Fed judges: Wash. felony inmates should get vote

Interesting. So, they are only worried about minority votes? Hmmmmmm, things just keep rolling along.

www.breitbart.com...

ACORN would be proud!

The 2010 elections are just around the corner and the desperation of the Democrat Party is beginning to show.

reply to post by Carseller4


Yup, gotta expand that base........amnesty is probably just around the corner.

Sounds like the 9th circuit court of appeals has lost it's mind. Since when does the 1965 civil rights act TRUMP the Constitution? One piece at a time we see our great compact torn asunder and replaced with PC nonsense. Courtesy of a lawsuit brought on by a convict (so guess who payed for HIS lawyers?) by the name of Muhammad Shabazz Farakhan
I'm sorry I just have to laugh at these so called "africanized" names people give themselves. If that makes me a racist so be it, flame away.
No doubt he found GOD while in prison so he could get an early release while serving time for grand larceny.
So what would be fitting punishment for judges who fail to carry out their Constitutional duties? Unemployment at the least I should say, not as judges anyway. bah humbug!

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Sounds like the 9th circuit court of appeals has lost it's mind. Since when does the 1965 civil rights act TRUMP the Constitution? Well, now, today, I mean we are keeping these minorities for voting. What a crock, they are just trying to further their voter base. And I agree on the names......why can't I get a good job, I don't know "insert dumbass name choice here", maybe because your name won't fit on any applications, and you need a translator to br pronounced.

Most importantly, how does one make the leap to: Yes, we value the votes of criminals incapable of living within the guidelines of society and think they should have a say as to whom makes, enforces the laws of this great country? How exactly does a candidate stand up and say: Well, I received more than 60% of the criminal vote....go me!

Another ridiculous piece of legislation.

If I understand the article, the person was no longer in prison, has served his time and was seeking his rights under the Washington state law, that would allow him to vote. (A felon could vote, after he has paid his debt to society) But apparently has not made the reparations and therefore was not given his rights back.
I think it goes to more of a larger question, at what point does society forgive a convicted criminal so they can get on with their lives? Most, even after serving their time, for 7 years are punished and shunned by society at large. I think that there is some validity in this case.

reply to post by lpowell0627


How exactly does a candidate stand up and say: Well, I received more than 60% of the criminal vote....go me!

Hell, that may have happened last election, we just didn't hear about it. Interesting take though........no one wants to be the Criminal candidate.

The Supreme court will shoot that down in a heartbeat. It was a waste of the 9th Circuit Courts time and taxpayers money.

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
If I understand the article, the person was no longer in prison, has served his time and was seeking his rights under the Washington state law, that would allow him to vote.

Nope, the article clearly states that he, and the other five in on the lawsuit were in prison when they sued. This is just ridicules... Sorry, but you do the crime, you pay the consequences. I don't know about Washington, but in VA a felon can have their voting rights restored after so many years. I think that is fair, otherwise just deal with it. If that makes me a racist then I guess I need to pay my KKK dues.