Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval
Its been hovering there for several months now. You should read the news sometime.
Well, in your zeal to sound like you know what you're talking about, you just made yourself look stupid.
Polls can be made to show whatever the pollster wants, like this poll, that shows obowma in a much different light... Rasmussen Reports™: The Most Comprehensive Public Opinion Data Anywhere
Oh noes...its only 58% approval rating isntead of 61%...man, that means a revolution must be coming soon
Obama Justice Department Decision Will Allow Non-Citizens to Register to Vote in Georgia
Atlanta - The decision by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to deny preclearance of Georgias already implemented citizenship verification process shows a shocking disregard for the integrity of our elections. With this decision, DOJ has now barred Georgia from continuing the citizenship verification program that DOJ lawyers helped to craft. DOJs decision also nullifies the orders of two federal courts directing Georgia to implement the procedure for the 2008 general election. The decision comes seven months after Georgia requested an expedited review of the preclearance submission.
DOJ has thrown open the door for activist organizations such as ACORN to register non-citizens to vote in Georgias elections, and the state has no ability to verify an applicants citizenship status or whether the individual even exists. DOJ completely disregarded Georgias obvious and direct interest in preventing non-citizens from voting, instead siding with the ACLU and MALDEF. Clearly, politics took priority over common sense and good public policy.
News Room | Press Release
Hey! Americans,, kiss your azz and your country goodbye,, cause you've been fucked!
Residence should be a sufficient condition for voting rights. A system of democratic input is of course based around the right of self-governance, and those present and affected by policy formed by the electorate and their representatives should have the same right to exercise a degree of control over said policy to the extent that it affects them.
I must be missing something. The only people I ever hear or see talking "revolution" are fearmongering leftwingnuts.
I'd love to know what makes such left-goobs think they consider themselves worth beating and subjugating. Lord knows given the nature of the left they would have to have their every need catered to.
You can just be left to your own self-defeating devices.
Then there's the fact that it always seems to be the left that's willing to resort to violence to force their political retardation on others. The right has "tea parties."
You're dismissed.
You have quite an active imagination. Perhaps you forgot your own statement about there is only so much "facism" that the American people will "take". And what happens when they won't take anymore?
Oh, and Pale Rider brought up "armed rebellion".
Fail.
Residence should be a sufficient condition for voting rights. A system of democratic input is of course based around the right of self-governance, and those present and affected by policy formed by the electorate and their representatives should have the same right to exercise a degree of control over said policy to the extent that it affects them.
So long as those subjects are legal American citizens and/or alive, I see nothing wrong with that.
77% of Georgia Voters Favor ID Checks Before Voting, Justice Department Disagrees
If you polled ACORN, you'd probably come in lower than 77%
This is not about ID checks. This is about illegaly preventing US Citizens from casting their vote. The Southern States have a long history of doing exactly that. And they did it again in Florida in 2000 with the bogus felons list. Not going to happen again.
77% of Georgia Voters Favor ID Checks Before Voting, Justice Department Disagrees
If you polled ACORN, you'd probably come in lower than 77%
This is not about ID checks. This is about illegaly preventing US Citizens from casting their vote. The Southern States have a long history of doing exactly that. And they did it again in Florida in 2000 with the bogus felons list. Not going to happen again.
WRONG
This is about LEGALLY preventing ILLEGALS or PEOPLE NOT QUALIFIED TO VOTE from casting votes
Why are you people so taken back by this? Voting rights in the south for minorities required LBJ and other good people to pass laws that should not even have been required. The inflammatory rhetoric of the piece is just that, pure BS, and that you believe it is scary to democracy. If a voting test were given, and sense were required, none of you dipshit wingnuts would ever be allowed to vote. You should give thanks for that.
Find something important to think about sometime. If you read a bit maybe you would learn something.
"n Georgia the Republican legislature voted to require government-issued ID; the same session of the legislature voted to double the fee for such an ID. A federal court in Georgia initially blocked that ID law but then dismissed the challenge after the legislature amended the statute to waive the fee. The Albuquerque charter amendment has been stayed by a federal judge; the Georgia case is on appeal. At stake is the potential margin of victory in a close election."
The Voter ID Fraud | CommonDreams.org
What is underlined above is nothing short of a poll tax.
24th Amendment:
"1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
U.S. Constitution - Amendment 24 - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net
Why is this even a consideration? What is there to argue?
You would have to count on all of those people revolting...a real stretch. And how long would you think it wouls take the gov't to take down say...6000 revolters? They are a lot of people unhappy with the gov't but I guarandamntee that most will not revolt. Now, peaceful dissent I can see.
6000 people? That's not being very realistic. Let's just keep a close eye on what happens on July 4th. I think the numbers of people and what you hear them saying will be very indicative of what direction a possible revolution may take.
But to just speculate... if it came down to the conservatives against the liberals, that would pretty much boil down to the country people against the city people. Who do you think would win that, and without as much as a shot fired? Where do you think the vast majority of truck drivers live? What do you think would happen if all the truckers quit driving? Do you live in a city? I'd give you three days and you people would be killing each other, for water, for food. I have my own well, my own septic, a garden, hundreds of thousands of acres of land surrounding me teaming with wild game. I don't need a truck to bring me my food. You do don't ya? Cities like NY, LA and Phoenix for example would be crushed in a matter of days. No... there's more ways to win a revolution then by shooting it out.
Been done before, halfwit. An agrarian South against and Industrial North. And the North won.
But keep talking like a total idiot. I am sure that by now you have been flagged for watch by the appropriate authorities.
So long as those subjects are legal American citizens and/or alive, I see nothing wrong with that.
Why are you people so taken back by this? Voting rights in the south for minorities required LBJ and other good people to pass laws that should not even have been required. The inflammatory rhetoric of the piece is just that, pure BS, and that you believe it is scary to democracy. If a voting test were given, and sense were required, none of you dipshit wingnuts would ever be allowed to vote. You should give thanks for that.
Find something important to think about sometime. If you read a bit maybe you would learn something.
"n Georgia the Republican legislature voted to require government-issued ID; the same session of the legislature voted to double the fee for such an ID. A federal court in Georgia initially blocked that ID law but then dismissed the challenge after the legislature amended the statute to waive the fee. The Albuquerque charter amendment has been stayed by a federal judge; the Georgia case is on appeal. At stake is the potential margin of victory in a close election."
The Voter ID Fraud | CommonDreams.org
What is underlined above is nothing short of a poll tax.
24th Amendment:
"1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
U.S. Constitution - Amendment 24 - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net
Why is this even a consideration? What is there to argue?
The reason it is "even an issue" is because of the next sentence that you conveniently didn't underline and bold because it defeated your position. The State waived the fee.
Why does the left fight so hard to make it easy to commit voter fraud?
You are either for the rule of law or you aren't. Undermining the concept of one man, one vote is pernicious to society. And, that's exactly what is at issue here.
So long as those subjects are legal American citizens and/or alive, I see nothing wrong with that.
Uh...that contradicts the entire premise of how residence should be a sufficient condition of electoral rights.
Residence alone isn't good enough. Point is, and what this whole thread is about, you should have to be a LEGAL citizen of America, and be able to prove it before you can vote. Anything less than that is a travesty to our sovereignty and constitution.
What is underlined above is nothing short of a poll tax.
24th Amendment:
"1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."
U.S. Constitution - Amendment 24 - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net
Why is this even a consideration? What is there to argue?
The reason it is "even an issue" is because of the next sentence that you conveniently didn't underline and bold because it defeated your position. The State waived the fee.
Why does the left fight so hard to make it easy to commit voter fraud?
You are either for the rule of law or you aren't. Undermining the concept of one man, one vote is pernicious to society. And, that's exactly what is at issue here.
I thought the sentence directly following your underline was a no-brainer. Sorry I misjudged you?
As to the rest, BS. It is that, nothing more noble, and nothing less prone to the infestation of maggots.
Well, in your zeal to sound like you know what you're talking about, you just made yourself look stupid.
Polls can be made to show whatever the pollster wants, like this poll, that shows obowma in a much different light... Rasmussen Reports: The Most Comprehensive Public Opinion Data Anywhere
Oh noes...its only 58% approval rating isntead of 61%...man, that means a revolution must be coming soon
Oh "noes"... what's that? Is that English?
And 58% and lower is a lot different than the 65% on the other poll. I made my point which you completely ignored, which doesn't surprise me coming from a partisan hack, and that's that polls generally don't mean shit. Ah... ha... aha ha ha... and that's so fucking funny.
Residence alone isn't good enough. Point is, and what this whole thread is about, you should have to be a LEGAL citizen of America, and be able to prove it before you can vote. Anything less than that is a travesty to our sovereignty and constitution.
I know what the "law" is. I'm expressing an ideological position.
6000 people? That's not being very realistic. Let's just keep a close eye on what happens on July 4th. I think the numbers of people and what you hear them saying will be very indicative of what direction a possible revolution may take.
But to just speculate... if it came down to the conservatives against the liberals, that would pretty much boil down to the country people against the city people. Who do you think would win that, and without as much as a shot fired? Where do you think the vast majority of truck drivers live? What do you think would happen if all the truckers quit driving? Do you live in a city? I'd give you three days and you people would be killing each other, for water, for food. I have my own well, my own septic, a garden, hundreds of thousands of acres of land surrounding me teaming with wild game. I don't need a truck to bring me my food. You do don't ya? Cities like NY, LA and Phoenix for example would be crushed in a matter of days. No... there's more ways to win a revolution then by shooting it out.
Been done before, halfwit. An agrarian South against and Industrial North. And the North won.
But keep talking like a total idiot. I am sure that by now you have been flagged for watch by the appropriate authorities.
Well shit for brains, that was a 175 years ago, and the war was for very different reasons. If you think it would be fought in exactly the same manner you're dumber than a bag of dog piss.
And I could give a flying fuck who's watching what I'm saying. Maybe somebody SHOULD be listening, because this country has had just about enough of this liberal madness. But hey, you be a good little obamabot and keep sucking his ass right up until there's no more America... it'll all belong to china, and you'll be paying 75% of your income to pay for it. Yeah, sounds great! Sounds like exactly what you pathetic morons want.
Oh noes...its only 58% approval rating isntead of 61%...man, that means a revolution must be coming soon
Oh "noes"... what's that? Is that English?
And 58% and lower is a lot different than the 65% on the other poll. I made my point which you completely ignored, which doesn't surprise me coming from a partisan hack, and that's that polls generally don't mean shit. Ah... ha... aha ha ha... and that's so fucking funny.
Polls don't mean shit? So how exactly did Nate Silver manage to almost perfectly predict the 2008 election? He just pulled it out of his ass?
I seem to recall a lot of people saying this same thing before Obama won
I see... so it's your contention that we should scrap our laws for ideology?
Been done before, halfwit. An agrarian South against and Industrial North. And the North won.
But keep talking like a total idiot. I am sure that by now you have been flagged for watch by the appropriate authorities.
Well shit for brains, that was a 175 years ago, and the war was for very different reasons. If you think it would be fought in exactly the same manner you're dumber than a bag of dog piss.
And I could give a flying fuck who's watching what I'm saying. Maybe somebody SHOULD be listening, because this country has had just about enough of this liberal madness. But hey, you be a good little obamabot and keep sucking his ass right up until there's no more America... it'll all belong to china, and you'll be paying 75% of your income to pay for it. Yeah, sounds great! Sounds like exactly what you pathetic morons want.
And exactly who elected you spokesman of the country? Speak for yourself, not for anyone else. As I posted, most people disagree with you, much less are willing to forment armed rebellion.
If you want to revolt, go for it. I'll laugh at your ass when you get shot.
I see... so it's your contention that we should scrap our laws for ideology?
My contention is that we should continue to adapt and develop our laws to facilitate the maximization of civil rights.
