At least someone else admits it's fair. That's all I've been trying to pry out of some here. So if we make it fair then no problems, eh?Quote:
Originally Posted by TUT317
|
At least someone else admits it's fair. That's all I've been trying to pry out of some here. So if we make it fair then no problems, eh?Quote:
Originally Posted by TUT317
Like the IRS imposing taxes without consent of Congress?? Like rendering the first amendment right to freedom of religion irrelevant?? Like ending the imperial presidency of Barack Obama??Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Hello again, Steve:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
What's going to END is the radical right wing of the Republican party. After the forthcoming LANDSLIDE, THAT kind of thinking will be PURGED.
excon
I attribute nothing to you, or your position personally. But that doesn't mean your buddies can get away with what they are trying to do. You may not be racially motivated, probably not, but I was explicit and clear as to what I think is the republican strategy to target minorities for voter suppression, and YOUR guy courts the right wing white male working vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
That's all he's has got. Don't be insulted, I assure you my ire, as strong as yours is NOT directed at you personally.
I admitted it was fair, and pointed out how long it took, and why it took so long. The process was fair, and we got a fair result, not so in other states, but eventually it will be. You can't hurry the process because you want it right NOW!!Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
You can't hurry a process but two hundred years should be long enough
Hello again,
Hmmmm... Florida REPUBLICANS get caught registering dead people... Whoda thunk THAT?
excon
Dude, you're the one that says Obama is Bush on steroids and claims to respect the constitution. Where is mandating a violation of your religious beliefs in the first amendment? Where is the power of the IRS to impose taxes enumerated in the sixteenth amendment? Who gave Obama the right to unilaterally decide if an American citizen lives or dies?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Those aren't radical right-wing complaints. They should be yours.
QUOTE by speechlesstx;
Like the IRS imposing taxes without consent of Congress??
The ACA was passed in Congress,the president signed it,its the law! Legal,and constitutional,SCOTUS said so.I get you don'tlike it.
Like rendering the first amendment right to freedom of religion irrelevant??
Business or church, take your pick, because you cannot force or rights at the expense of mine. I get you don't like that either, but churches and business is subject to the laws of the land,like I am,and you are.
Like ending the imperial presidency of Barack Obama??
You may not like that either, but thats what elections are about. VOTE!!!!!!!!!
Funny, but that's not at all what the article says right from the opening line. "Republicans on Thursday fired a vendor suspected of submitting 108 questionable new voter registrations."Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Can you really not tell the difference between being accountable and being guilty? If you had voter ID you couldn't complain about alleged Republican voter fraud. See how that works?
[QUOTE=talaniman;3283914]QUOTE by speechlesstx;
Like the IRS imposing taxes without consent of Congress??
The ACA was passed in Congress,the president signed it,its the law! Legal,and constitutional,SCOTUS said so.I get you don'tlike it.
What part of illegal taxes do you not get?Quote:
A president who says “I haven’t raised taxes” has authorized his Internal Revenue Service issue a “final rule” that will illegally tax some 12 million individuals, plus large employers, in as many as 40 states beginning in 2014. Oklahoma’s attorney general has asked a federal court to block this rule. Members of Congress have introduced legislation in both the House and the Senate to quash it.
At first glance, it might not seem that the IRS is up to anything nefarious. The rule in question concerns the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s tax credits, not the law’s tax increases. The tax credits are intended to offset the cost of insurance premiums for low- and middle-income workers.
For many Americans, however, those tax credits are like an anchor disguised as a life vest. The mere fact that a taxpayer is eligible for a tax credit can trigger tax liabilities against both the taxpayer (under the act’s “individual mandate”) and her employer (under the “employer mandate”). In 2016, these tax credits will trigger a tax of $2,085 on many families of four earning as little as $24,000. An employer with 100 workers could face a tax of $140,000 if even one of his workers is eligible for a tax credit.
Obama does not have the right to redefine the church. What part of that don't you get?Quote:
Like rendering the first amendment right to freedom of religion irrelevant??
Business or church, take your pick, because you cannot force or rights at the expense of mine. I get you don't like that either, but churches and business is subject to the laws of the land,like I am,and you are.
Hello again, Steve:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Well, OF COURSE, they fired 'em... They got caught, didn't they? Oh, right. This was a rogue organization and in no way should reflect on the Republican party...
Bwa, ha ha ha ha..
excon
The flawed logic leads to a flawed conclusion since the law is structured for larger companies to have insurance, and most already do. The only ones even affected are the taxpayers that can afford insurance but don't buy it, and pass the cost of care to others through the emergency room.Quote:
For many Americans, however, those tax credits are like an anchor disguised as a life vest. The mere fact that a taxpayer is eligible for a tax credit can trigger tax liabilities against both the taxpayer (under the act's “individual mandate”) and her employer (under the “employer mandate”). In 2016, these tax credits will trigger a tax of $2,085 on many families of four earning as little as $24,000. An employer with 100 workers could face a tax of $140,000 if even one of his workers is eligible for a tax credit.
That's PARTLY what the expansion of medicaid was about. But it's the states that are fighting that expansion of eligibility. That's what makes your opinion piece a flawed piece of paper. Including the false assertion that employers will be penalized by poor employees who cannot be covered. Its simple, over 100 employees, have insurance for them, and they have no liabilities, or tax obligations, plus they get premium support through the IRS!
And the government does have a right to define a church for tax purposes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
They had known of this fellow for YEARS, and are just now firing him?Quote:
Sproul owns another company, Lincoln Strategy Group, that was paid about $70,000 by the Mitt Romney campaign during the primaries to gather signatures. He said he created Strategic Allied Consulting at the request of the Republican National Committee because of the bad publicity stemming from the past allegations. In 2004, there were allegations in states such as Nevada and Oregon that employees of his firm -- which had a similar contract with the RNC -- registered Democratic voters and then destroyed their forms. (Sproul noted that no criminal charges were ever filed.)
Hello again,
If you don't understand voter suppression Sarah Silverman explains it well.. Yeah, she swears a little bit... So, what the f**k is wrong with that?
excon
This case should be proof positive that States should have a legitimate voter photo ID system in place . I don't trust either party . Both are quite capable of fraud . In this case however ,the Repubics hired a company called Strategic Allied Consulting to register voters .It was an outsourcing .It was a mistake to hire themQuote:
Originally Posted by excon
That firm is cooperating with the state election officials and it appears to be a single employee who turned in all the suspect forms .The firm fired the employee ;and the State GOP fired the firm .Yesterday the State GOP also took the additional step of filing an election fraud complaint against the firm .
I wonder if the Dems would take similar measures when a SEIU "volunteer " were also found handing in frauduent registrations... oh no you say... that can't happen .... the public unions would never stoop so low .Bwaa haaa haaa haa
They bused in and paid protesters $11 bucks an hour to go to a Romeny event in Cleveland and stage a spontaneous protest recently .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=G5DTqvX74O4
Yes, but this is the problem you cannot address because there is no solution. Namely, universal fairness of ID. Laws under the system you have.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Indiana may well be the ideal blueprint for fairness of I.D. laws,but other states are under no obligation to adopt this state's laws. They will implement I.D. laws that best suit their purpose.
The only way I can see to make some type of consistent attempt at fairness is a top down approach. This should go a long way in guaranteeing equal access. Equal access needs to be addressed before you can tackle the fairness issue. You are putting the cart before the horse and wondering way it isn't pulling it.
Tut
You are right TUT, as I think if enough attention and thoughtfulness was paid to the process of implementation as it was in writing the law we would have a fair law. It's a logistical problem really and that's the difference between Indiana and most states. One Indiana wrapped its head around getting the freaking ID to everyone, case closed.
You can't do it in 6 months unless you get busy with the logistics. I say again,it took Indiana 3 years.
Makes one think that republican lawmakers are more interested in having a law right NOW, with no mind as to serving the needs of the people. That smacks of a hidden agenda to me.
Tal, you know this has been in the works for much, much longer than your deliberately deceptive six months. Not to mention the faxt that elections have fixed dates, it's only logical to have the rules in place for the election. Your side is doing all they can to avoid implementation which is the whole point of a law.
Hello again,
I wonder if a girl working for the COUNTY CLERK, and who's ONLY registering Republicans, is voter suppression of another sort??
Nahhh... Republicans want INTEGRITY in the vote, right?? Bwa, ha ha ha.
excon
The girl was clearly not working for the county clerk's office . Clearly she was confused because the registration forms have to be returned to the county clerk's office when completed . Clearly she was a young volunteer for the local Romney campaign .
Is this ambush video the best you got ? Gee ;you would think she was intimidating voters at the polls with billy clubs or something... and if you think that selective registration.
Is a strategy that is only employed by one of the parties I'd be surprised . In my youth I worked on such campaign canvas drives for the Dems and I can assure you we were only looking to register select voters .Let the other side do their registration campaigns .THat's the way the game is played . AGAIN... all the more reason for proper voter ID .
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
It's only clear if you IGNORE what she said. Me?? I'm NOT going to do that. I know what I saw. It was a CRIME in process.. If you did it too, NO WONDER you think voter suppression is cool..
excon
And then I heard about this. I wonder how many more there are like this one.
It is not the practice of the county clerks to send out young volunteers to canvas grocery stores and do registration drives. If it were ;there would've been something clearly indicating that this was a drive by the local government and a public notice . You're really fishing here.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
I wonder when the arrests will begin? This is illegal material.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
http://www.floridacriminallawblog.com/2009/05/recording_telephone_conversati.html
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
I'll give you that. However, who signs her paycheck, or whether she's a volunteer, changes NOTHING... In fact, it CONFIRMS that Republicans are SUPPRESSING the vote... That's what we've been saying all along.
excon
Why the recording illegal? "The volunteer, who was not identified, did not hang up before moving onto her next call. Her pitch to the next person was picked up on the first person's answering machine."Quote:
Originally Posted by califdadof3
Video falsely claims to show Colorado county clerk employee registering only supporters of Mitt Romney - Political Intelligence - A national political and campaign blog from The Boston Globe - Boston.comQuote:
The statement made in this video is both unfortunate and inaccurate,” Williams said. “My office does not and will not engage in partisan voter registration. It is the duty of the clerk's office to ensure that elections are conducted in a fair and honest manner; this includes allowing anyone to register to vote regardless of their political party affiliation.”
It is legal for party workers to target supporters of a particular candidate during voter registration drives, but they cannot deny forms to people who back another candidate.
The current chairman of the El Paso County Republican Party, Eli Bremer, said in an interview that the woman in the video is 20-years-old and was in her first day on the job as a victory office staff member. Bremer said the local GOP works closely with the RNC victory office and that “one thing they hammer into you during training is that every paper you collect must be turned in to the clerk's office.”
Bremer said he talked at length with the woman, whose name has not been released, and said she was merely flustered by the shopper's questions and misidentified her employer. He insisted there was no collaboration on the voter registration drive between the victory office and Williams or the clerk's office.
The person who posted the video, whose YouTube username is "golddiggermom," denied the Clerk's office's request to remove the part about the woman incorrectly stating she works for them.
Hello dad:Quote:
Originally Posted by califdadof3
Me too. But, somehow I don't think it'll happen.. Talk about shooting the messenger... You just don't like it cause you got CAUGHT.
excon
Please... this is no different that ACORN of SEIU registering voters that they think will help their political goals . I've worked campaigns and offered to drive voters to the polls. Now ;if someone called I'd pick them up . But ;if I was doing the calling ;I'd make sure they were registered in the party I was working for . That is how elections are conducted at the local level.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Its not about that. Its about the law. Even stupid people get a break sometimes. Its like having been searched and they found drugs without the warrant. That is why there are rules surrounding the recording of persons.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
We can file the lawsuits but it's the courts who strike the law down because you didn't cross your T's and dot your I's. So its not like you haven't had the time to do it right you don't seem to have the inclination.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I mean if things were as fair as you say why do the courts strike the law down and send it back to the state to make changes or drop the law? Or just whack it from the get go?
Naw its NOT the dems blocking you it's the sloppy way you present the law. Good idea, sloppy implementation.
The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification
Seems the court cannot trust the state to handle its business for THIS election.Quote:
"I expected more photo IDs to have been issued by this time," Simpson said. "For this reason, I accept Petitioners' argument that in the remaining five weeks before the general election, the gap between the photo IDs issued and the estimated need will not be closed.... Consequently, I am not still convinced in my predictive judgment that there will be no voter disenfranchisement arising out of the Commonwealth's implementation of a voter identification requirement for purposes of the upcoming election. Under these circumstances, I am obliged to enter a preliminary injunction."
Neither do I given the constant changes. Don't you guys get you have to have a credible process in place when you pass a law? Back to the drawing board, you have two years, do it right!!
Hello again,
A judge blocks Pennsylvania from enforcing voter ID law, citing "disenfranchisement" concerns. Wow.. Whoda thunk that??
The NEED for ID wasn't the issue, as we've been saying all along.. It was the PROCESS that was flawed. It's spelled p-r-o-c-e-s-s...
One down, 32 to go.
excon
The judge reversed his own decisions based on State Supreme court "guidance" . They told him basically to find some way to reverse yourself. So that is what he did.
Here is the language of the State Supreme Court's instructions :
Overall, we are confronted with an ambitious effort on the part of the General Assembly to bring the new identification procedure into effect within a relatively short timeframe and an implementation process which has by no means been seamless in light of the serious operational constraints faced by the executive branch. Given this state of affairs, we are not satisfied with a mere predictive judgment based primarily on the assurances of government officials, even though we have no doubt they are proceeding in good faith.
Thus, we will return the matter to the Commonwealth Court to make a present assessment of the actual availability of the alternate identification cards on a developed record in light of the experience since the time the cards became available. In this regard, the court is to consider whether the procedures being used for deployment of the cards comport with the requirement of liberal access which the General Assembly attached to the issuance of PennDOT identification cards. If they do not, or if the Commonwealth Court is not still convinced in its predictive judgment that there will be no voter disenfranchisement arising out of the Commonwealth's implementation of a voter identification requirement for purposes of the upcoming election, that court is obliged to enter a preliminary injunction.
http://www.pacourts.us/OpPosting/Sup...14-2012pco.pdf
The real problem here was that the Penn DOT refused to make the issuance of a ID easier. They sabotaged the law (probably under the orders of their Dem bosses).
Oh an one more thing . The judge says it's OK for poll workers to ask for the IDs . But people who don't produce them can still vote . Now there is a recipe for confusion !
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Given that the only cheaters we found recently were REPUBLICANS, you should be thrilled the law was struck down.. Now you can hire those crooks to register dead Republicans... Better get a lot... Romney is down by 9.
excon
See my addition about the IDs
You mean like the Dem politician who was caught voting in 2 states ?Quote:
Given that the only cheaters we found recently were REPUBLICANS
Their memories are extremely selective. Good thing we're here to give a few reminders.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Yup ;and early voting gives them a chance to vote at multiple locations .
You guys lose in court its foul on the judge or sabotage by democrats. Never is it your own short sighted screw ups. That's why republican appointed judges keep slapping you down.
If you just settle down, look deeper and be more thoughtful with your ideas, they wouldn't STINK so bad. Or stop trying to screw those you don't like, of which the list is ENDLESS! They are still trying to sort out the last debacle you guys caused with this Sproul fellow. And the continuing back pedaling of supporting Todd Akins in Missouri for the senate.
Or waiting for Ryan Romney to tell us who gets screwed when the extract 5 trillion more dollars from the economy. Or why the scaredy fat cats you all call job creators ain't doing their JOB... wait for it... you blame on everybody but THEM!
I love it when you guys screw yourself with BS of your own making! I really do!
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:52 PM. |