One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: zombinis3
Page: <<prev 1 ... 23 24 25 26
Nov 18, 2018 11:58:45   #
crazylibertarian wrote:
A woman has the OBLIGATION to control her body and not engage in sexual activity which may result in a pregnancy. She is responsible for the results if she does.


Then a male should not be able to force the legs open when the woman says no.
Go to
Nov 6, 2018 19:29:14   #
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/fox-news-obama-economy-fact-check_us_5bdfd044e4b04367a87df156

https://secondnexus.com/news/fox-and-friends-trump-jobs-fact-check/

OR you can Google Pete Hegseth obama, I do give Trump credit for what is happening every administration is effected by the prior one be it good or bad.
I had trouble playing the clip my WiFi is giving me s**t. But the dialog is present.
Go to
Nov 5, 2018 23:19:55   #
PJT wrote:
V**er ID suppresses v**e? Nonsense. Fear monger Democrats who oppose v**er I.d. suppresses v**e.
There can be a bad v**er i.d. bill but the idea of v**er I.d. is rational and wise.

North Dakota Indians Id requirements were acceptable until just recently , the Id doesn't cause suppression but changing the requirements close to e******n does.
Go to
Nov 2, 2018 08:34:21   #
nwtk2007 wrote:
Not allowing one to v**e without proper ID isn't v**er suppression. It's v***r f***d suppression.

The problem is what is needed to prove , the who you are. Id requirements need to be universally adopted. For example the North Dakota Indians they do not normally have individual house number for a home address. So they use a po box
for mail delivery which until recently has been determined good enough. Which is now considered not good enough. The changes could have been put out early enough so that they can get a new Id. Putting out changes so close to e******n can be considered suppression.
Go to
Oct 15, 2018 22:11:58   #
It takes congress to put the amendment to change the limits. Or the Convention of States to suggest an amendment into the Constitution to change it. What I am saying is for amendment to be put into the Constitution you need the people in the seats to agree to the change by using your v**e,or the same with the Convention of States they both need your support.
You cannot just sit back and not get involved. It is called personal responsibility.
Go to
Oct 15, 2018 08:07:30   #
There are no term limits in the Constitution. Under the Constitution, members of the United States Senate may serve an unlimited number of six-year terms and members of the House of Representatives may serve an unlimited number of two-year terms. May sound childish to you, the terms limits are already on the amount of time each person can serve. Comments are being made every day that this representative is only doing this so they shouldn't be in office. Who are the ones that put them in office it is you , me and any one who v**es. The number of times you serve isn't limited but the length is. The responsibilty belongs to everyone to make the person sitting in that chair accountable that includes me and you.If you only v**e for this or that person because they have the same beliefs as you, you are doing a disservice. Yes if you want to limit the total length of time then start a movement and get people involved that is the only way changes can be made.
Go to
Oct 13, 2018 02:33:16   #
pafret wrote:
Term limits and restrictions on Corporate or Individual campaign funding. Convention of States required to repeal the amendment making Senators directly elected and to enact the term limits. Maybe even an amendment preventing the same family from continuously occupying the elected seats.
Agree with the restrictions. But disagree with the need to enact term limits because they are already in existence. If you mean that there should be a law or amendment to enforce the limits. Are you saying that you want the government to babysit so that the individual doesn't need to do want they should have been doing in the first place?
Go to
Oct 2, 2018 08:39:09   #
EconomistDon wrote:
I'm not braindead like you. Just curious, are you a school dropout? Did you quit before they got to subjects like US history, political science, and civics? You are so incredibly clueless.


Me personally nope I would not want him on the bench, one tactic he used was redirect the question to the person who asked it. Says delay or ignore to me.
Go to
Oct 1, 2018 09:42:02   #
Blade_Runner wrote:
OK, one more time. The FBI investigates FEDERAL CRIMES, and on occasion runs background checks on individuals tapped for important positions in the government, including applicants for CIA employment. The FBI does not investigate misdemeanors that are solely within the jurisdiction of local law enforcement.

In this case, even the Bethesda police or Montgomery county sheriff or Maryland State Police could not possibly launch an investigation into Ford's allegations simply because Ford is unable to provide sufficient information, such as date, day, place and time, Ford cannot even explain how she got home, and there are no corroborating witnesses. Where would the detectives or investigators even begin? How could they get a search warrant if they don't know what house to search? And, even if they knew this, after 36 years, who would be living in the house now? If they got permission from the current occupant, what would they find? Would they find any forensic evidence such as a "blue dress", a soiled cigar, fingerprints, DNA, a pubic hair, a stain, empty beer bottles?

I watched Rachel Mitchell's entire questioning of Ford and all I can say is if that woman were put on the witness stand in a court of law, even a third rate defense attorney would tear her testimony to shreds. I swear I've never seen such pathetic, non-committal and vague responses to direct questions in my life. Ford's story leaks like a screen door in a submarine.
OK, one more time. The FBI investigates FEDERAL CR... (show quote)


Yes there is a date it may not be the correct one and they do have names some investigations have started with less. The date is when on his calender where the friends were suppose to meet. The names you know. If the state feels strongly enough there is enough to follow through. Whether it's worth it or not that has to be decided. As for search warrant your right it would be pretty useless.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 23 24 25 26
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.