It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Veterans “Welcome” Obama to Delaware With Their Backs to Him

page: 13
37
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: bbracken677

Why, ty, and one for you as well!

The list simply HAD to be posted, after all the whining about "disenfranchised" voters. Simple logic shows that's complete bs.




posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879
Whoa! hold up LadyGreenEyes you just a page back wrongfully accused the man of gutting Veteran's benefits and deploying more troops to war when in fact he was trying to do the opposite.


No, he isn't doing anything to help veterans. He's completely against the military, and those of us in the military/families know this well.


originally posted by: dawnstar
I gave you info that stated the opposite was true and it was I guess.. YOUR?? Republican congress that maliciously sough to destroy the bill first by linking it to the Nuke /Iran sanctions,that it would increase spending was an after thought,and yesss it would, such as it is those things cost "money" but so are the wars started by the previous administration that ran in the Trillions.


Are you claiming troops aren't still being deployed? I hope not, because you'd be dead wrong. I KNOW they are being deployed; my husband's unit just left. No, he didn't; too close to retirement this time, finally. LOTS of units are deployed recently, and deploying. He didn't slow down a thing.


originally posted by: dawnstar

(Reuters) - The U.S. war in Iraq has cost $1.7 trillion with an additional $490 billion in benefits owed to war veterans, expenses that could grow to more than $6 trillion over the next four decades counting interest, a study released on Thursday said.

www.reuters.com...

All attempts made to pay for that war the old fashioned way by raising taxes have been blocked by Republicans who assumed that Iraqi oil would pay for it..good luck with that as Iraq is not even a country today and btw those same folks clamoring to deploy even more troops and get into even more wars from Syria,Iraq,Iran and Ukraine non other than your Republican leadership which you and others here have conveniently given a pass to, because all they have to do is puff their chest up wave the stars and stripes pat a vet or two on the head with a photo op and be done with it.
Just like they did with the first res-ponders after 911
Republicans Block U.S. Health Aid for 9/11 Workers


Show any proof that anyone officially believed oil would pay for anything. Show the evidence that we got any oil from Iraq. So far, I have heard that claim countless times, and seen not a shred of proof. It's the commander-in-chief who wants to send troops to all those other locations. His decisions, to help out his Muslim buddies. Military family member here, and I know the truth. You have that all backward.


originally posted by: dawnstar

WASHINGTON — Republican senators blocked Democratic legislation on Thursday that sought to provide medical care to rescue workers and others who became ill as a result of breathing in toxic fumes, dust and smoke at the site of the World Trade Center attack in 2001.
The 9/11 health bill, a version of which was approved by the House of Representatives in September, was among several initiatives that Senate Democrats had hoped to approve before the close of the 111th Congress. Supporters believe this was their last real opportunity to have the bill passed

www.nytimes.com...

I swear even though I have major problems with Obama ,I found myself constantly having to defend him against zombie lies of the rabid right.


Post the entire piece of legislation, with all the data, then we can discuss it. Bills get blocked because they have things added in that should not be, or are poorly written, or a host of reasons.

I am fairly certain that phrases like "zombie lies of the rabid right" are against the TOS.



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 08:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Ok let's look at these lies:


No, let's look at these FACTS. I know those are hard on some people, but try and bear up.


originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

1. You need valid identification to gain employment.


Not a constitutional right, voting is.


Not the point. The statement is a fact, and you called it a lie. If a person has a job, however, they have ID, and are thus not "disenfranchised" by any voter ID requirement.


originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

2. You need valid identification to collect welfare benefits, or social security, or food stamps.


You can get food stamps without an ID, I've helped a lot of homeless people get food stamps, no ID's required, just knowing their Social Security number is all that was required. You don't have to keep using your ID for welfare, and Social Security, it's put on a card for you when you get it.


Not legally, you can't. Homeless people have to have ID for that. I have a family member who's been there. They also do regular reviews, where the person has to again prove eligibility, or lose the benefits. Yes, they need ID. Next!


originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

3. You need valid photo identification to have insurance.


No you don't And it's not a constitutional right.


I never stated it was a Constitutional right. I stated you have to have ID to get it, which you do. You are batting zero so far here.


originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

4. You need valid photo identification to obtain housing.


Not a constitutional right


You seem to be confused as to the issue here. The issue isn't which of the things listed is a "right"; the issue is that they all require identification. As should voting. Maybe you need a cup of coffee or something?


originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

5. You need valid photo identification to attend school.


No you don't, how many 6 year olds do you know with a government issued ID?


.....which has a picture.......*smacks head*


originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

6. You need valid photo identification to drive a car.


Again, not a constitutional right.


Again, not the point!


originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

7. You need valid photo identification to adopt a pet.


Not a constitutional right.


You are starting to sound like a broken record. See the above responses to the same invalid comment.


originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

8. You need valid photo identification to buy a gun.


I think they should need a whole lot more than that, and there are laws that are set up for that, it's part of the well regulated bit in the second amendment that gun nuts constantly forget.


No surprise there. Let people vote illegally, but prevent them from the Constitutional right to defend themselves. Just what I would expect from you.

(to several more valid needs for ID)

originally posted by: HauntWok

Not a constitutional right.


Put a penny on the needle already.


originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

13. You need valid photo identification to get married.


Not a constitutional right.


Well, that's an interesting claim......

Voting is for legal citizens ONLY. Showing proper ID, that is, as proven, required for virtually every aspect of our lives, guarantees that the right isn't abused by those bent on fraud. You know, the way the guy there now was elected.
edit on 25-7-2014 by LadyGreenEyes because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-7-2014 by LadyGreenEyes because: quote issue, and forgot lto list reason



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 08:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: HauntWok

8. You need valid photo identification to buy a gun.
I think they should need a whole lot more than that, and there are laws that are set up for that, it's part of the well regulated bit in the second amendment that gun nuts constantly forget.

So, regulate the 2nd Amendment, but not regulate voting. Interesting.



originally posted by: HauntWok
13. You need valid photo identification to get married.

Not a constitutional right.

Well, isn't that interesting as well.



I thought so! All this time, some have claimed it is.......

Then again, it's par for the course all considered. The fact that you need ID to get by as an adult in our society, and anyone with a home, food, job, car, etc. has ID, seems to escape him.



posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 09:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Spider879
Whoa! hold up LadyGreenEyes you just a page back wrongfully accused the man of gutting Veteran's benefits and deploying more troops to war when in fact he was trying to do the opposite.


No, he isn't doing anything to help veterans. He's completely against the military, and those of us in the military/families know this well.


originally posted by: dawnstar
I gave you info that stated the opposite was true and it was I guess.. YOUR?? Republican congress that maliciously sough to destroy the bill first by linking it to the Nuke /Iran sanctions,that it would increase spending was an after thought,and yesss it would, such as it is those things cost "money" but so are the wars started by the previous administration that ran in the Trillions.


Are you claiming troops aren't still being deployed? I hope not, because you'd be dead wrong. I KNOW they are being deployed; my husband's unit just left. No, he didn't; too close to retirement this time, finally. LOTS of units are deployed recently, and deploying. He didn't slow down a thing.


originally posted by: dawnstar

(Reuters) - The U.S. war in Iraq has cost $1.7 trillion with an additional $490 billion in benefits owed to war veterans, expenses that could grow to more than $6 trillion over the next four decades counting interest, a study released on Thursday said.

www.reuters.com...

All attempts made to pay for that war the old fashioned way by raising taxes have been blocked by Republicans who assumed that Iraqi oil would pay for it..good luck with that as Iraq is not even a country today and btw those same folks clamoring to deploy even more troops and get into even more wars from Syria,Iraq,Iran and Ukraine non other than your Republican leadership which you and others here have conveniently given a pass to, because all they have to do is puff their chest up wave the stars and stripes pat a vet or two on the head with a photo op and be done with it.
Just like they did with the first res-ponders after 911
Republicans Block U.S. Health Aid for 9/11 Workers


Show any proof that anyone officially believed oil would pay for anything. Show the evidence that we got any oil from Iraq. So far, I have heard that claim countless times, and seen not a shred of proof. It's the commander-in-chief who wants to send troops to all those other locations. His decisions, to help out his Muslim buddies. Military family member here, and I know the truth. You have that all backward.


originally posted by: dawnstar

WASHINGTON — Republican senators blocked Democratic legislation on Thursday that sought to provide medical care to rescue workers and others who became ill as a result of breathing in toxic fumes, dust and smoke at the site of the World Trade Center attack in 2001.
The 9/11 health bill, a version of which was approved by the House of Representatives in September, was among several initiatives that Senate Democrats had hoped to approve before the close of the 111th Congress. Supporters believe this was their last real opportunity to have the bill passed

www.nytimes.com...

I swear even though I have major problems with Obama ,I found myself constantly having to defend him against zombie lies of the rabid right.


Post the entire piece of legislation, with all the data, then we can discuss it. Bills get blocked because they have things added in that should not be, or are poorly written, or a host of reasons.

I am fairly certain that phrases like "zombie lies of the rabid right" are against the TOS.

Better yet you post the entire legislation and underline the PORK! and you know very well that this current congress blocked everything not tied to tax cuts for the the rich.



Bills Blocked by Republican Filibusters
Friday, November 22, 2013
Here is a list of bills that would have passed the Senate if it weren't for Republcians requiring a 60-vote threshold.

113th Congress:

Manchin-Toomey Background Checks

Vote: 54-46

Keep Student Loans Affordable Act of 2013

Vote: 51-49

Would keep the interest rate of subsidized federal student loans at 3.4% for another year

Student Loan Affordability Act

Vote: 51-46

Would keep the interest rate of subsidized federal student loans at 3.4% for two years.

Sequestration replacement

Vote: 51-49

Would postpone the sequester until Jan 2, 2014

Required millionaires to pay at least a 30% tax rate



112th Congress



Bring Jobs Home Act

Vote: 56-42

Would grant businesses a tax credit for eliminating a business outside the US and relocating it in the US

Would deny businesses a tax deduction for outsourcing expenses related to outsourcing a business



Small Business Jobs and Tax Relief Act

Vote: 53-44

Gives small businesses a tax credit if their 2012 payrolls were higher than their 2011 payrolls



Paycheck Fairness Act

Vote: 52-47

Requires employers to prove differences in pay are not gender-related

Would allow employees to discuss salaries without retaliation, and allows government to collect data on women workers to better evaluate the wage gap



DISCLOSE Act

Vote: 51-44; reconsidered 53-45

Requires corporations, super PACs, labor unions, and other groups to disclose donors who give in excess of $10,000 for political contributions



Paying a Fair Share Act of 2012

Vote: 51-45

Requires millionaires to pay a 30% minimum tax rate

Expresses the Sense of the Senate that tax reform should repeal unfair loopholes and expenditures and make sure the wealthiest taxpayers pay a fair share of taxes



Repeal Big Oil Tax Subsidies Act

Vote: 51-47

Extends tax credits for energy efficient residences, electric vehicles, and other alternative forms of energy including wind facilities



Teachers and First Responders Back to Work Act of 2011

Vote: 50-50

Allocates grants to states to help them rehire teachers and others working in educational support



110th Congress



DREAM Act of 2010

Vote: 55-43



Emergency Senior Citizens Relief Act

Vote: 53-45

Provide senior citizens with a tax credit in lieu of a Social Security COLA



Paycheck Fairness Act (again)

Vote: 58-41



Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act

Vote: 53-45

Giving employers tax breaks for bringing overseas jobs back to America



DISCLOSE Act (again)

www.sanders.senate.gov...

You are correct however that using oil revenue to pay for the war was not "official" policy however Republican talking heads wished to make it so see Paul Wolfowitz .

May I add I hope your husband return home safe and sound.
edit on 25-7-2014 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 04:51 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

No, what you don't understand is that voting is a constitutional right, and forcing someone to give up their fourth amendment rights to vote isn't right.

You are defacto saying that the voter is an illegal alien unless they provide prof of their innocence.

Obama was legally elected, he wasn't born in Kenya, he was born in Hawaii, he's proven this time and again. Stop with the birther innuendo.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok

No, we will have proof they are not illegals,once they HAVE an ID ,THEN they will have to FORGE their own like EVERYONE else has to ,or NOT vote.

Doesn't really matter the midterms are a bygone conclusion after THAT circus.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

Earlier today I had to produce my ID to purchase a Bic lighter.

I though of this thread immediately.

What a backasswards country we are.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 08:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

Perhaps you should stop expecting the Democrats to be allowed to make all the decisions. There are very good and valid reasons that 60 votes are required. Not wasting time trying to explain them to someone who is clearly not going to listen, however.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: TiedDestructor

What does needing a ID to buy a lighter have to do with needing an ID to vote?



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 08:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

No, what you don't understand is that voting is a constitutional right, and forcing someone to give up their fourth amendment rights to vote isn't right.

You are defacto saying that the voter is an illegal alien unless they provide prof of their innocence.

Obama was legally elected, he wasn't born in Kenya, he was born in Hawaii, he's proven this time and again. Stop with the birther innuendo.


No one is forced to give up their right to vote by proving that they are eligible to vote. Claiming they are is simply nonsense. People can vote illegally otherwise, and have voted illegally otherwise. Every illegal vote, whether from an illegal alien of a citizen breaking the law, takes the vote from someone else. Simply put, if you don't insure that all votes are legal, cast by legal citizens, you are disenfranchising all voters. Showing proper ID, which adults need to function in society, and which they can obtain free if they have financial issues, prevents disenfranchisement.

No, he wasn't legally elected. Eligibility aside (which is FAR from proven), there were massive cases of voter fraud all over the country. An honest politician would demand that be looked in to, and that new elections were held in places that were clearly won by fraud. When some areas had more votes for him than they had people, you can't claim that isn't a problem. This is about preventing illegal voting, not whether he's eligible or not. If you want to discuss that, start a thread. Otherwise, stop trying to distract from this one with something ONLY you brought up.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

I refuse to entertain redundancy when making a statement.

Twirl that rope somewhere else. I ain't jumpin'.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 11:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: Spider879

Perhaps you should stop expecting the Democrats to be allowed to make all the decisions. There are very good and valid reasons that 60 votes are required. Not wasting time trying to explain them to someone who is clearly not going to listen, however.

Yeah but you then can't go around and lay blame for whats not being done to fix the economy,veteran's issues,the busted infrastructure on Dems or Obama.



posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 11:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

Sure I can. I can make whatever assumptions I choose, and blame whoever I want. I have no obligation to explain my decisions in that regard to you or anyone.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 01:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: Spider879

Sure I can. I can make whatever assumptions I choose, and blame whoever I want. I have no obligation to explain my decisions in that regard to you or anyone.

Off course you can it's called being disingenuous and intellectually bankrupt ..but hey!!.. U do U..



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 02:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

No, it's called having a mind of my own, and not being obligated to justify my ideas to someone who has already made up his mind on an issue. You HAVE done that, in this case. Simply put, we aren't going to agree, so why waste thread space saying the same things over and over? It's pointless. Does that make more sesnse to you, or are you just looking to make personal jabs?



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 03:39 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

By demanding a person's personal papers and effects without a warrant or probable cause, it's a violation of the forth amendment.

The voter registration card is enough proof, as the voter who bears it has already been vetted by the controller of elections.

And, no, Obama did not receive more votes in places than there were voters, that is a zombie lie:


www.factcheck.org...


www.snopes.com...

Sorry, there is not wide spread voter fraud going on.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

By demanding a person's personal papers and effects without a warrant or probable cause, it's a violation of the forth amendment.

The voter registration card is enough proof, as the voter who bears it has already been vetted by the controller of elections.

And, no, Obama did not receive more votes in places than there were voters, that is a zombie lie:


www.factcheck.org...


www.snopes.com...

Sorry, there is not wide spread voter fraud going on.


Checking identification to insure that a person is qualified to vote is not without cause", when massive voter fraud can and does happen. Yes, massive. The voter registration card could be carried by anyone, and they are easily obtained. There is no way, short of checking identification, to know that the person carrying the card is the actual voter. Without ID, someone could register as you in another state, and cancel out your vote.

Clearly, you haven't done any reading except for political sites that pretend there is no issue.

Election Fraud? Obama Won More Than 99 Percent Of The Vote In More Than 100 Ohio Precincts Read more at investmentwatchblog.com...

Maybe you feel such votes aren't "fraud", like this woman (pretty sure she was convicted) -

Did Obama supporter vote 6 times in 2012? Ohio poll worker target of investigation

Tons of news stories on the massive fraud, but you somehow missed them all?

Citing voter fraud, petition at White House web site demands recount of election

Did Obama Steal The Election?



Obama’s Election Victory: 22 things Obama doesn’t want you to know

Obama’s ‘Voter ID’ Scam Is Busted!

"The List", Obama Voter Fraud

Judicial Watch, AEF Challenge Obama Admin for States' Right to Block Noncitizen Voters

Obama Decries “Bogus” Voter Fraud Complaints After 35,570 Double Votes Counted in North Carolina

Barack Obama Voter Fraud 2012

Sometime next week, when you have time to read all that, I'll check for a response.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Every single one of those links have been completely debunked.

Every single one.



posted on Jul, 27 2014 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Every single one of those links have been completely debunked.

Every single one.



Sorry! The Ohio's Wood county over-vote is true! It was in the newspapers here for months afterwards. Two women were found guilty of voter fraud in Hamilton county in 2012. Sadly, one was an election official and was sentenced to 5 years but only served 5 months just to be visited by Al Sharpton upon her release.



new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join