Yeah, sure, it's ALWAYS the wascally wepublicans' fault for everything not-so-good. The same ol' diatribe is getting stale.
If the Democrats want to insure proper election results, with no fixin' by those horrible Republicans, I would have thought by now that THEY would've passed legislation with funding to get ALL people of voting age the means to an ID, free of charge, useful for any purpose as well as voting.
But no, it's easier to curse the darkness. Time for the excuses that run the gamut of possibility to end, and just get 'er done already.
0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Obviously, loco, you are not a worldly person. You have no idea of what the people do in the big cities. Most all of them have NO vehicles. Therefore, no drivers license. In addition, in some of the states the time frames were so tight that many of these people could not get to the centers to get picture ID's. Of course, we also have waiting lines for four or five hours because of the restrictiveness of the rules. But, as long as the Republicans can restrict the votes they want, it is ok. The only way the Republicans win is to fix the voting setup.
0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
No voter would need be disenfranchised if IDs were required. One person, one vote. Simple.
Voters suppression and gerrymandering political districts are a thousand times the problem you are so worried about. Disenfranchising millions of voters seems to be ok if Republicans are doing it.
Veritas, two pieces that were interesting reading about voter fraud.
rnla . org/votefraud . asp
electionlawblog . org/wp-content/uploads/Natl-Center-report . pdf
The second would probably be more to a non-partisan's liking than the first. But that's just my opinion.
1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
C'mon, Veritas, that's the one we know about, right?
I like how people supporting the Republican position on voter fraud come up with one person (therefor supporting fraud ratio of .00000659%) and claim it's a legitimate concern.
Kinda like finding one bone in a chicken MacSandwiche and closing all 14,000 restaurants. To alot of Republicans, this makes sense.
1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
I read an article or two about Melowese Richardson, the Cincinnati poll worker that Dusty referenced. She considered it her duty to get the President re-elected.
One of the faithful, eh, billgrr?
What did I just say about sore losers?
You've got to pay attention, billgrr, in spite of your being a top poster and all.
2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
So "confused" voters' results shouldn't stand, when leftists don't get the result they deem appropriate?
I get it. It's "hanging chads" deja vu, all over again. Sore losers.
Real time example: Pres. Obama won re-election, and there's no one going to court over that, even if some people didn't care for the result.
Rest assured, lefties. We can respect the results of a vote. Obviously, better than you.
So the voters were confused?
Yeah, only when a leftist result is at stake...
So all the citizens in California who voted for Prop 8? Their votes didn't matter because....?
Bill I'm sorry to hear your morals are so low you will except anything.
I'm sorry to hear you don't believe in God. I'm sorry to hear you don't believe Bible Passages
But what I am really sorry about is you are willing to except time off and pay for Christian holidays like Christmas and Easter and Good Friday.
Just make you even more of a hypocrite. Two faced comes to mine.
1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
8:35 Posted in wrong area...My Bad!
0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Farm Subsidies However, the largest fraction of corporate welfare spending, about 40%, went through the Department of Agriculture, most of it in the form of farm subsidies
The Big Picture So now let’s look at the big picture. The final totals are $59 billion, 3 percent of the total federal budget, for regular welfare and $92 billion, 5 percent of the total federal budget, for corporations. So, the government spends roughly 50% more on corporate welfare than it does on these particular public assistance programs
Can anyone weigh in on how big of a Welfare Queen North Dakota is or are you embarrassed because of your family history?
1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
billldoesntgetit Mar-29-13 3:52 PM
"Goes to show just how dumb and brainwashed the Democrats are."
lorexxx...How many times have you used the word "dumb" today?
You simply do not possess the intellect to call anyone that name. You are a Hillbilly with a keyboard and enough cognizance to type and press send...Second graders can do that...Did you know that?
So, the next time you call anybody "dumb"...Look at your thumb and say, Gee am I "Dumb".
3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
According to....well, of course. A Democrat.
2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
If "love is more than a sexual act," why oh why oh why is the court addressing this?
Who says same-sex couples can't draw up contracts? Civil unions were all about contractual rights, of property, of living wills, etc., right? If they weren't, I've been misled.
The term "marriage" over time has meant one thing: a union between a man and a woman. Word history of the word "marriage" shows that it meant the act of consummation itself: if you did it, you were "marrying" one another. Check it out in a good dictionary.
If same-sex couples want to solemnize their relationships, invent a word that all are willing to use. Obviously, "civil union" didn't take. Why does the word have to be "marriage?"
2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
More from the two faced Democrats:
Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., spoke against DOMA, saying it was unnecessary and an intrusion into states' rights to define marriage. But he emphasized his own opposition to gay marriage before expressing reservations about the bill.
"I am not for same-sex marriage. I have said that publicly. I would not vote for same-sex marriage,"
Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California made a similar point. "I personally believe that the legal institution of marriage is the union between a man and a woman," she said. "But, as a matter of public policy, I oppose this legislation."
Billgarr atila the hun.. Whatswhat is your definition of a man who is bigot enough to expect everyone to bow down to him beacues he is gay?
Who is a gay person that thinks the whole world should turn kinky so he can feel good about the way he preforms his needs?
They want us to change the rules so they don't feel like the dirty little people they really are.
Even the animal kingdom is smarter then that..
If God wanted us to all be like them he would have put only one sex on this earth and they would have been equipped to reproduce.
Think about it?? Minotier was right on in all he said yesterday.
It was just to Flaming for the newspaper but it also was just so true!!!
veritas whats your definition of "old"?
My granddaughter is 16 years "old"
How old is old? How much tax is enough?
Both questions no one can answer..
lorexxx...I read your post about remembering the winters of 48 7 49...
Are you old? Are you on Medicare/Medicaid?..Just wondering what Category to put you in beside the obvious!
3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
billldoesntgetit Mar-28-13 10:14 PM
"Are you gay?"
lorexxx...Are you Republican?
I see Bill is back with his Black.
Trying to draw people into your web again BGarr?
Are you gay?
301 4th St SE , Minot, ND 58703 | 701-857-1900