shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 09:40:12 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 20:24:14 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> . . .
>>>
>>>>> Well, when the California legislature changed the state's voting laws to
>>>>> legalize ballot harvesting-- something that's illegal pretty much
>>>>> everywhere else because it's like rolling out the red carpet for voter
>>>>> fraud-- and said right out loud that the reason for the change was to
>>>>> help Democrat voter turnout, I must have missed the howls of outrage
>>>>> from the likes of Stacey Abrams and the boxes of talking heads on CNN
>>>>> and MSNBC bemoaning this partisan attack on the democratic process, and
>>>>> the think-pieces in the New York Times speculating that this marks the
>>>>> beginning of the fall of the republic.
>>>
>>>> If they were actually engaged in voter fraud then they should be
>>>> arrested and put in jail. Otherwise there's nothing that prevents any
>>>> group (Republican, Democrats or any one else) from doing the legal
>>>> ballot harvest to insure everyone that wants to vote gets their
>>>> opportunity. Also given that Abrams has been focused on Georgia and
>>>> her election in Georgia I don't know why you would expect her to
>>>> comment on what California is doing.
>>>
>>> shawn, my state has an abyssmal state legislature but our election laws
>>> do not allow what California allows. A voter may give his completed
>>> mail-in ballot to a trusted relative or friend who will then mail it or
>>> drop it at a secure drop box set up by election officials. It would be
>>> illegal for a political partisan unknown to the voter to offer to accept
>>> the ballot. The re-election campaign of my governor clearly knew who had
>>> applied for mail-in ballots. I started getting text messages and
>>> mailings that were quite specific to the sending in the ballot.
>>>
>>> That was creepy as hell.
>>>
>>
>> One year while I was living at mom‘s I got a message from the republican
>> party that said I hadn’t voted in so long that my registration had lapsed
>> so they went ahead and re-registered me. As Republican.
>>
>> That was creepy as hell.
>
> No one should be allowed to re-register you to vote. I don't have a
> problem with your being contacted when if your registration expires as
> that leaves it up to you to re-register or not.

Agreed

>
>> In high school our social studies teacher gave us extra credit for
>> registering to vote. Of course we had to do it with him and he was a
>> Democratic registrar so you had to register Democrat.
>>
>> That was creepy as hell.
>
> Giving you extra credit for registering to vote was okay. Did he
> actually force you to register as a Democrat (as in no credit if you
> didn't register as a Democrat) or was it more of the 'go ahead and
> choose Democrat' recommendation since most kids wouldn't have a strong
> preference for any party. In any case it shouldn't be a real problem
> since you can change your party affiliation at any time.

It was more like “go ahead and register Republican at your own peril but
you know damn well you’ll flunk the course“

The guy was not subtle

And there was no credit given if you had already registered. You couldn’t
show him your card or anything. You had to register through him. Which was
just weird. And creepy as hell.

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

On 11/28/2022 5:31 PM, trotsky wrote:
> On 11/28/22 8:12 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 20:24:14 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <cvWgL.43469$c6W2.39935@fx41.iad>,
>>> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>>>    shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of
>>>>>>>> government.
>>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And
>>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>> if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that she's
>>>>>>>> maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot insurrection
>>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>>> have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>>
>>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes
>>>>>> made in
>>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but
>>>>> it's
>>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect Democrats?
>>>>
>>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>>
>>> Well, when the California legislature changed the state's voting laws to
>>> legalize ballot harvesting-- something that's illegal pretty much
>>> everywhere else because it's like rolling out the red carpet for voter
>>> fraud-- and said right out loud that the reason for the change was to
>>> help Democrat voter turnout, I must have missed the howls of outrage
>>> from the likes of Stacey Abrams and the boxes of talking heads on CNN
>>> and MSNBC bemoaning this partisan attack on the democratic process, and
>>> the think-pieces in the New York Times speculating that this marks the
>>> beginning of the fall of the republic.
>>
>> If there is anything that should be clearly illegal everywhere it's
>> ballot harvesting.  Interestingly enough Dems seem all for it.
>
>
> Prove it shitpuppet.

How does "ballot harvesting" differ in principle from busing voters?

shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 20:24:14 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <cvWgL.43469$c6W2.39935@fx41.iad>,
>> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of government.
>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And even
>>>>>>> if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that she's
>>>>>>> maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot insurrection could
>>>>>>> have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>
>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes made in
>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>
>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but it's
>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect Democrats?
>>>
>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>
>> Well, when the California legislature changed the state's voting laws to
>> legalize ballot harvesting-- something that's illegal pretty much
>> everywhere else because it's like rolling out the red carpet for voter
>> fraud-- and said right out loud that the reason for the change was to
>> help Democrat voter turnout, I must have missed the howls of outrage
>> from the likes of Stacey Abrams and the boxes of talking heads on CNN
>> and MSNBC bemoaning this partisan attack on the democratic process, and
>> the think-pieces in the New York Times speculating that this marks the
>> beginning of the fall of the republic.
>
> If they were actually engaged in voter fraud then they should be
> arrested and put in jail. Otherwise there's nothing that prevents any
> group (Republican, Democrats or any one else) from doing the legal
> ballot harvest to insure everyone that wants to vote gets their
> opportunity. Also given that Abrams has been focused on Georgia and
> her election in Georgia I don't know why you would expect her to
> comment on what California is doing.

Abrams comments on national issues all the time. Now suddenly she's
Georgia-only?

moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
> On 11/28/2022 9:11 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 23:08:40 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of government.
>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And even
>>>>>>> if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that she's
>>>>>>> maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot insurrection could
>>>>>>> have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes made in
>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>
>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but it's
>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect Democrats?
>>>
>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>
>> You didn't answer the question.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question

Nice, but my question was not rhetorical.

On 2022-11-26 9:13 p.m., Micky DuPree wrote:
> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
>
>> On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 05:05:05 +0000 (UTC),
>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>
>>> From a reductive standpoint, yes, but the devil is in the
>>> interpretation (or the interpretors more recently). I also suspect
>>> that shawn meant "statute" when he said "amendment."
>>>
>>> It's worth trying, but I see this SCOTUS being perfectly willing to
>>> strike down any federal law protecting abortion, based on some 16th
>>> century Calvinist theory or some such drivel.
>>
>> As I understand the court decision it put responsibility for the issue
>> on the STATES. Not sure I personally agree with that but if that's the
>> ruling then Biden and friends are spending a lot of time in waters
>> they ought not to be swimming in.
>
> As I understand it, the SCOTUS decision was that in the absence of a
> federal statute protecting abortion, the determination of abortion
> rights or abortion prohibitions devolved to the states. But if Congress
> did pass such a law, then that would supersede state laws (until, of
> course, there was a challenge by red states that would proceed to the
> SCOTUS again).

I'm pretty confident that the court would rule that the federal
government has no authority to tell the states that they can't ban
abortion. What would be their constitutional authority to do it?
>

On 11/28/2022 6:49 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>> On 11/28/2022 9:11 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 23:08:40 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>>> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of government.
>>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And even
>>>>>>>> if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that she's
>>>>>>>> maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot insurrection could
>>>>>>>> have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes made in
>>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but it's
>>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect Democrats?
>>>>
>>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>>
>>> You didn't answer the question.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question
>
> Nice, but my question was not rhetorical.

Have you stopped beating your wife?

In article <F9fhL.288896$kmVf.66854@fx15.iad>,
moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:

> On 11/28/2022 6:49 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
> >> On 11/28/2022 9:11 AM, NoBody wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 23:08:40 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
> >>>>> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
> >>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of government.
> >>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And
> >>>>>>>> even if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that
> >>>>>>>> she's maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot
> >>>>>>>> insurrection could have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
> >>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes made in
> >>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
> >>>>>> Republicans.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but it's
> >>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect Democrats?
> >>>>
> >>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
> >>>
> >>> You didn't answer the question.
> >>
> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question
> >
> > Nice, but my question was not rhetorical.
>
> Have you stopped beating your wife?

Don't have one.

On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 20:39:34 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>In article <F9fhL.288896$kmVf.66854@fx15.iad>,
> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
>> On 11/28/2022 6:49 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> > moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>> >> On 11/28/2022 9:11 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> >>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 23:08:40 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> >>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>> >>>>> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>> >>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of government.
>> >>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And
>> >>>>>>>> even if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that
>> >>>>>>>> she's maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot
>> >>>>>>>> insurrection could have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>> >>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes made in
>> >>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>> >>>>>> Republicans.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but it's
>> >>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect Democrats?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>> >>>
>> >>> You didn't answer the question.
>> >>
>> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question
>> >
>> > Nice, but my question was not rhetorical.
>>
>> Have you stopped beating your wife?
>
>Don't have one.

So you haven't stopped beating your non-existent wife?

On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 18:21:37 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
wrote:

>How does "ballot harvesting" differ in principle from busing voters?

Seriously?

Because if you bus (or otherwise transport a voter) you have anhonest
to god live voter who physically marks an "X".

As opposed to somebody who goes around stealing mail ballot envelopes
from somebody's mail in ballots and mail them in for them "on their
behalf" (all voting for the thief's preferred candidate) and counting
on most people wondering what happened to their ballot but not doing
anything about it - or turning up on election day in person and being
told they had already voted!

On 11/28/22 5:21 PM, moviePig wrote:
> On 11/28/2022 5:31 PM, trotsky wrote:
>> On 11/28/22 8:12 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 20:24:14 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <cvWgL.43469$c6W2.39935@fx41.iad>,
>>>> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>    shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of
>>>>>>>>> government.
>>>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start.
>>>>>>>>> (And even
>>>>>>>>> if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that she's
>>>>>>>>> maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot
>>>>>>>>> insurrection could
>>>>>>>>> have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>>>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes
>>>>>>> made in
>>>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but
>>>>>> it's
>>>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect
>>>>>> Democrats?
>>>>>
>>>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>>>
>>>> Well, when the California legislature changed the state's voting
>>>> laws to
>>>> legalize ballot harvesting-- something that's illegal pretty much
>>>> everywhere else because it's like rolling out the red carpet for voter
>>>> fraud-- and said right out loud that the reason for the change was to
>>>> help Democrat voter turnout, I must have missed the howls of outrage
>>>> from the likes of Stacey Abrams and the boxes of talking heads on
>>>> CNN and MSNBC bemoaning this partisan attack on the democratic
>>>> process, and
>>>> the think-pieces in the New York Times speculating that this marks the
>>>> beginning of the fall of the republic.
>>>
>>> If there is anything that should be clearly illegal everywhere it's
>>> ballot harvesting.  Interestingly enough Dems seem all for it.
>>
>>
>> Prove it shitpuppet.
>
> How does "ballot harvesting" differ in principle from busing voters?

"Ballot harvest" is as much a pile of horseshit as "Hunter's laptop."
Right wing assholes want you to play this game so you're constantly
mired in horseshit.

On 11/28/22 5:49 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>> On 11/28/2022 9:11 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 23:08:40 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>>> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of government.
>>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And even
>>>>>>>> if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that she's
>>>>>>>> maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot insurrection could
>>>>>>>> have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes made in
>>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but it's
>>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect Democrats?
>>>>
>>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>>
>>> You didn't answer the question.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question
>
> Nice, but my question was not rhetorical.

True, it was just a pile of horseshit. Here's me changing the rules:
every time you post horseshit without sites or examples to back up your
horseshit I'll just dismiss you as a eunuch to sent the proper message
to the rest of the group. Capiche?

On 11/28/22 6:20 PM, David Johnston wrote:
> On 2022-11-26 9:13 p.m., Micky DuPree wrote:
>> The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
>>
>>> On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 05:05:05 +0000 (UTC),
>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>
>>>>  From a reductive standpoint, yes, but the devil is in the
>>>> interpretation (or the interpretors more recently).  I also suspect
>>>> that shawn meant "statute" when he said "amendment."
>>>>
>>>> It's worth trying, but I see this SCOTUS being perfectly willing to
>>>> strike down any federal law protecting abortion, based on some 16th
>>>> century Calvinist theory or some such drivel.
>>>
>>> As I understand the court decision it put responsibility for the issue
>>> on the STATES. Not sure I personally agree with that but if that's the
>>> ruling then Biden and friends are spending a lot of time in waters
>>> they ought not to be swimming in.
>>
>> As I understand it, the SCOTUS decision was that in the absence of a
>> federal statute protecting abortion, the determination of abortion
>> rights or abortion prohibitions devolved to the states.  But if Congress
>> did pass such a law, then that would supersede state laws (until, of
>> course, there was a challenge by red states that would proceed to the
>> SCOTUS again).
>
> I'm pretty confident that the court would rule that the federal
> government has no authority to tell the states that they can't ban
> abortion.  What would be their constitutional authority to do it?
>>

You'd have to read the recent SCOTUS decision overturning Roe to see if
there's any wiggle room. It's not complicated.

Even as the sun glistened upon his thinning hair one bright Mississippi day
in DeKalb, Miss., U.S. Sen. Joe Biden stood out as the youngest of the
senators speaking at U.S. Sen. John C. Stennis' birthday party. It was Aug.
3, 1985, and the 42-year-old Biden was a rising star in the Democratic Party.
With the 1988 presidential race coming up, some hoped that he might help lead
it out of the wilderness of the Reagan years.

Despite Biden's reputation as a northeast liberal, the young Delawarean wowed
the southern crowd as he drew from the Confederate mythos to pile praise upon
Stennis, who was known for his decades of resistance to civil rights. Biden
compared him to Stonewall Jackson, a fabled Confederate military commander
known for his tactical prowess.

"It was said of Stonewall Jackson, 'He is an avalanche from an unexpected
quarter, a thunderbolt from a clear sky, and yet his character will make him
a stone wall more than any man I've ever known,'" Biden said, reciting a
quote that a 1920 book attributes to lecturer, and Stonewall Jackson's aide,
James Power Smith.

"And Mr. Chairman," Biden continued, "When you stand on the floor of the
Senate, and you point your finger, and you raise your voice, it's like a bolt
from a clear sky. And when you speak, everyone listens. And as all of my
colleagues have said here today, he truly does stand like a stonewall; he is
the rockbed of integrity of the United States Congress."

Even in the company of other segregationists like South Carolina Sen. Strom
Thurmond and Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater, Biden did not mention Stennis'
storied opposition to civil rights.

Biden on Busing: 'A Liberal Trainwreck'

A decade earlier, though, Biden worked with Stennis and other segregationists
like Thurmond and Sen. Jim Eastland, Mississippi's other U.S. senator, to
fight a key segregation program: busing, which the government used to send
children across district lines to make schools more integrated.

Southern Dixiecrats and Republicans had long opposed busing in their region,
where the federal government had mandated it most heavily. But as the
practice spread, whites in wealthy suburbs like those in Delaware began
pushing back. Some had moved to the suburbs to send their kids to what they
considered a "good school," which usually meant mostly white, and opposed
their kids being bused elsewhere to make schools more equal.

"Southern politicians who had been pushing against desegregation in the 1950s
realized, 'Oh, OK, now that it's hit the doorstep of the northeasterners;
they don't like it any more than we do,'" Ralph W. Eubanks, a southern
studies professor at the University of Mississippi, told the Jackson Free
Press in April. "And these political alliances began to form. So that's why
you had someone like Joe Biden making alliances with Strom Thurmond, James
Eastland and John Stennis."

In 1973, Biden ran on a pro-civil-rights platform. Just a year earlier,
though, segregationist Alabama Gov. George Wallace had won the Florida
Democratic presidential primary while running on an anti-busing platform. As
the concern among white parents about busing grew beyond the Deep South, even
some northeast liberal Democrats like Biden began criticizing it.

By 1975, Biden thought of busing as a "liberal train wreck," as he wrote in
his 2007 memoir, and found himself huddled with a group of Dixiecrats,
planning how they might introduce anti-busing legislation that could pass in
the Senate.

"The new integration plans being offered are really just quota systems to
assure a certain number of blacks, Chicanos, or whatever in each school,"
Biden told a Delaware newspaper in 1975. "That, to me, is the most racist
concept you can come up with. Who the hell do we think we are, that the only
way a black man or woman can learn is if they rub shoulders with my white
child?"

Around that same time, all the way across the country in Berkley, Calif., a
schoolgirl and future U.S. senator named Kamala Harris was reaping busing's
benefits. With an African American father and a mother from India, Harris was
the first in her family to go to an integrated school district.

'That Little Girl Was Me'

All these years later, on a Democratic presidential debate stage on Thursday
night, Harris took aim at Biden, not only for his recent praise for the
"civility" that segregationists like Eastland and former U.S. Sen. Herman
Talmadge of Georgia showed him, but for his efforts to kill the program that
integrated her school.

"Vice President Biden, I do not believe you are a racist, and I agree with
you, when you commit yourself to the importance of finding common ground,"
Harris said. "But I also believe--and it's personal--it was actually hurtful
to hear you talk about the reputations of two United States senators who
built their reputations and career on the segregation of race in this
country."

It was not only his praise of segregationists that bothered her, though,
Harris said, but his efforts to end the very program that ensured her an
integrated school experience.

"There was a little girl in California who was bused to school. That little
girl was me," she said.

Biden deflected the criticism, claiming that his opposition to busing was
about federally mandated busing. That decision, he said, should have been
left up to states and local governments as it was in Berkley--not enforced by
the federal government.

"The fact is that, in terms of busing, the busing, I never--you would have
been able to go to school the same exact way because it was a local decision
made by your city council," Biden said. "That's fine. That's one of the
things I argued for. We should be breaking down these lines."

That "local control" argument both invoke the segregationists' "state's
rights" argument--the racist Citizens' Council's logo was designed around the
words "Racial Integrity" and "State's Rights"--even as it recalls Eastland's
opposition to "forced busing ordered by federal courts," and Stennis'
suggestion, in a 1973 letter to a constituent, that busing only existed to
satisfy technocrats in the nation's capital.

"I am opposed to the busing of schoolchildren for the sole purpose of
overcoming racial imbalance," Stennis wrote in that letter. "This
unreasonable busing is injurious to our school children and only benefits
some Washington socio-political statistician."

Stennis' opposition to busing was indicative of the mood in Deep South
states, which showed no desire to implement busing on their own terms--a
point Harris made Thursday night.

"There are moments in history where states fail to support the civil rights
of people," she said.

In April, the Jackson Free Press spoke to Millsaps College civil rights
historian Stephanie Rolph, the author of the 2018 book, ""Resisting Equality:
The Citizens' Council, 1954-1989." Even today, she said, Biden would likely
face pushback from some white voters if he apologized for his position on
busing.

"It would be excellent if Biden could recognize the political moment he was
in at that time and why he realizes that was an erroneous position. But that
sort of contextual explanation for that for someone like him at the national
level also threatens to undermine certain constituencies that would not
appreciate his apology for that, because they might not think that anti-
busing legislation was a bad thing," she said.

Thursday night was not the first time Harris has pointed to America's history
of segregated public schools. In a speech in New Orleans last year, Harris
praised the city for the election of its first African American woman mayor
as evidence that America is better than the troubles of the Trump era.

"I know we are better than this because, less than 60 years ago, about four
miles up the road, Ruby Bridges needed federal marshals to escort her to
school," Harris said last August, referring to the civil-rights activist who,
as a 6-year-old child, faced abuse and harassment when she became one of the
first African American children to attend an integrated school in New
Orleans.

"And yet today, Mayor Latoya Cantrell is the first woman--and first black
woman--in history to lead this city. That's our American identity."

'A Man Without Guilt'

On Thursday night, Biden denied Harris' charge that he had praised
segregationists.

"It's a mischaracterization of my position across the board. I did not praise
racists. That is not true," Biden said on the debate stage.

Over the years, though, Biden has repeatedly praised segregationists like
Stennis, Eastland and Thurmond.

At the 1985 birthday party in DeKalb, Miss., Biden effusively praised Stennis
without reservation.

"He's an opponent without hate, a friend without treachery, a statesman
without pretense, a victim without any murmuring, a public official without
vice, a private citizen without wrong, a neighbor, as you all know, without
hypocrisy, a man without guilt," Biden said. "A senator whom future senators
can study with profit for as long as there is an America."

On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 16:31:04 -0600, trotsky <gmsingh@email.com> wrote:

>On 11/28/22 8:12 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 20:24:14 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <cvWgL.43469$c6W2.39935@fx41.iad>,
>>> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>>> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of government.
>>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And even
>>>>>>>> if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that she's
>>>>>>>> maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot insurrection could
>>>>>>>> have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>>
>>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes made in
>>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but it's
>>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect Democrats?
>>>>
>>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>>
>>> Well, when the California legislature changed the state's voting laws to
>>> legalize ballot harvesting-- something that's illegal pretty much
>>> everywhere else because it's like rolling out the red carpet for voter
>>> fraud-- and said right out loud that the reason for the change was to
>>> help Democrat voter turnout, I must have missed the howls of outrage
>>>from the likes of Stacey Abrams and the boxes of talking heads on CNN
>>> and MSNBC bemoaning this partisan attack on the democratic process, and
>>> the think-pieces in the New York Times speculating that this marks the
>>> beginning of the fall of the republic.
>>
>> If there is anything that should be clearly illegal everywhere it's
>> ballot harvesting. Interestingly enough Dems seem all for it.
>
>
>Prove it shitpuppet.

Since you asked so nicely:

"Democrats and their progressive activist allies did a better job
identifying and delivering their vote on and before Nov. 8. Like it or
not, early mail-in voting combined with newly legal ballot harvesting
has changed the modern campaigns. Democrats recognized and took full
advantage of this, while Republicans campaigned as if they were living
in the past. "

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/nov/28/republicans-must-learn-how-to-ballot-harvest-get-v/

So the media thinks it's a great idea for parties to go around
collecting votes in bulk and delivering them to voting sites. What
could *possibly* go wrong....

On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 18:21:37 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
wrote:

>On 11/28/2022 5:31 PM, trotsky wrote:
>> On 11/28/22 8:12 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 20:24:14 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <cvWgL.43469$c6W2.39935@fx41.iad>,
>>>> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>    shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of
>>>>>>>>> government.
>>>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And
>>>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>>> if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that she's
>>>>>>>>> maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot insurrection
>>>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>>>> have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>>>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes
>>>>>>> made in
>>>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but
>>>>>> it's
>>>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect Democrats?
>>>>>
>>>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>>>
>>>> Well, when the California legislature changed the state's voting laws to
>>>> legalize ballot harvesting-- something that's illegal pretty much
>>>> everywhere else because it's like rolling out the red carpet for voter
>>>> fraud-- and said right out loud that the reason for the change was to
>>>> help Democrat voter turnout, I must have missed the howls of outrage
>>>> from the likes of Stacey Abrams and the boxes of talking heads on CNN
>>>> and MSNBC bemoaning this partisan attack on the democratic process, and
>>>> the think-pieces in the New York Times speculating that this marks the
>>>> beginning of the fall of the republic.
>>>
>>> If there is anything that should be clearly illegal everywhere it's
>>> ballot harvesting.  Interestingly enough Dems seem all for it.
>>
>>
>> Prove it shitpuppet.
>
>How does "ballot harvesting" differ in principle from busing voters?
>

Quite frankly this practice, when done by political parties, should
also be illegal.

On Tue, 29 Nov 2022 03:19:57 -0600, trotsky <gmsingh@email.com> wrote:

>On 11/28/22 5:21 PM, moviePig wrote:
>> On 11/28/2022 5:31 PM, trotsky wrote:
>>> On 11/28/22 8:12 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 20:24:14 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <cvWgL.43469$c6W2.39935@fx41.iad>,
>>>>> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>>    shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of
>>>>>>>>>> government.
>>>>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start.
>>>>>>>>>> (And even
>>>>>>>>>> if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that she's
>>>>>>>>>> maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot
>>>>>>>>>> insurrection could
>>>>>>>>>> have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>>>>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes
>>>>>>>> made in
>>>>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but
>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect
>>>>>>> Democrats?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, when the California legislature changed the state's voting
>>>>> laws to
>>>>> legalize ballot harvesting-- something that's illegal pretty much
>>>>> everywhere else because it's like rolling out the red carpet for voter
>>>>> fraud-- and said right out loud that the reason for the change was to
>>>>> help Democrat voter turnout, I must have missed the howls of outrage
>>>>> from the likes of Stacey Abrams and the boxes of talking heads on
>>>>> CNN and MSNBC bemoaning this partisan attack on the democratic
>>>>> process, and
>>>>> the think-pieces in the New York Times speculating that this marks the
>>>>> beginning of the fall of the republic.
>>>>
>>>> If there is anything that should be clearly illegal everywhere it's
>>>> ballot harvesting.  Interestingly enough Dems seem all for it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Prove it shitpuppet.
>>
>> How does "ballot harvesting" differ in principle from busing voters?
>
>
>"Ballot harvest" is as much a pile of horseshit as "Hunter's laptop."

You mean the laptop that CBS finally admits to being an issue? Glad
you finally made it to the party. Better late than never I guess.

On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 10:27:40 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
wrote:

>On 11/28/2022 9:11 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 23:08:40 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of government.
>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And even
>>>>>>> if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that she's
>>>>>>> maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot insurrection could
>>>>>>> have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes made in
>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>
>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but it's
>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect Democrats?
>>>
>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>
>> You didn't answer the question.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question
>

Problem is that my question is NOT rehetorical. This is reality.

On 11/28/2022 11:39 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <F9fhL.288896$kmVf.66854@fx15.iad>,
> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
>> On 11/28/2022 6:49 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>>> On 11/28/2022 9:11 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 23:08:40 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of government.
>>>>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And
>>>>>>>>>> even if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that
>>>>>>>>>> she's maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot
>>>>>>>>>> insurrection could have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>>>>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes made in
>>>>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but it's
>>>>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect Democrats?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>>>>
>>>>> You didn't answer the question.
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question
>>>
>>> Nice, but my question was not rhetorical.
>>
>> Have you stopped beating your wife?
>
> Don't have one.

Two?

On 11/29/2022 9:49 AM, NoBody wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 10:27:40 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 11/28/2022 9:11 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 23:08:40 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>>> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of government.
>>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And even
>>>>>>>> if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that she's
>>>>>>>> maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot insurrection could
>>>>>>>> have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes made in
>>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but it's
>>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect Democrats?
>>>>
>>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>>
>>> You didn't answer the question.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question
>>
>
> Problem is that my question is NOT rehetorical. This is reality.

You didn't ask a question.

On 11/29/2022 2:54 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 18:21:37 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
> wrote:
>
>> How does "ballot harvesting" differ in principle from busing voters?
>
> Seriously?
>
> Because if you bus (or otherwise transport a voter) you have anhonest
> to god live voter who physically marks an "X".
>
> As opposed to somebody who goes around stealing mail ballot envelopes
> from somebody's mail in ballots and mail them in for them "on their
> behalf" (all voting for the thief's preferred candidate) and counting
> on most people wondering what happened to their ballot but not doing
> anything about it - or turning up on election day in person and being
> told they had already voted!

Afaics, you're conflating 'ballot harvesting' with 'voter fraud'.

In article <tm4v62$292hb$1@dont-email.me>, Ubiquitous
<weberm@polaris.net> wrote:

> Southern Dixiecrats and Republicans had long opposed busing in their region,
> where the federal government had mandated it most heavily. But as the
> practice spread, whites in wealthy suburbs like those in Delaware began
> pushing back. Some had moved to the suburbs to send their kids to what they
> considered a "good school," which usually meant mostly white, and opposed
> their kids being bused elsewhere to make schools more equal.
>
> "Southern politicians who had been pushing against desegregation in the 1950s
> realized, 'Oh, OK, now that it's hit the doorstep of the northeasterners;
> they don't like it any more than we do,'" Ralph W. Eubanks, a southern
> studies professor at the University of Mississippi, told the Jackson Free
> Press in April. "And these political alliances began to form. So that's why
> you had someone like Joe Biden making alliances with Strom Thurmond, James
> Eastland and John Stennis."

This is a gross misrepresentation of what was actually going on. The
tipping point came when kids began being bussed from the suburbs back
into the cities, adding hours to their school day. You didn't have to
be racist to not want your kids to be the subject of a social
experiment that required them to ride a bus for up to three hours per
day when there was a perfectly good public school within walking
distance of their homes.

On 11/29/2022 6:46 AM, NoBody wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 18:21:37 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 11/28/2022 5:31 PM, trotsky wrote:
>>> On 11/28/22 8:12 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 20:24:14 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <cvWgL.43469$c6W2.39935@fx41.iad>,
>>>>> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>>    shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of
>>>>>>>>>> government.
>>>>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And
>>>>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>>>> if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that she's
>>>>>>>>>> maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot insurrection
>>>>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>>>>> have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and what she
>>>>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes
>>>>>>>> made in
>>>>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but
>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect Democrats?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, when the California legislature changed the state's voting laws to
>>>>> legalize ballot harvesting-- something that's illegal pretty much
>>>>> everywhere else because it's like rolling out the red carpet for voter
>>>>> fraud-- and said right out loud that the reason for the change was to
>>>>> help Democrat voter turnout, I must have missed the howls of outrage
>>>>> from the likes of Stacey Abrams and the boxes of talking heads on CNN
>>>>> and MSNBC bemoaning this partisan attack on the democratic process, and
>>>>> the think-pieces in the New York Times speculating that this marks the
>>>>> beginning of the fall of the republic.
>>>>
>>>> If there is anything that should be clearly illegal everywhere it's
>>>> ballot harvesting.  Interestingly enough Dems seem all for it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Prove it shitpuppet.
>>
>> How does "ballot harvesting" differ in principle from busing voters?
>>
>
> Quite frankly this practice, when done by political parties, should
> also be illegal.
>
But no one's standing over the bussed voters to ensure that they vote
for one party over another. They're simply getting them there.

On Tue, 29 Nov 2022 10:25:21 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
wrote:

>On 11/29/2022 2:54 AM, The Horny Goat wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 18:21:37 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> How does "ballot harvesting" differ in principle from busing voters?
>>
>> Seriously?
>>
>> Because if you bus (or otherwise transport a voter) you have anhonest
>> to god live voter who physically marks an "X".
>>
>> As opposed to somebody who goes around stealing mail ballot envelopes
>> from somebody's mail in ballots and mail them in for them "on their
>> behalf" (all voting for the thief's preferred candidate) and counting
>> on most people wondering what happened to their ballot but not doing
>> anything about it - or turning up on election day in person and being
>> told they had already voted!
>
>Afaics, you're conflating 'ballot harvesting' with 'voter fraud'.
>

Yes, ballot harvesting can mean they simply gather everyone's ballot
from some spot and then drop them off at a drop box. It doesn't
necessarily entail fraudulently filling out the ballots. Still it's
frowned upon because of that possibility of tampering with the
ballots.

A Friend <nope@noway.com> wrote:
> In article <tm4v62$292hb$1@dont-email.me>, Ubiquitous
> <weberm@polaris.net> wrote:
>
>> Southern Dixiecrats and Republicans had long opposed busing in their region,
>> where the federal government had mandated it most heavily. But as the
>> practice spread, whites in wealthy suburbs like those in Delaware began
>> pushing back. Some had moved to the suburbs to send their kids to what they
>> considered a "good school," which usually meant mostly white, and opposed
>> their kids being bused elsewhere to make schools more equal.
>>
>> "Southern politicians who had been pushing against desegregation in the 1950s
>> realized, 'Oh, OK, now that it's hit the doorstep of the northeasterners;
>> they don't like it any more than we do,'" Ralph W. Eubanks, a southern
>> studies professor at the University of Mississippi, told the Jackson Free
>> Press in April. "And these political alliances began to form. So that's why
>> you had someone like Joe Biden making alliances with Strom Thurmond, James
>> Eastland and John Stennis."
>
>
> This is a gross misrepresentation of what was actually going on. The
> tipping point came when kids began being bussed from the suburbs back
> into the cities, adding hours to their school day. You didn't have to
> be racist to not want your kids to be the subject of a social
> experiment that required them to ride a bus for up to three hours per
> day when there was a perfectly good public school within walking
> distance of their homes.
>

And that you were paying higher taxes for. Not to mention the white kids
being bussed into the bad neighborhoods were in physical danger.

--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.

On 11/29/2022 10:34 AM, suzeeq wrote:
> On 11/29/2022 6:46 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 18:21:37 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/28/2022 5:31 PM, trotsky wrote:
>>>> On 11/28/22 8:12 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 20:24:14 -0800, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In article <cvWgL.43469$c6W2.39935@fx41.iad>,
>>>>>> moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11/27/2022 10:12 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article <hs78ohhu9bdjb6oth0kf77m9kggjd1i4nl@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>>>     shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 14:22:49 -0800, The Horny Goat
>>>>>>>>> <lcraver@home.ca>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 03:48:04 +0000 (UTC),
>>>>>>>>>> MDuPree@theworld.com.snip.to.reply (Micky DuPree) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> She hasn't incited the violent overthrow of any level of
>>>>>>>>>>> government.
>>>>>>>>>>> That puts her head and shoulders above Trump just to start. (And
>>>>>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>>>>> if she had such immoral inclinations, I've seen no sign that
>>>>>>>>>>> she's
>>>>>>>>>>> maniacally deluded enough to think that that tinpot insurrection
>>>>>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>>>>>> have succeeded, as Trump was deluded in thinking.)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No she hasn't but has twice denounced election 'fraud' and
>>>>>>>>>> what she
>>>>>>>>>> calls voter suppression.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Which was perfectly reasonable for her to do since the changes
>>>>>>>>> made in
>>>>>>>>> our (that is Georgia) voting rules were done solely to help elect
>>>>>>>>> Republicans.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why is it bad to change voting rules to help elect Republicans but
>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>> not only okay, but desirable, to change rules to help elect
>>>>>>>> Democrats?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Trying to keep people from voting is antithetical to a democracy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, when the California legislature changed the state's voting
>>>>>> laws to
>>>>>> legalize ballot harvesting-- something that's illegal pretty much
>>>>>> everywhere else because it's like rolling out the red carpet for
>>>>>> voter
>>>>>> fraud-- and said right out loud that the reason for the change was to
>>>>>> help Democrat voter turnout, I must have missed the howls of outrage
>>>>>> from the likes of Stacey Abrams and the boxes of talking heads on CNN
>>>>>> and MSNBC bemoaning this partisan attack on the democratic
>>>>>> process, and
>>>>>> the think-pieces in the New York Times speculating that this marks
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> beginning of the fall of the republic.
>>>>>
>>>>> If there is anything that should be clearly illegal everywhere it's
>>>>> ballot harvesting.  Interestingly enough Dems seem all for it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Prove it shitpuppet.
>>>
>>> How does "ballot harvesting" differ in principle from busing voters?
>>>
>>
>> Quite frankly this practice, when done by political parties, should
>> also be illegal.
>>
> But no one's standing over the bussed voters to ensure that they vote
> for one party over another. They're simply getting them there.

So, a voter could lie about which way he'll vote, just to get the free
ride? Hey, look, we've invented a new kind of "voter fraud"!...