The English And Spanish Versions Of The GOP SOTU Response Were The Same, Except On Immigration
 

[URL="http://thinkprogress.org/immigration/2016/01/13/3738927/nikki-haley-mario-diaz-balart-sotu-response/"]The GOP offered two different responses[/URL] to President Obama’s final State of the Union speech on Tuesday evening — and the small differences between them reveal an internal conflict over a policy issue that’s especially important to Latino voters.

[QUOTE]South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) offered separate messages in English and Spanish, respectively. In her speech, Haley supported stopping undocumented immigration and even refugee resettlement, while Diaz-Balart’s speech was tailored to a Spanish-speaking audience in favor of immigration reform. [/QUOTE]

I think the opening blurb is far too kind. They lied. They presented radically different positions on immigration to English and Spanish speaking audiences.

First he came for our outdated and bloated healthcare system, then our favorite boogieman Bin Laden, now our Cancer? What Freedom with he trample next?

The only parody of this is actual dialogue about real problems.

[YOUTUBE]vPRfP_TEQ-g[/YOUTUBE]

After the 2012 Election the Republicans stated that they would not have as many Presidential debates in the next cycle. They realized that the more people saw of Romney and Paul the less they liked them and the more they heard the Romney/Paul agenda the less they agreed with it.

They should have done the same thing with their own primary cycle.

[url]http://www.makepythongreatagain.org/[/url]

For you programmers out there.

A parody... of an almost parody...
[youtube]18pnjSu9-Bk[/youtube]

[url=www.truthdig.com/report/item/hillary_blames_bernie_for_an_old_clintonite_hustle_rotten_shame_20160119]Hillary Blames Bernie for an Old Clintonite Hustle, and That's a Rotten Shame[/url] | Robert Scheer, Truthdig
[quote]The Clintons have no shame, that much you can count on. That stupefying arrogance was on full display in the most recent presidential campaign debate when Hillary Clinton countered Bernie Sanders’ charge that she was compromised by her close ties to Goldman Sachs and other rapacious Wall Street interests with the retort: “Sen. Sanders, you’re the only one on this stage that voted to deregulate the financial markets in 2000, ... to make the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission no longer able to regulate swaps and derivatives, which were one of the main causes of the collapse in ’08.”

Hillary knows that the disastrous legislation, the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (CFMA), had nothing to do with Sanders and everything to do with then-President Bill Clinton, who devoted his presidency to sucking up to Wall Street. Clinton signed this bill into law as a lame-duck president, ensuring his wife would have massive Wall Street contributions for her Senate run.
...
In an awkward power-couple footnote, [Alan "Mr. Bubble"] Greenspan, chief prophet of radical banking deregulation, is married to NBC journalist Andrea Mitchell, one of the two debate moderators Sunday night, who pointedly challenged Sanders with questions about his integrity in his call for reform of the economy. But not as awkward as Hillary having been prepped by her debate adviser [Gary] Gensler to attack Sanders for his vote for legislation that Gensler wrote when working for her husband.[/quote]

[url]http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/sarah-palin-original-anti-establishment-candidate-crowns-donald-trump-iowa-n500186[/url]

[QUOTE]The only two leading Republicans who have both run for the White House and starred in their own reality television shows stood side by side in Iowa Tuesday night, vowing to steer the 2016 Republican primary nomination away from the establishment.[/QUOTE]

[URL="http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/34737-focus-why-we-must-now-adopt-the-qohio-planq-to-prevent-the-qstrip-a-flipq-of-american-elections"]A Modest Proposal[/URL]

[QUOTE]As the 2016 election approaches, we must remember that our electronic voting system as it currently stands is thoroughly rigged. The entire outcome can be flipped with a few late night keystrokes, as was done in Ohio 2004.

This year, at least 80% of the nation’s votes will be cast on electronic machines whose outcome can be altered by a governor and secretary of state with just a few keystrokes, and without detection.

There is a way – we call it “The Ohio Plan” – by which we can attain a fair and reliable vote count.[/QUOTE][B]
[SIZE=2]Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything.
-Joseph Stalin

[/SIZE][/B][SIZE=2]There are some very interesting comments, too.
[/SIZE]

[QUOTE=kladner;423486][URL="http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/34737-focus-why-we-must-now-adopt-the-qohio-planq-to-prevent-the-qstrip-a-flipq-of-american-elections"]A Modest Proposal[/URL]

[B]
[SIZE=2]Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything.
-Joseph Stalin

[/SIZE][/B][SIZE=2]There are some very interesting comments, too.
[/SIZE][/QUOTE]
Yes, I too think this is very important. Here in NL we had electronic voting for just a few years, but we returned to voting on paper with a red pencil in I think around 2010 because of the potential for undetectable fraud. This was purely precautionary and I don't think any pre- or post-election fraud with the voting machines was actually uncovered here, whereas it has demonstrably occurred in the USA, including putting George W. Bush instead of Al Gore in the White House in 2000 as the article mentions.

At least in my precinct in Chicago, pencil-marked paper ballots were still in use at the last election. However, they are machine tabulated, which still leaves room for skullduggery.