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.

 

Michelle Obama requires photo ID and SS number for book signing

page: 13
46
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by PvtHudson

Originally posted by captaintyinknots


Its not about finding out whether or not the people are "legal". It is about protecting the First Lady.

People just keep on trying to make something out of nothing.

And for the record, this entire thread should be pulled down as political trolling.


LOL! ATS always wanting to silence dissent against Democrats or Obama.


"LOL" the anti-obama crowd always jumps to this defense whenever someone doesnt agree with them.




posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American

Originally posted by captaintyinknots


Its not about finding out whether or not the people are "legal". It is about protecting the First Lady.

People just keep on trying to make something out of nothing.

And for the record, this entire thread should be pulled down as political trolling.


Isn't it even more important to protect the integrity of the voting process? Yet the Democrats won't even consider a voter ID to do so.

/TOA


Sure its important to protect the voting process. Care to explain to me how the two topics are actually connected, outside of the fact that they both have something to do with ID?



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by wardk28
 


And we have a winner! The most astute comment yet! ...Other than the one that was censored already, I'm sure. Folks, never in our nation's history have we been subjected to a more skewed, narcissistic and under qualified REGIME of leadership than we are right now. Mark my words - To win again in November for the House of O, is going to include a turn of events for the American citizens that will rival the current speculation.

When the Dictator has dictated (during an election year, for crying out loud) to his "subjects" and decreed support of gay-marriage and by-passed the written laws to give amnesty to those here illegally, we can only imagine what his final 4 will mean to the majority.

And that's what we'll call his second term - "The Final 4"

It has NOTHING to do with gay marriage or amnesty. This post is just a humble attempt at bringing to light, this new and dangerous mentality, inexperienced and weak that controls the fate of so many good people.

The SOB hasn't even managed so much as a Taco Bell...But yeah, "Hope" and "Change" voters still haven't asked what EXACTLY that "Change" was going to be...
- Disarmament of the citizens to prevent a Civil War and many other unjust “Lefty” reasons, mostly fear
- Re-write the Constitution with a “Progressive” mind set, to empower those views protected by 2 centuries of conservative leadership and strategy…and success.
- To put the nail in the coffin of, “One Nation Under God” to bring satisfaction to the Godless, eco-centric MINORITY (Don’t believe in God?…No problem! It’s still arguable that the general message of religion has strengthened the masses to perform in ways held “moral” and “accountable” through practices that are the actual foundation of everything. Of course, most of the lost and Godless aren’t “in” to the whole accountability thing anyway – And they dub it “Progressive”! So comical…)
- To make sure every student gets an “A” regardless of effort – Every person can get the handouts that they are “ENTITLED” to – And to ensure that those that do work harder to get ahead are never actually rewarded, since it means that another person has to “feel bad” about it. (The 99% actually went to work to put into the tax system, dollars, that went to welfare and soup kitchens – The “99%” never attended any rallies – We were busy WORKING and trying to put Capitalism to good use)
Since he’s a shut in to win. The question is, what will YOU do with your Final 4?



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


I think that its perfectly sensible that they take this step for those who will get near the First Lady. This is an example of Far Right lunacy.

I do agree though that asking for ID before you can vote is also reasonable and those opposed obviously think illegal votes will benefit their side. They think it's a sporting event and cheating is OK with them as long as they win. I'm convinced those from the Far Left would have no problem making Obama a Dictator if they thought they could get away with it. After all they are more intelligent and need to control people too stupid to let them run their lives


So the extremists from both sides seem to me to be about the same.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by seabag
 


I think that its perfectly sensible that they take this step for those who will get near the First Lady. This is an example of Far Right lunacy.

I do agree though that asking for ID before you can vote is also reasonable and those opposed obviously think illegal votes will benefit their side. They think it's a sporting event and cheating is OK with them as long as they win. I'm convinced those from the Far Left would have no problem making Obama a Dictator if they thought they could get away with it. After all they are more intelligent and need to control people too stupid to let them run their lives


So the extremists from both sides seem to me to be about the same.


This is so well put that I had to quote it. Thank you for stating this so succinctly.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
I do agree though that asking for ID before you can vote is also reasonable and those opposed obviously think illegal votes will benefit their side. They think it's a sporting event and cheating is OK with them as long as they win.


Actually, most of the people I talk to that are opposed to the ID laws feel the same way that I do. You kind of have to prove that there is a problem before asking me to help fix it. I see no problem. No one has ever voted in my name other than me. None of you can give me the examples of this crime I am asking for.

So, did you ever stop to think that perhaps we just do not want the government getting more in out business, asking us to pay more money, and giving them more power when no one can present a good reason to do so?



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bixxi3
There not related it’s funny how idiotic people can be with it comes to right & left.


Wow, since we are going to throw out veiled insults perhaps we could use proper grammar - the insults have more effect that way. I think you mean "they are not related..." not "there not related".

The two are absolutely related - if one must show ID to get into the White House for a Tour (as part of which they vet a person's ID, criminal history and their immigration status or nationality) to protect the First Family from possible stalkers/crazies why should we not at least check the same information to insure the integrity of the voting process?


Originally posted by Bixxi3I wish the use did have voter ID laws bush probably would not of been reelected.


Hello...pot this it kettle - I am black what color are you? Amazing you make an insult at those who show some left/right leaning, then show your left/right partisanship in the same post. Awesome!


Originally posted by Bixxi3
There not related its funny how idiotic people can be with it comes to right & left.



Originally posted by Bixxi3Its not like people can fake a drivers ID, right?


Sure, so why check them for a visit with the First Lady right - hypocrisy is alive and well I see.

I mean fake SSN and ID are a street corner and $100.00 away from you right now if you know who to ask. So why bother?

Because to check the system is at least a place to start before they are cleaning their brains off the walls and wondering why. It is called due diligence.


Originally posted by Bixxi3 Deaths are public records you can find out if a dead person took part in a vote. doesn't mean we need to show ID to vote. Seems like a extreme response why not just introduce fact checking


"Fact checking" is all people are asking for they just want it before the vote is cast not after.

Pro-tip, the time to intervene in an event is before the vote is cast not after to see how many votes were illegal if they are challenged (after the fact) - once the vote is taken and the new pundits post the "predicted outcome" getting the correct count becomes an emotional rather than an intellectual objective pursuit. See the Bush-Gore recount as an example.

The outcome of that goat rodeo was in no way an objective process. In a case like that one both sides become emotionally invested and will take any measure to get the win to include disenfranchising legitimate voters if that’s what it takes to win with legal wrangling.

I would say ensuring one person one vote and validating their citizenship and eligibility to place that vote at the time it is made would go a long way toward making people feel the integrity of the process was more protected.

Sure, fraud will still be attempted and even successfully executed with fake documents but it takes all the plausible deniability out of the act for the perpetrator. They won’t be able to feign ignorance (i voted at the wrong place) or a mistake (oh, my bad I forgot I voted once already) an attempt to subvert the process will be obvious to the moderators.

Preventing a crime (voter fraud) before it happens is more preferable to investigating one after it has occurred.

Ask any victim.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by olaru12
reply to post by seabag
 


Sarah Palin did exactly the same thing when I went to buy her book.....


SS protocol...

Now what were you sayin?



THANK YOU!!! So sick of the Obama bashing, I come on here now and check topics then get the heck out.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 03:47 PM
link   
New president runs of change.

People still losing houses, jobs, savings. 11 year war still going strong. Homeland security is watching it's citizens but not so much the borders. Financial system being bailed out because their billions and trillions are not enough.

Wife gets to be first lady, write a book and have high cost to tax payer book signing.

Here is a change:

Sign the books and sell them out of the US Printing Office...



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   
She's not worth the effort it takes to reach for my wallet and get my i.d. I'm sure Oprah will say it's a must read, I think it's a must avoid.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by roadgravel
New president runs of change.

People still losing houses, jobs, savings. 11 year war still going strong. Homeland security is watching it's citizens but not so much the borders. Financial system being bailed out because their billions and trillions are not enough.

Wife gets to be first lady, write a book and have high cost to tax payer book signing.

Here is a change:

Sign the books and sell them out of the US Printing Office...


Yeah that is messed up. If McCain had won the election he never would have let his wife be first lady. This is bull what Obama is trying to pull. Getting his wife a sweet deal like that...unlike any president before him.
edit on 18-6-2012 by habitforming because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 03:57 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   
The cost to the government would probably be less if they buy the books, give her a check for her royalty, and ship free to the first 10,000 people to submit a request.

Just seems there is always government money for those at the top of the heap and the cuts are targeted toward the bottom.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
I thought requiring people to provide ID and their SSN was a racist act like the Jim Crow laws of 1877? Isn’t that what we have been told? Obama himself has done his best to prevent stricter voting laws that would require people to show ID but apparently it’s ok to have that requirement to get an autograph from an elitist like Michelle Obama?


I’m sick of these hypocritical elitists?


Complete false equivalence. ID and SS for background checks for meeting a politician (or the wife of the President, in this case) is not the same as Voter ID laws.

Stop playing partisan politics and get out of this "Right vs. Left/us vs. them" tactic. You are playing right into the TPTB's hands.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 



Again, not trying to split hairs but elections and voting are State issues and if a State wants to require an ID, than it is up to its People to decide; not the Federal Governments'.


I appreciate your thorough explanation, and you are correct, but you missed the part about Holder going after Texas. Texas and other states have adopted voter ID laws and holder is challenging them (likely at the direction of Obama). 

What happened to states rights? If it's not up to the Federal government as you correctly stated then what is our idiotic AG doing???



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by The Old American

Isn't it even more important to protect the integrity of the voting process? Yet the Democrats won't even consider a voter ID to do so.

/TOA


The integrity of the voting process is not at risk...when every and any rational statistics or investigations are examined...but voter suppression in the guise of "voter integrity measures" is in fact occuring and it is not strange coincidence that it is occuring battlegropund states.
edit on 18-6-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)


Sure it's at risk. Thinking people know this. That's why I, even as a staunch fiscal conservative, would back a national voter ID, paid for with our income taxes. That way, there is absolutely and unequivocally zero voter suppression or racism or any other fairy dust and unicorn farts that the Democrats can come up with to block it. It's free (well, the perception would be free) for everyone, no matter who you are...as long as you are a citizen of the U.S.

/TOA



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American
That's why I, even as a staunch fiscal conservative, would back a national voter ID, paid for with our income taxes.


The only issue I have with this is the 'national' part. Voting is not a national issue. We do not have national elections. We have state elections for national offices. It should be up to the respective states to decide this.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


I wish I could bring to you a better response but I haven't been following those cases, i.e: Florida, Texas, et. al.

My understanding is as long as a State's voter laws follow the guidelines established in the Constitution of the United States and their own Constitutions and laws, the Federal Government has no jurisdiction over what the States decide in how they conduct those elections; may it be voter IDs or "bring us a copy of your utility bill" or "show up and vote".

Then again, the Federal Government tries to place itself as the jurisdiction in a lot of cases, but their is hope in the Bond v. United States Supreme Court case in which jurisdiction was challenged and the Individual won.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Why would anyone want a book written by her anyway? Much less want her to sign it?


MBF

posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 10:54 PM
link   
I don't think she will have to worry about signing anything for me. Line two!



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join