I didnt see where Obama had the DOJ go to white churches and strategize. If that isnt discriminatory, then what is.

 

WASHINGTON (RNS) Attorney General Eric Holder and other legal experts strategized with black religious leaders on Wednesday (May 30) about new restrictive state voting laws that could affect their congregants by reducing early voting and requiring identification

Religion News Service | Politics | Election | AG Eric Holder, black church leaders mull voter law changes

 

Still reaching huh?

You may be asked but you don't have to show an ID to vote in KY.

Didn't know that, they ask at my polls for everyone they don't personally know every year. For years I wasn't asked because one of the workers was the mother of a girl I went to school with that knew me.

You may be asked but you don't have to show an ID to vote in KY.

 

Depends on the election. Kentucky law does require an ID, but is a state law and only applies to state elections. If it's a federal election (House, Senate, President) you will be given a provisional ballot. The lack of ID can not prevent you from voting in a federal election. As to that last sentence, I don't know whether that's a state rule or whether federal law mandates that no ID is necessary.

 

Just for informational purposes, the statute in question states that it does not have to be a picture ID so long as it is either a social security card or a credit card that bears the voter's signature and the signature can be visually verified by the election officer. If it's not a Social Security card or a credit card then it must be an ID containing both photo and signature.

 

Those come from the specific Kentucky Revised Statutes entry on elections and the clarifying rule that can be found in the Kentucky Administrative Regulations.

 

Election law is still primarily left to the individual states. Some states have voter ID laws, some do not. That's been the battle that Pennsylvania and others have been fighting recently.

You need to study up on scientific polling. You don't personally need to be polled for the results to be valid.

You might want to as well. Often it's skewed data. That's not really the point anyway and I couldn't care less. Let's get the crux of this. Funny how that's the only thing you responded to. You're just going to ignore the hatred from the left and call out the right, not that you're biased at all....

The Baptist Church is faith-based. AM talk radio is hate-based. That's not my opinion. That's fact.

 

To put it another way, why was Rush Limbaugh shown the exit door when he sought an ownership position in the St. Louis Rams? Was it because he's too caring ... or was it because he made statements like the following: "The NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons."

 

No, it's not fact. It is merely your opinion. I don't agree with many Liberal ideologies. I certainly don't hate them, I just disagree.

 

Much like Rush, Hannity, Maddow, Shultz, etc., you need to learn the difference between fact and opinion.

You might want to as well. Often it's skewed data. That's not really the point anyway and I couldn't care less. Let's get the crux of this. Funny how that's the only thing you responded to. You're just going to ignore the hatred from the left and call out the right, not that you're biased at all....

You apparently don't have a clue as to how scientific polls are conducted -- margin of error, sampling size, etc. And why on earth would anyone want to challenge a Pew Research poll tracking radio listenership by age? (Or could this be a Communist plot to discredit Michael Savage?!) As far as skewed data, I suggest you revisit the right-leaning polls conducted two weeks before the November '12 election. Most of them severely underestimated the Dem turnout.

 

Re: " ... not that you're biased ...": Everyone is biased. But rage is more prevalent among those on the right, both on the radio and on BGP political threads. Remember what moderator rockmom said in the rules of engagement: Those who enter the political arena better have thick skin. Adios.

Thankfully, I've only subjected myself to talk radio a few times in my life. I'm pretty good at making my own decisions, forming my own opinions, and deciding what's best for me. I don't need someone doing that for me, or pigeon-holing me because of my beliefs.

I love reading some of these threads just to watch the train-wreck.

You apparently don't have a clue as to how scientific polls are conducted -- margin of error, sampling size, etc. And why on earth would anyone want to challenge a Pew Research poll tracking radio listenership by age? (Or could this be a Communist plot to discredit Michael Savage?!) As far as skewed data, I suggest you revisit the right-leaning polls conducted two weeks before the November '12 election. Most of them severely underestimated the Dem turnout.

 

Re: " ... not that you're biased ...": Everyone is biased. But rage is more prevalent among those on the right, both on the radio and on BGP political threads. Remember what moderator rockmom said in the rules of engagement: Those who enter the political arena better have thick skin. Adios.

You keep proving how green you are to this forum, otherwise you'd know better than to lump me in with those that listen to Michael Savage or any of the other idiots. Also I'm still laughing at how you keep pushing to the poll garbage even after I told you I didn't care and that's not the argument. Well done. :lol2: But, to answer you in kind, here are reasons scientific polls can be wrong:

 

1) Random sampling error.

2) Weighting errors.

3) Badly worded questions.

4) Bad screening.

5) Polling technique.

6) Volatile situation.

 

Now, in who listens to what, most of these likely wouldn't come into play, but again, the poll isn't the issue, so try talking about what I was getting at, which you avoided from the start.

 

That's you argument? Rage is more prevalent among those on the right? Prove that. I showed you evidence of how the left is every bit as bad. Show me evidence of how the right is worse. All you keep doing is making a silly blanket statement.

 

Oh, and trust me, I have thick enough skin. You haven't even scratched the surface.

Edited April 18, 201313 yr by Run To State

Thankfully, I've only subjected myself to talk radio a few times in my life. I'm pretty good at making my own decisions, forming my own opinions, and deciding what's best for me. I don't need someone doing that for me, or pigeon-holing me because of my beliefs.

Aren't you stereotyping a bit there RM? I'm sure not everyone that listens to talk radio does so to have decisions made for them and I'm sure many can form their own opinions. Heck, I'm sure a lot listen that disagree with them just to hear what the other side thinks. That being said, the only talk radio I really listened to was local, the Mike McConnell show. He had various topics rather than constantly political stuff.

Aren't you stereotyping a bit there RM? I'm sure not everyone that listens to talk radio does so to have decisions made for them and I'm sure many can form their own opinions. Heck' date=' I'm sure a lot listen that disagree with them just to hear what the other side thinks. That being said, the only talk radio I really listened to was local, the Mike McConnell show. He had various topics rather than constantly political stuff.[/quote']

 

I was speaking about the pundits, not the listeners. The talking heads all belittle anyone who disagrees. I prefer the Talking Heads to talking heads.

You keep proving how green you are to this forum, otherwise you'd know better than to lump me in with those that listen to Michael Savage or any of the other idiots. Also I'm still laughing at how you keep pushing to the poll garbage even after I told you I didn't care and that's not the argument. Well done. :lol2: But, to answer you in kind, here are reasons scientific polls can be wrong:

 

1) Random sampling error.

2) Weighting errors.

3) Badly worded questions.

4) Bad screening.

5) Polling technique.

6) Volatile situation.

 

Now, in who listens to what, most of these likely wouldn't come into play, but again, the poll isn't the issue, so try talking about what I was getting at, which you avoided from the start.

 

That's you argument? Rage is more prevalent among those on the right? Prove that. I showed you evidence of how the left is every bit as bad. Show me evidence of how the right is worse. All you keep doing is making a silly blanket statement.

 

Oh, and trust me, I have thick enough skin. You haven't even scratched the surface.

You're one tough hombre.

I was speaking about the pundits, not the listeners. The talking heads all belittle anyone who disagrees. I prefer the Talking Heads to talking heads.

Gotcha, and I totally agree.

You're one tough hombre.

Tough enough not to run from the debate...

Again, RTS, if we accept your premise that AM/satellite talk radio is poisonous regardless of left or right, and right wing talk radio is vastly more commercially successful, what does that say?