Posted on 02/21/2008 8:26:51 AM PST by Turret Gunner A20
Great story OP, but I’m not sure which post of mine on this thread you’re responding to. Anyway, I see Obama as the “Holy One”, the villiage people as the silly Democrats, and the three legged dog as Obama’s clarion call to ‘hope’.
Which also provides us with the earliest recorded example of 'ballot box stuffing'.
The liberals will always be in power as long as they control the education of our youths..
Hey, a simple majority is quite often moral and just enough to satisfy us. However, one would be a fool to absolutely count on that. A really good king is the best government. The next king? Could be a crapshoot. Some of the laws that we here hate the most were passed by a majority. Think about it.
Today's just and moral majority is tomorrow's mob.
ping
Well, I don't. I am a renter of an apartment and do not own any property. That would screw me royally. I think it is a bad idea.
ROTFLOL!!!!!
I still think only net tax payers and/or property owners should be allowed to vote. No one else has any “stake” in the outcome of the election,
except for those that seek to use the government to take from others what they haven’t earned for themselves.
This was my thinking too. Gotta pay to have a say!!
In the case of taxpayer voting requirement, I don’t agree with an IQ test. If you pay into the system, you get ONE VOTE for the leaders of the system.
Do you pay taxes, or are you a net “receiver” of gov’t largesse?
If you pay, you should vote,
if not, then you should have no say in how the wealth of the nation is spent.
Not to mention the fact that, while government schools are dumbing down and propagating ignorance, they are busily building “self-esteem”. So, the ignorant can be quite prideful in their stupidity.
Now THIS I can agree with...
So if “Democrat” was an epithet...
what about today’s “Dhimmicrats”?
LMAO!!! No, I just chuck s**t for the landlord...of COURSE I pay taxes for God's sake! I am a conservative, man!!!
So very true, LJ. I fear for our country that is fast becoming full of prideful idiots.
That's the deal, if only net tax payers voted, the vote totals would be about 80% conservative.
This leads me to ask a question. I know that the Constitution is a limit on government not the people. It tells govt. what it may, must and may not do. It is not a full ennumeration of the people’s rights as mentioned in the 9th amendment. There are, though, some spelled out in the Bill of Rights.
So why is it that some people then point to the Constitution and say “well, the right to X is not in the Constitution so that right doesn’t exist.”
For instance, I was reading Levin’s Men In Black and he had just finished discussing what I put in my first paragraph and then a few pages later began saying that the people do not have a right to privacy because it’s not in the Constitution. I could not read any further because of what seemed to be a great contradiction. Mind you, I’m not here claiming a side in that argument, just confused by the contradiction. Any enlightenment would be helpful.
I do not think it is inaccurate to say that the United States is a constitutional representative democracy, but a democracy, nonetheless.
We do not have “direct democracy”, the constitution and representative government were meant to attenuate the undesirable effects of mob rule, but keep the government ultimately accountable to the people.
IMHO, the problems all started with the 19th amendment. See my tagline.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.