DR,
Good ideas regarding the efforts to be taken getting these citizens you referenced able to comply with new rules regarding voting.
I've always been troubled that, rather than immediately launch this effort when there were rumblings emanating from State houses across the country, all efforts and energy was focused on defeating any new requirements.
The politics of this strategy was obvious. What was also obvious, at least to me, that obtaining these citizens these new required documents, would bring them out of the "marginalized" column, and into the world in which they live. Regardless of who they choose to vote for, just accepting them as a permanently marginalized group, did more harm to them than any vote they'd cast could remedy.
Old Pilot touches on more than he might realize. Because his knowledge of his field is deep, any inaccuracies jump off the page, or out of the TV. Unfortunately, his field is just one of all fields that are misreported daily by every media outlet in every medium. It's epidemic.
It's easier to swallow if one wasn't around when reports were checked and rechecked, and then checked again before being put out for public consumption. Anyone who assumes the older standards still apply, is not just often, but routinely disappointed.
You make an interesting comment Jim. The effort required to cast a vote was rather daunting in the beginning. Those late 18th and 19th century voters might disagree. It's all a matter of perspective.
With the best intentions from most, not all, but most, we as a society have continued to lessen the responsibilities that you and I just thought of as a given when waltzing through the years.
I don't think expecting less and less of people is a formula for an engaged citizenry. I believe the opposite is true.
C'mon Jim. You know referencing "Founders" and "back in the day " don't go hand in hand.
Referencing participation drops from the sixties, seventies, and eighties, goes back far enough.
And try to pretend someone's not in your face with a bullhorn calling you an idiot when commenting on my or other polite readers' input
Dear Carolyn.
I've nothing but respect for the League, and the wonderful work it's done since it's inception. The numbers you site are enlightening, although one could go deeper into the minutiae and find that the percentage of days and votes cast don't go hand in hand, but I'm willing to assume they do, and move on to this question.
Following the linear logic of your argument, and the argument of many others, providing every citizen with the "right" to vote isn't the goal at all. The goal as suggested by you is to make sure everyone votes. It's on this point that I feel many well meaning people have jumped off the rails.
You and I both know that providing no resistance to someone's right to do something is much, much different, than guaranteeing that person does it. Using your stated goals, every effort should be made to provide voting capable La Z Boys to each person who "may" have difficulty getting to the polls on Election Day, or within a couple of weeks from that date.
There is no way on earth when the Founders elevated the franchise, that they were prepared to make allowances for those folks who found it inconvenient to exercise that right.
Whether it's an elderly person, a young person, a minority person, or a low income person, they and you and I have to make every effort to vote. People were busy back in the day as well, they just made more of an effort to get to the polls, because they were more engaged.
Back to numbers. That's where the problem stems from. Every effort and accommodation has been made to make up for the deficit in one major category, a civic duty to engage
Oh, I almost forgot. There's a movement afoot, driven by a couple of very cutting edge irreverent creators of TV and an immensely popular show on Broadway, to stop using the current perjorative used to describe gay men for decades. It starts with an F and ends with a G for those scoring at home.
These cutting edge influential artists want to change the definition to now describing "Annoying Harley Riders, or those who own one."
Personally I wouldn't have gone that far, but it appears to be gaining a foothold. So when you see a young kid calling you the British term for cigarette, don't be confused, they do in fact know exactly what they're saying.
But hey, you can take that kind of name calling, and possibly even embrace it. As independent rebels tend to do.
Must admit I didn't think it would be necessary to explain what is obviously a tongue in cheek critique of many, many Harley's riding down Broad street at less than 20 mph, yet still forcing anyone enjoying an outside table, or a call from a friend, or a stroll with the kids, and any conversations therein, to completely stop while these beautiful bikes go by.
Love the sound. Attended bike week in Daytona many times, but I could blow my horn while in traffic to let all know that I'm deluded in thinking motorcycles can be as safe and noticeable as cars, and still realize that I'm not in danger passing slowly by Betsy's Crepes.
This is not I95, or even 15-501. This is a quiet village that asks its fellow citizens to have a minimal amount of respect for their neighbors. Waking up, or disturbing hundreds or thousands of these neighbors due to ridiculously high decibel emitting bikes, and I used a meter in my work for years, is not freedom. It's just being inconsiderate, and a few other things which would't be appropriate in a family paper.
Next time a few leathermen stop at a local eatery, make sure to get a large table, and every three to five minutes start yelling "vroom. vroom. vroom" as loud as you can. You'll get to see the same rolling of the eyes and dirty looks you miss while living the Easy Rider fantasy.
Probably true JR. Who knew that by freedom, the Founders were referencing obnoxious, attention starved dentists in leather vests, and their right to force any outdoor conversations, quiet moment, or marriage ceremony to stop while these Easy Riding oral surgeons passed on by.
A tragic occurrence to be sure. Praying for those killed, injured, and their families isn't just the least we can do, it's all we can do.
Referring to the 2nd amendment as outdated displays a less than perfect understanding
of the Founders' intentions.
That document may not be sacrosanct, but it certainly isn't ambiguous either.
Mechanisms for change are clearly outlined, and represent the only and most logical
steps needed to change the will of the majority, thus changing our nations positions.
Using a police state like China as a shining example of rational gun policy should immediately disqualify that person from expressing any more thoughts on this matter. A thorough
expression of that level of ignorance would take up a great deal of time, and probably to no avail.
The NRA is powerful, but also remember the mental health lobby fought vehemently
against severe limitations focused on those they represent.
As for supper, the media doesn't focus on inner city violence, because inner city news outlets do that. If the networks made that violence a coverage priority, there wouldn't be time for much else.
TSG 1 week, 4 days ago
Voting Bills Would Limit Access
DR, Good ideas regarding the efforts to be taken getting these citizens you referenced able to comply with new rules regarding voting. I've always been troubled that, rather than immediately launch this effort when there were rumblings emanating from State houses across the country, all efforts and energy was focused on defeating any new requirements. The politics of this strategy was obvious. What was also obvious, at least to me, that obtaining these citizens these new required documents, would bring them out of the "marginalized" column, and into the world in which they live. Regardless of who they choose to vote for, just accepting them as a permanently marginalized group, did more harm to them than any vote they'd cast could remedy.
TSG 1 week, 4 days ago
Wrong Cars
Old Pilot touches on more than he might realize. Because his knowledge of his field is deep, any inaccuracies jump off the page, or out of the TV. Unfortunately, his field is just one of all fields that are misreported daily by every media outlet in every medium. It's epidemic. It's easier to swallow if one wasn't around when reports were checked and rechecked, and then checked again before being put out for public consumption. Anyone who assumes the older standards still apply, is not just often, but routinely disappointed.
TSG 1 week, 4 days ago
Voting Bills Would Limit Access
You make an interesting comment Jim. The effort required to cast a vote was rather daunting in the beginning. Those late 18th and 19th century voters might disagree. It's all a matter of perspective. With the best intentions from most, not all, but most, we as a society have continued to lessen the responsibilities that you and I just thought of as a given when waltzing through the years. I don't think expecting less and less of people is a formula for an engaged citizenry. I believe the opposite is true.
TSG 1 week, 4 days ago
Voting Bills Would Limit Access
C'mon Jim. You know referencing "Founders" and "back in the day " don't go hand in hand. Referencing participation drops from the sixties, seventies, and eighties, goes back far enough. And try to pretend someone's not in your face with a bullhorn calling you an idiot when commenting on my or other polite readers' input
TSG 1 week, 4 days ago
Voting Bills Would Limit Access
Dear Carolyn. I've nothing but respect for the League, and the wonderful work it's done since it's inception. The numbers you site are enlightening, although one could go deeper into the minutiae and find that the percentage of days and votes cast don't go hand in hand, but I'm willing to assume they do, and move on to this question. Following the linear logic of your argument, and the argument of many others, providing every citizen with the "right" to vote isn't the goal at all. The goal as suggested by you is to make sure everyone votes. It's on this point that I feel many well meaning people have jumped off the rails. You and I both know that providing no resistance to someone's right to do something is much, much different, than guaranteeing that person does it. Using your stated goals, every effort should be made to provide voting capable La Z Boys to each person who "may" have difficulty getting to the polls on Election Day, or within a couple of weeks from that date. There is no way on earth when the Founders elevated the franchise, that they were prepared to make allowances for those folks who found it inconvenient to exercise that right. Whether it's an elderly person, a young person, a minority person, or a low income person, they and you and I have to make every effort to vote. People were busy back in the day as well, they just made more of an effort to get to the polls, because they were more engaged. Back to numbers. That's where the problem stems from. Every effort and accommodation has been made to make up for the deficit in one major category, a civic duty to engage
TSG 1 week, 6 days ago
Nice Day, Bad Noise
http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s13e12-the-f-word
Warning. Language is earthy
TSG 1 week, 6 days ago
Nice Day, Bad Noise
Oh, I almost forgot. There's a movement afoot, driven by a couple of very cutting edge irreverent creators of TV and an immensely popular show on Broadway, to stop using the current perjorative used to describe gay men for decades. It starts with an F and ends with a G for those scoring at home. These cutting edge influential artists want to change the definition to now describing "Annoying Harley Riders, or those who own one." Personally I wouldn't have gone that far, but it appears to be gaining a foothold. So when you see a young kid calling you the British term for cigarette, don't be confused, they do in fact know exactly what they're saying. But hey, you can take that kind of name calling, and possibly even embrace it. As independent rebels tend to do.
TSG 1 week, 6 days ago
Nice Day, Bad Noise
Must admit I didn't think it would be necessary to explain what is obviously a tongue in cheek critique of many, many Harley's riding down Broad street at less than 20 mph, yet still forcing anyone enjoying an outside table, or a call from a friend, or a stroll with the kids, and any conversations therein, to completely stop while these beautiful bikes go by. Love the sound. Attended bike week in Daytona many times, but I could blow my horn while in traffic to let all know that I'm deluded in thinking motorcycles can be as safe and noticeable as cars, and still realize that I'm not in danger passing slowly by Betsy's Crepes. This is not I95, or even 15-501. This is a quiet village that asks its fellow citizens to have a minimal amount of respect for their neighbors. Waking up, or disturbing hundreds or thousands of these neighbors due to ridiculously high decibel emitting bikes, and I used a meter in my work for years, is not freedom. It's just being inconsiderate, and a few other things which would't be appropriate in a family paper. Next time a few leathermen stop at a local eatery, make sure to get a large table, and every three to five minutes start yelling "vroom. vroom. vroom" as loud as you can. You'll get to see the same rolling of the eyes and dirty looks you miss while living the Easy Rider fantasy.
TSG 2 weeks, 1 day ago
Nice Day, Bad Noise
Probably true JR. Who knew that by freedom, the Founders were referencing obnoxious, attention starved dentists in leather vests, and their right to force any outdoor conversations, quiet moment, or marriage ceremony to stop while these Easy Riding oral surgeons passed on by.
TSG 5 months ago
Residents Gather for Candlelight Vigil to Remember Connecticut Shooting Victims
A tragic occurrence to be sure. Praying for those killed, injured, and their families isn't just the least we can do, it's all we can do. Referring to the 2nd amendment as outdated displays a less than perfect understanding of the Founders' intentions. That document may not be sacrosanct, but it certainly isn't ambiguous either. Mechanisms for change are clearly outlined, and represent the only and most logical steps needed to change the will of the majority, thus changing our nations positions. Using a police state like China as a shining example of rational gun policy should immediately disqualify that person from expressing any more thoughts on this matter. A thorough expression of that level of ignorance would take up a great deal of time, and probably to no avail. The NRA is powerful, but also remember the mental health lobby fought vehemently against severe limitations focused on those they represent. As for supper, the media doesn't focus on inner city violence, because inner city news outlets do that. If the networks made that violence a coverage priority, there wouldn't be time for much else.