That's what I want to know. As far as I'm concerned it's a special legal privelege, not a right. Personally, I don't think everyone should be allowed to vote. Wall Street representatives, big pharmaceutical company employees, representatives from the NRA and other gun control organizations, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, Morris Dees (and the rest of the SPLC), Abe Foxman (and the rest of the ADL), the people at Microsoft, Nintendo, Nike, and Verizon, military industrial complex employees shouldn't be allowed to vote, Federal employees, and all other welfare recipients shouldn't be allowed to vote either although I don't favor a federal prohibition of them voting. Also, people who believe that voting is a right shouldn't be allowed to vote as well as those who have openly supported affirmative action, openly supported making denial of the holocaust illegal, openly supported deporting or sterilizing blacks or Jews, and people who are "equality of outcome" feminists shouldn't be allowed to vote as far as i'm concerned If 25 states prohibited at least 90% of those people from voting, the democracy would be somewhat tolerable.
Why is voting commonly viewed as a right rather than a privelege?
- Thread starter Anarchist420
- Start date
Brainonska511
Lifer
- Dec 10, 2005
- 28,886
- 14,148
- 136
If some son of a bitch who has billions on Wall Street and wants to elect his servants who will further shift his taxes onto the public and let his companies kill off 20% of the population of southern states with mercury poisoning to boost his profits, the problem is not that he votes. That might make an election 100,000,000 to 5.
The problem is that he anonymously gives large sums anonymously to groups like Karl Rove's who give him a vastly disproportionate influence on who is elected, feeding the money into sophisticated marketing and political machines, that say the progressive is a commie socialist who secretly plots with terrorists, and repeats focus-group tested slogans that many viewers parrot (see this forum), and elect their servants who do things like attack unions who fund the other side, and pass voter suppression.
And so we end up with an 'enemy within', which is what today's Republican party is.
Who has no clue about something like beig 'moderate' in the use of the filibuster as it was designed, who thinks holding every presidential appointment hostage, or a nuclear proliferation treaty hostage, of the credit of the US hostage, for them to get their demands that might have nothing to do with those issues, is no problem.
People who say we can't afford the programs that help Americans, we can't afford anything from the regulatory agency overseeing oil drilling (slashed in their budget) to the nuclear regulatory agency that helps get control of nukes in other countries (slashed in their budget) while they say not one cent can be raised in taxes of the rich who skyrocket in income - the top 1% going from 10% to over 20% of income.
That's the problem. Not that they vote.
It is a *right* for people to vote in part because if it's not, the first people to lose their vote will not be that Wall Street guy, but the poor he wants to screw - which is what Republicans are doing NOW in passing the biggest attack on voters - mostly Democratic voters, poorer voters - in a century they say.
That's sort of the point of democracy, in large part, to try to balance the power and wealth of the 'economic royals' by giving 'one person, one vote'. In theory, that helps.
In practice, the well-funded right-wing propaganda machine and funding system hugely undermines democracy. But it's still better the poor suckers can have a vote.
Save234
The problem is that he anonymously gives large sums anonymously to groups like Karl Rove's who give him a vastly disproportionate influence on who is elected, feeding the money into sophisticated marketing and political machines, that say the progressive is a commie socialist who secretly plots with terrorists, and repeats focus-group tested slogans that many viewers parrot (see this forum), and elect their servants who do things like attack unions who fund the other side, and pass voter suppression.
And so we end up with an 'enemy within', which is what today's Republican party is.
Who has no clue about something like beig 'moderate' in the use of the filibuster as it was designed, who thinks holding every presidential appointment hostage, or a nuclear proliferation treaty hostage, of the credit of the US hostage, for them to get their demands that might have nothing to do with those issues, is no problem.
People who say we can't afford the programs that help Americans, we can't afford anything from the regulatory agency overseeing oil drilling (slashed in their budget) to the nuclear regulatory agency that helps get control of nukes in other countries (slashed in their budget) while they say not one cent can be raised in taxes of the rich who skyrocket in income - the top 1% going from 10% to over 20% of income.
That's the problem. Not that they vote.
It is a *right* for people to vote in part because if it's not, the first people to lose their vote will not be that Wall Street guy, but the poor he wants to screw - which is what Republicans are doing NOW in passing the biggest attack on voters - mostly Democratic voters, poorer voters - in a century they say.
That's sort of the point of democracy, in large part, to try to balance the power and wealth of the 'economic royals' by giving 'one person, one vote'. In theory, that helps.
In practice, the well-funded right-wing propaganda machine and funding system hugely undermines democracy. But it's still better the poor suckers can have a vote.
Save234
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,543
- 651
- 126
Brainonska511
Lifer
- Dec 10, 2005
- 28,886
- 14,148
- 136
Brainonska511
Lifer
- Dec 10, 2005
- 28,886
- 14,148
- 136
So you don't want anyone with a job or have any political views to vote it sounds like...
Great idea.
He wants crusty-travelers to be setting policy.
xj0hnx
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2007
- 9,262
- 3
- 76
Only Fail234 could take a mindless troll post and turn it into a partisan soapbox, and actually make a A420 thread more retarded. /golf clap
OP, serious question, do you think before you post, or does an idea just pop into your head and you start typing and see where the chips fall when the dust settles?
You'll have to be a bit clearer if you want a point to get across. I'm not sure you should.
Brainonska511
Lifer
- Dec 10, 2005
- 28,886
- 14,148
- 136
I'd imagine his ideas are generated somewhere in his lower digestional tract and are deposited right into his brain.
File photo of OP:
Thump553
Lifer
- Jun 2, 2000
- 12,839
- 2,625
- 136
You really should change your name to Elitist420 or Royalist420 for elitistism and rule by a benighted and benevolent few seem to be the dominant theme in your scatterbox of philosophies.
PS-take some spelling lessons as well-nothing says pretentious quite so clearly as repeatedly misspelling "big" words that are the central core of the thought you are trying to express.
PS-take some spelling lessons as well-nothing says pretentious quite so clearly as repeatedly misspelling "big" words that are the central core of the thought you are trying to express.
shortylickens
No Lifer
- Jul 15, 2003
- 80,287
- 17,082
- 136
That's true. Maybe someday I'll be banned.
However misguided and progressive he may be, he's not scum and I appreciate his well thought out reply to the thread I started courtesy of AT.
No. However, the number of people who favor it making it nationally illegal is like 40% and I don't want this country turning into to an bigger hellhole where even more natural rights are taken away.
guyver01
Lifer
- Sep 25, 2000
- 22,135
- 5
- 61
squirrel dog
Diamond Member
- Oct 10, 1999
- 5,564
- 48
- 91
So basically anyone who is intelligent, educated, and gainfully employed by any company or organization can't vote.
Makes perfect sense.
Makes perfect sense.
Nowhere did I say that I support mass genocide. I'm against the state for one thing.Wait... are you saying... you're in FAVOR of mass genocide????????
No, I never said that. Just companies that are recipients of tax payer subsidized corporate welfare and who lobby for ever more shouldn't be allowed to vote as well as those who lobby to take away our natural rights even more than the presence of a government already does.
Thump553
Lifer
- Jun 2, 2000
- 12,839
- 2,625
- 136
News flash-no corporations are, or ever have been, allowed to vote. Where in the world do you get your ideas?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter