Republicans freak out over HR1: They don't want America to have fair elections

[Just AnotherPerson]

See more at the link https://www.salon.com/2019/03/08/republicans-freak-out-over-hr1-they-dont-want-america-to-have-fair-elections/

Excerpt:


On Friday, the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives passed a hefty, but badly needed, omnibus bill aimed at restoring American democracy after the beating it's taken lately from big money and authoritarian interests. HR1, also called the "For the People Act," has a series of provisions aimed (https://www.salon.com/2019/01/04/house-democrats-unveil-their-first-big-bill-protecting-democracy-in-the-trump-era/) at protecting the right to vote, muting the impact of big money spending on politics and strengthening ethics requirements for political candidates.

This bill's aims are broadly popular with Americans. Its provisions to make voter registration essentially automatic -- you can opt out, but you won't have to opt in -- are supported by 65 percent of Americans (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/15/how-americans-view-some-of-the-voting-policies-approved-at-the-ballot-box/). Provisions to make voting easier enjoy similarly high levels of support. Campaign finance reform is also wildly popular, with healthy majorities supporting it (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/08/most-americans-want-to-limit-campaign-spending-say-big-donors-have-greater-political-influence/). And when it comes to the power of lobbyists, well, they come last in polls where Americans (https://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/lobbyists-ethics-gallup-poll-101187) ranks professions by ethical standards.


But while the public very much likes the provisions in this bill, Republican politicians and conservative activists very much don't. The reason is simple: Conservatives know they're not likely to win a fair fight, and so they want a system that makes it easy for them to cheat.

[Peter1469]

See more at the link https://www.salon.com/2019/03/08/republicans-freak-out-over-hr1-they-dont-want-america-to-have-fair-elections/

Excerpt:


On Friday, the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives passed a hefty, but badly needed, omnibus bill aimed at restoring American democracy after the beating it's taken lately from big money and authoritarian interests. HR1, also called the "For the People Act," has a series of provisions aimed (https://www.salon.com/2019/01/04/house-democrats-unveil-their-first-big-bill-protecting-democracy-in-the-trump-era/) at protecting the right to vote, muting the impact of big money spending on politics and strengthening ethics requirements for political candidates.

This bill's aims are broadly popular with Americans. Its provisions to make voter registration essentially automatic -- you can opt out, but you won't have to opt in -- are supported by 65 percent of Americans (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/15/how-americans-view-some-of-the-voting-policies-approved-at-the-ballot-box/). Provisions to make voting easier enjoy similarly high levels of support. Campaign finance reform is also wildly popular, with healthy majorities supporting it (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/08/most-americans-want-to-limit-campaign-spending-say-big-donors-have-greater-political-influence/). And when it comes to the power of lobbyists, well, they come last in polls where Americans (https://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/lobbyists-ethics-gallup-poll-101187) ranks professions by ethical standards.


But while the public very much likes the provisions in this bill, Republican politicians and conservative activists very much don't. The reason is simple: Conservatives know they're not likely to win a fair fight, and so they want a system that makes it easy for them to cheat.

The problem is voter fraud.

HR-1 aims to eliminate voter ID. That is insane.

We have a decent enough education system in the US that no class of people are too stupid to figure out how to get a voter complaint ID card.

[Cletus]

We have a decent enough education system in the US that no class of people are too stupid to figure out how to get a voter complaint ID card.

If they are, they are too stupid to vote.

[DGUtley]

Is this the resolution that supports illegals voting in local elections?

[Just AnotherPerson]

Is this the resolution that supports illegals voting in local elections?

Um no... that is just RW propaganda. It is an anti corruption bill, but people like you would like to swing it to being the opposite. God forbid the peoples voice actually count for something and we end corruption. That would just be awful. Better to have big business steal our democracy and buy or reps.

No worries for your little heart, it most likely wont ever pass. Not as long as our congress is bought and paid for by the very people it aims to stop. It's all a big joke really.

But hey nice to see your drive by mock again. Welcome!

[hanger4]

Um no... that is just RW propaganda. It is an anti corruption bill, but people like you would like to swing it to being the opposite. God forbid the peoples voice actually count for something and we end corruption. That would just be awful. Better to have big business steal our democracy and buy or reps. No worries for your little heart, it most likely wont ever pass. Not as long as our congress is bought and paid for by the very people it aims to stop. It's all a big joke really. But hey nice to see your drive by mock again. Welcome!*Um no... that is just RW propaganda.* ............ You would be incorrect; ............ http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/106988-House-votes-in-favor-of-illegal-immigrant-voting .............. https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/8/house-votes-favor-illegal-immigrant-voting/

[alexa]

Is this the resolution that supports illegals voting in local elections?

Yes, and taking your women too

[Common]

This resolution passed the house, to allow illegal immigrants to VOTE and over ride american citizens

Any AMERICAN that is for NON CITIZEN "Illegal" immigrants voting should move to another country of your choice

Only american iliberals would even consider taking the country away from its citizens. No other country in the world would do this.

[DGUtley]

Yes, and taking your women too

NOTICE - alexa TB'd for trolling and bad faith posting

[DGUtley]

Um no... that is just RW propaganda. It is an anti corruption bill, but people like you would like to swing it to being the opposite. God forbid the peoples voice actually count for something and we end corruption. That would just be awful. Better to have big business steal our democracy and buy or reps. No worries for your little heart, it most likely wont ever pass. Not as long as our congress is bought and paid for by the very people it aims to stop. It's all a big joke really. But hey nice to see your drive by mock again. Welcome!

Well, well, well. I have been on record forever that I want every US Citizen to vote. On this forum, at my prior forum (Please confirm ripmeister or Docthehun - if you remember). I am against illegal aliens voting as I believe that only citizens have the right to vote. As for your snarky comment alleging a "drive by mock", my inquiry was serious - is this or is this not the resolution supporting the right of illegals to vote? If so, then, the name is the opposite. It appears from posts below that it is.

[RadioGod]

This resolution passed the house, to allow illegal immigrants to VOTE and over ride american citizens

Any AMERICAN that is for NON CITIZEN "Illegal" immigrants voting should move to another country of your choice

Only american iliberals would even consider taking the country away from its citizens. No other country in the world would do this.

Could you please include the specific language in HR1 that allows illegals to vote? I read the bill and even posted it here a while back when it was first proposed. I never saw that language in it.
Here is the bill again in full- https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr1/text
And here was my original thread on HR1 with the OP including arguments for and against it. - http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/105739-HR-1-For-the-People-Act-of-2019

[RadioGod]

Is this the resolution that supports illegals voting in local elections?
I would ask the same of you as I did Common. Where in the bill does it say illegals will be allowed to vote? You are an attorney. Here is the bill. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr1/text

[DGUtley]

I would ask the same of you as I did @Common (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=2649). Where in the bill does it say illegals will be allowed to vote? You are an attorney. Here is the bill. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr1/text

Thanks for posting it. I don't know that it does or doesn't -- that's why I asked. I've read articles that it does -- I haven't read anything refuting that (until the drive by snark). I've downloaded the bill. I have a partners meeting at 9:00. I will try to take a look at it today. I don't believe that Illegal Aliens should vote as they aren't citizens. I think that citizenship means something. What Californians do in state elections is no concern for this Ohioan but I think it's the start of a push to eventually try to make illegal voting in federal elections legal. You may disagree with me, and that's your right. Again, meeting today but I'll try to take a look at it.

[Common]

I would ask the same of you as I did @Common (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=2649). Where in the bill does it say illegals will be allowed to vote? You are an attorney. Here is the bill. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr1/text

Its already passed

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/106988-House-votes-in-favor-of-illegal-immigrant-voting

[hanger4]

I would ask the same of you as I did Common. Where in the bill does it say illegals will be allowed to vote? You are an attorney. Here is the bill. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr1/textIt was to be language added to the resolution stating that “allowing illegal immigrants the right to vote devalues the franchise and diminishes the voting power of United States citizens.” All but six Democrats voted it down.

[Just AnotherPerson]

Well, well, well. I have been on record forever that I want every US Citizen to vote. On this forum, at my prior forum (Please confirm @ripmeister (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=2035) or @Docthehun (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1986) - if you remember). I am against illegal aliens voting as I believe that only citizens have the right to vote. As for your snarky comment alleging a "drive by mock", my inquiry was serious - is this or is this not the resolution supporting the right of illegals to vote? If so, then, the name is the opposite. It appears from posts below that it is.

Well you have priors for leaving me rude comments. Could your comment be misconstrued as a rude comment? Sure it can especially when just the other day you told me in another thread straight up that you mock me because you don't agree with me. You constantly do something really rude and when I say something back you accuse me of something. Like after you mocked me, I told you that you were a liar. You got mad at me for saying that but you mocked me first. Your holiness, am I not allowed to talk back to you???

You know darn well what this bill is you read it. Also your comment was meant to be rude. It was a smart remark. How should I reply to it like a kitten?

As for the not wanting American citizens to vote Please tell me where I said that. I mean seriously where did I say you don't want American citizens to be able to vote? Specifically I said, "God forbid the peoples voice actually count for something".

How did I come to that opinion? From our prior conversations, of course. You are pro- Citizens United. You are pro-electoral college. Those are both set in place to steal the voice of the people.

And.... P.S what the heck did you thread ban alexa for. Alexa didn't even say anything wrong. You seem to be on a power trip again.

[Just AnotherPerson]

This resolution passed the house, to allow illegal immigrants to VOTE and over ride american citizens

Any AMERICAN that is for NON CITIZEN "Illegal" immigrants voting should move to another country of your choice

Only american iliberals would even consider taking the country away from its citizens. No other country in the world would do this.

Look Common, I also am not for illegals voting. I am totally against that. But those words are not in this bill. That is not what this bill is about. Please show exactly in the bill where it says illegals will be able to vote. I don't think anyone would want illegals to be able to vote.

[zachroidott]

Yes, and taking your women too

I've felt possessive towards you.

[Docthehun]

Well, well, well. I have been on record forever that I want every US Citizen to vote. On this forum, at my prior forum (Please confirm @ripmeister (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=2035) or @Docthehun (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1986) - if you remember). I am against illegal aliens voting as I believe that only citizens have the right to vote. As for your snarky comment alleging a "drive by mock", my inquiry was serious - is this or is this not the resolution supporting the right of illegals to vote? If so, then, the name is the opposite. It appears from posts below that it is.

I've known Dave for the better part of ten years and a straighter shooter you'll not find. Without a doubt, he's sincere about wanting everyone (citizens) to vote. I also believe that he would agree, on a Constitutional basis, that any method of voter suppression was illegal. There is a school of thought on my side of the aisle, that doesn't want everyone voting because of the belief that many of us aren't smart enough to be making such monumental decisions and would always vote for free chit over "get to work". Of course, all of us would vote for "get to work" over "free chit"...right?

I don't want "illegals" to vote, the "Ruskies" already have too much say in our system; if you believe the tabloids. The immigration system is broken and I blame Washington for totally ignoring the real problem.

In any case, Counselor Utley is a top shelf American and genuinely cares for those below him.

[DGUtley]

Well you have priors for leaving me rude comments. Could your comment be misconstrued as a rude comment? Sure it can especially when just the other day you told me in another thread straight up that you mock me because you don't agree with me. You constantly do something really rude and when I say something back you accuse me of something. Like after you mocked me, I told you that you were a liar. You got mad at me for saying that but you mocked me first. Your holiness, am I not allowed to talk back to you???

I mocked you in that thread with the video b/c it was a thread that was factually misrepresentative. No, my comment could not be construed as rude. I do not constantly say something rude, it is not my style. I really don't care what you say to me substantively. I apologized and you said it was over -- apparently it isn't because you raise it again?


You know darn well what this bill is you read it. Also your comment was meant to be rude. It was a smart remark. How should I reply to it like a kitten?

I have not read the bill, as I said. My comment was not meant to be rude, it was inquisitive.

As for the not wanting American citizens to vote Please tell me where I said that. I mean seriously where did I say you don't want American citizens to be able to vote? Specifically I said, "God forbid the peoples voice actually count for something".

I didn't say that you did. I asked a question about illegals voting. How did you get there?


How did I come to that opinion? From our prior conversations, of course. You are pro- Citizens United. You are pro-electoral college. Those are both set in place to steal the voice of the people.

I don't know that I am "pro" Citizens United if I understand what you are saying but I do know that it is the constitutionally correct decision. As for finding a way to constitutionally roll back the abuse, I'm all ears.

Note: I removed the criticism of moderation activities.

[Just AnotherPerson]

DGUtley You even called people into the thread how novel. You accused me of that in a Pm, and here you are doing it out in the open. You know what you have said to me, and what the content of our conversations have been. You also said right here in this thread that I said something that I didn't say.

[Just AnotherPerson]

I've known Dave for the better part of ten years and a straighter shooter you'll not find. Without a doubt, he's sincere about wanting everyone (citizens) to vote. I also believe that he would agree, on a Constitutional basis, that any method of voter suppression was illegal. There is a school of thought on my side of the aisle, that doesn't want everyone voting because of the belief that many of us aren't smart enough to be making such monumental decisions and would always vote for free chit over "get to work". Of course, all of us would vote for "get to work" over "free chit"...right?

I don't want "illegals" to vote, the "Ruskies" already have too much say in our system; if you believe the tabloids. The immigration system is broken and I blame Washington for totally ignoring the real problem.

In any case, Counselor Utley is a top shelf American and genuinely cares for those below him.
He may be a decent guy and all that, but he hasn't been decent to me. But that don't mean he is not a decent guy just not towards me.

[Common]

Could you please include the specific language in HR1 that allows illegals to vote? I read the bill and even posted it here a while back when it was first proposed. I never saw that language in it.
Here is the bill again in full- https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/hr1/text
And here was my original thread on HR1 with the OP including arguments for and against it. - http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/105739-HR-1-For-the-People-Act-of-2019

No I wont, all im going to post is that the democrat controlled house passed a bill that allows illegal aliens to vote. Its right there I provided it for you, I am not going to run around looking for details that are meaningless. the end result is apparent

[RadioGod]

Thanks for posting it. I don't know that it does or doesn't -- that's why I asked. I've read articles that it does -- I haven't read anything refuting that (until the drive by snark). I've downloaded the bill. I have a partners meeting at 9:00. I will try to take a look at it today. I don't believe that Illegal Aliens should vote as they aren't citizens. I think that citizenship means something. What Californians do in state elections is no concern for this Ohioan but I think it's the start of a push to eventually try to make illegal voting in federal elections legal. You may disagree with me, and that's your right. Again, meeting today but I'll try to take a look at it.
Of course we can all agree that illegals should not be allowed to vote. That would make zero sense. If it were permissible to vote in another country's elections, I would be voting in Chinese and Russian elections as well. LOL.
Let me be fair here. Nowhere in the bill does it say illegals can vote. My real question would then be, what in HR1 makes it easier for illegals to vote? I do know in places like California, some democratic voting drives do pick up a few illegal votes here and there. I would imagine republican voting drives do the same. Some illegals are hardcore republican in their views, and I was truly amazed at how many hispanic people that were US citizens voted for Trump. What in HR1 would make it easier for illegal aliens to get on the voting rolls, or how can an illegal who wants to vote rig the system using HR1?
I will log back in later today when you are not as busy. This is a conversation worth having.

[DGUtley]

@DGUtley (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=2019) You even called people into the thread how novel. You accused me of that in a Pm, and here you are doing it out in the open. You know what you have said to me, and what the content of our conversations have been. You also said right here in this thread that I said something that I didn't say.

I never said that you said something you didn't say. I can't believe that I have to explain this to you but here it goes: The bill is to supposedly protect the integrity and promote voting. They accuse us of suppression. I was saying that I want all US Citizens to vote, I think that they want all non citizens to vote. I think that that they scheme to promote non-registered to vote and con people into voting for their candidates with parties and sandwiches etc (I have seen it). I think that's wrong. I do think though that all citizens should vote. Where you got that I was saying you felt otherwise is beyond me.

It is not improper to mention people in threads. It can be if you are calling them out. Read the rules.

[Peter1469]

Is this the resolution that supports illegals voting in local elections?
Yes. It prohibits voter ID. A clear attempt to facilitate voter fraud and to paint certain groups of people as too stupid to figure out how to get an ID.

[RadioGod]

Its already passed

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/106988-House-votes-in-favor-of-illegal-immigrant-voting

My understanding is that it passed the House. It still has the Senate and the President's desk to go. Considering this is an anti-corruption bill, it will probably die here. Trump would never sign something that made it more difficult for corporations to rig our elections and influence our votes.
But this still does not answer my question. You are claiming that HR1 will make it so illegal aliens have the right to vote. As I said to Mr. Utley, that question may not be entirely fair, because nowhere in the bill does it say that illegals will be given the right to vote. But I will settle for another argument in favor of your claim.
What in HR1 makes it easier for an illegal alien to vote in our elections? There are alot of sections in the bill, take your time to go through it. Let's get to the bottom of this statement that seems to be thrown around as if it's a fact. In all actuality, it's just fake sidebusting to rile up support for killing a bill that would make it more difficult for the billionaires to influence our elections. There are even provisions in it that would get rid of Citizen's United 1st Amendment claims of money in support of political campaigns as protected free speech, making it harder for the people with most of the money to have most of the vote, disenfranchising the majority of Americans.
Ironically, most of the corporations and their subsidiary think-tanks and PAC groups are multinational, or purely other nationalities than American. With that being the case, Citizen's United and other court cases actually gives foreign entities the same rights to free speech and voting in our country as any American citizen has. This is what HR1 is aiming to stop. The very thing you are claiming HR1 will do, is the very thing it is seeking to stop. Somebody has been lying to you. Let's sort this out and find out the facts for ourselves here.

[RadioGod]

No I wont, all im going to post is that the democrat controlled house passed a bill that allows illegal aliens to vote. Its right there I provided it for you, I am not going to run around looking for details that are meaningless. the end result is apparent
Alright. My question was a simple one. What in HR1 allows illegal to vote? Your answer was a dodge. But I think that will not stop you from continuing to make claims at every turn that HR1 makes it so illegals can vote. It doesn't. Before you dig yourself in a hole, please stop here.

[Admiral Ackbar]

Um no... that is just RW propaganda. It is an anti corruption bill, but people like you would like to swing it to being the opposite. God forbid the peoples voice actually count for something and we end corruption. That would just be awful. Better to have big business steal our democracy and buy or reps.

No worries for your little heart, it most likely wont ever pass. Not as long as our congress is bought and paid for by the very people it aims to stop. It's all a big joke really.

But hey nice to see your drive by mock again. Welcome!

You are wrong. Your position on this is wrong. Pelosi clearly stated she wanted "recent" arrivals to be able to vote. This is against the rule of law. This is not Right wing propaganda. This is fact.

This is not about corruption it is a bill designed to help Democrats win elections. This is a bill to get tax dollars to politicians to make their lives easier and their re election more certain.

God Bless America, God Bless American Citizens and God Bless Donald Trump

[Admiral Ackbar]

Alright. My question was a simple one. What in HR1 allows illegal to vote? Your answer was a dodge. But I think that will not stop you from continuing to make claims at every turn that HR1 makes it so illegals can vote. It doesn't. Before you dig yourself in a hole, please stop here.

What in the Constitution allows Baby Killing and Federal Control of Schools

[Docthehun]

He may be a decent guy and all that, but he hasn't been decent to me. But that don't mean he is not a decent guy just not towards me.

The eternal optimist in me hopes that you can one day resolve those differences. I suspect if your encounters had been face to face, the relationship might be totally different. In any case, you're both in good standing in my book.

[RadioGod]

What in the Constitution allows Baby Killing and Federal Control of Schools
I must have missed something here.

[Just AnotherPerson]

DGUtley I wont continue this argument. And also, I will take my poison well. Which I know is on the way. But I will say one last thing, is that I was not making stuff up when I said you read the bill. It was you yourself who said you were going to read it. I was not just saying that for no reason. I belived that you read it. Radio gave you a link to the thread where he originally posted about the bill. You are poster #2 please do read it, and see what your reply was to him about the bill. You said you were going to read it, back on 2-4-2019. See post #2 http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/105739-HR-1-For-the-People-Act-of-2019

I do see my comment got moved to flameout.

[RadioGod]

It was to be language added to the resolution stating that “allowing illegal immigrants the right to vote devalues the franchise and diminishes the voting power of United States citizens.” All but six Democrats voted it down.

I would have had no problem adding that language into the bill, as it would specifically prohibit illegals from using any part of HR1 to vote in an American election. But it's really not necessary, as only US citizens are supposed to vote in a US election anyways. But if it would have calmed people's fears, I would have been OK with it myself. I also have no problem with requiring ID to vote. It amazes me that there are places in this country where folks don't have ID. But it's real. In really rural or poor areas, there are a substantial number of people with no State ID card or Driver's License. The majority of them are US citizens, and they should be allowed to vote.
The other issue isn't just who should be allowed on the voting rolls, but how and when the voting rolls can be wiped clean. Both Repubs and Dems in control of each State's Legislature have been abusing this to eliminate the voter registrations of their competing party. This has made it so thousands of Americans who intend to vote, cannot do so when they show up at the polls.
There are a lot of issues attended to in HR1. It is at least an attempt to overhaul the election system in the US to make it more fair.
I would like to clarify that I do not think it is right for someone who is not a citizen to be voting. Illegals should not vote.
I also think it is illegal to prevent any US citizen from voting. Calling it, "disenfranchising", is a misnomer that makes it seem petty. Treason and Tyranny against the people is what I would call it when you are not allowed to vote.
Voter reform is actually that important, which is why I feel so strongly that HR1 does a pretty fair job of seeking to correct things when it comes to jerrymandering and the influence of big money in our politics. I, myself, would have wrote it differently. But my version would have never passed out of congressional committee, much less a House vote.

[countryboy]

He may be a decent guy and all that, but he hasn't been decent to me. But that don't mean he is not a decent guy just not towards me.
Actually, it's you who are rude, and misconstrue any disagreement as an attack on you. You really are too thin skinned to participate on a political forum. You might want to rethink your participation, all the stress can't be good for you.

[MisterVeritis]

This resolution passed the house, to allow illegal immigrants to VOTE and over ride american citizens

Any AMERICAN that is for NON CITIZEN "Illegal" immigrants voting should move to another country of your choice

Only american iliberals would even consider taking the country away from its citizens. No other country in the world would do this.
A civil war is coming.

[nathanbforrest45]

Might I add that the United States is NOT A DEMOCRACY. It wasn't until Progressive Democrat Woodrow Wilson was president that we ever referred to ourselves as a Democracy. The Pledge of Allegiance even states "And to the Republic for which it stands".

Democracy are pure mob rule and we all know mobs are easily led by those in power.

If it were up to me only those who have served in the military would be allowed to vote and I don't care about "what if's or what abouts"

[nathanbforrest45]

A civil war is coming.


Its already here, its just that no one has started shooting yet.

[Just AnotherPerson]

A civil war is coming.

Will it be corporations against the people? Seems like we are already in a civil war with them, and they have been winning for a long time. But the people are making a last stand. I wonder how it will go? Hmmm we shall see MR V...….

[MisterVeritis]

Its already here, its just that no one has started shooting yet.
We are in the period that precedes war. I predict we will not turn away.

[hanger4]

I would have had no problem adding that language into the bill, as it would specifically prohibit illegals from using any part of HR1 to vote in an American election. But it's really not necessary, as only US citizens are supposed to vote in a US election anyways. But if it would have calmed people's fears, I would have been OK with it myself. I also have no problem with requiring ID to vote. It amazes me that there are places in this country where folks don't have ID. But it's real. In really rural or poor areas, there are a substantial number of people with no State ID card or Driver's License. The majority of them are US citizens, and they should be allowed to vote. The other issue isn't just who should be allowed on the voting rolls, but how and when the voting rolls can be wiped clean. Both Repubs and Dems in control of each State's Legislature have been abusing this to eliminate the voter registrations of their competing party. This has made it so thousands of Americans who intend to vote, cannot do so when they show up at the polls.There are a lot of issues attended to in HR1. It is at least an attempt to overhaul the election system in the US to make it more fair. I would like to clarify that I do not think it is right for someone who is not a citizen to be voting. Illegals should not vote. I also think it is illegal to prevent any US citizen from voting. Calling it, "disenfranchising", is a misnomer that makes it seem petty. Treason and Tyranny against the people is what I would call it when you are not allowed to vote. Voter reform is actually that important, which is why I feel so strongly that HR1 does a pretty fair job of seeking to correct things when it comes to jerrymandering and the influence of big money in our politics. I, myself, would have wrote it differently. But my version would have never passed out of congressional committee, much less a House vote.*I would have had no problem adding that language into the bill, as it would specifically prohibit illegals from using any part of HR1 to vote in an American election. But it's really not necessary, as only US citizens are supposed to vote in a US election anyways.* ............. That would be federal elections. Some local governments have the power to allow noncitizens to vote in local elections. HR1 wouldn't stop that, just condem it. Reckon why all but 6 Democrats in the House vote down this additional language ?? Rather telling don't ya think ??

[MisterVeritis]

Will it be corporations against the people? Seems like we are already in a civil war with them, and they have been winning for a long time. But the people are making a last stand. I wonder how it will go? Hmmm we shall see MR V...….
No. Your goofy focus on corporations is silly.

[RadioGod]

Yes. It prohibits voter ID. A clear attempt to facilitate voter fraud and to paint certain groups of people as too stupid to figure out how to get an ID.
Peter, you have hit upon a legitimate point. I, too, have no problem with an ID being presented at time of voting. But there really are some places where US citizens get turned away because of no ID.
Another thing to consider is the level of intelligence and understanding of our system illegals have. If someone is an illegal here, then they have not applied for citizenship. This is a relatively easy thing to do. If an illegal doesn't have enough understanding to apply for citizenship, how would we expect them to be intelligent enough to scam their way into the voting rolls? And for what purpose?
I do understand that it does happen. It is far rarer than it might seem given some headlines on specific websites that purport to be "news". I think most often it is not illegals who are voting, but groups working for PAC's that enroll voters and mail in ballots on their behalf, without their knowledge. This is not illegals trying to undermine our elections, but our own people working the system.
It's a lot like the mortgage crash of 2008. Banks were extending home loans under the FHA program to underqualified people. The loan officers at the banks were under pressure to get as many loans in as possible, so they started fudging income numbers to get unqualified applicants approved for loans. Of course, those people largely defaulted on the loans, which were insured against default by Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. The taxpayers took a big hit.
The same type of thing goes on with elections. Groups working with PAC's are under the gun to provide registered voters. They fudge the numbers and pad them out with illegal votes from illegal aliens and ex-cons. Sometimes they just invent people out of thin air that do not exist. This isn't the work of illegals, it's the work of big money.
We need to look at these things carefully and point the finger in the right direction.

[Just AnotherPerson]

No. Your goofy focus on corporations is silly.

Now now Mr V it is not goofy, perhaps your goofy focus on the coming civil war is silly. No???

[Just AnotherPerson]

Now now Mr V it is not goofy, perhaps your goofy focus on the coming civil war is silly. No???

No I don't think it is silly but scary though, and dangerous.

[nathanbforrest45]

Will it be corporations against the people? Seems like we are already in a civil war with them, and they have been winning for a long time. But the people are making a last stand. I wonder how it will go? Hmmm we shall see MR V...….


No, it will be the individual against the collective and will have nothing to do with the corporation. You are foolish if you see the corporation as our enemy. Corporations cannot force you to act a certain way, governments and collectives can and do.

[RadioGod]

*I would have had no problem adding that language into the bill, as it would specifically prohibit illegals from using any part of HR1 to vote in an American election. But it's really not necessary, as only US citizens are supposed to vote in a US election anyways.* ............. That would be federal elections. Some local governments have the power to allow noncitizens to vote in local elections. HR1 wouldn't stop that, just condem it. Reckon why all but 6 Democrats in the House vote down this additional language ?? Rather telling don't ya think ??
You know as well as I do that the Democrats of today are really the Republicans of yesterday. They are both wholly corrupt. Nancy and Chuck are complete mouthpieces of the same exact business leaders that bankroll the Republicans. Everything they vote on is telling, especially when they say one thing in public, then vote the opposite on the floor.
As far as State-level elections go, it would seem to me that Congress might have very limited say. Maybe.
I'm sure State's rights advocates would have HR1 in court to settle any Constitutional issues. Parts of it might even be tossed out. I'm starting to really wonder if we are a United States any more. Maybe we should just fracture up into 50 different countries to ensure sovereign government. And if that is not feasible, then we need to all get on the same page. In this case, having a somewhat uniform elections process would be a good place to start, and that would put congress at the helm. Corruption and all.

[hanger4]

You know as well as I do that the Democrats of today are really the Republicans of yesterday. They are both wholly corrupt. Nancy and Chuck are complete mouthpieces of the same exact business leaders that bankroll the Republicans. Everything they vote on is telling, especially when they say one thing in public, then vote the opposite on the floor. As far as State-level elections go, it would seem to me that Congress might have very limited say. Maybe.I'm sure State's rights advocates would have HR1 in court to settle any Constitutional issues. Parts of it might even be tossed out. I'm starting to really wonder if we are a United States any more. Maybe we should just fracture up into 50 different countries to ensure sovereign government. And if that is not feasible, then we need to all get on the same page. In this case, having a somewhat uniform elections process would be a good place to start, and that would put congress at the helm. Corruption and all.I didn't say States, all states have law/s barring non-citizens from voting in state wide elections. San Francisco (a local government) allows non-citizens, both documented and undocumented to vote in local elections.

[RadioGod]

No. Your goofy focus on corporations is silly.

I actually missed you. You are a refreshing dose of insanity. While others proclaim the US should overthrow other nations and be at perpetual war, you advocate bringing war home too:) At least you have ballz, Mr.V. Not strong in the reasoning department, but ballz the size of a house.

[MisterVeritis]

Now now Mr V it is not goofy, perhaps your goofy focus on the coming civil war is silly. No???
Perhaps. Or, more likely, you won't see the war that is coming until it arrives.

It is possible, based on roughly five years of studying small wars, rebellions, civil wars, and coups, that I am connecting dots that ought not to be connected. We could turn away by simply following our Constitution.

[MisterVeritis]

I actually missed you. You are a refreshing dose of insanity. While others proclaim the US should overthrow other nations and be at perpetual war, you advocate bringing war home too:) At least you have ballz, Mr.V. Not strong in the reasoning department, but ballz the size of a house.
Hmm. My reasoning skills are so poor I rose through the engineering ranks to a level just below director in a major corporation. Perhaps if they had been better I might have become a Director.

I suppose you are right.

[MisterVeritis]

I actually missed you. You are a refreshing dose of insanity. While others proclaim the US should overthrow other nations and be at perpetual war, you advocate bringing war home too:) At least you have ballz, Mr.V. Not strong in the reasoning department, but ballz the size of a house.
Seeing what must come is no different from a meteorologist predicting a tornado.

[Just AnotherPerson]

Perhaps. Or, more likely, you won't see the war that is coming until it arrives.

It is possible, based on roughly five years of studying small wars, rebellions, civil wars, and coups, that I am connecting dots that ought not to be connected. We could turn away by simply following our Constitution.

Well I hope you are wrong.

[MisterVeritis]

Well I hope you are wrong.
It is not the way to bet. Prepare.

[RadioGod]

I didn't say States, all states have law/s barring non-citizens from voting in state wide elections. San Francisco (a local government) allows non-citizens, both documented and undocumented to vote in local elections.
It's San Francisco. The only place crazier is DC.
Hopefully HR1 would prevent San Franciscans from allowing illegal votes in a Federal election.

[MisterVeritis]

It's San Francisco. The only place crazier is DC.
Hopefully HR1 would prevent San Franciscans from allowing illegal votes in a Federal election.
It will not become law.

[Just AnotherPerson]

It is not the way to bet. Prepare.

Orrrr try to stop it.......that is where I place my bet. If war does break out all bets are off anyways.

[RadioGod]

Hmm. My reasoning skills are so poor I rose through the engineering ranks to a level just below director in a major corporation. Perhaps if they had been better I might have become a Director.

I suppose you are right.
LOL. Advocating a civil war? Was your degree in social engineering?

[RadioGod]

It will not become law.

You are right. It can't be allowed to happen in our current corporatocracy.

[RadioGod]

It is not the way to bet. Prepare.

A real civil war might well be in the future for us. Never have Americans been so divided on so many issues since the southern states bucked against the north. And the issue, as you probably know, wasn't really slavery. Especially since you were probably a first-hand witness:)
But really, the ramifications of another civil war are catastrophic. Look at how our regime-change missions go in other countries. They turn into proxy-wars. It is 100% guaranteed that dozens of countries will be backing different sides, and a few like Russia and China will be backing both sides.
Millions will die and be displaced. People can't live for 10 minutes without a cell phone connection, much less food and potable water. When the reality of a civil war set in, millions of Americans might just die of shock and having their fake world crash on them.
Any survivors will be more interested in personal survival than any cohesive community or government. This will make us easy targets of opportunity for other nations with an interest in our resources, especially water, oil, and mining. Even our trash landfills might be an alluring temptation for mining operations.
I have the video game DayZ on pc. Up to 60 people on a map at one time, and it is about 20Km square. After spending hours just trying to eat and stay hydrated and set up for your survival, you get knifed in the back and robbed. 1/2 the people that act friendly are really wanting to kill you and take your stuff, even if they know you have next to nothing. People do manage to form small groups to survive, and they do a little better. But everyone dies anyway. There is no law, and the street signs are in a foreign language.
When you talk about preparing, is this what you are alluding to? Good luck. Everyone dies anyway.

[hanger4]

It's San Francisco. The only place crazier is DC. Hopefully HR1 would prevent San Franciscans from allowing illegal votes in a Federal election.There is already a law that forbids non-citizens from voting in federal elections.

[MisterVeritis]

Orrrr try to stop it.......that is where I place my bet. If war does break out all bets are off anyways.
In my opinion, the only way to postpone the civil war is to reinstate the Constitution and follow it. That is not likely to happen.

[MisterVeritis]

My reasoning skills are so poor I rose through the engineering ranks to a level just below director in a major corporation. Perhaps if they had been better I might have become a Director.

I suppose you are right.

LOL. Advocating a civil war? Was your degree in social engineering?
It appears your reasoning skills may be deficient.

[RadioGod]

There is already a law that forbids non-citizens from voting in federal elections.
That's a plus. LOL. That's why I thought having it added into HR1 would just be pointless. I'm sure the Senate will rip it to shreds. And Trump would never sign it. Overriding Trump's veto would take too many votes. But it does show that a few decent people in the house of reps can make decent people out of the entire house. The reverse of a bad apple, if you will:)

[MisterVeritis]

A real civil war might well be in the future for us. Never have Americans been so divided on so many issues since the southern states bucked against the north. And the issue, as you probably know, wasn't really slavery. Especially since you were probably a first-hand witness:)
Some people claim I witnessed Abraham Lincoln's moment of regret over nominating Ruth Bader Ginsberg for the supreme court.

[RadioGod]

My reasoning skills are so poor I rose through the engineering ranks to a level just below director in a major corporation. Perhaps if they had been better I might have become a Director.

I suppose you are right.

It appears your reasoning skills may be deficient.

Then we are co-deficients? Is that an engineering term? Happy birthday Mr.V.

[MisterVeritis]

A real civil war might well be in the future for us.
Yes. As a parallel, we are somewhere in our "1850s".


Never have Americans been so divided on so many issues since the southern states bucked against the north. And the issue, as you probably know, wasn't really slavery. Especially since you were probably a first-hand witness:)
But really, the ramifications of another civil war are catastrophic.
That has never made a difference.


Look at how our regime-change missions go in other countries. They turn into proxy-wars. It is 100% guaranteed that dozens of countries will be backing different sides, and a few like Russia and China will be backing both sides.
Millions will die and be displaced. People can't live for 10 minutes without a cell phone connection, much less food and potable water. When the reality of a civil war set in, millions of Americans might just die of shock and having their fake world crash on them.
Any survivors will be more interested in personal survival than any cohesive community or government. This will make us easy targets of opportunity for other nations with an interest in our resources, especially water, oil, and mining. Even our trash landfills might be an alluring temptation for mining operations.
I have the video game DayZ on pc. Up to 60 people on a map at one time, and it is about 20Km square. After spending hours just trying to eat and stay hydrated and set up for your survival, you get knifed in the back and robbed. 1/2 the people that act friendly are really wanting to kill you and take your stuff, even if they know you have next to nothing. People do manage to form small groups to survive, and they do a little better. But everyone dies anyway. There is no law, and the street signs are in a foreign language.
When you talk about preparing, is this what you are alluding to? Good luck. Everyone dies anyway.
Prepare. Arm up. Train up. Band together. If possible, move out of the large cities. If possible live near a water source.

[MisterVeritis]

Then we are co-deficients? Is that an engineering term? Happy birthday Mr.V.
Thank you.

[RadioGod]

Some people claim I witnessed Abraham Lincoln's moment of regret over nominating Ruth Bader Ginsberg for the supreme court.
LOL:) Back when you were an engineer in the confederate army. In your early 50's. haahaaaaahaaaa

[MisterVeritis]

That's a plus. LOL. That's why I thought having it added into HR1 would just be pointless. I'm sure the Senate will rip it to shreds. And Trump would never sign it. Overriding Trump's veto would take too many votes. But it does show that a few decent people in the house of reps can make decent people out of the entire house. The reverse of a bad apple, if you will:)
I see no reason for the Senate to take it up.

[RadioGod]

Thank you.

You are permitted your own selective hearing.:)

[MisterVeritis]

LOL:) Back when you were an engineer in the confederate army. In your early 50's. haahaaaaahaaaa
During the Civil War, the ancestors I am aware of lived in Washingon State.

[RadioGod]

During the Civil War, the ancestors I am aware of lived in Washingon State.

Washington Territory? I don't know if we were a state yet in Washington. Wait- was that when you met Lewis and Clark on their expedition to the northwest? LOL.
If I run into any of the Veritis family up here, I'll be sure to give them boxes of ammunition as house-warming gifts.

[MisterVeritis]

LOL:) Back when you were an engineer in the confederate army. In your early 50's. haahaaaaahaaaa
Were that true I might have served as a brand new lieutenant under Captain Robert E. Lee during the Mexican unpleasantness.

[MisterVeritis]

Washington Territory? I don't know if we were a state yet in Washington. Wait- was that when you met Lewis and Clark on their expedition to the northwest? LOL.
If I run into any of the Veritis family up here, I'll be sure to give them boxes of ammunition as house-warming gifts.
Yes. I had direct relatives who lived in Steilacoom, what is now Tacoma, and the Puyallup River valley.

[MisterVeritis]

Washington Territory? I don't know if we were a state yet in Washington.
Yes. What is now Washington State.


Wait- was that when you met Lewis and Clark on their expedition to the northwest? LOL.
People claim Thomas Jefferson and I were close friends. They claim I was always jealous of the special relationship Jefferson had with Madison. I cannot recall.

If I run into any of the Veritis family up here, I'll be sure to give them boxes of ammunition as house-warming gifts.
9mm and 5.56mm rounds are always appreciated. I am considering buying a modern crossbow.

[Common]

Of course we can all agree that illegals should not be allowed to vote. That would make zero sense. If it were permissible to vote in another country's elections, I would be voting in Chinese and Russian elections as well. LOL.
Let me be fair here. Nowhere in the bill does it say illegals can vote. My real question would then be, what in HR1 makes it easier for illegals to vote? I do know in places like California, some democratic voting drives do pick up a few illegal votes here and there. I would imagine republican voting drives do the same. Some illegals are hardcore republican in their views, and I was truly amazed at how many hispanic people that were US citizens voted for Trump. What in HR1 would make it easier for illegal aliens to get on the voting rolls, or how can an illegal who wants to vote rig the system using HR1?
I will log back in later today when you are not as busy. This is a conversation worth having.

However, your democrats in the house think they should and I find that appalling

[Peter1469]

Peter, you have hit upon a legitimate point. I, too, have no problem with an ID being presented at time of voting. But there really are some places where US citizens get turned away because of no ID.
Another thing to consider is the level of intelligence and understanding of our system illegals have. If someone is an illegal here, then they have not applied for citizenship. This is a relatively easy thing to do. If an illegal doesn't have enough understanding to apply for citizenship, how would we expect them to be intelligent enough to scam their way into the voting rolls? And for what purpose?
I do understand that it does happen. It is far rarer than it might seem given some headlines on specific websites that purport to be "news". I think most often it is not illegals who are voting, but groups working for PAC's that enroll voters and mail in ballots on their behalf, without their knowledge. This is not illegals trying to undermine our elections, but our own people working the system.
It's a lot like the mortgage crash of 2008. Banks were extending home loans under the FHA program to underqualified people. The loan officers at the banks were under pressure to get as many loans in as possible, so they started fudging income numbers to get unqualified applicants approved for loans. Of course, those people largely defaulted on the loans, which were insured against default by Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. The taxpayers took a big hit.
The same type of thing goes on with elections. Groups working with PAC's are under the gun to provide registered voters. They fudge the numbers and pad them out with illegal votes from illegal aliens and ex-cons. Sometimes they just invent people out of thin air that do not exist. This isn't the work of illegals, it's the work of big money.
We need to look at these things carefully and point the finger in the right direction.
Voter registration drives can get illegals signed up to vote. When you register you check the citizen block and sign at the bottom of the page. Typically, that is the end of the citizen ship inquiry. Unless a state has a voter ID law.

[Peter1469]

You know as well as I do that the Democrats of today are really the Republicans of yesterday. They are both wholly corrupt. Nancy and Chuck are complete mouthpieces of the same exact business leaders that bankroll the Republicans. Everything they vote on is telling, especially when they say one thing in public, then vote the opposite on the floor.
As far as State-level elections go, it would seem to me that Congress might have very limited say. Maybe.
I'm sure State's rights advocates would have HR1 in court to settle any Constitutional issues. Parts of it might even be tossed out. I'm starting to really wonder if we are a United States any more. Maybe we should just fracture up into 50 different countries to ensure sovereign government. And if that is not feasible, then we need to all get on the same page. In this case, having a somewhat uniform elections process would be a good place to start, and that would put congress at the helm. Corruption and all.
Or return to our federalist roots. Enforce the enumerated powers. That is all the federal government gets to meddle in. All else devolves to the states.

[Cotton1]

If they are, they are too stupid to vote.

I think passing a general proficiency exam should be a must for the right to vote.

[Cotton1]

To vote :

1. Have ID
2. Prove you aren't a retard
3. Be a citizen

[RadioGod]

Were that true I might have served as a brand new lieutenant under Captain Robert E. Lee during the Mexican unpleasantness.
So it was you who coined the phrase, "Remember the Alamo". I should have suspected:)

[RadioGod]

Yes. What is now Washington State.


People claim Thomas Jefferson and I were close friends. They claim I was always jealous of the special relationship Jefferson had with Madison. I cannot recall.

9mm and 5.56mm rounds are always appreciated. I am considering buying a modern crossbow.

I had amazing success with pvc bows. Not as fast as any modern composite, but they can hit hard. Even made a 90lb bow from 1 1/4 inch schedule 40 pipe. Here, for your birthday...
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_U6Yek0YgKHN_A-iTAwZbg

And a starter video from that channel...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VUb0rG2wTM

[RadioGod]

To vote :

1. Have ID
2. Prove you aren't a retard
3. Be a citizen

Number 2 is a funny one. How can I prove I am not a retard, when the one's judging me probably are? Take this forum for example. There seems to be few members who think critically. And to hear most of the members talk, I would definitely fall into the retard category.
Even if a person cannot read or write, that would not make them dumb. A very hard criteria to impose.

[RadioGod]

Or return to our federalist roots. Enforce the enumerated powers. That is all the federal government gets to meddle in. All else devolves to the states.

I can see that. If we went back to just the Constitution, our society as we know it would crumble. All of our agencies that deal with different things would vanish. There would be no more protections of our individual liberties except through State laws, which would differ in all 50 states. We would be forced to vote by moving vans, going to the state that most represents our values.
Maybe you are right. Seems isolationist, but that is how it was laid out. We might have more influence at a local state level anyways.

[RadioGod]

Voter registration drives can get illegals signed up to vote. When you register you check the citizen block and sign at the bottom of the page. Typically, that is the end of the citizen ship inquiry. Unless a state has a voter ID law.

Last time I registered, I had to have my ID, and I took several pieces of official mail with me to boot, including my social. They wanted photocopies of my ID to register me. Maybe it's different here.

[Mini Me]

I think that Rethuglicans really want a one party dictatorship, as their HATRED for Dems is so strong!

Of course this is FASCISM but they don't care!

[RadioGod]

However, your democrats in the house think they should and I find that appalling
They are your democrats too, Common. They represent us all. Supposedly.
If Nancy Pelosi actually thinks non-US citizens should be allowed to vote in a US election, she has truly gone off the deep end. If she don't think that way, but you are accusing her of such, then it is you who have jumped off the ship of reality.
Maybe our career politicians are so used to meddling in the affairs of other nations, they can't understand why other nations wouldn't want to meddle in ours. Maybe Nancy thinks illegals voting in the US is the same as congress voting on who the next president of Iraq or Venezuela is.

[RadioGod]

I think that Rethuglicans really want a one party dictatorship, as their HATRED for Dems is so strong!

Of course this is FASCISM but they don't care!

That seems to be the case, Doc. The parties don't even have very different ideologies any more. Same ideas, same solutions, same corporate-serving backers. 2 different teams competing for the same duffel bags of cash. Modern democrats are like republicans from 3 years ago, and modern republicans are all ultra-right-wing nationalists.

[MisterVeritis]

So it was you who coined the phrase, "Remember the Alamo". I should have suspected:)
Given that I was in my mid-50s during the civil war, and in my early 20s during the war with Mexico, then perhaps what people say about me is true. My mother, the long-time mistress to Davy Crockett, spoke often of my father's fight and death at the Alamo in Bexar County. It was my mother who constantly told me I should grow tall and strong. I should always do the hard right thing rather than bend as others do. I should be brave. I should always remember what happened at the Alamo. "Remember the Alamo", she told me. I never forgot it.

It is possible I mentioned this to the other soldiers gathered under General Scott. Alas, my precise memory fades on this point.

[Just AnotherPerson]

In my opinion, the only way to postpone the civil war is to reinstate the Constitution and follow it. That is not likely to happen.

I can see that, but I see it somewhat differently. I believe that we can end corruption. I believe we can restore our system. I do believe that it is possible. Get corruption out, get money out of politics. This very bill is one of the steps that I believe is a step in that direction. Voting without an ID not so much. But ending corruption heck yeah. But I already know that you see it differently. I being a Marxist kook and all. This Kook is having trouble seeing through the eyes of the leader of the rebellion. But the leader does have some charisma though. :) LoL

[MisterVeritis]

I had amazing success with pvc bows. Not as fast as any modern composite, but they can hit hard. Even made a 90lb bow from 1 1/4 inch schedule 40 pipe. Here, for your birthday...

And a starter video from that channel...


This is what I had in mind:

https://aventuron.com/products/tenpoint-titan-m1?variant=15979292950630&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=google&utm_campaign=Google Shopping&gclid=Cj0KCQiA5Y3kBRDwARIsAEwloL7mOGO-LCB4pZ2msK0rLEWsQM8hD3HO0V5dGPCetAI6Z8YUzWUlMgIaAu J2EALw_wcB

[MisterVeritis]

I can see that, but I see it somewhat differently. I believe that we can end corruption. I believe we can restore our system. I do believe that it is possible. Get corruption out, get money out of politics. This very bill is one of the steps that I believe is a step in that direction. Voting without an ID not so much. But ending corruption heck yeah. But I already know that you see it differently. I being a Marxist kook and all. This Kook is having trouble seeing through the eyes of the leader of the rebellion. But the leader does have some charisma though. :) LoL
The bill does nothing more than make the Democrat party's corruption legal.

[RadioGod]

This is what I had in mind:

https://aventuron.com/products/tenpoint-titan-m1?variant=15979292950630&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=google&utm_campaign=Google Shopping&gclid=Cj0KCQiA5Y3kBRDwARIsAEwloL7mOGO-LCB4pZ2msK0rLEWsQM8hD3HO0V5dGPCetAI6Z8YUzWUlMgIaAu J2EALw_wcB

Oh, that is awesome! You could even use homemade arrows in a pinch. Why put arrows in someone when you can put arrows through someone, and the mob behind them? LOL. That thing looks lethal out to several hundred meters.

[RadioGod]

Given that I was in my mid-50s during the civil war, and in my early 20s during the war with Mexico, then perhaps what people say about me is true. My mother, the long-time mistress to Davy Crockett, spoke often of my father's fight and death at the Alamo in Bexar County. It was my mother who constantly told me I should grow tall and strong. I should always do the hard right thing rather than bend as others do. I should be brave. I should always remember what happened at the Alamo. "Remember the Alamo", she told me. I never forgot it.

It is possible I mentioned this to the other soldiers gathered under General Scott. Alas, my precise memory fades on this point.

And you kilt you a bear, when you was only 3. LOL. You are in top form today, Mr.V.

[Just AnotherPerson]

The bill does nothing more than make the Democrat party's corruption legal.
It is the opposite of that. Getting rid of citizens united is the way to go! Changing the way campaign donations wor…………...um never mind..... I will let you have it. Its your birthday after all. How about this. You are right MRV! Just for today.....

[MisterVeritis]

Oh, that is awesome! You could even use homemade arrows in a pinch. Why put arrows in someone when you can put arrows through someone, and the mob behind them? LOL. That thing looks lethal out to several hundred meters.
It is also very quiet. I would hate to reveal my position.

[MisterVeritis]

And you kilt you a bear, when you was only 3. LOL. You are in top form today, Mr.V.
This is the writing style I use professionally.

[MisterVeritis]

It is the opposite of that. Getting rid of citizens united is the way to go! Changing the way campaign donations wor…………...um never mind..... I will let you have it. Its your birthday after all. How about this. You are right MRV! Just for today.....
Thanks, Don't go easy on me. Ever.

Democrats want to eviscerate the Constitution's protections for speech they do not control.

[RadioGod]

It is also very quiet. I would hate to reveal my position.
You don't seem to have the same issues with your political positions.:) I admit, I want one.

[RadioGod]

This is the writing style I use professionally.
Ah, interwoven historical facts and mistruths? I see:)

[MisterVeritis]

You don't seem to have the same issues with your political positions.:) I admit, I want one.
Here I shoot to wound. :grin:

[MisterVeritis]

Ah, interwoven historical facts and mistruths? I see:)
It is a very good idea for an historical fiction series, actually.

I created a speech note on the idea. I will explore it.

[Peter1469]

I can see that. If we went back to just the Constitution, our society as we know it would crumble. All of our agencies that deal with different things would vanish. There would be no more protections of our individual liberties except through State laws, which would differ in all 50 states. We would be forced to vote by moving vans, going to the state that most represents our values.
Maybe you are right. Seems isolationist, but that is how it was laid out. We might have more influence at a local state level anyways.

A glass half-empty guy I see.

Yes, states are sovereign outside of the enumerated powers of Art. 1, sec. 8, US. Const. Or at least that is what should be.

If you live in NY and are heavily taxed you should be free to move to a better state. What is wrong with that?

[RadioGod]

It is a very good idea for an historical fiction series, actually.
Turn it into a script for a Netflix Original. People don't read anymore. 'Washington's Spies' did pretty well on Netflix.

[Peter1469]

Last time I registered, I had to have my ID, and I took several pieces of official mail with me to boot, including my social. They wanted photocopies of my ID to register me. Maybe it's different here.
Here you fill out a form. Check the boxes. Sign swearing it is true. Done.

[MisterVeritis]

Turn it into a script for a Netflix Original. People don't read anymore. 'Washington's Spies' did pretty well on Netflix.
A Song of Fire and Ice became the Game of Thrones.

[Peter1469]

I think that Rethuglicans really want a one party dictatorship, as their HATRED for Dems is so strong!

Of course this is FASCISM but they don't care!
Some problems with this theory. Fascists are hard left- they desire total government control.

Everything within the State, Nothing against the State, Nothing outside of the State - B. Mussolini. The father of fascism.

The Repubs may spend like drunken dems, but they are hardly fascists.

[Peter1469]

It is the opposite of that. Getting rid of citizens united is the way to go! Changing the way campaign donations wor…………...um never mind..... I will let you have it. Its your birthday after all. How about this. You are right MRV! Just for today.....
Remember to also include Union political contributions with this.

[Cotton1]

Number 2 is a funny one. How can I prove I am not a retard, when the one's judging me probably are? Take this forum for example. There seems to be few members who think critically. And to hear most of the members talk, I would definitely fall into the retard category.
Even if a person cannot read or write, that would not make them dumb. A very hard criteria to impose.

I could volunteer to be the judge of that. :)

[AZ Jim]

NOTICE - @alexa (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=2937) TB'd for trolling and bad faith posting Chicken shit TB.

[Just AnotherPerson]

Thanks, Don't go easy on me. Ever.

Democrats want to eviscerate the Constitution's protections for speech they do not control.
10- 4 :)

[Captdon]

Well you have priors for leaving me rude comments. Could your comment be misconstrued as a rude comment? Sure it can especially when just the other day you told me in another thread straight up that you mock me because you don't agree with me. You constantly do something really rude and when I say something back you accuse me of something. Like after you mocked me, I told you that you were a liar. You got mad at me for saying that but you mocked me first. Your holiness, am I not allowed to talk back to you???

You know darn well what this bill is you read it. Also your comment was meant to be rude. It was a smart remark. How should I reply to it like a kitten?

As for the not wanting American citizens to vote Please tell me where I said that. I mean seriously where did I say you don't want American citizens to be able to vote? Specifically I said, "God forbid the peoples voice actually count for something".

How did I come to that opinion? From our prior conversations, of course. You are pro- Citizens United. You are pro-electoral college. Those are both set in place to steal the voice of the people.

And.... P.S what the heck did you thread ban @alexa (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=2937) for. Alexa didn't even say anything wrong. You seem to be on a power trip again.

You should be tb'd for questioning the mods in the forum. Learn the rules and be thankful for their grace. I would have bounced you out.

[Captdon]

He may be a decent guy and all that, but he hasn't been decent to me. But that don't mean he is not a decent guy just not towards me.

No one is according to you.

[Captdon]

Might I add that the United States is NOT A DEMOCRACY. It wasn't until Progressive Democrat Woodrow Wilson was president that we ever referred to ourselves as a Democracy. The Pledge of Allegiance even states "And to the Republic for which it stands".

Democracy are pure mob rule and we all know mobs are easily led by those in power.

If it were up to me only those who have served in the military would be allowed to vote and I don't care about "what if's or what abouts"

What makes vets so special? What do you have that others don't? I'd say if that was the criteria it should only be vets who were short at; maybe only vets who were wounded. Saying only vets who were killed would be as dumb as your post.

[Common]

Chicken shit TB.

Questioning mod action on the open forum

[Captdon]

I can see that. If we went back to just the Constitution, our society as we know it would crumble. All of our agencies that deal with different things would vanish. There would be no more protections of our individual liberties except through State laws, which would differ in all 50 states. We would be forced to vote by moving vans, going to the state that most represents our values.
Maybe you are right. Seems isolationist, but that is how it was laid out. We might have more influence at a local state level anyways.

If the agencies were needed they would devolve to the states. I still can't figure out what the feds are doing in my local schools. How is that a federal concern? Why would someone on the west coast be involved in what happens after a hurricane on the east coast?

[Cletus]

Or return to our federalist roots. Enforce the enumerated powers. That is all the federal government gets to meddle in. All else devolves to the states.

Huzzah!

[Captdon]

Oh, that is awesome! You could even use homemade arrows in a pinch. Why put arrows in someone when you can put arrows through someone, and the mob behind them? LOL. That thing looks lethal out to several hundred meters.

Not trying to steal Mr v's thunder but the 58 cal minie was better than what we have today. You could kill three guys standing in a line. I admit to some limitations to the muzzle loaders but not to the minie ball.

[Captdon]

It is a very good idea for an historical fiction series, actually.

I created a speech note on the idea. I will explore it.

Careful. The Sacketts has been done.

[MisterVeritis]

Not trying to steal Mr v's thunder but the 58 cal minie was better than what we have today. You could kill three guys standing in a line. I admit to some limitations to the muzzle loaders but not to the minie ball.
Today we consider logistics, training, strength, endurance and finally, lethality.

[Captdon]

I could volunteer to be the judge of that. :)

Who would judge you?

[MisterVeritis]

Careful. The Sacketts has been done.
Do you have a title? I am not familiar with it.

I googled. I have Louis L'Amour's books somewhere.

[Cletus]

I had amazing success with pvc bows. Not as fast as any modern composite, but they can hit hard. Even made a 90lb bow from 1 1/4 inch schedule 40 pipe. Here, for your birthday...
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_U6Yek0YgKHN_A-iTAwZbg

And a starter video from that channel...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VUb0rG2wTM

I have a friend (yes, really) who is a top notch bowyer and knapper. The Discovery Channel has done two specials featuring him and his skills. Somewhere around here, i have a picture of him skinning a buffalo with an obsidian knife he made. Both my wife and I have bows he made. Mine is an English Longbow and hers is a really nice recurve.

[Mister D]

I have a friend (yes, really) who is a top notch bowyer and knapper. The Discovery Channel has done two specials featuring him and his skills. Somewhere around here, i have a picture of him skinning a buffalo with an obsidian knife he made. Both my wife and I have bows he made. Mine is an English Longbow and hers is a really nice recurve.
I've heard that it takes a strong man to use a longbow or at least its Medieval version.

[Cletus]

I've heard that it takes a strong man to use a longbow or at least its Medieval version.
It is a classic longbow. Think Battle of Agincourt. I love it. I am okay with it, not as good as I should be, but not bad.

[MisterVeritis]

It is a classic longbow. Think Battle of Agincourt. I love it. I am okay with it, not as good as I should be, but not bad.
It was an area suppression weapon if I remember correctly.

[Mister D]

It is a classic longbow. Think Battle of Agincourt. I love it. I am okay with it, not as good as I should be, but not bad.
Cool. Is the draw weight high?

I think Mr. V is correct. In battle, you wouldn't have been aiming at an individual target so pinpoint accuracy wouldn't have been an issue.

[Cletus]

Cool. Is the draw weight high?

Just under 80#. It is pretty stout.

The Honey badger's is just about half that. Her recurve is about a 40# pull.

[Mister D]

Just under 80#. It is pretty stout.
Yeah, that sounds rough. That partly explains the persistence of the crossbow despite it's much lower rate of release.

[Cletus]

Lately, Charlie has become fascinated with Turkish and Mongol bows. He has been shooting in mounted competitions, using them on horseback. He has made some really awesome examples... museum quality stuff.

[Mister D]

Those would be what they call a composite bow?

[Cletus]

Those would be what they call a composite bow?

They are. Wood and sinew, I believe.

I can ask him the next time I see him. Whatever they are, I would love to have one. They seem much more practical than mine, although I wouldn't trade mine for one (it has too much personal value for me). I think if I knew I had to depend on a bow for survival, the Turkish bow or Mongol bow would be the way to go.

Now, you guys have got me thinking. I do have a birthday coming up.

[Mister D]

They are. Wood and sinew, I believe.

I can ask him the next time I see him. Whatever they are, I would love to have one. They seem much more practical than mine, although I wouldn't trade mine for one (it has too much personal value for me). I think if I knew I had to depend on a bow for survival, the Turkish bow or Mongol bow would be the way to go.

Now, you guys have got me thinking. I do have a birthday coming up.
lol go for it!

Probably right about the composite bow for survival purposes.

[MisterVeritis]

They are. Wood and sinew, I believe.

I can ask him the next time I see him. Whatever they are, I would love to have one. They seem much more practical than mine, although I wouldn't trade mine for one (it has too much personal value for me). I think if I knew I had to depend on a bow for survival, the Turkish bow or Mongol bow would be the way to go.

Now, you guys have got me thinking. I do have a birthday coming up.
...and horn.

The Mongols carried several bows. They carried at least two for horse. And one for foot. How do I know? I researched for more than a year to write a book about the Mongols.

[Common]

Well you have priors for leaving me rude comments. Could your comment be misconstrued as a rude comment? Sure it can especially when just the other day you told me in another thread straight up that you mock me because you don't agree with me. You constantly do something really rude and when I say something back you accuse me of something. Like after you mocked me, I told you that you were a liar. You got mad at me for saying that but you mocked me first. Your holiness, am I not allowed to talk back to you???

You know darn well what this bill is you read it. Also your comment was meant to be rude. It was a smart remark. How should I reply to it like a kitten?

As for the not wanting American citizens to vote Please tell me where I said that. I mean seriously where did I say you don't want American citizens to be able to vote? Specifically I said, "God forbid the peoples voice actually count for something".

How did I come to that opinion? From our prior conversations, of course. You are pro- Citizens United. You are pro-electoral college. Those are both set in place to steal the voice of the people.

And.... P.S what the heck did you thread ban @alexa (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=2937) for. Alexa didn't even say anything wrong. You seem to be on a power trip again.

You have recieved a 24hr infraction for mentioning mod action on forum

[DGUtley]

I took a look at this. As best I can tell, there were two proposed amendments to the bill that spoke to this issue. One prohibited federal funding for cities that permitted illegals to vote and another reaffirming that only US Citizens should have the right to vote. Both of these were shot down. I believe that this is where the press reports are coming from. It is interesting to note that most of the amendments were passed on voice vote.

There's a lot in this bill, some of which has constitutional problems -- like the corporate disclosure of donations issue. They shot down a "vote at 16" proposal and a reaffirmation that Congress supports free speech. - Google: Republican Amendments HR-1 and there's a few of the Rep's sites that list the amendments and results. I didn't list them here b/c I didn't find one that had them all. I had to go to several of them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFroMQlKiag

[Hoosier8]

Here would be H.R. 1 at work.


https://youtu.be/38HPtrbsi0g

[donttread]

See more at the link https://www.salon.com/2019/03/08/republicans-freak-out-over-hr1-they-dont-want-america-to-have-fair-elections/

Excerpt:


On Friday, the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives passed a hefty, but badly needed, omnibus bill aimed at restoring American democracy after the beating it's taken lately from big money and authoritarian interests. HR1, also called the "For the People Act," has a series of provisions aimed (https://www.salon.com/2019/01/04/house-democrats-unveil-their-first-big-bill-protecting-democracy-in-the-trump-era/) at protecting the right to vote, muting the impact of big money spending on politics and strengthening ethics requirements for political candidates.

This bill's aims are broadly popular with Americans. Its provisions to make voter registration essentially automatic -- you can opt out, but you won't have to opt in -- are supported by 65 percent of Americans (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/15/how-americans-view-some-of-the-voting-policies-approved-at-the-ballot-box/). Provisions to make voting easier enjoy similarly high levels of support. Campaign finance reform is also wildly popular, with healthy majorities supporting it (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/08/most-americans-want-to-limit-campaign-spending-say-big-donors-have-greater-political-influence/). And when it comes to the power of lobbyists, well, they come last in polls where Americans (https://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/lobbyists-ethics-gallup-poll-101187) ranks professions by ethical standards.


But while the public very much likes the provisions in this bill, Republican politicians and conservative activists very much don't. The reason is simple: Conservatives know they're not likely to win a fair fight, and so they want a system that makes it easy for them to cheat.


Beware of Orwellian Double speak named bills they are often exactly the opposite of what they are named. Like the "unpatriot act". Personally I think we need the money out of politics so badly that we need an amendment to do so and to recognize multiple parties, not just two with very limited public election funding.
But IMO, it is NOT too much to ask someone to register to vote, or at least vote often enough to continue that registration. It's not that hard. We want to take the money out of elections, not dumb down the process.

[Captdon]

Do you have a title? I am not familiar with it.

I googled. I have Louis L'Amour's books somewhere.

https://www.google.com/search?q=ther+Sacketts+books&oq=ther+Sacketts+books&aqs=chrome..69i57.6719j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I think this is what you found.I haven't read them myself.

[hanger4]

Beware of Orwellian Double speak named bills they are often exactly the opposite of what they are named. Like the "unpatriot act". Personally I think we need the money out of politics so badly that we need an amendment to do so and to recognize multiple parties, not just two with very limited public election funding.But IMO, it is NOT too much to ask someone to register to vote, or at least vote often enough to continue that registration. It's not that hard. We want to take the money out of elections, not dumb down the process.*Personally I think we need the money out of politics so badly that we need an amendment to do so* ............ How ?? How do you get the money out of politics ??

[donttread]

*Personally I think we need the money out of politics so badly that we need an amendment to do so* ............ How ?? How do you get the money out of politics ??


You ban all contributions and publically fund elections at a very, very, very low level and thereby force voters to do their own research rather than allow the donkephant to shove candidates down their throats and then bulldoze "K" street. I realize it's extreme but right now the process is openly for sale , which is also extreme.

[hanger4]

You ban all contributions and publically fund elections at a very, very, very low level and thereby force voters to do their own research rather than allow the donkephant to shove candidates down their throats and then bulldoze "K" street. I realize it's extreme but right now the process is openly for sale , which is also extreme.Incumbents will love you long time.

[DGUtley]

You ban all contributions and publically fund elections at a very, very, very low level and thereby force voters to do their own research rather than allow the donkephant to shove candidates down their throats and then bulldoze "K" street. I realize it's extreme but right now the process is openly for sale , which is also extreme.

How do you politically ban contributions without changing the constitution?

[MisterVeritis]

https://www.google.com/search?q=ther+Sacketts+books&oq=ther+Sacketts+books&aqs=chrome..69i57.6719j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I think this is what you found.I haven't read them myself.
Yep.

[MisterVeritis]

You ban all contributions and publically fund elections at a very, very, very low level and thereby force voters to do their own research rather than allow the donkephant to shove candidates down their throats and then bulldoze "K" street. I realize it's extreme but right now the process is openly for sale , which is also extreme.
This will have an effect you won't like.

[Chris]

*Personally I think we need the money out of politics so badly that we need an amendment to do so* ............ How ?? How do you get the money out of politics ??


Reduce the power of politicians to the point they won't have anything useful to offer when selling out.

[MisterVeritis]

Reduce the power of politicians to the point they won't have anything useful to offer when selling out.
I have an idea. Let's limit governments with written Constitutions. Of course, the constitutions must have teeth and claws.

[hanger4]

Reduce the power of politicians to the point they won't have anything useful to offer when selling out.Severely reduce their power to tax and you severely reduce what they have to sell.

[RadioGod]

You should be tb'd for questioning the mods in the forum. Learn the rules and be thankful for their grace. I would have bounced you out.

There you go again. It's like you just wait in the wings for the slightest rule violations to appear, then jump out to turn people in. LOL. Maybe you should be "bounced out" for trying to be a mod. Kind of like when a prison guard thinks he is an actual police officer. Maybe I was wrong about you, maybe you are not a crybaby. Maybe you just want to be a mod so bad, it seems that way.

[Captdon]

Today we consider logistics, training, strength, endurance and finally, lethality.

But you were fighting that war. They just killed whoever they found and closed the circle. The minie ball was a bitch.

[Captdon]

Mr V., since you are going digital you could get them at Amazon.

[Captdon]

*Personally I think we need the money out of politics so badly that we need an amendment to do so* ............ How ?? How do you get the money out of politics ??

Who are you to say I can't support my candidate with donations? Why would you want to get the government involved in more of our business.

[donttread]

Incumbents will love you long time.

Why because they do so poorly now? LOL. I don't think there is a more incumbant friendly system than what we have RIGHT NOW!

[MisterVeritis]

Mr V., since you are going digital you could get them at Amazon.
I may already have a few.

:-)

[Tahuyaman]

See more at the link https://www.salon.com/2019/03/08/republicans-freak-out-over-hr1-they-dont-want-america-to-have-fair-elections/

Excerpt:


On Friday, the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives passed a hefty, but badly needed, omnibus bill aimed at restoring American democracy after the beating it's taken lately from big money and authoritarian interests. HR1, also called the "For the People Act," has a series of provisions aimed (https://www.salon.com/2019/01/04/house-democrats-unveil-their-first-big-bill-protecting-democracy-in-the-trump-era/) at protecting the right to vote, muting the impact of big money spending on politics and strengthening ethics requirements for political candidates.

This bill's aims are broadly popular with Americans. Its provisions to make voter registration essentially automatic -- you can opt out, but you won't have to opt in -- are supported by 65 percent of Americans (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/15/how-americans-view-some-of-the-voting-policies-approved-at-the-ballot-box/). Provisions to make voting easier enjoy similarly high levels of support. Campaign finance reform is also wildly popular, with healthy majorities supporting it (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/08/most-americans-want-to-limit-campaign-spending-say-big-donors-have-greater-political-influence/). And when it comes to the power of lobbyists, well, they come last in polls where Americans (https://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/lobbyists-ethics-gallup-poll-101187) ranks professions by ethical standards.


But while the public very much likes the provisions in this bill, Republican politicians and conservative activists very much don't. The reason is simple: Conservatives know they're not likely to win a fair fight, and so they want a system that makes it easy for them to cheat.

Voter suppression in America is a myth. The claim is politically motivated propaganda. Liberals are not trying to persuade people to support their ideas. They are trying to create one party rule. They are trying to eliminate opposition. They don’t want their ideas challenged.

[Captdon]

There you go again. It's like you just wait in the wings for the slightest rule violations to appear, then jump out to turn people in. LOL. Maybe you should be "bounced out" for trying to be a mod. Kind of like when a prison guard thinks he is an actual police officer. Maybe I was wrong about you, maybe you are not a crybaby. Maybe you just want to be a mod so bad, it seems that way.

Who the fuck are you? You're a JAP defender if not more. I think you should be banned too. I am the worst choice for a mod. You'd be banned for sure. I didn't turn anyone in for this. I said it right on the forum. I was smart enough not to attack the mods. Stupid wasn't.

I'm not a crybaby but you are an ass.

[hanger4]

Why because they do so poorly now? LOL. I don't think there is a more incumbant friendly system than what we have RIGHT NOW!Incumbents already have the podium, unknown challengers, without money or media support have little to no opportunity to push their message or agenda.

[Tahuyaman]

Incumbents already have the podium, unknown challengers, without money or media support have little to no opportunity to push their message or agenda.
Then how did we end up with these three newly elected idiots currently destroying the Democratic Party?

[hanger4]

Then how did we end up with these three newly elected idiots currently destroying the Democratic Party?They have money and media support.

[Tahuyaman]

They have money and media support.
They had neither.

[Hoosier8]

See more at the link https://www.salon.com/2019/03/08/republicans-freak-out-over-hr1-they-dont-want-america-to-have-fair-elections/

Excerpt:


On Friday, the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives passed a hefty, but badly needed, omnibus bill aimed at restoring American democracy after the beating it's taken lately from big money and authoritarian interests. HR1, also called the "For the People Act," has a series of provisions aimed (https://www.salon.com/2019/01/04/house-democrats-unveil-their-first-big-bill-protecting-democracy-in-the-trump-era/) at protecting the right to vote, muting the impact of big money spending on politics and strengthening ethics requirements for political candidates.

This bill's aims are broadly popular with Americans. Its provisions to make voter registration essentially automatic -- you can opt out, but you won't have to opt in -- are supported by 65 percent of Americans (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/15/how-americans-view-some-of-the-voting-policies-approved-at-the-ballot-box/). Provisions to make voting easier enjoy similarly high levels of support. Campaign finance reform is also wildly popular, with healthy majorities supporting it (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/05/08/most-americans-want-to-limit-campaign-spending-say-big-donors-have-greater-political-influence/). And when it comes to the power of lobbyists, well, they come last in polls where Americans (https://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/lobbyists-ethics-gallup-poll-101187) ranks professions by ethical standards.


But while the public very much likes the provisions in this bill, Republican politicians and conservative activists very much don't. The reason is simple: Conservatives know they're not likely to win a fair fight, and so they want a system that makes it easy for them to cheat.


Yeah, reach into my pocket for political ads. A non-starter.

[hanger4]

They had neither.AOC had money, her campaign spent over 1.6 million.

[Hoosier8]

AOC had money, her campaign spent over 1.6 million.
Not really her campaign. Her handlers campaign which evidently one of them squirreled away some of the funds

[Tahuyaman]

That’s not a staggering amount of money any longer. Especially for a congressional seat in New York.

[Tahuyaman]

Not really her campaign. Her handlers campaign which evidently one of them squirreled away some of the funds
Slush funds generally come back to bite you in the arse.

[Captdon]

Then how did we end up with these three newly elected idiots currently destroying the Democratic Party?

Idiot voters.

[RadioGod]

Who the $#@! are you? You're a JAP defender if not more. I think you should be banned too. I am the worst choice for a mod. You'd be banned for sure. I didn't turn anyone in for this. I said it right on the forum. I was smart enough not to attack the mods. Stupid wasn't.

I'm not a crybaby but you are an ass.

Thank you. I wish I could say your input was appreciated. Funny how you keep calling me a JAP defender. This from the folks who get into an argument and call in all of their backup when their lies and fake facts come into question.
You have 10 posters of hypocritical ethics and outright liars that back you up constantly. Please do not begrudge JAP 1 defender in the quest for truth and morality.

[RadioGod]

If the agencies were needed they would devolve to the states. I still can't figure out what the feds are doing in my local schools. How is that a federal concern? Why would someone on the west coast be involved in what happens after a hurricane on the east coast?

I would tend to agree with you on this issue, remarkably. But I do see a need for some federal agencies. The EPA, if it were living up to it's principles, would be an example. There are some situations where environmental pollution crosses state lines into another state. Take the big rivers that cross multiple states, like the Snake, Mississippi, and Missouri. If one state dumps in anything it wants, or even dams up a river to prevent water from reaching others, this should be sorted out at the national level.
I think the issues that have arisen are when these agencies usurp the state sovereignty without due cause. Just like the Federal Dept of Education should have no say in local schools, unless they are violating the constitution somehow that all states have agreed on.
When you consider why the government has gotten so big and bloated, and all of these agencies have overstepped their bounds, it is all due to the influence of big business interests, or failed attempts to reign in those business interests. Since that is the root of the true issue that has led us away from the Constitution and State's rights, it should be addressed there.
I do agree with you in part, but the common welfare and interstate activity still can only be addressed with the federal government in certain situations. For these situations, a small federal agency is a good idea. And it must be clear about where lines are drawn as to jurisdiction under the Constitution, and never overstep those lines.

[RadioGod]

I've heard that it takes a strong man to use a longbow or at least its Medieval version.

I'd like to think of myself as an average fat american, and I can hold a 90lb. recurve steady for a good 30 seconds or so to take a shot. It's just a matter of practice.

[Tahuyaman]

Well you have priors for leaving me rude comments. Could your comment be misconstrued as a rude comment? Sure it can especially when just the other day you told me in another thread straight up that you mock me because you don't agree with me. You constantly do something really rude and when I say something back you accuse me of something. Like after you mocked me, I told you that you were a liar. You got mad at me for saying that but you mocked me first. Your holiness, am I not allowed to talk back to you???

You know darn well what this bill is you read it. Also your comment was meant to be rude. It was a smart remark. How should I reply to it like a kitten?

As for the not wanting American citizens to vote Please tell me where I said that. I mean seriously where did I say you don't want American citizens to be able to vote? Specifically I said, "God forbid the peoples voice actually count for something".

How did I come to that opinion? From our prior conversations, of course. You are pro- Citizens United. You are pro-electoral college. Those are both set in place to steal the voice of the people.

And.... P.S what the heck did you thread ban @alexa (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=2937) for. Alexa didn't even say anything wrong. You seem to be on a power trip again.
Oh my. This is just plain odd.

[Mini Me]

If they are, they are too stupid to vote.

In America, we allow stupid people the vote! After all, look at all the millions of trump voters!LOL!

[DGUtley]

In America, we allow stupid people the vote! After all, look at all the millions of trump voters!LOL!

Yes, we overcame the stupid Hillary voters with brilliant strategy -- winning the states we needed to win!! :wink: