Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (591)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Totally Communist-Totally Un-Constitutional ..  Our Country is GONE, if we allow this.

  • hey_ànýÕnÉ_wáÑñÃ_chât_wìth_mÈ_­Ï_fÈêl_sÕ_loÑëlÿ_t0DAý...

  • desperate measures for desperate phoneys who will use any scam to try to retain control and office

  • As a white Port Chester resident, this is all a bunch of B.S. EVERYONE had six votes because there was six seats up for grabs. Stop listening to the FOX hype machine.

  • @schlect So everyone in Portchester was allowed to if they wanted to put all their six votes on one candidate if they so wished? I have seen this kind of "cumulative" voting allowed in a labor organization election, but it begs the question what would have happended if the other 54% of the towns population put all of their six votes onto one other candidate? that would have left 4 seats unfilled, not the most effcient electoral plan I've ever heard of.

  • GET HIM OFF THE BENCH. DOESN'TDESERVE TO BE A JUDGE.

  • I listened to Rush today. He said he plans to leave this country and immigrate to Paraguay or Uruguay. He suggested that all of hte conservatives move down there with him so that they could start a country with real conservative values. He thinks that if they get a critical mass number, the Uruguayans will be grateful for having hard working Americans in theiri country. I think it's a very good idea. I think America is "done" and a waste of time. We can do better as conservatives on our own!

  • I hope they overturn this one,, one person one vote

  • Isnt it sickening? The sad thing is that "WE" the people who believe in the constitution and in GOD - are not united /strong enough to cause this from happening ...In other countries this could not happen - because the " WE"s would have a revolt to stop it ... 1ststardancer (above) - made all the right comments- I agree with you ... THIS IS SOOO SAD and sickening !!

  • It is so true, we that believe in God and in the constitution are not united. We are strong enough but need to be more pro-active about standing up for truth and making a difference in our communities. 

  • Comment removed

  • Arrest the judge. Needs to be in prison.

  • Don't you have to be a citizen to vote ?? Age limit ?? I"m a working white male and I get screwed ALL the time. Keep raising my taxes though. We can't even get the ballots to our Military men and woman for their votes, REAL AMERICAN CITIZENS. REAL HEREOS !!!!!!!!! What a slap in the face. I hope Porchester N.Y. is proud. You can keep this idiot.

  • On another note, maybe the time has come for term limits all around. Judges like this are a good example. worse yet, ther is some old codger over 100 years old still warming a bench in Kansas.  Insane!

  • This isn't Dancing with the Stars. One vote and one vote only. Exactly how is this fair to any other group?

  • 1Stardancer you must have read my mind. I've been saying this for years. If we had a White Miss America Al Sharpton would have a freaking cow.

  • What in the world. How is that right.

  • Ummm... YOu guys realize Everyone gets the same amount of votes right?

  • Assinine rulings like this one are what fuels the tea party movement which really has no formal leader but is systemic, non centralized and will be very hard to fight against. Much as the distributive staying power of that vaunted sci-fi race known as the Borg was. Whiny simps on the left HATE the tea party and try to do eveything in their power to discredit it, but it is not inclined to suffer by any of it. It is self adapting, self fueled and does not march to the tune of any single piper.

  • I can think of 6 things to cast to help Robinson get his mind screwed back on straight...

    It has been said that in the "end times" right will be seen as wrong and wrong will be seen as right... Think about it...

  • REMOVE THIS JUDGE! He has become a law unto himself!

  • Legislating from the bench is unconstitutional.

    The judge is unfit and should be permanently removed.

  • The Judge should be removed from the bench

  • @michaelajlewis -- add fined a schidtleaude for criminal stupidity, horsewhipped for the insult to the Constitution, fair play and common sense, and summarily disbarred. That ruling goes waaaay beyond the pale of judicial activism, which is contemptible enough in normal proportions.

  • it seems like the judges are always trampling our constitution - they need to be removed from office

  • With a mentally deficient government, comes a mentally deficient country. Vote out all incumbents, and place term limits. Make them accountable or turn them into inmates. Erradicate the disease before it's too late.....

  • bullshit

  • White, armed Christian men made this Country what it is if you want the Country to look like the rest of this lousy World keep kissing these politically correct pinkos asses and bowing to these minorities.

    Political correctness is theft of white peoples rights. Period! Piss on political correctness and the NWO who invented it.

  • This is INSANITY!! The Judge is a "court jester" and not a true judge. He hasn't a clue!!!

  • I never watch cable news so I don't know who she is but that chick is hot.

  • Everyone ALREADY gets 6 votes for 6 councilmen.

    Now ANYONE can stack all 6 votes on 1 councilman.

    This means a 1/6 minority can burn all their votes getting 1 councilman on.

    But that person will be outvoted 5 to 1 on the council.

    You can debate whether cumulative voting is a good thing to do, but you can't claim Latinos get more voting rights than anyone else.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • REALLY, REALLY? What the heck? One legal person one vote! Even a first grade child knows the rule. This is cheating pure and simple!!!!!! This judge should step down....apparently his judgement is impaired!! This is craziness!!!

  • Whoever made this rule needs to be strung up! It goes against the principles of our republic.

  • Its time for REVOLUTION to take back our country!!

  • HOORAY FOR IDIOCY! THE LEFT CONTINUES TO AMAZE EVEN LITTLE OLD ME WITH THEIR BIGOTRY

  • This isn't the whole story: Google "Fox News distorts facts to attack election of first Latino to NY" & Cumulative Voting on Wikipedia.

    It's 6 votes for everyone. Cumulative voting gives everyone 6 votes to cast in situations where more than one person is being elected. Minorities will put all their votes behind one person to try to get that person elected. In theory it allows you to split your vote across multiple candidates when more than one is being elected. Way to distort the facts Fox.

  • @wendywwood It doesn't matter. It's one person, one vote. If it didn't make any difference why would they need to make the change? Wake up wendy! It isn't FOX news It's NY and a liberal judge.

  • @DoubleAce60 - Oh I agree it's not a good system, I just didn't agree with the commentator's explanation. And it does favor minorities, however the majority still has the opportunity to put all their votes behind their own candidates as well. Now whether or not people are organized enough to follow through with a large majority of the Latino population not able to vote I'm not sure how this will pan out anyway. Veering from 1/1 also allows for future "adjustments," and that's the real danger.

  • Really people? You need to change channels and stop watching this propaganda. They use the oldest trick in the book and you fall for it! Do me a favor and google cumulative voting. It has been around since the 1800's and is a common method used in corporations as well. Don't let these people prey on you with their twisted slanderous slant on the news.

  • If white people really only voted based on race, Obama would not have been elected.

  • Only God can help us...pray people pray!

  • What is this country coming too! Having latino without residency andy type of voting right or to be aoud to vote. We are saying they don't have to follow the rules as other citizens of this country. Coming from immigrants parents who when through the legal channel to becoming a resident of the state and a citizen of this country without special favors they were never given special treatment 52 years ago. Any time someone doesn't like something the cry discrimmination, to create fear!

  • We need to start running Federal Judges out of town. They are the bane of our times and the root cause of falling confidence in our Judicial System.

  • or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

  • No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

    No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops

  • No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

    No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

    No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United

  • The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

    No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

    (No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.) (Section in parentheses clarified by the 16th Amendment.)

    No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

  • of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

    Section 9 - Limits on Congress

    The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

  • and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

    To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government

  • To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

    To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States,

  • To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

    To provide and maintain a Navy;

    To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

    To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

  • To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

    To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

    To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

    To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

  • To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

    To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

    To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

    To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

  • Section 8 - Powers of Congress

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

    To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

    To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

  • of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

  • If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

    Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President

  • If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively.

  • Section 7 - Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto

    All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

    Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House

  • No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

  • Section 6 - Compensation

    (The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States.) (The preceding words in parentheses were modified by the 27th Amendment.) They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech.

  • at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal.

    Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

  • Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.

    Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy; and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal.

    Neither House,

  • nless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.

    Section 5 - Membership, Rules, Journals, Adjournment

    Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.

  • Section 4 - Elections, Meetings

    The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Place of Chusing Senators.

    The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall (be on the first Monday in December,) (The preceding words in parentheses were superseded by the 20th Amendment, section 2.)

  • And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

    Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

  • chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

    The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

  • No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

    The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

    The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall

  • of the second Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one third may be chosen every second Year; (and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies.) (The preceding words in parentheses were superseded by the 17th Amend

  • Section 3 - The Senate

    The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, (chosen by the Legislature thereof,) (The preceding words in parentheses superseded by 17th Amendment, section 1.) for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

    Immediately after they shall be assembled in Consequence of the first Election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of the Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the Expiration

  • nce Plantations one, Connecticut five, New York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five and Georgia three.

    When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies.

    The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

  • The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Provide

  • of that State in which he shall be chosen.

    (Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.) (The previous sentence in parentheses was modified by the 14th Amendment, section 2.)

  • Section 2 - The House

    The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.

    No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant

  • Section 1 - The Legislature

    All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

  • Affirmative action? It is affirmative that people are more whacked out than ever!!!

    Where do these sickos come from? What is wrong with people? Where does one minority group come off thinking they have more rights than another?

    I think it is official, it is time to rise back and start fighting for "the Constitution" and for American citizens to stand up and say "We have had enough of this tolerance for scum buckets that don't give a rip about American rights".

    We are America! Not Mexico.

  • Affirmative action? It is affirmative that people are more whacked out than ever!!!

    Where do these sickos come from? What is wrong with people? Where does one minority group come off thinking they have more rights than another?

    I think it is official, it is time to rise back and start fighting for "the Constitution" and for American citizens to stand up and say "We have had enough of this tolerance for scum buckets that don't give a rip about American rights".

    We are America! Not Mexico. Get Out

  • Where is the thought process coming from? This Judge should be ejected immediately!

    Amendment 11 - Judicial Limits. Ratified 2/7/1795. Note History

    The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State

    People had better start abiding by the constitution. This is what this coutry was built on!

  • Electoral decision? You can't just go changing votes for an area because some minority is "not represented"! PEOPLE most of them are ILLEGALS!!! Wake up idiots!!!

  • Well it looks like getting rid of some Judges is in order as well. Where does he get off making a decision like that? Kick him out and replace him with someone that wasn't a minority placement!

  • It is time to stand for ourselves and the Constitution!!! I am so sick of minorities cramming their bullshit down out throats! We have right too and they are being violated and I will do everything in my power to prevent this from now on!!!

    I'm sick of it and am fighting back. Try to stop me I just dare you!

  • I love how all people have to do is see this one video to form an opinion. What most of you idiots are failing to see is that EVERYONE gets six votes.

    So jokes on you, you all fell victim to the way Fox "news" loves to twist the story to put their own ignorant spin on things.

    Personally, I believe in ONE MAN ONE VOTE. But to get angry over this video, you people are wasting your time. Now go do some research.

  • White people have been discriminated against ever since they started the affirmative action crap. If you think I'm crazy, tell me where I can find White History Month, White Entertainment Channel, White Movie Awards, United Caucasian College Fund, National Association for the Advancement of White People, and Miss White America.

    Not to mention the numerous similar Latino organizations. Plus, I'm sick of pressing one for English and seeing signs EVERYWHERE I GO with both English and Spanish.

  • @1stardancer

    They employ role reversal, Jim Crow for white people. The kumbayah crap we are taught is designed to psychologically disarm us & make us passive sheep awaiting our slaughter while non-whites are taught about hate & being "victimized" as they prepare to dominate & oppress us. Hypocritical guilt trips are used to instill us with guilt, shame, self-loathing & a desire to be sacrificed / victimized in order to "atone." WTF?

  • @1stardancer Right on brother. It's time to fight back. I pissed white man is about to get some well needed attention!

  • Hey im latino but this, i know for a fact, is pure bull. How does voting by skin color make sense? I vote by competence which i find very little of these days.

  • you've got to be kidding!

    A voice from Texas

  • YOU ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION. This is not about "affirmative action." NOBODY got more votes than anyone else. EVERYBODY got six votes to cast for six open seats. If you want to cast all your votes for one candidate you are free to do so. The same rule applies to all voters. Are all the racists posting here ILLITERATE or what? Get a clue.

  • @alachuagreen You are an official retard! It is against the constitution and some minority Judge can't go changing that at his Whim. 1 vote per person and no "Daily" voting! Wake up man!

  • Fuck afirmative action. All this is now is a way to give lazy ass bastards more votes. Latinos can kiss my ass

  • America had better wake the hell up and get their heads out of their keister This is still AMERICA and we still Have a CONSTITUTION that we live by or so I thought, these Socialist Idiots in Washington are hell bent on taking over the America that we grew up in and I for one am sick to death with these dopes, So all I can say is I will see ya at the next Tea Party Rally bring a friend. Ernest S. DuBrey...

  • #

    1235Leilanie - Please cite the article in the Constitution. to which you are referring.

    I will repeat - for those who just don't get it - that there is nothing undemocratic about this cumulative voting system. It provides the same voting strength to all voters. If any minority (ethnic or otherwise) with 15% of the population uses their votes to elect one commissioner to a local governing board of 13, why is this a problem? Proportional representation is MORE democratic, not less.

  • @alachuagreen How about one votre per person. why should a certgain group be given more votes per person then anyone else? How is this fair?

  • @alachuagreen What about being trreated equally not just there but all over the USA? Are you that much of a moron you can't see that?

  • @alachuagreen -hey you mean if i'm the only eskimo living in NY I get porportional voting? Does that mean I get 7,500 votes per candidate? Gee thanks!

  • I see no difference bewteen this and packing the ballot box with names on tombstones.

  • Sick! The mental disorder of liberalism is out of control!!!!

  • Was it just the latinos that got 6 votes each? Or everyone 6 votes each? If everyone and if everyone votes 6 times wouldn't that equal 1 vote for all X 6 (ratio)?

    Don't get me wrong, everyone that is eligible to vote should only get 1 vote. I just don't see how this would benefit anyone, if it is open to everyone there.

    I want my 6 votes.

    Race vs qualification - hmmmm we got one in office right now.

  • @cosmoknight74 No aonly latinos were given a 6 to 1 ratio. Whites, blacks, asians, etc were given only one vote

  • @allgregjockca Isn't that racism? Where is Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton and the ACLU on this one? Hmmm...maybe they only butt in when it's a white doing the racism...

  • @cosmoknight74 no it is bull shit not racism. As for Jackson and sharp they can kiss off, two usless people

  • @allgregjockca I agree 100%

  • Thank God we have Fox News to report what the left wing main stream media doesn't have the balls to show us.Remember the left wing media desperately wanted Obama to get into the White House and they did everything they could to put him there.Now America has buyers remorse .This same media wont admit that.

  • wow, what a joke.

  • And to think I couldn't cast my ONE vote because the election was held before the post office was able to deliver my new voter registration card showing my new address. I was unable to vote at my old voting station because my ID had my new address and unable to vote and the new station because my voter registration card still had my old address listed.... yet these people are allowed to vote not once but SIX times.

  • The Dept. of Justice recommended that the village break down into districts. The Village asked for maintaining the at-large system and offered the cumulative voting as the remedy.  The Judge, who was simply presiding in this case, agreed to accept the village's offer. And it worked to the satisfaction of the Justice Department and the Village. Fox news should be ashamed of how it reported this issue. Race baiting, disinformation, and full of agenda.

  • There is no "unfair advantage" given to anyone under this voting system. In fact, it is inherently more DEMOCRATIC than a system that allows the same majority of voters to elect ALL the members of a board. YES, it does allow a minority to achieve a bit of proportional representation on a board, but the same "advantage" is provided to EVERYONE. If white skinheads made up 15% of the voters and they all cast their 6 votes for one of their own, THEY could elect a council member.

  • @alachuagreen You certainly obviously have never read the Constitution. One person one vote. I am so sick of this "race baiting", which is being done by the minories. I don't care what color someone's skin is or his race. No Assimilation is the problem. Seems like this is the way they must run elections in Mexico...

  • What is total bullshit is the way racists and xenophobes are spinning this news about cumulative voting. This voting system simply makes it possible for ANY minority (let's say, right wing Christians in a liberal town, for example) to achieve representation on the municipal board. If all the board members are elected at-large, a minority has little chance of ever electing a rep on the board. With this system ANY minority (NOT JUST LATINOS) with enough members can be represented.

  • Is the judge going to make them pay six times the taxes??

  • Total bullshit.

  • Maybe the Latinos own slaves up there like the old confederate days o_O

  • Comment removed

  • This federal judge should be fired, tried for treason and shot by firing squad!! People like this judge are destroying the very foundation of this country, we absolutely must stop this by whatever means!

  • Do you thumb up or thumb down this? I'm glad it's being reported, but I'm shocked by the story.

  • Send them all to war 6 times as often including the judge. In fact, send him into com bat on the pointy end of a bomb in flight. To think I spent 22 years in the US Navy to support frigging idiots like this is driving me closer to the edge than I've ever been. The race bating I've observed being perpetuated by libs is nauseating. They'll get exactly what they all deserve in the end, but not without driving significant wedges between segments of the population.

  • @hwobsmsncom race bating by libs? Oh, I don't know. Let's show the face and provide the name of the BLACK judge so he can be found, drug out of his home, and lynched. All for being the presiding judge in this district when this case was brought to the court. ALL voters, latino, black, asian, white had 6 votes to use as they wished. That;s all. Everyone the same. No one more than any other.  Even then, Latino's only got 1 seat of the six total. Can you believe those uppity spics?

  • god dammit, everyone has the right to vote if they want to! no one is stopping minorites from voting! get out and vote the person you want to, let the best person win, that's the way it's supposed to be!!!!

  • you don't have to be sorry zzz, it definitely is bullshit no matter what race you are.

  • Let's just go down to Mexico in military mass, kick their ass, take the country, assimilate it into the U.S., standardise the economic structure ( since we already give them it here )then they can all be "citizens". AND then we can all have a Mexico Vacation home on the beach!

  • There is disinformation. There nothing unfair or undemocratic about PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION (look it up). There were six seats open in the election, and this voting system gave 6 votes to ALL voters, not just Latino voters. It's just that Latino voters cast most of their votes for one candidate. It is really more democratic than a winner-take-all system where 51% can elect ALL the council members and 49% get no representation.

  • @alachuagreen, your an idiot, did you also see that voters were allowed to use all 6 votes on one candidate even though there was 13 candidates running? With 1 candidate being Latino all the Latino voters used their 6 votes to vote for the 1 Latino. This is absolute voter fraud and this judge should be tried for treason!

  • @alachuagreen BTW, this is a Republic NOT a democracy.

  • THis is OUTRAGEOUS! THat judge needs to be put out of the judicial system...if they aren't CITIZENS or old enough then they DON"T GET A VOICE! THis ticks me off to no end! I didn't get to vote until I was 18...and why should non citizens get a vote?? I can't vote in Latin American countries! How does this judge get around the basis of democracy and out constitution? ONE PERSON ONE VOTE..anl the person has to be a CITIZEN!

  • I'm sorry, but this is BULLSH!T

    America, what is happening to our country?!?!

  • plzzzz ..give me a breake..why don't we just put on blinders and let emmm have everything..oh! wait we have

  • What a surprise, the judge is a minority.

  • What a surprise, the judge is a minority.

  • yo soy latino, i'm hispanic ,damn man 1 vote per person. come on now..........

  • @capcon6 thank you, Capcon6. You are a thinking American. I know there are more Hispanics out there like you.

  • Apparently the judge was a result of affirmative action. And voted accordingly.

    Certainly not qualified.

    They are going to kick our rear ends while we stand for it because otherwise we'll be called racists.

    Even though racism is more widely broadly practiced by the 'minorities'.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • This is beyond understanding. How can a judge have that much power? How nuts can we get? If this is affirmative action then God save us all. How about this -- I should be allowed to be voted in as president because not enough people voted for me that would have if they could have or did have.

  • Just give one guy a million votes and make sure he gets to the polls. Robinson is a moron.

  • Before minorities started shoving racism down my throat, I actually thought that we were all members of the human race and that pigmentation did not matter. I did not care what ethnicity represented me. I saw only a man or a woman. But because THEY have made it VERY clear that pigmentation means EVERYTHING to THEM, I must now reciprocate in order to feel as if I TOO am in fact being represented. Minoritiy race baiting PRODUCES racism. THAT is a fact that has become all too clear.

  • @kasaljf Well said. I am sick and damned tired of being lecture to by liberals that race shouldn't matter and even the mere mentioning of race is racist and that my disapproval of Obama is racist. But then they turn around and pull stunts like this in which they are so obviously and disgustingly pandering to one specific ethnicity by playing politics with the color of their skin and encouraging them to play the system to get what they want. It is an outrage.

  • @Conservamommy your the type of homeschooling dribble that is dragging down the quality of our future workforce. Facts slam themselves in your face, but since they don't jell with the world you think exists, then you dismiss them out of hand. Thankfully, most American voters aren't so naive.

  • So Janis, I am given to understand that Hispanics in Port Chester only make up 20% of the voters? Whats with the other 80%? Are they all children? One can argue they are all illegals and via this sham of a voting procedure were all given a voice illegally and unconstitutionally.

  • Let me explain to you what the problem with your logic is, as I see it and I assure you many do as well. You inherently assume only a Latino can sufficiently represent a Latino politically. It is one thing when you are talking about a Democrat being voted in via cumulative voting based on the notion that only a Democrat can represent a 46% democratic minority. But basing it on ethnicity or enacting cumulative voting merely to assure a person of a specific RACE is elected? How is this NOT racist?

  • @Conservamommy it's so nice to be white. Isn't it? To believe that we white people understand minority issues and problems just as sufficiently as they can themselves. But that's not all this is about. It's about opportunity to lead in elective office without the system being stacked against you. But your right, this is about racism, systemic racism in the voting process. The whole reason for the 1965 voting rights act in the first place.

  • So you actually think that the illegal criminal aliens will not find a way to cheat? What do you think their very existence in this country says about your pipe dream? If they can't get their guy elected without an unfair advantage then tough shit. They are welcome to move back to Sonora and vote for there favorite candidate there. In their country.

  • You need to educate YOURSELF more on this vote fiasco. I will try to explain this so that a liberal MIGHT be able to understand. The illegal aliens will have one candidate to vote for. Probably because they can only find one "legal" guy to run. They will cast all six of their votes for this guy. Everyone else will have to spread their votes amongst the other candidates. They will not be pooling all of there votes for one guy. THIS IS INTENDED TO GIVE THE MINORITY AN UNFAIR ADVANTAGE.

  • @kasaljf Oh, you thought that illegal immigrants were allowed to vote. That's not true. Only legal citizens 18 years old and older were allowed to vote in this election.

    Even if everyone pooled all their votes for one guy, then what? They'd have elected one guy. Five other trustees would have been elected by the rest of the populace.

  • @janiszew They elected one guy based only on race. Again, the inherent assumption that they are being encouraged to make is that only someone of their ethnicity can represent them politically. Isn't this the stereo type we are TRYING to abolish? WHY would liberals wish to perpetuate it? Don't answer...that's rhetorical.

  • @kasaljf Exactly. And given that unfair advantage based on nothing more than their ethnicity or color of their skin. Liberals are incredibly hypocrites when it comes to race baiting and using race to politically advance themselves. If I live in Detroit, should I feel I am not being sufficiently represented because the majority of local politicians are BLACK and I am white? Should Detroit allow for cumulative voting so that whites get an undue advantage over black candidates?

  • And Janis, two more points. Just because he was a Bush appointee doesn't mean he isn't an Obama cronie. Second, given what we know of the framers of the Constitution, do you really, truly believe they would have intended to allow for federal judges to assist in skewing an election towards one ethnicity or race or religious creed? REALLY????

  • @Conservamommy I'm not sure what you think an Obama crony is. He was appointed in 2003 by Bush; that negates the definition of crony that I know. Let's leave that one, as it hardly matters.

    Second, a federal judge ruled that this election structure was unfair based on 40 year old laws, and there is no appeal pending. I must repeat, this does not skew the election towards an ethnicity or race or creed, it merely allows a minority to achieve minority representation in elections with many seats.

  • @janiszew Why should it matter how old the voting laws are? They were enacted for a reason. To prevent this very thing from happening. That is why it took a nosy federal judge to come along and shift the outcome to a Latino candidate. And your wording, while quite imaginable and reeks of liberal affirmative action speak, and we all know how that turned out. Changing voting laws and voting procedures to "allow" a minority to win a seat they couldn't win under correct and truly democratic voting,,

  • procedures IS most definitely skewing and tampering with an election. And for a federal judge to do it is sickening. He ought to be removed from the bench. I have to wonder if you would be throwing the full weight of your support behind this if it were whites claiming to be the minority in a district and a federal judge told the district they had to allow cumulative voting in order to make it "easier" for a white to get elected.

  • @Conservamommy I assure you, I would find their old election method unfair regardless of the minority; I find myself in the minority often enough, and so even when I'm in the majority (I'm white) I would prefer rules which are fair to everyone always. I would definitely support this method of election anywhere where many people run for many seats in a single election year; otherwise a 60/40 split turns into 100/0 representation. I don't want to be at 0%, and I don't need to be 100%. Fair's fair.

  • @janiszew Oh again with all the fair talk. How was cumulative voting fair to the person who lost to the under qualified Latino who couldn't win on their own merits but needed a federal judge to tip the scales in their favor? How is it fair to the person voting for the other candidate who lost to the Latino, who couldn't win on their own merits? Fair is such a subjective concept, my friend. What seems fair to you can seem inherently and patently unfair to the next person. Who determines "fair"?

  • @Conservamommy My town has a population of around 80k people, and our city council always swings between 100% R and 100% D. The campaigns are horrible; lots of outside money comes into our relatively small city, and half the time I find the entire council to be comprised of people with whom I have nothing in common. I'd much prefer cumulative voting here, where worst case there'd at least be one voice representing me in the city's government at all times.

  • @janiszew And you are failing to convince me, and I am sure many, that your ability to throw all of your votes behind one candidate would achieve that. In a small town such as yours, I think your expectations are too high. Besides, this is America...if you don't like the political make up of the town you live in then MOVE. That is what my family did. When it appeared California was headed for deep financial troubles we left the state. Unfortunately we came to another state that headed down...

  • the same big government, big taxes, job destroying path. And of course, now we are looking to move again. The answer is NOT to undermine traditional, constitutional voting procedures to get what you want. My goodness, can you imagine if we all did that? Just run around undermining the Constitution for political gains...oh wait you libs have that down to an art form.

  • @Conservamommy The 40 year old law is the one the town was violating. It was as you say enacted for a reason. I mention the age, because if there were any solid legal challenge, it probably should have occurred in the last few decades.

    I must stress, also: The judge did not nose in; that was the DoJ. The DoJ wanted to cut the town into districts, but the town was very small. The town said it would rather have cumulative voting, and the judge accepted their proposal. This was not his idea.

  • @janiszew My reading of the case, and I read several articles last night is that the DOJ busted their nose in on this town's issues, at taxpayer expense. Now I ask you, why would a liberal controlled DOJ want to interfere in an election where Latinos are involved? Don't answer I think we all know. The liberals are slobbering all over themselves to garner the Latino vote. By hook or by crook. How did this small town fall on the radar of the DOJ? Smells terribly to me.

  • @janiszew An Obama crony is someone who would happily scratch his back for a scratching in return. And for Latino votes the liberals will scratch the back of the Devil himself. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a big reward for Robinson at the end of this rainbow.

  • @Conservamommy This needs to be my final post to you; I hope you can appreciate that there's not much point in either of us continuing. I just have one last fact, regarding the DoJ being liberal controlled:

    To enforce the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the United States Department of Justice brought a lawsuit in 2006 to compel the village government to change from its present allegedly racially discriminatory at-large electoral system to one that is district-based.

    It was Bush's DoJ.

  • I appreciate you admitting you are running out of straw man arguments to the valid points I make. And to be clear this case in Port Chester was resolved by Robinson in 2010. Obama's DOJ. The lawsuit was FILED bu a US attorney in 2006 and please don't treat anyone here like they are stupid. Bush has no control over what law suits are filed and when. Just so we are clear: the lawsuit was filed in 2006 and RESOLVED IN 2010. No blaming Bush, sweetheart.

  • There's a reason they're called "minorities". Why are we letting the minorities control what we do again?? This is rediculous!

  • Look up Maynard vs. Board of canvassers 84 Mich 228. Cumulative voting was held as unconstitutional. Reasons given? It unlawfully affects the electing franchise by giving undue value to the choice of an elector who wished to cumulate his votes upon one candidate. I think that reason is CLEAR.

    Now answer my question.

  • @Conservamommy Repeat y