Republican voter ID laws unconstitutional - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

Robbie · 10-10-2014, 04:29 PM

@kane
Those are some interesting points you have.

But how does it only "help" one party?

So Democrats are too stupid to vote on the actual election day or only at the voting station assigned to them, but Republicans are somehow superior and able to do that with ease?

I just don't get it. If the voter laws affect everyone...then how can it only "help" Republican candidates?

Rochard · 10-10-2014, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

So according to you, it's ok to target the presidents opposition using the IRS.

According to you the IRS no longer has the right to target political groups who are violating tax law?

If the President goes to the IRS and orders then not to allow an opposition group to operate, then we have a massive problem. However, this is not what happened. The IRS, as a matter of regular business, decided that certain groups frequently violate tax laws, and as such require extra scrutiny. This is common sense. But now if they are a political group... They can do whatever they want tax wise. Great, wonderful - brilliant. Don't you dare bitch about the debt because the IRS can't do it's job.

kane · 10-10-2014, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

@kane
Those are some interesting points you have.

But how does it only "help" one party?

So Democrats are too stupid to vote on the actual election day or only at the voting station assigned to them, but Republicans are somehow superior and able to do that with ease?

I just don't get it. If the voter laws affect everyone...then how can it only "help" Republican candidates?

There are tons of studies out there that show those who tend to vote democrat tend to take advantage of early voting days in much larger numbers than those who tend to vote republican.

Here is a quote from this article. "A disproportionate number of black residents used early voting, which has been cut back by a week. Grass-roots efforts to get out the black vote relied on the state?s annual voter drive and same-day registration, which allowed residents to register and vote early at the same time. Both have been eliminated."

Karl Rove famously said that for republicans to win elections they need to stay far enough to the right to rally the base while moving just enough to the center to get the right leaning moderates and then pray for rain on election day because the republican base is well organized and will turn out to vote no matter what. The same can't be said about the democrat base. The lower the turnout the better it is for republicans.

Just google "low voter turnout helping republicans" and you will find plenty of info that shows why they want to limit the number of people who show up at the polls.

kane · 10-10-2014, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

I'm too lazy to look into the details or specifics you mention and do not doubt it, however, i'd say that any discussion i've ever heard on the subject (including this forum) has been about the undo hardship the requirement places on people with respect to simply getting an ID at all. What you're saying simply seems to be a more credible angle on the issue rather than the first real argument that its just too difficult for people to get ID's. To believe you, would mean accepting that everyone is 100% fine with a requirement for having an ID as a sole issue and any other details could simply be stricken from a bill and then would pass with great expediency, which absolutely is not the case.

There are tons of lawsuits as well as news stories surrounding the lessening of voting days etc in these laws, but they don't get as much big press because of the spin that both parties want to put on it.

If you are a republican and you are pressing for these laws then you argue that everyone should have to show ID. If you are a democrat you argue that some people are too poor to show ID. The reason is because that is better than saying, "We don't want liberals voting." or "Our voters can't be bothered to show up on election day."

Robbie · 10-10-2014, 04:52 PM

That's cool kane, but "taking advantage" of early voting days doesn't mean that they are completely incapable of just voting on election day.

It seems as if the studies are saying that Dems are so stupid and lazy that unless you make it 1000% convenient for them to vote any time and any where...then they simply WON'T vote.
And Republicans apparently care enough about their country to vote the same way that people voted for over 200 years.

I know that can't be true. So why do these studies seem to indicate that? And what the fuck is wrong with people in the Democrat party that they have to be treated so gently?
Do they want us to wipe their asses for them too?

Holy fuck. What a sorry ass bunch of people that can't vote unless it fits their schedule.
Maybe they could fit it in between their spa visit and their round of golf?

blackmonsters · 10-10-2014, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

That's cool kane, but "taking advantage" of early voting days doesn't mean that they are completely incapable of just voting on election day.

It seems as if the studies are saying that Dems are so stupid and lazy that unless you make it 1000% convenient for them to vote any time and any where...then they simply WON'T vote.
And Republicans apparently care enough about their country to vote the same way that people voted for over 200 years.

I know that can't be true. So why do these studies seem to indicate that? And what the fuck is wrong with people in the Democrat party that they have to be treated so gently?
Do they want us to wipe their asses for them too?

Holy fuck. What a sorry ass bunch of people that can't vote unless it fits their schedule.
Maybe they could fit it in between their spa visit and their round of golf?

Why do republicans whine all the time?
Do you people ever want to be happy?

bronco67 · 10-10-2014, 05:09 PM

Maybe people who work 3 jobs because they can barely make ends meet need that extra flexibility that early voting provides.

People who vote Republican are usually making ends meet, unless they have other motives like "freedom and guns".

kane · 10-10-2014, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

That's cool kane, but "taking advantage" of early voting days doesn't mean that they are completely incapable of just voting on election day.

It seems as if the studies are saying that Dems are so stupid and lazy that unless you make it 1000% convenient for them to vote any time and any where...then they simply WON'T vote.
And Republicans apparently care enough about their country to vote the same way that people voted for over 200 years.

I know that can't be true. So why do these studies seem to indicate that? And what the fuck is wrong with people in the Democrat party that they have to be treated so gently?
Do they want us to wipe their asses for them too?

Holy fuck. What a sorry ass bunch of people that can't vote unless it fits their schedule.
Maybe they could fit it in between their spa visit and their round of golf?

At its core it could be that they are too lazy. It may also be a case of circumstance. Let me give you an example from my life. When I turned 18 and was able to vote in my first election I was still living in the little redneck town I grew up in. My voting precinct was located in our local grade school. I happened to have a job that was a 45 minute commute (maybe more if traffic was bad) each way. With the hours I worked there was no way for me to vote on election day due to the hours that the polls were going to be open. I ended up having two choices. I could do an absentee ballot (which is what I did) or I could take off from work and make a 90 minute round trip to vote. If there had been early voting days I could have went in on my day off and voted.

Regardless of why people vote early be it circumstance, laziness or whatever, why should election day be so sacred? Why should we force people to stand in line, go to specific places and jump through hoops to vote when we have the simple means to make it faster and better. We should be encouraging people to vote not giving them reasons not to vote.

In my opinion every state should do it like my state does which is that 100% of the vote is by mail. You get the ballot and you can either mail it back or drop it in one of the many drop boxes that are around. Simple and easy. You can take as much time as you want with the ballot. You can vote when you want. The ballots come about 2 weeks before the election so you have plenty of time to vote. But that is too easy.

Axeman · 10-10-2014, 09:39 PM

Seems Kane is the only one who read it. The Supreme Court only ruled on the Wisconsin law for this year and how they handled the mail in voting instructions.

They did not rule that it's unconstitutional to require ID.

Robbie · 10-11-2014, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axeman

Seems Kane is the only one who read it. The Supreme Court only ruled on the Wisconsin law for this year and how they handled the mail in voting instructions.

They did not rule that it's unconstitutional to require ID.

Oh, okay. We should have all known better than to believe Mark Prince and his thread title.
He was just lying again.

I shoulda known...

Vendzilla · 10-11-2014, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

According to you the IRS no longer has the right to target political groups who are violating tax law?

If the President goes to the IRS and orders then not to allow an opposition group to operate, then we have a massive problem. However, this is not what happened. The IRS, as a matter of regular business, decided that certain groups frequently violate tax laws, and as such require extra scrutiny. This is common sense. But now if they are a political group... They can do whatever they want tax wise. Great, wonderful - brilliant. Don't you dare bitch about the debt because the IRS can't do it's job.

Ok so it was OK for the IRS to leak the Tax return of the Organization The National Organization of Marriage? Which is prohibited by federal law!

During the period in which the applications were being scrutinized, the Cincinnati office of the IRS violated policy by releasing nine confidential pending applications from conservative groups to ProPublica, an investigative reporting organization. ProPublica had made a records request to the office seeking only completed applications, which are public information
On June 24, 2014 the IRS admitted wrongdoing in the case and paid the organization $50,000 in actual damages.

They ADMITTED WRONG DOING!

So fuck you and you're don't you dare bitch about the debt, it's not the job of the IRS to break the LAW!

Robbie · 10-11-2014, 12:25 PM

Actually, the IRS admitted quite a few things in front of Congress that they did.

And even with the words coming out of their own mouths...there were Obamapologists on here saying it was all a "non-issue" being caused by evil Republicans.

Good lord, could you imagine if this had been a Republican president in office? The media would have been calling for his head and the faux-Liberals of GFY would be furious and screaming for impeachment.

Vendzilla · 10-11-2014, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

Actually, the IRS admitted quite a few things in front of Congress that they did.

And even with the words coming out of their own mouths...there were Obamapologists on here saying it was all a "non-issue" being caused by evil Republicans.

Good lord, could you imagine if this had been a Republican president in office? The media would have been calling for his head and the faux-Liberals of GFY would be furious and screaming for impeachment.

It amazes me the idiots that think refusing to believe it exists will make it go away!

Case in point, Rochard

Robbie · 10-11-2014, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

It amazes me the idiots that think refusing to believe it exists will make it go away!

Actually, that strategy kinda worked on just about any misstep that this current administration has made.

Worked for the Bush admin too.

The govt. seems to have the media in it's pocket these days.

The Bush administration "embedded" them with the troops to make sure that we didn't have any Vietnam War style reporting and only pro-America reporting in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The media went along with it like sheep.

And the Obama administration apparently has never done anything wrong either. lol

What this country needs is a Free Press again that gets out to the masses.
Right now Twitter gets more info out to people worldwide than the news does.

I mean...the other day on CNN they kept REPEATEDLY doing a "Breaking News" over and over again.
What was the "Breaking News"? Had war been declared with Russia? Had the Pres. been assassinated? Did an earthquake destroy Los Angeles?

No.
The guy in Dallas with Ebola died.
They reported it the first time as "Breaking News". Then they spent 10 minutes discussing it. Then they went to commercial. When they came back it was "Breaking News" and they repeated it. Then they discussed it for 10 minutes. Then to commercial.

They repeated that for about 14 hours straight.

That's not the news. And it's definitely not "Breaking News" when you repeat it all day long.

Vendzilla · 10-11-2014, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

Actually, that strategy kinda worked on just about any misstep that this current administration has made.

Worked for the Bush admin too.

The govt. seems to have the media in it's pocket these days.

The Bush administration "embedded" them with the troops to make sure that we didn't have any Vietnam War style reporting and only pro-America reporting in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The media went along with it like sheep.

And the Obama administration apparently has never done anything wrong either. lol

What this country needs is a Free Press again that gets out to the masses.
Right now Twitter gets more info out to people worldwide than the news does.

I mean...the other day on CNN they kept REPEATEDLY doing a "Breaking News" over and over again.
What was the "Breaking News"? Had war been declared with Russia? Had the Pres. been assassinated? Did an earthquake destroy Los Angeles?

No.
The guy in Dallas with Ebola died.
They reported it the first time as "Breaking News". Then they spent 10 minutes discussing it. Then they went to commercial. When they came back it was "Breaking News" and they repeated it. Then they discussed it for 10 minutes. Then to commercial.

They repeated that for about 14 hours straight.

That's not the news. And it's definitely not "Breaking News" when you repeat it all day long.

That's why Fox news has been doing so great in the ratings. People see this and are tired of it.
Liberal news barely reports of anything Obama does wrong, it's like they ask permission first!

Learner took the fifth and quit over the IRS scandal
Shinseki quit or was fired over the VA scandal
Sebelius was fired or quit over Obamacare
Holder is still in contempt over fast and furious and quiting
No one trust what the NSA says.

And the democrats are trying to say The Obama Administration is doing great?

Robbie · 10-11-2014, 12:52 PM

Actually I don't think that's why Fox has higher ratings.

Fox sucks up to the Republicans almost as bad as MSNBC sucks up to the Dems.

I think it's simply that the clowns on Fox News (OReilly and Hannity) are far more entertaining than the clowns of MSNBC (Maddow, Sharpton, and Matthews).

Get some better, more charismatic people at CNN or MSNBC and they could turn that around.

The news channels are just entertainment channels now. Look at CNN. They brought in Piers Morgan. What a joke!
And now they have "shows" on CNN instead of news (though I have to say that Anthony Bourdain's show is fucking awesome...but it's not the news)

MSNBC? Forget about it.
It's like you walked into a roomful of people from "Revenge Of The Nerds".
They are so boring and condescending it's pathetic.

No, Fox wins because they have charismatic entertainers who love to bring on people with oppposing views and argue with them like it's the Jerry Springer show. And that's entertaining. It's not "news", but neither is MSNBC.

To see the actual news...you can go to Fox and watch the top of the hour news break where they just report what's going on with no "opinion".

Other than that? Tune in to CBS, NBC, or ABC news and watch the first five minutes (which is when they actually report shit).

AlJazeera America reports news sometimes as well.

Vendzilla · 10-11-2014, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

Actually I don't think that's why Fox has higher ratings.

Fox sucks up to the Republicans almost as bad as MSNBC sucks up to the Dems.

I think it's simply that the clowns on Fox News (OReilly and Hannity) are far more entertaining than the clowns of MSNBC (Maddow, Sharpton, and Matthews).

Get some better, more charismatic people at CNN or MSNBC and they could turn that around.

The news channels are just entertainment channels now. Look at CNN. They brought in Piers Morgan. What a joke!
And now they have "shows" on CNN instead of news (though I have to say that Anthony Bourdain's show is fucking awesome...but it's not the news)

MSNBC? Forget about it.
It's like you walked into a roomful of people from "Revenge Of The Nerds".
They are so boring and condescending it's pathetic.

No, Fox wins because they have charismatic entertainers who love to bring on people with oppposing views and argue with them like it's the Jerry Springer show. And that's entertaining. It's not "news", but neither is MSNBC.

To see the actual news...you can go to Fox and watch the top of the hour news break where they just report what's going on with no "opinion".

Other than that? Tune in to CBS, NBC, or ABC news and watch the first five minutes (which is when they actually report shit).

AlJazeera America reports news sometimes as well.

I watch the today show in the morning, I read the news on Yahoo during the day and I watch a Fox news show a couple times a week, the 5 is a good show. I figure to get all the news you need to watch a mix.

OldJeff · 10-11-2014, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

Why do republicans whine all the time?
Do you people ever want to be happy?

Calling Robbie a republican is sort of like saying a dog is a hippopotamus

OldJeff · 10-11-2014, 01:50 PM

It is actually funny to me that people actually believe we have somehow had a change in political parties since Reagan, It is actually hard to see a difference in any of them once you look below the on the surface buzzwords, and talking points

kane · 10-11-2014, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

Actually I don't think that's why Fox has higher ratings.

Fox sucks up to the Republicans almost as bad as MSNBC sucks up to the Dems.

I think it's simply that the clowns on Fox News (OReilly and Hannity) are far more entertaining than the clowns of MSNBC (Maddow, Sharpton, and Matthews).

Get some better, more charismatic people at CNN or MSNBC and they could turn that around.

The news channels are just entertainment channels now. Look at CNN. They brought in Piers Morgan. What a joke!
And now they have "shows" on CNN instead of news (though I have to say that Anthony Bourdain's show is fucking awesome...but it's not the news)

MSNBC? Forget about it.
It's like you walked into a roomful of people from "Revenge Of The Nerds".
They are so boring and condescending it's pathetic.

No, Fox wins because they have charismatic entertainers who love to bring on people with oppposing views and argue with them like it's the Jerry Springer show. And that's entertaining. It's not "news", but neither is MSNBC.

To see the actual news...you can go to Fox and watch the top of the hour news break where they just report what's going on with no "opinion".

Other than that? Tune in to CBS, NBC, or ABC news and watch the first five minutes (which is when they actually report shit).

AlJazeera America reports news sometimes as well.

I also think Fox's rating are due to the fact that if you want your news with a conservative slant they are really the only place to get it. If you want your news with a liberal slant you have a lot of options. If you want your news with no slant you are screwed.

Robbie · 10-11-2014, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane

I also think Fox's rating are due to the fact that if you want your news with a conservative slant they are really the only place to get it. If you want your news with a liberal slant you have a lot of options. If you want your news with no slant you are screwed.

That kind of makes sense...except that Fox News has almost double the ratings of MSNBC and CNN combined!

I know damn well that there aren't double the amount of conservatives in this country. And I also know all too well that stupid rednecks hardly watch the news at all (so that would eliminate a big part of the religious right crowd).

Here are the rating for yesterday (Thursday Oct. 9 2014). Just look at those numbers. It's not even close:
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/201...9-2014/312792/

theking · 10-11-2014, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I watch the today show in the morning, I read the news on Yahoo during the day and I watch a Fox news show a couple times a week, the 5 is a good show. I figure to get all the news you need to watch a mix.

I watch the Shepard Smith hour of news on Fox on occasion. In my opinion it is the only real news show on Fox. Hannity and to a lessor extent O'rielly are just the National Enquirer of the airway. All of the others that appear on Fox are just conservative talking heads. The five is just a conservative entertainment show...in my opinion.

What is the current status of your daughter?

theking · 10-11-2014, 02:48 PM

BTW...I spend alot of my time watching the various C-Span channels for much of my news. You can hear and see the words come out of the "horses mouth" instead of being filtered through some news anchor.

Vendzilla · 10-11-2014, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

I watch the Shepard Smith hour of news on Fox on occasion. In my opinion it is the only real news show on Fox. Hannity and to a lessor extent O'rielly are just the National Enquirer of the airway. All of the others that appear on Fox are just conservative talking heads. The five is just a conservative entertainment show...in my opinion.

What is the current status of your daughter?

I like Shepard Smiths News Room, very high tech.

I don't care for Hannity, Oreilly I like better, but when you listen to either, it's mostly opinion.

My daughter graduated from college, so she came to live with me for a while she looks for a job. Given that she's a veteran and has a degree, gives a good chance at getting something good. She's been applying for all sorts of things.
I love having her around, she's been going to the gym with me 4 times a week, great motivation! She also gets along with my fiancee really well.

dyna mo · 10-11-2014, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axeman

Seems Kane is the only one who read it. The Supreme Court only ruled on the Wisconsin law for this year and how they handled the mail in voting instructions.

They did not rule that it's unconstitutional to require ID.

I read the article, and while I'm rarely in agreement with the op, in the article it does state the texas voter law was/is unconstitutional.

theking · 10-11-2014, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I like Shepard Smiths News Room, very high tech.

I don't care for Hannity, Oreilly I like better, but when you listen to either, it's mostly opinion.

My daughter graduated from college, so she came to live with me for a while she looks for a job. Given that she's a veteran and has a degree, gives a good chance at getting something good. She's been applying for all sorts of things.
I love having her around, she's been going to the gym with me 4 times a week, great motivation! She also gets along with my fiancee really well.

Is she just taking a break from school for awhile and planning on continuing her education at some point?

kane · 10-11-2014, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

That kind of makes sense...except that Fox News has almost double the ratings of MSNBC and CNN combined!

I know damn well that there aren't double the amount of conservatives in this country. And I also know all too well that stupid rednecks hardly watch the news at all (so that would eliminate a big part of the religious right crowd).

Here are the rating for yesterday (Thursday Oct. 9 2014). Just look at those numbers. It's not even close:
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/201...9-2014/312792/

When you add them all together and combine CNN, MSNBC and HLN their numbers are close to what FOX gets. Then add in ABC, NBC etc which are more left leaning as well.

To me it is like this. If you have a town with 1 burger joint and five pizza places. Those pizza places will split the customers that want pizza on any given night, but the burger joint gets all of the customers who are in the mood for a burger.

I agree with you that FOX likely has the more entertaining pundits like Hannity and O'Riley. I don't really watch any of those guys (on any station), but from what I have seen, if you share the beliefs of these guys they do a good job entertaining you.

Vendzilla · 10-11-2014, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

Is she just taking a break from school for awhile and planning on continuing her education at some point?

She took off the summer and is going to get a good job that hopefully pay for her continued education. Because at this point, she has no student loans to pay and that's a good thing.

She wants to continue to get her doctorate as a Anthropologist.

Robbie · 10-11-2014, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane

When you add them all together and combine CNN, MSNBC and HLN their numbers are close to what FOX gets. Then add in ABC, NBC etc which are more left leaning as well.

I'm not seeing that in the numbers on that ratings page. How are you coming up with those figures?

What I see is that if you add them all together, FOX is almost a third again bigger than all the rest combined.

Am I missing something on that page?

kane · 10-11-2014, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

I'm not seeing that in the numbers on that ratings page. How are you coming up with those figures?

What I see is that if you add them all together, FOX is almost a third again bigger than all the rest combined.

Am I missing something on that page?

If you start with the first set of numbers for total day you get Fox at 1,199,000 viewers. The total of the others (I'm not including FBN because I'm not sure who that is) totals 1,151,000.

Moving on to primetime Fox has 1,927,000. The others combined have 1,637,000 so Fox has a bigger lead, but it isn't massive.

Where Fox excels is at their primetime shows. Their 6-9pm shows crush the others in their ratings and that adds to the total overall ratings.

When you add in broadcast networks it isn't even close. ABC World News tonight draws in about 8.4 million viewers while NBC gets 8.2 and CBS gets 6.6.

If you add it all together it means that on any given night roughly 2 million people get their "news" from conservative slanted fox and about 24.8 million get their "news" from a more liberal or moderately slanted source.

Robbie · 10-11-2014, 06:36 PM

Wow I had no idea the networks were getting any viewers anymore for the news or anything else.

That's pretty impressive. I'm guessing it's nothing close to the numbers they used to get before cable television got big.

kane · 10-11-2014, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

Wow I had no idea the networks were getting any viewers anymore for the news or anything else.

That's pretty impressive. I'm guessing it's nothing close to the numbers they used to get before cable television got big.

I would agree. I seem to remember not even that long ago if a network show had 10-15 million viewers it was considered a decent hit. Now if a network show gets 8-9 million viewers it is a big hit.

marlboroack · 10-11-2014, 07:24 PM

Smooth move

theking · 10-11-2014, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

She took off the summer and is going to get a good job that hopefully pay for her continued education. Because at this point, she has no student loans to pay and that's a good thing.

She wants to continue to get her doctorate as a Anthropologist.

Interesting field of study. I take it her GI College Fund has been used up.

DAMNMAN · 10-11-2014, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustDaveXxx

Interesting.

I don't see peoples right to vote being affected.

Everyone by law has to carry identification. Licenses, state ID, passport, etc. By law when a peace officer asks a citizen for his or her ID it must be presented by law as to establish the ID of that person for what ever reason.

I get asked for ID when I go to a bar, I get asked ID when I use my credit card, when I go in for medical services, when I buy scratchers at the market, When I buy spray pain at The Home Depot, When I buy Cigarettes, When I buy alcohol, when I rent a anything, etc.

My point is that in everyday life we are constantly getting asked to Identify ourselves to prove who we say we are.

Now that we get asked to ID ourselves prior to voting as to prevent voter fraud? And somehow thats unconstitutional?

People whining because they get asked to show something that they are suppose to always have on them. This is just comical to me.

Just Dave

Untrue - You do not have to provide ID to police if the police do not have a reason, such as suspecting a crime has been committed. They can and will ask, but you don't have to comply. Unless you are a sheep. If you do not flex your rights you will lose them!!!

Vendzilla · 10-11-2014, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

Interesting field of study. I take it her GI College Fund has been used up.

I believe it pretty much is. It was the Post 9/11 bill that Bush put in place. Basically giving a free ride to those that want an education. They paid for everything. I wish they had that when I was in.

She got her degree in 3 1/2 years

Barry-xlovecam · 10-12-2014, 06:13 AM

When I got my passport renewed this year I paid an additional $30 for a US Passport Card. The mechanism exists for a national identity card. This is a picture ID card proving citizenship -- this should be provided to all citizens over 18 years of age for a nominal fee like a state id or driver's license. This Passport Card proves USA citizenship and the right to vote -- that person's name would be on the voter registration roll for the jurisdiction -- case closed -- have a nice day.

Other forms of ID DO NOT PROVE CITIZENSHIP.

TheSquealer · 10-12-2014, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAMNMAN

Untrue - You do not have to provide ID to police if the police do not have a reason, such as suspecting a crime has been committed. They can and will ask, but you don't have to comply. Unless you are a sheep. If you do not flex your rights you will lose them!!!

The laws are different from state to state... you're quite wrong. Some states have laws which explicitly require you to provide an ID to an officer when he asks,... and a huge number of states require you to identify yourself to the officer, in which case he can look it up.

It's people like you which tend to end up getting arrested and then want to cry victim.

2MuchMark · 10-12-2014, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom_PM

All of these political tactics designed to LIMIT VOTERS are based on a false premise; that there is widespread voter fraud. There isn't. End.

2MuchMark · 10-12-2014, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

So let me get this straight...Mark Prince has to show his ID in order to vote in Canada, but somehow it's "voter repression" if we do it in the U.S. too?

That's interesting. Typical of faux-liberals who tell you to "Do as we say, not as we do"

I didn't say anything about that. I just linked to a story saying the was was blocked from going into effect. Again Robbie, please don't speak for me.

crockett · 10-12-2014, 04:27 PM

Look voting fraud is real.. This is video of the same people voting over and over. In Texas of all places..

For some reason these people think it's ok to vote more than once.

PornoMonster · 10-12-2014, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustDaveXxx

I would have to agree with you on all your points. Nice post.

But if people are to stupid to go get an ID; Something that they are by law required to do, don't you think that they are probably not smart enough to understand the issues they are voting for or against? Just a thought.

Just Dave

EXACTLY......

My state you have to have ID to vote. I honestly believe that all the illegals would line up if they did not check ID.

My state also gives you a FREE ID if you tell them you need it to Vote.

SO as far as it being a Poll tax, blah.
You need that ID to get everything else in the USA.
You need that ID for all Government assistance.

This just blows my mind, people do not have to show ID to vote for the most powerful position in the USA....

PornoMonster · 10-12-2014, 08:59 PM

Hell make it MANDATORY you MUST vote if you are an American.....

Robbie · 10-12-2014, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by **********

I didn't say anything about that. I just linked to a story saying the was was blocked from going into effect. Again Robbie, please don't speak for me.

So you are saying that having to show ID is NOT "voter repression"?

Good, then we can finally agree on something.

Axeman · 10-12-2014, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

I read the article, and while I'm rarely in agreement with the op, in the article it does state the texas voter law was/is unconstitutional.

The Texas ruling was in US District Court by a Federal judge in Texas, not the Supreme Court.

Wisconsin was a ruling by the Supreme Court in how they handled the lack of proper notification when sending out the absentee/mail ballots.

So far the Supreme Court has yet to weigh in on whether or not requiring ID is unconstitutional.

Axeman · 10-18-2014, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

I read the article, and while I'm rarely in agreement with the op, in the article it does state the texas voter law was/is unconstitutional.

An update:

Quote:

The United States Supreme Court has denied the Application to Vacate the Stay filed by Texas Voter ID opponents. Senate Bill 14 Texas Voter ID requirements will be used in the November election. Justices Sotomayor, Ginsburg, and Kagan dissented. Greg Abbott, the Texas Attorney General, vows to continue to fight this battle in the courts.

Application to Vacate the Stay the order that was issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Breitbart Texas reported that the Fifth Circuit had acted quickly to unanimously rule in favor of Texas by staying the decision of Judge Nelva Gonzalez Ramos, an Obama appointee sitting in the Corpus Christi Division of the U.S. District Courts for the Southern District of Texas.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-T...oming-Election

Vendzilla · 10-18-2014, 12:58 PM

Ok, for those that think there is NO voter fraud
1,099 felons voted in Minnesota and the race was won by 312 votes.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/yo...rticle/2504163

Which is why we now have Al Franken as a senator

177 people have been convicted SO FAR of voting fraudulently in the Senate race. Another 66 are awaiting trial

JustDaveXxx · 10-18-2014, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Ok, for those that think there is NO voter fraud
1,099 felons voted in Minnesota and the race was won by 312 votes.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/yo...rticle/2504163

Which is why we now have Al Franken as a senator

177 people have been convicted SO FAR of voting fraudulently in the Senate race. Another 66 are awaiting trial

Nice post!!

Agree or disagree with anyone on an issue, you always have to respect the guy that finds a good source to back up his argument.

Much respect!

And I like what Robbie posts as well. I usually agree with Robbie across the board on all issues, I'm just nicer about things when I disagree with others on an issue.

And to add I do see the OPs point on some of the issues.

Just Dave

kane · 10-18-2014, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Ok, for those that think there is NO voter fraud
1,099 felons voted in Minnesota and the race was won by 312 votes.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/yo...rticle/2504163

Which is why we now have Al Franken as a senator

177 people have been convicted SO FAR of voting fraudulently in the Senate race. Another 66 are awaiting trial

Just out of curiosity, how will a voter ID law stop this from happening?

These people clearly registered to vote and were on the voter rolls in order to vote in the first place and felons can get drivers licenses.

I'm not saying this is something to ignore, clearly this is a case of voter fraud, but I wonder how a voter ID law will stop this from happening.

Robbie · 10-18-2014, 02:47 PM

Actually, I kinda think it's bullshit that a felon can't vote.

For instance, I have a friend who is a very successful guy. Big in the community where he lives. Gives to charities. Sponsors a little league baseball team and is always giving money to local causes.

BUT...back in the early 1980's he was arrested dealing blow. He was 19 years old at the time.

Fast forward 30 years. He finally had to pull every string he had to get the governor of his state to issue him a pardon a few years back so he no longer had a felony conviction on his record.

It kept him from doing a lot of things...including voting.

Seems like that should be unconstitutional.

10-10-2014, 04:29 PM	#51
Robbie Leaner, Meaner, Faster Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Vegas Posts: 20,959	@kane Those are some interesting points you have. But how does it only "help" one party? So Democrats are too stupid to vote on the actual election day or only at the voting station assigned to them, but Republicans are somehow superior and able to do that with ease? I just don't get it. If the voter laws affect everyone...then how can it only "help" Republican candidates? __________________ -Robbie ClaudiaMarie.Com

10-10-2014, 04:52 PM	#55
Robbie Leaner, Meaner, Faster Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Vegas Posts: 20,959	That's cool kane, but "taking advantage" of early voting days doesn't mean that they are completely incapable of just voting on election day. It seems as if the studies are saying that Dems are so stupid and lazy that unless you make it 1000% convenient for them to vote any time and any where...then they simply WON'T vote. And Republicans apparently care enough about their country to vote the same way that people voted for over 200 years. I know that can't be true. So why do these studies seem to indicate that? And what the fuck is wrong with people in the Democrat party that they have to be treated so gently? Do they want us to wipe their asses for them too? Holy fuck. What a sorry ass bunch of people that can't vote unless it fits their schedule. Maybe they could fit it in between their spa visit and their round of golf? __________________ -Robbie ClaudiaMarie.Com

10-10-2014, 05:09 PM	#57
bronco67 Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 29,032	Maybe people who work 3 jobs because they can barely make ends meet need that extra flexibility that early voting provides. People who vote Republican are usually making ends meet, unless they have other motives like "freedom and guns". __________________

10-10-2014, 09:39 PM	#59
Axeman Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Swamp Posts: 5,201	Seems Kane is the only one who read it. The Supreme Court only ruled on the Wisconsin law for this year and how they handled the mail in voting instructions. They did not rule that it's unconstitutional to require ID. __________________ XXXRewards - Karups - Boyfun - Jawked. Paying on time since 1997. Contact me at brent [at] xxxrewards.com

10-11-2014, 12:25 PM	#62
Robbie Leaner, Meaner, Faster Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Vegas Posts: 20,959	Actually, the IRS admitted quite a few things in front of Congress that they did. And even with the words coming out of their own mouths...there were Obamapologists on here saying it was all a "non-issue" being caused by evil Republicans. Good lord, could you imagine if this had been a Republican president in office? The media would have been calling for his head and the faux-Liberals of GFY would be furious and screaming for impeachment. __________________ -Robbie ClaudiaMarie.Com

10-11-2014, 12:52 PM	#66
Robbie Leaner, Meaner, Faster Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Vegas Posts: 20,959	Actually I don't think that's why Fox has higher ratings. Fox sucks up to the Republicans almost as bad as MSNBC sucks up to the Dems. I think it's simply that the clowns on Fox News (OReilly and Hannity) are far more entertaining than the clowns of MSNBC (Maddow, Sharpton, and Matthews). Get some better, more charismatic people at CNN or MSNBC and they could turn that around. The news channels are just entertainment channels now. Look at CNN. They brought in Piers Morgan. What a joke! And now they have "shows" on CNN instead of news (though I have to say that Anthony Bourdain's show is fucking awesome...but it's not the news) MSNBC? Forget about it. It's like you walked into a roomful of people from "Revenge Of The Nerds". They are so boring and condescending it's pathetic. No, Fox wins because they have charismatic entertainers who love to bring on people with oppposing views and argue with them like it's the Jerry Springer show. And that's entertaining. It's not "news", but neither is MSNBC. To see the actual news...you can go to Fox and watch the top of the hour news break where they just report what's going on with no "opinion". Other than that? Tune in to CBS, NBC, or ABC news and watch the first five minutes (which is when they actually report shit). AlJazeera America reports news sometimes as well. __________________ -Robbie ClaudiaMarie.Com

10-11-2014, 01:50 PM	#69
OldJeff Big Fucking hahahaha Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 2,056	It is actually funny to me that people actually believe we have somehow had a change in political parties since Reagan, It is actually hard to see a difference in any of them once you look below the on the surface buzzwords, and talking points __________________ "As pornographers we must act responsibly! ;))"- Nickatilynx I might be Old and Tired, but at least I don't support a whiney cunt

10-11-2014, 02:48 PM	#73
theking Nice Kitty Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: The good old USA!!! Posts: 21,053	BTW...I spend alot of my time watching the various C-Span channels for much of my news. You can hear and see the words come out of the "horses mouth" instead of being filtered through some news anchor. __________________ When you're running down my country hoss...you're walking on the fighting side of me! FOR THE LYING LOWLIFE POSTING AS PATHFINDER...https://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...athfinder.html

10-11-2014, 06:36 PM	#81
Robbie Leaner, Meaner, Faster Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Vegas Posts: 20,959	Wow I had no idea the networks were getting any viewers anymore for the news or anything else. That's pretty impressive. I'm guessing it's nothing close to the numbers they used to get before cable television got big. __________________ -Robbie ClaudiaMarie.Com

10-11-2014, 07:24 PM	#83
marlboroack So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: ☣ Posts: 9,327	Smooth move

10-12-2014, 06:13 AM	#87
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	When I got my passport renewed this year I paid an additional $30 for a US Passport Card. The mechanism exists for a national identity card. This is a picture ID card proving citizenship -- this should be provided to all citizens over 18 years of age for a nominal fee like a state id or driver's license. This Passport Card proves USA citizenship and the right to vote -- that person's name would be on the voter registration roll for the jurisdiction -- case closed -- have a nice day. Other forms of ID DO NOT PROVE CITIZENSHIP.

10-12-2014, 04:27 PM	#91
crockett in a van by the river Industry Role: Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 76,806	Look voting fraud is real.. This is video of the same people voting over and over. In Texas of all places.. For some reason these people think it's ok to vote more than once.

10-12-2014, 08:59 PM	#93
PornoMonster Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 2,257	Hell make it MANDATORY you MUST vote if you are an American..... __________________ $6 a Month 4 Blade Razors, 4 Cartridges, Includes shipping! Domains 4 Sale CashForVideos.com - Pussy.biz - FootPorn.com - SoloMovie.com - CollegeGirlCams.com - AmateurCamGirls.com - PR3 4 Letter Domain

10-18-2014, 12:58 PM	#97
Vendzilla Biker Gnome Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: cell#324 Posts: 23,200	Ok, for those that think there is NO voter fraud 1,099 felons voted in Minnesota and the race was won by 312 votes. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/yo...rticle/2504163 Which is why we now have Al Franken as a senator 177 people have been convicted SO FAR of voting fraudulently in the Senate race. Another 66 are awaiting trial __________________ Webair died? Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants think about that

10-18-2014, 02:47 PM	#100
Robbie Leaner, Meaner, Faster Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Vegas Posts: 20,959	Actually, I kinda think it's bullshit that a felon can't vote. For instance, I have a friend who is a very successful guy. Big in the community where he lives. Gives to charities. Sponsors a little league baseball team and is always giving money to local causes. BUT...back in the early 1980's he was arrested dealing blow. He was 19 years old at the time. Fast forward 30 years. He finally had to pull every string he had to get the governor of his state to issue him a pardon a few years back so he no longer had a felony conviction on his record. It kept him from doing a lot of things...including voting. Seems like that should be unconstitutional. __________________ -Robbie ClaudiaMarie.Com