Political spin

1. 92

   habeeposted 11 years ago

   Obama beat McCain by 7 points in 2008, and the liberal anchors referred to that as a "decisive victory." I agree. Some libs even called it a landslide. Walker wins by 8 points, and the talking heads on MSNBC called it a "squeaker" and a "narrow win." Lawrence O'Donnell said Walker "barely stayed alive." What's the difference?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The difference is this is a recall election rather than a standard election, it is generally accepted that it will be much easier for an incumbent on a recall election first because of the voter reaction to recall elections but also because there are many financial benefits for an incumbent in a recall. For example The Republicans outspent the Dems 3 to 1 in this election, a big part of that was that under the laws of a recall election the incumbent does not have a donation maximum while the dems could not receive donations over $10 000. Therefore what might be considered comfortable in a regular election is definitely close in a recall election.

      replyreport
      1. 67

         Bob Zermopposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Nicely said. +

         replyreport
      2. 92

         habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I read that about the contributions, too. I don't think that's fair. I agree that the Dem had an uphill battle. Still, I'd call it a decisive win. You compare this to the 2008 election. Didn't Obama outspend McCain by more than 3-1? McCain had an uphill battle, too, because of Bush fatigue. I'm not a Walker fan, by the way. I just thought the despriptions of the contest were "interesting."

         replyreport
         1. 61

            American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            I just read a report that shows the actual spending is one to one and half. In other words for every $1.00 the Democrats spent the Republicans spent $1.50. I think that will be more in line with what the actual spending will be. It will be some time before we know all the facts, the unions have not released any information yet.

            replyreport
      3. 65

         Smirelesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Governor Walker was the first governor ever to win a recall election. The comment that Josak made "it is generally accepted that it will be much easier for an incumbent on a recall election first because of the voter reaction to recall elections but " is something that was learned through polling in this election cycle. I am amazed at the voter reaction after what I can only call brawling and rioting in the state capitol by those protesting Governor Walker's policies. At any rate it is clear that the voters in Wisconsin have a sense of fairness that we would all be wise to emulate.

         replyreport
   2. 60

      paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Those are the same mathmaticians in the Obama White house who's figures are able to achieve a trillion dollar decrease in the national debt Obama claims to have accomplished during his reign, as well as having the slowest growth of federal spending since Reagan, or was it Eisenhower?

      replyreport
   3. 70

      Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It's simple really Habee, it just points out the stupidity in motion between both sides of media and of each political party.
      
      I don't see how anything less than 10 points to be decisive. If it isn't double digit gain, then it would be considered a squeaker. If it was done by higher double digits, such as 15 points or 20 points, would be a landslide.
      
      The example you provided just shows what it shows. They are a bunch of talking a$$e$.

      replyreport
      1. 52

         jwburneyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         some of it is definitely bias but if I remember correctly the last election with Obama and McCain went pretty quick compared to Bush and Gore which stretched out for a while. I believe that they are more than likely talking about  the amount of time the election stretched on for and the popularity of the candidates through out the process versus the actual numbers. Also keep in mind that Presidential Races are usually extremely close in comparison with other elections. Im not really a fan of MSNBC and Fox because they tend to be extremely biased but I feel like this is fair enough.

         replyreport
         1. 70

            Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            So what. And your point?
            Again, I'm not sure what this has to do with anything.
            Like it matters, the election process isn't and doesn't display citizens power. It hasn't for a very long time, if ever.
            I don't watch any news station because of the power and wealth bias behind all of them.

            replyreport
            1. 52

               jwburneyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               We are talking about two different sizes of Elections. Presidential Elections are usually a close race compared to a race such as this recall election. Obviously 7 points in races that ended quickly before McCain jumped out is not the same as a recall election in which someone wins by 8. one has more people voting in it than the other.

               replyreport
   4. 0

      Sooner28posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The difference is partially that it's a recall, which will ALWAYS have lower turnout, and partially that seeing your side lose an election is hard to face. 
      
      Both sides are guilty of this.

      replyreport
2. 79

   Mighty Momposted 11 years ago

   I dunno, Habee.
   7 points seems pretty decisive to me.
   
   There's gotta be some formula here that calculates the 3:1 spending differential and its effect on point spread.
   Where are the bookies of Hub Pages?
   

   replyreport
   1. 69

      Teddletonmrposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Political spin or just business as usual. Fox reported 69 % of the voters did not think the recall was justified. After all that has been said, Walker has committed no crime or misdeed. Interesting, yes?.

      replyreport
   2. 59

      carol3sanposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Just goes to show you that it is not that easy to beat an incumbent in a recall election.  The Governover had a lot of advantages because he was able to advertise for 6 months while the Dems didn't even have an official canidate yet...plus, thanks to citizens united, he had more money than the dems would ever be able to match.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Bogus excuses, when there was no candidate the recall signature list was over 900,000 signatures, yet Barret only got 1,162,785 votes. Where was the advantage? Walker was losing 900,000 to zero on day one.

         replyreport
3. 61

   logic,commonsenseposted 11 years ago

   How about, he won because the majority of the voters liked what he did and the results thereof?  Lots of positive things came out of what he and the Repubs legislated.  Several states could take heed and act accordingly if they wish to keep from bankruptcy.

   replyreport
   1. 76

      lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Oh, they will.
      
      The end of unions.
      
      Like Ross Perot said in 1992: when they (third world workers) make $6.00 an hr, and workers here make $6.00 and hour, then it will even out, and business will come back.
      
      Welcome to $6.00 and hr, and be grateful for it.
      
      and BTW---don't a majority of Americans want the wealthy to pay more taxes? Walker gave them a tax cut.
      
      and teachers are making up for that loss of revenue by getting less. You might call that positive...I call it a swindle.

      replyreport
      1. 66

         Marquisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Chris, unions were good in their day. Unions are not needed anymore. Unions are just an arm for Democrats. Unions are filled with nothing but Communists and Socialists.
         
         I remember when I was in a union. They did nothing but take money.
         
         Labor Day is nothing more than a celebration for atheists Socialists and Communists.

         replyreport
4. 76

   lovemychrisposted 11 years ago

   A Dem senator was on tv saying "people think he balanced the budget....he didn't"
   
   looking forward to seeing what she meant by that.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      She was just spouting Dems talking points

      replyreport
      1. 76

         lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I don't think so. I think Walker's a crook. I think he "cooked the books".
         
         And I think that will be proven shortly. And I think most Republicans won't care.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            "I don't think so. I think Walker's a crook. I think he "cooked the books"."
            
            Like I said, talking points. Those she says I think he's a crook, I think he cooked the books. LMC, you are entitled to what you think but when you come out here and tell everybody what you think and try to pass it off as fact and when you get called by you get pissed off. You think he is a crook, proved, show us why he's a crook, use numbers and facts.
            
            I could tell everybody I think I am a millionaire, but that doesn't make it so.

            replyreport
            1. 76

               lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Never did I pass it off as fact. I said I think. I think. I think.
               
               I have the right to think. And I'm not trying to pass it off as fact.
               Lay off, will you?

               replyreport
5. 0

   PrettyPantherposted 11 years ago

   I understand the argument that they are using to call it a "squeaker," but I agree with you, habee, that it was a decisive victory for the Walker camp.
   
   Money wins.

   replyreport
   1. 92

      habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Money is a big part, just as it was in the 2008 election.

      replyreport
6. 67

   SparklingJewelposted 11 years ago

   every scenario is spin...truth is what matters...and the sides oppose each other's definition of truth
   
   Our country really needs to have the discussions...what does the Constitution really say?  What does a free market really mean, how does it play out? What is the natural law of supply and demand, what does that mean?
   
   here's another one from Florida...is it illegal for non-citizens to vote?

   replyreport
   1. 65

      Smirelesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      If we cannot answer the question...Is it illegal for non-citizens to vote? I have to say that our country is doomed. We have rationalized ourselves right out of a country. Common sense has failed us and much of that an be laid right at the door of money grubbing politicians, unions and teachers who teach more propaganda and less fact. Anyone who believes that illegal aliens have as much right as citizens in this country have no common sense whatsoever. Sorry to be so blunt.

      replyreport
7. 76

   lovemychrisposted 11 years ago

   How about this: Is it Constitutional to prevent citizens from voting?

   replyreport
   1. 59

      carol3sanposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      No way!  And the dirty tricks are happening right now by the republicans.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Yes it is shameful, a criminal offence, an outrage even.. that those tricky Repubs would insist that only legal U.S. citizens with photo i.d.s should be able to vote. Why the next trick those tricksters will try will be to have us show a picture i.d to buy a beer. Now that will be the ultimate trick, even a blatent conspiracy aimed at the poor, elderly and minorities....rascally varmits, every one of um.

         replyreport
         1. 76

            lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            You have no idea what Rick Scott is doing, do you?
            
            He is working against the Constitution...I don't Know WHO he's working for, but it's not the people of America.
            
            Too bad we have such a limp media...maybe one of them would bother to find out.

            replyreport
            1. 66

               Marquisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Actually, you have no idea what you are saying. And too bad for those little Socialists and Communists trying to recall him.
               
               This is proof that the Left is a major fail. See, the Left are nothing more than massive greedy people who do not practice what they preach.
               
               They talk about greed and corporations while they try to bleed corporations dry and over-tax them via the federal secular government.

               replyreport
      2. 61

         American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         LMC,
         
         Your question is is it constitutional to present a citizen from voting, how about this is it constitutional or should I say is there a constitutional amendment that says it is your right to vote. If you say yes show me exactly where in the constitution it says" citizens have the right to vote"
         
         I can save you trouble it doesn't, it does imply that we will vote when it discusses how a president, a congressman, any Senator get their jobs, but it never actually says it's your right.
         
         I personally do not think it your right, I figure it's your honor to vote. But then again that's just my opinion

         replyreport
   2. 69

      Teddletonmrposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Should Legal citizens be allowed to vote yes, a better question, should they first pass a test.
      Do they live where they say they do?
      Are they who they say they are?
      Are they a real citizen that has not renounced their citizenship or a convicted criminal who has forfeted their right to vote?
      habee I hope you do not mind me  asking.

      replyreport
      1. 92

         habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Not at all, Mike!

         replyreport
      2. 76

         lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         So bring a bill with your name and address on it. All I have to do to vote is fill out a census form.
         
         Requiring a picture ID takes time and takes papers that many do not have...for instance....do you have your birth certificate? A lot of people do not keep that thing for decades. What if it burnt in a fire, was destroyed in a disaster...whatEVER.
         
         WHY make it harder to vote? My town requires you fill out a census..that's it. And if you somehow forget, or blow it off...you need to bring a bill--like electric or phone, that has your name and address showing...presto.
         
         My town doesn't treat Americans with suspicion, acting like they are some sort of criminals.
         
         Outta here R's. We know what you're doing! Trying to prevent Democrats from voting. Pa-thetic. IMO

         replyreport
         1. 76

            handymanbillposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Whats wrong with a picture I.D. Everybody should have one or if not then they have plenty of time to get one. if you are here legally then get one. If you are not then you don't have it. So come here to this country the way you should. Anybody could forge a Bill.Any Illegal could have a electric bill or water bill. What type of I.D. is that. Heck I could fake one of those in a few minutes.

            replyreport
            1. 79

               Uninvited Writerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               We accept that in Canada and we don't have a big problem with the wrong people voting. There are laws and if you are found to have voted illegally you will face the full brunt of that law. That seems to work. Everyone also gets mailed a card telling them where to vote which is collected at that time. Maybe that would solve the problem in the US.
               
               I sincerely doubt illegal aliens voting is a huge problem anywhere.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Canada doesn't have the problems of organized Union knuckle crackers piling into precincts with bus loads of voters, some of them from other states, falsly registered to vote in those districts. Then we have other operatives  who organize scores of Union Hacks to fill out registration forms on dead people, soldiers in Afghanistan, Nun's in Rectories, Monks, convicts etc.etc. all well documented cases. A.C.O.R.N. was under direct control of the Dem's fraudulent abuse of the Democratic process. The worst offenders usually are given probation or relocated to Obama's cabinet when caught, as was the case when A.C.O.R.N. was exposed and susequintly disbanded, but the elected official is able to retain their seat. Good for Canada's lack of corruption...it's not applicable here.

                  replyreport
                  1. 76

                     lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Want some ice for that kool-aide?

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        I think you've already drank it all.

                        replyreport
                        1. 76

                           lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           No, I don't like the magenta stuff.. I like blue.

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              Whatever color it is, it is truly mind altering.

                              replyreport
                              1. 79

                                 Uninvited Writerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 Have you met Claire? I think you two would get on well...

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 59

                                    Randy Godwinposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                    Reported!!!!
                                    
                                    
                                    
                                    Yo, UW !
                                    
                                    
                                                                                   

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 61

                                       American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                       LMAO

                                       report
                     2. 61

                        American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        No ice left LMC, you used it all

                        replyreport
            2. 61

               American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               "Requiring a picture ID takes time and takes papers that many do not have"
               
               So I'm curious LMC, do you have a bank account, your car, do you rent, do you own a home, do you write checks at a store to pay for items, are you applying for a new job, are you applying for welfare, are you applying for food stamps, are you applying for section 8 or any other housing assistance program, are you looking for help from the government to pay some bills,   these are just a few of many every day functions that people need photo IDs for.As you can see from some of the things I listed here it is actually more important for poor people to have photo ID to cash their checks, to get welfare, get housing, get food stamps. So it seems they are ready have I day, so what's the problem

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  As you may have heard...Michelle Obama is on a whirlwind tour touting her cookbook that includes a recipe for BaracKoli, how cute. Anyway..Its also a campaign tour, nice when you can stump for your hubby and make a few million while your touring on the working class dime you so boldly proclaim your giving 'Hope and Change' to. But in order to gain access to her book signings you have to present a picture I.D. and a Social Security #. I think she is, to put it in the words of the left, "Disenfranchising those who does'nt have the means of producing a picture I.D." also, the National Democratic Committee Conference which ran the 3rd-6th of June, required you to present no less than that dreaded picture I.D. and S.S.# to be admitted. I know somehow the Republicans were behind "Disenfranchising" to poor, the minorities, and the elderly from being able to participate in thier own parties conference.

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Paint, 
                     
                     Not to mention that her campaigning and her self-promotion to sell her books and make a profit is being done on the taxpayers dime. Don't we all wish we could do that to?
                     
                     I wonder if she will try to write off her travel expenses on our tax return?

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        AV they have no shame it seems. The hypocracy is nauseating with this administration, pitting income brackets, races, religions, againt one another while amassing wealth beyond measure and smoozing with the Hollywood elite on a campaign that has ran longer than any former incumbent in history....they've got to go in Nov. It has become a matter of national security that their reign of destruction to the American system has caused.

                        replyreport
                     2. 76

                        lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        OH, I see you and phd passing off your opinions as fact! Why I'll be. Guess there are 2 sets of standards around here.....

                        replyreport
                        1. 61

                           American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           LMC,
                           
                           What opinion? It is a fact. Michelle Obama is out campaigning and is also going on TV and attending book signings almost everyday. How do you think she is getting to these events? By plane and motorcade your tax dollars are paying for, you pay for her meals and overnight stays in top suites in hotels, She has SS details following her around on your dime and all the while you are paying, she is making money by selling books.
                           
                           See I did not say "I think" she is doing it, it is reported on TV for all to see she is doing it. Your favorite on MSNBC  Madow showed Michelle at a book signing event then later that day at a rally giving a speech about Obama. That is a big difference from you trying to pass of as a fact about Scott Walker, you get called on it then you back off saying it was just an opinion by saying "I think"

                           replyreport
                           1. 76

                              lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              When did I say Maddow was my favorite? Or msnbc for that matter? They have scarboroguh, steele and ratinger.....what liberal?
                              
                              
                              When did I say ANYTHING I say is fact? When? You just keep using it to smear.
                              
                              I DID say I think Walker is a crook. And I think we will know soon. How is that stating it as fact?
                              
                              And you have no idea what Mrs. Obama's motives are..you don't know her at all, do you?
                              Seems like you're the one stating your opinion as fact. You and phd know exactly why Mrs. Obama is doing what she's doing, eh?

                              replyreport
                              1. 61

                                 American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 LMC,
                                 
                                 Why didn't you tell us then what it means when the first lady gets on an airplane at taxpayers cost flies out to a book signing, to promote and sell her book, then flies out to give campaign speeches for her husband. They stayed overnight, get up the next morning, fly out and do two more book signings, go do another speech, then later that night meet up with her husband for a campaign fundraiser.
                                 
                                 Sounds to me like she's campaigning on the taxpayers dime, sounds like she's being a capitalist on the taxpayers dime.
                                 
                                 Do you think the president would provide you an airplane, bodyguard, overnight accommodations, and all out more if you would sell your book?
                                 
                                 If you say that Walker is a crock you need to back it up. I can and do say Obama policies are failures and I can back it up and have done so many times. Even something as silly as giving a prediction as to who I think will win the Super Bowl, I can back it up. That is the difference between me and you. You spout off and try to present them as facts and now you're trying to deny that you do that.
                                 
                                 So you think you'll know soon, tell us why?

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 60

                                    paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                    Don't you understand, a crook to libs are those who want to "Steal" their entitlements that are unsustainable, or to "Steal" collective bargaining powers so tenured lazy teachers can suck the life out of the education funds while teaching our children nothing, or to "Steal" lifetime pensions from public employees so that the services such as the postal service is totally insolvent and on the brink of collapse. While screaming greed at the free enterpize capitolist they say 'I want all that's coming to me' with total disregard for the future debt shouldered upon our children. THATS WHAT A CROOK IS IN THEIR REALITY.

                                    replyreport
                     3. 66

                        Marquisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        She will indeed. Notrice Democrats hate paying taxes but love raising taxes for other people to pay.
                        
                        Democrats are TRASH.

                        replyreport
                        1. 61

                           American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           Very true. I am tired of hearing Democrats saying they could pay more. Put up or shut up!!!!

                           replyreport
         2. 60

            paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Poor Dems, don't have a picture i.d. Haven't figured out how them tricky Repubs have no trouble getting one. It is a misdemeanor offence of Vagrancy in most U.S. cities upon failure to provide identification to law inforcement, though it's seldom enforced as long as the person is'nt up to no good and can satisfy the cop's questions of residency. That's unless they are Repub cop's and a control ray shoots from their eyes into yours then they control your body like a Star Trek episode you probably remember where Scotty's body was being controled by Excablians.

            replyreport
            1. 76

               lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Heh?

               replyreport
            2. 76

               handymanbillposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               lol ^^^^^^^^^^

               replyreport
            3. 66

               Marquisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Democrats want anarchy, voter fraud and anything else that they can get away with. Democrats are trash.

               replyreport
            4. 75

               Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Wrong!  There is no Law requiring showing I.D. to anybody! You have to verbally identify yourself, STOP!

               replyreport
               1. 70

                  Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  This statement proves you've no clue what you're talking about.
                  
                  Vagrancy is a law which is in place about "money" and nothing more. Yes, it is a misdemeanor offense if you have less than $1 in your pocket at the time a police officers assumes you are a "vagrant". The police officer will factor in many aspects before reaching that conclusion. If you're unable to provide an ID, then they are likely to hold you until them find out who you are and you might be possibly subjected to community service or a fine, depending on your actual state of a living.

                  replyreport
               2. 60

                  paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  You stop,  That's as silly a statement as can be stated...verbally identifying yourself, thats the system you'd like to have, but it's not reality. As I stated, Verbally proving who you are is fine as long as the cop obtained enough info from you to run you through N.C.I.C. Then you'd better have satisfied their suspicions or he'll do the rest of his fact finding while you cool off in a holding cell friend.

                  replyreport
                  1. 75

                     Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Research facts,  I have already stated the truth!
                     
                     you may Google:  Do I Have To Reveal My Name To A Police Officer? Do I Have To Carry An Identification Card?
                     
                     
                     
                     lol, I did not mean for you to stop, I meant once you verbally identify yourself there is nothing more you need to say or do!
                     
                     edit: unless you consent to waiving any Rights you have, your decision to lay down for authority though!

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        Sounds good...Tell the cop your not giving him your name. Tell him you googled the facts on it .

                        replyreport
                        1. 75

                           Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           You have to verbally identify yourself.
                           
                           http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_v._ … _of_Nevada
                           
                           Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004), held that statutes requiring suspects to disclose their names during police investigations did not violate the Fourth Amendment if the statute first required reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal involvement. Under the rubric of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), the minimal intrusion on a suspect's privacy, and the legitimate need of law enforcement officers to quickly dispel suspicion that an individual is engaged in criminal activity, justified requiring a suspect to disclose his name.
                           The Court also held that the identification requirement did not violate Hiibel's Fifth Amendment rights because he had no reasonable belief that his name would be used to incriminate him; however, the Court left open the possibility that Fifth Amendment privilege might apply in a situation where there was a reasonable belief that giving a name could be incriminating.
                           
                           
                           That is all you are required to do.   I won't tell the cop anything outside of my name, have and will continue to do it.

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              They'll require a D.O.B. with that name. Cops and the many jurisdictions have their own way of doing things. They're not lawyers, so they are'nt especially mindful of future legal challenges..they let the city atty. sort that out...But we're off point of the original discussion...Political Spin...The rights of states to require a picture I.D. is'nt relevant. It's a prime example of how we get so distracted from the relevant issues of the economy, jobs, entitlements, national security, failed policies and lies.

                              replyreport
                              1. 75

                                 Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 As to the D.O.B., if I had to declare my registered birthday under oath, I would perjure myself.  I do not remember the day, the date, the month, the year, all that I have been told is nothing but hearsay!
                                 
                                 It might be a distraction, but people need to find the truth as to the individuals actual status in society.  Kowtowing to OUR authority figures is a disgrace.  Lawbreakers need to be punished, even if they are Government Employees, the innocent need to be left the hell alone.  As long as we allow ourselves to live lives of deception, we can never change things.

                                 replyreport
         3. 65

            Smirelesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            You know, I have had to have a picture I.D. for everything I do most of my life. We do not live back in the sixties when I could sign  (Mrs) Mireles to the back of my husband's pay check at a grocery store and get it cashed. I find it very interesting that people want to blame the rebublicans for everything when it is clear that people who do not have the best interests of this country in their heart welcome the idea that anyone and everyone who happens to be here at the time of an election should vote. Some appear to believe that dead people are entitled to their vote as well. Ridiculous. I would also like to know how many of you know poor people who own businesses and hire other people. People should research the facts before spewing nonsense they hear on the liberal media. Those people are not poor and most have never been poor but every word they say seems to be swallowed hook line and sinker. Sorry, but I need to get this off my chest.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               paintphdposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               The truth,  ahhh what a fresh and novel idea.

               replyreport
         4. 69

            Teddletonmrposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            @lovemychris
            Actually, I do keep a copy of my birth certificate, military discharge papers and other important identification, insurance and financial papers readily available. As for a fire, theft, or natural disaster I have copies on file at my local county court house and other protected locations just for safekeeping that cost me nothing.
            When I vote I must show my valid state identification card with my current address that matches the voters registration registrar.
            Blame the identity thief’s, republicans if you must, the truth that you choose to ignore, people lie, steel and cheat honest folks every day. Therefore, we must take steps that protect each legal citizen’s vote from thieves’ surely, you agree.

            replyreport
            1. 76

               lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               What it is doing is preventing honest US citizens from voting!

               replyreport
               1. 69

                  Teddletonmrposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Pure B.S

                  replyreport
            2. 66

               Marquisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               We must also make sure illegal aliens do not steal other people's identities. In addition to that, we must make sure that people do not vote more than once (voter fraud).

               replyreport
8. 66

   Marquisposted 11 years ago

   The Libs are still upset about not being able to ruin Wisconsin like they do every place in the United States of America.

   replyreport