If you are a female voter in this country you need to really watch this.
Because trust me, if you live in a Red state, and they get away with it in Texas, it will soon be coming to a polling station near you.
The fear of Wendy Davis in Texas is both shocking and, at least for me as a liberal, exhilarating.
Thank God for Rachel on MSNBC. She ALWAYS educates Americans and I feel everyone should watch her show. She is a true journalist - provides facts and if she ever goofs (which is rare!), she always notes it. Where others do NOT - i.e. FOX!
ReplyDeleteFox doesn't goof; most of what they say are outright lies.
DeleteI'm a Texas woman..we are on Wendy's side! Give'em hell Wendy, we've got your back!
ReplyDeleteWhat they will succeed in doing is driving an entire generation of women to NOT change their names upon marriage. That'll be a good!
ReplyDeleteI'm with you Anon 2:53.
ReplyDeleteAnd I had the impression that the Texas law "mandated" a woman's original name become her middle name. Does that really mean that Texas mandated that a woman change her name when she marries?
I wouldn't do very well in Texas, I'm just sayin'. Oh no, not well at all.
I got married in TX in 1973 and was required to use my maiden name as my middle name on my drivers license. It barely fit in the space because my first, maiden, and my new married name were of German derivation and contained a total of 24 letters. I don't know what they would have done if there weren't enough spaces for all the letters of all my names. I went to the trouble of changing my name on my SS card to match my TX driver's license which turned out to be a good move. TX has some very archaic rules and regulations concerning women. But then we already know that.
ReplyDeleteThis is very upsetting as I noticed that the database (vital statistics) totally put my name in wrong and they refused to fix it. My marriage license in correct but the database has it entered wrong. I have to wonder if they will use that and try to keep me from voting. I've been trying to deal with these people and though the mistake is their fault they have refused steadfastly to fix it. I would stir up a shit storm if I'm not allowed to vote.
ReplyDeleteThey'll try any trick in the book.
ReplyDeleteThis will probably backfire big time, it'll get sane women out to vote in droves, especially with Wendy Davis running.
Texas AG Admits If Minorities Voted For Us, Republicans Wouldn’t Have to Suppress Votes
DeleteConservatives never did embrace voting rights for women and minorities. Paul Weyrich said it back in the 1980′s. The more people vote, the worse Republicans do in elections.
When the Tea Party’s Judson Phillips said that restricting the vote to property owners is a “wise idea” he was simply restating the general thrust of Paul Weyrich’s sentiments.
First they combined gerrymandering with rigged and faulty voting machines.
Vote suppression reached a level of intensity unseen since Jim Crow after the 2008 presidential election.
As my colleague Dennis S. observed, Conservatives never could lose graciously. The very notion of Americans rejecting Sarah Palin aka God’s gift to Birchers was just too much for them to take. So rather than long for the good old days when voting was a privilege bestowed on propertied white men, state Republicans decided enough is enough. They are going to get your votes my pretties, and your ability to register too.
Of course, they underestimated our intelligence,when they claimed that vote suppression was the solution to the statistically non-existent problem of voter fraud.
Their best efforts backfired big time. In 2012, voters braved all that the Tea Party Republicans dished out and re-elected Barack Obama.
Since then, the Supreme Court of the United States gutted the pre-clearance formula in the Voting Rights Act and the right wing went to town passing laws that courts had previously ruled unconstitutional.
The excuse du jour for vote suppression is it’s just another form of gerrymandering.
Some admit, with pride, that suppressing votes gives Republicans an electoral advantage In the Tea Republlican logic, if it’s about electoral advantage, then it can’t be about racism.
In response to the DOJ’s challenge of Texas’s redistricting plan and voter ID laws, Attorney-General, Gregg Abbott admitted what we already know. Republicans want to suppress votes by racial minorities because that’s the only chance they’ve got at winning elections . Evidently, even that’s not enough suppression because Abbot wants to target women too. But hey, no racism was intended and no sexism intended. This is just good old fashioned gerrymandering.
In 2011, both houses of the Texas Legislature were controlled by large Republican majorities, and their redistricting decisions were designed to increase the Republican Party’s electoral prospects at the expense of the Democrats.6 It is perfectly constitutional for a Republican-controlled legislature to make partisan districting decisions, even if there are incidental effects on minority voters who support Democratic candidates. …. The redistricting decisions of which DOJ complains were motivated by partisan rather than racial considerations,
Last year, Abbott claimed the purpose of ID laws was to stop voter fraud. But the absence of evidence to support that excuse meant he had to come up with another reason to tell the courts.
This year, it’s just about party politics as usual. The fact that voter ID laws disproportionately affect racial minorities is merely coincidence. It’s about the fact that “those people” keep voting Democrat so that they can get free stuff. If they voted Republican instead of the “food stamp” President, Republicans wouldn’t need to suppress their votes.
In reality, Republicans are trying to hold our votes for ransom just as they tried to hold the government and the economy for ransom because things didn’t go their way.
http://www.politicususa.com/2013/10/24/texas-ag-admits-minorities-voted-republican-suppress-votes.html
A heckler to tried to interrupt former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton’s speech in Buffalo with Benghazi conspiracy talk, but Clinton blew him and the GOP to smithereens with one sentence.
ReplyDeleteVideo:
http://www.politicususa.com/2013/10/24/hillary-clinton-blows-benghazi-heckler-smithereens-speech-buffalo.html
A pat on the head,and a "not now sweetie"will only enrage most women.......and if it doesn't.......it definitely should.
ReplyDeleteSo I guess the gentile Texas ladies who've been voting for Ted Cruz and his ilk finally get it. Whenever something is designed to diminish the rights of blacks and other racial minorities, it's only a matter of time before restrictions start to seep over to affect members of the majority culture. Do we get it now? Until we become a truly egalitarian country, civil rights and voting rights are necessary. They're like the herd effect, vaccinating children provides immunity to the unvaccinated. As we're seeing, eroding the voting rights law not only has a direct impact on targeted groups but also removes protections for those who thought they weren't targets--the very people who vote for tea party candidates.
ReplyDeleteI have been married since 1982 and my TX DL and voter ID card carry my middle name, not my maiden name. (But I had to get them both out to double-check, since I believe everything Rachel Maddow says!) So I guess that law changed at some point.
ReplyDeleteThe good news is, Dallas County (a very BLUE county) is working through their lists to contact these affected female voters to update their information.
Support Battleground Texas #BGTX to turn Texas blue again! If that happens, there is no mathematical way for a Republican to win the White House again.