Fair enough, and I appreciate this. As I said, I’m unwilling to condemn the whole of either party for the actions of a few. But I can see how there’s room for disagreement on this point.
Sorry if I’m hounding you on it; I didn’t get from your previous posts that you were willing to condemn the whole party for those actions.
Daniel
No, spin isn’t lying. “To provide an interpretation of (a statement or event, for example), especially in a way meant to sway public opinion” — American Heritage.
Sigh. You can trump the entire OP story with this one
Have at it, chaps.
Then, as I said, I apologize and retract that statement. I believed you were accusing me of deliberate dishonesty there. If you were using the definition as provided, there’s nothing wrong at all with spinning events: virtually any communication made to the public qualifies as spin under that definition, including an announcement that (for example) brushing your teeth promotes healthy gums.
Daniel
Oh, THIS is a guy we want in the armed services, all right. Sheesh! Leave it the the Republicans to find support for the gun lobby and the war in Iraq from such a stable, calm, nuanced individual.
“…in this thread”? I suppose you realize you are just adding another qualifier to the mix. 
However, I didn’t really get involved in this thread to get into a pissing contest with you…and besides, I’m afraid the exchange between us has become more than a little trite…so if you want to end this silly little squabble now it would be fine with me.
Look. Put up or shut up. I don’t much like you, because you’re are consistently patronizing. If you think I’ve lied anywhere since the beginning of fucking time or before, in this or any other previous incarnation, through words, pictures, charades, semaphore or any other form of communication, now’s the time to put up or shut up.
If you think I’m just abrasive, well, yes. I don’t like you, so I’m not very nice to you. I can live with that.
Daniel
Then you and I have a fundamental difference of opinion here. There are 365 days a leap year where the cops can come bust you for your unpaid parking tickets or your unpaid child support. And IMHO, the cops should show up at their door and bust them then; the right to vote should be fundamental enough that people shouldn’t have to worry about being hassled over misdemeanors or civil actions in the course of exercising their franchise. That’s a point of theory, though. Because you know what? The cops - by and large - aren’t actually trying to bust anyone at the polls for these or other infractions.
But your party - YOUR party - is trying to scare people away from the polls by spreading the lie - and it is a lie - that that’s what will happen. (I guess it’s OK for the Party of Responsibility, the Party of Morality, to lie to people, too. Who knew?)
Why would they come in the first place?
We have reading comprehension problems?
Once again: is it a right and good and moral thing for the GOP to lie about this to people, whether we call it ‘harassment’ or not?
Y’know, I have zero sympathy for people who will lie to other people in order to scare them away from the polls. And I do have some regard for people who aren’t as clean and brave as you or I.
Besides, there is in fact nothing in the law that says people won’t be able to vote if they’ve got outstanding judgments against them. So you are “holding people responsible for themselves” in a manner that goes beyond their legal responsibilities. What gives you the right to decide what actions should have which legal consequences, when you aren’t involved? If I break the law, what gives you the right to exact extra penalties not specified by law, if you and I have no business with each other? Seems you’re saying, once you break one law, there’s no reason why the consequences shouldn’t be infinite.
That’s a theology of salvation and damnation, without the benefit of grace. It’s got nothing to do with the responsibilities of an individual under the law.
I find this view surprising from an attorney. You of course, are aware, that a warrant for some one’s arrest does not mean that the person is guilty of anything. It may mean they’ve been accused of something. It may mean that they didn’t pay a speeding ticket on time. In some jursidictions, it may also mean that they’ve got some unpaid parking tickets (which may or may not have been their fault). It also may mean that they have the same name as some one who has done something wrong. Or that some one else gave their name when they were arrested.
a mere accusation of wrongdoing should not result in a person loosing their right to vote.
Watch it pal. Don’t make us jump into a phone booth and take off all our clothes . . .
Ohgod, cold shower time.
Well, first of all, I haven’t accused you of lying at any time. Secondly, your defensiveness is what causes you to perceive that I have; I’ve only questioned your use of qualifiers. Thirdly, you came after me first asshole, so you want to act like this, fine. Fourthly, as far as this “patronizing” bullshit goes, that just sounds like the whining of someone who doesn’t like to get what he gives.
I offered an olive branch; you sneered at it. So fuck you, you little dweeb. I have better things to do with my time than fuck around with the likes of you.
(Btw, the last paragraph is meant to be condescending.)
Schmuck. :dubious:
Since this issue has been questioned several times, the answer is HE, for almost a half-century, still with the same factory-furnished penis and accessories.
I reject the term “sides” and instead have my beliefs. When I sleep at night, I don’t have to reconcile myself to any party or platform, as my personal slate isn’t embraced by any one moniker. The whole notion of “sides” is bullshit, and makes it easier for people to find a reason behave like asshats, to which this thread and a hundredfold other bear stark witness.
RTFirefly, as previously stated, I fully favor intensive scrutiny in all polling places in those states deemed critical according to the electoral process. If I fall behind on my child support, and can’t vote because of it, then it sucks to be me because it’s my own fault. How more plain can I be?
Sorry, but I don’t a vote to be swayed by deadbeats and felons.
*and I wanted the word “want” in the last line. Damnit.
Actually, I believe that, by the definition provided, spin would be a comment on the statement, such as…
Democratic Spin
The Bush administration has withheld releasing until today vital information about gum disease. “Brushing your teeth,” Dr. Rice finally disclosed after much posturing, “promotes healthy gums”.
Republican Spin
The Kerry campaign ducked questions from Fox News about Kerry’s four-month tour of Vietnam and opted instead to take what some interpret as a shot at Donald Rumsfeld. “Brushing your teeth,” Kerry said, possibly refering to Rumsfeld’s false teeth, “promotes healthy gums”.
Wow, so no corporate CEOS at the polls, huh?
It’s you who are saying that individuals will refuse to vote because they fear being served with an extant warrant. They are imposing that penalty upon themselves. There’s nothing to have stopped them from turning themselves in last week and dealing with the warrant. I am not imposing any consequences in law that don’t already exist: namely, that when the police have a warrant with your name on it, they are entitled to arrest you at any time.
Of course. So - what’s the problem? If they have the slightest concern that a warrant exists for their arrest, they should immediately call the police, turn themselves in, and deal with the warrant. If a warrant exists because someone else gave their name when arrested, then they don’t know about it, so are unlikely to be worried about a warrant.
My point is simply this: while a warrant is merely an accusation, it is something that responsible people deal with when it becomes apparent. If I had the slightest reason to believe the police had a warrant for my arrest, I would promptly deal with it. Such a fact would not remotely influence me come Election Day.
No one has a right to ignore warrants. If the fear of being arrested on an extant warrant is keeping people away from the polls, I have no sympathy.
OK - where is the specific instance in which the Republicans are doing this?
Stop being an asshole. You know me well enough by now that I condemn the likes of Dennis Kozlowski, Ken Lay, and Marvin Grass as quickly as I do the shithead who caps the owner of the inner city liquor store.
Besides, Gobear’s remark is as stupid as any other broad-brush bigotry. Not all Indians have trouble holding their liquor; not all gay men are effeminate; and not all CEOs are felons.
I’ve seen cases where some one was released from prison, a warrant check was done prior to their release, and nothing appeared, yet some months later the warrant appeared. As far as the person knew, there were no warrants out against them. Folks don’t always know, however if it has happened to you or some one you know, the fear would be there.
again - your point seems to be that if some one has done nothing wrong, they should not fear being arrested. However, that’s simply not the case in every persons world. I don’t question that it is in your world. You’ve no doubt heard the term “Driving while black”, right? Folks I know have been worried about that. and would be cautious, even though they’ve done nothing wrong.
as far as I know, I don’t have any warrants out against me. But if I believed that there were checks being done at the precinct I’d be cautious. You simply have no way of ever knowing. and again, the penalty for jay walking, unpaid traiffic fines, unpaid child support, unpaid parking tickets, noise violations etc etc etc does not generally include disenfranchisement.
and of course, if they had no reason to believe there was one, but mistrusted ‘the system’, that’s of course, legitimate reason for them to be excluded on election day. One woman I know did indeed have a criminal record in her name, although it wasn’t her. She has no way of knowing if the person who gave her name has done so again within the past 24 hours, at any given point. If she were to be arrested, she could (ulitmately) prove it wasn’t her, but that takes time. In my jurisdiction, the process is “get arrested, taken to city lock up, sit and wait, go to county lock up at end of the day” somewhere along there some one may take your prints. There were several cases locally of “the wrong guy” being arrested (on their jobs) for outstanding child support warrants as well.
My point is that having an arrest warrant out in your name is not generally acceptable as a reason to refuse to allow someone to vote. Especially since they’ve not been found guilty of anything.
and, of course, spreading rumors trying to get folks to keep away from the polls because they may or may not be arrested for warrants they may or may not have is unethical.
Waitaminute wring. The persons alleged to be targeted by campaigns to disenfranchise them are not living in a vacuum. They watch TV, presumably with stations other than FOX, also have access to the internet, and can therefore avail themselves of information to disprove any falsehoods directed their way.
The first step to empowerment is renouncement of addiction to victim status.