The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 So in other words, you posted a **** story, and when called on in, you change the subject. The only thing this story has shown is that you can't comprehend what you see, read, or hear in order to draw a logical conclusion. Or in other words, you're an idiot. Please, enlighten me. What did I miss in the story? We'll ignore (for now) the fact that you've completely skirted around everything I said because you'd rather just call the story illegitimate and be done with it. Less thinky make brainy not hurt so much, I'm sure.) But in the meantime, what did I fail to derive from this story that--up until now--you've only barely hinted at its illegitimacy without providing a single example? Reform my idiotic ways!! Wasn't your stance from the beginning one of support for the requirement? You support it, you don't think its unreasonable to require a photo ID, but you think its "f#$%ed up", racist, and sleazy. How do you reconcile these ideas? I've been pretty !@#$ing clear on your question at numerous points throughout this thread. If it hasn't sunk in yet, then you're the problem. Also: nothing to add after looking at the PBS story? Would rather try and back me and my opinion into a corner than address facts reported on? That sounds about right.
Joe Miner Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Reform my idiotic ways!! Do your own homework Sue. There's no fix for stupid.
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Do your own homework Sue. There's no fix for stupid. Way to raise the discourse.
WorldTraveller Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Way to raise the discourse. Coming from you? Priceless!
B-Man Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 I thought this was somewhat relevant to the thread: Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's campaign is asking Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli to launch an investigation into voter-registration forms that are being sent to Virginia residents and addressed to deceased relatives, children, family pets and others ineligible to vote. The errant mailings from the Washington-based nonprofit group Voter Participation Center have befuddled many Virginia residents, leading to hundreds of complaints. The organization has been mass-mailing the forms — pre-populated with key information such as names and addresses — to primarily Democratic-leaning voting blocs such as young adults, unmarried women, African-Americans and Latinos. http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/virginia-politics/2012/jul/25/tdmain01-romney-camp-asks-va-to-probe-voter-forms-ar-2081517/ So an advocacy groups sends out thousands of pre-filled out registration forms, to specific groups that they think will vote dem, including deceased, non-resident, and non-human names ? Nope..................no problem there. Why, oh why, is the GOP suppressing the dead vote and the pet vote............lol .
Jauronimo Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) I've been pretty !@#$ing clear on your question at numerous points throughout this thread. If it hasn't sunk in yet, then you're the problem. Also: nothing to add after looking at the PBS story? Would rather try and back me and my opinion into a corner than address facts reported on? That sounds about right. I'm not saying the laws aren't sensible--they are--but the circumstances under wich we're being sold the necessity for the laws is completely bogus. Sensible, yet racist, and underhanded. That sounds about right. The sensibility of racism. Very clear, Big Cat. You backed your own opinion into a corner. I don't care to read the PBS article especially since you described it as poorly written, disowned it as another's opinion, then reclaimed it. Edited July 25, 2012 by Jauronimo
Joe Miner Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) Way to raise the discourse. When you post a stupid story that doesn't really pertain to the discussion since it is an incomplete story at best, this is the kind of discourse you can expect. When you raise the level of your posts, the level of your responses will rise. Unless EII or MDP responds, then the discourse will always remain in what seems to be your comfort zone. Edited July 25, 2012 by Joe Miner
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 When you post a stupid video that doesn't really pertain to the discussion since it is an incomplete story at best, this is the kind of discourse you can expect. When you raise the level of your posts, the level of your responses will rise. Unless EII or MDP responds, then the discourse will always remain in what seems to be your comfort zone. You're right, the video was completely irrelevant.
WorldTraveller Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 So an advocacy groups sends out thousands of pre-filled out registration forms, to specific groups that they think will vote dem, including deceased, non-resident, and non-human names ? Nope..................no problem there. Why, oh why, is the GOP suppressing the dead vote and the pet vote............lol . No, but you don't get it, it's not relevant to the thread.
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 I'm still waiting for one person ONE PERSON to address the possibility of hundreds of thousands of voters being eliminated by these laws--as shown by the PBS story, piece of **** thought it was.
Jauronimo Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 I'm still waiting for one person ONE PERSON to address the possibility of hundreds of thousands of voters being eliminated by these laws--as shown by the PBS story, piece of **** thought it was. I'm waiting for you to address your blatant contradictions. I also demand that you address points made in this incompetently written article. My link
DC Tom Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 I'm still waiting for one person ONE PERSON to address the possibility of hundreds of thousands of voters being eliminated by these laws--as shown by the PBS story, piece of **** thought it was. Simple: it's not a problem. They shouldn't be voting to begin with, if they can't prove who they are.
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 I'm waiting for you to address your blatant contradictions. I also demand that you address points made in this incompetently written article. My link You need to do a better job at hiding your links, bro.
IDBillzFan Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 So in other words, you posted a **** story, and when called on in, you change the subject. The only thing this story has shown is that you can't comprehend what you see, read, or hear in order to draw a logical conclusion. Or in other words, you're an idiot. This is why I leave him alone, and regret jumping into this with him. Because he is ridiculously predictable: post story with no commentary, wait for people to react, stand in judgement of what people say, then claim he has no opinion and just wanted to post the story. Notice I asked him a number of questions about the woman in the story, and he has neither the intellect nor ability to respond. He goes right to personal. And instead of addressing the focal point of the story, he repeatedly asks people to address the hundreds of thousands of people like Wilola who apparently are too stupid to get their birth certificate after 10 years of trying. Imply and infer. But hey...he says he doesn't plan to vote for either Obama or Romney, so he must be one of those self-proclaimed "moderate independents" who run around this board all the time.
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 This is why I leave him alone, and regret jumping into this with him. Because he is ridiculously predictable: post story with no commentary, wait for people to react, stand in judgement of what people say, then claim he has no opinion and just wanted to post the story. Notice I asked him a number of questions about the woman in the story, and he has neither the intellect nor ability to respond. He goes right to personal. And instead of addressing the focal point of the story, he repeatedly asks people to address the hundreds of thousands of people like Wilola who apparently are too stupid to get their birth certificate after 10 years of trying. Imply and infer. But hey...he says he doesn't plan to vote for either Obama or Romney, so he must be one of those self-proclaimed "moderate independents" who run around this board all the time. I'll pic message you my ballot, broheem.
IDBillzFan Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 I'll pic message you my ballot, broheem. Don't do me any favors, Congressman Weiner.
Doc Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Simple: it's not a problem. They shouldn't be voting to begin with, if they can't prove who they are. It's racist to have to prove who you are.
Jauronimo Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 It's racist to have to prove who you are. Racist, but sensible.
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Don't do me any favors, Congressman Weiner. Then don't question my honesty.
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Simple: it's not a problem. They shouldn't be voting to begin with, if they can't prove who they are. And since I've moved, I have trouble finding the folder I keep my passport, social security card and birth certificate. Does that mean I don't exist and thusly shouldn't vote? The one woman who was interviewed had identification, just not the right identification--probably the case for others who stand to be affected by this.
Recommended Posts