- Joined
- Dec 23, 2009
- Messages
- 16,881
- Reaction score
- 2,980
- Location
- virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Private
Rich "civil rights leaders" are in the profession of being outraged to try to gain self attention.
Class warfare, now, huh?
Rich "civil rights leaders" are in the profession of being outraged to try to gain self attention.
Class warfare, now, huh?
It seems you favor guilt by association, thus a never ending control of many southern state's voting distrct bondaries and ID laws by "other" wiser folks from different states. Gerrymandering for "good" is somehow seen as justice, or some sort of payback (reparations?) for acts of long dead folks. One must not prove any discrimination to get the district boundaries changed, simply suggest that another version would be "better" in their "enlightened" view in order to achieve "greater minority representation". Thus we have defined "good" racial/ethnic discrimination that is now legally required only in "known bad" states/districts making it all somehow more "fair". Of course these "fair" districts take into account only the content of one's character and not the color of one's skin just as MLK had in his dream. :roll:
Sure, it's the "IN THING" to do. I strive to figure how to be a modern, trendy and enlightened man you know.
It seems you favor guilt by association, thus a never ending control of many southern state's voting distrct bondaries and ID laws by "other" wiser folks from different states. Gerrymandering for "good" is somehow seen as justice, or some sort of payback (reparations?) for acts of long dead folks. One must not prove any discrimination to get the district boundaries changed, simply suggest that another version would be "better" in their "enlightened" view in order to achieve "greater minority representation". Thus we have defined "good" racial/ethnic discrimination that is now legally required only in "known bad" states/districts making it all somehow more "fair". Of course these "fair" districts take into account only the content of one's character and not the color of one's skin just as MLK had in his dream. :roll:
It takes a wacky sense of reality to think that areas which have had hundreds, and possible thousands, of voting rights violations in the recent past are being victimized by "guilt by association" when the truth is that they continue to demonstrate that they are unwilling or unable to protect the rights of all voters.
Even more absurd is the notion that the govt is somehow discriminating between "good discrimination" and "bad discrimination" when its' actions have only served to reduce discrimination.
Have you seen the court approved (ordered?) Texas election district boundaries? They are intended to discriminate and even the judges drawing them have said so.
It seems you favor guilt by association, thus a never ending control of many southern state's voting distrct bondaries and ID laws by "other" wiser folks from different states. Gerrymandering for "good" is somehow seen as justice, or some sort of payback (reparations?) for acts of long dead folks. One must not prove any discrimination to get the district boundaries changed, simply suggest that another version would be "better" in their "enlightened" view in order to achieve "greater minority representation". Thus we have defined "good" racial/ethnic discrimination that is now legally required only in "known bad" states/districts making it all somehow more "fair". Of course these "fair" districts take into account only the content of one's character and not the color of one's skin just as MLK had in his dream. :roll:
That's funny. You act as if racism all died out in the 1960's, but there are plenty of black people in Florida who sued the state, and won, because they were not allowed to vote. Something to do with "felons lists" that even preachers ended up on.
What has that got to do with the VRA? The VRA does not preclude any lawsuits, it places "preclearance" provisions on voting law changes including drawing MANDATORY new district boundaries based on census data. Have you seen the court approved (ordered?) distrct shapes in the Dallas and San Antonio areas? The judges actually bragged how minority friendly they had made them.
After Court Rejects Discriminatory Redistricting Plan, New Texas Map Creates Four Additional Minority-Friendly Districts | ThinkProgress
What has that got to do with the VRA? The VRA does not preclude any lawsuits, it places "preclearance" provisions on voting law changes including drawing MANDATORY new district boundaries based on census data. Have you seen the court approved (ordered?) distrct shapes in the Dallas and San Antonio areas? The judges actually bragged how minority friendly they had made them.
After Court Rejects Discriminatory Redistricting Plan, New Texas Map Creates Four Additional Minority-Friendly Districts | ThinkProgress
I wouldn't call those districts minority friendly. I would call them constitutional. After all, don't you think minorities deserve a voice in government, or do you think it's OK to gerrymander districts so that they are all white?
I wouldn't call those districts minority friendly. I would call them constitutional. After all, don't you think minorities deserve a voice in government, or do you think it's OK to gerrymander districts so that they are all white?
I wouldn't call those districts minority friendly. I would call them constitutional. After all, don't you think minorities deserve a voice in government, or do you think it's OK to gerrymander districts so that they are all white?
It is not racist to remember history, and black bodies hanging from trees in the South. Seems you are attempting to turn these crimes around and make them acceptable by arguing that those who did not like the lynchings are the real racists. LOL.
I don't know how you got that interpretation, but ok, it's your opinion. My stance is that racism is always bad. It causes disharmony and many other problems in society. You, to me anyway, are saying that the past racism of some justifies using racism against their race. Racism, whether done for "good" or "ill", still is a bad policy. It still causes racial conflict. Using the government to enforce racist, sexist, etc, policy is unconstitutional and wrong, regardless of the race that is being "helped" or "harmed".