"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:55:18 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:50:39 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Jim" wrote in message
m...
How do you propose low income people pay for the passport? They're
not
cheap these days.

Yeah, we're in favor of voter fraud like what happened in 2000 in
Florida? right.

Fraud? Nope. Just a few mis counted votes, hanging chad and the fact
that Al gore kept demanding recounts until he was declared winner.


Total fraud. Yet after Bush was elected by the Supreme Court, loyal
Americans accepted the result. We didn't question that Bush was the
president. After 9/11, Bush had something like 90% approval rating in
the
polls. The vast majority of the world were sympathetic and
supportive.
Instead of taking advantage of our remarkable position, Bush
squandered
it in a war of choice. Tens of thousands died, and we're much worse
off,
politically, financially, and morally.

Now, answer the question.

Already did, sweetie.


No, you didn't:

How do you propose low income people pay for the passport? They're not
cheap these days.

If we are to end up paying for health care for the poor, and not
including illegal immigrants, then I've no problem with providing the
poor a free passport. That could then be an ID requirement for the
free healthcare.
--

John H


Illegal immigrants are exempt from signing up for the various healthcare
programs winding their way through Congress. So, you don't mind a national
id card? That's quite a statement.

Saying, "That's quite a statement" is quite a statement.

I said I agree with everyone being required to have a passport. It
hasn't killed one European that I know of.
--

John H


So you believe in a national id card program? Wow... that's pretty much
diametrically opposed to the Right's view of gov't intrusion into "our"
lives.

Would you like to rethink this or are you going to stick to your guns?

I certainly have absolutely no problem with having a national id. Of course,
there are logistical problems, including cost, ability to prevent forgeries,
etc.

--
Nom=de=Plume

In article ,
says...

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JohnH wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:46:45 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:35:41 -0400, JustWait wrote:


Not bull**** at all.. It was finally friday they agreed to put in
legislation forcing folks to prove citizenship... Up until then it was
deliberately left out of the law...
That's nice. I guess we should all permanently carry our passports
around with us, and clean underwear. You never know when you might be
involved in an accident. So, how does that work? If you can't prove
citizenship, to they kick you out unto the curb?
Why not carry passports? Europeans do it, and it hasn't killed any of
them. Hell, it might even reduce voter fraud. Oh, wait a minute,
liberals are in *favor* of voter fraud.

I forgot.
--

John H
Please show me where any liberal EVER said that they were "in favor of
voter fraud" or apologize for the lie.
I bet Harry has uttered those words before, especially if it creates one
party rule like we have now. And if you think there are not millions of
other idiots like him around, you are not paying attention.

And what does that have to do with me? Are you responsible for every
word uttered by any conservative?

You said "show me where *any* liberal... " And Harry is certainly a
liberal, no?

I'll bet good money Harry never said he was "in favor of voter fraud".
Ergo, John owes an apology.

John owes nothing, I said it. And if I had the time to go through his
thousands of posts, I am quite sure he probably said it at one time or
another...

--
Wafa free since 2009

In article ,
says...

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
Thought you were for
SMALLER government?

Putting words in my mouth again?




Oh, so your NOT for smaller government??

Don't think I ever said that either..

--
Wafa free since 2009

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 07:48:57 -0400, JustWait
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:55:18 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:50:39 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Jim" wrote in message
...
How do you propose low income people pay for the passport?
They're
not
cheap these days.

Yeah, we're in favor of voter fraud like what happened in 2000
in
Florida? right.

Fraud? Nope. Just a few mis counted votes, hanging chad and the
fact
that Al gore kept demanding recounts until he was declared
winner.


Total fraud. Yet after Bush was elected by the Supreme Court,
loyal
Americans accepted the result. We didn't question that Bush was
the
president. After 9/11, Bush had something like 90% approval rating
in
the
polls. The vast majority of the world were sympathetic and
supportive.
Instead of taking advantage of our remarkable position, Bush
squandered
it in a war of choice. Tens of thousands died, and we're much
worse
off,
politically, financially, and morally.

Now, answer the question.

Already did, sweetie.


No, you didn't:

How do you propose low income people pay for the passport? They're
not
cheap these days.

If we are to end up paying for health care for the poor, and not
including illegal immigrants, then I've no problem with providing the
poor a free passport. That could then be an ID requirement for the
free healthcare.
--

John H


Illegal immigrants are exempt from signing up for the various
healthcare
programs winding their way through Congress. So, you don't mind a
national
id card? That's quite a statement.

Saying, "That's quite a statement" is quite a statement.

I said I agree with everyone being required to have a passport. It
hasn't killed one European that I know of.

The problem with a national ID card is it takes away the Democrats best
election tool, voter fraud... They will never let it happen.

Well, the pup says that the Republicans in Florida were the voter
fraud folks. So it would seem they'd be in favor of a national ID just
to stop the Republican voter fraud.

Something doesn't ring true here. Hopefully the pup will explain
hisheritself.
--

John H


Something sure doesn't ring true. You don't sound like much of a Republican
or Libertarian to me:

http://epic.org/privacy/id-cards/
Americans have rejected the idea of a national ID card. When the Social
Security Number (SSN) was created in 1936, it was meant to be used only as
an account number associated with the administration of the Social Security
system. Though use of the SSN has expanded considerably, it is not a
universal identifier and efforts to make it one have been consistently
rejected. In 1971, the Social Security Administration task force on the SSN
rejected the extension of the Social Security Number to the status of an ID
card. In 1973, the Health, Education and Welfare Secretary's Advisory
Committee on Automated Personal Data Systems concluded that a national
identifier was not desirable. In 1976, the Federal Advisory Committee on
False Identification rejected the idea of an identifier.

In 1977, the Carter Administration reiterated that the SSN was not to become
an identifier, and in 1981 the Reagan Administration stated that it was
"explicitly opposed" to the creation of a national ID card. The Clinton
administration advocated a "Health Security Card" in 1993 and assured the
public that the card, issued to every American, would have "full protection
for privacy and confidentiality." Still, the idea was rejected and the
health security card was never created. In 1999 Congress repealed a
controversial provision in the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant
Responsibility Act of 1996 which gave authorization to include Social
Security Numbers on driver's licenses.


--
Nom=de=Plume

In article ,
says...

JohnH wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:59:57 -0400, NotNow wrote:

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:55:18 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:50:39 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Jim" wrote in message
...
How do you propose low income people pay for the passport? They're
not
cheap these days.

Yeah, we're in favor of voter fraud like what happened in 2000 in
Florida? right.

Fraud? Nope. Just a few mis counted votes, hanging chad and the fact
that Al gore kept demanding recounts until he was declared winner.
Total fraud. Yet after Bush was elected by the Supreme Court, loyal
Americans accepted the result. We didn't question that Bush was the
president. After 9/11, Bush had something like 90% approval rating in
the
polls. The vast majority of the world were sympathetic and supportive.
Instead of taking advantage of our remarkable position, Bush squandered
it in a war of choice. Tens of thousands died, and we're much worse
off,
politically, financially, and morally.

Now, answer the question.

Already did, sweetie.
No, you didn't:

How do you propose low income people pay for the passport? They're not
cheap these days.
If we are to end up paying for health care for the poor, and not
including illegal immigrants, then I've no problem with providing the
poor a free passport. That could then be an ID requirement for the
free healthcare.
--

John H
Illegal immigrants are exempt from signing up for the various healthcare
programs winding their way through Congress. So, you don't mind a national
id card? That's quite a statement.
Saying, "That's quite a statement" is quite a statement.

I said I agree with everyone being required to have a passport. It
hasn't killed one European that I know of.
The problem with a national ID card is it takes away the Democrats best
election tool, voter fraud... They will never let it happen.

No, the problem(s) with a national ID card is that our basic freedoms
will be lost and gone forever.

Cost. They are estimating the program will cost upwards of $23 billion,
plus they'll have to run the program year to year. Thought you were for
SMALLER government?

I've had a passport for over thirty years. I know of no 'basic
freedoms' I've lost forever.

Do you have any idea WTF you're talking about?

Yes, I'm talking about a National ID card.

Issuing a passport to the poor would cost $23 billion a year? That's
pure horse**** and you know it.
--

John H

Again, a NATIONAL ID CARD.....did you READ it?

It is my responsibility to carry an id card, since I was a young boy.
Why should only certain folks be allowed to go without them now? So they
can game the system???

--
Wafa free since 2009

"JustWait" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
Thought you were for
SMALLER government?

Putting words in my mouth again?



--
Wafa free since 2009


Like all right-wing idealogs, it seems this person is only interested in
gov't sized for their special interests.

--
Nom=de=Plume

JohnH wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 11:39:09 -0400, NotNow wrote:

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JohnH wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:46:45 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:35:41 -0400, JustWait wrote:


Not bull**** at all.. It was finally friday they agreed to put in
legislation forcing folks to prove citizenship... Up until then it was
deliberately left out of the law...
That's nice. I guess we should all permanently carry our passports
around with us, and clean underwear. You never know when you might be
involved in an accident. So, how does that work? If you can't prove
citizenship, to they kick you out unto the curb?
Why not carry passports? Europeans do it, and it hasn't killed any of
them. Hell, it might even reduce voter fraud. Oh, wait a minute,
liberals are in *favor* of voter fraud.

I forgot.
--

John H
Please show me where any liberal EVER said that they were "in favor of
voter fraud" or apologize for the lie.
I bet Harry has uttered those words before, especially if it creates one
party rule like we have now. And if you think there are not millions of
other idiots like him around, you are not paying attention.

And what does that have to do with me? Are you responsible for every
word uttered by any conservative?
You said "show me where *any* liberal... " And Harry is certainly a
liberal, no?

I'll bet good money Harry never said he was "in favor of voter fraud".
Ergo, John owes an apology.

Go read all of plum's posts. You'll find it.

Ergo, no apology.
--

John H

The burden is on you. You are the one who said that liberals were "in
favor of voter fraud". Who said that and where? I wouldn't expect you to
apologize. Harry has never apologized for his political lies either.

JohnH wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 11:42:16 -0400, NotNow wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:59:57 -0400, NotNow wrote:

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:55:18 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:50:39 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Jim" wrote in message
...
How do you propose low income people pay for the passport? They're
not
cheap these days.

Yeah, we're in favor of voter fraud like what happened in 2000 in
Florida? right.

Fraud? Nope. Just a few mis counted votes, hanging chad and the fact
that Al gore kept demanding recounts until he was declared winner.
Total fraud. Yet after Bush was elected by the Supreme Court, loyal
Americans accepted the result. We didn't question that Bush was the
president. After 9/11, Bush had something like 90% approval rating in
the
polls. The vast majority of the world were sympathetic and supportive.
Instead of taking advantage of our remarkable position, Bush squandered
it in a war of choice. Tens of thousands died, and we're much worse
off,
politically, financially, and morally.

Now, answer the question.

Already did, sweetie.
No, you didn't:

How do you propose low income people pay for the passport? They're not
cheap these days.
If we are to end up paying for health care for the poor, and not
including illegal immigrants, then I've no problem with providing the
poor a free passport. That could then be an ID requirement for the
free healthcare.
--

John H
Illegal immigrants are exempt from signing up for the various healthcare
programs winding their way through Congress. So, you don't mind a national
id card? That's quite a statement.
Saying, "That's quite a statement" is quite a statement.

I said I agree with everyone being required to have a passport. It
hasn't killed one European that I know of.
The problem with a national ID card is it takes away the Democrats best
election tool, voter fraud... They will never let it happen.

No, the problem(s) with a national ID card is that our basic freedoms
will be lost and gone forever.

Cost. They are estimating the program will cost upwards of $23 billion,
plus they'll have to run the program year to year. Thought you were for
SMALLER government?
I've had a passport for over thirty years. I know of no 'basic
freedoms' I've lost forever.

Do you have any idea WTF you're talking about?
Yes, I'm talking about a National ID card.
Issuing a passport to the poor would cost $23 billion a year? That's
pure horse**** and you know it.
--

John H
Again, a NATIONAL ID CARD.....did you READ it?

Think PASSPORT loogy, and then get back to me.

I already have a national ID card. Sure didn't cost any $23 billion.

Tell me what freedoms I've lost? Tell me what freedoms a passport
causes one to lose.

What freedoms would a 'national ID card' cause one to lose that a
passport wouldn't?
--

John H

Apparently it's over your head John. The National ID card idea wasn't a
friggin' passport. Two different things.

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JohnH wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:46:45 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:35:41 -0400, JustWait wrote:


Not bull**** at all.. It was finally friday they agreed to put in
legislation forcing folks to prove citizenship... Up until then it was
deliberately left out of the law...
That's nice. I guess we should all permanently carry our passports
around with us, and clean underwear. You never know when you might be
involved in an accident. So, how does that work? If you can't prove
citizenship, to they kick you out unto the curb?
Why not carry passports? Europeans do it, and it hasn't killed any of
them. Hell, it might even reduce voter fraud. Oh, wait a minute,
liberals are in *favor* of voter fraud.

I forgot.
--

John H
Please show me where any liberal EVER said that they were "in favor of
voter fraud" or apologize for the lie.
I bet Harry has uttered those words before, especially if it creates one
party rule like we have now. And if you think there are not millions of
other idiots like him around, you are not paying attention.

And what does that have to do with me? Are you responsible for every
word uttered by any conservative?
You said "show me where *any* liberal... " And Harry is certainly a
liberal, no?

I'll bet good money Harry never said he was "in favor of voter fraud".
Ergo, John owes an apology.

John owes nothing, I said it. And if I had the time to go through his
thousands of posts, I am quite sure he probably said it at one time or
another...


No, John said that liberals "are in favor of voter fraud". That's a lie
unless a liberal actually said they were for voter fraud. And again,
I'll bet GOOD money that Harry never said he was in favor of voter
fraud. Harry's a fat asshole, a bigot and a lot of other things, but I'd
bet good money he never said that.

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
Thought you were for
SMALLER government?
Putting words in my mouth again?



Oh, so your NOT for smaller government??

Don't think I ever said that either..

Well which is it?