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.
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Indigo5
I see errors in what they have labelled true and false, therefore the rest is nonsense.
Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
"President Obama’s lawsuit claims it is unconstitutional for Ohio to allow servicemen and women extended early voting privileges during the state’s early voting period. " FALSE
That is exactly what is claimed. It is unconstitutional to grant voting rights to members of the military. Their intent may not be to restrict military personel voting further, their intent is to add more days for other people.
Republicans who control Ohio’s state government passed a law last year that would have reduced the time frame for early voting from five weeks to three, eliminated most weekend voting hours and dropped a requirement that poll workers redirect voters to the correct precinct if they show up at the wrong one in a location that hosts multiple precincts. Ohio legislators repealed that law when it became clear it would face a referendum this year, though its ban on early voting on the weekend before elections remained in place because it was part of a separate law
Last month, President Obama’s re-election campaign filed a lawsuit against Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted to demand that in-person voting be allowed during the three-day weekend before elections. It noted that approximately 93,000 Ohioans voted in the three days before the 2008 presidential election. The lawsuit argues that all Ohio voters should be permitted to cast ballots that weekend, as members of the U.S. military are permitted to do. The complaint alleged that Ohio’s legislature failed to justify the disparate treatment between military and nonmilitary voters, and contended the "unequal burden on the fundamental right to vote violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution."
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by macman
Indigo5 and Politifact are drinking too much Obama Cool-Aid.
Go to the Pinocchio System at the Washington Post.
Originally posted by macman
I did visit the site.
Again, statements were cherry picked to show a favorable outcome for 0bama.
Plus, normally one shows the evidence behind what they are stating as incorrect or correct.
They use black and white statements for 0bama, and basically him asserting "The sky is blue", and claim as fact beyond all fact.
For Romney, they use grey area statements.
AGAIN, politifact fail. Indigo5 fail.
PolitiFact relies on on-the-record interviews and publishes a list of sources with every Truth-O-Meter item. When possible, the list includes links to sources that are freely available, although some sources rely on paid subscriptions. The goal is to help readers judge for themselves whether they agree with the ruling.
We looked at presidential approval data from Gallup, which goes back to Harry Truman. It’s the longest continuous data set for presidential approval ratings. We looked at two different measurements: Each president’s lowest approval rating for their entire term, and each president’s lowest point for their first 968 days, which is how long Obama has served in office.
First, the lows for the presidents' entire terms, listed in descending order from the "highest" low to the "lowest" low:
John F. Kennedy: 56 percent
Dwight Eisenhower: 48 percent
Barack Obama: 40 percent
Bill Clinton: 37 percent
Gerald Ford: 37 percent
Ronald Reagan: 35 percent
Lyndon B. Johnson: 35 percent
George H.W. Bush: 29 percent
Jimmy Carter: 28 percent
George W. Bush: 25 percent
Richard Nixon: 24 percent
Harry Truman: 22 percent
By this measure, nine presidents hit lower lows than Obama has.
What about comparing only the first 968 days for each president? Bachmann’s closer with this one, but still wrong. Here is a list of each president’s low point during that time frame:
John F. Kennedy: 61 percent
Dwight Eisenhower: 57 percent
George H.W. Bush: 53 percent
George W. Bush: 50 percent
Richard Nixon: 48 percent
Lyndon B. Johnson: 46 percent
Barack Obama: 40 percent
Bill Clinton: 37 percent
Gerald Ford: 37 percent
Ronald Reagan: 35 percent
Harry Truman: 33 percent
Jimmy Carter: 28 percent
By this measure, five presidents had lows that were worse than Obama at this point in their presidencies.
Originally posted by Indigo5
Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by macman
Indigo5 and Politifact are drinking too much Obama Cool-Aid.
Go to the Pinocchio System at the Washington Post.
The Washington Post? While most would agree they are not as thorough or non-partisan as Politifact...I'll play
The Washington Post gave Mitt Romney's most recent Statement 3 out 4 on the "Pinicchios Scale"
Is Obama challenging voting privileges of Ohio military members?
www.washingtonpost.com... c5-a7dcf1fc161d_blog.html
AND despite being the most favorable "fact-checker" that conservatives can find...it STILL shows Mitt Romney as lying more often than Pres. Obama..What does that tell you?
www.washingtonpost.com...
Originally posted by Indigo5
The complaint alleged that Ohio’s legislature failed to justify the disparate treatment between military and nonmilitary voters, and contended the "unequal burden on the fundamental right to vote violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution."
President Obama never claimed it was unconstitutional "for Ohio to allow servicemen and women extended early voting privileges "
How about only African-Americans being able to vote early?...Only Unions?...Those without cars?....would a GOP argument that EVERYONE should have equal voting rights be the same as ..."The GOP lawsuit claims it is unconstitutional for Ohio to allow African-Americans extended early voting privileges during the state’s early voting period."???
FALSE logic...BS...Asking that everyone have the same priveledge to vote early (equal protection clause) is not the same as discrimanting against one group.
Originally posted by korathin
reply to post by Indigo5
If Romney is nominated for the Presidency at the Republican Convention, then anyone who stays in the Republican Party is basically giving silent consent to everything they supposedly stand against.
Originally posted by Indigo5
Genuine Conservatives could have gotten a great deal done with the current President...but that would have infuriated the TP...and the Liberal base..
Originally posted by Indigo5
Obama is a moderate...slightly left of center...
Originally posted by Indigo5
Romney is slightly right of center and pretending to be far-right to appeal to new/TP conservatives.
Originally posted by Indigo5
Obama is only cast as far-left in the context the extreme right that has hijacked the conservative party.