@worfCalling government given welfare really does not change much
since bankers and owners of large corporations receive great monitory benefits
based on who they vote into office. I also wonder how exactly your would define
welfare is it strictly in terms of money given, again we all benefit from our
form government. As to education I could argue that since I have
Masters degree, I think maybe we should set the bar at an advanced degree so
only the best and brightest are voting. I could argue that anyone with a lesser
education not even bother arguing with me because i have a "higher proven
cognitive ability>" I of course really do not believe that should be the
case but you get the point
@lost in DC Worf stated "Only those with a high school degree or
higher, and not on the dole,--can vote." to which spring street made
reference to feudalism. So unless your other sign is worf I dno't see were
spring street was addressing your. If you are not worf then your post is
existent on this thread. if you are also worf then you made claims well beyond
one man one vote. again reading comprehension is a good thing.
spring street--let's change dole to government given welfare. This way
politicians can't buy votes with outrages promisesHS degree of
higher--so people with some proven cognitive abilities, will decide the
important participants of leadership.A national debt equal to
$560,000 for every second in year, is absolute proof of passed leaders being
weak, and corrupt, placed in office by deceived low knowledge voters.
spring street,you forget that originally in this country, hardly known as
a feudal society, only property-owning males could vote?I am not
advocating anything other than a one-man one-vote system, but your reference to
a feudalistic society is out of place when applied to the US. One
could argue, however, that with BO's "big brother" idea of
government, he is trying to establish some type of feudal system here, then your
argument would make sense.
Since the federal government is not allowed to regulated voting laws in federal
or state elections they cannot abridge the laws that are the right of the states
to maintain and operate. The closest voting right that federal government has is
in the electoral college that each state reports to presidential elections.Federal government has no controls on elections and cannot mandate or
control election laws. The Supreme Court has once again shown its prejudice and
partisan loyalty to outside influences, and it invalidates any opinions based on
criminal association or personal loyalty.The states should ignore
the federal impudence and do as they wish in defining and establishing voting
rights of all voters regardless of race, wealth, or sex. The worst thing that
could happen is nullify the supreme court who are not independent of citizens
government. Proving citizenship is not a hardship on any american for any
reason.Americans still have the right to discredit and nullify the
Supreme court because they only exist with their powers by the will and choice
of the people. We can challenge every thing that governement and its branches
do. We can revoke all government decisions at any time, its our right.
'Worff Right because feudalistic societies have worked so well
througout t history and why we still have so many. I also wonder how you define
on the dole? Do bankers the Walton's and other large corpriate owners not
get to vote? Do you utilize our streets and other public infrastructures? Does
that mean you do not get to vote?
Many don't agree with me, but here it goes.Only those with a
high school degree or higher, and not on the dole,--can vote.Oh how
different our leadership would be different.
Christopher B.Your joking right!!
Changing voter forms to prove you actually have the RIGHT to vote?That makes perfect sense.Which is why liberals will never allow
it.How long, Lord, how long?.....
Why should you have to be an American to vote?All elections
worldwide should be open to anyone who wants to vote.