Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Those who cherish the constitution understand the constitution. Those who don't cherish it don't understand it and in my opinion includes our current president.
The constitution states we have a right to vote at the state level. It states nothing about voting at the federal level thus making a test in order to vote for the president feasible.
For president you don't even need to hold state elections technically. With that said there are certainly many Constitutional rules about voting at the federal level any one who does not know this probably has not taken the time to read the Constitution, much less understand it.
The Constitution in article 1 section 5 specifically that each house of congress shall be the judge of its elections and returns and qualifications for its members. Congress passed the 1964 civil rights act and 1965 voting rights act which have provisions which basically says no tests. Therefore unless you repeal the VRA and Civil rights act, you cannot do a test for federal elections for congress specifically, or really, because of other constitutional provisions, any federal election except for in a few limited circumstances.
Either way the vast amount of history we have regarding voter tests especially in the south makes me highly wary of any person advocating them. I think they are a terrible idea and serve no purpose then to deny people their fundamental right to participate in elections simply because other people don't like the person they are voting for.
Last edited by Randomstudent; 03-11-2012 at 11:15 AM..
Buzzards....no matter how many doctored charts you slap up, people know that your president has been a FAILURE.
Only if you think that turning the economy around or saving the American auto industry or getting over 200,000 jobs back for two straight months and lowering unemployment for the last 11 months or ending the war in Iraq etc etc etc etc etc.......... a Failure..........
Only if you think that turning the economy around or saving the American auto industry or getting over 200,000 jobs back for two straight months and lowering unemployment for the last 11 months or ending the war in Iraq etc etc etc etc etc.......... a Failure..........
Huge failure by that dude. How easy would it be to disprove that chart if it was doctored? Why no support for that claim?? Maybe because the chart is correct.
I guess I give Bush Jr a little leeway because I refer to Cheney as
the "real" President. If you don't think Cheney is evil you were not
paying attention from 2000 to 2008.
Here's a good read:
Cheney: The Untold Story of America's Most Powerful and Controversial Vice President by Hayes.
Cheney is just evil
Okay, very humorous. I knew you couldn't reply to my question with a valid post. BTW, the "real" President from 2001 to 2009 (not 2000-2008) was G.W. Bush.
Seeing that the unemployment rate had already shot past that number before the stimulus was enacted I don't have a problem with it. The provisions of the stimulus didn't begin to affect employment numbers til June.
Sure looks like the stimulus turn things around, what do you see?
When Obama made his promise, the unemployment rate was below 8%.
When Obama made his promise, the unemployment rate was below 8%.
That may be true - barely - unbeknowst to him later numbers would show that it was ALREADY at 7.8% at the time he made that statement. That statement by Obama was made in January of 2009 - a few days before he was even yet in office, using the best data available the at time the numbers were crunched (which was November data from the outgoing Administration and which showed a UE rate of 6.8%). Problem is the situation in the waining days of Bush's Presidency was deteriorating so rapidly that BY THE TIME the stimulus was passed (just a month later in February 2009) the UE rate was ALREADY at 8.2% - it's just that no one KNEW that yet because the numbers had not yet been collected. Not only that, but by the time the Stimulus was even beginning to implimented the UE rate was already closing in on 9%. No RATIONAL person is going to hold a person to something that was unknowingly already out of date by the time he said it. That's just not an intellectually honest argument.
I know that won't stop YOU from making it though.
Ken
Last edited by LordBalfor; 03-12-2012 at 11:47 PM..
Huge failure by that dude. How easy would it be to disprove that chart if it was doctored? Why no support for that claim?? Maybe because the chart is correct.
So if someone sets your home alight and when you get home it's a out of control blaze....... everyone can blame you .......... Obama inherited a Country that was ablaze and out of control and is now putting out the fire and rebuilding....................
Do these people live in cloud cuckoo land?
To predict the future is ok as long as you can control everything and everyone and every Country around you but alas the POTUS or any POTUS cannot do that.
Maybe the people on here blaming Obama for not getting unemployment under 8% or not keeping gas prices low are spoilt brats who got everything mommy and daddy told them they would get by a certain time ?
hate to break it to you, but Obama is getting re-elected. The only republican who stands a chance is Ron Paul. Romney and Sanitorium suck.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
