Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Virex]

Still means you'd have to persecute about a third of the population for supporting riot-inducing policies...

Taking an argument and cranking it up to eleven isn't a valid way to make a point.
I say prosecute the decision maker, you say prosecute the voters, that's simply not the same thing.

The voters made him make the decisions, or at the very least enabled him to do so. Those decisions then proceeded to cause the riots, so the people who voted for him are partially responsible for his actions, which are partially responsible for the riots. At what point does the chain of indirect blame stop?

[Truean]

I just... we ... if we tried we couldn't.... We have the single stupidest methods of helping us pick our presidents ever.... [headdesk].

I'd say nuke it from orbit as the only way to be sure, if I didn't know the real reason:
http://news.yahoo.com/michele-bachmann-wins-iowa-republican-poll-004004700.html

Whoever wins the Iowa Straw Poll is the person with the nicest tent, and that part is serious:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2011/08/13/iowa_straw_poll_is_first_test_for_gop_hopefuls/

She had a petting zoo.... Yes a petting zoo, “We’re going to have one whale of a time,’’ Bachmann promised a group in front of a Cedar Rapids hotel last Saturday. “Come out! We’ll have a petting zoo. And bring your friends.’’

Her tent was also air conditioned.... and they were giving away, "Beef sundaes:"
Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, who featured “beef sundaes” - a scoop of mashed potatoes topped with beef chunks, gravy, and fresh plum tomatoes. On the side, corn dogs on a stick. For dessert, ice cream cups and giant cinnamon rolls from The Machine Shed restaurant.

We made a sundae without ice cream.... [shivers]

Then of course, the thing isn't a poll, it is a fund raiser. No really, $30 a pop. Good ole fashion vote buying....
http://www.kare11.com/rss/article/933761/14/Iowa-straw-poll-part-circus-part-politics

If the leader of the free world is, in part, chosen by food and attractions, then we have officially reached bread and circuses status. Worse yet, this is a tradition, so we've been there a while.

Of course you know what this means: the smartest, most successful president will hire animal planet and food network for the Iowa straw poll....

I'm sure the democrats are no better, but [twitch].

[Andir]

Then of course, the thing isn't a poll, it is a fund raiser. No really, $30 a pop. Good ole fashion vote buying....

Well, technically it's not buying a vote, it's paying to vote... So calling it vote buying is a little disingenuous.

[scriver]

We made a sundae without ice cream.... [shivers]

Meh, that ain't no baconnaise. Just one dish made to look like something else. I would've been a lot more disgusted if they made an ice-cream with beef in it.

[sluissa]

We made a sundae without ice cream.... [shivers]

Meh, that ain't no baconnaise. Just one dish made to look like something else. I would've been a lot more disgusted if they made an ice-cream with beef in it.

Not beef, but close:
http://eater.com/archives/2011/03/25/dennys-unveils-a-maple-bacon-sundae.php

To be fair, I've heard it's not bad.

[Gunner-Chan]

I don't know. Both of those sound good. I'd eat em both.

[Truean]

Then of course, the thing isn't a poll, it is a fund raiser. No really, $30 a pop. Good ole fashion vote buying....

Well, technically it's not buying a vote, it's paying to vote... So calling it vote buying is a little disingenuous.

Actually no, it's kind of me, incredibly, unbelievably, mind blowingly kind of me.

In that case it's a Poll Tax which is illegal as hell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax and just about expressly against the 24th amendment to the US constitution.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

"Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

Of course, they get around this just barely because the Republican Party is "not a government actor," even though this is complete crap. They pick presidents about half the time.... They are or should be considered "government actors" for federal election purposes and so should the democrats. Both of whom violate the heck out of "one man one vote" without technically doing so. As "private actors" [snark] political parties can make whatever silly rules they want and you don't "have to join them." Except this is crap because everyone knows the US is a two party system. Meh.

It wouldn't be frivolous at all for a poor person from Iowa to seriously sue over this by saying he or she could not vote as a result of this. They would have standing and a legitimate shot if they could show the RNC and GOP was being a defacto government actor. That last part would admittedly be hard, but not impossible. It could make it past summary judgment and 56(C) dismissal stages. I mean hey, they have an express constitutional amendment .... Only question is if they can make it apply. I know back when this was being litigated, the US Supreme Court wouldn't have let it fly if they tried to privatize a poll tax. That would've been seen as just more sneaky Jim Crow at the time. 

Also you certainly didn't mean to say I was http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/disingenuous did you? We'll leave that at rhetorical....

[scriver]

I don't know. Both of those sound good. I'd eat em both.

Well, the first one just sounds like an ordinary, everyday meal dressed up to bear resemblance to sundae, and yeah, I think it would taste rather good, if somewhat dull.

But the actual ice cream? I wouldn't mind trying it, but I'd have to proceed with caution

[Reelyanoob]

Couldn't resist, This is actually Ice-cream but you wouldn't know it by looking at it

[Korgus]

Actually no, it's kind of me, incredibly, unbelievably, mind blowingly kind of me.

In that case it's a Poll Tax which is illegal as hell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax and just about expressly against the 24th amendment to the US constitution.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

"Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

Of course, they get around this just barely because the Republican Party is "not a government actor," even though this is complete crap. They pick presidents about half the time.... They are or should be considered "government actors" for federal election purposes and so should the democrats. Both of whom violate the heck out of "one man one vote" without technically doing so. As "private actors" [snark] political parties can make whatever silly rules they want and you don't "have to join them." Except this is crap because everyone knows the US is a two party system. Meh.

It wouldn't be frivolous at all for a poor person from Iowa to seriously sue over this by saying he or she could not vote as a result of this. They would have standing and a legitimate shot if they could show the RNC and GOP was being a defacto government actor. That last part would admittedly be hard, but not impossible. It could make it past summary judgment and 56(C) dismissal stages. I mean hey, they have an express constitutional amendment .... Only question is if they can make it apply. I know back when this was being litigated, the US Supreme Court wouldn't have let it fly if they tried to privatize a poll tax. That would've been seen as just more sneaky Jim Crow at the time. 

Also you certainly didn't mean to say I was http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/disingenuous did you? We'll leave that at rhetorical....

Wouln't that not apply because it's not actually a real primary?

[Truean]

Na, the issue is they aren't a part of the government.

First and foremost:
"Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, ....

Then of course, you need to start thinking like a bastard:
If the "its not really the primary" thing held up, then there would never, ever be a "real" primary. There would just be the "not real" primary, but everyone would know what this meant: an attempt at an endrun of the law.

Aside from the fact that the amendment is rather broad, you need the reason why. See, In order to understand this, you have to understand Jim Crow Laws and the amazing BS the south did in order to try and stay as racist as possible. Every time a portion of Jim Crow was struck down, they would try to change a little tiny piece of it and just keep being racists.... They knew it would take forever to get through the US Supreme Court again to challenge the "new" Jim Crow Law. This was the old Jim Crow law with a minor tweak and everyone damn well knew it. Even when you finally reached that court, again, they'd just rinse and repeat so you'd have to work your way all the way up to the US Supreme Court, again. Their plan was to do this forever....

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

What do you suppose this means: "As the Civil Rights Movement gained momentum and used federal courts to attack Jim Crow statutes, the white-dominated governments of many of the southern states countered with passing alternative forms of restrictions."

At some point, The court got sick of this shit and repeatedly seeing them, again, and again, and again.... This was back on the Warren court, which employed judgment and reasoning instead of slavish devotion to the legislature. This resulted in verdicts like Brown v. Board of Education. We seem to have forgotten that the Judiciary is an independent co equal branch of government and not the legislature's lapdogs. This failure to remember is why corporations are now "people" with "free speech rights." Warren would've beaten this argument out of his courtroom....

Listen to what the Wikipedia article is not saying: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax

No, the only real victory racists in the US have found is privatization. That's right, privatization is the tool of racism in the south, because if you aren't the government, all those restrictions and civil rights, don't apply (goes their argument). Unfortunately, most of the time they are right unless you can prove this is their hidden intent. The thing about hidden intents is they are hidden and hard to prove. Massive resistance to desegregation was lead by Senator Harry F. Byrd, Sr  and they closed schools instead of desegregating them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education#Social_implications Naturally, they didn't stop educating their kids when they shut down the public school, rather they just opened up a "private school" which only admitted the white kids....

This is not an historical argument either, things have not changed, why do you think they "canceled" the public high school prom but had a "private" prom party:http://abcnews.go.com/Health/TheLaw/aclu-files-lawsuit-school-cancels-prom-lesbians-request/story?id=10076018 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36178446 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/24/national/main6328407.shtml

And of course, guess who all the locals blamed for "making them cancel the prom" http://articles.cnn.com/2010-03-26/living/constance.mcmillen.tension_1_prom-summer-internship-mississippi?_s=PM:LIVING That's right, let's blame the victim. replace "gay girl" with "black" and you've got jim crow situation....

[Kay12]

Funny story about unlawfully influencing voters here in Finland, possibly just an anecdote.

Several decades ago, there was a politician in one of the smaller electoral districts who won by a landslide. However, it was quickly realized that the guy had committed electoral fraud, and not of the most covert type. He had rented a pickup truck and purchased a large amount of Koskenkorva (a popular Finnish clear spirit) after which he had toured around the district picking up various drunkards. The "tour" ended at an election office, of course.

[Andir]

Na, the issue is they aren't a part of the government.

First and foremost:
"Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, ....

Nitpick here... (I thought you were involved in legal?  Loopholes should be par for the course!)

It's not an election for President, it's an election for a candidate.  Either way, it's probably best to err on the side of caution when it comes to paying to vote and just say it's morally impermissible.  It's actually one of the main reason why I don't like the puppet party system.

And yes, I meant disingenuous, as in deceptive/false (...as the statement was.  You were the one who personalized it, trying to make it sound as though I was calling you disingenuous opposed to the statement.  We should agree to not do that in the future to keep things civil.)

[ggamer]

(offensive post removed)

[Truean]

Na, the issue is they aren't a part of the government.

First and foremost:
"Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, ....

Nitpick here... (I thought you were involved in legal?  Loopholes should be par for the course!)

It's not an election for President, it's an election for a candidate.  Either way, it's probably best to err on the side of caution when it comes to paying to vote and just say it's morally impermissible.  It's actually one of the main reason why I don't like the puppet party system.

Yeah.... The thing about "legal" is knowing where the loopholes exist and where they don't but look like they do. This isn't a loophole, you're mistaken.... Election law and anti Jim Crow... The court takes a dim view of this, as you would see if you read my last posts. You honestly think the US Supreme Court would be perfectly ok with a Poll Tax on any type election given Jim Crow's repeated attempts at tweaking the rules just a bit each time and trying to squeal by on technicalities? The court takes a wide view in light of this and anything that has to do with voting and someone seriously trying to be president, fits the bill.

And yes, I meant disingenuous, as in deceptive/false (...as the statement was.  You were the one who personalized it, trying to make it sound as though I was calling you disingenuous opposed to the statement.  We should agree to not do that in the future to keep things civil.)

Because someone has a point of view that disagrees with yours, does not mean they are deceptive or false and it is insulting to say they are.

What exactly do you think you're doing with this? This is exactly what you have repeatedly gotten yourself into trouble with in the past and have been warned against. When you say someone is "disingenuous" you are calling them a deliberate liar, or in your words "deceptive/false" which here is you personalizing it against me, again. This attempt to bait me; won't work. I even gave you a chance to back out of it gracefully and explained my views....

Furthermore, no it is not deceptive or false to call it vote buying. They are giving something for people to vote for them. It doesn't have to be money, it can be food, a petting zoo for the kids, etc. Or as Kay 12 said, booze:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Funny story about unlawfully influencing voters here in Finland, possibly just an anecdote.

Several decades ago, there was a politician in one of the smaller electoral districts who won by a landslide. However, it was quickly realized that the guy had committed electoral fraud, and not of the most covert type. He had rented a pickup truck and purchased a large amount of Koskenkorva (a popular Finnish clear spirit) after which he had toured around the district picking up various drunkards. The "tour" ended at an election office, of course.

Moreover, I'm not the only one who thinks its "buying votes," here's Republican Presidential Candidate  Herman Cain strongly suggesting it but being careful not to actually say it, because he doesn't want it coming back on him: http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/06/22/cain-we-wont-buy-votes-in-iowa-gop-straw-poll/

At worst, you could argue I was mistaken, though I was not, or you could point out that you disagree and why. Saying someone is a lair, which is exactly what "disingenuous" means is personalizing and insulting.

You have been warned by Toady himself, less than a week ago (Aug 14 -8= 6 days):

I've warned Andir for the post.  I hope that a spirit of calm will be able to prevail in this thread, although it might be a difficult thing.

You have repeatedly attacked me with wild accusations:

You are overreacting and imagining horrible things about me:[/b]

(I literally imagined you tossing the table aside and getting right in my face.) 

Where in the hell did you get that? Wow, really? You are imagining me tossing aside tables and getting in your face huh? Yeah I can't imagine anyone thinking you're overreacting.... This is another example of you totally putting words in my mouth/ascribing motives and actions to me that come out of nowhere. Even if I had a disagreement with you, do you think I'm going to physically fight you or something? Why? I'm a transsexual who likes men and wants to be a woman desperately, where the crap did you get this from? 

This is unacceptable, also boring. I'm not responsible for what you imagine. You've been told to quit assuming people's motives repeatedly; you're still doing it. I will go out of my way to be as close to a perfect lady as possible when dealing with you specifically, so you can't bait me and turn it around. However, I'm going to keep calling you on it until you stop it. This is the kind of thing that has caused the flare ups in this thread in the past. I've invested too many hours typing up numerous, well supported articles for this thread to watch it blow up.