• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

Joe Manchin's "highly suspicious" reversal on voting bill follows donation from corporate lobby

Discussion in 'General Politics' started by tulc, Jun 10, 2021 at 3:04 PM.

  1. tulc

    tulc loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

    +18,311
    Christian
    Married
    Joe Manchin's "highly suspicious" reversal on voting bill follows donation from corporate lobby
    tulc(thought this was interesting)
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. CatsRule2020

    CatsRule2020 Member

    187
    +105
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    Although the corporations put money into the pockets of politicians to control their votes on certain bills, I think the problem may be more frightening.
    By the way so many politicians have been voting to end democracy, it looks like someone is making them more terrified of them than the politicians love the money from the corporations.

    I have never had my life threatened, or worse had any loved one threatened by someone fully capable and could evade prosecution. I would not know what to do if it was useless to go to the police.
     
  3. Fantine

    Fantine Dona Quixote Supporter

    +9,323
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    Basically, Manchin has a thesis.

    Thesis: Republicans can be trusted to act in a bipartisan manner for the good of the country.

    This thesis has been disproven hundreds of times since the inauguration of Barack Obama. McConnell, Senate minority, (that sure sounds good) leader, pledged to stop every single bill Obama supported--no matter what it was. He is now extending that pledge to Biden, and 50 of his senatorial puppets are blindly obeying.

    And so Manchin is desperately trying to prove his thesis which has been disproven over and over. If he can get some pale, diluted, weak facsimile of an original Democratic bill to gain one or two Republican votes, he can support his delusional thinking.

    I sure hope he can be set free of his delusions more easily than the anti-vaxxers and the MAGA supporters.
     
  4. Ignatius the Kiwi

    Ignatius the Kiwi Newbie

    +2,460
    Eastern Orthodox
    Single
    Based Manchin beats teh libs and gets them mad.
     
  5. iarwain

    iarwain Newbie

    168
    +78
    Christian
    In Relationship
    Voting laws should be decided on the state level, as prescribed in the Constitution, not at the Federal level.
     
  6. tulc

    tulc loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

    +18,311
    Christian
    Married
    true, you'd think Democrats would be kind of used to being betrayed by members of their own Party by now.
    tulc(just a thought)
     
  7. tulc

    tulc loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

    +18,311
    Christian
    Married
    Well...that's how Jim Crow laws were in place for so long.
    tulc(thinks that's the down side to that idea)
     
  8. iarwain

    iarwain Newbie

    168
    +78
    Christian
    In Relationship
    Jim Crow laws are not the fault of state rights, they are the fault of wrong thinking.
    And just so we're clear, there are no "Jim Crow 2.0, Jim Eagle, Jim Crow on steroids" laws in the US today.
     
  9. Fantine

    Fantine Dona Quixote Supporter

    +9,323
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    Closing polling places in urban areas is Jim Crow.

    Gerrymandering to minimize the impact if black votes is Jim Crow.

    If the intention and result is racist, it's Jim Crow.
     
  10. tulc

    tulc loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

    +18,311
    Christian
    Married
    ...didn't the State have the right to make any laws they wanted about who could or couldn't vote? If so, I'm not sure how your argument that:
    and since those States chose to enact Jim Crow laws I'm not seeing where they can be separated.

    Well...except there are...and have been for quite some time now.
    The New Jim Crow - Wikipedia
    tulc(just a thought)
     
  11. hislegacy

    hislegacy At the great Pyramids

    +9,803
    United States
    Charismatic
    Married
    US-Others
  12. Fantine

    Fantine Dona Quixote Supporter

    +9,323
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    What purpose will increasing hours in rural areas--combined with closing large numbers of polling places in the Atlanta area--accomplish?

    Hmm...so maximizing opportunities for whites while minimizing them for blacks was a 2 step process.

    Hmmm...so they maximized white rural opportunity and minimized urban black.opportunity to say there was more opportunity.

    So what should we call them? Racist hypocrites? Lying hypocrites? Pinnochios?
     
  13. iarwain

    iarwain Newbie

    168
    +78
    Christian
    In Relationship
    Anyone who wants to vote can vote. But leftists keep fanning the flames of racial hatred. We'll see where it takes us.
     
  14. tulc

    tulc loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

    +18,311
    Christian
    Married
    ...that seems to be the main reason Republicans are trying pass laws to curtail that. Even they admit restricting voting is their only way to win elections
    Trump says Republicans would ‘never’ be elected again if it was easier to vote

    huh...not sure how "pointing out a problem exists" can be considered "fanning the flame of racial hatred", how else do you deal with something if people aren't aware the problem exists in the first place?

    Perhaps to a Nation that doesn't fight to make it harder and harder for it's citizens to vote?
    tulc(thinks that sounds like a good thing)
     
  15. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +7,649
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    They just added some new hoops for some voters to jump through in order to do so. As republicans occasionally admit, they do it in hopes that it will reduce turnout of minority voters. No one is fooled.
     
  16. iarwain

    iarwain Newbie

    168
    +78
    Christian
    In Relationship
    The Democrats are only complaining about the Georgia Law because they want to use it to push their own unconstitutional "For the People" Act that suppresses free speech and centralizes more power in the Federal government.
     
  17. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +7,649
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    What speech would be suppressed by opposing voter suppression?

    The Civil Rights Laws did that. And it gave tens of millions of Americans their rights back. States have no rights; that collectivist idea is the antithesis of freedom. People have rights.
     
  18. iarwain

    iarwain Newbie

    168
    +78
    Christian
    In Relationship
    The (very liberal) ACLU does not support HR1 because it suppresses free speech by regulating campaign contributions and reducing the ability to donate anonymously. Given that Cancel Culture has declared it open season on conservatives, and the left wing media and government have no problem with this whatsoever, the latter attack on civilian privacy is especially disturbing.

    Also, I am against any movement to transfer power from the states to the federal government. It's the constitution, which leftists hate. The founders put in place a system of checks and balances, and the distribution of powers at both the central and local level are a major part of that system. A system that is highly under attack by leftists, because they want all power to be held by the central government. They do not like the idea that red states might want to live in peace under their own control, while the Dems want to turn the whole country into California, New York, or Portland. No thanks.
     
  19. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +7,649
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    ACLU, as you seem to realize, is more libertarian than liberal.

    The Dixie Chicks are conservative? Colin Kaepernick is conservative? The right wing created that monster, and now they're wailing because after they let it loose, it bit them on the rump.

    The right wing media and government had no problem with this whatsoever, until they learned that the door swings both ways.
     
  20. Fantine

    Fantine Dona Quixote Supporter

    +9,323
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    I read their position paper. They mention public-interest organizations and individual speech.

    They do not mention money at all. Nor do they mention anonymity.

    That's Citizens United, not HR 1. That Supreme Court decision needs to be overturned--either by law or a new court.

    Corporations are not "public interest groups." And anonymous mega-money is not speech.
     
Loading...