Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 42 reply threads

  • Author

    Posts

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      The cornerstone of American citizenship is the right to elect representatives. The Voting Rights Act protected this right in several ways, but one was the “pre-clearance” process that required certain states to pre-clear voting changes with the DOJ, BASED ON THOSES STATES LONG HISTORY OF VOTING DISCRIMINATION.

      In 2013, the SCOTUS incredibly struck down pre-clearance suggesting that the various states racist past was . . . well . . . in the past (that the method for assessing was outdated).

      Almost immediately, states like Texas started closing policing places, mostly in minority districts, so it became obvious to most that SCOTUS was wrong about racism being in the past. States like Texas offered all kinds of excuses for closing poling station, excuses that probably never fly in pre-clearance.

      Like all things, the passage of time tests the excuses. The DOJ just sued Texas for a SECOND TIME, this time notably for its district maps (gerrymandering). Here’s the facts in the suit:

      “After the 2020 census, Texas was awarded two additional seats in the US House of Representatives. The population growth that created the new seats was propelled by minority communities, with people of color making up 95% of the growth, according to census data.”

      However, Texas has designed both of those new seats to have White voting majorities”

      HOW DOES THAT RELATE TO THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT & PRE-CLEARANCE?

      “Texas “intentionally eliminated a Latino electoral opportunity in Congressional District 23, a West Texas district where courts had identified Voting Rights Act violations during the previous two redistricting cycles.”

      IN OTHER WORDS, AS SOON AS PRE-CLEARANCE WAS REMOVED, TEXAS WENT RIGHT BACK TO THE VERY DISCRIMINATION THAT LED TO PRE-CLEARANCE IN THE FIRST PLACE

      This is the power of government (the voting system) working directly against POC

      its not imaginary

      its real

      Texas gets greater representation in Congress as the result of mostly MINORITY growth in the state but then drafts the district boundaries to be majority white

      El Paso news – “[Texas GOP gerrymandering] reduces the state’s eight current Hispanic voting majority districts to seven though 50% of Texas’ population growth came from Hispanics.”

      Just one example

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      In case its not obvious, the absence of pre-clearance allows the state to implement a racist policy FIRSDT, placing the entire burden on the federal government TO UNDO IT and this is what that means in the real world:

      “Texas is no stranger to litigation about its line-drawing. It sought the approval of a federal court for the maps it drew in 2010, in what became a legal fight that stretched throughout most of the decade.

      Garland on Monday noted the absence of the preclearance requirement and the impact its absence had on the department’s voting rights enforcement efforts, by depriving it of an opportunity to review new maps before they go into effect.

      “I want to, again, urge Congress to restore the Justice Department’s preclearance authority where that preclearance tool is still in place. We would likely not be here today announcing this complaint,” Garland said.

    • Biggs3535

      Participant
      Post count: 7236

      We’ve found the “ultimate” display have we, Mr. Cronkite? And it’s on full display, you say? Sounds interesting.

      No shame, no self-awareness.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      We’ve found the “ultimate” display have we, Mr. Cronkite? And it’s on full display, you say? Sounds interesting.

      No shame, no self-awareness.

      No comment on the substance?

      Weird. So unlike you.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      Oh wait. Last time you tried to discuss the VRA you claimed it didn’t deal with polling station.

      Lol

      And when I pointed out that it did you went on to call me a bunch of names

      Haha

      That explains it, Buggsy.

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 586

      The Justice Department is another wing of the Biden White House and DNC headquarters. Let’s see if he addresses Illinois’ gerrymandering.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      The Justice Department is another wing of the Biden White House and DNC headquarters.

      The deflection

      Nothing about Texas’ conduct, nothing about pre-clearance

      Lol.

      Just hyper politics

      Both sides gerrymander and it’s wrong

      In the instance I am pointing out though …ITS INTENTIONALLY RACIST …and you guys say there is no systemic racism

      Here is a government system intentionally diminishing the most precious right (voting) for POC

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 586

      ITS INTENTIONALLY RACIST

      Or it could be INTENTIONALLY POLITICS. It all depends upon which soap box you want to stand.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      ITS INTENTIONALLY RACIST

      Or it could be INTENTIONALLY POLITICS. It all depends upon which soap box you want to stand.

      LOL, wtf?

      Intentionally crafting a district GAINED BY AN INCREASE IN POC . . to form a WHITE majority is RACIST, especially when you were stopped from doing it twice before in the same district.

      If you want to excuse the RACISM in the name of politics (i.e., it was a incumbency plan that ‘just turned out to be racist”) that is your prerogative, but that does NOT make it NOT RACIST??????????

      basic logic, right?

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 586

      but that does NOT make it NOT RACIST

      Nor does it make it racist. You’re portending to know the intent based on the results.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      but that does NOT make it NOT RACIST

      Nor does it make it racist. You’re portending to know the intent based on the results.

      No I am not?

      wth are you talking about?

      when something is RACIST in the results it is RACIST. I mean, the intent is OBVIOUS here because we are talking about a pretzelled map to carve into a district a white majority

      BUT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE’s RIGHT’S

      Think about way you are saying? If your rights were “unintentionally” violated you’d accept that?

      You get arrested because a cop mistakes your home for another and conducts an illegal search . . you’d tell the court . . “yeah, I am unlucky . . I go to jail.”

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      I think I am starting to understand why people on your side so steadfastly stand against the idea that there is systemic racism

    • Biggs3535

      Participant
      Post count: 7236

      The Justice Department is another wing of the Biden White House and DNC headquarters. Let’s see if he addresses Illinois’ gerrymandering.

      That Illinois stuff is perfectly fine to the Larry Hogan conservative and former Republican OP.

      Mr. Cronkite just reports the news. The man’s integrity is without question.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      I think I am starting to understand why people on your side so steadfastly stand against the idea that there is systemic racism

      sorry, in the Arbery case do you understand that the Judge said of the jury selection that the RESULT was racist, but it was achieved within the current state of the law?

      do you get that RULES allowing a racist result is an example of SYSTEMIC racism? The system is working against the citizen’s right to a jury of peers?

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 586

      we are talking about a pretzelled map to carve into a district a white majority

      Or a likely Republican majority. Just because you say it’s racist, does not make it racist. Again, you are just looking at the results and crying “Systemic Racism! See, I told you dumbasses there is systemic racism!!!” You need to know the intent and since you live in NYNY…you’re just crying Chicken Little.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      The Justice Department is another wing of the Biden White House and DNC headquarters. Let’s see if he addresses Illinois’ gerrymandering.

      That Illinois stuff is perfectly fine to the Larry Hogan conservative and former Republican OP.

      Mr. Cronkite just reports the news. The man’s integrity is without question.

      Buggsy CRUSHES Kermit a second time lol

      Buggsy, you dumb azz . . . you’re saying (presumably without understanding it . . HOPEFULLY . please god, hopefully) . . . . that RACISM in Texas is excused by POLITICS in Illinois??

      wth?

      wondering if some of you even bother to think about the points you make

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      we are talking about a pretzelled map to carve into a district a white majority

      Or a likely Republican majority. Just because you say it’s racist, does not make it racist. Again, you are just looking at the results and crying “Systemic Racism! See, I told you dumbasses there is systemic racism!!!” You need to know the intent and since you live in NYNY…you’re just crying Chicken Little.

      man. . . @Kermit56 . . I have faith in you. I have faith that you are NOT as dumb as Buggsy

      Let’s try this one more time . . please . . just answer this question . . even if just to yourself:

      You get arrested because a cop mistakes your home for another and conducts an illegal search . . you’d tell the court . . “yeah, I am unlucky . . I go to jail.”

    • Biggs3535

      Participant
      Post count: 7236

      that RACISM in Texas is excused by POLITICS in Illinois??

      lolz, this bastard is the gift that keeps on giving as the boy who cried wolf.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      that RACISM in Texas is excused by POLITICS in Illinois??

      lolz, this bastard is the gift that keeps on giving as the boy who cried wolf.

      that means you don’t understand because you’re a BLOCK HEAD

      Now, get on with your string of personal attacks and expletives . . because that’s all YA GOT DUMBO

      :-)

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 586

      You get arrested because a cop mistakes your home for another and conducts an illegal search . . you’d tell the court . . “yeah, I am unlucky . . I go to jail.”

      What in the world does this scenario have to do with the topic? Are you okay? Is your blood sugar low or something?

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      You get arrested because a cop mistakes your home for another and conducts an illegal search . . you’d tell the court . . “yeah, I am unlucky . . I go to jail.”

      What in the world does this scenario have to do with the topic? Are you okay? Is your blood sugar low or something?

      well, your answer suggest you know exactly why I raised it

      as does why you don’t want to answer it

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      Look, the very nature of systemic racism is that people (mostly white in America) deny it — even when its obvious from the results — on the basis that you’d have to know what was in someone’s head to say its racist.

      That’s absolutely absurd, but importantly it is also a position that a ONLY person in the majority could take. A position that a person with the privilege of NOT being discriminate against . . would take. That’s precisely how you get absurd positions like “this in TX isn’t racist because . . Illinois”

      Uh no, even if you think Illinois is racist that wouldn’t mean Texas was NOT racist, it would just mean you are JUSTIFY racism as a means to get to your own end.

      Historically speaking, that kind of end justifies any means concept (the opposite of “rule of law”) has not ended well.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      Hahahahahahahahahahahhahahaha

      two Trumpers raised Illinois . . lo and behold . . the cocoon delivers:

      Tom Cotton TWEET– “If @TheJusticeDept cared about gerrymandering, they would sue Illinois. Merrick Garland’s only concern is electing more Democrats. He should resign in disgrace.”

      uhh . .

      The Justice Department is another wing of the Biden White House and DNC headquarters. Let’s see if he addresses Illinois’ gerrymandering

      The Justice Department is another wing of the Biden White House and DNC headquarters. Let’s see if he addresses Illinois’ gerrymandering

      That Illinois stuff is perfectly fine

      and why is that even FUNNIER than usual because Cotton clowned both Trumpers:

      “Oh, does Sen. Cotton think partisan gerrymandering should be justiciable in federal courts? SCOTUS voted 5-4 in 2019 that partisan gerrymandering involved non-justiciable political questions, but it’d sure be fascinating to learn that Cotton disagrees.”

      That 5-4 vote . . ROBERTS, THOMAS, ALITO GORSUCH and KAVANUGH

      LOL . . .the court punting in that case is just like “states rights”

      Cotton didn’t tell you guys that part . . maybe its the character limit

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 5000

      A thread like this makes sense coming from someone who believes that colorblindness is counterproductive.

      I know that there are plenty of scholars who say all the things that you think are going to save the world but I’m telling you that I don’t think it will. Quite the opposite. A focus on the individual will save the world which is the opposite of what progressive thought is telling you these days. This focus on group distinction and not on respecting all individuals is going to cause much more harm than it will ever help.

      There is also the very obvious backlash or pendulum swing which you’ve already seen. Now you’ve got the Trump crowd which has latched on to the idea that they are members of a group “White people” and they need to protect that group status and privilege and yes they also believe that their group is under siege and for reasons that they view as wrong. For example, Trump guy finds it offensive that he might not get a job as a walmart greeter because he speaks better English than another guy. What do you people call that? Soft skills? Fact is it’s a skill to be able to communicate and it pisses people off that the extremists won’t even allow them their one tiny thing they’re reasonably good at because it’s unfair.

      This issue has come up in other circumstances as well especially with immigration. Many progressives seem to think it’s racist to be for a wall or for lower levels of immigration yet as has been pointed out on numerous occasions, the people who are hurt the most are the lowest among us. The uneducated, low skilled workers. The Trump voter. lol The whole concept of Anti-racism is counter productive and unfair. It seems to me that progressives hang their hat on the idea that it’s somehow less unfair than “systemic racism” only that ignores the fact that anti-racism promotes in an official sense, the concept of race distinction. If there is systemic racism it’s underground. What the left proposes is sanctioned.

      And what about the racism of the past, the innercity black neighborhoods. Why can’t we encourage people to move out to the burbs to fully assimilate into the rest of society? Supposedly it has to be that way because the black group needs to have the black district representative that represents the black man. I live in a white district that elected a black man to be our representative in congress so I know that this can and will happen everywhere once people get their heads out of their asses.

      At the same time, nobody cares about the trailer park getting a representative….. I know you disagree right?

      Verge, it’s not that I don’t think there is some unfairness in the world there certainly is. I just think a society that truly focuses on the rights of all individual human beings is the way out. I know you disagree.

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 586

      BB, you aren’t as smart as you think you are. I had never seen Cotton’s statement until you just posted it. I based my statement on what I had read about Illinois’ gerrymandering. But, you do you, BB. What color is your sky today?

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      I just think a society that truly focuses on the rights of all individual human beings is the way out. I know you disagree.

      I only disagree with part. I say that because you propose a platitude:

      “a society that truly focuses on the rights of all individual human beings is the way out”

      But even you had to give the qualifiers, which I mark here in bold

      I just think a society that truly focuses on the rights of all individual human beings is the way out. I know you disagree.

      as I pointed out before, as a white person you have the privilege of saying that right now society TRULY is focusing on the rights of ALL individual human beings

      I’ve given you examples of where that is UNDENIABLY untrue . .Arbery, Floyd, Castille etc

      it is NOT looking our for the Hispanics who moved to Texas 23

      In other words, I share your IDEALISM, but without losing REALISM.

      You think Portland Proud Boys are just observers of a random church prayer group . . about the degradation of the “nuclear family.” I pointed out that was untrue. the local cops even agree with me

      You said there was no need for a FEDERAL hate crime. I pointed out that it was a difference maker in Arbery

      You said no systemic racism. I pointed to Arbery and now an actual law.

      So, the difference is real versus philosophical. Philosophically, there should be no need for expanding federal power to have a federal hate crime, but in the real world there still is. Philosophically cops should be all good, but in reality many have CONSENTED to reforming their departments. Philosophically, the racism of the past should be gone and the VRA no more. In reality, the VRA is OBVIOUSLY needed still.

      etc

      etc

      etc

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      on what I had read about Illinois’ gerrymandering

      where, post the article and the source?

      I said the cocoon delivers

      the cocoon delivers:

      post the article, at least enough to find the source?

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      ou aren’t as smart as you think you are

      and I am not saying or trying to prove I am smart, I am making an educated guess that a guy who posted (parphrasing) “dem candidates want to kill live babies” and then had to walk that back likely hasnt come up with the “Illinois” story from some objective source.

      Buggsy chiming in (again) almost puts a nail in that coffin lol

      I could be wrong.

      Ball is in your court, @Kermit56

      lets see the full article?

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 586

      Google “Illinois Gerrymandering 2021” and you will find more articles than you care to read.

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 586

      and then had to walk that back

      I haven’t walked anything back.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      Google “Illinois Gerrymandering 2021” and you will find more articles than you care to read.

      LOL, you said you read an article, so now you dont wnat to provide it.

      Got it

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 586

      I based my statement on what I had read about Illinois’ gerrymandering.

      This is what I posted. I did not say “an article” because I read more than one. If you don’t want to Google it I could not care less. I was just pointing out you were wrong when you said I got the statement from Cotton.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      and then had to walk that back

      I haven’t walked anything back.

      during the election campaign, the dem candidates were espousing abortion should be legal all the way up to 9 months, including killing a baby who survived abortion.

      Not through their words,

      maybe this is that “twisting” you complained of? Check closely!

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      and then had to walk that back

      I haven’t walked anything back.

      during the election campaign, the dem candidates were espousing abortion should be legal all the way up to 9 months, including killing a baby who survived abortion.

      Not through their words,

      maybe this is that “twisting” you complained of? Check closely!



      @Kermit56

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 586

      Look up the definition of “espouse” and get back to me.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      Look up the definition of “espouse” and get back to me.

      this might be the worst effort ever

      actually embarrassing lol

      You said “during the election campaign,” which would be November 2020

      What makes that even funnier than you now say to look up “espouse” is that I said it was you were FALSELY assigning a position to “dem candidates” based on a “poison pill” bill to make people like you (who clearly don’t think for themselves) say shit like you posted here.

      In 2020, the bill you later identified IN YOUR BACKTRACK was voted on in the Senate in FEBRUARY and . . just to emphasize the “poison pill” nature of it . . it was ADDED to HR2229 – the wholly-unrelated Military Hunger Prevention Act – lmao, by a total clown . . STEVE SCALISE . . . just so he could issue this kind of press release . . IN FEBRUARY . . to get to clowns like you:

      “ABORTION EXTREMISTS ONCE AGAIN VOTE DOWN BORN-ALIVE ACT
      February 28, 2020 Press Release
      WASHINGTON, D.C. — Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) released the following statement after House Democrats voted down the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act as part of a motion to recommit on H.R. 2339.

      “House Democrats have happily joined their colleagues in the Senate by, once again, voting against protections for babies born during an abortion.”

      LMAO . . . you Kermit and Spartan and Buggsy . . all parroted this same shit . . . and actually want to deny there existence of the cocoon.

      deny it?
      YOU PROVE IT

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 586

      I see you didn’t look up the word espouse. Work on your reading comprehension and get back to me.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      I see you didn’t look up the word espouse. Work on your reading comprehension and get back to me.

      LOL, I love that you are dumb enough — and fragile enough, apparently — to die on the “espouse” hill. .. REPEATEDLY

      You should keep posting that . . ITS CONVINCING . . (to people who have never taken grammar)

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      I see you didn’t look up the word espouse. Work on your reading comprehension and get back to me.

      LOL, I love that you are dumb enough — and fragile enough, apparently — to die on the “espouse” hill. .. REPEATEDLY

      You should keep posting that . . ITS CONVINCING . . (to people who have never taken grammar)

      I see you didn’t look up the word espouse. Work on your reading comprehension and get back to me.

      LOL, I love that you are dumb enough — and fragile enough, apparently — to die on the “espouse” hill. .. REPEATEDLY

      You should keep posting that . . ITS CONVINCING . . (to people who have never taken grammar)

      during the election campaign, the dem candidates were espousing abortion should be legal all the way up to 9 months, including killing a baby who survived abortion

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 586

      LOLzzzzzz

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      LOLzzzzzz

      Love it

      during the election campaign, the dem candidates were espousing abortion should be legal all the way up to 9 months, including killing a baby who survived abortion.

      later . .

      Not through their words

      :-)

      In MAGALAND a verb does not have an actor (noun)

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      and I am not saying or trying to prove I am smart, I am making an educated guess that a guy who posted (parphrasing) “dem candidates want to kill live babies” and then had to walk that back likely hasnt come up with the “Illinois” story from some objective source.

      your response @Kermit56 to my request to POST article you claimed you read

      Google “Illinois Gerrymandering 2021

      you don’t want to post the article(s) because OF THE SOURCES (educated guess) . . so we get all the absurdity that follows . . all the way to “do you wear a kilt” in the Smollett thread lol

      Laugh a little. Grab a coffee.

    • BucsBits

      Participant
      Post count: 2030

      In MAGALAND a verb does not have an actor (noun)

      “do you wear a kilt”

Viewing 42 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.