The Democrats Crap on the Military Again - OT - Off-Road Forums & Discussion Groups
Jeep-Short Wheelbase All discussion of short wheelbase Jeeps: CJ, TJ, YJ and JK

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of (permalink) Old 12-13-2000, 11:31 AM Thread Starter
Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: In the Ozarks of Missouri
Posts: 500
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
 
The Democrats Crap on the Military Again - OT

This same "hypocrat" that said every vote must count, whose party pushed the motor voter law and whose party on national TV registered criminals in the jails in Florida to vote in the last election . . . . yet whose party sued to throw out thousands of ballots from service members overseas;

Now what does the Senate Minority Leader, the beloved Democrat Senator from South Dakota do? Mr. Daschle has blocked a bill that would place polling stations aboard domestic military bases! As we so dearly said in the Corps . . . Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? I just can not understand why there is not a total uproar from Senator McCain! Why is this former POW such a SORRY SENATOR to our men and women in uniform?!?!?!?! Why is he willing to share power with these flower children of yesterday that have become the blooming idiots we see slashing military spending, selling nuclear secrets to the Chi-comms, and now refusing to make it easier for our men and women in uniform vote?!?!?!?! Now I am through ranting, but this is totally crappy and totally hypocritical from the "EVERY VOTE MUST COUNT" party! I think what they really mean is "EVERY VOTE MUST COUNT FOR DEMOCRATS!"

Liberals don't mind being lied to . . . they just want to be lied to by someone they trust!
Jay Anger is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of (permalink) Old 12-13-2000, 11:38 AM
Keyboard Implanted
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Southeast Iowa
Posts: 6,394
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
 
Re: The Democrats Crap on the Military Again - OT

[img]/wwwthreads_images/icons/blush.gif[/img] Er...Jay; I believe the term is demoCRAPs, not democrats. The alternate term is demo-rat.[img]/wwwthreads_images/icons/tongue.gif[/img]

CJDave
Quadra-Tracs modified While-U-Wait by the crack moonguy[img]/wwwthreads_images/icons/wink.gif[/img] Quadra-Trac Team.[img]/wwwthreads_images/icons/tongue.gif[/img][img]/wwwthreads_images/icons/smile.gif[/img]
CJDave is offline  
post #3 of (permalink) Old 12-13-2000, 12:27 PM
**DONOTDELETE**
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: The Democrats Crap on the Military Again - OT

Hey, Jay. Tell us how you REALLY feel.


Ron R. - 90 YJ w/ good stuff [img]/wwwthreads_images/icons/cool.gif[/img]
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of (permalink) Old 12-13-2000, 12:55 PM
RedSandDog
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: The Democrats Crap on the Military Again - OT

Apparently our Senator McCain is not the patriot that you are. Perhaps he should take a lesson from you on how to serve his country.

And the reason he "is he willing to share power with these flower children of yesterday" is because that is how the Constitution says power is to be shared. You remeber the Constitution, right? It is that thing you took an oath to defend from all enemies, foriegn and domestic. I know it was part of the Oath that I swore.

We are damn proud of our Senator, for the most part he does a fine job. Wanna bag on someones elected officals, bag on your own.

'74 CJ-5, 258, NP435, D44 w/LockRite
(OK, well the np435 is in the garage next to the Jeep)
post #5 of (permalink) Old 12-13-2000, 01:30 PM
DRM
Keyboard Implanted
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Spring Hill, TN
Posts: 3,425
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
 
Re: The Democrats Crap - a closer look...

You may want to look into this a little deeper.

I first was outraged, but then I started seeing some reasoning...

I believe that original law was put in place because they did not want voting places to be held at military instalations. Also realize the original law - I believe - was not directed at just military personnel voting, but ALL people. Obviously, they felt the US gov't should not be involved in any way with voting.

Think about it: would you want to go to a military base and vote as a citizen, especially if the person you were voting for was contrary to the military higher ups' opinions? Can you say "intimidation"?

Personally, although I would love for these military peopole to be able to vote more easily - I do not think that this is the answer.

Think of it this way: would you want to place the voting polls for Union workers to be in the Union headquarters? Do you think MAYBE the Union would have the slightest INTIMIDATION factor in saying "vote this way or else"?

Do you see the problems that leads to?

Anyway, just look a little closer into this, and you may see some reasons why we need to fix this problem, but the resolution presented was not the best one... [img]/wwwthreads_images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

Just my 'pinion [img]/wwwthreads_images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

DRM is offline  
post #6 of (permalink) Old 12-13-2000, 06:35 PM
**DONOTDELETE**
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: The Democrats Crap on the Military Again - OT

Jay, someone like senator McCain could not support this bill, I would not either. Voting is a function of each state and its legislature. If military post had there own polling places then military votes and civilian votes would not be the same. George W. won on this very "equal protection under the law interpretation" The US Supreme court ruled that it was unfair to recount votes with varying interpretations of what a vote is. If you are a believer in States Rights then we would need 50 state elections supervisors on each post to make sure that the votes were conducted according to each states rules. I think absentee ballots are a much better choice, it could be improved, but it is still the best way to do it.

jjc

post #7 of (permalink) Old 12-13-2000, 08:41 PM Thread Starter
Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: In the Ozarks of Missouri
Posts: 500
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
 
Re: The Democrats Crap on the Military Again - OT

It is not that he didn't support it . . . he did . . . it is that yet again he is SILENT as the military is getting slammed by the democrats again! Where the heck is Trent Lott for that matter? I get sick of these guys not standing up on the PRINCIPLES in their OWN PLATFORM!!! Where were they when the Demo's were trying to throw out the absentee ballots? Silent again!

RedSandDog - FYI, "bagging" is in open season on YOUR elected officials as well as MINE, or have YOU not read the Constitution? Perhaps YOU would like to silence me on this matter? It appears so by your response! This has nothing to do with comparing his patriotism to mine; this has everything to do with allowing our armed forces to get tromped on yet again! Your senator called for military pay raises, etc, etc, sponsored and co-sponsored the bills, and then almost lost all of it for us at the last minute by attaching a smaller version of the McCain/Feingold Campaign Finance Reform to it!!!!! Sorry RSD - that is really, really crappy to risk the pay of thousands of men and women in uniform just to advance your PERSONAL adgenda! It is equally crappy to keep silent and do nothing. Furthermore, if you like the powersharing in your committees so much, then I CHALLENGE YOU to give complementary full membership status to local Sierra Club activists in YOUR OFF ROAD CLUB and give them an EQUAL VOICE IN CONTROLLING YOUR CLUB'S LAND AND MONEYS! Oh don't worry, you will still be president of the club, but your VP will be a Sierra Club activist. You see, that is just nonsensical! Sure - you will be the hero of all the local treehuggers in your community and those who are indifferent with your cause - but you will screw your fellow club members. Why is Senator McCain doing this on his REPUBLICAN committee?!?!?!?! You see RSD, this is POLITICS - it is not a "don't talk trash about my football team" nor is it a "lets all get together and be nice to each other." Disagreements are an indispensable part of politics . . .and disagreements are within the bounds of freeplay. These disagreements - now disdainfully called "partisanship" by liberals - are based on PRINCIPLES!!!! A liberal NEVER moderates his principles, just as a Sierra Club member would never allow SOME use of ORV trails. So why is Sen Mac moderating his principles so he doesn't offend anybody? Why is he giving such powerful positions away to those who would just as soon have him out of public office all together? Sorry RSD, his actions or inactions rather are screwing all of those he says he so ardently supports - as does Senator Lott for that matter!

As for the military argument stated earlier in these posts; let's just ban the military from voting all together. This would ensure absolutely no pressure or intimidation! NO!!!! This is AMERICA!!!! This is what we live and die for! Talk about pressure . . . a Gunny WATCHED me fill out my absentee ballot because he never voted in his life and didn't want to screw it up. I was more than happy to teach him by example, but what if instead he had wanted to make sure I voted "his" way? Nothing would have stopped him!!!! Remember, you pencil in your absentee ballots on your own time! I would have much rather be in the privacy of the voting booth in a somewhat controlled environment under the watchful eye of perhaps the Chaplain and Legal sections! If I were intimidated, I could lie like a dog after I walked out of the booth!

I don't know - maybe I am totally off, but I disagree with all of you, and I am once again severely disappointed in my party. I sure hope they don't blow it for all of us in the next four years!


Liberals don't mind being lied to . . . they just want to be lied to by someone they trust!
Jay Anger is offline  
post #8 of (permalink) Old 12-13-2000, 11:51 PM
I Might Just Know What I'm Talking About
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: C-ville, VA
Posts: 1,586
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
 
Re: The Democrats Crap on the Military Again - OT

Well guys, it's official, we can't hold the Democrats responsible for ANYTHING that goes wrong now. House, Senate, President, and even the Justices are now majority Republican. This means that if ANYTHING passes through, it will be with the blessings of the Republicans. So lets hope that from now on we get what we wanted, or else there will be much to be sorry for.

And yes, I did vote Democrat, but I put more value in the way our system works than the fact that those I supported did not win. It shows to me that what we now have MUST be the best. I look forward to seeing what comes of this.

I guess my point is that WE elect our officials and that they are RESPONSIBLE to do as we wish. So get out those pens and write Them.

Fritz

Jeep...need I say more?
ExtinctJeep is offline  
post #9 of (permalink) Old 12-14-2000, 11:32 AM Thread Starter
Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: In the Ozarks of Missouri
Posts: 500
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
 
Re: The Democrats Crap - a closer look...

DRM - I must remind you that these polling stations are set up on DOMESTIC installations - not overseas stations. An interesting thing is that the American Red Cross would run the polling station! Here are some further comments by the supporters of the bill:

"We concluded that while the provision cited by the general counsel was intended to prevent intimidation of voters at polls by the military, it does not prohibit merely the location of a voting site on DoD property," said Mr. Thomas, House Armed Services Chairman Floyd D. Spence, South Carolina Republican, and Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Bob Stump, Arizona Republican.

"They're shutting down military absentee ballots in Florida and putting a hold that could have increased the total number of people who could have voted in this election," said Rep. Bill Thomas, California Republican and the bill's chief sponsor. "It would have been a lot nicer if Daschle had cooperated and it would have moved through both houses. . . . It's a little embarrassing. They are still stopping this thing. Some people can't be shamed into anything."

It is amazing that today AFTER Gore has dropped out, Daschle aids say that he hasn't blocked it, has not tried to block it, and would never even try to block such a bill! (A call to the Democratic cloakroom will tell you otherwise - the bill is still being held. Go figure!) I guess it isn't fashionable now to try to block the vote of our military personnel anymore since the head has been cut off! Democrats made the point I was whining about two days ago: Sen. Lott (nor any other Republican leader for that matter) never pressed for a floor vote FORCING Daschle to block this publicly. Where was our party leaders for our military personnel? Where are our military champions like McCain? I rest my case. Sorry actions like this is what got Clinton off the hook over and over again.

I will also remind you that the house passed this (bi-partisan) 297-114:

************
106th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 5174

AN ACT
To amend titles 10 and 18, United States Code, and the Revised Statutes to remove the uncertainty regarding the authority of the Department of Defense to permit buildings located on military installations and reserve component facilities to be used as polling places in Federal, State, and local elections for public office.

HR 5174 EH


106th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 5174


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


AN ACT
To amend titles 10 and 18, United States Code, and the Revised Statutes to remove the uncertainty regarding the authority of the Department of Defense to permit buildings located on military installations and reserve component facilities to be used as polling places in Federal, State, and local elections for public office.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. USE OF BUILDINGS ON MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AND RESERVE COMPONENT FACILITIES AS POLLING PLACES.

(a) USE OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AUTHORIZED- Section 2670 of title 10, United States Code, is amended--

(1) by striking `Under' and inserting `(a) USE BY RED CROSS- Under';

(2) by striking `this section' and inserting `this subsection'; and

(3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:

`(b) USE AS POLLING PLACES- (1) Notwithstanding chapter 29 of title 18 (including sections 592 and 593 of such title), the Secretary of a military department may make a building located on a military installation under the jurisdiction of the Secretary available for use as a polling place in any Federal, State, or local election for public office.

`(2) Once a military installation is made available as the site of a polling place with respect to a Federal, State, or local election for public office, the Secretary shall continue to make the site available for subsequent elections for public office unless the Secretary provides to Congress advance notice in a reasonable and timely manner of the reasons why the site will no longer be made available as a polling place.

`(3) In this section, the term `military installation' has the meaning given the term in section 2687(e) of this title.'.

(b) USE OF RESERVE COMPONENT FACILITIES- (1) Section 18235 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

`(c) Pursuant to a lease or other agreement under subsection (a)(2), the Secretary may make a facility covered by subsection (a) available for use as a polling place in any Federal, State, or local election for public office notwithstanding chapter 29 of title 18 (including sections 592 and 593 of such title). Once a facility is made available as the site of a polling place with respect to an election for public office, the Secretary shall continue to make the facility available for subsequent elections for public office unless the Secretary provides to Congress advance notice in a reasonable and timely manner of the reasons why the facility will no longer be made available as a polling place.'.

(2) Section 18236 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

`(e) Pursuant to a lease or other agreement under subsection (c)(1), a State may make a facility covered by subsection (c) available for use as a polling place in any Federal, State, or local election for public office notwithstanding chapter 29 of title 18 (including sections 592 and 593 of such title).'.

(c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 18- (1) Section 592 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`This section shall not prohibit the use of buildings located on military installations, or the use of reserve component facilities, as polling places in Federal, State, and local elections for public office in accordance with section 2670(b), 18235, or 18236 of title 10.'.

(2) Section 593 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

`This section shall not prohibit the use of buildings located on military installations, or the use of reserve component facilities, as polling places in Federal, State, and local elections for public office in accordance with section 2670(b), 18235, or 18236 of title 10.'.

(d) CONFORMING AMENDMENT TO VOTING RIGHTS LAW- Section 2003 of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1972) is amended by adding at the end the following: `Making a military installation or reserve component facility available as a polling place in a Federal, State, or local election for public office in accordance with section 2670(b), 18235, or 18236 of title 10, United States Code, shall be deemed to be consistent with this section.'.

(e) AVAILABILITY OF POLLING PLACES FOR 2000 FEDERAL ELECTIONS- If a military installation or reserve component facility was made available as the site of a polling place with respect to an election for Federal office held during 1998, the same or a comparable site shall be made available for use as a polling place with respect to the general election for Federal office to be held in November 2000.

(f) CLERICAL AMENDMENTS- (1) The heading of section 2670 of title 10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`Sec. 2670. Buildings on military installations: use by American National Red Cross and as polling places in Federal, State, and local elections'.

(2) The item relating to such section in the table of sections at the beginning of chapter 159 of such title is amended to read as follows:

`2670. Buildings on military installations: use by American National Red Cross and as polling places in Federal, State, and local elections.'.

Passed the House of Representatives October 12, 2000.

Attest:

Clerk.

END

Liberals don't mind being lied to . . . they just want to be lied to by someone they trust!
Jay Anger is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Off-Road Forums & Discussion Groups forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome