1 posted on
03/11/2009 5:16:16 PM PDT by
Nachum
To: Nachum
It is still an executive power grab.
2 posted on
03/11/2009 5:17:21 PM PDT by
mylife
( The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
To: Nachum
3 posted on
03/11/2009 5:18:30 PM PDT by
GOP Poet
To: Nachum
I received a call from the census yesterday. I had to answer questions from their “long form”. Nothing terribly invasive, but I did find out that they are now going to do the census every FIVE years.
Strange, but I don’t think it was a scam.
5 posted on
03/11/2009 5:20:31 PM PDT by
EggsAckley
("The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.")
To: Nachum
If they can cheat their way into gerrymandering a permanent Democrat majority in the House, we are in deep doo-doo. The Census should be an actual count. Nothing else will satisfy the Constitution. Not that the Dems give a whit about the Constitution.
To: Nachum
White Hut may “soften language.”
White Hut will not “change plan.”
8 posted on
03/11/2009 5:23:37 PM PDT by
RobinOfKingston
(Democrats, the party of evil. Republicans, the party of stupid.)
To: Nachum
Communists lie, cheat and deceive.
10 posted on
03/11/2009 5:26:43 PM PDT by
unkus
To: Nachum
Please forgive my ignorance, but I don’t completely understand the political power significance of a census. Could someone please briefly explain?
11 posted on
03/11/2009 5:27:39 PM PDT by
3boysdad
To: Nachum
If the Obamoron’s lips are moving . . . . he’s lying.
Actions . . . . . . words!
12 posted on
03/11/2009 5:28:32 PM PDT by
DustyMoment
(FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
To: Nachum
This is only because the Commerce department is now in the hands of a loyal leftist.....and not Judd Gregg.
To: Nachum
Democrats want a “fair and accurate” count.
How about just an accurate count?
If fairness comes into play we know exactly who will make the rules about what is fairness.
And like anything else named with the “fairness” moniker, it smokescreens actual intent.
16 posted on
03/11/2009 5:31:45 PM PDT by
o_zarkman44
(Obama is the ultimate LIE!)
To: Nachum
0’s “softened language” simply means he thinks he has amnesty in the bag now and the census won’t have to be an underhanded count of ILLEGALS now.
27 posted on
03/11/2009 5:41:15 PM PDT by
freeangel
( (free speech is only good until someone else doesn't like what you say))
To: Nachum
30 posted on
03/11/2009 5:42:22 PM PDT by
dennisw
(0bomo the subprime president)
To: Nachum
Three people live here: Me, myself, and I.
To: Nachum
Softening language is cheap.
What matters is what Obama plans to do with that Census. And that is not going to change.
To: Nachum
I am not answering any more questions than I did on the 2000 census. Screw them.
41 posted on
03/11/2009 5:58:09 PM PDT by
Secret Agent Man
(I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
To: Nachum
Before the 2000 census the XXX-42 administration got a smackdown from the court (in a narrowly defined case) that they couldn't use statistical sampling to apportion the House seats among the states . Clinton and gang quickly pointed out that they hadn't been restricted from using sampling to layout House districts. Even if you have the Dems tied down 99%, that 1% will still cause trouble.
42 posted on
03/11/2009 5:58:43 PM PDT by
KarlInOhio
(Obama: removing the speed limit on the Road to Serfdom)
To: Nachum
Nope Obama how about we do it the way it’s been done since we started them and you keep your nose and your party politics out of it?
To: Nachum
“Soften their language”?
In other words, they’re still politicizing it....they’re just doing it with a different tone.
We’re hosed folks.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson