THEY Can'ts HANDLE the Truth!
Find a Conversation
| Thu, 07-15-2004 - 9:30pm |
By ALAN FRAM, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Think the passions from the 2000 presidential election have cooled? Certainly not in the House, which voted Thursday to strike a Florida representative's words from the record after she said Republicans "stole" that closely fought contest.
The verbal battle broke out after Rep. Steve Buyer, R-Ind., proposed a measure barring any federal official from requesting that the United Nations (news - web sites) formally observe the U.S. elections on Nov. 2.
Rep. Corrine Brown, D-Fla., and several other House Democrats have made that suggestion. They argue that some black voters were disenfranchised in 2000 and problems could occur again this fall.
"We welcome America to observe the integrity of our electoral process and we do not ask, though, for the United Nations to come as monitors at our polling stations," Buyer said.
"I come from Florida, where you and others participated in what I call the United States coup d'etat. We need to make sure it doesn't happen again," Brown said. "Over and over again after the election when you stole the election, you came back here and said, 'Get over it.' No, we're not going to get over it. And we want verification from the world."
At that point, Buyer demanded that Brown's words be "taken down," or removed the debate's permanent record.
The House's presiding officer, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, ruled that Brown's words violated a House rule.
"Members should not accuse other members of committing a crime such as, quote, stealing, end quote, an election," Thornberry said.
When Brown objected to his ruling, the House voted 219-187 to strike her words.

Pages
Drinking while driving = pulling license
Sex offender = disallowing them around children and informing the community they live of their crime
a felony violent crime = unable to carry hand guns
felonies (a displayed lack of respect or ability to follow the law) = loss of voting priviledges (disallowing to take part in creating laws or electing those that write them)
Do you really think some drug-addicted repeat felon cares if he can vote again? If someone wants to vote again, it's probably a sign that he/she is now a working, tax-paying citizen, and wants to do his 'duty' by voting.
Again, my opinion...
"If someone wants to vote again, it's probably a sign that he/she is now a working, tax-paying citizen, and wants to do his 'duty' by voting."
I’m not an expert on how each state handles voting law, but my understanding is that even if someone loses their voting rights for “life” they can still petition their state after a period of time to have voting rights reinstated. I tend to believe that if the state believes the x-felon has “cleaned up their act” they will reinstate them on the voting roles. Just my understanding.
Pages