Did you vote today?

Did you vote today?

Created by Rick on Jun 8, 2010

6,407 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

Jessica

Jonesboro, AR

#27977 Nov 17, 2013
Marcus Welby DDS wrote:
<quoted text>
Yawn..........
I guess it is hard for you to stay awake when you can't understand the subject matter, I believe there is Topix For Toddlers, try it
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#27980 Nov 17, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
OH yeah, about that "precedent' thing I mention, forgot one.
“This is a huge undertaking and there are going to be glitches. My goal is the same as yours: Get rid of the glitches.”
A Democrat in 2013? Wrong! Actually, it was Rep. Joe Barton, a Texas Republican who chaired the House Energy and Commerce Committee, about Medicare Part D in 2006"
"When former President Bush rolled out Medicare Part D, it had huge problems — but it is now widely popular. Instead of writhing orgasmically in the backseat mocking the fail, Democrats got on board to help fix Bush’s plan. This is what grown ups who are paid to make policy do"
By: Sarah Jones
Sunday, November, 17th, 2013, 9:46 am
Part A, Part B, Part C, Part D, or Part XYZ, the entire set of entitlement programs are unsustainable. Who cares who is responsible for keeping them alive? They're all going to collapse on themselves because the demand is too great for the supply. That is neither a Democratic nor Republican statement. It's just a fact. How much funny accounting math will be what determines how long it is before each of those programs runs completely out of money.
HEY NMORON

Mountain Home, AR

#27981 Nov 17, 2013
UR Dumber than Dirt wrote:
<quoted text> So here you go you fricken liberal
! the Demorats controlled the senate
50 to 49 and Jimmy Jeffers was an independent! I bet you can't count to 50 can you? Failed Civics in High school? Oh that's right you didn't go to high School.
read this
On May 24, 2001, Jim Jeffords left the Republican Party, with which he had always been affiliated, and announced his new status as an independent.
The independent status of Jeffords changed the Senate composition from 50-50 (with a Republican Vice President, Dick Cheney, serving as President of the Senate to break tie votes) to 49 Republicans, 50 Democrats, and one independent. Jeffords promised to vote for Democratic control after being promised a committee chairmanship by Democratic Leader Tom Daschle. He then handed his chairmanship of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, which he had held since 1997, to Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and was given the chairmanship of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which would have been occupied by ranking minority member Harry Reid.
They just don't come any more ignorant than you do they, read your own fucking post moron I will cut and paste it for you because I doubt you could find it again.

"49 Republicans voted Yes and one voted No (Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island)." 49+ 1 = 50, your post also said this,

In the Senate, 28 Democrats voted Yes (56% of the delegation, including Senators Clinton, Kerry, Edwards, Biden, Bayh, and Daschle) and 22 voted No; 28+22= 50

So there you have it idiot, 2 senators for each state, there is 50 states in the US that comes to a grand total of 100 senators.

SOOOOOOOO, 50 Republicans + 50 Democrats = 100 Senators, and you said your self the VP holds the tie breaker. Now with your infinite wisdom please tell me how the fuck Democrats controlled the Senate.

GEEZ, you're an Idiot.
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#27982 Nov 17, 2013
HEY FUDD wrote:
<quoted text>
BUSH LIED - PEOPLE DIED-- BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WASTED.
Bush 2004: The Weapons Inspectors Lie
Grappling with the unpopularity of the Iraq war, President Bush sought to deflect that charge that he had gotten American stuck in a foolhardy war of choice, saying "After more than a decade of diplomacy, we gave Saddam Hussein another chance, a final chance, to meet his responsibilities to the civilized world. He again refused."
But Saddam did not refuse to let international inspectors in. After inspectors were struggling to find anything, Bush forced the inspectors out before they could formally conclude that Saddam was not stockpiling weapons of mass destruction.
Yet the claim is still embraced by Republicans today. In fact, FactCheck.org dinged Mitt Romney in 2007 for repeating it:
I am not a great fan of Bush but at least whether or not to go into Iraq was voted on and passed with bipartisan support. What was the vote count for Obama to tell our military to stand down in Benghazi while he watched four American's get murdered. Then Obama and his administration went out and blamed it on a video. Heck, they even arrested the guy that supposedly made the video. So you say that Bush lied and people died but the majority of Congress agreed with Bush. With Obama people died so he lied. Why are you putting all the blame on Bush when he was only 1/535th of the decision or 1/3 however you wish to look at it.
Please moron

Mountain Home, AR

#27983 Nov 17, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>I am not a great fan of Bush but at least whether or not to go into Iraq was voted on and passed with bipartisan support. What was the vote count for Obama to tell our military to stand down in Benghazi while he watched four American's get murdered. Then Obama and his administration went out and blamed it on a video. Heck, they even arrested the guy that supposedly made the video. So you say that Bush lied and people died but the majority of Congress agreed with Bush. With Obama people died so he lied. Why are you putting all the blame on Bush when he was only 1/535th of the decision or 1/3 however you wish to look at it.
Stand down you are just a Fox News , special kind of stupid .
Jessica

Jonesboro, AR

#27984 Nov 17, 2013
Why are all the idiots either from Mountainhome or Horshoe Bend
Jessica

Jonesboro, AR

#27985 Nov 17, 2013
Please moron wrote:
<quoted text>
Stand down you are just a Fox News , special kind of stupid .
I do believe that you know special
harveyton

Donora, PA

#27987 Nov 18, 2013
youtube.com/watch...
Yes I voted ok heres my vote
Redd

United States

#27988 Nov 18, 2013
Emmer wrote:
Most demorats are lying scumbags... I didn't inhale or have sex with that woman..course that depends on what is is .. Lol. Jokes they are and this one is no different...
There you go again Elmer, constantly misspelling your name seems to be a long-held family tradition...along with incest.

Who's your Daddy..

Jokes they are and this one is no different..
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#27989 Nov 18, 2013
Please moron wrote:
<quoted text>
Stand down you are just a Fox News , special kind of stupid .
I'm not but, if I were, that would put me head and shoulders above being a liberal. What does that say about liberalism. Regardless of how you sound, I sure hope you aren't a liberal. It would suck to always fail in everything you do and then have to lie about it in order to fool enough people to continue to support you.
Reality Check

Camden, AR

#27991 Nov 19, 2013
Nothing like a transparent honest government.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/18/if...

So what is the real unemployment numbers today? 7.4%? Probably not. Just add this to the long list of scandals for the Obama administration.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#27992 Nov 19, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
Nothing like a transparent honest government.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/18/if...
So what is the real unemployment numbers today? 7.4%? Probably not. Just add this to the long list of scandals for the Obama administration.
Im sure the blaze has some "anonymous source" that will tell you,

"If These Claims by ‘Reliable Sources’ Are Proven True"

-ROF-LMAO-

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#27993 Nov 19, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not but, if I were, that would put me head and shoulders above being a liberal. What does that say about liberalism. Regardless of how you sound, I sure hope you aren't a liberal. It would suck to always fail in everything you do and then have to lie about it in order to fool enough people to continue to support you.
Now why would you say it "sucks" the Blaze does it all the time, and you seem to think they rate right up there with the Bible
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#27994 Nov 19, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Im sure the blaze has some "anonymous source" that will tell you,
"If These Claims by ‘Reliable Sources’ Are Proven True"
-ROF-LMAO-
If you knew anything about Glen Beck, which you don't and you prove it every time you talk about him or his organization, you would know that he doesn't just jump out there at the first tidbit of information with claims that it's the gospel truth. He verifies it through his sources that he trusts. That's exactly why there is language like "supposedly" and "reportedly". The title of the article "If These Claims by ‘Reliable Sources’ Are Proven True, the Obama Administration Will Be Dealing With Another Huge Scandal" suggest that further investigation needs to be done. This is what real reporting looks like. I know it's foreign to you but it really is a better way to get the news to the people instead of making things up like your left wing media. From what I know of The Blaze, the article only got posted because there is a far greater chance that it's going to turn out to be true rather than false. We'll see how this turns out.
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#27995 Nov 19, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Now why would you say it "sucks" the Blaze does it all the time, and you seem to think they rate right up there with the Bible
You have no proof of either claim you just made (especially the one about the Bible). You know lying is wrong even if your not a Christian? You believe that lying is wrong don't you, or do you believe like your fellow liberals at the Huffington Post?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/06/how-...

What do you believe?

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#27997 Nov 19, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
If you knew anything about Glen Beck, which you don't and you prove it every time you talk about him or his organization, you would know that he doesn't just jump out there at the first tidbit of information with claims that it's the gospel truth. He verifies it through his sources that he trusts. That's exactly why there is language like "supposedly" and "reportedly". The title of the article "If These Claims by ‘Reliable Sources’ Are Proven True, the Obama Administration Will Be Dealing With Another Huge Scandal" suggest that further investigation needs to be done. This is what real reporting looks like. I know it's foreign to you but it really is a better way to get the news to the people instead of making things up like your left wing media. From what I know of The Blaze, the article only got posted because there is a far greater chance that it's going to turn out to be true rather than false. We'll see how this turns out.
I have to agree with a portion of one sentence in your post, he does not claim it to be the "gospel truth" or any other kind of truth either, he knows better.

He exploits the ignorance of his fans, which in turn makes that claim for him, as you just did, an frequently do.

Since: Jun 12

Detroit City

#27998 Nov 19, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
If you knew anything about Glen Beck, which you don't and you prove it every time you talk about him or his organization, you would know that he doesn't just jump out there at the first tidbit of information with claims that it's the gospel truth. He verifies it through his sources that he trusts. That's exactly why there is language like "supposedly" and "reportedly". The title of the article "If These Claims by ‘Reliable Sources’ Are Proven True, the Obama Administration Will Be Dealing With Another Huge Scandal" suggest that further investigation needs to be done. This is what real reporting looks like. I know it's foreign to you but it really is a better way to get the news to the people instead of making things up like your left wing media. From what I know of The Blaze, the article only got posted because there is a far greater chance that it's going to turn out to be true rather than false. We'll see how this turns out.
That is what reporting looks like for Tabloid journalism .
Reality Check

Lonoke, AR

#27999 Nov 19, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
I have to agree with a portion of one sentence in your post, he does not claim it to be the "gospel truth" or any other kind of truth either, he knows better.
He exploits the ignorance of his fans, which in turn makes that claim for him, as you just did, an frequently do.
You support Obama and you say Beck exploits the ignorance of his fans? Wow, that's rich. That's hypocritical but that's the Democratic MO so I'm not surprised.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#28001 Nov 20, 2013
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
You support Obama and you say Beck exploits the ignorance of his fans? Wow, that's rich. That's hypocritical but that's the Democratic MO so I'm not surprised.
President Obama received 65,445,394 popular votes in the last election.

Glen Beck, the self proclaimed, "entertainer" I am not a journalist, was fired from Fox News.

Looking for some hypocrisy, try this,

Congressman Trey Radel (R-FL) was arrested in Washington, DC, at the end of October for possession of cocaine.

Radel voted for a House bill that would have required all recipients of SNAP (known more widely as food stamps) to undergo drug testing.

Be careful of the mud you sling, some of it is sure to fly back on you.
Reality Check

Little Rock, AR

#28002 Nov 20, 2013
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
President Obama received 65,445,394 popular votes in the last election.
Glen Beck, the self proclaimed, "entertainer" I am not a journalist, was fired from Fox News.
Looking for some hypocrisy, try this,
Congressman Trey Radel (R-FL) was arrested in Washington, DC, at the end of October for possession of cocaine.
Radel voted for a House bill that would have required all recipients of SNAP (known more widely as food stamps) to undergo drug testing.
Be careful of the mud you sling, some of it is sure to fly back on you.
Two completely separate incidents. The Congressman from Florida, who needs to resign, is employed and works for the money he gets. Food stamp recipients, even if they work, are getting free money that has to come out of income's from hard working, mostly middle class, citizens. Many of those citizens, in all likelihood, really need that money for their own bills. So requesting that food stamp recipients live responsible lives is not asking too much. I also believe that our elected representatives should be expected to live clean responsible lives as well but I am not naïve enough to believe that all, or even most, do.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Pocahontas Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
ted suhl lords ranch 2 hr yep 3
sheila jones street or bean 3 hr Whew 6
New apartment's 7 hr sick 11
Donald Ray Lee 23 hr yep 2
Wreck savannah hart and Clyde wheeler Sat Hhhhhh 6
Michelle Johnson (Lee) Fri friend 2
Eddie Clay & Kerry Stevens both in jail (both s... (May '14) Fri friend 6

Pocahontas Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Pocahontas Mortgages