John Stossel always seems to expose the best in America.
-
Exclusive B&R Advertisers
Buy this e-book from this Nationwide Concealed Carry ad and the publisher will make a donation to Black & RightLingerie, Sexy Lingerie and Plus Size Lingerie
Quick Booklet Printing Online
Genuine Style by DirectBuy
-
My oldest, now on iTunes
Originally, a citizen had to also prove ownership of property or some other viable indicator of useful production in order to be eligible to vote.
fboiteau,
I always got a kick out of Heinlein.
I posted (as in “used thumb tacks”) this excerpt from his “Time Enough for Love” on a college bulletin bulletin during the 1976 elections:
“If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for. . . but there are certain to be ones you want to vote against. If this is too blind for your taste, consult some well-meaning fool (there is always one around) and ask his advice. Then vote the other way. This enables you to be a good citizen (if such is your wish) without spending the enormous amount of time on it that truly intelligent exercise of franchise requires.”
The stoners that said there are 51 states, and 52 states were way closer than Barry.
People on welfare or any form of government assistance shouldn’t be allowed to vote (barring the retired who have earned their Social Security). They don’t have any stake in the game, no investment in the company.
I think Stossel has been watching too much Jay Walking. God, that was scary.
Heinlein had a good idea…
Let only discharged Vets vote.
Yeah, you may not have people who are completely focused on the issues, and they’re like other people, but…they have civic virtue.
If I may be permitted to quote Heinlein: “Son, you would find it much easier [to restore my eyesight] than instill moral virtue – social responsability – into a person who doesn’t have it, doesn’t want it and resents having the burden thrust on him.”
Another interesting passage: Both for practical reasons and for mathematically verifiable moral reasons, authority and responsability must be equal – else a balancing takes place as surely as current flows between points of unequal potential. To permit irresponsible authority is to sow disaster; to hold a man responsible for anything he does not control is to behave with blind idiocy. The unlimited democracies were unstable because their citizens were not responsible for the fashion in which they exerted their sovereign authority…other than through the tragic loss of history. [...] No attempt was made to determine whether a voter was socially responsible to the extent of his literally unlimited authority. If he voted the impossible, the disastrous possible happened instead – and responsibility was then forced on him willy-nilly and destroyed both him and his foundationless temple”
(both quotes from Major Reid, O.C.S. instructor, Starship Troopers)
Voting is your right to practice or not to practice. Voting is also not consent.
Voters are punny. Seriously, you can’t get a driver’s license without passing a few basic tests. Why should voters be required to as well?
Oh wait… cause they don’t teach civics anymore and our hallowed schools are bastions of revisionist history. Stupid me… until everyone catches up we could do it the old way; educated land-owners are qualified to vote…
No that won’t work… even the poor, disenfranchised and moronic can get a house… the same goes for education.
What have we let happen to us? The Kool-Aid doesn’t even taste that good.