8 plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
View 15 previous comments
- , troublemakers can look up these 180,000 names in a phone book and cause them trouble. I wouldn't mind the 180,000 people whose names are on the list being contacted privately (by mail, for example), but to simply announce the names to the world would be a danger to them all.Jun 27, 2012
- They're not talking about releasing the names to the public. He refuses to release the name to the election officials.Jun 27, 2012
- James: I think everyone knows that. They're just desperately grasping at straws in an effort to find some reasonable excuse.Jun 27, 2012
- , is that true? How do you know?
"Scott's elections agency is refusing numerous requests from voter advocacy groups and news outlets to release the list" http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/elections/state-wont-release-larger-list-of-possible-noncitizen-voters/1237192
Notice how it doesn't say "from election officials." These are not election officials asking, they are private groups. They include the Press, whose job it is to tell things to the public; these names can and probably will get out if the press is informed. Gov. Scott's excuse is that he's checking whether they are public documents, which makes sense since it is the public asking for them.
In fact, how could voters possibly be disenfranchised if the names do not end up in election officials' hands so that they can enforce them as a blacklist? Anyone who thinks voters may be disenfranchised must necessarily assume that election officials must be given the names to accomplish that heinous act.Jun 27, 2012
- I think I misread the article. Thanks.Jun 28, 2012
- I agree James, some of the Huffinton stories are ambiguously written, I come away thinking "what did I just read" and "huh?"Jul 2, 2012