Millions Blocked from Voting in U.S. Election

[Doctor Manhattan]

Millions of U.S. citizens, including a disproportionate number of black voters, will be blocked from voting in the Nov. 2 presidential election because of legal barriers, faulty procedures or dirty tricks, according to civil rights and legal experts. (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040922/us_nm/campaign_vote_dc_3)

<a href="http://www.whitehouse.org/"><img src="http://members.cox.net/nicksporsche/bushchen.jpg" border=0></a>

[silera]

The Civil Rights movement was way overrated.

Martin Luther King was a left wing liberal unpatriotic asshole.


<center>http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/silerass.jpg
<font size="3" color="red">AND WHAT?</font></center><font color="FBF2F7">

[furie]

convicted felons shouldn't be able to vote. This has been the case for 100 years, now it's news? dirty tricks. you know what's a dirty trick? a major news outlet atempting to sway the vote with forged documents.


<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/furie1335/.Pictures/rfsigs/uncanny141.jpg">

<a href="http://fallingtowardsapotheosis.blogspot.com/">mental vomit</a>

[silera]

Convicted felons are not allowed to vote in 14 states. Felonies include writing a bad check, and driving under the influence. edit: Each state has different rules as to what felonies are as well. So someone that can't vote in Florida that has such a law, they can move to a different state that doesn't have the law and vote there.

The fact is, the less money you have, the more likely you are to be convicted of a felony. The darker your skin, the more likely you are of being arrested.

These are Jim Crow laws in disguise.

I could not agree more that inmates in prison should not be allowed to vote, as they are deprived of their freedoms to pay for their crimes. However, once an convicted felon completes his/her prison sentence it is NOT ok to continue to deprive them of their rights as US citizens.


<center>http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/silerass.jpg
<font size="3" color="red">AND WHAT?</font></center><font color="FBF2F7">

This message was edited by silera on 9-24-04 @ 10:40 AM

[badorties]

Martin Luther King was a left wing liberal unpatriotic asshole.


according to the horrific literature placed on my windsheild a few years ago, he was also a communist, womanizer, black and didn't earn hi doctorate degree ...

fucking glendale ...


<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=badorties"><br>

+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+

[Freakshow]

Felonies include writing a bad check, and driving under the influence

So how many members of congress can't vote in their own elections?


<center><img width=300 src=http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=Freakshow>
Thanks Furtherman, SatCam, Reefdweller, and Monsterone!<br>Bacon Sandwich is an odd name for a ferret</center>

[silera]

dirty tricks. you know what's a dirty trick? a major news outlet atempting to sway the vote with forged documents.


Or the Office of the Presidency argueing for a war with forged documents.


<center>http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/silerass.jpg
<font size="3" color="red">AND WHAT?</font></center><font color="FBF2F7">

[LordJezo]

What a worthless liberal bias scare tactic "news' story of garbage.

Things like this are what keep the races seperated. The Democrats like it that way.. at least then they have the scare tactic since they have nothing else to offer black voters.

I like the way it says BLACKS CANT VOTE! But then says they are felons who are legally not allowed to.

Garbage and filth from the left, you shmucks are getting desperate.

------------------------
I KISS YOU!

[silera]

Additionally, Florida is one of 14 states that prohibit ex-felons from voting. Seven percent of the electorate but 16 percent of black voters in that state are disenfranchised.


In other swing states, 4.6 percent of voters in Iowa, but 25 percent of blacks, were disenfranchised in 2000 as ex-felons. In Nevada, it was 4.8 percent of all voters but 17 percent of blacks; in New Mexico, 6.2 percent of all voters but 25 percent of blacks.


In total, 13 percent of all black men are disenfranchised due to a felony conviction, according to the Commission on Civil Rights.

Please stop participating in this forum.

Idiot.


<center>http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/silerass.jpg
<font size="3" color="red">AND WHAT?</font></center><font color="FBF2F7">

This message was edited by silera on 9-24-04 @ 11:01 AM

[LordJezo]

.

This message was edited by LordJezo on 9-24-04 @ 11:10 AM

[LordJezo]

Additionally, Florida is one of 14 states that prohibit ex-felons from voting. Seven percent of the electorate but 16 percent of black voters in that state are disenfranchised.


In other swing states, 4.6 percent of voters in Iowa, but 25 percent of blacks, were disenfranchised in 2000 as ex-felons. In Nevada, it was 4.8 percent of all voters but 17 percent of blacks; in New Mexico, 6.2 percent of all voters but 25 percent of blacks.


In total, 13 percent of all black men are disenfranchised due to a felony conviction, according to the Commission on Civil Rights.

Please stop participating in this forum.

Idiot.



Why are strong right wing republican views considered those of an idiot? Would you say the same thing to Michael Savage or Sean Hannity if they came in here posting their views about all of these things?

M enot supporting the left wing at all does not make me an idiot.

How about the race baiting being done by Kerry and the unofficial Democrat radio ads? Do you support all of that as well? This is a scare tactic, nothing more. They want to get the black vote out of fear because they have nothing else.
------------------------
I KISS YOU!

This message was edited by LordJezo on 9-24-04 @ 11:12 AM

[mikeyboy]

*sigh* Everybody scale it back, please

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=mikeyboy">
Ron & Fez Show Log (http://www.osirusonline.com/ronfez.htm)
Just because you don't listen doesn't mean I don't have a radio show
The Music Mikey Likes Show on radiobbq, weekdays 12-2 (http://www.live365.com/stations/radiobbq)

[Furtherman]

Why are strong right wing republican views considered those of an idiot?[quote]

Same goes for strong left wing democrat. Ignorant too.

[quote]Would you say the same thing to Michael Savage or Sean Hannity if they came in here posting their views about all of these things?


Yes. Through a megaphone.

<IMG SRC="http://www.chaoticconcepts.com/randomizer/random.php?uid=7">
...with thanks to JustJon

This message was edited by Furtherman on 9-24-04 @ 11:18 AM

[ChickenHawk]

"Millions of U.S. citizens, including a disproportionate number of black voters, will be blocked from voting in the Nov. 2 presidential election."

WHEW!

<IMG SRC="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=ChickenHawk">
HORDE KING FOREVER!!! ORACLE NEVER!!!
<strike>Shock</strike>
<marquee behavior=alternate><font size=2><b>EMFA</b></font></marquee>[color=white]

[silera]

They want to get the black vote out of fear because they have nothing else.

Would that equate at all with the Bush campaign and republican rhetoric that terrorists support Kerry for president?

I like the way it says BLACKS CANT VOTE! But then says they are felons who are legally not allowed to.

Your statement was selective reading comprehension. I called you an idiot because you chose to ignore the specific statements in the article and instead made a broad, baseless generalization to discredit it.

You have no ability to discuss something, so instead choose to throw out the terms "liberal", "left wing", and "bias."

You are not an idiot because you do not agree with democrats or liberals or the so called left.

You are an idiot because you have no ability to back up your beliefs with actual evidence.


<center>http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/silerass.jpg
<font size="3" color="red">AND WHAT?</font></center><font color="FBF2F7">

[canofsoup15]

Who said that these people were going to vote in the first place? Were they all registered BEFORE they committed the crimes? The point is that even if those 2 million people could vote, I wouldn't bet on more than half of them actually doing it. There are way more people in America that CAN vote and they don't, and that's a problem. Stopping past felons from voting is unethical and wrong but not finding those who want to vote but can't find a way to vote, or not providing the proper equipment to calculate the votes (see Florida) is a much bigger problem.

<img src=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/ERUZIES1.gif>

<marquee behavior=alternate><Font size="1" Color="blue">
I got the glass, I got the steel. I got the love to hate.
</font><font color=red> All I need is your head on stake.</font></marquee><Font Color = White>

This message was edited by canofsoup15 on 9-24-04 @ 11:35 AM

[wilee]

Plenty of scare tactics in that article...

Regarding the laws in various states prohibiting convicted felons from voting. If they are a holdover from pre-Civil War era, why don't they get them repealed? Then they can vote. This is a democracy, and there are mechanisms that can be used to remove outdated/ineffective/discriminatory laws. Nowhere in the article does it indicate whether or not this has been attempted. Instead of crying about it, they should get something done about it.

Regarding the "clerical errors" with voter registration, the story offers no proof any dishonorable intent was behind these errors. It throws that statement out there implying that it is the case. Sloppy journalism...



<IMG SRC="http://cwjr.home.infionline.net/sigpic.gif">
The sun in your eyes made some of the lies worth believing

[silera]

There is a lawsuit. The point of this article I think is to get people to start paying attention to the problem.

Instead of crying about it, they should get something done about it.

Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak up.





<center>http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/silerass.jpg
<font size="3" color="red">AND WHAT?</font></center><font color="FBF2F7">

[TheMojoPin]

Why are strong right wing republican views considered those of an idiot?

Because this is how you preface or frame your views...

Garbage and filth from the left, you shmucks are getting desperate.

shows that your mind is so far left field you should be tossed out of the country along with the rest of the treasonous morons over there.

More like the crazed liberal democratic america hating underground all you hippies live in.

Don't insult "us" that blatantly and undeservingly and then play the unsuspecting martyr when you get insulted right back. You call people traitors over their political views, and then get coy when you're called an "idiot?" Please.

Share your opinions. Don't attack other people with them. Silera, you too. Just because someone else does it first doesn't make it any better.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << I love my drug buddy... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 9-24-04 @ 12:34 PM

[silera]

Felons, of course, aren't just murderers and muggers. Three out of every five felony convictions don't lead to jail time, and there's no clear line you have to cross to earn one. Being convicted for driving while intoxicated three times bans you from voting for life in numerous states. Stopping payment on a check of more than $150 with intent to defraud makes you a felon in Florida. Being caught with one-fifth of an ounce of crack earns you a federal felony, but being caught with one-fifth of an ounce of cocaine only earns a misdemeanor. (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0101.thompson.html)



<center>http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/silerass.jpg
<font size="3" color="red">AND WHAT?</font></center><font color="FBF2F7">

[wilee]

There is a lawsuit. The point of this article I think is to get people to start paying attention to the problem.

Quote
Instead of crying about it, they should get something done about it.



Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak up.


The "they" I was speaking of was the citizens of the respective states that have this law. In NJ where I live, there is no such law for "lifetime loss" of voting privileges after serving time. If you are in one of the three P's (prison, probation or parole) you lose voting rights, but once you're clear of them, you get your vote back.

About getting people to pay attention to the problem, I seldom see this "problem" spoken about in the news until an election rolls around.

<IMG SRC="http://cwjr.home.infionline.net/sigpic.gif">
The sun in your eyes made some of the lies worth believing

[TheMojoPin]

Since when have you known the media to NOT be lazy? Everything has to be tied into something.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << I love my drug buddy... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[mdr55]

This is how they used to prevent people from voting when I lived in Mississippi.
http://www.treehouseof66.de/Randzone/XXL/hatemonger.jpg

[wilee]

Since when have you known the media to NOT be lazy? Everything has to be tied into something.
Having it tied into something is fine. Tie it in to a story about overpopulated prisons or something.

There's problems with both presidential candidates, but this article simply works to demonize one political party as a whole and is not attacking a specific candidate on his agenda or views.

The felony disenfranchisement laws are state-level, and who is in the White House has little bearing on them. It's whoever is in their respective State House that they should concern themselves with.

<IMG SRC="http://cwjr.home.infionline.net/sigpic.gif">
The sun in your eyes made some of the lies worth believing

[TheMojoPin]

Well, my problem with the article IS the timing, because this is hardly a "new" problem. It's been an issue for at least 3-4 elections now, and this is being prestened on Yahoo as, "oooh, look what WE found!" I simply take issue with people who have served their time for offenses and are now out not being able to vote, if they choose to do so. Mostly it ties in with my issue with people with relatively minor drug charges getting caught up in the "mandatory minimum"-type overreaction that leads to non-violent minor drug offenders being charged with felonies.

As for who's getting bashed or who thinks who is getting bashed, well, at this point, I don't care. That's used as an excuse now to actually ignore the real issue at heart, so I've pretty much stopped hearing it. This is a much larger issue that really has zero to do with the specifics of who is running in the election, and more with how our country works overall, period. Partisanship and "watchdogs" are killing us. Who CARES who looks worse in the article? THAT'S NOT THE ACTUAL ISSUE.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << I love my drug buddy... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 9-24-04 @ 1:32 PM

[42nd-delay]

There's no smoking gun here, but stuff like this doesn't give me reassurance:

State knew of Hispanic undercount on purge list since `98 (http://www.thewestsidegazette.com/News/article/article.asp?NewsID=46519&sID=4)

A further investigation by the New York Times revealed that out of the 47,763 names on the purge list of alleged felons, only 61 were Hispanic. It might be noted that historically, Hispanics have tended to lean strongly toward the Republican Party. By contrast, 22,000 names on the purge list were African Americans who solidly vote for the Democratic Party.

According to spokesperson, Chuck Jones, representing ChoicePoint -- formerly known as Database Technologies (DBT) -- high ranking state officials were well aware that Hispanics were undercounted in the felon purge list, dating all the way back to 1998, through the hotly-contested 2000 presidential election race, up to, and including the present day.

------------------------------
"42nd-delay is the only person who's making sense." - Ron, 3-12-02

[Furtherman]

Don't forget these guys.

Klingons For Kerry (http://www.wweek.com/story.php?story=5539)

You'd think a warrior race would be for Bush, but then I realized... ahh yes, he has no honor! K'PLA!

http://www.wweek.com/photos/3047/news39.jpg

<IMG SRC="http://www.chaoticconcepts.com/randomizer/random.php?uid=7">
...with thanks to JustJon

[jeffdwright2001]

According to spokesperson, Chuck Jones. . . .


You can't trust him, he's wascally.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=jeffdwright2001"><br>
"It is not best to use our morals weekdays, it gets them out of repair for Sunday." - Mark Twain 1898

Thanks to Reefy & M1 for my sigs!!

This message was edited by jeffdwright2001 on 9-24-04 @ 3:08 PM

[furie]

from the klingon article:


Two Klingons polled--or 25 percent--said they planned to write in Satan.


Don't they mean Fek'lhr?


<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/furie1335/.Pictures/rfsigs/uncanny141.jpg">

<a href="http://fallingtowardsapotheosis.blogspot.com/">mental vomit</a>

[golfcourseguy]

This is how they used to prevent people from voting when I lived in Mississippi


"How many bubbles in a bar of soap?"

I'm old enough to have sat in the "colored" section
at a Nascar event in South Carolina, as a kid.
Stuff like that makes a big impression.

" editing posts since day one"

[Yerdaddy]

There's problems with both presidential candidates, but this article simply works to demonize one political party as a whole and is not attacking a specific candidate on his agenda or views.

The felony disenfranchisement laws are state-level, and who is in the White House has little bearing on them. It's whoever is in their respective State House that they should concern themselves with.
I imagine the reference to presidential elections is because most Americans think more about them than they do local and state elections, (given the much higher voter turnout in presidential elections than midterm elections), and there are also local and state elections coming up. The issue of voting in general is relevant to all of the elections, however, which is why the news would find the issue of disenfranchisement relevant at this time. Maybe ideally the media would report every issue the entire time that it was existant, but who would pay attention except when issues are most relevant? Most serious issues don't get the proper attention by the public regardless of reporting or their level of relevance as long as politicians are slinging mud at each other and Brittney Spears is getting married every other weekend.

I think the issue of the franchise is an important enough issue in America, and always has been, to merit an article without the presumption that it is motivated by an underhanded attack on one particular candidate.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

[NewYorkDragons80]

according to the horrific literature placed on my windsheild a few years ago, he was also a communist, womanizer, black and didn't earn hi doctorate degree ...
Hmm... Sort of true. He specifically said that he was not a Marxist, but did agree with some of his views on social justice. Rev. King made it clear that Marx's views on religion and humanity in general were polar opposites of his own beliefs. King has been labeled a Communist by more fervent anti-Communists, and I once counted myself among them. I strongly feel that he was more inclined to side with North Vietnam than the United States on most occasions during the Vietnam War and history has whitewashed that part of his life. As for being a womanizer, that is a fact. He did cheat on his wife. In fact, I believe the FBI monitored extramarital relations the night before he died. As for being black, he was a black man, yes. He did earn his doctorate, but it was later revoked when it was found that he plagiarized his thesis.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

[TheMojoPin]

And yet, none of that has any impact on the overall message of non-violence and tolerance that he's most famous for.

It's funny that history works that way.

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/mlking.asp

I mean, you wanan get down to it, Ghandi was an absolute prick of a man. Hellen Keller was a staunch and passionate communist in her adult life. Do these aspects of their lives humanize them? Of course. Does it cheapen their live's work and universal messages and accomplishments? Not in the slightest.

I whore this book all the time here, but it really is a great resource for painting a much more well-rounded image of the people that have been made into myths in our nation's history, from Washington to Lincoln to Kennedy.

<img src=http://free.freespeech.org/americanstateterrorism/books/bookcovers/LiesTeacherTold.jpeg>

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << I love my drug buddy... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 9-24-04 @ 8:32 PM

[El Mudo]

ha ha...

Don't get me started on Lincoln....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v53/monster6sixty6/guests/elm_sig.gif
<marquee>Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum </marquee>
Thanks Monsterone!!

[TheMojoPin]

Calvin Coolidge ate babies!

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << I love my drug buddy... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[El Mudo]

Grover Cleveland spanked Abraham Simpson on two non consecutive occaisons...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v53/monster6sixty6/guests/elm_sig.gif
<marquee>Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum </marquee>
Thanks Monsterone!!

[reeshy]

Is this a Communist Book????
http://free.freespeech.org/americanstateterrorism/books/bookcovers/LiesTeacherTold.jpeg




[center]<IMG SRC="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=reeshy">
[center]

This message was edited by reeshy on 9-24-04 @ 11:45 PM

[TheMojoPin]

Not, it is not a communist.

It is a Marxist-Leninist.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << I love my drug buddy... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[Mike Teacher]

I whore this book all the time here, but it really is a great resource for painting a much more well-rounded image of the people that have been made into myths in our nation's history, from Washington to Lincoln to Kennedy.


Great book; recommended o me by many history teachers, along with Zinn's 'A People's History...' [see 'Good Will Hunting'] and Davis' 'Don't know Much about History'

It's worth whoring, Mojo.



<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/anisig4">

[NewYorkDragons80]

And yet, none of that has any impact on the overall message of non-violence and tolerance that he's most famous for.
Absolutely.

Helen Keller was more of a Socialist. She was a Christian, after all.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

[Mike Teacher]

If Helen Keller falls in the Woods, does she make a sound?

<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/anisig4">

[TheMojoPin]

It's worth whoring, Mojo.

Definitely! It's always reassuring to hear of teachers using and teaching that book to kids still in school, so they don't have to play catch-up afterwards.

Zinn's the same thing, and good call with the "Don't Know Much..." series. That author has done books on the Bible and science with the same style, and they're fantastic.

There's another series out, called "What They Didn't Teach You," and it's covered WW2, the American Civil War, the American Revolution, the 60's and the "wild west." It's a little more factoid-y than the others above, but still good stuff.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << I love my drug buddy... >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[El Mudo]

The more I think about it, the more i can think of history not being presented, or being presented incorrectly...

I never heard in school about black slaveowners, or the North's dirty hands in the process of slavery...

And also, forget everything you know about the battle of Gettysburg...it's a complete sham...For instance:

*Almost every monument there is in the wrong spot. Some guy named Batchelder got the job from the Feds to "map out" the battlefield and decide where to put monuments. My favorite story about that is when he walked the field with Gen'l Hancock, and Hancock says "I was wounded here"...and Batchelder(who wasn't even in the Army of the Potomac) pointed to another spot and said "No General, you were wounded over here"...So there are a lot of misplaced monuments and unit markers( some placed for effect like the place where they decided to put Capt. Smith's Battery at)

*Pickett's charge has been a source of much myth. Someone said that the main point of the charge was this mythical "copse of trees" that didnt even exist at the time of the battle(the objective of the attack was Ziegler's grove), and most of the troops in the Charge weren't even Picketts. He had his division there, true, but there were two other divisions from AP Hill's Corps, Heth's (commanded by Isaac Trimble cause Heth had got shot in the head the first day) and Pender's(commaned by JJ Pettigrew cause Pender was wounded). These guys felt(and rightly) they have been denied their rightful honour of being in the attack and suffering worse than Pickett's men ever did...

*There seems to have been a concerted movement to come up with a "high water mark" of the "rebellion", a place where you can go and say "the war turned here", and its generally supposed to be the furthest point of penetration from the Charge, but the North Carolinians of Pender's division got farther, and they put their monument yards ahead of the Virginia one, as a sort of answer to that.

*The whole notion that the tide of the war turned at Gettysburg isn't true. The war became unwinnable for the South after Sharpsburg, which allowed Pres. Lincoln to issue the Emancipation Proclamation, a political ploy meant to keep Europe out of the war by turning it into a war to free the slaves, and it worked pretty well. When the subject was brought up in England before Gettysburg the people were so against it that it was scrapped pretty quickly

*the whole 20th Maine saga is pretty inaccurate, and thats partly brought on by the movie "Gettysburg". For one thing, even if they had somehow been driven off Li'l Round Top, the whole entire V Corps was passing behing the hill at the time(thats how Vincent's brigade got thrown up there, and how O'Rorke's brigade came in later as well). Wm. Oates' brigade only had two regiments(15th and 44th Alabama) in it, and they were exhausted and worn out from marching all day, climbing up Big Round Top, and fighting, so even if they had driven Vincent and O' Rorke's people off Lil Round Top, there was no way they could have held it(the aforementioned entire V Corps, and the advance elements of VI Corps were just starting to come up).

And, the account of the 20th Maine on Little Round Top was written by Cpl. Thomas Livermore of the 20th. Which would be okay except Cpl. Livermore wasn't with the 20th that day. He wasn't at Gettysburg at all. He was in Philadelphia, on sick leave.

I'm not saying the 20th Maine wasn't a good unit, but there were other great units in the Army of the Potomac than the 20th that don't get half the recognition they do. Hell they weren't even the best Reg't in their brigade....the 83d Pennsylvania served from 1st Bull Run to Appomattox and accumulated more casualties than any unit in Federal service. 5 officers in the 5th New York eventually became Generals....

I'm not trying to wrong anyone that fought at Gettysburg, I appreciate the sacrifices of those men as much as anyone. But what I don't appreciate are those that have distorted truths about the battle to suit their own designs.....

[shamus mcfitzy]

Zinn's 'A People's History...' [see 'Good Will Hunting'] and Davis' 'Don't know Much about History'


as long as we're gonna give out books such as these and the one Mojo gave, Bertell Ollman's "How 2 Take an Exam... & Remake the World" aint bad at all


Regarding the laws in various states prohibiting convicted felons from voting. If they are a holdover from pre-Civil War era, why don't they get them repealed? Then they can vote. This is a democracy, and there are mechanisms that can be used to remove outdated/ineffective/discriminatory laws.


i don't think it is farfetched at all to say that there are still states that would deprive blacks or even gays from voting. Doesn't make it any better.

This message was edited by shamus mcfitzy on 9-26-04 @ 2:37 PM

[wilee]

to merit an article without the presumption that it is motivated by an underhanded attack on one particular candidate.
As I said, the article seems slanted against a particular party. While I agree that the issue of disenfranchisement is worthy of coverage regardless of the whether or not there is an election happening, it seems rather interesting that articles like this pop up when most people feel that they are voting for "the lesser of two evils", but if the one cadidate is clearly leading on his own, his respective party doesn't trot out stuff like this, lest it be considered mud-slinging.

<IMG SRC="http://cwjr.home.infionline.net/sigpic.gif">
The sun in your eyes made some of the lies worth believing

[wilee]

i don't think it is farfetched at all to say that there are still states that would deprive blacks or even gays from voting. Doesn't make it any better.
Unfortunately, it's majority rule. If the majority of that state votes that way, while unfortunate, it's the law.

<IMG SRC="http://cwjr.home.infionline.net/sigpic.gif">
The sun in your eyes made some of the lies worth believing

[silera]

As I said, the article seems slanted against a particular party. While I agree that the issue of disenfranchisement is worthy of coverage regardless of the whether or not there is an election happening, it seems rather interesting that articles like this pop up when most people feel that they are voting for "the lesser of two evils", but if the one cadidate is clearly leading on his own, his respective party doesn't trot out stuff like this, lest it be considered mud-slinging.
It's being trotted out because the US Commission on Human Rights is discussing it. The Commissioner of this government entity, is the one that specifically said the disenfranchisement is one which keeps blacks from voting democratic.

2004 NEWS RELEASES, PRESS ADVISORIES AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS (http://www.usccr.gov/)

I don't get why we've gotten to the point where politics is an "all or nothing" situation. I understand that we have to question things, and of course weigh bias and perspective against any information we are given. It just seems that we as a whole are at a point where we just discuss "mud slinging", political leanings, and actions of 30 years ago instead of actually addressing the issues that are being discussed.

I don't know if I'm making sense, but it's almost impossible to have a discussion in the forum without anyone muddying the issues at hand with non sequitors and qualifiers for everything.

Regardless of which way people are going to vote, this issue should concern EVERYONE. Just because it's not happening to us, doesn't mean that it can't.


<center>http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/silerass.jpg
<font size="3" color="red">AND WHAT?</font></center><font color="FBF2F7">

[Yerdaddy]

It's trotted out because one of the most fundamental rights we have is being denied US citizens. If righting that wrong hurts one party over the other is incidental. This country is presumably about freedom. That's what I hear lately anyway.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

[42nd-delay]

Report: Jeb Bush Ignored Felon List Advice (http://http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041017/ap_on_el_pr/florida_felons_voting&cid=694&ncid=716)


Florida Gov. Jeb Bush ignored advice to throw out a flawed felon voter list before it went out to county election offices despite warnings from state officials, according to a published report Saturday.

In a May 4 e-mail obtained by the Sarasota Herald-Tribune, Florida Department of Law Enforcement computer expert Jeff Long told his boss that a Department of State computer expert had told him "that yesterday they recommended to the Gov that they 'pull the plug'" on the voter database.

The e-mail said state election officials "weren't comfortable with the felon matching program they've got," but added, "The Gov rejected their suggestion to pull the plug, so they're 'going live' with it this weekend."

A software program matched data on felons with voter registration rolls to create the list of 48,000 names. Secretary of State Glenda Hood junked the database in July after acknowledging that 2,500 ex-felons on the list had had their voting rights restored.

Most were Democrats, and many were black. Hispanics, who often vote Republican in Florida, were almost entirely absent from the list due to a technical error.


------------------------------
"42nd-delay is the only person who's making sense." - Ron, 3-12-02

[LiquidCourage]

I know I've been screwed over for the second time for a Presidential election with these fucking absentee ballots.