RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts

RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

CreativeDominant -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/5/2016 6:52:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail was it a bigger violation than nutsuckers in florida? ~just waiting to see your posts to Tkman and Dominant Wrestler, since they also agree with those calling for Clinton's arrest. And Lord knows, neither of them are on the right~

mnottertail -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/5/2016 7:40:48 PM)
not sure I buy that.

MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 5:56:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux http://nypost.com/2016/03/03/why-85000-people-are-calling-for-bill-clintons-arrest/ The number is over 100k now... Bill Clinton, for many years now, is suffering from "Dixie Chick Syndrome": 1) The afflicted gets maligned and harassed by the right-wing over issues that have nothing to do with his/her job or issues made up completely 2) The afflicted gets so angry, warped, jaded that he/she can no longer be effective in public life I have seen so many cases of it. It's sad. (Ever hear the last Dixie Chicks album?) Sad. All because she said she was genuinely embarrassed as a Texan by GWB.

thompsonx -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 10:55:01 AM)
ORIGINAL: bounty44 just back to point out to vile critter parts ranting about the "nutsuckers"---these are BERNIE SANDERS supporters who are pursuing the matter...so your own people there comrade! When did you become an athletic supporter for sanders? Obviously you are since you have pointed out that it is the sanders people (and you) who are upset about this>

thompsonx -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 11:01:13 AM)
ORIGINAL: BamaD It is still illegal to urge people to vote for any candidate inside a polling place. Unless, of course, your name is Clinton You have yet to bring any proof of these illegal actions.

thompsonx -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 11:03:39 AM)
ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Lessee here. this is not OK but it was OK for Blacks to scare Whites away from voting places. Whites have a long history of doing that very thing. Why does it offend you when it is returned?

thompsonx -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 11:07:22 AM)
ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01 Bill Clinton, for many years now, is suffering from "Dixie Chick Syndrome": The dixie chicks are hugely popular, more so since the comment about dubya. Slick willie should be so lucky.

angelikaJ -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 2:01:14 PM)
Lots of people violate election laws. Some on purpose, some unintentional. Very rarely would it require going to jail.

MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 5:21:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01 Bill Clinton, for many years now, is suffering from "Dixie Chick Syndrome": The dixie chicks are hugely popular, more so since the comment about dubya. Slick willie should be so lucky. Hugely popular? More so since the comment about dubya? Uhhhh No. Not by any measure. And not according to Natalie Maines (who would know). Right or wrong, Bill Clinton is infinitely more popular than the Chicks (who, like Bill, was once awesome!)

thompsonx -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 5:52:21 PM)
ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01 ORIGINAL: thompsonx Bill Clinton, for many years now, is suffering from "Dixie Chick Syndrome": The dixie chicks are hugely popular, more so since the comment about dubya. Slick willie should be so lucky. Hugely popular? More so since the comment about dubya? Uhhhh No. Not by any measure. And not according to Natalie Maines (who would know). Right or wrong, Bill Clinton is infinitely more popular than the Chicks (who, like Bill, was once awesome!) Your opinion is in conflict with reality. As of 2015, Dixie Chicks have won 13 Grammy Awards, including five in 2007 for Taking the Long Way—which received the Grammy Award for Album of the Year—and "Not Ready to Make Nice", a single from that album. By December 2015, with 30.5 million certified albums sold,[2] and sales of 27.5 million albums in the U.S. alone, they had become the top selling all-female band and biggest selling country group in the U.S. during the Nielsen SoundScan era (1991–present).[3][4][5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixie_Chicks#2003.E2.80.9305:_Political_controversy

MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 7:40:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01 ORIGINAL: thompsonx Bill Clinton, for many years now, is suffering from "Dixie Chick Syndrome": The dixie chicks are hugely popular, more so since the comment about dubya. Slick willie should be so lucky. Hugely popular? More so since the comment about dubya? Uhhhh No. Not by any measure. And not according to Natalie Maines (who would know). Right or wrong, Bill Clinton is infinitely more popular than the Chicks (who, like Bill, was once awesome!) Your opinion is in conflict with reality. As of 2015, Dixie Chicks have won 13 Grammy Awards, including five in 2007 for Taking the Long Way—which received the Grammy Award for Album of the Year—and "Not Ready to Make Nice", a single from that album. By December 2015, with 30.5 million certified albums sold,[2] and sales of 27.5 million albums in the U.S. alone, they had become the top selling all-female band and biggest selling country group in the U.S. during the Nielsen SoundScan era (1991–present).[3][4][5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixie_Chicks#2003.E2.80.9305:_Political_controversy You didn't read the full article. Even the excerpt you quoted refers to their career in aggregate. It never indicates that they remain hugely popular. You also badly conflate grammys (music industry recognition) with popularity. I enjoy their immense talent and creativity. However, asserting that they are currently hugely popular is just not true. Nor does this wiki link establish that. And of course, popularity wasn't my main point anyway. I was referring to the quality of their music post the dubya comment. ok... Enough about the Dixie Chicks :)

Termyn8or -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 9:32:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Lessee here. this is not OK but it was OK for Blacks to scare Whites away from voting places. Whites have a long history of doing that very thing. Why does it offend you when it is returned? Nice editing motherfucker. YOU KNOW what the next line said in my post yet you snipped it. You snipped it because you are a paqthetic hypersensitive politically correct rag and because I mention differences in races I must be a knuckle dragging redneck. Because you can never mention any difference in race because "we are all the same under the skin" even though after you are dead a hundred years they can tell which side of what hill you were born on. And even though skeletal remains show quite plainly the differences, of course they make no difference in the traits of a being. That an Oriental is exactly the same as a Swede for example, is the liberal dogma. We are not the same under the skin and we are not equal either. Equality means equal treatment. What you are and what you can make yourself is not equal. Never was. Never will be. So, nice editing motherfucker. Everyone here can go look at my post and see what you did. You proud now ? Are you proud that you called out a knuckle dragging redneck ? Are you proud that you did is undeservedly ? That should make you cream your panties even more. T^T

Termyn8or -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 9:36:08 PM)
FR : For the record : "Lessee here. this is not OK but it was OK for Blacks to scare Whites away from voting places. And it was OK for Whites to close the roads between Black neighborhoods and voting places.. " T^T

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 10:04:25 PM)
Regarding the issue of the applicability of the law to a primary, I wonder who pays for it. Is it not the party that pays for primaries/caucuses?

Termyn8or -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 10:20:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick Regarding the issue of the applicability of the law to a primary, I wonder who pays for it. Is it not the party that pays for primaries/caucuses? You just hit a nerve. Really. Sure, ask where these candidates got the money, but where did the political parties get the money ? A VERY good question. T^T

Phydeaux -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 10:32:36 PM)
For some period of time, the feds subsidized the parties political conventions. I'm not up on whether that is still true. Most of the political parties do separate and prodigious fund raising, additionnally - both the house, the senate, the parties, and the individual candidates all fundraise.

ThatDizzyChick -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 10:49:36 PM)
Well I did some research and it seems they are publicly funded, in which case the State law should apply.

Phydeaux -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/6/2016 11:13:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick it seems they are publicly funded, in which case the State law should apply. Why on earth would you think that? I don't know one way or the other, however electioneering law is federal law. Ie., FEC. Fed law trumps state law in most cases, wherever it applies.

mnottertail -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/7/2016 7:24:33 AM)
Federal law is pretty much money. http://www.fec.gov/law/feca/feca.pdf It would violate states rights to describe the dimensions regarding distance from a MA polling place to a citizen of the US being given succor and comfort, and the great state's own hospitality, in the Commonweal. Also there is that pesky constitution thingie....... Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. It protects the Koch's of this world as it protects the Clinton's. Nothing federal to see here folks, states-rights, and near as I can tel no law broken. I am awaiting someone who can actually show me a statute from MA itself in disagreement.

thompsonx -> RE: Clinton violated election laws in Massachusetts (3/7/2016 7:47:00 AM)
ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01 ORIGINAL: thompsonx You didn't read the full article. Yes I did. This is the important part. they had become the top selling all-female band and biggest selling country group in the U.S. during the Nielsen SoundScan era (1991–present).[3][4][5] It never indicates that they remain hugely popular. Why is it that in your opinon "the top selling all-female band and biggest selling country group in the us from 1991 to present does hot indicate hugely popolar? You also badly conflate grammys (music industry recognition) with popularity. The quoted part speaks directly to money as in "top selling all female band and the biggest selling country group in the u.s" and not to grammys or music industry recognition. I enjoy their immense talent and creativity. However, asserting that they are currently hugely popular is just not true. Nor does this wiki link establish that. Really???what does "they had become the top selling all-female band and biggest selling country group in the U.S. during the Nielsen SoundScan era (1991–present).[3][4][5] " mean then? Selling the most recordings does seem to indicate "hugely popular" And of course, popularity wasn't my main point anyway. I was referring to the quality of their music post the dubya comment. Is the low quality of their music post dubya why "they had become the top selling all-female band and biggest selling country group in the U.S. during the Nielsen SoundScan era (1991–present).[3][4][5]"?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875