Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: drainbamage
Page: <<prev 1 ... 220 221 222 223 224 225 next>>
Jan 5, 2017 17:07:09   #
Keenan wrote:
"she won because of lack of voter ID in 19 states."

"She never would have had that many votes if every voter had been checked for citizenship."

So this is your normal routine - just speaking out of your arse? You think you can just make shite up like this and be taken seriously? What is wrong with you?

Please seek professional help. You obviously cannot differentiate between your fantasy world and the real world. Moron.


Is that all you can do is call me names? If you disagree with me, why don't you just say so and stop with the insults. I have not insulted you for your viewpoints. I have an opinion. This is a public forum. It is what adults do - have discussions about their viewpoints. Please ignore me if you don't like what I have to say. I certainly am going to ignure you (not with the ignore function, either - just on my own).
Go to
Jan 5, 2017 16:46:50   #
pounder35 wrote:
No shit. A photo ID should be required to vote. Period! I have to carry one to drive, cash a check, and buy beer. I'm 59. I think I look of legal age to buy a damn six pack. I don't have a problem showing my ID to vote. What's the problem? The Dims are the only ones crying about it.


Me either. The dems should realize that when they scream "Hillary won the popular vote" that she won because of lack of voter ID in 19 states. She never would have had that many votes if every voter had been checked for citizenship. They can't have it both ways, but they sure do think they deserve to have it both ways, for some reason.

ETA: Having said that, though, I still believe that Hillary won nothing at all, since the popular vote does not exist.
Go to
Jan 5, 2017 15:29:28   #
phcaan wrote:
The point is that democrats have no intention of giving up their advantage using illegal voters, so they have the catchall phrase they constantly sell to anyone stupid enough to listen.


Rather than just spewing off these phrases, I would really like for someone to give me a clear way of knowing how voter fraud did not occur.

I find it quite amusing when Trump claimed the election was rigged before the election happened. And then when someone asked him how he felt about the rigging after he won, he said "Yes, there was rigging going on, and I STILL won."
Go to
Jan 5, 2017 15:17:48   #
Was Bill Clinton one of them? After all, his wife was running for office. Doesn't that make it a conflict of interest for him?
Go to
Jan 5, 2017 15:11:04   #
Twardlow wrote:
Voter ID is a way to keep Blacks and College students from voting, and it works very well as records show.



What are you saying? That Blacks and College students don't have ID's? I don't get your point, if there is one.
Go to
Jan 5, 2017 14:50:44   #
Jakebrake wrote:
If there is 'practically No Voter Fraud', then why are you libs so afraid of voter ID?


Imagine their panic if technology takes over and can prove eligibility with something like a fingerprint ID...or voiceprint! Do I hear heads exploding?
Go to
Jan 5, 2017 14:47:02   #
Twardlow wrote:
All this proves nothing. If you want to do something, investigate actual illegal votes, count them. Tthen you might build a case.

Remember, O'Keif (I thank his name was) who tried to make a point by voting illegally and got caught?


How on earth can I investigate all the ballots that were handed in by people I know nothing about, who have no paperwork to prove to me that they are citizens and eligible to vote? The only thing I can think of would be to follow every single voter in each of those 18 states (and Washington DC) from the booth and ask them for their ID. And your pointing at James O'Keefe as getting caught trying to vote illegally proves to me one thing: that one person, out of millions of voters, got caught. In other words, it proves nothing.
Go to
Jan 5, 2017 14:09:29   #
Twardlow wrote:
You're wandering in a confusion that lacks logic or reality. Serious investigators--impartial investigators--find no threat from illegal voting.

It just something to keep conservatives stirred up, and it works.


Here are the stats regarding voter ID for each state. Note that there are 19 states that have NO voter ID requirements at the ballot box at all.

The NCSL categorises state-level voter ID laws as follows:

Strict photo ID required: Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin.[13]
Strict non-photo ID required: Arizona, North Dakota and Ohio.
Non-Strict photo ID required: Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Rhode Island, South Dakota and Texas.
Non-Strict non-photo ID required: Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and Washington.
No ID required to vote at ballot box: California, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, West Virginia, Wyoming, and Washington, D.C.


EDITED TO ADD - because I KNOW someone will say it - I correct myself. There are 18 states plus Washington DC with no voter ID requirements.
Go to
Jan 5, 2017 13:48:11   #
green wrote:
what's your point... how many of the 11 million illegals got nabbed when they were voting this election? 11,000? 0.1%?

...oh actually 40!

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-noncitizen-voters-20161025-snap-story.html


How can the LA times know how many illegals voted when there is no voter ID requirement in CA? How did they get that number? If they don't check a voter's ID at the time of voting, how can they possibly prove that that particular voter is legitimate or not? Until the voter ID requirement becomes very strict in all 50 states (every single voter must prove they are a US citizen), the popular vote will never work. Multiple voting and illegal voting can happen in the states that do not have ID requirements now. But eventually technology may solve this problem with fingerprint identification at the voting booth.
Go to
Jan 4, 2017 19:15:33   #
green wrote:
So back in March of 2008 when the Office of Congressional Ethics was formed... Obama had just completed a tedious lobbying program to get the House members to approve a non-partisan ethics committee (run by Obama sympathizers) just before he became a dark-horse candidate for the democratic nomination?

you get the Tinkerbell Of The Day award! If I feel inclined, I might make a whole thread commemorating your idiotic talking points and sound-bites

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/7b/dc/12/7bdc12f08085029d9c8171b9ff8eb1f8.jpg
So back in March of 2008 when the Office of Congre... (show quote)


Oh dear me. I'm quaking in my boots. Go ahead. Knock yourself out. Insecure people do that to make themselves feel like they have some kind of power.
Go to
Jan 4, 2017 19:00:37   #
green wrote:
nice cut'n'paste to prove you are wrong...Obama don't mess with the house, except to scold them.


And you know this how? Obama has lobbyists all over the place to get done what he wants done - and to make it look like he's "not involved." So will Trump for that matter.

ETA: And Trump has already killed the investigation, saying he doesn't want to waste his time on it. Here's another cut and paste for ya: "House Republicans on Tuesday abruptly dropped a proposal seeking controversial changes to the Office of Congressional Ethics after President-elect Donald Trump criticized the plan, as the 115th Congress opened on a contentious note."
Go to
Jan 4, 2017 18:49:21   #
Szalajj wrote:
http://ethics.house.gov/about/committee-history


fact-gathering in 89 separate investigations, resolved 58 matters without forming an investigative subcommittee, and created four investigative subcommittees. The Committee filed 10 reports with the House totaling nearly 1,900 pages on various investigative matters.

At the beginning of the 114th Congress, Representative Charles W. Dent of Pennsylvania was appointed Chairman and Representative Linda T. Sánchez of California was reappointed as Ranking Member of the Committee.

A more detailed history of the Committee is available in the Congressional Research Service report below. It includes discussion of the Committee’s jurisdiction and procedures, changes in ethics standards, and a list of all members who have served on the Committee."

The Constitution authorizes the House to discipline its members. However, the House had no uniform or consistent mechanism for self-discipline until the 1960s. Some allegations of misconduct were investigated in an ad hoc manner by special committees, and some issues went directly to the floor of the House.

Questions about official misconduct and the need for a source of reliable, accessible information led to the creation of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct in 1967. At the start of the 112th Congress, in 2011, the name was changed to the Committee on Ethics.

Under House Rule X, the Committee is authorized to enforce standards of conduct for members, officers and employees; to investigate alleged violations of any law, rule or regulation; and to make recommendations to the House for further action. The Committee has sole jurisdiction over the interpretation of the Code of Official Conduct.

The House has added to or changed its rules of conduct several times. In 1977, the House adopted the first financial disclosure rules and limits on outside income, gifts, the franking privilege and foreign travel. Rules were also modified by the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 and the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, which included a ban on honoraria, among other statutory changes.

An Office of Advice and Education, with its own director who reports to the chief counsel, was established within the Committee in 1990 under the Ethics Reform Act. The office is responsible for providing information and guidance to Members and staff, responding to requests for advisory opinions and conducting annual ethics training.

An Ethics Reform Task Force’s recommendations were adopted by the House in 1997, which mandated a nonpartisan staff for the committee, and reduced Committee membership from 14 to 10 while creating a pool of 20 members who could serve on investigative subcommittees as needed.

In 2008, the House created the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE), an independent entity within the House to accept complaints of wrongdoing from the public, review such allegations and submit recommendations to the Committee on Ethics.

The Committee’s responsibilities for training, guidance and investigations have grown in recent years. During the 113th Congress, the Committee started or continued fact-gathering in 89 separate investigations, resolved 58 matters without forming an investigative subcommittee, and created four investigative subcommittees. The Committee filed 10 reports with the House totaling nearly 1,900 pages on various investigative matters.

At the beginning of the 114th Congress, Representative Charles W. Dent of Pennsylvania was appointed Chairman and Representative Linda T. Sánchez of California was reappointed as Ranking Member of the Committee.

A more detailed history of the Committee is available in the Congressional Research Service report below. It includes discussion of the Committee’s jurisdiction and procedures, changes in ethics standards, and a list of all members who have served on the Committee."


Downloads

Congressional Research Service Report »
http://ethics.house.gov/about/committee-history br... (show quote)



It's NOT the HCE that was being targeted, it is the OCE:

"In 2008, the House created the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE), an independent entity within the House to accept complaints of wrongdoing from the public, review such allegations and submit recommendations to the Committee on Ethics.

The Committee’s responsibilities for training, guidance and investigations have grown in recent years. During the 113th Congress, the Committee started or continued fact-gathering in 89 separate investigations, resolved 58 matters without forming an investigative subcommittee, and created four investigative subcommittees. The Committee filed 10 reports with the House totaling nearly 1,900 pages on various investigative matters.

At the beginning of the 114th Congress, Representative Charles W. Dent of Pennsylvania was appointed Chairman and Representative Linda T. Sánchez of California was reappointed as Ranking Member of the Committee.

A more detailed history of the Committee is available in the Congressional Research Service report below. It includes discussion of the Committee’s jurisdiction and procedures, changes in ethics standards, and a list of all members who have served on the Committee."

ETA: Here's the link - I quoted strting with the 10th paragraph: http://ethics.house.gov/about/committee-history
Go to
Jan 4, 2017 18:36:57   #
Hal81 wrote:
They even said later in their 11 0'clock That one district had a 110% of the vote turn out. Don't they read that stuff before they go on the air?



Lol! I bet CA had 150% of the vote turn out, and NY had 130%. (Just kidding, libs. It's called "humor")
Go to
Jan 4, 2017 18:28:32   #
Keenan wrote:
You are free to show everyone how utterly uninformed and sycophantic you are towards your beloved misogynistic narcissistic cult hero. Who is stopping you?

Please, by all means, keep posting! I love watching you make a complete idiot out of yourself.


By doing that, you show that it's not worth my time to even try to have a meaningful dialogue with you. All you can do, it seems, is revert to third-grade tactics and call me whatever name you think is going to bother me. There are lots of intelligent liberals that I have had very brilliant conversations with, and we leave each others' company shaking hands and agreeing to disagree. You, on the other hand, can only come up with hate words. I feel sorry for you. I hope you can find a way to become a bit more broad-minded about life. It makes a difference in how you get along with people.
Go to
Jan 4, 2017 18:22:54   #
Keenan wrote:
Only Republicans? Did you just pull that one out of your arse, again? You know, when you spew blatant falsehoods that people can disprove with just a few seconds of google, you merely prove to everyone how utterly unconcerned you are with the truth, and remind everyone that you live in your own alt-reality bubble completely separated from the real world.


It's not rocket science. Obama forms an ethics committee. Do you really think they are going to find anything at all wrong with his party's ethics?
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 220 221 222 223 224 225 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.