1 - 9
In response to:

The Real Vote Fraud

Frank3839 Wrote: May 16, 2014 7:10 PM
For over 100 years, your "voter ID" has been your registration card. Your citizenship and eligibility have already been verified, and your signature is on file. Your address has been verified because you received the card in the mail. New laws to require showing a PHOTO ID in addition to already being registered only protects against an imaginary situation where someone is IMPERSONATING another voter and can successfully forge that person's signature. Yet millions of Americans who are registered voters do not have an acceptable valid photo ID. Many older Americans stop driving and don't renew their licenses. Blacks and Hispanics have higher levels of poverty and are less likely to have cars And getting a non-automobile photo ID requires a copy of your birth certificate, and if you have lost it, you usually have to make a trip to the state you were born in -- and you must show a photo ID -- which you don't have -- for you to get a copy of your own birth certificate. In most states, the non automobile photo ID is still issued by the Dept of Vehicles, which means you have to stand in the long lines of people taking driving tests -- and usually open 9-5 Monday-Friday making most of the working poor take half a weekday off without pay. It;s a evil plan, enacted only in Republican states to correct a problem that does not exist -- and is carefully crafted to disqualify voters that are more likely to vote Democrat. And several GOP leaders have even admitted it., Mike Turzai — the Republican House Majority Leader of Pennsylvania — boasted “Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”
For over 100 years, your "voter ID" has been your registration card. Your citizenship and eligibility have already been verified, and your signature is on file. Your address has been verified because you received the card in the mail. New laws to require showing a PHOTO ID in addition to already being registered only protects against an imaginary situation where someone is IMPERSONATING another voter and can successfully forge that person's signature. Yet millions of Americans who are registered voters do not have an acceptable valid photo ID. Many older Americans stop driving and don't renew their licenses. Blacks and Hispanics have higher levels of poverty and are less likely to have cars And getting a non-automobile photo ID requires a copy of your birth certificate, and if you have lost it, you usually have to make a trip to the state you were born in -- and you must show a photo ID -- which you don't have -- for you to get a copy of your own birth certificate. In most states, the non automobile photo ID is still issued by the Dept of Vehicles, which means you have to stand in the long lines of people taking driving tests -- and usually open 9-5 Monday-Friday making most of the working poor take half a weekday off without pay. It;s a evil plan, enacted only in Republican states to correct a problem that does not exist -- and is carefully crafted to disqualify voters that are more likely to vote Democrat. And several GOP leaders have even admitted it., Mike Turzai — the Republican House Majority Leader of Pennsylvania — boasted “Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”
In response to:

IRS Scandal In a Nutshell

Frank3839 Wrote: Feb 10, 2014 5:37 AM
The scandal is that the Tea Party groups all got tax exempt status, and in no way are they "charities" They are "political" -- they even get to present their own state of the union reply.
In response to:

Does America Still Want To Prosper?

Frank3839 Wrote: Feb 09, 2014 9:08 AM
What an ironic title to this article -- "Does America still want to prosper" -- when a college education gives a young person $1 million to $2 million more in lifetime earnings. The application for student aid that the First Lady is promoting is not for “free government handouts." The majority of federal student aid is LOANS. The small Pell grant program is means-tested, but other federal non-loan college aid is earned for joining the military, for veterans after their service, or for commitments to serve Americorps, Veterans hospitals, teaching in schools for the children of our military both here and abroad, and other hard-to-fill jobs. The application form matches students with scholarships, grants, work-study programs, and various programs by the colleges and universities themselves to discount tuition based on financial need. There is no more certain way to break the cycle of poverty in families than to make the first generation of college graduates. Writer Austin Hill's belittling tone and mischaracterization of these programs as "handouts" is shameful.
In response to:

Obama Bullying Nuns (Part 2)

Frank3839 Wrote: Jan 14, 2014 1:51 PM
Well under Obama, taxes are lowest in 50 years. The deficit has been cut in half from $1.2 trillion to $600 billion. And 40% of the stimulus was direct tax cuts -- the largest in US history.
In response to:

Obama Bullying Nuns (Part 2)

Frank3839 Wrote: Jan 14, 2014 1:40 PM
So to provide a written statement to employees that they are NOT providing birth control is STILL a violation of their religious freedom -- because the women employees will be alerted that they have to arrange for separate coverage? And in any case, the Church owned Christian Brothers insurance company is exempt from offering contraception. So the "Obama forcing nuns to pay for birth control" story is A LIE. The issue is that the nuns refuse to provide a written statement to employees that they are not providing contraception coverage for religious reasons. How is that a sin?
From Consumer Reports: Consider the case of Diane Barrette, a 56-year-old woman from Winter Haven, Fla. Her story was featured in this CBS News report and endlessly echoed on the Internet. She was upset because Blue Cross Blue Shield of Florida was canceling her $54-a-month “GoBlue plan 91” and offering to replace it with a $591-a-month “Blue Options Essential plan.” Sounds terrible—except that Barrette’s expiring policy is a textbook example of a junk plan that isn’t real health insurance at all. If she had ever tried to use it for anything more than an occasional doctor visit or inexpensive prescription, she would have ended up with tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars of medical debt. Here are some of the gory details. (You can see the rest for yourself on this complete plan summary from the insurance company.) The plan pays only the first $50 of doctor visits, leaving Ms. Barrette to pay the rest. Specialist visits can cost several hundred dollars. Only the first $15 of a prescription is covered. Some prescriptions can cost hundreds or even thousands of dollars a month The plan only pays for hospitalization for "complications of pregnancy," which are unlikely given Ms. Barrette's age and in any event only the first $50 is covered. It pays $50 for a mammogram that can cost several hundred dollars, and only pays $50 apiece for advanced imaging tests such as MRIs and CT scans and then only when used for osteoporosis screening. "She's paying $650 a year to be uninsured," Karen Pollitz, an insurance expert at the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation, said. "I have to assume that she never really had to make much of a claim under this policy. She would have lost the house she's sitting in if something serious had happened. I don't know if she knows that." In fact, had Blue Cross Blue Shield allowed her to keep the plan, she would have been fined for going uninsured in 2014. Limited plans such as these are considered "excepted benefits" that don't fulfill the new obligation to have health coverage. Okay, but can't we be outraged that Ms. Barrette will have to fork over $591 a month for a replacement plan? Actually, no, because she has other and better options than the costly plan Blue Cross Blue Shield wants to put her in. She get real insurance that covers all essential health benefits for well under $200 a month.
These numbers have been promoted by white supremacists for decades to try and prove that blacks are targeting whites for killing. Blacks are only 13% of the population but 80% of the people they kill are white! White people are obviously being targeted -- right? Let's see what happens if a black killer does NOT target the race of his victims. Give him a gun, a blindfold, and some device that lets him know his gun is pointed at a person and tell him to fire away. And the people within his firing range should be the same percentage of whites and blacks as the countryw 'Count the bodies and we find that 80% of the victims are..STILL WHITE PEOPLE.. Repeat our experiment with a white killer firing at random..count the bodies...80% white. Because the population is 80% white, these scare headlines about 80% of the people killed by blacks are WHITE means blacks ARE NOT targeting white people --
The headline is a lie, Catholic churches got an automatic waiver, the bishops asked for and got waivers for Catholic universities and hospitals, even though most employees are non Catholic, NOW they want Catholic businessmen to be able to force non Catholic employees to follow Catholic teaching on contraceptives?? That's not banning the Catholic faith, it's like allowing it to be imposed on others by attaching strings to a necessity. Better watch what you wish for.,you might work for a Christian Scientist whose says his religious freedom is violated unless his employees heath insurance bans all drugs, and will let you die if you need a blood transfusion
1 - 9