9th CIRCUT COURT-ILLEGALS CAN VOTE

[RightField]

My point is that until you wake up and realize that you're getting your information from sources that don't actually provide information, virtually everything you say is instantly dismissable.

That's actually very arrogant. She lists cases which are current that have to do with voter fraud and draws a conclusion that there maybe a wider problem since these several cases are already in process (and documented). The liberal in you says "I know what's better for the American public and I don't like her politics so I'm not going to listen" and then tell me that you put no stock on my comments because anything she says is "dismissable".

Of course, it's this same phenomena of 'not listening' which is part of the cause of the growth of the tea party...that democrats arrogantly insist that they know best and that they're going to make up the rules because "they won" the last election even if the American public doesn't agree with them on specific policies. It's this same arrogance that I hope makes it so liberals are unelectable for at least another generation so that we don't find ourselve once again in a sinking ship of economy while they stand on the bridge saying "Don't worry, things are going fine, don't pay attention to the hole that the iceburg ripped in the hull"

Our country is sinking fast and all you and the other liberals can say is "Don't listen to those pessimists, everything is going to be just fine"(cause we're arrogant and we know better). The problem is that you and the liberals don't know all that you think you know.

It's just like your comment about France. Even though you've probably never been there and definately haven't worked there, you know for a fact that my observations after 6 months of working there must be false because you have the (false) conviction of a liberal democrat to guide you.

You're an average American with a third rate education and yet because you've decided to call yourself a liberal, you've invested in yourself the authority to tell me and others what is sensible to read and understand and what isn't, that you hold a monopoly on "the truth" and brook no dissension. You've decided that allegations of voter fraud by democrats (documented in court briefs) isn't worth my time or any other conservatives time because due to the power invested in you as a card carrying liberal, you automatically know better and part of your knowledge is that I and others really ought not concern ourselves with allegations of voter fraud.

When you signed up to be a liberal, did they give you a pin-on nametag too, it is it invested with magical liberal "do-good" and "know everything" powers or is that included in your little plastic liberal ring?

Maybe this is why the dems have been toying with the idea of shutting down talk radio and other news sources that they don't agree with.

 

[unregistered]

 

[richard_daily]

How much would you care to wager on that?

How much, you coward?

 

[hogjack]

You can bet your wrinkly old bigotted ass that if Repubs were in power right now that the electorate would be every bit as ready to throw their asses out on the street.

Unfortunately the Republicans keep coming back and the Democrats don't get the hint either.

The parties pander to get elected and then fail in office. They're both owned by the money paying for the election cycles. The two major parties are errand boys and girls.

 

[hogjack]

Michelle Malkin makes more sense than 95% of you cheating liberals.

Rightfield: Every single post you use the word "liberal". Do you secretly masturbate to the sound of "L"? You're like Rush Limbaugh without the money (emphasize without).

 

[IrezumiKiss]

That's actually very arrogant. She lists cases which are current that have to do with voter fraud and draws a conclusion that there maybe a wider problem since these several cases are already in process (and documented). The liberal in you says "I know what's better for the American public and I don't like her politics so I'm not going to listen" and then tell me that you put no stock on my comments because anything she says is "dismissable".

Of course, it's this same phenomena of 'not listening' which is part of the cause of the growth of the tea party...that democrats arrogantly insist that they know best and that they're going to make up the rules because "they won" the last election even if the American public doesn't agree with them on specific policies. It's this same arrogance that I hope makes it so liberals are unelectable for at least another generation so that we don't find ourselve once again in a sinking ship of economy while they stand on the bridge saying "Don't worry, things are going fine, don't pay attention to the hole that the iceburg ripped in the hull"

Our country is sinking fast and all you and the other liberals can say is "Don't listen to those pessimists, everything is going to be just fine"(cause we're arrogant and we know better). The problem is that you and the liberals don't know all that you think you know.

It's just like your comment about France. Even though you've probably never been there and definately haven't worked there, you know for a fact that my observations after 6 months of working there must be false because you have the (false) conviction of a liberal democrat to guide you.

You're an average American with a third rate education and yet because you've decided to call yourself a liberal, you've invested in yourself the authority to tell me and others what is sensible to read and understand and what isn't, that you hold a monopoly on "the truth" and brook no dissension. You've decided that allegations of voter fraud by democrats (documented in court briefs) isn't worth my time or any other conservatives time because due to the power invested in you as a card carrying liberal, you automatically know better and part of your knowledge is that I and others really ought not concern ourselves with allegations of voter fraud.

When you signed up to be a liberal, did they give you a pin-on nametag too, it is it invested with magical liberal "do-good" and "know everything" powers or is that included in your little plastic liberal ring?

Maybe this is why the dems have been toying with the idea of shutting down talk radio and other news sources that they don't agree with.

You talk all this knowledge game, yet you admittedly didn't even know about the Rand Paul supporter head stomping incident two days after it's been plastered all over the country. I mean, come on, guy. You gonna talk this kinda shit?

Maybe you better rub your little magic plastic conservative ring, huh?

 

[unregistered]

 

[richard_daily]

Fuck you, Stand in front of the fucking mirror and tell yourself how successful you are, you'll have a gullible but sympathetic audience who might give a shit.

So basically, you're afraid to stand up for what you say, yet again...

loser.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Luk]

Basically, you lose. You have failed to disprove the law I posted concerning Chicago and only wish to deflect attention from that particular humiliation; but know this clown, I've read your pathetic book so you might as well sneak off now while you still have a chance.

The point is this... You're crying about big government being imposed upon your will by the Socialist regime. Yet the law you are citing is not being enforced, a law that was passed in California by a *gasp* Republican governor.

I've purchased two commercial buildings, bought and sold a condo and bought a home since that law was passed and never once had prints taken.

 

[jeninflorida]

The point is this... You're crying about big government being imposed upon your will by the Socialist regime. Yet the law you are citing is not being enforced, a law that was passed in California by a *gasp* Republican governor.

I've purchased two commercial buildings, bought and sold a condo and bought a home since that law was passed and never once had prints taken.

are you saying that obama doesn't want more government?

 

[MeeMie]

Which of you righties is hiding the evidence that foreign citizens are voting in our elections? Or are you just parroting what you hear from Glenn Beck again?

Did you miss this earlier post? It's quite informative that some states already allow people, who are not citizens of the United States, to vote in US elections. Additionally, there's evidence showing a push to allow people who are foreign NON-citizens the right to vote in US elections.

All of which is easily researched, if you took your head out of your ass.

I'll highlight the relevant parts for you, since you must be blind to the facts.


The Right To Vote!


The right to vote is granted to all citizens of the United States regardless of race, creed, color, sex, income, or sexual orientation. If you are a citizen over the age of 18, who hasn’t committed a felony, you have the right to vote.



That is soon to change.

For now there is a movement by the Progressives Liberal Moonbats to allow legal non-citizens to vote.

On Election Day, some people will be allowed to vote even though they are not citizens of the United States.

A handful of communities allow noncitizens who are in the country legally to vote in municipal elections. Portland, Maine, could be about to join that short list of communities.

With citizenship comes the right to vote, but in a handful of places, even legal noncitizens have limited voting rights. Their ranks may grow come Election Day.

That's when San Francisco takes up noncitizen voting in school races, and Portland, Maine will decide whether legal immigrants noncitizens can vote in all local elections.



Cities Weigh Letting Noncitizens Vote

PORTLAND, Maine --
Like his neighbors, Claude Rwaganje pays taxes on his income and taxes on his cars. His children have gone to Portland's public schools. He's interested in the workings of Maine's largest city, which he has called home for 13 years.

There's one vital difference, though: Rwaganje isn't a U.S. citizen and isn't allowed to vote on those taxes or on school issues. That may soon change.

Portland residents will vote Nov. 2 on a proposal to give legal residents who are not U.S. citizens the right to vote in local elections, joining places like San Francisco and Chicago (ahem Richard Daily) that have already loosened their rules or are considering it.

Noncitizens hold down jobs, pay taxes, own businesses, volunteer in the community and serve in the military, and it's only fair they be allowed to vote, Rwaganje said.

"We have immigrants who are playing key roles in different issues of this country, but they don't get the right to vote," said Rwaganje, 40, who moved to the U.S. because of political strife in his native Congo and runs a nonprofit that offers financial advice to immigrants.

Opponents of the measure say immigrants already have an avenue to cast ballots -- by becoming citizens.

Allowing noncitizens to vote dilutes the meaning of citizenship, they say, adding that it could lead to fraud and unfairly sway elections.


"My primary objection is I don't think it is right, I don't think it is just, I don't think it is fair," Portland resident Barbara Campbell Harvey said.

In San Francisco, a ballot question Nov. 2 will ask voters whether they want to allow noncitizens to vote in school board elections if they are the parents, legal guardians or caregivers of children in the school system.

Noncitizens are allowed to vote in school board elections in Chicago and in municipal elections in half a dozen towns in Maryland, said Ron Hayduk, a professor at the City University of New York and author of "Democracy for All: Restoring Immigrant Voting Rights in the United States."

New York City allowed noncitizens to vote in community school board elections until 2003, when the school board system was reorganized, and several municipalities in Massachusetts have approved allowing it but don't yet have the required approval from the Legislature, he said.

The Maine ballot questions asks whether legal immigrants who are city residents but not U.S. citizens should be allowed to vote in municipal elections. If the measure passes, noncitizens would be able to cast ballots in school board, city council and school budget elections, as well as other local issues, but not on federal or statewide matters.

The Maine League of Young Voters, which spearheaded the drive to force the question on the ballot, estimates there are 5,000 to 7,500 immigrants in Portland, roughly half of whom are not U.S. citizens. They come from more than 100 countries, with the two largest groups from Somalia and Latin America.

On a recent day in a small lunchroom at the Al-Amin Halal Market, a group of Somali men ate lunch and talked in their native language. A sign advertised the day's offerings, including hilib ari (goat), bariis (rice) and baasto (spaghetti).

Abdirizak Daud, 40, moved to Minneapolis 18 years ago before coming to Portland in 2006. He hasn't been able to find a job. Some of his nine children have attended Portland schools, and he'd like to have a say in who's looking over the school system and the city, he said.

But between his limited English and the financial demands, Daud hasn't been able to become a citizen.

"I like the Democrats. I want to vote for Democrats, but I don't have citizenship," he said.

To become a citizen, immigrants must be a lawful permanent resident for at least five years, pass tests on English and U.S. history and government, and swear allegiance to the United States.

Supporters of Portland's ballot measure say the process is cumbersome, time-consuming and costly. The filing fee and fingerprinting costs alone are $675, and many immigrants spend hundreds of dollars more on English and civics classes and for a lawyer to help them through the process.

Allowing noncitizens to vote fits with basic democratic principles, Hayduk said.

Historically, 40 states allowed noncitizens to vote going back to 1776, but an anti-immigrant backlash in the late 1800s and early 1900s resulted in laws that eliminated their voting rights by 1926, Hayduk said.

"We look back in history and we say that was a bad thing that we didn't allow African-Americans to vote, or we didn't allow half the population, women, to vote, or we didn't allow younger people to vote," he said. "We've modified our election laws to become more inclusive to incorporate more members of society."

The Federation for American Immigration Reform, a Washington, D.C., group that advocates tougher immigration enforcement, says voting is a privilege and should be limited to citizens.

"People who are legal immigrants to the United States after a five-year waiting period can become citizens and become enfranchised," spokesman Ira Mehlman said. "But until then, being here as a legal immigrant is a conditional agreement, sort of like a trial period. You have to demonstrate you are the type of person we would want to have as a citizen, then you can become a citizen and vote."






I don't believe this is Constitutional.

Just examine the following Amendments:

15th Amendment
Section 1.
http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxv

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.

19th Amendment
http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxix

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.

26th Amendment
Section 1.
http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxxvi

The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.



It is a right to vote for citizens of the United States - not residents.

You tell Glenn Beck's and Michelle Malkin's propaganda, nothing more.

Michelle Malkin makes more sense than 95% of you cheating liberals.

That's what they do when they can't discuss issues sensibly.



The classic loonie debate:

• fault the source
• point finger elsewhere
• namecalling
• insult integrity and intelligence
• answer a question with another question
• refuses to read info stating already knows what's in it
• BLAME BUSH!

It's a pattern easily recognizable.




They have an phony excuse for every truth.

They're the only people on the face of the earth who have the gall to deny that there was voter fraud committed during the last election, despite numerous legal charges proving otherwise.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Read the law. I've run into it every time I have my signature verified by a notary, which has been many times, to say nothing of the fact that my wife was a notary for many years.

You get asked to supply fingerprints? Seriously?

I had to get some forms notarized last week, and I didn't even have to show ID. Maybe the rules are different where you live.

 

[unregistered]

 

[MeeMie]

The point is this, you are wrong. KRC was nice enough to supply you with a PDF link in post #148 to the Notary Public Handbook, published by Debra Bowen, Secretary of State, Notary Public Section 2010. You should have acknowledged her attempt in advancing your edification and at least made the effort to read its contents which would have revealed the following on page 9:

3. Two credible witnesses whose identities are proven upon the presentation of satisfactory
evidence, the journal shall contain the signatures of the credible witnesses and the type of
identifying document, the governmental agency issuing the document, the serial or identifying
number of the document, and the date of issue or expiration of the document establishing the
identity of the credible witnesses.
• The fee charged for the notarial service.
• If the document to be notarized is a deed, quitclaim deed, or deed of trust affecting real
property or a power of attorney document, the notary public shall require the party signing
the document to place his or her right thumbprint in the journal. If the right thumbprint is
not available, then the notary public shall have the party use his or her left thumb, or any
available finger and shall so indicate in the journal. If the party signing the document is
physically unable to provide a thumb or fingerprint, the notary public shall so indicate in
the journal and shall also provide an explanation of that physical condition.

But no, you insist on battling your way into total ignorance.

It's a loonie trait. Say it ain't so loudly and sooner than later it becomes their truth.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[MeeMie]

This is, afterall, politics Chicagoland style.


The Illinois General Assembly late last year passed a vote-by-mail law for the first time.
(as if there wasn't already enough voter/registration fraud coming from that direction)

Then this summer, in another piece of election legislation, lawmakers approved allowing anyone to send out applications for vote-by-mail ballots.

More than 900,000 of the applications were sent to voters by the state Democratic Party.

The trouble is the return address was the Democratic Party - where political workers would process the voter's data, then forward the applications to county clerks.





Sounds fair.

 

[Luk]

The point is this, you are wrong. KRC was nice enough to supply you with a PDF link in post #148 to the Notary Public Handbook, published by Debra Bowen, Secretary of State, Notary Public Section 2010. You should have acknowledged her attempt in advancing your edification and at least made the effort to read its contents, which would have revealed the following on page 9:

3. Two credible witnesses whose identities are proven upon the presentation of satisfactory
evidence, the journal shall contain the signatures of the credible witnesses and the type of
identifying document, the governmental agency issuing the document, the serial or identifying
number of the document, and the date of issue or expiration of the document establishing the
identity of the credible witnesses.
• The fee charged for the notarial service.
• If the document to be notarized is a deed, quitclaim deed, or deed of trust affecting real
property or a power of attorney document, the notary public shall require the party signing
the document to place his or her right thumbprint in the journal. If the right thumbprint is
not available, then the notary public shall have the party use his or her left thumb, or any
available finger and shall so indicate in the journal. If the party signing the document is
physically unable to provide a thumb or fingerprint, the notary public shall so indicate in
the journal and shall also provide an explanation of that physical condition.

But no, you insist on battling your way into total ignorance.

I guess you're too stupid to understand what D.C. and I are saying... The law exists but it's not enforced. A law signed off on by a Republican yet here you are crying about Socialists imposing their will on you.

 

[Wok]

I guess you're too stupid to understand what D.C. and I are saying... The law exists but it's not enforced. A law signed off on by a Republican yet here you are crying about Socialists imposing their will on you.

Nah, Schwarzenegger is a RINO.

 

[Luk]

Nah, Schwarzenegger is a RINO.

It was Wilson who gave this the big thumbs up.

 

[Wok]

It was Wilson who gave this the big thumbs up.

Wilson was a secret commie too.

 

[MeeMie]

Nah, Schwarzenegger is a RINO.

A RINO overruled by a large Democratic state majority. His hands have been firmly tied behind his back.

The spend spend spend state legislators are responsible for California's demise. Putting into law programs that are unfunded and not allowing for any tax increases to pay for their foibles.

Can't necessarily blame the Governor for their spendthrift programs and mistakes.

The real harm will be when taxpayers, from across the nation who governed responsibly, are forced to pay for California's debts.

 

[Wok]

A RINO overruled by a large Democratic state majority. His hands have been firmly tied behind his back.

The spend spend spend state legislators are responsible for California's demise. Putting into law programs that are unfunded and not allowing for any tax increases to pay for their foibles.

Can't necessarily blame the Governor for their spendthrift programs and mistakes.

The real harm will be when taxpayers, from across the nation who governed responsibly, are forced to pay for California's debts.

Too bad for him.

Wah.

 

[Luk]

A RINO overruled by a large Democratic state majority. His hands have been firmly tied behind his back.

The spend spend spend state legislators are responsible for California's demise. Putting into law programs that are unfunded and not allowing for any tax increases to pay for their foibles.

Can't necessarily blame the Governor for their spendthrift programs and mistakes.

The real harm will be when taxpayers, from across the nation who governed responsibly, are forced to pay for California's debts.

Meemie, you don't know shit about California.

Here's a nice little advert for you.

http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2010/10/meg_whitman_parrots_arnold_sch.php