Candy's all pi$$ed off...again

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Candy's all pi$$ed off...again

Post by T on Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:08 pm

Candy's all pi$$ed off with the Board's decision.  She feels it makes it difficult or prevents the good citizens of Rumford from exercising their right to vote. However, Candy has no problem with photo voter ID, which makes it difficult for the poor, elderly, "shut-ins", and disabled to vote.


Tea Party Hypocrite


*****************************************************************************************************************************

Rumford to vote on police coverage June 1

RUMFORD — Acting on the town attorney's advice, the Board of Selectmen voted Monday evening to have the issue of police coverage decided at the annual town meeting June 1, not at the polls June 9.

SJ Link

*****************************************************************************************************************************

Wrong! Rumford will NOT be voting, a select few will be.
By Candice Casey, Community Member, Rumford — Wed, 04/29/2015 - 21:06
The reason we did away with voting all issues at town meeting was because it prevented far too many from being able to participate, to be heard, to VOTE!

The town meeting articles can NOT be voted on by absentee ballot. That means, ALL shut-ins are stripped of their right to vote. That means if you are working 3-11, 11-7 or are working out of town, you are stripped of your vote. Have small children at home and no babysitter (good luck finding a babysitter these days), you are stripped of your vote. Don't own a car to get you to the high school to sit through the meeting and get you home, you are stripped of your vote. Injured or disabled and can't get to, access or sit through the meeting, you are stripped of your vote.

This interference in the ability to vote on a critical matter dwarfs the poll taxes and most cumbersome ID law ever devised combined. This lays the town wide-open for a lawsuit by the disenfranchised voters no matter the outcome and I hope someone does sue on principle alone. No government action is more deplorable than obstructing a persons right to vote except the concerted actions and efforts to deprive legal register voters from voting as in this case.

*****************************************************************************************************************************

Score one for the integrity of the vote.
By Candice Casey, Community Member, Rumford — Wed, 04/29/2015 - 15:03
And so the integrity of the vote in Maine is restored when it comes to only those still breathing, legal citizens registered to vote, appearing before a clerk will be voting. We have a long way to go in other areas but this is a huge win for those who make the effort and go vote.

SJ Link

T

Number of posts : 2684
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum