UN rights council delves into US voter I.D. laws [Archive]

sailsmen

03-14-2012, 05:24 PM

Just throwing this out there, we are having a big push now to have government-sponsored contraceptives, surely if THAT is a feasible plan, then ensuring every US citizen has an ID can be too? I'd actually like to see the counterpoints to both of these topics, there's some part of me that can't help but wonder that a justification for one would validate the other, or conversely a pitfall of one would also be applicable to the other.

I mean, it'd only be in the interest of added insurance that the voting process is carried out legitimately, why would that be a bad thing?

On February 10, 2012 President Obama announced his new "rule by Executive Order" that requires one Group, in this case Health Insurance Companies owners and employees, to give their Labor and their Property to another group, in this case employees of religious institutions, FOR FREE.
This is Slavery, to force one group to work for another with out compensation.

President Obama knows this is SLAVERY and has ordered it as a test. There has been no objection to my knowledge on the basis of violating the 13th or the 4th Amendments. He is now the Supreme Ruler of all. What Group will he enslave next? Will you stand by and watch the enslavement of your fellow man? When will he enslave you?

For your reference the Press Conference and 13th Amendment and Definition of Slavery follow.

13th Amendment

Amendment XIII

Section 1.

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Fourth Amendment
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Feb 10, 2012

This fact sheet was released by the White House in advance of President Barack Obama's Feb. 10 comments about mandated health insurance coverage for contraception.

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

______________________________ ______________________________ ________

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

February 10, 2012

FACT SHEET: Women’s Preventive Services and Religious Institutions

Today, President Obama will announce that his Administration will implement a policy that accommodates religious liberty while protecting the health of women. Today, nearly 99 percent of all women have used contraception at some point in their lives, but more than half of all women between the ages of 18-34 struggle to afford it.

Under the new policy to be announced today, women will have free preventive care that includes contraceptive services no matter where she works. The policy also ensures that if a woman works for religious employers with objections to providing contraceptive services as part of its health plan, the religious employer will not be required to provide contraception coverage, but her insurance company will be required to offer contraceptive care free of charge.

The new regulation will require insurance companies to cover contraception if the non-exempted religious organization chooses not to. Under the policy:

· Religious organizations will not have to provide contraceptive coverage or refer their employees to organizations that provide contraception.

· Religious organizations will not be required to subsidize the cost of contraception.

· Contraception coverage will be offered to women by their employers’ insurance companies directly, with no role for religious employers who oppose contraception.

· Insurance companies will be required to provide contraception coverage to these women free of charge.

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2012/February/10/White-House-Contraception-Compromise-Fact-Sheet.aspx

But if a woman’s employer is a charity or a hospital that has a religious objection to providing contraceptive services as part of their health plan, the insurance company -– not the hospital, not the charity -– will be required to reach out and offer the woman contraceptive care free of charge, without co-pays and without hassles.

The result will be that religious organizations won’t have to pay for these services, and no religious institution will have to provide these services directly. Let me repeat: These employers will not have to pay for, or provide, contraceptive services. But women who work at these institutions will have access to free contraceptive services, just like other women, and they'll no longer have to pay hundreds of dollars a year that could go towards paying the rent or buying groceries.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/02/10/remarks-president-preventive-care

sailsmen

03-14-2012, 05:25 PM

Remarks by the President on Preventive Care

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

12:15 P.M. EST

Q Here we go.

THE PRESIDENT: Here we go.

Q Here he is.

THE PRESIDENT: Here I am.

Q “Hello, everybody.”

THE PRESIDENT: That was pretty good.

Q I’ve been working on that.

THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody. (Laughter.) I was actually going to say good morning. But I guess it’s afternoon by now.

As part of the health care reform law that I signed last year, all insurance plans are required to cover preventive care at no cost. That means free check-ups, free mammograms, immunizations and other basic services. We fought for this because it saves lives and it saves money –- for families, for businesses, for government, for everybody. That’s because it’s a lot cheaper to prevent an illness than to treat one.

We also accepted a recommendation from the experts at the Institute of Medicine that when it comes to women, preventive care should include coverage of contraceptive services such as birth control. In addition to family planning, doctors often prescribe contraception as a way to reduce the risks of ovarian and other cancers, and treat a variety of different ailments. And we know that the overall cost of health care is lower when women have access to contraceptive services.

Nearly 99 percent of all women have relied on contraception at some point in their lives –- 99 percent. And yet, more than half of all women between the ages of 18 and 34 have struggled to afford it. So for all these reasons, we decided to follow the judgment of the nation’s leading medical experts and make sure that free preventive care includes access to free contraceptive care.

Whether you’re a teacher, or a small businesswoman, or a nurse, or a janitor, no woman’s health should depend on who she is or where she works or how much money she makes. Every woman should be in control of the decisions that affect her own health. Period. This basic principle is already the law in 28 states across the country.

Now, as we move to implement this rule, however, we’ve been mindful that there’s another principle at stake here –- and that’s the principle of religious liberty, an inalienable right that is enshrined in our Constitution. As a citizen and as a Christian, I cherish this right.

In fact, my first job in Chicago was working with Catholic parishes in poor neighborhoods, and my salary was funded by a grant from an arm of the Catholic Church. And I saw that local churches often did more good for a community than a government program ever could, so I know how important the work that faith-based organizations do and how much impact they can have in their communities.

I also know that some religious institutions -– particularly those affiliated with the Catholic Church -– have a religious objection to directly providing insurance that covers contraceptive services for their employees. And that’s why we originally exempted all churches from this requirement -– an exemption, by the way, that eight states didn’t already have.

And that’s why, from the very beginning of this process, I spoke directly to various Catholic officials, and I promised that before finalizing the rule as it applied to them, we would spend the next year working with institutions like Catholic hospitals and Catholic universities to find an equitable solution that protects religious liberty and ensures that every woman has access to the care that she needs.

Now, after the many genuine concerns that have been raised over the last few weeks, as well as, frankly, the more cynical desire on the part of some to make this into a political football, it became clear that spending months hammering out a solution was not going to be an option, that we needed to move this faster. So last week, I directed the Department of Health and Human Services to speed up the process that had already been envisioned. We weren’t going to spend a year doing this; we’re going to spend a week or two doing this.

Today, we’ve reached a decision on how to move forward. Under the rule, women will still have access to free preventive care that includes contraceptive services -– no matter where they work. So that core principle remains. But if a woman’s employer is a charity or a hospital that has a religious objection to providing contraceptive services as part of their health plan, the insurance company -– not the hospital, not the charity -– will be required to reach out and offer the woman contraceptive care free of charge, without co-pays and without hassles.

The result will be that religious organizations won’t have to pay for these services, and no religious institution will have to provide these services directly. Let me repeat: These employers will not have to pay for, or provide, contraceptive services. But women who work at these institutions will have access to free contraceptive services, just like other women, and they’ll no longer have to pay hundreds of dollars a year that could go towards paying the rent or buying groceries.

Now, I’ve been confident from the start that we could work out a sensible approach here, just as I promised. I understand some folks in Washington may want to treat this as another political wedge issue, but it shouldn’t be. I certainly never saw it that way. This is an issue where people of goodwill on both sides of the debate have been sorting through some very complicated questions to find a solution that works for everyone. With today’s announcement, we’ve done that. Religious liberty will be protected, and a law that requires free preventive care will not discriminate against women.

We live in a pluralistic society where we’re not going to agree on every single issue, or share every belief. That doesn’t mean that we have to choose between individual liberty and basic fairness for all Americans. We are unique among nations for having been founded upon both these principles, and our obligation as citizens is to carry them forward. I have complete faith that we can do that.

Thank you very much, everybody.
Previously….

Link for mobile device viewing. Live web-feed video is above. The video stream is also available at CNN Live and CNN for iPhone and iPad app. Find more mobile viewing options with the White House iPad and iPhone app and Android app, both are a free download. The speech will begin at 12:15 p.m. ET (9:15 a.m. PT).

The President will outline a compromise on the birth control policy which has proved controversial in recent days.. According to Politico:

The White House plans to announce a compromise designed to allay the concerns of religious organizations on a Health and Human Services rule that would require religious employers to cover birth control, a senior administration official confirmed to POLITICO.

The announcement will come as early as Friday, the official said.

White House officials have been hinting for days at finding a resolution to the fast-growing controversy over the contraception rule, which has angered the Catholic Church, energized Republicans and concerned Democrats about the political damage to President Barack Obama and their party.

Vice President Joe Biden told Cincinnati radio station WLW on Thursday that he is “determined to see that this gets worked out, and I believe we can work it out.”.

NOUN

1.

system based on enslaved labor: the practice of, or a system based on, using the enforced labor of other people

CBT

03-14-2012, 05:27 PM

BODYMAN

03-14-2012, 05:27 PM

Of 149 Nations with a population over 2.5 mm only 37 are free. The UN is predominantly an organization of despots who are our enemy.

When a person forces a group of people to provde their labor and property to another group for free it is called SLAVERY. When Obama does it it is called Birth Control???

Man best serves Man individually and collectively through Charity. Gov't only serves Gov't.

This is very spot on!

MrBluGruv

03-14-2012, 05:33 PM

I don't think I should have to pay for subsidized birth control unless I have a say in who is forced to take it. I also do not agree with abortion, unless the woman can at any time in the baby's life take it away. First tri-mester, first grade, first date, I don't give a ****. I think the first time a mother opted to abort a 10 year old, people's opinions would change dramatically.

That's interesting, to say the least. Adds perspective for sure, harder to swallow it when you think in the bigger picture like that.

Just for the record, I'm not a supporter of what is essentially subsidized contraceptives, I know too many women that attest to the fact that it's not as expensive as it's being made out to be and therefore I don't buy into the premise of the argument in favor of subsidizing it.

What I'd like to see is how arguments for and against it stack up against the arguments for and against mandatory voter ID, like I said I think some arguments will overlap, to a point where "you can't have it both ways."

CBT

03-14-2012, 05:40 PM

That's interesting, to say the least. Adds perspective for sure, harder to swallow it when you think in the bigger picture like that.

Just for the record, I'm not a supporter of what is essentially subsidized contraceptives, I know too many women that attest to the fact that it's not as expensive as it's being made out to be and therefore I don't buy into the premise of the argument in favor of subsidizing it.

What I'd like to see is how arguments for and against it stack up against the arguments for and against mandatory voter ID, like I said I think some arguments will overlap, to a point where "you can't have it both ways."

I would rather my tax dollars go to a program that prevents voter fraud than to a program that hands out birth control.

MrBluGruv

03-14-2012, 05:59 PM

I would rather my tax dollars go to a program that prevents voter fraud than to a program that hands out birth control.

Same here. That's why I want to see the arguments for both, I don't think you could argue against one without fundamentally proving or disproving the argument for another.

kernie

03-14-2012, 06:08 PM

IMO, only, birth control should be provided to every woman on this overcrowed doomed planet.

I also believe that life begins at conception, how anyone can believe anything different is beyond me.

CBT

03-14-2012, 06:14 PM

IMO, only, birth control should be provided to every woman on this overcrowed doomed planet.

So you put the burden on the woman to handle the possibility of getting pregnant, because she can get birth control for free. Then all men have to do is say "you deal with birth control, not me." Cop out.

I also believe that life begins at conception, how anyone can believe anything different is beyond me.

Totally agree.

CBT

03-14-2012, 06:16 PM

James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas (wlmailhtml:{6CED46CD-4737-4728-8A19-2B16FC19AF0B}mid://00000008/!x-usc:http://theprojectveritas.com/) has released a new video exposing just how easy it is to commit voter fraud in Vermont.

The video, a sequel to O'Keefe's "Primary of the Living Dead" in New Hampshire, shows a Veritas agent entering various voting places around the state of Vermont, giving a different name each time. Each time, he is given a ballot without showing an ID, to his disbelief.
In the video, the agent repeatedly requests (but does not take) a Republican primary ballot. As he explained to Breitbart.com (wlmailhtml:{6CED46CD-4737-4728-8A19-2B16FC19AF0B}mid://00000008/!x-usc:http://breitbart.com/): "We wanted to remind viewers this is not a partisan issue. This is a situation wherein anyone -- Republican or Democrat -- can exploit the system."
The new video follows in the wake of a highly-politicized media attack on Mr. O’Keefe after his exposure of voter fraud in New Hampshire. Those videos resulted in calls from the left for O’Keefe’s arrest. However, the videos soon resulted in the New Hampshire State Senate passing a new bill requiring voter ID (wlmailhtml:{6CED46CD-4737-4728-8A19-2B16FC19AF0B}mid://00000008/!x-usc:http://merrimack.patch.com/articles/senate-passes-voter-photo-id-bill-5d32ccd4).
O'Keefe's new video from Vermont could not be more timely, coming the day after the U.S. Department of Justice's civil rights division blocked a Texas photo ID requirement for voters--to the applause of the American Civil Liberties Union, which claimed (wlmailhtml:{6CED46CD-4737-4728-8A19-2B16FC19AF0B}mid://00000008/!x-usc:http://www.texastribune.org/texas-politics/voter-id/reactions-voter-id-decision-expected/) that the law was “discriminatory” against “Latinos, African-Americans, elderly citizens, and others.” (Funny I don't remember Eric Holder sueing New Hampshire!!)
As the Project Veritas video shows, the current system in Vermont discriminates against actual legal voters, who must face the prospect of disenfranchisement by those who would vote in their stead illegally, or have their votes cancelled out by those voting illegally in place of deceased voters who have yet to be removed from the rolls. If it is not discriminatory for Vermont citizens to be required to show ID to get married or buy alcohol, it is certainly not discriminatory to make them show ID to vote.
“It is a national disgrace that ballots can be given out in the names of dead people,” O’Keefe told Breitbart.com (wlmailhtml:{6CED46CD-4737-4728-8A19-2B16FC19AF0B}mid://00000008/!x-usc:http://breitbart.com/). “Threats of government intimidation will not stop us from protecting the integrity of the ballot box. If any state has a system which encourages ballots to be given out to the wrong person, dead or alive, we will come to your state, we will film your poll workers, and Project Veritas will put the videos on YouTube. States like Vermont and New Hampshire have to take dead people off voter registration forms and clean up their act, once and for all.”

sailsmen

03-14-2012, 06:27 PM

sailsmen

03-14-2012, 06:30 PM

Dead people have rights so long as they vote Democratic. Whoelse will protect the rights of the dead to postmorteum nondeominational care at tax payers expense.

kernie

03-14-2012, 07:09 PM

Totally agree.

If i were a woman i think i would accept responsibility before i would let a shoot and run man make the wise choises..

CWright

03-14-2012, 07:12 PM

Question...... What happened to Personal Responsibility?

sailsmen

03-14-2012, 07:18 PM

In a Gov't run State only the Dead have personal responsibility.

PonyUP

03-14-2012, 07:29 PM

I just love how all the woes in the world are the fault of democrats, and how the only people that have cheated in an election are Democrats, oh but then there is that Nixon thing.
I'm not Democrat, but I am so sick of this board blaming them for everything. Both parties are corrupt, both have failed this country miserably and to think anything different is absolutely ignorant.

And can we please stop the birth certificate nonsense, like he could ever possibly produce something you guys would buy.

I'm not an Obama supporter, or a Democrat supporter. I'm an Independent and proud to be. But the endless bickering that takes place on this board and the public forum is ridiculous. I rarely hear or see anyone trying to work together for results, but I see plenty of people trying to assess blame. It happened to Bush too and it's ridiculous.

We need to stop playing the blame game and start searching for solutions, real solutions that are a possibility. Not all the "round up the deadbeats and massacre them" solutions.
It took two parties to dig this hole, and it will take two to get it out. If you think anything different you are fooling yourself.
I for one have no problem with providing birth control, I just want to mandate that it is used. We have plenty of people that have no business being parents, and making it easier for them to prevent that is a win.
Regarding the population, sure places like Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and Montana have lots of empty land, but to think we don't need to control the population one of the most foolish things I've heard. There aren't enough jobs, there isn't enough money and for every area you tell me is empty, I'll point to one where the cup runeth over.
We have real problems in this country and all the pointing fingers gets us nowhere.
So you can blame Obama and the Dems, or you can blame Bush and the Reps, I choose to blame them both. They ate Frickin politicians that only look out for themselves. Without campaign finance reform and removal of lobbyists, it will never change.
Rant over, flame suit on. Responses over

Pony seal of Approval

Shaijack

03-14-2012, 07:49 PM

Come on guys give a voter a break. My people came here in 1890 and they are still voting. Isn't that how it should be. I am only protecting their rights to vote. HAHA

STEPS

03-14-2012, 07:59 PM

1. Acts of hostility toward people of Biblical faith:

April 2008 – Obama speaks disrespectfully of Christians, saying they “cling to guns or religion” and have an “antipathy to people who aren’t like them.”
February 2009 – Obama announces plans to revoke conscience protection for health workers who refuse to participate in medical activities that go against their beliefs, and fully implements the plan in February 2011.
April 2009 – When speaking at Georgetown University, Obama orders that a monogram symbolizing Jesus’ name be covered when he is making his speech.
May 2009 – Obama declines to host services for the National Prayer Day (a day established by federal law) at the White House.
April 2009 – In a deliberate act of disrespect, Obama nominated three pro-abortion ambassadors to the Vatican; of course, the pro-life Vatican rejected all three.
October 19, 2010 – Obama begins deliberately omitting the phrase about “the Creator” when quoting the Declaration of Independence – an omission he has made on no less than seven occasions.
November 2010 – Obama misquotes the National Motto, saying it is “E pluribus unum” rather than “In God We Trust” as established by federal law.
January 2011 – After a federal law was passed to transfer a WWI Memorial in the Mojave Desert to private ownership, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that the cross in the memorial could continue to stand, but the Obama administration refused to allow the land to be transferred as required by law, and refused to allow the cross to be re-erected as ordered by the Court.
February 2011 – Although he filled posts in the State Department, for more than two years Obama did not fill the post of religious freedom ambassador, an official that works against religious persecution across the world; he filled it only after heavy pressure from the public and from Congress.
April 2011 – For the first time in American history, Obama urges passage of a non-discrimination law that does not contain hiring protections for religious groups, forcing religious organizations to hire according to federal mandates without regard to the dictates of their own faith, thus eliminating conscience protection in hiring.
August 2011 – The Obama administration releases its new health care rules that override religious conscience protections for medical workers in the areas of abortion and contraception.
November 2011 – Obama opposes inclusion of President Franklin Roosevelt’s famous D-Day Prayer in the WWII Memorial.
November 2011 – Unlike previous presidents, Obama studiously avoids any religious references in his Thanksgiving speech.
December 2011 – The Obama administration denigrates other countries’ religious beliefs as an obstacle to radical homosexual rights.
January 2012 – The Obama administration argues that the First Amendment provides no protection for churches and synagogues in hiring their pastors and rabbis.
February 2012 – The Obama administration forgives student loans in exchange for public service, but announces it will no longer forgive student loans if the public service is related to religion.

2. Acts of hostility from the Obama-led military toward people of Biblical faith:

June 2011 – The Department of Veterans Affairs forbids references to God and Jesus during burial ceremonies at Houston National Cemetery.
August 2011 – The Air Force stops teaching the Just War theory to officers in California because the course is taught by chaplains and is based on a philosophy introduced by St. Augustine in the third century AD – a theory long taught by civilized nations across the world (except America).
September 2011 – Air Force Chief of Staff prohibits commanders from notifying airmen of programs and services available to them from chaplains.
September 2011 – The Army issues guidelines for Walter Reed Medical Center stipulating that “No religious items (i.e. Bibles, reading materials and/or facts) are allowed to be given away or used during a visit.”
November 2011 – The Air Force Academy rescinds support for Operation Christmas Child, a program to send holiday gifts to impoverished children across the world, because the program is run by a Christian charity.
November 2011 – The Air Force Academy pays $80,000 to add a Stonehenge-like worship center for pagans, druids, witches and Wiccans.
February 2012 – The U. S. Military Academy at West Point disinvites three star Army general and decorated war hero Lieutenant General William G. (“Jerry”) Boykin (retired) from speaking at an event because he is an outspoken Christian.
February 2012 – The Air Force removes “God” from the patch of Rapid Capabilities Office (the word on the patch was in Latin: Dei).
February 2012 – The Army orders Catholic chaplains not to read a letter to parishioners that their archbishop asked them to read.

You can read the entire list here <http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=10693 8> (http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=10693 8) .

------ E

duhtroll

03-14-2012, 08:02 PM

http://www.drudge.com/news/154324/vets-photo-id-rejected-ohio

Vet's Photo ID Rejected in Ohio

Paul Carroll, an 86-year-old World War II veteran who has lived in the same Ohio town for four decades, was denied a chance to vote in the state's primary Tuesday because a poll worker denied his form of identification, a photo ID from the Department of Veterans Affairs. The poll worker rejected the ID because it did not contain an address, as required by Ohio law. "I had to pay a driver to take me up there because I don't walk so well and have to use this cane and now I can't even vote," Carroll said. "I had to stop driving, but I got the photo ID from the Veterans Affairs instead, just a month or so ago. You would think that would count for something. I went to war for this country, but now I can't vote in this country."

It is stuff like this I'd like to see eliminated.

You guys can make up all the fake electoral fraud stories you like (the stats on verified voter fraud are extremely low), but in reality people who are citizens and eligible to vote are being hassled.

duhtroll

03-14-2012, 08:05 PM

WTF does this have to do with birth control or voter registration?

Half of those who oppose Obama still think he is a Muslim and an illegal alien, so I don't think you have a lot to complain about.

1. Acts of hostility toward people of Biblical faith:

April 2008 – Obama speaks disrespectfully of Christians, saying they “cling to guns or religion” and have an “antipathy to people who aren’t like them.”
February 2009 – Obama announces plans to revoke conscience protection for health workers who refuse to participate in medical activities that go against their beliefs, and fully implements the plan in February 2011.
April 2009 – When speaking at Georgetown University, Obama orders that a monogram symbolizing Jesus’ name be covered when he is making his speech.
May 2009 – Obama declines to host services for the National Prayer Day (a day established by federal law) at the White House.
April 2009 – In a deliberate act of disrespect, Obama nominated three pro-abortion ambassadors to the Vatican; of course, the pro-life Vatican rejected all three.
October 19, 2010 – Obama begins deliberately omitting the phrase about “the Creator” when quoting the Declaration of Independence – an omission he has made on no less than seven occasions.
November 2010 – Obama misquotes the National Motto, saying it is “E pluribus unum” rather than “In God We Trust” as established by federal law.
January 2011 – After a federal law was passed to transfer a WWI Memorial in the Mojave Desert to private ownership, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that the cross in the memorial could continue to stand, but the Obama administration refused to allow the land to be transferred as required by law, and refused to allow the cross to be re-erected as ordered by the Court.
February 2011 – Although he filled posts in the State Department, for more than two years Obama did not fill the post of religious freedom ambassador, an official that works against religious persecution across the world; he filled it only after heavy pressure from the public and from Congress.
April 2011 – For the first time in American history, Obama urges passage of a non-discrimination law that does not contain hiring protections for religious groups, forcing religious organizations to hire according to federal mandates without regard to the dictates of their own faith, thus eliminating conscience protection in hiring.
August 2011 – The Obama administration releases its new health care rules that override religious conscience protections for medical workers in the areas of abortion and contraception.
November 2011 – Obama opposes inclusion of President Franklin Roosevelt’s famous D-Day Prayer in the WWII Memorial.
November 2011 – Unlike previous presidents, Obama studiously avoids any religious references in his Thanksgiving speech.
December 2011 – The Obama administration denigrates other countries’ religious beliefs as an obstacle to radical homosexual rights.
January 2012 – The Obama administration argues that the First Amendment provides no protection for churches and synagogues in hiring their pastors and rabbis.
February 2012 – The Obama administration forgives student loans in exchange for public service, but announces it will no longer forgive student loans if the public service is related to religion.

2. Acts of hostility from the Obama-led military toward people of Biblical faith:

June 2011 – The Department of Veterans Affairs forbids references to God and Jesus during burial ceremonies at Houston National Cemetery.
August 2011 – The Air Force stops teaching the Just War theory to officers in California because the course is taught by chaplains and is based on a philosophy introduced by St. Augustine in the third century AD – a theory long taught by civilized nations across the world (except America).
September 2011 – Air Force Chief of Staff prohibits commanders from notifying airmen of programs and services available to them from chaplains.
September 2011 – The Army issues guidelines for Walter Reed Medical Center stipulating that “No religious items (i.e. Bibles, reading materials and/or facts) are allowed to be given away or used during a visit.”
November 2011 – The Air Force Academy rescinds support for Operation Christmas Child, a program to send holiday gifts to impoverished children across the world, because the program is run by a Christian charity.
November 2011 – The Air Force Academy pays $80,000 to add a Stonehenge-like worship center for pagans, druids, witches and Wiccans.
February 2012 – The U. S. Military Academy at West Point disinvites three star Army general and decorated war hero Lieutenant General William G. (“Jerry”) Boykin (retired) from speaking at an event because he is an outspoken Christian.
February 2012 – The Air Force removes “God” from the patch of Rapid Capabilities Office (the word on the patch was in Latin: Dei).
February 2012 – The Army orders Catholic chaplains not to read a letter to parishioners that their archbishop asked them to read.

You can read the entire list here <http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=10693 8> (http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=10693 8) .

------ E

guspech750

03-14-2012, 08:06 PM

Simple solution...................... ..........Revolution...:uzi:

sailsmen

03-14-2012, 08:11 PM

I say re elect no one. Neither Party will get us out of this. The numbers don't lie and Obama has pushed us financially to collapse. We are past the point of fixing it.
In 3 years our Public Debt to GDP has gone from 40% to ~77% of GDP. Since 1948 whenever Fed spending was at or over 20% for 2 or more years unemployment increased a min of 50% and stayed there regardless of whether GDP grew or not. Pres Obama increased Fed spending from 20% to 25% and has a rosy Budget of 21.5+% through 2016.

How can any economy thrive with Gov't sucking up 44% of GDP and spending $58,100 per private sector worker? IT cannot!

The 1 child policy has not worked in China. It has skewed the Deomgraphics resulting in an aging Society of 57+% men and that equals World War. In Europe it forced them to open to immigration from a group that wants a separtists state. Russia faces similar issues due to no population growth.

Itlay has reached the tipping point where their culture will be lost forever.

If you think there are too many people then kill the old people by denying them medical care or reduce the life expectancy by cutting off medical care at 65.

Not reproducing results in all being killed or dying.

It is not bickering, it is a War of Gov't vs the PEOPLE. Why should Gov't workers get their pension in full while non-gov't workers SS is cut 24%? Answer the War is Gov't vs the PEOPLE.

1 out of every 7 workers works for the Gov't. That's right 1 Gov't worker is watching 6 non-gov't worker. In Obama's first 2 years in office over 200 new laws were passed totaling over 8,000 pages.

There are so many laws it is now "easier" for the Gov't to tell us what to do instead of what not to do.
MSNBC staff and news service reports

updated 12/31/2011 10:12:54 AM ET

About 40,000 state laws taking effect at the start of the new year will change rules about getting abortions in New Hampshire, learning about gays and lesbians in California, getting jobs in Alabama and even driving golf carts in Georgia.

Several federal rules change with the new year, too, including a Social Security increase amounting to $450 a year for the average recipients and stiff fines up to $2,700 per offense for truckers and bus drivers caught using hand-held cellphones while driving.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45819570.../#.Tv-fd1bURn8

Grossman Washington Tiimes - "The Lacey Act hangs like the sword of Damocles over the heads of American businesses. In
addition to the 4,500 or so criminal offenses in federal law, plus as many as 300,000 more contained
in federal regulations, businesses are expected to comply with the laws of nearly 200 foreign
countries every time they purchase or take possession of any product from a foreign source —
whether or not they imported it themselves."

kernie

03-14-2012, 08:11 PM

Simple solution...................... ..........Revolution...:uzi:

Yee-haw! Who is relotin agan who, ahh who cares, yee-haw, count me in!

:D

CBT

03-15-2012, 04:20 AM

Haggis

03-15-2012, 04:30 AM

Simple solution...................... ..........Revolution...:uzi:

Your now on a watch list. Congratulations!!!!!

We need to kick the UN out of our country and stop giving the bas.tards any money. And be more concerned with our own country and people then being the big brother to the rest of the world. And conception is just that conception.

bolsen

03-15-2012, 07:01 AM

80 percnet of the land in the USA is untouched by man. The entire Worldds population can comfortably fit in Texas. I live in a populayed area and thEre are woods in my back yard. To think we are over poPulated is the height of arrogance.

Not overpoplated in terms of physical space to live. Overpopulated in terms of natural resources, food, oil, energy production capability, etc. The list goes on and on. We are not running out of space, we are running out of ways to sustain life. It sounds terrible but it's true. For the record I'm not for abortion but I would never judge someone who chose to abort. I'm just speaking on your comment about overpopulation.

Fosters

03-15-2012, 07:09 AM

Okay, here's a couple I made up:

http://rottenacorn.com/activityMap.html

Don't bother. In his reality, voter fraud is small and legal eligible voter hassling is huge, yet he can only come up with 1 incident for every 100+ of voter fraud...

What democrats don't realize is, every fraudulent vote is the same thing as cancelling a real eligible vote... but yet they never take any issue with that.

tbone

03-15-2012, 08:48 AM

Obama can't win without voter fraud and the latino vote. He already has 95% of the black vote. So he has no choice but to promote and protect voting with no ID. :bs:

Fosters

03-15-2012, 09:01 AM

Obama can't win without voter fraud and the latino vote. He already has 95% of the black vote. So he has no choice but to promote and protect voting with no ID. :bs:

Vote early and often... the democrat way! :mad2:

duhtroll

03-15-2012, 09:35 AM

OK, lets see some stats then. You are the one stating voter fraud is so prevalent -- prove it. Anecdotal evidence doesn't count. You can look up anecdotal if you don't understand it.

Funny how it is the conservatives crying foul when just 4-6 years ago the Dems were the ones talking about Diebold voting machines. Better post those stats too while you're at it.

http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/policy_brief_on_the_truth_abou t_voter_fraud/

Don't bother. In his reality, voter fraud is small and legal eligible voter hassling is huge, yet he can only come up with 1 incident for every 100+ of voter fraud...

What democrats don't realize is, every fraudulent vote is the same thing as cancelling a real eligible vote... but yet they never take any issue with that.

duhtroll

03-15-2012, 09:39 AM

Here's a random quote from your Acorn page:

WI 2008 At least 33,000 ACORN-submitted registrations in Milwaukee have been called into question after it was found that the organizations had been using felons as registration workers, in violation of state election rules. Two people involved in the ongoing Wisconsin voter fraud investigation have been charged with felonies.

I suppose to you guys this means 33,000 registrations are false, doesn't it?

CBT

03-15-2012, 09:45 AM

tbone

03-15-2012, 09:46 AM

The Brennan Center is a think tank and legal activist group affiliated with New York University Law School and closely aligned with the Shadow Party (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6706) of George Soros (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/individualProfile.asp?indid=97 7). It pursues a wide range of goals drawn from the radical agenda of Sixties activism as well as from the program of George Soros’ Open Society Institute (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/funderProfile.asp?fndid=5181). The Center generates “scholarly” studies, mounts media campaigns, files amicus briefs, gives pro bono support to activists and litigates test cases in pursuit of radical "change".

Great source of information. I guess the case is closed now and we can all relax.

duhtroll

03-15-2012, 10:36 AM

Funny, none of that appears on their "about" page. You have any proof to that claim or is this just another hack accusation? You copied this from http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/brennancenteragenda.html and it is supposed to be *more* reliable?

http://www.brennancenter.org/pages/about/

Also, why not discuss the results? Can you dispute the findings, or are you just going to throw out *possible* circumstantial claims?

Person #1 knows person #2, and we don't like person #2, so therefore anything person #1 says is now completely untrue. Good logic, there. You guys have been using it against the President since before he was elected. If it actually had any merit, it would warrant discussion.

If you guys have some actual statistics on voter fraud you'd find that it is far less than significant.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.html

Sure, you guys will bash that the NYT is reporting, but you won't address the study.

http://pubrecord.org/nation/437/bush-orders-doj-to-probe-ohio-voter-registrations/

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/voter_fraud_still_fairly_rare/

I am waiting for some actual, verified stats on voter fraud and that it has affected elections in any real sense. Then you have to take all of those instances and divide them by the number of ballots cast in elections during the same time period.

...and you will come up with less than 0.01%

But please, continue to try and get people angry over nothing because I'm sure it will help the Mittster find a personality.

The Brennan Center is a think tank and legal activist group affiliated with New York University Law School and closely aligned with the Shadow Party (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6706) of George Soros (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/individualProfile.asp?indid=97 7). It pursues a wide range of goals drawn from the radical agenda of Sixties activism as well as from the program of George Soros’ Open Society Institute (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/funderProfile.asp?fndid=5181). The Center generates “scholarly” studies, mounts media campaigns, files amicus briefs, gives pro bono support to activists and litigates test cases in pursuit of radical "change".

Great source of information. I guess the case is closed now and we can all relax.

duhtroll

03-15-2012, 10:42 AM

It doesn't say that at all, for the record.

Yes. Obtained in violation of the law.

CBT

03-15-2012, 10:52 AM

duhtroll

03-15-2012, 10:56 AM

What are you -- 6?

Mentioning something and discussing it are quite a bit different.

Says the person who just discussed it.

CBT

03-15-2012, 12:40 PM

What are you -- 6?

Mentioning something and discussing it are quite a bit different.

Why, you like talking to 6 year olds?

Fosters

03-15-2012, 12:44 PM

Please stop quoting him... Makes the ignore function useless :(

http://images.wikia.com/potcoplayers/images/5/56/Please-dont-feed-the-trolls.jpg

tbone

03-15-2012, 12:46 PM

Please stop quoting him... Makes the ignore function useless :(

http://images.wikia.com/potcoplayers/images/5/56/Please-dont-feed-the-trolls.jpg

lmao :beer:

MrBluGruv

03-15-2012, 12:48 PM

So can we vote this thread officially dead?

Don't see anything productive coming out of it from here on out, and that's really saying something the way some threads around here go... :(

tbone

03-15-2012, 12:54 PM

But it's so much fun to watch the troll have his little temper tantrums and resort to spewing insults at eveyone who disagrees with him.;)

duhtroll

03-15-2012, 01:26 PM

Yeah, we should never question the "blustering rant of the day" and the conspiracy threads here.

Still waiting for something substantial from you, but then again, why start now?

But it's so much fun to watch the troll have his little temper tantrums and resort to spewing insults at eveyone who disagrees with him.;)

guspech750

03-15-2012, 01:33 PM

Perhaps no one is going to find hard evidence of voter fraud due to the fact it's controlled by the very same losers we don't want in office.......... The government will do anything to cover that up.

Just my opinion.

Sent from my iPhone
Eaton Swap + 4.10's = Wreeeeeeeeeedom!!

vkirkend

03-15-2012, 01:48 PM

I believe if you are voting someone into the most important office on the planet, you should be who you say you are and prove it. :flag:

All I'm saying is that for many years people of color could not vote for a number of reasons which were all rooted in racisim. Once these individuals earned the right to vote they had to pass some kind of test (usually at the descretion of the state/county the lived in) and then had to pay a "Poll Tax" in order ot vote. These were people that fought and died to make this country what it is. But they could not vote and were treated as "2nd" citizens. Oddly after the first Black President was elected there became a voter fraud problem:eek:. The national percentage of voter fraud is .003 percent. Is that really a problem or is this another diversion to hide the real reason for this change in the law. :shake:

tbone

03-15-2012, 01:53 PM

Yeah, we should never question the "blustering rant of the day" and the conspiracy threads here.

Still waiting for something substantial from you, but then again, why start now?

Once again you prove my point. Resorting to insults against anyone who disagrees with you.

Voter fraud especially by and for democrats is common knowledge and needs no further proof in this forum. Besides, no matter what I or anyone writes, you will denigrate it and slew personal insults at them.

Fosters

03-15-2012, 01:59 PM

The national percentage of voter fraud is .003 percent. Is that really a problem or is this another diversion to hide the real reason for this change in the law. :shake:

How exactly is that determined? That may at the very best be just the ones that are caught and convicted, but there's no way to verify and come up with the number of fraudulent votes that actually make it thru.

And as for how important that 0.003% you claim is, as a resident of Minnesota, I can tell you we've had 2 elections that were decided by less votes than that recently...

Nobody is asking anyone to pass a test or pay a tax. It's nice of you to bring up the 50s and 60s, but it's 2012 now. We're talking about obtaining a free ID issued by the state, if they don't want to or cannot show a driver's license, that's IT. That's ALL people have to get. If they refuse to even get that and show it, without having to pass any test, what do they have to hide?

And you make a big deal about hassling voters... do you realize that every vote stolen cancels out a legit vote? How can you make a big fuss about hassled eligible voters, and in the same breath, downplay fraudulent votes??

PonyUP

03-15-2012, 03:04 PM

How exactly is that determined? That may at the very best be just the ones that are caught and convicted, but there's no way to verify and come up with the number of fraudulent votes that actually make it thru.

And as for how important that 0.003% you claim is, as a resident of Minnesota, I can tell you we've had 2 elections that were decided by less votes than that recently...

Nobody is asking anyone to pass a test or pay a tax. It's nice of you to bring up the 50s and 60s, but it's 2012 now. We're talking about obtaining a free ID issued by the state, if they don't want to or cannot show a driver's license, that's IT. That's ALL people have to get. If they refuse to even get that and show it, without having to pass any test, what do they have to hide?

And you make a big deal about hassling voters... do you realize that every vote stolen cancels out a legit vote? How can you make a big fuss about hassled eligible voters, and in the same breath, downplay fraudulent votes??

I whole heartedly agree that showing proof of identification to prove you are eligible to vote is an absolute necessity, and should not be given to people that are not legal residents of the US

Where I get frustrated is everyone acts as if voter fraud and campaign fraud is some kind of Democrat scheme, it's not and it's foolish to think so. It's the product of living in a bubble propagated with propaganda. Voter fraud exists, and every politician regardless of party wants it. There was the Acorn scandal for Obama, the Florida scandal for Bush that had to be settled by the Supreme Court despite losing the popular vote, there was Watergate, there was the Cook county scandal for Kennedy. This is not a Democrat problem, it's a politician problem

I respect greatly my Republican brethren on this board, as well as my Democrat friends.

The problem I have on this board is if someone is a Democrat, you guys paste them as a Libtard. It's not wrong to believe what they believe and we shouldnt insult them for it.

It is also not right to hurl insults at the Republican supporters for what they believe.

It seems like we lack the ability on this board to have an honest debate and open discussion, I guess it's just easier to call people stupid.

Then we wonder why these threads get shut down, it's because of the immediate tone that takes place.

Raven posted an interesting thread about a serious topic, count the number of posts before someone blamed all Democrats?

That didn't take long did it.

Damn it's a long step down from this soap box

Pony seal of Approval

Fosters

03-15-2012, 03:56 PM

I whole heartedly agree that showing proof of identification to prove you are eligible to vote is an absolute necessity, and should not be given to people that are not legal residents of the US

Where I get frustrated is everyone acts as if voter fraud and campaign fraud is some kind of Democrat scheme, it's not and it's foolish to think so. It's the product of living in a bubble propagated with propaganda. Voter fraud exists, and every politician regardless of party wants it. There was the Acorn scandal for Obama, the Florida scandal for Bush that had to be settled by the Supreme Court despite losing the popular vote, there was Watergate, there was the Cook county scandal for Kennedy. This is not a Democrat problem, it's a politician problem

I respect greatly my Republican brethren on this board, as well as my Democrat friends.

The problem I have on this board is if someone is a Democrat, you guys paste them as a Libtard. It's not wrong to believe what they believe and we shouldnt insult them for it.

It is also not right to hurl insults at the Republican supporters for what they believe.

It seems like we lack the ability on this board to have an honest debate and open discussion, I guess it's just easier to call people stupid.

Then we wonder why these threads get shut down, it's because of the immediate tone that takes place.

Raven posted an interesting thread about a serious topic, count the number of posts before someone blamed all Democrats?

That didn't take long did it.

Damn it's a long step down from this soap box

Pony seal of Approval

You're blurring the line between voter ID and voting fraud. They are two distinct things.

Hard to paint voter ID as a bi-partisan issue when one party is largely opposed to it and one is largely against it. Voter fraud is a larger problem, yes, and voter ID is a fix for one part of it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but where are the solutions to the other parts? I'm especially interested in hearing the democrat proposed solutions.

Also, losing the popular vote has nothing to do with winning the electoral vote. That is not fraud, that's how our system works, plain and simple. You can argue it's not what the people want, but until there's enough of a push to change that, this is what we have.

PonyUP

03-15-2012, 04:04 PM

You're blurring the line between voter ID and voting fraud. They are two distinct things.

Hard to paint voter ID as a bi-partisan issue when one party is largely opposed to it and one is largely against it. Voter fraud is a larger problem, yes, and voter ID is a fix for one part of it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but where are the solutions to the other parts? I'm especially interested in hearing the democrat proposed solutions.

Also, losing the popular vote has nothing to do with winning the electoral vote. That is not fraud, that's how our system works, plain and simple. You can argue it's not what the people want, but until there's enough of a push to change that, this is what we have.

Well, I'm not a Democrat, so I can't present their view as I am all for straight up elections with proof of citizenship. I only pointed to Florida because of the hanging Chad problem, not saying he shouldn't have won, just that that was a scandal to.
I do agree the UN has no place here or anywhere else for that matter.
I agree it aids Dems for looser voting restrictions and that's not right.
But this whole thread has started pasting people for what they believe and that's not right either

Pony seal of Approval

tbone

03-15-2012, 04:48 PM

Acorn was an organization designed by democrats to, amoung other things, sign up voters to vote for democrats. The corruption and fraud was so bad that they had to disband /rename/hide it. I would like to challenge anybody to come up with an organization on the right that practices anything comparable to the breadth and scope that Acorn did.

duhtroll

03-15-2012, 05:12 PM

Once again you prove my point. Resorting to insults against anyone who disagrees with you.

And yet here we are once again, you claiming your opinion is fact. I ask you to back it up and you give us the following:

Voter fraud especially by and for democrats is common knowledge and needs no further proof in this forum.

Can't argue with that one... :shake: ...mainly because it is 100% opinion. But please, keep running to mommy saying that the bad man insulted you -- that way maybe people won't realize you haven't posted a shred of evidence to your claim.

Or maybe I'll keep pointing it out.

I don't care what you guys believe, but when you post Sean Hannity's latest rant of the day on a completely unrelated discussion forum, occasionally someone is going to check your claims.

(OK it might not be Hannity's, but he has spoken all of the same words in relation to this issue, as have callers on his radio show. Maybe that is just a huge coinkydink.)

Acorn was an organization designed by democrats to, amoung other things, sign up voters to vote for democrats. The corruption and fraud was so bad that they had to disband /rename/hide it. I would like to challenge anybody to come up with an organization on the right that practices anything comparable to Acorn.

They don't need one. They are the ones currently rewriting the laws.

Acorn, Acorn, Acorn. That is all you can parrot. Please find just how many elections were stolen by Acorn.

How exactly is that determined? That may at the very best be just the ones that are caught and convicted, but there's no way to verify and come up with the number of fraudulent votes that actually make it thru.

Oh I love this one! So in essence every election result you don't like, you pull out the "conspiracy theory boogeyman."

And as for how important that 0.003% you claim is, as a resident of Minnesota, I can tell you we've had 2 elections that were decided by less votes than that recently...

And by putting the two together you are implying that the two are related. Nice application of what I said above.

Nobody is asking anyone to pass a test or pay a tax. It's nice of you to bring up the 50s and 60s, but it's 2012 now. We're talking about obtaining a free ID issued by the state, if they don't want to or cannot show a driver's license, that's IT. That's ALL people have to get. If they refuse to even get that and show it, without having to pass any test, what do they have to hide?

And they are rejecting forms of ID that were acceptable in previous elections. The best part is that they aren't making these changes common knowledge or well enough in advance so that people who need to make these changes can do so. It is why we have the veteran rejected at the polls example, see previous post.

Just a few years ago we had Dems claiming election fraud because they had lost the previous presidential election. They even showed how the Diebold machines could be easily hacked with no paper trail. All the 'pubs laughed at them and just called them desperate.

I guess what goes around...

finster101

03-15-2012, 05:14 PM

I have to show an ID for damn near everything I do, banking, buying booze (not any more, I'm too darned old) applying for a job. Why is it so discriminatory to show one when you vote? I don't care which party you are for this just makes sense.

tbone

03-15-2012, 05:23 PM

And yet here we are once again, you claiming your opinion is fact. I ask you to back it up and you give us the following:

Can't argue with that one... :shake: ...mainly because it is 100% opinion. But please, keep running to mommy saying that the bad man insulted you -- that way maybe people won't realize you haven't posted a shred of evidence to your claim.

Or maybe I'll keep pointing it out.

I don't care what you guys believe, but when you post Sean Hannity's latest rant of the day on a completely unrelated discussion forum, occasionally someone is going to check your claims.

(OK it might not be Hannity's, but he has spoken all of the same words in relation to this issue, as have callers on his radio show. Maybe that is just a huge coinkydink.)

They don't need one. They are the ones currently rewriting the laws.

Acorn, Acorn, Acorn. That is all you can parrot. Please find just how many elections were stolen by Acorn.

Oh I love this one! So in essence every election result you don't like, you pull out the "conspiracy theory boogeyman."

And by putting the two together you are implying that the two are related. Nice application of what I said above.

And they are rejecting forms of ID that were acceptable in previous elections. The best part is that they aren't making these changes common knowledge or well enough in advance so that people who need to make these changes can do so. It is why we have the veteran rejected at the polls example, see previous post.

Just a few years ago we had Dems claiming election fraud because they had lost the previous presidential election. They even showed how the Diebold machines could be easily hacked with no paper trail. All the 'pubs laughed at them and just called them desperate.

I guess what goes around...

Once again you are proving my points. I win. You lose.

duhtroll

03-15-2012, 05:53 PM

This just gets better and better.

It has been a really long time, but I think the appropriate response is, "I know you are but what am I?"

Oh, wait! I remember. It is "and so is your face!"

Neener.

Once again you are proving my points. I win. You lose.

CBT

03-15-2012, 06:29 PM

All I'm saying is that for many years people of color could not vote for a number of reasons which were all rooted in racisim. Once these individuals earned the right to vote they had to pass some kind of test (usually at the descretion of the state/county the lived in) and then had to pay a "Poll Tax" in order ot vote. These were people that fought and died to make this country what it is. But they could not vote and were treated as "2nd" citizens. Oddly after the first Black President was elected there became a voter fraud problem:eek:. The national percentage of voter fraud is .003 percent. Is that really a problem or is this another diversion to hide the real reason for this change in the law. :shake:

Democrats and voter fraud problems existed long before The First Black President. It's been a running joke for hundreds of years. We aren't voting for the President of your local schools PTA, we are voting for the President of The United States of America. I would like to see a system in place that cannot be tampered with when it comes to voting. I don't think that is too much to ask for.

PonyUP

03-15-2012, 06:49 PM

Democrats and voter fraud problems existed long before The First Black President. It's been a running joke for hundreds of years. We aren't voting for the President of your local schools PTA, we are voting for the President of The United States of America. I would like to see a system in place that cannot be tampered with when it comes to voting. I don't think that is too much to ask for.

I agree Case, but it's not like Pubs are innocent, remember Watergate. We are losing sight of the fact that we are talking about politicians, by definition they are all crooks

Still want their pension plan though :lol:

Pony seal of Approval

CBT

03-15-2012, 06:57 PM

I agree Case, but it's not like Pubs are innocent, remember Watergate. We are losing sight of the fact that we are talking about politicians, by definition they are all crooks

Still want their pension plan though :lol:

Pony seal of Approval
As you know from past posts, I hate both sides equally, lol. No doubt in my mind both sides cheat, but like I said, Democrats have had a lock on it for a looooooooooooooooooong time. But, you can present facts (even if it is cut/copy/paste) and some one will still post the interwebz equivalent of a loser fly-by to your statement. Not you, just sayin'.
Term limits should be in effect, but politicians would have to vote for it. Fox guarding the hen house, they are not going to change that or give up thier politician pension program. If you could vote your self a pay raise, would you honestly want to be the Lone Ranger that proposes that to your fellow politicians?

PonyUP

03-15-2012, 07:03 PM

As you know from past posts, I hate both sides equally, lol. No doubt in my mind both sides cheat, but like I said, Democrats have had a lock on it for a looooooooooooooooooong time. But, you can present facts (even if it is cut/copy/paste) and some one will still post the interwebz equivalent of a loser fly-by to your statement. Not you, just sayin'.
Term limits should be in effect, but politicians would have to vote for it. Fox guarding the hen house, they are not going to change that or give up thier politician pension program. If you could vote your self a pay raise, would you honestly want to be the Lone Ranger that proposes that to your fellow politicians?

Ricer flyby :lol: damn man you crack me up.

Man I wish I could vote myself a pay raise. My boss was in town today and we went to dinner and he gave me my bonus, so I'm all smiles now

Btw, I bought something for Louisville you're gonna love

Pony seal of Approval

kernie

03-15-2012, 07:10 PM

As you know from past posts, I hate both sides equally, lol. No doubt in my mind both sides cheat, but like I said, Democrats have had a lock on it for a looooooooooooooooooong time. But, you can present facts (even if it is cut/copy/paste) and some one will still post the interwebz equivalent of a loser fly-by to your statement. Not you, just sayin'.
Term limits should be in effect, but politicians would have to vote for it. Fox guarding the hen house, they are not going to change that or give up thier politician pension program. If you could vote your self a pay raise, would you honestly want to be the Lone Ranger that proposes that to your fellow politicians?

If you didn't have a 2 term limit on your presidents, Bill Clinton would {if he wanted to} still be your president and things would be better.

There!

:D

CBT

03-15-2012, 07:27 PM

Ricer flyby :lol: damn man you crack me up.

Man I wish I could vote myself a pay raise. My boss was in town today and we went to dinner and he gave me my bonus, so I'm all smiles now

Btw, I bought something for Louisville you're gonna love

Pony seal of Approval

You go, girl! :beer:

CBT

03-15-2012, 07:33 PM

If you didn't have a 2 term limit on your presidents, Bill Clinton would {if he wanted to} still be your president and things would be better.

There!

:D
LMAO! Canadian weed must full of awesome. Clinton was a crook. There's a nice 9 or 10 part video series on youtube about how shady him and Hillary were, while on thier path to power. I think it's called he Whitewater Chronicles or some ****. He could have been an awesome President, he was very well liked. Too bad he would rather poke interns than focus on the task at hand, running a country.

kernie

03-15-2012, 07:44 PM

LMAO! Canadian weed must full of awesome. Clinton was a crook. There's a nice 9 or 10 part video series on youtube about how shady him and Hillary were, while on thier path to power. I think it's called he Whitewater Chronicles or some ****. He could have been an awesome President, he was very well liked. Too bad he would rather poke interns than focus on the task at hand, running a country.

OK, but what if along comes a perfect ten president, no matter the stripe who is 42 years old. Best president ever, all agree. 50 years old and done? I don't understand the term limit mentality. I mean look at the republican contenders, :eek:, find a good one, ya best keep em!

:beer:

CBT

03-15-2012, 07:57 PM

OK, but what if along comes a perfect ten president, no matter the stripe who is 42 years old. Best president ever, all agree. 50 years old and done? I don't understand the term limit mentality. I mean look at the republican contenders, :eek:, find a good one, ya best keep em!

:beer:

I am rooting for Mitt, but only because he autographed a shirt for me a few years ago.

kernie

03-15-2012, 08:07 PM

I am rooting for Mitt, but only because he autographed a shirt for me a few years ago.

Do you find it disturbing as i do, that #2 and #3 are finding as much support as they are?

CBT

03-15-2012, 08:09 PM

Do you find it disturbing, as i do, that #2 and #3 are finding as much support as they are?

I think it is all disturbing to be honest. Bunch of knuckleheads.

kernie

03-15-2012, 08:18 PM

I think it is all disturbing to be honest. Bunch of knuckleheads.

Let's just hope for better, for both our countries.

:beer:

CBT

03-15-2012, 08:19 PM

Let's just hope for better, for both our countries.

:beer:
I can drink to that, amen. :beer:

BODYMAN

03-15-2012, 08:25 PM

LMAO! Canadian weed must full of awesome. Clinton was a crook. There's a nice 9 or 10 part video series on youtube about how shady him and Hillary were, while on thier path to power. I think it's called he Whitewater Chronicles or some ****. He could have been an awesome President, he was very well liked. Too bad he would rather poke interns than focus on the task at hand, running a country.

Bill was good at getting diff folks from each party to work with him. Not so good when it came to Military ( cut armed Forces by 43%) after all he dropped the ball on them poor seals in Mogadishu. As for being crooked, yes! He & his wife both were afterall they are politicians. Cant forget about how many people that crossed them over the years the ended dead due to strange circumstances.
As for canadian weed, Na I dont think they got anything on us Americans LOL;)

kernie

03-15-2012, 08:42 PM

Bill was good at getting diff folks from each party to work with him. Not so good when it came to Military ( cut armed Forces by 43%) after all he dropped the ball on them poor seals in Mogadishu. As for being crooked, yes! He & his wife both were afterall they are politicians. Cant forget about how many people that crossed them over the years the ended dead due to strange circumstances.
As for canadian weed, Na I dont think they got anything on us Americans LOL;)

Ha Ha! Sorry, hockey and weed we do well! Ha Ha. Of course you have our "price of pot", Marc Emery in your jail right now.

We want him back!

:beer:

BODYMAN

03-15-2012, 08:50 PM

Ha Ha! Sorry, hockey and weed we do well! Ha Ha. Of course you have our "price of pot", Marc Emery in your jail right now.

We want him back!

:beer:

LOL, I got a few friends who live up there & agree it is good or so my friends say;) But sorry what Ive seen americanse do in that field Ive been told we now in the last few years hold the Cannabis cup. Personally I myself wouldnt know.

kernie

03-15-2012, 08:58 PM

LOL, I got a few friends who live up there & agree it is good or so my friends say;) But sorry what Ive seen americanse do in that field Ive been told we now in the last few years hold the Cannabis cup. Personally I myself wouldnt know.

Ha! With knowledge of the Cannabis cup, i'm thinking you would know, LOL.

But with the ever present authorities and their silly war on dr-gs it is best to keep your head down, :shake:.

:beatnik:

:beer:

CBT

03-16-2012, 03:31 AM

We ownz the Cannibus Cup and the Stanley Cup both? Oh, Canada. :shake:

:D

kernie

03-16-2012, 05:12 AM

We ownz the Cannibus Cup and the Stanley Cup both? Oh, Canada. :shake:

:D

All due to dastardly American tricks i tell you.

First they lean on the Canadian government to expropiate our "prince of pot" just cause he shipped some seeds thus securing the Cannibus cup.

Then they infiltrate my Toronto Maple Leafs with an American GM Brian Burke who brings in his fellow American coach Ron Wilson who then bring in 8, count em, 8 American players. The crew has of course lost their last 14 out of 17 games to fall from a comfy playoff spot to an embarrasing mess. Try winning a Stanley Cup with 8 Americans and no boys from Ontario.

I'm on to yous!

:D

:beer:

CBT

03-16-2012, 05:20 AM

All due to dastardly American tricks i tell you.

First they lean on the Canadian government to expropiate our "prince of pot" just cause he shipped some seeds thus securing the Cannibus cup.

Then they infiltrate my Toronto Maple Leafs with an American GM Brian Burke who brings in his fellow American coach Ron Wilson who then bring in 8, count em, 8 American players. The crew has of course lost their last 14 out of 17 games to fall from a comfy playoff spot to an embarrasing mess. Try winning a Stanley Cup with 8 Americans and no boys from Ontario.

I'm on to yous!

:D

:beer:

We shipped you illegals. Status of take over plan: Success!!

Haggis

03-16-2012, 05:44 AM

All due to dastardly American tricks i tell you.

First they lean on the Canadian government to expropiate our "prince of pot" just cause he shipped some seeds thus securing the Cannibus cup.

Then they infiltrate my Toronto Maple Leafs with an American GM Brian Burke who brings in his fellow American coach Ron Wilson who then bring in 8, count em, 8 American players. The crew has of course lost their last 14 out of 17 games to fall from a comfy playoff spot to an embarrasing mess. Try winning a Stanley Cup with 8 Americans and no boys from Ontario.

I'm on to yous!

:D

:beer:
Stop your complaining, you (Canada) introduced the world to curling.

kernie

03-16-2012, 07:45 AM

We shipped you illegals. Status of take over plan: Success!!

Don't think we have not got that threat covered...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8Nk43SXJac

:beer:

CBT

03-16-2012, 07:54 AM

Damn, can't youtube at work.....

Don't think we have not got that threat covered...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8Nk43SXJac

:beer:

Fosters

03-16-2012, 08:05 AM

I am rooting for Mitt, but only because he autographed a shirt for me a few years ago.

:(

I honestly can't see how any conservative would consider Mitt to be the one to undo all the damage Obama has done... Politicians usually never say concretely what they will cut, for fear of losing votes from those affected by the cuts. So far there has only been one candidate who has said specifically what he will cut out of the government to reduce the ridiculous spending. It wasn't Mitt.

vkirkend

03-16-2012, 08:12 AM

Ozark Marauder

03-16-2012, 08:24 AM

I'm not against people having to show ID to vote. I'm against using this tactic to disenfranchise the people that are judged simply they look different.

Am I missing something here? you say you're not against it, but then say it's a tactic to disenfranchise. I guess I'm just I'm just not informed enough. A little enlightenment please.

OZ

vkirkend

03-16-2012, 08:34 AM

Am I missing something here? you say you're not against it, but then say it's a tactic to disenfranchise. I guess I'm just I'm just not informed enough. A little enlightenment please.

OZ

If I remember correctly the issue is the form of ID. example college students with scholl id's will not be able to use that id to vote. My wife was denied boarding on a plane by TSA WITH a state issued drivers license. They said the issue was that when she renewed it she did not bring in the additional documents to meet the federal guidelines. I'm afraid this will be the standard implemented and many voters will be turned away at the polls becuase of it with no recourse to fix the problem or vote.

tbone

03-16-2012, 08:43 AM

Fosters

03-16-2012, 08:51 AM

If I remember correctly the issue is the form of ID. example college students with scholl id's will not be able to use that id to vote. My wife was denied boarding on a plane by TSA WITH a state issued drivers license. They said the issue was that when she renewed it she did not bring in the additional documents to meet the federal guidelines. I'm afraid this will be the standard implemented and many voters will be turned away at the polls becuase of it with no recourse to fix the problem or vote.

Student ID's don't show address where you live. You could thus vote in 2+ precincts claiming you live in that area. If a picture is all that's needed, what good does it do?

The TSA issue has absolutely nothing to do with voting and you know that. Was it the paper kind they issue when they renew it that doesn't show the photo until you get the new one in the mail? I can see that being a big problem for the TSA, they need to verify who you are. I have had no problem boarding a flight with one of those paper ones - just happened to have to fly right after - but I had my old DL and passport with me just in case. And yes, they needed those because the paper DL isn't enough.

tbone

03-16-2012, 09:35 AM

Here's an article that describes some of the vile processes pretty well.....

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25349

Stealing elections!

Democrat Voter Fraud is Far More Widespread Than You Think

- Fred Dardick Wednesday, July 14, 2010

http://www.canadafreepress.com/images/uploads/dardick071410.gifLast week I wrote an article titled How Obama Used an Army of Thugs to Steal the 2008 Democratic Primary (http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25125) that introduced the conservative community to the movie “We Will Not Be Silenced (http://wewillnotbesilenced2008.com/video/index.htm)”, made by Democrat activist Gigi Gaston two years ago. Her video documented widespread voter fraud committed by Obama supporters during the 2008 Democratic primary election to secure the nomination for Obama over the popular vote winner Hillary Clinton.
The story went viral and 24 hours later Fox News asked Gaston to appear on the Sunday morning program Fox and Friends. For the first time many Americans saw for themselves first hand accounts from Democrats who personally witnessed “the disenfranchising of American citizens by the Democratic Party and the Obama Campaign.”

As explained on the We Will Not Be Silenced website, “‘Change’ from Chicago encouraged and created an army to steal caucus packets, falsify documents, change results, allow unregistered people to vote, scare and intimidate Hillary supporters, stalk them, threaten them, lock them out of their polling places, silence their voices and stop their right to vote.”
Because of the program and other recent events concerning voter intimidation, including the Black Panther incident in Philadelphia and testimony from J. Christian Adams on the Department of Justice’s unwillingness to pursue voter related crimes committed by African Americans, people around the country are finally waking up to the fact that Democrat voter fraud is a far, far bigger problem than anyone had ever realized.
Some conservatives have mistakenly interpreted these events as only affecting Democratic primaries and aren’t concerned about the possibility of vote theft in a general election.
But they would be wrong.
While the voter fraud documented in Gaston’s film primarily involves Democratic caucuses, the bigger story here isn’t a single primary, but the bag of tricks that Democrats use to influence elections of all kinds.
Earlier in the week Fox News ran a story showing how illegal votes by felons in Minnesota were enough for Democrat Al Franken to beat Republican candidate Norm Coleman and claim the Senate seat.
Millions had voted in the Minnesota election, but at the end of the day all it took was 341 criminals to disenfranchise an entire state.
How to Steal an Election

What we are seeing is the transplantation of Chicago politics to communities throughout the nation that are completely unprepared for the level of fraud and intimidation that can be generated by thousands of unethical Democrats, including private citizens, local, state, and federal officials, and politicians, convinced that breaking the law is okay as long as the “right” candidate wins.
On July 6, American Thinker published an article by Lee Cary about an interview with a Chicago political machine insider. It contained the following warning:

“In Chicago, the Precinct Captains watch to see who votes and who doesn’t. Then, at the end of the day, others will cast votes for those who haven’t shown up to vote, all under the direction of the Precinct Captain. If the actual voter shows up later, they’re given someone else’s card. The Republican poll watchers don’t stop this. Hell, most of them are actually Democrats.”

The Democrat Voter Fraud Playbook is as follows:
ACORN registers the names, legitimate or not.
Black Panther, SEIU and other “community organizer” groups intimidate people, especially minorities, from voting Republican.
Voter lists remain unscrubbed of felons, dead people, and illegal immigrants.
On Election Day, precinct workers submit any unused ballots for Democrat candidates.
Democrat officials and politicians pretend like nothing happened.
It’s as easy as that to steal an election.
An Army of Republican Poll Watchers Will Be Needed this November

The voter fraud stories so far are just the tip of a very large iceberg. No one really knows the full extent of the problem and the Democratic Party is counting on Americans to shrug it off as just another conservative conspiracy theory.
But take it from a lifelong Chicagoan, it’s not just Bosnia that needs election observers to keep voter fraud in check.
The dropping of voter intimidation charges by Department of Justice political appointees against billy club wielding Black Panthers sends the message to the Democrat community that mass voter fraud can continue without fear of legal reprisal.
Justice officials know full well that if they were to start digging around this Pandora’s Box of fraud, many influential Democratic organizations (especially ACORN) and politicians will be implicated. So they go straight to Step #5 from above and pretend like there’s nothing to see.
While the problem may be substantial, there is one way Republicans can fight back: Keep a close eye on voting locations. Election fraud only works if citizens remain ignorant to the problem and unwilling to become involved in the voting process.
Considering the importance of the upcoming November elections, an army of Republican poll watchers, especially in minority neighborhoods which are often treated like never ending vote generating machines by unscrupulous Democrat politicians, will be needed to prevent liberals from once again stuffing ballot boxes and gaming the system.

Now the onus is on you Troll to prove this wrong. Won't happen.

vkirkend

03-16-2012, 10:28 AM

Student ID's don't show address where you live. You could thus vote in 2+ precincts claiming you live in that area. If a picture is all that's needed, what good does it do?

The TSA issue has absolutely nothing to do with voting and you know that. Was it the paper kind they issue when they renew it that doesn't show the photo until you get the new one in the mail? I can see that being a big problem for the TSA, they need to verify who you are. I have had no problem boarding a flight with one of those paper ones - just happened to have to fly right after - but I had my old DL and passport with me just in case. And yes, they needed those because the paper DL isn't enough.

A precinct voting card WILL show your address and name and can be matched with the information available at the polling place which along with a state issued ID should be sufficient (i.e.student ID card). Student ID's are accepted by police to identify you and at banks and even by courts, why not for voting? Federal law, federal license issue. On voter fraud, why make a new law when there is no real problem? And the TSA issue IS relavant. My wife DID have her state issued drivers license, not the temporary paper and was still denied boarding. With this proposed law the devil will be in the details. That's my concern....

CBT

03-16-2012, 11:18 AM

:(

I honestly can't see how any conservative would consider Mitt to be the one to undo all the damage Obama has done... Politicians usually never say concretely what they will cut, for fear of losing votes from those affected by the cuts. So far there has only been one candidate who has said specifically what he will cut out of the government to reduce the ridiculous spending. It wasn't Mitt.

Ron Paul? I honestly do not know.

Fosters

03-16-2012, 06:10 PM

A precinct voting card WILL show your address and name and can be matched with the information available at the polling place which along with a state issued ID should be sufficient (i.e.student ID card). Student ID's are accepted by police to identify you and at banks and even by courts, why not for voting? Federal law, federal license issue. On voter fraud, why make a new law when there is no real problem? And the TSA issue IS relavant. My wife DID have her state issued drivers license, not the temporary paper and was still denied boarding. With this proposed law the devil will be in the details. That's my concern....

You're presenting instances of events where address does not have to be verified and you're trying to draw a parallel to voting.

If the police pulls you over on campus for riding your bike on the sidewalk, yes, a student ID will suffice, as they likely won't need your address. However, if a burglary in progress is called in and a student pulls out the student ID, that won't be proof he lives there. If a student is committing a traffic violation in a motorized vehicle he's driving, the driver's license has that address on him for a reason - so that it can be copied down, and to verify that's actually him. If John Smith was to be issued a ticket, and showed only student ID, there'd be no way to identify the correct one, without the address.

Banks already have all of your info, down to social security number, blood type, shoe size, date of birth, 5th grandmother's maiden name and everything else they ask for. The reason they will accept a student id sometimes is, they simply need to put a face with a name that matches the account you claim to be owner of. Likewise, try to open an account or buy a house with just a student id, see how well that works out for ya.

Courts again, have all of the information on you (they better write it down while the cop is issuing you a ticket, from your DL), and again, they only need to put your face with your name.

Voting needs to put your face with your name AND with your address. Because they do not have up to date information on where everyone lives, when everyone turns voting age and so on. Answer this: If a student id was to be considered sufficient, what would stop someone from voting at every precinct in the state of the university they go to?

Ron Paul? I honestly do not know.

:cool:

sailsmen

03-17-2012, 04:03 AM

8 Year Annual Average Clinton vs Bush
Measurement 60 Year Post WW II Annual Average President Clinton President Bush
8 Years Annual Average Unemployment 5.60% 5.21% 5.26%
8 Years Annual Average Annual Deficit as a Percent of our Economy -1.70% -0.08% -2.00%
8 Years Annual Average Public Debt as a Percent of our Economy 40.80% 44.90% 36.10%
8 Years Annual Average Annual Tax Collections N/A $1.55 Trillion $2.14 Trillion
8 Years Annual Average Spending as a Percent of our economy 19.90% 19.80% 19.60%

3 Year Annual Average Clinton vs Bush vs Obama
Measurement 60 Year Post WW II Annual Average President Clinton President Bush President Obama
3 Years Annual Average Unemployment 5.60% 6.20% 5.50% 9.30%
3 Years Annual Average Annual Deficit as a Percent of our Economy -1.70% -3.00% -1.20% -9.90%
3 Years Annual Average Public Debt as a Percent of our Economy 40.80% 49.20% 33.90% 62.60%
3 Years Annual Average Annual Tax Collections N/A $1.25 Trillion $1.88 Trillion $2.15 Trillion
3 Years Annual Average Spending as a Percent of our economy 19.90% 21.00% 19.00% 24.70%

Note: All Data is from the Government BLS and OMB

Bluerauder

03-17-2012, 05:06 AM

3 Year Annual Average Clinton vs Bush vs Obama
Measurement 60 Year Post WW II Annual Average President Clinton President Bush President Obama
3 Years Annual Average Unemployment 5.60% 6.20% 5.50% 9.30%
3 Years Annual Average Annual Deficit as a Percent of our Economy -1.70% -3.00% -1.20% -9.90%

3 Years Annual Average Public Debt as a Percent of our Economy 40.80% 49.20% 33.90% 62.60%
3 Years Annual Average Annual Tax Collections N/A $1.25 Trillion $1.88 Trillion $2.15 Trillion
3 Years Annual Average Spending as a Percent of our economy 19.90% 21.00% 19.00% 24.70%
Note: All Data is from the Government BLS and OMB

Yep, if people would vote on the record of accomplishments, Obama would be hard pressed to even get Michele's vote. His legacy will be that of "Worst President in History". How's that for CHANGE?

sailsmen

03-17-2012, 05:51 AM

The philosophy of Redistribute until Collpase. Then we all start out even, with absolutely nothing!
What Obama does not understand is that with in 7 years after the end of the WW that follows 80% of what was redistributed will be right back in the hands of the people he took it from and in 10 years 90% and in 15 years 100%.
All he would have accomplished is a lot of death, destruction and misery primarily for the very people he thought he was making it Wright for!

dohc324ci

03-17-2012, 06:07 AM

Sailsman keep your responses to one to two paragraphs the links to pages if need be! Your killing me...lol Maybe it's my ADD.

Vallejo California was the first City to file for bankruptcy because of its unfunded liabilities. Stockton CA is in the process, San Jose CA is considering major reforms in unfunded liabilities...San Diego it was just reported as being in crisis as well.

Point is we have a bigger problem voter ID in the grand scheme of things clouds the message. Focus on what's happening on the city, county, state Level get informed. Think economy as that goes so does our way of life.

Links:
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-07/states-facing-sleeping-cancer-in-96-unfunded-retiree-benefits
http://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2012/03/10/in-stockton-calif-slow-fall-off-financial-cliff?page=2
http://m.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-san-jose/unfunded-liabilities-decimates-city-budgets-san-jose-cronies-pretending-denial

tbone

03-17-2012, 08:23 AM

kernie

03-17-2012, 08:56 AM

Four more years because the republicans are that bad.

Carry on.

dohc324ci

03-17-2012, 09:30 AM

^^out of touch with reality. This is your utopia?

dohc324ci

03-17-2012, 09:35 AM

[QUOTE=dohc324ci;1160871]
Vallejo California was the first City to file for bankruptcy because of its unfunded liabilities. Stockton CA is in the process, San Jose CA is considering major reforms in unfunded liabilities...San Diego it was just reported as being in crisis as well.
/QUOTE (http://m.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-san-jose/unfunded-liabilities-decimates-city-budgets-san-jose-cronies-pretending-denial/QUOTE)]

All cities run by liberal democrat politicians that were helped obtain office by voter fraud.

Not trying to argue. Just stating a fact.

Sure my comments were simply stating the over arching message should be financial health of local, county, federal levels. Voter fraud happens when people lose sight of what the core problems are; essentially uninformed/under informed. Without finacial stability of a city how can they perform the most basic services? How bout the counties, state oh federal? Micro to the macro financial health impacts us all democrats/independents/republicans.

kernie

03-17-2012, 10:08 AM

^^out of touch with reality. This is your utopia?

How in the world did you that out of...

this?

Four more years because the republicans are that bad.

Carry on.

:confused:

Think back to the events in the months before Obama became the president. Ya it's all Obama.

:shake:

Fosters

03-17-2012, 10:47 AM

Think back to the events in the months before Obama became the president. Ya it's all Obama.

:shake:

Good point, let's think about it.

Economy crashed because of the housing crisis, correct?

Housing collapsed because banks started lending to people who shouldn't have had a home mortgage, correct?

That was a result of government regulation passed in the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of... 1992. Act which:

mandated that HUD set specific goals for the government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, with regard to low income and underserved housing areas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Housing_Enterprises_Fi nancial_Safety_and_Soundness_A ct_of_1992

mnuoHx9BINc

And something even your canuks can see:
cMnSp4qEXNM

Yep, Bush's fault. I hear he's also the one that put in drilling bans in place so the US cannot get to its own oil. :lol:

Yeah, let's look back a few months, but let's not look back a few years that might show the kleptocrats setting the wheels in motion for the financial meltdown...

sailsmen

03-17-2012, 11:01 AM

[QUOTE=tbone;1160925]

Sure my comments were simply stating the over arching message should be financial health of local, county, federal levels. Voter fraud happens when people lose sight of what the core problems are; essentially uninformed/under informed. Without finacial stability of a city how can they perform the most basic services? How bout the counties, state oh federal? Micro to the macro financial health impacts us all democrats/independents/republicans.

Exactly! No economy can grow/prospher with Gov't spending ~44% of GDP or $58,100 per private sector worker.

Gov't spending destroys wealth. For every $1 the Gov't borrows, $5.2+ Trillion in the past 3 years, 33 cents of private capital is crowded out. Capital is the life blood of our economy.

Obama's edict "Now is not the time to make profits". I have yet to hear him tell us when is the time.

sailsmen

03-17-2012, 11:06 AM

05/21/2002 - Updated 08:38 AM ET

Critics: Fannie, Freddie grip mortgage market
By Thomas A. Fogarty, USA TODAY

Related stories

• What critics such as Alan Greenspan and Warren Buffett have to say
• Ideas for reform sought

WASHINGTON — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, huge players in the mortgage market, present themselves to the world in soft images.
Fannie is in "the American Dream business," and Freddie "opens doors," their slogans say. In advertising, puppies gambol in the yard as families beam proudly outside new homes acquired with capital from one of the companies.
Yet, these twin missionaries in the American religion of home ownership find themselves in an intensifying political battle that could change the way they do business and, consequently, the way Americans finance houses. A persistent chorus of critics is arguing for Congress to rein in the federally chartered and regulated mortgage giants, which some say have become too big, too powerful and outdated.
"The gorilla has outgrown the cage, and we don't know what to do with him," says Rep. Richard Baker, R-La., whose House Capital Markets Subcommittee resumes hearings next month to rein in the housing finance giants.

About Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac
Fannie Mae Freddie Mac
Federal National Mortgage Association Formal name Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp.
1938 Founded 1970
Washington Headquarters McLean, Va.
Franklin Raines CEO Leland Brendsel
4,500 Employees 3,995
$80.0 billion Market capitalization $46.9 billion
$79.50 Share price $66.42
$73.71-$87.87 52-week range $58.80-$71.25
$50.8 billion 2001 revenue $36.2 billion
$5.9 billion 2001 earnings $4.1 billion
20 Fortune 500 rank (revenue) 41
$1.5 trillion Value of bond-investor guarantees $1.2 trillion
24.2% % of U.S. mortgage debt guaranteed 19.3%
Source: USA TODAY research
A partial list of critics: Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan; activist Ralph Nader; investor Warren Buffett; FM Watch, a group of financial services companies; and assorted free-market think tanks. Throw in the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal, which recently compared the firms' risk hedges with those of fallen energy giant Enron, and it becomes clear that good works and image-building advertising might not save Fannie and Freddie from the boiling pot.
But Fannie and Freddie are hardly impotent. They argue — accurately — their key role in a U.S. home financing system that is the envy of the industrialized world. Why risk change, they ask. The cheap and plentiful mortgage credit they've provided has helped drive the home ownership rate in the USA to a record 68%. Mark Zandi, chief economist at Economy.com, calls the chartering of the companies decades ago simply "the most successful policy initiative ever undertaken by the government."
Estimates vary, but experts say Fannie and Freddie make possible a discount of a quarter- to a half-percentage point on a 30-year mortgage. That's a monthly savings of $33 to $67 on $200,000 mortgage paid over 30 years.
Criticism falls in two categories:
• The companies have become so big, their failure could jeopardize the whole U.S. economy. According to the doomsday scenario, failure could drag down a U.S. banking system dependent on Fannie- and Freddie-issued bonds. Taxpayers would be on the hook for a bailout that would dwarf the savings and loan scandal.
• Paralleling software industry criticism of Microsoft, other players in financial services say Fannie and Freddie, by their market dominance in home finance, are stifling competition and innovation.
A pipeline to homeowners

sailsmen

03-17-2012, 11:07 AM

How big are the gorillas? They guarantee payments to bond investors for $2.7 trillion in mortgage debt, or 44% of the U.S. total. By comparison, the U.S. Treasury's public debt is $3.4 trillion.
In general, the firms are limited to dealing in mortgages less than $300,700, or about double the price of the typical American home. In that market, the firms guarantee more than 70% of mortgage debt.

How Fannie, Freddie work

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) — shareholder-owned, for-profit corporations chartered by Congress to ensure that banks and other lenders have a constant supply of money to lend home buyers. They don't lend money directly to consumers. Here's how the system works:
Step 1: The primary mortgage market. A potential home buyer wants to buy a home and approaches a bank or other lender for a mortgage loan.
Step 2: The secondary mortgage market. The lender resells the mortgage to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, freeing capital so that the lender can make more mortgage loans.
Step 3: Packaging. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac package a group of mortgages as mortgage-backed securities and sell them to investors, who want the interest. Or they buy and hold the mortgages originated by lenders.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are private corporations with a public purpose: to expand homeownership by assuring a steady flow of affordable capital to mortgage lenders. They have two methods: They buy and hold the mortgages originated by lenders; or they pool a large number of mortgages and sell shares as mortgage-backed securities.
Think of the companies as pipelines from bond markets to lenders to homeowners. They raise money by selling debt securities to bond investors. The companies themselves guarantee principal and interest payments on the notes. Investors assume that in a crunch, taxpayers would step in and pay them, since Fannie and Freddie are government-chartered institutions. That perception of safety allows Fannie and Freddie to issue debt at only a slightly higher interest rate than paid by the U.S. Treasury itself.
Fannie and Freddie compete with one another in the bond market and for business from lenders. Purely private financial firms also compete with both. They are largely behind the push to eliminate what they view as the unfair advantage of the government charters.
Profit machines
If Fannie and Freddie are doing the work of the angels, they're also doing well by doing good. Fannie last year earned $5.9 billion. Freddie earned $4.1 billion. They landed at No. 13 and No. 18 on Fortune magazine's list of most profitable corporations. Each has registered annual double-digit earnings growth for more than a decade.
Critics allege that Fannie and Freddie — motivated by the need to meet the high expectations of Wall Street — continue to aggressively carve out new and expanded roles in home finance. That would be business as usual for most corporations, but mortgage industry critics say the benefits conferred by their government charters give Freddie and Fannie unfair advantages.
"Those are unrealistic (profit) numbers to maintain over time unless you're going to get into someone else's business," says Mike House, executive director of FM Watch, the financial industry coalition formed to battle what members view as the expansionist tendencies of Fannie and Freddie. Key backers of FM Watch include GE Capital, Wells Fargo and American International Group, as well as trade groups involved with consumer banking and housing finance.
Among the practices they find alarming:
• Establishing a brand. Fannie and Freddie advertise directly to consumers, positioning them as a direct competitor to mortgage companies.
• Second mortgages. Fannie buys a small number of second mortgages, Freddie even fewer. But competitors say it's the first step into the business of lucrative home-equity lending.
• Mortgage insurance. The firms have structured some of their mortgage deals to eliminate or minimize the involvement of mortgage insurance sellers.
• Technology. Each company sells to lenders a software program that judges whether to approve a mortgage, and on what terms. The software packages are so dominant in mortgage lending that critics say they give Fannie and Freddie nearly complete control of the transaction.
• Appraisals. The software dips into millions of digital home sale records to assign a value to the house for which a mortgage is sought. The virtual appraisal allows some borrowers to sidestep the use of human appraisers.
• Small investors. Fannie and Freddie each sell, through brokers, bonds in $1,000 increments. The companies say it prudently broadens their base of investors. Competitors see it as a grab for investors who otherwise would be buying bank CDs.
Spokesmen for Fannie and Freddie dismiss the critics, saying they do nothing outside the bounds of their charters. If some firms are feeling a competitive squeeze from Fannie or Freddie reducing the cost of home ownership, so be it, they say. "If it helps American home buyers, I'd question whether anyone in Congress would have a problem with our doing it," says Freddie spokeswoman Sharon McHale.
The debate
Fannie Vice President Arne Christenson says that critics overestimate the competitive value of the firm's charter, and underestimate its constraints. Commercial banks, he says, enjoy their own access to low-cost capital, some of it loaned by the government or made cheaper by government-sponsored deposit insurance.
Christenson says the notion that Fannie needs to snatch bacon from other financial institutions to meet Wall Street expectations of profitability is wrong. Continued strong housing demand and increasing home prices, Fannie predicts, will cause Americans to double the current $11 trillion investment in homes by the end of the decade. Critics fail to realize the profit potential in Fannie's core business, Christenson says. "We don't feel a need to break out of it."
The financial underpinnings of both Fannie and Freddie appear rock solid.
"They're well-managed companies, and they're healthy financially," says Armando Falcon, director of their financial regulator, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight. In June, Falcon's agency plans to issue results of a financial "stress test," measuring the likelihood that Fannie and Freddie could continue meeting their financial obligations during a sustained national housing depression.
In February, The Wall Street Journal's editorial page looked askance at the companies' use of derivatives in managing their combined multitrillion-dollar debt. "The more we've looked," said the editorial, "the more they look like poorly run hedge funds: lots of leverage and snarkily hedged risk. The word Enron ring any bells?"
Not fair, both companies responded. Their derivatives are relatively simple, and used solely for controlling risk of interest rate swings, not for speculative trading.
Fannie and Freddie, alone among public corporations, are exempt from reporting to the Securities and Exchange Commission. To head off a move in Congress to change that, both companies have adopted voluntary disclosure practices that meet or exceed what would be required by the SEC.
Baker, the Louisiana congressman, says SEC reporting and long-term financial stability will be probed at his hearing next month. Baker's preference is to set Fannie and Freddie loose from their charters to compete on an equal basis with other financial companies. That, he acknowledges, is too ambitious to accomplish any time soon.
For now, he says, he'll settle for more effective government controls.
Democrats who control the Senate are sympathetic to Fannie and Freddie, and likely to block any changes that Baker is able to push through the Republican-controlled House.
Baker says he's in the fight for the long haul, comparing his efforts to melting an iceberg with a blow-dryer. After years of effort, he says, "I'm just now beginning to see the first few drops of water."
http://www.usatoday.com/money/covers/2002-05-21-fannie-mae.htm

sailsmen

03-17-2012, 11:08 AM

As a US Senator exactly what did Obama do to stop all these problems he alledgedly inherited?
Ohh, that's right as a US Senator he CREATED the problems!

PonyUP

03-17-2012, 11:11 AM

I love how you guys give the President the credit/blame and blame a single party. It's an asinine argument. Congress creates the bills and passes them, they don't get vetoed they become law.

IT'S BOTH PARTIES fault, to think anything else is just plain stupid. All the Dems that want to blame Bush, guess what, his second term he had a Dem controlled congress. You want to Blame Clinton, he had a Republican congress though I can't remember if that was true in his first term
Oh here's a question, do we blame Bush for easing oil drill safety regulations that no longer required the back up valve that would have prevented the BP oil spill, or do we Blame the Dem congress.

I can find plenty wrong with the Dem party, but I also see plenty wrong with the Republican party. The most of which is that you guys seem to think they walk on water and can do no wrong. So here's a question, are any of you willing to openly admit something a Republican President has done wrong? Or we're they all just perfect

You Guys give the Pres too much credit or blame. Obama has sucked, but putting a colony on the moon as the 51st state is just as stupid as anything Obama has done. Stop painting all Democrats with the same Brush. Think of how you felt when everyone was pasting Bush.

Kernie like Obama and the Dems, and you continue to think him foolish for what he believes?

It's what he believes and you should respect it just like you would want him to respect you. He's in a minority on this board, but his view should be respected and discussed, and not call him names like Libtard because of it. Would you want him to start calling you conservaloids? I doubt it.

Pony seal of Approval

Fosters

03-17-2012, 11:22 AM

PonyUP

03-17-2012, 11:28 AM

No one is saying republicans are saints. But they've screwed up on other matters.

CAFE regulations, EPA, TSA, Patriot act, etc... Those things, sure, they're the idiots that passed them and touted them.. But I'm sorry, the housing meltdown doesn't rest all on republicans as Kernie would have you believe.

I 100% agree with this. I don't think it falls on any one parties shoulders, it's a mess that has been 20-30 years in the making. It's kind of like Social Security, a good idea at the time, but as times changed we did nothing to adapt with those times. I think the same could be said of the Housing market. Following the S&L scandals we tried to do something to increase the housing market. We failed miserably at who we were give those loans too. Sometimes we have to let markets correct themselves and keep government involvement out of it.
I think the first two bail out spendings were good things that helped the economy, my problem comes with we kept doing it, and when we did we continued to focus on the wrong things like individual companies instead of industries.
Fosters, your post and my reply is what I hope to get out of these threads. A good honest discussion of ideas.

Pony seal of Approval

sailsmen

03-17-2012, 11:38 AM

Pony - what you fail to recognize is Obama believes 1) in Social Justice via Redistributing Wealth, 2) the USA is a White Supremist Society, 3) the Constitution is "flawed" for being a "Charter of Negative Liberties" which does not allow for Social Justice and 4) the only way to make us all equal is to collapse the system so we all start from zero.

The Fed Spending overwhelmes wealth. Obama said we will go after those insurance companies. If Obama Nationalized all 3,000 non life/health insurers in the USA, (State Farm/Liberty Mutual/ Travelers), he could only run the Fed for 58 days. Think about what you pay in auto and home owners insurance, what businesses pay in insurance and yet it only generates enough to run the Fed for 58 days.

sailsmen

03-17-2012, 11:46 AM

Senator Obama radio Interview "If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be OK .

But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.

And that hasn't shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkpdNtTgQNM

sailsmen

03-17-2012, 11:57 AM

Public Debt is the shackle to Slavery that a Government imposes upon it's People.

Fosters

03-17-2012, 12:08 PM

I 100% agree with this. I don't think it falls on any one parties shoulders, it's a mess that has been 20-30 years in the making. It's kind of like Social Security, a good idea at the time, but as times changed we did nothing to adapt with those times. I think the same could be said of the Housing market. Following the S&L scandals we tried to do something to increase the housing market. We failed miserably at who we were give those loans too. Sometimes we have to let markets correct themselves and keep government involvement out of it.
I think the first two bail out spendings were good things that helped the economy, my problem comes with we kept doing it, and when we did we continued to focus on the wrong things like individual companies instead of industries.
Fosters, your post and my reply is what I hope to get out of these threads. A good honest discussion of ideas.

Pony seal of Approval

After I made that post I realized I forgot to mention the biggest one: spending. Bush added 5 trillion to the debt in 8 years. Sure, that's small compared to Obama who's managed to do that in 3, but it should have been at the very worst 0, and should have been in the negative, for a so called conservative... That's my beef with republicans, they've forgotten their roots, and they try too hard to be democrats in order to cater to some of their voters. Bush, McCain, Romney, etc are all proof of that, and until they realize they can't be better democrats then the democrats, we are screwed as far as conservative candidates go...

I don't think any of the bailouts were good ideas. The market is a self correcting mechanism as long as it's free. It put the competitors that did the right thing at a disadvantage, and it didn't allow them to pick up the assets needed at a bargain price as normal bankruptcies would have been conducted. The result of all bailouts wasn't better business practices, was subsidizing bad business practices for the illusion of financial safety.

We haven't yet seen the effects of this subsidy, but when we do, it will be a LOT worse. The path we're on is simply not sustainable, we have more debt per capita then Greece. When China cuts our purse strings and the ball drops, it will be a lot worse than what we've been in...

PonyUP

03-17-2012, 12:50 PM

After I made that post I realized I forgot to mention the biggest one: spending. Bush added 5 trillion to the debt in 8 years. Sure, that's small compared to Obama who's managed to do that in 3, but it should have been at the very worst 0, and should have been in the negative, for a so called conservative... That's my beef with republicans, they've forgotten their roots, and they try too hard to be democrats in order to cater to some of their voters. Bush, McCain, Romney, etc are all proof of that, and until they realize they can't be better democrats then the democrats, we are screwed as far as conservative candidates go...

I don't think any of the bailouts were good ideas. The market is a self correcting mechanism as long as it's free. It put the competitors that did the right thing at a disadvantage, and it didn't allow them to pick up the assets needed at a bargain price as normal bankruptcies would have been conducted. The result of all bailouts wasn't better business practices, was subsidizing bad business practices for the illusion of financial safety.

We haven't yet seen the effects of this subsidy, but when we do, it will be a LOT worse. The path we're on is simply not sustainable, we have more debt per capita then Greece. When China cuts our purse strings and the ball drops, it will be a lot worse than what we've been in...

I completely agree, spending has gotten out of control and businesses and markets need to ride the highs and lows. Our debt has gotten to a point that it can never be fixed. Until we absolutely cut spending and I hate to say raise taxes, quit spending on other countries problems, we can't reverse the curse

Pony seal of Approval

CBT

03-17-2012, 02:27 PM

Interesting....

http://www.westernjournalism.com/obama-team-praying-voter-fraud-will-re-elect-their-boss/?utm_source=Western+Journalism&utm_campaign=95a3c428c5-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

PonyUP

03-17-2012, 02:43 PM

Interesting....

http://www.westernjournalism.com/obama-team-praying-voter-fraud-will-re-elect-their-boss/?utm_source=Western+Journalism&utm_campaign=95a3c428c5-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

That is an interesting article. Just goes to show those in power will do what they can to stay in power especially if it allows them to increase their sphere of influence

Pony seal of Approval

jerrym3

03-17-2012, 05:42 PM

MrBluGruv

03-17-2012, 05:50 PM

We don't want to pay for foodstamps, but we'll pay executives big time when they fail?

Wall street bonuses average $120,000? Down from a much higher figure?

We pay these ridiculous corporate bonuses and salaries with the increased cost of their products, and, they (corporations) also decrease their tax liability by paying these higher salaries.

I don't think that bonuses are evil in and of themselves.

I think they become bad when they are publically subsidized; rewarding failure is the fault here, not just giving rewards.

I think people need to remember that distinction before we get further down the road of hating those that have nicer things than us, i.e. living empty lives of pure jealousy.

jerrym3

03-17-2012, 06:29 PM

I don't think that bonuses are evil in and of themselves.

I think they become bad when they are publically subsidized; rewarding failure is the fault here, not just giving rewards.

I think people need to remember that distinction before we get further down the road of hating those that have nicer things than us, i.e. living empty lives of pure jealousy.

It's not hate nor jealousy, and my life is far from empty. Plus, I'm very comfortably retired, and really don't give a squat.

But, even when bonuses are exorbitant, that's OK with you? What if the company is failing? Every bonus is publicly subsidized by the cost of the product. Where do you think the money is coming from?

Remember, you and I are ultimately paying those bonuses and salaries.

And, when a bonus is based on "today", and not what may happen down the road, it can be an evil.

Makes a person do everything to emphasize short term gain, and the heck with repercussions down the road (ie: real estate and banking debacle).

I'd do the same thing, given the opportunity.

MrBluGruv

03-17-2012, 06:44 PM

It's not hate nor jealousy, and my life is far from empty. Plus, I'm very comfortably retired, and really don't give a squat.

But, even when bonuses are exorbitant, that's OK with you? What if the company is failing? Every bonus is publicly subsidized by the cost of the product. Where do you think the money is coming from?

It's not jealousy; it's reality.

Remember, you and I are ultimately paying those bonuses and salaries

I wasn't aiming my post at you, I mean it in general; if we start hating people that have more than us, and then that becomes ok, we can slip into a comfortable pattern of being jealous rather than working hard to improve our own means. I believe we already see signs of this in our society.

But in regards to bonuses, I believe that if the company is failing, then what I said still stands: rewards are not inherently evil, but rewarding failure is a very detrimental thing. That would be rewarding failure, and therefore would be ridiculous.

And if it is a business entity in a competitive free market, then the only way I pay their bonuses is if I support their product, in which case I don't believe I'd take exception to said bonuses anyways. Unless of course this business is publically subsidized, which I have already addressed also.

I'm just afraid that "bonus" will gain an intrinsically negative identity if the current line of thought prevails....

And, when a bonus is based on "today", and not what may happen down the road, it can be an evil.
Makes a person do everything to emphasis short term gain, and the heck with repercussions down the road (ie: real estate and banking debacle).

I agree that mentality is very hurtful for long-term. To my understanding though, there were MANY more parties involved that allowed those two examples to come to pass, and therefore beyond what any one person could have done by themselves through short-sightedness. It may be short-sighted to hand out loans like candy, but it is also short-sighted on the consumer's end to knowingly live significantly beyond your means. Of course I don't know if it was knowingly or not, so I'm guessing either people gambled to big or they are lacking certain financial management skills. But I digress...

tbone

03-18-2012, 09:20 AM

Good point, let's think about it.

Economy crashed because of the housing crisis, correct?

Housing collapsed because banks started lending to people who shouldn't have had a home mortgage, correct?

That was a result of government regulation passed in the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of... 1992. Act which:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Housing_Enterprises_Fi nancial_Safety_and_Soundness_A ct_of_1992

mnuoHx9BINc

And something even your canuks can see:
cMnSp4qEXNM

Yep, Bush's fault. I hear he's also the one that put in drilling bans in place so the US cannot get to its own oil. :lol:

Yeah, let's look back a few months, but let's not look back a few years that might show the kleptocrats setting the wheels in motion for the financial meltdown...

This is exactly the truth. Democrats have no defense against this. They will just change the subject or scream that we are dumb.

Brad, no one is saying the republicans are perfect. We are just pointing out the weaknesses of the democrats. And there's so much material.:puke:

kernie

03-18-2012, 09:33 AM

I wouldn't call anyone stupid...

Good thing the majority are not stupid, four more years.

CBT

03-18-2012, 09:48 AM

Seems like everything is money, money, money.

Nobody cares that we went into a ridiculous war that cost over 4,000 American lives, thousands of Iraquis lives, and who knows how much in national treasure?

Iraqi citizens would greet us in the streets waving flags?

Oil from Iraq would pay for the war?

But, GW led from his heart. Good man.

We don't want to pay for foodstamps, but we'll pay executives big time when they fail?

Wall street bonuses average $120,000? Down from a much higher figure?

Where does this money come from, China?

We pay these ridiculous corporate bonuses and salaries with the increased cost of their products, and, they (corporations) also decrease their tax liability by paying these higher salaries.

It's a win, win.

Or, a lose, lose.

I care! I cared while I was active duty, didn't agree with it then, don't agree with it now. I'm all for punching other countries in the face (I do miss my combat pay :() when they mess with us but I do not agree with trying to establish democracy or win the hearts and minds of the locals. Know what happens if I let a bank robber stay at my house? I get in trouble, too. Screw them, give up the bad guys or you are the bad guys.
We roll into countries to spread democracy and help them hold fair elections, but we can't do that here, ****ing ********. :mad2:

tbone

03-18-2012, 09:57 AM

I wouldn't call anyone stupid...

Good thing the majority are not stupid, four more years.

40% Conservative, 40% independent, 20% liberal in the USA.
You're right. The majority aren't stupid.
Once we start in on the Blamer in Chief, he won't stand a chance.

kernie

03-18-2012, 10:03 AM

tbone

03-18-2012, 10:14 AM

40% Conservative, 40% independent, 20% liberal in the USA.
You're right. The majority aren't stupid.
Once we start in on the Blamer in Chief, he won't stand a chance.

Any chance that it will occur to you that you are not helping?

Does it ever occur to you that you have no say in US politics since you are not a citizen of this country? Socialist Canadians owned by the British need not apply.

kernie

03-18-2012, 10:21 AM

[QUOTE=kernie;1161303]

Does it ever occur to you that you have no say in US politics since you are not a citizen of this country? Socialist Canadians owned by the British need not apply.

When you lose the debate and turn your attack to the person, try to say something remotely intellegent.

You now have the mic to yourself, bleat away.

tbone

03-18-2012, 10:28 AM

I lost the debate? You smoking that medical marijuana again?

I attacked you? How? Because I said you're socialist? And your point is.......

Leave the discussion to the grownups.

PonyUP

03-18-2012, 11:04 AM

This is exactly the truth. Democrats have no defense against this. They will just change the subject or scream that we are dumb.

Brad, no one is saying the republicans are perfect. We are just pointing out the weaknesses of the democrats. And there's so much material.:puke:

Well I can't argue that Tom, Dem's are certainly providing lots of fuel to the fire. I was watching Bill Mahr this week (I Know, I know, I think he's funny. don't agree with all he says blah blah blah) but he had on Alexander Pelosi (Daughter to Nancy Pelosi, I know, but wait) she did a film that went to the heart of Mississippi and asked why they wouldn't vote for Obama and answers ranged from "I vote for my freedom and my faith, not because I need something" to "He's a half breed Muslim and I won't vote for him"
Then she went to New York outside of a Welfare Office and asked why they would vote for Obama and why because they seemed able bodied they couldn't get a job. Answered ranged from
"Obama gives me free stuff, so I'll vote for him" and "I don't want a job, I want a career" to "I don't even know what I qualify for, but I come down here and they give me money, so why should I work"

What I saw in all of this was two inherant truths, politicians are stupid and so are the idiots voting for them. Which along the lines of toughing proof of identification for voting, I think it's time we require licensing and testing to become a parent. We absolutley have to stop breeding stupidity.

China is crowded, and has environmental problems, but instead of invading countries for world domination, they bought them. they have a very intelligent society and cap the number of Children. I'm starting to think it's not a bad idea

dohc324ci

03-18-2012, 11:20 AM

^^lol wow unless it's your lucky number.

I have faith in the Majority of Americans. Sure extreme views from right/left but that is not the majority.

PonyUP

03-18-2012, 11:23 AM

^^lol wow unless it's your lucky number.

I have faith in the Majority of Americans. Sure extreme views from right/left but that is not the majority.

:confused::confused::confused: :confused:

Not sure what you're saying here?

kernie

03-18-2012, 11:25 AM

Well I can't argue that Tom, Dem's are certainly providing lots of fuel to the fire. I was watching Bill Mahr this week (I Know, I know, I think he's funny. don't agree with all he says blah blah blah) but he had on Alexander Pelosi (Daughter to Nancy Pelosi, I know, but wait) she did a film that went to the heart of Mississippi and asked why they wouldn't vote for Obama and answers ranged from "I vote for my freedom and my faith, not because I need something" to "He's a half breed Muslim and I won't vote for him"
Then she went to New York outside of a Welfare Office and asked why they would vote for Obama and why because they seemed able bodied they couldn't get a job. Answered ranged from
"Obama gives me free stuff, so I'll vote for him" and "I don't want a job, I want a career" to "I don't even know what I qualify for, but I come down here and they give me money, so why should I work"

What I saw in all of this was two inherant truths, politicians are stupid and so are the idiots voting for them. Which along the lines of toughing proof of identification for voting, I think it's time we require licensing and testing to become a parent. We absolutley have to stop breeding stupidity.

China is crowded, and has environmental problems, but instead of invading countries for world domination, they bought them. they have a very intelligent society and cap the number of Children. I'm starting to think it's not a bad idea

Is this post the equivelent of a warm bottle of milk at bedtime?

BTW, you like Bill Mayer because he is funny, usually right and is not afraid to express his true opinions. There is a lesson in there for you pony-up, you can't appease that crowd, speak your true mind.

dohc324ci

03-18-2012, 11:37 AM

:confused::confused::confused: :confused:

Not sure what you're saying here?

Read your last post. You can always get extreme views of both sides doesn't mean its a vast majority. Remember 300 million people in the US; a small sample set like that isn't representative of that group. Your China comment well your gonna have to connect the dots for yourself there chief.

Let me help:
http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/countries/asia-and-the-pacific/china
http://www.countercurrents.org/lendman030410.htm
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/07/apple-foxconn-scandal_n_1325930.html

PonyUP

03-18-2012, 11:43 AM

Is this post the equivelent of a warm bottle of milk at bedtime?

BTW, you like Bill Mayer because he is funny, usually right and is not afraid to express his true opinions. There is a lesson in there for you pony-up, you can't appease that crowd, speak your true mind.

Really Kernie????
Haven't I been defending you in this thread. Tom is a friend of mine, and we may not agree on everything politically. But if you gave missed my tone in this thread, let me make it clear.

I'm not going to insult someone or get in a fight with them because they believe something different than I do.

So I won't add to the tone and fuel the keyboard warriors. But in areas where I think there is an opportunity to have a discussion, I will do that.

Tom is good peeps, I have nothing bad whatsoever to say about the man. So I'm sorry if my post lacked the fire you were open for, I don't have the energy to waste on being a keyboard warrior.

Not to mention the fact he is right, the Dems have provided plenty of material for the fire.

I don't agree with many things this administration has done, and I also think this President has been shown more disrespect than any other one.

But having Freedom means more than the ability to shout what you believe from the mountaintop, it also has to mean that you have to listen to someone else do the same from a different mountain with a different message.
In other words confrontation breeds confrontation, offer up some warm milk and have a conversation. You may find a good person there.

That's how Tbone and I became friends, we'd hash it up on the board and then the more we talked calmly, we found there were two very intelligent people there that shared some of the same beliefs, but also differ quite a bit. But we have Marauders and drink beer, so it's all good.

Pony seal of Approval

dohc324ci

03-18-2012, 11:48 AM

PonyUP

03-18-2012, 11:49 AM

Read your last post. You can always get extreme views of both sides doesn't mean its a vast majority. Remember 300 million people in the US; a small sample set like that isn't representative of that group. Your China comment well your gonna have to connect the dots for yourself there chief.

Let me help:
http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/countries/asia-and-the-pacific/china
http://www.countercurrents.org/lendman030410.htm
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/07/apple-foxconn-scandal_n_1325930.html

Oh I got you now, I was just a bit confused about the number popping up portion. I agree, very small sampling and it's definitely extreme. But many voters don't take the time to do the research and make up there minds based on facts that effect their lives and the country. In the 24hr news tv world, you no longer have news being reported, but opinions and agendas. Voters listen to these opinions from Fox and MSNBC and adopt them as there own.
Ask you average voter why they are voting for who they are, they will repeat a sound bite, ask the question behind the question, they won't have an answer at all.
Then you have the people that just votes along party lines, regardless of the candidate.
Listed above describes I would venture to say 80 % of the people voting.
So when idiot politicians keep getting reelected, who is more intellectually challenged, the idiot, or the idiots who vote for them?

Pony seal of Approval

PonyUP

03-18-2012, 11:56 AM

dohc324ci

03-18-2012, 12:14 PM

Oh I got you now, I was just a bit confused about the number popping up portion. I agree, very small sampling and it's definitely extreme. But many voters don't take the time to do the research and make up there minds based on facts that effect their lives and the country. In the 24hr news tv world, you no longer have news being reported, but opinions and agendas. Voters listen to these opinions from Fox and MSNBC and adopt them as there own.
Ask you average voter why they are voting for who they are, they will repeat a sound bite, ask the question behind the question, they won't have an answer at all.
Then you have the people that just votes along party lines, regardless of the candidate.
Listed above describes I would venture to say 80 % of the people voting.
So when idiot politicians keep getting reelected, who is more intellectually challenged, the idiot, or the idiots who vote for them?

Pony seal of Approval

Yes I agree. Most will look at traditional media to make a UN-informed decision. To make an informed decision research both sides of the argument (multiple sources) then use critical thinking to decide right? We have so many distraction in this country that I am afraid it will need to hit bottom before folks wake up.

I would say NEVER EVER put your faith in a politician they will most certainly disappoint you.

My China comment by the way was just an extreme statement to say providing contraception to prevent people from becoming parents that shouldn't is a good thing. Having 5 kids with 4 different women and not supporting any of them is deplorable. It happens everyday, it's sad. I do believe you should have to pass some barometer before having a kid though

Pony seal of Approval

Pony, I hear you its what society and what we value morally that will ultimately decide. What do we do as a society to frown upon that father? I would never allow our government to mandate some moral values. That is why it is so confusing...I value something morally but am frowned upon for not being open minded non-PC compliant. That father should bear the financial weight of the upbringing of that child into this world.

OK let me just say the social issues are big but the biggest issue we that faces us all is financial reforms from your local municipalities, to the county and state all the way to the Feds. Otherwise we will end up like Greece. HOLD these politicians accountable.

PonyUP

03-18-2012, 12:38 PM

Yes I agree. Most will look at traditional media to make a UN-informed decision. To make an informed decision research both sides of the argument (multiple sources) then use critical thinking to decide right? We have so many distraction in this country that I am afraid it will need to hit bottom before folks wake up.

I would say NEVER EVER put your faith in a politician they will most certainly disappoint you.

Pony, I hear you its what society and what we value morally that will ultimately decide. What do we do as a society to frown upon that father? I would never allow our government to mandate some moral values. That is why it is so confusing...I value something morally but am frowned upon for not being open minded non-PC compliant. That father should bear the financial weight of the upbringing of that child into this world.

OK let me just say the social issues are big but the biggest issue we that faces us all is financial reforms from your local municipalities, to the county and state all the way to the Feds. Otherwise we will end up like Greece. HOLD these politicians accountable.

I concur my friend, we have to hold them accountable for the mess they created. They haven't been able to fix unemployment, so hopefully in November we can give many of them a chance to experience unemployment.
If we don't do something soon, we could very well see the collapse of the market and the dollar to a point we can't rebound from. The only thing that saved us from the last depression, was a global war. And we didn't face 1/10 of the problems we have now, and a global war can't happen now to right the course.
It's scary times, and while the market is doing well, as we know it won't take much to crash it again and next time, it might take much much longer to rebound

Pony seal of Approval

kernie

03-18-2012, 01:50 PM

Really Kernie????
Haven't I been defending you in this thread. Tom is a friend of mine, and we may not agree on everything politically. But if you gave missed my tone in this thread, let me make it clear.

I'm not going to insult someone or get in a fight with them because they believe something different than I do.

So I won't add to the tone and fuel the keyboard warriors. But in areas where I think there is an opportunity to have a discussion, I will do that.

Tom is good peeps, I have nothing bad whatsoever to say about the man. So I'm sorry if my post lacked the fire you were open for, I don't have the energy to waste on being a keyboard warrior.

Not to mention the fact he is right, the Dems have provided plenty of material for the fire.

I don't agree with many things this administration has done, and I also think this President has been shown more disrespect than any other one.

But having Freedom means more than the ability to shout what you believe from the mountaintop, it also has to mean that you have to listen to someone else do the same from a different mountain with a different message.
In other words confrontation breeds confrontation, offer up some warm milk and have a conversation. You may find a good person there.

That's how Tbone and I became friends, we'd hash it up on the board and then the more we talked calmly, we found there were two very intelligent people there that shared some of the same beliefs, but also differ quite a bit. But we have Marauders and drink beer, so it's all good.

Pony seal of Approval

Have you ever thought about trying out for the reality show survivor?

tbone

03-18-2012, 03:47 PM

Brad, as always you speak eloquently. Thanks for that. You're a good man.

sailsmen

03-18-2012, 04:28 PM

What you do not understand is the "markets" are doing "well" because the Fed Reserve has monitized the debt, i.e. printed money, trillions of dollars including assuming Fed/Fan bad mortgages, in 2009 increased the money supply 110%. That is 11 times more than than ever in our history. The Quanitative Easing plus guarranteeing the Euro has turned the dollar into toliet paper. The only thing that is keeping the dollar from collapsing is that oil is currently traded exclusively in dollars. It is the devaluation of the dollar that results in the long term trend of oil going up.

My advice is to buy a wheelbarrow.

Yahoo Finance - "Guessing whether the Federal Reserve will undertake another round of quantitative easing has become a popular parlor game on Wall Street. As could be expected, ahead of the Fed's Tuesday policy meeting, chatter has been renewed over whether the central bank should and could institute another round of QE to help the economy and keep its two mandates, high inflation and unemployment, at bay.

Despite a more stable economy in recent months, the word last week was that the Fed is considering another potential long-term bond buying program called "sterilized QE." This program would be similar to QE2, except this time, the Fed would restrict how banks can use the funds earned from the sale of the securities. Markets loved the idea, since with each round of additional easing, asset prices have jumped.

Lance Roberts, CEO of Streettalk Advisors, compares the Fed to a "drug dealer" for Wall Street -- he says Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke took on a third unofficial mandate after QE1 to "boost asset prices," because that increases consumer confidence and props up spending.

The Fed's first installment of QE involved buying more than $1 trillion in mortgage-backed securities in 2008. QE2 came in the form of buying $600 billion in long-term U.S. Treasury securities in 2010. And the most recent round of easing last fall, dubbed Operation Twist, involved selling-short term U.S. Treasury securities and buying the same amount of long-term ones, with the goal of pulling down long-term interest rates.

The impact has been great for the markets. All three major U.S. indices have nearly doubled since the lows of March 2009. But in terms of the real economy, quantitative easing has done little to help home prices or wage growth and only recently has the jobs picture started to improve.

"The issue now is what are we going to do from here? My concern is [the Fed] cannot do much." Roberts tells Henry in the accompanying video. "The problem is that each one of these have less and less relative effect on the economy and as well as the markets. We're getting less gains out of it."

In addition to becoming less and less effective each time, the impact of inflation has to be considered.

"Every time you implement QE, you create inflationary pressures. Oil prices go up, food prices go up and the average American is not seeing wage increases. They are having a declining rate of disposable income," he says.

The Fed is well aware of the impact of inflation of any easing program on the consumer. However, it faces a conundrum, says Roberts. "The Fed needs inflation to try to inflate their way out of debt, but the problem is now they have tapped themselves into artificially low interest rates, and you can't have both."

Even with the talk of another bond-buying program, the consensus expectation for this week's meeting is for no additional QE and for interest rates to remain at "exceptionally low levels until late 2014," as the central bank signaled at its last meeting.

Roberts agrees with the consensus. "I think they are going to keep talking the point" of yet another bond-buying program. "They [will] keep talking the game, because right now the talk is keeping the markets going."

But eventually something has got to give, says Roberts. Either the economy needs to fully recover so that the Fed does not need to institute another round of easing, or the markets will eventually call the Fed's bluff. Roberts believes the latter will happen first since he does not currently see any real strength in the underlying economy." http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/markets-addicted-qe-yes-fed-wall-street-drug-142857829.html

sailsmen

03-18-2012, 04:35 PM

sailsmen

03-18-2012, 04:53 PM

A lesson on the Federal Reserve. If you are a Federally Chartered Bank you can borrow money from the Fed Reserve. In 2008 and since the Fed Reserve told Chartered Banks they must accept printed money from the Fed Reserve. This was in effect a "loan" with no terms.
Many Banks refused the money, but the Fed said all Banks must accept it. This was to give the illusion of an industry wide banking crisis when in fact it was a crisis for some WS bankers.

What did the banks do with these "free loans"? They bought Gov't Bonds. This funded the Gov't spending massive amounts of money at low interest rates.

To some it up the Federal Reserve printed money and gave it to the banks who bought Fed Gov't Debt. The only real money in this is the interest the Gov't pays on the Fed Gov't Debt to the banks.

The interest is paid by the tax payer.

This is why our money is toilet paper. Soon the World will realize we keep printing money and the World will no longer use the dollar to buy oil.

Fosters

03-19-2012, 08:16 AM

Any chance that it will occur to you that you are not helping?

Wait, no comment on Obama blaming everyone but himself, but it's bad for anyone else to point out his own failures? Oh, yes, let's not talk about those, that's just hate speech and racist, right?

Afraid someone might wise up and look into these failures? :eek: The truth might come out! :shake:

Fosters

03-19-2012, 08:23 AM

I have been studying the CBO, OMB, IMF and BLS reports for 3+ years. The trends and numbers are so obvious anyone with an 8th grade math level can see financial collapse is imminent and yet our Gov't stays on a path that will result in suffering, death and destruction that this Nation has never experienced.

We have already passed the point minor tweaks such as rolling back spending to 2008 or freeze at current levels then cut 1% a year.

We are on a sinking ship lead by fools that we have appointed.

The bigger Government the smaller the individual.

I keep hearing democrats praise Clinton for his projected budget surplus... I'd be willing to bet if tomorrow a republican proposed ALL Bush tax cuts got rolled back (aka even those for the lower tax brackets which the dems like to pretend don't exist), and more importantly roll back spending to Clinton's last budget, the one credited with the on-paper surplus; I'm willing to bet the screaming and crying from the left would be deafening.

Just imagine the dems realizing that in addition to the TSA and Patriot act being nixed (no funding), that Obamacare would too go away... :bigcry:

sailsmen

03-19-2012, 08:45 AM

I remember watching protest as a little one and I will never forget the smell of tear gas.

Back then "Liberal" meant to leave me alone to live my life as I like it. Never trust anyone under 30, authority figures such as parents, schools and government were WRONG!

Today "Liberal" means LIVE YOUR LIFE AS GOVERNMENT LIKES IT TO BE. Gov't control over every aspect of an individuals life from the toilet I take a crap in, to the shower head I use to wash my body, to the light bulb I use to illuminate my body, to the food I can put in my body, to what I can say/write at work, .....................

The Bigger the Government the smaller the Individual.

mrjones

03-19-2012, 08:53 AM

sailsmen

03-19-2012, 09:01 AM

[QUOTE=sailsmen;1161698] Gov't control over every aspect of an individuals life from the toilet I take a crap in.....

You must've watched the new episode of South Park last week. Funny stuff with the TSA and all. Well, funny if weren't so true.

I don't watch South Park or most TV shows. I became aware of Fed Toilet control when I went from a 60 year old house where the toilets worked to a new house in 1998 where they did not work.

I have a question for these dumb a@@es who think we are running out of water. Now that they Shuttle program has ended and we are no longer shipping water to outer space exactly where do they think the water is going???

CBT

03-19-2012, 09:44 AM

Federal Reserve has about as much to do with the government as Federal Express does. Neither are controlled/owned by the government, but the name makes it sound like it is.

sailsmen

03-19-2012, 09:49 AM

Federal Reserve has about as much to do with the government as Federal Express does. Neither are controlled/owned by the government, but the name makes it sound like it is.

The Federal Reserve website has an excellent explanation of what they are and what they do.

The Federal Reserve is a Government Sponsored Entity that is controlled by Gov't by the appointment process.

"The seven members of the Board of Governors are nominated by the President of the United States and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. By law, the appointments must yield a "fair representation of the financial, agricultural, industrial, and commercial interests and geographical divisions of the country," and no two Governors may come from the same Federal Reserve District.

The full term of a Governor is 14 years; appointments are staggered so that one term expires on January 31 of each even-numbered year. A Governor who has served a full term may not be reappointed, but a Governor who was appointed to complete the balance of an unexpired term may be reappointed to a full 14-year term.

Once appointed, Governors may not be removed from office for their policy views. The lengthy terms and staggered appointments are intended to contribute to the insulation of the Board--and the Federal Reserve System as a whole--from day-to-day political pressures to which it might otherwise be subject.

In addition to serving as members of the Board, the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Board serve terms of four years, and they may be reappointed to those roles and serve until their terms as Governors expire. The Chairman serves as public spokesperson and representative of the Board and manager of the Board's staff. The Chairman also presides at Board meetings. Affirming the apolitical nature of the Board, recent Presidents of both major political parties have selected the same person as Board Chairman."

CBT

03-19-2012, 09:56 AM

They are a high interest loan company.

kernie

03-19-2012, 10:10 AM

Wait, no comment on Obama blaming everyone but himself, but it's bad for anyone else to point out his own failures? Oh, yes, let's not talk about those, that's just hate speech and racist, right?

Afraid someone might wise up and look into these failures? :eek: The truth might come out! :shake:

I keep hearing democrats praise Clinton for his projected budget surplus... I'd be willing to bet if tomorrow a republican proposed ALL Bush tax cuts got rolled back (aka even those for the lower tax brackets which the dems like to pretend don't exist), and more importantly roll back spending to Clinton's last budget, the one credited with the on-paper surplus; I'm willing to bet the screaming and crying from the left would be deafening.

Just imagine the dems realizing that in addition to the TSA and Patriot act being nixed (no funding), that Obamacare would too go away... :bigcry:

The Democrats could have put the Lord himself in the white house and fox news-hannity and the tens of millions of their hopeless sheep would be talking the same way, on and on and on and on.

That is the problem, i speak of.

sailsmen

03-19-2012, 10:23 AM

They are a high interest loan company.

Unfortunately they are the complete opposite. They print money and hand it out for a very low interest rate to favor those they want to favor.

All US Citizens end up with a devalued dollar and the taxpayer pays the low interest they do charge.

For years it was the monetary policy of the Fed Reserve to make money CHEAP. In doing so people treated money like anythingelse that is CHEAP.

Hey man your problem is you did not borrow enough money. Just borrow some more and your problem is fixed. I will even pay you to borrow the money!;)

Was it no surprise the end result of CHEAP money?

CBT

03-19-2012, 10:29 AM

Good point.

Fosters

03-19-2012, 10:46 AM

The Democrats could have put the Lord himself in the white house and fox news-hannity and the tens of millions of their hopeless sheep would be talking the same way, on and on and on and on.

That is the problem, i speak of.

The problem isn't that someone is being critical of the government. The problem is the government.

Obama's policies wouldn't be any better for the country if Fox news joined rank with CNN and MSNBC and started kissing up to him.

sailsmen

03-20-2012, 06:10 AM

I keep hearing democrats praise Clinton for his projected budget surplus... I'd be willing to bet if tomorrow a republican proposed ALL Bush tax cuts got rolled back (aka even those for the lower tax brackets which the dems like to pretend don't exist), and more importantly roll back spending to Clinton's last budget, the one credited with the on-paper surplus; I'm willing to bet the screaming and crying from the left would be deafening.

Just imagine the dems realizing that in addition to the TSA and Patriot act being nixed (no funding), that Obamacare would too go away... :bigcry:

In round numbers.
Per the rating agencies an annual Deficit that exceeds 3% of the Economy cannot be paid back.
Economy ~$15Trillion
3% ~$450Billion
Annual Deficit ~$1.5Trillion
Annual Deficit Reduction to = ~3% of the Economy ~$1.05Trillion
Roll back the "Bush Tax Cuts" for those over $250K = ~$70Billion, leaving ~980Billion left to eliminate
Roll back the "Bush tax Cuts" for those who make less than $250K = ~$300Billion, leaving $680Billion left to eliminate
Cut the increases in Federal spending made in the last 3 years and the $680Billion is eliminated!
We can now pay back our annual Deficit. The next step is to pay off the Debt and the unfunded liablities.
From the White House;
Year Receipts Spending Annual Deficit
2004 1,880,114 2,292,841 -412,727
2005 2,153,611 2,471,957 -318,346
2006 2,406,869 2,655,050 -248,181
2007 2,567,985 2,728,686 -160,701
2008 2,523,991 2,982,544 -458,553
2009 2,104,989 3,517,677 -1,412,688
2010 2,162,724 3,456,213 -1,293,489
2011 estimate 2,173,700 3,818,819 -1,645,119

sailsmen

03-20-2012, 06:16 AM

Kennedy 1964 tax revenues $113B 1972 $207B
Reagan 1981 tax revenues $599B 1989 $991B
Bush 2000 tax revenues $2025B 2008 $2524.

Individual Income Taxes Under Presidents Clinton and Bush, 1999 Law and 2008 Law
For taxpayers who take the standard deduction and have no children
Taxpayer Tax under Clinton, 1999 tax law Tax under Bush, 2008 tax law Savings under Bush % Under Clinton % Under Bush % Reduction
Single, income of 30,000 $3,157.50 $2,756.25 $401.25 11% 9% -13%
Single, income of 50,000 $7,262.50 $6,606.25 $656.25 15% 13% -9%
Married, income of $50,000 $5,085.00 $4,012.50 $1,072.50 10% 8% -21%
Single, income of $75,000 $14,262.50 $12,856.25 $1,406.25 19% 17% -10%
Married, income of $75,000 $9,426.50 $7,762.50 $1,664.00 13% 10% -18%
Single, income of $125,000* $29,378.50 $26,472.25 $2,906.25 24% 21% -10%
Married, income of $125,000* $23,426.50 $19,462.50 $3,964.00 19% 16% -17%
*This chart does not take into account the Alternative Minimum Tax

tbone

03-20-2012, 04:10 PM

The Democrats could have put the Lord himself in the white house and fox news-hannity and the tens of millions of their hopeless sheep would be talking the same way, on and on and on and on.

That is the problem, i speak of.
Democrats think he is the Lord. Here's proof. You know.....proof? The facts that back up an argument, that you are always completely lacking?

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=qKdScVerrBU&vg=medium

kernie

03-20-2012, 04:42 PM

Democrats think he is the Lord. Here's proof. You know.....proof. The facts that back up an argument, that you are always completely lacking?

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=qKdScVerrBU&vg=medium

Sorry, you have slipped below my threshhold of people worthy of debate.

tbone

03-20-2012, 04:55 PM

Sorry, you have slipped below my threshhold of people worthy of debate.

I figured you would would give up.:banana:

You're probably too busy throwing rocks at your local police.

http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2012/Mar/Week3/16191539.jpg

HAPPY ST. PATRICK'S DAY FROM BEAUTIFUL LONDON, ONTARIO!

CBT

03-20-2012, 05:25 PM

28229

...................

sailsmen

03-20-2012, 06:40 PM

Obama upon winning the Democratic Presidential Primary - "[T]his was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal,"

tbone

03-20-2012, 07:12 PM

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3173/2552047591_54eebcf3e3.jpg?v=0

"... a light will shine through that window, a beam of light will come down upon you, you will experience an epiphany ... and you will suddenly realize that you must go to the polls and vote for Obama".
Barack Obama
Lebanon, New Hampshire
January 7, 2008

"and be sure to have some refreshing kool aid on your way out...."

tbone

03-20-2012, 07:26 PM

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2308/2286521650_15d399b8c2.jpg?v=0<<< This looks like Hillary 5 minutes after the kool aid!

Obama Conversion Stories

"Obama is, of course, greater than Jesus." -- Politiken (Danish newspaper) (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2009/12/denmarks-politiken-obama-is-of-course.html)

"No one saw him coming, and Christians believe God comes at us from strange angles and places we don't expect, like Jesus being born in a manger." --Lawrence Carter (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/11/no-one-saw-him-coming-like-jesus-being.html)

"Many even see in Obama a messiah-like figure, a great soul, and some affectionately call him Mahatma Obama." -- Dinesh Sharma (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/06/obama-new-mahatma.html)

"We just like to say his name. We are considering taking it as a mantra." -- Chicago] Sun-Times (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/06/we-just-like-to-say-his-name-we-are.html)

"A Lightworker -- An Attuned Being with Powerful Luminosity and High-Vibration Integrity who will actually help usher in a New Way of Being" -- Mark Morford (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/06/obama-is-lightworker-attuned-being-with.html)

"What Barack Obama has accomplished is the single most extraordinary event that has occurred in the 232 years of the nation’s political history" -- Jesse Jackson, Jr. (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/06/another-another-chapter-could-be-added.html)

"This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal." -- Barack Obama (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/06/this-was-moment-when-rise-of-oceans.html)

"Does it not feel as if some special hand is guiding Obama on his journey, I mean, as he has said, the utter improbability of it all?" -- Daily Kos (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/04/his-story-exemplifies-quest-of-solar.html)

"He communicates God-like energy..." -- Steve Davis (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/03/he-communicates-god-like-energy.html) (Charleston, SC)

"Not just an ordinary human being but indeed an Advanced Soul" -- Commentator @ Chicago Sun Times (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/03/not-just-ordinary-human-being-but.html)

"I'll do whatever he says to do. I'll collect paper cups off the ground to make his pathway clear." -- Halle Berry (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/02/ill-collect-paper-cups-off-ground-to.html)
"A quantum leap in American consciousness"
-- Deepak Chopra (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/01/quantum-leap-in-american-consciousness.html)
"He is not operating on the same plane as ordinary politicians. . . . the agent of transformation in an age of revolution, as a figure uniquely qualified to open the door to the 21st century." -- Gary Hart (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/02/agent-of-transformation-he-is-not.html)
"Barack Obama is our collective representation of our purest hopes, our highest visions and our deepest knowings . . . He's our product out of the all-knowing quantum field of intelligence."
-- Eve Konstantine (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/02/collective-representation-of-our-purest.html)
"This is bigger than Kennedy. . . . This is the New Testament." | "I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often. No, seriously. It's a dramatic event."
-- Chris (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/02/christopher-matthews-this-is-new.html)Matthews (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/02/i-felt-this-thrill-going-up-my-leg.html)
"[Obama is ] creative imagination which coupled with brilliance equals wisdom . . . [He is] the man for this time."
-- Toni Morrison (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/02/creative-imagination-coupled-with.html)
"Obama's finest speeches do not excite. They do not inform. They don't even really inspire. They elevate. . . . He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh . . . Obama is, at his best, able to call us back to our highest selves."
-- Ezra Klein (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/01/ezra-klein-he-is-not-word-made-flesh.html)
"Obama has the capacity to summon heroic forces from the spiritual depths of ordinary citizens and to unleash therefrom a symphonic chorus of unique creative acts whose common purpose is to tame the soul and alleviate the great challenges facing mankind."
-- Gerald Campbell (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2008/01/gerald-campbell-obama-radiates-truth.html)
"We're here to evolve to a higher plane . . . he is an evolved leader . . . [he] has an ear for eloquence and a Tongue dipped in the Unvarnished Truth."
-- Oprah Winfrey (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2007/12/oprah-winfrey-obama-has-tongue-dipped.html)
“I would characterize the Senate race as being a race where Obama was, let’s say, blessed and highly favored. That’s not routine. There’s something else going on. I think that Obama, his election to the Senate, was divinely ordered. . . . I know that that was God’s plan."
-- Bill Rush (http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/2007/09/his-election-to-senate-was-divinely.html)

So Kernie, who are the "MINDLESS SHEEP"?

Ok, now I'm done proving my point.