Nick Anderson by Nick Anderson

Nick Anderson

Comments (14) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago

    Well, sure. Maybe that your comprehension is not as good as you think ladies.

    The 15th amendment Prohibits the denial of suffrage based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
    Where Universal suffrage exists, the right to vote is not restricted by sex, race, social status, or wealth. It typically does not extend a right to vote to all residents of a region; distinctions are frequently made in regard to citizenship, age, and occasionally mental capacity or criminal convictions.

    Now one must take into consideration the 20 million or so non-citizens in the country, the incentive for them to attempt to vote on certain issues and for certain people who support those issues and the relative ease with which one can enter some polling places, obtain a ballot not their own and submit that ballot.

    Also one must consider the accounts of others who have stated they voted more than once in the last election. The ease with which “absentee” ballots or “vote by mail” ballots can be abused.

    Butr as to the 15th? Well one’s “legal” right to vote is protected.

  2. wbr

    wbr said, over 3 years ago

    good point bruce 4671

  3. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Just require all voters to answer 4 of 5 random questions from the test for naturalization, that would thin “conservative” ranks considerably, especially among “TEA party”, JBS, NRA, and “sovereigns”.

    While Scalia HAS actually read the Constitution, both he and his clone Thomas, have rendered several written opinions deserving of impeachment. (Of course Thomas makes Calvin Coolidge seem a total blabbermouth in oral arguments.)

  4. wbr

    wbr said, over 3 years ago

    and wipe all the lib vote i like your idea dtroutma

  5. Ken M

    Ken M GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Methinks Hon. Sotamayor et. al. need a refresher on the 15th’s application to “citizens of the United States” first and foremost. And as far as dtroutma suggests, we should make sure that those random questions are all asked in English.

    The notion that there is still rampant denial of voting based on color, race or previous condition of servitude, as being portrayed by the leftist media, is absurd. We do not live in the 1950s or 1960s any longer, folks. Time to wake up to reality.

  6. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago


    Which ones trout, and on what do you base your opinion?

  7. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago

    Ok then explain this from the preamble to the bill of rights:

    THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added

    Added where?

    So amendments added are then “part of” the Constitution. And amendments 15, 19, 24, and 26 all begin their text with: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote.

    This “implies” that only citizens have a right to vote.

    Further, the 24th amendment says: “The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President…shall not be denied or abridged…”

    So, on guard, onguard. Support your opinion.

  8. ronald rini

    ronald rini said, over 3 years ago

    I like the idea if you can’t read how can you vote on a issue. at one time there were a lot of people who could not read. I also think you shoud have to the polls to vote. And also on tax issue you should have to own a house or have or had a job.

  9. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago

    Well now, I agree with your opening statement Then…really? Grant them all citizenship? (no such thing as temporary in government) Do away with a word that is descriptive of those that break the law? Really?

    First, one must “earn” citizenship UNLESS one meets all the requirements currently stated in the federal statutes. There is a long standing time honored process.

    Second, ignoring the problem by not using a “word” is ludicrous. Like not using the words “radical Muslim” or “terrorist” will change the attitude of those that are those things. Worked well at Ft. Hood did it not?

    You are very generous with other peoples things aren’t you?

    As for the rest? Ok I agree.

  10. Alc7

    Alc7 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    A thought: as long as we are discussing voting etc., what about the “popular vote” vs the “Electoral College” and Gerrymandering?

  11. Mom of 5

    Mom of 5 said, over 3 years ago

    Allen Corneau: While in college the discussion came up about the “Electoral College” and “popular vote”. My instructor was very clear that we here in Washington the State would be fine, as we have a West side of the state and an East side. But when Rhode Island or Texas voted, always Texas would have the upper hand and Rhode Island would have no voice at all. When I think of that I then wonder if they should have a voice at all anyway. They have (lets just round it up) 4 people versus Texas who has 4000. During an Electoral vote situation R.I. gets 1 representative. TX, gets 4. It’s still a win for Texas but the rest of the country has to vote to make it mean anything. Now the problem is the GOP rearranging the lines in their states to make it all GOP when that is not the case. That has to stop. When the popular vote is 50/50 and the votes go 18/2 there is something wrong and our country all needs to be screaming bloody murder at what Virginia is doing.

  12. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago

    @Mom of 5

    The term “gerrymandering” arose in 1812, when a cartoonist drew such a district in Massachusetts in the shape of a salamander, and the newspaper editor called the drawing a gerrymander, after E. Gerry, the governor of the state at that time.

    OK so how do we get a generic district?

    The number of congressional districts for each state is determined based on the population recorded by the official census made every 10 years. We just had a census and there was a change in allocation for some states. (Fl being one of them) But the total is always 435.

    If the number of districts changes, the boundaries of the districts must be changed and the state legislature draws up the new boundaries.

    The party in control of the legislature tries to adjust the boundaries so as to win the largest number of districts for their party.

    I am just so sure that in legislatures controlled by democrats they never ever redistrict to gain control. But yes the republicans have elevated the process to an art form.

  13. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago

    OK, well then, are you sure you understand what type of government we have in the US?

    Article four of the US Constitution says:

    Section. 4.

    “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government”

    And it is in fact a “representative Republic” and why when honoring our national was banner (the flag) we "for the Republic for which it stands.

    WE elect “representatives” to vote for us. Generally, the political parties nominate Electors at their State party conventions or by a vote of the party’s central committee in each State. Which is why if you want your opinion to matter, you should be involved in your state’s convention for you party.

    On Election Day, the voters in each State choose the Electors by casting votes for the presidential candidate of their choice. The Electors’ names may or may not appear on the ballot below the name of the candidates running for President, depending on the procedure in each State. The winning candidate in each State—except in Nebraska and Maine, which have proportional distribution of the Electors—is awarded all of the State’s Electors.

    And so onguard, again I ask you to think about the process and understand that the people of a state select the electors in the electoral college (if you are not involved it is YOUR fault), that the “electors” vote the popular vote as a general rule -though they are not required to do so – and so the people then do indeed vote for the president.

    But I’m good with doing away with the electoral college..

  14. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago

    So the 24th amendment says nothing.

    Amendment XXIV:

    Section 1.
    The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax.

    OK, so you can’t read. I get it.

  15. Refresh Comments.