Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

NC Republican/General Assembly Idiocy


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
45 replies to this topic

#13 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,277
  • Reputation: 479
HUDDLER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 11:43 AM

I keep hearing about obscure bills being filed but nothing crazy being passed yet. This is a symptom of something... Can you guess what it is?


Sky is falling?

#14 I Mean He Was Found Guilty

I Mean He Was Found Guilty

    Jerry Richard$on and Gettledouche apologist

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 12,249
  • Reputation: 5,684
SUPPORTER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 11:44 AM

I keep hearing about obscure bills being filed but nothing crazy being passed yet. This is a symptom of something... Can you guess what it is?


so obscure that the majority leader is a sponsor

#15 I Mean He Was Found Guilty

I Mean He Was Found Guilty

    Jerry Richard$on and Gettledouche apologist

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 12,249
  • Reputation: 5,684
SUPPORTER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 11:45 AM

Sky is falling?


and the huddle's biggest fan of voter disenfranchisement finally puts in an appearance

#16 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,277
  • Reputation: 479
HUDDLER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 11:51 AM

I've made this statement many times. I want every legal voter to vote. Period. You can pin ignorance, lack of care, etc to the reasons you want on any persons that take issue with it, but there's no poll taxing, no literacy testing, no bill that has been put to paper that resembles anything you all are saying is going on and preventing legal voters from voting. States have the right to determine their means of voting. Name one provision that doesn't pass constitutional muster or the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

But continue on...don't let this take the thread down a different path.

#17 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 18-October 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,155
  • Reputation: 2,343
HUDDLER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 11:56 AM

so am I understanding this right that college aged people and their parents would have to decide between the right to vote and being considered dependents for tax purposes? That seems like a huge effort to disenfranchise young people. It might be technically legal (though I'm not sure on that) but that doesn't mean it should be done.

#18 Cat

Cat

    Terminally bored

  • Joined: 20-May 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 9,051
  • Reputation: 1,484
HUDDLER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 11:57 AM

Wasn't it ruled that the 14th admendment enforces the Bill of Rights at the State level?

#19 I Mean He Was Found Guilty

I Mean He Was Found Guilty

    Jerry Richard$on and Gettledouche apologist

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 12,249
  • Reputation: 5,684
SUPPORTER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 12:05 PM

I've made this statement many times. I want every legal voter to vote. Period. You can pin ignorance, lack of care, etc to the reasons you want on any persons that take issue with it, but there's no poll taxing, no literacy testing, no bill that has been put to paper that resembles anything you all are saying is going on and preventing legal voters from voting. States have the right to determine their means of voting. Name one provision that doesn't pass constitutional muster or the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

But continue on...don't let this take the thread down a different path.


it fails the undue burden standard outright, for one. forcing parents to accept what is a de facto tax penalty based on where their adult children register to vote is a glaring problem.

i refuse to believe for a second that you don't understand that this is intended to make voting as annoying as possible for demographics who threaten republicans. there's absolutely no use for it otherwise no matter how obtuse you want to be about it.

#20 I Mean He Was Found Guilty

I Mean He Was Found Guilty

    Jerry Richard$on and Gettledouche apologist

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 12,249
  • Reputation: 5,684
SUPPORTER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 12:13 PM

so am I understanding this right that college aged people and their parents would have to decide between the right to vote and being considered dependents for tax purposes? That seems like a huge effort to disenfranchise young people. It might be technically legal (though I'm not sure on that) but that doesn't mean it should be done.


g5 is going to argue from the standpoint of pure legality because he knows he doesn't have a leg to stand on when it comes to anything regarding the implications stemming from the application of such a law. he "doesn't see the harm" in any kind of voter suppression effort.

#21 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 23,831
  • Reputation: 3,112
HUDDLER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 12:21 PM

If the govt had some empirical evidence where x# of voting fraud happened I kinda sorta could see the idea behind this but I'm with ireg on this. It totally appears to be making voting a big time hassle.
This is where if I was consulting Rep candidates I would say just blow others away with your track record and taking care of big issues so you won't sweat worrying getting votes.

The Reps are the guy who finally got the pretty girl to go out with him and he takes her to a place he wants to eat at and talks only about himself. Then is baffled when she doesn't answer the phone for a second date.

#22 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 18,268
  • Reputation: 6,644
Administrators

Posted 03 April 2013 - 12:22 PM

so obscure that the majority leader is a sponsor


fine, in this case I rescind the obscure part.

But in the next 12 threads, I won't be so kind!

#23 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • Joined: 12-December 08
  • posts: 9,360
  • Reputation: 1,526
SUPPORTER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 12:42 PM

I bet it won't pass, however I hate the religion thing.

Both seem pretty stupid to me however.

Then again, I am not really a Republican either.

#24 Gazi

Gazi

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 07-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 8,008
  • Reputation: 382
HUDDLER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 12:59 PM

They can't claim them as dependents and can't carry them on their insurance under Obamacare? WTF is this?