Skip to main content

View Diary: Seriously, Florida. WTF? (283 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Actually, I think it's worse than that... (4+ / 0-)

    They know that the poor have no means to move.  I think they're trying to create a new class of slave labor.  I don't know... someitmes I feel very sorry for them, but then again... they put him in office and it's hard to sympathize with people who literally ask to be screwed!

    I live in a country where it's easier to buy a gun, than to cast a vote.

    by stuckupnorth on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 10:05:46 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Actually I think it's worse... (11+ / 0-)

      No, poor people didn't elect this governor.  Between his voter suppression and the fact that so many poor people have felony convictions, many for minor, nonviolent drug offenses, which leaves them unable to vote, this criminal cherry picked his voters just enough to slither into office.  We'll see if we can vote him out this fall, but the FL GOP is working viciously to suppress the vote again and stack the deck in their favor.

      •  I'm one of those (6+ / 0-)

        who would be effected by cuts. Actually already have been. My medicare no longer covers dental or vision and I didn't know it until I went to the dentist.In short, my benefits were cut and I was never notified of such. My damned premiums are the same though. My decades long girlfriend is also disabled and on medicaid. Medicaid is actually a bit better than the medicare here in Jacksonville. Not much but some. We relocated to Florida btw. Things were so bad in Ky and Ohio we were homeless for about six months. Scott nor anyone else will stop me from voting this November. If I have to hitch hike all the way to Miami to vote I'll by dammed be there and it would give me a great deal of satisfaction to see a gay, cross dressing in between sex change surgeries Atheist Democrat of color with the entire answer to fixing our economy on the ballot because I'll vote for them,,,,,, twice if I could pull it off. Conservatives are little more than psychopaths with genocidal tendencies who acquired the power to make laws,,,,,,, kinda like Hitler did actually. Maybe they should drop the elephant mascot and start wearing the swastika arm bands Hitlers officers all wore.

      •  One more thing (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lonesome Jeff, Skanner

        It is harder to get your civil rights restored in Florida than most places. A coworker did 5 years for DUI manslaughter. He got out 22 years ago. He has worked for the same company for 18 years. He can't vote or get a drivers license. I am not sure what sort of proof one needs to show that you have been rehabilitated, but he has been denied 10 times by the state board.

        •  I don't think a drunk driver who KILLED someone... (0+ / 0-)

          ...counts as the sort of "minor, non-violent" offense which shouldn't have long-term consequenses. He's had 22 more years of free, productive life than his victim, whose life he ended by CHOOSING to get in a car and drive while drunk. DUI manslaughter isn't a "crime of poverty", it's sure as hell not "minor", or "non-violent", and not the sort of crime I consider a good example for Why Ex-Felons Don't Deserve To Lose Their Voting Rights Forever.

          I'm all for restoring rights to "criminals" convicted of offenses (e.g.: drug possession) which involved no violence or harming of others (and believe personal-consumption quantities of many drugs should be decriminalized entirely). But, if you kill someone (even accidentally) in the course of committing your felony (DUI), is it "too much" to face consequences beyond 5 years in prison?

          •  However, once someone is out of prison (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kirnerpilstime, Oh Mary Oh, enufenuf

            they are no longer incarcerated, have paid the price of their felony, or other criminal act, and should have their rights restored. It is expected that someone work, and be self supporting, once out of prison, ergo, they should have a driver's license, so they can get to their place of employment and they are expected to act responsibly therefore voting is part of "acting responsibly" and they should have that right restored.

          •  While agreeing upon the severity of the crime (0+ / 0-)

            Upon serving his sentence, and demonstrating his rehabilitation for a number of years, he's somewhat earned his constitutional rights be reinstated. That is the point of incarceration, to "rehabilitate".  Since the law in most states, has legal rights restoration clauses, it's only natural that they be restored for all that have earned them. Notice that Florida, is big on purging those with voting rights restored, when they are sure it's to their advantage on election day. Coincidence? Not likely.

        •  I'm a (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kfunk937, Michigandrew, Papuska

          convicted felon, and there are a lot more of us than you may think. Eleven years ago, I was convicted of what the state deemed a "non-dangerous, non-repetitive" crime. I did 2 1/2 years in prison. A few years after I got out, I started checking into getting my right to vote back. At the time, I was naive enough to believe that it would be contingent upon my behavior since my release. I should have known better.

          When I was convicted, there was also a very large fine involved, on top of which, an 80% (yes 80%) county "surcharge" was levied. Given the job prospects for a convicted felon, Ive since resigned myself to the fact that the rest of my life will be spent working low paying, service jobs. That, I can handle. I've been poor my whole life, and beyond food and shelter, I never gave money much thought except as a means to those ends (a somewhat crude one, IMO). But in my state (AZ), the court won't even consider the request until those fines are paid in full. It's more money than I've seen in 11 years. My right to vote is, in essence, being held for ransom. The most basic of American rights is based solely on my economic status. There are those who are quite happy with that. In recent years, I've heard more than one person suggest that maybe only those who own their own homes should be allowed to vote, or that each vote should have a dollar amount attached to it. SCOTUS has now made money synonymous with free speech.

          It's all crime, you see. But most have neither the will, nor the resources to commit crimes on the scale of those at the top. Because they've learned that crime doesn't pay on a small scale. It pays on a big one, and, as Steve Mason once said, "When the crime becomes big enough, it begins to govern." They know that by the time people sympathize with someone like me, they will already be people like me.

          Our civilization will end the way that most do. With an ever-shrinking circle of affluent, hard-working, decent, "real" Americans, and the rest of us. The inherent danger is that the fewer people there are in that circle, the more palatable anything suggested to them becomes.

          When elephants fight, it's the grass that suffers. -- African Proverb

          by LouisWu on Wed Mar 05, 2014 at 09:34:52 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  A new form of genocide- invented by the right (0+ / 0-)

        No shots fired, just slow helpless starvation, while the perpetrators sit around and gloat about getting away with it.  May they get all that's coming to them.

    •  stuckupnorth (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lonesome Jeff

      WRONG. The "poor" did NOT vote for TrickyRick. REPUBLICANS in the GOPclan did, and they will try to do it again although 2 of 3 of them don't like Scott.

      Out of habit, they love being A Republican. Sort of a tribal medievalism.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site