"[P]ass the word around that Mister Nigger is not wanted at the polls."
November 17, 2005 12:15 AM Subscribe
"Do you want to see niggers in the state capital with their feet on the desk?"
"This newspaper believes in white supremacy, and it believes that the poll tax is one of the essentials for the preservation of white supremacy." From "Suffrage in the South" Part I, published January 1st, 1940 [mi]
"This newspaper believes in white supremacy, and it believes that the poll tax is one of the essentials for the preservation of white supremacy." From "Suffrage in the South" Part I, published January 1st, 1940 [mi]
Wow, you sound pissed or something. Disenfranchising voters is nothing new in politics and will probably always be a part of politics. This definitely seems like an assault on the disadvantaged (not just blacks) in Georgia. Unfortunately, as previously discussed, even if they go though all of these hoops to vote who knows if their vote will even be counted.
posted by Mijo Bijo at 12:30 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by Mijo Bijo at 12:30 AM on November 17, 2005
Wow, you sound pissed or something.
Any time voters are disenfranchised, it should elicit anger. A lot of anger. We should never just shrug and say, "it's always going to be this way."
posted by teece at 12:52 AM on November 17, 2005 [1 favorite]
Any time voters are disenfranchised, it should elicit anger. A lot of anger. We should never just shrug and say, "it's always going to be this way."
posted by teece at 12:52 AM on November 17, 2005 [1 favorite]
The funny part is that you think voting matters anymore.
posted by nightchrome at 12:53 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by nightchrome at 12:53 AM on November 17, 2005
Sorry, I forgot the "/sarcasm" at the end of that line. It does piss me off, but after so many years of shit like this happening one does get a feeling of hopelessness as to ever seeing this fixed. The Georgia law is pretty blatant, but so is a lot of the redistricting that has been happening lately, and in the past. What exactly am I, or you, going to do about it? Huff and puff a blog to no avail? And to be even more cynical, this law only effects people who predominantly do not vote. I'm much more concerned about redistricting than I am about people without ID's having to go out of their way to assert their right to vote. I think their is a reasonable basis for this law, but it has been perverted into an implement to disenfranchise by not making it easily accessible to get the required ID.
BTW, can't they just go to their DMV and get an ID? Most states make it a law to have a picture ID on you at all times. I'm assuming the special ID for voting is for people who do not want to fork over the money for a state issued ID card, which I'm assuming you could probably get in Atlanta.
posted by Mijo Bijo at 1:01 AM on November 17, 2005
BTW, can't they just go to their DMV and get an ID? Most states make it a law to have a picture ID on you at all times. I'm assuming the special ID for voting is for people who do not want to fork over the money for a state issued ID card, which I'm assuming you could probably get in Atlanta.
posted by Mijo Bijo at 1:01 AM on November 17, 2005
Here is a state-by-state list of ID requirements for voting. A handful of other states have photo ID requirements but only Indiana, South Carolina and South Dakota seem to require government issued photo ID.
Anyway, how do you get through daily life without a photo ID? I can't imagine that the average poor black guy in ATL would risk being approached by a police offer without having a valid form of photo ID - that'd just result in a visit to the local jail.
Even though the number of voters affected by this is probably very small, I understand the outrage brought on by any voter disenfranchisement. What I don't understand is why these lawmakers would even both to disenfranchise such a small number of voters given the amount of negative publicity it is bound to draw.
posted by mullacc at 1:04 AM on November 17, 2005
Anyway, how do you get through daily life without a photo ID? I can't imagine that the average poor black guy in ATL would risk being approached by a police offer without having a valid form of photo ID - that'd just result in a visit to the local jail.
Even though the number of voters affected by this is probably very small, I understand the outrage brought on by any voter disenfranchisement. What I don't understand is why these lawmakers would even both to disenfranchise such a small number of voters given the amount of negative publicity it is bound to draw.
posted by mullacc at 1:04 AM on November 17, 2005
What I don't understand is why these lawmakers would even both to disenfranchise such a small number of voters given the amount of negative publicity it is bound to draw.
This might have something to do with it [via Wikipedia]:
Until recently, Georgia's state government had the longest unbroken record of single-party dominance of any state in the Union. For over 130 years, from 1872 to 2003, Georgians only elected Democratic governors, and Democrats held the majority of seats in the General Assembly. Most of the Democrats elected throughout these years were Southern Democrats or Dixiecrats who were very conservative throughout the 60's segregationist period. As of the 2001 reapportionment, the state has 13 congressmen and women in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The political dominance of Democrats ended in 2003, when former governor Roy Barnes was defeated by Perdue in what was regarded as a stunning upset. While Democrats retained control of the State House, they lost their majority in the Senate when four Democrats switched parties. They relinquished their hold on the House in the 2004 election; currently, Republicans control all three primary branches of government.
posted by Mijo Bijo at 1:18 AM on November 17, 2005
This might have something to do with it [via Wikipedia]:
Until recently, Georgia's state government had the longest unbroken record of single-party dominance of any state in the Union. For over 130 years, from 1872 to 2003, Georgians only elected Democratic governors, and Democrats held the majority of seats in the General Assembly. Most of the Democrats elected throughout these years were Southern Democrats or Dixiecrats who were very conservative throughout the 60's segregationist period. As of the 2001 reapportionment, the state has 13 congressmen and women in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The political dominance of Democrats ended in 2003, when former governor Roy Barnes was defeated by Perdue in what was regarded as a stunning upset. While Democrats retained control of the State House, they lost their majority in the Senate when four Democrats switched parties. They relinquished their hold on the House in the 2004 election; currently, Republicans control all three primary branches of government.
posted by Mijo Bijo at 1:18 AM on November 17, 2005
That's exactly what I don't understand. They have a firm hold on the government and they've begun to re-district, which will ensure that this remains the case. Why go out of the way to fuck over some poor, elderly black voters? They'll just end up looking like assholes.
posted by mullacc at 1:28 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by mullacc at 1:28 AM on November 17, 2005
"Looking like assholes" is the idea. Assholes are both in fashion and in power. Hadn't you noticed? They want to send the message of hate and intolerance. Their careful manipulation has convinced people that hate and intolerance are godly, family values.
posted by Goofyy at 1:51 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by Goofyy at 1:51 AM on November 17, 2005
But usually they code the hate and intolerance so that the conservative base gets the message but the opposition can't make the accusation outright. This situation comes off as poorly handled - unless it's just noise to divert discussion away from re-districting.
posted by mullacc at 2:18 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by mullacc at 2:18 AM on November 17, 2005
Nothing quite like throwin' a nice "nigger" out there on the FPP.
But why not make voting a more competitive enterprise? If you can't hit the hoop from the 3-point line, you don't get to vote. At least we would then get some variance in the demographic that makes an uninformed decision about who everybody pisses and moans about for the next four years.
I remember following my mom to the polls a few times when I was younger and didn't have a functional grasp of politics. She would whimsically mark anybodys name who was not in one of the two dominating parties. I was convinced, at that point, that she was thoroughly insane, but as the years passed, just as others seemed to have indicated my whole life, I started to view my [mom] as a wiser person than I had at first mistaken her.
posted by GooseOnTheLoose at 2:25 AM on November 17, 2005
But why not make voting a more competitive enterprise? If you can't hit the hoop from the 3-point line, you don't get to vote. At least we would then get some variance in the demographic that makes an uninformed decision about who everybody pisses and moans about for the next four years.
I remember following my mom to the polls a few times when I was younger and didn't have a functional grasp of politics. She would whimsically mark anybodys name who was not in one of the two dominating parties. I was convinced, at that point, that she was thoroughly insane, but as the years passed, just as others seemed to have indicated my whole life, I started to view my [mom] as a wiser person than I had at first mistaken her.
posted by GooseOnTheLoose at 2:25 AM on November 17, 2005
Excuse me, but isn't this FPP a little racist!?
Oh wait. ;)
posted by redteam at 4:30 AM on November 17, 2005
Oh wait. ;)
posted by redteam at 4:30 AM on November 17, 2005
I'm interested in a clarification of the word "Most" in the statement "Most states make it a law to have a picture ID on you at all times."
posted by shmegegge at 5:00 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by shmegegge at 5:00 AM on November 17, 2005
Good old Southern Strategery at work.
Jim Crow is alive and well.
posted by nofundy at 5:45 AM on November 17, 2005
Jim Crow is alive and well.
posted by nofundy at 5:45 AM on November 17, 2005
This is a double post, for starters. Also, a federal appeals court has ruled that Georgia cannot enforce the law, at least for now. Georgia has appealed the ruling.
posted by raysmj at 5:52 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by raysmj at 5:52 AM on November 17, 2005
I find the "it's the law in most states to carry photo ID" thing hard to believe. In Canada if you're a pedestrian and haven't given a police officer any reason to believe you're breaking any laws, you can refuse to identify yourself at all when asked.
posted by orange swan at 6:08 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by orange swan at 6:08 AM on November 17, 2005
It's not racism right now, so much as noticing that black people tend to vote for democrats.
One of the biggest disenfranchisers is Ohio's secretary of state, who is black (and a Republican) himself. This is a guy who tried to throw out tons of voter registration applications days before the 2004 election because they were printed on the wrong type of paper, far too late for people to re-register. That turned out to be illegal under federal law, and the plan was revoked.
---
Republicans often counter that democrats want to allow voter fraud. Here in Iowa, we have a democrat secretary of state. You don't even need to show ID to vote (just sign your name on the voter rolls), and there are short lines on Election Day (like 20 minutes at most). We also give people the opportunity to vote early with 'satalite' polls around town a couple of days before Election Day. It would have been incredibly easy to come up with a fake name and register and vote twice. Or vote for a dead person, or whatever.
I understand that in some places in Ohio people needed to wait in like for hours and hours to vote.
(Interestingly, there was actually a debate between our Secretary of state and Ohio's. I'm sure it came as a surprise to some people that Iowa and Ohio are actually different states!)
posted by delmoi at 6:43 AM on November 17, 2005
One of the biggest disenfranchisers is Ohio's secretary of state, who is black (and a Republican) himself. This is a guy who tried to throw out tons of voter registration applications days before the 2004 election because they were printed on the wrong type of paper, far too late for people to re-register. That turned out to be illegal under federal law, and the plan was revoked.
---
Republicans often counter that democrats want to allow voter fraud. Here in Iowa, we have a democrat secretary of state. You don't even need to show ID to vote (just sign your name on the voter rolls), and there are short lines on Election Day (like 20 minutes at most). We also give people the opportunity to vote early with 'satalite' polls around town a couple of days before Election Day. It would have been incredibly easy to come up with a fake name and register and vote twice. Or vote for a dead person, or whatever.
I understand that in some places in Ohio people needed to wait in like for hours and hours to vote.
(Interestingly, there was actually a debate between our Secretary of state and Ohio's. I'm sure it came as a surprise to some people that Iowa and Ohio are actually different states!)
posted by delmoi at 6:43 AM on November 17, 2005
Anyway, how do you get through daily life without a photo ID? I can't imagine that the average poor black guy in ATL would risk being approached by a police offer without having a valid form of photo ID - that'd just result in a visit to the local jail.
While a recent Supreme Court ruling has made it legal for the police to demand your name, you're still not required to carry an ID on you, or show it to the police if they ask.
posted by delmoi at 6:47 AM on November 17, 2005
While a recent Supreme Court ruling has made it legal for the police to demand your name, you're still not required to carry an ID on you, or show it to the police if they ask.
posted by delmoi at 6:47 AM on November 17, 2005
I linked to this article in the other thread, but it is pretty good 7and related to the discussion, originaly from Hapers: None Dare Call it Stolen. (The excerpt from Harpers is here: Excerpt of None Dare Call it Stolen.)
posted by chunking express at 6:50 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by chunking express at 6:50 AM on November 17, 2005
I don't know what the current specifics are, but last I heard the mandatory photo ID thing is/was in jeopardy of being unconstitutional. There have been a few cases challenging it, but I'm not sure how far they went.
Anyway, how do you get through daily life without a photo ID?
I have a photo ID. One that expired in 1996. I've flown between states with it and my Social Security card as backup, post 9/11. I've opened utility accounts, cashed checks, obtained check cashing agency cards, started and stopped several jobs, voted and more.
I haven't been stopped by the cops and asked requested to present ID since 1994-ish, but then I'm "white" and a non-driver.
posted by loquacious at 6:50 AM on November 17, 2005
Anyway, how do you get through daily life without a photo ID?
I have a photo ID. One that expired in 1996. I've flown between states with it and my Social Security card as backup, post 9/11. I've opened utility accounts, cashed checks, obtained check cashing agency cards, started and stopped several jobs, voted and more.
I haven't been stopped by the cops and asked requested to present ID since 1994-ish, but then I'm "white" and a non-driver.
posted by loquacious at 6:50 AM on November 17, 2005
delmoi writes "I understand that in some places in Ohio people needed to wait in like for hours and hours to vote. "
I can personally attest to the long lines resulting from few voting machines in minority precincts -- I stood in the rain outside one such polling place in Ohio from 7pm to 10pm on Election Night 2004, encouraging voters (not that they needed my encouragement, they were fighters) to stay in line long enough to vote for Kerry.
(And up to 7pm, indeed from the day before and without sleep, I'd been volunteering at the state coordinated camoaign campaign headquarters, working on software to alleviate the "no provisinal ballots" obstacle thrown up by Secretary of State Blackwell. Standing in the rain was my "break".)
I remember many of those voters from that night, but one man in particular: an older and very frail black man in line with his wife. They explained to me that he'd been ill in bed for nearly a week -- and he looked completely wiped out, standing there in the chill rain -- but that he'd insisted to his wife that he had to get out of bed and vote for John Kerry, no matter how long and cold and wet the wait.
I learned they were a middle-class couple, she a teacher, he a unionized worker, so I suppose they could have come up with the price of a vote in Georgia.
But they were also, as I noted, of a certain age -- old enough to remember when, in their own lifetimes, a black man couldn't vote in Georgia for any amount of money, without risking his life, without the risk of his children being terrorized in the night by a visit from the Klan.
Maybe it was memories like that impelled them to stand for hours in the rain that night, just to cast a vote.
Makes me wonder how long the memories are of Georgia politicians who passed this bill, and the Department of Justice political appointees who approved it.
What happened to the memories of the people who blithely say this can't be racism? The Voting Rights Act is only forty years old, and Jim Crow is living memory for many American, black and white. Why so forgetful?
posted by orthogonality at 6:53 AM on November 17, 2005 [1 favorite]
I can personally attest to the long lines resulting from few voting machines in minority precincts -- I stood in the rain outside one such polling place in Ohio from 7pm to 10pm on Election Night 2004, encouraging voters (not that they needed my encouragement, they were fighters) to stay in line long enough to vote for Kerry.
(And up to 7pm, indeed from the day before and without sleep, I'd been volunteering at the state coordinated camoaign campaign headquarters, working on software to alleviate the "no provisinal ballots" obstacle thrown up by Secretary of State Blackwell. Standing in the rain was my "break".)
I remember many of those voters from that night, but one man in particular: an older and very frail black man in line with his wife. They explained to me that he'd been ill in bed for nearly a week -- and he looked completely wiped out, standing there in the chill rain -- but that he'd insisted to his wife that he had to get out of bed and vote for John Kerry, no matter how long and cold and wet the wait.
I learned they were a middle-class couple, she a teacher, he a unionized worker, so I suppose they could have come up with the price of a vote in Georgia.
But they were also, as I noted, of a certain age -- old enough to remember when, in their own lifetimes, a black man couldn't vote in Georgia for any amount of money, without risking his life, without the risk of his children being terrorized in the night by a visit from the Klan.
Maybe it was memories like that impelled them to stand for hours in the rain that night, just to cast a vote.
Makes me wonder how long the memories are of Georgia politicians who passed this bill, and the Department of Justice political appointees who approved it.
What happened to the memories of the people who blithely say this can't be racism? The Voting Rights Act is only forty years old, and Jim Crow is living memory for many American, black and white. Why so forgetful?
posted by orthogonality at 6:53 AM on November 17, 2005 [1 favorite]
(And ironically, the guy who wrote the front-end of that software I wrote the back-end of, wrote it from his home in Georgia.)
posted by orthogonality at 6:55 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by orthogonality at 6:55 AM on November 17, 2005
Now that this whole "Democracy" thing has worked out so well for us, why don't we go force the rest of the world to become democracys?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:56 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:56 AM on November 17, 2005
I don't bother to carry a purse (with my photo I.D. inside) unless I am driving. Many times I go out shopping or to the movies or to the park with my husband and have no I.D. on me at all.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:03 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:03 AM on November 17, 2005
Awwesome post!
Some games never change; the players change, the rulebook is modified to address modern limitations, but at its core the game remains the same.
posted by caddis at 7:11 AM on November 17, 2005
Some games never change; the players change, the rulebook is modified to address modern limitations, but at its core the game remains the same.
posted by caddis at 7:11 AM on November 17, 2005
How much would a voting ID card cost? I'm just having trouble grasping this as an intended plan to disenfranchise poor, black, voters. I think a standard non-driver ID card at the DMV usually costs less than ten dollars.
Ah, google-fu. Apparently, the DMV issues these ID cards for free. Even if you don't have access to a nearby DMV, they're even sending a special bus around the state to allow people to sign up and receive them....still for free.
So, how again does this law disenfranchise?
posted by Atreides at 7:41 AM on November 17, 2005
Ah, google-fu. Apparently, the DMV issues these ID cards for free. Even if you don't have access to a nearby DMV, they're even sending a special bus around the state to allow people to sign up and receive them....still for free.
So, how again does this law disenfranchise?
posted by Atreides at 7:41 AM on November 17, 2005
" Nothing quite like throwin' a nice "nigger" out there on the FPP."
Yeah, let's scrub all the offensive language and views from our history so we can all pine for a simpler time.
posted by 2sheets at 8:22 AM on November 17, 2005
Yeah, let's scrub all the offensive language and views from our history so we can all pine for a simpler time.
posted by 2sheets at 8:22 AM on November 17, 2005
chunking express writes "I linked to this article in the other thread, but it is pretty good 7and related to the discussion, originaly from Hapers: None Dare Call it Stolen".
So it is official, Bush owns not one but both his terms to electoral fraud? And your Democratic (so-called) Party remains silent like a rock? And your free media refuses to notice it, since no abducted white girl is involved? And all that in the Bringer of Democracy, Pillar of Faith, Home of the Brave? Funny like hell.
posted by nkyad at 8:43 AM on November 17, 2005
So it is official, Bush owns not one but both his terms to electoral fraud? And your Democratic (so-called) Party remains silent like a rock? And your free media refuses to notice it, since no abducted white girl is involved? And all that in the Bringer of Democracy, Pillar of Faith, Home of the Brave? Funny like hell.
posted by nkyad at 8:43 AM on November 17, 2005
nkyad, it is certainly a scary article. It also seems to have been ignored by most everyone. America's electoral process is a big mess. I am surprised there aren't people in the streets protesting against this sort of stuff.
posted by chunking express at 9:04 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by chunking express at 9:04 AM on November 17, 2005
A special bus, Atreides, as in ONE. For the entire 159-county state. Did you miss it? Sucks to be you.
And the free ID card requires a claim of "indigence." What qualifies a person as "indigent"? They never did say, which means anyone who swears to it risks being hauled to court on voter fraud charges anyway. This 7-page PDF file explains the objections more succinctly than I could.
Georgia seems to be becoming a neat little testing ground for Republican goals. Pointless gay marriage amendments, (abortive) eminent domain rulings, and now a swipe at voter disenfranchisement. We live in interesting times.
posted by tyro urge at 10:14 AM on November 17, 2005
And the free ID card requires a claim of "indigence." What qualifies a person as "indigent"? They never did say, which means anyone who swears to it risks being hauled to court on voter fraud charges anyway. This 7-page PDF file explains the objections more succinctly than I could.
Georgia seems to be becoming a neat little testing ground for Republican goals. Pointless gay marriage amendments, (abortive) eminent domain rulings, and now a swipe at voter disenfranchisement. We live in interesting times.
posted by tyro urge at 10:14 AM on November 17, 2005
Jane Galt has a much more levelheaded take on the issue:
While I agree that any time we tighten voting requirements, we will inevitably exclude some people who should vote along with those who shouldn't, it doesn't follow that the ratio of legal to illegal voters is 1:1. Where the cost-benefit ratio of a measure is high (i.e. where we can exclude a lot of illegal voters at the cost of only a few legal voters), then I'd say it's obvious we should take that measure, because doing so will result in increasing the total effectiveness of legal votes. Remember, each illegal voter effectively disenfranchises a (legal) one, so if we can reduce the illegal voters by a greater number than the legal voters, the net result will be positive.
posted by Kwantsar at 10:37 AM on November 17, 2005
While I agree that any time we tighten voting requirements, we will inevitably exclude some people who should vote along with those who shouldn't, it doesn't follow that the ratio of legal to illegal voters is 1:1. Where the cost-benefit ratio of a measure is high (i.e. where we can exclude a lot of illegal voters at the cost of only a few legal voters), then I'd say it's obvious we should take that measure, because doing so will result in increasing the total effectiveness of legal votes. Remember, each illegal voter effectively disenfranchises a (legal) one, so if we can reduce the illegal voters by a greater number than the legal voters, the net result will be positive.
posted by Kwantsar at 10:37 AM on November 17, 2005
It's rediculous to claim that every single illegal vote disenfranchises a single legal one. As long as fraud has a spesific cost, it's likely to happen on both sides.
posted by delmoi at 10:44 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by delmoi at 10:44 AM on November 17, 2005
(and by high cost, I mean you've got to risk your neck for one extra vote, not 1000 at the punch of a keyboard)
posted by delmoi at 10:45 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by delmoi at 10:45 AM on November 17, 2005
Who the hell is Jane Galt? What are her special credentials?
posted by raysmj at 11:48 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by raysmj at 11:48 AM on November 17, 2005
Where's her proof that there was enormous voter fraud in Georgia before? She's talking out of her asshole.
posted by raysmj at 11:49 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by raysmj at 11:49 AM on November 17, 2005
Sounds like an idiot libertarian (riffing on 'john galt') Her linking to instapundit reinforces this.
posted by delmoi at 11:50 AM on November 17, 2005
posted by delmoi at 11:50 AM on November 17, 2005
If you are just walking on the street in my state odds are you are picked up by one of three kinds of cops:
1. Wet behind the ears pigs that you remember from high school as a total social outcast whose one goal on this earth now is to make life hell.
2. Seasoned professionals who really only care if you give them lip. Respect them and understand they have a job to do and you usually have nothing to worry about.
3. Middle of the road cops in their 30's who are worried about meeting some dumb quota to keep them busy so the tickets fly right out of their hands.
Odds all three of these types are going to call for backup and generally look for any possible excuse to arrest you if you refuse ID: 1 in 1.
posted by Dean Keaton at 11:51 AM on November 17, 2005
1. Wet behind the ears pigs that you remember from high school as a total social outcast whose one goal on this earth now is to make life hell.
2. Seasoned professionals who really only care if you give them lip. Respect them and understand they have a job to do and you usually have nothing to worry about.
3. Middle of the road cops in their 30's who are worried about meeting some dumb quota to keep them busy so the tickets fly right out of their hands.
Odds all three of these types are going to call for backup and generally look for any possible excuse to arrest you if you refuse ID: 1 in 1.
posted by Dean Keaton at 11:51 AM on November 17, 2005
The seven page PDF file did help, thanks for the link, if not the sarcasm.
posted by Atreides at 1:32 PM on November 17, 2005
posted by Atreides at 1:32 PM on November 17, 2005
The "dirty negro lawmakers" fantasy is blatently cribbed from Birth of a Nation.
posted by VanRoosta at 2:53 PM on November 17, 2005
posted by VanRoosta at 2:53 PM on November 17, 2005
Georgia has had an ID law for 15 years, but before, you could simply sign an affidavit that you were elgible to vote. I have been signing that thing for years. I almost hope that the law isn't overturned the next time I go to vote so I can cause a ruckus and maybe get in trouble like H. D. Thoreau.
posted by Megafly at 3:19 PM on November 17, 2005
posted by Megafly at 3:19 PM on November 17, 2005
This was also blatantly cribbed from Birth of a Nation, as it were.
(AJC Bugmenot:
ajc
ajc@mailinator.com
ajcajc)
Racism doesn't exist in America, people!
It's just been...minoritized!
(Catch ironies at will.)
posted by objet at 6:07 PM on November 17, 2005
Who the hell is raysmj? What are his special credentials?
posted by Kwantsar at 7:24 PM on November 17, 2005
posted by Kwantsar at 7:24 PM on November 17, 2005
Sorry, the sarcastic "you" was meant to be non-directional.
The GLOW bus statistics continue to amaze me though. This page says the bus can handle up to 200 registrations a day, and this one says that there could be up to 100,000 voters in need of registration (although it downplays the likelihood of that). 100K/200... at this rate they'll be done registering people in ten years or so.
This blog is biased-- aren't they all?-- but I agree with its basic argument.
posted by tyro urge at 12:25 PM on November 18, 2005
The GLOW bus statistics continue to amaze me though. This page says the bus can handle up to 200 registrations a day, and this one says that there could be up to 100,000 voters in need of registration (although it downplays the likelihood of that). 100K/200... at this rate they'll be done registering people in ten years or so.
This blog is biased-- aren't they all?-- but I agree with its basic argument.
posted by tyro urge at 12:25 PM on November 18, 2005
« Older Feline Follies | Confessions in Stone Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Georgia's former poll tax was called "the most effective bar to Negro suffrage ever devised." From The International Encyclopedia of Elections,Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1999
"Between 1896 and 1903 every southern state possessing a substantial Negro population amended their constitutions to permit official white primaries and to prohibit—by ingenious laws—both Negroes and uncooperative poor whites from voting.... by 1900 the Negro could no longer count on the Federal government to assist him in overcoming his hopelessly unequal political position." From "The Development of Negro Power in American Politics since 1900", originally written for the Hattiesburg Freedom School by SNCC/COFO volunteers.
"[P]ass the word around that Mister Nigger is not wanted at the polls." -- gubernatorial candidate Eugene Talmadge, in 1847, quoted in the free online edition of the book JIM CROW GUIDE : The way it was, 1990
So how far have we come in the in 65 years since "Suffrage in the South" was written? published today in the The Washington Post.
(Reminiscent of how scientists and doctors at the FDA were overruled by political appointees on the morning-after pill?)
Georgia's new law will require those without a driver's license to pay for a special voter ID card -- and that card will be available in only 59 of Georgia's 159 counties. None of the cards will be sold in Georgia's most populous city, Atlanta.
Where does this come from? More than one hundred years ago, Frederick Douglas proposed an explanation: "It comes from those who would smooth the way for the Negro's disfranchisement in clear defiance of the constitution they have sworn to support -- men who are perjured before God and man." -- from The Reason Why The Colored American is not in the World's Columbian Exposition, 1893
posted by orthogonality at 12:17 AM on November 17, 2005