“Iraqi dead, murder of” isn’t a warning? I hope no one thought that they’d see bunnies and rainbows if they clicked on the link. Then again, since people are acting like it’s all bunnies and rainbows over there, some probably did.
Yeah, it’s one click away. Your voting booth makes a clicking sound too. Well, many.
My point is that everyone who voted for Bush the last time, as well as everyone who voted for Nader and who didn’t vote, is directly responsible for that dead girl.
There’s a flap over republicans accusing Michael Moore of bribing voters. He’s offered slackers clean underwear and ramen if they’ll vote.
:rolleyes:
Nope, it’s because she lived under a murderous lying dictator who antagonized the free world and got taken down for it. If she was indeed killed by an American bomb (any proof it wasn’t a car bomb by one of her own people?) then it was an accident. Saddam threw children in jail on purpose. It was fine when they died there, in the dark, where we couldn’t see them, right?
It wasn’t a sovereign nation, it was a Mafia fiefdom run by a corrupt clan. I voted for Gore but I was for the war, thinking that the WMD info now proved wrong was true. but think Bush has screwed up the peace so I’m voting for somebody whom the Iraqis will respect more. If the majority of voters disagree with me, I’ll live with it.
Ahem. Legal-talking guy to legal-talking guy, I have a slight nitpick here: Batson challenges are not predicated on asserting the rejected juror’s right to be seated – they are an exercise of an equal protection claim, where equal protection is violated when the government tries an accused before a jury from which members of his race have been deliberaltely excluded. It is true that by denying someone the opportunity to participate in jury service because of his race, the government also unconstitutionally discriminates against the excluded juror, but the Batson challenger is not vicariously asserting that right.
IIRC, Trunk lives somewhere in the Baltimore area as well as I. Maryland, as far as I know, isn’t considered to be a swing state, as it tends to support Democrat candidates. Although, there was that thing about electing a Republican governor for the first time in 30 years…
Anyway, I live in Baltimore City, but I’m still planning to vote even though I know it’ll be one more in the tide. Each Presidential election past, I felt a little guilty for not having bothered, and this time, I want to feel that I’ve actually taken part.
Thanks for the response, melondeca. Sorry for the delay, I’ve been away from a computer for a couple of days. I guess what struck me the hardest was the following from your OP:
This is both good and bad. Bad, because (a) you don’t vote, (b) you have no interest, and (c) the system has driven you out. But on the good side, (a) you’re out of the system, (b) you recognize the level of BS that comes from politicians, (c) if you do choose to vote, your choice won’t be predicated on things like labels and spin.
Like it or not (if and once you choose to vote), you are the most important type of voter - independent, refusing a political label, massively undecided. And with power comes… yadda, yadda, yadda.
I have voted in EVERY election since I first became eligable back in 1977. Be it presidential or a local bond issue, I’ve voted.
With that out of the way, I’m 100% behind Melondica in his choice not to vote. That is his decison, and frankly it’s none of your or my business. He works and I would assume pays taxes so he’s a productive, contributing member of society whether he votes or not.
Oh, and Equipoise…
FOUR MORE YEARS!!!
That makes two of us. 
As a woman, it is my duty to vote, as the battle to get the vote was won less than 100 years ago. It’s my duty to exercise the privelege that was so hard won.
Think about that, ladies who don’t vote.
I don’t know the circumstances of her death, but I do know that there wouldn’t be car bombings if we hadn’t invaded and destabilized the country, and there wouldn’t be any “accidental” “collateral damage” if we hadn’t invaded and bombed their cities. Saddam was indeed a murderous lying dictator but do we, should we, go around invading, bombing and occupying every country that’s ruled by a murderous lying dictator? There are plenty of others who pose much more of a threat to us than Iraq, where we had no-fly zones and weapons inspectors. Is it just because Saddam was so damned antagonizing?
Saddam and Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11.
Saddam and Iraq had NO weapons of mass destruction.
Saddam and Iraq had NO connection with Osama bin Laden.
Why in the world did we take our focus off Afghanistan and the “war on terror” to follow this deadly, foolish and dangerous path?
Maybe. If that happens, I expect to hear a trickle of “mea culpas” from Bush, Nader and non-voters fairly soon after, turning into an avalanche. If any good would come out of a second Bush term, it’s that as the damage that Bush and his minions have done, are doing, and will do becomes clearer and clearer, finally, the people would rise up against the neo-con right-wingers and boot them so far out of office they’ll never get back in. It would permanently damage the Republican party to a point it might take them decades to repair the rift. I’m glad that many Republicans are aware of that fact and are voting their conscience, rather than their party.
If I didn’t love my country so much, I’d almost wish for Bush to win.
Bricker, I hate to say you’re wrong on the law, but it’s the only time I’ve ever known you to be. Batson was pretty clear that deliberate exclusion of blacks from a jury on the basis of race constitututed a denial of not only the defendant’s constitutional rights, but also the rights of the excluded jurors to serve and particpate in the administration of justice. Since the excluded jurors are not parties to the case, the defendant is indeed asserting third party standing on behalf of the excluded jurors.
If you’re still not convinced, the Court established that the defendant’s assertion of third party standing on behalf of excluded jurors was exactly what Batson mandated in Powers v. Ohio, 499 U.S. 400 (1991), which involved the exclusion of black jurors from a white defendant’s trial, and Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co. 500 U.S. 614 (1991), which involved the exclusion of black jurors in a civil case.
Her…I am a woman. Just a little thing and not necessarily important to this thread but kind of important to me. Oh yeah, and to my boyfriend. He is really happy that I am not a guy.
I can accept that you are sort of a jerk.
>I had a woman tell me that it is my duty as an American to get out there and vote.
She’s right. It is.
>I patiently(well maybe not so much)explained to her that I have no clue what any of the candidates stand for. I feel that it is better to not vote than to make an uninformed vote.
That’s correct, but not voting and voting unimformedly aren’t the only options. You’re ethically obligated to inform yourself and then vote whether you like it or not. Sorry!
In these times, it’s sad to say that if you live in a swing state, there is a high likelihood your vote will make a difference.
After all, if there is another state this election that, like in Florida, the election is within the polling technology’s margin of error, every vote that makes the election even closer in that state will impact the political situation. There would probably be more political pressure for a recount if the winner won the state by 19 votes than if it were by 20, etc.
After a certain point, even lifers such as the Supremes would be influenced by the closeness. Not necessarily so, some would still stick to their guns to make sure that “their” candidate won, democracy be damned, but each vote counts, when the lawsuits start :mad:
Unlike many people, I’m actually informed about the two main candidates, although part of that comes from my ride to school having his car radio set to NPR, and listening to that for 1-1.5 hours a day does a little something. I’m aware of much of Bush’s history, and of Kerry’s. I have no intention of voting for Nader, and not really because he has no chance, I don’t agree with him more than anyone else. I’d rather vote for Kerry than any other candidate, though in my case the point is moot.
Ah, rest easy, Trunk, Cardboard BOX; you’re only declining a precious responsibility that many people would fight to possess – including me.