Justice Dept. blocks N.C.'s nonpartisan vote

[meme]

wtf
-----------------------------------------------------------

SNIP:


By Ben Conery THE WASHINGTON TIMES

KINSTON, N.C. * Voters in this small city decided overwhelmingly last year to do away with the party affiliation of candidates in local elections, but the Obama administration recently overruled the electorate and decided that equal rights for black voters cannot be achieved without the Democratic Party.

The Justice Department's ruling, which affects races for City Council and mayor, went so far as to say partisan elections are needed so that black voters can elect their "candidates of choice" - identified by the department as those who are Democrats and almost exclusively black.

The department ruled that white voters in Kinston will vote for blacks only if they are Democrats and that therefore the city cannot get rid of party affiliations for local elections because that would violate black voters' right to elect the candidates they want.

Several federal and local politicians would like the city to challenge the decision in court. They say voter apathy is the largest barrier to black voters' election of candidates they prefer and that the Justice Department has gone too far in trying to influence election results here.

Stephen LaRoque, a former Republican state lawmaker who led the drive to end partisan local elections, called the Justice Department's decision "racial as well as partisan."

"On top of that, you have an unelected bureaucrat in Washington, D.C., overturning a valid election," he said. "That is un-American."

The decision, made by the same Justice official who ordered the dismissal of a voting rights case against members of the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia, has irritated other locals as well. They bristle at federal interference in this city of nearly 23,000 people, two-thirds of whom are black.


the whole article here...
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/20/justice-dept-blocks-ncs-nonpartisan-vote/#

 

[Canceled2]

More hope and change from the Racist Obama Administration!

wtf
-----------------------------------------------------------

SNIP:


By Ben Conery THE WASHINGTON TIMES

KINSTON, N.C. * Voters in this small city decided overwhelmingly last year to do away with the party affiliation of candidates in local elections, but the Obama administration recently overruled the electorate and decided that equal rights for black voters cannot be achieved without the Democratic Party.

The Justice Department's ruling, which affects races for City Council and mayor, went so far as to say partisan elections are needed so that black voters can elect their "candidates of choice" - identified by the department as those who are Democrats and almost exclusively black.

The department ruled that white voters in Kinston will vote for blacks only if they are Democrats and that therefore the city cannot get rid of party affiliations for local elections because that would violate black voters' right to elect the candidates they want.

Several federal and local politicians would like the city to challenge the decision in court. They say voter apathy is the largest barrier to black voters' election of candidates they prefer and that the Justice Department has gone too far in trying to influence election results here.

Stephen LaRoque, a former Republican state lawmaker who led the drive to end partisan local elections, called the Justice Department's decision "racial as well as partisan."

"On top of that, you have an unelected bureaucrat in Washington, D.C., overturning a valid election," he said. "That is un-American."

The decision, made by the same Justice official who ordered the dismissal of a voting rights case against members of the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia, has irritated other locals as well. They bristle at federal interference in this city of nearly 23,000 people, two-thirds of whom are black.


the whole article here...
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/20/justice-dept-blocks-ncs-nonpartisan-vote/#

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Justice is done.

 

[/MSG/]

Justice is done.

HOW? How is overturning a valid election justice in any sense of the word? Stop being a prick for once.

 

[RockX]

They have so little confidence in the intelligence of their voters being able to remember a name rather than just looking for the D. They tell them just look for the D next to the name and vote for that one and you'll get your Obama Money.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

how exactly is a justice dept. opinion a valid ruling on anything other than the justice department? are you telling me the justice dept. has constitutional authority to overturn any state law the relates to voting???

 

[christiefan915]

wtf
-----------------------------------------------------------

SNIP:


By Ben Conery THE WASHINGTON TIMES

KINSTON, N.C. * Voters in this small city decided overwhelmingly last year to do away with the party affiliation of candidates in local elections, but the Obama administration recently overruled the electorate and decided that equal rights for black voters cannot be achieved without the Democratic Party.

The Justice Department's ruling, which affects races for City Council and mayor, went so far as to say partisan elections are needed so that black voters can elect their "candidates of choice" - identified by the department as those who are Democrats and almost exclusively black.

The department ruled that white voters in Kinston will vote for blacks only if they are Democrats and that therefore the city cannot get rid of party affiliations for local elections because that would violate black voters' right to elect the candidates they want.

Several federal and local politicians would like the city to challenge the decision in court. They say voter apathy is the largest barrier to black voters' election of candidates they prefer and that the Justice Department has gone too far in trying to influence election results here.

Stephen LaRoque, a former Republican state lawmaker who led the drive to end partisan local elections, called the Justice Department's decision "racial as well as partisan."

"On top of that, you have an unelected bureaucrat in Washington, D.C., overturning a valid election," he said. "That is un-American."

The decision, made by the same Justice official who ordered the dismissal of a voting rights case against members of the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia, has irritated other locals as well. They bristle at federal interference in this city of nearly 23,000 people, two-thirds of whom are black.

the whole article here...
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/20/justice-dept-blocks-ncs-nonpartisan-vote/#

This law has been in effect for 43 years and it's suddenly Obama's fault? Funny how the Washington Times left off that little snippet.

You hacks couldn't get any hackier if you tried.

"Kinston is one of the areas subject to provisions of the landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act, which requires the city to receive Justice Department approval before making any changes to voting procedures. Kinston is one of 12,000 voting districts in areas of 16 states, almost exclusively in the South, that the Voting Rights Act declared to have had a history of racial discrimination."

 

[Annie]

HOW? How is overturning a valid election justice in any sense of the word? Stop being a prick for once.

Might as well ask water not to seek the path of least resistance.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Stripping valuable information out of the ballot for no particular reason is not conducive to fair elections.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Stripping valuable information out of the ballot for no particular reason is not conducive to fair elections.

1. what valuable information was stripped?

2.......how exactly is a justice dept. opinion a valid ruling on anything other than the justice department? are you telling me the justice dept. has constitutional authority to overturn any state law the relates to voting???

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

1. what valuable information was stripped?

Information relating to the party of the candidate was stripped from the ballot without cause.

2.......how exactly is a justice dept. opinion a valid ruling on anything other than the justice department? are you telling me the justice dept. has constitutional authority to overturn any state law the relates to voting???

Voting rights act.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Information relating to the party of the candidate was stripped from the ballot without cause.



Voting rights act.

how is the party of the candidate important information? are you suggesting that voters are to stupid to vote for candidates unless they have a D next to their name?

i wasn't aware that this state was one of the original states taht the DOJ has power over....do you have link that says it is?

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

how is the party of the candidate important information?

Because it tells the political affiliation of the said candidate? Whether they are conservative or far right? This is the dumbest question ever.

are you suggesting that voters are to stupid to vote for candidates unless they have a D next to their name?

Voting for a candidate because they have a D next to their name isn't stupidity, it's common sense. It makes no sense to vote for a conservative in one space and a liberal in the next.

i wasn't aware that this state was one of the original states taht the DOJ has power over....do you have link that says it is?

North Carolina?

 

[meme]

Maybe black people will wake up some day and see it's the Democrat party who wants to keep them on the plantations..

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Because it tells the political affiliation of the said candidate? Whether they are conservative or far right? This is the dumbest question ever.



Voting for a candidate because they have a D next to their name isn't stupidity, it's common sense. It makes no sense to vote for a conservative in one space and a liberal in the next.



North Carolina?

the whole state isn't included, i just checked, but the county is....thanks for that answer...

if you don't know what your candidate stands for and you need to identify them by party, you shouldn't be allowed to vote. and it makes perfect sense to vote for a d and an r.....IF you vote principles and not merely like a sheeple who votes solely due to party affiliation

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

if you don't know what your candidate stands for and you need to identify them by party, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

A candidate decides what he stands for when he chooses his political party. You'd disallow choosing people based on what they stand for, and only allow what amounts to random nonsense votes that cancel each other out?

and it makes perfect sense to vote for a d and an r.....IF you vote principles and not merely like a sheeple who votes solely due to party affiliation

I vote by ideology, not some vaguely defined feel good jibberish like "principles". If a candidate agrees with my ideology, he gets my vote. I've never heard of a Republican who deserved my vote.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

UOTE=Watermark;539785]A candidate decides what he stands for when he chooses his political party. You'd disallow choosing people based on what they stand for, and only allow what amounts to random nonsense votes that cancel each other out?

lol....learning what your candidate stands, not based on the letter next to their name, is nonsense to you...you're a sheeple watermark, you don't think for yourself and you don't think anyone else should either, you want the party to speak for you

I vote by ideology, not some vaguely defined feel good jibberish like "principles". If a candidate agrees with my ideology, he gets my vote. I've never heard of a Republican who deserved my vote.

you have it backwards....ideology is a feel good gibberish...no wonder you're a sheeple and not a leader or one who thinks for himself, you don't even know the difference between ideology and principles....since you're still in college, i suggest you take a philosophy class

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

lol....learning what your candidate stands, not based on the letter next to their name, is nonsense to you...you're a sheeple watermark, you don't think for yourself and you don't think anyone else should either, you want the party to speak for you

Party is means a lot more than simply being a letter next to someones name on the ballot. It tells you which ideology they reprsent.

you have it backwards....ideology is a feel good gibberish...no wonder you're a sheeple and not a leader or one who thinks for himself, you don't even know the difference between ideology and principles....since you're still in college, i suggest you take a philosophy class

I vote for candidates as tools to further MY ideology. I do not vote for candidates so that THEY can further THEIR ideology.

 

[Epicurus]

Eugh sometimes I can't even read Watermark's stupidity without feeling dumber.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Party is means a lot more than simply being a letter next to someones name on the ballot. It tells you which ideology they reprsent.



I vote for candidates as tools to further MY ideology. I do not vote for candidates so that THEY can further THEIR ideology.

huh....?

so if they simply put a D next to their name, you will vote them because they must represent your idealogy....that is the stupidest thing i've ever heard....if you don't know anything about them other than the D next to their name, then you are in fact voting for them to further their ideology, not yours.

you're basically saying, fuck principles, idealogy trumps all....great, so when charles manson runs on the dem ticket you will vote for him.....because you're nothing but a sheeple hack