If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Salon)   Noted political wizard Ted Nugent lays out his list of 5 groups who should not be able to vote. Before you snicker, wait until you see the asploding heads of farkers upset that they agree with three of them   (salon.com) divider line 299
    More: Interesting, Ted Nugent, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, vote, paycheck to paycheck, tax exemption  
•       •       •

13041 clicks; posted to Politics » on 06 Jul 2013 at 11:42 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



299 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-06 12:47:46 PM
These folks should be able to vote:

* Felons - Not just ex-felons, but those in prison as well. Who has a greater interest in laws & justice than those who have been directly impacted by it. In some cases unfairly. (with one exception, outlined below)

* Minors - If you're interested enough to want to vote, perhaps even as young as 13, you should be able to (Girls starting at 12 because they mature faster, of course). Policies enacted now will impact the lives of seniors for only a few years, but will impact the lives of young people for half a century or more. I think their interests should be key. Also: Mandatory voting for 16-18 year olds in school. Make it a requirement to graduate. If they get into the habit maybe more will continue to do so later.

* Everyone in the country. Citizens, non-citizens, undocumented folks. Everyone, no exceptions. None of this crazy "papers please". Laws impact everyone, not just those who have been here a long time, or jumped through the hoops to get the citizen prize.

Who should not be able to vote (or contribute to campaigns):

* Corporations - Should be obvious by now why this is a bad idea

* Those who have been out of the country for a year or more. This is the corollary to my "everyone in the country gets to vote". If you leave, too bad.

* Those convicted of high treason or subverting the constitution. Of course most legislators since 9/11 would fall into this category, since they passed such blatantly unconstitutional laws including the "Patriot act". Anyone barred from voting for this reason should also of course be barred from running for office.

/Its Saturday. Just let me keep living my Liberal fantasy here, ok?
 
2013-07-06 12:48:12 PM
I'll go one worse. Voting should be compulsory.

"Oh, the infrastructure couldn't handle that."

Good. Now you have a reason to make your voting infrastructure good.

"Many people will vote without being informed."

You think they don't know? In the 2012 election, the majority of likely Republican voters thought Barack Obama had been born in Kenya, in Ohio. That's mental.

"It's a form of tyranny."

God, Americans and their love of calling basic interactions with society tyranny. Seatbelts are tyranny, road laws are tyranny. You don't get to spend that nickel, because you were busy blowing it  when suggesting you guys stop hogging all the IPs was a form of tyranny.

"If you do this, you'll have a lot of people voting who weren't before, and who's to say we want them?"

You want them to have to vote. If they have to vote, there will be at least one week every two years where they have to give a shiat about politics, and then, microcosmically, you will start them towards paying attention.

"It'll never work."

Yes, it won't work, because this is America, the home of the free and the land of the brave, where there is no system so awful, so nonfunctional and so downright deleritous to governance, liberty and human dignity, that they won't resist maintaining it as it is forever, because Founders And Freedom And Also.

/blah blah blah Talen
//nobody cares
///Australian, not even drunk
 
2013-07-06 12:49:18 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Mangoose: man who wants an abortion

Should probably have just kept it in his pants.


What if she literally tied me down and (because I enjoy that sort of thing) got me off...
 
2013-07-06 12:50:24 PM
Salon made those other five up.
 
2013-07-06 12:52:18 PM

cman: Fart_Machine: How about we just stop pretending that Ted Nugent is relevant.

In the world of politics of course

But one cannot deny his relevancy in the history of music


I can deny it. His music was crap. I will concede he had one decent song, but given one out of the piles of shiat, he was still shiat.
 
2013-07-06 12:52:18 PM

CokeBear: The My Little Pony Killer: Mangoose: man who wants an abortion

Should probably have just kept it in his pants.

What if she literally tied me down and (because I enjoy that sort of thing) got me off...


Safety word?
 
2013-07-06 12:53:03 PM

Lando Lincoln: 1) Corporations
2) People under 18



3) Members of the Westboro Baptist Church
 
2013-07-06 12:55:03 PM
Play stranglehold and STFU, ted.
 
2013-07-06 12:55:10 PM
I wouldn't be opposed to removing the right to vote from churchgoers.  I wouldn't advocate for it, but I think we'd be better off.
 
2013-07-06 12:55:38 PM
People talk about repealing the mortgage interest deduction, but I wonder about the possibility of taking the opposite approach.

Instead of applying to all mortgage interest, a person could instead deduct the net decrease in any one debt that he owes, OR instead deduct the rent payments on his or her own place of residence.

Note I specifically mention "net decrease" here, not payments. This is to prevent a loophole whereby someone runs huge amounts of money through a credit card and then pays it off immediately, resulting in little change to the person's finances but a potentially huge deduction (consider the Sacagewea-dollar frequent-flyer miles scheme for an example of how someone might do that). But you could use a credit card for this deduction, provided that you are actually paying the card down.

With housing being the largest expense of most households in the US nowadays, how much would most families be helped if that particular expense suddenly became tax-free? For that matter, how many people would get a much-needed boost toward getting out of debt?
 
2013-07-06 12:56:52 PM
lunatic draft-dodging pedofile moron.  We lose good men every year and this fark won't roll over and die.  There is no justice in the world.
 
2013-07-06 12:59:09 PM

Aarontology: How about we stop with this bullshiat anti-freedom, anti-democracy, pro-aristocracy nonsense of trying to revoke people's right to vote?


Because then Republicans would be a minority party for decades.
 
2013-07-06 01:01:00 PM

yelmrog: thamike: cman: Are you serious?

You have to earn the right to ask this question without receiving immediate peals of laughter, Mr. I Slept Through the Southern Strategy Section of the Color-My-Lunch Menu at Cracker Barrel.

The Southern Strategy does not exist to anyone on the right these days.  It never happened. The GOP has always been the party of freedom.  Always.

We have always been at war blah blah blah...


www.sciway.net

"Hello, friends, Sen. Strom Thurmond here.  If you're not familiar with me, I ran in 1948 as the candidate for The Segregation Party, and I even frequently peppered my stump speeches with the N-Bomb.  Even though I hated Truman for integrating the U.S. Army, I ran for Senate as a Democrat.  Now, in 1964, Democratic President LBJ, working with a coalition of Republicans and Northern Democrats in Congress, passed the Civil Rights Act.  I tried to filibuster that damn thing for a record-setting 24 hours, but eventually even my racist-ass got tired.

Shortly after, I switched my party affiliation to Republican.  Which was, I assure you, is nothing more than a coincidence.  Honest, smelly, red-skin, drunk-off-their-heathen-ass Injun."
 
2013-07-06 01:01:03 PM
1) People who aren't me.
 
2013-07-06 01:01:08 PM

Peki: Men, if the issue is abortion.

Everything else is fair game.


Leaving the actual abortion debate out of it, what's the rationale for this line of thinking?  It's cool to sacrifice the very founding principles of democracy and equality for an issue you feel really really really strongly about?
 
2013-07-06 01:02:40 PM

Tyrone Slothrop: Aarontology: How about we stop with this bullshiat anti-freedom, anti-democracy, pro-aristocracy nonsense of trying to revoke people's right to vote?

Because then Republicans would be a minority party for decades.


That ship sailed a long time ago.  The GOP knows it can't win without cheating.
 
2013-07-06 01:03:31 PM

phaseolus: Mr. Coffee Nerves: There was a great photo from a teabagger rally at the PA Capitol building -- a guy dressed as a Hessian mercenary soldier and carrying a "Taxation Without Representation" sign talking...to his elected State Senator.

It could be the official poster for the Festival of Cognitive Dissonance


I'm not surprised. My guess is he's just a reenactor.

I took my kids to this one annual local event a few times when they were younger, and noticed a couple things --

For someone with no family connection to the Revolutionary War, and German immigrant roots, joining a Hessian group is an attractive proposition. (I'd seriously consider joining it myself if I was looking for exactly one hobby that would monopolize every minute of my free time. It looks like a lot of fun in a demanding sort of way.)

And the 'hobby politics' was very strong with everyone I talked to in a really bizarre fashion that I hadn't noticed when my dad took me to the same events 35 years earlier. Back then, all the reenactors were simply history buffs, many of whom enjoyed making and firing the really cool replica muzzle-loaders among other things. The guns were tools. Today, many of the reenactors I spoke with were almost cultishly devoted to their guns, viewing their weapons as quite literally sacred objects. Reenacting wasn't so much a celebration of the birth of our nation and all of our freedoms as it was a celebration of gun rights ... at least to the subset of reenactors who saw fit to walk up to me and volunteer their opinions about guns.


Whoa pard, many reenactors ARE history buffs and discuss no modern politics. Others find guns interesting. Look on FB, try a search using 18th Century.
 
2013-07-06 01:05:13 PM

CokeBear: /Its Saturday. Just let me keep living my Liberal fantasy here, ok?


Jimmy Carter just shat himself.

/that may or may not be your fault.
 
2013-07-06 01:06:30 PM
I'm firmly of the opinion that every citizen of appropriate age should be allowed to vote unless they are otherwise held to be mentally incompetent.

That said, I'd love to see the Nuge's reaction to the idea that only military service guarantees citizenship to vote.

Cheers

//Do you want to know more?
//I think Teddy would lose the vote twice in this case.
 
2013-07-06 01:08:34 PM

Brian_of_Nazareth: I'm firmly of the opinion that every citizen of appropriate age should be allowed to vote unless they are otherwise held to be mentally incompetent.


I feel the same way, on a much more give or take level, about gun ownership.
 
2013-07-06 01:10:29 PM

Brian_of_Nazareth: I'm firmly of the opinion that every citizen of appropriate age should be allowed to vote unless they are otherwise held to be mentally incompetent.



Why do you want to deny conservatives the right to vote?
 
2013-07-06 01:14:11 PM

Sgt Otter: "Hello, friends, Sen. Strom Thurmond here.  If you're not familiar with me, I ran in 1948 as the candidate for The Segregation Party, and I even frequently peppered my stump speeches with the N-Bomb.  Even though I hated Truman for integrating the U.S. Army, I ran for Senate as a Democrat.  Now, in 1964, Democratic President LBJ, working with a coalition of Republicans and Northern Democrats in Congress, passed the Civil Rights Act.  I tried to filibuster that damn thing for a record-setting 24 hours, but eventually even my racist-ass got tired.

Shortly after, I switched my party affiliation to Republican.  Which was, I assure you, is nothing more than a coincidence.  Honest, smelly, red-skin, drunk-off-their-heathen-ass Injun."


I have no idea why, but I read that in Troy McClure's voice.
 
2013-07-06 01:14:47 PM

cman: bindlestiff2600: makers vs takers huh

ok
so anyone that actually produces something whether it be food, logs, ore, or a bike would be makers

anyone that produces nothing for thier pay which would be politicians, cops, teachers, would be takers

You think that Teachers do nothing productive for their pay? Or even cops?


Republicans do.
 
2013-07-06 01:20:02 PM

thamike: Brian_of_Nazareth: I'm firmly of the opinion that every citizen of appropriate age should be allowed to vote unless they are otherwise held to be mentally incompetent.

I feel the same way, on a much more give or take level, about gun ownership.


I have a very different opinion on that one.  I'm Canadian, we don't have an explicit right to keep and bear arms and I'm good with it.  Seems to have worked out for us.  You guys seem mostly comfortable with where you're at, so please carry-on.

Not completely sure why gun rights comments so commonly show up in any thread related to other rights.

Cheers.
 
2013-07-06 01:22:53 PM
Who cares what the fark Ted says.  Oh yeah, Salon and Mother Jones and Huffpo.  Carry on.
 
2013-07-06 01:23:00 PM

CokeBear: Brian_of_Nazareth: I'm firmly of the opinion that every citizen of appropriate age should be allowed to vote unless they are otherwise held to be mentally incompetent.


Why do you want to deny conservatives Palin Americans the right to vote?


I like this question better.  I don't actually want to deny them the vote, I just wanted the cheap shot at the Nuge.  I have a personal belief that the purpose of life on this planet is to entertain me.  You guys are doing an admirable job, but sometimes a bit of spice is all the difference.

Cheers.
 
2013-07-06 01:23:35 PM

thamike: Brian_of_Nazareth: I'm firmly of the opinion that every citizen of appropriate age should be allowed to vote unless they are otherwise held to be mentally incompetent.

I feel the same way, on a much more give or take level, about gun ownership.


Why do you equate the fundamental exercise of democracy with owning deadly weapons?
 
2013-07-06 01:23:58 PM
And if we re-define Welfare to mean "people who eat food" then Nugent thinks democracy is a sham!
 
2013-07-06 01:24:05 PM

Brian_of_Nazareth: thamike: Brian_of_Nazareth: I'm firmly of the opinion that every citizen of appropriate age should be allowed to vote unless they are otherwise held to be mentally incompetent.

I feel the same way, on a much more give or take level, about gun ownership.

I have a very different opinion on that one.  I'm Canadian, we don't have an explicit right to keep and bear arms and I'm good with it.  Seems to have worked out for us.  You guys seem mostly comfortable with where you're at, so please carry-on.

Not completely sure why gun rights comments so commonly show up in any thread related to other rights.

Cheers.


Its about political polarization.

We will use any opportunity we can to bash the other side politically. The conversation could be about liposuction and you bet your ass someone will use it to bash someone else.
 
2013-07-06 01:25:31 PM

cman: Brian_of_Nazareth: thamike: Brian_of_Nazareth: I'm firmly of the opinion that every citizen of appropriate age should be allowed to vote unless they are otherwise held to be mentally incompetent.

I feel the same way, on a much more give or take level, about gun ownership.

I have a very different opinion on that one.  I'm Canadian, we don't have an explicit right to keep and bear arms and I'm good with it.  Seems to have worked out for us.  You guys seem mostly comfortable with where you're at, so please carry-on.

Not completely sure why gun rights comments so commonly show up in any thread related to other rights.

Cheers.

Its about political polarization.

We will use any opportunity we can to bash the other side politically. The conversation could be about liposuction and you bet your ass someone will use it to bash someone else.


Will liposuction be covered under Obummercare?

/did I do that right?
 
2013-07-06 01:26:23 PM

dericwater: clambam: cman: Delay: Same list of designated non-voters as ever Republicans have wanted.

1) Negroes
2) American Indians and Mexicans
3) Italians and Chinese
4) Women
5) Children

Seems legit.

You do realize that the Republican party was the driving factor for universal suffrage, do you not?

Republicans have never been the party that denies women the vote.

Why is it when you guys want to defend yourselves from charges of racism and sexism you have to dig back a hundred years or more to find something worth bragging about? "Sure we want to rape you with a plastic dildo if you dare to ask for an abortion, but look how awesome we were in 1919! And, yeah, of course we want to disenfranchise blacks and Latinos now, but wasn't what we did in 1865 totally awesome? Where's your sense of gratitude?" In point of fact the repub Party has done nothing of value to the country since Teddy Roosevelt's day. At best caretaker repub presidents like Eisenhower or Bush I didn't make things worse. Go away. No one will miss you.

I would say that Bush 1 is the only modern Republican who hasn't totally wrecked the country. Eisenhower was a democrat recruited by the GOP to give political life support to Nixon.


Not quite - Eisenhower was in a sense drafted. Members of both political parties sought him out, because Douglas MacArthur was considering a political career. You want to talk about a disaster in the making...
 
2013-07-06 01:26:35 PM

FitzShivering: cman: Brian_of_Nazareth: thamike: Brian_of_Nazareth: I'm firmly of the opinion that every citizen of appropriate age should be allowed to vote unless they are otherwise held to be mentally incompetent.

I feel the same way, on a much more give or take level, about gun ownership.

I have a very different opinion on that one.  I'm Canadian, we don't have an explicit right to keep and bear arms and I'm good with it.  Seems to have worked out for us.  You guys seem mostly comfortable with where you're at, so please carry-on.

Not completely sure why gun rights comments so commonly show up in any thread related to other rights.

Cheers.

Its about political polarization.

We will use any opportunity we can to bash the other side politically. The conversation could be about liposuction and you bet your ass someone will use it to bash someone else.

Will liposuction be covered under Obummercare?

/did I do that right?


Indeed you did. I award you 1 internet
 
2013-07-06 01:29:16 PM

CokeBear: * Minors - If you're interested enough to want to vote, perhaps even as young as 13, you should be able to (Girls starting at 12 because they mature faster, of course). Policies enacted now will impact the lives of seniors for only a few years, but will impact the lives of young people for half a century or more. I think their interests should be key. Also: Mandatory voting for 16-18 year olds in school. Make it a requirement to graduate. If they get into the habit maybe more will continue to do so later.


You apparently don't know any minors, or else you would know why this is a terrible idea. Children make bad decisions. It's why they are under the legal protection of adults, unless in the extremely rare instance they can legally demonstrate that it isn't needed, and why that anyone under 18 can not be legally bound by a contract. Moreover, speaking someone who grew up in a fundie household, their politics and worldviews are dominated by those of their parents, and so are unable to objectively create their own opinions for the most part until they can get real, unprotected experience with the world at large.

/have no issue with the others you listed.
 
2013-07-06 01:29:25 PM

cman: Brian_of_Nazareth: thamike: Brian_of_Nazareth: I'm firmly of the opinion that every citizen of appropriate age should be allowed to vote unless they are otherwise held to be mentally incompetent.

I feel the same way, on a much more give or take level, about gun ownership.

I have a very different opinion on that one.  I'm Canadian, we don't have an explicit right to keep and bear arms and I'm good with it.  Seems to have worked out for us.  You guys seem mostly comfortable with where you're at, so please carry-on.

Not completely sure why gun rights comments so commonly show up in any thread related to other rights.

Cheers.

Its about political polarization.

We will use any opportunity we can to bash the other side politically. The conversation could be about liposuction and you bet your ass someone will use it to bash someone else.


Quite true, though I would add there's probably more than one reason.

The comment was a (too?) subtle dig at thamike.  I'm the middle-aged stoned guy with ADD but he's the one having trouble staying on topic.

Cheers.
 
2013-07-06 01:30:37 PM

Brian_of_Nazareth: I have a very different opinion on that one. I'm Canadian, we don't have an explicit right to keep and bear arms and I'm good with it. Seems to have worked out for us. You guys seem mostly comfortable with where you're at, so please carry-on.


I'm honestly fine either way.  I have hope for sanity, yet I accept that my country is inherently Yosemite Sam-like...In most ways.

Brian_of_Nazareth: Not completely sure why gun rights comments so commonly show up in any thread related to other rights.


It's a hot topic, like abortion and gay rights.  In fact, I can't wait to get my General Dynamics Homobortion phased plasma rifle with a 40 watt range.
 
2013-07-06 01:31:20 PM

scumshine: phaseolus: Mr. Coffee Nerves: There was a great photo from a teabagger rally at the PA Capitol building -- a guy dressed as a Hessian mercenary soldier and carrying a "Taxation Without Representation" sign talking...to his elected State Senator.

It could be the official poster for the Festival of Cognitive Dissonance


I'm not surprised. My guess is he's just a reenactor.

I took my kids to this one annual local event a few times when they were younger, and noticed a couple things --

For someone with no family connection to the Revolutionary War, and German immigrant roots, joining a Hessian group is an attractive proposition. (I'd seriously consider joining it myself if I was looking for exactly one hobby that would monopolize every minute of my free time. It looks like a lot of fun in a demanding sort of way.)

And the 'hobby politics' was very strong with everyone I talked to in a really bizarre fashion that I hadn't noticed when my dad took me to the same events 35 years earlier. Back then, all the reenactors were simply history buffs, many of whom enjoyed making and firing the really cool replica muzzle-loaders among other things. The guns were tools. Today, many of the reenactors I spoke with were almost cultishly devoted to their guns, viewing their weapons as quite literally sacred objects. Reenacting wasn't so much a celebration of the birth of our nation and all of our freedoms as it was a celebration of gun rights ... at least to the subset of reenactors who saw fit to walk up to me and volunteer their opinions about guns.

Whoa pard, many reenactors ARE history buffs and discuss no modern politics. Others find guns interesting. Look on FB, try a search using 18th Century.


I worked with a fair number of living history folks in grad school. The majority of reenactors are genuinely good people, but even they've admitted there's been a rise in political zealotry in their ranks. I blame the SCV crowd, to them "Unreconstructed" is the highest compliment.
 
2013-07-06 01:32:22 PM

Mangoose: If we banned everyone who voted in their own sense of self-interest from voting, then no one should be left allowed to vote.

Peki: But that's a courtesy. Not a requirement.

Provided that a man who wants an abortion doesn't have to pay for care of a woman and child that only the woman wants. I mean he could. But that should be a courtesy, not a requirement.

Your body, your baby, your problem.


The problem women have with your mentality is that they suffer permanent physical change--possibly  illness if complications spring up--and  run the risk of death in childbirth from pregnancy. You...stand to lose some money.

Can you see why claiming those two are equal investments might be offensive?
 
2013-07-06 01:33:25 PM

bindlestiff2600: cman: bindlestiff2600: makers vs takers huh

ok
so anyone that actually produces something whether it be food, logs, ore, or a bike would be makers

anyone that produces nothing for thier pay which would be politicians, cops, teachers, would be takers

You think that Teachers do nothing productive for their pay? Or even cops?


you may want what they do
but you cant eat it wear it or take it home with you
they produce nothing
you might want thier service but a hooker provides service too
thats not a product
cops might reduce loss of a product so they might claim a share of that
teachers might (sometimes somewhere) train people to be able to be productive (but ill leave it open how often that happens)
thats not a product either
side issue   how many non productive people (cops, teachers, hair-dressers, politicians, et al ) can be supported by those who produce something


Please rewrite this using proper sentence structure and check your punctuation. You are not e. e. cummings, and this is so difficult to read that I'm having trouble following your point, though I gather that you disagree with cman.
 
2013-07-06 01:34:35 PM

Brian_of_Nazareth: The comment was a (too?) subtle dig at thamike. I'm the middle-aged stoned guy with ADD but he's the one having trouble staying on topic.


I was just making conversation.  Conversations sometimes go off on tangents, not that that was my intention.  You being old and stoned and having ADD would explain why my agreement with your basic point while offering another example might seem like I was plunging headlong into the depths of a completely unrelated topic.

The squirrel is still here, guvnor.  The squirrel is right here with us.
 
2013-07-06 01:34:39 PM

Peki: Mangoose: If we banned everyone who voted in their own sense of self-interest from voting, then no one should be left allowed to vote.

Peki: But that's a courtesy. Not a requirement.

Provided that a man who wants an abortion doesn't have to pay for care of a woman and child that only the woman wants. I mean he could. But that should be a courtesy, not a requirement.

Your body, your baby, your problem.

This may surprise you, but if I'm pregnant, and decide to keep the kid, and you give up all parental rights, yeah, I'm okay with not making the guy pay child support for it.

/however, just like a girl shouldn't get drunk at a party by herself, a guy ought to always keep things under wraps, so to speak. Don't let yourself get into the situation in the first place.




Let's just say that I'm skeptical, at best. Even taking you at your word, there are billions of women on this earth. They might disagree. I have no problem forfeiting the right to have input into a woman's right to choose. Provided, a woman can't use a baby to trap a guy financially. Yes. If she's game and wants your plonker, use a jiffy so you can bonk her, as the old British advert use to go. But rules aren't for when everyone is on their best behavior. Rules are for when people are at their worst.
 
kab
2013-07-06 01:35:24 PM

Uzzah: Nuget, eh? Isn't he dead or in jail or something?


You don't expect to actually back up his words, do you?
 
2013-07-06 01:36:15 PM

Brian_of_Nazareth: cman: Brian_of_Nazareth: thamike: Brian_of_Nazareth: I'm firmly of the opinion that every citizen of appropriate age should be allowed to vote unless they are otherwise held to be mentally incompetent.

I feel the same way, on a much more give or take level, about gun ownership.

I have a very different opinion on that one.  I'm Canadian, we don't have an explicit right to keep and bear arms and I'm good with it.  Seems to have worked out for us.  You guys seem mostly comfortable with where you're at, so please carry-on.

Not completely sure why gun rights comments so commonly show up in any thread related to other rights.

Cheers.

Its about political polarization.

We will use any opportunity we can to bash the other side politically. The conversation could be about liposuction and you bet your ass someone will use it to bash someone else.

Quite true, though I would add there's probably more than one reason.

The comment was a (too?) subtle dig at thamike.  I'm the middle-aged stoned guy with ADD but he's the one having trouble staying on topic.

Cheers.


DUDE I AM A STONED AS WELL
 
2013-07-06 01:36:35 PM

Lando Lincoln: 1) Corporations
2) People under 18

And that's it. That's the only people (or "people") that should not be allowed to vote.

It seems many Republicans want to go back to a day where only white wealthy land owners have a right to vote.


And we're done. There is no such thing as "people who should not be allowed to vote." Just non-people and non-adults.

Also, why does anyone think Ted Nugent's opinion on the subject is worth a damn? He doesn't like folks on TANF? Fark him. We don't care about how your dumb ass feels about it, Ted.
 
2013-07-06 01:40:04 PM
Echoing a few earlier comments, as much as I despise Nugent, he only said people on welfare shouldn't be allowed to vote. Then author of the article then extrapolated the rest. Thanks, subtard, for wasting my time. Same goes for whomever greened this headline, you both should lose your right to post. Morans.
 
2013-07-06 01:40:15 PM

UNC_Samurai: dericwater: clambam: cman: Delay: Same list of designated non-voters as ever Republicans have wanted.

1) Negroes
2) American Indians and Mexicans
3) Italians and Chinese
4) Women
5) Children

Seems legit.

You do realize that the Republican party was the driving factor for universal suffrage, do you not?

Republicans have never been the party that denies women the vote.

Why is it when you guys want to defend yourselves from charges of racism and sexism you have to dig back a hundred years or more to find something worth bragging about? "Sure we want to rape you with a plastic dildo if you dare to ask for an abortion, but look how awesome we were in 1919! And, yeah, of course we want to disenfranchise blacks and Latinos now, but wasn't what we did in 1865 totally awesome? Where's your sense of gratitude?" In point of fact the repub Party has done nothing of value to the country since Teddy Roosevelt's day. At best caretaker repub presidents like Eisenhower or Bush I didn't make things worse. Go away. No one will miss you.

I would say that Bush 1 is the only modern Republican who hasn't totally wrecked the country. Eisenhower was a democrat recruited by the GOP to give political life support to Nixon.

Not quite - Eisenhower was in a sense drafted. Members of both political parties sought him out, because Douglas MacArthur was considering a political career. You want to talk about a disaster in the making...


And which party would Douggie boy be running under? I'm guessing the GOP only because he and Truman didn't along very well.
 
2013-07-06 01:41:19 PM

thamike: Brian_of_Nazareth: The comment was a (too?) subtle dig at thamike. I'm the middle-aged stoned guy with ADD but he's the one having trouble staying on topic.

I was just making conversation.  Conversations sometimes go off on tangents, not that that was my intention.  You being old and stoned and having ADD would explain why my agreement with your basic point while offering another example might seem like I was plunging headlong into the depths of a completely unrelated topic.

The squirrel is still here, guvnor.  The squirrel is right here with us.


No worries, I'm here for the chat as well, never intended to come across as mean spirited.  Taking a break from LDAP and Catalyst.

Cheers.
 
2013-07-06 01:43:00 PM

Bigdogdaddy: Who cares what the fark Ted says.  Oh yeah, Salon and Mother Jones and Huffpo.  Carry on.


Just curious--was it Salon or Mother Jones that invited him to sit in on the State of the Union? Since we're on the subject of people that give a fark what his opinion is.
 
2013-07-06 01:46:14 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Mangoose: man who wants an abortion

Should probably have just kept it in his pants.


that should be a fortune cookie or something.

And listen. I am pro choice. Do as you wish. But don't pretend that there's only one party involved. Because if it is "her body, her choice?", Why is it that what comes out of it isn't "her baby, her problem"
 
2013-07-06 01:49:05 PM

Bigdogdaddy: Who cares what the fark Ted says.  Oh yeah, Salon and Mother Jones and Huffpo.  Carry on.


The NRA and Fox News certainly do.  He was a keynote speaker at their last convention and he's a regular contributor on Fox.
 
2013-07-06 01:50:11 PM

CokeBear: These folks should be able to vote:

* Felons - Not just ex-felons, but those in prison as well. Who has a greater interest in laws & justice than those who have been directly impacted by it. In some cases unfairly. (with one exception, outlined below)

* Minors - If you're interested enough to want to vote, perhaps even as young as 13, you should be able to (Girls starting at 12 because they mature faster, of course). Policies enacted now will impact the lives of seniors for only a few years, but will impact the lives of young people for half a century or more. I think their interests should be key. Also: Mandatory voting for 16-18 year olds in school. Make it a requirement to graduate. If they get into the habit maybe more will continue to do so later.

* Everyone in the country. Citizens, non-citizens, undocumented folks. Everyone, no exceptions. None of this crazy "papers please". Laws impact everyone, not just those who have been here a long time, or jumped through the hoops to get the citizen prize.

Who should not be able to vote (or contribute to campaigns):

* Corporations - Should be obvious by now why this is a bad idea

* Those who have been out of the country for a year or more. This is the corollary to my "everyone in the country gets to vote". If you leave, too bad.

* Those convicted of high treason or subverting the constitution. Of course most legislators since 9/11 would fall into this category, since they passed such blatantly unconstitutional laws including the "Patriot act". Anyone barred from voting for this reason should also of course be barred from running for office.

/Its Saturday. Just let me keep living my Liberal fantasy here, ok?


People who live out of the country who are still citizens still pay taxes and should be able to vote. Oh, and since we're on the taxation with representation thing, DC should have a senator and a representative.
 
Displayed 50 of 299 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report