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: 9
46
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by sonnny1
Well,look at it this way........

What REAL reason does she need all this information,when her OWN Husband,didn't need it,for his bid for Presidency?





Since nobody seems to get it, I'll say it again: SHE IS NOT ASKING FOR THIS INFO. THE SECRET SERVICE IS. The thread title is blatantly false and misleading.

This is just sad.
edit on 17-6-2012 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)


OK. The Secret Service is.






This doesnt involve Prostitution,in anyway,does it ?


And still the question remains. Why isnt she not up in arms,when her own Husband,didnt require ID'S for his bid,in his election?

WHY are you side stepping the question?

Thats sad also.....







posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by habitforming
 



You are going to have to prove that to me. I have never been turned away because someone already voted in my name. I am old enough to have become eligible to vote more than once.


You are a youngster, huh?



Dead people voting is a type of election fraud that occurs when the name of a deceased person remains on a state's official list of registered voters and a living person fraudulently casts a ballot in that name.
link

This seems like an easy way for illegals to vote, right; just claim they are a person who is deceased…the voting monitors have no reason to try and verify DEATH when the person’s name is on the damn role!!

As far as the “proof” you requested…..


A voter fraud controversy is currently taking place in South Carolina after the Department of Motor vehicles discovered that 953 deceased registered voters appeared to have voted in state elections. The state’s attorney general, Alan Wilson (R), is now asking the Feds to investigate elections dating back to before the 2008 presidential election. There is no evidence of this occurring in Saturday’s primary election, but Wilson says it is a possibility.

According to the report, some of the voters passed away as far back as six years ago, and 37,000 deceased individuals were still on the state’s voter rolls after they died. These recent allegations come as the Department of Justice has blocked the state’s controversial voter photo ID law, claiming it discriminates against minorities.
link

The word Naïve comes to mind…

Just saying!



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:31 PM
link   
Seems off topic but, when I vote I show either a voter reg card or driver license. Sounds like there might be a market for dead people's voter reg cards.
edit on 6/17/2012 by roadgravel because: typo



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by seabag
 


I never attacked you or even mentioned you.

Yawn



Really? You said:


When right wingers get desperate their stories get sillier and sillier.
Stick to the real reasons why Obama is bad, not garbage stories like this, they just make you look bad.


What part of that response addressed the contents of the OP? Seems like you attacked “right-wingers” to me?

You failed to do much else.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


They just don't get it,and apparently never will.

Ask for ID to cash a check
Open a bank account
Buy a car
Buy a home
Get pulled over for speeding
Got see the like totally awesome FLOTUS

No problemo.

Ask for it at a voluntary act of voting

Racist!
Wrong!
You hate Poor People!

And for millions of Americans who drive to the polling booth by law they should already have it on them,

The anti argument to the op is ludicrious.

Dead people do vote
Felons vote
illegals vote.

Meh



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Voter ID Laws are not about determining whether anyone is leagl or not...it is to keep dead people from voting and from other people showing up and voting in someones place...the only trolling going in this thread is your reply...I do not think its a big deal to ask for a picture ID for someone to prove who they are in order to vote...in many SSN offices to enter one must present an ID...just grow up and you stop the trolling !



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by seabag
 


They just don't get it,and apparently never will.

Ask for ID to cash a check
Open a bank account
Buy a car
Buy a home
Get pulled over for speeding
Got see the like totally awesome FLOTUS

No problemo.

Ask for it at a voluntary act of voting

Racist!
Wrong!
You hate Poor People!

And for millions of Americans who drive to the polling booth by law they should already have it on them,

The anti argument to the op is ludicrious.

Dead people do vote
Felons vote
illegals vote.

Meh


I know!! I enjoy hearing their lame arguments though.

If anyone wonders why we had 4 years of Obama I will point to several posts in this thread.

It’s funny when they keep repeating there is no comparison!

REALLY??



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by xEphon
 



I read the thread.

It's based on an apples versus oranges cry of hypocricy in regards to two wildly different scenarios.
Clearly, you have no understanding of the debate of requiring voter ID's as is made painfully obvious by the fact you're trying to equate it to the standard protocol of requiring ID's for the protection of the presidential family.

They both have the word "ID" in them so they must be related. Is that really your logic?


Well, you’ve exposed yourself now because that question has been raised (and answered) 10 times already.

Nice try…I’m not going to waste my time answering again.

I don’t know who called you into this thread to ‘tow the line’ but it’s obvious….either that or you just didn’t read the thread.

It’s sad that people still help the elites rule the roost. I’d have figured you’d all be tired of the status quo by now.

What’s it going to be for you; 4 more years of Obama?


Sad!





I have no idea what you're even talking about.
If you knew anything about me and what I believe in you would know that I think both major political parties are two sides of the same coin; so, no, I'm not here to tow any line, unless that line is common sense and critical thinking.

I read all 8 almost 9 pages so far and not once did anyone make a valid reason as to why asking for ID's for presidential security reasons is in any way related to requiring IDs to vote.

I personally don't see why requiring ID's to vote is a bad thing; however, I understand the oppositions point. The current voter laws have been relatively sufficent in preventing voter fraud, so, requiring IDs is just another step that may discourage people from voting. Not everyone has an ID and for those that don't, it's typically the lower class and minorities, hence the racist accusations.

To that, I say, well get an ID! But, that's my opinion. If the current system that's in place has been working, then it's really a debate I'd rather not get into.

However, to make these two issues mutually inclusive is just partisan bait tactics. I personally think its fine if states require voter IDs. I also think the presidential family needs protection. And, i'm sure there are many on here who think requiring voter IDs is rubbish but also think the presidential family needs protection.

Would I call them hypocrites? Never.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:49 PM
link   


'Nuff said...



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by xEphon
 



I have no idea what you're even talking about.


Sure you do…its one or the other.


If you knew anything about me and what I believe in you would know that I think both major political parties are two sides of the same coin; so, no, I'm not here to tow any line, unless that line is common sense and critical thinking.


If you knew anything about me you’d know that I agree with that….and critical thinking would lead you to the obvious hypocrisy of this situation.


I read all 8 almost 9 pages so far and not once did anyone make a valid reason as to why asking for ID's for presidential security reasons is in any way related to requiring IDs to vote.


Both are to protect people; one is to protect MO and the other is to protect me and you.


I personally don't see why requiring ID's to vote is a bad thing; however, I understand the oppositions point. The current voter laws have been relatively sufficent in preventing voter fraud, so, requiring IDs is just another step that may discourage people from voting. Not everyone has an ID and for those that don't, it's typically the lower class and minorities, hence the racist accusations.

To that, I say, well get an ID! But, that's my opinion. If the current system that's in place has been working, then it's really a debate I'd rather not get into.


If you don’t have an ID then you can’t even cash your welfare check…let’s be real.


However, to make these two issues mutually inclusive is just partisan bait tactics. I personally think its fine if states require voter IDs. I also think the presidential family needs protection. And, i'm sure there are many on here who think requiring voter IDs is rubbish but also think the presidential family needs protection.

Would I call them hypocrites? Never.


WE AGREE ON BOTH!! If you read the thread then you’d know that!! I think both instances deserve a thorough CHECK!!


It's hypocrisy to demand one but not the other!!



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:57 PM
link   
YET... You don't have to have an ID to VOTE because it's RACIST and it disenfranchises illegal immigrants from the election process that they're not allowed to participate in to begin with.

Hypocrisy as an art form, indeed.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
You are a youngster, huh?


I guess if that is what you call someone in their 40s then yeah.



Dead people voting is a type of election fraud that occurs when the name of a deceased person remains on a state's official list of registered voters and a living person fraudulently casts a ballot in that name.
link

This seems like an easy way for illegals to vote, right; just claim they are a person who is deceased…the voting monitors have no reason to try and verify DEATH when the person’s name is on the damn role!!


Sure that seems real easy. Who publishes these lists for illegal voters to know what name and address to go in with? How many cases of this have been prosecuted?



As far as the “proof” you requested…..


A voter fraud controversy is currently taking place in South Carolina after the Department of Motor vehicles discovered that 953 deceased registered voters appeared to have voted in state elections. The state’s attorney general, Alan Wilson (R), is now asking the Feds to investigate elections dating back to before the 2008 presidential election. There is no evidence of this occurring in Saturday’s primary election, but Wilson says it is a possibility.


You do not really know what proof is, do you? A republican made a claim that is being looked into. Hardly proof his claim holds any water.



According to the report, some of the voters passed away as far back as six years ago, and 37,000 deceased individuals were still on the state’s voter rolls after they died. These recent allegations come as the Department of Justice has blocked the state’s controversial voter photo ID law, claiming it discriminates against minorities.
link

The word Naïve comes to mind…

Just saying!





Yeah it is pretty naive to believe that because a politician thinks something might be happening then it must actually be happening and his accusation alone is proof. No, actually that is just stupid.

So here I am still waiting for that proof.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   
If you want to believe that a standard security protocol that requires IDs is somehow related to a debate over whether IDs should be required are somehow comparable, then have at it.

I'm literally blown away.

A is standard practice about IDs
B is debatable topic about IDs

You know what. Nevermind. An old saying is forcing me to bow out of this thread before I go cross eyed.
edit on 17-6-2012 by xEphon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by habitforming
 



I guess if that is what you call someone in their 40s then yeah.


I call that uniformed! I'm in my late 30's and I know what's going on so you have no excuse!




Sure that seems real easy. Who publishes these lists for illegal voters to know what name and address to go in with? How many cases of this have been prosecuted?


The voting jurisdictions do! And NOT ENOUGH have been prosecuted! Who pays for that??

The reality is that it HAPPENS and you’re being disingenuous.



Keep drinking Kool Aid, dude…you’re free to do so! I’m fee to call BS when I see it!



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96



I am old enough to have become eligible to vote more than once.


Really?

Someone is eligible to vote more than once?

Reminds me of vote early and vote often.


Your reading skills reading are lacking. Old enough to have become eligible to vote....more than once. Nothing about voting more than once. Reaching the age of eligibility more than once. Jesus Christ I cannot believe how much I have to explain to you.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
I call that uniformed! I'm in my late 30's and I know what's going on so you have no excuse!


You call being in my 40s uninformed? Cuz that makes sense.




The voting jurisdictions do! And NOT ENOUGH have been prosecuted! Who pays for that??


I need to see these publications you speak of. I have never seen a list of dead voters.
And you mean you cannot find any actual cases of this happening? I would have at least thought you might find a handful but none eh?


The reality is that it HAPPENS and you’re being disingenuous.


This is my third time asking you to prove it to me. I am not denying anything. I am asking you to make me believe. So far you a failing.





Keep drinking Kool Aid, dude…you’re free to do so! I’m fee to call BS when I see it!


As you should and so do I. I call BS on your claims that you are having a really tough time backing up.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by xEphon
 


They are confused because they see the word ID in both things. This is why they keep trying to connect the right to vote with things like renting a car, buying cigarettes and porn, etc. You know, things many people live just fine without ever doing.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by habitforming

Originally posted by neo96



I am old enough to have become eligible to vote more than once.


Really?

Someone is eligible to vote more than once?

Reminds me of vote early and vote often.


Your reading skills reading are lacking. Old enough to have become eligible to vote....more than once. Nothing about voting more than once. Reaching the age of eligibility more than once. Jesus Christ I cannot believe how much I have to explain to you.


Nope reading skills are just fine in fact a person only becomes "eligible" to vote when they turn 18.

Yes?

So they do not become eligible more than once since a person only turns 18 once in their lives.

Sorry nothing has been explained except the lengths some go to defend the Obama's.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by habitforming
 



You call being in my 40s uninformed? Cuz that makes sense.


I call someone with your response who is in his late 40’s un-informed! YES!




I need to see these publications you speak of. I have never seen a list of dead voters.

And you mean you cannot find any actual cases of this happening? I would have at least thought you might find a handful but none eh?

This is my third time asking you to prove it to me. I am not denying anything. I am asking you to make me believe. So far you a failing.


Seriously? OK! Where do you live that you haven’t heard of this?? Did you watch the video?
So you need ONE CASE to prove it happen??


OK…how about 4?


While NAACP President Benjamin Jealous lashed out at new state laws requiring photo ID for voting, an NAACP executive sits in prison, sentenced for carrying out a massive voter fraud scheme.



Sowers was found guilty of voting in the names of Carrie Collins, Walter Howard, Sheena Shelton, Alberta Pickett, Draper Cotton and Eddie Davis. She was also convicted of voting in the names of four dead persons: James L. Young, Dora Price, Dorothy Harris, and David Ross.
link




posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:47 PM
link   
hmmm, without going down the comparison road so many have laid before me, i still have a question or two.
anyone care to explain how or why this requirement isn't discriminatory to every citizen who does not possess them?

why should any citizen be prevented from receiving a "signature copy" of a personal product that has nothing to do with the US, the Administration, National Security or history for that matter ??

and, what's with the 4 day wait anyway ??
are they expecting half of the country to appear and request time with this person ??
multiple background checks can be done in minutes, not days.
heck, less time is required for a "cooling off" period to collect a purchased firearm (3 days)



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join