Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More at the source.Civil rights leaders are up in arms over Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's skeptical questions about a key portion of the Voting Rights Act, a cornerstone of the civil rights movement that brought an end to Jim Crow-era racial discrimination at the polls in the South.
In oral arguments over the law on Wednesday, Scalia, a stalwart of the court's conservative wing, suggested that the Voting Rights Act was overwhelmingly reauthorized in 2006 by Congress because the nation's politicians were afraid to oppose a "racial entitlement."
Scalia said that each time the Voting Rights Act has been reauthorized in the past 50 years, more and more senators supported it, even though the problem of racial discrimination at the polls has decreased over that time. "Now, I don't think that's attributable to the fact that it is so much clearer now that we need this," he said. "I think it is attributable, very likely attributable, to a phenomenon that is called perpetuation of racial entitlement. It's been written about. Whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes."
You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you?Sure doesn't take much for rw nutters to dump the Constitution when it suits their racist agenda. The Constitution of my USA says we all have an equal right to vote. The right of every American to vote is NOT "racial entitlement".
Even white Republicans should be against Scalia's racist statement.
Sure doesn't take much for rw nutters to dump the Constitution when it suits their racist agenda. The Constitution of my USA says we all have an equal right to vote. The right of every American to vote is NOT "racial entitlement".
Even white Republicans should be against Scalia's racist statement.
Sure doesn't take much for rw nutters to dump the Constitution when it suits their racist agenda. The Constitution of my USA says we all have an equal right to vote. The right of every American to vote is NOT "racial entitlement".
Even white Republicans should be against Scalia's racist statement.
Sure doesn't take much for rw nutters to dump the Constitution when it suits their racist agenda. The Constitution of my USA says we all have an equal right to vote. The right of every American to vote is NOT "racial entitlement".
Even white Republicans should be against Scalia's racist statement.
Sure doesn't take much for rw nutters to dump the Constitution when it suits their racist agenda. The Constitution of my USA says we all have an equal right to vote. The right of every American to vote is NOT "racial entitlement".
Even white Republicans should be against Scalia's racist statement.
Sure doesn't take much for rw nutters to dump the Constitution when it suits their racist agenda. The Constitution of my USA says we all have an equal right to vote. The right of every American to vote is NOT "racial entitlement".
Even white Republicans should be against Scalia's racist statement.
Puddly stepped in it this time.
Sure doesn't take much for rw nutters to dump the Constitution when it suits their racist agenda. The Constitution of my USA says we all have an equal right to vote. The right of every American to vote is NOT "racial entitlement".
Even white Republicans should be against Scalia's racist statement.
Sure doesn't take much for rw nutters to dump the Constitution when it suits their racist agenda. The Constitution of my USA says we all have an equal right to vote. The right of every American to vote is NOT "racial entitlement".
Even white Republicans should be against Scalia's racist statement.
It is possible to take an unconstitutional voting law to court without the Voting Rights Act.
And how do we know this?
Because states that are not subject to the Act have done so.
The Voting Rights Act achieved what it was meant to achieve. It is time to celebrate it and put it to bed.
The Constitution of my USA says we all have an equal right to vote. The right of every American to vote is NOT "racial entitlement".
Sure doesn't take much for rw nutters to dump the Constitution when it suits their racist agenda. The Constitution of my USA says we all have an equal right to vote. The right of every American to vote is NOT "racial entitlement".
Even white Republicans should be against Scalia's racist statement.
It is possible to take an unconstitutional voting law to court without the Voting Rights Act.
And how do we know this?
Because states that are not subject to the Act have done so.
The Voting Rights Act achieved what it was meant to achieve. It is time to celebrate it and put it to bed.
Bull-looney, Did you not see the efforts to suppress the vote in last year's election? Are you in denial or do you choose to lie by omission?
Sure doesn't take much for rw nutters to dump the Constitution when it suits their racist agenda. The Constitution of my USA says we all have an equal right to vote. The right of every American to vote is NOT "racial entitlement".
Even white Republicans should be against Scalia's racist statement.
It is possible to take an unconstitutional voting law to court without the Voting Rights Act.
And how do we know this?
Because states that are not subject to the Act have done so.
The Voting Rights Act achieved what it was meant to achieve. It is time to celebrate it and put it to bed.
Bull-looney, Did you not see the efforts to suppress the vote in last year's election? Are you in denial or do you choose to lie by omission?
It is possible to take an unconstitutional voting law to court without the Voting Rights Act.
And how do we know this?
Because states that are not subject to the Act have done so.
The Voting Rights Act achieved what it was meant to achieve. It is time to celebrate it and put it to bed.
Bull-looney, Did you not see the efforts to suppress the vote in last year's election? Are you in denial or do you choose to lie by omission?
It is pretty well known around here that I am opposed to Voter ID. No one has fought against them on this board more vehemently than I. Ask around.
I repeat, you do not need the Act to fight an unjust law. A Voter ID law was overturned in Pennsylvania during this last election cycle. Pennsylvania is not subject to the Voting Rights Act.
QED.
So the only lie of omission around here is the one which says you need the Act to fight unjust voting laws.
It is possible to take an unconstitutional voting law to court without the Voting Rights Act.
And how do we know this?
Because states that are not subject to the Act have done so.
The Voting Rights Act achieved what it was meant to achieve. It is time to celebrate it and put it to bed.
Bull-looney, Did you not see the efforts to suppress the vote in last year's election? Are you in denial or do you choose to lie by omission?
If you are referring to Voter ID laws, you'll note that Pennsylvania's Voter ID law was struck down for the 2012 election by a federal judge. Pennsylvania is not subjected to Section 5 of the VRA, further, thus aiding g5000's statement.
It actually doesn't do any of that, but thanks for playing.Bull-looney, Did you not see the efforts to suppress the vote in last year's election? Are you in denial or do you choose to lie by omission?
It is pretty well known around here that I am opposed to Voter ID. No one has fought against them on this board more vehemently than I. Ask around.
I repeat, you do not need the Act to fight an unjust law. A Voter ID law was overturned in Pennsylvania during this last election cycle. Pennsylvania is not subject to the Voting Rights Act.
QED.
So the only lie of omission around here is the one which says you need the Act to fight unjust voting laws.
This act prevents a situation where individuals are left to file lawsuits after they have been fucked over. Instead, it prevents assholes from instituting bullshit regulations in the first place.
Scalia's comments are fucked up by any standard.
It actually doesn't do any of that, but thanks for playing.It is pretty well known around here that I am opposed to Voter ID. No one has fought against them on this board more vehemently than I. Ask around.
I repeat, you do not need the Act to fight an unjust law. A Voter ID law was overturned in Pennsylvania during this last election cycle. Pennsylvania is not subject to the Voting Rights Act.
QED.
So the only lie of omission around here is the one which says you need the Act to fight unjust voting laws.
This act prevents a situation where individuals are left to file lawsuits after they have been fucked over. Instead, it prevents assholes from instituting bullshit regulations in the first place.
Scalia's comments are fucked up by any standard.
The act is patently unconstitutional as it puts different states and locales on different footings. The 14th Amendment guarantees equal rights to all citizens. No one will be denied anything when this turd gets overturned.
