Comments by "Jack Haveman" (@JackHaveman52) on "'Is Anyone Else Disturbed?': Lankford Cites Ad From Biden Nom's Thesis In Call Against Confirmation" video.

@fj400007 That never occured to me but you're correct. In fact, I'll be that Tracy Stone-Manning would be the first to start wailing had that been a dark skinned little girl. There's nothing that I can say that will fully reveal the depth of my revulsion at people like her.....and Biden. It has to be within him, as well, for nominating a person that would say something like that.
2
@jamesmccarte1609 The ridiculous voter suppression bills. I read the Georgia voter bill, the Jim Crow 2.0 bill, all 97 pages of it. Nothing in there that would suppress a voter from voting. So, I'll issue the challenge that I've issued to dozens of others. You show me, in that bill, what items would suppress voters. I don't want to see second hand interpretations. I want the item, page number and then an explanation on how the would discourage any voter from exercising their voting rights. I have to warn you. I've not had one person respond to that challenge. I've been called a few names but nothing more and I don't expect anything from you either.
1
@jamesmccarte1609 You need a photo ID to buy cigarettes, booze, pick up a prescription, get a job, rent an apartment, apply for a loan, get a bank account, travel on a plane, get a package from the post office, apply for welfare and food stamps, get a credit card, see an age restricted movie, ....that's just off the top of my head. Are these all discriminatory practices? Who is this person that can't and isn't doing ANY of these things? Every western country has ID requirements to vote. Google "what is required to vote in (name of country)" and you'll always have an "ID requirement" listed at the top. This is a non-issue and worse, it suggests that minorities don't have the mental capacity to get an official ID. An exceptionally poor complaint and I'd be willing to state that it would be difficult to find someone that doesn't already have it. They Bill even states that you can get help acquiring that ID if you don't know how. They can keep repeating this claim all they want but it's condescending towards minorities and, frankly, untrue.
1
@jamesmccarte1609 If a person isn't willing to take the time to do these things, it's obvious that the vote isn't all that important to them. If there were barriers put into place to prevent them from fulfilling voting requirements, you'd have a point but you've not done that. People have had to register to vote for years upon years, some of them, country folk, have to travel 15 miles or more to fulfill the requirements or to vote. Nobody's crying for the poor town folk who have these distance problems. These are requirements that must be met by everyone. Pretending that this is somehow a suppression issue doesn't wash. It's no harder than filling out a census report.
1
@jamesmccarte1609 The conviction of a felony has always carried with it a loss of rights. That's nothing new. A convicted felon should try to work his way back into society, as a contributing member. It's part of the rehab process. If a convicted felon doesn't even want to make the effort to try to re-establish themselves, including winning back the right to vote, that's their decision. They're the ones that put themselves into that position. It's only right that they pull themselves out. That's what I did and I know others that did the same thing. I did it in atonement for those that I hurt. If I couldn't do that, then I don't deserve to win back those rights. The country owes me nothing....but I owe my victims everything and I'll gladly do what's required.
1
@lizardbyte People, who leave comments, like your's, always leave me a little sad. You throw out some insults, never explain why you feel that way and then leave, thinking that you've scored some really salient points. You've said nothing of any value. It has no more worth than the insults of an 8 year old bully on a playground. Time to grow up....unless you are 8 years old. Then it's time to reflect on your boorish behaviour.
1
@jamesmccarte1609 It is one thing to want to disband a government agency and another to plant steel obstruction that could kill or severely injure someone. If Trump's pick had tried to physically destroy property, in a covert fashion, that would be a crime. To openly state an intention, which isn't illegal, and to try to do it through authorised and legal channels, is completely different than committing an illegal act that is intended to damage property and cause injury and suffering. If you can't see that, YOU are the problem. I might disagree with his desire to disband the EPA, but I'd never commit an illegal act in an attempt to stop him. I'd do it like a civilised human being and this has nothing to do with party politics. You're defending a dangerous and illegal practice. Once again....that makes you a part of the problem.
1
@Austin1990 Austin.....I think that those who fought with security and broke into the Capitol building were nothing but criminals and no better than the BLM and Antifa thugs, who burned, looted and attacked people for their cause. However, I still believe that we should look into election practices and even perform audits when needed. I think that this is reasonable for those on both sides. Arrests have been made for ballot harvesting, including one, Rachel Rodrigues, who was exposed by Project Veritas and is now facing charges. And yes, the election audits should be done to appease voters. If the process shows no wrong doing.....great. However, if there was wrong doing, let's work on the election process to ensure that it never happens again. Only an audit will show problems and that's the only real way to know how to fix those problems if they do show up.
1
@t3dwards13 He said. "They'll let you grab them by the p.....". That implies consent. It's reprehensible behaviour but it's still legal. Spiking trees is an abhorrent and dangerous act of terrorism and is illegal. Why would anyone listen to a degree from her agency when she's already demonstrated that if you don't agree with government decisions, ignore it and physically rebel until you get what you want, even if it might kill someone? She's set the ground rules with her support of tree spiking. However, I'll bet she'll insist that you follow her mandates. She doesn't care about right or wrong. She cares about power and it's irrelevant what Trump does or says. This is about her.
1