Truthmatters' " GOP making it difficult to vote" thread.

[CountofTuscany]

You are claiming it was NOT politically motivated.

That is yours to prove

How many Obama voters actually have cars? Ones they haven't stolen anyway?

 

[Full-Auto]

You are claiming it was NOT politically motivated.

That is yours to prove

idiot... you say it IS


so that puts the burden of prof on YOU

The idiot was already discredited way early in the thread, with an article that detailed the decisions.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

You are claiming it was NOT politically motivated.

That is yours to prove

Sorry, that's not how the process works. You made the initial claim that it was politically motivated. That claim is yours to prove.

Had hboats started the thread saying it was not politically motivated, then the onus would be on him to prove it.

But this is your thread, and your case to prove.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Prove it was NOT politically motivated.


They had to change it for some reason huh?

Why did they change the law after people called it political?

Are you truly this dense? I'm not the one making a claim and then not proving it. How can I possibly disprove something that has never been proven?

Your original post states that these closing are politically motivated and there is no proof of this claim. Now you want me to disprove something that you've never offered proof of?

I guess the correct answer is that you just lied and expected us to believe it blindly like you do.

Rick

Yes she is; yes she does.

Her 'proof' was a blog and because she thinks the Trans. Dept. assistant is 'carrying Walker's water' (which I assume means he does whatever Walker wants) it must be true. Oh, and she hasn't proven this claim about the Trans. Dept. either . . . guess there wasn't a blog posting on it.

 

[Truthmatters]

And I proved there is pleanty of evidence to show that the republican party has used these types of tactics in the past to keep voters from voting.

Then the capper is they did NOT impliment the plan after it was publicized WHAT they were doing.

If it was not scrapped because of the beliefs of people it was politically motivated WHY did they scrap the idea?

 

[Zoom-boing]

Hey truthmangler, where's my apology?

You're nothing but a liar and it has been proven time and again.

Liar. Liar. Liar.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Yes I say it was politically motivated.

I have decades of republicans actions in elections to keep people from voting along with the fact that once it was scrutinized they had to change the plan.

Now prove it was not politically motivated like you claim.

Decades of any actions have nothing to do with this one particular proposal.

You need to prove this proposal was politically motivated on it's own merits, not on what happened in the past.

 

[CountofTuscany]

And I proved there is pleanty of evidence to show that the republican party has used these types of tactics in the past to keep voters from voting.

Then the capper is they did NOT impliment the plan after it was publicized WHAT they were doing.

If it was not scrapped because of the beliefs of people it was politically motivated WHY did they scrap the idea?

You call more of your personal lies evidence?

 

[Truthmatters]

WHY did they scrap the idea?

what reason did they give?

 

[Immanuel]

The Bush five year study found no such voter problems as you suggest.


Why make laws for a crime that doesnt exist?

Why spend millions when you dont have to?

You have screamed for ten years about the ineptness of the Bush Admin. Why is it that in this one instance you find their research to be reliable?

Immie

 

[Rat in the Hat]

And I proved there is pleanty of evidence to show that the republican party has used these types of tactics in the past to keep voters from voting.

Then the capper is they did NOT impliment the plan after it was publicized WHAT they were doing.

If it was not scrapped because of the beliefs of people it was politically motivated WHY did they scrap the idea?

The plan was never "scrapped". It was brought into line with what the effected communities wanted, and what their representatives negotiated for.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And I proved there is pleanty of evidence to show that the republican party has used these types of tactics in the past to keep voters from voting.

Then the capper is they did NOT impliment the plan after it was publicized WHAT they were doing.

If it was not scrapped because of the beliefs of people it was politically motivated WHY did they scrap the idea?

The illegal alien Mexican assassin was registered to vote....TWICE!!!

Why do you want to make it easier for illegal aliens to vote?

 

[Zoom-boing]

WHY did they scrap the idea?

what reason did they give?

The state Division of Motor Vehicles unveiled details of a major expansion of services Thursday, tweaking a preliminary proposal that had created a controversy among some lawmakers.

Department of Transportation Secretary Mark Gottlieb said the expansion leaves all current offices open, increases the total number of offices across the state from 88 to 92 and drastically expands the hours of operation for some 40 counties.

Read more: DMV to add hours, offices to address increased demand for photo IDs

I wonder if our friend TM knows the difference between a preliminary proposal and a finished bill?

Gottlieb said Thursday that politics was never a consideration. He said DOT tweaked the original plan after feedback from lawmakers.

"We listened to the concerns of legislators and others impacted by the potential changes," he said.

And this is why you release a proposal. To get feedback from the community to see if anything is wrong with the proposal, and make needed changes.

They didn't "dump" the idea, they worked to make it better.

Or are you saying they totally got rid of doing this at all? If so, link?

Where's my apology, liar?

 

[Immanuel]

No, it was after it was pointed out that the proposal would leave some areas without motor vehicle services.

And, come to think of it, you never did get around to explaining how the closure of these offices would keep the Democratic voters from getting ID's, while the Republican voters in the same towns would have no such problems. How about filling us in on that?

You really dont understand?

When you cut them predomantly Dem areas it comes out in the republican partys favor.

That was the whole point

And once again, it was NEVER proven that they were cutting them in Dem areas. You keep saying that without offering one shred of proof of it. Prove it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Rick

You don't understand, Teamster Nation claims it to be so; therefore, it is so. A left wing blog is all the evidence she needs.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

Prove it was NOT politically motivated.


They had to change it for some reason huh?

Why did they change the law after people called it political?

Dingbat, you made that accusation. That means it is your responsibility to prove. Failure to do so, proves you are a liar.

Immie

 

[Rat in the Hat]

And I'm still waiting to hear how it would only effect the Democratics, without any problems for the Republicans.

 

[CountofTuscany]

WHY did they scrap the idea?

what reason did they give?

I'm just curious. Do you have to spread a trail of bread crumbs behind you to find your way home each night?

 

[syrenn]

Yes I say it was politically motivated.

I have decades of republicans actions in elections to keep people from voting along with the fact that once it was scrutinized they had to change the plan.

Now prove it was not politically motivated like you claim.

BINGO!! YOU SAY!


Just because you say it over and over again to yourself does not make it true or fact.

 

[syrenn]

You are claiming it was NOT politically motivated.

That is yours to prove

idiot... you say it IS


so that puts the burden of prof on YOU

The idiot was already discredited way early in the thread, with an article that detailed the decisions.

LOL.... oh i know. Its fun watching her melt down.

 

[syrenn]

Hey truthmangler, where's my apology?

You're nothing but a liar and it has been proven time and again.

Liar. Liar. Liar.

You forgot


pants on fire.