tkhayes

http://www.dmv.org/fl-florida/id-cards.php Florida does not - touche.

I never said any such thing. So let's not presuppose that you know anything about me or what I stand for. What I said is that ANY infringement on the right to vote should be shot down. It is a fundamental Constitutional right and the govt should protect it, not infringe upon it. Any restriction on the right to vote is a RESTRICTION on the right to vote and therefore unconstitutional. period that is what I said. Try not to re-ietrpret it into something that it is not. or go ahead, try anyway....go ahead....say that I said something else.....go ahead. I would expect nothing less.

I give up? How are they? If you are going to make a statement that they need ID to cash their SSI checks, then show examples where that is the case. I suspect they have electronic deposit, maybe you have not heard of that before. Maybe their 'son' or 'neighbor' takes the check to the bank for them and maybe it is a small town so of course the bank knows everyone and does not require ID. Maybe they have neighbors to take them on a errand run once in a while. Maybe your argument is bullshit. Just maybe.

I just stated that unemploymewnt is lessening or perhaps you missed that. Gas prices? Since when does the govt control gas prices when the world price of a barrel of oil has absolutely nothing to do with the US govt? The last ridiculously high gas prices we had were in 2007 when Bush was in power. Everyone bitches about gas prices, no one is going to change their vote over it.

Most laws allow time off work to vote, and there is early voting. Do you ever listen to what you are saying?

Maybe you have not heard. 200K jobs added every month for the last 3 months. Interest rates are low. Stock market is up. Ford/GM are selling cars. So perhaps by the time we get to November, Obama might actually be able to say - hey - we actually fixed all your fuck-ups...... Whatever will the right wing do? Continue on a platform that women should not get birth control? I sure hope so......

Not to mention that she will also have to PAY to get that ID, which in itself is likely unconstitutional. If the govt is going to make you get an ID to vore, and that being your absolute right as a citizen, then the govt should make every effort to get you that ID as well. Of course mnealtx will focus on only the one example of the single working mom that I gave to make his entire case instead of the greater constitutional argument against the entire concept of the new restrictions against voting. So much for his constitutional scruples (except for the 2nd amendment of course)

I gave up on the gun debate years ago, you must have missed that. They're not asking for just 'any' ID to vote. They are asking for very specific forms of ID. And that for some people could be difficult to get. Single mom, working two jobs, has to make an appointment to go stand in line at a DMV office perhaps with a half day off to get the 'proper form' of ID to satisfy the law. Undue burden. Unconstitutional and disenfranchises - yes. Greater restrictions passed in Florida for voter registration groups (on both sides) to even help these people with that task, shortened submission times and increased penalties and fines, as well as their own registration requirements just to be allowed to help people register. WTF? I have to register myself as a "voter registration driver" just to help my elderly grandmother get registered to vote? Again, what problem exactly are they hoping to fix? Undefined.....or maybe they just don't want people to vote. Particularly people who might have problems with meeting the requirements to vote.

Or they could try putting up candidates and developing policies/platforms that actually address the reality of the electorate instead of some fucked up fantasy world.

Actually YOU made the statement with no evidence - so LET'S SEE IT. Show me the cases of voter fraud that justify ANY law that restricts voting in ANY way. It's complete bullshit. ANY law that restricts citizens right to vote should be ruled unconstitutional and for that matter, should never be considered at any level, state or federal. Any law that restricts the right to vote MUST by its very existence, have an agenda to do just that, restrict voting. Voting is a fundamental right and should never be impeded. Anyone passing a law that restricts voting has the burden of proof to demonstrate that this law is actually necessary with solid evidence that the 'problems' it is trying to fix actually exist. From Miami Herald: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/11/12/2498170/gops-new-voting-law-in-florida.html There it is....let's see yours.

appreciate the vote of support.... The difference between me and many conservatives is I do not mind paying for some things through taxes. I'm for education, health care, roads, police. I understand that the country actually costs money to run, vs. the Libertarian approach of every man for himself. I do not like paying for wars, useless laws that drive up costs, like putting Walk/Don't Walk lights at intersection where no person has even stepped. Sprinkler systems in buildings that have no walls. Security measures like the TSA, DHS and the Patriot Act. Paying Americans to spy on Americans does not excite me. Government projects should be looking after the basic needs of the people and should be protecting the people. We actually agree on a lt more than most people think.

No I don't. 'taxation' is taxation. Government makes me pay for tags for my car. Government pays for the tags for my car and I pay for it through income taxes. It's the same thing. But it is also a great argument for the case of a single payer Health Care system. hooray for that.

No. What pisses off people like me is that the government is getting involved in procreation wars and stemming it not by providing it themselves but ordering others to pay for it. So women the people don't have the money for birth control wars? Well, then, let's just ensure that everybody pays for it, then. I feel bad for gay men that are now put in a position of paying for birth control wars for others. I don't like paying for sex wars. And I like it even less paying for someone else to have sex fight wars. (Note: where do AIDS activists stand on this issue of unsafe sex wars?)

I built a lot of electronics years ago. My senior year technical project was an early pre-amp i built from scratch for DJ work, with multiple phono, tape, mic and audio inputs and such. Took me a year to design and build, got an 'A' as well. Years later, I built a 400 Watt MOSFET power amp, just one channel first to work out any bugs. Powered it up, and pulled 408W RMS clean before any clipping. One day, I went to fire it up again for some testing and the whole fucking thing went up in smoke. I never did figure out what went wrong and I never did get that fucker working again.

I still have the Technics direct drive turntable hooked up to my Mac for copying my records. Had a Marantz receiver for years, Sansui as well, a few Dula turntables with high-end Shure cartridges, Akai tape decks, and roomie had a B&O system as well which was very cool. I built a lot of speakers myself, probably 7 sets of them over the years,

I did 14 at the 1994 Freefall Convention in one day. The difference was I packed every one myself...

He was a raging RELIGIOUS lunatic, self-proclaimed 'prophet' Not sure why no one believed that, I mean if Jesus Christ himself showed up today, it is doubtful that any one of these religious groups would believe it anyway.... After-all most evangelical Christians in the USA believe that God and America have a special connection, that God intended America to be 'the place' over and above any other 'Christian place' David Koresh was American. Americans like guns. David Koresh liked guns. Americans like religion. David Koresh liked religion. I have no idea why everyone who thinks this way would be held high as a 'messsiah'

what sort of 'experience' does one need when they see videos of helicopter gunships mowing down unarmed civilians and then thinks its OK that someone made that public? And I 'understand' the need for that... But sure I also 'understand' the need for the 'military' or any other organization to NOT want that to be seen, otherwise, OMG, someone might want to end the war or some such crazy idea like that. CRAZY TALK...I know!!

perhaps you could quote where I said that. My comment was regarding the blaming of a stupid gun 'incident' on liberals by the poster when both federal and provincial govt's are actually conservative. try reading it again, instead of misreading it.

depends on you definition of 'center'. and besides - the original poster used the word "liberal", not me. And the parties in both jurisdictions are named "Conservative" in their title..... just sayin', if you are going to call names, at least use the proper name, not some fictional entity you just made up to try and back you your feeble argument.

liberals? Canada has a conservative government. Alberta has an even MORE conservative government. If you are blaming the 'overreaching government' for this, then I guess we know where the blame lies then......

So let me see. he is guilty of treason.... well, actually 'aiding the enemy' is a form of treason... well actually maybe not directly, but 'indirectly'...... Just how far away from 'evidence' are you trying to get? You just verified that his case is based on an opinion. You just made the case for the defense. thanks for that. If that is 'aiding the enemy', then anyone who has ever made a comment or wrote a post or an op-ed piece about the wars, good or bad, is by the same logic, guilty of treason.

Then he is guilty of dereliction of duty, not treason or aiding the enemy. The soldier that murdered 24 civilians just got off with dereliction of duty, no jail time and did not even get a dishonorable discharge.

with these last three responses, I rest my case - well said in fact. publishing the stuff to anyone is not that same as aiding the enemy. GIVING it to the enemy might and only might be aiding the enemy. Nothing that was leaked actually aided anyone - hence the title of the thread. The enemy has NOT be declared, and a large part of the backlash within the USA over these wars was in fact the lack for a formal declaration of any sort of war. So am I splitting hairs?. you fucking bet I am. Are the military splitting hairs trying to prosecute him? You fucking bet they are.

From the UCMJ: He gave no information to the enemy, he gave it to Wikileaks. Wikileaks has not been declared an enemy. For that matter, Afghanistan, the Taliban have not been declared enemies either......given that no formal declaration of war was implemented with either Iraq nor Afghanistan, I expect that the definition of 'enemy' is pretty muddled here. But as usual, the right wing is welcome to take away civil and human rights and avoid the Constitution when it suits them.