|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
 Posted - 03/12/2014 : 18:44:56
|
Paul Fidalgo understates the case in Religious Exemption from Healthcare Law Overwhelmingly Passes the House… and That’s Bad:Yesterday, the U.S. House voted overwhelmingly in favor of H.R. 1814 (the “Equitable Access to Care and Health Act”), a truly nefarious bill that would allow anyone claiming a religious justification to entirely opt out of compliance with the Affordable Care Act. Whatever you think of “Obamacare,” you have to have your hackles raised by the idea that someone can entirely avoid obeying the law of the land simply by claiming it’s against some tenet of his particular religion. What's really horrible about this is that coupled with the legal notion that corporations are "people" in the eyes of the law, every business that doesn't want to comply with the Affordable Care Act is going to claim some tenuous "religious" excuse to not do so. Sure, Hobby Lobby and others are already doing so in court, but if this bill passes, they won't have to go to court any more.
(It is, of course, unclear how a business could be religious - how does an entity that exists solely on paper worship?)
|
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2014 : 23:24:52 [Permalink]
|
| It also must pass the Senate and be signed by the President. Just saying. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2014 : 11:53:18 [Permalink]
|
It might be a worthwhile discussion if this were the only flop going on with the ACA right now. This "law" is such a cluster xxxx that our own President is willing to be reduced to a laughing stock on internet tv in hopes of getting a few cheap plugs in encouraging the healthy young people he needs signed up to allegedly make this joke of a law able to hold water. This interview made it painfully clear the president now realizes how much trouble the ACA really is in and the desperate measures he will go to in attempt to change the fateful course it is currently on.
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/18e820ec3f/between-two-ferns-with-zach-galifianakis-president-barack-obama
Didn't the ACA give young people the ability to stay on their parents insurance plan until they are 26? Right there his own law is cutting itself off at the knees. And young people are graduating college these days with mounds of student debt and moving into a miserable job market yet this is who BO want's to shoulder the burden of the ACA? No wonder BO wants to raise the minimum wage, so all the young people he and the ACA are counting on will have some money to buy some healthcare with deductibles that will bury them even further into debt if God forbid they actually get sick and try to make a claim. I think they should have thought this one out a little further before just ramming anything they had down the throat of their democratic brethren just for the sake of passing something.
After billions and billions of tax dollars wasted and millions of folks who's existing plans got cancelled my prediction is that 2014 will make it crystal clear for all that in the end the only thing the ACA will have actually accomplished is delivering the Senate right into the hands of the pubs.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/373268/chris-matthews-senate-goes-andrew-johnson
Matthews offered his own campaign advice for Democrats if they want to minimize the damage this fall: Go all-in on scare tactics. He encouraged Democrats to up the ante on various issues, such as framing voter-ID laws as attacks on minorities and pro-life measures as attacks on abortion rights.
Don't forget about the phony republican war on women, war on the environment, war on the middle class, war on the poor, war on seniors, war on kids, war on animals, war on Sesame Street, war on gays etc... etc... etc.... scare tactics as well my fine feathered progressive friends. Never want to let a good psedo war go to waste. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2014 : 12:28:30 [Permalink]
|
Whatever you think of “Obamacare,” you have to have your hackles raised by the idea that someone can entirely avoid obeying the law of the land simply by claiming it’s against some tenet of his particular religion.
Yet whatever you think of the "US Constitution" you have to have your hackles raised by the idea that a president (not a monarch or a dictator) and his cabinet can avoid enforcing any law in which they happen to disagree with and without even a hint of an explanation as to why or how they can do this.
To bellyache about Hobby Lobby in light of this president and his attorney general making up the laws as they go and enforcing only the ones they like reduces the credibility of the bellyacher to a factor of almost zero. I am quickly loosing my rspect for this president. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2014 : 12:47:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
It also must pass the Senate and be signed by the President. Just saying. |
Yeah, but with 80 House Dems voting for it, it doesn't bode well. It passed with 71% of the votes. If a similar proportion of the Senate votes for it, that'd be 68%, which would mean it'd pass Congress with veto-proof majorities. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2014 : 12:52:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
...just ramming anything they had down the throat... |
You mean "voted for, passed and signed into law per the rules of Congress and the laws of the United States of America."
And "anything they had" was a Republican plan from the 1990s.| After billions and billions of tax dollars wasted and millions of folks who's existing plans got cancelled... |
Citations for either claim?
| Don't forget about the phony republican war on women, war on the environment, war on the middle class, war on the poor, war on seniors, war on kids, war on animals, war on Sesame Street, war on gays etc... etc... etc.... scare tactics as well my fine feathered progressive friends. Never want to let a good psedo war go to waste. |
Which is why there's an alleged war on Christmas and a war on Christians. It's not like the Democrats have a lock on manufactroversies. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2014 : 12:57:15 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Kil
It also must pass the Senate and be signed by the President. Just saying. |
Yeah, but with 80 House Dems voting for it, it doesn't bode well. It passed with 71% of the votes. If a similar proportion of the Senate votes for it, that'd be 68%, which would mean it'd pass Congress with veto-proof majorities.
|
Who gives a flying xxxx if it becomes law even with 100% of the vote? Not Obama or Eric Holder. They will just ignore the law and refuse to enforce it as they do any other that they don't like. If that don't work they can always sick the IRS on anybody they feel needs it. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 03/13/2014 13:18:14 |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2014 : 12:59:01 [Permalink]
|
Let's see, you have young people coming out of college with record high student loan debts, who can't find a job in the Obama economy that pays more than minimum wage, which forces them to move back home into mom and dad's basement and this who the president is counting on to pay the lion's share of the ACA costs?????? I don't think this president is as smart as everybody seemed to think he was. That was self-evident when was willing to get lambasted on a internet tv show in a pathetic attempt at free plugs for his doomed law.
http://collegeinsurrection.com/2014/02/a-record-number-of-college-grads-are-living-in-their-parents-basements/ |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2014 : 13:14:08 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| You mean "voted for, passed and signed into law per the rules of Congress and the laws of the United States of America." |
But who cares? BO and EH have clearly demonstrated that these laws are subjective and can be ignored if chosen, even after congressional approval. Heck, this dictator flippantly changes and/or ignores his own laws!!!!!
| And "anything they had" was a Republican plan from the 1990s. |
But you hate the republicans so why brag about regurgitating one of their old tired and failed ideas?
| Citations for either claim? |
heathcare.gov
| Which is why there's an alleged war on Christmas and a war on Christians. It's not like the Democrats have a lock on manufactroversies. |
I agree. But the dems, with the help of the mainstream media, have got a lot more traction with their notion that the pubs are war with everybody, so why not continue to push the scare tactic as Chris Matthews has urged them to do? |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 03/13/2014 13:20:51 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2014 : 14:20:35 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
Who gives a flying xxxx if it becomes law even with 100% of the vote? Not Obama or Eric Holder. They will just ignore the law and refuse to enforce it as they do any other that they don't like. If that don't work they can always sick the IRS on anybody they feel needs it. |
Like nobody else has ever done that. The fact that this was posted today is purely coincidental to your complaints, I'm sure:...Let’s take a stroll through history, shall we? The Republican party likes to call itself the “party of Lincoln.” Few presidents have violated the constitution and ignored the law quite as flagrantly as Lincoln did when he suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War. The Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional and Lincoln ignored that ruling and ordered the Army to ignore it as well, which they did. It’s hard to imagine a more flagrant example of a president picking and choosing which laws to enforce and which to ignore than that.
And how about Cruz’ hero, Ronald Reagan? A law passed in 1983 prohibited the federal government from sending aid to the Nicaraguan Contras. So what did St. Ronald the Magnificent (PBUH) do? Secretly funded them by diverting funds from the also-illegal sale of weapons to Iran, which was supporting terrorists in Lebanon at the time. Their excuse: Reagan was too incompetent and out of touch with his own administration to know what was going on.
And remember George W. Bush and his infamous signing statements that said right up front while signing a bill that he would ignore certain provisions in them? He issued 161 such statements containing more than 1000 instances of him saying he would refuse to enforce one or more sections of the bill he was signing. This amounted to a line-item veto, something that is unconstitutional.
Yes, Obama has continued to expand executive power in ways that I’ve been writing about for years and that is a very, very bad thing. But I can credibly say that because I was criticizing Bush for the same thing. I don’t conveniently discover civil liberties and limits on executive power only when one party is in office. And I certainly don’t make stupid statements like the one Cruz made. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2014 : 14:30:54 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
But you hate the republicans so why brag about regurgitating one of their old tired and failed ideas? |
It's just an example of the astounding hypocrisy of partisan Republicans. A plan they came up with is inherently evil and wasteful as soon as a Democrat says, "hey, let's pass this!"| Citations for either claim? |
heathcare.gov |
So you've got no citations.| I agree. But the dems, with the help of the mainstream media, have got a lot more traction with their notion that the pubs are war with everybody, so why not continue to push the scare tactic as Chris Matthews has urged them to do? |
Um, being #1 in the ratings, Fox News is leading the mainstream media.
And it's hardly a "scare tactic" to point out that (to follow Matthews' first example) voter-ID laws do nothing to combat voter fraud and disenfranchise the old, the poor and the brown. It's simply factual. It was Republican scare tactics that got those laws in place to begin with, with their claims that thousands upon thousands of people were voting illegaly, when in fact the number was in the double digits at worst and most were mistakes, not intentional fraud (for example, a parolee thinking he'd filed the proper paperwork to vote).
By the way, real vote fraud occurs primarily via absentee ballots, which voter-ID laws does nothing to fix. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2014 : 08:21:55 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| It's just an example of the astounding hypocrisy of partisan Republicans. A plan they came up with is inherently evil and wasteful as soon as a Democrat says, "hey, let's pass this!" |
Oh you were trying to demonstrate astounding partisan hypocrisy, well I can give you a better example than that.
Here senator Obama calls GWB unpatriotic for adding 4 trillion worth of new debt in his 8 years as President.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyLmru6no4U
Here president Obama says the Republicans are waging a war on the military, seniors and the economy by refusing to raise the debt ceiling past 16.1 trillion letting Obama add even more debt to the 7.4 trillion he has piled up in his first 5.75 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_debt-ceiling_crisis_of_2013
| So you've got no citations. |
Ignoring citations does not equate to no citations.
| Um, being #1 in the ratings, Fox News is leading the mainstream media. |
Um, Fox News is #1 among cable news networks. With CBS, ABC, NBC nightly news, MSNBC, and CNN all being in the tank for BO and the democrat party I would hardly describe FOX as the mainstream media.
| And it's hardly a "scare tactic" to point out that (to follow Matthews' first example) voter-ID laws do nothing to combat voter fraud and disenfranchise the old, the poor and the brown. It's simply factual. It was Republican scare tactics that got those laws in place to begin with, with their claims that thousands upon thousands of people were voting illegaly, when in fact the number was in the double digits at worst and most were mistakes, not intentional fraud (for example, a parolee thinking he'd filed the proper paperwork to vote). |
OK here we go again with the republicans war on everybody scare tactics. You guys are consistent I'll give you that. Funny, none of the poor or brown people I have seen at the gas station buying cigs or at the alcohol store getting beer have ever had any trouble pulling out a photo ID to get their products. Why are not the progressives tied to be fit over these ID laws as well? Obviously this is just a trumped republican law who's only intent is to keep poor and brown folk from getting their beer and cigs!!!!!!! Those mean and racist pubs!!!! Heck here in my city your photo ID is provided free of charge if you fall below a certain income level. No reason at all any person 18 or older could not get a photo ID.
Even International voting observers were stunned at our last presidential election by the fact that folks could just show up without producing any form of ID and vote.
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/11/06/foreign_election_officials_amazed_by_trust_based_us_voting_system
More astounding hypocrisy from the loony progressive left. Here are two examples of the NAACP requiring participants and/or reporters to produce a photo ID in order to attend an event protesting voter photo ID laws?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/08/naacp-requires-marchers-protesting-north-carolina-voter-id-law-to-show-photo-id/#!
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/07/10/naacp-requires-two-forms-of-id-from-media-to-see-eric-holder-say-voter-id-laws-are-racist/
Can you yet see why the center and right thinks you guys are crackpots? Requiring participants at a voter photo ID law protest to produce a photo ID, oh that is rich. Hahahaha... You can't make up stuff that funny and silly.
| By the way, real vote fraud occurs primarily via absentee ballots, which voter-ID laws does nothing to fix. |
The international voting observes seemed much less stunned by this than allowing folks to vote without any form of ID what so ever. So we are just supposed to trust everyone, oh brother?!?!?!? Try telling that to the checkout guy when you are trying to buy some booze!!!! "Oh you can trust me" Hahahahahahaah |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
| Edited by - Bill scott on 03/14/2014 08:51:23 |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2014 : 08:27:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Bill scott
Who gives a flying xxxx if it becomes law even with 100% of the vote? Not Obama or Eric Holder. They will just ignore the law and refuse to enforce it as they do any other that they don't like. If that don't work they can always sick the IRS on anybody they feel needs it. |
Like nobody else has ever done that. The fact that this was posted today is purely coincidental to your complaints, I'm sure:...Let’s take a stroll through history, shall we? The Republican party likes to call itself the “party of Lincoln.” Few presidents have violated the constitution and ignored the law quite as flagrantly as Lincoln did when he suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War. The Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional and Lincoln ignored that ruling and ordered the Army to ignore it as well, which they did. It’s hard to imagine a more flagrant example of a president picking and choosing which laws to enforce and which to ignore than that.
And how about Cruz’ hero, Ronald Reagan? A law passed in 1983 prohibited the federal government from sending aid to the Nicaraguan Contras. So what did St. Ronald the Magnificent (PBUH) do? Secretly funded them by diverting funds from the also-illegal sale of weapons to Iran, which was supporting terrorists in Lebanon at the time. Their excuse: Reagan was too incompetent and out of touch with his own administration to know what was going on.
And remember George W. Bush and his infamous signing statements that said right up front while signing a bill that he would ignore certain provisions in them? He issued 161 such statements containing more than 1000 instances of him saying he would refuse to enforce one or more sections of the bill he was signing. This amounted to a line-item veto, something that is unconstitutional.
Yes, Obama has continued to expand executive power in ways that I’ve been writing about for years and that is a very, very bad thing. But I can credibly say that because I was criticizing Bush for the same thing. I don’t conveniently discover civil liberties and limits on executive power only when one party is in office. And I certainly don’t make stupid statements like the one Cruz made.
|
Yep. I believe all presidents should be kept in check by having to go through congress. I am not a big fan of the executive order by any sitting president, even Lincoln. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2014 : 08:44:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
Let's see, you have young people coming out of college with record high student loan debts, who can't find a job in the Obama economy that pays more than minimum wage, which forces them to move back home into mom and dad's basement and this who the president is counting on to pay the lion's share of the ACA costs?????? I don't think this president is as smart as everybody seemed to think he was. That was self-evident when was willing to get lambasted on a internet tv show in a pathetic attempt at free plugs for his doomed law.
http://collegeinsurrection.com/2014/02/a-record-number-of-college-grads-are-living-in-their-parents-basements/
|
So the ACA now allows young folk to stay on mom and dad's insurance until they are 26, which just eliminated millions of healthy young people from having to pay into the ACA. Most of the college graduates who are fortunate enough to land a decent job out of college will get their insurance through their employer. That leaves BO counting on in debt college kids who can't find a good job and live in their mom's basement along with the 26 years old who never went to college and make $10/hour at a dead end job to cover the lion's share of the ACA. That's why he was willing to humiliate himself and the office by going on that stupid internet tv show, he was trying to reach this demographic with a cheap ACA plug. Obviously this law was not to well thought out by those who voted for it and support it. Heck, I bet 95% of which have never even read it. Sad really.... |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2014 : 10:22:25 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
Oh you were trying to demonstrate astounding partisan hypocrisy, well I can give you a better example than that. |
I never said that Obama wasn't a partisan hack.| Ignoring citations does not equate to no citations. |
The web page you pointed to does not support your assertions.| ...I would hardly describe FOX as the mainstream media. |
Being the most popular defines the mainstream.| OK here we go again with the republicans war on everybody scare tactics. You guys are consistent I'll give you that. Funny, none of the poor or brown people I have seen at the gas station buying cigs or at the alcohol store getting beer have ever had any trouble pulling out a photo ID to get their products. |
Yeah, you don't see the ones without ID buying alcohol or cigs, do you?| Why are not the progressives tied to be fit over these ID laws as well? |
Because alcohol and cigarettes are not constitutional rights.| Obviously this is just a trumped republican law who's only intent is to keep poor and brown folk from getting their beer and cigs!!!!!!! |
No, they're to keep young people from them.| Those mean and racist pubs!!!! |
Agreed.| Heck here in my city your photo ID is provided free of charge if you fall below a certain income level. No reason at all any person 18 or older could not get a photo ID. |
How about they were born in the backwoods without a doctor present 90 years ago and so don't have a birth certificate?It's a shame the Republicans are trying to change that, isn't it?| More astounding hypocrisy from the loony progressive left. Here are two examples of the NAACP requiring participants and/or reporters to produce a photo ID in order to attend an event protesting voter photo ID laws?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! |
You understand that there's no constitutional right to attend NAACP events, correct?| Can you yet see why the center and right thinks you guys are crackpots? |
The funny thing is that Obama is a conservative. There is no viable center or left party in the US.| By the way, real vote fraud occurs primarily via absentee ballots, which voter-ID laws does nothing to fix. |
The international voting observes seemed much less stunned by this than allowing folks to vote without any form of ID what so ever. |
Really? How many did you poll?| So we are just supposed to trust everyone, oh brother?!?!?!? |
According to the article you linked to, we do trust everyone. And the Republicans are trying to change that.| Try telling that to the checkout guy when you are trying to buy some booze!!!! "Oh you can trust me" Hahahahahahaah |
Again, buying booze isn't a constitutionaly protected right.
Now, if the Republicans were trying to pass voter-ID laws because they had evidence that lots of underage kids were voting (analogous to ID-for-booze laws), then those laws might have a reasonable basis. But they don't.
Besides, Bill, you never addressed the central fact of the matter: actual, documented, in-person voting fraud accounts for perhaps five votes out of every million in this country. Why do we need voter-ID laws that disenfranchise thousands of voters if the problem doesn't exist in amounts large enough to sway elections? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 03/14/2014 : 11:39:34 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| I never said that Obama wasn't a partisan hack. |
Well assuming then that you think he is it looks like you and I can find something to agree on.
| The web page you pointed to does not support your assertions. |
Oh but it does.
| Being the most popular defines the mainstream. |
It's the most popular cable tv news. When compared to the combined left leaning CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC and CNN's who are all in the tank for Obama it pales in comparison.
| Yeah, you don't see the ones without ID buying alcohol or cigs, do you? |
No because the stores will not sell it to them without a valid ID, which anybody can get if they are entitled to one. Funny how that works. People who are not supposed to be buying the product can't.
| Because alcohol and cigarettes are not constitutional rights. |
So for that reason alone it's now OK for the mean pubs to declare war on poor and brown people by disenfranchising them from their beer and cigs?!?!?!
| No, they're to keep young people from them. |
But why not just go by the honer system like we do when it comes to voting? Why single out the poor and brown people from getting beer and smokes by making it a law they have valid ID to buy it? I am sure there would be no trouble at all just asking people to be honest about being of age rather than this whole having to have a valid ID nonsense. If we can use the honor system to let people exercise their constitutional right to vote it should be a no-brainier to use it for beer and smoke purchases.
| It's a shame the Republicans are trying to change that, isn't it? |
No. I see no reason at all a person should not provide valid ID before voting.
| How about they were born in the backwoods without a doctor present 90 years ago and so don't have a birth certificate? |
Hahahahahaha... And so that is what you base your repub war on poor and brown people scare tactic on! Hahahahahaha that 0.0001% of the poor and brown people were born 90 years ago in a place where there are no birth certificates and so therefore nobody ever should need to have a valid ID to vote ever. Hahahahahaha
| You understand that there's no constitutional right to attend NAACP events, correct? |
Which makes requiring a valid ID to vote all the more important. Anything less belittles that constitutional right and belittles those who vote legal. You blow so much smoke up your own ass I can't believe your head has not popped off yet. No joke.
| The funny thing is that Obama is a conservative. |
Sure he is.
| There is no viable center or left party in the US. |
I never said there was
| Really? How many did you poll? |
More than you.
| According to the article you linked to, we do trust everyone. And the Republicans are trying to change that. |
As well they should. Just as we don't trust the 19 year old in the liquor saying "trust me" when trying to buy booze nor should we trust any Tom Dick or Harry who just walks in off the street to vote and says "trust me". Why are not the poor and brown outraged that they have to produce a valid ID to fly in a plane? I know I know your rambling nonsense about that not being a constitutional right. You are so full of crap I bet your eyes are brown.
| Again, buying booze isn't a constitutionaly protected right. |
And yet they still feel it is important enough to ask for ID which belittles our rights to vote when any Tom Dick and Harry can walk in off the street and enter a ballet box with no questions asked. You live in the backwards bizzaro world my fine feathered friend.
| Now, if the Republicans were trying to pass voter-ID laws because they had evidence that lots of underage kids were voting (analogous to ID-for-booze laws), then those laws might have a reasonable basis. But they don't. |
Naturally. Anything that makes sense to rational civilized people, here and abroad, is nixed in your backwards bizzaro world. Millions of men have fought and died for our constitutional right to vote, which allowing any Tom Dick and Harry to vote with no ID verification at all just belittles that right and the men who died for us to have that right. Of course in your backwards bizzaro world it is OK to ID somebody for a pack of smokes but not to vote and that is the result of you being from a different planet.
| Besides, Bill, you never addressed the central fact of the matter: actual, documented, in-person voting fraud accounts for perhaps five votes out of every million in this country. Why do we need voter-ID laws that disenfranchise thousands of voters if the problem doesn't exist in amounts large enough to sway elections? |
You have never proven that it disenfranchise 1000's of voters. Why can't get these 1000's of people get a valid ID to vote when they have no problem getting one to buy smokes or booze? And don't try to bring up up your phony story about 1000's of poor and brown people being born 90 years ago in places where birth certificates were not accessible, that just makes you look even sillier than you already do. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Religious privilege, legislated
