Civil rights icon shames Republican into dropping anti-voting rights measure

By Stephen C. Webster/Raw Story

Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) learned a lesson in humility on the floor of the House of Representatives Wednesday night.

Reacting to an amendment proposed by Broun that would withhold funding for the enforcement ofa key portion of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), who actuallymarched with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and others during the civil rights movement, said that Broun’s move was “almost unbelievable.”

“Under [the Voting Rights Act], seven states in the south, as well as Arizona, Texas and a number of counties scattered across the country, are required to receive federal preclearance to every change they make in election laws,” Broun said. “The provision stipulates that only changes to election law in those covered locations, which are shown to be non-discriminatory, may be precleared. Unfortunately, the burden of proving that a change is non-discriminatory is on the state or locality which wishes to make the change.”

He added that the law, signed by President Lyndon Johnson (D), essentially assumes the guilt of southern states, making it an “onerous” burden and an “antiquated provision.” “My home state of Georgia, as an example, has long struggled with the U.S. Department of Justice over its identification laws,” Broun said, claiming his home state is “being discriminated against.”

Lewis’s response to that assertion was fiery, to say the least.

“Maybe some of us need to study a little contemporary history dealing with the question of voting rights. Just think, before the Voting Rights Act of 1965, it was almost impossible for many people in the state of Georgia, in Alabama, in Virginia, in Texas, to register to vote, to participate in the democratic process. The state of Mississippi, for example, had a black voting-age population of more than 450,000, and only about 16,000 were registered to vote. One county in Alabama, there was more than 80 percent not a single registered African-American voter.”

“It’s shameful that you would come here tonight and say to the Department of Justice that you must not use one penny, one cent, one dime, one dollar to carry out the mandate of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act,” he said. “We should be opening up the political process, letting all our citizens come in and participate. People died for the right to vote! Friends of mine, colleagues of mine! I speak out against this amendment. It doesn’t have a place. This is not the place.”

Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL) rose next to agree with Lewis, lecturing other members that “both Democrats and Republicans throughout history have used race to try to draw congressional districts and legislative districts,” and citing currently ongoing disputes over voting maps in New Mexico and Texas.

Soon thereafter, Broun then withdrew his amendment and apologized.

“I have the same dream that Martin Luther King had where people are accepted for their character and not any discrimination against their skin or their forefathers or anything else, and any insinuation that I would ever believe in any kind of discrimination or trying to suppress anyone from having their constitutionally given rights, I would contest that accusation, frankly,” he said. “I apologize to any hurt feelings that anyone has, because I certainly wasn’t meaning to hurt anyone’s feelings.”

This video was broadcast by C-SPAN on Wednesday, May 9, 2012.

This video was broadcast by C-SPAN on Wednesday, May 9, 2012.

Broun’s Vitriol Spawns Hate As Constituent Asks Congressman, ‘Who’s Going To Shoot President Obama?’

By Zaid Jilani

This past Tuesday Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) held a town hall meeting in Oglethorpe County, Georgia. During the question and answer session, one constituent asked a particularly outlandish question. As the Athens Banner Herald reports, the questioner asked, “Who’s going to shoot Obama?” The question apparently evoked laughter from the town hall meeting.

Rather than outright condemning the suggestion of violence, Broun tried to show empathy for the questioner by saying that he knows “there’s a lot of frustration with this president” and that he hopes we can “elect somebody who’s going to be a conservative” next year:

The thing is, I know there’s a lot of frustration with this president.We’re going to have an election next year. Hopefully, we’ll elect somebody that’s going to be a conservative, limited-government president that will take a smaller, who will sign a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare.

Out of all of the members Congress, Broun has used perhaps the most vitriolic rhetoric to describe his political opponents, including Obama. He has previously said that Democrats want to take over “all of society,” that the president was spewing “venom” at the State of the Union, that the stimulus and health care laws were going to “kill” the elderly, that clean energy legislation would make southerners die from hyperthermia, and has compared Obama to Hitler, complete with a claim that the president is secretly assembling a version of the Hitler Youth.

In a statement provided to the Athens Banner Herald, a Broun spokesman said, “Obviously, the question was inappropriate, so Congressman Broun moved on.” Yet until Broun stops telling his constituents that all of his political opponents are plotting to kill Americans with diabolical fascist plots, he should expect more and more of them to think violence is justified.

UPDATEThe Secret Service was dispatched to investigate the constituent who asked the question and determined it was asked "in poor taste," but that it was not a serious threat.

UPDATEBroun has released a statement saying that he "regrets" that the incident happened and that he condemns "all statements -- made in sincerity or jest -- that threaten or suggest the use of violence against the President of the United States or any other public official. Such rhetoric cannot and will not be tolerated."

M.C.L Comment: This is what pisses me off between 2001-2007 Paul Broun and his ilk were accuse you of having Osama Bin Laden hiding out in your basement if you said anything remotely critical of George W.Bush leap forward to now Paul Broun can call the President whatever he wants and those knuckle dragging half wits that made up Bush supporters can ask dumb ass questions about shooting the president.. Could you image what would that right wing would have done if he stood next to someone asking the same question about Bush? He would probably tried to knock that guy out.

Rep. Alan Grayson Grills Republican Congressman On Constitutionality Of Anti-ACORN Crusade

By Zaid Jilani

One of the right’s loudest crusades has been their effort to undermine the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN). Following the release of a series of videos showing a handful of ACORN employees behaving inappropriately, conservatives in Congress have done everything they can to single out ACORN for being stripped of all federal funding (while engaging in apparent opposition to defunding companies that cover up rape). Many legal experts have warned that these measures may be unconstitutional because lawmakers cannot punish a group or individual without a trial.

Yesterday, Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) challenged the constitutionality of one of these anti-ACORN measures being supported by Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) during a hearing of the Science and Technology committee. Grayson repeatedly questioned Broun about the constitutionality of “bills of attainder” — which are punishments that single out a group or individual without a court trial. The Georgia Republican was unable to offer a coherent rebuttal:

GRAYSON: I’d like to ask the gentleman from Georgia a few questions, and I’ll yield to him for the purpose of having answers to these questions. Does the gentleman from Georgia know what a bill of Attainder is?

BROUN: A bill of, the answer’s yes, in fact it’s been very explicitly described by the court’s.

GRAYSON: What is it?

BROUN: [long pause. Scrambling through papers.] The courts have applied a two pronged test. Number one, whether specific individuals or entities are affected by the staute, Number two, when the legislation affects a “punishment,” on those individuals, it serves no legitamate regulatory purpose.

GRAYSON: What, um, does the Constitution says about Bills of Attainder?

BROUN: Oh, I suggest that this is not a Bill of Attainder. It’s, um, certainly does focus on a specific entity, but it does not inflict punishment by any means. In fact…

GRAYSON: Will the gentleman from Georgia explain what the Constitution says about Bills of Attainder?

ANOTHER CONGRESSMAN: Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield for a second? The gentleman from Florida?

GRAYSON: No. I’d like an answer to my question. [...]

GRAYSON: The question is, will the gentleman from Georgia agree with me that the Bill of Attainder clause was intended not as a narrow or technical provision, but as an implementation of the seperation of powers, and a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function, or more simply, trial by legislature. Will the gentleman agree to that?

BROUN: No, sir, I will not, and I ask counsel to help us with this. I think all this is determination of the court and I’d like to appeal to Mr. Sensenberner.

GRAYSON: Well, I’m sorry, but it’s my time, not yours or Mr. Sensenberner’s, so I will reclaim my time, and I will point out that what you just you would not agree to is from a Supreme Court case called the United States v. Brown, something I would expect you might know about, given your name.

Watch it:

Grayson ended his remarks by noting that the conservative crusade against ACORN isn’t based in principle but politics: “We are trampling on people’s Constitutional rights. And I think it’s unfortunate that the mania that exists on the other side of the aisle regarding this one organization, and we know why that mania exists, it’s because they’ve registered an awful lot of Democrats, continues to distort and waste the time of this committee and many other committees here in Congress. Enough is enough.”

M.C.L Comment: Rep. Grayson has once again hit the nail on the head, the Republicans don't give a damn about what ACORN has or hasn't done the real sin ACORN has committed in the eyes of Republicans and their allies in the right wing media is this ACORN get people signed up to vote but here comes the sin part those people tend to vote Democratic.