Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well I am sure uninformed and illiterate voters also vote for the republican party too, if you can remember the 2004 election.
Actually, Bush won the majority of voters with a college education in both 2000 and 2004. The Democrats had a firm majority among those with less than a high school diploma, however (58% in 2000).
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques
The laws were not racist. They were tools in the hands of men who were racist.
If it can be shown that such a law could be applied in a fair and practical way, there is no very good argument I see for not doing so. We have tests for driving, high school graduation, college entrance, practice of law, and a whole raft of other things. The public need for qualified and informed voters should be obvious.
They were racist because the laws were unfairly implemented and focused only on keeping illiterate blacks from voting. No whites had to take the test or pay a poll tax. As such, there will always be a negative stigmatism attached to poll tests in the US.
Last edited by Frankie117; 02-09-2010 at 09:23 PM..
figures that Tancredo proposes such a test! That rightwing bigot! Tancredo had to cancel a speech in Miami because of threats against him after he called Miami a"third world country" bcause of its high hispanic population! After the "voting test" there will probably be a "language proficiency" test! What a slippery slope but like I said in many posts here about "tea baggers", they are a bunch of old angry white people!
The laws were not racist. They were tools in the hands of men who were racist.
If it can be shown that such a law could be applied in a fair and practical way, there is no very good argument I see for not doing so. We have tests for driving, high school graduation, college entrance, practice of law, and a whole raft of other things. The public need for qualified and informed voters should be obvious.
Your argument is dead in the water.
What you have listed are privileges, voting is a right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States and verified by the United States Supreme Court. No state or local government or employer can pass any law, rule or regulation that would impede, deny or obstruct ANY citizen from observing that right.
That's the way it is, deal with it or move to Crawford, Texas!
So you're in favor of an uninformed and illiterate voter? That's what the dems count on. I think a basic civics test isn't too bad an idea.
Who's the loon whose article you're cutting and pasting?
We have posters here who claim Obama has raised their taxes, when it clearly has not happened. Should we then give a test to see if potential voters are even living in reality?
How can all Americans of all Races, Creeds and Religions agree with these people?
So you automatically know in your heart that a test will hurt a specific race. So you already have a preconcieved notion that only white people are smart enough to pass it. That would make you a prejudiced. I feel some kind of test would be appropriate. I watched a TV show just after the election where people were interviewed that said they were supporters for Obama but had not idea who his VP was or even one of his campaign platforms. This is scary since he is leading what used to be the most powerful nation in the world and was voted in for people just because of his race, charisma, or any other singular reason they found, but not for the true measure of the man.
I would like to see everyone of all races and backgrounds respect each other enough to understand that your own beliefs are important to you and theirs are just as important to them.
I'm no fan of Tom Tancredo (or, really, any Republican) but the title of this thread is a lie. He said nothing about "Jim Crow-style" tests or "Jim Crow-style" anything else. Nobody should have words placed in his mouth, even this douchebag.
There is absolutely no reason why a civic literacy test couldn't be applied equally to everyone. Whether it's a good or a practical policy idea is debatable, but there is nothing intrinsically racist about the concept.
Do you know anything about the *literacy tests* back in the 1950s? Do you know how they were applied? And if so, why would you think it would be any different today?
What you have listed are privileges, voting is a right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States and verified by the United States Supreme Court. No state or local government or employer can pass any law, rule or regulation that would impede, deny or obstruct ANY citizen from observing that right.
Bull****. My 5-year-old is a citizen. The state says he cannot vote. QED.
The Supreme Court has never, ever said "voting is a fundamental right that can never be restricted for any reason." Sorry Charlie, they didn't, because it isn't. Children can't vote; prison inmates can't vote; people who are too lazy to register can't vote. You have no idea what you are talking about.
The Supreme Court upheld the Voting Rights Act of 1965 which struck down the use of literacy tests in many states, because they were being used in a racially discriminatory manner. Neither they, nor Congress, have ever addressed the legality of voter literacy tests which were NOT used in a discriminatory manner.
It is so sad the OP relates illiteracy with minorities. I thought we had moved beyond that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
