Racism in the Press

Lest anyone think I'm for the forcing of ID, I am not. I am against double standards of government being allowed to require you to spend thousands of dollars if you're a lower middle class family trying to save for a better life, but not allowed if you're a potential voter they want to scoop up.

I say no ID and no individual mandate. I try to be philosophically consistent that way.

 

In WA where I live all voting is by mail but when I lived in CA to obtain an absentee ballot the person had to cerfify that voting at the local polling location would not be possible. In short, a person couldn't choose to use an absentee ballot just because they didn't want to go to the poll. It can also be noted that the application for an absentee ballot has time constraints (i.e. can't request one after a certain date) and has to be applied for each and every election. That imposes a double burden on the voter because first they have to request the ballot and then vote.

Once agian if there was a real problem with voter identification fraud at the polls perhaps the Vote ID laws could be rationalized but the fact is that this isn't a problem and never has been. There are all types of voting fraud but the one type least likely to ever occur is voter identification fraud at the polls. It is basically a non-existant problem that doesn't exist according to every expert. Not even the Republicans creating these laws can point to any significant cases of voter identification fraud at the polls. As I noted in Texas it avereged one case per election over a six year period (four elections and four cases of possible voter indentification fraud being prosecuted).

What part of the fact that voter identification fraud at the polls doesn't actually exist to Republicans refuse the acknowledge?

The voter ID laws make no sense except based upon the demographics that show that blacks will be disproportionately disenfranchised so they won't vote for Democrats is being ignored. This is exactly like the Jim Crow voting laws in the South that were designed to keep poor blacks from voting. There is literally no difference between the two.

 

How can you possibly hold an election without checking IDs or having a registration list? I get that too many of these laws are intended to disenfranchise minorities, but having those measures in place is essential to the integrity of elections. Sure, it doesn't happen to any significant degree, but people think it does, so the effect is the same.

The US needs a federal elections commission ASAP. This state by state thing is just awful.

 

Actually the "most cheating" is committed by those not qualified to vote, predominately ex-felons (BTW most of which demographically are black because of racial bias in our criminal justice system and law enforcement), and by duplicate voting by being registered at two different polling locations and voting at both or submitting an absentee ballot and also voting at the polling place.

Virtually never is voting fraud related to voter identification.

 

Once agian Obamacare has nothing to do with voting but I'll address this.

Whether a person with $38,000 in income has to pay anything for health insurance is based upon the following:

http://www.obamacarewatch.org/primer/exchanges-and-premium-subsidies

At the very most they would be required to pay a maximum $3,610/yr or just under $70/wk (out of $730 in income) but only if they were single. Remember though that I don't support Obamacare but those are the numbers.

While I've seen alternatives related to establishing personal idenfication I've seen no provisions that would cover the costs of documenting US citizenship. For example if a person in Texas or North Carolina was born in California and doesn't have a passport or birth certificate then how are they going to estabish that they are a US citizen which entitles them to the Right to Vote and a Voter ID card? Is Texas or North Carolina going to pay the costs to the person that has to order a certified copy of their birth certificate?

This still continues to ignore the fact that VOTER IDENTIFICATION FRAUD AT THE POLLS IS VIRTUALLY NON-EXISTANT IN THE UNITED STATES!!!

There is no rational foundation for requiring a voter to present identification to vote at the polls.

 

Although Republicans were more likely than Democrats to express racial prejudice in the questions measuring explicit racism (79 percent among Republicans compared with 32 percent among Democrats), the implicit test found little difference between the two parties.

That test showed a majority of both Democrats and Republicans held anti-black feelings (55 percent of Democrats and 64 percent of Republicans), as did about half of political independents (49 percent).

Further, the same results apply when white Americans are tested about Hispanics.

Racial issues ARE NOT a political party problem...they are pervasive in our culture.

IMO every American citizen should hold some legal form of identification...how can this possibly be an issue?

Funny you comment about 'Republicans' stopping legal immigration for employment demands when many or most CEO's are Republican??

There is no American of age who cannot vote if she or he wishes to do so (assuming state felon laws). Elections are held every two and four years and this implies every American can easily comply with voter ID rules or any other legal identification policy...this truly is not a big deal except in politics...

 

Someplace on the federal government web pages a few months ago I came across a projection of the 'participation rate' through 2050. If I remember correctly, it showed a staggering reduction in the rate by 2050. I don't have the time or interest to chase down this data again but I remember it well because of the very surprising numbers; while today we're like ~60% I think it showed 30-40%. As usual in their data they did not provide backup info on the projection.

How does this unfold for the USA? Obama has budget projections that show a minimum of $500 billion deficits for a few years then this increases to $1 trillion primarily to fund Obamacare subsidies and general government growth. If we only 'assume' a 10 year period with 6 of the years over $500 billion and 4 of the years at $1 trillion, this is another $7 trillion in national debt! We'll be at $24 trillion in debt and paying ~$650 billion per year in interest!

If we must slow down some of the deficit spending, let's say by 50%, using the assumption above, the government must extract another $3.5 trillion in taxation during the next 10 years, and/or greatly reduce government spending. How will this effect the economy?

How this unfolds is...it is not sustainable!

 

That which cannot be sustained won't be sustained.

 

It is true that racial prejudice crosses all political lines but it is also true that it can only be effectively dealt with within a political ideology. A "conservative" is not going to listen to a "liberal" addressing racial prejudice within the "conservative" political ideology.

"Republicans" are not going to listen to a "Democrat" pointing out that 79% of Republicans express explicit anti-black racial prejudice. They simply deny it calling it liberal propaganda. They need to hear that from their political leaders, ALL OF THE THEIR POLITICAL LEADERS, and maybe then they'd realize they have a problem that they must deal with. As it is they deny the problem exists and do nothing to rectify the problem.

I'm on a Libertarian Forum and I'm quick to point out explicit racial prejude to my fellow Libertarians. They like to deny it as well and because I'm not a "political leader" I don't have much influence but at least it's coming from "within" the ideology and not from outside where it can just be denied. I have some "ground" because of a commonly shared political ideology.

It's an issue because it reeks of "Police State" as there should be no general reason for having to respond to the "Show me your papers" by the Gestapo. Unless there is a valid need for identification, such as operating a vehicle on a public road, then the person should not have to "Show their papers" to anyone expecially government officials.

Provide a compelling argument to support the need for personal identification and it can be justified but lacking that, such as in the case of virtually no cases of voter identification fraud at the polls, and the demand that a person "show me their papers" cannot be rationalized in a free society.

A CEO is not a politican passing immigration laws but we can look a CEO's like Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg that believes our immigration laws that restrict immigration are a huge mistake as does the American Enterprise Institute and many economists.

http://news.yahoo.com/open-immigration-could-double-global-economy-162100675.html

Great in theory but short on reality as we know from the Jim Crow voting laws that were finally abolished in the 1960's but those Jim Crow voting laws have returned. There is fundamentally no difference between the Voter ID Laws today and the Jim Crow voting laws in the South prior to the civil rights movement. The laws aren't based upon a compelling agrument because voter identification fraud at the polls is virtually non-existant in the United States. As noted in North Carolina I was unable to find any cases of voter identification fraud at the polls existing and in Texas that also passed a Voter ID Law there are only four cases documented over six-years (four election cycle) that only reflects about one case per over 7 million votes.

Always remember as well that the Supreme Court has already ruled that any form of "poll tax" either direct or indirect is Unconstitutional. If a person is required to purchase a certified copy of their birth certificate to establish that they are a US citizen entitled to vote then it is a de facto poll tax and is unconstitutional. In all cases where I've read the "voter ID laws" they require that the person prove US citizenship and that would require all natural born citizens to purchase a copy of their birth certificate and that is Unconstitutional according to the US Supreme Court because it's a de facto poll tax.

These new Jim Crow voting laws are finally reaching the courts and being struck down:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...photo-id-requirement-for-pennsylvania-voters/

 

More white people in North Carolina without an ID than there are blacks. You just see racism wherever you want to see it.

 

the North Caroline Voter ID law is a Jim Crow voting law
.
Let me see if I understand -- people who buy their clothes and dress themselves, people who shop for groceries and feed themselves, people who watch TV and understand it, some people who own and drive a vehicle, people with jobs, people who have a roof over their head, people who can read and write, people who can communicate verbally, people who understand bus schedules and ride the bus, and people who pay attention to the political candidates and vote -- are unable to apply for an ID card? Run that by me again but drop the race crap.

 

Working towards sustainability means we're being PROACTIVE while accepting the status quo means we're being REACTIVE...

 

IMO if we avoided politics we would not be discussing racial issues as a political ideology...instead we would make laws which serve the best interest of the nation...whatever these laws might be.

Don't go to extremes like 'gestapo' and 'show me your papers' because these are not reasons to have personal identification. Whether it's a police officer, or government official, or public department, or to vote...all of these should be able to ask for identification. I carry identification in the USA and carry more when I'm out of the USA...there is zero ambiguity about who I am; if I can do this then anyone can do this.

Most CEO's are not politicians but those involved in employing green card workers are involved in these matters whether directly to government or via lobbyists. Again, many/most of these CEO's are Republican and have no problem with legal immigration.

It is reality...not theory. If an American cannot obtain legal identification in 2 or 4 years time, then IMO they should be deported! Enough excuses...if identification makes the world a better place then get some.

Lastly, if someone says 'all Blacks must obtain legal identification' then this is a problem. If someone decides ALL Americans must obtain legal identification, this is not about Jim Crow and not about Blacks...

 

Racism in the press. Here is an example.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkUTish7RhI
Try to find this on msnbc.
Then try to find msnbc tea party racist.
Tell how well that works for you.

 

Why does anyone care about this other than political and racial idiocy? The NC law is not in effect until 2016 and IMO anyone who cannot obtain a legal identification in 2-3 years time is just making excuses. Ole poor me is a tiring excuse for all of this nonsense!

 

"Pay" for insurance premiums. If they want any healthcare, they will be paying for it out of pocket unless they have major health issues.

 

Like here?
http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/bestoftv/2014/02/23/nr-car-prank-racism-long.cnn.html

 

Blacks have a reputation. Whites have a reputation. Groups earn their reputation. Other people react to your reputation. That's what I see in the video.

 

In that case ALL priests are child rapers, ALL white male bankers in suits are scam artists, ALL white males with tattoos and bald heads are members of the KKK... need I go on?

 

CEO's are also typically Wealthy WASP Males that have historically discriminated against and oppressed every other demograhic group in the United States historically. Not really a "banner of virtue" when waving an anti-discrimination flag.

I oppose any law requiring a person to carry government issued identification because it violates my Right of Liberty. A person should never, and I mean never, be subjected to a criminal complaint for not doing anything. Requiring a person to carry or present government issued identification creates a situation where, by inaction, a person becomes a criminal subject to prosecution under the law.

Jim Crow laws are those laws that "by effect" adversely affect African-Americans (and/or other minorities). If a law stated "African-Americans can't vote" then it would blatantly violate the 15th Amendment but when a law imposes a requirement, without mentioning race, that disproportionately results in African-Americans being denied their Right to Vote then it is a Jim Crow law. Every study done shows that African-Americans will be highly disproportionately denied their Right to Vote based upon the new "voter ID laws" which makes they Jim Crow laws. The effect of the law will prevent African-American citizens from voting.

Imposing any government fee, directly or indirectly, as a requirement for a person to vote has already been ruled unconstitutional. It was unconstitutional for Virgina to impose a direct poll tax of $1.50 and it is unconstitutional for North Caroline and Texas to impose a requirement for a citizen to spend $30-$45 to purchase a birth certificate so they can prove they are US citizens to vote.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=383&invol=663

We can also note that these new Jim Crow voter ID laws are now being adjudicated and the Courts are citing the fact that there is no rational basis for them.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...photo-id-requirement-for-pennsylvania-voters/

There is absolutely "no need" for these nefarious voter ID laws and all studies establish that they would disproportionaly disenfranchise African-American voters which establishes that they are nothing but the latest attempt in imposing Jim Crow voting laws.

Every Republican that supports these laws should be correctly labeled as a Jim Crow Republican and a racist because that is exactly what they are. They are no different than the KKK politicians from the pre-civil rights era. Jim Crow was alive and well in the past and these new laws show that Jim Crow is alive and well in the Republican Party today.

 

It is my understanding that "preventative" health care is free under Obamacare. Of course, like most Americans, I'm not directly affected by Obamacare but then I still oppose much of what is contained in it. I agree that the problem exists (we've known of the problem since 1948 as I recall) but don't believe Obamacare was the correct way to address the problem.

Still off-topic because this thread is about the Jim Crow voter ID law in North Carolina (and other states) and how the press interjects racism into the issue instead of addressing the problem which are racist Jim Crow voting laws being passed by Republican controlled State governments.

 

Stop making me feel guilty for being part of a genocidal, slave trading, colonialist, violently psychopathic group. It's not my fault my ancestry is mostly European. At least I'm not Norse as far as I know. Those Vikings! What a bunch of bloodthirsty crazies. Never turn your back on one.

 

Do you deny groups have reputations, earned or unearned?

 

Trayvon Martin died because "black teenagers have a reputation for being criminals" and George Zimmerman reacted to that "reputation" by stereotyping Trayvon Martin. Had Zimmerman not believed that Martin was in the neighborhood for nefarious criminal purposes based upon a stereotype of young black teenagers he would have never followed Martin that fateful night and Martin would be alive today.

No person should ever be judged nor any action taken against them based upon a stereotype, ever!!!

 

I just posted that they did didn't I.