Originally Posted by janmcn

I was referring to a name, which I won't repeat, that you called a sitting US Senator.

After I went back and read the post, I think I was confused by a reply you gave. Post #107 I said "To do otherwise would reinstate the poll tax". In post #108 you said "As for your last sentence...thank God for that". I realize now you were referring to a statement made by another poster and I apologize for the misunderstanding.

This criticism coming from someone who called the Governor a criminal and falsely accused him of a number of things. Who, in addition has made fun of ANY republican mentioned.

Wow...how do you expect anyone to take anything you say with any credence

Come on here and talk about issues...stop with the constant and continuing character assassination of anyone who says anything negative about your wonderful heroes. Dispute the facts..give your opinion, but it does not justify your NON VALIDATED comments that you make.

Originally Posted by waynet

skyguy welcome but perhaps some facts to back up some of your claims.

Thanks for the welcome, but I think my participation of this forum is going to wind up being short lived based on the tactics I've been subjected to in my short time here.

As for backing with facts, I don't generally do backing up facts as I am merely a pundit, like everyone else on here, voicing my opinions based on my past experiences and learnings over many years, and I'm also not a news journalist that should back their comments... but frequently don't on on most TV/Cable outlets and news publications. Even if they did, I would frequently not trust them or their proof as being creditable or unbiased, and... I don't necessarily trust the sources of those who do back what they say on blogs or forums with so called facts.

I don't have the time, interest or financial resources to do the kind of research needed to back up years of learning. So anyone not liking that I won't will not change that I don't! If they want to believe me fine, if they don't want to believe me they can feel free not to. I really don't care if I'm believed or not since any belief or lack of it would most likely be based on politics and ideology bias anyway!

Originally Posted by janmcn

It's what photo voter ID that is accepted that is the problem. Texas, for example, will not accept a student's college photo ID but they will accept a gun license photo ID.

I totally agree with the need for a photo ID to vote, but each state must contact every voter to make sure that voter has the proper ID, and, if not, must provide one free of charge. To do otherwise would reinstate the poll tax.

Student ID's are definitely not proper identification. Purchasing of fraudulent ID's are rampant and I even had bar owners bring boxes full of confiscated fraudlent ID's to me. Even my son had one he bought for $50 back in the 90's when he was in college so he could hit the bars at night with his friends! I took it away from him and I think I still have it around somewhere!

Regarding contacting voters to make sure they have the proper ID, I registered to vote in December and I was giiven clear notification of the ID requirements. It also happens in NY where I came from and was involved in Motor Voter as part of my job duties. I doubt there are many if any states that don't do similarily!

skyguy79-It has been pure pleasure reading your posts on this thread!Thanks

Originally Posted by janmcn

The expert has spoken. Now we just have to wait to hear on the news that President Obama has been extradited to Georgia to see if he's guilty of the charges RichieLion alleges.

Hahaha, if they get caught up in a Georgia speed trap he may be hauled up to a night court situation if they still do that there. His chances of being pulled over expand on 301 if Waldo Willie is working. LOL

Originally Posted by Posh 08

Hahaha, if they get caught up in a Georgia speed trap he may be hauled up to a night court situation if they still do that there. His chances of being pulled over expand on 301 if Waldo Willie is working. LOL

Ain't gonna happen... he'll be hiding behind a plethora of his secret service guards!

Originally Posted by skyguy79

Ain't gonna happen... he'll be hiding behind a plethora of his secret service guards!

No chit

Does Skyguy think that Secret Service guards are a new thing for presidents or that they protect too closely?

Remember that the families of the President also have their own Secret Service agents, too. They only look after the safety of their charges - not protect them from breaking laws. Prime example are the Bush twin girls. They got drunk at bars in Washington more than once when they were underage and their Secret Service agents did not stop them from breaking the law but only protected their safety.

Originally Posted by buggyone

Does Skyguy think that Secret Service guards are a new thing for presidents or that they protect too closely?

Remember that the families of the President also have their own Secret Service agents, too. They only look after the safety of their charges - not protect them from breaking laws. Prime example are the Bush twin girls. They got drunk at bars in Washington more than once when they were underage and their Secret Service agents did not stop them from breaking the law but only protected their safety.

No, Skyguy does not think that Secret Service guards are a new thing for presidents or that they protect too closely. You either totally miss the point of Skyguys post or you're spinning and adding elements to make more of it than Skyguy wrote or intended. Skyguy already knows everything you stated and knew it decades ago! Nice try!

Skyguy...please don't ever leave Political!

Well, I guess I totally missed your point of the posting. I have no idea of what you meant.

Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

skyguy79-It has been pure pleasure reading your posts on this thread!Thanks

I agree, and I have been a huge fan of your posts, and am glad you decided to add your cogent thoughts to the political section of this forum. Through PM's I've known a bit of your thinking on the political scene and I am thrilled that you decided to share them in much more detail with the masses.

Whether you decide to continue posting in political or not, I want you to know I appreciate your input.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

I agree, and I have been a huge fan of your posts, and am glad you decided to add your cogent thoughts to the political section of this forum. Through PM's I've known a bit of your thinking on the political scene and I am thrilled that you decided to share them in much more detail with the masses.

Whether you decide to continue posting in political or not, I want you to know I appreciate your input.

Thanks Richie! I've been a fan of your posts too even if I don't always agrre with you. But then again no two people always agree with each other, unless of course you consider the US Senate where it has frequently happened with a majority of senators over the last several years!