Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 7/25/2013 5:13:18 AM EST
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_AG_VOTING_RIGHTS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-07-25-09-46-04

"WASHINGTON (AP) -- Attorney General Eric Holder announced Thursday the Justice Department is opening a new front in the battle for voting rights in response to a Supreme Court ruling that dealt a major setback to voter protections.

In a speech to the Urban League in Philadelphia, the attorney general said the Justice Department is asking a federal court in San Antonio to require the state of Texas to obtain approval in advance before putting future voting changes in place.

...

Holder said that based on evidence of intentional racial discrimination presented last year in the redistricting case in Texas, "we believe that the state of Texas should be required to go through a preclearance process whenever it changes its voting laws and practices."

In Texas, there is a history of "pervasive voting-related discrimination against racial minorities," Holder added."
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:14:27 AM EST
In the 1960s and before. Not now. Fuck off and die Holder.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:14:48 AM EST
I just can't say Fuck This Guy enough.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:14:57 AM EST
Does he also want to implement multiple votes per person so they do not feel as minority?
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:17:00 AM EST
POS d-bag
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:18:31 AM EST
They are extremely worried that the new voter ID laws and district maps will keep Texas from shifting to D. I would say that with amnesty, and without voter ID, the state will vote Democratic for president within a decade. If that happens, the Democrats have a lock on the presidency.

You would not believe the political machine that has sprung up here in the last 4-6 years. It's an organized, pervasive effort to get minority voters registered and to the polls during the early voting period. Go to the church, get bussed to the polls, vote, and return for a free chicken dinner. The minority turnout rates during early voting used to be horrible, but it's better than Republican turnout in many areas now.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:18:37 AM EST
Fuck that guy.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:18:45 AM EST
PS, didnt the Supreme Court JUST rule that the shit that little faggot is babbling about is unConstitutional
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:21:03 AM EST
What a fucking ass hat.

Seriously, fuck you you rat bastard.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:22:00 AM EST
I guess Holder isn't a fan of Texas barbecue and thinks Texas didn't invent chili!
Seriously, he is just following Obama's lead in trying to cause more racial division.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:22:34 AM EST
And then there's the Guy that went after Nancy Grace.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:22:57 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By lilMAC25:
In the 1960s and before. Not now. Fuck off and die Holder.
View Quote


He lives in the 60's and 70's. That's his reality. He's still that college black revolutionary fighting the system. He fails to recognize that now, since he is the system he was against in the 70's. Black power!


Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:23:02 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Andr0id:
I just can't say Fuck This Guy enough.
View Quote



Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:23:32 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/25/2013 5:24:26 AM EST by USMCTanker]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Possum-Sammich:
They are extremely worried that the new voter ID laws and district maps will keep Texas from shifting to D. I would say that with amnesty, and without voter ID, the state will vote Democratic for president within a decade. If that happens, the Democrats have a lock on the presidency.

You would not believe the political machine that has sprung up here in the last 4-6 years. It's an organized, pervasive effort to get minority voters registered and to the polls during the early voting period. Go to the church, get bussed to the polls, vote, and return for a free chicken dinner. The minority turnout rates during early voting used to be horrible, but it's better than Republican turnout in many areas now.
View Quote


Democrats are committed, if nothing else. They devote their lives to the "cause". That's why so many become teachers, professors, and activist lawyers.

If and when this country suffers from one party rule in the not-too-distant future, then there's no telling what will happen.

If you think these fuckers are unhinged now, just wait until they have complete power over all three branches of government without any meaningful opposition. God help us.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:24:17 AM EST
Holder is a bigger racist than the entire State of Texas.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:24:29 AM EST
I don't think there are any real Texans living in Texas anymore. I don't think real Texans would tolerate a Democrat invasion.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:25:23 AM EST
Fuck that guy. I used to live in SJL's district. Where the fuck was my representation?
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:25:43 AM EST
FBHO and FEH
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:26:00 AM EST
This could be fun...FBHO and FEH trying to mess with texas....
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:26:52 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By lilMAC25:
PS, didnt the Supreme Court JUST rule that the shit that little faggot is babbling about is unConstitutional
View Quote


It ruled that the formula to determine what states or areas need preclearance(Section 4 of Voting rights act) was unconstitutional. Preclearance itself(Section 5) still stands. But, without a new formula to figure out what now qualifies for preclearance, the concept is effectively dead until Congress passes a new Section 4.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:27:26 AM EST
And many states in the NE have a very recent history of pervasive voting fraud favoring Democratic candidates. Whatcha doing about that???
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:28:10 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By matto4785:


It ruled that the formula to determine what states or areas need preclearance(Section 4 of Voting rights act) was unconstitutional. Preclearance itself(Section 5) still stands. But, without a new formula to figure out what now qualifies for preclearance, the concept is effectively dead until Congress passes a new Section 4.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By matto4785:
Originally Posted By lilMAC25:
PS, didnt the Supreme Court JUST rule that the shit that little faggot is babbling about is unConstitutional


It ruled that the formula to determine what states or areas need preclearance(Section 4 of Voting rights act) was unconstitutional. Preclearance itself(Section 5) still stands. But, without a new formula to figure out what now qualifies for preclearance, the concept is effectively dead until Congress passes a new Section 4.
thanks
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:28:11 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By USMCTanker:


Democrats are committed, if nothing else. They devote their lives to the "cause". That's why so many become teachers, professors, and activist lawyers.

If and when this country suffers from one party rule in the not-too-distant future, then there's no telling what will happen.


If you think these fuckers are unhinged now, just wait until they have complete power over all three branches of government without any meaningful opposition. God help us.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By USMCTanker:
Originally Posted By Possum-Sammich:
They are extremely worried that the new voter ID laws and district maps will keep Texas from shifting to D. I would say that with amnesty, and without voter ID, the state will vote Democratic for president within a decade. If that happens, the Democrats have a lock on the presidency.

You would not believe the political machine that has sprung up here in the last 4-6 years. It's an organized, pervasive effort to get minority voters registered and to the polls during the early voting period. Go to the church, get bussed to the polls, vote, and return for a free chicken dinner. The minority turnout rates during early voting used to be horrible, but it's better than Republican turnout in many areas now.


Democrats are committed, if nothing else. They devote their lives to the "cause". That's why so many become teachers, professors, and activist lawyers.

If and when this country suffers from one party rule in the not-too-distant future, then there's no telling what will happen.


If you think these fuckers are unhinged now, just wait until they have complete power over all three branches of government without any meaningful opposition. God help us.



We all know what will happen, but then again, we're kinda there now
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:28:41 AM EST
Fuck off and die Holder and take barry and his sasquatch with you!
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:28:55 AM EST
"WASHINGTON (AP) -- Attorney General Eric Holder announced Thursday the Justice Department is opening a new front in the battle for voting rights in response to a Supreme Court ruling that dealt a major setback to voter protections.
View Quote


BULL. FUCKING. SHIT.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:29:27 AM EST
How odd it is to have a DOJ that shows open contempt for court decisions.



Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:31:00 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Andr0id:
I just can't say Fuck This Guy enough.
View Quote

Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:31:16 AM EST
Fuck that slimy POS and the aids infested kenyan dick he rode in on.

[mad]

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:31:39 AM EST
"KeithC: The Administration has a history of criminal behavior against, blatantly lying to, and utter contempt for the rights of the American people"

And here's a real quote for you, CockHolder: "No society can exist unless the laws are respected to a certain degree. The safest way to make laws respected is to make them respectable." - Frédéric Bastiat, "The Law". You and your cronies think you're so fucking clever by bending the rules to suit your agenda because, until now, our side has had a terrible habit of obeying said rules. But that's because they at least had the appearance of being legitimate. When you push so far that it becomes blazingly apparent to even those deepest in denial that the rules are strictly a tool of oppression, God fucking help you from the backlash. History will caption your shocked picture with the phrase "They're not supposed to do that!"
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:32:59 AM EST
Yet he was cool with the black panthers outside polling stations.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:34:05 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By chupacabras:


BULL. FUCKING. SHIT.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By chupacabras:
"WASHINGTON (AP) -- Attorney General Eric Holder announced Thursday the Justice Department is opening a new front in the battle for voting rights in response to a Supreme Court ruling that dealt a major setback to voter protections.


BULL. FUCKING. SHIT.

You want voter protection, ID every voter...(Oh wait, can't do that because the poor can't afford a $15 ID? Deduct from their EBT cards then or give everyone eligible a free voter ID card.).

This will ensure each voter's vote counts and isn't stolen by identity fraud.


Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:34:16 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/25/2013 5:36:17 AM EST by Bartholomew_Roberts]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By lilMAC25:
PS, didnt the Supreme Court JUST rule that the shit that little faggot is babbling about is unConstitutional
View Quote


No, the Supreme Court said it was unconstitutional to require preclearance for Texas and other states based on voting registration practices and numbers from 1960. Suprisingly, this incredibly obvious statement had been existing law since that time. Texas was required to get preclearance in 2012 because it had few blacks registered to vote and poll tests in 1960.

Holder is indicating he is going to try and make the case that Texas is still so racist it must submit all of its voting plans to DOJ for preclearance; but he will have to use recent evidence to make the case. That is why he is bringing the case to the Federal court at San Antonio.

So just to square everyone away:

1. Overriding states democratically elected representatives so that unelected bureaucrats and judges run the process by which they vote = justice.
2. Requiring a voter ID = discrimination.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:38:51 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By rca2222:
How odd it is to have a DOJ that shows open contempt for court decisions.



View Quote



They are revolutionaries.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:39:37 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By rca2222:
How odd it is to have a DOJ that shows open contempt for court decisions.



View Quote



Imagine Obama picking Holder for the SC and he gets the nod from both sides ( yeah, far from likely, but the thought is frightening )
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:43:36 AM EST
Whinny little cunt is just trying to interfere with Texas' latest gerrymandering.

He'll lose.

I hope we can cut Shelia Jackson Lee this time.

Out on your ass bitch!
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:44:03 AM EST





Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:44:14 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By joedirt1977:
Yet he was cool with the black panthers outside polling stations.
View Quote

Racial Minorities cannot be racist.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:45:36 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By The_Macallan:


http://i.ytimg.com/vi/neGbKHyGuHU/0.jpg


View Quote

Just a couple of members from a community organization promoting equality in voting is all.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:45:40 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bobby_the_Hun:



We all know what will happen, but then again, we're kinda there now
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bobby_the_Hun:
Originally Posted By USMCTanker:
Originally Posted By Possum-Sammich:
They are extremely worried that the new voter ID laws and district maps will keep Texas from shifting to D. I would say that with amnesty, and without voter ID, the state will vote Democratic for president within a decade. If that happens, the Democrats have a lock on the presidency.

You would not believe the political machine that has sprung up here in the last 4-6 years. It's an organized, pervasive effort to get minority voters registered and to the polls during the early voting period. Go to the church, get bussed to the polls, vote, and return for a free chicken dinner. The minority turnout rates during early voting used to be horrible, but it's better than Republican turnout in many areas now.


Democrats are committed, if nothing else. They devote their lives to the "cause". That's why so many become teachers, professors, and activist lawyers.

If and when this country suffers from one party rule in the not-too-distant future, then there's no telling what will happen.


If you think these fuckers are unhinged now, just wait until they have complete power over all three branches of government without any meaningful opposition. God help us.



We all know what will happen, but then again, we're kinda there now


It's going to get much worse.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:46:40 AM EST
Postconstitutional America.

It gets worse from here on out....
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:52:43 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Andr0id:
I just can't say Fuck This Guy enough.
View Quote

Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:54:37 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By rca2222:
How odd it is to have a DOJ that shows open contempt for court decisions.



View Quote



That isn't the case. The Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 said basically "these areas have a history of racism and are covered by this Act.". Because of this racism, any area that meets the criteria of Section 4, is subject to Section 5 of the VRA (preclearance by DOJ). The Supreme Court invalidated only Section 4; because it was based on formulas that were over 50 years old. Hell, Texas was majority Democrat when the practices complained about were common.

The VRA also has Section 3 - this Section says that if a court finds that an area intentionally discriminated against voters based on race, they are subject to Section 5 as well. Since the formulas under Section 4 were found unconstitutional, DOJ, several groups have filed suit against Texas under Section 3. Texas is viewed as low-hanging fruit because the Federal court in San Antonio that reviewed their districting plans for 2012 found the plans discriminatory. Not suprisingly, that district is also where these groups filed their suit against Texas. Texas made a motion to dismiss the suit claiming the groups lacked standing and that only DOJ could bring the suit. DOJ had until the 26th to put in their $.02. They declined to answer until today and then said "Looks good to me!". No big shock there.

These groups have timed it so that they'll get a friendly decision and injunction from the lower court that will effect the 2014 elections; but probably not enough time for a higher court to overturn the decision prior to the 2014 primaries and maybe even the general election. Again, not unexpected.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:54:57 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kihn:


He lives in the 60's and 70's. That's his reality. He's still that college black revolutionary fighting the system. He fails to recognize that now, since he is the system he was against in the 70's. Black power!

http://i.istockimg.com/file_thumbview_approve/7102027/2/stock-illustration-7102027-three-power-fist-black.jpg
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kihn:
Originally Posted By lilMAC25:
In the 1960s and before. Not now. Fuck off and die Holder.


He lives in the 60's and 70's. That's his reality. He's still that college black revolutionary fighting the system. He fails to recognize that now, since he is the system he was against in the 70's. Black power!

http://i.istockimg.com/file_thumbview_approve/7102027/2/stock-illustration-7102027-three-power-fist-black.jpg
no way...


Link Posted: 7/25/2013 5:55:10 AM EST
Texas blue in 3...2...

If the libs don't do it the fed will!!
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 6:04:49 AM EST
Eric Holder is a dick.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 6:08:02 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Possum-Sammich:
They are extremely worried that the new voter ID laws and district maps will keep Texas from shifting to D. I would say that with amnesty, and without voter ID, the state will vote Democratic for president within a decade. If that happens, the Democrats have a lock on the presidency.

You would not believe the political machine that has sprung up here in the last 4-6 years. It's an organized, pervasive effort to get minority voters registered and to the polls during the early voting period. Go to the church, get bussed to the polls, vote, and return for a free chicken dinner. The minority turnout rates during early voting used to be horrible, but it's better than Republican turnout in many areas now.
View Quote



It's all part of a master plan. If you haven't done so already, go read The Blueprint: How the Democrats Won Colorado (and Why Republicans Everywhere Should Care)

It worked in Colorado, and they are applying it to TX.
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 6:35:14 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/25/2013 10:40:03 AM EST by EMSflyer]
Well this pisses me right off...

Edit because I was too pissed off to spell a simple word correctly.....
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 8:06:33 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bartholomew_Roberts:



That isn't the case. The Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 said basically "these areas have a history of racism and are covered by this Act.". Because of this racism, any area that meets the criteria of Section 4, is subject to Section 5 of the VRA (preclearance by DOJ). The Supreme Court invalidated only Section 4; because it was based on formulas that were over 50 years old. Hell, Texas was majority Democrat when the practices complained about were common.

The VRA also has Section 3 - this Section says that if a court finds that an area intentionally discriminated against voters based on race, they are subject to Section 5 as well. Since the formulas under Section 4 were found unconstitutional, DOJ, several groups have filed suit against Texas under Section 3. Texas is viewed as low-hanging fruit because the Federal court in San Antonio that reviewed their districting plans for 2012 found the plans discriminatory. Not suprisingly, that district is also where these groups filed their suit against Texas. Texas made a motion to dismiss the suit claiming the groups lacked standing and that only DOJ could bring the suit. DOJ had until the 26th to put in their $.02. They declined to answer until today and then said "Looks good to me!". No big shock there.

These groups have timed it so that they'll get a friendly decision and injunction from the lower court that will effect the 2014 elections; but probably not enough time for a higher court to overturn the decision prior to the 2014 primaries and maybe even the general election. Again, not unexpected.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bartholomew_Roberts:
Originally Posted By rca2222:
How odd it is to have a DOJ that shows open contempt for court decisions.






That isn't the case. The Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 said basically "these areas have a history of racism and are covered by this Act.". Because of this racism, any area that meets the criteria of Section 4, is subject to Section 5 of the VRA (preclearance by DOJ). The Supreme Court invalidated only Section 4; because it was based on formulas that were over 50 years old. Hell, Texas was majority Democrat when the practices complained about were common.

The VRA also has Section 3 - this Section says that if a court finds that an area intentionally discriminated against voters based on race, they are subject to Section 5 as well. Since the formulas under Section 4 were found unconstitutional, DOJ, several groups have filed suit against Texas under Section 3. Texas is viewed as low-hanging fruit because the Federal court in San Antonio that reviewed their districting plans for 2012 found the plans discriminatory. Not suprisingly, that district is also where these groups filed their suit against Texas. Texas made a motion to dismiss the suit claiming the groups lacked standing and that only DOJ could bring the suit. DOJ had until the 26th to put in their $.02. They declined to answer until today and then said "Looks good to me!". No big shock there.

These groups have timed it so that they'll get a friendly decision and injunction from the lower court that will effect the 2014 elections; but probably not enough time for a higher court to overturn the decision prior to the 2014 primaries and maybe even the general election. Again, not unexpected.

I understand your reply, and I don't disagree with the technicalities. My comment was directed more at the spirit of the decision and the sour grapes response from DOJ regarding this and the Zimmerman verdict. That and the racial pandering associated with both that Holder has been engaged in recently.


Link Posted: 7/25/2013 8:07:05 AM EST
So does every state in the Union
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 8:09:33 AM EST
Well fuck'em if they can't take a joke.

Can we just get this shit over with already?
Link Posted: 7/25/2013 8:10:52 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By rca2222:

I understand your reply, and I don't disagree with the technicalities. My comment was directed more at the spirit of the decision and the sour grapes response from DOJ regarding this and the Zimmerman verdict. That and the racial pandering associated with both that Holder has been engaged in recently.


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By rca2222:
Originally Posted By Bartholomew_Roberts:
Originally Posted By rca2222:
How odd it is to have a DOJ that shows open contempt for court decisions.






That isn't the case. The Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 said basically "these areas have a history of racism and are covered by this Act.". Because of this racism, any area that meets the criteria of Section 4, is subject to Section 5 of the VRA (preclearance by DOJ). The Supreme Court invalidated only Section 4; because it was based on formulas that were over 50 years old. Hell, Texas was majority Democrat when the practices complained about were common.

The VRA also has Section 3 - this Section says that if a court finds that an area intentionally discriminated against voters based on race, they are subject to Section 5 as well. Since the formulas under Section 4 were found unconstitutional, DOJ, several groups have filed suit against Texas under Section 3. Texas is viewed as low-hanging fruit because the Federal court in San Antonio that reviewed their districting plans for 2012 found the plans discriminatory. Not suprisingly, that district is also where these groups filed their suit against Texas. Texas made a motion to dismiss the suit claiming the groups lacked standing and that only DOJ could bring the suit. DOJ had until the 26th to put in their $.02. They declined to answer until today and then said "Looks good to me!". No big shock there.

These groups have timed it so that they'll get a friendly decision and injunction from the lower court that will effect the 2014 elections; but probably not enough time for a higher court to overturn the decision prior to the 2014 primaries and maybe even the general election. Again, not unexpected.

I understand your reply, and I don't disagree with the technicalities. My comment was directed more at the spirit of the decision and the sour grapes response from DOJ regarding this and the Zimmerman verdict. That and the racial pandering associated with both that Holder has been engaged in recently.




To be fair, DOJ does show open contempt for a lot of court decisions lately. I just didn't see this as a good example. Plus everyone knew it was coming as soon as SCOTUS declared Section 4 formulas unconstitutional. If all the preclearance states (or even a lot of them) escape the DOJ oversight of their voting process, the Democrats have a big problem.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top