[tomder55]

Face it... if the Indiana law was up for debate today ,the left would oppose it. .

[speechlesstx]

face it ... if the Indiana law was up for debate today ,the left would oppose it. .

Absolutely.

[Wondergirl]

Absolutely.

I'm all for voter ID, but not five minutes before an election.

[tomder55]

Come on... you told us 100 excuses why it would be unfair to ask some people to get id ;even when I pointed out that Pa made provisions for alll who would have difficulty . It doesn't impress me that some liberal judge disagrees . I expected it .

[Wondergirl]

come on .... you told us 100 excuses why it would be unfair to ask some people to get id ;even when I pointed out that Pa made provisions for alll who would have difficulty . It doesn't impress me that some liberal judge disagrees . I expected it .

I'm against ID now just before the election. I never said ID is bad. The discussion was for NOW.

[talaniman]

face it ... if the Indiana law was up for debate today ,the left would oppose it. .

And rightfully so since you guys have a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG history of grand ideas and no thought to process!!

Thats how Indiana got a FAIR voter ID law. Obviously the concept of fair goes against your thinking!! Or you just can't grasp details.

No wonder your guy you want to win doesn't need details of his process to turn you guys on!

[tomder55]

As opposed to your guys jigging up a convoluted Health care law for the whole nation and shoving it up our keisters .What process they they follow ?

[talaniman]

Took two years to pass and two years to implement. You have your own insurance and a doctor, so its not your keister being affected. RIGHT?

[excon]

as opposed to your guys jigging up a convoluted Health care law for the whole nation and shoving it up our keisters .What process they they follow ?

Hello again, tom:

The Constitution. Any questions?

excon

[paraclete]

Took two years to pass and two years to implement. You have your own insurance and a doctor, so its not your keister being affected. RIGHT?

I don't know Tal it seems like he needs a proctologist to me

[tomder55]

Hello again, tom:

The Constitution. Any questions??

excon

don't remember reading anywhere in the constitution that a fine or a penalty =tax .

[TUT317]

Dude, I've been saying for days that states needs to use Indiana's law as a blueprint. In fact, I just used Indiana as an example AGAIN as a FAIR law.



How many times do I have to say it before you stop deflecting and insulting my intelligence? I've more than demonstrated I get your point, now it's your turn. The question before you is not do I understand the difference, but is Indiana's law fair enough for you?

Indiana's laws may well be fair, but that is just one state. That leaves 49 other states to adopt fair or unfair voting practices.

As I said before, Indiana may well be a fair blue print for voter law but there is next to no chance every other state adopting the blueprint. How does the SCOTUS decision help one way or the other in this regard? I don't think it does.

I know of at least least one state ( Wisconsin ) that has been cited here that won't be adopting voter ID laws because the proposed ID laws were ruled unconstitutional by that state. Is SCOTUS going to rule that Wisconsin's voter laws are unconstitutional because of the process they used in formulating their voter laws?

Tut

[tomder55]

Is SCOTUS going to rule that Wisconsin's voter laws are unconstitutional because of the process they used in formulating their voter laws?

that remains to be seen.What we have here is a stalling tactic by the Dems so that voter ID laws won't have an affect on the outcome of the 2012 elections . In other words ;they don't care that the current systems can corrupt the outcome because it works in their favor.

[talaniman]

All Wisconsin had to do was change their state Constitution. They didn't. I Doubt they will try it either. And its presumptuous to even think dems will let the repubs do anything to suppress their votes.

[TUT317]

that remains to be seen.What we have here is a stalling tactic by the Dems so that voter ID laws won't have an affect on the outcome of the 2012 elections . In other words ;they don't care that the current systems can corrupt the outcome because it works in
their favor.

Well, it's a good thing you are a Constitutional Republic, isn't it?

Which every way you want to look at it the problem is insurmountable.


Tut

[talaniman]

Well, it's a good thing you are a Constitutional Republic, isn't it?

which every way you want to look at it the problem is insurmountable.


Tut

Their may be no quick fix, but there is a process, its just republicans are in a hurry to prevent changes that are inevitable.

[tomder55]

Prevent changes ? Your side is the one that is blocking needed changes in the process.

[excon]

don't remember reading anywhere in the consitution that a fine or a penalty =tax .

Hello again, tom:

So, like Romney, you LIKE the good stuff... It's just PAYING for it that you don't like... Sounds familiar..

excon

[talaniman]

We have to block the changes YOU want because they are not well thought out or practical.

What you think we should go along with the rights program and sacrifice our own rights, just so you get the black guy out of the white house and let your guy extract what little money is left to redistribute it his way, and pee on our heads and call it rain?

I don't think so!

We haven't forgotten, or forgiven GWB. You have though.

[tomder55]

We have to block the changes YOU want because they are not well thought out or practical.

What you think we should go along with the rights program and sacrifice our own rights, just so you get the black guy out of the white house and let your guy extract what little money is left to redistribute it his way, and pee on our heads and call it rain?

I don't think so!

We haven't forgotten, or forgiven GWB. You have though.

You attributing my position to racism is insulting and uncalled for .