When I’m right, I’m right. I said for people not to ignore the Left melting down in NC and they would try to apply it in other states.

.@hapkidogal @NAACP @maddow @TheJusticeDept Nat’l #MoralMondays protests must be organized to pressure Congress to restore #VotingRightsAct.

— Anthony B. (@WebAntOnYT) June 27, 2013

Let’s just ignore that the SCOTUS decision was spot on  in striking down section 4 and call for protests of something that is incredibly outdated. Got it. Related: DNC quickly fundraises off Supreme Court’s Voting Rights Act decision

Newsflash: It is NOT the 1965 and the last time the VRA formula was updated was sometime in the 1970’s.  The demographics and voting participation have drastically changed. From The Census:

Voting rates increase with age: in 2012, the percentage of eligible adults who voted ranged from 41.2 percent for 18- to 24-year-olds, to a high of 71.9 percent for those 65 and older.Although blacks voted at higher rates than non-Hispanic whites nationally in 2012, this result was not uniform across the country.

In the East North Central, East South Central, Middle Atlantic, and South Atlantic divisions, blacks voted at higher rates than non-Hispanic whites. In the Mountain and Pacific divisions, non-Hispanic whites voted at higher rates than blacks. In the New England, West North Central and West South Central divisions, voting rates for the two groups were not significantly different from each other.

Full Report here; Key excerpt:

Voting rates for Blacks were higher  in 2012 than in any recent  Presidential election, the result of a steady increase in Black voting rates since 1996.

Gee, those Southern states where VRA was mainly imposed seem to have higher rates of Black voter turnout.  Steady increase since the mid-90’s must mean suppression and not a change in demographics right? Related: John Roberts is Probably Right About Black Voter Turnout in Mississippi

But don’t believe your lying eyes, read the SCOTUS Decision for yourself:

The coverage formula and preclearance requirement were initially set to expire after five years, but the Act has been reauthorized several times. In 2006, the Act was reauthorized for an additional 25 years, but the coverage formula was not changed. Coverage still turned on whether a jurisdiction had a voting test in the 1960s or 1970s, and had low voter registration or turnout at that time.

And:

(3) Nearly 50 years later, things have changed dramatically.
Largely because of the Voting Rights Act, “[v]oter turnout and registration rates” in covered jurisdictions “now approach parity. Blatantly discriminatory evasions of federal decrees are rare. And minority candidates hold office at unprecedented levels.” Northwest Austin, supra, at 202. The tests and devices that blocked ballot access have  been forbidden nationwide for over 40 years. Yet the Act has not eased §5’s restrictions or narrowed the scope of §4’s coverage formula along the way. Instead those extraordinary and unprecedented features have been reauthorized as if nothing has changed, and they have grown even stronger. Because §5 applies only to those jurisdictions singled out by §4, the Court turns to consider that provision.
Pp. 13–17.  (b) Section 4’s formula is unconstitutional in light of current conditions. Pp. 17–25

(1) In 1966, the coverage formula was “rational in both practice
and theory.” Katzenbach, supra, at 330. It looked to cause (discriminatory tests) and effect (low voter registration and turnout), and tailored the remedy (preclearance) to those jurisdictions exhibiting both.
By 2009, however, the “coverage formula raise[d] serious constitutional questions.” Northwest Austin, supra, at 204. Coverage today is based on decades-old data and eradicated practices. The formula captures States by reference to literacy tests and low voter registration and turnout in the 1960s and early 1970s. But such tests have  been banned for over 40 years. And voter registration and turnout  numbers in covered States have risen dramatically. In 1965, the States could be divided into those with a recent history of voting tests  and low voter registration and turnout and those without those characteristics. Congress based its coverage formula on that distinction.

Today the Nation is no longer divided along those lines, yet the Voting Rights Act continues to treat it as if it were. Pp. 17–18.

I encourage people to read the whole thing. Link to the Decision here.

Please, continue to argue that the Black vote is being suppressed though, it’s clearly happening since we’ve elected a Black President twice now.

Related: 

• Blacks Made History Surpassing White Voter Turnout Rate
• Black Voter Turnout Rate Passes Whites In 2012 Election
• Blacks’ Turnout Outpaces Whites’

UPDATE: After a brief conversation that resembled a giant circle run around a river called Denial… someone got upset the numbers and facts were presented.

.@tweetinallnight @LadyLiberty1885 You know what? Fuck you. All you care about is Whites,you don’t give a shit about anyone else. Bye.

— Anthony B. (@WebAntOnYT) June 27, 2013

Related Articles by LL1885:

• #MoralMondays: June 24th Edition
• #MoralMonday and @WRAL Get Owned by Civitas
• #MoralMonday: @WRAL In Full CYA Mode For NAACP, Lefties
• #MoralMonday: Transparency Fail by Wake Sheriff, Courts
• #MoralMonday : June 10 Arrests Edition
• @WRAL Beclowns Itself In Debunk Attempt of #MoralMonday Attendance
• #MoralMondays: June 10 Edition
• #MoralMondays: The SEIU Factor
• #MoralMondays: Those who want to be arrested attend a ‘meeting’.
• #MoralMondays: Costing Taxpayers 11k and counting; Bonus – Names of Arrestees
• #MeltdownMonday – June 3rd Edition Arrests
• #MeltdownMonday – June 3rd Edition
• #MeltDownMonday – Wake County Dems Praise Protests
• Democrats Are Melting Down In NC