Biden: "Back in chains!"

[sd'sker]

For the record, when you get to know me, you will realize that even though I am pretty much conservative, I absolutely can't STAND Fox News channel, Rush, O'Reilly...

I put them right up there with Maddow and MSNBC. I personally believe that the media in this country is even more of a threat to our future than anyone who is in Washington or wants to be in Washington.

why does maddow get thrown in the mix with rush and o'reilly. just because she is left-leaning does not make her a blowhard. she reports on stories that will interest the left, but she is not inaccurate and she provides plenty of context. i always find this unfair, the right were so vitriolic (and that is why they are criticized), but they make it seem like their bias is why they are crucified. so whenever someone criticizes them, well it is no worse than this left-leaning commentator. and to be fair, maddow is the only televised news i watch (irregularly at that. sometimes i will watch 'the daily show' but that should not really count).

 

furthermore, the model created by rush just does not work on the left. air america tried and completely failed. angry and spite just does not sell as well to the left.

 

You don't think she is innaccurate because she slants towards your views. This is no different than someone from the right thinking ORielly just talks about topics that are in the news.

 

Give me a break and you can throw Oberman in there too. All of these people are in the pockets of their respective parties. They make their money off of getting the people on their side of issues all worked up no matter if it is rational or not. I have watched Maddow before and she is no different. I refuse to watch any of them anymore.

 

The problem is that non of it will get fixed untill people start holding the media people on THEIR side accountable. That goes for both conservatives and liberals.

yeah, but she uses sources, primary sources. the people at fox news and rush use a lot of misinformation and propaganda. i would have no problem with a conservative who was accurate and honest. george will, for instance, seems to meet this criteria. even though i disagree with him, i respect him and what he says. here is what it comes down to, are they wrong, factually. not, do you differ with their opinion. is she objective? no. is she accurate, yes. that is all that matters. also, i prefer her demeanor to more of the hotheads and angry fear-mongers.

 

and how did olberman get thrown into this conversation. in fact, that is my point. all biased news reporters are not the same. as i said, i only listen to and trust maddow because she provides an adequate enough amount of context for me to trust her. when watching her show, there is less garbage i have to sift through.

[BigRedBuster]

Really??? If you listen to black leaders, slavery is still an extremely hot topic with them.

 

"Black leaders?" Who?

 

 

Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan....etc.

 

These people use the black community for their own financial gain and it is disgusting to watch.

[knapplc]

Those are fringe, marginal people today. Maybe 20, 30 years ago, but not today.

 

Further, provide a recent quote from any of them using slavery as a "hot topic." I doubt this can be done without much digging. Nobody listens to any of them anymore. It's like citing Bob Kerry's stance on something a year ago, before he jumped into the senate race. Nobody cares what Bob Kerry says before that.

[lo country]

Those are fringe, marginal people today. Maybe 20, 30 years ago, but not today.

 

Further, provide a recent quote from any of them using slavery as a "hot topic." I doubt this can be done without much digging. Nobody listens to any of them anymore. It's like citing Bob Kerry's stance on something a year ago, before he jumped into the senate race. Nobody cares what Bob Kerry says before that.

 

Here is a quote referring to a "poll tax" from AG Holder.

http://www.washingto...ASbW_story.html

 

CL Bryant calls out Jackson and Sharpton

http://www.therights...yvon-martin/One

 

Jackson and Sharpton are not "fringe", they are very much in the mainstream today. I guess a lot has to do with ones experiences, geography etc, but they have a lot more clout than some "fringe" element.

 

In the south, "back in chains" only means one thing and it is not good. Odd that a gentleman from Delaware would even use the word y'all.

[gobiggergoredder]

I, like many on Huskerboard, would only have a problem if Ryan said it.

[carlfense]

Here is a quote referring to a "poll tax" from AG Holder.

http://www.washingto...ASbW_story.html

Looks like that's a law that requires people to spend money to cast a vote. That's a poll tax.

 

One Million dollar bounty on the head of George Zimmerman from the New Black Party Panther. (No opinion from Obama or Holder about keeping the peace).

So what do those kooks in the New Black Panthers have to do with this?

 

Over ruling the voter intimidation arrest of the NBPP in Philly

Actually, that criminal case was dismissed by the Bush administration. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/26/us/26panther.html?_r=2

 

Obama beer summit http://www.huffingto...-_n_248254.html

Having a beer with them is playing the race card?

 

Attacks on voter ID laws by current DOJ

Damn right. We should question any limitation or impediment to lawful casting of votes.

[carlfense]

I, like many on Huskerboard, would only have a problem if Ryan said it.

Who are these people? Sounds like most people have a problem with it.

 

Persecution complex again?

[lo country]

Here is a quote referring to a "poll tax" from AG Holder.

http://www.washingto...ASbW_story.html

 

Looks like that's a law that requires people to spend money to cast a vote. That's a poll tax.

You have to have a govt issued ID. Poll tax? Come on Carl, that is a stretch even for you. Just an example about people bringing up "racial issues. Poll tax or Jim Crow laws are very "racial" and bring up strong feelings.

 

One Million dollar bounty on the head of George Zimmerman from the New Black Party Panther. (No opinion from Obama or Holder about keeping the peace).

 

So what do those kooks in the New Black Panthers have to do with this?

Originally posted in ref to Knapps comments about slavery issues. Showing the disparity by Obama. Guys communicate threats against a person. Have the means, ability and opportunity, it is against the law. Yet no comment from the Pres or the AG

 

Over ruling the voter intimidation arrest of the NBPP in Philly

 

Actually, that criminal case was dismissed by the Bush administration. http://www.nytimes.c...nther.html?_r=2

This says differently. http://americanactio...r-intimidation/

And another. http://www.foxnews.c...-case-political

 

Obama beer summit http://www.huffingto...-_n_248254.html

Having a beer with them is playing the race card?

No. The immediate assumption that the police officer was in the wrong.

 

Attacks on voter ID laws by current DOJ

 

Damn right. We should question any limitation or impediment to lawful casting of votes.

Even if it means clearing the role of illegal aliens or convicted felons without having their citizenship restored, or dead people? You are so fired up about Tax returns, but you could care less about who votes or am I missing something.

 

Carl, tried to answer your responses with mine in bold.

 

Off to the football board. Almost kickoff and tired of the constant back and forth. Have a good one.

[gobiggergoredder]

I, like many on Huskerboard, would only have a problem if Ryan said it.

Who are these people? Sounds like most people have a problem with it.

 

Persecution complex again?

Looks like BigRedBuster appears to be the only one.

[walksalone]

Joe Biden, not a friend of the NAACP

[sd'sker]

I, like many on Huskerboard, would only have a problem if Ryan said it.

Who are these people? Sounds like most people have a problem with it.

 

Persecution complex again?

i would juice my pants if i heard ryan say anything critical of wall street.

[carlfense]

You have to have a govt issued ID. Poll tax? Come on Carl, that is a stretch even for you. Just an example about people bringing up "racial issues. Poll tax or Jim Crow laws are very "racial" and bring up strong feelings.

Listen, this isn't complicated and it is certainly not a stretch. If you are required to have a government issued ID to vote . . . and you have to pay for that government issued ID . . . you have to pay to cast your vote. Poll tax. Period.

 

 

This says differently. http://americanactio...r-intimidation/

And another. http://www.foxnews.c...-case-political

We don't need to revert to Fox News and American Action. We've got sworn testimony from the case:

http://www.usccr.gov...NBPPhearing.pdf

This is the matter referenced in the recent GAO report that examined a number of cases brought by certain sections of the Civil Rights Division during the Bush administration.

 

Moving to the matter at hand, the events occurred on November 4th, 2008. The Department became aware of these events on Election Day and decided to conduct further inquiry.

 

After reviewing the matter, the Civil Rights Division determined that the facts did not constitute a prosecutable violation of the criminal statutes.

 

Even if it means clearing the role of illegal aliens or convicted felons without having their citizenship restored, or dead people? You are so fired up about Tax returns, but you could care less about who votes or am I missing something.

What concerns me is legal citizens having their voting rights restricted, infringed, or blocked all in the name of combatting in-person voter fraud that is virtually non-existent. The available evidence shows that despite the fear mongering by certain elements of the GOP . . . in person voter fraud is astoundingly rare.

 

This is about vote suppression. This is about increasing the odds for a GOP electoral victory. Don't think for a second that this is about voter fraud. Be smarter than that.

[Comish]

You have to have a govt issued ID. Poll tax? Come on Carl, that is a stretch even for you. Just an example about people bringing up "racial issues. Poll tax or Jim Crow laws are very "racial" and bring up strong feelings.

Listen, this isn't complicated and it is certainly not a stretch. If you are required to have a government issued ID to vote . . . and you have to pay for that government issued ID . . . you have to pay to cast your vote. Poll tax. Period.

 

 

This says differently. http://americanactio...r-intimidation/

And another. http://www.foxnews.c...-case-political

We don't need to revert to Fox News and American Action. We've got sworn testimony from the case:

http://www.usccr.gov...NBPPhearing.pdf

This is the matter referenced in the recent GAO report that examined a number of cases brought by certain sections of the Civil Rights Division during the Bush administration.

 

Moving to the matter at hand, the events occurred on November 4th, 2008. The Department became aware of these events on Election Day and decided to conduct further inquiry.

 

After reviewing the matter, the Civil Rights Division determined that the facts did not constitute a prosecutable violation of the criminal statutes.

 

Even if it means clearing the role of illegal aliens or convicted felons without having their citizenship restored, or dead people? You are so fired up about Tax returns, but you could care less about who votes or am I missing something.

What concerns me is legal citizens having their voting rights restricted, infringed, or blocked all in the name of combatting in-person voter fraud that is virtually non-existent. The available evidence shows that despite the fear mongering by certain elements of the GOP . . . in person voter fraud is astoundingly rare.

 

This is about vote suppression. This is about increasing the odds for a GOP electoral victory. Don't think for a second that this is about voter fraud. Be smarter than that.

 

Federal elections

 

In Canada to vote, you must prove your identity and address. You have three options^[1]:

(1) Show one original piece of identification with your photo, name and address like a driver's licence or an health card. It must be issued by a government agency.

(2) Show two original pieces of authorized identification. Both pieces must have your name and one must also have your address. Examples: student ID card, birth certificate, public transportation card, utility bill, bank/credit card statement, etc.

(3) Take an oath and have an elector who knows you vouch for you (both of you will be required to make a sworn statement). This person must have authorized identification and their name must appear on the list of electors in the same polling division as you. This person can only vouch for one person and the person who is vouched for cannot vouch for another elector. Examples: a neighbour, your roommate.

 

I'd be fine with that.

 

Don't hear much obsession over Canada's requirements. Don't hear people call it a poll tax. Why is it only in America that some feel it is voter supression to prove you are who you say you are?.

Even my bank (whom I visit multiple times a week) makes me prove who I am again and again and again, etc even though they KNOW who I am.

[carlfense]

Federal elections

 

In Canada to vote, you must prove your identity and address. You have three options^[1]:

(1) Show one original piece of identification with your photo, name and address like a driver's licence or an health card. It must be issued by a government agency.

(2) Show two original pieces of authorized identification. Both pieces must have your name and one must also have your address. Examples: student ID card, birth certificate, public transportation card, utility bill, bank/credit card statement, etc.

(3) Take an oath and have an elector who knows you vouch for you (both of you will be required to make a sworn statement). This person must have authorized identification and their name must appear on the list of electors in the same polling division as you. This person can only vouch for one person and the person who is vouched for cannot vouch for another elector. Examples: a neighbour, your roommate.

 

I'd be fine with that.

 

Don't hear much obsession over Canada's requirements.

You want the US to be more like Canada? Why apologize for America?

 

Don't hear people call it a poll tax.

Is a free ID available in Canada? If so . . . that wouldn't be a poll tax.

 

Why is it only in America that some feel it is voter supression to prove you are who you say you are?

Even my bank (whom I visit multiple times a week) makes me prove who I am again and again and again, etc even though they KNOW who I am.

Listen, I'm fine with voter ID laws if the ID is easily available (not 1 day each month, for example) and provided free of cost.

 

Your banking is not a fundamental right. The right to vote is.

[Comish]

You want the US to be more like Canada? Why apologize for America?

***Nope. Just thought the lib's dream country would be somewhere you'd emulate.

 

Is a free ID available in Canada? If so . . . that wouldn't be a poll tax.

*** Library card is free here and yet you're not satisfied

 

Your banking is not a fundamental right. The right to vote is.

**** Banking was just an example as you well know. But now that you've broached it............why wouldn't banking be a fundamental right? Would you arbitrarily restrict certain groups (probably conservatives in your case, ) from engaging in free commerce?