Ohio officials want to indict Rush, conservatives.

[theHawk]

Well the liberals are revealing themselves to be the communist assholes we always knew they were. Now apparently they want to ARREST people for exercising their Constitutional right to vote for whoever the hell they want to.


http://www.alternet.org/democracy/80392/



As the board of election in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, where Cleveland is located, launches an investigation into illegal crossover voting in the state's 2008 presidential primary, a big open question remains unanswered: Will county officials go after the ringleaders of apparently illegal electioneering where thousands of Republican voters swore -- under penalty of law -- allegiance to the Democratic Party in order to vote for Hillary Clinton?



SNIP

While this all makes for great talk radio and sounds like fun, there is one catch: What Limbaugh encouraged Republican voters to do in Ohio was a fifth-degree felony in that state, punishable with a $2,500 fine and six to 12 months in jail. That is because in order to change party affiliation in Ohio, voters have to fill out a form swearing allegiance to that party's principles "under penalty of election falsification."

On Thursday, March 20, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported that the "Cuyahoga County Board of Election has launched an investigation that could lead to criminal charges against voters who maliciously switched parties for the March 4 presidential primary." According to the report, "One voter scribbled the following addendum to his pledge as a new Democrat: "For one day only."

Of course the form forcing people to "swear allegiance" to a party's principles when you register is completely unconsitutional and won't stand in any court of law, unless its judge is a liberal.

And also they don't seem to be "investigating" the roles of Obama and Hillary who both have urged Republicans to switch over and vote for them.

[stephanie]

Oh my gawd..
I just listened to an attorney talking about this, and she said that if someone bragged on a website about crossing over, that if they could find out who the address belongs to of the person bragging, he should be arrested and fully prosecuted...

Because they lied on a piece of paper pleading allegiance to A PARTY..

True colors showing of who the Democrats are..

[theHawk]

Here's my favorite part:

"Here we have a real instance of spurring people on to engage in illegal election activities with a real intent to affect the outcome," Slater said. "That is voter fraud. People were encouraged to break the law. They had to declare allegiance to a political party and sign a document under penalty of perjury. Intent is what matters in voter fraud."

Isn't EVERY person who votes in ANY election trying to "affect the outcome"? Thats the whole point for ANYONE voting. How stupid can this guy be? And I guess this idiot doesn't understand that no matter what 'document' voters sign with the Democratic party it does not forfeit their Constitutional right to vote for whomever they want on election day.

[theHawk]

Oh my gawd..
I just listened to an attorney talking about this, and she said that if someone bragged on a website about crossing over, that if they could find out who the address belongs to of the person bragging, he should be arrested and fully prosecuted...

Because they lied on a piece of paper pleading allegiance to A PARTY..

True colors showing of who the Democrats are..

Yup, those communist colors are coming out! Throwing people in jail for how they vote!!!

[hjmick]

When registering for the Republican party in Ohio, is one also required to "swear allegiance" to the party or is that only a Democrat thing?

I know that in Virginia's Republican presidential primary voters had to sign an oath swearing loyalty to the eventual GOP ticket in the fall election. The reasoning behind this? Voters in Virginia do not register by party. Since the mid-90s, the Virginia Republicans have worried that Democrats might meddle in their primaries, which are open to all registered voters.

[Pale Rider]

I heard this too.... we might as well start calling the democratic party the Gestapo.

[JohnDoe]

What Limbaugh encouraged Republican voters to do in Ohio
was a fifth-degree felony in that state, punishable with a $2,500 fine and six to 12 months in jail. That is because in order to change party affiliation in Ohio, voters have to fill out a form swearing allegiance to that party's principles "under penalty of election falsification."

Swearing under oath is a pretty serious thing in our country....

Anyone ecouraging people to commit a felony would probably get in trouble is how I look at it.

Anyway, reading the whole article, looks like the justice dept in ohio is gonna pass the buck....nothing will be done about it.

If you all don't agree with the LAWS on the books then I would suggest if you live in ohio, you guys get your congress to change the LAW so that Rush CAN legally be allowed to do what he did, but as it stands, he wasn't...he was encouraging the citizens of OHIO to commit a felony in the State of Ohio, was he not?

[Monkeybone]

encouraging is nothing. it's who commits the act.

unless it is the ppl prosecuting that do the encouraging...then it's uh..entrapment?

[stephanie]

What Limbaugh encouraged Republican voters to do in Ohio

Swearing under oath is a pretty serious thing in our country....

Anyone encouraging people to commit a felony would probably get in trouble is how I look at it.

Anyway, reading the whole article, looks like the justice dept in Ohio is gonna pass the buck....nothing will be done about it.

If you all don't agree with the LAWS on the books then I would suggest if you live in Ohio, you guys get your congress to change the LAW so that Rush CAN legally be allowed to do what he did, but as it stands, he wasn't...he was encouraging the citizens of OHIO to commit a felony in the State of Ohio, was he not?

Rush can't MAKE ANYBODY go out and do anything..
But the Democrats and pundits making a big stink over this, is whats making operation chaos so friggin funny...:laugh2:

[Hagbard Celine]

Perhaps these divisive personalities should've thought about the damage they were doing to America while they were littering the airwaves with intolerant, un-American theocratic/totalitarian propaganda. I guess it just goes to show that what comes around goes around. (shrug)

[stephanie]

Perhaps these divisive personalities shouldve thought about the damage they were doing to America while they were littering the airwaves with intolerant, un-American theocratic/totalitarian propaganda. I guess it just goes to show that what comes around goes around. (shrug)

Randi Rhodes, Bill Maher, Keith Overblown, etc, etc.....

Preachers of LOVE..:laugh2:

[Hagbard Celine]

Randi Rhodes, Bill Maher, Keith Overblown, etc, etc.....

Preachers of LOVE..:laugh2:

I don't know who Randi Rhodes or Keith Overblown are, but Bill Maher can be sorta funny sometimes. A resounding endorsement that was not.

[JohnDoe]

encouraging is nothing. it's who commits the act.

unless it is the ppl prosecuting that do the encouraging...then it's uh..entrapment?Can a radio host encourage its listeners to slice the throats of Democrats or republicans or any person or group of people?

Slicing someone's throat is a felony also?

Don't you think the law would punish a radio host encouraging listeners to do such and it would be breaking some law?

If it is against the law to do something like that, then it would also be against the law to do what Rush did, I would imagine?

A father telling his son to rob a bank, and telling his son how to rob a bank, then the son robbed a bank, and then got caught, and the gvt got on tape, the father telling the son to rob the bank and how to rob the bank, do YOU think the father would be charged as an accessory to the bank robbery? I do.

Regardless, the State of Ohio has already indicated imo that they aren't going to do anything....



jd

[Yurt]

What Limbaugh encouraged Republican voters to do in Ohio

Swearing under oath is a pretty serious thing in our country....

Anyone ecouraging people to commit a felony would probably get in trouble is how I look at it.

Anyway, reading the whole article, looks like the justice dept in ohio is gonna pass the buck....nothing will be done about it.

If you all don't agree with the LAWS on the books then I would suggest if you live in ohio, you guys get your congress to change the LAW so that Rush CAN legally be allowed to do what he did, but as it stands, he wasn't...he was encouraging the citizens of OHIO to commit a felony in the State of Ohio, was he not?

my guess is its unconstitutional on its face....

[stephanie]

This only seems to be a problem when it's Republicans supposedly doing this..

But, all those Democrats who crossed over in the Northeast to help get McCain the nomination is AOK..:poke:

[JohnDoe]

Rush can't MAKE ANYBODY go out and do anything..
But the Democrats and pundits making a big stink over this, is whats making operation chaos so friggin funny...:laugh2:
but Stephanie, your article said NOTHING about Democrats pressing this issue, it said that a NON PARTISAN group was pushing the issue and the Democrats in office in Ohio ARE the ones that ARE SAYING that they basically are NOT going to pursue Rush?

Did you read the article in full? Go to the 2nd page of it....

jd

[Monkeybone]

they aren't doing anything because nothig would come of it and it would bring even more light to their apprently already weird 'voting party contracts'. someone didn't like Rush and decided to stir some shit. that is how i see it.

[JohnDoe]

This only seems to be a problem when it's Republicans supposedly doing this..

But, all those Democrats who crossed over in the Northeast to help get McCain the nomination is AOK..:poke:


baloney Steph!:D lol

If you are talking about New Hampshire, that was a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT situation, different voting laws...

MOST PEOPLE in New Hampshire ARE independents, they are not Democrats or republicans and they have a different voting law than OHIO, who has a completely different election law.

so, unless you can point out some other state in the north that helped McCain win....I don't know what you are talking about?

jd

[stephanie]

but Stephanie, your article said NOTHING about Democrats pressing this issue, it said that a NON PARTISAN group was pushing the issue and the Democrats in office in Ohio ARE the ones that ARE SAYING that they basically are NOT going to pursue Rush?

Did you read the article in full? Go to the 2nd page of it....

jd

I didn't post the article dear..and I didn't read it..
I've been reading and hearing about it for the last couple of days..

As I said..Ohio and the liberal media pundits making a big stink over this, is the reason operation chaos is so friggin funny...:coffee:

[diuretic]

encouraging is nothing. it's who commits the act.

unless it is the ppl prosecuting that do the encouraging...then it's uh..entrapment?

Incitement to commit certain acts can be a crime in some jurisdictions. Entrapment is much more than encouragement.

Sounds like old Rushbo crossed the line, not sure about the jurisdiction thing though, would Ohio extradite him if he made his comments in New York?

[JohnDoe]

they aren't doing anything because nothig would come of it and it would bring even more light to their apprently already weird 'voting party contracts'. someone didn't like Rush and decided to stir some shit. that is how i see it.
Why did the Ohio Congress write this law in to the books, do ya know? What's the purpose of it?

The Democratic party DID NOT MAKE THIS RULE.....I can not emphaisize this enough....

So why did Congress make this LAW...there must have been a purpose?

jd

[Monkeybone]

Incitement to commit certain acts can be a crime in some jurisdictions. Entrapment is much more than encouragement.

Sounds like old Rushbo crossed the line, not sure about the jurisdiction thing though, would Ohio extradite him if he made his comments in New York?

yah...and i know the whole "ignorance is no excuse" but is this a law anywhere else? or just in Ohio?

and what are they gonna do to stop this? start handing out voting cards that you need to present when you vote? ha! :poke:

:cheers2:

[Monkeybone]

Why did the Ohio Congress write this law in to the books, do ya know? What's the purpose of it?

The Democratic party DID NOT MAKE THIS RULE.....I can not emphaisize this enough....

So why did Congress make this LAW...there must have been a purpose?

jd

no idea JD other than to stop certain kinds of fraud, but at the same time what if someone suddenly and truely/honestly decides to switch sides in a revalation or what not? they ain't allowed to vote since they didn't fill out the right form?

...sides..i don't live in OH...it smells funny over there and we get enough of it wafting over to Indiana

[JohnDoe]

I didn't post the article dear..and I didn't read it..
I've been reading and hearing about it for the last couple of days..

As I said..Ohio and the liberal media pundits making a big stink over this, is the reason operation chaos is so friggin funny...:coffee:
So you didn't hear about all of this from Rush himself, but YOU heard it from Democrats all over the place in alaska? :slap: :laugh2: j/k u stephanie lol

jd

[Pale Rider]

This has all been looked at already... and the dems are just blowing hot air... they don't have a legal leg to stand on.

[JohnDoe]

no idea JD other than to stop certain kinds of fraud, but at the same time what if someone suddenly and truely/honestly decides to switch sides in a revalation or what not? they ain't allowed to vote since they didn't fill out the right form?

...sides..i don't live in OH...it smells funny over there and we get enough of it wafting over to Indiana

hahahahahahaha! well OKAY then, I guess I'll cut ya a break!!!! lol

[JohnDoe]

This has all been looked at already... and the dems are just blowing hot air... they don't have a legal leg to stand on.

What Dems?

[diuretic]

yah...and i know the whole "ignorance is no excuse" but is this a law anywhere else? or just in Ohio?

and what are they gonna do to stop this? start handing out voting cards that you need to present when you vote? ha! :poke:

:cheers2:

Speaking as a ferriner I have to admit the differences in state voting laws is amazing. I know the reason, I just stand amazed :laugh2:

[stephanie]

The Democrat people voting in the primaries don't really count anyway..

Not when the Democrat Party have over 800(i think) SUPERDELEGATES who can change a vote in a heartbeat..that's what they are worried about now..
Is Obama getting the popular votes from all the little people, then the Superdelegates coming in and giving their vote to Clinton, and giving her the nomination...

That's the Democrat party for ya..they don't trust you little people to make the right choices...

gotta buy more popcorn..:laugh2:

[theHawk]

Swearing under oath is a pretty serious thing in our country....

Its simply a statement that one signs, it has nothing to do whatsoever with an oath in a court of law. It may be an "oath" taken with the Democratic party, but it should have no bearing in the court of law. Unless you're contending that its OK for the Democratic party to strip its members of the constitutional right to vote for whomever the hell they want to on election day.


That being said, each political party has every right to 'police' their own party. They can kick people from their party if they aren't loyal, its their right. But for the local, state or Federal GOVERNMENT to arrest people and throw them in jail for voting a certain way is completely unconstitutional. What are they going to do? Arrest everyone who voted in the Democratic Primary? Arrest only those that registered in the last few months and voted. How can they possibly know how any one invidual has voted? If they even know how someone has voted, that in itself is violating their constitutional rights. So not only are these communist bastards trying to figure out how someone voted, they want to determine their "intent."

There couldn't be a clearer definition of thought police than that.

[theHawk]

Why did the Ohio Congress write this law in to the books, do ya know? What's the purpose of it?

The Democratic party DID NOT MAKE THIS RULE.....I can not emphaisize this enough....

So why did Congress make this LAW...there must have been a purpose?

jd

You seem to be putting alot of faith into the government, implying there must be a purpose for it. Even though you're too blind to see what it is.

The law serves no purpose at all other than voter intimidation. To even suggest that there could be criminal penalties for voting a certain way is completely unconstitutional. The law has absolutely no way of ever being able to convict anyone because voting is anonymous, unless of corse the Democratic Party and/or the prosecuting government violate the constituional rights of the voter and find out how he voted.

[manu1959]

so you have to sign an oath to vote party line or you will be arrested?

why vote at all.....they should just count the names of those registered and assign thier votes as the party sees fit....

[avatar4321]

What the heck does it matter? it's not like your vote counts. The Superdelegates will choose the nominee. Not the Democrats.

And the idea that someone can be prosecuted for changing party registrations is ridiculous. However, if you really want to act like that then fine.

From this day forward no one can register as a Democrat. Everyone is however, welcome to the Republian party.

[Kathianne]

What Limbaugh encouraged Republican voters to do in Ohio

Swearing under oath is a pretty serious thing in our country....

Anyone ecouraging people to commit a felony would probably get in trouble is how I look at it.

Anyway, reading the whole article, looks like the justice dept in ohio is gonna pass the buck....nothing will be done about it.

If you all don't agree with the LAWS on the books then I would suggest if you live in ohio, you guys get your congress to change the LAW so that Rush CAN legally be allowed to do what he did, but as it stands, he wasn't...he was encouraging the citizens of OHIO to commit a felony in the State of Ohio, was he not?
Seems silly. The Founding Fathers loathed 'factions' which were political parties, for they knew that any would lead to 'dealing' and 'deception'. Well the factions came anyways, with the 2nd president, as well as the dealing and deceptions. Can't make a law for it, as long as the citizen follows the state laws. Not every Democrat or every Republican buys into their party platforms 100%. In fact, often both parties' members agree with the other party's platform, partially.

[Pale Rider]

What Dems?

Oh nobody... the whole thing is an illusion... :uhoh:

[JohnDoe]

What the heck does it matter? it's not like your vote counts. The Superdelegates will choose the nominee. Not the Democrats.

And the idea that someone can be prosecuted for changing party registrations is ridiculous. However, if you really want to act like that then fine.

From this day forward no one can register as a Democrat. Everyone is however, welcome to the Republian party.You're a lawyer right? So why don't you look up Ohio's law and this and explain it to us.....it would be helpful....

But your comment is sort of ignorant or a layman's comment at most, isn't it? You don't even address the Law on the books that makes this a 5th degree Felony in Ohio, or that the Congress of Ohio made this LAW for some reason....

What is your lawyerly opinion on the law itself and the constitutionality of it?

Do you ever have an opinion on a subject that is nonpartisan....? Or am I dreaming about getting something like this once in a while on a political board? hahahahaha....never mind Avatar, we are on a political board, I shouldn't expect partisanship not to be here!!!!!

But if you have an inside track to finding out what this Ohio Law says regarding this I would love to hear your professional opinion on it.

Honestly, it is the law as it stands, but it certainly seems like it would be unconstitutional to me...in fact, the whole way primaries are run seems just plain wrong to me.

jd

[JohnDoe]

Oh nobody... the whole thing is an illusion... :uhoh:

Well, I have not seen this on the news so I do not know what Democrats you all keep bashing?

The link provided for this thread said it was a non partisan group that was pursuing this and that the Dem attorney general of ohio was NOT GOING to pursue what this group wants and threw it back in to the local locations to do something if they wanted to and even they are balking.....

As I said before, nothing will be done to enforce the law, just like with immigrants it's just another law on the books to ignore....pretty typical for the whole era we seem to be in actually, of just ignoring laws....or lawlessness....and it ain't a partisan thing imho!!!!

So, I hear from you and Stephie and others on this board Dem's this and Dems that and Dems this and Dems that regarding this issue so I'm basically calling the cards....show em, now baby!!!! Who are the Dems? :laugh2: hahahahahaha!

lol maybe there are Dnc members involved that are pushing this, or Democratic leaders in Ohio that are pushing this....but so far, I have not seen any conclusive evidence of such, only some mention of some nonpartisan group!

jd

[Pale Rider]

Well, I have not seen this on the news so I do not know what Democrats you all keep bashing?

The link provided for this thread said it was a non partisan group that was pursuing this and that the Dem attorney general of ohio was NOT GOING to pursue what this group wants and threw it back in to the local locations to do something if they wanted to and even they are balking.....

As I said before, nothing will be done to enforce the law, just like with immigrants it's just another law on the books to ignore....pretty typical for the whole era we seem to be in actually, of just ignoring laws....or lawlessness....and it ain't a partisan thing imho!!!!

So, I hear from you and Stephie and others on this board Dem's this and Dems that and Dems this and Dems that regarding this issue so I'm basically calling the cards....show em, now baby!!!! Who are the Dems? :laugh2: hahahahahaha!

lol maybe there are Dnc members involved that are pushing this, or Democratic leaders in Ohio that are pushing this....but so far, I have not seen any conclusive evidence of such, only some mention of some nonpartisan group!

jd
I don't believe it's going to be ignored because it's like the illegal alien issue, which it's very easy to identify an illegal, I believe they're going to leave this voting thing alone because it would be extremely hard to prove if anyone did what they're ranting about.

[Nukeman]

JD I have to ask! Where is Rush based out of? What state is he broadcasting from? He should ONLY be concerned about his OWN state and no others! IF the people in Ohio want to vote differently than THEY are RESPONSIBLE for knowing their own laws, not Rush. This is the problem, Rush is nationally syndicated if he calls for one thing in a single state he can not be expected to know the laws of all the states he is listened to in.

As for Rep voting in a Dem primary I see nothing wrong with it, just as I see nothing wrong with Dem's voting in the Reb primary, if you want to throw your vote away thats your choice.

Monkey brought up a valid point a few post ago, What are we going to do, have everyone have a "party card", isn't this tantamount to voter ID that the left so vehemently oppose. How else will we know what party someone is voting for or has "allegiance" to without "proper" ID.

If we go down this route we are back to disenfranchising the poor, elderly, and minorities are we not? After all how can we expect someone to have proper ID to vote in a primary and not have the SAME requirement for the final election.... Can you say double standard!!!????:poke:

[JohnDoe]

You seem to be putting alot of faith into the government, implying there must be a purpose for it. Even though you're too blind to see what it is.

The law serves no purpose at all other than voter intimidation. To even suggest that there could be criminal penalties for voting a certain way is completely unconstitutional. The law has absolutely no way of ever being able to convict anyone because voting is anonymous, unless of corse the Democratic Party and/or the prosecuting government violate the constituional rights of the voter and find out how he voted.

Okay, I have to admit that your argument makes alot of sense and those on the site that feel this same way....

It HAS TO BE unconstitutional.....i agree.

[JohnDoe]

JD I have to ask! Where is Rush based out of? What state is he broadcasting from? He should ONLY be concerned about his OWN state and no others! IF the people in Ohio want to vote differently than THEY are RESPONSIBLE for knowing their own laws, not Rush. This is the problem, Rush is nationally syndicated if he calls for one thing in a single state he can not be expected to know the laws of all the states he is listened to in.

As for Rep voting in a Dem primary I see nothing wrong with it, just as I see nothing wrong with Dem's voting in the Reb primary, if you want to throw your vote away thats your choice.

Monkey brought up a valid point a few post ago, What are we going to do, have everyone have a "party card", isn't this tantamount to voter ID that the left so vehemently oppose. How else will we know what party someone is voting for or has "allegiance" to without "proper" ID.

If we go down this route we are back to disenfranchising the poor, elderly, and minorities are we not? After all how can we expect someone to have proper ID to vote in a primary and not have the SAME requirement for the final election.... Can you say double standard!!!????:poke:

YES you are right...

okay...here goes...hahahahaha!

ALL OF YOU ARE RIGHT,

AND I WAS WRONG!

This just has to be unconstitutional....it just don't fly!

jd

[Pale Rider]

JD I have to ask! Where is Rush based out of? What state is he broadcasting from? He should ONLY be concerned about his OWN state and no others! IF the people in Ohio want to vote differently than THEY are RESPONSIBLE for knowing their own laws, not Rush. This is the problem, Rush is nationally syndicated if he calls for one thing in a single state he can not be expected to know the laws of all the states he is listened to in.

As for Rep voting in a Dem primary I see nothing wrong with it, just as I see nothing wrong with Dem's voting in the Reb primary, if you want to throw your vote away thats your choice.

Monkey brought up a valid point a few post ago, What are we going to do, have everyone have a "party card", isn't this tantamount to voter ID that the left so vehemently oppose. How else will we know what party someone is voting for or has "allegiance" to without "proper" ID.

If we go down this route we are back to disenfranchising the poor, elderly, and minorities are we not? After all how can we expect someone to have proper ID to vote in a primary and not have the SAME requirement for the final election.... Can you say double standard!!!????:poke:

Rush lives in Florida.

[krisy]

I live in Ohio and it's become quite a pain with Ohio being such a big state in the election.

I can't prove,but believe the people upset about this are Obama supporters.

I saw on the news that there were 16,000 switchover voters. Does anyone really think that they are going to spend the money to investigate something so stupid? Ohio is allready in economic hard times. They cannot prove what was going on in anyone's head when they went to the polling place and switched over. They cannot prove the intention of 16,000 voters.

This does smell of soar loosers. There was all kinds of dumb issues brought up when Ken Blackwell (R) was Sec of State. Why? Because he was a Republican.

[Hobbit]

Ok, I jumped in late, but here goes.

First off, you have no constitutional right to vote. It's not there. Look it up. Get over it. Now, Ohio may have a law or section of their state constitution that mandates secret ballots, but it's not a federal thing.

Limbaugh is not indictable. When he made those statements, he was in either New York or Florida, where it's not illegal. Even if it was, he was unaware of the specific states' laws and repeatedly told his listeners not to break the law and to check out state laws for themselves before doing this.

In any case, it's a bunch of whining about an unenforceable law that's stupid.

[avatar4321]

You're a lawyer right? So why don't you look up Ohio's law and this and explain it to us.....it would be helpful....

But your comment is sort of ignorant or a layman's comment at most, isn't it? You don't even address the Law on the books that makes this a 5th degree Felony in Ohio, or that the Congress of Ohio made this LAW for some reason....

What is your lawyerly opinion on the law itself and the constitutionality of it?

Do you ever have an opinion on a subject that is nonpartisan....? Or am I dreaming about getting something like this once in a while on a political board? hahahahaha....never mind Avatar, we are on a political board, I shouldn't expect partisanship not to be here!!!!!

But if you have an inside track to finding out what this Ohio Law says regarding this I would love to hear your professional opinion on it.

Honestly, it is the law as it stands, but it certainly seems like it would be unconstitutional to me...in fact, the whole way primaries are run seems just plain wrong to me.

jd

The constitution trumps any Ohio law.

[MtnBiker]

Is it constitutional for the Florida and Michigan votes to not count at all?

Actually there are no provisions for a political party's primary votes in the constitution.

[krisy]

I went to the Sec of State's website for Ohio,Jennifer Brunner. It didn't mention anything about this. If action were going to be taken,wouldn't she have to be involved?

[Dilloduck]

Is it constitutional for the Florida and Michigan votes to not count at all?

Actually there are no provisions for a political party's primary votes in the constitution.

Correct---polical parties have assumed authority they never had---Michigan and Florida can still submit delgates to elect a president. The major parties have gotten a little big for their britches and are punishing states for not playing a game that they are not required to play. It's fun to pretend you're the only show in town.

[Mr. P]

Perhaps these divisive personalities should've thought about the damage they were doing to America while they were littering the airwaves with intolerant, un-American theocratic/totalitarian propaganda. I guess it just goes to show that what comes around goes around. (shrug)

Oh yeah, and these divisive personalities are oppressing what part of the Constitution? Idiot!

[DragonStryk72]

Randi Rhodes, Bill Maher, Keith Overblown, etc, etc.....

Preachers of LOVE..:laugh2:

Hey, hey, hey Bill's not that bad. He's a fellow libertarian, and insults all parties fairly equally. yes, Bush more than others, but come on, even Bush laughs at the jokes

[theHawk]

Ok, I jumped in late, but here goes.

First off, you have no constitutional right to vote. It's not there. Look it up. Get over it. Now, Ohio may have a law or section of their state constitution that mandates secret ballots, but it's not a federal thing.

Limbaugh is not indictable. When he made those statements, he was in either New York or Florida, where it's not illegal. Even if it was, he was unaware of the specific states' laws and repeatedly told his listeners not to break the law and to check out state laws for themselves before doing this.

In any case, it's a bunch of whining about an unenforceable law that's stupid.

If there is no right to vote then why does section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment say:



Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State

Not to mention the several subsequent Amendments expanding that right to black men (15th Amendment), to women (19th Amendment), and to people who don't pay property taxes (24th Amendment).

Seems to be a lot of Constitutional Amendments for a right we don't have....



The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.


The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.


Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

[Mr. P]

If there is no right to vote then why does section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment say:



Not to mention the several subsequent Amendments expanding that right to black men (15th Amendment), to women (19th Amendment), and to people who don't pay property taxes (24th Amendment).

Seems to be a lot of Constitutional Amendments for a right we don't have....

Hobbit is correct, Hawk.

It's true we use popular vote to elect "Electors" that then cast votes for President but there is no Constitutional mandate to use popular vote in the selection of "Electors". Therefor, no right to vote for President can be found in the Constitution.

[Hagbard Celine]

Oh yeah, and these divisive personalities are oppressing what part of the Constitution? Idiot!

Here we have what is called a "paradox." It seems that you've deemed me an "idiot" based on the fact that you've brought up the Constitution here as if I had mentioned it in the selection you quoted me on. The key here is that I did not. Hence, the paradox.
I'm not a professional or board certified psychiatrist, but if I were I'd say you're exhibiting signs of what is called "projection." You see you've attributed a negative trait you exhibit, i.e. "idiocy," onto me. Your selection of me as the object of projection in this instance could be random. It could also be based on some subconscious memory or what-have-you--we'll never know or be certain of your motivations in this matter. One thing though that we can be certain of is that you are in fact the idiot here, not me.

:dance:

[Immanuel]

Do you ever have an opinion on a subject that is nonpartisan....? Or am I dreaming about getting something like this once in a while on a political board? hahahahaha....never mind Avatar, we are on a political board, I shouldn't expect partisanship not to be here!!!!!


Sorry jd,

But this is definitely one of those pot calling the kettle black moments. Have you ever had a non-partisan moment in your life? ;)

Immie

[Hobbit]

Hobbit is correct, Hawk.

It's true we use popular vote to elect "Electors" that then cast votes for President but there is no Constitutional mandate to use popular vote in the selection of "Electors". Therefor, no right to vote for President can be found in the Constitution.

Yeah, the Constitution mandates who may vote and by which standards you are not permitted to disenfranchise somebody, but not right to vote exists.

Right now, the Constitution permits only persons 18 years of age or older to vote and states that a person may not be denied the vote due to race or gender. If, say, Ohio wanted to bar all persons over 70 from the election, that's their right. Hell, they could bar anyone belonging to a certain political party, but the backlash would make that unfeasible.

I even found an article calling for a Constitutional amendment granting the right to vote. If it was already there, there'd be no need for one.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060206/jackson

I, personally, don't want there to be a right to vote. I think we let too many people vote. Those on welfare or not paying taxes should be barred from voting. I'd even be in favor of skipping this whole national election thing and letting the state legislators pick the president. That would end this whole media circus/presidential beauty contest every 4 years, and I wouldn't have to worry about people picking the president because he 'has an honest face' or something stupid like that. Then go back to the state legislators picking the senators and, all of a sudden, all politics becomes local, the way the founders intended. That way, the biggest thing you vote for nationally is your representative, who lives within driving distance of your house. No more national pandering to the lowest common denominator. No more 2 year long elections. It would be simple and awesome.

[Mr. P]

Here we have what is called a "paradox." It seems that you've deemed me an "idiot" based on the fact that you've brought up the Constitution here as if I had mentioned it in the selection you quoted me on. The key here is that I did not. Hence, the paradox.
I'm not a professional or board certified psychiatrist, but if I were I'd say you're exhibiting signs of what is called "projection." You see you've attributed a negative trait you exhibit, i.e. "idiocy," onto me. Your selection of me as the object of projection in this instance could be random. It could also be based on some subconscious memory or what-have-you--we'll never know or be certain of your motivations in this matter. One thing though that we can be certain of is that you are in fact the idiot here, not me.

:dance:


Oh yeah, and these divisive personalities are oppressing what part of the Constitution?
That question was toooo difficult for you? :laugh2:

[Hagbard Celine]

That question was toooo difficult for you? :laugh2:

No Mr. P. The obvious answer to your question is that they aren't "oppressing" any part of the Constitution. The reason that I haven't answered it until now is that I shouldn't have to. I never brought up the Constitution so your insertion of it into the conversation is not only irrelevant, to paraphrase you, it's "idiotic."
The fact remains that partisan blowhards who pervert their free speech rights to spew divisive bullsh*t over the airwaves do harm to the social fabric of the country. Do you disagree? BTW, I'm not defending liberal pundits who do the same thing. I think they're all bad for the collective mentality of the country. If I think some of them happen to be mildly entertaining from time to time it doesn't take away from the truth of my above statement. In the same thread, just because I indulge in the occasional cigarette, it doesn't mean they don't still cause cancer.

[Little-Acorn]

Ohio officials want to indict Rush, conservatives.

Sure. But they'll have to wait until the indictments against Bush, Cheney, etc. are issued, Hillary tells the truth about her "experience", Obama tells the truth about what he heard from his pastor, and Alec Baldwin moves to France.

:lol:

By the way, indictments usually have a space you have to fill in, citing the law(s) the person is supposed to have violated. If it's left blank (as it must be in this case), the indictment is invalidated.

Better luck next time, Demmies.