The crazy state race continues...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dave

Dave

Staff member
Why is it all of these insane things always seem to come from the right?

In first place in the Race to the Crazy is ARIZONA with multiple examples! Second is Wisconsin and no there's a fight between South Dakota & New Hampshire for third!

South Dakota for their batshit insane laws on abortion and now New Hampshire for wanting to stop college kids from voting since they lack "life experiences". Yup, Republicans want to prevent college kids from voting because (a) they vote liberal and (2) they just vote their feelings.
 
Espy

Espy

I know quite a few college kids.

It terrifies me that they vote.

I also know quite a few not-college kids.

They are equally terrifying.

So basically it's all gonna pan out bad. :/
 
Krisken

Krisken

Yeah, Arizona really blew us away with that one. Even Wisconsin's new provision in the budget bill to give unclaimed dogs to various institutions to use for medical experiments doesn't compare to 'let the transplant people die'.
 
sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

I never understood why those agencies that use animals in their studies don't raise their own. Just something sounds a little sinister in taking an adoptable dog out of the pound just to preform a vivisection on him.
 
phil

phil

Dave said:
Why is it all of these insane things always seem to come from the right?

In first place in the Race to the Crazy is ARIZONA with multiple examples! Second is Wisconsin and no there's a fight between South Dakota & New Hampshire for third!

South Dakota for their batshit insane laws on abortion and now New Hampshire for wanting to stop college kids from voting since they lack "life experiences". Yup, Republicans want to prevent college kids from voting because (a) they vote liberal and (2) they just vote their feelings.
Click to expand...

Holy shit when you said they vote liberal and with their feelings I thought you were putting words in his mouth. Nope! Because I guess voting liberal is foolish? Jesus fucking Christ.

I can't even process this right now.
 
Krisken

Krisken

It's like someone saw this guy typing on Yahoo articles and thought "Hey, wouldn't it be funny to be represented by this guy in our government?"
 
strawman

strawman

sixpackshaker said:
I never understood why those agencies that use animals in their studies don't raise their own. Just something sounds a little sinister in taking an adoptable dog out of the pound just to preform a vivisection on him.
Click to expand...
They generally don't do either. They almost always buy them from suppliers that specialize in providing lab animals with very specific traits for very specific uses. The main reason being that stray animals are not well characterized, and so studies can't control enough variables to get good data. You really need to have 10-50 of essentially the same animal to even begin to think about doing controlled studies.

If you've ever wondered where and how to buy laboratory grade animals, look no further than:

http://laboratoryanimalsciencebuyer...egory=Animal Model Suppliers&category_id=2806

Or do a google search for "Animal model"

Notably animal models are very expensive. Common lab mice are around $35-$50 each. Dogs, cats, and pigs are much more expensive.
 
Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

He has a point. College kids lack the life experience to make informed decisions like that. Young people in general, actually, so lets just raise the voting age to thirty.

You can't really understand the importance of economy without owning your own home, so let's throw that in too. And women... Well, they are too emotional to vote. And we all know minorities can't be trusted with that kind of decision.

I see no problem in this, it's pretty simple. You can vote, so long as you're a white male landowner over thirty.
 
Tress

Tress

Why was Georgia left off this list? I think eliminating drivers' licenses while making miscarriages illegal deserves some consideration.
 
C

Chibibar

You know what is interesting? The Republican are trying to regain control, but now they do have control (in the Senate) all the weird stuff are coming out of the woodwork FROM Republican. I know it is harsh to say all GOP are the same, but dang, they are not making it any easier to tell them apart :(
 
Krisken

Krisken

Chibibar said:
You know what is interesting? The Republican are trying to regain control, but now they do have control (in the Senate House) all the weird stuff are coming out of the woodwork FROM Republican. I know it is harsh to say all GOP are the same, but dang, they are not making it any easier to tell them apart :(
Click to expand...
Fixed that bit for you.
 
Krisken

Krisken

Facebook status:
Me: So, who wants to talk politics? *ducks*
Friend: Nooooooooooo
Me: Oddly enough, people are generally congenial on my wall, even when we disagree. Probably because I'm a socialist pinko commie fascist freedom hating protest supporter.
Friend 2: Vive le France!!! (runs away)
Friend 1: So, why do you hate America?
Me: lol, I love America, I just don't know where it went!
 
DarkAudit

DarkAudit

phil said:
If palin even has a chance of winning in 2012 I'd seriously consider moving. This stuff here is extra incentive to look into the steps for it.
Click to expand...
Not even Fox takes Palin's chances seriously. When they suspended Gingrich and Santorum because they planned on running in 2012, they didn't suspend Palin or Huckabee.

When all these teabaggers were running, they kept screaming about the sanctity of the Constitution. The first thing they did once they got into office was piss all over it in full view of the public.

What gets me is there's no one in these staffs who dares to tell these morons the truth. No one stepping up and saying, "this will never pass, it will make you and the state look stupid and insane" before these bills ever get drafted.
 
C

Chibibar

DarkAudit said:
Not even Fox takes Palin's chances seriously. When they suspended Gingrich and Santorum because they planned on running in 2012, they didn't suspend Palin or Huckabee.

When all these teabaggers were running, they kept screaming about the sanctity of the Constitution. The first thing they did once they got into office was piss all over it in full view of the public.

What gets me is there's no one in these staffs who dares to tell these morons the truth. No one stepping up and saying, "this will never pass, it will make you and the state look stupid and insane" before these bills ever get drafted.
Click to expand...
They are not sharing the community juice!
 
North_Ranger

North_Ranger

Staff member
ScytheRexx said:
Okay that is it, I am moving to Canada or Finland, this place has gone bonkers.
Click to expand...
You can sleep with Krisken on the balcony.

I am confused, however... The article makes it sound like that college students can't vote in their place of residence (i.e. where they are officially living; I had to go vote in Satakunta during my first university year because I was still officially booked there instead of where I lived. Long story.). And you guys don't have to prove your identity to vote? That was a bit strange. I had to flash a driver's license (or equivalent) when I last went voting.

Or did I misunderstand something?

Disenfranchising college students, though, because they vote liberal? Okay, can we then also stop old people from voting because they just vote because of "their feelings", too?
 
Krisken

Krisken

The constitution makes any cost to vote illegal. Because of this (and because no one will allow the government to pay for ID's and it would be hard for seniors, homeless, etc to get these ID's), it is a contentious issue.
 
strawman

strawman

In Michigan they ask for ID, but you aren't required to show it. If you don't show it then you sign an affidavit, and your votes go to the ballot box, while the affidavit goes into a separate pile.

If they discover after the fact that the affidavit is falsified, they can prosecute you for election tampering, but since they can't mark the ballot or figure out which one was yours, the vote is still counted.

The affidavits aren't checked unless the election is challenged.
 
Sara_2814

Sara_2814

North_Ranger said:
You can sleep with Krisken on the balcony.

I am confused, however... The article makes it sound like that college students can't vote in their place of residence (i.e. where they are officially living; I had to go vote in Satakunta during my first university year because I was still officially booked there instead of where I lived. Long story.). And you guys don't have to prove your identity to vote? That was a bit strange. I had to flash a driver's license (or equivalent) when I last went voting.

Or did I misunderstand something?
Click to expand...
I think this may depend on the state. When I was in college, I registered to vote in my college town. However, I lived there year-round so that may have made it easier. I was also in the same state (Michigan) as my "home" address (albeit 400+ miles away), so out-of-state students may not have had it quite so easy.

I don't remember if I had to show ID in Michigan, but in Nebraska you tell them your name and address and they cross you off a list of registered voters. So it's kinda-sorta asking for ID. I don't know what happens if you're not on the list, since I've always been a registered voter (you can do that when you get your driver's license). But the US has a history of discrimination in voting, so voting access is a sensitive issue.

North_Ranger said:
Disenfranchising college students, though, because they vote liberal? Okay, can we then also stop old people from voting because they just vote because of "their feelings", too?
Click to expand...
LOL! Considering how many adults I know who do just that, they believe any "truth" that appeals to their fear and ignorance without researching it to find out if it actually is true, I'd trust most college students to make better decisions. At least they are being exposed to other ideas in classes and probably interacting with people with other view points on a daily basis.
 
Krisken

Krisken

First Lady Puffinstuff said:
In Michigan they ask for ID, but you aren't required to show it. If you don't show it then you sign an affidavit, and your votes go to the ballot box, while the affidavit goes into a separate pile.

If they discover after the fact that the affidavit is falsified, they can prosecute you for election tampering, but since they can't mark the ballot or figure out which one was yours, the vote is still counted.

The affidavits aren't checked unless the election is challenged.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that FLP. The reason for the affidavit clause is because of Amendment 24, which states
Amendment 24 said:
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.
2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Click to expand...
Oddly enough, the Constitution does not grant voting as a "right". I found this odd.
 
strawman

strawman

Krisken said:
Oddly enough, the Constitution does not grant voting as a "right". I found this odd.
Click to expand...
We started as a republic, and voting, particularly who voted, was determined by the states (and still largely is). People still harbored ideas that only landowners should be able to vote, and certainly women should not be able to vote.

Conflicts somewhat with the Boston tea party event - no taxation without representation. We still taxed all those people that couldn't vote in the beginning.

I'm not fully convinced that even today voting is a right. However, the courts have struck down most laws that discriminate, therefore simply by being unable to enact laws that bar some from voting, we've given it to everyone. At that point the amendment kicks in - if they are permitted to vote, then no one can make it difficult or costly to do so.

Its one of many "rights" we citizens are granted by court rulings - and is similar to the way people are fighting to have gay marriage accepted, through the courts, rather than by amendment. While homosexuals may never have the "right" to marry, it may be that no one else will have the right to deny them marriage, and the effect in the end is much the same.
 
Espy

Espy

I don't think I would scream and cry if we said only taxpayers could vote.

I can't think of anyone who, in one way or the other doesn't pay taxes though on some level.
 
Tress

Tress

I don't see any kind of realistic difference between a citizen of the U.S. and a taxpayer... so why bother making a distinction for voting eligibility? Now, if you restrict it to income tax or property tax, then it gets really dicey.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top