Slog PM: Senate GOP Blocks Voting Rights Legislation, Lumen Field to Welcome Hoards of Seahawks Fans, Today Would Be a Good Day to Play "Smooth" by Santana feat. Rob Thomas

Comments

1

Republicans don't want anyone to vote? Well they have inspired more people than ever to vote and in the next election, they can all feel free to go. Meanwhile the Democrats need to get rid of the filibuster and get some fucking work done. The only thing any of these people seem interested in is collecting their fucking paychecks. They can all go as far as I'm concerned. We obviously don't need them. They don't do anything for the people. Our government does not function and has not for decades. Enough already.

2

And what about State's Rights?

3

@2

What, you want to purchase a slave, Phoebe?

4

@2 You do realize that states were under federal observation for decades for violating the Voting Rights Act until it was gutted by Justice Roberts and the SCOTUS? States have rights. They don't have right to nullify federal law in violation of people's protected rights. That's why all of the states that vote to outlaw abortion lose because Roe v. Wade is federal law. An education is a beautiful thing. You might want to get one.

5

@2 what about them? Do you actually know what that phrase means? Go crank one out into your dont tread on me flag grandpa

6

Anybody who's too woke for watermelons, greens, mac'n'cheese can inflict their share on me.

7

Is ID problem?

8

Man, the whole concept of states rights has always struck me as rather backward for a number of reasons. First, rights should be, and rightfully are, conferred to individual citizens, and not some abstract and non-amorphous entity incapable of actually manifestly wielding them in any sort of meaningful way. And by granting rights to such entities, we actually confer individual rights disproportionately within our citizenry by giving far more power to those individuals who just so happen to live in less densely populated regions. While I obviously understand the idea conceptually, it just doesn't really seem to stand up to any sort of real world scrutiny.

It's also an idea that surely made a shitload more sense a couple hundred years ago when those states existed far more independently than they do now. A resident living east of the Mississippi 200 or even 100 years ago would reasonably be expected to live their entire life without any sort of first hand knowledge what day-to-day life in other regions actually entailed. Such people may have read books or seen pictures, maybe even heard radio broadcasts, but the true life's experience of such people was largely unknown. With 10 minutes worth of planning, I could be in Florida tomorrow morning if I so desired.

Our government has an obligation and responsibility to react and adapt to a changing world and they're neglecting it at the expense of the people they purport to represent. Fuck states rights.

9

@2 and 7, State’s rights are irrelevant in a federal election. The Constitution gives Congress the right to regulate federal elections. ID is fine as long as it’s free, politically neutral, and easily available.

10

@7 - Is ID (a) problem? For millions and millions of Americans, yes it is.

For millions of Americans too ignorant to know these other millions exist, it may not be a problem.

11

Now, has voting by fictitious persons ever been a problem? (Not a hypothetical problem, but an actual problem.)

12

@10, Why is it a problem? Federal Aid requires ID.

13

What? A persistent culture of racism and contempt for the public? On a police force? I'm taken completely by surprise.

14

3 - Just because you think jackkay is a sock pupppet of me doesn't mean that he is.

15

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

If times have changed, the language can be amended (see Article 5). Since the original ten, that has been done 17 (?) times. Difficult but not impossible. All that you have to do is convince enough people that you're right.

16

@14, Sorry Phoebe, how we are linked as one in the same escapes me to. Excessive brain ooze from progressive dreams I suppose.

17

15 - No worries at all. Indeed, I find it amusing.

18

to 16 I mean

19

@15,

You're missing my point though. I'm not saying that the system as it exists is unconstitutional; I'm saying that the constitution itself is fucking trash. It was set up (unintentionally I'll freely admit) in such a fashion as to be unamendable, if doing so would disempower those that wield disproportionate and hugely advantageous, exploitable power by virtue of it's existence. It's trash.

20

@mike blob is right, this outdated notion that we're merely a collection of 50 independent states is long past its expiration date. The US Civil War destroyed that idea. They should have abolished individual states altogether when it was over and just make one large State of America. But they didn't. Just another of many mistakes made following the defeat and surrender of the traitors.

21

Stop linking to stories printed in the NYT and do your own damn journalism for once. I swear, all the reporters worth a damn have left this benighted rag. All y'all do is repost the hard work of others or count on Mudede to make a weird post to generate rage clicks. Seems like you're leaving the actual hard work to everyone else.

Hell, reading your AM/PM posts through the editorialized lense of your trash-ass Millennial writers is becoming a greater chore every day! Why do I bother!

22

@20: So you just want one huge federal bureaucracy for everyone from everywhere to deal with for everything.

I'm skeptical.

23

Kill the filibuster and the GOP finally goes extinct. Win-win!

24

@22,

Yes. Please provide any evidence you have that shows a 50 party governing body is superior to a single governing body.

Your ideas are obsolete. If you can prove otherwise, please do so, otherwise, please go away.

25

@24, Allowing states to set their own laws has driven quite a bit of changes at the federal level. For example, gay marriage started at the state level. Currently marijuana legalization is being rolled out state by state. I doubt we'd have seen anything like the process we've had on these issues if we waited for the federal government to get them done.

26

@12 True, but the list of acceptable forms of ID for federal assistance is far broader than the list for voting in many states. For example, a current utility bill is acceptable ID for assistance but not for voting in many states. Manchin’s bill would require ID but would broaden the requirements to include things like utility bills.

To @11’s point, in-person voter fraud is virtually nonexistent. When absentee voter fraud has been committed at scale, it’s been Republicans doing it.

27

@24: OMG. Your idea is enormously stupid.

No, I need to hang around to help guide you into intellectual health and moral clarity.

28

@26 -- Jackkay has simply expanded his argument from ignorance to multiple fronts -- a typical trollish tactical diversion (along with the suggestion that only welfare recipients are the subject of our concern.

He's exposed enough. If there's any reasoned discourse to be had -- and it's needed as the majority of poll respondents don't know these problems exist -- it won't happen here.

But here's a frinstance a guy I know ran into. Post-9/11, it's harder and harder to obtain replacement photo ID for ppl who have let it lapse (they don't drive, maybe never did, or don't drink, or look obviously old enough, etc) or lost it thru fire or flood or theft. To replace acceptable lID, you'll need your birth cert, and if you were born in Hawaii they'll want you to show up in person, in the county of your birth. Assuming you have the time and money, how are you going to get there without ID?? There are agencies that can act as intermediaries in such cases, but it;s a long hard road.

And Jack certainly knows we keep slipping the deadlines year by year for WA DL's to conform to US Real ID standards - but when in comes, many Washingtonians will be left out in the cold for lack of supporting documentation..

29

@27: Yes, I can prove it. Imagine if Donald Trump had been the president with such consolidated and centralized power.
QED

30

Ugh, put the fucking comments links back on the main page, you wankers.

31

@29,

He never would've gained power, as he lost the popular vote by a considerable margin.

32

@31: They hypothetical is still applicable given its hypothetical.

34

@21 As far as the Stranger goes, I find reading the dipshit comments more interesting that the articles themselves. If the Stranger took away the comment sections, I wouldn't read it at all.

35

'art-
icles'?
tS has
Articles?

Who knew.

37

Obviously, vote for Power Rangers.

38

@33: And the other 20% dish#t comments are yours.

39

But Mask is a better movie than any of those!

40

@38 RAINDROP FOR THE WIN!!! The Professor is always amusing. It's like going to the zoo and looking into the monkey cage.

42

@41 I recommend you stop by Babe's on the Hill to pick up another can of lube. It seems life's got you pretty puckered today. Or try not looking into the mirror when posting comments.

43

@41: Glad you're going to media outlets you love just to jerk off all day. At least you have that amount of self respect.