|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
THE GREAT FLORIDA EX-CON GAME
by Greg Palast
In November the U.S. media, lost in patriotic reverie, dressed up the Florida recount as a victory for President Bush. But however one reads the ballots, Bush's win would certainly have been jeopardized had not some Floridians been barred from casting ballots at all. Between May 1999 and Election Day 2000, two Florida secretaries of state - Sandra Mortham and Katherine Harris, both protegees of Governor Jeb Bush- ordered 57,700 "ex-felons," who are prohibited from voting by state law, to be removed from voter rolls. (In the thirty-five states where former felons can vote, roughly 90 percent vote Democratic.) A portion of the list, which was compiled for Florida by DBT Online, can be seen for the first time here; DBT, a company now owned by ChoicePoint of Atlanta, was paid $4.3 million for its work, replacing a firm that charged $5,700 per year for the same service. If the hope was that DBT would enable Florida to exclude more voters, then the state appears to have spent its money wisely.
Two of these "scrub lists," as officials called them, were distributed to counties in the months before the election with orders to remove the voters named. Together the lists comprised nearly 1 percent of Florida?s electorate and nearly 3 percent of its African-American voters. Most of the voters (such as "David Butler," (1); a name that appears 77 times in Florida phone books) were selected because their name, gender, birthdate and race matched - or nearly matched - one of the tens of millions of ex-felons in the United States. Neither DBT nor the state conducted any further research to verify the matches. DBT, which frequently is hired by the F.B.I. to conduct manhunts, originally proposed using address histories and financial records to confirm the names, but the state declined the cross-checks. In Harris?s elections office files, next to DBT?s sophisticated verification plan, there is a hand-written note: ?DON?T NEED.?Thomas Alvin Cooper (2), twenty-eight, was flagged because of a crime for which he will be convicted in the year 2007. According to Florida?s elections division, this intrepid time-traveler will cover his tracks by moving to Ohio, adding a middle name, and changing his race. Harper's found 325 names on the list with conviction dates in the future, a fact that did not escape Department of Elections workers, who, in June 2000 emails headed, ?Future Conviction Dates," termed the discovery, "bad news.? Rather than release this whacky data to skeptical counties, Janet Mudrow, state liaison to DBT, suggested that ?blanks would be preferable in these cases." (Harper's counted 4,917 blank conviction dates.) The one county that checked each of the 694 names on its local list could verify only 34 as actual felony convicts. Some counties defied Harris' directives; Madison County's elections supervisor Linda Howell refused the purge list after she found her own name on it.Rev. Willie Dixon (3), seventy, was guilty of a crime in his youth; but one phone call would have told the state that it had already pardoned Dixon and restored his right to vote. On behalf of Dixon and other excluded voters, the NAACP in January 2001 sued Florida and Harris, after finding that African-Americans?who account for 13 percent of Florida's electorate and 46 percent of U.S. felony convictions ?were four times as likely as whites to be incorrectly singled out under the state's methodology. After the election, Harris and her elections chief Clay Roberts, testified under oath that verifying the lists was solely the work of county supervisors. But the Florida-DBT contract (marked "Secret" and ?Confidential?) holds DBT responsible for ?manual verification using telephone calls.? in fact, with the state?s blessing, DBT did not call a single felon. When I asked Roberts about the contract during an interview for BBC television, Roberts ripped off his microphone, ran into his office, locked the door, and called in state troopers to remove us.
Johnny Jackson Jr. (4), thirty-two, has never been to Texas, and his mother swears he never had the middle name ?Fitzgerald.? Neither is there evidence that John Fitzgerald Jackson, felon of Texas, has ever left the Lone Star State. But even if they were the same man, removing him from Florida?s voter rolls is an unconstitutional act.
full article and others at link
You can also read about it in his book, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Trevor wrote: |
A vote of confidence takes a day.
Re-electing the house of representatives in its entirety takes six years.
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
- The United States has no such mechanism. We have a problem. The problem is the government itself. The problem is getting bigger. It is not possible to correct that problem in an orderly manner, such as in a parliamentary government.
|
I would (and have) argued before that a regularly scheduled election of the entire House of Representatives and 1/3 of the Senate is at least as good as a vote of confidence. The parliamentary and presidential systems address the problem in slightly different ways, but both are equally effective.
It is looking increasingly as if you are looking for a justification for treason. Our system has both regular elections and a mechanism for amendments. Together those legal remedies obviate the necessity for revolution--unless you are a traitor. The right of revolution does not include the right to win each election and always having your own way. Petulant children think otherwise. |
|
I'm sure you meant to say 'Senate' rather than the House of Representatives. The House is the lower body that controls the purse strings. The Senate is the one that allows a minority of one to bring the entire body to a halt.
Why the obsession with a vote of confidence? Do you trust the elected officials to act with more wisdom than the electorate as a whole? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Trevor
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 1:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, actually I am not so sure that a vote of confidence is the appropriate methdy. Perhaps there is some other mechanism that would work. Parliaments have votes of confidence. Imperialists chop off the head of the reigning monarch. Theocracies....I don't know what theocracies do, but everyone has a safety valve that takes a lot less than six years to use.
Do I trust the electorate more than others? That's a tough one, and actually that exposes a fundamental weakness in my argument. I think that just about everybody is an idiot in the United States so what's the use?
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Trevor wrote: |
A vote of confidence takes a day.
Re-electing the house of representatives in its entirety takes six years.
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
- The United States has no such mechanism. We have a problem. The problem is the government itself. The problem is getting bigger. It is not possible to correct that problem in an orderly manner, such as in a parliamentary government.
|
I would (and have) argued before that a regularly scheduled election of the entire House of Representatives and 1/3 of the Senate is at least as good as a vote of confidence. The parliamentary and presidential systems address the problem in slightly different ways, but both are equally effective.
It is looking increasingly as if you are looking for a justification for treason. Our system has both regular elections and a mechanism for amendments. Together those legal remedies obviate the necessity for revolution--unless you are a traitor. The right of revolution does not include the right to win each election and always having your own way. Petulant children think otherwise. |
|
I'm sure you meant to say 'Senate' rather than the House of Representatives. The House is the lower body that controls the purse strings. The Senate is the one that allows a minority of one to bring the entire body to a halt.
Why the obsession with a vote of confidence? Do you trust the elected officials to act with more wisdom than the electorate as a whole? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 1:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Imperialists chop off the head of the reigning monarch. ...., but everyone has a safety valve that takes a lot less than six years to use.
|
You seem to have a woefully weak understanding of basic governmental history. You haven't been reading far right-wing crap, have you? Imperialists conquer empires, hence the name. It's small 'r' republicans who whack off the heads of monarchs: see Charles II Stuart, Louis XVI Bourbon and Nicholas II Romanov for references.
What 6 years? It takes one election in the US to change who controls Congress. All you really need is one control of one house to whip the others into line...at least to restrain the majority from wild adventures. And that can happen with elections every 2 years--don't forget that 2 years is the max. Crisesdon't automatically happen right at election time, so the time lag is less than 2 years.
| Quote: |
I think that just about everybody is an idiot in the United States so what's the use?
|
I see you are a self-appointed elitist. Perhaps an aristocracy would suit your taste in government better. May I suggest the 15th Century as an alternative time for you to teletransport yourself to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Trevor
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
You are beginning to be a bit of an asshole, ya-ta. Keep it reasonably cordial or I'll ignore you.
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
Imperialists chop off the head of the reigning monarch. ...., but everyone has a safety valve that takes a lot less than six years to use.
|
You seem to have a woefully weak understanding of basic governmental history. You haven't been reading far right-wing crap, have you? Imperialists conquer empires, hence the name. It's small 'r' republicans who whack off the heads of monarchs: see Charles II Stuart, Louis XVI Bourbon and Nicholas II Romanov for references.
What 6 years? It takes one election in the US to change who controls Congress. All you really need is one control of one house to whip the others into line...at least to restrain the majority from wild adventures. And that can happen with elections every 2 years--don't forget that 2 years is the max. Crisesdon't automatically happen right at election time, so the time lag is less than 2 years.
| Quote: |
I think that just about everybody is an idiot in the United States so what's the use?
|
I see you are a self-appointed elitist. Perhaps an aristocracy would suit your taste in government better. May I suggest the 15th Century as an alternative time for you to teletransport yourself to. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
You are beginning to be a bit of an asshole, ya-ta. Keep it reasonably cordial or I'll ignore you.
|
In other words, I'm right and you have no answer. I thought so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
You are beginning to be a bit of an asshole, ya-ta. Keep it reasonably cordial or I'll ignore you.
|
In other words, I'm right and you have no answer. I thought so. |
Come now, Yat.
He was being extremely generous by saying "beginning to be."
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
You are beginning to be a bit of an asshole, ya-ta. Keep it reasonably cordial or I'll ignore you.
|
In other words, I'm right and you have no answer. I thought so. |
Come now, Yat.
He was being extremely generous by saying "beginning to be."
 |
9-11 conspiracy theorists= neo nazis looking to make a comeback.
I am glad about this thread
Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Fri Sep 11, 2009 6:53 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
You are beginning to be a bit of an asshole, ya-ta. Keep it reasonably cordial or I'll ignore you.
|
In other words, I'm right and you have no answer. I thought so. |
No point in engaging the guy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Captain Corea

Joined: 28 Feb 2005 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Trevor wrote: |
| You are beginning to be a bit of an asshole, ya-ta. Keep it reasonably cordial or I'll ignore you. |
Actually, I thought his comments were right on the mark. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| 9-11 conspiracy theorists want to overthrow the government. |
If there were evidence that your government allowed an attack on its own people, wouldn't you be in favor of overthrowing it? Is it even a legitimate government?
Or would you just continue to be unquestioningly, unthinkingly loyal? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 6:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| 9-11 conspiracy theorists want to overthrow the government. |
If there were evidence that your government allowed an attack on its own people, wouldn't you be in favor of overthrowing it? Is it even a legitimate government?
Or would you just continue to be unquestioningly, unthinkingly loyal? |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BePFbDTqmfg |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 7:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| 9-11 conspiracy theorists want to overthrow the government. |
If there were evidence that your government allowed an attack on its own people, wouldn't you be in favor of overthrowing it? Is it even a legitimate government?
Or would you just continue to be unquestioningly, unthinkingly loyal? |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BePFbDTqmfg |
I'll take that as a "Yes" to the second question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| 9-11 conspiracy theorists want to overthrow the government. |
If there were evidence that your government allowed an attack on its own people, wouldn't you be in favor of overthrowing it? Is it even a legitimate government?
Or would you just continue to be unquestioningly, unthinkingly loyal? |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BePFbDTqmfg |
I'll take that as a "Yes" to the second question. |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn6cDaHLaMo&NR=1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn6cDaHLaMo&NR=1 |
Me too, buddy. Me too.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|