm from that translates into the ghetto vs middle class suburbia - and they're only doing this in an attempt to redistribute wealth....
 
Mr.Nick said:
I thought it was equal representation - NOT equal representation based on race, creed or political affiliation. It seems politicians enjoy redrawing district lines based on those ideas - especially race.

It seems democrats continually attempting to redraw district lines to even out white vs minority and where I'm from that translates into the ghetto vs middle class suburbia - and they're only doing this in an attempt to redistribute wealth....
Click to expand...

The Federal government was actually using discriminatory legislation against 6 southern states, Virgina, and Alaska. I thought as a nation we were against discrimination based on race, the SCOTUS action enforces that idea.
 
NIMBY said:
And I agree. And the concern I have is the requirements invented by these 15
Southern states in order to get a voter ID. These states haven proven in the past what illegal ends they are willing to go to with the intent of denying a voter ID to intended constituencies.
Click to expand...

But now most Southern states are Republican with the Jim Crowe Democrats moving into Democrat vote selling in the Northern States.

I don't think there is anything to worry about
 
Fenton said:
But now most Southern states are Republican with the Jim Crowe Democrats moving into Democrat vote selling in the Northern States.

I don't think there is anything to worry about
Click to expand...

Jim Crow Democrats are now Jim Crow Republicans.
 
I am very disappointed at the Supreme Court's ruling. They are striking down the VRA, saying that racial discrimination in voting is no longer a problem, did it ever occur to them that maybe the VRA had something to do with that? That's like saying " We haven't had any 8 year olds get sucked into machinery in decades, So lets get rid of child labor laws!" or getting rid of your umbrella simply because the rain is no longer getting you wet. In my opinion, the VRA ruling shows that some Supreme Court members have some powerful blinders on. Already, states such as Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina are moving to suppress the minority vote. Texas moved to implement as voter ID law that the DoJ had not allowed them to implement the year before TWO HOURS after the ruling was announced. So much for having moved on.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Jim Crow Democrats are now Jim Crow Republicans.
Click to expand...

Wrong...again, your nonsense is baseless.

A democrat by any other name is still a Democrat. The false narrative of Republicans being racist is just another tactic by the party that's known for enabling generational dependence so they can buy a vote.

Cabrini Green, Robert Taylor Homes, Queens-bridge, Jordan Downs, etc, the list goes on.

Under Obama's abject incompetence more people have become dependent on the Government than in the last 80 years.

So you really have no idea what your'e talking about. To pass policies that enable generational dependence in crime ridden neighborhoods is insidiously evil. It's the Democrat way.

From the Plantation, to the Housing Projects.
 
Democrat152 said:
I am very disappointed at the Supreme Court's ruling. They are striking down the VRA, saying that racial discrimination in voting is no longer a problem, did it ever occur to them that maybe the VRA had something to do with that? That's like saying " We haven't had any 8 year olds get sucked into machinery in decades, So lets get rid of child labor laws!" or getting rid of your umbrella simply because the rain is no longer getting you wet. In my opinion, the VRA ruling shows that some Supreme Court members have some powerful blinders on. Already, states such as Texas, Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina are moving to suppress the minority vote. Texas moved to implement as voter ID law that the DoJ had not allowed them to implement the year before TWO HOURS after the ruling was announced. So much for having moved on.
Click to expand...

As Texas should have.

It's not racist NOT to buy into the False Narratives of the Democrat party and at least there are still parts of the US that have fought off the innate corruption of the Democrat policies.

No, asking for a ID is not a violation of anyone's Civil liberties, and forcing Southern States to follow laws that were put into effect when Racist Democrats ran local Governments is an overreach of the Federal Government.

It's about time.
 
Fenton said:
As Texas should have.

It's not racist NOT to buy into the False Narratives of the Democrat party and at least there are still parts of the US that have fought off the innate corruption of the Democrat policies.

No, asking for a ID is not a violation of anyone's Civil liberties, and forcing Southern States to follow laws that were put into effect when Racist Democrats ran local Governments is an overreach of the Federal Government.

It's about time.
Click to expand...

I find your statements concerning. The southern states are trying their hardest to make it harder for the minorities to vote, extra hassle, no early morning voting(when the most minority voting is) etc.. And I have no clue how supposed "democratic party corruption" has anything to do with what we are talking about. I also have no clue what you are trying to say about racist democrats either. Top be honest, I think your talking gibberish because the only reason you like this ruling because it will let republicans stay in power in the south a little longer. That's probably why Texas moved first, with all the Latinos there, its only a matter of time before it goes Purple. If we are going to imagine that the South's recent actions have nothing to do with racism, at the VERY LEAST it shows a devious intent to influence elections.
 
Fenton said:
Wrong...again, your nonsense is baseless.

A democrat by any other name is still a Democrat. The false narrative of Republicans being racist is just another tactic by the party that's known for enabling generational dependence so they can buy a vote.

Cabrini Green, Robert Taylor Homes, Queens-bridge, Jordan Downs, etc, the list goes on.

Under Obama's abject incompetence more people have become dependent on the Government than in the last 80 years.

So you really have no idea what your'e talking about. To pass policies that enable generational dependence in crime ridden neighborhoods is insidiously evil. It's the Democrat way.

From the Plantation, to the Housing Projects.
Click to expand...

Of course, this didn't address what I said at all. I know that you would much prefer to discuss what you WISH I had been talking about... doing so tends to be far easier for people who post like right wing hacks like you. And of course the talking points of current Democrats being racist is just some idiotic sound byte fostered by conservatives who don't understand history or reality.
 
Democrat152 said:
I find your statements concerning. The
southern states are trying their hardest to make it harder for the minorities to vote, extra hassle, no early morning voting(when the most minority voting is) etc.. And I have no clue how supposed "democratic party corruption" has anything to do with what we are talking about. I also have no clue what you are trying to say about racist democrats either. Top be honest, I think your talking gibberish because the only reason you like this ruling because it will let republicans stay in power in the south a little longer. That's probably why Texas moved first, with all the Latinos there, its only a matter of time before it goes Purple. If we are going to imagine that the South's recent actions have nothing to do with racism, at the VERY LEAST it shows a devious intent to influence elections.
Click to expand...

I find your statements to be filled with misinformation, dishonesty and false narratives

It's CONCERNING that so many people have so willingly bought into the false narratives of the Democrat Party


That somehow having to show an ID is some how comparable to a poll tax, or that it stops minorities from going to the polls.

It's just another Democrat Construct, a lie .
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Of course, this didn't address what I
said at all. I know that you would much prefer to discuss what you WISH I had been talking about... doing so tends to be far easier for people who post like right wing hacks like you. And of course the talking points of current Democrats being racist is just some idiotic sound byte fostered by conservatives who don't understand history or reality.
Click to expand...

You contradicted my statements but offered no data to back up your'e assertions.

That's pretty week.

Explain specifically how I was wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom