What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Killing Of The United States of America

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
41,129
Reaction score
6,833
Points
1,860
Location
Peaking out from the redwoods
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,966
Reaction score
11,804
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
Please read the report folks. I think it contains things that even the most ardent commiecrats would object to.
Well, you are certainly encouraging Dems by calling them a slur.

I read the whole thing. It's a hit piece expressing opinions of what will happen, opinions that offer next to nothing in the form of analysis or evidence.

Not too surprising given that Heritage is one of the outfits that backed the neocons and Trotsky-like never-ending war in the Middle East. And here I thought Trumpers shared my contempt for neocons.


You're welcome to your opinion. Personally I'll take the word of Heritage over the commies propaganda as to the effects of this bill.

.
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,966
Reaction score
11,804
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
Everything that is anti-American sounds reasonable to you. The Constitution delegates the conduct of elections to the States, this BS is unconstitutional. That explains why you like it, centralized control. That's all you commies want, to control every aspect of people's lives. Move your ass to North Korea or China if that's the type of government you want.

Guy, Voting is federalized under the 12th, 15th, 17th, 19th, 23rd, 24th and 26th amendments.

If you guys spent half the time you spend trying to prevent poor people of color from voting and instead giving them reasons to vote for you, then you might even win an election once in a while, legitimately.


And those amendments exist, why? Oh right, the States agreed to them. Perhaps your mommy can explain the difference in congressional dictates and constitutional amendments that are ratified by the States.

.
 

dudmuck

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2017
Messages
7,941
Reaction score
2,565
Points
345
Location
Camarillo, CA
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
so you have the comply with the 15th amendment? aww. poor baby.
So the 14th & 15th amendment compliance means the "loss of everything this country has ever stood for"?


What the fuck are you babbling about?

.
If you were following the 15th amendment, then HR1 shouldnt be necessary.
Same thing with voting rights act of 1965.
I'm just trying to be concise, but it doesnt work with ignorant people.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
71,250
Reaction score
18,843
Points
2,290
Thankfully (hopefully?) the current mix on the Supreme Court wouldn't let this stand if somehow it gets through congress and Biden's stamp of approval.

Still.......this and the gun bill is going to unnecessarily cost us taxpayers millions of dollars in litigation because the commies now control the federal government and believe they can do whatever they want. The House spent the first two years of power trying to get rid of Trump, and today, instead of helping people who were affected by the Covid crisis, they are going to waste more time and money on fixing elections and disarming law abiding citizens, and we have too many stupid people voting these days that don't even understand this enough to vote them completely out of power.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
71,250
Reaction score
18,843
Points
2,290
They had those, they were called "Literacy tests". They were the source of all sorts of racist discrimination.

Because not everybody had the opportunity to be educated back then, especially blacks. Today education is all around us; no fee public schooling, at the library, on television, at our fingertips on the computer keyboard. Today there is no excuse for not learning about policies, candidates and how our country operates. And if this subject bores you, then you shouldn't be voting either because you are voting for something you have no idea about.

Uh, guy, Your side hasn't won the popular vote in a General Election since 2004.... and you had to terrify the nation into just barely doing that.

Well there you go, thanks for making my point. Stupid and politically uneducated voters.
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,966
Reaction score
11,804
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)

  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
71,250
Reaction score
18,843
Points
2,290
If you guys spent half the time you spend trying to prevent poor people of color from voting and instead giving them reasons to vote for you, then you might even win an election once in a while, legitimately.

How are we stopping the poor and people of color from voting now? Anybody that's legally allowed to vote votes.
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,966
Reaction score
11,804
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
so you have the comply with the 15th amendment? aww. poor baby.
So the 14th & 15th amendment compliance means the "loss of everything this country has ever stood for"?


What the fuck are you babbling about?

.
If you were following the 15th amendment, then HR1 shouldnt be necessary.
Same thing with voting rights act of 1965.
I'm just trying to be concise, but it doesnt work with ignorant people.


HR-1 has nothing to do with racial discrimination. Why do you commies always play the race card when anyone has an opinion that doesn't agree with yours? Do you really think minorities are so inept they can't abide by the same rules everyone else does? Personally, I think they can.

.
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,966
Reaction score
11,804
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
Thankfully (hopefully?) the current mix on the Supreme Court wouldn't let this stand if somehow it gets through congress and Biden's stamp of approval.

Still.......this and the gun bill is going to unnecessarily cost us taxpayers millions of dollars in litigation because the commies now control the federal government and believe they can do whatever they want. The House spent the first two years of power trying to get rid of Trump, and today, instead of helping people who were affected by the Covid crisis, they are going to waste more time and money on fixing elections and disarming law abiding citizens, and we have too many stupid people voting these days that don't even understand this enough to vote them completely out of power.


HR-1 was passed in the house yesterday.

.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
71,250
Reaction score
18,843
Points
2,290
HR-1 has nothing to do with racial discrimination. Why do you commies always play the race card when anyone has an opinion that doesn't agree with yours? Do you really think minorities are so inept they can't abide by the same rules everyone else does? Personally, I think they can.

The left are told what to think, but not why they should be thinking it.
 

BLUE COLLAR

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2021
Messages
489
Reaction score
131
Points
143
Please read the report folks. I think it contains things that even the most ardent commiecrats would object to.
Well, you are certainly encouraging Dems by calling them a slur.

I read the whole thing. It's a hit piece expressing opinions of what will happen, opinions that offer next to nothing in the form of analysis or evidence.

Not too surprising given that Heritage is one of the outfits that backed the neocons and Trotsky-like never-ending war in the Middle East. And here I thought Trumpers shared my contempt for neocons.


You're welcome to your opinion. Personally I'll take the word of Heritage over the commies propaganda as to the effects of this bill.

.
There are very few "commies" in this country. There are a fair number of socialist, or more correctly, people who partake of social programs like SOCIAL Security, Medicare, unemployment, disability, stimulus checks, public parks and roads. Hell, you could make the case that fire, police and even unconstitutional standing armies are social programs in the sense that they are products of our having bound together in a social effort aimed at a common good.

Degrees and perspective, it's all such a bitch.
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,966
Reaction score
11,804
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
Please read the report folks. I think it contains things that even the most ardent commiecrats would object to.
Well, you are certainly encouraging Dems by calling them a slur.

I read the whole thing. It's a hit piece expressing opinions of what will happen, opinions that offer next to nothing in the form of analysis or evidence.

Not too surprising given that Heritage is one of the outfits that backed the neocons and Trotsky-like never-ending war in the Middle East. And here I thought Trumpers shared my contempt for neocons.


You're welcome to your opinion. Personally I'll take the word of Heritage over the commies propaganda as to the effects of this bill.

.
There are very few "commies" in this country. There are a fair number of socialist, or more correctly, people who partake of social programs like SOCIAL Security, Medicare, unemployment, disability, stimulus checks, public parks and roads. Hell, you could make the case that fire, police and even unconstitutional standing armies are social programs in the sense that they are products of our having bound together in a social effort aimed at a common good.

Degrees and perspective, it's all such a bitch.


The father of our Constitution put the rolls of government very precisely.

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.
-James Madison Federalist 45

.
 

ThoughtCrimes

Old Navy Vet
Joined
Jun 25, 2012
Messages
4,255
Reaction score
947
Points
245
Location
Desert Southwest
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)

  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

.
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)
  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.
Tex, you keep dodging every challenge to cite the actual language of H. R. 1. That is because you are using the fraudulent shields in the form of the Heritage Foundation (HF) "critique" of the proposed legislation rather than the actual verbiage written into H. R. 1 as you've done again to Seawytch, which are two different things; fact and fiction.

Well, let's just compare the language purporting to be truth by the hand of HF and the actual language in H. R. 1.

The Heritage version:
Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

H. R. 1 Section re: “hindering, interfering, or preventing” :

PART 7—PROHIBITING INTERFERENCE WITH VOTER REGISTRATION

"SEC. 1071. PROHIBITING HINDERING, INTERFERING WITH, OR PREVENTING VOTER REGISTRATION.

(a) In General.—Chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
Ҥ 612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote

“(a) Prohibition.—It shall be unlawful for any person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from registering to vote or to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from aiding another person in registering to vote.

“(b) Attempt.—Any person who attempts to commit any offense described in subsection (a) shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense that the person attempted to commit.

“(c) Penalty.—Any person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”.
(b) Clerical Amendment.—The table of sections for chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

“612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote.”.

(c) Effective Date.—The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to elections held on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, except that no person may be found to have violated section 612 of title 18, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), on the basis of any act occurring prior to the date of the enactment of this Act."

~~ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text#toc-H0C72CA940E684A0986583236950CC71E ~~

You went straight for the propaganda, Tex, when an honest person would have, at the very least, skimmed the source material (H. R. 1), the bloody proposed legislation, to gain some insight into its validity and flaws! This thread you started is nothing more than propaganda you helped spread for the Heritage Foundation!
 

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
41,129
Reaction score
6,833
Points
1,860
Location
Peaking out from the redwoods
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)

  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

.
That is their interpretation of the bill. What does the bill say? Do you not think it should be a crime to hinder, interfere or prevent someone from voting?
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,966
Reaction score
11,804
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)

  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

.
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)
  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.
Tex, you keep dodging every challenge to cite the actual language of H. R. 1. That is because you are using the fraudulent shields in the form of the Heritage Foundation (HF) "critique" of the proposed legislation rather than the actual verbiage written into H. R. 1 as you've done again to Seawytch, which are two different things; fact and fiction.

Well, let's just compare the language purporting to be truth by the hand of HF and the actual language in H. R. 1.

The Heritage version:
Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

H. R. 1 Section re: “hindering, interfering, or preventing” :

PART 7—PROHIBITING INTERFERENCE WITH VOTER REGISTRATION

"SEC. 1071. PROHIBITING HINDERING, INTERFERING WITH, OR PREVENTING VOTER REGISTRATION.

(a) In General.—Chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
Ҥ 612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote

“(a) Prohibition.—It shall be unlawful for any person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from registering to vote or to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from aiding another person in registering to vote.

“(b) Attempt.—Any person who attempts to commit any offense described in subsection (a) shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense that the person attempted to commit.

“(c) Penalty.—Any person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”.
(b) Clerical Amendment.—The table of sections for chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

“612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote.”.

(c) Effective Date.—The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to elections held on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, except that no person may be found to have violated section 612 of title 18, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), on the basis of any act occurring prior to the date of the enactment of this Act."

~~ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text#toc-H0C72CA940E684A0986583236950CC71E ~~

You went straight for the propaganda, Tex, when an honest person would have, at the very least, skimmed the source material (H. R. 1), the bloody proposed legislation, to gain some insight into its validity and flaws! This thread you started is nothing more than propaganda you helped spread for the Heritage Foundation!


Your lame opinion is noted. But reading what you posted I'd say Heritage got their assessment right. The language in the bill is too broad.

.
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,966
Reaction score
11,804
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)

  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

.
That is their interpretation of the bill. What does the bill say? Do you not think it should be a crime to hinder, interfere or prevent someone from voting?

See post 375.

.
 

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
41,129
Reaction score
6,833
Points
1,860
Location
Peaking out from the redwoods
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)

  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

.
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)
  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.
Tex, you keep dodging every challenge to cite the actual language of H. R. 1. That is because you are using the fraudulent shields in the form of the Heritage Foundation (HF) "critique" of the proposed legislation rather than the actual verbiage written into H. R. 1 as you've done again to Seawytch, which are two different things; fact and fiction.

Well, let's just compare the language purporting to be truth by the hand of HF and the actual language in H. R. 1.

The Heritage version:
Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

H. R. 1 Section re: “hindering, interfering, or preventing” :

PART 7—PROHIBITING INTERFERENCE WITH VOTER REGISTRATION

"SEC. 1071. PROHIBITING HINDERING, INTERFERING WITH, OR PREVENTING VOTER REGISTRATION.

(a) In General.—Chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
Ҥ 612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote

“(a) Prohibition.—It shall be unlawful for any person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from registering to vote or to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from aiding another person in registering to vote.

“(b) Attempt.—Any person who attempts to commit any offense described in subsection (a) shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense that the person attempted to commit.

“(c) Penalty.—Any person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”.
(b) Clerical Amendment.—The table of sections for chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

“612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote.”.

(c) Effective Date.—The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to elections held on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, except that no person may be found to have violated section 612 of title 18, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), on the basis of any act occurring prior to the date of the enactment of this Act."

~~ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text#toc-H0C72CA940E684A0986583236950CC71E ~~

You went straight for the propaganda, Tex, when an honest person would have, at the very least, skimmed the source material (H. R. 1), the bloody proposed legislation, to gain some insight into its validity and flaws! This thread you started is nothing more than propaganda you helped spread for the Heritage Foundation!


Your lame opinion is noted. But reading what you posted I'd say Heritage got their assessment right. The language in the bill is too broad.

.

Your lack of independent research is noted. Do you have an opinion not fed to you by the Heritage Foundation? Do you think it should be a crime to prevent or attempt to prevent someone from voting, yes or no?
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,966
Reaction score
11,804
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)

  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

.
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff. It’s mostly no brainer changes.


Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.

Please try your question again in English.

Are you really that senile?
Meh...my state already does most of this stuff.
Obviously language isn't the problem. It must be your lack of intellect.

So I'll ask again:
Most, what do they not do? Please be specific.

.
Your sentence still doesn't make sense grammatically

We pretty much already do all of it. Early voting at E-15, done...we start at E-30. Same day registration, done. No excuse Vote by Mail? We do better, universal Vote by Mail.

I haven't gone line by line through the bill yet, but it doesn't seem to have much impact on my state.


So your State has already criminalized challenging a voters eligibility? And your State has limited any challenge to your election laws to a single court in DC?

.

Describe the exact provision in the bill that would criminalize challenging a voter's identity.


Do you not know the difference between a voters eligibility and a "voters identity"? Or were you just trying to deflect from what I said?

From the link in the OP: (color mine)
  • Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.
Tex, you keep dodging every challenge to cite the actual language of H. R. 1. That is because you are using the fraudulent shields in the form of the Heritage Foundation (HF) "critique" of the proposed legislation rather than the actual verbiage written into H. R. 1 as you've done again to Seawytch, which are two different things; fact and fiction.

Well, let's just compare the language purporting to be truth by the hand of HF and the actual language in H. R. 1.

The Heritage version:
Violate the First Amendment with respect to a vast range of legal activity. Voter intimidation or coercion that prevents someone from registering or voting is already a federal crime under the Voting Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. But H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting, which is so vague and so broad that it could prevent providing any information to election officials about the ineligibility of an individual, such as an applicant not being a U.S. citizen.

H. R. 1 Section re: “hindering, interfering, or preventing” :

PART 7—PROHIBITING INTERFERENCE WITH VOTER REGISTRATION

"SEC. 1071. PROHIBITING HINDERING, INTERFERING WITH, OR PREVENTING VOTER REGISTRATION.

(a) In General.—Chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
Ҥ 612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote

“(a) Prohibition.—It shall be unlawful for any person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from registering to vote or to corruptly hinder, interfere with, or prevent another person from aiding another person in registering to vote.

“(b) Attempt.—Any person who attempts to commit any offense described in subsection (a) shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense that the person attempted to commit.

“(c) Penalty.—Any person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.”.
(b) Clerical Amendment.—The table of sections for chapter 29 of title 18, United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

“612. Hindering, interfering with, or preventing registering to vote.”.

(c) Effective Date.—The amendments made by this section shall apply with respect to elections held on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, except that no person may be found to have violated section 612 of title 18, United States Code (as added by subsection (a)), on the basis of any act occurring prior to the date of the enactment of this Act."

~~ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text#toc-H0C72CA940E684A0986583236950CC71E ~~

You went straight for the propaganda, Tex, when an honest person would have, at the very least, skimmed the source material (H. R. 1), the bloody proposed legislation, to gain some insight into its validity and flaws! This thread you started is nothing more than propaganda you helped spread for the Heritage Foundation!


Your lame opinion is noted. But reading what you posted I'd say Heritage got their assessment right. The language in the bill is too broad.

.

Your lack of independent research is noted. Do you have an opinion not fed to you by the Heritage Foundation? Do you think it should be a crime to prevent or attempt to prevent someone from voting, yes or no?


See post 377.

.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$20.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top