namelesstavern.net

no room for facts in MURKA, obv

Arlos wrote:

Narrock wrote:ID's should be mandatory for voting, period. Without this law, shitbag illegals and underachiever democrats who think they need to rely on government etc, will vote over and over again like cheatin scumbags.

Do you have one iota of proof of this assertion?

-Arlos

Of course not. Faux News told him to say it

Romney family investments have direct ties to voting machine company, whose board members are among Romney's biggest donors

this is part of the problem with any elite, D or R or otherwise. apparently once you get that high up and surrounded by toadies, there's no one honest enough to point out obvious conflicts of interest. kings without jesters imo

Arlos wrote:

Narrock wrote:ID's should be mandatory for voting, period. Without this law, shitbag illegals and underachiever democrats who think they need to rely on government etc, will vote over and over again like cheatin scumbags.

Do you have one iota of proof of this assertion?

-Arlos

Don't be naive. Why do you think dems (really) dont want ID laws for voting? It has nothing whatsoever to do with disenfranchisement... that's just a smoke screen.

Narrock wrote:

Arlos wrote:

Narrock wrote:ID's should be mandatory for voting, period. Without this law, shitbag illegals and underachiever democrats who think they need to rely on government etc, will vote over and over again like cheatin scumbags.

Do you have one iota of proof of this assertion?

-Arlos

Don't be naive. Why do you think dems (really) dont want ID laws for voting? It has nothing whatsoever to do with disenfranchisement... that's just a smoke screen.

Actually, since the people being disenfranchised overwhelmingly vote for the Democratic ticket, yes, I think that's EXACTLY what they care about. Do I think they'd care anywhere near as much if it was parts of the GOP voting block that was being disenfranchised? Probably not, no. But then, the GOP wouldn't be pushing for disenfranchisement, either.

In any case, I repeat: Do you have ANY evidence, at all, that there is large-scale repeat voting by any group, or that there are large amounts of illegal immigrants that are voting. Well?

-Arlos

I don't need proof. It's a certainty, given the unscrupulous history of the democratic party. Need I remind you of when algore tried, to steal the election with his fucking attorneys? The count, the re-count, the re-count, and the re-count all yielded the same result: Floridians wanted Bush for prez.

So you are willing to believe things that have no proof at all for them, just because you want to? Come on, Mindia, I know you're better than that. That's either being willfully blind or highly gullible.

It's a simple thing: If you want to make extreme allegations, you need to have significant factual proof of those allegations, or people simply won't go along with you. Since there is *NO* evidence of voter fraud, then I remain adamantly opposed to efforts that have the very high likelihood of disenfranchising legitimate voters. Just because you WANT to believe it happens doesn't mean it DOES happen.

-Arlos

Thing is... I don't really care if you guys go along with it or not. We all know this board is comprised of 95+% liberals.

Narrock wrote:Thing is... I don't really care if you guys go along with it or not. We all know this board is comprised of 95+% liberals.

Head in the sand.

You are also 95% wrong. Coincidence?

Tossica wrote:

Narrock wrote:Thing is... I don't really care if you guys go along with it or not. We all know this board is comprised of 95+% liberals.

Head in the sand.

You are also 95% wrong. Coincidence?

Hmm... Maybe there's two different namelesstavern.net's

Like one where you aren't a fucking retard? Would be nice

Narrock wrote:I don't need proof.

like i said, the touch is gone. you've gone from incisive satirism to hackneyed slapstick. wrap it up, mindailure