ADVERTISEMENT

Official Political Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
Off the subject but I would submit that it is the left who continually pushes back on things like voter id requirements because it somehow puts blacks and other minorities at a disadvantage. That's their reasoning anyway but we all know the real reason. Blacks aren't capable of getting ID's according to the left. So if anyone is portraying the black communities as "mindless slaves", it is the left.

Some people just don't have or don't want an ID and the left believes they should still be able to vote. How in the heeeeeeeeeeell did you get the Democrats don't believe blacks are capable of acquiring an Identification card??

Nope, it's people like CatsRuleSEC that are portraying minorities as mindless slaves incapable of making their own decisions.
This post was edited on 6/14 7:49 PM by Mime-Is-Money
 
Originally posted by CatsRuleSEC:
o.k. now I know you're not serious. You would say the same thing about any link that was posted. You're not serious about having a discussion, but just playing games.

lame...

ohwell.gif

I read your opinion piece. He does the same hearsay crap you do all the time. It's no surprise that was the best you could muster. Now, let's talk about me voting Republican this presidential election some more and you never voting for a Democrat in your entire life.
 
Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
His affiliation goes back 20 years and when the acorn scandal broke he acted as if he hardly knew who ACORN was You are simply wrong on this one. It's not hard to find credible evidence on any of this but continue to bury your head in the sand if you must. From an article by John Fund.


"Mr. Obama took great pains to act as if he barely knew about Acorn. In fact, his association goes back almost 20 years. In 1991, he took time off from his law firm to run a voter-registration drive for Project Vote, an Acorn partner that was soon fully absorbed under the Acorn umbrella. The drive registered 135,000 voters and was considered a major factor in the upset victory of Democrat Carol Moseley Braun over incumbent Democratic Senator Alan Dixon in the 1992 Democratic Senate primary.

Mr. Obama's success made him a hot commodity on the community organizing circuit. He became a top trainer at Acorn's Chicago conferences. In 1995, he became Acorn's attorney, participating in a landmark case to force the state of Illinois to implement the federal Motor Voter Law. That law's loose voter registration requirements would later be exploited by Acorn employees in an effort to flood voter rolls with fake names.

In 1996, Mr. Obama filled out a questionnaire listing key supporters for his campaign for the Illinois Senate. He put Acorn first (it was not an alphabetical list). In the U.S. Senate, Mr. Obama became the leading critic of Voter ID laws, whose overturn was a top Acorn priority. In 2007, in a speech to Acorn's leaders prior to their political arm's endorsement of his presidential campaign, Mr. Obama was effusive: "I've been fighting alongside of Acorn on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote in Illinois, Acorn was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work."

But the Obama campaign didn't appear eager to discuss the candidate's ties to Acorn. Its press operation vividly denied Mr. Obama had been an Acorn trainer until the New York Times uncovered records demonstrating that he had been. The Obama campaign also gave Citizens Consulting, Inc., an Acorn subsidiary, $832,000 for get-out-the-vote activities in key primary states. In filings with the Federal Election Commission, the Obama campaign listed the payments as "staging, sound, lighting," only correcting the filings after the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review revealed their true nature."

That's great but.......it was a waste of your time.

Catsrule stated, emphatically, that Obama was a member of ACORN. I stated that he is not (correctly).....and laughed at him for getting something so simple so wrong. What else is there to discuss in this situation? How am I wrong? Where did I state that Obama did or didn't know who ACORN was?

You're attacking positions that just don't exist (that Obama does not have past associations with the organization). You can continue on if you'd like but it achieves nothing except disparaging our opinion of your own reading comprehension.

Obama led workshops on community organizing activities with ACORN members in attendance......while he was a community organizer? Holy shit, what a scoop! How dare "they" even assemble! He made a speech to ACORN leaders commending their get-out-the-vote efforts trying to get their support? He must be their exalted leader! If we only had a jpeg of Obama wearing an ACORN hat we could bring all of this together!!1

Lastly, linking is easy. Just do this [exclude the (')]:



Or you can use the link address/link name option when posting your original response.
This post was edited on 6/14 8:29 PM by Mime-Is-Money
 
Originally posted by Mime-Is-Money:
Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
Off the subject but I would submit that it is the left who continually pushes back on things like voter id requirements because it somehow puts blacks and other minorities at a disadvantage. That's their reasoning anyway but we all know the real reason. Blacks aren't capable of getting ID's according to the left. So if anyone is portraying the black communities as "mindless slaves", it is the left.

Some people just don't have or don't want an ID and the left believes they should still be able to vote. How in the heeeeeeeeeeell did you get the Democrats don't believe blacks are capable of acquiring an Identification card??

Nope, it's people like CatsRuleSEC that are portraying minorities as mindless slaves incapable of making their own decisions.
This post was edited on 6/14 7:49 PM by Mime-Is-Money

So black people don't drive, they don't rent movies, they don't rent a car, they don't fly, they don't check into hotels, they don't check out books at the library, they don't have a checking acccount?. Got it. Do you know a lot of folks that have absolutely no form of id? I know not one nor have ever met anyone in 42 years. It's a lame, lame argument meant to help Democrats steal elections. Nothing more.
 
Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
So black people don't drive, they don't rent movies, they don't rent a car, they don't fly, they don't check into hotels, they don't check out books at the library, they don't have a checking acccount?. Got it.

Yep, that's exactly what I said, and I said it only pertains to black people. Powerful deduction.

You're a huge fan of strawmen today.

Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
Do you know a lot of folks that have absolutely no form of id? I know not one nor have ever met anyone in 42 years. It's a lame, lame argument meant to help Democrats steal elections. Nothing more.

I know some from my old neighborhood (I volunteered at the local voting precinct for the '04 election). They were asked for their ID if their name wasn't on the voter registration log. They were old and/or poor people, whites and non-whites. Some people just forgot them.

All your election are belong to us.
This post was edited on 6/14 8:58 PM by Mime-Is-Money
 
Originally posted by ukalumni00:
Not a fan at all of Obama, but the man has stuck to his campaign principals for the most part. Obamacare was discussed during his campaign, people knew about his lack of business experience and frankly experience overall, people knew he was the most liberal Senator in Washington D.C., many knew he was a master of the teleprompter speech, and the list goes on. So, why people are surprised he is not getting the job done and has created an even bigger mess is beyond me. The bigger problem is that so many people do not know who or what they are voting for (both sides of the aisle). I know many people who voted from Obama because they just liked his message of change and had no idea what he stood for. Now they are begging to bring someone else into Washington. I am not going to get into an argument on which side is right, wrong, etc. but the fact is that this country is in a financial mess and we need someone who can bring in the right team with the right experience and knowledge to get this problem fixed. We all know most politicians are corrupt and dirtbags, so it comes down to who has the right experience and smallest amount of shadiness in them. I really have no clue right now.

Check out Ron Paul
 
- Every registered voter should have to have some form of identification in order to vote. Laughable to suggest otherwise. Not sure how this became a partisan issue, you would think it is something we can all agree on.

- ...But the video, which Messina calls a “highlight reel” and the DNC titled “What in the world are they talking about?” selectively uses clips from the 2-hour forum suggesting that the candidates were focused on idiotic issues, or battles from the past, when all of the topics the video hammers the Republicans for talking about were ones they were asked about at the forum.

Apparently the Obama campaign sent out a video that was grossly misleading about the debate last night. I would think the POTUS has a enough of a bully pulpit that he would not stoop to being disingenuous about a R debate in June '11, but whatever.

It isn't really news or important, I am really mentioning it to highlight the blogger that covered it, Jake Tapper. If you aren't familiar with him or the ABC News political blog, he kills it. If you insist on a MSM source, put him in your rotation.

LINK ABC/Tapper
 
Originally posted by Rex Kwon Do:
- Every registered voter should have to have some form of identification in order to vote. Laughable to suggest otherwise. Not sure how this became a partisan issue, you would think it is something we can all agree on.

My old precinct didn't require a form of identification as long as you were on the voter registration roll. You can certainly be included in a census without a physical form of identification.
 
Originally posted by ukalumni00:
Not a fan at all of Obama, but the man has stuck to his campaign principals for the most part. Obamacare was discussed during his campaign, people knew about his lack of business experience and frankly experience overall, people knew he was the most liberal Senator in Washington D.C., many knew he was a master of the teleprompter speech, and the list goes on. So, why people are surprised he is not getting the job done and has created an even bigger mess is beyond me. The bigger problem is that so many people do not know who or what they are voting for (both sides of the aisle). I know many people who voted from Obama because they just liked his message of change and had no idea what he stood for. Now they are begging to bring someone else into Washington. I am not going to get into an argument on which side is right, wrong, etc. but the fact is that this country is in a financial mess and we need someone who can bring in the right team with the right experience and knowledge to get this problem fixed. We all know most politicians are corrupt and dirtbags, so it comes down to who has the right experience and smallest amount of shadiness in them. I really have no clue right now.

great post.
 
Originally posted by Mime-Is-Money:
Originally posted by Rex Kwon Do:
- Every registered voter should have to have some form of identification in order to vote. Laughable to suggest otherwise. Not sure how this became a partisan issue, you would think it is something we can all agree on.
My old precinct didn't require a form of identification as long as you were on the voter registration roll. You can certainly be included in a census without a physical form of identification.
Pardon my ignorance, but I still don't get it. You are correct that you don't need ID to be counted in the census, but being counted in the census does not mean you are registered to vote.

More importantly, once the voter registration roll is sitting at the precinct, how do they know it is you that is in fact on the voter registration roll and about to cast a vote? Your word?
 
Originally posted by cbpointblank1979:
Paddock political thread drinking game rule number 1: Drink whenever anyone uses the words "strawman", "fascist", "socialist", "Marxist", or "fringe".

Would the use of a strawman require drinking or calling out said strawman? Either way, we're getting hammered.

Others to include:

- anti-American
- anti-business
- *** Breaking News ***
- Bush
- Dumocrats / Repugnantcans (or any variation)
 
Originally posted by Mime-Is-Money:
Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
So black people don't drive, they don't rent movies, they don't rent a car, they don't fly, they don't check into hotels, they don't check out books at the library, they don't have a checking acccount?. Got it.

Yep, that's exactly what I said, and I said it only pertains to black people. Powerful deduction.

You're a huge fan of strawmen today.

Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
Do you know a lot of folks that have absolutely no form of id? I know not one nor have ever met anyone in 42 years. It's a lame, lame argument meant to help Democrats steal elections. Nothing more.

I know some from my old neighborhood (I volunteered at the local voting precinct for the '04 election). They were asked for their ID if their name wasn't on the voter registration log. They were old and/or poor people, whites and non-whites. Some people just forgot them.

All your election are belong to us.
This post was edited on 6/14 8:58 PM by Mime-Is-Money

BleedBluNAZ has wasted you in this debate dude...Give it up. Nobody, but you believes ACORN is a harmless organization working for "your peeps" in the hood.

They prey off the uneducated and use them to make loads of money by shaking down banks and other institutions with intimidation tactics. Thank God they are being shut down finally.

and we've already proven Obama had tons of ties to ACORN again and again. Everyone admits it except you. Maybe he wasn't a card-carrying member, but he didn't need to be, now did he??

You have lost this argument. Come back and play again.
 
Originally posted by Irish Beck:
Originally posted by CatsRuleSEC:
o.k. now I know you're not serious. You would say the same thing about any link that was posted. You're not serious about having a discussion, but just playing games.

lame...

ohwell.gif

I read your opinion piece. He does the same hearsay crap you do all the time. It's no surprise that was the best you could muster. Now, let's talk about me voting Republican this presidential election some more and you never voting for a Democrat in your entire life.

that's the point...You're not serious because any article posted would be called "hearsay" by you. Unlike you, I've admitted when I've been wrong in the past about things. Not sure you could ever do that....

as far as Dems, I like Kucinich because he's principled and actually respects the Constitution. I thought he should have run with Ron Paul for Pres. They could have made a strong run. Not sure how they could reconcile some of their differences in the role of government though...
 
Originally posted by Rex Kwon Do:
Pardon my ignorance, but I still don't get it. You are correct that you don't need ID to be counted in the census, but being counted in the census does not mean you are registered to vote.

In MA, you can register when filling out the census. I don't believe an ID is required to register this way in MA....but I'm not certain.

Originally posted by Rex Kwon Do:
More importantly, once the voter registration roll is sitting at the precinct, how do they know it is you that is in fact on the voter registration roll and about to cast a vote? Your word?

Yep. They mark out your name once you've voted. You have to give your name and address. If someone else comes in saying they're the same person at that same address then you have an issue.
 
Jesus Christ. So, this is the way it's going to go.

WhitesRuleSEC will post a clearly partisan, agenda-driven article from an obviously biased source. Somebody will call it out for being precisely that. WhitesRuleSEC, rather than defending the article, will dismiss their criticism and pretend like he's above responding (because he has no response).

Circular argument commencing!
 
Originally posted by CatsRuleSEC:
BleedBluNAZ has wasted you in this debate dude...Give it up. Nobody, but you believes ACORN is a harmless organization working for "your peeps" in the hood.

They prey off the uneducated and use them to make loads of money by shaking down banks and other institutions with intimidation tactics. Thank God they are being shut down finally.

and we've already proven Obama had tons of ties to ACORN again and again. Everyone admits it except you. Maybe he wasn't a card-carrying member, but he didn't need to be, now did he??

You have lost this argument. Come back and play again.

In what debate? That Obama was not a member of ACORN? Because that's what I was referring to.

You can't even keep up with the conversation. There was no question that Obama had ties to ACORN. There was a small, irrelevant discussion as the extent of ACORN's "evil doings". You made at least two claims (thugs! businesses! ghetto masters!!) and copied & pasted an article to which you didn't even read.

I will say this, you have proven time and time again that you're second to none in dumbing down a conversation. Well done.
 
Originally posted by cbpointblank1979:
Jesus Christ. So, this is the way it's going to go.

WhitesRuleSEC will post a clearly partisan, agenda-driven article from an obviously biased source. Somebody will call it out for being precisely that. WhitesRuleSEC, rather than defending the article, will dismiss their criticism and pretend like he's above responding (because he has no response).

Circular argument commencing!

cbshootsblanks1979, let me guess, an article from your favorite source MSNBC would be unbiased and factual...right?

laugh.gif
 
Originally posted by CatsRuleSEC:
cbshootsblanks1979, let me guess, an article from your favorite source MSNBC would be unbiased and factual...right?

laugh.gif

You're really terrible at this.

Weren't you bitching about straw men earlier? (EVERYBODY DRINK!)
 
I continue to be amazed how anyone can argue against the concept of requiring everyone to show a valid form of ID in order to vote. This is a no brainer. There is no reasonable opposing argument.

In the interest of curbing voter fraud, it's entirely reasonable to require identification to be presented. Perhaps there is an exceedingly small percentage of voters who currently have no ID in their possession, for whatever reason. If such an ID requirement were put in place to vote, it's not too much to ask for these people to obtain an ID.
 
Originally posted by UKBlueBlood:
I continue to be amazed how anyone can argue against the concept of requiring everyone to show a valid form of ID in order to vote. This is a no brainer. There is no reasonable opposing argument.

In the interest of curbing voter fraud, it's entirely reasonable to require identification to be presented. Perhaps there is an exceedingly small percentage of voters who currently have no ID in their possession, for whatever reason. If such an ID requirement were put in place to vote, it's not too much to ask for these people to
obtain an ID.

One would like to think.
 
Originally posted by Mime-Is-Money:
Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
His affiliation goes back 20 years and when the acorn scandal broke he acted as if he hardly knew who ACORN was You are simply wrong on this one. It's not hard to find credible evidence on any of this but continue to bury your head in the sand if you must. From an article by John Fund.


"Mr. Obama took great pains to act as if he barely knew about Acorn. In fact, his association goes back almost 20 years. In 1991, he took time off from his law firm to run a voter-registration drive for Project Vote, an Acorn partner that was soon fully absorbed under the Acorn umbrella. The drive registered 135,000 voters and was considered a major factor in the upset victory of Democrat Carol Moseley Braun over incumbent Democratic Senator Alan Dixon in the 1992 Democratic Senate primary.

Mr. Obama's success made him a hot commodity on the community organizing circuit. He became a top trainer at Acorn's Chicago conferences. In 1995, he became Acorn's attorney, participating in a landmark case to force the state of Illinois to implement the federal Motor Voter Law. That law's loose voter registration requirements would later be exploited by Acorn employees in an effort to flood voter rolls with fake names.

In 1996, Mr. Obama filled out a questionnaire listing key supporters for his campaign for the Illinois Senate. He put Acorn first (it was not an alphabetical list). In the U.S. Senate, Mr. Obama became the leading critic of Voter ID laws, whose overturn was a top Acorn priority. In 2007, in a speech to Acorn's leaders prior to their political arm's endorsement of his presidential campaign, Mr. Obama was effusive: "I've been fighting alongside of Acorn on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote in Illinois, Acorn was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work."

But the Obama campaign didn't appear eager to discuss the candidate's ties to Acorn. Its press operation vividly denied Mr. Obama had been an Acorn trainer until the New York Times uncovered records demonstrating that he had been. The Obama campaign also gave Citizens Consulting, Inc., an Acorn subsidiary, $832,000 for get-out-the-vote activities in key primary states. In filings with the Federal Election Commission, the Obama campaign listed the payments as "staging, sound, lighting," only correcting the filings after the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review revealed their true nature."

That's great but.......it was a waste of your time.

Catsrule stated, emphatically, that Obama was a member of ACORN. I stated that he is not (correctly).....and laughed at him for getting something so simple so wrong. What else is there to discuss in this situation? How am I wrong? Where did I state that Obama did or didn't know who ACORN was?

You're attacking positions that just don't exist (that Obama does not have past associations with the organization). You can continue on if you'd like but it achieves nothing except disparaging our opinion of your own reading comprehension.

Obama led workshops on community organizing activities with ACORN members in attendance......while he was a community organizer? Holy shit, what a scoop! How dare "they" even assemble! He made a speech to ACORN leaders commending their get-out-the-vote efforts trying to get their support? He must be their exalted leader! If we only had a jpeg of Obama wearing an ACORN hat we could bring all of this together!!1

Lastly, linking is easy. Just do this [exclude the (')]:



Or you can use the link address/link name option when posting your original response.
This post was edited on 6/14 8:29 PM by Mime-Is-Money

Mime you spent 5 posts talking about how Obama's affiliation with ACORN was no different than any other politician. And that is was minimal. I proved you wrong 3 times with 3 different sources. I stated twice I don;t care about whether or not he was a "card carrying member" but that his adoration of the group surpassed all others. I'm right and you are wrong.
Just move on. You are starting to look silly, not to mention desperate at this point.
 
Originally posted by Mime-Is-Money:
Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
So black people don't drive, they don't rent movies, they don't rent a car, they don't fly, they don't check into hotels, they don't check out books at the library, they don't have a checking acccount?. Got it.

Yep, that's exactly what I said, and I said it only pertains to black people. Powerful deduction.

You're a huge fan of strawmen today.

Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
Do you know a lot of folks that have absolutely no form of id? I know not one nor have ever met anyone in 42 years. It's a lame, lame argument meant to help Democrats steal elections. Nothing more.

I know some from my old neighborhood (I volunteered at the local voting precinct for the '04 election). They were asked for their ID if their name wasn't on the voter registration log. They were old and/or poor people, whites and non-whites. Some people just forgot them.

All your election are belong to us.
This post was edited on 6/14 8:58 PM by Mime-Is-Money

You're not on your game tonite mime. You can get an ID at a swap meet for $10. "Old" people will most certainly have and Id - how would they not? And why is it that you and your ilk single out blacks as being at a disadvantage if they are asked for ID before voting? Please explain. The hole is getting deeper mime. You look like a fool.
 
Originally posted by cbpointblank1979:
Paddock political thread drinking game rule number 1: Drink whenever anyone uses the words "strawman", "fascist", "socialist", "Marxist", or "fringe".

Mimes in the lead today with "strawman"
 
"Yep. They mark out your name once you've voted. You have to give your name and address. If someone else comes in saying they're the same person at that same address then you have an issue."

And after 8-12 hours working and hundreds, if not thousands, of voters coming thru, you are going to remember that Sam Allen from 1382 Elm Street already voted 10 hours ago?? Let alone Jesus Martinez. All 50 of them. Mime, you really need to go back and focus on the benefits of sparrow fart wind energy. You lose tonite. Badly.
 
Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
Mime you spent 5 posts talking about how Obama's affiliation with ACORN was no different than any other politician. And that is was minimal. I proved you wrong 3 times with 3 different sources. I stated twice I don;t care about whether or not he was a "card carrying member" but that his adoration of the group surpassed all others. I'm right and you are wrong.
Just move on. You are starting to look silly, not to mention desperate at this point.

5 different posts? No, I acknowledged he was connected with ACORN (who cares how many times) and that other pols are connected to this organization, and Obama's affiliation was minimal (once). We can argue the definition of minimal if you'd like. I also said I can connect just about any politician with ACORN if given a few days. You're playing a guilt by association, which is simply a waste of time.

You're 3 different sources all say the same thing, and they all warp the truth. Do you really want to waste time on how these sources (all oped pieces, one from a website that photoshops Obama with an ACORN hat) are crap?

Yep, I'm the silly one that keeps harping on Obama and ACORN. This is a fantastic discussion.
 
Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
"Yep. They mark out your name once you've voted. You have to give your name and address. If someone else comes in saying they're the same person at that same address then you have an issue."

And after 8-12 hours working and hundreds, if not thousands, of voters coming thru, you are going to remember that Sam Allen from 1382 Elm Street already voted 10 hours ago?? Let alone Jesus Martinez. All 50 of them. Mime, you really need to go back and focus on the benefits of sparrow fart wind energy. You lose tonite. Badly.

Go back and re-read what the process for voting is in Cambridge, MA and you'll realize how idiotic your response sounds.
This post was edited on 6/15 12:45 AM by Mime-Is-Money
 
Originally posted by Mime-Is-Money:
Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
Mime you spent 5 posts talking about how Obama's affiliation with ACORN was no different than any other politician. And that is was minimal. I proved you wrong 3 times with 3 different sources. I stated twice I don;t care about whether or not he was a "card carrying member" but that his adoration of the group surpassed all others. I'm right and you are wrong.
Just move on. You are starting to look silly, not to mention desperate at this point.

5 different posts? No, I acknowledged he was connected with ACORN (who cares how many times) and that other pols are connected to this organization, and Obama's affiliation was minimal (once). We can argue the definition of minimal if you'd like. I also said I can connect just about any politician with ACORN if given a few days. You're playing a guilt by association, which is simply a waste of time.

You're 3 different sources all say the same thing, and they all warp the truth. Do you really want to waste time on how these sources (all oped pieces, one from a website that photoshops Obama with an ACORN hat) are crap?

Yep, I'm the silly one that keeps harping on Obama and ACORN. This is a fantastic discussion.

The Wall Street Journal, John Fund with a caveat from the NY Times - who I'm sure you masturbate to- all confirm what you can't dispute. You lose Mime. It happens. Please be an adult about it and move on.
 
Originally posted by Mime-Is-Money:
Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
"Yep. They mark out your name once you've voted. You have to give your name and address. If someone else comes in saying they're the same person at that same address then you have an issue."

And after 8-12 hours working and hundreds, if not thousands, of voters coming thru, you are going to remember that Sam Allen from 1382 Elm Street already voted 10 hours ago?? Let alone Jesus Martinez. All 50 of them. Mime, you really need to go back and focus on the benefits of sparrow fart wind energy. You lose tonite. Badly.

Go back and re-read what the process for voting is in Cambridge, MA and you'll realize how idiotic your response sounds.
This post was edited on 6/15 12:45 AM by Mime-Is-Money

Dispute one of my assertions. You're a child mime which is why you still ride a bike. I commented on your "foolproof" anti-voter registration, no id required methodology which is shit all stupid and flawed beyond comprehension. Please get some rest, put some ice on the wounds and think before posting tomorrow. For your sake, not mine.
 
Originally posted by BleedBluNAZ:
Dispute one of my assertions. You're a child mime which is why you still ride a bike. I commented on your "foolproof" anti-voter registration, no id required methodology which is shit all stupid and flawed beyond comprehension. Please get some rest, put some ice on the wounds and think before posting tomorrow. For your sake, not mine.

Why did you put "fullproof" in quotes? Did I say this? Once again, you're inventing an argument to attack so that you can inflate your own self worth........I think? You know what this is called, don't you? Everyone drink!

Plus, the system used in my precinct was for VOTING....not 'voter registration'. Two different segments of the democratic process which you and many of your brethren on the right have trouble comprehending.

Re-read how the VOTING system works and I'll ask you this one question: How do you think we know if someone has voted or not? I'll give you a hint - they gave us their name and address. What happens next? Do you think we have to memorize who cast a ballot and who did not? Just answer that one, super simple question.

You're propping up 'assertions' that have nothing to do with the conversation at hand. I think your reading comprehension is crap, at least today. Can you dispute this assertion?

You're right on one thing: I definitely lost today responding mostly to you and CaucasionsRuleSEC.

G'night. Hopefully tomorrow we can discuss something worthwhile.
This post was edited on 6/15 2:17 AM by Mime-Is-Money
 
Interesting topic on Morning Joe re corporate tax rates. Some misguided NYT journo was yapping about "why haven't all these record profits lead to new hiring"...pretty simpleton. Some of the resident Libs (drink lol!!1) actually had good answers: companies are sitting on cash due to uncertainty.

- first/preface: Corporations don't pay taxes, consumers do. Not arguable. Raising corporate taxes = raising taxes on US citizens that consume the products made by or serviced from said corporations. True. Story.

- Uncertainty that the simpleton journo doesn't understand. Corporations feel comfortable hiring when they have confidence that the boat will not be rocked. I will point the finger right at the "Bush Now Obama Tax Cuts"...the economy would have been better served had they either made the cuts permanent or raised them back to pre Bush levels. Extending them for two years was a terrible idea. Hiring plans on a mass scale are not done on two year plans. How do they plan on what the economy/individual purchasing power will be when the individual income tax is in flux? At least under normal circumstances they can count on at least 4-8 years of constant consumer income tax rates depending on POTUS cycles.

Now, I feel 90% sure that in two years they will vote to "extend" them again, kicking the can back down the road but limiting them to two years to please lefty constituents....if so, what have we gained? Not stability.
 
The next time the Bush(now Obama) tax cuts come up will be the end of 2012. And seeing as how Dingy Harry Reid is too much of a coward to bring up a Democrat budget for an actual vote (getting close to 800 days since they last did so), stone cold lock this won't be addressed before the elections. The sleezebag is too afraid of the political implications for his party members to discuss and vote on a budget now, no way in hell he has them take on these tax cuts prior to 23 of them comming up for election.

So we likely will have a situation Nov/Dec 2012 when a party about to lose control of its majority in the Senate, and very possibly a lame duck President, will decide if these tax cuts are extended or expire. If he goes down in flames and is a One Termer what possible motivation is there for Obama to sign a bill extending these tax cuts? If he only has 2 months left as majority leader why would Dingy Harry bring up extending the tax cuts in the Senate?
 
Originally posted by Rex Kwon Do:
Interesting topic on Morning Joe re corporate tax rates. Some misguided NYT journo was yapping about "why haven't all these record profits lead to new hiring"...pretty simpleton. Some of the resident Libs (drink lol!!1) actually had good answers: companies are sitting on cash due to uncertainty.



I also got a good laugh from those bozos trying to impersonate economists. When will journalist learn that when they try to analyze the economy, something they never studied in journalism school, that they will always look like fools. I actually do like most of the guys including Scarborough, but they just need to understand their limits.

Uncertainty about the economy is a big factor right now, but lack of demand is probably the bigger issue. Hiring is needs-based. If demand is there, employers will ramp up for it, but business expansion, new product development, new facilities etc. may still be looking at the yellow caution flag until the economic outlook clears a little more, including the debt ceiling issue which could come crashing down on our heads in August.
This post was edited on 6/15 10:29 AM by Deeeefense
This post was edited on 6/15 10:30 AM by Deeeefense
 
On a jobs note, why isn't our intellectual, "smartest guy in the room," president taking more of a hit for his weird remarks concerning those evil ATMs and airport kiosks hindering job growth? Lucky for Bush those things didn't exist during his term when unemployment was under 5%.
laugh.gif

This post was edited on 6/15 11:45 AM by kafka0117
 
Poor Barak, I suppose the development and widespread distribution of ATM's, grocery automatic scanners, and airport kiosks just began January 2009

Damn the bad timing, dangdarndangdarn!
 
If the NYT, ABC, NBC, MSNBC and all the mainstream media had taken the time to investigate Obama during his Chicago days with Jeremiah Wright and all the left-wing activists groups he was affiliated with, they might have found a lot of things that the American people should have known about him before he was elected POTUS - then maybe they wouldn't have voted for him. They sure spent a lot of time and money looking in Palin's emails for anything they could find on her - which was NOTHING. He is a POS and should have never been elected POTUS. He will go down as the worst president of the United States - hands down.
 
Originally posted by C_Cat:
If the NYT, ABC, NBC, MSNBC and all the mainstream media had taken the time to investigate Obama during his Chicago days with Jeremiah Wright and all the left-wing activists groups he was affiliated with, they might have found a lot of things that the American people should have known about him before he was elected POTUS - then maybe they wouldn't have voted for him. They sure spent a lot of time and money looking in Palin's emails for anything they could find on her - which was NOTHING. He is a POS and should have never been elected POTUS. He will go down as the worst president of the United States - hands down.
roll.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT