Voting irregularities, Race Relations, etc.

This is Dave Young's Forum.
Can you really bridge the gap between reality and training? Between traditional karate and real world encounters? Absolutely, we will address in this forum why this transition is necessary and critical for survival, and provide suggestions on how to do this correctly. So come in and feel welcomed, but leave your egos at the door!
Post Reply
User avatar
Don Rearic
Posts: 697
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Absurdistan
Contact:

Voting irregularities, Race Relations, etc.

Post by Don Rearic »

In another thread where "voting irregularities" became an interesting sidebar, I said the following:

"If you really believe in this day and age where so many Black folks are in Law Enforcement that Black folks were turned away at official roadblocks and whatnot by Mighty white, Dear Lady, I don't know what to say because I don't want to insult you. You're smart, you've been snookered if you believe that. There is no way in Modern America where they are going to pull off Klan like behavior like that."

I was replying to Dana Sheets...

To which Gene responded:
Gene DeMambro wrote:
In the 2000 election, federal election monitors acting under the auspices of the Voting Rights Act, monitored the elections in many Alabama counties due to continued violations of the Voting Rights Act in that state.

Gene
Now, I responded in a flippant manner and was a little sarcastic for a reason. We were discussing the Electoral College and the many Florida re-counts in the Bush V. Gore Election.

Florida.

Not Alabama.

Florida is joined with Alabama, if I remember correctly, but it is still not Alabama.

Then I replied:

"It's 1960! Again! Who'da thunk it?"

Gene once again responded:
Gene DeMambro wrote:
In certain voting sictricts in certain parts of certain states, it is.

Gene
Gene, No it's not. The fantasy that it is...is part of the reason we still have incredibly crappy race relations and racism in this country. I'm sorry. It's not 1960 in ANY state in this country.

It is the sort of thing that Jesse Jackson gathers a bunch of Black folks together, whips them into a rage as if "Mississippi Burning" is a modern day reality and every day or election cycle occurrence, and then herds them onto a bus and they go protest somewhere.

Jesse Jackson, the good Reverend Adulterer, who gathered up people from Northern Illinois (Read: Chicago) and takes them down-state to protest the expulsion of Black thug "students" who hardly spent any time in school, who went on a rampage pounding on people during a sports event at school.

I believe it was reported that three of these young "men," out of the three if you added up all the days they attended school that year, it still would not equal one student going to school with good attendance.

But their right to an education was being endangered, an education that they had not taken advantage of because they hardly ever went and when they did, apparently they beat on people...so how can you take away something from someone who does not want it to begin with?

You can if you cause enough of a controversy and everyone is terrified of being branded a "racist" or a "bigot" and you walk all over them, as Jesse "Hi" Jackson did.

Get it? Jesse ... Hijack(son)?

He profits from racism, there have been accusations that he shakes down corporations for perceived racism. I wonder who gets the money, the people he supposedly champions or does he use it to pay people off he impregnates? That's not an accusation, it's a simple question, it's not libel or anything like that, it's a question. Without racism, he might possibly be a real Reverend, yeah? You know, living a good life, comfortable, as a Reverend.

I mention this because it is important. Jesse Jackson is to race relations as Geraldo Rivera is to finding Old Gangster's riches. Except through bullying and accusations of racism and bigotry, Jesse gets his way. Geraldo just made an ass out of himself and went to go lick his wounds for a couple/few years after the "Al Capone's Vault" debacle.

Al Sharpton does as well. He's another real winner that spews this sort of venom that people like you believe. It's sad.

We could go into the lawsuit that he lost if you want to, oh, what the hell, let's look at the outcome of it. Court TV is owned by a dyed in the wool, Clinton supporting liberal, so I don't think there is any need to question the source. It is what it is.
In November of 1987, a 15-year-old girl named Tawana Brawley was found in upstate New York, covered with feces and racial slurs written in charcoal. Brawley, who is black, claimed to have been abducted and raped by six white law enforcement officers.

A decade later, the men who advised Brawley after the alleged incident -- Al Sharpton, Alton Maddox, and lawyer C. Vernon Mason -- are being sued by one of those six men: Steven Pagones, then a local prosecutor, now an assistant state attorney general.

In a trial that began December 3, 1997 in a Duchess County, New York courtroom, Pagones sought damages for defamation that escalated during the course of the trial from $150 million to $395 million, but returned to $150 million during the eventual damages phase.

Brawley, now 25 and called Maryam Muhammad, appeared after 10-year silence at a Brooklyn rally the night before her advisors' trial began to insist once more that her charges are true.

Her case was ultimately thrown out in 1988 when a grand jury determined that her story was not credible. Justice S. Barrett Hickman of the New York State Supreme Court has allowed that report to be included as evidence in the current trial.

On July 13, 1998, after a trial lasting almost eight months, a jury found the three advisors liable for defaming Pagones.

Just over two weeks later, on July 29, the jury awarded Pagones $345,000 in damages, about two percent of the amount he originally sought. Sharpton was found liable for $65,000 of the total damages, Maddox for $95,000 and Mason for $185,000.
http://www.courttv.com/legaldocs/newsmakers/tawana/


Oh my Gene, what a mess, huh? It seems as though the major players in the race game in this country are just infected with this sort of thing.

Understand that you can say something, you can scream it from the mountaintops, but that does not make it so.

Should we discuss more about Sharpton? Perhaps later. It's sort of Soul-killing to do so, it's depressing to think of the greatness that exists in peoples of all colors, but it is being wasted on the depressing and Soul-killing profiteers of racism.

Perhaps we should discuss Louis Farrakhan?

Please. I hardly ever eat breakfast, but I think I might vomit regardless of ingestion of anything other than Maxwell House at the moment. If someone cannot figure out Louis, God bless you.

These are the players who are carrying the stench of racism and they use people, they really use them and then they discard them. They live quite well, they're wealthy, and the people they champion, well their Saviors in the race game, they whine and complain about the Government giving them more because God knows they won't share the wealth that they have on the backs of these people.

The accusation of Police turning away Black voters in the State of Florida appeals to those who are predisposed to believe that the KKK is still a powerful entity. Here is a newsflash, they're not and they have not been for a very long time.

As I pointed out originally, which you ignored and used an Alabama Red Herring and Straw Man Argument against, do you think in this day and age where there are so many Black Police Officers, that there could be a concerted effort, Official or Quasi-Official, to set up roadblocks and turn Black voters away from the Polls?

It's an interesting and sad thing to watch the major players in the race game in this country, Gene. It's interesting that the NAACP has not had their hand slapped by the Courts for lobbying for the Democratic Party, which they do and they deny that they do it.

During the last Presidential Election Cycle, we were treated to a very interesting commercial from the NAACP with a voice-over from James Byrd's Daughter. With a chain dragging and on the bumper? A Texas license plate.

Here is something else that stoked all of that "Hate Crime Legislation" Gene, you might find it very interesting.

http://www.texashatecrime.com/

Meanwhile, where I live, we tend to joke after two Election Cycles with then Governor Glendenning that we are fortunate that Election Day is so close to Halloween, for it makes it easier for the dead people to rise and vote for Democrats.
And in Baltimore, Chicago and Los Angeles, allegations are surfacing of roving bands of voters who were taken in buses from precinct to precinct to vote in place of registered voters who had moved away or who had never voted before.

"We are relatively certain people were being taken from polling place to polling place and allowed to vote," said Republican national committeewoman from Maryland, Ellen Sauerbrey.

How can someone vote in place of another? Actually, it's fairly simple -- for the fraudulently inclined. In many states, including Maryland, it is illegal to ask voters to present identification, on the pretext that would be construed as voter intimidation. Election officials in Maryland and in many other states are allowed to ascertain a voter's true identity by asking only for their name, address and date of birth.

"But in practice, there's no check whatsoever," Sauerbrey said. "The election judge will prompt you by asking if you live at such and such address, if you were born at such and such date. This makes it easier for one person to vote in the name of another, simply by mimicking the signature on the voter card.

"Repeated attempts by Republicans in Maryland to pass legislation that would require voters to present identification at the polls have been blocked by the Democratic majority in the state's House of Delegates.


http://www.timmerman2000.com/news/wnd001215.htm

Before you think I am making a baseless accusation of the same type you did about voter intimidation, etc., let me say this. She proved that dead people voted for the Democrat she ran against.

Something interesting happened during one of Sauerbrey's runs for the Governor. Someone had placed fliers on the cars of Black folks with pictures of Police K-9s tearing up Black folks in the 1960s. A message was clear, vote for her and you vote for that. Some of the absolutely worst form of terroristic propaganda...but hey, it comes to some people naturally.

That is the sort of thing that can make people lose elections, that is why the claims of voting irregularities were reported in Gore V. Bush.

It never happened.

The great danger in perpetrating myths and false allegations of this type are, Gene, that good people can get hurt and it also continues to pour salt in old wounds that should have been healed by now. Instead, they are ripped open and the salt is poured in because healed wounds don't make money. Healed wounds don't win elections.
Stultorum infinitus est numerus
Kevin Mackie
Posts: 671
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 1998 6:01 am

Post by Kevin Mackie »

As I pointed out originally, which you ignored and used an Alabama Red Herring and Straw Man Argument against, do you think in this day and age where there are so many Black Police Officers, that there could be a concerted effort, Official or Quasi-Official, to set up roadblocks and turn Black voters away from the Polls?

That would be a conspiracy of OJ proportions!

Maybe the LAPD Robbery-Homicide division has very long tentacles. :wink:
Gene DeMambro
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 1998 6:01 am
Location: Weymouth, MA US of A

Post by Gene DeMambro »

There is no way in Modern America where they are going to pull off Klan like behavior like that
And Alabama isn't part of Modern America?
The accusation of Police turning away Black voters in the State of Florida appeals to those who are predisposed to believe that the KKK is still a powerful entity. Here is a newsflash, they're not and they have not been for a very long time.
One does not have to be a Klansman to be a racist. Nor do I believe that black voters were turned away in droves due to a conspiracy to negate the votes of blacks. And I wish the Klan, however powerful they are, would get Panther's favorite punishment...expulsion.
Meanwhile, where I live, we tend to joke after two Election Cycles with then Governor Glendenning that we are fortunate that Election Day is so close to Halloween, for it makes it easier for the dead people to rise and vote for Democrats.
It's good that the officials make voting so convenient :wink:
As I pointed out originally, which you ignored and used an Alabama Red Herring and Straw Man Argument against, do you think in this day and age where there are so many Black Police Officers, that there could be a concerted effort, Official or Quasi-Official, to set up roadblocks and turn Black voters away from the Polls?
Never said there was a concerted effort to set up roadblacks and such to keep away black voters. Way too public and they'd never get away with it. And it isn't that type of overtly discriminatiory practice that is alleged. But the DOJ files several lawsuits a year, correcting violations of the Voting Right Act, and many of these violations are insidious,
Al Sharpton does as well. He's another real winner that spews this sort of venom that people like you believe. It's sad.
Trust me...You don't know what I believe. And I never mentioned Jesse Jackson, AL Sharpton, Farrakhan or anyne else. So what was that about a Red Herring? Save it.
Before you think I am making a baseless accusation of the same type you did about voter intimidation, etc.,
And what accusation was that?

Gene
User avatar
Don Rearic
Posts: 697
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Absurdistan
Contact:

Post by Don Rearic »

Gene,

Hey! What sort of voter fraud, intimidation or irregularities happened in Alabama? Two white guys in a Ford pickup look at a Black family "the wrong way" or what? Ford truck broke down on the side of the road and Bubba looks pissed because his truck is broke down so a Black couple are frightened and they turn back and go home?

Because that is about all it is.

You tell me to "save it." I consider all of that to be fantasy land. I brought up the sordid cast of characters merely to show you that racism is political power and big money. If you wish to live in a rather depressing Willem DeFoe movie, so be it. But that does not amount to a hill of beans when the rubber hits the road Dude.

And it is finally beginning to not wash in America, hopefully the trend continues and people that wail about racism all the time will be politically marginalized, if not neutered.

Anyone that could possibly compare America "2000" with America "1960" is re-living a terrible time and they are a roadblock to real understanding and progress.

There is no healing in the manufacturing of racism.
Stultorum infinitus est numerus
User avatar
Panther
Posts: 2807
Joined: Wed May 17, 2000 6:01 am
Location: Massachusetts

Post by Panther »

Not bad...

However, it is my opinion that the rhetorical questions in response don't further the discussion. My suggestion at this point would be that perhaps by giving documented cases of these "insidious" actions and discussing if, when and/or how they were resolved, this issue can be viewed in a more in-depth manner.
User avatar
Don Rearic
Posts: 697
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Absurdistan
Contact:

Post by Don Rearic »

The original point of interest was the Bush V. Gore Election, specifically, in Florida. For if Bush did not win Florida, he did not win the Electoral College. This stems from the constant stream of insults hurled at him. That "original point of interest" was a not so subtle accusation that Black Americans were somehow kept from the polls or somehow intimidated into not going to or turning away from the polls.

Specifically in Florida, not Alabama.

I distinctly remember reports of Black Floridians being turned away by Police Officers and that there were roadblocks manned by Police Officers. The fact or myth, either one it does not matter, that "something," some accusation, was investigated in the next bordering State is a non-issue. That was the Red Herring.

It is not, however, in a heated election with the NAACP being involved heavily, to submit the information on Jackson specifically and "Black Leaders" in general to establish that this sort of "Little Boy That Cried Wolf" nonsense has went on far too long in our country.

I hope that the SCOTUS puts an end to one aspect of The Race Hustle in June (when they expected to issue their opinion) and we can get back on the right track. I think Black folks would best be served by following the example of one Justice Clarence Thomas or a Professor Walter E. Williams instead of the current stream of profiteers that seem to have the reigns of power on the collective conscience of the Black Community.

Furthermore, why aren't those more "liberally inclined" just as concerned with the efforts of Democrats to "Rob the Vote" from Military Personnel who voted by Absentee Ballot?

That's why I focused on race because they always go for the hot button to wrench the heart of those who are predisposed to not seeing through the smoke, i.e., while false accusations of voter intimidation is going on and false accusations of "Election Theft" is going on, another group of Democrats are trying their best, at that time, to take away the Voting Rights of Military Personnel who usually vote Republican.

Just some random thoughts. :)
Stultorum infinitus est numerus
User avatar
Panther
Posts: 2807
Joined: Wed May 17, 2000 6:01 am
Location: Massachusetts

Post by Panther »

<Moderator's hat == off>

Don,

I understand where you're coming from. In fact, I know of a former Massachusetts State Police officer, an investigator/detective who retired to Florida. He is Jewish and is considered "liberal" by most measures. He became part of the investigations into these allegations of preventing the minority vote... From what I've heard (granted, this is second hand info, but I've never seen a valid contradiction and the fed reports have corroborated this), NONE of the original allegations of preventing blacks from voting had any basis in fact! Actually, a few things were amazing to me, not because they may have occurred, but because they weren't widely reported... first is that one of the african-american people who were primary in the suit (brought in no small part by the usual cast of characters you've already mentioned), was found to have not only voted, but to have voted twice! Seems they were bused to a few different polling places with some others and the fact that they were turned away was because some poll observers realized what was going on and stopped it from continuing... second, there actually were some cases of minority voters being turned away... but... Oops! They were cuban-americans who, after the Elian Gonzales debacle of the Clinton-Gore administration, voted overwhelmingly for... BUSH! Didn't see either of those on the news... Just my $0.02 worth.

<Moderator's hat == on>
Gene DeMambro
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 1998 6:01 am
Location: Weymouth, MA US of A

Post by Gene DeMambro »

The US Department of Justice has Federal Examiners in 148 counties in 9 states. Many of these counties have had Examiners since the 60's, some from the 70's, a few from the 80's and even a couple since the 90's. Most are in the South, but a NY has three counties being watched, interestingly enough.

In addition, several other counties in 6 states have had Examiners appointed to them by the Federal Courts for a limited period of time, including New Jersey, Utah and Michigan, of all places.

Also, Federal Observers are posted in voting disctricts in 24 counties in 13 states.

Check this al out yourself at the DOJ Website.

As for lawsuits, the DOJ cites 16 recent lawusits aither filed, settled or in negotiations regarding violations of the Voting Rights Act. These lawsuits mostly deal with voter "dilution", attempting to water down the effect of the minority vote. This is not The Man keeping blacks away from the voting booths with batons, water cannons and attack dogs. They'd never get away with it in this day and age. But voter "dilution" is insidious, and may fly under the radar if we're not careful.

Regarding the absentee ballot flap:

The Dems wanted certain ballots invalidated due to the fact that local election officials let Republican activists add information to ballot applications. This was not disputed by the Republicans.

And the military absentee ballots, the ones in question lacked postmarks, in conflict with the absentee ballot legalities.

AL Gore did not take part in any lawsuit intending to invalidate any vote cast. He urged that every vote must be counted in Florida, and was not a party to any lawsuit seeking to disqualify the absentee ballots.

Bush, on the other hand...

Gene
User avatar
Don Rearic
Posts: 697
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Absurdistan
Contact:

Post by Don Rearic »

Gene DeMambro wrote:
The US Department of Justice has Federal Examiners in 148 counties in 9 states. Many of these counties have had Examiners since the 60's, some from the 70's, a few from the 80's and even a couple since the 90's. Most are in the South, but a NY has three counties being watched, interestingly enough.
(stroking goatee, thinking like a liberal) Yes, yes, one would think that sophisticated New York would not need to be watched, interesting indeed.

Actually, it is a great idea to have Federal Examiners in alot of States I would think. Maybe not for some of the paranoid reasons others might think, but to stop voter fraud, period.
In addition, several other counties in 6 states have had Examiners appointed to them by the Federal Courts for a limited period of time, including New Jersey, Utah and Michigan, of all places./b]


Yeah, might not be racism, probably voter fraud instead of voter intimidation.

As for lawsuits, the DOJ cites 16 recent lawusits aither filed, settled or in negotiations regarding violations of the Voting Rights Act. These lawsuits mostly deal with voter "dilution", attempting to water down the effect of the minority vote.


I'm sorry Gene, I'm laughing, you are an obviously intelligent and caring man and even though we are probably politically opposed to one another, I find the concept and term of "voter dilution" to simply be some sort of New Speak. How does one "water down the effect," i.e., "dilute" the minority vote unless there is fraud or intimidation?

Is this some sort of joke where people are at polls, which is legal within a certain amount of yards or feet, and saying, "Hey, you might want to vote for..." Does this involve a Supersoaker or something?

In Maryland, if you want to work the polls for a political party, you have to stay a certain number of feet away from the entrance to the polls. I think that is an excellent policy and I don't know how many States have that or if it is Federally Mandated by Law or not. But a good idea. Also, if Police Officers want to work the polls, they cannot use Police Vehicles or their Uniforms, etc., which is a great idea as well.

These things could lead to "dilution" of certain members of society, not always race-based, if it were not for the fact that the vote is still a secret. :)

This is not The Man keeping blacks away from the voting booths with batons, water cannons and attack dogs. They'd never get away with it in this day and age.


I thought you said in the other thread which I quoted at the beginning of this one that it was possible that Black folks were being kept away from the polls? Confusion abounds.

But voter "dilution" is insidious, and may fly under the radar if we're not careful.


Yes, and a bunch of other things we can dream up as well, tend to be insidious, some so insidious that they have very murky definitions...

The Dems wanted certain ballots invalidated due to the fact that local election officials let Republican activists add information to ballot applications. This was not disputed by the Republicans.


So much for those pesky hanging chads.

And the military absentee ballots, the ones in question lacked postmarks, in conflict with the absentee ballot legalities.


Yes, and it is often the case and oftentimes, they are accepted out of the spirit involved. You know, allowing those who protect us to participate even though they might be on a ship or in a far off land and the mail does not get postmarked properly.

AL Gore did not take part in any lawsuit intending to invalidate any vote cast. He urged that every vote must be counted in Florida, and was not a party to any lawsuit seeking to disqualify the absentee ballots.

Bush, on the other hand...


Yes, wonderful Albert Gore, hell, we wouldn't even be communicating with each other right now if it were not for Al! After all, he did invent the Internet. I can't help it Gene, the guy is such a ... he's everything they accused George W. Bush of being (but he's not) and there is videotape proof of Gore being a moron... If we can only teach Dubya to say "nu-cle-ar" instead of "nu-Q-lur," I would think that he would come across as being quite intelligent. At least he does not waste several million dollars on studying bovine flatulence and its effects on the environment. :)

More on target, to your little slammer you posted there, friend. Well, I would imagine that the DNC was well behind Gore, Gore did not have to do anything, you and I both know politics me thinks. It was done for him and I think to argue that point would indeed be a waste of flowing electrons.
Stultorum infinitus est numerus
Gene DeMambro
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 1998 6:01 am
Location: Weymouth, MA US of A

Post by Gene DeMambro »

Vote Dilution is a legally recognized term, and it is specifically banned in the Voting Rights Act. From the DOJ webite:
What kinds of racial discrimination in voting are there, and what does the Voting Rights Act do about them?
The Voting Rights Act is not limited to discrimination that literally excludes minority voters from the polls. Section 2 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1973) makes it illegal for any state or local government to use election processes that are not equally open to minority voters, or that give minority voters less opportunity than other voters to participate in the political process and elect representatives of their choice to public office. In particular, Section 2 makes it illegal for state and local governments to "dilute" the votes of racial minority groups, that is, to have an election system that makes minority voters' votes less effective than those of other voters. One of many forms of minority vote dilution is the drawing of district lines that divide minority communities and keep them from putting enough votes together to elect representatives of their choice to public office. Depending on the circumstances, dilution can also result from at-large voting for governmental bodies. When coupled with a long-standing pattern of racial discrimination in the community, these and other election schemes can deny minority voters a fair chance to elect their preferred candidates.

To show vote dilution in these situations, there must be a geographically concentrated minority population and voting that is polarized by race, that is, a pattern in which minority voters and white voters tend to vote differently as groups. It must also be shown that white voters, by voting as a bloc against minority-choice candidates, usually beat those candidates even if minority voters are unified or cohesive at the polls.


Anyone aggrieved by minority vote dilution can bring a federal lawsuit to stop it. If the court decides that the effect of an election system, in combination with all the local circumstances, is to make minority votes less effective than white votes, it can order a change in the election system. For example, courts have ordered states and localities to adopt districting plans to replace at-large voting, or to redraw their election district lines in a way that gives minority voters the same opportunity as other voters to elect representatives of their choice.
Supersoakers were not mentioned.

So Don might thinks it's some type of New Speak, but it's legal New Speak!
I thought you said in the other thread which I quoted at the beginning of this one that it was possible that Black folks were being kept away from the polls?
Please find the quote. I'd be intrested in reading it.
Yeah, might not be racism, probably voter fraud instead of voter intimidation.
The DOJ website specifically says the counties/states are being watched for voter discrimination.
Yes, and it is often the case and oftentimes, they are accepted out of the spirit involved. You know, allowing those who protect us to participate even though they might be on a ship or in a far off land and the mail does not get postmarked properly.
Secretary of Defense Bill Cohen ordered an investigation into why these ballots were handled improperly and why, if they needed a post-mark to be legal, why they weren't.

Gene
User avatar
Don Rearic
Posts: 697
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Absurdistan
Contact:

Post by Don Rearic »

Gene DeMambro wrote:
Vote Dilution is a legally recognized term, and it is specifically banned in the Voting Rights Act. From the DOJ webite:

"What kinds of racial discrimination in voting are there, and what does the Voting Rights Act do about them?

The Voting Rights Act is not limited to discrimination that literally excludes minority voters from the polls...

...In particular, Section 2 makes it illegal for state and local governments to "dilute" the votes of racial minority groups, that is, to have an election system that makes minority voters' votes less effective than those of other voters. One of many forms of minority vote dilution is the drawing of district lines that divide minority communities and keep them from putting enough votes together to elect representatives of their choice to public office.
Gene, thanks for the clarification! Now I know that this is all about political Gerrymandering!

Here we go:
GERRYMANDERING

What is gerrymandering?

Gerrymandering is a term that describes the deliberate rearrangement of the boundaries of congressional districts to influence the outcome of elections.

Where did gerrymandering come from?

The original gerrymander was created in 1812 by Massachusetts governor Elbridge Gerry, who crafted a district for political purposes that looked like a salamander.

What is the purpose of gerrymandering?

The purpose of gerrymandering is to either concentrate opposition votes into a few districts to gain more seats for the majority in surrounding districts (called packing), or to diffuse minority strength across many districts (called dilution).

How has Congress regulated redistricting?

In 1967, Congress passed a law requiring all U.S. representatives to be elected from single member districts&#8212;the system we use today. All other redistricting regulations comes from the states or the courts.
Source:

http://www.fairvote.org/redistricting/g ... dering.htm

Aye, Matey, Arr, Arr, :)

So, at Michigan State University, whatever it is called...and at many other universities, do you think it is "fair" to "level the playing field" by giving someone 20 points because they are a certain minority? As I understand it, people that fall into the Asian or Oriental "category" were placed with Mighty white, i.e., they did not get a boost up either. No, just Black folks and I don't know who else.

The point I am getting at is this, Gerrymandering to neuter the minority vote is pretty treacherous. But years later, we are now getting some reverse Gerrymandering going on where the salamander runs through minority communities in a rather demented pattern.

Do you think that discrimination is the answer to discrimination and do you think that "dilution" is the solution to "dilution?"

(That sounds pretty cool, I can see Johnny Cochran using that! Sort of like, "If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit...")

Personally, I say just draw up the congressional districts in blocks without regard to anything. But any time they look like the dreaded political salamander that benefits either side, you don't allow that. What say you?
So Don might thinks it's some type of New Speak, but it's legal New Speak!
"What we are saying...is give peace a chance...all we are saying...is give peace a chance."

Your enthusiasm is duly noted. Slavery was "legal" once too, that didn't make it "right."

Next, something I said:
I thought you said in the other thread which I quoted at the beginning of this one that it was possible that Black folks were being kept away from the polls?
Then you be sayin' dis...
Please find the quote. I'd be intrested in reading it.
Oh Gene, I don't have to! That's what we were talking about and if you say that is not what we are talking about, I guess that is why I called what you started talking about...the "Alabama Red Herring."

That's the problem with arguing with them pesky liberals, sometimes they get off-task and you have to go back and remind them.

OK, so, now you consider the claims of Black folks being turned away from the polls in Florida...as being...a false claim?
Secretary of Defense Bill Cohen ordered an investigation into why these ballots were handled improperly and why, if they needed a post-mark to be legal, why they weren't.

Gene


Yes! There must be an investigation! Because there seemed to be a concerted effort to deny people their right to vote, yes?
Stultorum infinitus est numerus
Gene DeMambro
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 1998 6:01 am
Location: Weymouth, MA US of A

Post by Gene DeMambro »

On Gerry-mendering to create Minority-Majority Districts. From the DOJ Website:
Is it prohibited to draw majority-minority districts?

No. Over 30 years ago the Supreme Court held that jurisdictions are free to draw majority-minority election districts that follow traditional, non-racial districting considerations, such as geographic compactness and keeping communities of interest together. Later Supreme Court decisions have held that drawing majority-minority districts may be required to ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act.

While it remains legally permissible for jurisdictions to take race into account when drawing election districts, the Supreme Court has held that the Constitution requires a strong justification if racial considerations predominate over traditional districting principles. One such justification may be the need to remedy a violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. While such a remedy may include election district boundaries that compromise traditional districting principles, such districts must be drawn where the Section 2 violation occurs and must not compromise traditional principles more than is necessary to remedy the violation.
OK, so, now you consider the claims of Black folks being turned away from the polls in Florida...as being...a false claim?
What do you think?
Yes! There must be an investigation! Because there seemed to be a concerted effort to deny people their right to vote, yes?
Or maybe the military mishadled the mail, yes?

For the biggie:
do you think it is "fair" to "level the playing field" by giving someone 20 points because they are a certain minority?
What do I get in return for my answer?

Gene

Gene
User avatar
Don Rearic
Posts: 697
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Absurdistan
Contact:

Post by Don Rearic »

Gene,

I post here for a reasoned exchange. Basically what I gather is, you support things that go one way and not the other. You won't clarify and I don't have time to guess.

As far as Gerrymandering is concerned, it would appear as though the DOJ definition of Gerrymandering seems to fit the spirit of "dilution" which means it is supported and "legal" as long as it benefits minority voters and not white.

For shame...

What do you get if you answer or do not answer. Nothing at all.
Stultorum infinitus est numerus
Post Reply

Return to “Realist Training”