Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

“it wouldn’t be a Republican majority if they weren’t taking an African-American’s voting rights away”

“it wouldn’t be a Republican majority if they weren’t taking an African-American’s voting rights away”

From David Dayen of Firedoglake, whose election coverage I enjoyed, comes what may be the first race card played during the Boehner era (emphasis mine):

The new House of Representatives will be sworn in at noon today. We have a pretty good sense of their schedule of events for the first few weeks before the State of the Union address, and because the Senate is leaving town (another brilliant Democratic tactical decision), they will have Congress all to themselves.

First we’ll have the adoption of the new rules, which will allow tax cuts but not new spending, set budget caps based on the whim of the Budget Committee Chair, exempt health care repeal and the Bush tax cuts from stringent budget rules, and reduce the power of the non-voting representative from Washington DC, because it wouldn’t be a Republican majority if they weren’t taking an African-American’s voting rights away.

Umm, the only times DC Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton had the power to “vote” were when the House acted as a Committee of the Whole.

Here is Boehner’s position on why even such limited votes were improper:

“Speaker-designate Boehner appreciates that DC Vote stopped by today to share their concerns. He continues to believe, however, that delegates should not vote in the committee of the whole because they constitutionally cannot vote on the House floor.”

Call this a power play, if you want.  But the race card?

Everything has changed; nothing has changed.

——————————————–
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
Bookmark and Share

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:

Comments

I tried reading FDL for a while, but they're really narrow-minded about so many things, and say the most outlandish things (like this), that I finally had to stop. It's nice to see what "the other side" is saying, but after a couple weeks, you get a feel for it, and can easily predict it–(everything boils down to conservatives in general and the GOP in particular wanting old people, black people, children, et al to starve, to die, to fall off the face of the earth. How you get there may be different: big oil, Wall Street, race, whatever, but it always ends up there.) So I thought, why bother reading it?

They call us racists while we just put in Indians and Blacks from the TEA Party. Someone needs to point this out.

I blame those racist Founders. They knew, KNEW, that creating a capital city in the middle of a malarial swampland that was not a part of any state and thus without congressional or senate representation would deprive the flood of blacks having moved there 200 years later(of their own free will and with full knowledge of its political status) of the political might that they feel is there due.

Evil geniuses, I say. I'm not sure how, but I suspect Dick Chenney and a time machine were involved.

Fuzzy, I can't believe you lasted that long. I made a real effort to read the Left's blogs and had to give up after 7 days of pure misery. I broke everything down into two groups:
Bush lied.
Palin is an idiot.

HuffPo alone owes most of their existence to Sarah Palin. It was all Palin all the time over there. You could take any topic, go to the chat boards, mention Palin and in minutes watch the entire thing melt down into a demonic hate-frenzy.

I can only imagine what they are saying now… (giggle)

Split the DC electorate by the respective states and abolish home rule. It ain't called DC for nothing.

"…it wouldn’t be a Republican majority if they weren’t taking an African-American’s voting rights away."

I just love how the left conveniently "forgets" that the Democrats were the ones with Jim Crowe laws, that Democrats started the KKK, that Democrats were the party of Wallace and segregation, that Democrats were anti-civil rights legislation. Etc., etc., etc.

Republicans, beginning with Lincoln, up through Martin Luther King, Jr., Reagan, and even Congressman Allen today, made all the positive changes for freedom of the slaves and civil rights in this country. Saying anything less is re-writing history, perverting the cause of those who fought for freedom. Slavery by government control is still slavery.

Why do they trot out these lies – and how can they continually get away with it?! (Rhetorical question.) I'm beyond sick and tired of this b.s.

Speaker Boehner, Republicans,…welcome!!! The party of pro-civil rights, pro-liberty, pro-limited government, pro-individual rights and freedoms=Republican. I can't thank you enough for coming to serve the people!!

DINORightMarie, you're getting hung up on bourgeois truth, when all the cool kids are digging revolutionary truth . Come on, get with the program.

Completely agree with DINORightMarie. Dayen completely beclowns himself and demonstrates the typical Democrat historical ignorance when he writes stuff like that. Orville Faubus, Lester Maddox, and Bull Connor (to name just a few) were all Democrats, just like David Dayen. Silly Klucker.

One of my favorite writers stated "If Liberals didn't have double standards, they would have no standards whatsoever".

DC should have representation, as should all citizens. It's strongly resisted by Republicans because DC is a Democratic stronghold.

The District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007 received 57-42 support, with the vote nearly on party lines, but due to the peculiarities of the Senate, that wasn't sufficient to end the filibuster. The District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2009 was tabled after Republicans attached a poison pill amendment concerning gun control. Many residents of DC, most of whom are black, believe they are being denied the right to representation, even though they pay federal taxes.

See my post above. The capital was created as a non-state by the Constitution, with no representation, by design, because any capital city as such would almost surely become a spoils pit unto itself. Its had its current status for over two centuries. But since a lot of democrats decided to move in over the last 40 years, knowing full good and well that they would have no direct legislative representation, we are now supposed to change the rules because, like, its unfair and stuff.

Uh, no.

If you really want them to have representation, agitate for the residential areas of the city to be ceded back to Maryland. The people don't even have to move. The city doesn't need them, and DC can return to what it was always supposed to be, the location of the national government and nothing more.

Cowboy Curtis: But since a lot of democrats decided to move in over the last 40 years, knowing full good and well that they would have no direct legislative representation, we are now supposed to change the rules because, like, its unfair and stuff.

So you support taxation without representation. Good for you!

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend