Who do you support for U.S. Senate in North Carolina in 2010?

Makin bacon wrote:

<quoted text>
And your point is about those working 40 hours a week? If they're working jobs, they still had to provide documentation for the job they're working unless they're being paid under the table and I doubt that's happening. If they have a job, they had to have the same documentation required for an ID. Mike, white is a color. I've never filled out or seen any sort of document that says "skin color" with a list of shades of color in the group you choose.

Was it not you who complained I would argue white is black or something like that? Now you are arguing 'people of color' has no meaning in our culture? Hypocrite comes to mind.

So some may have a job, and that job may have been aquired a decade in the past. You act as if they must still possess every piece of paper they had ten years ago. In fact,they could have been working at the job for several decades. And many jobs do not ask for ID. Not just under the table jobs. You really seem to be in a bubble.

The Truth wrote:

This article needs to be reviewed to see how well the liberals' policies work.
Can you imagine either of these two things occurring?
Firefighters and police making MINIMUM WAGE.
Homeowners receiving a 78%(YES SEVENTY-EIGHT percent) property tax increase.
http://www.independentsentinel.com/2012/07/sc...

Mitt Romney cut pay and fired police and firefighters in his state to give rich people a few bucks to buy a larger boat to get on once a year.
I did not look at your claim but just wanted you to know when you vote for Romney, you are voting against your ideals.

Taxper wrote:

<quoted text>
There are a lot of people on this tread with a racist attitude that are using their race for an excuse to freeload. Like the criminal’s they are, they want to use the government as a weapon to steal from people working hard to support the families.
After they sent the criminals to prison for stealing and I got their job and have done good, thank you.

Who on this tread is freeloading?
Thanks for giving your false stereotyping perception opinion to us.

Arnold-Ziffel wrote:

<quoted text>
Because the Supreme Court ruled it to be?

No Arnold because the Socialist trash, out to destroy America rule it so.

Makin bacon wrote:

<quoted text>
Mike, I can't vote for Pelosi but her vote does have a say in the shaping of laws in our country. I think it's fair to call out double standards. If outsourcing is wrong for Romney, then we ought to tell all our elected officials keep our jobs at home and stop the blame game about it being all about the Republicans.
“Designed in California, Made in Manila”sounds like an excellent title for a smear ad to be run the by the Barack Obama campaign. Instead, it appears to be Nancy Pelosi’s investment strategy.
Pelosi is also a small investor in the embattled “Moduslink Global,” one of the “outsourcing pioneers” that Mitt Romney has been criticized for associating with while at Bain Capital."
quote from the article I posted.
Would you agree Nancy is wrong for participating in outsourcing of jobs as you stated investing in overseas market is not an issue but pushing jobs overseas is?

It is only a double standard if that is what Nancy was complaining about with Mitt, but it is not.
Mitt did not just associate with the companies in question, he had power to make them in our country.

You seem to be trying to justify outsourcing by calling out Nancy. Why do I say that? Because you have yet to condemn Mitt for doing so. Thus I conclude this is just a diversion or justification that all do this.

Makin bacon wrote:

<quoted text>
No, I get tired of being asked he same inane questions over and over. I stated I believe ownership of a person is wrong and I don't believe in same sex marriage. If someone wants to know what I think don't send you a post and then ask me to answer it. That's what Arnold did with this question. He asked Robert and when Robert didn't answer in the same post he posed the question to me. He asked today and I gave him my answer. EOS

The question did not ask you if you believed slavery was wrong. It asked if slavery should have been put up to a vote like gay marriage.

You see, these are not the same questions over and over. They are different questions about the same subject.
You refuse to debate the subject.
This is a subject that is huge in our state this year, as it was put up to a vote. Yet you refuse to debate it.

Steve wrote:

<quoted text>
Go suck off another guy

So you have no answer to Arnold's question? I see we have another Zero substance republican on this thread.

Arnold-Ziffel wrote:
<quoted text>
32 times in an attempt to repeal Obamacare in the House. Do Republicans have any other agenda?

The Truth wrote:

<quoted text>
Lying Mike.

Zero substance.

The Truth wrote:

Lying Mike times 4 posts.
(Hey, this is fun!)

Zero substance.

Mike Duquette wrote:

<quoted text>Mitt Romney cut pay and fired police and firefighters in his state to give rich people a few bucks to buy a larger boat to get on once a year.
I did not look at your claim but just wanted you to know when you vote for Romney, you are voting against your ideals.

Exactly!

Are you aware Massachusetts is one of the most LIBERAL states in the union? Are you aware the legislature of Massachusetts is DOMINATED by LIBERALS?

I must apologize for asking this but your answer requires it. Are you completely ignorant or do you have short term memory loss? I have been railing against Romney (and Obama) for a long, long time. I have put forth Ron Paul as the only realistic choice for America. Your last sentence is evidence you are suffering from one of the two choices above.

Makin bacon wrote:

<quoted text>
Heard the same "bob and weave" argument over and over again. You really need to get some new material.

The shoe fits, so wear it. You bob and weave like Mitt Romney being asked what policies he plans to make to increase jobs, improve schools, foreign policy, or anything specific.

Mike Duquette wrote:

<quoted text>Was it not you who complained I would argue white is black or something like that? Now you are arguing 'people of color' has no meaning in our culture? Hypocrite comes to mind.
So some may have a job, and that job may have been aquired a decade in the past. You act as if they must still possess every piece of paper they had ten years ago. In fact,they could have been working at the job for several decades. And many jobs do not ask for ID. Not just under the table jobs. You really seem to be in a bubble.

Mike, I can't speak to the first sentence about white is black or something like that. I believe you said people of color or something like that were sent letters in the Florida. I looked up "people of color" meaning and it's no longer considered PC because people like to be known by their race, not color. Initially, "people of color" was a term used for blacks, but this description left out Indians, Native American Indians, Hispanics, and just about any color you can throw in there. Why the hypocrite remark? White is a color last time I checked. Mike, we all live on this great big planet and there are people of all color. Stop trying to be so PC.

Your argument about people working long-term employment at a place is weak at best. Aren't they required to fill out tax returns? If so, they need their SS#, address, age, sex, etc.; everything needed to get an ID. What bubble do you live in? You own a business. Do you hire somebody, not ask them to fill out paperwork for taxes, don't know their address, SS#, phone number, nothing, don't ask for driver's license or some sort of ID to make sure the person is who they say they are? Who's living in a bubble? If people have worked at a job several decades chances are some may retire from the place, how are they going to get their SSI, Medicare without some sort of proof of who they are?

We were having a good debate and then you for some reason start hopping down bunny trails.

Mike Duquette wrote:

<quoted text>Zero substance.

I understand now.

I wrote "Lying Mike" and you replied, "Zero Substance".

You are correct. You do have zero substance.

Mike Duquette wrote:

<quoted text>The question did not ask you if you believed slavery was wrong. It asked if slavery should have been put up to a vote like gay marriage.
You see, these are not the same questions over and over. They are different questions about the same subject.
You refuse to debate the subject.
This is a subject that is huge in our state this year, as it was put up to a vote. Yet you refuse to debate it.

No and this is why. Slaves were unable to vote on behalf of themselves. Slaves did not have support except from other slaves and they didn't have numbers from sympathetic people thinking slavery was wrong to impact any election. Had slaves had the right to vote and it was put up for a vote, then that's a horse of another color.

I feel the same about gay marriage. If on a statewide basis, gay marriage is put to a vote and gays, their family, friends, etc have a right to support them with their votes then it should be put to a vote. Despite the outcome, whether it's for or against gay marriage, then the will of everyone has been spoken by a FREE vote.

You're comparing apples to oranges with this slavery vs. gay marriage issue.

Mike Duquette wrote:

<quoted text>The question did not ask you if you believed slavery was wrong. It asked if slavery should have been put up to a vote like gay marriage.
You see, these are not the same questions over and over. They are different questions about the same subject.
You refuse to debate the subject.
This is a subject that is huge in our state this year, as it was put up to a vote. Yet you refuse to debate it.

The consevatives like to dismiss the past, thus making them deny the current issues, and blind to the future. The ministers in the churches of the south during the time of slavery, justified it as God's plan for whites to oversee the inferior animal like black man and painted slavery as being very humane. They do the same today in condeming gays as being unworthy in our society. The wheel continues to turn for their righteous judgement of others and justification for denying them free and equal benefits as citizens. Thus, in their righteousness, they construt a Constituional Amemdment for referendum, knowing the the churches have already done their job in selling this bigotry and hatred toward gays. Silver,Bacon and truth outwardly supported Amendment One, have fallen prey to this scheme. My bet is that their same attitudes would have also promoted slavey in the south during slavery times. Their is no question of this fact.

Mike Duquette wrote:

<quoted text>Was it not you who complained I would argue white is black or something like that? Now you are arguing 'people of color' has no meaning in our culture? Hypocrite comes to mind.
So some may have a job, and that job may have been aquired a decade in the past. You act as if they must still possess every piece of paper they had ten years ago. In fact,they could have been working at the job for several decades. And many jobs do not ask for ID. Not just under the table jobs. You really seem to be in a bubble.

So, as a bar owner, do you not card patrons that is in your establishment or are you perpetrating under age consumption?

I am not sure what job now a days doesn't require a valid ID for tax purposes.

Maybe working in a bar...That would require a privledge license to operate along with ABC permitting...

Hmmmm......

Mike Duquette wrote:

<quoted text>The shoe fits, so wear it. You bob and weave like Mitt Romney being asked what policies he plans to make to increase jobs, improve schools, foreign policy, or anything specific.

Well Mitt could say "nothing" and that would be the same thing Obama has done for our country. No bobbing and weaving, there are statistics to prove that our country is no better off than it was when Obama took office.

Makin bacon wrote:

<quoted text>
No and this is why. Slaves were unable to vote on behalf of themselves. Slaves did not have support except from other slaves and they didn't have numbers from sympathetic people thinking slavery was wrong to impact any election. Had slaves had the right to vote and it was put up for a vote, then that's a horse of another color.
I feel the same about gay marriage. If on a statewide basis, gay marriage is put to a vote and gays, their family, friends, etc have a right to support them with their votes then it should be put to a vote. Despite the outcome, whether it's for or against gay marriage, then the will of everyone has been spoken by a FREE vote.
You're comparing apples to oranges with this slavery vs. gay marriage issue.

Was it the conservatives or the liberals of the day who sanctioned slavery? I know, another bob and weave question. I apologize, but request an answer.

Mike Duquette wrote:

<quoted text>It costs nothing to vote. Many are given a ride for the patriotic occasion.
Why do you try to deny them their civil right to vote? Are you scared they will vote democrat?

Not denying them anything. Making them more accountable and encouraging them to be more American by being responsible and get valid identification.

Not scared they will vote democrat, provided they have valid ID.

I am required to show valid ID to vote in my district. Not even sure why this would even be challanged. Seems like a responsible act of any American. Not just democrats.

Scranton is what happens when the money runs out. The government cannot provide what the people are unwilling to pay for. This is the result of the "starve the beast" mentality. The same thing will happen to our federal government eventually unless financial problems are addressed in an honest and realistic manner. Being honest and realistic will require that we work together toward common goals rather than defining ourselves and others with dehumanizing idealistic labels . The financial situation is quickly deteriorating to the point that our very survival actually depends on putting cooperation ahead of idealistic purity. Following the left wing and right wing nut fringes have obscured for us the founding principles of this great nation. Among those being tolerance, individual freedom, religious freedom and yes, even freedom from religion. We will either come together to trim and support our government (with taxes) or some other country will establish their government here.. My guess is that would be a communist regime having 10 times as many people as the USA and to which we already owe huge debts payable on demand.

The Truth wrote:

This article needs to be reviewed to see how well the liberals' policies work.
Can you imagine either of these two things occurring?
Firefighters and police making MINIMUM WAGE.
Homeowners receiving a 78%(YES SEVENTY-EIGHT percent) property tax increase.
http://www.independentsentinel.com/2012/07/sc...