Why Western-Style Democracy Sux

[Romero]

BTW, Exit polling showed that one of the big reasons blacks went over to Obama (besides skin color), was the promise of stuff like FREE healthcare.

False. No exit polling has ever asked if anyone voted to get free stuff. Bribing voters is against the law. You got a source for that fib?

Organizations like Acorn have been prosecuted for going into black and other minority communities, registering voters multiple times and bribing them with money, cigarettes, and false promises of free shit.

Four different independent investigations by various state and city Attorneys General and the GAO released in 2009 and 2010 cleared ACORN, finding its employees had not engaged in the alleged criminal activities and that the organization had managed its federal funding appropriately.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Community_Organizations_for_Reform_Now">//http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Community_Organizations_for_Reform_Now

You need to try using some logic instead of just believing crazy assumptions. Since black voters don't get free health care, money, cigarettes etc. for voting, they know they're not going to get that stuff for voting.



African Americans have had full voting rights since 1965 and they've never been given free stuff. You must think they're pretty stupid.



Why only blacks, Renee? Why are you trying to prove they're worse citizens than whites?

[Renee]

BTW, Exit polling showed that one of the big reasons blacks went over to Obama (besides skin color), was the promise of stuff like FREE healthcare.

False. No exit polling has ever asked if anyone voted to get free stuff. Bribing voters is against the law. You got a source for that fib?

Organizations like Acorn have been prosecuted for going into black and other minority communities, registering voters multiple times and bribing them with money, cigarettes, and false promises of free shit.

Four different independent investigations by various state and city Attorneys General and the GAO released in 2009 and 2010 cleared ACORN, finding its employees had not engaged in the alleged criminal activities and that the organization had managed its federal funding appropriately.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Community_Organizations_for_Reform_Now">//http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Community_Organizations_for_Reform_Now

You need to try using some logic instead of just believing crazy assumptions. Since black voters don't get free health care, money, cigarettes etc. for voting, they know they're not going to get that stuff for voting.



African Americans have had full voting rights since 1965 and they've never been given free stuff. You must think they're pretty stupid.



Why only blacks, Renee? Why are you trying to prove they're worse citizens than whites?

You're an idiot; funny how I keep having to say that. ac_rollseyes  Do you really think exit pollsters are going to ask if a vote was cast on the basis of "getting free shit?" ac_toofunny Are you a total retard?....... Don't answer that, I already know the answer.



They ask questions like what was the determining factor in your decision to vote for a particular candidate. They then record the answers. Obviously you are as naive as you are stupid or you just never voted. Either one wouldn't surprise me.



African Americans have had full voting rights since way before 1965, you fucking tool. ac_lmfao  The 15th Amendment which prohibited federal and state governments from restricting voting rights based on race, creed or color was ratified in 1870. You really have no clue, do you? It's typical of your ignorant kind.



If you are that ill-informed regarding voting rights in the US, I suggest you just STFU now and save yourself any further embarrassment.



BTW, It's true African Americans haven't truly been given anything for free any more than most other racial demographic but that doesn't stop left-wing politicians from making promises of entitlement protection and entitlement expansion just to corral the black vote. And worst of all, it doesn't stop blacks for falling for the same lies time and time again. It's a common tactic used by liberal democrats and they do the same thing with the elderly when it comes to social security. Everyone with a brain (that leaves you out) understands that this happens.

[Anonymous]

BTW, It's true African Americans haven't truly been given anything for free any more than most other racial demographic but that doesn't stop left-wing politicians from making promises of entitlement protection and entitlement expansion just to corral the black vote. And worst of all, it doesn't stop blacks for falling for the same lies time and time again. It's a common tactic used by liberal democrats and they do the same thing with the elderly when it comes to social security. Everyone with a brain (that leaves you out) understands that this happens.

This pandering shit makes me fucking sick to my stomach. It's a natural byproduct though of universal suffrage, but it still makes makes me sick. Earn your vote for fuck sakes. acc_angry

[Romero]

Do you really think exit pollsters are going to ask if a vote was cast on the basis of "getting free shit?"

Hello, you're the one claiming they do.



"BTW, Exit polling showed that one of the big reasons blacks went over to Obama (besides skin color), was the promise of stuff like FREE healthcare."



And now you're calling your own claim totally retarded. In the likely case you're going to twist this around some more, remember that respondents can't give their own personal answers. They aren't asked if they voted for free stuff, and they can't answer that they voted for free stuff. So where are you getting this idea that they do? And why just mostly blacks?

African Americans have had full voting rights since way before 1965, you fucking tool.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a landmark piece of federal legislation in the United States that prohibits racial discrimination in voting. It was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson during the height of the American Civil Rights Movement on August 6, 1965, and Congress later amended the Act five times to expand its protections. Designed to enforce the voting rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the Act allowed for a mass enfranchisement of racial minorities throughout the country, especially in the South. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the Act is considered to be the most effective piece of civil rights legislation ever enacted in the country.



Section 2, for instance, prohibits any state or local government from imposing any voting law that results in discrimination against racial or language minorities. Additionally, the Act specifically outlaws literacy tests and similar devices that were historically used to disenfranchise racial minorities.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965">//http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965

If African Americans had full voting rights since way before, why would there need to be a Voting Rights Act of 1965? Mass disenfranchisement and discrimination of racial minorities are not full voting rights.

[Renee]

Do you really think exit pollsters are going to ask if a vote was cast on the basis of "getting free shit?"

Hello, you're the one claiming they do.



"BTW, Exit polling showed that one of the big reasons blacks went over to Obama (besides skin color), was the promise of stuff like FREE healthcare."



And now you're calling your own claim totally retarded. In the likely case you're going to twist this around some more, remember that respondents can't give their own personal answers. They aren't asked if they voted for free stuff, and they can't answer that they voted for free stuff. So where are you getting this idea that they do? And why just mostly blacks?

African Americans have had full voting rights since way before 1965, you fucking tool.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a landmark piece of federal legislation in the United States that prohibits racial discrimination in voting. It was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson during the height of the American Civil Rights Movement on August 6, 1965, and Congress later amended the Act five times to expand its protections. Designed to enforce the voting rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the Act allowed for a mass enfranchisement of racial minorities throughout the country, especially in the South. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the Act is considered to be the most effective piece of civil rights legislation ever enacted in the country.



Section 2, for instance, prohibits any state or local government from imposing any voting law that results in discrimination against racial or language minorities. Additionally, the Act specifically outlaws literacy tests and similar devices that were historically used to disenfranchise racial minorities.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965">//http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965

If African Americans had full voting rights since way before, why would there need to be a Voting Rights Act of 1965? Mass disenfranchisement and discrimination of racial minorities are not full voting rights.

The voting rights act of 1965 was about prohibiting voter suppression which covered ANY minority or ANY affected racial demographic, NOT just blacks. Blacks already had the constitutional and legal right to vote for almost 100 years before the Voter Rights Act of 65. The 1965 legislation was not meant to augment or revise actual voter rights. It was meant to enhance access to voter registration and election polling places.



If you really want to play like this you're going to have to back to the "Civil rights Act of 1957" which allowed the US Attorney General to sue on behalf of anyone claiming their right to vote was suppressed. Then you have to look at the "Civil Rights Act of 1960" which allowed the federal courts to appoint observers and supervisors at places of voter registration which were allegedly refusing or known to refuse the registration minorities. And whether you know it or not, most of those places where minorities were turned away from registering were in liberal democratic (Dixiecrats) strongholds.



So don't go waving the history of US voter rights in my face. For me this is HS civics 101 and I've forgotten more info on the subject than you will ever accumulate in your pea-sized brain.  Stop trying to squirm out from under your ignorance of US voter rights. You're obviously talking out of your ass. ac_toofunny

[Romero]

The voting rights act of 1965 was about prohibiting voter suppression which covered ANY minority or ANY affected racial demographic, NOT just blacks. Blacks already had the constitutional and legal right to vote for almost 100 years before the Voter Rights Act of 65. The 1965 legislation was not meant to augment or revise actual voter rights. It was meant to enhance access to voter registration and election polling places.



If you really want to play like this you're going to have to back to the "Civil rights Act of 1957" which allowed the US Attorney General to sue on behalf of anyone claiming their right to vote was suppressed. Then you have to look at the "Civil Rights Act of 1960" which allowed the federal courts to appoint observers and supervisors at places of voter registration which were allegedly refusing or known to refuse the registration minorities. And whether you know it or not, most of those places where minorities were turned away from registering were in liberal democratic (Dixiecrats) strongholds.



So don't go waving the history of US voter rights in my face. For me this is HS civics 101 and I've forgotten more info on the subject than you will ever accumulate in your pea-sized brain.  Stop trying to squirm out from under your ignorance of US voter rights. You're obviously talking out of your ass. ac_toofunny

We appear to have different definitions of full voting rights. For me, full voting rights means full voting rights. For you, "full voting rights" include poll taxes, literacy tests, grandfather clauses, removal from electoral rolls, fraud and intimidation.



Why did African Americans protest for full voting rights if they already had full voting rights? Why would Congress pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965 if there were already full voting rights?





"So long as I do not firmly and irrevocably possess the right to vote I do not possess myself. I cannot make up my mind — it is made up for me. I cannot live as a democratic citizen, observing the laws I have helped to enact — I can only submit to the edict of others.



So our most urgent request to the president of the United States and every member of Congress is to give us the right to vote."



- Martin Luther King, Jr., 1957





What a strange thing to say for someone you claim to have had full voting rights.

[Renee]

The voting rights act of 1965 was about prohibiting voter suppression which covered ANY minority or ANY affected racial demographic, NOT just blacks. Blacks already had the constitutional and legal right to vote for almost 100 years before the Voter Rights Act of 65. The 1965 legislation was not meant to augment or revise actual voter rights. It was meant to enhance access to voter registration and election polling places.



If you really want to play like this you're going to have to back to the "Civil rights Act of 1957" which allowed the US Attorney General to sue on behalf of anyone claiming their right to vote was suppressed. Then you have to look at the "Civil Rights Act of 1960" which allowed the federal courts to appoint observers and supervisors at places of voter registration which were allegedly refusing or known to refuse the registration minorities. And whether you know it or not, most of those places where minorities were turned away from registering were in liberal democratic (Dixiecrats) strongholds.



So don't go waving the history of US voter rights in my face. For me this is HS civics 101 and I've forgotten more info on the subject than you will ever accumulate in your pea-sized brain.  Stop trying to squirm out from under your ignorance of US voter rights. You're obviously talking out of your ass. ac_toofunny

We appear to have different definitions of full voting rights. For me, full voting rights means full voting rights. For you, "full voting rights" include poll taxes, literacy tests, grandfather clauses, removal from electoral rolls, fraud and intimidation.



Why did African Americans protest for full voting rights if they already had full voting rights? Why would Congress pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965 if there were already full voting rights?





"So long as I do not firmly and irrevocably possess the right to vote I do not possess myself. I cannot make up my mind — it is made up for me. I cannot live as a democratic citizen, observing the laws I have helped to enact — I can only submit to the edict of others.



So our most urgent request to the president of the United States and every member of Congress is to give us the right to vote."



- Martin Luther King, Jr., 1957





What a strange thing to say for someone you claim to have had full voting rights.

Read the 15th Amendment before flap your yap. That is the ultimate legal authority on the issue. It grants full voting rights to blacks, former slaves and minorities born in the US.



What you are talking about is voter suppression which is an illegal act and a VIOLATION of the VOTING RIGHTS granted under the 15th Amendment. The points you are hung up on are racist acts that were once committed in select southern states.  



It's amazing; you don't even understand what you are quoting.



MLK acknowledges that there are laws in place that give him the right to vote but because of the "edict of others" he and his people are stopped from voting. Look up the word "edict".......it's a mandate or proclamation and not necessarily a "legal" one, and certainly it's NOT a "legislative" LAW. In other words, a bunch or racist, redneck fucks kept blacks from voting in violation of constitutional law and in turn he was asking the legal authority (congress) to put an end to the illegal practices of voter suppression.



BTW, your buddy Obama is famous for governing by "edict". He routinely by-passes the legislative branch of the government to enact laws based on his personal whim. In most cases it is completely illegal and unconstitutional.  



You really are stupid. I can't believe that had to be explained to you and worst of all I can't believe I've wasted so much time responding to your inane ignorance driven horseshit. Black citizens were give the right to vote with the ratification of the 15 Amendment in 1870; END OF STORY. Anything that prevented blacks from voting, post ratification, was a violation of the law.



What don't you understand? Not for nothing but I'm guessing it's probably to many fucking things to cover in the time allotted in a week. ac_umm  ac_lmfao



BTW, don't ever try that leftist bullshit practice on me of demonizing your opponent with lies and false assumptions. My Idea of voter rights comes from the US Constitution and all the rights granted there in. Any form of voter suppression then or now is and was ILLEGAL, you fucking liberal tool.

[Romero]

What you are talking about is voter suppression which is an illegal act and a VIOLATION of the VOTING RIGHTS granted under the 15th Amendment.

Poll taxes, literacy tests, grandfather clauses, removal from electoral rolls etc. were often common and legal across the South, until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 finally put a stop to all that.



The 15th Amendment was supposed to prohibit the federal and state governments from denying any citizen the right to vote based on race. It didn't work in the states and jurisdictions which found ways around it, and found ways around it they did.



You're correct that blacks had "full voting rights" on paper, but if they are indeed denied their vote and they can't do anything about it, they do not have full voting rights. Many African Americans in many states didn't officially get full voting rights until 1965.



If you were ever turned away from the polls you wouldn't say you had full voting rights!

[Renee]

What you are talking about is voter suppression which is an illegal act and a VIOLATION of the VOTING RIGHTS granted under the 15th Amendment.

Poll taxes, literacy tests, grandfather clauses, removal from electoral rolls etc. were often common and legal across the South, until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 finally put a stop to all that.

None of the practices you listed were constitutionally legal. I don't care if they were common in the south; "common" doesn't mean legal. A lot of laws are on the books, in many states, that are directly counter to the rights granted in the US Constitution, it doesn't make them legal. Politicians and bureaucrats routinely create ordinances that do not stand up in court. Unfortunately that is a byproduct of electing leaders who are more concerned with an agenda than they are in upholding and defending the law of the land.



I still maintain that the Voter Rights Act of 1965 provided NO additional voting rights to blacks or anyone else. It merely dealt with and put an end to illegal and unconstitutional laws and voter suppression practices.

[Romero]

The Voting Rights Act, signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson (1908-73) on August 6, 1965, aimed to overcome legal barriers at the state and local levels that prevented African Americans from exercising their right to vote under the 15th Amendment (1870) to the Constitution of the United States. The act significantly widened the franchise and is considered among the most far-reaching pieces of civil rights legislation in U.S. history.



The act banned the use of literacy tests, provided for federal oversight of voter registration in areas where less than 50 percent of the nonwhite population had not registered to vote, and authorized the U.S. attorney general to investigate the use of poll taxes in state and local elections (in 1964, the 24th Amendment made poll taxes illegal in federal elections; poll taxes in state elections were banned in 1966 by the U.S. Supreme Court).



Although the Voting Rights Act passed, state and local enforcement of the law was weak and it often was ignored outright, mainly in the South and in areas where the proportion of blacks in the population was high and their vote threatened the political status quo. Still, the Voting Rights Act gave African-American voters the legal means to challenge voting restrictions and vastly improved voter turnout. In Mississippi alone, voter turnout among blacks increased from 6 percent in 1964 to 59 percent in 1969.



http://www.history.com/topics/black-history/voting-rights-act">//http://www.history.com/topics/black-history/voting-rights-act

[Renee]

The Voting Rights Act, signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson (1908-73) on August 6, 1965, aimed to overcome legal barriers at the state and local levels that prevented African Americans from exercising their right to vote under the 15th Amendment (1870) to the Constitution of the United States. The act significantly widened the franchise and is considered among the most far-reaching pieces of civil rights legislation in U.S. history.



The act banned the use of literacy tests, provided for federal oversight of voter registration in areas where less than 50 percent of the nonwhite population had not registered to vote, and authorized the U.S. attorney general to investigate the use of poll taxes in state and local elections (in 1964, the 24th Amendment made poll taxes illegal in federal elections; poll taxes in state elections were banned in 1966 by the U.S. Supreme Court).



Although the Voting Rights Act passed, state and local enforcement of the law was weak and it often was ignored outright, mainly in the South and in areas where the proportion of blacks in the population was high and their vote threatened the political status quo. Still, the Voting Rights Act gave African-American voters the legal means to challenge voting restrictions and vastly improved voter turnout. In Mississippi alone, voter turnout among blacks increased from 6 percent in 1964 to 59 percent in 1969.



http://www.history.com/topics/black-history/voting-rights-act">//http://www.history.com/topics/black-history/voting-rights-act

You're still not showing where the 1965 voter rights act increased or added additional voting rights that weren't already granted under the 15 Amendment. All it did was prohibit and remove the unconstitutional laws and practices used in a select few states. Your argument holds no water because outside certain southern states, black citizens in the US had full access (no restrictions) to voter registration and the polls. The 15th Amend was and still is the law of the land, end of story.



The problem with people like you is you can't distinguish actual reality from the emotional reality that you let run wild in your head. To people like you, logic and reason take a back seat to semantics and hysterics. This is why debating people like you is usually futile.

[Anonymous]

The problem with people like you is you can't distinguish actual reality from the emotional reality that you let run wild in your head. To people like you, logic and reason take a back seat to semantics and hysterics. This is why debating people like you is usually futile.

Romero is an ideologue. He doesn't care about facts or practical solutions. Never deviate from ideology no matter how impractical staying the course may be or how inaccurate your position is.



Skinny little white guys need to hit the gym and drink lots of pragmatism shakes afterwards.

[Renee]

The problem with people like you is you can't distinguish actual reality from the emotional reality that you let run wild in your head. To people like you, logic and reason take a back seat to semantics and hysterics. This is why debating people like you is usually futile.

Romero is an ideologue. He doesn't care about facts or practical solutions. Never deviate from ideology no matter how impractical staying the course may be or how inaccurate your position is.



Skinny little white guys need to hit the gym and drink lots of pragmatism shakes afterwards.

That's what YOU call him.  ac_toofunny

[Anonymous]

The problem with people like you is you can't distinguish actual reality from the emotional reality that you let run wild in your head. To people like you, logic and reason take a back seat to semantics and hysterics. This is why debating people like you is usually futile.

Romero is an ideologue. He doesn't care about facts or practical solutions. Never deviate from ideology no matter how impractical staying the course may be or how inaccurate your position is.



Skinny little white guys need to hit the gym and drink lots of pragmatism shakes afterwards.

That's what YOU call him.  ac_toofunny

Yes, I do.

"an adherent of an ideology, especially one who is uncompromising and dogmatic".

[Renee]

Romero is an ideologue. He doesn't care about facts or practical solutions. Never deviate from ideology no matter how impractical staying the course may be or how inaccurate your position is.



Skinny little white guys need to hit the gym and drink lots of pragmatism shakes afterwards.

That's what YOU call him.  ac_toofunny

Yes, I do.

"an adherent of an ideology, especially one who is uncompromising and dogmatic".

 ac_rollseyes Yeah I know.



My previous response was meant to be a joke because what I call him isn't nearly as nice.  



Come on Shen, stay with me. ac_toofunny