What Does Richardson Not Understand About Strictly Interpreting the Constitution?

Speaker Glenn Richardson apparently believes that strictly interpreting the Constitution only means agreeing with what Republicans in the General Assembly believe. 

Section 1, Paragraph 2 of Article II of the Georgia Constitution provides the following requirements for voting in Georgia: 

Every person who is a citizen of the United States and a resident of Georgia as defined by law, who is at least 18 years of age and not disenfranchised by this article, and who meets minimum residency requirements as provided by law shall be entitled to vote at any election by the people.

Notice that the Georgia Constitution makes no mention of any requirement of providing a valid photo ID in order to vote.  The only reasons for disenfranchisement under Paragraph 3I of Article 2 is conviction of a “felony involving moral turpitude” or if a person has been “judicially determined to be mentally incompetent.”

So, therefore, Judge Bedford’s strict interpretation of the Georgia Constitution is that in order for the legislature to require a photo ID in order to vote in Georgia, you will need to amend the Constitution.  Remember, according to conservatives, a judge should not decide a law is valid or invalid because of any personal belief or ideoglogy.  So even if Judge Bedford believed that requiring a photo ID is a good idea, he is not allowed to interject his own personal beliefs into his judicial opinion. 

But that is not what Republican Speaker Glenn Richardson wanted Judge Bedford to do.  You see, in Glenn Richardson’s world, it does not matter what the Constitution requires, if his General Assembly passed a law, then it should be valild.  And if a Judge strikes a law down, then obviously he is an “activist judge.” 

Well, Speaker Richardson, you are neither wise nor conservative. 

75 comments

  1. jsm says:

    Where does the State Constitution state that you have to have a photoID to buy beer or cigarettes? This is an issue of enforcing the law, and the Constitution can’t delineate all enforcement methods. There should be a reasonable way to verify the qualifications of voters, and I support the voter ID bill.

    The judge is wrong, and his ruling should be reversed.

  2. Loren says:

    Notice that the Georgia Constitution makes no mention of any requirement of providing a valid photo ID in order to vote…So, therefore, Judge Bedford’s strict interpretation of the Georgia Constitution is that in order for the legislature to require a photo ID in order to vote in Georgia, you will need to amend the Constitution.

    Interestingly, I don’t see any mention in Section IIof any requirement of providing ANY identification in order to vote.

    So if it’s an unconstitutional restriction on suffrage to require a photo ID, why is it constitutional for our existing law to require a non-photo ID in order to vote?

    BTW, where can I find a copy of Judge Bedford’s decision?

  3. Decaturguy says:

    JSM, I don’t think you understand Contitutional law. There is no Constitutional right to buy beer or cigarettes. If they state wanted to ban it, then it could. Therefore, the state can restrict access to purchasing these items.

    The Georgia Constitution, for which the Georgia General Assembly cannot pass a law that violates it, sets out specifically what the requirements are for voting and it is that one is (a) a citizen of the United States, (b) at least 18 years old, (c) have the minimum residency requirements and (d) have registered to vote. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Interestingly, the Judge pointed out that the photo ID requirement is particularly curious since “for purposes of registering to vote, a photo ID is not required. The only information at the registrar’s office subject to verification is residency, date of birth and a signature. There is no photo on file for comparison purposes.”

    Importantly, Judge Bedford did not say that a photo ID is prohibited from being used for verification of the voter, only that it could not be the only means of verification of the voter, specifically, the form of photo ID required by the Legislature.

  4. Mike Hauncho says:

    How do you think we should verify that those who show up at the polls are wo they say they are? Do we just take their word for it? NO!!! The Voter ID Bill does not keep people from voting. Everyone who is registered to vote can still vote, they just need to verify who they are. Plain and simple. If people don’t want to go and get their free id cards then that is not my problem nor is is the state’s. If you value your right to vote and if it means that much to you then you could use the time that you normally spend complaining about the law and use that time to go out and get one.

  5. Jace Walden says:

    Decaturguy,

    I think it’s your own view of Constitutional Law that is incorrect.

    specifically what the requirements are for voting and it is that one is (a) a citizen of the United States, (b) at least 18 years old, (c) have the minimum residency requirements and (d) have registered to vote. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Fair enough. Then you have to admit that the State Constitution does not require ANY I.D. to be presented, photo or non-photo.

    So, if you support the Judge’s decision here, based on strict Constiutional interpretation, then you would also agree (based on strict Constitutional interpretation) that NO I.D. should be required. That the only “proof” you have to have is your word.

    Since this is the case, then why aren’t Democrats challenging the current laws on the books that require some type of I.D., photo or non-photo?

    It is a Judge’s job to interpret the Constitution as strictly as possible. And I can’t stand it anymore than you when dumb ass legislators start screaming “Judical Activism” for every damn thing. But, basically saying that no I.D. should be required since it isn’t explicitly stated in the constitution is a little far-fetched. Don’t ya think?

  6. LINDA says:

    There is only one reason that the Democrats are against voter identification that includes a photo, and that reason is that they know that fraud is taking place! If the Democrats had real issues to run on, they would not need to cheat! I do not know anyone that would not apply for a photo identification if it meant they were going to get something free, and if you say you do Decaturguy, then I say you are a liar.

  7. Rick Day says:

    The poster has, in a nutshell, addressed the very basic problem with the GA legislature today.

    In Texas, we called it Flim-Flam. An elected official swears to uphold the Constitution, not his power base.

    Voting is an enumerated right, specifically spelled out on procedure. Blaming the judge for your unconstitutional statute is flip-flopping on your sworn duty, Mr. Richardson.

    You can not have your cake, and eat it too!

  8. atlantaman says:

    How are you supposed to prove the person is at least 18 years of age and meets the minimum residency requirements without a photo ID?

  9. atlantaman says:

    To me we are not currently upholding the GA State Constitution, because the state is not fulfilling it’s obligation to ensure the person voting is actutally a resident of the state and 18 years old. Under the current system, it would be very easy for a non-resident to impersonate a resident and vote in our election.

  10. Decaturguy says:

    The Constitution also sets our specific qualifications for being elected in the General Assembly: (1) you must be 25 years old to be in the Senate; 21 to be in the House, (2) be a citizen of Georgia for 2 years, (3) live in the district for one year. Very specific. There are no other requirements. What if the legislature added the requirement that a legislator had to have a state issued photo ID and you could not serve in the legislature unless you had one? That would clearly be an additional qualification that was not authorized by the Constitution and would be invalid.

    Jace and Linda – If it is so important to have a photo ID in order to vote, in order to prevent fraud, then why is photo ID not required to register to vote? Why is photo ID not required for absentee ballots? If someone really wanted to perpetrate a fraud out there, all they need to do is go to their county office, show one of the forms of ID that would not be allowed at the voting place, and get a photo ID issued. Why is a photo ID required to vote, but not to get a photo ID in the first place?

    Judge Bedford is not saying that it is against the Constitution to verify the identity of a voter at the polls. He is saying that arbitrarily declaring only one form of ID, issued by the state, as the only method to verify a voter’s identity, is actually an additional qualification for voting, not authorized by the Constitution. It is actually quite simple. If the legislature believes that photo ID is so essential, then pass a Constitutional Amendment.

  11. Decaturguy says:

    How are you supposed to prove the person is at least 18 years of age and meets the minimum residency requirements without a photo ID?

    How do they do that when one registers to vote and is not required to show a photo ID?

  12. LINDA says:

    When one register to vote, they are giving an address to receive their voter registration in the mail! By allowing for people to vote without photo identification on election day, people can vote in the place of people that do not care to vote in the first place.

    When I ran for office, I talked to so many people that were so disgusted with the politics that they do not bother voting. I could have gone around to these people’s home, if i were dishonest, and stolen utility bills and then had people go to the polls and vote using names that I knew would never vote.

    What part of that is so hard for you liberals to grasp? If people were honest, which we know that most Democrats are not and a handful of Republicans fit this category, then we would truly live in Utopia. Cheating is taking place, and we do need to stop it!

  13. LINDA says:

    Now, I get the big picture. Jace is reading some good books now! Glad to see that you are getting with the program, and maybe you will get on the same page with those of us in the know! The time clock is ticking, and we have got to get people educated!

  14. Loren says:

    He is saying that arbitrarily declaring only one form of ID, issued by the state, as the only method to verify a voter’s identity, is actually an additional qualification for voting, not authorized by the Constitution.

    The law doesn’t declare that only one form of ID is acceptable; it provides for the use of any of 6 types of identification.

    Our existing law “arbitrarily” restricts the forms of allowable ID to 17. I can’t use my credit card, or Sam’s Club card, or frequent movie-watcher card as ID.

    So why is the requirement of one of 6 forms of identification an unconstitutional additional restriction on voting, but the requirement of one of 17 forms of identification perfectly constitutional?

  15. Mad Dog says:

    Jace,

    “A step in the right direction?” Come on, man. You went to college. Don’t use a throw away line like that. Let me do it.

    Did you ever think that when you’re lost in a huge flappin desert with no water, no food, no compass, a step in any direction is right? Can’t we identify what problem exists before walking about?

    http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/stories/2006/09/21/0921edvote.html

    An op/ed. But, can anyone dispute this comment?

    “Certainly, Georgia Republicans have yet to offer any reason why voter ID merits such urgency and ferocity. At trial, the best evidence was the testimony of a local Fulton election board member who, in a 26-year career, could recall only a single instance of fraud. That was someone who tried to vote twice, and the effort failed.”

    I hate to say it when I’ve used you as the lead in… but…

    The Republican Party has nothing on this topic, just the blue sky argument.

    “The sky is blue!” “The sky is blue!” “The sky is blue!” “The sky is blue!”
    “Everybody knows the sky is blue!”

    Somedays, during daylight hours, the sky is blue. Every morning and every evening the sky can be filled with colors. During some rain storms, every color of the rainbow can be seen in the sky. At 3 am, in the darkness of our souls as the poets say, the sky has no color other than black and white.

    Reagan’s legacy … its morning in America! Same flickin’ thing.

    It’s not about the color of the sky in the middle of the day on a pretty day, nor the position of the sun relative to the horizon. It’s what you do whether the sun shines or not.

    Show me this huge problem that fills blogs with partisan rhetoric, clogs conservative cognitations, and panics the beautiful Linda into vapors.

    Everyone knows the sky is blue. Everyone knows Democrats cheat. Everyone knows liberals are destroying the moral fiber of Tom DeLay, Duke Cunningham, Ralph Reed, Abramoff, Bob Ney, and Sonny Perdue, Georgia’s only Governor to have an ethics violation, connviction, and fine.

  16. LINDA says:

    “I did not have sex with that woman.” Clinton

    “I voted for the war before I voted against the war.” Kerry

    What President served two terms, had no home when leaving Arkansas and now owns a big mansion in New York and his wife has her own price place, too?

    What Senatorial canddiate running for office in New York used our tax dollars to campaign and I believe the full benefits of Air Force One?

    Enough for you Maddog?

  17. Bill Simon says:

    If any of you ever look at a form for registering to vote, all you do is register and put your birth date….AND, you swear that you have never been convicted of a crime of moral turpitude. I’ve yet to see thta enumerated in the Constitution as a valid reason why we can refuse someone the right to vote.

    SO, where are the Dems and Common Cause’s fight to overturn that obstacle to voting? If people who have been convicted of a crime of moral turpitude ARE a resident of Georgia and ARE over 18, then it seems to me that law preventing their eligibility to vote is against the Georgia Constitution as well.

  18. jsm says:

    Funny I still haven’t heard any opponents of the measure offering suggestions for how to constitutionally verify one’s qualifications to vote.

    Whether voting is a right is not the issue. The issue is how we ensure that only legally qualified people vote (a.k.a. how to enforce the law). I’m sure the “sky is blue” Republicans would be eager to hear other viable suggestions.

    The proof is in the pudding. Democrats have no interest in ensuring legitimate elections.

  19. LINDA says:

    Well, Gator, I sure did see that speech! And I would wager money that either Al Gore or the nit wit, Howard Dean wrote the speech for him!

  20. Decaturguy says:

    If any of you ever look at a form for registering to vote, all you do is register and put your birth date….AND, you swear that you have never been convicted of a crime of moral turpitude. I’ve yet to see thta enumerated in the Constitution as a valid reason why we can refuse someone the right to vote.

    SO, where are the Dems and Common Cause’s fight to overturn that obstacle to voting? If people who have been convicted of a crime of moral turpitude ARE a resident of Georgia and ARE over 18, then it seems to me that law preventing their eligibility to vote is against the Georgia Constitution as well.

    Bill, you need to actually read the Georgia Constitution. Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution states that a reason for disenfranchisement is a conviction of a “felony involving moral turpitude.

  21. LINDA says:

    And I will add, I think that President George W. Bush is the most honorable and hardest working president that has served in my life time. Under the circumstances, and the cards that President Bush was dealt, there is no other person that I would rather have seving as Commander in Chief. My Marine son, and his friends have the highest regard and respect for President Bush. And trust me, the respect was not there for President Clinton.

    But to all of you liberals, in time you will have the crap hole that you dream of at night: lawlessness in every city, drug abuse in schools more so than today, criminals running every city, no one with enough brains to invent one thing, mortgage defaults through the roof, soup lines in every town if there are any conservative Christians left to run them, and you can say wow where in the devil did we go wrong. Voting is a priviledge not a right! Wake up before your own selfish thirst for power destroys the United States!

  22. LINDA says:

    And I will add, I think that President George W. Bush is the most honorable and hardest working president that has served in my life time. Under the circumstances, and the cards that President Bush was dealt, there is no other person that I would rather have seving as Commander in Chief. My Marine son, and his friends have the highest regard and respect for President Bush. And trust me, the respect was not there for President Clinton.

    But to all of you liberals, in time you will have the crap hole that you dream of at night: lawlessness in every city, drug abuse in schools more so than today, criminals running every city, no one with enough brains to invent one thing, mortgage defaults through the roof, soup lines in every town if there are any conservative Christians left to run them, and you can say wow where in the devil did we go wrong. Voting is a priviledge not a right! Wake up before your own selfish thirst for power destroys the United States!

  23. Decaturguy says:

    Linda, you are an idiot. And you are no conservative either. You want to interpret the Georgia Constitution in order to pass an agenda that you see fit, despite the plain language of the Constitution. That is the very definition of being a liberal.

  24. Mad Dog says:

    Linda,

    I love you, babe.

    Was there a point to your “I hate Clinton post?” Just couldn’t find any Democrats convicted of a felony this year? Last year? So bitching about the Clintons will have to do.

    Was Kerry lying about his record? And, did you even get the quote right?

  25. Mad Dog says:

    Decatur Guy,

    The very definition of being a liberal. …

    Well, we agree on the definition of idiot.

    Plain language of the Constitution? Nothing plain or common about it.

    It would be nice if it were modern language or clear language. At least it’s not bureaucratese.

    Just have to remember that queer meant conterfeit money in those times. Might help you deal with my definition of clear language.

  26. atlantaman says:

    “So why is the requirement of one of 6 forms of identification an unconstitutional additional restriction on voting, but the requirement of one of 17 forms of identification perfectly constitutional?”

    A very good point that I had not thought of.

  27. Jason Pye says:

    I have to agree with Decutarguy on constitutionality of this.
    However, I do support reasoning behind the law, but they need to make it a Constitutional amendment.

  28. atlantaman says:

    “What if the legislature added the requirement that a legislator had to have a state issued photo ID and you could not serve in the legislature unless you had one? That would clearly be an additional qualification that was not authorized by the Constitution and would be invalid.”

    I thought the Legislators were given a state issued card to vote. To my knowledge they are not allowed to vote under the Gold Dome using their electric bill.

  29. Jace Walden says:

    Mad Dog,

    We can identify a problem. The problem is elections in general. Diebold machines with no paper trail, stuffed ballot boxes, and voter fraud are all part of the problem. Now, there may not be that many examples of all of these problems happening with enough frequency to swing an election, but they are still problems. They need to be addressed. Like I said, voter I.D. is a step in the right direction. It doesn’t completely fix the problem, but it’s a step.

    Decaturguy,

    You still haven’t addressed the strict constructionalist consitutional issue here. Neither the State nor the U.S. Constitutions allow for ANY I.D. to be required to vote, be it photo I.D. or non-photo I.D.

    Therefore, if you are truly a strict interpreter of the Constitution as you claim to be in this thread, then you are against the requirement of any I.D.

    Since this is the case, why haven’t you or the Democratic Party sued the state for the laws already on the books?

  30. Decaturguy says:

    It is not unconstitutional, Jace, for the state to be able to verify the identity of the voter. That is not the point. The point is that by mandating that only one type of ID (a state issued photo ID) as the only means by which a poll worker can verify the identity of a voter, it is tantamount to addition an additional qualification in order to vote – that is, you must possess a valid, state issued photo ID.

    This is true, even if the poll worker knows the elderly lady next door to her, and has known her for years, and can verify who she is, she still cannot be allowed to vote, unless she presents a state issued ID. That is why it is an unconstitional qualification.

  31. Big Mack says:

    The only reason that anybody would object to a photo id is because their ultimate intention is to vote and vote and vote and vote and vote a la Dodge county.

  32. atlantaman says:

    “The only reason that anybody would object to a photo id is because their ultimate intention is to vote and vote”

    Just like the folks who get really insulted by being carded at a bar or package store are always under 21.

  33. benevolus says:

    So Linda says she could:
    1. Get people to commit a felony.
    2. Find victims with active registrations who are definitely not going to vote.
    3. Steal their ID.
    4. Hope that their accomplices will actually vote their way, or even at all.
    5. Arrange the transportation and logistics.
    6. Handle the payoff.

    Linda, sweetie, the photo ID “law” has nothing to do with voting integrity. It has everything to do with the fact that too many elderly, urban, black folks were voting “D”. Wake up.

  34. jsm says:

    benevolus,

    You have absolutely no proof for your last statement. In fact, it’s pretty stupid. You might have a point if the “D’s” demonstrated even the least bit of concern about fair elections.

  35. Bill Simon says:

    But, Linda…it’s not “voter fraud”, which is the subject of this thread….

    DecaturGuy: Thanks for the extraction from the Georgia Constitution on moral turpitude.

  36. gatormathis says:

    The voter ID Law is to deal with one thing. Walking around money that pays people to vote for a particular person. It is sacked up, hauled around and spread out to folks who know who will take it. Not as prevalent as in the old days when 5 or 10 dollars was good money, but still enough to be a factor.

    Anyone who would pay someone to vote, will sure as heck pay them to vote more than once. The law should at least limit the bought vote to one.

    Remember one thing, Sonny and a lot of his friends are old time Democrats. The urgency in their getting this law on the books is because they know both who and what they are up against.

    And as Dirty Harry always said, “A man has got to know his limitations.”

    nite ya’ll
    gator
    p.56
    Time Magazine
    May 25, 1998
    Frank Sinatra done died issue.

  37. LINDA says:

    Well Bill,

    It is still an interesting link. I think both parties have enough corruption to spare, but this voter identification is simply common sense in these fraudulent times. A guy called into a local talk show this morning and said that we should use blue ink to dip fingers in like Iraq did. That way if you already had ink on your finger, no more voting.

  38. Decaturguy says:

    So, Gator, you agree that the legislation is targeted at the assummed practice that blacks will not vote unless they get paid, ala Sue Burmeister? But there is no racial intent to the legislation?

  39. jsm says:

    You know how to twist things, don’t you, Decatur? What good is any vote that is bought?

    Race has nothing to do with Gator’s statement. In fact, he didn’t even mention race. You can return your race card to your wallet now.

  40. ColinATL says:

    How do we verify the identity of ABSENTEE voters? Hmmm? We don’t. Seems like a much bigger source of fraud than folks showing up at polling locations.

  41. LINDA says:

    I have thought of a simple solution: An adjustment to the lottery rules could be added that requires a photo identification to purchase a lottery ticket, and photo booths could be set up in convenience stores (like the ones at malls). Then 99.99999% of voters most likely to vote without a photo identification could use their lottery photo ID when voting. Offer a special, if you purchase ten cash threes, you get a free photo id.

  42. LINDA says:

    I would assume that you have to be eighteen to purchase a lottery ticket, probably not adhered to. But that is surely constitutional to request proof of age on a photo id to purchase a lottery ticket. That should not have to pass constitutional hurdles at all!

  43. LINDA says:

    One more comment: But we know that the legislature would cringe at my ideas because we all know that illegal immigrants purchase lottery tickets. ROFL

  44. benevolus says:

    It’s not common sense, it’s absurd.
    The proposal is to improve voting integrity by adding a subjective judgement component?
    Instead of paying a whole bunch of people add votes to your column, you would only have to pay one to deny votes to the other column. Wholesale vs. retail.

    It’s just farcical on it’s face. No one, even in court, has been able to show any evidence that it is happening. It’s just bizarre to me that people think someone is going to go around and identify non-voting voters, steal their mail or trash to get utility bills, then hire a bunch of college kids or winos to each commit a felony, get them to the right precinct, gamble on the vote actually being cast or cast correctly, and not be detected!

  45. jsm says:

    According to state records, 5412 dead people voted in Georgia in 2000. Atkinson County the same year had 15 affidavits from illegals who were encouraged by county officials to register to vote anyway.

    How’s that for evidence of voter fraud?

  46. benevolus says:

    Dead people voting is a completely seperate problem. If you want to stop that, may I suggest we focus our energy on having updated voter rolls (which I think they are trying to do with the new electronic poll books). Not only that, my understanding is that the most likely cause of this problem is that the poll worker is checking off the wrong name in the book, usually a widow or widower. “Mrs. John Smith”, for example.

    As far as illegals being asked to register, I’m not sure I get what you are saying. Did they get registered? Or did the process work and they got caught?

  47. Mad Dog says:

    Linda,

    Need help finding crooked Dems. Just ask. I’ll point a couple out.

    I just hate when you can’t keep up your side of the discussion.

    (Six Reagan cabinet members were pardoned by George H. W. Bush)

  48. LINDA says:

    Dear Mad dog,

    Why don’t you just throw in the towel and admit that the Democrat Party is so corrupt that the only way you can win an election is by placing advertisements in local newspapers, “give us a call and we’ll give you a ride to the polls.” But you know, I pointed that out right here in Macon recently with the SPLOST election. I questioned some scoundrels as to why they were not offering rides to the polls to the poor unfortunate souls to vote for or against the SPLOST????

    Why any Democrat worth a hoot should have been hauling their poor brethren to the polls to vote a big NO! Would you not agree with me, Mr. Brains?

    Not only do you people cheat in elections, but you also lie about it when you get caught! That is what happens to any party that alligns itself with the distributors of other people’s money because the last time a Democrat had any real issues was when Kennedy was President.

  49. jsm says:

    benevolus said,

    “As far as illegals being asked to register, I’m not sure I get what you are saying. Did they get registered? Or did the process work and they got caught?”

    Maybe they did. 90% of the county’s Latino voter registrations were challenged, and 15 people said the county election folks encouraged them to register even though they weren’t citizens. One guy running for office is in legal trouble for delivering a bunch of absentee ballots from Latinos, some of whom said that the guy filled out their ballot for them.

  50. Mad Dog says:

    Linda,

    I’d throw in the bathroom sink if you would shut up!

    But, then, if I hit ya with it, you wouldn’t believe it happened.

    But, then, i’m lying. Since YOU label me a Liberal Democrat with no issues..

    (I thought Clinton had some issues. Maybe that praying for him worked, eh?)

  51. LINDA says:

    I say that we can solve all of the voting issues, and fighting for the right to redistribute wealth by making Mexico part of the United States. We could make all hard working Mexicans U.S. citizens, and create a big welfare state in Mexico where all Democrats could move to. Then we could build a big strong border fence and let you feed like vampires off each other. You would have a whole state to rule, but your electoral votes would only be four! ROFL

  52. benevolus says:

    jsm, that is part of the reason why this fantasy of voter impersonation fraud doesn’t work; the more people you have to get involved, the more likely you will get caught, and it becomes increasingly unlikely that anyone would even try it if they thought were only going to be able to change one or two votes.

    We know there are about 200,000 to 300,000 Georgia citizens who are registered to vote (which means that have voted recently) who do not have the proper new ID. We are introducing a new hurdle to their casting a perfectly valid ballot in order to try to prevent a problem that does not exist, is unlikely to exist, and in this age of picture phones and rampant $15 fake ID’s, wouldn’t even solve the very problem it is allegedly designed for anyway. Not to mention the lack of training or standards or procedures for poll workers regarding facial recognition.

  53. benevolus says:

    OK, but if Repubs are running the program, you know they’ll put unqualified cronies in charge and end up with a no-bid contract for a standardized test that actually has nothing to do with blood analysis, but will involve money laundering and retroactive laws that benefit one person. Oh, and terrorism. 🙂

  54. Mad Dog says:

    benevolus,

    Has Mike Brown found a job in the private sector yet?

    If not, … we’ll be hearing”

    You’re doing heck of job, Brownie!

  55. Mad Dog says:

    benevolus,

    Good point on conspiracy weaknesses. i.e. the more people involved, the more likely it will be exposed.

    Add the issue knows as the coaltion of the minority, now we know why massive efforts to defraud the vote one vote at a time can’t work.

Comments are closed.