Renegade Public Forums
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » For Crimservative...
For Crimservative... [message #109839] Tue, 24 August 2004 12:54 Go to next message
SuperFlyingEngi is currently offline  SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
General (1 Star)
Last night on mIRC I said I was too tired to look up lots of links to support 100,000 disenfranchised voters... Damn that Katherine Harris.

First, a history. Florida hasn't been plagued by voter disenfranchisement simply in the 2000 election....

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/apr2001/flor-a09.shtml

Looks like those 94,000 are still without a vote, because if they got one, Jeb Bush would lose to another candidate. And we can't have that, now, can we?

http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/2002/11/04_Palast.html

More later, if necessary.


"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)

"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)

The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
For Crimservative... [message #109855] Tue, 24 August 2004 14:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Nodbugger is currently offline  Nodbugger
Messages: 976
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
Colonel
I wish you retards would go look up Florida laws.

In the state of Florida anyone who serves jail time is not allowed to vote. The person can get their vote back if they ask for it by a judge. These people were not disenfranchised. They were simply criminals that hadn't gotten their vote back.

Oh, and not even half of the voters barred from voting were black. Most where white. The link to this information is somewhere on CNN, If I find it I will post it.


http://www.n00bstories.com/image.fetch.php?id=1129285834
For Crimservative... [message #109862] Tue, 24 August 2004 14:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Crimson is currently offline  Crimson
Messages: 7427
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR
Yeah, and yesterday it was 50,000...now it's 100k?

I'm the bawss.
For Crimservative... [message #109888] Tue, 24 August 2004 16:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
SuperFlyingEngi is currently offline  SuperFlyingEngi
Messages: 1756
Registered: November 2003
Karma: 0
General (1 Star)
Crimson, I was just making a guess from what I've seen last night on mIRC.

Nodbugger

I wish you retards would go look up Florida laws.

In the state of Florida anyone who serves jail time is not allowed to vote. The person can get their vote back if they ask for it by a judge. These people were not disenfranchised. They were simply criminals that hadn't gotten their vote back.

Oh, and not even half of the voters barred from voting were black. Most where white. The link to this information is somewhere on CNN, If I find it I will post it.


Nodbugger, you don't know what the hell you are talking about. of course, felons are not allowed to vote, but [i]not[/i-felons are allowed to vote. Katherine Harris...wait, I won't even bother explaining it to you. Go be an ignorant fool somewhere else.


"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt (1918)

"The danger to political dissent is acute where the Government attempts to act under so vague a concept as the power to protect "domestic security." Given the difficulty of defining the domestic security interest, the danger of abuse in acting to protect that interest becomes apparent. --U.S. Supreme Court decision (407 U.S. 297 (1972)

The Liberal Media At Work
An objective look at media partisanship
For Crimservative... [message #109897] Tue, 24 August 2004 16:50 Go to previous message
Nodbugger is currently offline  Nodbugger
Messages: 976
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
Colonel
I'm not an ignorant fool you are, everyone that was supposedly disenfranchised were 99% criminal and were unaware of this law. Go look it up if you don't believe me.

http://www.n00bstories.com/image.fetch.php?id=1129285834
Previous Topic: FOX News ...
Next Topic: How low can you go?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Apr 29 07:32:44 MST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00618 seconds