[speechlesstx]

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.

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?

[speechlesstx]

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

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??

[excon]

Like ending the imperial presidency of Barack Obama???????

Hello again, Steve:

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

[talaniman]

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

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.

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.

[talaniman]

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?

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!!

[paraclete]

You can't hurry a process but two hundred years should be long enough

[excon]

Hello again,

Hmmmm... Florida REPUBLICANS get caught registering dead people... Whoda thunk THAT?

excon

[speechlesstx]

Hello again, Steve:

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

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?

Those aren't radical right-wing complaints. They should be yours.

[talaniman]

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!!!!!!!!!

[speechlesstx]

Hello again,

Hmmmm... Florida REPUBLICANS get caught registering dead people... Whoda thunk THAT?

excon

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."

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?

[speechlesstx]

[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.

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.

What part of illegal taxes do you not get?

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.

Obama does not have the right to redefine the church. What part of that don't you get?

[excon]

"Republicans on Thursday fired a vendor suspected of submitting 108 questionable new voter registrations."

Can you really not tell the difference between being accountable and being guilty?

Hello again, Steve:

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

[talaniman]

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.

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.

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.

[talaniman]

Hello again, Steve:

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

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.)

They had known of this fellow for YEARS, and are just now firing him?

[excon]

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

[tomder55]

Hello again, Steve:

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

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 them

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

[TUT317]

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 .

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.

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

[talaniman]

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.

[speechlesstx]

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.

[excon]

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