Discussion for article #236921
How about no votes for him?
4 Likes
Thank you for this article. What a scum bag piece of shit he is - fucker!!
9 Likes
Nice to hear that after ending the Voting Rights and ending One person, one vote, he’ll be “done.” What else will there be left to do? Answer: Whatever the Koch Brothers want. He should be wearing his white sheet, but his publicist said to leave it home.
12 Likes
Since when does Prince Charles get to meddle in our electoral law?
12 Likes
He doesn’t mention how many electoral votes and Representatives he wants Texas to give back, due to all these people who don’t count.
20 Likes
How very 3/5ths of him.
14 Likes
Here is my plan. Your voting rights will be determined by an aggregate number determined by your age, location, and health status. The old and/or sick will be allowed one vote and the young, healthy will be given two votes. This will allow the country to represented by the people that will live with the latest legislation passed to have a greater say. This sounds at least as fair as Blum’s scheme.
12 Likes
All part of the plan: shift even more Federal power to more sparsely populated and rednecked-out regions than the Constitutional provisions for the US Senate do already by shifting the population that’s counted (and the Congressional districts that accompany them) away from urban centers. In conjunction, make sure that each rednecked-out state legislature passes ALEC-written laws to distribute electoral college votes by Congessional district instead of the traditional winner-take-all. Say hello to President Santorum.
The Supreme Court installed the Bush Reign of Error in spite of the readily predictable and lasting controversy, and have had no hesitation about rigging the game for themselves with the gutting of the Voting Rights Act and the enabling of unlimited and anonymous political contributions from even foreign interests that is the Citizens United decision. Nor will they with this scheme to vest more power in the gullible. It’s the only recourse they have in the face of the inevitable demographic shift that will drown them.
Plutocrats don’t like to cede influence, and they’re not taking it lying down like progressives so often do. They have long-term commitment, and the patience, strategy, and tactics to get the job done. They are real-life super-genius villains on par with the most vile of those depicted in fantasy comic books, but this ain’t no fucking fantasy.
16 Likes
You know, rather than killing of the right to vote by a ‘thousand small cuts’, why don’t these fascist fuckers just be done with it and just make landowners only eligible? White landowners only? Just get the coup fucking over with already so we can take to the streets and settle this bullshit once and for all. Goddamned I’m tired of this.
12 Likes
They’d be all for it — if welfare queen Cliven Bundy and his ilk gets to vote, that is.
2 Likes
Something else we can thank Ralph Nader and his acolytes for.
I was relieved – and quite surprised – when the Chief Injustice of the United States stepped back from his earlier position, shared with the other three notoriously corrupt Republican “justices” (yes, I know there is redundancy there), that there is nothing the matter with the CEO of a corporation appealing a judgement against it from giving the Chief Justice of the state supreme court hearing the appeal as much money as they want as long as it’s laundered properly.
4 Likes
Hear hear!
1 Like
Why shouldn’t districts be divided up by eligible voter count? (I am not a partisan troll, this is a serious question)
The eligible voters are the ones who are supposed to get to elect the official and influence policy decisions by their vote. Why should ineligible voters be part of the equation of district size?
I have a few fists here that would like to embrace his face.
What more proof do we need that think tanks like AEI have direct inroads to their well-groomed acolytes sitting on the court, and that they intend to impose their dogmatic exercises on every man, woman and child in the nation?
1 Like
What’s really amazing about this case is the deep analysis given it by the MSM. They are treating it as if the SCOTUS will be faced with an important legal issue. We all know what’s going to happen. This is not a legal issue. It’s a political issue and, as it stands, plaintiffs will win and One Person One Vote lose in a 5 to 4 decision. You can bet on it…
1 Like
I find it hard to believe this case is even being heard. The simple fact is that the elected representatives are supposed to represent everyone in their “district” or state irrespective of how many voters actually vote. I don’t see how the conservative, “original intent” wing of SCOTUS can ignore that fact.
“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative…”
— U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 2, clause 3
Subsequent amendments of course eliminated the 3/5 rule. I don’t see how anyone can read that as being anything other than total population.
7 Likes
You know – and I’m among the most guilty – when some of us call these people out as being stupid, we’re kidding ourselves. We’re actually playing into their game.
They only play stupid to pander to those who genuinely are stupid. The stupid things they say are for the consumption of the genuinely stupid. The last thing they’d want to be public is that they’re highly educated sonsofbitches with a maniacal obsession for power. They don’t fuck around, and they’re anything but stupid. But they in fact revel in the idea that we call them stupid, because the genuinely stupid are enraged by it and take it as a personal affront.
6 Likes
Wanderer, for example, your position would eliminate representation for children in any district, as they are not eligible voters. Forget the undocumented, felons, etc. Members of Congress are supposed to represent all people in their district, not just those privileged enough to have the vote.
2 Likes