If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Sun Sentinel)   That voter purge in Florida? It has already caught a grand total of TWO men who weren't citizens but voted anyway. See, it's clearly a justified decision   (sun-sentinel.com) divider line 205
    More: Followup, voter file, purge, Miami Herald, Rick Scott, voter purge  
•       •       •

4679 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Jun 2012 at 12:48 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



205 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-04 04:47:33 PM
eh gringo i'm from mexico
and i'll vote for obama cause he's gonna close the border between our countries
 
2012-06-04 04:53:25 PM
How do we know people who knew they were going to get caught, didn't hear about it and just refrained from voting.

Maybe they should go through the registered voters lists and see what shakes out.

You know, sorta like the folks that drive drunk regularly that do it early in the day, and who stay home on holidays when the cops might be out. It's not rocket surgery to stay one step ahead of the popo. You just can't miss a step...
 
2012-06-04 05:15:07 PM
So, is subby trying to be a sarcastic douchebag with that headline?


It has already caught a grand total of TWO men who weren't citizens but voted anyway. See, it's clearly a justified decision


Hey, Subby... that is TWO more than there should be. Suck me.
 
2012-06-04 05:26:52 PM

vegasj: So, is subby trying to be a sarcastic douchebag with that headline?


It has already caught a grand total of TWO men who weren't citizens but voted anyway. See, it's clearly a justified decision


Hey, Subby... that is TWO more than there should be. Suck me.


Which is a bigger problem for a democracy: two people voting who shouldn't, or thousands of people who should be able to vote being unable to do so?
 
2012-06-04 06:20:42 PM

vegasj: Hey, Subby... that is TWO more than there should be. Suck me.


This bath water is dirty, ditch it!

And stop whining about there being a baby in it!
 
2012-06-04 06:23:50 PM

phyrkrakr: Phinn: StrangeQ: Phinn: Everyone should be allowed to vote as long as they don't have any outstanding arrest or traffic warrants, or missed any probation office check-ins in the previous 2 years.

What if they are campaigning against what they see are unjust laws and want to vote for the person who they believe will best act to change those laws?

No, those people shouldn't vote.

No one should vote, really. It's evil.

[media.tumblr.com image 500x647]

/surprised nobody's stuck this in here yet...


I've BEEN praying, but I'm still not married to Jason Statham's character in "Crank" and living in a yacht anchored off the Grand Caymans. And God TOLD me that was his plan for me!
 
2012-06-04 06:30:16 PM

rufus-t-firefly: It's right in the farking Constitution. It's not something to be interpreted - it's explicitly stated that there is a right to vote in federal elections.


There's a reason I keep Silly Jesus "favorited" as "GED in Law". His frequent, easily debunked legal ideas. Made even funnier when he claims he's an attorney.

Lionel Hutz's Fark Handle?
 
2012-06-04 06:51:05 PM
In all fairness, two votes in Florida could swing a presidential election.
 
2012-06-04 06:51:15 PM
Well, in Florida, that is the margin between winning and losing . . .
 
2012-06-04 07:03:32 PM

glenlivid: Were any of you paying attention in 2000 and 2004 - or did you think Bush actually won?

http://www.salon.com/2002/11/01/lists_2/

http://www.gregpalast.com/voting-fraud-is-a-fraud-buzzflash-interview s -greg-palast/




The Gore Butthurt gift that keeps on giving.

www.mediabistro.com

Keep looking, it's in there moonbats.
 
2012-06-04 08:16:16 PM
If I make a decision to start hunting cockroaches in my house, but I catch only two of them, was it a bad decision?

Or maybe just poor implementation?

You really think there are only two?
 
2012-06-04 08:24:38 PM

Lewis: If I make a decision to start hunting cockroaches in my house, but I catch only two of them, was it a bad decision?

Or maybe just poor implementation?

You really think there are only two?


It depends on how you're hunting them, douchebag. Do you even know for sure if there ARE any cockroaches in your house, or did you just assume they were there before you started looking? And if you did, did you have a good plan for finding them, or are you just crawling around the room on your hands and knees with a magnifying glass and going "AHA! GOT ONE!" everytime a bug flies past? Do you even know what a cockroach looks like?
 
2012-06-04 08:35:06 PM
Hysterical analogy fail trolling, Gyrfalcon.

Quit your day job!
 
2012-06-04 08:39:13 PM

Lewis: If I make a decision to start hunting cockroaches in my house, but I catch only two of them, was it a bad decision?

Or maybe just poor implementation?

You really think there are only two?


The fact that only two were proved, out of how many?

You really think there weren't more than 2 false positives?

There were more than 2 false positives in the 2000 purge.
 
2012-06-04 08:46:11 PM

Lewis: Hysterical analogy fail trolling, Gyrfalcon.

Quit your day job!


Hysterical laughter Bruce.

I don't have a day job.
 
2012-06-04 08:47:49 PM
Yep, implementation is difficult all right.

Detzner's office and the Republican Party of Florida chairman, Lenny Curry, have complained that another agency under President Obama, the Department of Homeland Security, has blocked access to a federal database, which would help the state more easily identify noncitizens.

Whoa, didn't see that one coming.
 
2012-06-04 08:56:48 PM

Gyrfalcon: Lewis: Hysterical analogy fail trolling, Gyrfalcon.

Quit your day job!

Hysterical laughter Bruce.

I don't have a day job.


Cheers, mate! Then I hope you're enjoying either (a) the night shift, (b) your studies, (c) your trust fund, or (d) mom's basement.

'Cause if it turns out you're a kept sexual plaything of a wealthy paramour, then I hate hate hate you.
 
2012-06-04 08:58:23 PM
There is a house with nobody living in it in Florida that has no less than ten people with different names registered to vote.

We now have two categories of people when it comes to voter ID.

People who recognize the problem and want to do what they can to solve it and people who recognize the problem and want to do everything they can to make sure it continues.
 
2012-06-04 09:17:22 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: glenlivid: Were any of you paying attention in 2000 and 2004 - or did you think Bush actually won?

http://www.salon.com/2002/11/01/lists_2/

http://www.gregpalast.com/voting-fraud-is-a-fraud-buzzflash-interview s -greg-palast/



The Gore Butthurt gift that keeps on giving.

[www.mediabistro.com image 450x363]

Keep looking, it's in there moonbats.


i194.photobucket.com

She's still wondering why she didn't get that cabinet position after that 'butthurt'
 
2012-06-04 09:31:53 PM

randomjsa: There is a house with nobody living in it in Florida that has no less than ten people with different names registered to vote.


How many of those registrations were ever actually used simultaneously?

Here's a perfectly legal, perfectly legitimate way that could happen.

It's a rental house. Someone moves in, they register to vote there. Their name goes on the rolls at that address. Some time later, six months or a year or two later, that person moves out of state, or they die. A family moves in next. Might be a mother and father, maybe even a grandparent, they all register there as their voting address. They stay there a few years, then they move out of state. This same story repeats itself a few times with families and couples moving in and out over the years. Doesn't take long for 10 voter registrations to pile up, especially with just one extended family living there.

When people die, or when they move and register to vote at a new address, especially one out of state, most jurisdictions don't immediately purge the voter registration of that person. It happens every day, in every state. It's nothing sinister. Certainly not this vaguely defined massive conspiracy to commit voter fraud that you are implying.

If it's some kind of actual voter fraud you are alleging, point out one person. ONE PERSON. who has ever been convicted in court of voter fraud in the state of Florida for any fraud that this purge would have prevented.

Here's an example of the "voter fraud" that's going on in Florida: In Florida voter fraud is rarer than shark attacks: Tampa Bay Times
Also, that is just investigations of alleged fraud, not even convictions. The allegations of fraud serious enough to actually warrant a criminal investigation are rarer than actual confirmed shark attacks.

The biggest example the Tampa Bay Times could come up with was a schoolteacher running a voter registration drive turned in registration forms later than the 48 hour deadline and faces a $1000 fine for doing so.

Oooh. Big fraud there. Certainly a massive purge of voter records that might catch legitimate voters in the crossfire is warranted there to (not) prevent a teacher from turning in forms late.

So, seriously, where is the actual fraud this is preventing? It looks like just an elaborate scheme to deprive legitimate voters of their constitutional right to vote on the grounds that they might vote for the "wrong" person (i.e. a Democrat).
 
2012-06-04 09:41:59 PM

Silverstaff: It looks like just an elaborate scheme to deprive legitimate voters of their constitutional right to vote on the grounds that they might vote for the "wrong" person (i.e. a Democrat).


Just like requiring voters to show ID to vote, amiright?
 
2012-06-04 10:25:04 PM

Lewis: Silverstaff: It looks like just an elaborate scheme to deprive legitimate voters of their constitutional right to vote on the grounds that they might vote for the "wrong" person (i.e. a Democrat).

Just like requiring voters to show ID to vote, amiright?


Oh great. now when James O'keefe want to fark with my vote, all he needs to do is come up with a shopping club card with his picture and my name and signature forged on it, insead of the higher bar that he actually duplicate the signature in the poll worker's book right in front of the poll worker,
 
2012-06-04 10:34:38 PM
Right. Because that's the kind of I.D. voter verification proponents would favor ... not, say, a driver's license, non-driver's license, sheriff's I.D., or a passport or anything like that.

A government-issued I.D. with both a picture and a signature on it? Crazy talk, man. Crazy talk!
 
2012-06-04 10:38:39 PM

Lewis: Gyrfalcon: Lewis: Hysterical analogy fail trolling, Gyrfalcon.

Quit your day job!

Hysterical laughter Bruce.

I don't have a day job.

Cheers, mate! Then I hope you're enjoying either (a) the night shift, (b) your studies, (c) your trust fund, or (d) mom's basement.

'Cause if it turns out you're a kept sexual plaything of a wealthy paramour, then I hate hate hate you.


Wow, I wish I was the kept sexual plaything whatever. Can he look like James Bond only not with Sean Connery's accent?
(I'm studying for the bar, so nobody will hire me--it sucks.)
 
2012-06-04 10:49:28 PM
Wait ... either a gay man, or a straight woman (n0t - your profile has DUDE stamped all over it), who wants to run a stable of dominatrixes?

*shakes head in confusion*
 
2012-06-05 12:45:18 AM

Lewis: A government-issued I.D. with both a picture and a signature on it?


See: Poll tax.
See: Constitutionality of poll taxes.

Come back after you've boned up on your constitutional law.
 
2012-06-05 12:46:35 AM

Vangor: IAmRight: Every vote counts, unless there's two that are voting illegally, then it's a ridiculous waste of time to have their illegitimate votes scrubbed from the record.

Did they vote, or did they vote and the vote was counted? Those are different scenarios requiring different amounts of concern.


...But, how many times did they vote is even more pressing.
 
2012-06-05 12:47:55 AM
show ID to buy beer = responsible society
show ID to vote = racist

remove ineligible voters = fraudster rep. party
"vote early, vote often" = dem. M.O.
\
1960's liberal = don't trust The Man, man
2000's liberal = the government needs to regulate everything, man

wtf is it with you people, anyway? Brain damage??
 
2012-06-05 04:58:40 AM

Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]


Silly assed image is silly assed.
I know I'm feeding a troll, but... here we go...

- if you don't drive
- if you don't fly
- never asked for identification in all my visits to either my doctor or dentist
- never asked for ID when applying for a job. My resume was enough.
- never asked for ID except when picking up prescriptions. I could buy anything else in the store without one.
- What if you do all your banking online and at ATMs?
- never asked for ID to apply for school. after being enrolled and my transcripts sent, yes. But not before. That ID was my social security card and my DD214.
- who gives a f*ck about store credit cards? are they run by the government?
- never asked for ID for my utilities, cable, phone or internet. Just a credit card or bank account number will do. As long as someone can pay for it, they don't give a f*ck.
- who gives a f*ck about car dealers? are they owned by the government?
- the DMV already has you in their database if you have a license. No ID needed to register your car, just a credit card to pay the fees.
- WTF is "outpatient testing"?
- Homeless people can get medicare/medicaid without ID other than their SSN. FAIL.
- who gives a f*ck about donating blood? are the facilities run by the government?
- who gives a f*ck about buying a firearm? is the government selling it to you?
- SS only needs your SSN, and they send you a card for that, in the mail, for free.
- who gives a f*ck about pawn shops? are they run by the government?
- who gives a f*ck about writing a check? is that part of the government?
- who gives a f*ck about credit cards? are they issued by the government?
- who gives a f*ck about car insurance? is it a government service?
- who gives a f*ck about train tickets? are they government trains?
- who gives a f*ck about amusement parks? are they run by the government?
- who gives a f*ck about volunteering at "non-prophet orgs"? are they part of the government?
- all you need to check a book out of the library is your library card, which is either barcoded or mag stripped or both
- [citation needed] though I know THAT won't happen
- no ID needed to buy a house. If I walk up to you with a wad of cash and buy your house, all I need to to have the deed and other papers signed and notarized. Done.
- who gives a f*ck about apartments? are they owned by the government?

So yes, you f*cking moron, asking for ID to vote - since voting is a GOVERNMENT FUNCTION - can be racist when the people who ask for this ID make sure that they do so in such a way that they target the people who are LEAST LIKELY to have one. Those people in too many cases, happen to be people of color, college students, and "those people" from certain parts of town, all whom tend not to vote republican... cause they're smart like that.

You, on the other hand, are a waste of your parents' bodily fluids.
Next time you want to post something as insanely stupid as this FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW: bait, count to ten (use your toes or your teeth if necessary)... then don't.
 
2012-06-05 06:19:43 AM

Lord Dimwit: Whereas some of the voter ID laws either in force today or under consideration would effectively disenfranchise millions and millions of people.

who are non-citizens, non residents of the jurisdiction, missed the cutoff for registration or cannot prove who they are. In other words, they are disenfranchising themselves.

Some people act as though obtaining a photo ID is the hardest thing an individual can ever do.
 
2012-06-05 06:54:45 AM

Diogenes: Ha! (Warning: CSB)

Just got a call on my cell phone last night from United in Purpose, an Evangelical group. They wanted to know if I was tired of Obama's high taxes and spending, and if I was not registered, they'd get me registered.

Here's a piece on them.

So they're trying to purge Democratic leaning voters while running a slipshod operation to register Christians and Republican leaning voters. Coincidence? I think not. Plus, this operation is out of California, while I live in Orlando.

Yet ACORN were the bad guys.


Not sure if it's the same group, but this past week I received a similar call from what was obviously a christian voter registration group. I was asked if I'm sick of Obama and his failed anti christian policies etc etc etc. I was in central PA at the time but my legal residence is in Philadelphia which is where I vote. I told the guy on the phone that and also told him I'm not a christian and why should I give him another second of my time? I also inquired how he got my unlisted land line phone number. He said there are ways (some shiat about how god provides) and that I was a lost cause, was going to be very sorry for my sins and he hung up. The caller ID was from a number in CA that does not take incoming calls. Still thinking about reporting it as he did kind of threaten me, but I'm sure it will prove to be a total waste of time. I also found out from a friend that there is no longer anything remotely like a private phone number no matter how much you pay your provider for one. If someone wants that number, they can get it.
 
2012-06-05 07:00:34 AM
I seem to remember that they teach everyone in school that every vote counts, and in history there were one or two winners by one vote. So......
 
2012-06-05 07:42:04 AM

Zasteva: relcec: Zasteva: - There is no requirement to show id to apply for a job. I've done it many time.

the requirement is for new hires, not when you turn in your app to mcdonalds.

Of course. I'm guessing you understand that still makes the graphic wrong on that count?


Point of question: Does it being wrong on one, more than one, many, or even most of the points invalidate the remainder which are true?

/not sure I agree with their premise
//never needed any proof to vote until recently
/oddly, they do absentee ballots from prison in Maine it seems
 
2012-06-05 07:45:24 AM

Jamieboy: Diogenes: Ha! (Warning: CSB)

Just got a call on my cell phone last night from United in Purpose, an Evangelical group. They wanted to know if I was tired of Obama's high taxes and spending, and if I was not registered, they'd get me registered.

Here's a piece on them.

So they're trying to purge Democratic leaning voters while running a slipshod operation to register Christians and Republican leaning voters. Coincidence? I think not. Plus, this operation is out of California, while I live in Orlando.

Yet ACORN were the bad guys.

Not sure if it's the same group, but this past week I received a similar call from what was obviously a christian voter registration group. I was asked if I'm sick of Obama and his failed anti christian policies etc etc etc. I was in central PA at the time but my legal residence is in Philadelphia which is where I vote. I told the guy on the phone that and also told him I'm not a christian and why should I give him another second of my time? I also inquired how he got my unlisted land line phone number. He said there are ways (some shiat about how god provides) and that I was a lost cause, was going to be very sorry for my sins and he hung up. The caller ID was from a number in CA that does not take incoming calls. Still thinking about reporting it as he did kind of threaten me, but I'm sure it will prove to be a total waste of time. I also found out from a friend that there is no longer anything remotely like a private phone number no matter how much you pay your provider for one. If someone wants that number, they can get it.


0000
0001
0002
0003
0004
0005

In theory they'd sanitize it first but compute power is cheap and POTS is outdated so setting up an automated outbound call (with the various disconnect/error message tones included) can be done by anyone with a wee bit of Google skill and, by now, simply hitting up a torrent site. Hell, there are probably scads of freeware apps for it by now.
 
2012-06-05 07:49:52 AM

rewind2846: cause they're smart like that


I probably shouldn't...

If they're smart like that, why are they unable to get an ID?

/wouldn't recommend voting Republican
//you seem lacking in either logic or debate skills
/it's okay, someone will take care of you
 
2012-06-05 09:36:29 AM

UnspokenVoice: Zasteva: relcec: Zasteva: - There is no requirement to show id to apply for a job. I've done it many time.

the requirement is for new hires, not when you turn in your app to mcdonalds.

Of course. I'm guessing you understand that still makes the graphic wrong on that count?

Point of question: Does it being wrong on one, more than one, many, or even most of the points invalidate the remainder which are true?

/not sure I agree with their premise
//never needed any proof to vote until recently
/oddly, they do absentee ballots from prison in Maine it seems


No, being wrong on one or even most doesn't invalidate the remainder.

That said, it seemed to me that the intent of the graphic was to show how many ordinary things require an ID, so what's the big deal about using it for voting?

By refuting the vast majority of those points, instead we've shown the opposite. That for nearly everything that people commonly use IDs to facilitate there are workarounds for people who don't have IDs. So what's the big deal about leaving voting the way it is? -- you can show an ID to make it easier, but it's not a requirement written into law.
 
2012-06-05 10:09:53 AM
DERP!!!!
 
2012-06-05 10:13:40 AM

rufus-t-firefly: Silly Jesus: Lord Dimwit: Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]

What part of "The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election...shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax" do you not understand? ...

Lol.

There is no "Right to Vote" in Federal elections.

Let's try this again.

Amendment 24

The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

It's right in the farking Constitution. It's not something to be interpreted - it's explicitly stated that there is a right to vote in federal elections.


www.fairvote.org - There are lots of words here, maybe some of them will help you.
 
2012-06-05 10:20:58 AM

Silverstaff: rufus-t-firefly: It's right in the farking Constitution. It's not something to be interpreted - it's explicitly stated that there is a right to vote in federal elections.

There's a reason I keep Silly Jesus "favorited" as "GED in Law". His frequent, easily debunked legal ideas. Made even funnier when he claims he's an attorney.

Lionel Hutz's Fark Handle?


1. I've never claimed to be an attorney.
2. Example of a legal idea of mine that your far superior mind has debunked?

tl;dr
[citation needed]
 
2012-06-05 10:33:30 AM

o5iiawah: Some people act as though obtaining a photo ID is the hardest thing an individual can ever do.


Florida has become real dicks about getting ID. To renew a DL you'd think that showing up with a face that matches the photo in the computer database would be enough. Uh-uh!

Instead you have to show up with not only photo ID, but extra documentation. You have to have a paper document of your SSN. It doesn't matter that the IRS has a phone hotline to verify SSNs for employers to use. No, you must contact the Social Security Admin and get a piece of paper. You need to show where you live. If you don't own your house or have the utilities in your name, then the people that do have to sign an affidavit that you live there. IIRC you can use connection to two financial institutions to substantiate yourself. I guess Little Tiger Check Cashing and Amscot could help their clientele by issuing photo IDs.

In short they have made it so confusing that they had to create a website just to guide people through the process. http://www.gathergoget.com/ (note the bagger appropriate use of .com for a government connected website)

In short, they've made it much more difficult than it used to be. So it is a barrier to those who never needed a DL before. And what demographics never needed to DLs before? Maybe the elderly, retiring here from a blue state. Maybe people too poor to afford a car? Maybe people who live in a big city and use public transportation? Do you associate those demographics with a strong GOP voter turnout?

I don't think the GOP does.

Smart ALECs.
 
2012-06-05 11:12:39 AM

Fecal Conservative: I think a couple hundred gallons of purple ink would go a long way to stopping all this silliness.

[www.apfn.net image 331x450]

/Hot like fairness and equality


I'm cool with that.

In fact, they could use 3 colors of voting finger ink -- red, blue and purple, and you can pick which one you want to use. Red if you voted Democrat (because they're Commies), blue for Repukes, and purple if you don't want to disclose to the world who you voted for.

Having bright colors on a bunch of people's fingers would make it easy to identify who among us had decided to participate in the corrupt system of voting, i.e., who has no problem using government agents to steal from their neighbors. The markings would be very useful in any post-electoral revolutions, street-sweeps or guerrilla wars that may occur.

Of course, even without a post-electoral reign of terror, the ink-finger system won't cut down on voting by illegal aliens or felons. And there's the problem of absentee voters, too. But the ink fingers would cut down on the vote-early-vote-often crowd.

There's also the question of people with a non-standard number of hands and/or fingers, but my guess is that's not too many people.
 
2012-06-05 11:46:41 AM

Silly Jesus: Silverstaff: rufus-t-firefly: It's right in the farking Constitution. It's not something to be interpreted - it's explicitly stated that there is a right to vote in federal elections.

There's a reason I keep Silly Jesus "favorited" as "GED in Law". His frequent, easily debunked legal ideas. Made even funnier when he claims he's an attorney.

Lionel Hutz's Fark Handle?

1. I've never claimed to be an attorney.
2. Example of a legal idea of mine that your far superior mind has debunked?

tl;dr
[citation needed]


My apologies, I double checked the threads. It was a different GED in Law I remembered here claimed he was an attorney: StanTheMan.

As for your GED in Law Moments:
Claiming that it's justifiable "self defense" to kill somebody fleeing from the scene of their crime, based solely on the fact they'd committed an assault recently and still had the weapon in their hand. Pursuing that person as they are fleeing, knocking them to the ground, and stabbing him to death being justifiable. Link

Claiming that it's obvious Martin Zimmerman won't be arrested or charged as it's open-and-shut self-defense, or if he is arrested the Judge will immediately throw it out and release him because there is absolutely no case. Link

Claiming that it's legal for US citizens to sleep with 14 year old girls when outside the US, as long as local laws say it's okay (18 USC 2423(b) disagrees, you're looking at Federal charges when you get back): Link

Claiming that Police are obviously not liable for damages when they raid a house on an anonymous tip and start a fire by detaining a family member who was cooking at a lit stove, that causes major property damage. . .and the tip turned out to be completely bogus and nothing illegal was found in the raid. Link

Claiming that if somebody is beaten to death in a hazing ritual, it's obviously not illegal because the victim consented to the hazing in the first place: Link
 
2012-06-05 01:08:50 PM

Silverstaff:

My apologies, I double checked the threads. It was a different GED in Law I remembered here claimed he was an attorney: StanTheMan.

As for your GED in Law Moments:
Claiming that it's justifiable "self defense" to kill somebody fleeing from the scene of their crime, based solely on the fact they'd committed an assault recently and still had the weapon in their hand. Pursuing that person as they are fleeing, knocking them to the ground, and stabbing him to death being justifiable. Link

There is ample case law backing this up. I likely cited it elsewhere in that thread. Also, your summary of the situation is a bit off. It wasn't argued that it was "self-defense" but rather that the general public was reasonably in danger from a murderer on a rampage. The courts have repeatedly held that lethal force is justifiable in the protection of third parties from reasonable threat.

Claiming that it's obvious Martin Zimmerman won't be arrested or charged as it's open-and-shut self-defense, or if he is arrested the Judge will immediately throw it out and release him because there is absolutely no case. Link

I did not accurately predict that the prosecutor would commit perjury when filing her affidavit. Link

Also, the hearing where the judge can throw the whole thing out based on his self-defense (SYG) claim has not occurred yet.


Claiming that it's legal for US citizens to sleep with 14 year old girls when outside the US, as long as local laws say it's okay (18 USC 2423(b) disagrees, you're looking at Federal charges when you get back): Link

I, and several others in the thread, were arguing that the wording is not clear as it related to that specific scenario. (Traveling somewhere for the sole purpose of engaging in such activity, rather than traveling for other purposes and happening to also engage in such activity...is how I interpreted it. That would be directly aimed at "sex tourism", which I think is the point of the law.) Either way, I was not making a moral argument. Thanks for the ad hominem thrown in there though...adds to your credibility.

Claiming that Police are obviously not liable for damages when they raid a house on an anonymous tip and start a fire by detaining a family member who was cooking at a lit stove, that causes major property damage. . .and the tip turned out to be completely bogus and nothing illegal was found in the raid. Link

They obviously aren't. Again, the police don't send other people into buildings where they have reason to believe a fleeing, armed, violent criminal is hiding out. You may disagree with it, but that doesn't change the fact that they are no liable for the damages. If you can find some law that would hold them liable, I'd love to see it. There is a long standing concept of "acting in good faith" that protects public safety workers from such things. If you are merely arguing that they are morally liable, then I would tend to agree with you there somewhat. It'd be nice of them to help the family out. They are in no way criminally liable though.

Claiming that if somebody is beaten to death in a hazing ritual, it's obviously not illegal because the victim consented to the hazing in the first place: Link


I argued that it shouldn't be illegal. Should boxers who kill another boxer in the ring be imprisoned? Should my friend be imprisoned if I ask him to punch me, he does, and I am seriously injured?

It seems that when you originally said that I don't know what I am talking about, legally speaking, you really meant to say that you don't agree with how the laws are written.
 
2012-06-05 01:57:22 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: o5iiawah: Some people act as though obtaining a photo ID is the hardest thing an individual can ever do.

Florida has become real dicks about getting ID. To renew a DL you'd think that showing up with a face that matches the photo in the computer database would be enough. Uh-uh!

Instead you have to show up with not only photo ID, but extra documentation. You have to have a paper document of your SSN. It doesn't matter that the IRS has a phone hotline to verify SSNs for employers to use. No, you must contact the Social Security Admin and get a piece of paper. You need to show where you live. If you don't own your house or have the utilities in your name, then the people that do have to sign an affidavit that you live there. IIRC you can use connection to two financial institutions to substantiate yourself. I guess Little Tiger Check Cashing and Amscot could help their clientele by issuing photo IDs.

In short they have made it so confusing that they had to create a website just to guide people through the process. http://www.gathergoget.com/ (note the bagger appropriate use of .com for a government connected website)

In short, they've made it much more difficult than it used to be. So it is a barrier to those who never needed a DL before. And what demographics never needed to DLs before? Maybe the elderly, retiring here from a blue state. Maybe people too poor to afford a car? Maybe people who live in a big city and use public transportation? Do you associate those demographics with a strong GOP voter turnout?

I don't think the GOP does.

Smart ALECs.


The act of gathering a few documents and getting on a bus, walking or driving to your local government agency to get an ID or license doesn't represent a serious deviation from the act of voting itself.

The bottom line is in order to have free and fair elections, states need to find out who people are and where they live. That isn't Jim Crow and the SCOTUS ruling on Crawford Vs. Marion county doesn't think so either.

Also, I lived in FL for 24 years...it isn't that bad.
 
2012-06-05 02:13:33 PM

UnspokenVoice: rewind2846: cause they're smart like that

I probably shouldn't...

If they're smart like that, why are they unable to get an ID?

/wouldn't recommend voting Republican
//you seem lacking in either logic or debate skills
/it's okay, someone will take care of you


And obviously you lack the cognitive skills to see the big picture.
This entire issue is not about ID, it's about the republican effort to purposely reduce the number of people who vote, especially those people who don't vote republican.
When voter turnout is low, the odds of winning favor republican candidates and causes.
When voter turnout is high, the odds of winning favor democrat candidates and causes.
This is why all those republican assholes were able to take over local elections in 2010, and should serve as a lesson to democrats... when you don't vote, sh*t like Wisconsin's Scott Walker happens. Sh*t like Arizona's 18th week abortion bill happens. And sh*t like these new voter ID restrictions happen in places they never had before.

All to appease the boogeymen of people like you.

/how's that for logic
//or maybe you'd like this explanation in the form of a picture book
 
2012-06-05 03:10:18 PM

o5iiawah: The act of gathering a few documents and getting on a bus, walking or driving to your local government agency to get an ID or license doesn't represent a serious deviation from the act of voting itself.


Oddly enough, the way you describe it it seems 100% more arduous. If it took X amount of effort to vote, it will now take X effort to get an ID, and X effort to vote (time off work,travel, waiting, etc). Total, 2X.

But I guess a 2X effort is insignificant, eh?
 
2012-06-05 03:24:54 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: o5iiawah: The act of gathering a few documents and getting on a bus, walking or driving to your local government agency to get an ID or license doesn't represent a serious deviation from the act of voting itself.

Oddly enough, the way you describe it it seems 100% more arduous. If it took X amount of effort to vote, it will now take X effort to get an ID, and X effort to vote (time off work,travel, waiting, etc). Total, 2X.

But I guess a 2X effort is insignificant, eh?


People just can't be expected to go through all that trouble in their lives to participate in such an insignificant process...there's TV to be watched and Doritos to be eaten.
 
2012-06-05 03:39:22 PM

Silly Jesus: People just can't be expected to go through all that trouble in their lives to participate in such an insignificant process...there's TV to be watched and Doritos to be eaten.


Too bad you can't sign up for Cable TV or buy Doritos with your ATM card without an ID, eh?
 
2012-06-05 04:15:15 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: o5iiawah: The act of gathering a few documents and getting on a bus, walking or driving to your local government agency to get an ID or license doesn't represent a serious deviation from the act of voting itself.

Oddly enough, the way you describe it it seems 100% more arduous. If it took X amount of effort to vote, it will now take X effort to get an ID, and X effort to vote (time off work,travel, waiting, etc). Total, 2X.

But I guess a 2X effort is insignificant, eh?


It is, if the person disposes of their ID after each election and then has to go to the DMV/office to get another. The smart person however will hold onto it until the ID expires which in most states is 6-10 years.
 
2012-06-05 04:19:58 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: Silly Jesus: People just can't be expected to go through all that trouble in their lives to participate in such an insignificant process...there's TV to be watched and Doritos to be eaten.

Too bad you can't sign up for Cable TV or buy Doritos with your ATM card without an ID, eh?


Tee-hee-hee
 
Displayed 50 of 205 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report