Posted on 04/22/2014 9:25:59 AM PDT by BarnacleCenturion
Over at NPR, Liz Holloran's latest piece on Sen. Rand Paul's efforts to loosen the Democratic Party's lock on black votes included some positive feedback from a prominent African-American leader:
"He's a different voice in the arena that we don't traditionally hear," says Lorraine Miller, acting head of the NAACP, who expects to invite Paul to speak at the organization's July national conference in Las Vegas.
"He's an engaging guy — that's why we want to talk to him," Miller says. Miller is not the only black leader who has been intrigued by Paul, whose father, former Texas Rep. Ron Paul, had three unsuccessful presidential runs and amassed a fervent Libertarian following.
Miller's predecessor, Benjamin Jealous, has previously hailed Paul's position on reforming drug and sentencing laws, which disproportionately affect African-American individuals and families
(Excerpt) Read more at theweek.com ...
Perhaps you missed the point, which was that allowing convicted felons to vote does not create millions of Democratic voters.Actually, I didn't make that narrow point. Guess you missed that in your general confusion here.Further to respond to another point you made in this thread...
justice isn't just about punishment. Justice is much more complex, involving ideas of restitution, fairness, etc.
Your confused ideas of restitution are called lawsuits. We are talking here about convicted felons who served jail time. A felon will go to jail independent of a civil lawsuit. A civil lawsuit has absolutely no bearing on the amount of time a felon will serve.
Nor does your silly liberal idea of "fairness".
involving ideas of restitution, fairness, etc.
Perhaps you missed the point, which was that allowing convicted felons to vote does not create millions of Democratic voters.Actually, the point you made to me was very specific. You plainly stated that because most States have a law on the books, that made everything proper and correct....
Your argument might have some merit if most states didn't already allow convicted felons the right to vote (Source).MY reply about Abortion devastated your silly notion. Which is way you desperately seek to now change the discussion. You need to learn to swallow a healthy dose of humility and admit when you are wrong, instead of wasting more of my time. Thanks!
And restitution is part of punishment. Still no clue what your idea of “fairness, etc” is though... LoL!
Let me know if it ever kicks you in the behind and hands you a clue.
I like to just place this link here. Like a pamphlet under the pillow...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3141542/posts
You're sooooo right Barnacle... and I have the solution. We 'find' voters the same way dems find voters... And trust me they're not raiding our base to fine new voters...
Here's the plan:
We go to some poor Asian country and offer free citizenship to say ... 30 million Vietnamese or North Koreans - maybe Chinese... whatever ON THE CONDITION they vote Republican. To sweeten the pot we offer food stamps, welfare, medicare for their parents and a free education for their kids....
In addition we'll try to find some airhead democrat to talk about how coming here is an 'act of love' or some such bullsh*t. Do you know of any democrats as stupid as our own Jeb Bush?
Is that a cool solution or what?
We do what dems do... Or course I'm not sure if the New YUCK Times will pretend to be as gullible about our 'dreamers' as they are about democrat's 'dreamers'... but who knows. If they call us on it they'll be showing they knew what was going on with democrats all along... and I don't think they want to admit that... do you?
Same for the Washington Post... and LA Times...
You introduction of abortion was nothing more than attempt to change the subject. It didn’t work.
I already sorted your idiocy - you mistakenly attributed what someone else had posted, to me.
Can’t remember someone ever doing that before - congratulations for being a first.
Medieval Sourcebook:
The Anglo-Saxon Dooms, 560-975
560-975??
Waste someone else time.
Whatever you have to tell yourself.
...you mistakenly attributed what someone else had posted, to me.
What do you think was mis-attributed? The response in post 22? Pretty obvious I was quoting ansel12 and including you on the post.
Yes, history has nothing to do with the conception and reality of justice /sarcasm. Suggesting you actually spend some time engaged in that study is obviously a waste of time.
Further to respond to another point you made in this thread,It's obvious you quoted another and then attributed his position to me.
Sir Francis Drake, vice admiral (c. 1540 – 27 January 1596) was an English sea captain, privateer, navigator, slaver, and politician of the Elizabethan era. Drake carried out the second circumnavigation of the world, from 1577 to 1580.
Elizabeth I of England awarded Drake a knighthood in 1581. He was second-in-command of the English fleet against the Spanish Armada in 1588. He died of dysentery in January 1596[3] after unsuccessfully attacking San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.