Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Paul Ryan!!!


fatbeer

Recommended Posts

 

This is probably the closest thing to an admission of clearly smearing this person we can expect from you.

 

Again, let me suggest that you hear what you want to hear, appropriating this issue, the evidence and quotes to a preconceived narrative/meme.

 

I still believe it to be a cockblock of the vote. Maybe I was wrong about his motivations but I really don't think I was... Anything more than a cursory glance at these voter ID laws should raise eyebrows over their true purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 229
  • Created
  • Last Reply

 

Conservatives don't necessarily equal Republican.

 

Correct. And 70-75% of the country is not GOP or conservative. Thus, those continually insisting that this is a GOP only issue AND claim to know that the true GOP intentions are nefarious -- those folks are either political hacks and/or insufferable drones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little levity from a libertarian website (Whether the author is or not I can't know. And even if I knew, that wouldn't entitle me to claim to know anything more *wink)

"Looks like some racist judge loves him some poll taxes. Because he’s racist. And wants to disenfranchise the millions upon millions of people studies from “non-partisan” and “independent” leftwing groups have shown will lose their franchise if they are required to engage in the onerous, unfair, and frankly racisty, polltaxy indignation of having to show a photo ID proving that they are who they are should they wish to vote.After all, it is much easier for our own Justice Department to sue to allow anybody who wants to to vote — several times, in fact, or even while dead, or not a citizen, or not human — than it is to get photo ideas [sic] to people without them. Which is an insurmountable obstacle.Moreso, it is just and fair to sue on behalf of these poor photo-less wretches yearning to be free. And decidedly non-racist, too boot. And decidedly non-polltaxy. Which is how we know that this judge is a racist — having upheld this racist polltax that unfairly and in a very racist way requires people to show ID before voting for other people’s ****."

 

http://beforeitsnews.com/libertarian/2012/08/voter-id-in-pa-survives-2447766.html

Forgive the quoted swear word, but it seems this cite's guidelines/rules have already been bent/broken by one of their promulgators, wink*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Conservatives don't necessarily equal Republican.

 

Correct. And 70-75% of the country is not GOP or conservative. Thus, those continually insisting that this is a GOP only issue AND claim to know that the true GOP intentions are nefarious -- those folks are either political hacks and/or insufferable drones.

 

The Democrats don't want the bills to pass because it's bad for the party and good for the GOP. The Libertarians oppose it on principle. I won't speak for the rest because I don't pay much attention to them.

 

Sadly enough, I'm pretty sure this bill is going to pass in MN. The only hope I have is that Federal Judges will continue to shoot them down, as what happened today with the Texas bill.

 

On the other hand, I think MN has a damned good shot at stemming the flow of anti-marriage amendments that have been sweeping the country and I'll be damned proud of the state if we do it. I'm seeing more and more of those orange "Don't Restrict Marriage" signs plunked down in front lawns (including my own).

 

But in the case of Voter ID laws, I think that's a losing battle in the polling booth. Sigh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Conservatives don't necessarily equal Republican.

 

Correct. And 70-75% of the country is not GOP or conservative. Thus, those continually insisting that this is a GOP only issue AND claim to know that the true GOP intentions are nefarious -- those folks are either political hacks and/or insufferable drones.

 

The Democrats don't want the bills to pass because it's bad for the party and good for the GOP. The Libertarians oppose it on principle. I won't speak for the rest because I don't pay much attention to them.

 

Sadly enough, I'm pretty sure this bill is going to pass in MN. The only hope I have is that Federal Judges will continue to shoot them down, as what happened today with the Texas bill.

 

On the other hand, I think MN has a damned good shot at stemming the flow of anti-marriage amendments that have been sweeping the country and I'll be damned proud of the state if we do it. I'm seeing more and more of those orange "Don't Restrict Marriage" signs plunked down in front lawns (including my own).

 

But in the case of Voter ID laws, I think that's a losing battle in the polling booth. Sigh.

 

You know, if you ran for office I'd be very tempted to vote for you. And I'm fairly socialist. But I like how you stand up for the issues based on real facts, common sense and what is humanly ethical rather than twisted half-truths and scare tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[The courts have decided this, not me, not you.

 

Congrats, you've gotten Brock distracted. Not going to happen here. Which courts and what evidence did they cite that no one would be "burdened" by such a requirement?

 

Missed the point on that. The point is that it's not like a poll tax as was suggested. No ID is full proof, but it certainly cuts down fraud, or are you suggesting driver ID, ID to buy a guy be done away with because they can be faked?

 

This is such a juicy mistake. So no ID is fool proof (can I pretend to be you and be a petty jerk about that mistake?) but this will "cut it down". By all means - could you tell me how much is happening now nation-wide. And then give me the numbers on how many less will happen with this? Since you already admitted that this legislation will not fix the problem, just reduce it - how much is this reduction going to be?

 

FYI - if you're honest here, you're going to realize that this massive concentration of time and campaigning is for a gain that is so minimal you should be ashamed of the pretentious tact you've taken. But by all means - post numbers. Not opinions. Facts. Burden of proof is on you.

 

"tating that a number of election precincts in Philadelphia that are reliably Democratic have produced results which showed that more than 100 percent of registered voters cast ballots in some years in districts where turnout is normally low. It is true that these areas are also largely African-American, but that does not make such results more explicable or less suspicious.Does anyone really believe Philadelphia is the only place in America where there is a reasonable suspicion of fraud? The Supreme Court doesn’t. In 2008, it upheld an Indiana law requiring voter ID saying that it posed no undue burden on voters. And in his majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that “not only is the risk of voter fraud real but...it could affect the outcome of a close election.”"

 

A Justice's opinion is still an opinion. Since you undoubtedly researched which precincts these were - care to share which ones they were and evidence of this? Again, there was no reference in this article so these are not "facts" until shown to be so. As far as I can tell, it is speculation and hearsay. I googled for these precinct issues and all I can find is this article. No outside verification doesn't do much to establish this as fact. So, again, since you undoubtedly fact checked what you posted - care to enlighten what this author did not and actually provide facts and not just the appearance of them?

 

Or are all articles I post that say something is true acceptable as facts?

 

Self-righteous? Condescending? Since I've never engaged you, I would think we'd have a fresh start civilly. Brock flew off the handle and said some pretty insulting things before my rejoinder.

 

I don't always agree with Brock, Psuedo, GPA, Hornhead, diehard or any of the other old BYTO crew but I respect them and reading your pretentious nonsense lit me up. So no, we're not going to be civil if this is the tone of your discourse. I'll just give it back to you - better than you can.

 

How do you know?

 

Because it's in the same vein as redistricting and all the other things both parties do to screw with the other. That's all this is.

 

Igain, see the piece linked above and the portion I've copied above. Even with this, you will still believe that this is about racism with this video as the smoking gun. Why? Because you WANT to believe that the GOP is racist. If they weren't your head would explode.

 

I'm sorry - where did I say anything about racism? Feel free to post this exchange for your class - show what a winner you are at this!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GOP is actively trying to get certain demographics to stop voting, period.

Which, and how do you know?

 

Correct answers: Which? -- those people who are voting illegally. How do I know? -- I know this because this is what they and more the 70% of the country have said they want.

 

 

Just a comment about voter ID, but if people actually cared about vote fraud, they would be outraged at how electronic voting has been implemented in most states.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, if you ran for office I'd be very tempted to vote for you. And I'm fairly socialist. But I like how you stand up for the issues based on real facts, common sense and what is humanly ethical rather than twisted half-truths and scare tactics.

 

Heh, thanks. I just try to call it like I see it and rarely agree with any party on more than a few topics (even the Libertarian Party, they just happen to be the closest thing to "my" party). I have very little respect for anyone who follows party lines because, in this day and age, it doesn't make any sense to do so and shows just how little independent thinking that person is putting into their political opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll simply repost this. The man cannot be trusted.

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2200[/ATTACH]

 

He didn't turn into a fiscal conservative until Obama took office. That should tell you all you need to know about the man and his politics.

 

It'd be nice if the country was given the option of voting for a real fiscal conservative, bonus points if the person doesn't come with crazy religious baggage. We haven't seen one of those in a long, long time. Eisenhower, maybe? But even Eisenhower's "fiscal conservatism" is in question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, if you ran for office I'd be very tempted to vote for you. And I'm fairly socialist. But I like how you stand up for the issues based on real facts, common sense and what is humanly ethical rather than twisted half-truths and scare tactics.

 

Heh, thanks. I just try to call it like I see it and rarely agree with any party on more than a few topics (even the Libertarian Party, they just happen to be the closest thing to "my" party). I have very little respect for anyone who follows party lines because, in this day and age, it doesn't make any sense to do so and shows just how little independent thinking that person is putting into their political opinions.

 

This kinda illustrates my point from several pages ago, when open-minded liberals and conservatives get together and actually talk through issues we often end up agreeing on quite a few things. I can't think of much that I agree with the President or MSNBC on but non-extremist liberals and I usually come to very similar conclusions if we can talk civilly for a while. I maintain that most people are mostly libertarian but don't realize it.

 

I have also found that for the most part that these discussions are highly ineffective when held on the interwebs. I have had or read several of these conversations with people from my motorcycle boards and then met them in person only to find a completely different individual than their posts were depicting. My main forum doesn't even allow these type of thread because they can be a very slippery slope. I have a feeling this would be an entirely different conversation over some beers.

 

Also odd that somebody identified themselves as "fairly socialist". Just don't hear that very often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling this would be an entirely different conversation over some beers.
It would be. The sarcasm, overt hyperbole, and general good will from individuals would be a lot more palatable. Like you said, when we talk about actual policy, we'll come to some agreements if we're willing to give ideologically.

 

I guess my problem is some of the underlying assumptions that buttress libertarian thinking (likewise, I'm sure some feel the same way about liberalism or social conservatism), and it is in that argument, where we can get heated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In regards to voter ID> Why not have everyone v-chipped at birth so then all you would have to do is scan them in. If the goal of the voter ID was preventing fraud from happening they would offer plans that would prevent it from happening.

 

Yeah thats the funny part - our advocate here even admitted it wont stop with these laws. Cant wait to hear his responses!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With regard to honest debate between "left" and "right" -- seriously the left/right dichotomy is a BIG factor in the problem here. Go check out The Political Compass for a quadrant represenation -- anyway, I agree that someone with some clout needs to make true debates actually occur. For instance, Dennis Kucinich or Ralph Nader vs. Ron Paul. Both of them know the great problem of the two party system and how the military-industrial and the Federal Reserve are, well, problems, but yet they have actual legitimate differences in view, differences that hearken back, some, to both the founding of the American system and the general role and function of government. THESE other debates? Two factions of the same damn party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund
The Twins Daily Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Twins community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...