Custom Search

Monday, January 31, 2011

Federal court declares Obama Care unconstitutional

Topic requested...


Blogger Bob said...

Folk's we won't be forced to pay for Chuck and Eric's health care. :)

7:36 PM  
Anonymous LINK HERE said...

Demand the Media "Tell the Truth!" About Government-Run Health Care

7:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck and Eric have their own private health care. We'd be paying for guys like you who don't carry health insurance but expect an ambulance and doctor care when they have a heart attack. Or guys like Bill who use the emergency for flu meds.

Its not Government ran healthcare. Unless you receive a waiver, which most on here would, you will have to pay a tax, for not carrying health insurance. You can get any policy you want if you're working and your employers doesn't provide one. Your employer is eligible for a waiver if they have less than a couple of hundred employees and other reasons.

Point is, Republicans as governors have signed laws that require people to carry health insurance because the rising cost of providing health and emergency care to the uninsured is killing small businesses and bankrupting families.

Be responsible for your own health care and there's no need for this.


9:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well Eric how about deneying coverage to people who are in this country illegaly? Would you support that?

11:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Senate's version which passed specifically states that non-citizens will not be covered. Obama signed and in the statement of the week of the signing pointed how they made it impossible for non-citizens to get covered.

It was a stupid move. Because we don't live in 18th century Mongolia, if they are brought to an emergency room they will continue to take care of all first and and ask questions later. So we'll pay anyway, just more because emergency care is more expensive.

Bob is not very well versed on this legislation and is doing the work of the billion dollar health industry instead of the working man with a family.

Keep barking little doggie and your owner may give you a pat on your head.


8:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:41 as Eric said the bill denied coverage to non-citizens...pretty cool huh?


What that means is that those people end up in the hospital with no coverage. Yippie!!! And, are still treated and the bill gets eaten by the hospital, WHO RAISE THEIR RATES ON THOSE OF US WHO PAY OUR BILLS!!!

This is what you idiots don't get.

All of this hate the poor and don't let them have health coverage that we have had just keeps costing the rest of us money.

Hospitals will get paid one way or another for everything they do. If 80% of people pay their bills, then they will raise the cost to those who pay their bills 20% to make up the difference.

So, if it costs you $1,000 to stay a night in the hospital, the real cost is probably $800 and they jack you $200 to make up for all of those who don't have any money.

You clowns are so freaking brilliant. If everyone had insurance, then people would get treatment sooner, and we (who who pay for those who don't have insurance) would pay less than if they wait and eat up a hospital bed.

The problem with you guys is that you don't get it that the big corporations are getting their money one way or another.

The real reason for all of the fight about this is once people get it, they will realise that we would all be better served if we had the government be the insurance company (public option) rather than giving our cash to private health insurance companies. It would cost less.

That is the real fear of the rich and powerful that spend their days scaring you and keeping you angry and stupid.


Chuck Repke

10:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why buy insurance Chcuk. We just go down to the ER and talk real dumb, fake an accent, mention that we are illegal and can't get back to Mekiko and they roll out the DFL health care plan that's second to none.

12:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And when the hell did Eric care about small business?

12:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:48 you moron...

Read what I posted.

That isn't the DFL plan that you are suggesting that is the GOP plan.

If someone shows up at the hospital bleeding, the hospital is going to take care of them. It doesn't freaking matter if they have insurance or not or if they are from Saint Paul or the MOON.

That is a fact.

If they can't pay for it the hospital EATS THE BILL. They get stuck with the tab. Do you understand that?

So, I know you have never run a business or had to figure out a budget, but what the hospital does, is figures out how many people are going to stick them with the bill each year, and it assumes that loss rate into its costs for services. (I know that is getting a little complicated for your small brain but bare with me.)

So, the hospital charges more for the service to everyone that comes into the hospital to make up for the people that don't pay them. So, like I said if it costs $800 a night for general care in a hospital bed, the hospital charges $1,000 a night to cover the bills that are not going to be paid.

Get it????

Again, I know you have never run a business, but its the same when you are selling any product, you base the price of the product on an assumption that so many go bad or are stolen off of the shelf... same thing with hospital costs.

That is the reason why we would all save money if everyone was insured. And, we would really all save money if we didn't have to buy insurance from a company that had stock holders that need to make money off of us. IF we had a medicare program for all of us working stiffs that we could buy into, then we wouldn't be paying for both health care costs AND stock bonuses.


Chuck Repke

9:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We'll all save money when the next Pres buys trucks and starts picking border jumpers up at the ER, and ships them to Cuba!

Chuck Reprobate can get a job driving the truck.

9:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You know what is so sad is that facts are meaningless to morons like Swifty...

US President Barack Obama’s administration deported 393,289 undocumented immigrants in 2009 - the highest number of deportations for any year in the country’s history, according to official figures by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released in August.

Source: Department of Homeland Security
Exact figures
2009: 393,289
2008: 358,886
Yearly average during Bush administrations: 251,454

The US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deported 34,403 more people during President Obama’s first year in office than during former president George W. Bush’s last year (2008), which was also Bush’s highest year for deportations. ICE director John Morton has predicted an even higher number for the fiscal year 2010.


Chuck Repke

10:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And when Obamma deported them Chuck the airplane dropped them off in the desert right by the border only to be met by the DFL handing out voter registration cards for the next election in the US. Why don't you brush up on your facts Chuck?

9:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


The National Health Care Program is the Democrat's plan, not any Republican plan.

You sure know how to revise history don't you.

So is Frank Brown going to get elected today in the DFL?

Brown is the sex offender (1st degree with penetration) that the DFL has put up to be their affirmative action guy.

I also notice how the Minneapolis paper buried this story and the St. Paul paper didn't report it at all. If this were a Republican it would be front page news.

Here it is for you Chuck and Eric:

DFL affirmative action officer Frank Brown's criminal history has come up as he runs for party re-election.

In 1999, Brown was convicted of first degree criminal sexual conduct.

He said he had his voting rights restored in 2009 and he still must register as a sex offender for the next two years.

According to public records, he was incarcerated in 1999 and served his time in St. Cloud, Moose Lake and Lino Lakes. He was placed on supervised release in 2004 and discharged in 2009, according to the records. The records do not show any re-offense.

"I had talked about it publicly but I hadn't ever talked about it publicly in the DFL itself," Brown said. He has been active with the Second Chance Coalition, which pushes to allow people who have "committed crimes to redeem themselves, fully support themselves and their families, and contribute to their communities to their full potential." With Second Chance, he has spoken of his felony conviction in a general way.

Brown said he served his time, took classes and fully realized his mistakes.

"I changed who I was as a person," he said.

He shared his Second Chance speech and an explanation of his background with supporters and DFLers recently after his history came up in his re-election fight.

At their Business Conference on Saturday, DFL activists will vote on whether to retain him as Affirmative Action Chair or vote for his opponent Eric Margolis.

DFLers Saturday will also elect a new party chair. Ken Martin, a longtime DFL operative who managed the heavy spending Win Minnesota in the 2010 election, is running unopposed.

7:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

US President Barack Obama’s administration deported 393,289 undocumented immigrants in 2009

But left just enough to help Soros of State Ritchie bag the election for Governor JimBeam.

8:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Only the Minnesota DFL would want a sex offender to be their affirmative action guy.

I bet Chuck and Eric endorsed him.

8:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You can bet that both Chuck and Eric are giving this a lot of screwtiny.

11:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

7:26 - read what I wrote.... yes Democracts continue to try and create a better policy for national health care, and the current proposal is to require people to buy health insurance if they can afford it... BUT.... the GOP plan is what I spelled out. No health insurance fot the poor, so they end up at hospitals that they end up sticking with the bills and then all of us who have health insurance or pay are bills get stuck paying the bills with higher health care costs.

Not having a plan - IS A PLAN. That is the GOP plan.

...and I have no idea who Frank Brown is....


Chuck Repke

9:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Haven't you heard of Minnesota care for the poor?

The National Health care system the Obama administration pushed down our throats is a farce. It has been tried in other countries and look at the quality of care. I know both Canada and the UK's system because I have very close family members in both countries. These folks come to America for their care because their countries national healthcare is a farce. Even the PM of Canada came here for his medical care because the national health care system in Canada is broke.

It is also interesting that the DFL is pushing for ID numbers for all of our children in school to follow their educational progress. It is also interesting why the Minnesota DFL opposed Voter ID. Chuck you can't have it both ways.

I wonder what planet you liberals live on?

7:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Already just a quick pull off of the internet lets you know:

The latest official estimate of healthcare coverage from the U.S. Census Bureau is for 2007, and reveals that 15.3% of all Americans (including children) are without insurance. This translates into the oft-cited figure of 46 million Americans without insurance. The Census figures show that those under 18 are more likely to be insured than those 18 and older, and extrapolations of the Census data suggest that the percentage of adults aged 18 and older without insurance in 2007 would be close to 17%. Given Gallup's estimate that the percentage uninsured has risen by about a percentage point in the first half of 2009 compared to 2008, it would not be surprising if the Census figures for 2009, when available, show an increase in the percentage who are uninsured compared to earlier years.


That is the planet that I live on. The one where very, very, very wealthy people may come to the US for treatment, but 15% or better of our population have no insurance while every man, woman and child in England and Canada have health insurance and they think we are crazy that we don't have it.

As for their system being broke... OUR SYSTEM IS BROKE YOU IDIOT... My insurance is over $1,000 a month A FREAKING MONTH. The diference between their system and ours is they get to bitch when the government raises the rates and we get to bend over and take it when the insurance companies raise ours.

What color is the sky on your planet?

Because you don't live on Earth.


Chuck Repke

9:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My sister in-law had cancer. She went to NHC in the UK. She was told to come back in 6 months when they had an opening.

My sister in-law is not rich Chuck, far from it. She came to the US and was treated at full cost. She needed to be treated, but the National Health Care system in the UK was so over crowed because of the low cost that real people who really need healthcare are told to wait until a bed is available. If she had waited she would be dead now.

Canada is rethinking their National Healthcare why because the system doesn't work.

Please take your socialist crap elsewhere.

I am tried of the Dems trying to be like Europe. This is America, we are supporting the Europeans and many other nations and they are free to spend on programs like NHC. We don’t have to be like the Europeans, that is why we came to America.

Chuck would you care to comment about the Dem's plan to give all students in Minnesota an Educational ID? You Dems want to control all aspects of our life, but you don't want Photo ID when it comes to elections. I like how you avoided this whole topic.

10:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I love these "stories" what cancer did your sister-in-law have that took one treatment and then she was fine...? give me a break... I love those stories about England where someone had to wait because all of those poor people were in line in front of them so they had to come here. What a crock of crap. What was she realy here for face lift or tummy tuck?

No, Canada isn't thinking about going into a let them eat cake and let the average person die, health care system. Better than 90% of the people prefer the system to ours.

Insurance is socialistic you idiot!

You and I put our money in a pot and which ever one of us gets sick gets to use it. Sounds like socialism to me.... the only diference between our system and theirs is that some people don't get health coverage in ours. You and I get to be "sociable" with our money but 15% of the country don't get to play and they cause the health care costs to go higher because they don't have money to pay hospital bills and the hospitals jack our costs.

I had a student ID when I was in school... 40 years ago... big deal.

The entire point of requiring a voter ID is to stop people who have the right to vote from voting. There is no evidence of any significant voter fraud anywhere in the country and the I get your goal... you don't want poor people to vote.


Chuck Repke

11:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


My sister in-law was treated for breast cnacer kere in the US. No it didn't take one treatment and I never said that. My brother and sister in-law had to sell their house in the UK and they received treatment here in the US, because of the wait getting into NHS was six months or more.

Believe what you want, but I have first hand knowledge about the healthcare system in the UK. It is the pits and you want that substandard care here in the USA.

Give me a break.

As for the school ID. You had a school ID number with the state of Minnesota 40 years ago? Now Chuck you are not telling the truth. Colleges and universities and private ID numbers, but not with the state. The state wants to track our youth with an education ID number. This is a big deal, just like the state having access to your private medical records, oh wait they already do (DFL sponsored bill).

The whole thing about Voter ID is to make sure that the person voting should be voting. If they are in our country when they should not be then they should not be voting. You have to present a photo ID when you purchase anything. Every time I write a check or use my credit card the cashier asks for my ID, sometimes two forms of ID are required. I don't know what you liberals are afraid of with photo ID unless you got another plan in mind. Chuck this isn't Chicago you know. Dead people can't vote.

The last two elections we found numerous people who shouldn’t have been voting. Felons who should have been excluded from the voting rolls, but due to Mark Richie he didn’t do his job. I personally know a person who is a guest from a different country who voted. Yes Chuck I turned him in, but he left the country before the county could take action. Darwin Lookingbell was the county attorney I talked to.

Chuck you have many defenders, but no defense in your arguments.

2:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First off on your sister-in-law and why she came here, I don't buy it. Every honest appraisal of the British system vs ours has theirs on top. I don't know, and you aren't saying what are the specifics of her case, but in almost every case I have heard of the person coming for treatment in the US was looking for something they either didn't need or could have waited for. The facts are that US health care is now ranked behind almost every industrial nation on the planet.

You are correct though if you are willing to sell your house you can get treatment in the US. Every day thousands of Americans have to sell their house because THEIR PRIVATE INSURANCE COMPANY has denied them treatment. The company that they pay thousands of dollars to a year has determined that they won't pay for a treatment that the family and DOCTOR believes they desperately need.

That is the American way, the wealthy insurance company's "DEATH PANEL" decides it won't pay for your treatment. It would cost the stock holders to much for you to live.

It is amazing how dumb some people are.... do you think it says that someone is a felon on their drivers license? Do you really? Not very bright are you? If everyone was required to have an ID to vote, you would catch exactly as many felons voting as you do now. There is no place on your drivers license where it asks you if you are a felon.

Believe it or not you get your rights to vote back once you have been released from probation or parole. Only those currently under supervision of the court can not vote.

So, try again... other than your hatred of poor people, why do you want a requirement for a voter ID?


Chuck Repke

8:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, I just did a quick check on what radiation and chemotherapy would cost for breast cancer, paying for it "cash" like your sister-in-law did... minimum of a quarter of a million dollars was the estimate for what treatments would be.

So, yes either they are flushed and could just drop that cash fast or they had a nice flat they could sell quickly in England. ...and they sold it in less than the 6 months they would have had to wait for free treatment.... good realtor I guess.

Lying Sack of....


Chuck Repke

4:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck, I came here and told you how it really is, from personal experience and you call me a "Lying Sack of...." Really.

Second, The issue with felons voting was very real. It was reported in all the major newspapers. Mark Richie didn't do his job. Before any election, the Minnesota Secretary of State - Mark Richie requests a list of names from the BCA of recent felons who are not off paper and can't vote. Then this list is checked against registered voters and their names are taken off the voter lists. Mr. Richie FAILED to do this. A conservative group brought this to the attention of both Hennepin and Ramsey Counties and found a majority of these voters had voted who should not have voted. Try taking away a vote once it is cast. Norm Coleman lost by how much, 327 votes. This group found over 2400 felons voted who shouldn't have voted. I wonder whom they voted for? It sure wasn't Norm, but Al Franken.

Chuck I am a little taken aback by your attack on my family and me. My sister in-law really had cancer, she needed treatment in the US. She and my brother really sold their home in the UK. I see you are an expert on real estate in the UK also. My brother and sister in-law also had the help of friends and family. She survived because she had treatment right away, not six months later as the UK' NHS was offering.

7:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First, you don't use your name, so I don't trust you.

Second, you clearly don't know what you are talking about concerning felons voting, because it is the felons responsibility to know that he shouldn't be voting and it is a felony if he does vote. Even if there was the voter ID requirement and even if you had the sec of state clean the voting rolls a felon could just go to the polls with his drivers license and vote!! It changes nothing. And, it is a big lie that there has ever been 2,400 felons voting in any election in Minnesota. So, since I know you are lying about that...

So, this 5 month cancer cure that your sister-in-law got in the USA... how much did it cost and how long did it take her to sell her estate in England.

Like I said lying, sack of....


Chuck Repke

8:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Everyone lies except for Chuck!

11:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:20 - OK so maybe they just make up stories, and I bust them out on them.... 2,400 felons voting in the 2008 election and none of them arrested, nice story, scares all of the out of touch people, but it just is a story designed to scare the out of touch people.

What is so sad is that the out of touch people who hear those stories and repeat those stories don't get it that it is the people who make up those stories are the ones that really hate them and use them by feeding them those stories and think that they are stupid enough to believe them.

Sorry, they make up this garbage to get you to vote against your own best interest. As they say they treat you like muchrooms, they keep you in the dark and feed you bull shit. I just try to turn on the light....


Chuck Repke

11:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Felons voting in 2008 became politicized last year when the Republican Party asked Minnesota prosecutors to investigate conservative group Minnesota Majority’s allegations that hundreds of ineligible felons voted or registered to vote in 2008.

So, if you look up felons voting in Minnesota you will find that the number that the most wacked out right wing group came up with was 1,000.

You then find the facts a year later:

Prosecutors found most of the alleged cases were unsubstantiated. Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman, for example, announced in October his office found 47 cases of voter fraud from 2008, compared to the more than 400 names submitted by Minnesota Majority.


So, if you were lucky maybe 100 felons voted in 2008 and I'll bet you most if not all of them had drivers licenses.

Sorry folks there are lies, big lies and then there is Fox news.


Chuck Repke

11:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


You are wrong about the felons voting.

Minnesota Majority exposed how the Minnesota DFL through Mark Richie wasn't doing his job.

Checking the voter rolls is his responsibility as outlined in state law. This was also reported in the Pioneer Press and Minneapolis Star.

The reason so many were not arrested or prosecuted was because many had moved and could not be interviewed or as I suspect Ramsey and Hennepin counties are run by the DFL, no Republicans are to be found except Tony Bennett the token Republican from the burbs.

Just because these people weren't prosecuted doesn't mean that they didn't vote.

I suggest you look at the report that was produces by Minnesota Majority. It seems they are doing a better job than the DFL elected official Mark Richie.

Here is the report:

One more thing Chuck I call into question your veracity. It ias always the DFL line here with you.

6:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did you read the report you sent me a link to?

I mean beyond the first paragraph?

Because if you read it you will find:

"To date, Minnesota Majority has obtained 341 copies of Hennepin and Ramsey County court registers of actions that document felons’ ineligibility to vote on November 4th 2008, that are linked to electronic voter history records of people who SVRS indicates voted in 2008."


They started with 2,803 and after they spent time looking at it they threw out all but 341.

Like I said, there has never been 2,400 people with active felonies voting in Minnesota. Even if I give you everyone they still suspect you get 341.

I win, you loose.

And, no where in the report have they shown if any of these 341 felons don't have a drivers license, which was the point of the law you want enacted.

I will bet you better than 75% of felons on the street today have valid Minnesota drivers licenses. In fact I would bet its closer to 90%.

Your law is just an assault on poor people.

Also, no where in the report does it say that Ritchie is required to purge the list of active felons. Do you know if that is a fact? It would seem to be an interesting waste of time to have the SoS do that. I mean when would they do that? When someone is placed on probation for a felony and then replace them on the list when their probation has been completed? Sounds like a lot of useless paperwork. But if its a law, it would at least keep a couple of more employees on the payroll in the SoS office. You can count on the GOP to create dumb government jobs.


Chuck Repke

9:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The state failed to purge their voter rolls of ineligible voters — the dead, those who have moved, felons, undocumented immigrants, etc. — and to ensure that elections are administered and conducted fairly.

Chuck here is a link for you from

The number of ineligible felons who voted illegally in the general election in Minnesota is much higher than a government investigation found, according to the government watchdog group Minnesota Majority.

Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner announced to the local press on Oct. 14 that her office had charged 23 felons with illegally voting or registering to vote, saying, "The numbers are very small," Minnesota Majority said in a news release today accompanying the results of its own research.

Using data obtained from the Minnesota Department of Corrections, Minnesota Majority found evidence that hundreds of ineligible felons may have voted in the 2008 election, the group said.

"I think people should be concerned that most of the instances of felon voter fraud would have never been detected had it not been for our independent research," said Minnesota Majority President Jeff Davis. "It begs the question of what other problems officials may be missing and how long these problems have gone undetected."

Election and law enforcement officials failed to detect and prevent felons from voting, the group contends.

8:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck try this link:

He (Dan McGrath) said his group was largely ignored when it turned over a list of hundreds of names to prosecutors in two of the state's largest counties, Ramsey and Hennepin, where fraud seemed to be the greatest.

A spokesman for both county attorneys' offices belittled the information, saying it was "just plain wrong" and full of errors, which prompted the group to go back and start an in-depth look at the records.

"What we did this time is irrefutable," McGrath said. "We took the voting lists and matched them with conviction lists and then went back to the records and found the roster lists, where voters sign in before walking to the voting booth, and matched them by hand.

"The only way we can be wrong is if someone with the same first, middle and last names, same year of birth as the felon, and living in the same community, has voted. And that isn't very likely."

The report said that in Hennepin County, which in includes Minneapolis, 899 suspected felons had been matched on the county's voting records, and the review showed 289 voters were conclusively matched to felon records. The report says only three people in the county have been charged with voter fraud so far.

A representative of the Hennepin County attorney's office, who declined to give her name, said "there was no one in the office today to talk about the charges."

But the report got a far different review in Ramsey County, which contains St. Paul. Phil Carruthers of the Ramsey County attorney's office said his agency had taken the charges "very seriously" and found that the Minnesota Majority "had done a good job in their review."

The report says that in Ramsey, 460 names on voting records were matched with felon lists, and a further review found 52 were conclusive matches.

Carruthers attributed differences in the numbers to Minnesota Majority's lack of access to nonpublic information, such as exact birth dates and other court records. For example, he said, "public records might show a felon was given 10 years probation, but internal records the county attorney has might show that the probation period was cut to five and the felon was eligible to vote."

Carruthers said Ramsey County is still investigating all the names and has asked that more investigators be hired to complete the process. "So far we have charged 28 people with felonies, have 17 more under review and have 182 cases still open," he said. "And there is a good chance we may match or even exceed their numbers."

Chuck there were people charged with voter fraud because they were felons who voted whenm they shouldn't have. The Minnesota SOS needed to purge the voter rolls as this is his job and he didn't.

8:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

After reading Chuck's comments one gets the feeling that he is not a very nice person.

10:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:45 and 8:47 those are news reports about the charges that the right wing Minnesota Majority made. THE CHARGES THEY MADE.

Then (as in next) the right wing Minnesota Majority got the information from the state of Minnesota and checked the list themselves. Their list, they checked their list with the state data and the 2,800 are down to 341. That is from the earlier link.

See that is how things are done, charges are made and then investigated, and then you have facts - so the crap you posted is before this report came out from the same people. Get it? Please read the crap you post before you think you have something new.

And, could one of you please find me that law that requires the SoS to purge the rolls. You guys keep saying its the law, but could one of you find it for me....

And, yes 10:04 everybody knows I am not a nice person. Ask anyone. At least you got that right.


Chuck Repke

11:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So Chuck if I use your logic:

Chuck says he is not a nice person.
Chuck is a DFL member.

So Chuck is not a nice DFL member.

11:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Mr. Richie "prepares the official roster of voters for every election conducted in Minnesota."

If you don't believe me, just ask Joe Mansky about how the SOS is required to remove felons (on paper) from the voter rolls. I am not talking about the felons who have had their voting right restored (off paper). Mansky is the top election official in Ramsey County and he also worked in the Minnesota Secretary of State's office for elections.

Here it is right from the Minnesota Secretary of State website:

"The secretary of state is the chief election official in Minnesota and is responsible for administration of the Minnesota election law. In this capacity, the secretary of state operates the statewide voter registration system and prepares the official roster of voters for every election conducted in Minnesota. Other election activities include certifying voting systems, conducting administrative recounts, accepting filings by candidates for multi-county offices, and training of local election officials. The secretary of state chairs the State Canvassing Board, which certifies the results of state elections."

Yawn....... It is tough being "right!"

12:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK, help me again...

Where exactly did it say, remove felons from the list as being a part of "prepares the official roster?"

I mean, you said it was a law...

...and I asked to see it...

Yawn.... its amazing how you all have no facts just statements.

I mean it may be a law, but come on you're the one that is suppose to know this stuff and what a great problem it is.

You are the one saying someone isn't following the law, can I see the law please?


Chuck Repke

12:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


1:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck prove it isn't law.


1:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

LOL - proving the lack of something that someone else says exists.

The bigger point on this again is, no one has a proposal for how you stop the few felons who vote from voting. What the GOP has is a plan that requires people have drivers licenses or state issued ID's.

I would guess that every felon who has an probation or parole officer worth his/her salt has an agent that has told them to get their drivers license (so they aren't driving illegally) or get a state ID to make it easier to apply for work... since if they are on supervision, that is usually something they are being encouraged to do.

So, the GOP hate the poor and elderly and stop them from voting won't do a damn thing about stopping felons from voting.

And, on the purging the rolls issue... you do understand that all that does, is takes your name off of the list, so if you walk in with a drivers license you can vote. Your name is added to the list that day when you sign in. Not a thing the SoS can do about that.

More GOP garbage to scare you into voting against your best interest.


Chuck Repke

9:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck you sound just like a city council member we have here in St. Paul named Dave Thune.

You spew this GOP hate, but you have no facts to back up your claim.

Please show how Photo ID will hurt the poor. As you say "So, the GOP hate the poor and elderly and stop them from voting won't do a damn thing about stopping felons from voting."

What facts do you have to prove your statement?

Again you up to your old DFL ways with your hate the GOP at all costs language. It pains me to see all the hate you DFLers spew. You say things with no facts to back up what you say. Chuck you are all talk, but very little substance.

5:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck, Mark Richie is responsible for the voter rolls. Being a DFLer he wants all felons to vote, as they vote mostly for DFL candidates and the handouts the government gives them.

6:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

5:58 - Let's see what we agree on and then you tell me if I am right.

1. Everyone in this country over 18 years old has a right to vote, if they have not lost the right.


2. Everyone who goes to vote in the state of MN has the right to vote at the location they currently live in.


3. Low income people (renters) move more frequently than wealthy people (home owners).


4. Extremely low income people (homeless, those in shelters, missions) move very frequently.


5. Almost nobody that is living in a shelter or the mission has a drivers license at that address.


6. Many people that lose their home and move in with Mom or friends don't change their drivers license on the same day (or even for weeks or months).


7. Senior Citizens that move into senior care centers by-in-large no longer drive and don't have drivers license.


8. The GOP ID bill requires people to have a drivers license or state ID for the locatin they live at.


Well, if all of those statements are true (and they are) and you agree that they are (and if you aren't a total ass, you would have to agree) then you can see who won't be able to vote.

Nobody in the mission, or a battered women shelter, or homeless shelter will ever vote again. They are done.

Many renters will be wiped out if they haven't changed their drives license at least 30 days before the election.

Anyone, who moves back with mom, or shacks up with their girlfriend or is in transition at all will not be able to vote.

Seniors that move into senior care and don't make a special effort to get an ID card from the state THAT THEY WILL NEVER USE FOR ANYTHING ELSE won't be able to vote.

Today, the fact that the county can send you a postcard at the location you live at is good enough to prove you live there.

The real issue in this bill isn't proving that you are a living breathing American citizen that has the right to vote. The issue is prove that you have lived here long enough to have an address.

And better than that, prove that you aren't poor enough that we suspect you may be a Democrat


Chuck Repke

10:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


You just presented your ideas on what MIGHT happen. The same kinds of things were said by the Minnesota DFL about conceal and carry a few years back. You would have thought the place was going to turn into a Wild West sort of thing, but that didn't happen. You and your party play on fear and the government knows better, but the Progressive Minnesota DFL are out of touch.

Now Chuck please present some REAL facts on how Voter Photo ID is preventing people from voting.

The real issue is the simple fact your party needs these illegal voters to stay in power, and you will say and do anything to keep illegal voters voting.

Facts Chuck, facts are needed. I just don't believe you.

11:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You don't believe me that people living at the mission for 30 days don't have a drivers license with that address?

You don't believe that women in battered women's shelters don't have drivers licenses with that address on it?

Well then you are either an idiot or you are a lying coward.

Just be honest you don't want poor people to vote and you want a system that will keep them from voting.

The fact that they don't have drivers licenses at those addresses are facts. The fact that the bill requires an ID with a CURRENT address is designed to make damn, fucking sure the poor can't vote.


Chuck Repke

11:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck you bring up fantasy situations, but the reality is they have ID and the bill currently at the capitol allows up to $20 million to these folks to get an ID. So paying for an ID isn't a problem.

The problem is the integrity of the voting place. We have seen in the past few elections how there have been serious concerns about the integrity of the voting here in Minnesota. The public also is behind the security of the ballet box, who don't you want the same?

So I am waiting Chuck, please show us the documented facts why Photo ID is restricting the vote. Please post your findings and while you are at it please cite where you got your information.

Oh by the way Chuck, in the US there are 27 other states that have Voter ID and they seen to think it is fine. The only ones who are complaining about Voter ID are Acorn, the Democrats and any other progressive liberal Democrat. It seems they have an interest in people voting who shouldn't be voting.

You cash a check you need Photo ID. Chuck you are talking about some very extreme cases and the bill before the Minnesota House and Senate provides for these people.

Chuck you reference concerns about a very small minority being disenfranchised by a small minority. What about the MAJORITY being disenfranchised by a small minority? Example the Coleman vs. Franken election. This election was decided by 300+ votes. Keeping the integrity of the ballot box is important. As has been discovered, there has been voting issues with both the 2008 and 2010 elections and the Minnesota legislators are addressing these concerns.

The people want change Chuck, they voted for change in the last election. If you look at Minnesota, what happened Chuck in the last two election? Both the Minnesota House and Senate changed hands. Why? Because the people were tired of the same old crap from the Democrats and they voted them out of office. There was no amount of funny business at the ballot box that the Democrats could muster that could change that outcome.

Still waiting for the facts Chuck that supports your argument. Chuck you are all hot air, no facts, and more hot air. Is the sky falling in your world? That's it you remind me of Chicken Little. Chuck "Chicken Little" Repke

6:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let's be honest this is what you don't like.

1, Minnesota
Average voter registration rate: 83.8
Average voter participation rate: 69.8

2, North Dakota
Average voter registration rate: 91.1
Average voter participation rate: 66.3

3, Maine
Average voter registration rate: 83.0
Average voter participation rate: 65.1

4, South Dakota
Average voter registration rate: 77.1
Average voter participation rate: 65.5

5, Wisconsin
Average voter registration rate: 80.8
Average voter participation rate: 62.9

6, Oregon
Average voter registration rate: 75.5
Average voter participation rate: 64.3

7, Montana
Average voter registration rate: 74.0
Average voter participation rate: 64.8

8, Massachusetts
Average voter registration rate: 74.2
Average voter participation rate: 61.7

9, Alaska
Average voter registration rate: 74.2
Average voter participation rate: 61.5

10, Rhode Island
Average voter registration rate: 73.4
Average voter participation rate: 61.7

And, then these are the eight states that have photo ID requirements similar to the one you are proposing:

South Dakota

There are nineteen other states that have ID requirements but not photo ID.

So, notice any interesting about the list?

Notice how Minnesota has the best voter turn out in the country?

Notice how NONE of the states that have your photo requirement are in the top ten of voter turnout?

Those are FACTS Jack.

The easier it is to vote the more people vote. The harder you make it to prove you live where you live the harder it is to vote. that is the data. And, you don't want just photo ID, you want photo ID with current residence... harshest requirement in the country!!

And, you are freaking joking if you think the issue is just paying for the ID. The issue is that many of these people move so damn often that getting a new ID isn't that important to them or as in senior care residents they don't need the ID for anything at all (other than when you take their right to vote away because they are to old and sick to have that right in your new right wing world).

The right wings research has already proven that few felons vote and it has no data to show that requiring a photo ID will stop any felons from voting.

We do know and can see from the data that what will happen if we implement one of these hate the poor and the old voting requirement is that less people who should have the right to vote will be able to vote.

I laugh when I hear you clowns talk about how often you need to show your ID to cash a check or some other such nonsense. When was the last time you cashed a check? Five, ten years ago? Check, what's a check?

It's like George Bush and the scanner at the grocery store, will someone tell the GOP that nobody uses checks anymore and you don't need to show an ID to use a debit card.

Even at the pawn shop they pay people with debit cards that they can take to the ATM to get cash... no checks in the 21st century.

There are lies, there are big lies and then there are these guys....


Chuck Repke

11:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


You still haven’t proven how Photo ID disfranchises voters. No facts, just voter registrations is all you provided, but you skirted the real question: Prove how voter ID disfranchises voters.

27 states have Voter ID and it is working in their states and more are coming. Minnesota is soon to be one of them.

Please answer the question and stop avoiding it, Jack!

7:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look clown...

If states that have voter ID have lower turn out, and that is consistant across the country, and if you are so stupid you can't see the relationship there is no help for you.

You aren't looking for facts.

The truth is that you want to stop poor people from voting. Why else would you want it?

There is no voter fraud, as in people voting twice that you assholes have any evidence of, and it is clear that voter ID's won't do anything to stop felons from voting.

This is simple and I get why you are doing it. Poor people vote more D than R. Old people vote more D than R. If you can stop them from voting it improves your chances.

It works for the right wing to make up boogey men to justify taking away the vote from the poor, the old and the sick.

It has always been that way with your kind.


Chuck Repke

10:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1. Chuck you don't know what I want, so don't pretend to know what I think.

2. You said, "The truth is that you want to stop poor people from voting. Why else would you want it?"

My reply is, Show me the facts that back up this claim. You can't. You might want to believe it is a vast right wing conspiracy, but the average Joe gets it. The average Joe wants the voting box restored to a place where there is integrity, not fraud.

3. You said, "It works for the right wing to make up boogey men to justify taking away the vote from the poor, the old and the sick."

My reply, "Right back at you. The Progressive DFL says the boogey man is going to do this or that if you don't fund this or that. Former state senator Mee Moua was great at this. Have you ever listened to Jay Bennanav or Anne Carroll? They spew this sky is falling crap all the time. In the end they are wrong."

You say states that have lower voter turnout are a result of Photo ID, then what about St. Paul? For the last two mayoral elections we have had very low turnouts and we don't have Photo ID.

2009 (Minnesota Secretary of state. (
EVA NG 10496
Total Votes for mayor: 34,042 (21.6%)
Total registered voters: 157859

2005 (Minnesota Secretary of State and Ramsey County elections (
Chris Coleman:40,601
Randy Kelly: 18,203
Total votes for mayor: 58,804 (36.7%)
Total registered voters: 160414

So Chuck without Photo ID only 36.7% of the registered voters voted in St. Paul in 2005 and in 2009 it dropped to 21.6% of the total registered voters. Maybe Photo ID is needed to attract voters to come in and vote.

Chuck I am still waiting for you to present hard facts to back up your argument with citations. You are all talk, but you can't back up what you say with actual facts.

We call this in a court of law "hearsay."

11:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First off this is getting pretty silly...

You are the one that wants to change the law.

You want to require people to have current ID's to vote.

It is clear who doesn't have current ID's (the poor and the elderly).

You can run all of the bull shit you want, but that is just a fact. There are few wealthy middle aged people without ID's.

The law is directed at the poor and the elderly.

You claim that there is fraud in the ballot box, but the only "fraud" that ever gets charged (and ever happens) is that a few felons a year vote when they shouldn't.

You offer no evidence that having an ID would stop felons from voting. In fact if you check with any probation or parole officer, they try to make sure their clients have current ID's. (...and if you think about it any felon that would be concerned enough about the world to vote, has probably taken care of getting himself an ID.. that is the reason why judges tend to go soft on them when they get caught because it tends to be the guys that are trying to go straight and become good citizens that think they should go out and vote. The last thing that they paid attention to when they were released from prison was someone saying they don't have their voting privileges back.)

So, you offer a law that you claim will end a fraud that either doesn't happen (pretend people voting) or that your fix won't help (stopping felons from voting) when you know who it will have an impact on is people that don't have ID's (the poor and the elderly).

I know how the right wing hates the poor, sick and elderly, we have seen your regimes in other places and at other times.


Chuck Repke

9:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck your HATE speech is really something. You degrade someone when you don't have a defense. You belittle my family when we tell you how it really is in the UK.

You belittle me when I have an opposing view of the Photo ID topic than you do. You ignore my request for facts to back up what you say, but you require I provide sources and I do and you then ignore the data.

You have really opened the window into how the DFL mind works. You call me a "right wing" or state I hate the poor. Chuck I am not rich, I volunteer, I am an average citizen who cares deeply about our country and the direction it's headed. The DFL controlled city council has not respected the average taxpayer, but they are very generous with the city unions. City government has grown when other private businesses have rightsized. The unions in turn have given lots of money to DFL candidates. The DFL is the in party in the metro area because they give away the store to the unions and anyone else with their hand out.

Chuck we are very different. I believe in our Founding Fathers and you believe in the Soviet style of government where government controls all and everyone is equal.

Well I believe in free enterprise rewarding someone for his or her hard work. Helping someone in need, but drawing the line as there is no free lunch and they have to actually work for a living. I believe letting the people keep their hard-earned money. Money they took a risk to make it grow. The DFL wants to tax the rich, but I got news for you, that golden goose has been killed a long time ago.

Obama wants workers to share in the corporate profits, but will the workers also share in the risks of the business. Business risk money all the time and they lose money. If you are going to have it one way you also have to have it the other way.

Businesses hire workers. The workers are paid for their work. That is the contract between a worker and their employer. The owners don't owe anything to the workers except for paying what is in their contract. This contract may include many benefits like health insurance or it may not. If the employee doesn't like the contract then they are free to seek out employment elsewhere. The business owner is not a mother or father to their workers. They expect a job to be done and they then pay the agreed upon compensation. Deal Done!

7:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sad, so, so, so sad...

Our founding fathers were left wing revolutionists.

They took on the wealthy powerful elite that was the King, his appointed governors and the mighty Church of England.

They believed in shared power, the power of the people to rule themselves and the right of the people to vote.

It estimated that up to 1/3 of the population in the US remained loyal to the King during the rebellion, they waited for the King to send a large enough army to supress this rebelion because it was bad for business, destroyed trade and resulted in many shortages of supplies. They were your kind of guys.

And, please don't bring me this all wealth belongs to business bull shit and that the people ought to be happy that they pay us at all for our labors... that is as anti-American as one can possibly be.

One of the first taxes that our founding fathers imposed was an estate tax because the biggest thing they feared would destroy the democracy was a permanent wealthy elite. Some state estate taxes were as high as 70% of the assets...

And socialistic, talk about socialism those founding fathers soon after the country was established they took tax dollars from the wealthy and bought land from the French and GAVE IT AWAY to POOR PEOPLE!!!

Hundreds of thousands of acres bought with tax payers money and given out as land grants to anyone who would head out to the Lousiana purchase and claim the land -SOCIALISM.

And, you know what they did it again and again and again for over a hundred years the American Government would either buy land from foreign powers or steal it from the Indians (with tax payer paid for troops) and GIVE IT AWAY - FREE LAND to poor people who would settle there. THE MOST SOCIALISTIC GOVERNMENT ACT EVER.

So, just because you have been fed bullshit by Fox News and don't understand your nation's history, don't try running that crap to me.


Chuck Repke

8:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So Chuck you have skirted around showing us any facts on Photo ID. You presented NOTHING, but hot air as to why Photo ID is in your opinion a bad idea.

Your argument is as stale as a loaf of bread left on the counter for two weeks, as it lacks substance.

I win.

7:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It looks like Chuck got his hat handed to him.

Nice job 7:34 AM

10:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

7:34 - you are a joke.

I showed you facts.

The facts of how few people vote that shouldn't.

The facts that the few of them that are voting that shouldn't wouldn't be stopped with an ID requirement.

The facts of actually doesn't have an Id.

The facts that those people will be unlikely to get an ID to vote.

The facts that those states that require ID like you would like have less people voting.

The facts that not having those requirements allow more people to vote.

The fact is you don't want the poor the sick and the elderly to vote and every piece of evidence that there is confirms that.

You are saying that if I can not prove future actions (that those who live in Minnesota will end up exactly like every other state) that I haven't proved my case.

You offer no proof that there is voter fraud (people voting twice), you offer little evidence of felons voting and no proof that requiring an ID would stop felons from voting.

Sorry, you lose, I have shown real facts you are a clown.


Chuck Repke

10:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck I am STILL waiting for documented FACTS to back up your WILD and UNFOUNDED claims that Photo ID will disenfranchise voters. The reason you haven't posted them is because there are NONE, the only see coming from you is fear and hate speech and the claim that the sky is falling.

The problem with you liberals is you want it both ways. You make WILD claims like it will disenfranchise the masses, but you offer NO proof, just like the Conceal and Carry law.

I on the other hand I offered you proof of the voting in St. Paul based on the Minnesota Secretary of State and Ramsey County Elections for 2005 and 2009. I even included web site links to this information. I also offered a copy of a lawsuit that was filed based on FACTS (Minnesota Majority) on felons voting when they shouldn't have voted. You retorted that only a few were prosecuted. That doesn't negate the FACT that felons voted in higher numbers than were prosecuted. You equated the low number of prosecutions to the actual number of felons who voted and that is totally FALSE and misleading. Many times the prosecutor drops some charges in light of other circumstances like the individual pleads to a lesser charge like someone who is caught drinking and driving. The prosecutor may drop the charge down to lesser charge of careless driving, but that does that mean there are less DWIs? The same principle applies here.

Chuck when you actually have some FACTS to debate instead of hot air without documentation, lets debate. For a learned Liberal you surprise me by your lack of facts and figures. Maybe you are just running out of BS to spew.

3:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck please show us the facts.....

3:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It seems like Chuck has met his match.

6:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


By facts I mean documentated FACTS, not what you believe in that mind of yours, but actual, REAL FACTS on Photo ID. You don't have the FACTS to back up your arguement. It is getting old because your arguement is stale and lacking FACTS. I am glad you don't work in a drug research lab, as we would all be in trouble.

10:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

10:22 are you twelve?

Have you gone beyond grade school? Have you any idea of logic or how a case is proven?

You have raised an issue - the need for voter ID.

The need for voter ID was based an an assumption that there is massive voter fraud. You have offered no evidence of any voter fraud (people trying to vote twice or falsifying their name to vote). Since there is no evidence of voter fraud, you then bring the accusation that there are massive numbers of felons voting (2800). Over the course of the last year all but 341 of those allogations have proven to be false by your own people. Less than 100 have been charged, but even if your people are right and there was 341 felons voting in the last election, you have offered no evidence that requiring them to have an ID would have stopped any of them from voting. So, you have proved that voter ID would do no good, your own facts have done that.

Now as to my facts you are correct I can not prove what exactly will happen in the future, I can't even prove that the sun will come up in the morning.... the world could blow up tonight...

But, the facts I have shown are that 1. Minnesota currently has the best voter participation of any state in the country; 2, None of the states that have voter ID requirements are in the top 5 of voter participation.... and that is true if it is a red state or a blue state, it doesn't matter, photo ID's reduce voter participation. And, that is a fact because, stats are facts, they are evidence, to claim that they are not means that you are either crasy or don't understand anything about logic.

I have then also shown by simple logic, who doesn't have ID's, the poor, the sick and the elderly.

Staying with that then we know three things...

There is no voter fraud that photo ID's will stop.

It will reduce voter participation.

And those who it will stop from voting are the poor the sick and the elderly.

Since those things have been proven by the facts both sides have given and you still want to move ahead with photo ID, then it is also logical that what you want is to stop the poor the sick and the old from voting and you are politically motivated to do that.

Like I have said, we have seen your kind before... the ones who want to get rid of the poor, the sick and the elderly. Take away their votes....


Chuck Repke

11:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your premise and logic is faulty.

"Chuck, you have offered no evidence to back up your defense of not having Voter ID reduces voters or disfranchises voters. I do remember a situation where some Black Panthers were outside the voting booth telling people to vote for Obama. They were even armed."

Here is the link:

"I bet you are going to say these nice gentleman with the clubs were not deterring voters."

"As for the numbers of felons being charged vs. voting. As I said the DA dropped charges on many to lesser charges. Some moved out of town, some were convicted. Just like someone with a DWI, many times those charges are dropped to careless driving."

You stated the following: "The report said that in Hennepin County, which includes Minneapolis, 899 suspected felons had been matched on the county's voting records, and the review showed 289 voters were conclusively matched to felon records. The report says only three people in the county have been charged with voter fraud so far."

"Sloppy work by Hennepin County is all I can say. If Mark Richie had done his job and cleaned up the voter rolls, as he is the keeper of the voter rolls this would have been a non-issue."

"Even is there were only 341 felons convicted, Norm Coleman lost by 327. Those felon voters weren't voting for Republicans."

You said "Now as to my facts you are correct I can not prove what exactly will happen in the future, I can't even prove that the sun will come up in the morning.... the world could blow up tonight..."

My response: "Thank you for admitting you have no facts to support your argument. Yes, the sun is going to come up tomorrow. NASA and a really cool website that will show you the sun will come up tomorrow."

You said: "you are either crazy or don't understand anything about logic."

My response: "I have then also shown by simple logic, who doesn't have ID's. your syllogism is faulty. People in our society need an ID to do just about everything."

You said: "There is no voter fraud that photo ID's will stop."

My response: "The bill that is working through the Minnesota State Capitol also eliminates Minnesota's long-standing tradition of "vouching" for unregistered voters. Illegals who are in our country don’t deserve any form of ID except their passport from their country. I couldn't get an UK ID or a Canada ID or South Africa ID when I was in those countries, as I was not a citizen of that country. I am tired of working hard and then letting some foreign national pick our leaders while they are receiving free schooling, and social services. Enough is enough!"

You said: "And those who it will stop from voting are the poor the sick and the elderly."

My response: "The time has come when our country needs to be run by the majority, not the minority. It is better to have integrity at the ballot box instead of the crap that has happened in the last two elections."

You said: "Like I have said, we have seen your kind before... the ones who want to get rid of the poor, the sick and the elderly. Take away their votes...."

My response: "I only want only the people who should be voting to be able to vote and not have their vote cancelled out by a felon or illegal who should not be voting. The bill also makes provisions to the poor and elderly to get an ID free. Chuck, please show the FACTS on how many poor or elderly would be effected by this law. The same BS was said about CC and look how that has turned out. All you want to do is scare people to promote your socialist ways."

1:15 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First off you appear to be reasonably insane.... I have already gone through it. In predicting the future the only thing one has to go on is what has occured at other times. (My point about not being able to prove the sun will come up tomorrow you nut case...)

I have shown that Minnesota has the best voter participation in the country and that states with photo ID requirements have low voter turn out. That is the only facts one needs to predict what will occur if your law passes.

Also anyone who isn't insane knows who does not have CURRENT photo ID's (people who move regularly and abruptly (the poor) and seniors in senior homes/centers)...

Your law doesn't just have Mr Smith show up with an ID that proves who he is, it requires him to have a current ID to prove he lives where he says he does.

So, the senior in the senior center can't vote unless they go get a new ID that they don't need for a F'ing thing and all of the people that bounce from one housing location to another lose their ability to vote.

You haven't shown one shred of evidence that any of the felons that voted didn't have a good ID.

You are the guy with no facts.

Face it. You are a right wing nut case that hates the poor and the elderly.

You are the typical bully that gets his kicks out of hurting those who have less than you.


Chuck Repke

9:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


You say I am insane and a bully.

You have tried here to pull on our heartstrings that this Photo ID Bill will somehow disenfranchise the poor, but you produce NO facts to back up your claim.

You say Minnesota has the highest voting of all states, but right here in St. Paul where there is the highest concentration of poor and elderly I have shown you that it has one of the lowest voter turnouts in the state. Please see me cited documents from the Minnesota Secretary of State and the Ramsey County Elections office.

My point is these people are not voting as you say they are. Photo ID or not St. Paul has a very low voter turnout.

Typical DFLer such as yourself to say I have no facts when you are the one who has put forth an argument and I have asked you numerous times to support it with FACTS and not just touchy-feely comments.

Then you end your post by calling me a "Face it. You are a right wing nut case that hates the poor and the elderly."

I have found when someone doesn't have a shred of evidence they resort to name calling. I thought Bob had a rule against this type of thing.

6:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

6:54 - last point first, as Bob says this blog is a "truth seeking mission," so, telling the truth about you is not a violation of the rules of the blog.

And, try comparing apples to apples in your arguments, sonny, comparing voter turn out in municipal elections to presidential year turn outs only confirms your ignorance of voting behaviors.

Everyone in this country who understand voting laws understands that fuzzy headed liberals like me want the poor, sick and elderly to vote. That is what we spend all of our time doing, trying to drag their asses to the polls. That is why we support same day registration, and registered voters being able to vouch for people. It makes it easier for those people to vote. That is the point of it.

Everyone in this country who understands voting laws understands that right wing conservatives don't want the poor the sick and the elderly to vote, because they don't vote for them. To keep those numbers down, they try to stop same day registration and impose some kind of photo voter restrictions on voters.

Look they are the same politicians that wanted education or social studies tests to be able to vote. They understand that low income, and minority voters vote more D than R.

It is why you do Jim Crow laws to make it harder to vote.

I on the other hand spent all of 2009 fighting having our municipal elections turned into a confusing complicated ballot that all over the country has been shown to hurt the poor and minority voters.

I have given you the facts. You chose to ignore them.

You have no - zero cases in the state of someone voting under any name other than their own (voter fraud). You have not shown where requiring an ID would stop felons from voting.

But, you have used those bullying, scare tactics to try and stop the poor, the sick and the elderly from voting. Your goal.


Chuck Repke

9:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck I could call you many names because I feel you represent them fully, but I will not stoop down to your gutter level.

You say, “I have given you the facts. You chose to ignore them.”

My response: This is not so. You have given hot air, but you have not cited that Photo ID will disfranchise the voting mass. Just the opposite will happen, integrity of the voting booth will be restored.

You say, “bullying, scare tactics to try and stop the poor, the sick and the elderly from voting. Your goal.”

My response: The only one who is calling names or throwing their weight around is you. You have called me several names. I am not sure who you are or where you come from, but you sure don’t represent St. Paul nice. You seem very angry and I suggest you seek professional help with your personality disorder.

When you want to debate the FACTS with documented sources then we can talk.

9:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look clown what I have given you are facts.

Facts are true statement based on data.

That is what I have given you. Current data on turn out in Minnesota, comparable data in states with photo ID requirements and a clear understanding of who doesn't have ID's and why.

You are now redefining what a fact is.

You want me to show proof of a future event. You want me to show that Minnesota voters will not be able to vote because of your new law, and the only thing you will accept as a fact is it occurring in the future. Meaning I must show you those voters turned away in Minnesota before the law happens in Minnesota.

You are either a nut job or a lying, fascist, propagandist who knows very well the facts and whose heart is filled with so much hate he can't look on it without seeing the scum that he is.

You say you want the, "integrity of the voting booth will be restored."

You haven't shown one fact that shows that your anti-poor anti-elderly hate legislation will do that at all.

As is typical of fascist propagandists you want to spin that there are evil people out their tampering with the voting booth and to fix that we make sure that the poor and the elderly don't vote, because then we will catch the criminals.

Give me one scrap of information that anyone has been voting under a fake name. That is what voter fraud is. You fascists have none of that. No facts. And no proof that any of the felons that have been found to have been voting didn't have a current ID.

Yet you intend to screw the poor, the sick and the elderly because you can.

And, damn straight I am not very nice. I confront jerks like you any chance I get and call them out for exactly what they are.

Cowards and bullies and usually racists (which I assume is one of the other reasons you don't want the poor to vote).

Prove that you aren't and sign your name.


Chuck Repke

10:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


You have only provided your opinion. You have shown neither facts based on documented data, nor have you cited this data or provided a link to this data.

Chuck face it you are all hot air and no substance.

Your argument against Photo ID or Voter ID is based only on YOUR beliefs and you don't have one shred of data to back up your argument. State all you want your argument is based on facts, but it would be nice to see these facts and judge them ourselves instead of your interpretation or these facts.

I on the other hand have supplied you with lots of data and even provided you with a link to the data.

Again calling me names does this make you feel big. I bet you are some creep who sits in his mother's basement plugging away on the computer all day. Or you are probably a progressive liberal who is sucking of government for your daily existence. I on the other hand work hard, today I put in over 17 hours.

It is nice to see Gov. Dayton wanting to take more of my money and give it to slobs like you. Gov. Dayton should be cutting instead of raising taxes. The last Legislature spent like mad, to the tune of $6,2 BILLION. Thank God the people of Minnesota voted in the Republicans to curb the out of control spending of the DFL. We in the private sector have had to take lots of cuts, but government keeps growing and growing.

12:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look I will bet my $100 to your $1 with the money going to your favorite charity that you aren't one of the people who will pay more taxes.

Because you are clearly to stupid to be someone netting $85K single or $150K married a year personal income.

You clearly have no education, or you wouldn't suggest that I had no facts because the stats I gave you are clear facts.

And, you aren't coming up with an original thought because all you have been able to do is mouth lines that you have heard somewhere else.

And, you aren't well read, because you couldn't even figure out which link you sent was the earlier accusation and which was the later link with data.

So, Dayton's tax proposal, like universal health care, and assistance to the poor is more likely to help you than to hurt you.

And, I got $100 to prove it.

Just start signing your posts racist, fascist coward.


Chuck Repke

9:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck, I make over $200,000.00 a year and I have my Masters from UST. I also have been known to play a few rounds at T & C.

You said, "Just start signing your posts racist, fascist coward."

Please look in the mirror, as I think you are describing yourself.

7:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not a chance...

Unless daddy bought you your degrees and your job.

There is nothing that shows you know anything about facts or proofs or have at all researched anything.

So, you are either lying about that or you know that your propaganda is one big lie and that is why you don't sign your posts.


Chuck Repke

9:35 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

For your INFO - CR

Saturday, March 26 · 9:00am - 12:00pm


Location St. Louis Park City Hall-Council Chambers
5005 Minnetonak Ave.
Saint Louis Park, MN


Created By League of Women Voters Minnesota


More Info Voter Photo ID: Does Minnesota Need It?

The League of Women Voters invites you to a public panel discussion on Voter Photo Identification.
9:00-9:30 Coffee & Connecting
9:30-11:00 Program
Panel Members:
Moderator: Helen Palmer, Past President of the Minnesota League of Women Voters
Pro: Rep. Kurt Zellers (R) 32B, Maple Grove, Osseo
Con: Rep. Steve Simon (D) 44A, Hopkins, St. Louis Park
Sec. of State Office: Claire Wilson, Voter Outreach Director

Sponsored by the League of Women Voters West Metro Alliance: Brooklyn Park/Osseo/Maple Grove, Crystal/New Hope/E. Plymouth, Golden Valley, Minnetonka/Eden Prairie/Hopkins, St. Louis Park, South Tonka and Wayzata/Plymouth.

Legislation (HF 210/ HF 89) has been introduced requiring Voters to present photo ID at the polls, for both new registration and for voting. A new Provisional Ballot procedure is de-fined for registered voters unable to provide the ID. Does Minnesota need Voter Photo ID? What voter fraud does this address? What are the impacts of the bill to state and local budg-ets, voter costs, voter turnout, and election results tabulation? The public is invited to attend this panel discussion to hear from all sides of the Voter Photo ID issue.

12:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Chuck is that all you got? How lame is that, still name-calling when you don't have any FACTS to back up your argument.

It is interesting when you make outrageous claims that Photo ID is going to disenfranchise voters and then you don't back it up with any substance. It seems like the DFL does this a lot.

Chuck you talk big, but you don't have any substance. Why don't you come back when you are able to debate like a real man.

6:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Again, this is insane and pointless.

I have given you facts.

Real data concerning who does and doesn't have ID;s and what is the impact of these laws.

You have offered nothing other than scare tactics.

Yes I call you names, because you are a fraud.


Chuck Repke

10:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck you are so lame.

Just because you say you have produced facts doesn't make it true. You DFLers think if you say something over and over it becomes the truth, but I have news for you Chuck that isn't true.

In looking back al all of your posts you expel a lot of hot air, but you provide no citations or links to your facts you pulled from thin air.

You mention the word fraud. The only fraud it YOU! All talk no substance.

10:32 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home