It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

In Order To Save America, We Must Legally Prevent Oblivious People From Voting

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 9 2016 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel

my that's a nice long rant about obama.... as if bush was any better.... and gee why did people vote for him? I can't speak for all of them but I know that quite a few of them did because he was portrayed as being a "christian"....
okay, but then much of what he did while in office was just not the christian thing to do...




Anyone who would vote for someone because of their skin color or gender is not actively honoring their civic duty.


so, maybe you should put religion into that statement also???

ya see, posts like yours, along with a few others kind of give me the idea that you want to eliminate an entire political party from the voting pool.... only those who can pass your civic exam (made out to express your version of history and your interpretation of the constitution) should be able to vote??? never mind that well, I went to school decades ago and quite frankly, your version of history, and interpretation of the constitution isn't the same as what was taught in our civics classes back then. ya see, I was taught, way back then when the US ran much better and it's politicians weren't a bunch of corrupt lying ba...rds... well.. the Iroquois Confederacy was attributed as being the source of many of the ideas of the constitution....not the bible or religion, the supreme court was tasked with the job of weighing laws and determining if they wen't against the basic constitutional principles to the point in denying individuals their rights. ect....
and, guess what, there were a far less percentage of the population that had a college education and far more people who didn't have a high school diploma and they were all allowed to vote, and yet, our country ran much smoother, congress would cross the aisle and get the work done, and the politicians at least tried to portray themselves as having some integrity!




posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 12:09 AM
link   
Wow... just fricken wow.

Hitler and Stalin are cheering in their graves as we speak.




In Order To Save America, We Must Legally Prevent Oblivious People From Voting


Translation:

Welfare mums, Walmart shoppers, socialist pinko liberals, and po' folk in Detroit and Chicago need not apply.



Land of the free...?
Hardy har har.




posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 02:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

In Order To Save America, We Must Legally Prevent Oblivious People From Voting.

Starting to support those who would like to cancel elections pe se now a???

Get it up and running using some extreme cases and it wont take long before a trickle becomes a flood and then its unstoppable so 'we gottem now haven't we''?

We will lead every revolution against us ..... haven't I heard that before somewhere?



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 05:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Vroomfondel

my that's a nice long rant about obama.... as if bush was any better.... and gee why did people vote for him?


1) Gore
2) Kerry


only those who can pass your civic exam (made out to express your version of history and your interpretation of the constitution)


Which is why I recommend the most current version of our citizenship tests. If a potential American is supposed to know it well enough to become an American, then an existing American who is paying attention to how the country works should have no problem with it. From what I have seen in anecdotal 'man on the street' videos an Ivy League diploma or high-income job would not give people any special advantage.

And instead of completely negating their vote, you simply given them a percentage of their correct score, ie. 7/10 correct answers = 0.7 voting power. Therefore it would take 3 lucky guessers with 0.3 and 0.4 scores to negate the selection of a single opposing educated voter with a perfect 1.0 vote.

As an added bonus we'd learn more about the political knowledge of the voters and political parties across the country.
edit on 10-3-2016 by Teikiatsu because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 05:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Thank you for your biased, ill-informed and frankly risible post. Please address the issue instead of ranting.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar



as if bush was any better


Exactly as I said it would be. I said something bad about obama. Instead of addressing obama and what he has done the immediate response is to redirect the topic of conversation elsewhere, Bush, then attack. That straw man tactic does nothing to justify what obama has done.



so, maybe you should put religion into that statement also???


I said you should not decide who to vote for based on skin color or gender. Again, the immediate response is to redirect the topic of conversation elsewhere, then attack that. Straw man tactics again.

I never said eliminate an entire political party. I said people should not decide who to vote for based on skin color or gender. You seem to believe that means the entire democratic party. I am sure there are many who would agree with you.

My version of history? And can you please tell my why your "version" is any better or more accurate than mine? For that matter, can you even tell me what mine is? I assume you can if you are willing to declare it false....

You seem to imply that understanding civic duty requires higher education. Reference back in the days when most people did not have a college education or even a high school diploma, but the country still ran smoothly. Of course, that is excluding all the ways in which it didn't... That being said, higher education is not necessary. Common sense is.

obama was not qualified to run for office. Any office. The fact that he was elected by people openly saying they voted for him because he was black is a disservice to this nation. And now many of those same people are voting for hillary because, "it is time for a woman president". No, it isn't. It is the same time it always is during an election: it is time to vote for the best candidate. Period.

I live near Chicago. I see and hear about election fraud every time there is an election. Its no secret around here. The lines of buses that go to the ghetto areas, pick up hundreds of people, give them a free ride to the polls with a cup of coffee and a donut and promise them lunch after they vote, all while hearing about the democrats who provided this nice warm bus and the tasty coffee for them, free of charge. The message: if you want more free stuff vote for democrats. And of course there is always the fact that the democrats lead the republicans among dead voters by huge margins. Most Illinois politicians end up serving jail time. Many still are. obama sprang from the midst of one of the most corrupt Illinois governments ever. That is saying something, that should not be ignored under any circumstances. Remember mayor daley trying to sell a senate seat? Did you ever wonder how a man with no political experience at all ended up in the senate in Illinois? Is it possible he bought his way in?

Clinton tried to block many active military members from voting because they were massively opposed to his administration. obama did the same thing while making it possible for illegal aliens to vote. To the best of my knowledge no republican has done that.

Understand, I know republicans have had bad administrations and made mistakes. I don't deny that. I do not agree with everything Bush did. I never did. But I also can honestly say when it comes to elections republican hands are cleaner. Not spotless, but definitely cleaner.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Thank you for your biased, ill-informed and frankly risible post. Please address the issue instead of ranting.



If you read the actual OP you no doubt saw that it was in fact about obama. My comments were on topic.

But thank you for your biased and ill-informed response. Which, by the way, did nothing to address the topic...

BTW, I love how when someone bashes Bush its just stating facts but when someone says something derogatory about obama its automatically called a rant. I love how that works...
edit on 10-3-2016 by Vroomfondel because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Well then Trump would be upset, because if people had to take a civics course and really knew the basics of gov and the tax system, he would lose a LOT of support knowing his plans not only wouldnt work, but would damage the economy.

Need only look at history to see how his "Tariff" solution , was the same sort of thing that helped usher in the great depression.

Or how you cant make a country build a wall.....

Or how his Tax plan isnt sound......

Many many things........

As to the Article though, and all things being said..........those people I dont agree with should still get a voice........

And if they elect despots, maybe they will learn.........but let it be through our democratic republic, and let it stand



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 10:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
Well then Trump would be upset, because if people had to take a civics course and really knew the basics of gov and the tax system, he would lose a LOT of support knowing his plans not only wouldnt work, but would damage the economy.

Need only look at history to see how his "Tariff" solution , was the same sort of thing that helped usher in the great depression.

Or how you cant make a country build a wall.....

Or how his Tax plan isnt sound......

Many many things........

As to the Article though, and all things being said..........those people I dont agree with should still get a voice........

And if they elect despots, maybe they will learn.........but let it be through our democratic republic, and let it stand


Trump doesn't have a working plan. I don't think republicans do and I know democrats don't. The last seven years have proven that. The only reason most people will vote for Trump is because they are sick and tired of business as usual with the democrats and republicans. Remember, obama promised hope and change, yes we can, all that other cliche crap. And its still business as usual, if not worse. Many people have figured out that they got lied to. Sadly, many still haven't got it yet. (before you start, yes republicans lie too...) We really need and deserve better.

My willingness to deny the right to vote is ideological. In practice, I would never disrespect the nations laws in such a manner. I do like the idea of making sure the people who vote know what they are doing and why. You have to learn how to drive and prove it before you get a license. Why not require people to demonstrate at least a working knowledge of what voting means and how it affects the nation? Is it that far fetched to think a little information to help people make an informed decision is a bad idea? And I mean factual information, not campaign ads and not free rides and coffee in exchange for votes.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Thank you for your biased, ill-informed and frankly risible post. Please address the issue instead of ranting.



If you read the actual OP you no doubt saw that it was in fact about obama. My comments were on topic.

But thank you for your biased and ill-informed response. Which, by the way, did nothing to address the topic...

BTW, I love how when someone bashes Bush its just stating facts but when someone says something derogatory about obama its automatically called a rant. I love how that works...


Sorry, but I get very irritated when I hear people complain that Obama spent his first four years talking about he mess that Dubya left him. If you look at the massive amount of economic rubble that Dubya left in his wake then you'd understand why. You can't wave a magic wand and turn an economy around in a month or even a year. It takes longer than that. Bush's Treasury rammed through TARP, not Obama, after being told by people like Bernancke and Paulson that it was TARP or the Great Depression on steroids.
Yes, I know, this started off when Clinton repealed Glass-Stengall, but no-one knew that the financial industry would rush into CDOs and RMBS in the way that they would, still less that the rating agencies would prostitute themselves to approve them with high ratings. The fact that Dubya's people kept whiffling on about the invisible hand of the market made me nauseous then and still does now. They took their eye off the regulatory ball and then they stuck the US tax payer with the bill.
And as for Obama being too partisan - no. Sorry, but no. Again and again he reached across the aisle. And again and again Turtleface and the human cheato spat in his face. Have you forgotten McConnell's comments about making sure - right from the start - that Obama would be a one-term president? And that was at a time when the US economy was on fire and threatening to fall down!!!
As far as I am concerned I'm disappointed that Obama has not been the left winger that the GOP try (pathetically, given that they know nothing about it) to paint him as. But my god, he's light years ahead of the slime in the gutter that have tried to pull him down to their squalid level. "He's secret muslim!" "No, he's a secret Kenyan!" "No, no, he's a secret muslim, communist, terrorist Kenyan!"

Sorry folks, rant over.
edit on 10-3-2016 by AngryCymraeg because: Typo

edit on 10-3-2016 by AngryCymraeg because: Typo due to annoyance short-circuiting brain



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
Can you imagine that a subset...lets say people on ATS were able to vote and select out next President here in the US. I have no doubt that 90% or more of us could pass a 5th grade civics test. Can you imagine what a difference it would make to have informed voters make the choices for our country? I can guarantee no Bush or Clinton would be elected ever again.


I have a hard time believing that such a high percentage of ATS would pass a 5th grade civics test. I see so many people who THINK they know how the government works on these boards all the time, but they really don't.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Thank you for your biased, ill-informed and frankly risible post. Please address the issue instead of ranting.



If you read the actual OP you no doubt saw that it was in fact about obama. My comments were on topic.

But thank you for your biased and ill-informed response. Which, by the way, did nothing to address the topic...

BTW, I love how when someone bashes Bush its just stating facts but when someone says something derogatory about obama its automatically called a rant. I love how that works...


Sorry, but I get very irritated when I hear people complain that Obama spent his first four years talking about he mess that Dubya left him. If you look at the massive amount of economic rubble that Dubya left in his wake then you'd understand why. You can't wave a magic wand and turn an economy around in a month or even a year. It takes longer than that. Bush's Treasury rammed through TARP, not Obama, after being told by people like Bernancke and Paulson that it was TARP or the Great Depression on steroids.
Yes, I know, this started off when Clinton repealed Glass-Stengall, but no-one knew that the financial industry would rush into CDOs and RMBS in the way that they would, still less that the rating agencies would prostitute themselves to approve them with high ratings. The fact that Dubya's people kept whiffling on about the invisible hand of the market made me nauseous then and still does now. They took their eye off the regulatory ball and then they stuck the US tax payer with the bill.
And as for Obama being too partisan - no. Sorry, but no. Again and again he reached across the aisle. And again and again Turtleface ad the human cheato spat in his face. Have you forgotten McConnell's comments about making sure - right from the start - that Obama would be a one-term president? And that was at a time when the US economy was on fire and threatening to fall down!!!
As far as I am concerned I'm disappointed that Obama has not been the left winger that the GOP try (patheitically, given that they know nothing about it) to paint him as. But my god, he's light years ahead of the slime in the gutter that have tried to pull him down to their squalid level. "He's secret muslim!" "No, he's a secret Kenyan!" "No, no, he's a secret muslim, communist, terrorist Kenyan!"

Sorry folks, rant over.


Part of the problem is that Presidents often get stuck with the results of decisions made by their predecessors and congress from years if not decades earlier. Dumb economic and business decisions sometimes take years, if not decades, to show up.

The housing market implosion was a culmination of bad decisions over 30+ years that finally came together in a perfect storm. Both conservatives and liberals are responsible.

Obama was wholly unqualified to be President. He went from a back bencher State rep to Senator to President out of no where. Most people even in IL knew nothing about him. How could they? His background was thoroughly white washed. He won his Senate seat by default because of the dirt unsealed in Jack Ryan's divorce.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 11:15 AM
link   
"In Order To Save America, We Must Legally Prevent Oblivious People From Voting"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

That would be unfair to illiterate knaves who want cradle to grave care from the government...
It would completely invalidate the Democratic Party....poor Bernie and Hillary would have no one to exploit...err, I mean, represent...

Find me a 23 year old mother of 4 with multiple fathers and take a guess what her political leanings are...

In spite of the fact that people with low IQs tend to make terrible life decisions, this does not nullify their right to vote...

Not to mention, were America to implement a voter test, beaurocratic liberals would immediately morph the test into a litmus one full of junk science and socialist lies....
As always they would seek to invalidate conservative thought through this...

Christosterone



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Christosterone
"In Order To Save America, We Must Legally Prevent Oblivious People From Voting"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

That would be unfair to illiterate knaves who want cradle to grave care from the government...
It would completely invalidate the Democratic Party....poor Bernie and Hillary would have no one to exploit...err, I mean, represent...

Find me a 23 year old mother of 4 with multiple fathers and take a guess what her political leanings are...

In spite of the fact that people with low IQs tend to make terrible life decisions, this does not nullify their right to vote...

Not to mention, were America to implement a voter test, beaurocratic liberals would immediately morph the test into a litmus one full of junk science and socialist lies....
As always they would seek to invalidate conservative thought through this...

Christosterone


I don't even know where to start with the delusion in the above. So I will take a deep breath and ignore it.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 12:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: Vroomfondel

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Thank you for your biased, ill-informed and frankly risible post. Please address the issue instead of ranting.



If you read the actual OP you no doubt saw that it was in fact about obama. My comments were on topic.

But thank you for your biased and ill-informed response. Which, by the way, did nothing to address the topic...

BTW, I love how when someone bashes Bush its just stating facts but when someone says something derogatory about obama its automatically called a rant. I love how that works...


Sorry, but I get very irritated when I hear people complain that Obama spent his first four years talking about he mess that Dubya left him. If you look at the massive amount of economic rubble that Dubya left in his wake then you'd understand why. You can't wave a magic wand and turn an economy around in a month or even a year. It takes longer than that. Bush's Treasury rammed through TARP, not Obama, after being told by people like Bernancke and Paulson that it was TARP or the Great Depression on steroids.
Yes, I know, this started off when Clinton repealed Glass-Stengall, but no-one knew that the financial industry would rush into CDOs and RMBS in the way that they would, still less that the rating agencies would prostitute themselves to approve them with high ratings. The fact that Dubya's people kept whiffling on about the invisible hand of the market made me nauseous then and still does now. They took their eye off the regulatory ball and then they stuck the US tax payer with the bill.
And as for Obama being too partisan - no. Sorry, but no. Again and again he reached across the aisle. And again and again Turtleface and the human cheato spat in his face. Have you forgotten McConnell's comments about making sure - right from the start - that Obama would be a one-term president? And that was at a time when the US economy was on fire and threatening to fall down!!!
As far as I am concerned I'm disappointed that Obama has not been the left winger that the GOP try (pathetically, given that they know nothing about it) to paint him as. But my god, he's light years ahead of the slime in the gutter that have tried to pull him down to their squalid level. "He's secret muslim!" "No, he's a secret Kenyan!" "No, no, he's a secret muslim, communist, terrorist Kenyan!"

Sorry folks, rant over.


You ignored the fact that my response was on topic.

You rant about Bush and the economic rubble he left, as you put it. And you further add that no one has a magic wand that can fix the economy in a month or a year. But that is exactly what obama said he could do. And he never even passed a budget, which he is required to do.

The blame game goes far beyond obama. Look at the economy clinton inherited. A budget surplus. And by the time he left office the economy was tanking so badly he had to enact steep spending cuts to stay positive by the time he left office, which he just barely managed to do. The economy was nose diving - before Bush even took office. Short sighted people blame Bush for that. Some people say were it not for Bush' efforts things would have been worse. And no one knew the events of 9/11 or the affect it would have on the economy which also played a major role.

As for obama reaching across the aisle - no, sorry, but no. When you look across the aisle and say "its my way or the highway", that is not cooperation. That is b______t. Oh, lets not forget, "You can read it after you sign it". One of my favorites. Yeah, thats non-partisan cooperation at its best. Or at least the best obama can do.

Your partisan rant is no different than mine, except for one thing. I know they are the same, apparently you don't. Your perceptions are influenced by your partisan position as much or more than anyone else. You say "there is no magic wand to solve the nations economic problems". Yet you readily blame Bush for not having a magic wand. You say obama tried to reach across the aisle when he clearly tried to dictate terms and refused to negotiate on them. That is not cooperation in any way shape or form. Yet you praise obama for his non-partisan efforts, even though they did not exist. And you speak of how irritated you get when you hear people blame obama and praise Bush. Now do you understand why some people get so irritated when people praise obama and blame Bush?

Both Bush and obama made mistakes. Neither one of them solved as many problems as they, or we, would have liked. But I can still honestly say that Bush had the nations best interests at heart. And I can not honestly say obama does. Sorry, but that is the truth. And non-partisan truth at that. That is not a reflection of republican vs. democrat. That is an honest comparison of Bush to obama. Two people, not two parties.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join