It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Feds spike voter citizenship checks in Georgia

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:10 AM
link   


Justice Department officials said the citizenship match through driver's license and Social Security data has flagged 7,007 individuals as non-citizens but that many have been shown to be in error.


The article doesn't mention whether the people are black, white, orange, green or purple, but it DOES say that the check has been PROVEN to be inaccurate. Isn't this reason enough to dump it and start over? Why are you all supporting a system that denies a person their right to vote? Why are you all defending this with such juvenile party politics? This system is an affront to everyone who supports the democratic process.




posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Montana
 


It would be nice for the people saying to scrap the current citizenship check procedure to offer a new, better, system.

Don't you see the danger in scraping the system without a replacement?

It's not definite that it's in error to start with anyway. The verb "may" can mean that there is no error, too. The article does say that minorities are being denied the right to vote.

[edit on 6/3/2009 by octotom]

[edit on 6/3/2009 by octotom]



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman

A "discriminatory effect" could mean a lot of things. Please provide more proof of the "crap" that's been going on for years in Georgia.




A three-judge federal panel in October ordered the state to seek Justice Department preclearance for the checks under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the same reason the federal agency must sign off on the new law that made Georgia only the second state after Arizona to require such proof. Georgia is one of several states that need federal approval before changing election rules because of a history of discriminatory Jim Crow-era voting practices.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:25 AM
link   
The article says "has been shown to be in error." There is no 'may' in that sentence. Why is it required to proffer a replacement when demanding an inaccurate (read just plain wrong) system be removed?

It's not working. It's been PROVEN to be wrong. People who are legal citizens are being denied the right to vote. Remove the system. Seems like common sense to me.

I am not an expert on election law, but there are plenty of people out there who are. I am willing to let them suggest a replacement. That's what they do. I however will DEMAND that the systems put in place are accurate and fair. Otherwise what is the point? If our right to vote is not protected jealously, what difference does it make if you are a citizen or not? The very idea that a rightful vote wouldn't be counted should make your blood boil!



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by octotom

I guess you guys must have missed the part where they found "the state's voter verification program is frequently inaccurate and has a "discriminatory effect" on minority voters."


No, I didn't miss it, in fact, I addressed it. I said, how is it possible that by running a check on a Social Security Number we can tell what someone's race is if the check just determines whether or not that number belongs to a citizen. The process is only "unfair" to that minority group that are called illegal immigrants. That's it. It would happen to that those who deem that it's unfair that only citizens can vote would find the system inaccurate as well.


You think they type in a social security number and it just comes back with a big smiley face if it's a citizen?



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by mythatsabigprobe
 


No, I don't think that. But, the Social Security numbers are different for citizens that residents. You do know that the numbers actually mean something, right? They're not random.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Montana
 



The article says "has been shown to be in error." There is no 'may' in that sentence.

Sorry I misread the sentence.


Why is it required to proffer a replacement when demanding an inaccurate (read just plain wrong) system be removed?

Are we to have no system then? We don't know who these 7000 are. They could very well be citizens that have lost their voting rights. If I murder someone and go to prison, I'm still a citizen but I have no right to vote. They could very well be dead people, who were citizens, but don't have the right to vote any more because, well they're dead.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:40 AM
link   
Well I am a "minority" in Georgia I have been a voter for the last 4 elections, I have never been discriminated yet I go to my voting district my name is always there, only register once in the 90s and I am always in the list.

Now, taking into consideration all the stupidity going on in this state, and the bubble heats running government and the lazy people that call themselves voters but that never take their time to check if they are in the voting list until is time to "vote". I say this problem have the roots more in the "voters" than in the government.

And this is just my opinion base on observation and personal experience as a voter since the 90s in GA.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman

A "discriminatory effect" could mean a lot of things. Please provide more proof of the "crap" that's been going on for years in Georgia.




A three-judge federal panel in October ordered the state to seek Justice Department preclearance for the checks under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the same reason the federal agency must sign off on the new law that made Georgia only the second state after Arizona to require such proof. Georgia is one of several states that need federal approval before changing election rules because of a history of discriminatory Jim Crow-era voting practices.


First, the Jim Crow-era was from 1876 and 1965 - 50 years ago next year.

Second, Georgia was by no means the only state with discriminatory voting practices then. 42 of the then 48 states had these laws. Jim Crow laws

If this is your only proof for your statement then I think you need to do a little more research before just believing what you read to be true. If you have any proof of more recent "crap" I'd love to know what it is.

[edit on 3/6/2009 by Iamonlyhuman]



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by octotom
 


The point is, the person checking SS# has access to the full information in the social security database. Name, race, date of birth, etc. Apparently the Justice Department thinks it was being abused to deny minorities their voting rights.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by octotom
 


Ok, kinda grasping at straws now, but whatever.

Like I said, there are plenty of people who have paid a substantial amount of money to earn a college degree and who have spent many years gaining experience in the field of election law and voter rights. Most are in one way or another government employees. We are already paying them to design and maintain voter registration systems. That's their job, That's what they do. I certainly wouldn't want to live with a system designed by some po-dunk from Montana with little election law education and no experience. And neither should you!!!!



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


Dude, the ruling was made by a panel of judges in October last year. The state has a history of Jim Crow Era voting practises, not just referring to the 1965 time frame.
It's all in the article. It explains why the Justice Department thinks the current law was being abused and it has nothing to do with illegal immigrants.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Montana
 


I don't want government hacks to create the election laws and systems either. People in the government, and lawyers, tend to slant left and something that the left is actively seeking is the inclusion of illegals in the voting system--which is what would easily happen if there is no system in place.

It's not grasping at straws that the 7000 citizens that were denied the right to vote were dead or convicts--something ACORN is widely known for. It's also possible that they were found to be registered in two states.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrMattMaddix
Not that a persons vote counts, what with the electoral college.

At least make the public version of 'voting' appear to matter.

This whole administration is so screwed up. When we finally get a common sense dictator back in office to reverse all this BS will take him or her years!

Have you seen anyone except gov't officials side with anything that they've been proposing recently? Oh, you see the liberal media push for Healthcare and other BS programs. When the common sense Libs, Cons and Indies are polled... Guess what, mostly common sense rules.

Yet the 'elected' officials push their agenda in congress ignoring the general population.

This OP is one more non-common sense approach and will silence more of our great nation.

Heads need to roll hard and soon if this keeps up. ("Heads rolling" means they are separate from the hosts body.)

Waiting for the camel's back. As is everyone else?


[edit on 6·3·09 by DrMattMaddix]


you know, there are countries that have dictators that you can move to. and by the way...there is no such thing as a "common sense dictator". what are you...8 years old?



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by octotom
 





Justice Department officials said the citizenship match through driver's license and Social Security data has flagged 7,007 individuals as non-citizens but that many have been shown to be in error.


Again, the article states "have been shown to be in error." Why is this so hard to grasp? Have been shown to be in error. Should I say it again?

And even bureaucratic hacks have a place in life (if you want to call such an existence life). They can and will do a good job, given sufficient oversight. That's what is happening here. Someone came up with a system. It has been proven to be broken. Now we either demand it be changed or a completely new system designed. This is what is supposed to happen. This is what we WANT to happen. Right?



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by octotom
reply to post by Montana
 


I don't want government hacks to create the election laws and systems either. People in the government, and lawyers, tend to slant left and something that the left is actively seeking is the inclusion of illegals in the voting system--which is what would easily happen if there is no system in place.

It's not grasping at straws that the 7000 citizens that were denied the right to vote were dead or convicts--something ACORN is widely known for. It's also possible that they were found to be registered in two states.


of course you have verifiable proof about your ACORN accusation, right?....no, you can't use FOX NEWS. and who do you want to create election laws??...since it would be LAW...it therefore stand to reason that you would want a LAWYER to draft LAWS. and no...the left is not seeking to actively include ILLEGAL ALIENS, where do you dig up this crap? off of some nazi website? and isn't it funny how they have found republicans registered in two states also. and before you start your diatribe about election fraud, look at ACTUAL COURT FINDINGS about election fraud in the 04' ohio presidential race. this is where there were thousands of votes NOT counted that were in heavy democratic districts overseen by republican election officials. what a hypocrite.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by octotom
reply to post by Montana
 


I don't want government hacks to create the election laws and systems either. People in the government, and lawyers, tend to slant left and something that the left is actively seeking is the inclusion of illegals in the voting system--which is what would easily happen if there is no system in place.

It's not grasping at straws that the 7000 citizens that were denied the right to vote were dead or convicts--something ACORN is widely known for. It's also possible that they were found to be registered in two states.


of course you have verifiable proof about your ACORN accusation, right?....no, you can't use FOX NEWS. and who do you want to create election laws??...since it would be LAW...it therefore stand to reason that you would want a LAWYER to draft LAWS. and no...the left is not seeking to actively include ILLEGAL ALIENS, where do you dig up this crap? off of some nazi website? and isn't it funny how they have found republicans registered in two states also. and before you start your diatribe about election fraud, look at ACTUAL COURT FINDINGS about election fraud in the 04' ohio presidential race. this is where there were thousands of votes NOT counted that were in heavy democratic districts overseen by republican election officials. what a hypocrite.


You seem to contradict yourself. You say that the left is not actively seeking to include illegal aliens, and then you bring up instances of voter fraud and manipulation. The left has their illegals, the right has their graveyards and count manipulations.

Yes, the right is equally as guilty, and yes dead people have been voting for 200 years. It is not new or exclusive to ACORN, but that does not take away from the current situation.

Driver's licenses for illegal aliens, health care, etc.? When all the laws and common sense say they should be arrested and deported? Someone stands to benefit from this coddling of criminals!?! In this case it is the Democrats, but in general it is all the elite with their house servants, lawn boys, and cheap construction labor!

[edit on 3-6-2009 by getreadyalready]



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 09:52 AM
link   
This problem wouldn't even exist if our super-corrupt govt would do it's job and take away all benefits for illegals and crack down on all employers of illegals. Then they'd self-deport.

Unfortunately every single member of congress takes bribes from big business to leave the illegals alone.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Montana
 



Again, the article states "have been shown to be in error." Why is this so hard to grasp? Have been shown to be in error. Should I say it again?


I understand what you're saying, but I think that you're missing the point of the argument.

Say I, Tom R., who am registered to vote in Florida, go and register in Georgia. If someone goes and investigates and mark me as an illregistered voter, of course it would seem, on the surface, that I was being denied my right to vote--it's "proven" that mean old Georgia is just being mean! But, in reality, while Georgia denies me, I am really not being denied my right unless it's apparent that across all 50 states I'm being denied voting priviledges.

Before people get all upset about the 7000 voters being denied, they should see to make sure that they themselves aren't breaking elections law.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by jimmyx
 



of course you have verifiable proof about your ACORN accusation, right?....no, you can't use FOX NEWS.

Pfft. Like MSNBC is better, right?


and who do you want to create election laws??...since it would be LAW...it therefore stand to reason that you would want a LAWYER to draft LAWS. and no...the left is not seeking to actively include ILLEGAL ALIENS, where do you dig up this crap?

Can you read? I didn't say I don't want lawyers to make the laws. I said I don't want lawyers who are involved in the government to come up with the laws. They have a bias. It tends to slant left. If you don't believe that lawyers involved in politics don't tend to go left, just look and see whom lawyer organizations typically support.

It may not seem that the left is seeking actively to include illegal aliens in the electorate, they are. Democrats are largely in favor of "Motor Voter Laws" and giving illegals driver's licenses. Motor Voter laws allow someone to to register to vote simply because they got a driver's license. While it's novel and convient at [when I got a replacement license in '07, I took advantage of the Florida Motor Voter system], there is no check on citizenship and you get your voter card in the mail. No quesitons asked. So, for example, Janos Kovacs, a Hungarian who has just received all his papers and goes to exchange his Hungarian driver's license for one in Florida. The clerk at the end of the process says, would you like to reigiste to vote? All he has to say yes and then he can vote.

Now imagine, some illegal is able to get a driver's license, the people aren't allowed to ask his status, and he can register to vote. "Nem jó!" as my Mr. Kovacs would say.


off of some nazi website?

Yes, of course. Because all of us who aren't liberal only scour the Nazi sites for the latest and greatest hate filled talking points too make illegals look worse than they actually are!



and isn't it funny how they have found republicans registered in two states also.

I didn't deny that. The simply fact though is that it is Democrats that control the whole of government right now. Even the justice department.


and before you start your diatribe about election fraud, look at ACTUAL COURT FINDINGS about election fraud in the 04' ohio presidential race. this is where there were thousands of votes NOT counted that were in heavy democratic districts overseen by republican election officials.

Don't forget in 2000 the Democrats refusing to count the military votes in Florida, which had they been counted, would've given Bush a clear cut majority in Florida and we would've been spared from the whole, 'he's not my president' nonsense.



what a hypocrite.

No I'm not. I didn't say to do something and did another. I just happen to think that we should protect the system so that illegals can't vote.




top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join