Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
The FACTS about the Florida voter purge.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012 3:43 AM
GEEZER
Keep the Shiny side up
Quote:MoveOn says Florida election supervisors refuse to participate in noncitizen voter purge MoveOn.org has been hitting the TV with ads in English and Spanish and emailing supporters to bash the state’s effort to remove noncitizens from the voter rolls. "Republican Governor Rick Scott tried to kick 180,000 people off the voter rolls in his state and is now suing the Department of Justice after they stepped in to stop him," MoveOn wrote in a June 27 email. "Rick Scott's racist voter purge—which directly targets Latino voters—is so egregious that every one of the 67 supervisors of elections in the state—Democrats, Republicans, and independents—has so far refused to carry it out." In this fact-check we will explore whether all Florida supervisors of elections refused to carry out the noncitizen voter purge. In a related fact-check, we’ll look at whether Scott "tried to kick 180,000 people off the voter rolls" and include more background on the history of the purge. The origins of the list Scott’s quest to remove noncitizens from the voter rolls began shortly after the governor took office in 2011. He asked the state’s chief elections official at the time, Kurt Browning, to look into whether noncitizens were illegally voting. Two departments, the Florida Department of State and the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, compiled a list comparing voter registration information with drivers’ license data. It’s possible for a noncitizen to get a drivers’ license, but it’s illegal for a noncitizen to vote. So the agencies looked for noncitizen drivers to see if they had also registered to vote. There’s a catch there, though: The drivers’ license data is not updated when people become citizens, at least not until they need to renew their licenses. The state found 180,000 names that they considered potential noncitizens. But the state government itself does not have the power to remove people from the voting rolls -- that power lies with the local supervisors of elections. It’s important to note here that the state did not send all 180,000 names to the local supervisors. Instead, the state identified a much smaller subset of 2,600 potential noncitizens and sent those names to the local supervisors in April. So Scott was not trying to remove 180,000 names, and we rated that claim False. (Read the full fact-check.) The state gave supervisors a sample letter to send to the registered voters asking for proof of citizenship. If the voters failed to comply, state law indicated they would be removed from the voter rolls within one or two months. The largest contingent came from Miami-Dade County, which has a high foreign-born population. Democrats questioned the motives and timing of a Republican governor months before a presidential election. Republican leaders pointed out that it’s a felony for noncitizens to vote. A Miami Herald analysis determined that there were more Democrats than Republicans on the list and that about 58 percent were Hispanic. Flaws found in the counties It didn’t take long for supervisors to find flaws on the list and air grievances at their statewide annual conference in mid May. "It just doesn't seem to be consistent with the thing we always preach, which is uniformity. I'm feeling really uncomfortable about this," Broward County Elections Supervisor Brenda Snipes told state officials, according to the Palm Beach Post. When the supervisors and journalists started looking into the list, they found some people who were clearly eligible to vote. A few examples: Manoly Castro-Williamson was one of 13 potential noncitizen voters on the list for Pasco County. She was born in Ohio, is a registered Republican and has voted in every election in Florida since 2004. In Broward County, Democrat and Brooklyn-born Bill Internicola (who fought in World War II) was shocked to find himself on the list. The U.S. Department of Justice ordered the state to halt its noncitizen purge on May 31. The next day, the attorney for the statewide supervisors’ association recommended that counties halt the project. Statewide, more than 100 ineligible voters were removed before the purge came to a halt, according to the Secretary of State Ken Detzner. "Initially almost all of us (county election supervisors) started out complying with that request," said Vicki Davis, president of the statewide association of election supervisors and the supervisor in Martin County. But nearly all counties stopped in June amid concerns raised by the DOJ, the association’s own attorney and supervisors’ concerns about flaws in the list. We checked in with several counties to see if they refused to comply with the state’s direction after receiving the list of names in early April. We found that Davis’ summary was accurate: Of the counties we contacted, most sent letters to voters on the list and removed those who confirmed they were not citizens. But most of the counties we contacted didn’t remove the individuals who never replied and halted the process in June amid concerns about the legal fights and accuracy of the list. Here are the specific responses of the counties we contacted. We have included the party affiliation of the supervisors although some are elected to a nonpartisan position. Miami-Dade: Of the 1,637 names, 554 provided proof of citizenship and an additional 30 said they would send that proof as soon as possible. Supervisor Penelope Townsley, who is registered as no-party affiliation, decided on May 31 not to remove any voters other than those 14 who admitted they were ineligible. Townsley told state officials in a letter that the list for Miami-Dade had an error rate between 31 and 33 percent based on their research and "may be potentially higher." Broward: The county received a list of 259 names. Seven responded that they were citizens, and six were removed after reporting that they were not citizens. Supervisor Brenda Snipes, a Democrat, did not remove the remainder who didn’t respond. Snipes halted the purge in early June after the advice from the association attorney. Palm Beach: Palm Beach received 115 names from the state but never sent the voters letters or removed any, because Supervisor Susan Bucher said that the drivers license information was outdated. (Bucher is a Democrat but her position is nonpartisan.) Pinellas: The county received 36 names from the state. It stopped processing the names on June 1 and reactivated 15 who had been canceled from the voter file after not responding. One man was removed from the voter roll because he confirmed he is not a U.S. citizen. Supervisor Deborah Clark, a Republican, announced that she was halting the process June 1 due to concerns about the reliability of the data. Hillsborough: The county received a list of 72 names. Six individuals provided documents verifying their U.S. citizenship. The office contacted one person by telephone who had voted about 42 times, and he said that he was a naturalized citizen. Around May 18, supervisor Earl Lennard, a Republican, decided to stop any action unless his office received reliable information, according to the supervisor’s chief of staff. The county removed one voter who verified that he was not a U.S. citizen. Pasco: Pasco County sent letters to 13 individuals -- two provided birth certificate copies and two asked to be removed. The county didn’t hear from the remainder. The county forwarded one name on the list -- a Canadian who never voted -- to the state attorney for review. The remaining nine were not removed because Supervisor Brian Corley, a Republican, told PolitiFact that he lacked "clear and credible evidence to proceed with removal." However, these voters have been flagged, and if they show up to vote, a member of Pasco’s supervisor of elections management team will speak with the voter and advise them that if they are not citizens, it is a felony to vote. "We complied with the law -- there was not a preponderence of the evidence," Corley told PolitiFact in a telephone interview. "If I could get credible information, I would move forward tomorrow." Collier and Lee: These two Southwest Florida counties accounted for about 1.5 percent of the 2,600-name list, but they are noteworthy because they continued the process of removing names after the DOJ got involved. Both counties had done a separate search for noncitizens, prompted by a TV report earlier in the year that compared voter rolls with prospective jurors excused from jury duty because they were not citizens. Lee removed 11 who didn’t respond. Collier removed seven who indicated in writing or on the phone that they were not citizens, plus two who indicated on their registration application that they were not citizens. Collier also removed nine who signed for their letter and didn’t respond and eight who still didn’t respond after a published notice. One person who provided proof of citizenship remained on the rolls. Lee County Supervisor Sharon Harrington is a Republican, but the position nonpartisan. Collier County Supervisor Jennifer Edwards is a Republican. We contacted MoveOn and told them the results of our investigation. MoveOn spokesman Nick Berning told PolitiFact in an email: "Though election officials may have originally complied with the order, the language in our e-mail was intended to convey to our members the important point that none of the 67 officials are willing to carry out the purge." Our ruling MoveOn.org wrote that "Rick Scott's racist voter purge—which directly targets Latino voters—is so egregious that every one of the 67 supervisors of elections in the state—Democrats, Republicans, and independents—has so far refused to carry it out." Actually, many supervisors began to carry out the state directive to verify the citizenship of some voters, starting in April and continuing for several weeks. We only found one county -- Palm Beach -- that never contacted voters on the list at all. (We contacted about eight counties and the statewide association.) Ultimately, the Justice Department and supervisors themselves raised concerns about the list. It was at this point that many supervisors halted the purge. We also found at least two counties that did, in fact, carry out Scott's plan. So we rate the statement False.
Quote: MoveOn says Gov. Rick Scott “tried to kick 180,000 people off the voter rolls" The liberal group MoveOn.org warned its supporters in a blistering email that Florida Gov. Rick Scott is engaged in voter suppression. The subject line: "Secret GOP plan revealed." "Republican Governor Rick Scott tried to kick 180,000 people off the voter rolls in his state and is now suing the Department of Justice after they stepped in to stop him," the June 27 fundraising email said. "Rick Scott's racist voter purge -- which directly targets Latino voters -- is so egregious that every one of the 67 supervisors of elections in the state -- Democrats, Republicans, and independents -- has so far refused to carry it out." MoveOn also has run TV ads in Florida (watch them here and here) about the state-led effort to remove noncitizens from the voter rolls. Some of the email’s claims struck us as a bit off, so we decided to investigate. Here, we’ll fact-check whether Scott tried to kick 180,000 people off the voter rolls. In a related fact-check, we will explore whether every election supervisor has "refused" to carry out this project. The origins of the list Scott’s quest to remove noncitizens from the voter rolls began shortly after the governor took office in 2011. He asked the state’s chief elections official at the time, Kurt Browning, to look into whether noncitizens were illegally voting. Two departments, the Florida Department of State and the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, compiled a list comparing voter registration information with driver's license data. It’s possible for a noncitizen to get a driver's license, but it’s illegal for a noncitizen to vote. So the agencies looked for noncitizen drivers to see if they had also registered to vote. There’s a catch there, though: The driver's license data is not updated when people become citizens, at least not until they need to renew their licenses. The state found 180,000 names that they considered potential noncitizens. But the state government itself does not have the power to remove people from the voting rolls -- that power lies with the local supervisors of elections. It’s important to note here that the state did not send all 180,000 names to the local supervisors. Instead, the state identified a much smaller subset of potential noncitizens and sent those names to the local supervisors in April. The first batch of about 1,200 names included people who get annual drivers' licenses because they are on work or student visas. Another 1,400 were the first ones that the state verified that names on the driver's license list and the voter registration list matched, said Chris Cate, a spokesman for the Florida Division of Elections. So that came to 2,600 names that the state sent to the local supervisors, not 180,000 names. The state gave supervisors a sample letter to send to the registered voters asking for proof of citizenship. If the voters failed to comply, state law indicated they would be removed from the voter rolls within one or two months. The largest contingent came from Miami-Dade County, which has a high foreign-born population. Democrats questioned the motives and timing of a Republican governor months before a presidential election. Republican leaders pointed out that it’s a felony for noncitizens to vote. A Miami Herald analysis determined that there were more Democrats than Republicans on the list and that about 58 percent were Hispanic. The feds step in And then the dueling lawsuits began. The U.S. Department of Justice sent a letter to the state ordering it to halt its noncitizen purge on May 31. On June 11, the state Division of Elections filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, seeking access to the SAVE database, which contains information on noncitizens. The state had been trying to access that database for about a year. (MoveOn wrote that the state sued DOJ, but the state actually sued DHS.) The next day, June 12, the DOJ filed a lawsuit against Florida. On June 27, a U.S. District Court Judge denied the DOJ’s request for a restraining order. But that wasn’t really a game-changer, because the state hadn’t sent additional names to counties after April. By late June, many counties had either finished or halted the process. (See our related factcheck here.) Before and after the feds got involved, state officials left open the possibility that they might send additional names from the list of 180,000 to the counties. "When we are able to improve the information we have from the driver’s license database by accessing SAVE, we will begin sending additional names to supervisors," Cate told PolitiFact in an email. We asked MoveOn specifically about the 180,000 number being overblown. MoveOn spokesman Nick Berning said that the 180,000 are "at risk" of being thrown off the rolls. "Florida’s State Department of Elections has disclosed that it has a list of 180,000 people that was assembled in connection with the purge, which is why the U.S. Justice Department has written that the purge ‘may ultimately target more than 180,000 voters.’ … To clarify, our intention was to identify for our members the large number of voters that are at risk of being purged off the rolls, and we will endeavor to use language that more accurately explains this as we continue our campaign to protect voters from this discriminatory purge." Our ruling MoveOn.org said, "Republican Governor Rick Scott tried to kick 180,000 people off the voter rolls in his state...." The 180,000 was the state’s starting point for gathering data on potential noncitizens. But the state forwarded less than 2 percent of that list -- about 2,600 -- to the counties for further review. Also, state officials were careful to say that the list was "potential" noncitizens and asked counties to contact those registered voters for proof of citizenship. That means the county officials had the power to decide whether anyone should be kicked off the list. MoveOn wildly exaggerated the number of voters that Scott tried to "kick off" -- it wasn’t close to 180,000. It was 2,600. If the state had forwarded the full list of 180,000 names, or even close to that number, MoveOn would have been on more solid ground. We rate this claim False.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012 4:06 AM
6IXSTRINGJACK
Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: There’s a catch there, though: The drivers’ license data is not updated when people become citizens, at least not until they need to renew their licenses.
Quote:The state found 180,000 names that they considered potential noncitizens. But the state government itself does not have the power to remove people from the voting rolls -- that power lies with the local supervisors of elections.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012 6:14 AM
NIKI2
Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...
Quote:This weekend, Pennsylvania Republican House Leader Mike Turzai (R-PA) finally admitted what so many have speculated: Voter identification efforts are meant to suppress Democratic votes in this year’s election. At the Republican State Committee meeting, Turzai took the stage and let slip the truth about why Republicans are so insistent on voter identification efforts — it will win Romney the election, he said:Quote:... Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”
Quote:... Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”
Quote:The Romney video uses footage from Obama’s trip to New Hampshire in 2008. In the ad, text rolls over the screen reading, “On October 16, 2008, Barack Obama visited New Hampshire. He promised he would fix the economy. He failed.” As video footage shows vacated business and foreclosed homes, Obama can be heard saying, “If we keep talking about the economy, we’re going to lose.” Politifact , which monitors the accuracy of campaign statements, gave Romney’s ad a “Pants on fire” rating.
Quote:Rush Limbaugh: "Obamacare is . . . the largest tax increase in the history of the world." Chain e-mails: "Says "a lip-reading instructor at the River School, a Washington, D.C., school for the deaf" has determined that during 9/11 ceremonies, Michelle Obama said, "All this for a damn flag." Paul Ryan: "President Barack Obama "has doubled the size of government since he took office." Andrew Napolitano: "A bill that could restrict free speech when the president is nearby was signed by President Barack Obama "in secret." NRA: "Says Barack "Obama admits he’s coming for our guns, telling Sarah Brady, ‘We are working on (gun control), but under the radar.’ " Mitch Daniels: ""Nearly half of all persons under 30 did not go to work today." Rick Perry: "The first round of stimulus ... it created zero jobs." Michael Steele: "The Department of Veterans Affairs has "a manual out there telling our veterans stuff like, 'Are you really of value to your community?' You know, encouraging them to commit suicide." House Republican Conference: "The administration raises revenue for nationalized health care through a series of new taxes, including a light switch tax that would cost every American household $3,128 a year." John McCain: "(Bill) Ayers and Obama ran a radical education foundation together."
Quote:Americans for Prosperity: "Says the stimulus bill sent tax credits overseas, such as "$1.2 billion to a solar company that's building a plant in Mexico." Crossroads GPS: "North Dakota's economy is reeling." AmeriPAC: "The Democrats have already voted to ban our conventional light bulbs ... in favor of dangerous fluorescent light bulbs." Liberty Council: "Page 992 of the health care bill will "establish school-based 'health' clinics. Your children will be indoctrinated and your grandchildren may be aborted!" Rick Santorum: "President Barack Obama’s policies have forced "many parts of the country to experience rolling blackouts." Crossroads GPS: "Unions don’t have to comply with Obamacare." Americans for Prosperity: "Says the stimulus bill sent tax credits overseas, such as "$1.2 billion to a solar company that's building a plant in Mexico." NRA: "Says Barack "Obama admits he’s coming for our guns, telling Sarah Brady, ‘We are working on (gun control), but under the radar.’ " Americans for Prosperity: "A government panel that didn't include cancer specialists says women shouldn't receive mammograms until age 50...If government takes over health care, recommendations like these could become the law for all kinds of diseases." NRA: ""Obama's Ten Point Plan to 'Change' the Second Amendment…Ban use of firearms for home defense." Florida Republican Party: "Fidel Castro endorses Obama."
Quote: Romney: "President Barack Obama is "ending Medicare as we know it." Romney: "Says in the 2012 State of the Union address, President Obama "didn't even mention the deficit or debt." Romney: "The U.S. military is at risk of losing its "military superiority" because "our Navy is smaller than it's been since 1917. Our Air Force is smaller and older than any time since 1947." Romney: ""We're only inches away from no longer being a free economy." Romney: "The Massachusetts health care plan "dealt with 8 percent of our population," far less than the "100 percent of American people" affected by President Barack Obama’s health care law."All from http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/rulings/pants-fire/?page=1 just "false", mind you, but "Pants on Fire". There are eleven pages...and I left out the lies from chain e-mails, which are the worst. We could do this all day. The MoveOn stuff is SLANTED and misrepresents the facts, but a) The state DID find 180,000 names that they considered potential noncitizens; b) Scott's people ARE suing the DOJ; c) The voter purge DOES directly target Latino voters, in that Quote:"87% of the people on Florida’s purge list are people of color and more than 50% are Latinos." http://colorlines.com/archives/2012/06/civil_rights_groups_sue_florida_over_voter_purging_lists.html Quote:About 58% of those identified as potential noncitizens are Hispanics, Florida’s largest ethnic immigrant population, the analysis of the list obtained by The Herald shows. Hispanics make up 13 percent of the overall 11.3 million active registered voters. http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/12/2796905/noncitizen-voter-hunt-targets.html#storylink=cpyNot 50% of all Latinos, 50% of REGISTERED VOTERS. d) As to election supervisors "refusing" to comply with the list, "most of the counties we contacted...halted the process in June amid concerns about the legal fights and accuracy of the list". Given they were told to do it, and THEY chose to stop doing it, they weren't given orders to, that is technically "refusing" to do it. So the best you can say about it is that MoveOn MISREPRESENTED the facts, which politicians and political groups do every day, whereas most of those I cited were flat-out LIES. Like I said, we could do this all day, and I think I'd come out ahead, just by quoting PolitiFact. Nobody likes misrepresentations and slanting of the truth (well, I don't anyway), but it's a fact of life in politics, unfortunately. I rate your post "irrelevant" and that any attempt to portray the voter purge as ANYTHING other than an effort to suppress Democratic voters is a flat-out lie, proven by Turzai's own words.
Quote:"87% of the people on Florida’s purge list are people of color and more than 50% are Latinos." http://colorlines.com/archives/2012/06/civil_rights_groups_sue_florida_over_voter_purging_lists.html
Quote:About 58% of those identified as potential noncitizens are Hispanics, Florida’s largest ethnic immigrant population, the analysis of the list obtained by The Herald shows. Hispanics make up 13 percent of the overall 11.3 million active registered voters. http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/12/2796905/noncitizen-voter-hunt-targets.html#storylink=cpy
Wednesday, July 11, 2012 6:27 AM
Wednesday, July 11, 2012 7:44 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: So the best you can say about it is that MoveOn MISREPRESENTED the facts...
Wednesday, July 11, 2012 7:46 AM
ANTHONYT
Freedom is Important because People are Important
Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: So the best you can say about it is that MoveOn MISREPRESENTED the facts... No. I can say that PolitiFact rated their statements as FALSE, which means they LIED. That's all I'm saying.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012 8:27 AM
Wednesday, July 11, 2012 12:50 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: As such, MoveOn's claims were false; the others were Pants On Fire because they were total, unequivocal lies with no basis in fact whatsoever.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012 3:44 PM
KWICKO
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)
Wednesday, July 11, 2012 3:45 PM
Thursday, July 12, 2012 3:07 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Kwicko: And the fact that you do it as well seems to escape you, Geezer. You're no less partisan about it than anyone else.
Thursday, July 12, 2012 4:15 AM
Quote: Mike, I'm probably less partisan than anyone else here.
Thursday, July 12, 2012 6:11 AM
Quote: I'm probably less partisan than anyone else here.
Thursday, July 12, 2012 7:03 AM
CAVETROLL
Quote: Earlier today, Attorney General Eric Holder addressed the NAACP Nation Convention at the George R. Brown Convention Center in Houston, Texas. What did media need in order to attend? That's right, government issued photo identification (and a second form of identification too!), something both Holder and the NAACP stand firmly against when it comes to voting. Holder's DOJ is currently suing Texas for "discriminatory" voter ID laws. From the press release: All media must present government-issued photo I.D. (such as a driver’s license) as well as valid media credentials. Members of the media must RSVP to receive press credentials at http://action.naacp.org/page/s/registration. For security purposes, media check-in and equipment set up must be completed by 7:45 a.m. CDT for an 8:00 a.m. CDT security sweep. Once the security sweep is completed, additional media equipment will NOT be permitted to enter and swept equipment will NOT be permitted to exit.
Thursday, July 12, 2012 7:25 AM
Thursday, July 12, 2012 10:33 AM
HERO
Quote:Originally posted by ANTHONYT: From the information provided, it appears that the NAACP is requiring press registration at their gathering, including the presentation of identification.
Thursday, July 12, 2012 10:44 AM
Friday, July 13, 2012 2:36 AM
Quote:Originally posted by ANTHONYT: Quote: Mike, I'm probably less partisan than anyone else here. Hello, That's a bold statement, Geezer. --Anthony
Friday, July 13, 2012 2:53 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Quote: I'm probably less partisan than anyone else here.You have GOT to be kidding me! Just reading through your posts, and how you inevitably post things anti-liberal, attack most anything liberals here say, and so forth shows that to be untrue.
Quote:ETA: There's also the fact that you rarely offer ANYTHING as a topic here...
Friday, July 13, 2012 3:26 AM
Quote:Nearly one in five citizens over 65 — about 8 million — lacks a current, government-issued photo ID, a 2006 Brennan Center study found. Most people prove their eligibility to vote with a driver's license, but people over 65 often give up their license and don't replace it with the state-issued ID that some states offer non-driving residents. People over 65 also are more likely to lack birth certificates because they were born before recording births was standard procedure. The midwife at the 1949 home birth in rural South Carolina delivered a healthy baby girl but didn't file a birth certificate. Donna Jean Suggs grew up, got a Social Security card and found work as a home health aide. Try as she might, though, she couldn't get a birth certificate. That meant she couldn't get a driver's license or register to vote. "I fought with them and fought with them," she said of the local and state officials. "I prayed and prayed." In time, said Suggs, 62, who lives in Sumter, S.C., "I gave up on things" — like voting. Having a driver's license or photo identification card is commonplace for most Americans, but about 11 percent of adult citizens — more than 21 million people — lack a valid, government-issued photo ID.More at http://www.aarp.org/politics-society/government-elections/info-01-2012/voter-id-laws-impact-older-americans.html
Quote:(The Law) posed an especially big problem for the elderly: A unique Tennessee law allows residents over 60 to get driver's licenses without a picture. According to state records, more than 230,000 Tennessee seniors have such licenses -- 126,000 of whom are registered to vote -- meaning they wouldn't be able to vote with those IDs. The total number of eligible Tennesse citizens without photo IDs is likely much higher. Voting rights groups like the Brennan Center estimate that up to 10 percent of eligible voters nationally lack photo ID cards. With nearly 3.9 million registered voters, that would translate to more than 380,000 citizens without the needed photo ID in Tennessee. In an email to Facing South, Jennifer Donnals of the department stated, "As of Monday, July 9 our department had issued 20,923 state IDs for voting purposes to citizens in Tennessee." That figure would only cover 17 percent of Tennessee seniors who are registered to vote but who, according to state records, lack photos on their driver's licenses, potentially leaving as many as 100,000 citizens aged 60 and up without the needed identification to vote. Using the estimate of 10 percent of state voters without photo ID -- both seniors and non-elderly citizens -- the number of Tennesseans lacking the required ID could reach up to more than 300,000.
Friday, July 13, 2012 3:40 AM
Sunday, July 15, 2012 5:33 AM
Quote:Florida election officials will have access to a federal law enforcement database to challenge the eligibility of a person to vote as part of its effort to purge non-citizens from its voting rolls, state officials said. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security will allow state officials access to the SAVE -- Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements -- database in an agreement that was announced Saturday by Florida Secretary of State Ken Detzner and the Florida Department of State. The announcement follows weeks of legal wrangling between the federal and state officials, a fight being closely watched in Colorado, Nevada, Michigan and North Carolina -- states that could ultimately swing November's presidential election -- where officials are advocating for similar access. "Florida voters are counting on their state and federal governments to cooperate in a way that ensures elections are fair, beginning with ensuring the voter rolls are current and accurate," Detzner said in a statement. "Now, we have a commitment to cooperate from DHS and we look forward to a partnership that improves our election process." Details of the agreement were not immediately available, and it was not clear when Florida would begin checking its voter rolls against the database, which lists those who are legally in the United States on either visas or "green cards" but not eligible to vote. The Department of Homeland Security did not respond late Saturday to a CNN request for comment. The SAVE database, which contains alien registration numbers, is a web-based service that was created to help "federal, state and local benefit-issuing agencies, institutions, and licensing bureaus determine the immigration status of benefit applicants so only those entitled to benefits receive them," according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Florida officials sued last month to gain access to the database after an effort this year to purge the state voting rolls -- using driver licenses and birth dates -- went awry because of faulty state records. A Florida Department of State spokesman, Chris Cate, told CNN in June that the state identified roughly 100 people who are not citizens but registered to vote. CNN found, though, that some of the names on the potential purge list were, in fact, legitimate voters -- newly minted Americans recently granted citizenship. DHS and Florida struck a deal over the database just weeks after a federal judge rejected a U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit aimed at preventing Florida from moving forward with a voter registration purge. Proponents of the plan say purging the rolls protects the integrity of the voting process, while critics say it targets the poor and minority voters who may be disenfranchised by the process. The poor, voting and civil rights groups say, can not afford to pay for documentation that may be required, while minorities would likely be among the groups whose voter registration records are examined. A number of states are moving to institute and tighten voter identification laws, and many are finding themselves in direct conflict with the federal government. A key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965 grants the federal government open-ended oversight of states and localities -- many in the South -- with a history of voter discrimination. Any changes in voting laws and procedures in those pre-determined areas must be "pre-cleared" by Washington. Today, 32 states have in place varying degrees of voter identification laws, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Some of the states with the most stringent requirements are also regions that have seen large increases in their minority population. Florida has the nation's third largest Hispanic population, behind Texas and California. http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/15/us/florida-citizenship-database/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Monday, July 16, 2012 4:37 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Update: So DHS finally gave them access to SAVE. At least that's better than the DMV information...we'll have to see where it goes from here.
Monday, July 16, 2012 6:03 AM
Monday, July 16, 2012 6:37 AM
1KIKI
Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.
Monday, July 16, 2012 7:23 AM
Quote: Well, you disparage Cuba's socialism.
Monday, July 16, 2012 7:29 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: Okay.... I'll try this again without any swearing that will be ignored. If you do ignore this, you're ignoring the truth. 1) There are computer databases on EVERY single person who should be legitimately in the system today. 2) Even though I'm over 30, I can't drive a car, buy smokes, buy booze, or go into many drinking establishments. Sometimes, even having a legal state ID is not enough for the latter 3 in some places. 3) I cannot pay taxes, and therefore all of my income is illegal, if I don't have a SS#. I ask again, why should I not be required to show a legitimate photo ID when I go to the voting booth, when I can't buy a pack of smokes without one?
Monday, July 16, 2012 7:34 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: "And on another note, I'm still waiting for you to cite my "anti-liberal" positions." Well, you disparage Cuba's socialism. Are for the president and AGs office being investigated over Fast and Furious - no related reason given, apparently 'just because'. Support the validity of Biden speaking to an 'empty room' and the probative value of the photo used in the right-wing-nut world. Think that readers need to keep crediting anti-global warming screeds with validity, no reason, just because. Find the fact that Romney at least made conflicting statements and possibly illegal ones over his role at Bain - many of them on official documents - to be a 'circle jerk' equivalent to birthters (who apparently don't recognize official and legal documents when they see them). Criticize the feds for not making SAVE available FASTER - and fail to criticize Florida for going forward with such half-assed data in the first place. And those are just recent threads where you ooze snake oil then bail when challenged with facts. Did you ever get back to me over the 'empty room' claim? Did you ever get back to Mal4 over your Romney-Bain claims? AND despite a record of always criticizing the left and never criticizing the right (BTW which I have taken the trouble to save so you can't go back and do that thing you ahem 'never' do, and post-edit) claim to be unbiased. Which is really really funny. But really, enough about you. There are far more interesting things to discuss than yet another troll from Rappyland, who ALSO has to snark in order to get a response. SignyM: I swear, if we really knew what was being decided about us in our absence, and how hosed the government is prepared to let us be, we would string them up.
Monday, July 16, 2012 7:53 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: Niki.... please..... If the voter fraud you speak of were prevalant today, there's ZERO reason why it couldn't have been done 100 years before there were computers if there is no ID check. I don't want my freaking ID scanned into a database. Let it be known that I'M 1000% AGAINST THAT STEP!!!!! That's not at all what I'm talking about here at all. If that were the case, they might as well know every single politician I vote from Alderman to President then (although if I were a Facebooker, they probably would know those answers after the fact anyhow)..... Why can't somebody just look at a photo ID and let me through and nod in approval? Hell... I was even turned down by one beer vendor at a concert because he said I looked too young even though he physically SAW my picture ID!!!!!! It doesn't have to be a drivers license if you don't drive. A state ID, a passport... whatever... Otherwise, I can just sign in as anybody in their absence and vote for them. How can you even argue around that, no matter what the opposite end of the two sided blade is?
Monday, July 16, 2012 1:13 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: "And on another note, I'm still waiting for you to cite my "anti-liberal" positions." Well, you disparage Cuba's socialism.
Quote:Are for the president and AGs office being investigated over Fast and Furious - no related reason given, apparently 'just because'.
Quote:Support the validity of Biden speaking to an 'empty room' and the probative value of the photo used in the right-wing-nut world.
Quote:Think that readers need to keep crediting anti-global warming screeds with validity, no reason, just because.
Quote:Find the fact that Romney at least made conflicting statements and possibly illegal ones over his role at Bain - many of them on official documents - to be a 'circle jerk' equivalent to birthters (who apparently don't recognize official and legal documents when they see them).
Quote:Criticize the feds for not making SAVE available FASTER - and fail to criticize Florida for going forward with such half-assed data in the first place.
Quote:Did you ever get back to me over the 'empty room' claim?
Quote:Did you ever get back to Mal4 over your Romney-Bain claims?
Quote:(BTW which I have taken the trouble to save so you can't go back and do that thing you ahem 'never' do, and post-edit).
Monday, July 16, 2012 3:33 PM
Quote:One thing Attorney General Eric Holder and Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill leading the Fast and Furious investigation agree upon: The 2009-2010 operation by Phoenix-based agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives used ill-advised tactics in efforts to stem the tide of U.S.-purchased weapons destined for ultra-violent Mexican drug cartels. As is the case with so many Washington firestorms dating back to Watergate, the focus has shifted from the original misdeed to the alleged cover-up –“what did (insert name of public official) know and when did he know it,’’ to paraphrase former Sen. Howard Baker’s famous 1970s-vintage Watergate paradigm. How much of Fast & Furious is politics? How much is substance? After initially denying that gun-walking — tracking cartel-linked gun purchases instead of interdicting them — took place, Holder decried the tactic and ordered that it not be used again. But although “there’s a `there’ there,’’ as one Justice official put it to congressional investigators, Republicans and their gun-rights allies have used Fast and Furious to bash Holder, President Obama and ATF, a long-time target. Democratic lawmakers in turn have taken aim at the GOP probe, accusing Republicans of ginning up a controversy to fight changes in gun laws that they say would thwart cartels’ easy access to military-type semi-automatic weaponry. {buncha questions and answers here which I'm leaving out; only posting the relevant material to make my point} What did Attorney General Eric Holder know and when did he know it? Holder has said that he became aware of gun-walking allegations in Fast and Furious early in 2011 after it was discussed in news accounts. In February 2011, he ordered the Justice Department Inspector General to investigate. Holder has stuck to that formulation and it now appears unlikely anything will emerge to show the attorney general had earlier knowledge of the tactics, much less authorized them.Late last month, Issa acknowledged in congressional testimony that he harbors no “strong suspicion’’ that Holder knew of or authorized gun-walking.
Quote:The Romney campaign cited our work in a recent ad to accuse President Obama of running a “dishonest campaign.” The term “dishonest” is theirs, not ours, however. And we make no judgments about the personal character of either candidate, or their campaigns. And we’ll just note for the record that FactCheck.org has also found numerous instances in which Romney has also strayed from the facts in accusations against Obama. He also claimed that he created 100,000 jobs at Bain Capital — a claim we found lacked support because it took credit for jobs added by companies long after Romney had left the Bain. http://factcheck.org/2012/07/romneys-bain-years-new-evidence-same-conclusion/
Quote:Sloppy Journalism Take this story on the Pacquiao-Bradley fight in the June 10 Washington post. I looked it up for last week's column to verify the weight class and sanctioning boxing organization. I was pretty sure it was welterweight, but I didn't know which belt was on the line (WBC, WBA, IBF, other?). The article didn't mention the weight class (the photo caption did, I noticed later). It didn't mention the belt. Of the 4 w's establishing basic facts - who, what, where, and when - the "what" was missing. ..... But the most ridiculous item I saw last week was, "Casey Anthony Is Reading 'Hunger Games,' Book About Killing Children." What's next? "O.J. Simpson Cuts Steak With Knife, Same Kind of Weapon That Murdered Ex-Wife." ..... A century ago, journalism was considered a lunch-bucket job. Literacy was all that was required.... Now, I wonder if you can even get your foot in the door at a major media outlet without an M.A. in Journalism. Are we better off for it? http://www.partialobserver.com/article.cfm?id=3765&RSS=1
Quote: As you read his defense of The Washington Post, the wisdom of having impartial third-party observers becomes luminously clear. The reason no one should be a judge in his own case, the reason why judges often recuse themselves if they have a vested interest in a case and most obviously the reason why referees and umpires don't work for any one team, is to avoid what would clearly appear to be a tainted verdict, judgment or call. Imagine how convenient it would be if all the referees in the Redskins games worked for the team. The best that The Post is able to conclude is that somehow The Post's reporting, and even editorials, lack passion. The real question is not do they jump up and down with passion. It is do they report articles and write editorials with objectivity? Perhaps the question can be asked in another way. Is The Washington Post objective? Is there a lack of rigorous professionalism at The Post? Do we find some sloppy journalism at The Post? ..... If the paper is truly professional and actually objective, why has it not corrected this misinformation? More recently, The Washington Post jumped into the Georgetown University/Secretary Sebelius issue with an astonishingly incorrect editorial claiming to be based on facts that don't exist. Why no clarification or correction if the paper is so rigorously objective with no taint of bias? http://www.cathstan.org/main.asp?SectionID=2&SubSectionID=19&ArticleID=5163
Quote: Sloppy journalism leaves political mess behind ..... In another example, the Ombudsman of the Washington Post described how readers complained about a report that Al Qaeda received a deadly nerve gas from Iraq. Readers had complained that this report was based on too little actual factual information and so should not have been published until there was more intelligence to confirm the information. Recognizing the problem with such misleading and inaccurate journalistic practices, media professionals and academic researchers like W. Lance Bennett of the University of Washington have proposed the need for the US media to employ more responsible practices in its reporting. http://opinion.globaltimes.cn/foreign-view/2011-04/619212.html
Quote: The Post's editorial positions on foreign policy and economic issues have seen a definitively conservative bent: it steadfastly supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq, warmed to President George W. Bush's proposal to partially privatize Social Security, opposed a deadline for U.S. withdrawal from the Iraq War, and advocated free trade agreements, including CAFTA. In "Buying the War" on PBS, Bill Moyers noted 27 editorials supporting George W. Bush's ambitions to invade Iraq. National security correspondent Walter Pincus reported that he had been ordered to cease his reports that were critical of Republican administrations.[37] In 1992, the PBS investigative news program Frontline suggested that The Post had moved to the right in response to its smaller, more conservative rival The Washington Times, which is owned by News World Communications, an international media conglomerate owned by the Unification Church which also owns newspapers in South Korea, Japan, and South America. The program quoted Paul Weyrich, one of the founders of the conservative activist organization the Moral Majority, as saying "The Washington Post became very arrogant and they just decided that they would determine what was news and what wasn't news and they wouldn't cover a lot of things that went on. And The Washington Times has forced The Post to cover a lot of things that they wouldn't cover if the Times wasn't in existence."[38] In 2008, Thomas F. Roeser of the Chicago Daily Observer also mentioned competition from the Washington Times as a factor moving The Post to the right.[39] In 2009, Parry criticized The Post for its allegedly unfair reporting on liberal politicians, including Vice President Al Gore and President Barack Obama.[ Responding to criticism of the newspaper's coverage during the run-up to the 2008 presidential election, The Washington Post ombudsman Deborah Howell wrote: "The opinion pages have strong conservative voices; the editorial board includes centrists and conservatives." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Post
Monday, July 16, 2012 3:39 PM
Quote:What were ATF agents thinking when they allowed guns to “walk’’ to Mexico? As cartel middlemen ramped up gun purchases in border states over the past decade, ATF got dinged by Justice Department overseers for focusing on small-potato straw purchasers. Instead of seeking wrist-slap jail time for these cartel-linked surrogates, officials said ATF should join forces with DEA and FBI agents in Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force cases that take down entire trafficking gangs, top to bottom, with significant prison sentences for all convicted. Fast and Furious had its roots in tips from Phoenix-area gun dealers about a suspicious ring of 15 or so purchasers. ATF supervisors were excited by the prospect of linking weapons bought in U.S. gun stores to Mexican drug kingpins. But agents feared they were enabling mayhem in Mexico, and possibly putting the lives of U.S. law enforcement personnel at risk. Didn’t “gun-walking’’ tactic start under President George W. Bush? Yes, the same Phoenix-based ATF career supervisors had overseen three gun-walking cases in the Bush era. One of them involved a promise by Mexican officials to help intercept the guns once they got into Mexico, an offer that never materialized. Another, designated Wide Receiver, was a carbon copy of Fast and Furious only it involved far fewer weapons and started in gun stores in Tucson. The U.S. attorney’s office in Arizona declined to prosecute Wide Receiver for fear it might reveal gun-walking. Who authorized Fast & Furious? This may be hard to pin down since the investigation that developed into Fast and Furious was ongoing when Obama Justice Department officials ramped up focus on gun trafficking to Mexico. Although gun-walking tactics in Fast and Furious were detailed in wiretap affidavits in 2010 that had to be cleared by the Justice Department in Washington, the official who reviewed them _ Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jason Weinstein _ said he looked only at the summary memos and not the affidavits themselves that spelled out the gun-walking. Why did Holder and the Justice Department at first deny gun-walking and then, nine months later, admit it? On Feb. 4, 2011, the Justice Department responded to Grassley’s inquiry about alleged use of gun-walking in Fast and Furious by denying that ATF agents had used such tactics. “ATF makes every effort to interdict weapons that have been purchased illegally,’’ said the letter, signed by Ronald Weich, then assistant attorney general for legislative affairs. For Grassley and the other Republicans, the letter came to crystallize what they saw as a pattern of deceit on Fast and Furious _ the classic Washington conundrum of compounding original errors by trying to cover them up. Among the contributors to the Feb. 4 letter was Weinstein, who has acknowledged that he knew gun-walking had been used in Wide Receiver. Weinstein told congressional investigators that he and others had relied on assurances from the ATF and the U.S. attorney’s office in Phoenix that guns had not been walked _ assurances that proved inaccurate. Breuer was in Mexico in February 2011 when he received a draft of the Feb. 4 letter. He forwarded the letter to his private email account but claimed not to have read it. It took the Justice Department until December 2011 to acknowledge the February letter was inaccurate. In the battle with Republicans over documents, the White House has claimed executive privilege on everything written after Feb. 4. They argue privilege traditionally extends to administration internal policy deliberations. Grassley, Issa and the other Republicans counter that documents generated after Feb. 4 likely go to the heart of the Fast and Furious investigation _ what did individual Justice officials know and when did they know it. Has gun walking been used in other cases? Is it routine? Much like counterparts in the Drug Enforcement Administration, ATF agents routinely engage in “controlled delivery.’’ This tactic, a distant relation of gun-walking, involves arresting small players in trafficking organizations and persuading them to work undercover against kingpins in exchange for favorable treatment by prosecutors. Current and former ATF and DEA agents say the idea of letting low-level criminals continue transporting guns or drugs is a valuable way to identify higher ups. ATF uses it against trafficking rings that ferry weapons from states with easy-purchase gun laws such as Virginia, North Carolina, or Nevada and Arizona to states with strict gun laws such as New York and California. But controlled delivery is distinct from gun-walking in that agents are supposed to bust kingpins after low-level transporters are “flipped’’ and delivers the goods. ATF agents are at something of a disadvantage because unlike drugs, guns are a legal commodity. Since there is no firearms trafficking statute, ATF agents must be able to prove a straw purchaser knowingly bought a gun for someone else. Middlemen are prosecuted for dealing firearms without a license. Neither crime entails significant jail time, and Congress has shown little appetite for stiffening penalties. The only known ATF gun-walking cases are Fast and Furious and the three cases from the Bush era. ATF regulations from 1989 permit agents to avoid “immediate intervention’’ when they encounter illegal firearms transactions “in order to further an investigation and allow for identification of additional co-conspirators.’’ An ATF briefing paper from January 2010 cited this regulation in justifying the tactics used in Fast and Furious. What happens now that the House has held Holder in contempt? It’s in a holding pattern for now. Holder’s No.2, Deputy Attorney General James Cole, has said prosecutors will not present the House contempt citation to a grand jury. When the Republican-dominated House approved a contempt resolution last month, it also approved a second resolution directing the House general counsel to file suit in federal court in Washington to enforce the subpoena. That hasn’t happened yet, so stay tuned.Same
Monday, July 16, 2012 4:02 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: So has every American president, Democrat or Republican, since the Cuban revolution. Interesting to know that John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were all anti-liberal.
Quote:I'm for the AG's office being investigated, because they allowed what pretty much everyone agrees was a stupid plan to go forward, then tried to cover it up. Sort'a like Watergate or Iran-Contra.
Quote:You really are stupid, aren't you. I never mentioned a "empty room", saying only that the crowds in two pictures appeared to be the same to me. If there were crowds in both pictures, how could there be an empty room? Apparently you're off in fantasyland again.
Quote:Sorry if I want people to look at both sides of an issue and make up their own minds, rather than just accept what you're pushing blindly.
Quote:Yep. Me and CNN and FactCheck.com and the Washington Post. Just a pack of rabid conservatives. You ARE part of the circle-jerk. Taking stuff out of context, ignoring reasonably un-biased national sources with the resources to do in-depth research much more detailed than you could even imagine.
Quote:Considering that Florida went with less than good data only because the Feds refused to provide it, hardly seems their fault.
Quote:Why? When he goes off into conspiracy-land and accuses the Washington Post of sloppy or conservative-biased coverage, there's not much point. Besides, you and he and Mike were having too much fun jacking each other off.
Quote:I hear Costco has tin-foil on sale. Make yourself a new hat.
Monday, July 16, 2012 4:10 PM
Monday, July 16, 2012 4:15 PM
MAL4PREZ
Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: Quote:Find the fact that Romney at least made conflicting statements and possibly illegal ones over his role at Bain - many of them on official documents - to be a 'circle jerk' equivalent to birthters (who apparently don't recognize official and legal documents when they see them). Yep. Me and CNN and FactCheck.com and the Washington Post. Just a pack of rabid conservatives. You ARE part of the circle-jerk. Taking stuff out of context, ignoring reasonably un-biased national sources with the resources to do in-depth research much more detailed than you could even imagine.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012 1:40 AM
Quote:Originally posted by mal4prez: Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: Quote:Find the fact that Romney at least made conflicting statements and possibly illegal ones over his role at Bain - many of them on official documents - to be a 'circle jerk' equivalent to birthters (who apparently don't recognize official and legal documents when they see them). Yep. Me and CNN and FactCheck.com and the Washington Post. Just a pack of rabid conservatives. You ARE part of the circle-jerk. Taking stuff out of context, ignoring reasonably un-biased national sources with the resources to do in-depth research much more detailed than you could even imagine.
Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: Quote:Find the fact that Romney at least made conflicting statements and possibly illegal ones over his role at Bain - many of them on official documents - to be a 'circle jerk' equivalent to birthters (who apparently don't recognize official and legal documents when they see them).
Tuesday, July 17, 2012 1:51 AM
Tuesday, July 17, 2012 2:39 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: True. We have never had a liberal president. At best they were middle of the road, and definitely anti-liberal with things like Cuba, the cold war and Vietnam, regulation and NAFTA. F&F was not a gun-walking operation. Hence, no cover-up. No, you just refuse to admit that there indeed are photos that show far more people than the original photo you endorse. etc. etc. etc.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012 7:13 AM
Quote:We have never had a liberal president. At best they were middle of the road
Quote: I want you to imagine a twelve-inch ruler, like the ones those of us of a certain age used to pack in our schoolbags. On the far left, just above the “1,” picture Trotsky and his band of crazies; on the far right, at “12,” Hitler and Genghis Khan. Barack Obama, like my father’s hat size, is seven and an eighth, just to the right of Cameron. Mitt Romney, the Republican most likely to face Obama in November’s presidential race, is a solid eight; Newt Gingrich, the acerbic former House Speaker, now in ill-tempered retreat, is a nine; but Rick Santorum, the arch-Catholic candidate from Pennsylvania, is not only, like Bo Derek, a Perfect Ten, he is a Ten who “throws up” at the mere mention of the separation of Church and State. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/walterellis/100142115/there-is-no-proper-left-in-american-politics-even-obama-is-more-right-wing-than-cameron/
Quote: An interesting new study from political scientists Keith Poole and Christopher Hare at the University of Georgia finds that Barack Obama is the most conservative Democratic President of the modern era. Using a modified version of DW-NOMINATE scores, the duo find that Democratic Presidents have gotten more conservative over the past several decades, while Republican Presidents have gotten radically more conservative. As a result, the ideology of the nation’s Presidents has inexorably moved to the right.Quote:Our findings here echo those discussed in a prior post that Republicans have moved further to the right than Democrats to the left in the contemporary period. Indeed, as seen below, President Obama is the most moderate Democratic president since the end of World War II, while President George W. Bush was the most conservative president in the post-war era.On a number of issues, Mitt Romney’s public positions taken in the campaign are actually far more conservative than Bush – in particular immigration and federal spending – so if Romney were to win in November, it’s possible that this trend will continue. A cynic would argue that the country has gotten more conservative, and that Presidents are just moving with the country, by way of trying to get ahead of the parade. I’m not sure I believe that, given the progressive bent of the country on an individual issue-by-issue basis. The country supports increased financial regulation, progressive taxation, a public option for health care, and a host of other more liberal issues. I think this can be reconciled by looking at the nature of US Presidential elections. A candidate must appeal to a narrow, wealthy fundraising base with a particular set of interests, that necessarily move them in a more conservative direction. Maybe that’s not the only reason, but I don’t think it’s an accident that the conservative outcomes from this drift of conservatism line up with corporate America and the extremely wealthy. http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/02/06/new-study-presidents-getting-more-and-more-conservative/
Quote:Our findings here echo those discussed in a prior post that Republicans have moved further to the right than Democrats to the left in the contemporary period. Indeed, as seen below, President Obama is the most moderate Democratic president since the end of World War II, while President George W. Bush was the most conservative president in the post-war era.
Quote: He is very moderate, even conservative on some issues. The GOP has just moved farther to the right.....so, anything to the left of them is considered socialism, communism, Marxism, et al. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20120225181906AADBPNj
Tuesday, July 17, 2012 7:59 AM
Tuesday, July 17, 2012 4:29 PM
Tuesday, July 17, 2012 4:52 PM
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 5:35 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Kwicko: Reagan couldn't get elected today because the truth of it is that he was a tax & spend liberal who tripled the debt, blew up the deficits, and raised taxes time after time after time.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 5:52 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: I see you've failed to support ANY of the points you brought up all on your very own.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 11:55 AM
Quote:So the 180,000 figure was bogus, the claim that all the supervisors were against the review were bogus, and at least 32 people who were on the voting rolls were removed because they themselves stated they were not eligible. Hmm.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 12:10 PM
STORYMARK
Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: If you can't find facts to prove what you think, you just start making stuff up. "Ohh" Kiki says, "you go back and change your posts to make me look stupid". Sorry, but I don't need to do anything at all to accomplish that.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 1:40 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: I see you've failed to support ANY of the points you brought up all on your very own. No, dear Kiki. You keep changing reality so you can deny them. No Democratic president since Kennedy was ever a liberal - That'll be a surprise to the Democratic party. They foolishly think that they're Liberals. Have you told them yet? No guns were ever bought illegally in Arizona and moved to Mexico while the ATF looked on and did nothing - So the smuggled AK47s found where Border patrol agent Brian Terry was killed weren't really there? Maybe Agent Kelly is really alive? Have you told his family the good news?
Quote: Guess I should quit thinking of you as an idiot an start thinking of you as delusional.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 1:42 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Geezer: Quote:Originally posted by Kwicko: Reagan couldn't get elected today because the truth of it is that he was a tax & spend liberal who tripled the debt, blew up the deficits, and raised taxes time after time after time. But...But... Kiki and Niki both say we've NEVER had a liberal president. You need to drop all that anti-liberal retoric, Mike, or you'll be in BIG trouble.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 2:03 PM
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL