Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

NO, he didn't say he wanted to suppress Black people, he said he wanted to supress Detriot's vote for other political reasons.

At 9/1/04 07:56 PM, IceWraith15 wrote: NO, he didn't say he wanted to suppress Black people, he said he wanted to supress Detriot's vote for other political reasons.

Well THAT makes it all OK then!

At 9/1/04 07:56 PM, IceWraith15 wrote: NO, he didn't say he wanted to suppress Black people, he said he wanted to supress Detriot's vote for other political reasons.

Yeah, i mean he is Republican, it's his job to make it harder for peopel to vote, because when less people vote Republicans usually win.

At 9/1/04 07:56 PM, IceWraith15 wrote: NO, he didn't say he wanted to suppress Black people, he said he wanted to supress Detriot's vote for other political reasons.

I see - maybe because Detroit just happens to have the largest Muslim community in the USA? They even have bilingual American/Arabian neighborhoods and signs.

Maybe its to suppress the Muslim vote instead?

There are still two seperate posts of mine you have yet to respond to Anti. Please do.

They were allowed to vote, they just needed to re-register, and they were informed of the fact that they had been accidentally taken off the list and needed to re-register long before the vote.

No citation - no proof.

http://www.pww.org/past-weeks-...tial%20vote%20in%20Florida.htm
Shows mass disenfranchizement.

the system is so flawed that Jeb Bush finally gave up in disgust and scapped the 2004 felon list
http://www.sptimes.com/2004/07/11/State/Florida_scraps_felon_.shtml

Just last week, Bob Herbert of the New York Times wrote a column describing armed, plain-clothes officers from the Florida state police (which reports directly to Governor Jeb Bush) going into the homes of elderly black voters and interrogating them, supposedly as part of an investigation into voter fraud.

Weren't you just posting in Befell's topic about a ton of elderly people voting twice?

Elderly JEWS with two residences. Yet they were investigating Blacks. And the article he posted showed ZERO evidence of double voting in the 2000 election...

Several? Well I'll be darned. You know.... I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that the Orlando League of Voters has alot of old people.... could that, perhaps, be why some of the old people questioned were in it?

How about the 300 cars of uniformed pseudo agents sent out by the republican party asking black people for ID? Is that intimidation?

And as I stated before, most of the accidentally purged voters were notified months before the election.

Odd, not according to the statewide investigation. But then again you post not a single source so <thank you - come again>

The company that provided the purge list warned Florida officials that thousands of eligible voters would likely be disenfranchised in the process, but Katherine Harris, the Florida Secretary of State who also served as state campaign manager for George W. Bush, went forward with the purge anyway. The result was thousands of voters not allowed to vote in an election that was decided by just over 600 votes.

Thats because the old system let thousands of Felons vote. In one election a dead guy voted. I really reccommend you read that Palm Beach Post article.

In MOST states in the US - Felons CAN vote. And as I said earlier - FLAWED list. its on public record. So flawed they are nixing it this election.

Signs posted at the polling place warning of penalties for “voter fraud” or “non-citizen” voting, or illegally urging support for a candidate.

Are you implying that black people not... citizens... or something... because otherwise I see nothing wrong with signs posting warnings about penalties of those things.

Odd, no such signs appeared at my polling place. It seems to me, a plethora of signs such as this could intimidate someone who has felt oppressed or intimidated already by the system.

Poll workers “helping” voters fill out their ballots, and instructing them on how to vote.

Old people can be pretty damn stupid, remember Florida?

Odd that so many were 'helped' to vote for a candidate they clearly did not want... or do you think that all those Jews really wanted Buchanan?

At 9/2/04 12:56 AM, Jimsween wrote: There are still two seperate posts of mine you have yet to respond to Anti. Please do.

Unless you start making citations - I'm done with you after the last post.

At 9/2/04 01:40 AM, antiklaus wrote: No citation - no proof.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A99749-2001May30
"Many counties sent certified letters notifying residents that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement had listed them as felons. People who did not respond were removed from voting rolls -- a practice criticized by the civil rights groups that filed the lawsuit. "

http://www.pww.org/past-weeks-...tial%20vote%20in%20Florida.htm
Shows mass disenfranchizement.

Thats not a real link. It just brings you to the front page.

the system is so flawed that Jeb Bush finally gave up in disgust and scapped the 2004 felon list
http://www.sptimes.com/2004/07/11/State/Florida_scraps_felon_.shtml

So? What does this have to do with the previous list? More important, what does this have to do with anything I've said so far?

Elderly JEWS with two residences. Yet they were investigating Blacks. And the article he posted showed ZERO evidence of double voting in the 2000 election...

Jews? Uhm... no. It was just elderly people.... don't know where you came up with Jews. Where in the article did it say there were investigating only blacks? And furthermore, what does the 2000 election have to do with this, you are talking about black supression in general, as was that article.

How about the 300 cars of uniformed pseudo agents sent out by the republican party asking black people for ID? Is that intimidation?

What does that have to do with anything I've said? Can't you keep a debate civil, and maybe try reading it out before hastily clicking the reply button?

Odd, not according to the statewide investigation. But then again you post not a single source so <thank you - come again>

I already did, now it's your turn to back up the "Statewide investigation" comment. No amount of immaturity will compensate for your lack of a reasonable argument.

In MOST states in the US - Felons CAN vote. And as I said earlier - FLAWED list. its on public record. So flawed they are nixing it this election.

In FLORIDA felonds CAN'T vote. Which is why the system that let thousands of felons vote there, was flawed. Der. Quite obviously, this list isn't as flawed as the old one, or else they would have already gone back to the old one.

Odd, no such signs appeared at my polling place. It seems to me, a plethora of signs such as this could intimidate someone who has felt oppressed or intimidated already by the system.

I find that tree intimidating, I demand it be taken down. I find that employees must wash hand's sing intimidating, I demand it must be taken down. Ahhh that no parking sign is opressing me. Black people aren't children, anti.

Odd that so many were 'helped' to vote for a candidate they clearly did not want... or do you think that all those Jews really wanted Buchanan?

This, you have no proof of, and can not possibly prove.

At 9/2/04 01:41 AM, antiklaus wrote:

At 9/2/04 12:56 AM, Jimsween wrote: There are still two seperate posts of mine you have yet to respond to Anti. Please do.

Unless you start making citations - I'm done with you after the last post.

I'm noticing a pattern..... you ignore posts..... then you act as if you already addressed them....... then... when you are cornered into replying to a post that shatters your argument... you blabber on about this topic being a waste of your time.

If the topics in this forum are such a waste of time, then by all means, leave.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A99749-2001May30
"Many counties sent certified letters notifying residents

http://www.pww.org/past-weeks-...tial%20vote%20in%20Florida.htm
Shows mass disenfranchizement.

Thats not a real link. It just brings you to the front page.

It works for me.

So? What does this have to do with the previous list? More important, what does this have to do with anything I've said so far?

It shows that if even after FOUR FULL YEARS to try and fix the felon list program they cannot rid it of the bugs that it was one major clusterfuck 4 years ago.

Jews? Uhm... no. It was just elderly people.... don't know where you came up with Jews.

from a related article. but it's irrelevant. the posting showed no evidence during the 2004 election.

How about the 300 cars of uniformed pseudo agents sent out by the republican party asking black people for ID? Is that intimidation?

What does that have to do with anything I've said? Can't you keep a debate civil, and maybe try reading it out before hastily clicking the reply button?

The topic is intimidation of black voters. Very relevant point if you ask me.

I already did, now it's your turn to back up the "Statewide investigation" I posted the source for that. I'm not going to READ the articles for you too.

Quite obviously, this list isn't as flawed as the old one, or else they would have already gone back to the old one.

They scrapped this list after 4 years of trying to fix it. That should be pretty damned telling.

I find that tree intimidating, Black people aren't children, anti.

you are the one acting like a child. Black people often feel intimidated - the system is run by white men. Blacks are disproportiantely arrested and confined. A warning of criminal action is seen by many as a threat.

If Blacks are so equal, explain why their votes were discarded 8 times more often than white votes? As evidenced by the pdf file on the source I sent you (you know - the state investigation link)

Odd that so many were 'helped' to vote for a candidate they clearly did not want... or do you think that all those Jews really wanted Buchanan?

This, you have no proof of, and can not possibly prove.

Actually I have a lot of citations, as well as eyewitness accounts. But your postings indicate you cannot even be bothered to read my citations so why waste my time?

If the topics in this forum are such a waste of time, then by all means, leave.

No - YOU are the waste of time.

You cite one piss poor example and act as if that is going to shatter a multitude of citations from me, and when I do post examples, you ignore them outright.

well, while its a little racist, it really isnt. i mean, its like the democarts said " we need to supress the north-florida vote". of course they do, South florida is chock ful of minorities, retirees and homosexuals. If it were up to us, Fl would be the biggest kerry state in the union. If you find a vote that is almost always unfavourable to you, its just logical to try and supres it. Its not really racist.

At 9/3/04 09:20 AM, antiklaus wrote:

Thats not a real link. It just brings you to the front page.

It works for me.

It brings you to the homepage of People's Weekly World, this is most likely because of those dots in the middle of it.

So? What does this have to do with the previous list? More important, what does this have to do with anything I've said so far?

It shows that if even after FOUR FULL YEARS to try and fix the felon list program they cannot rid it of the bugs that it was one major clusterfuck 4 years ago.

Still don't see what it has to dow ith what I've said so far. Please, point out where I said that the lsit was not flawed? If you took just a few seconds to read you would see that my argument is not that blacks are not supressed, it is that alot of what the editorial said is taken out of context.

Jews? Uhm... no. It was just elderly people.... don't know where you came up with Jews.

from a related article. but it's irrelevant. the posting showed no evidence during the 2004 election.

If I had to come up with a guess, and this is just out of the blue, I would say thats because the 2004 election hasn't happened yet.

How about the 300 cars of uniformed pseudo agents sent out by the republican party asking black people for ID? Is that intimidation?

What does that have to do with anything I've said? Can't you keep a debate civil, and maybe try reading it out before hastily clicking the reply button?

The topic is intimidation of black voters. Very relevant point if you ask me.

This topic is indeed about it, but where did I say that black voters aren't intimidated? Nowhere, I would not make such a blanket statement like that without a detailed description of why I believe that, what I did say, and I shouldn't have to tell you this so many times, is that some of the reasons that this editorial gave to come to the conclusion are not accurate. Hey, I've got a crazy idea, since this is about the fourth time you have said something that I already explained in the other post you also decided to ignore, maybe you should go find that post, and reply to it. How does that sound?

Quite obviously, this list isn't as flawed as the old one, or else they would have already gone back to the old one.

They scrapped this list after 4 years of trying to fix it. That should be pretty damned telling.

They didn't revert to the old list though. I never claimed the list wasn't flawed. But you cannot deny that the older list was in the eyes of the politicians more flawed, being that they prefereed no list, to that list.

I find that tree intimidating, Black people aren't children, anti.

you are the one acting like a child. Black people often feel intimidated - the system is run by white men. Blacks are disproportiantely arrested and confined. A warning of criminal action is seen by many as a threat.

So then we should stop publication of all laws, because apperantly the laws are a threat when black people see them. What are we, the mind police now anti?

If Blacks are so equal, explain why their votes were discarded 8 times more often than white votes? As evidenced by the pdf file on the source I sent you (you know - the state investigation link)

Where did I say they were treated equally? I'm not going to respond to this comment for the most justified reason ever possible, it has nothing to do with my argument. My argument, is that the editorial you posted's argument (I say that rather than your argument because you apperantly thought it was a waste of your time to acutally come up with one of your own) stated many things that were either taken out of context or misleading.

Odd that so many were 'helped' to vote for a candidate they clearly did not want... or do you think that all those Jews really wanted Buchanan?

This, you have no proof of, and can not possibly prove.

Actually I have a lot of citations, as well as eyewitness accounts. But your postings indicate you cannot even be bothered to read my citations so why waste my time?

As I said before, you can't possibly have such things. Voter booths are completely private, nobody can see into them. And furthermore, in no instance have you asked me for a citation that I did not give it, in fact, when you did ask me for one, I gave it as asked, and then you magically shut up (which I'm assuming means you concede that part of your argument).

If your claiming my argument lacks sources, tell me which part of my argument you want sources for and why it requires sources and I will gladly give it. Otherwise, you can't keep claiming I lak citations, it would be like accusing the police department of brutality without any cases of brutality to support that claim.

At 9/3/04 09:21 AM, antiklaus wrote:

If the topics in this forum are such a waste of time, then by all means, leave.

No - YOU are the waste of time.

You cite one piss poor example and act as if that is going to shatter a multitude of citations from me, and when I do post examples, you ignore them outright.

Do you have any instances of this you can use as proof? If your going to attack my debate style, than the least you can do is back up your attacks.

As far as I can see, I have given you lengthy rebuttals to your claims in two differen't posts, only one of which you decided to acknowledge. Then after giving these rebuttals, you, without any explaination, started making claims about flaws in my debate style, and then continued to innacurately respond to my posts, most likely because you decided to ignore my previous posts.

Why do you insist of stooping to such poor tactics, can't you carry on a reasonable debate without resorting to unbacked attacks or whining and leaving?