A federal judge has once again unconstitutionally interfered with a state’s right.
This time it was with the operation of voting, which is NOT a constitutionally assigned federal responsibility. Barack Obama appointee, and U.S. District Court Judge Gershwin Drain’s decision to issue four preliminary injunctions against state election officials has also demonstrated his trust in the ability of African Americans to self determine. As reported by the Detroit News:
In a passionate 37-page opinion announced Thursday, Drain said the new law will reduce African-Americans’ opportunity to participate in the state’s political process and puts a disproportionate burden on African-Americans’ right to vote.
Of course.
In liberal Judge speak: “It is too much to expect an African American to actually go down the ballot and choose candidates, as they are wholly under qualified.”
Are we interpreting this decision incorrectly?
(14)Nuh Uh.
(1)
This change barely passed the House (might have been 2 votes).
Plenty of voice votes..which Tea Partiers and their establishment allies evidently approve of given the former's refusal to make transparency (in general) their #1 issue from the very beginning.
What does waiting until 8 months ago with a solid Republican majority/willing governor tell us about this bill? That it was rammed through just before everybody in the legislature was forced to admit that poisoned kids had been on their radar for much longer than they were about to admit?
Apply what happened here in terms of timing/who voted against SB13 and you pretty much have a snapshot of the hows and whys involving the most incompetent/corrupt Republican majority in state history.
Wouldn't you have preferred that this bill be signed into law BEFORE your local clerk asked for/recorded which party you were voting for not a short time ago? The Tea Partiers or "defenders of the vote" couldn't even muster a 'peep' over this craziness at that time. Or was this previously undisclosed information DESIGNED to be revealed (statewide) for the benefit of BOTH parties 'just' before straight ticket voting was (finally) killed at he 11th hour?
I read the opinion and my first impression was an opinion begging for appeal. It also furthered racial divide, which I'm sure was the intention and exposed the judge's ignorantly based bias.
What's suppose to occur with straight party voting is A) vote straight party; B) go through the ballot and vote who you want anyway. Even a first year law student can figure this out.
So, let's say you vote straight party Libertarian, you can still go through the ballot and mark races where there's no Libertarian candidate, or a candidate you feel is better than the Libertarian candidate. The whole exercise of straight party voting is to limit votes for judges (Supreme Court/COA) and ballot proposals, as neither would get straight party votes and who wants anyone flipping over the ballot to vote for judges and proposals. The ballot would be tallied as "undervoted".
What so pissed me off during the March Primary is that we weren't given a ballot with both parties on it but had to declare what party before being handed a ballot. I watched the election clerk mark by card with an "R" which was done AFTER I signed the app. (I'm thinking there's a violation of contract law in there somewhere.) This allowed us to be targeted and our party affiliation were sold to the highest bidder--mass violations of our privacy. Voter registrations are public record so our tax dollars were used to place us in the proper hole for future political targeting. This also increased the cost of printing those very expensive ballots.
My vote is private and this privacy was violated.
...your privacy (and mine) were HISTORICALLY violated, Sue..yet where was the outrage?
Tea Partiers?..Libertarians?..in an election year of unprecedented consequence??? How was THAT trial balloon any different than the hear-no-evil/speak-no-evil complete silence from 'conservatives' when our own saliva was similarly vulnerable (soon afterwards) as well? Why would they stop?
Didn't both sides of the aisle obtain EXACTY what they were after from both you and I (data-wise) AFTER this straight ticket voting law was intentionally delayed for all these years..then quickly made law?
Take a look at the boobs who voted against the straight ticket changes:
HOUSE REPUBLICANS
Bizon (R) Glardon (R) Howrylak (R) Lyons (R) Maturen (R)
Potvin (R)
I see at least one who was elected simply by having an 'R' next to his name and absolutely nothing else of meaningful achievement besides being a lifelong establishment fanboy.
Since $5 million is but a drop in the bucket in terms of what is needed to prevent people from waiting at the polls (with the absentee proposals thankfully failing) libs will STILL have the opportunity to point to plenty in this election which will be later deemed 'inconvenient' (translation: bigoted/unaceptable).
Each side got what they wanted (again)...which will be the ongoing sickening theme in our upcoming lame duck like no other (again) as well.