Best reason to vote for Obama?

mkk41mkk41 BannedPosts: 1,932 Senior Member
"There are no victims , only volunteers!"
«134

Replies

  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,102 Senior Member
    You should have no voting privilege if:

    1. You never graduated high school
    2. You have not been a tax-paying member of society for more than 50% of your life since you turned 18 years old
    3. You cannot pass a simple test relating to the voting structure in the USA
    4. You have ever been found to have committed fraudulent practice with government aid
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,050 Senior Member
    Heh... it was started under Reagan and I believe extended to cell phones under George W. Bush...
    Overkill is underrated.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,050 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    You should have no voting privilege if:

    1. You never graduated high school
    2. You have not been a tax-paying member of society for more than 50% of your life since you turned 18 years old
    3. You cannot pass a simple test relating to the voting structure in the USA
    4. You have ever been found to have committed fraudulent practice with government aid
    Actually, voting is a right.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • BuffcoBuffco Senior Member Posts: 6,243 Senior Member
    Actually, voting is a right.

    Neal Boortz says all the time, there is no Constitutional right to vote..
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,050 Senior Member
    So? Because 6 different amendments define and extend the right to vote:
    14: all male citizens born or naturalized in each of the several states has a right to vote unless convicted of rebellion or a crime.
    15: can't abridge the right due to race, color, or previous employment condition
    19: extends voting rights to women
    23: D.C. residents can vote
    24: you can't be denied the right to vote based on payment or nonpayment of poll or ANY OTHER tax (see point 2 of Jason's.)
    26: who are 18 years of age or more

    Kinda hard for the Constitution to expand a right that one doesn't have. Plus, that pesky thing called the Supreme Court has upheld the right to vote, and even used that term in its decisions.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • BuffcoBuffco Senior Member Posts: 6,243 Senior Member
    Then what is he talking about when he says that?
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    Heh... it was started under Reagan and I believe extended to cell phones under George W. Bush...
    The original program was started to bring LAND LINE service to rural areas. The phone companies argued that a line ran miles down a dirt road to service only a few people would never pay for itself. Much less make a profit. And rightly so. However, this is one of those government programs I have no problem subsidizing on my monthly landline bill. If I had a land line, which I don't.
    Regarding this free cell phone thing being started under Bush, here's a link that shows it's a little more complicated than that:

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=591_1348942725

    This is from memory but IIRC this was sold to us after the economic meltdown that these folks needed this in case they'd turned in a job application or fired off a resume'.

    But let me tell you how this works on the street. They don't have to go to a government office with documentation. A van pulls up in the hood and starts helping people fill out forms and they walk away with a free phone. The government, our money, is billed shortly thereafter.

    Testimony at congressional hearings indicates all to many cases of single individuals with upwards of 10, count 'em 10, free cell phones.

    So, while this poster child of free things as depicted in the video is surely wrong about "...everybody in Cleveland got an Obama phone..." I have to wonder if you were to take the total number of free phones in the Cleveland MSA and divided it by the overall population in that same area, how close she might be.

    And this is why it will take generational re-education regarding the benefits, and more importantly the responsibilities of being a free citizen living in a free state to effect real change.
    To slam the door anytime between tomorrow and say 20 years from now would bring on civil unrest never seen before in this country. And I include the Revolutionary and Civil Wars in that assessment.

    IMHO if Romney loses OH and/or PA it won't be because coal miners, auto workers, or small business people think he's a rich plutocrat. It'll be because there's lot's of free things in Cleveland, Youngstown, Columbus, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia.

    De Tocqueville anyone? I'm afraid we may have already arrived.
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • coolgunguycoolgunguy Senior Member Posts: 6,352 Senior Member
    Heh... it was started under Reagan and I believe extended to cell phones under George W. Bush...


    Not exactly, but not far off either:

    The cell phone freebies are subsidized by the Universal Service Fund, essentially a tax on phone service that was originally used to subsidize rural phone bills. The program was expanded in the Reagan years with the creation of the “Lifeline” program that provided modest subsidies for the phone bills of poor people. In 1996, Congress further expanded the subsidy program by creating the Universal Service Administrative Company with the express mission of ensuring "all Americans, including low-income consumers and those who live in rural, insular, high cost areas, shall have affordable service and [to] help to connect eligible schools, libraries, and rural health care providers to the global telecommunications network." While this subsidy was largely still limited to landline phone, in 2008 under the Bush Administration it spawned a further subsidy known as Safelink, which began providing free cell phones.

    Basically, it started with the Communications Act of 1934, (possibly earlier, I'm unclear regarding the wording in the article) and has expanded and changed over time, both with deregulation in 1984 and with the re-vamped Telecommunications Act of 1996 during Clinton's administration. Cell phone access was added during the Bush administration.

    Mebbe somebody needs to tell her that she's talking on a 'Bush' phone? :roll2:
    "Bipartisan" usually means that a bigger than normal deception is happening.
    George Carlin
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,050 Senior Member
    Buffco wrote: »
    Then what is he talking about when he says that?
    He's talking out his rear end.

    Note: he's a radio personality. He's been to law school, sure, but what did he learn?

    Do you trust radio commentators to give you advice on repairing farm equipment, or do you go to the guys who actually work on them?
    Overkill is underrated.
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    "He's talking out his rear end."

    He most certainly is. Let me ask you something though bream. You're obviously educated and informed on these types of issues so I'd like your opinion on something. Regarding JasonMPD's post above and your response to it, I think all he's saying is that people should be informed and have at least a modicum of skin in the game, as it were. So here's my question, in an election to raise property taxes, should folks who own no property have the right to vote on that one issue?
    Also, when you wrote, ".. has a right to vote unless convicted of rebellion or a crime." I'm sure you already know this but in the off chance you don't you might want to look into how many states allow convicted felons, many on death row, to vote. I have to wonder how they'd vote vis a vis a president who would appoint folks to the SCOTUS that would uphold their right to the Playboy channel, at taxpayer expense, because to do otherwise would constitute "cruel and unusual punishment".

    I look forward to you thoughts should you choose to express them.
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,050 Senior Member
    As far as property taxes go, it really affects everyone. Even those who have "no skin in the game." When I lived in an apartment and the county raised property taxes, we had to pay more rent when the leases were renewed. Reason? The landowner was paying more in property taxes. Naturally at $5 tax increase was passed along as a $50 rent increase, but that's the way business seems to be handled these days...

    As for felons on death row voting, this site only lists two states:
    http://felonvoting.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=286

    My personal feeling is that voting is a state's rights issue, so how the state handles voting should be up to them. That being said, I feel that allowing a convicted felon the right to vote after incarceration, or incarceration plus parole, or incarceration, parole, plus probation is not necessarily a bad thing. I lean towards option 3, as that's the maximum time whereby they've been "paying back their debt to society" as the popular term goes.

    The reason I feel this way is akin to what another member once said: if the felon is such a problem, why are they allowed out in free society? If they've done such horrible things that their rights should be restricted, restrict them in prison, don't tack it on after they're allowed out and "free." Would that mean that we'd need to lock people up longer? Possibly. But if we'd stop locking some folks up for stupid reasons we'd probably be able to save prison for the folks who really need it.

    Just my opinion.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • DoctorWhoDoctorWho Senior Member Posts: 9,496 Senior Member
    :agree:
    "There is some evil in all of us, Doctor, even you, the Valeyard is an amalgamation of the darker sides of your nature, somewhere between your twelfth and final incarnation, and I may say, you do not improve with age. Founding member of the G&A forum since 1996
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    Thanks for the thoughtful reply bream. I reckon we'll just have to agree to disagree. But a coupla things.
    When you wrote: "My personal feeling is that voting is a state's rights issue, ..."
    I like the way your mind works but I would argue that the constitution trumps states rights. I like to think we settled that issue circa 1865. Edited to add: Note I said the Constitution, not the Federal government.

    Also, " if the felon is such a problem, why are they allowed out in free society? "
    One word, overcrowding. The recidivism rate in this country is ridiculous.

    Thanks again for the thoughtful reply.
    Vote wisely my friend.
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,102 Senior Member
    Actually, voting is a right.

    My point exactly.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • RazorbackerRazorbacker Senior Member Posts: 4,646 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    My point exactly.[/QUOTE

    Is it safe to assume you mean that rights carry with them implied and implicit responsibilities? So the right to keep and bear arms means you have the responsibility to possess, own, and use them responsibly?
    If so then it would follow that if one claims the right to vote then they would be required to vote responsibly.
    So therefore healthcare can never be an"unalienable right". For were it to be so, other than the right to treat yourself or negotiate the payment for services from others, your right would infringe on others rights.
    In other words, the government could force others to care for you. Where then are the rights of the care givers?

    Not picking on you Jason. I think you and I are of like minds in many ways. Just thinking out loud here.
    Teach your children to love guns, they'll never be able to afford drugs
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,102 Senior Member
    All rights carry with them responsibilities, but responsibilites of those exercising their rights.

    A right to vote is little different.

    If you vote for a president because he "gave you a cell phone", you are so far-gone ignorant and voting irresponsibly.

    Health care is an animal of a different feather.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • JasonMPDJasonMPD Senior Member Posts: 6,102 Senior Member
    Also...

    I see no problem making voter's rights a qualifiable action. Sure, we have the right to keep and bear arms....if you pass a background check. Checking for a criminal history before possessing a gun is, in my mind, not out of the question. I know criminals get an amazing number of firearms on the street, but imagine how many they could get if LGS's didn't ask for your info and check your history?

    On the same token, I see no reason you shouldn't have to test to become a voter. Voting should be done intelligently. Not on a whim. I'd amend my previous 4 qualifications to exclude high school graduation. But the other three, I'd stand by that.
    “There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
  • FiveSevenFiveSeven Member Posts: 289 Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    Also...

    I see no problem making voter's rights a qualifiable action. Sure, we have the right to keep and bear arms....if you pass a background check. Checking for a criminal history before possessing a gun is, in my mind, not out of the question. I know criminals get an amazing number of firearms on the street, but imagine how many they could get if LGS's didn't ask for your info and check your history?

    On the same token, I see no reason you shouldn't have to test to become a voter. Voting should be done intelligently. Not on a whim. I'd amend my previous 4 qualifications to exclude high school graduation. But the other three, I'd stand by that.

    That's a real slippery slope you're playing on Jason. Who gets to decide what the test is, or who grades it? Sounds like another beautiful way for a power hungry government to amass even more power. It would be abused on both sides of the aisle, and you end up with a country that is ruled by elitest who can never be voted out because they hold the power of who votes and who doesn't. Do you really want to give someone that kind of power?
    Only the optimists suggest that the future is uncertain. The pessimists have done the math.
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    Jason MPD wrote:
    If you vote for a president because he "gave you a cell phone", you are so far-gone ignorant and voting irresponsibly.

    :agree::that: Cell phone, Money, guarenteed appointed position, free car, free house,etc.,etc, Isn't this what they call or used to call a bride? Is not this illegal? IIRC that's why a lot of the liquor stores are closed on election day, to prevent bridery to voters.
    "It is what it is":usa:
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    From the looks of this we are beyond doomed!!!!!!!!!! We are sunk for sure!!!!!!!!! Our Tax dollars at work huh? free cell phones for voting for Odummy... That woman/girl or whom ever she is in the video from Ohio, reminds me of the old group (1964) The Newbeats- Bread and Butter, and that exactly what Odummy is handing out for votes!!!!!!!!!!!! The only difference is one can't eat a cell phone!!!!!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8m1cP0ez_S8
    "It is what it is":usa:
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,050 Senior Member
    FiveSeven wrote: »
    That's a real slippery slope you're playing on Jason. Who gets to decide what the test is, or who grades it? Sounds like another beautiful way for a power hungry government to amass even more power. It would be abused on both sides of the aisle, and you end up with a country that is ruled by elitest who can never be voted out because they hold the power of who votes and who doesn't. Do you really want to give someone that kind of power?
    Good point. Anybody remember learning about the citizenship tests folks had to pass before voting post-Reconstruciton?
    Overkill is underrated.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,050 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    Also...

    I see no problem making voter's rights a qualifiable action. Sure, we have the right to keep and bear arms....if you pass a background check. Checking for a criminal history before possessing a gun is, in my mind, not out of the question. I know criminals get an amazing number of firearms on the street, but imagine how many they could get if LGS's didn't ask for your info and check your history?

    On the same token, I see no reason you shouldn't have to test to become a voter. Voting should be done intelligently. Not on a whim. I'd amend my previous 4 qualifications to exclude high school graduation. But the other three, I'd stand by that.
    The background check is not done to see if you are qualified, but to see if you've done anything that would preclude you from legally possessing a firearm. You know, felonies, restraining order, and other such things that society, through the legislative process, have deemed should not allow someone to keep firearms.
    What you are proposing would be more akin to some set of standards one must meet before owning a firearm. Say passing a firearms proficiency test, having basic legal knowledge, maybe even demonstrating a "good" reason to need the firearm, perhaps?
    When you start doing that stuff you've gone from a right to a privilege. What is what you first called voting.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,050 Senior Member
    Thanks for the thoughtful reply bream. I reckon we'll just have to agree to disagree. But a coupla things.
    When you wrote: "My personal feeling is that voting is a state's rights issue, ..."
    I like the way your mind works but I would argue that the constitution trumps states rights. I like to think we settled that issue circa 1865. Edited to add: Note I said the Constitution, not the Federal government.

    Also, " if the felon is such a problem, why are they allowed out in free society? "
    One word, overcrowding. The recidivism rate in this country is ridiculous.

    Thanks again for the thoughtful reply.
    Vote wisely my friend.

    I think you misread my "state's rights" statement. I shouldn't have used that terminology. Voting qualifications are definitely Constitutionally defined, and to that I will not argue. However, the Constitution is also pretty broad in defining what disqualifies one from voting. A good thing in my book. With that in mind, it's left up to the states to administer the voting (the county in Florida, don't know about other states.) Anyway, like many things the Constitution sets the basic parameters, states further refine it, and the counties administer it. Not a bad idea, as "one-size-fits-all" rarely works. That's what I was trying to get to.

    As for overcrowding and recidivism: the overcrowding and associated recidivism is due in part to political manipulations whereby the prisons are no longer about punishment and making sure that folks don't repeat that behavior, and shifting them to holding areas. NPR did a great bit a few years ago on the situation in California, and incorporated the 3-strikes law and its mandatory imprisonment rules into the discussion. Interestingly enough, a lot of the degradation of CA prisons came along with more stiffer penalties that were lobbied for not by the police unions, but by the corrections officer union. They wanted more strict penalties, which lead to more imprisonment and overcrowding. Because of that situation, more corrections officers were needed, and eventually the union grew to one of the strongest in the state. This is where I would say I have a real problem with any group of government employees lobbying for regulations or laws that could lead to more government employee employment. Point of disclosure: I am a government employee.

    http://www.npr.org/2009/08/13/111843426/folsom-embodies-californias-prison-blues

    I have no problems agreeing to disagree, as long as we're not disagreeable in our disagreement.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • snake284-1snake284-1 Senior Member Posts: 2,500 Senior Member
    JasonMPD wrote: »
    You should have no voting privilege if:

    1. You never graduated high school
    2. You have not been a tax-paying member of society for more than 50% of your life since you turned 18 years old
    3. You cannot pass a simple test relating to the voting structure in the USA
    4. You have ever been found to have committed fraudulent practice with government aid

    Jason, this is the result of giving excessive entitlements for so long. Now we've got whole generations who survive on entitlements and have no clue how to make it on their own. This lady in the video is at least 50 years old if not 60 and you can tell she thinks we owe her her every wish and command. Why else would anyone vote for someone who would give them a phone or food or money or any damn thing. Nobody ever gave me a damn thing in this life except my parents who gave me an education on what makes the world go round, something this lady missed in her edumacational process.

    When I was a kid we had a poll tax. This meant that a person had to have a stake in the election process. In other words he/she had to own something besides an unbrella to vote because those who work and pay taxes should have the say on what those taxes are based on and how much they should be. Not some dead head that sleeps on a park bench or in government housing that they don't own. This is insanity!!!

    But the Dummycrats have been pushing it so long that even those that pay for it have come to accept at least some of it. Our whole society is conditioned to allow this crap. And it's a big anchor around our necks.

    So when I was a kid, there was this poll tax, which in effect, disallowed those who didnt' contribute to society a vote. This is only fair and reasonable. But those who were for it were called racist. This is totally insane and those who bought into it never saw this coming. Can you believe that? Well, the problem is that the liberal politicians saw it coming. In fact they engineered it. This sort of crap keeps them in power. So gradually over the years they implimented this entitlement mentality into society. And sadly, there's really only one way out of it. Remember what Jefferson said about the tree of liberty.

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
    -- Thomas Jefferson

    Nuff said!

    Edited to Add: Maybe Property Taxes should be considered a substitute for a poll tax. It would accomplish the same thing. If you pay property tax then you own something and have a stake in the game. But there are so many dead heads that don't pay ANY taxes except sales tax on their cigarretts and booze. And where do they get the money for that? From their welfare checks and food stamps, more entitelment crap.

    So should they have a rigth to vote???
    I'm Just a Radical Right Wing Nutt Job, Trying to Help Save My Country!
  • snake284-1snake284-1 Senior Member Posts: 2,500 Senior Member
    One thing to remember about voting rights as they are interpreted today is that they aren't the same as what the founders of this country and framers of its Constitution envisioned. These rights have been amended to accomodate the progrssivism that permeates the liberal agenda. I would almost like to see all this hogwash undone. Sometimes I wish the Constitution just had a default button on it.
    I'm Just a Radical Right Wing Nutt Job, Trying to Help Save My Country!
  • SideOfBaconSideOfBacon Member Posts: 111 Member
    snake284-1 wrote: »
    Maybe Property Taxes should be considered a substitute for a poll tax.

    So everyone that rents wouldn't be allowed to vote? Active Duty military that live on base (don't pay property taxes) can't vote? The Air Force moves us every 2 years or so, so we haven't bought a house. Why should preclude us from being allowed to vote?

    I don't think this is a good solution.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,050 Senior Member
    snake284-1 wrote: »
    One thing to remember about voting rights as they are interpreted today is that they aren't the same as what the founders of this country and framers of its Constitution envisioned. These rights have been amended to accomodate the progrssivism that permeates the liberal agenda. I would almost like to see all this hogwash undone. Sometimes I wish the Constitution just had a default button on it.
    So blacks and women shouldn't vote?


    I'm glad some of you guys know what a "right" really is.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • FiveSevenFiveSeven Member Posts: 289 Member
    Uh.... Snake what do you do when the gov jacks your property taxes up so high Bill Gates couldn't pay them.
    Only the optimists suggest that the future is uncertain. The pessimists have done the math.
  • mkk41mkk41 Banned Posts: 1,932 Senior Member
    I didn't get a free phone! :mad:
    "There are no victims , only volunteers!"
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    mkk41 wrote: »
    I didn't get a free phone! :mad:

    I didn't either; but men like you and me don't need free Odummy hand outs. We can read, write, and arithmetic, we don't need calculators, or phone brides, to know whats going on in this country!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I ain't never got that much free stuff in my life, and I really don't want to start now. All I want is a chance to be a productive tax paying member of the USA, own guns, be left alone free from Government hassle, and such!!!!!!!!!!! I am sure you do to!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    "It is what it is":usa:
«134
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.