|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) |
Fleshdancer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:20 AM Original message |
YES! Supreme Court overturns part of Texas' political map |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cal04 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:22 AM Response to Original message |
1. NYTimes has this |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
napi21 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:30 AM Response to Reply #1 |
4. Is there a deadline? Will this be done before Nov? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:36 AM Response to Reply #1 |
5. The WHOLE FREAKIN' THING should have been thrown out. THIS MEANS SHIT! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Norquist Nemesis (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:43 AM Response to Reply #5 |
14. I'm trying to find a bright spot in the ruling as well |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cal04 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:57 AM Response to Reply #5 |
25. Agree. Once again this criminal court doesn't work |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
myrna minx (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:27 AM Response to Original message |
2. I had a pit in my stomach anticipating this ruling. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tesha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:38 AM Response to Reply #2 |
7. It was a horrible blow; Delay has been almost entirely upheld. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Norquist Nemesis (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:40 AM Response to Reply #7 |
9. Agreed. MSNBC saying it might "embolden" other states |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:42 AM Response to Reply #9 |
12. The Dems will be doing it. They were just waiting for this ruling. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tesha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:56 AM Response to Reply #12 |
23. Umm, in which states... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:01 AM Response to Reply #23 |
26. Illinois is one of the States. I don't remember the list I heard. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mikelgb (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:02 AM Response to Reply #23 |
28. I think Montanta is close to that situation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mikelgb (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:04 AM Response to Reply #23 |
30. But that does not need to be the case |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tesha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:11 AM Response to Reply #30 |
32. Good point! (NT) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Biernuts (446 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 06:24 PM Response to Reply #30 |
53. Probably because the governator wold veto it n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Norquist Nemesis (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 11:11 AM Response to Reply #12 |
43. You may have found the bright side that I was looking for in this! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Catherine Vincent (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:28 AM Response to Original message |
3. I guess this isn't good news as I thought. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mcscajun (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:37 AM Response to Original message |
6. No impact from the decision. The Republicans won six seats |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:41 AM Response to Reply #6 |
10. Gee, I wonder why they didn't address the ILLEGALITY of it? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Biernuts (446 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 06:55 PM Response to Reply #10 |
54. The court ruled 7-2 that overall the redistricting was legal. Only |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lonestarnot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:43 AM Response to Reply #6 |
13. Hey it's a goddamned victory! Any little dribble from this court is |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fleshdancer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:43 AM Response to Reply #6 |
15. when you're a liberal in TX, every little win feels huge |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fmlymninral (42 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:44 AM Response to Reply #6 |
17. They did rule on the issue of when to redistrict and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Norquist Nemesis (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:46 AM Response to Reply #17 |
19. Exactly! n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NoPasaran (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:03 AM Response to Reply #6 |
29. You can't redraw one district |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lonestarnot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:39 AM Response to Original message |
8. Well bowl me over! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cal04 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:42 AM Response to Original message |
11. more of the ruling |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Norquist Nemesis (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:45 AM Response to Reply #11 |
18. I'm pissed! If the Constitution says every 10 years |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fmlymninral (42 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:48 AM Response to Reply #18 |
20. The language says |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:54 AM Response to Reply #18 |
22. The Constitution is a God Damn Piece of Paper...Remember? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hugin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:56 AM Response to Reply #11 |
24. "the court ruled that state legislators may draw new maps as often as they |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tammywammy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:17 AM Response to Reply #24 |
34. I don't think it's unconstitutional |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hugin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:22 AM Response to Reply #34 |
35. So, you're okay with the ensuing political free-for-all? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tammywammy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:24 AM Response to Reply #35 |
37. Where did I say I was okay with it? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hugin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:29 AM Response to Reply #37 |
38. *breaks out copy of Constitution* |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tammywammy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:39 AM Response to Reply #38 |
39. Right. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hugin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:43 AM Response to Reply #39 |
40. It is if the final result is voting discrimination. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tammywammy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:56 AM Response to Reply #40 |
42. And I agree with that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hugin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 11:39 AM Response to Reply #42 |
46. Article ONE, Section II... "within every subsequent term of 10 years." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tammywammy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 11:45 AM Response to Reply #46 |
47. But to me it doesn't |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hugin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 11:50 AM Response to Reply #47 |
48. Split all the semantic hairs you wish... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tammywammy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 11:53 AM Response to Reply #48 |
50. The semantics is what matters |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
global1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:43 AM Response to Original message |
16. Just More Of The Same - The Effort Is Futile - We Are Never Going - |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cynatnite (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 09:50 AM Response to Original message |
21. Why didn't they uphold all of it rather than just the one? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RagingInMiami (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:02 AM Response to Original message |
27. Excellent |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ian_rd (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:05 AM Response to Original message |
31. THIS IS WHAT TOM DELAY DID TO MY DISTRICT |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Breeze54 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:43 AM Response to Reply #31 |
41. Holy shit! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Breeze54 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:15 AM Response to Original message |
33. Fantastic! To bad they didn't throw the whole thing out! n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
acmejack (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 10:23 AM Response to Original message |
36. Big deal. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Biernuts (446 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 07:04 PM Response to Reply #36 |
55. They didn't duck it. Check out page 17 of 132 of the court's |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Biernuts (446 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 07:20 PM Response to Reply #36 |
56. We may not like the ugly truth, but the Texas electorate HAD |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
robinlynne (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 11:22 AM Response to Original message |
44. unfortunately this is not good news. Read the article. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
npincus (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 11:24 AM Response to Original message |
45. most of ruling upheld- districting tinckered with 2 times after 2000 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nothing Without Hope (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 11:53 AM Response to Original message |
49. This is hardly a victory: ***WASH. POST LINK & EXCERPT***: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nothing Without Hope (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 12:10 PM Response to Original message |
51. ***another DU thread on this decision:*** |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nothing Without Hope (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Jun-28-06 01:55 PM Response to Reply #51 |
52. And another DU thread: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Mon Apr 29th 2024, 07:23 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC