so true!! Just look at who they help put in office. Now there are millions who don’t have healthcare because of Big “O” and Miss “we have to pass it to find out what is in it” HOWS THAT HOPE AND CHANGE working for you now????????
In his teens, my son frequently read The Economist and Foreign Affairs, along with the newspaper and many books on history and politics. When he was about 16, he said he resented the fact that, no matter how well informed he might be, he couldn’t vote, but some semiliterate yahoos living down the street could, simply because they were born a couple years before him. I couldn’t argue. Fortunately, I don’t think those guys ever bothered to vote.
Why “Bring back dry”? Some handles are obvious – “leftwingpatriot” is self-explanatory – but yours has got me curious, as do Night-Gaunt49, and Redkaycei Repoc.
Forcing people to vote may force them to vote for candidates and issues they have no knowledge about. When I don’t know anything about candidates for a particular office or have no opinion about an issue, I skip that part of the ballot so I don’t cancel out a more informed voter’s vote.
I also wonder: If this takes place in North Carolina, why aren’t there any African Americans in the audience? I thought the schools there are now integrated.
Voting is mandatory in Australia, as it was in George Washington’s Virginia. Voting was a civic responsibility, like militia service, posse and jury duty. It is based on the idea that voters are citizens, participants in the government of their country, and have no business being either ignorant or apathetic. And the richer you were, the more such duties you had.
Getting rid of the fines for failure to vote (just like evading the draft, or shirking jury duty) was presented as easing a burden placed on poorer (in both senses) voters, and keep the more easily bribable away from the polls, but was (of course) also a means of encouraging the “lower sorts” to leave the running of things to “their betters.” As in “let those better informed do the voting, don’t trouble your little head about it.”
We are no longer required by law to get out with pick and shovel to help maintain the roads, nor to ride with the posse, nor serve in uniform, nor help put out fires, nor come to one another’s aide in emergencies, etc. The only obligations left to us as citizens are (1) serve on a jury if called; (2) pay our taxes; and now (3) buy ourselves health insurance: though even that last is set up as a tax on the uninsured, rather than an actual positive command, like a jury summons or a draft notice.
But these days, most Americans HATE the idea that they have ANY duties owed to their country, or any responsibilities as citizens, other than to leave one another alone. Military service is now a job, even a career, rather than a burden placed on citizens generally. And as for paying taxes, paying their “freedom dues” as I think they ought to be called, that’s only for the other guy. Voting remains a moral obligation to some, but as several comments here demonstrate, we don’t actually trust our fellow citizens enough to want all of them voting. Some ask “Why should we encourage the apathetic and ignorant to vote?” rather than asking “Why should we encourage our fellow citizens be apathetic and ignorant?”
We hate the very idea of duty, because all we really believe in is “looking out for number one” which is the antithesis of public duty. Oh, we may do things we think benefit the country, but only when we individually feel like it, and only on our own personal terms. And we label irresponsibility “freedom.”
I’ve been thinking a lot about WWI, with the centennial upon us. During WWI, the sons of the nobility in England flocked to the colors, and died in droves: the sons of the elite suffering the highest casualty rates of any social class. How many of the children of the 1% today place themselves in harm’s way for their country, I wonder. Has any child of a president served in combat since WWII? (The question is not rhetorical, I actually don’t know the answer.) I don’t want to idealize the past, buying your way out of military service has also a long history in America. Still, liberty and self-government once meant PARTICIPATING in the government of your community and nation.
There is a difference between being a citizen and being a subject, as some conservatives like to say. But the difference is NOT between meekly obeying the laws others make, versus standing up (perhaps gun in hand) to resist those laws. That’s only the difference between being a good subject and being a bad subject. (Though sometimes being a bad subject is a good thing to be, at least when the law in question is genuinely bad, and usually leaving out the gun!) The difference between a citizen and a subject is between one participating in, and thus owning and respecting, the process of government and the laws, … and one who does not. Voting is only one part of that.
My old friend Henry was never a good citizen, by this measure, but was rather a bad subject merely. As I said, however, being a bad subject has its value too. And I still like what he said in 1854 about voting: “The fate of the country does not depend on how you vote at the polls … it does not depend on what kind of paper you drop into the ballot-box once a year, but on what kind of man you drop from your chamber into the street every morning.”
Good points, Doughfoot. One thing which irked my dad is that presidents Johnson and Nixon had daughters and thus didn’t give a fig about who was sent to war. No, I believe both presidents Roosevelt were the last to have sons serve in combat. Teddy lost a son in WW I and another in WW II. FDR’s eldest, James, was executive officer of one of the Marine Raider battalions.
I’m not convinced that any American can be informed. It wasn’t until recently that I learned of “The Plot to Seize the White House” (book title and actual event) and the overthrow of foreign governments by our country; three of these leaders were democratically elected. These are things which are deliberately not taught in public schools before college. I mean, imagine what would happen if Americans actually knew of the shenanigans going on by the wealthy and powerful in our gov’t. We common folk don’t control the media and we are kept ignorant to make sure the powerful may continue to have their ways.
The citizens of North Carolina are doomed, as long as the GOP controls the legislature. Every Republican fantasy, no matter how evil, can become law in NC. The real damage gerrymandering can do is on full display there for all to see.
As TV’s detective Lt. Colombo would say, “One more thing.” The people of the City of Ann Arbor, MI voted for a living wage about the year 2000. Republican mayor Ingrid Sheldon vetoed it and it was not enacted. I can understand why some would give up on voting when it’s evident that it’s not always effective. I learned that when I was a representative in student gov’t. in HS: There is usually somebody above who will make the real decisions.
This arc fits in well with current episodes of alpha house. I’m glad GT has a liberal point of view. I’m also glad we live in a country where we have freedom of speech, which includes your freedom to not read Doonesbury if you don’t like it. Face it cons, it is free country.
@Corzac, as the smart alecks might say, “You guessed her, Chester!” Iran in 1953 with the help of MI6; Teddy’s grandson Kermit was a key player. Guatemala in 1954 and Chile in ’72 or ’73. The Bay of Pigs was conceived during a Repub. administration; if it had been successful they would have taken credit. It was not and JFK took the heat.
@williamjschmidt, yes, good point. I neglected to say that all four of FDR’s sons were in the military in WW II; the 4 branches – if one counts the Army Air Corps and ignores the Coast Guard – had a Roosevelt in it. I guess GHW Bush is our most recent combat vet prez. Many Presidents were in the military and many were combat vets, perhaps more than half. Pardon me for my digression; it’s really not a big deal with me, or it shouldn’t be.
Read up on how the Dulles brothers, in State and CIA, formulated and executed policies that earned us enmity around the world. The shame is that presidents allowed them to do it.
It is a dangerous trend we are seeing where some are making it harder to vote. The get out the vote effort is important. It should be strengthened, not weakened. If a larger number of people would participate and we still had the right wing reactionaries being elected in this country, I could accept it, but as it is, no way. Lots more people need to be encouraged to vote, especially the working poor and middle class in this country, who often tend to give up on being part of the process. We should never accept the idea of going back to the bad old days, when we had poll tests, etc. That is essentially what happens in every election where we see much greater access to the polls in more affluent areas. At the same time, perhaps the best way to encourage many to vote is to threaten to infringe upon that right. The right to vote should not limited to the affluent among us. 18 year olds do have the right to vote. Whether or not they have access to a car, for example, should not be a determining factor as to whether or not they can register, and therefore, vote. The same is true for many seniors and minority voters in terms of access to registration and polling places.
Sometimes I feel like there’s a 2nd civil war taking place. It’s the cons against libs name calling each other. Why are politicians trying to undermine people’s ability to go out & vote ? This is certainly no democracy we live in with gerrymandered districts favoring Republicans in the House. Politicians need to follow the will of the people & stop trying to make it so damn difficult to cast a simple vote.
On a more seasonal topic, I enjoyed the GoComics guy Joe Heller recently in his spoof of the Fox News Carolers:I’m believing in a white Santa,‘Cause he’s the only one I know,Though he might be fiction,It’ll cause some friction,And boost ratings for my show…
Who would decide who is not allowed to vote based on whether or not they have made “the right decisions” in their personal lives? Talk about arrogance!
From your description of North Carolina I cannot imagine any Californian being interested in moving there – except to work at Triangle Park. (Is there a fence around it?)
“If one cannot make the right decisions to manage one’s own life, including, but not limited to, housing, children, marriage, health-care and education, that one should not be empowered to make decisions for those who have made valid decisions in those areas.”
-Absolutely right! Only property owners should be allowed to vote!
GBT covers all sunjects eventually.He is not your slave or puppet.Nor does he have to respond to your dares.He already covered drone strikes when he had the kid accidentally launch a strike a few years back.Personally, I like NSA spying on you; you strike me as an al-Qaida mole.
So you believe individuals should not be free to speak in favor of candidates they favored by contributing to their campaigns and you believe we should all be forced to support even candidates we oppose by contributions via taxing us?And someone in government should have the power to forbid statements they decided were propaganda and forbid any to seak office they decided was not a decent choice?.What would be the point of voting if the government could decide who could run and what she could say?
Any gerrymandering done by my party is for the good of the nation and freedom whereas any gerrymandering done by notmyparty is evil and an attempt to destroy the nation in which we all live (and it doesn’t matter which is my party or who is notmyparty).
I love that idea that money is speech. Based on that, Bill Gates and I have equally loud voices, right? I know, it’s my fault I’m not a billionaire, but surely my right-wing rep will give us each equal time. Won’t he?
While I know that folks have the right to hate GT, I don’t know why they bother to spout off about it on this thread. Since I don’t appreciate Mallard Fillmore, I don’t go on his thread and act as a troll to others who do appreciate him. Seems like a tremendous waste of time to me. I would rather do more positive things, such as read things I enjoy. That is the point. The point is that I DON’T do that at all. I wouldn’t dream of it. What an exercise is negativity that would be —and what a bore.
By the way, I remember someone saying that ever since the coming of nuclear weapons and intercontinental delivery systems, we are ALL on the front lines concerning nuclear war..The same can be said for terrorists, their purpose is to convince us any of us can be killed..Looking at it this way, every president, legislator and judge’s family has been in harm’s way all along.
“This would, of course, NOT change.”.That is a straight line I shall not touch..I shall simply touch the substance of what you write. You would only allow candidates to seek votes for 20 days prior to an election day. This is not similar to freedom.
.You want people to realize it is their/our government while you want the government to limit how people can campaign and give goverment the power of the purse strings..Please think about what you are actually proposing even as you insist I have nothing correct.
Thank you Doughfoot for the history lesson and some serious perspective!
Warbuck$, how apropos. Get used to the influx, irresponsible gay freedom-loving hippies have to live somewhere too, they can’t all fit here in Portland….
I wonder how many people would turn out to vote against a mandatory voting initiative? ha ha suckers!
‘should be silenced’One of your more nonsensical posts. Exaggerate much? How does that address my point? Don’t bother, it doesn’t.We must protect our billionaires’ rights at all costs, musn’t we? They are so delicate and endangered.
I live in NC. Believe me, the GOP in our state’s attempts to turn back the clock on voting rights are only the tip of the iceberg. You should see what they’re doing to the community colleges.
Oh, yeah, ’cause North Carolina thirty years ago, where you still had de facto segregation everywhere, was such a wonderful place to live in. So carefree.
Also, don’t be so disingenuous. You and I both know an awful lot of those “Yankees” are actually African Americans returning home after their parents and grandparents left to escape racism.
There are definitely some obnoxious people in North Carolina, but they’re hardly all Yanks. Stop fighting the Civil War. It’s been over for almost a century and a half. You lost. Get over it.
I utterly fail to see how those conservative posters who come here every day without fail to trash Trudeau are having their right to free speech curtailed. Disagreement with you is not violating your First Amendment rights. So, you can go peddle your conservative victim lines elsewhere.
Then yes, you are as foolish as I think you are. How about :4. Public funding for elections exclusively so there is no point in the rich buying politicians?I understand your naivety in thinking no politician can be bought, I just don’t agree with it..Thanks to SCOTUS, this would take a constitutional amendment, which they would buy the votes against, and therefore will not happen..As for people voting against their own best interests, low and middle class republicans do it every election..I neither worship nor envy money. But I know there are people who will do anything for it. When you set up a society where you’re either rich or nothing, many will do what it takes to survive..“I don’t understand” – the truest words you’ve ever said here.
BE THIS GUY almost 11 years ago
What a silly young man.
Buzza Wuzza almost 11 years ago
the dirty trick squad strikes again
lindonc almost 11 years ago
so true!! Just look at who they help put in office. Now there are millions who don’t have healthcare because of Big “O” and Miss “we have to pass it to find out what is in it” HOWS THAT HOPE AND CHANGE working for you now????????
DavyG almost 11 years ago
In his teens, my son frequently read The Economist and Foreign Affairs, along with the newspaper and many books on history and politics. When he was about 16, he said he resented the fact that, no matter how well informed he might be, he couldn’t vote, but some semiliterate yahoos living down the street could, simply because they were born a couple years before him. I couldn’t argue. Fortunately, I don’t think those guys ever bothered to vote.
DavyG almost 11 years ago
Why “Bring back dry”? Some handles are obvious – “leftwingpatriot” is self-explanatory – but yours has got me curious, as do Night-Gaunt49, and Redkaycei Repoc.
arye uygur almost 11 years ago
Forcing people to vote may force them to vote for candidates and issues they have no knowledge about. When I don’t know anything about candidates for a particular office or have no opinion about an issue, I skip that part of the ballot so I don’t cancel out a more informed voter’s vote.
I also wonder: If this takes place in North Carolina, why aren’t there any African Americans in the audience? I thought the schools there are now integrated.
billydub almost 11 years ago
Um, NOBODY is “forcing” anyone to vote in the US, that’s for sure! Forgive my ignorance, but is Ned a take-off on some particular politician?
Doughfoot almost 11 years ago
Voting is mandatory in Australia, as it was in George Washington’s Virginia. Voting was a civic responsibility, like militia service, posse and jury duty. It is based on the idea that voters are citizens, participants in the government of their country, and have no business being either ignorant or apathetic. And the richer you were, the more such duties you had.
Getting rid of the fines for failure to vote (just like evading the draft, or shirking jury duty) was presented as easing a burden placed on poorer (in both senses) voters, and keep the more easily bribable away from the polls, but was (of course) also a means of encouraging the “lower sorts” to leave the running of things to “their betters.” As in “let those better informed do the voting, don’t trouble your little head about it.”
We are no longer required by law to get out with pick and shovel to help maintain the roads, nor to ride with the posse, nor serve in uniform, nor help put out fires, nor come to one another’s aide in emergencies, etc. The only obligations left to us as citizens are (1) serve on a jury if called; (2) pay our taxes; and now (3) buy ourselves health insurance: though even that last is set up as a tax on the uninsured, rather than an actual positive command, like a jury summons or a draft notice.
But these days, most Americans HATE the idea that they have ANY duties owed to their country, or any responsibilities as citizens, other than to leave one another alone. Military service is now a job, even a career, rather than a burden placed on citizens generally. And as for paying taxes, paying their “freedom dues” as I think they ought to be called, that’s only for the other guy. Voting remains a moral obligation to some, but as several comments here demonstrate, we don’t actually trust our fellow citizens enough to want all of them voting. Some ask “Why should we encourage the apathetic and ignorant to vote?” rather than asking “Why should we encourage our fellow citizens be apathetic and ignorant?”
We hate the very idea of duty, because all we really believe in is “looking out for number one” which is the antithesis of public duty. Oh, we may do things we think benefit the country, but only when we individually feel like it, and only on our own personal terms. And we label irresponsibility “freedom.”
I’ve been thinking a lot about WWI, with the centennial upon us. During WWI, the sons of the nobility in England flocked to the colors, and died in droves: the sons of the elite suffering the highest casualty rates of any social class. How many of the children of the 1% today place themselves in harm’s way for their country, I wonder. Has any child of a president served in combat since WWII? (The question is not rhetorical, I actually don’t know the answer.) I don’t want to idealize the past, buying your way out of military service has also a long history in America. Still, liberty and self-government once meant PARTICIPATING in the government of your community and nation.
There is a difference between being a citizen and being a subject, as some conservatives like to say. But the difference is NOT between meekly obeying the laws others make, versus standing up (perhaps gun in hand) to resist those laws. That’s only the difference between being a good subject and being a bad subject. (Though sometimes being a bad subject is a good thing to be, at least when the law in question is genuinely bad, and usually leaving out the gun!) The difference between a citizen and a subject is between one participating in, and thus owning and respecting, the process of government and the laws, … and one who does not. Voting is only one part of that.
My old friend Henry was never a good citizen, by this measure, but was rather a bad subject merely. As I said, however, being a bad subject has its value too. And I still like what he said in 1854 about voting: “The fate of the country does not depend on how you vote at the polls … it does not depend on what kind of paper you drop into the ballot-box once a year, but on what kind of man you drop from your chamber into the street every morning.”
cdward almost 11 years ago
Wait, the young are too immature to handle voting, but assault weapons, which he equates with voting, are okay for the young?
ART Thompson Premium Member almost 11 years ago
That’s the big Joke! The Koch Joke.
wdgnas almost 11 years ago
while both of those programs started under you boy bush 43, obama has continued them using the same lame excuse. are we safer?
2578275 almost 11 years ago
Good points, Doughfoot. One thing which irked my dad is that presidents Johnson and Nixon had daughters and thus didn’t give a fig about who was sent to war. No, I believe both presidents Roosevelt were the last to have sons serve in combat. Teddy lost a son in WW I and another in WW II. FDR’s eldest, James, was executive officer of one of the Marine Raider battalions.
I’m not convinced that any American can be informed. It wasn’t until recently that I learned of “The Plot to Seize the White House” (book title and actual event) and the overthrow of foreign governments by our country; three of these leaders were democratically elected. These are things which are deliberately not taught in public schools before college. I mean, imagine what would happen if Americans actually knew of the shenanigans going on by the wealthy and powerful in our gov’t. We common folk don’t control the media and we are kept ignorant to make sure the powerful may continue to have their ways.
Vermont Premium Member almost 11 years ago
The citizens of North Carolina are doomed, as long as the GOP controls the legislature. Every Republican fantasy, no matter how evil, can become law in NC. The real damage gerrymandering can do is on full display there for all to see.
2578275 almost 11 years ago
As TV’s detective Lt. Colombo would say, “One more thing.” The people of the City of Ann Arbor, MI voted for a living wage about the year 2000. Republican mayor Ingrid Sheldon vetoed it and it was not enacted. I can understand why some would give up on voting when it’s evident that it’s not always effective. I learned that when I was a representative in student gov’t. in HS: There is usually somebody above who will make the real decisions.
montessoriteacher almost 11 years ago
This arc fits in well with current episodes of alpha house. I’m glad GT has a liberal point of view. I’m also glad we live in a country where we have freedom of speech, which includes your freedom to not read Doonesbury if you don’t like it. Face it cons, it is free country.
2578275 almost 11 years ago
@Corzac, as the smart alecks might say, “You guessed her, Chester!” Iran in 1953 with the help of MI6; Teddy’s grandson Kermit was a key player. Guatemala in 1954 and Chile in ’72 or ’73. The Bay of Pigs was conceived during a Repub. administration; if it had been successful they would have taken credit. It was not and JFK took the heat.
evelduwer almost 11 years ago
Hey, pay attention! You’ve just been told all you need to know.
2578275 almost 11 years ago
@williamjschmidt, yes, good point. I neglected to say that all four of FDR’s sons were in the military in WW II; the 4 branches – if one counts the Army Air Corps and ignores the Coast Guard – had a Roosevelt in it. I guess GHW Bush is our most recent combat vet prez. Many Presidents were in the military and many were combat vets, perhaps more than half. Pardon me for my digression; it’s really not a big deal with me, or it shouldn’t be.
Carol69 almost 11 years ago
I bet you sleep with your guns also.OK by me.
BeniHanna6 Premium Member almost 11 years ago
Key term ‘PRE’, all you have to do is register when you turn 18 years old.
luvdafuneez almost 11 years ago
The Eisenhower years … oh, yeah. Read “The untold history of the United States” by Oliver Stone & Peter Kuznick. It will curl your hair.
Life Blumberg Premium Member almost 11 years ago
Hmm, plagiarizing himself from Alpha House it seems…
kaffekup almost 11 years ago
Read up on how the Dulles brothers, in State and CIA, formulated and executed policies that earned us enmity around the world. The shame is that presidents allowed them to do it.
montessoriteacher almost 11 years ago
It is a dangerous trend we are seeing where some are making it harder to vote. The get out the vote effort is important. It should be strengthened, not weakened. If a larger number of people would participate and we still had the right wing reactionaries being elected in this country, I could accept it, but as it is, no way. Lots more people need to be encouraged to vote, especially the working poor and middle class in this country, who often tend to give up on being part of the process. We should never accept the idea of going back to the bad old days, when we had poll tests, etc. That is essentially what happens in every election where we see much greater access to the polls in more affluent areas. At the same time, perhaps the best way to encourage many to vote is to threaten to infringe upon that right. The right to vote should not limited to the affluent among us. 18 year olds do have the right to vote. Whether or not they have access to a car, for example, should not be a determining factor as to whether or not they can register, and therefore, vote. The same is true for many seniors and minority voters in terms of access to registration and polling places.
Dapperdan61 Premium Member almost 11 years ago
Sometimes I feel like there’s a 2nd civil war taking place. It’s the cons against libs name calling each other. Why are politicians trying to undermine people’s ability to go out & vote ? This is certainly no democracy we live in with gerrymandered districts favoring Republicans in the House. Politicians need to follow the will of the people & stop trying to make it so damn difficult to cast a simple vote.
montessoriteacher almost 11 years ago
On a more seasonal topic, I enjoyed the GoComics guy Joe Heller recently in his spoof of the Fox News Carolers:I’m believing in a white Santa,‘Cause he’s the only one I know,Though he might be fiction,It’ll cause some friction,And boost ratings for my show…
montessoriteacher almost 11 years ago
Who would decide who is not allowed to vote based on whether or not they have made “the right decisions” in their personal lives? Talk about arrogance!
Ginny Premium Member almost 11 years ago
From your description of North Carolina I cannot imagine any Californian being interested in moving there – except to work at Triangle Park. (Is there a fence around it?)
braindead Premium Member almost 11 years ago
“There should be a five line limit.”-Right! Anything longer than a bumper sticker is too difficult for a troll to comprehend.
braindead Premium Member almost 11 years ago
“If one cannot make the right decisions to manage one’s own life, including, but not limited to, housing, children, marriage, health-care and education, that one should not be empowered to make decisions for those who have made valid decisions in those areas.”
-Absolutely right! Only property owners should be allowed to vote!
DavyG almost 11 years ago
Thanks for the explanation.
David Huie Green LoveJoyAndPeace almost 11 years ago
GBT covers all sunjects eventually.He is not your slave or puppet.Nor does he have to respond to your dares.He already covered drone strikes when he had the kid accidentally launch a strike a few years back.Personally, I like NSA spying on you; you strike me as an al-Qaida mole.
David Huie Green LoveJoyAndPeace almost 11 years ago
So you believe individuals should not be free to speak in favor of candidates they favored by contributing to their campaigns and you believe we should all be forced to support even candidates we oppose by contributions via taxing us?And someone in government should have the power to forbid statements they decided were propaganda and forbid any to seak office they decided was not a decent choice?.What would be the point of voting if the government could decide who could run and what she could say?
David Huie Green LoveJoyAndPeace almost 11 years ago
Nah, everyone should be allowed as much room to speak as she needs.
David Huie Green LoveJoyAndPeace almost 11 years ago
Any gerrymandering done by my party is for the good of the nation and freedom whereas any gerrymandering done by notmyparty is evil and an attempt to destroy the nation in which we all live (and it doesn’t matter which is my party or who is notmyparty).
kaffekup almost 11 years ago
I love that idea that money is speech. Based on that, Bill Gates and I have equally loud voices, right? I know, it’s my fault I’m not a billionaire, but surely my right-wing rep will give us each equal time. Won’t he?
montessoriteacher almost 11 years ago
While I know that folks have the right to hate GT, I don’t know why they bother to spout off about it on this thread. Since I don’t appreciate Mallard Fillmore, I don’t go on his thread and act as a troll to others who do appreciate him. Seems like a tremendous waste of time to me. I would rather do more positive things, such as read things I enjoy. That is the point. The point is that I DON’T do that at all. I wouldn’t dream of it. What an exercise is negativity that would be —and what a bore.
David Huie Green LoveJoyAndPeace almost 11 years ago
By the way, I remember someone saying that ever since the coming of nuclear weapons and intercontinental delivery systems, we are ALL on the front lines concerning nuclear war..The same can be said for terrorists, their purpose is to convince us any of us can be killed..Looking at it this way, every president, legislator and judge’s family has been in harm’s way all along.
Not the Smartest Man On the Planet -- Maybe Close Premium Member almost 11 years ago
Trudeau does it again.
David Huie Green LoveJoyAndPeace almost 11 years ago
“This would, of course, NOT change.”.That is a straight line I shall not touch..I shall simply touch the substance of what you write. You would only allow candidates to seek votes for 20 days prior to an election day. This is not similar to freedom.
.You want people to realize it is their/our government while you want the government to limit how people can campaign and give goverment the power of the purse strings..Please think about what you are actually proposing even as you insist I have nothing correct.
Frogger104 almost 11 years ago
Wow nice conversation starter GT!
Thank you Doughfoot for the history lesson and some serious perspective!
Warbuck$, how apropos. Get used to the influx, irresponsible gay freedom-loving hippies have to live somewhere too, they can’t all fit here in Portland….
I wonder how many people would turn out to vote against a mandatory voting initiative? ha ha suckers!
kaffekup almost 11 years ago
‘should be silenced’One of your more nonsensical posts. Exaggerate much? How does that address my point? Don’t bother, it doesn’t.We must protect our billionaires’ rights at all costs, musn’t we? They are so delicate and endangered.
thesnowleopard Premium Member almost 11 years ago
I live in NC. Believe me, the GOP in our state’s attempts to turn back the clock on voting rights are only the tip of the iceberg. You should see what they’re doing to the community colleges.
thesnowleopard Premium Member almost 11 years ago
Oh, yeah, ’cause North Carolina thirty years ago, where you still had de facto segregation everywhere, was such a wonderful place to live in. So carefree.
Also, don’t be so disingenuous. You and I both know an awful lot of those “Yankees” are actually African Americans returning home after their parents and grandparents left to escape racism.
There are definitely some obnoxious people in North Carolina, but they’re hardly all Yanks. Stop fighting the Civil War. It’s been over for almost a century and a half. You lost. Get over it.
thesnowleopard Premium Member almost 11 years ago
I utterly fail to see how those conservative posters who come here every day without fail to trash Trudeau are having their right to free speech curtailed. Disagreement with you is not violating your First Amendment rights. So, you can go peddle your conservative victim lines elsewhere.
kaffekup almost 11 years ago
Then yes, you are as foolish as I think you are. How about :4. Public funding for elections exclusively so there is no point in the rich buying politicians?I understand your naivety in thinking no politician can be bought, I just don’t agree with it..Thanks to SCOTUS, this would take a constitutional amendment, which they would buy the votes against, and therefore will not happen..As for people voting against their own best interests, low and middle class republicans do it every election..I neither worship nor envy money. But I know there are people who will do anything for it. When you set up a society where you’re either rich or nothing, many will do what it takes to survive..“I don’t understand” – the truest words you’ve ever said here.
kaffekup almost 11 years ago
Nothing you have said is an actual refutation of any of my points, just a restating of your opinion. I remain unconvinced.