new obama vote buys

Posted in the Dunkirk Forum

Comments (Page 2)

Showing posts 21 - 40 of51
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Clyde10

Cranberry Twp, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Jun 17, 2012
 
joe white wrote:
<quoted text>just for once clyde stop defending the man,his announcement coupled with the DOJ suits against voter registration reforms are for one thing and one thing only, to BUY VOTES!!!! losing a case is not good for your legal reputation you know.
Learn how to read. I'm not defending anyone or anything.
joe white

Fredonia, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Jun 17, 2012
 
Clyde10 wrote:
<quoted text>
Learn how to read. I'm not defending anyone or anything.
of course you are with your bs of comparing what Obama is doing with that of Reagan. that is a closet "defense" and you know it!
Pal

Fredonia, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Jun 17, 2012
 
joe white wrote:
<quoted text> DOJ suits against voter registration reforms
http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/...
joe white

Fredonia, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Jun 17, 2012
 
Pal wrote:
gee "pal" how could have I ever expected where that crap was coming from,colbert? what an idiot.head back down to the campus!
Pal

Fredonia, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Jun 17, 2012
 
Crap? I think the word you are looking for is "facts".

I take it you didn't look at the compiled chart using data from the Florida Department of State, which monitors elections, and the Florida Museum of Natural History in Gainesville, which has a renowned ichthyology department.(Ichthyology is the study of fish.)
Clyde10

Cranberry Twp, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Jun 17, 2012
 
joe white wrote:
<quoted text>of course you are with your bs of comparing what Obama is doing with that of Reagan. that is a closet "defense" and you know it!
Learn how to read, moron. I didn't compare anything. I commented on others' efforts to make a distinction.
William

Canton, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Jun 17, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Clyde10 wrote:
<quoted text>.
were did you discuss any substantive differences in the actual policy in your post? The "big difference" you claimed was Reagan had already been re-elected by a wide margin.
"The "big difference" you claimed was Reagan had already been re-elected by a wide margin." All politics on Obama seemingly and suddenly being interested in hispanics! Nuff said!
Clyde10

Cranberry Twp, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Jun 17, 2012
 
William wrote:
<quoted text> "The "big difference" you claimed was Reagan had already been re-elected by a wide margin." All politics on Obama seemingly and suddenly being interested in hispanics! Nuff said!
Nice try at revisionism, but all you have to do is go back and read the posts. It was Joe and Clifford who claimed that the two reform efforts were different because Reagan had already been reelected. Damn internet, it makes it so hard to lie without getting. Timing and motive is irrelevant to whether it's good policy. Or are you really dumb enough to believe that politicians don't consider how things will affect them at the polls? No, you're right, I'm sure that Obama is the only one, ever.
Clifford 1969

Fredonia, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Jun 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Clyde10 wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice try at revisionism, but all you have to do is go back and read the posts. It was Joe and Clifford who claimed that the two reform efforts were different because Reagan had already been reelected. Damn internet, it makes it so hard to lie without getting. Timing and motive is irrelevant to whether it's good policy. Or are you really dumb enough to believe that politicians don't consider how things will affect them at the polls? No, you're right, I'm sure that Obama is the only one, ever.
..........Folks have you ever wondered how the phrase,"You've got more shit than Carter has liver pills",came about??
Clyde10

Cranberry Twp, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Jun 18, 2012
 
You're just pissed because Obama proposed it before Rubio could.
If your boy Marco had presented it, you'd have been cheering him on.

You're all just partisan dimwits. "My side good. Other side bad. Ugh."
joe white

Fredonia, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Jun 18, 2012
 
Clyde10 wrote:
You're just pissed because Obama proposed it before Rubio could.
If your boy Marco had presented it, you'd have been cheering him on.
You're all just partisan dimwits. "My side good. Other side bad. Ugh."
proposed it Mr lawyer? the President "told" the DHS Secretary to ignore the law of the United States. that to me is a clear violation of the oath he took "to swear to uphold the laws of the United States". Sen Rubio is proposing a bill go through the proper legislative process to become law. Sen Rubio did not tell anyone to ignore the laws of the United States did he? if indeed you are a lawyer and are a great constitutional scholar,how can you have overlooked the difference?

Since: May 09

usa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Jun 18, 2012
 
Clyde10 wrote:
You're just pissed because Obama proposed it before Rubio could.
If your boy Marco had presented it, you'd have been cheering him on.
You're all just partisan dimwits. "My side good. Other side bad. Ugh."
Just for the record, I believe in securing our boarders and believe in deporting illegal immigrants! BUTTTT!!! think about this, here we have children no fault of their own they are here in this country, they go to school cause no trouble and don't know any other place as home except here. This is the only place they can remember. I hate to say this maybe Obama got this right. The issue is how he did it!!! I don't think he should have by passed congress.
joe white

Fredonia, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34
Jun 18, 2012
 
achomes wrote:
<quoted text> Just for the record, I believe in securing our boarders and believe in deporting illegal immigrants! BUTTTT!!! think about this, here we have children no fault of their own they are here in this country, they go to school cause no trouble and don't know any other place as home except here. This is the only place they can remember. I hate to say this maybe Obama got this right. The issue is how he did it!!! I don't think he should have by passed congress.
I totally agree with you AC,the President does NOT have the constitutional authority to circumvent the laws of the United States. he is in violation of the oath of office pure and simple.
gusinski

Thomasville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Jun 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

joe white wrote:
<quoted text> I totally agree with you AC,the President does NOT have the constitutional authority to circumvent the laws of the United States. he is in violation of the oath of office pure and simple.
well file a complaint
gusinski

Thomasville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#36
Jun 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

better yet joe have a nice warm glass of milk and go to bed
Clyde10

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37
Jun 19, 2012
 
achomes wrote:
<quoted text> Just for the record, I believe in securing our boarders and believe in deporting illegal immigrants! BUTTTT!!! think about this, here we have children no fault of their own they are here in this country, they go to school cause no trouble and don't know any other place as home except here. This is the only place they can remember. I hate to say this maybe Obama got this right. The issue is how he did it!!! I don't think he should have by passed congress.
You and I both know that Congress would not pass anything proposed by the President right now.
Clyde10

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38
Jun 19, 2012
 
joe white wrote:
<quoted text>proposed it Mr lawyer? the President "told" the DHS Secretary to ignore the law of the United States. that to me is a clear violation of the oath he took "to swear to uphold the laws of the United States". Sen Rubio is proposing a bill go through the proper legislative process to become law. Sen Rubio did not tell anyone to ignore the laws of the United States did he? if indeed you are a lawyer and are a great constitutional scholar,how can you have overlooked the difference?
The executive branch enforces the laws, which includes allocating resources to enforcement. Every President selectively enforces laws and regulations based on his or her policy and budgetary priorities. Just look at the difference in enforcement activity by the EPA and SEC during various administrations.

I'm trying to see things your way, Joe, but I can't get my head that far up my ass.
Clyde10

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39
Jun 19, 2012
 
joe white wrote:
<quoted text> I totally agree with you AC,the President does NOT have the constitutional authority to circumvent the laws of the United States. he is in violation of the oath of office pure and simple.
First, it's a desperate effort to buy votes. Now that your buddy acknowledges it's good policy, it's about bypassing Congress.
You are a shameless partisan. In your mind, if Obama does it, says it, or thinks it, it's bad.
Clyde10

Pittsburgh, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40
Jun 19, 2012
 
joe white wrote:
<quoted text>proposed it Mr lawyer? the President "told" the DHS Secretary to ignore the law of the United States. that to me is a clear violation of the oath he took "to swear to uphold the laws of the United States". Sen Rubio is proposing a bill go through the proper legislative process to become law. Sen Rubio did not tell anyone to ignore the laws of the United States did he? if indeed you are a lawyer and are a great constitutional scholar,how can you have overlooked the difference?
You mean, the way the Treasury and Fed spend billions of tax payer dollars to bailout Bear Stearns and AIG (and nationalized Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae) without any legislation in 2008? Oh, wait, that was the Bush Administration, so that must have been okay, because no Republican President would ever cirumvent Congress. Well, there was that Iran-Contra thing under that Reagan guy.
joe white

Fredonia, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41
Jun 19, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Clyde10 wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean, the way the Treasury and Fed spend billions of tax payer dollars to bailout Bear Stearns and AIG (and nationalized Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae) without any legislation in 2008? Oh, wait, that was the Bush Administration, so that must have been okay, because no Republican President would ever cirumvent Congress. Well, there was that Iran-Contra thing under that Reagan guy.
you are desperate Clyde, you really need to return to law school and rethink what you said about being a constitutional scholar. you have been caught with your pants down! watch out,Gusinski might be close behind!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 21 - 40 of51
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

12 Users are viewing the Dunkirk Forum right now

Search the Dunkirk Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
2 elderly women robbed inside Movieplex 59 4 hr Hamburglar 45
Review: Shults Resale Center (Nov '13) 6 hr Richard 4
NY New York Primary Election Sept 14: Will you vote? (Sep '10) 9 hr Habanero Harv 16,760
Fireworks 20 hr Drunkirk man 2
Big Daddy's Shutdown Wed orange 4
pp Tue just that person 3
Who are we Tue Dont think so 3
•••
•••
•••
•••

Dunkirk Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Dunkirk People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Dunkirk News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Dunkirk
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••