The Republican Attack on the Right to Vote

StormfrontFL

Superior Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Posts
8,903
Media
4
Likes
6,857
Points
358
Location
United States
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Storm, I'm gonna be here after you are dead and rotted in the ground.

If fact I think your starting to smell now.
I think what you smell is the hair on your upper lip. Either that or you have a serious yeast infection.

Seriously, have you ever posted anything on here that required a modicum of thought? I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you must be capable of posting something that requires some intellect.
 
Last edited:

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,784
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
:bsflag:
If it walks like a duck. Quacks like a duck. Looks like a duck then it must be a duck. I don't really give a damn about your voting history. What I take offense at is your attempts to insult the intelligence of anyone by spouting nothing but right wing talking points and then claiming to be non partisan. Where is your venom for the Republicans you now claim to have no great love for? You've agreed with everyone claim that Fox has made and then rail on about the liberal media but show that you have no problem with conservative media. Is it any wonder your claim of non partisanship isn't believed?

If the voter fraud were so bad then one would question why even some GOP officials admit that they've yet to find any proof?
Ohio GOP finds no voter fraud conspiracy, but still pushes voting*restrictions
Ahead Of Voter ID Trial, Pennsylvania Admits There's No In-Person Voter Fraud
Republicans look for voter fraud, find little

Funny how you ignore the information provided that covers the HOP incidents of voter fraud. Actually it's not so funny. It's expected.

I also wonder why the GOP is not concerned with fraud via absentee balloting? That is the easiest way to commit fraud but I guess since more Republicans than Democrats vote that way they don't want to rock the vote.
More Republicans than Democrats Requesting Absentee Ballots in Four Swing States | National Review Online
In Iowa, GOP outpacing Democrats in absentee requests over last 10 days - First Read
Absentee ballot vote fraud - Ballotpedia

According to a study conducted by the United States Election Assistance Commission, absentee voting creates one of the greatest opportunities for vote fraud and is the area of voting subject to the largest proportion of fraudulent acts

Thanks again, Storm, for your response and more excellent and verifiable references (to add to the thousand or so I've bookmarked).

What's the count now for references and verifiable fact based links compared to similar that offer SOME kind of refutation?

Something like a ZILLION to NONE?? lol :rolleyes:

 

skylancer81

Experimental Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Posts
89
Media
0
Likes
18
Points
228
Gender
Male
Well here ya go.

One from a crazy site: How Widespread is Voter Fraud? | 2012 Facts & Figures | Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

One from a Liberal site: Column: Underestimating our voter fraud vulnerability

One from a Christian site: Voting fraud in Election 2012: How common is it? (+video) - CSMonitor.com

One from Chuck Norris Voter fraud: The way to America’s destruction And those are just a few.

Feel free to not believe them as I am sure you will not.

As to why I do not blast the Conservatives/Republicans on this issue is because they are the ones who are trying to fix it and the point of this thread was that they were trying to attack the right to vote. Which they are not.

If this thread was about marriage I would be all over them for stopping folks from wedding whoever they want. If a man wants to marry a man, fine. A woman wants to marry a woman, sure. If a woman wants to marry a man and another woman, let them. Marry whoever, whatever, however many you want as far a I am concerned. But this thread is not about that.

If this thread was about the war on drugs and the conservatives/republicans hard-on to continue it I would be all over them for that too. Decriminalize all drugs and only enforce under the influence cases (while driving or in public etc). And provide better dependance care instead of incarceration. But see this thread is not about those issues where I disagree with the conservative/republican view. It is about the right to vote and voter fraud.

And one last thing. I actually like Bill Clinton's suggestion from last week of putting picture ID's on Social Security Cards. However both the conservatives/republicans and liberal/democrats seem at odds about it.​
 
Last edited:

Popyuu

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Posts
2,223
Media
0
Likes
46
Points
83
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
So to fix voter fraud you go after those that vote on sundays? Aren't sundays like umm a church day? Isn't that the day many churches get together as a community to visit the polls? Not only that but isn't that like one of the most off-of-work days there is? With the way the economy has been, how minimum wages have been, how there have been people trying to cut back government assistance, how people have been trying to relabel what full time work hours are and a whole host of other things wouldn't it be a bad idea to cut voting on that one day.

Just speaking on sundays. Aren't sundays the universally known "get other shit done" day. Unless jobs have started allowing people to take a day off to vote. Which might be nice now that i think about it.

As far as absentee ballots are concerned it goes that:

"An absentee ballot is a vote cast by someone who is unable or unwilling to attend the official polling station. Numerous methods have been devised to facilitate this. Increasing the ease of access to absentee ballots is seen by many as one way to improve voter turnout, though some countries require that a valid reason, such as infirmity or travel, be given before a voter can participate in an absentee ballot."

So wouldn't that basically mean the elderly, those with health issues and generally those that for whatever reason cannot or do not want to leave their residence?

So wouldn't all of this mean that republicans don't want people that cannot or will not leave their homes to vote? That republicans don't want people that vote on sundays to vote? And wouldn't that generally equate to people that work multiple jobs and don't have the time to go to the polls as well as people with health issues? I don't know correct me if i'm wrong.

But doesn't that mean anyone in serious need of healthcare? Doesn't that mean anyone busting their ass to take care of their families, that are attempting to do so without government assistance?

And yes i know. "Spin this, spin that!" But really, who are these laws going to hurt? How will these laws hurt them? What are the future implications of these laws? How does this make the GOP look? Is the liberal media making the GOP go after these voters? If the liberal media is forcing the GOP's hand on going after these sorts of voters then why doesn't the GOP just stop going after these voters?

I don't know, maybe i worded it wrong. Maybe i should say that the GOP is attempting to fix it so people can't vote on sundays. That the GOP is fixing it so that people with health conditions can't vote or have to find money from somewhere to give to someone else to help them vote. But wait. Saying it like that would come off sounding like i'm putting some sort of spin to it.

Hmm how could i express that then? How could i say that those with serious medical conditions would no longer have the right to vote? How could i say that blue collar workers would have a harder time voting? How could i say that the GOP is targeting american citizens that would like the chance to exercise their right to vote?

And yeah. I still left a lot of stuff out in this post. Cause it does also say travel and there are a bunch of other people trying to force people to jump throw a whole lot of other hoops for their right to vote but i find it better to ask the question...why now? Why are people so hell bent on "fixing" voting now rather then well...
 
Last edited:

Jjz1109

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Posts
5,277
Media
25
Likes
6,813
Points
333
Location
NYC (New York, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Well here ya go.

One from a crazy site: How Widespread is Voter Fraud? | 2012 Facts & Figures | Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

One from a Liberal site: Column: Underestimating our voter fraud vulnerability

One from a Christian site: Voting fraud in Election 2012: How common is it? (+video) - CSMonitor.com

One from Chuck Norris Voter fraud: The way to America’s destruction And those are just a few.

Feel free to not believe them as I am sure you will not.

As to why I do not blast the Conservatives/Republicans on this issue is because they are the ones who are trying to fix it and the point of this thread was that they were trying to attack the right to vote. Which they are not.

If this thread was about marriage I would be all over them for stopping folks from wedding whoever they want. If a man wants to marry a man, fine. A woman wants to marry a woman, sure. If a woman wants to marry a man and another woman, let them. Marry whoever, whatever, however many you want as far a I am concerned. But this thread is not about that.

If this thread was about the war on drugs and the conservatives/republicans hard-on to continue it I would be all over them for that too. Decriminalize all drugs and only enforce under the influence cases (while driving or in public etc). And provide better dependance care instead of incarceration. But see this thread is not about those issues where I disagree with the conservative/republican view. It is about the right to vote and voter fraud.

And one last thing. I actually like Bill Clinton's suggestion from last week of putting picture ID's on Social Security Cards. However both the conservatives/republicans and liberal/democrats seem at odds about it.​

Thanks for the insightful links skylancer.

I think when you see the likes of Andrew Young and Bill Clinton come up with proposals for voter IDs (in direct challenge to Obama and his race baiting comments aimed at the Republican Party) you know there is some rational thinking from the dems, however limited, and the liberal opposition days' are numbered on this issue.

Young to Obama: Put photos on Social Security cards

However, the liberal spin and scare tactics abound. The attached is clearly biased, but certainly begs the question: are the Democrats the true party of "No!", completely devoid of suggestions / recommendations how to address the issue?

Why putting photos on Social Security cards won't save voting rights - latimes.com
 

Popyuu

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Posts
2,223
Media
0
Likes
46
Points
83
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Thanks for the insightful links skylancer.

I think when you see the likes of Andrew Young and Bill Clinton come up with proposals for voter IDs (in direct challenge to Obama and his race baiting comments aimed at the Republican Party) you know there is some rational thinking from the dems, however limited, and the liberal opposition days' are numbered on this issue.

Young to Obama: Put photos on Social Security cards

However, the liberal spin and scare tactics abound. The attached is clearly biased, but certainly begs the question: are the Democrats the true party of "No!", completely devoid of suggestions / recommendations how to address the issue?

Why putting photos on Social Security cards won't save voting rights - latimes.com

Just curious but who exactly would pay for photo ID's on social security cards? And who would handle the process/paper work/leg work on it? I was under the impression that republicans and conservatives were firmly against more government. As well as government spending. So if you're for this wouldn't that mean you're for more government spending and regulation?

Just sayin :wink:

Edit: OMG! Are you crossing party lines? Are you gonna be a liberal now?Cause if so i am shocked! No really my new name is Shocked Montgomery and i'm pleased to meet you, you new liberal/democrat you. Gimme a big hug! How are you. And why have you had the sudden change of heart with regards to your political affiliation?
 
Last edited:

Eric_8

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Posts
3,559
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I think what you smell is the hair on your upper lip. Either that or you have a serious yeast infection.

Seriously, have you ever posted anything on here that required a modicum of thought? I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you must be capable of posting something that requires some intellect.

WOW. That got catty quickly.
 

JTalbain

Experimental Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Posts
1,786
Media
0
Likes
14
Points
258
Age
34
Thanks for the insightful links skylancer.

I think when you see the likes of Andrew Young and Bill Clinton come up with proposals for voter IDs (in direct challenge to Obama and his race baiting comments aimed at the Republican Party) you know there is some rational thinking from the dems, however limited, and the liberal opposition days' are numbered on this issue.

Young to Obama: Put photos on Social Security cards

However, the liberal spin and scare tactics abound. The attached is clearly biased, but certainly begs the question: are the Democrats the true party of "No!", completely devoid of suggestions / recommendations how to address the issue?

Why putting photos on Social Security cards won't save voting rights - latimes.com
Believe it or not, Bill Clinton's proposal is diplomatic genius. On the surface, he appears to be giving in to the voter fraud prevention mentality. But what are the actual ramifications of his idea?

First off, no social security card currently has a photo ID. This means that if this ID was required to vote, it would 100 percent guarantee no particular groups were being unfairly targeted. Second, the Social Security Card it's a federal form of identification rather than state, so states wouldn't have the opportunity to play games with the implementation to discriminate. Third, such a tie to SSN for voter ID would almost necessitate that voter registration rolls would be federally maintained. So in one swoop, he gains points for his party by being willing to compromise and he castrates any attempt to disenfranchise voters by mucking with voter registration or voter ID in the future. Bravo, Bill. A political masterpiece.
 
Last edited:

StormfrontFL

Superior Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Posts
8,903
Media
4
Likes
6,857
Points
358
Location
United States
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Well here ya go.

One from a crazy site: How Widespread is Voter Fraud? | 2012 Facts & Figures | Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

One from a Liberal site: Column: Underestimating our voter fraud vulnerability

One from a Christian site: Voting fraud in Election 2012: How common is it? (+video) - CSMonitor.com

One from Chuck Norris Voter fraud: The way to America’s destruction And those are just a few.

Feel free to not believe them as I am sure you will not.

As to why I do not blast the Conservatives/Republicans on this issue is because they are the ones who are trying to fix it and the point of this thread was that they were trying to attack the right to vote. Which they are not.

If this thread was about marriage I would be all over them for stopping folks from wedding whoever they want. If a man wants to marry a man, fine. A woman wants to marry a woman, sure. If a woman wants to marry a man and another woman, let them. Marry whoever, whatever, however many you want as far a I am concerned. But this thread is not about that.

If this thread was about the war on drugs and the conservatives/republicans hard-on to continue it I would be all over them for that too. Decriminalize all drugs and only enforce under the influence cases (while driving or in public etc). And provide better dependance care instead of incarceration. But see this thread is not about those issues where I disagree with the conservative/republican view. It is about the right to vote and voter fraud.

And one last thing. I actually like Bill Clinton's suggestion from last week of putting picture ID's on Social Security Cards. However both the conservatives/republicans and liberal/democrats seem at odds about it.​
Only two of your links merit a look(Chuck Norris?).

Thanks for continuing to ignore the questions asked of you and those who think like you, namely.....
1. What does eliminating polling places in minority and Democratic leaning areas have to do with fraud?
2. How does reducing early voting in minority and Democratic leaning areas while extending the times in GOP leaning areas eliminate fraud?

edit: Your "liberal" link is an editorial written by a member of the Conservative group, The Heritage Foundation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_A._von_Spakovsky

Hans Anatol von Spakovsky (born March 11, 1959) is an American attorney and a former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC). He was nominated to the FEC by President George W. Bush on December 15, 2005 and was appointed by recess appointment on January 4, 2006.[1]
However, von Spakovsky's nomination was opposed by Senate Democrats, who argued that his oversight of voter laws was unacceptably partisan and that he had consistently acted to disenfranchise poor and minority voters.[2][3] Opposition to the nomination was bolstered by objections from career Justice Department staff, who accused von Spakovsky of politicizing his nominally non-partisan office to an unprecedented degree.[4]
While von Spakovsky and the Bush Administration denied the accusations of partisanship, the nomination was withdrawn on May 15, 2008.[5] Von Spakovsky subsequently joined the staff of the Heritage Foundation, a politically conservative think tank.
BTW I never stated that fraud doesn't happen. What I and others(government officials included) have stated is that the number is so low that it would have no bearing on deciding an election. The rules set down by GOP officials would serve to disenfranchise more people who want to vote legally than it would anyone out to commit fraud.
I also checked on your Christian link and found nothing of any import. You use one instance as proof of widespread fraud and this instance just as the one mentioned in your liberal link revolves around the actions of discredited "journalist" James O'Keefe.

What is sad is that you claim to be impartial and seek out the truth but have you realized that just as you found sources that prove what you already believe there are as many if not more sources that disprove your belief? You believe the stories that claim widespread fraud because you want to believe them so stop playing high and mighty condemning liberals for not looking for the truth, as you put it.
 
Last edited:

Jjz1109

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Posts
5,277
Media
25
Likes
6,813
Points
333
Location
NYC (New York, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Believe it or not, Bill Clinton's proposal is diplomatic genius. On the surface, he appears to be giving in to the voter fraud prevention mentality. But what are the actual ramifications of his idea?

First off, no social security card currently has a photo ID. This means that if this ID was required to vote, it would 100 percent guarantee no particular groups were being unfairly targeted. Second, the Social Security Card it's a federal form of identification rather than state, so states wouldn't have the opportunity to play games with the implementation to discriminate. Third, such a tie to SSN for voter ID would almost necessitate that voter registration rolls would be federally maintained. So in one swoop, he gains points for his party by being willing to compromise and he castrates any attempt to disenfranchise voters by mucking with voter registration or voter ID in the future. Bravo, Bill. A political masterpiece.

Wow, talk about spin...next you will be taking credit for voter IDs being the libs idea.

Actually, may disappoint you, but I agree on the overall principles. It is what the Republicans have been pushing for all along. It's been the libs that have been using scare tactics and race bating spin on this country. Had Bill and Andrew Young not had the b***s to forge ahead, in direct conflict to Obama, we would be stuck in a quagmire (Sound familiar? Like the past 6 years?). I give both of them credit for their courage, and for looking for solutions in spite of the obstructionist views of their party. Yep, real American heroes.

If you feel the need to score points for your party, go ahead, take a victory lap. Feel better? Remember you would not be doing it were it not for the efforts of the Republicans.

Maybe Bill can ask Obama to apologize for his race baiting. Nah, that'll never happen.
 

StormfrontFL

Superior Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Posts
8,903
Media
4
Likes
6,857
Points
358
Location
United States
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Wow, talk about spin...next you will be taking credit for voter IDs being the libs idea.

Actually, may disappoint you, but I agree on the overall principles. It is what the Republicans have been pushing for all along. It's been the libs that have been using scare tactics and race bating spin on this country. Had Bill and Andrew Young not had the b***s to forge ahead, in direct conflict to Obama, we would be stuck in a quagmire (Sound familiar? Like the past 6 years?). I give both of them credit for their courage, and for looking for solutions in spite of the obstructionist views of their party. Yep, real American heroes.

If you feel the need to score points for your party, go ahead, take a victory lap. Feel better? Remember you would not be doing it were it not for the efforts of the Republicans.

Maybe Bill can ask Obama to apologize for his race baiting. Nah, that'll never happen.
Race baiting? Dude, guys who keep crying that are usually the ones pissed off that they can't use the N word without being looked at as a pariah. Deny all you want but until you can admit that the real race baiters are the guys like O'Reilly, Limbaugh, and Coulter who keep attempting to portray blacks and other minorities as the cause of all problems within the U.S. you will be a part of the real problem.

Now come on big shot white guy and try again to tell this black man that you know more about being racially discriminated against than I.

Still don't have the balls to answer the questions asked of you Republicans huh? Funny to have so many of you guys on a big dick site and all have such tiny balls.:tongue:
 

Eric_8

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2010
Posts
3,559
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Where were you when someone said they'd die before they voted for a democrat?

Cause that statement crossed over into suicide bomber territory.

Missed it, clearly. While that's not what I would consider catty, it's clearly idiotic.

I don't know the poster who wrote that, but he/she is obviously a moron.
 

Jjz1109

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Posts
5,277
Media
25
Likes
6,813
Points
333
Location
NYC (New York, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Race baiting? Dude, guys who keep crying that are usually the ones pissed off that they can't use the N word without being looked at as a pariah. Deny all you want but until you can admit that the real race baiters are the guys like O'Reilly, Limbaugh, and Coulter who keep attempting to portray blacks and other minorities as the cause of all problems within the U.S. you will be a part of the real problem.

Now come on big shot white guy and try again to tell this black man that you know more about being racially discriminated against than I.

Still don't have the balls to answer the questions asked of you Republicans huh? Funny to have so many of you guys on a big dick site and all have such tiny balls.:tongue:

Nope, you got me there. Don't know what it's like to be discriminated against racially (but may have been religiously. Lots of hatred out there towards religion in general).

However, don't ever imply that race baiting, or discrimination, is limited to one group. Bigots come in every color. Not agreeing with you but implying O'Reilly, Limbaugh, and Coulter alone are race baiters is in itself ignorant, as similar charges could be made against Sharpton (remember Tawana Brawley?), Jesse Jackson and Obama.

So I may not know discrimination, but I can tell race baiting and discrimination when I see it.
 

StormfrontFL

Superior Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Posts
8,903
Media
4
Likes
6,857
Points
358
Location
United States
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Nope, you got me there. Don't know what it's like to be discriminated against racially (but may have been religiously. Lots of hatred out there towards religion in general).

However, don't ever imply that race baiting, or discrimination, is limited to one group. Bigots come in every color. Not agreeing with you but implying O'Reilly, Limbaugh, and Coulter alone are race baiters is in itself ignorant, as similar charges could be made against Sharpton (remember Tawana Brawley?), Jesse Jackson and Obama.

So I may not know discrimination, but I can tell race baiting and discrimination when I see it.
Ignore or deny. Ignore or deny. Ignore or deny.

All your responses either ignore or deny. Lousy attempt to once again try to divert focus from you and those like you. What group is the one constantly calling others race baiters? Hm? Go on, I know you know the answer to this one.
Any time the discrimination that is happening is brought up the first and only thing guys like you do is cry "race baiter". It's as if you don't want any attention brought to the matter of discrimination.:rolleyes:
When Sharpton discusses the problem of racial profiling and stop and frisk on his show the usual suspects immediately scream "race baiter" but how is it race baiting when it is obvious to anyone with a brain that it's not white guys being affected by the policy? Is he not allowed to discuss issues that have an effect of minorities? It's not as if O'Reilly and Limbaugh will discuss the unfairness of the policy and it's effect on those impacted by it.
You really wanna go way back to Brawley. Okay then let's also discuss all those white news anchors who so readily believed Susan Smith and Charles Stuart when they each accused a black man of having committed horrific crimes. I don't recall ever seeing any of those newscasters called race baiters.
Susan Smith - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Susan Leigh Vaughan Smith (born September 26, 1971) is an American criminal who was sentenced to life in prison for murdering her children. Born in Union, South Carolina, and a former student of the University of South Carolina Union, she was convicted on July 22, 1995 for murdering her two sons, 3-year-old Michael Daniel Smith, born October 10, 1991, and 14-month-old Alexander Tyler Smith, born August 5, 1993.[2] The case gained worldwide attention shortly after it developed, due to her claim that a black man carjacked her and kidnapped her sonshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Stuart_%28murderer%29

Charles "Chuck" Stuart (December 18, 1959 – January 4, 1990) was an apparent victim, with his wife Carol DiMaiti Stuart, of a violent carjacking in Roxbury, Boston, Massachusetts. Stuart was shot in the abdomen, while his wife was killed by a shot to the head. Stuart blamed the incident on an African-American male, leading to a massive manhunt that inflamed racial tensions in Boston and resulted in the arrest of an innocent suspect
 

Popyuu

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Posts
2,223
Media
0
Likes
46
Points
83
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Believe it or not, Bill Clinton's proposal is diplomatic genius. On the surface, he appears to be giving in to the voter fraud prevention mentality. But what are the actual ramifications of his idea?

First off, no social security card currently has a photo ID. This means that if this ID was required to vote, it would 100 percent guarantee no particular groups were being unfairly targeted. Second, the Social Security Card it's a federal form of identification rather than state, so states wouldn't have the opportunity to play games with the implementation to discriminate. Third, such a tie to SSN for voter ID would almost necessitate that voter registration rolls would be federally maintained. So in one swoop, he gains points for his party by being willing to compromise and he castrates any attempt to disenfranchise voters by mucking with voter registration or voter ID in the future. Bravo, Bill. A political masterpiece.

Ya know i was wondering if that were the case. I wonder how that would have effected past elections.

Thanks for the insightful links skylancer.

I think when you see the likes of Andrew Young and Bill Clinton come up with proposals for voter IDs (in direct challenge to Obama and his race baiting comments aimed at the Republican Party) you know there is some rational thinking from the dems, however limited, and the liberal opposition days' are numbered on this issue.

Young to Obama: Put photos on Social Security cards

However, the liberal spin and scare tactics abound. The attached is clearly biased, but certainly begs the question: are the Democrats the true party of "No!", completely devoid of suggestions / recommendations how to address the issue?

Why putting photos on Social Security cards won't save voting rights - latimes.com

Wasn't going to say anything but seeing as how your still looking at the thread. I'll just say. Really? So the president of the United States is a race balater? Yup same old tactics.
 
Last edited:

Jjz1109

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Posts
5,277
Media
25
Likes
6,813
Points
333
Location
NYC (New York, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
Ignore or deny. Ignore or deny. Ignore or deny.

All your responses either ignore or deny. Lousy attempt to once again try to divert focus from you and those like you. What group is the one constantly calling others race baiters? Hm? Go on, I know you know the answer to this one.
Any time the discrimination that is happening is brought up the first and only thing guys like you do is cry "race baiter". It's as if you don't want any attention brought to the matter of discrimination.:rolleyes:
When Sharpton discusses the problem of racial profiling and stop and frisk on his show the usual suspects immediately scream "race baiter" but how is it race baiting when it is obvious to anyone with a brain that it's not white guys being affected by the policy? Is he not allowed to discuss issues that have an effect of minorities? It's not as if O'Reilly and Limbaugh will discuss the unfairness of the policy and it's effect on those impacted by it.
You really wanna go way back to Brawley. Okay then let's also discuss all those white news anchors who so readily believed Susan Smith and Charles Stuart when they each accused a black man of having committed horrific crimes. I don't recall ever seeing any of those newscasters called race baiters.
Susan Smith - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Susan Leigh Vaughan Smith (born September 26, 1971) is an American criminal who was sentenced to life in prison for murdering her children. Born in Union, South Carolina, and a former student of the University of South Carolina Union, she was convicted on July 22, 1995 for murdering her two sons, 3-year-old Michael Daniel Smith, born October 10, 1991, and 14-month-old Alexander Tyler Smith, born August 5, 1993.[2] The case gained worldwide attention shortly after it developed, due to her claim that a black man carjacked her and kidnapped her sonshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Stuart_%28murderer%29

Charles "Chuck" Stuart (December 18, 1959 – January 4, 1990) was an apparent victim, with his wife Carol DiMaiti Stuart, of a violent carjacking in Roxbury, Boston, Massachusetts. Stuart was shot in the abdomen, while his wife was killed by a shot to the head. Stuart blamed the incident on an African-American male, leading to a massive manhunt that inflamed racial tensions in Boston and resulted in the arrest of an innocent suspect

Dude, you just don't get it. It's not a contest. You need to open your eyes that racism exists and comes in all colors. That was my point. You can let it paralyze you, or you can deal with it and move forward. Those who have dealt with it with class, dignity and self respect are heroes, and Sharpton and Jackson aren't even in the same league. Both have always been about self promotion, not representing the little guy. Sadly, they both take advantage of they very people they proclaim to be representing. They are vile charlatans who are race baiters using their notoriety to be constantly in the public eye. Sad that many people don't recognize that. The smarts one do.

And if you haven't figured it out yet, the reason why people ignore your leading questions is to avoid the bs agenda you have. If you had a legitimate question, and were honestly open and objective, maybe people would respond. But the hate gets tired. Just a heads up.
 

Popyuu

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Posts
2,223
Media
0
Likes
46
Points
83
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Dude, you just don't get it. It's not a contest. You need to open your eyes that racism exists and comes in all colors. That was my point. You can let it paralyze you, or you can deal with it and move forward. Those who have dealt with it with class, dignity and self respect are heroes, and Sharpton and Jackson aren't even in the same league. Both have always been about self promotion, not representing the little guy. Sadly, they both take advantage of they very people they proclaim to be representing. They are vile charlatans who are race baiters using their notoriety to be constantly in the public eye. Sad that many people don't recognize that. The smarts one do.

And if you haven't figured it out yet, the reason why people ignore your leading questions is to avoid the bs agenda you have. If you had a legitimate question, and were honestly open and objective, maybe people would respond. But the hate gets tired. Just a heads up.

And with that you let the world know that you haven't even kept up with what those guys are currently doing. Cause just in the last few links posted within these threads i've personally watched segments from "the Rev" where he brought up issues for both women and Jewish people. He even had a republican woman on the show. ha.

So yeah keep it up dude. Go get'm! Get those race blahiters that only care about themselves. Expose them for all that they are. And when it backfires way more than it already has. Go after them some more. Go ahead and completely spell out how you personally hate these guys/people. Go ahead and comment on them every last time something comes up. Don't ever ever quit trying to let the world know who they are. Go ahead and glen beck that shit dude! :cool:
 

StormfrontFL

Superior Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Posts
8,903
Media
4
Likes
6,857
Points
358
Location
United States
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Dude, you just don't get it. It's not a contest. You need to open your eyes that racism exists and comes in all colors. That was my point. You can let it paralyze you, or you can deal with it and move forward. Those who have dealt with it with class, dignity and self respect are heroes, and Sharpton and Jackson aren't even in the same league. Both have always been about self promotion, not representing the little guy. Sadly, they both take advantage of they very people they proclaim to be representing. They are vile charlatans who are race baiters using their notoriety to be constantly in the public eye. Sad that many people don't recognize that. The smarts one do.

And if you haven't figured it out yet, the reason why people ignore your leading questions is to avoid the bs agenda you have. If you had a legitimate question, and were honestly open and objective, maybe people would respond. But the hate gets tired. Just a heads up.
As JT pointed out in another thread, you are conceding the point. You can't answer the questions because there is no answer that can justify the GOP's actions. No matter how long you search via Google you'll never find an article to justify closing precincts in Democratic and minority area while increasing the number in GOP areas,

Another lousy attempt to divert attention from yourself and point it at me. I never said that bigotry goes one way however you are making out that it is. Why else is it that you portray any black media figure who points out discrimination as a race baiter while intentionally ignoring the white media figures who almost daily make race an issue when they attempt to blame minorities the cause of problems?

You say deal with it and move on. Well pointing it out and trying to rectify the problem is dealing with it. Why should anyone being discriminated against "move on"? By your words you have just defined a race baiter as anyone who points out discrimination and doesn't ignore it and "move on". Thanks for that so just go get your robe and hood and have fun:pat: