Hump Day Report: You WILL Vote – Or Else!


ALOHA, ALL!!  So have you heard the latest?  Obama minions are now calling for mandatory voting.  That’s right….you WILL vote and like it!  Faced with the prospect of a landslide loss in November, it seems Barry’s supporters want to force people to vote.  Wow.  But don’t even consider making people show IDs when voting.  That’s racist and suppresses voting.  (Sidebar:  I’ve often wondered if making people show IDs to board an airplane suppresses flying.  The outrage!)  Think back just 4 short years ago…did you ever imagine it would come to this?  Desperation:  Obama Surrogate Calls To Make Voting Mandatory

Of course, Nancy Nitwit thinks the reason for going after Eric Holder is not at all because of Fast and Furious.  It’s because the GOP is trying to suppress the vote.  Seriously.  Pelosi:  Republicans Are Going After Holder As Part of a “Nationwide Scheme to Suppress the Vote”  As HDR reader Brett would say,  she’s off her meds again.  Representative Gowdy agrees.  

In Other News:

How about some good news for a change?  High Court Rules 7-2 Against SEIU  “The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 today, siding with nonmember California state employees challenging a Service Employees International Union (SEIU) political fee charged to them without notice and opportunity to opt out.”

We know SCOTUS has to rule on Obamacare, but what else?  Supreme Court Saves Best For Last  “As usual, the Supreme Court, although close to the end of its term, is in no hurry to decide its big cases. The court ruled Thursday against the FCC in the indecency case, saying it didn’t give fair notice to broadcasters. But many big cases remain to be decided at the end of the 2011-12 term.”

GREAT analysis!  The Paternalism of Obamacare Supporters  “The paternalistic pre-postmortem of ObamaCare by its supporters is entirely consistent with the paternalistic nature of the legislation itself. At every step, the crafters of the legislation have behaved as though the people covered by the law were too stupid to have their own opinions on it.”

Brian Terry’s parents speak out.  White House is “Lying”  “I probably couldn’t say on camera what I would like to say to him,” Ken Terry said regarding his feelings toward President Barack Obama.  “I was very furious. I was very upset,” he added, speaking about when he first found out about the concept of gunwalking and the fact that it was linked to his son’s death. “It’s like a bad dream, like I’m going to wake up.”

It’s Friday – time for NewsBusted!  

Final Thought:  “The difference between a contemporary liberal and a socialist is that to a liberal the most beautiful word in the English language is ‘forbidden’, whereas to a socialist the most beautiful word is ‘compulsory.’ John McCarthy

GOD BLESS AMERICA – PASS THIS ON – REMEMBER IN NOVEMBER!!

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

About giliar

An American patriot who has gone rogue - I will remember in November!

8 responses to “Hump Day Report: You WILL Vote – Or Else!”

  1. Tom says :

    The mandatory-voting ideal raises the issue of voting requirements. America, a republic, has too many people voting already. But what is the answer?

    Academic tests for voting would be tantamount to handing the Left complete control, since conservatives tend to be less educated on non-business matters, and Tea Partiers brag about their lack of understanding of civil and political issues. Heinlein-type service requirements might have similar effect, especially if non-military service is counted, as conservatives are less service-minded than liberals. Racial/ethnic and/or gender restrictions are unconstitutional and impossible in the the current social setting.

    The only remotely feasible restrictions would be a return to the Founders’ generation’s approach of limiting voting to those with a certain level of property or wealth. Tea Partiers should have no problem with this, since they believe that “the economy” is the only issue of importance, and so they should–if they are capable of thinking to the next stage–believe that the wealthy are the ones with the most justification to vote and have power. Also, “the rich” have the time and resources to understand the issues at a level beyond the Tea-brained, “Well, I jes’ kinda think…” approach. Finally, such an aristocratic approach maintains our republic, acknowledges the Declaration of Independence’s statement that “all men are created equal,” while recognizing the reality that not all people stay equal.

    Under this system, I would no doubt lose my own suffrage. But it would be a sacrifice gladly made in order to save the country.

    • giliar says :

      I actually think there should be an aptitude test to allow people the privilege to vote. From what I’ve seem, those who voted for Obama would fail miserably.

      • Tom says :

        So, you–a self-professed “Tea Partier”–disagree with the Founders very fundamentally on one of the key aspects of our republic? The Founders designed the country on the premise only the elite would vote, thereby keeping uneducated and small-minded riffraff from exercising legal power. That’s not to say that the riffraff had no influence–they had loud mouths, a bit of money, and a bunch of guns.

        From what I’ve seen–and indeed, by definition–conservatives generally are less inclined toward thinking about things like politics and civics. Even most “social conservatives” think primarily in terms of principle or religion. They may have correct positions, but they have no idea about the constitutional or legal bases for implementing them. If your “aptitude test” involves such questions, which would seem pertinent to whether one should be allowed to vote or not, conservatives would fail in massive numbers, with the excuse, “Well, I didn’ git no time to study, cuz’n I was busy with muh new Evinrude and watchin’ NASCAR.”

        To not patently disenfranchise conservatives, your aptitude test would have to be more about general mental aptitude–like not putting square pegs in round holes. All joking aside, I question whether that would accomplish the goal in mind.

        But above all, whatever the nature of the test, I strongly recommend it be rigged to NOT count off for bad spelling. Just sayin’.

      • giliar says :

        So let’s looks at the two contemporary groups that represent the conservative and the liberal causes: The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street. I would be willing to bet that the average Tea Party person knows more about The Constitution and the workings of our government than the average OWS person (he’s too busy defecating on cop cars.) We’ll have to agree to disagree on this one….conservatives would not fail in massive numbers. and BTW….I’ve seen some pretty lousy spelling on OWS signs, too. But that’s OK – they think we live in a democracy. (Tea Party people KNOW it’s a republic.)

      • Tom says :

        I would gladly take that bet! And the key question I would demand in the survey, at least for the Tea Partiers: “Do you believe that Congress violated the ‘All men are created equal’ clause of the Constitution when it passed the ‘Roe V. Wade’ law?” Other questions would involve the political-science definition of “Right” versus “Left,” and the constitutional principle of “14th Amendment incorporation.” *

        On a related matter, perhaps we need an aptitude test for public expression, wherein a person is required to have a certain baseline level of understanding of a general subject matter area–such as knowing the correct response to the question above–before being allowed to speak out on it. Hannity, Beck (though he’s done a little better), O’Reilly, and 90 percent of the local talk show hosts would be off the air tomorrow.

        * The answers to the questions in the first paragraph:

        -“All men are created equal” is a phrase from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution, and “Roe V. Wade” was a Supreme Court decision, not an act of Congress. The issue is not “a matter of opinion”.
        -“Right” versus “Left” in political science is based on the organization of the French Parliament of the 1780s, wherein the traditional-minded people–the elites of society–were on the RIGHT, and the common people wanting reform and less powerful government were on the LEFT. Hence today, “the Right” consists of people who support traditional ideas and power structures, while “the Left” consists of people who support more wholesale disregarding of traditional societal traits in favor of radical changes. (E.g., White racists are generally Rightwing for wanting to maintain White standing; Black racists are generally Leftwing for wanting to reverse that.) It is NOT defined as, “Right=Freedom” versus “Left=Tyranny.”
        -“14th Amendment incorporation” is not a form of business organization, but rather the term in jurisprudence used to refer to using the 14th Amendment to make certain provisions in the Constitution which were originally applicable only the federal government now applicable to state and local governments. (E.g., the 2010 McDonald case, wherein the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment is applicable against state and local laws infringing on the private right to arms.) [PERSONAL NOTE: I would love to tell a Tea Party small businessman he should look into “14th Amendment incorporation” for his company, and then watch on hidden camera what happens when he talks to his lawyer about it. HEE HEE!]

        These answers are substantially correct. They are not opinions. If a reader disagrees, then let him or her do actual research BEFORE challenging them, and then present at least two qualified sources to show where I am substantially incorrect. (And no, merely citing a book title does not suffice. One must actually read the book and use its contents–and not just look at the pictures.)

      • giliar says :

        Good questions, but the format is not useable for a wide-scale grading of an aptitude test. I was thinking more along the lines of the test contained in this article: Crisis: American Students Fail Basic Civics Test The link is at the end of the article and was developed by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. I took it and here’s how I rank: You answered 9 out of 10 correctly — 90.00 %

        YOUR RANKING

        Philosopher-King
        In ancient Greece, this was Plato’s ideal ruler in The Republic; combines both wisdom and power.

        Not bad for what you like to call a “Tea Brainer.”

      • Tom says :

        Just for the record, I got 10/10 on what you took and 33/33 on the full exam. Some of the questions are biased and presumptive of certain conclusions. Even so, my questions could readily be adapted to that format.

        My money remains on the Occufreaks in a comparison. I guarantee most Tea Partiers would reverse Federalists and Anti-Federalists (they’d think “Anti-Federalists” opposed state power), just as they would about the French Parliament’s “Right” and “Left” (they’d think the common people calling for less-intrusive government were on the “Right”).

      • giliar says :

        Congratulations! You can vote.

%d bloggers like this: