If you want to change this country this has to STOP!

Granule said:
Actually, this country has become socialistic with traces of a democracy. The good news is, patriotic Americans won't be putting up with that for too much longer.
Click to expand...


insane idiots rambling on the internets don't get to redefine words
 
This country is a democracy.

that is evident by the very definition of the word.


How fucking stupid are you to rant right wing money powers stupid talking points designed to fool the people into voting for the very harm the wealthy want to do to your own life ?


very stupid


you have to accept the definitions of words or you are relegated to the nutter line
 
The government of the United States of America is the federal government of the constitutional republic of fifty states that constitute the United States...

600px-Great_Seal_of_the_United_States_%28obverse%29.svg.png


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_of_the_United_States
 
This country IS a democracy.


saying it is not means you have to ignore the very definitions of the words
 
evince said:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/republic


Definition of REPUBLIC


1

a (1) : a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government

b (1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government

c : a usually specified republican government of a political unit <the French Fourth Republic>

2

: a body of persons freely engaged in a specified activity <the republic of letters>


3

: a constituent political and territorial unit of the former nations of Czechoslovakia, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or Yugoslavia
Click to expand...




facts matter
 
evince said:
http://www.brennancenter.org/legal-work/south-carolina-v-holder




South Carolina v. Holder



October 15, 2012|



Voting Rights & Elections,

Restricting the Vote




The League of Women Voters of South Carolina and Craig Debose, a South Carolina resident who lacks photo identification, intervened in South Carolina v. Holder to block South Carolina’s new, restrictive law requiring photo ID to vote. The Brennan Center for Justice and Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law represented the League and Mr. Debose with pro bono counsel at the law firms of Sullivan & Cromwell and Derfner Altman & Wilborn. Additional intervenor defendants included the South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, the Family Unit Inc. – a South Carolina based non-profit that helps South Carolina citizens register to vote – and various South Carolina residents who would be affected if the new law were to go into effect.

The League argued that the law would erect unnecessary barriers to voting and could disenfranchise thousands of minority voters. Thus, the new identification requirement would interfere with its mission to encourage civic participation through voting. Mr. Debose had made previous attempts over the span of several years to obtain a South Carolina photo ID, but was unable to do so. Mr. Debose argued that if the new law were to go into effect, he would not be able to vote.

Under the federal Voting Rights Act, changes to South Carolina’s election laws must be “pre-cleared” by the Department of Justice or a D.C federal court. South Carolina originally sought preclearance from the Department of Justice (DOJ) on June 28, 2011. On December 23, 2011, DOJ announced that it would not preclear the law. On February 8, 2012 South Carolina challenged the DOJ’s ruling in federal district court. A complete list of the letters from South Carolina to the DOJ, from DOJ to South Carolina, and from the Brennan Center to the DOJ is available here.

On October 10, 2012, a three judge panel ruled there was not enough time left to implement the law for the 2012 general election. The law will be in effect for future elections, but the court clarified aspects of the law so that it “does not require a photo ID to vote.” Instead, South Carolinians can continue to use their non-photo voter registration card after 2012, so long as the voter states the reason for not having obtained a photo ID.

South Carolina’s photo ID law is just one of many restrictive laws passed in the states since the beginning of the 2011 legislative session. For more information on these laws, see the Brennan Center report Voting Law Changes in 2012.

Press Release for South Carolina v. Holder decision available here.

Key Documents
•Memorandum Opinion as to Preclearance
Click to expand...
 
evince said:
Errors in the list[edit]

Florida has re-edited its felon list five times since 1998 to correct errors.

The first list DBT Online provided to the Division of Elections in April 2000 contained the names of 181,157 persons. Approximately 65,776 of those included on the first list were identified as felons.

In May 2000, DBT discovered that approximately 8,000 names were erroneously placed on the exclusion list, mostly those of former Texas prisoners who were included on a DBT list that turned out never to have been convicted of more than a misdemeanor. Later in the month, DBT provided a revised list to the Division of Elections (DOE) containing a total of 173,127 persons. Of those included on the "corrected list", 57,746 were identified as felons.

Examples:
Thomas Cooper, Date of Birth September 5, 1973; crime, unknown; conviction date, January 30, 2007
Johnny Jackson Jr., Date of Birth, 1970; crime, none, mistaken for John Fitzgerald Jackson who was still in his jail cell in Texas
Wallace McDonald, Date of Birth, 1928; crime, fell asleep on a bus-stop bench in 1959
Reverend Willie Dixon, convicted in the 1970s at the latest; note, received full executive clemency
Randall J. Higginbotham, Date of Birth, August 28, 1960; crimes, none, mistaken for Sean David Higginbotham, born June 16, 1971
Reverend Willy D. Whiting Jr., crime, a speeding ticket from 1990, confused with Willy J. Whiting who have birthdays 2 days apart

Demographics of the purge list[edit]

According to the Palm Beach Post, among other problems with the list, although blacks accounted for 88% of those removed from the rolls, they made up only about 11% of Florida's voters.[9]

Voter demographics authority David Bositis, a senior research associate at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies in Washington, DC, reviewed The Nation's findings and concluded that the purge-and-block program was "a patently obvious technique to discriminate against black voters". He noted that based on nationwide conviction rates, African-Americans would account for 46% of the felon group wrongly disfranchised.[10]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Central_Voter_File#Errors_in_the_list
Click to expand...


facts
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top