Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: john9001 on September 18, 2003, 07:04:05 PM
-
should the people born in the USA have to pass the citizenship test* before they can vote, or would that disenfranchise the stupid people?
* the test immigrants have to pass to become a citizen.
-
why???
thats the worst bait ive ever seen by the way...try another forum
-
As much as it sounds like a worthwhile idea it could turn into a "poll tax" -- meant to deprive the poor (or in this case ignorant) of the right to vote -- far too easily.
-
tarmac. you are prejudging poor people to be stupid, do not confuse money/education with intelligence.
-
No, just trying to use a similar event in our nation's past to draw a parallel.
Keeping "undesirables" from voting by any means (whether a tax for the poor or a test for the ignorant) would be unfairly depriving them of their right to vote.
-
Dunno about unfair, but it would be depriving them of a vote. I think the "test" to vote sould be taxes. If you actually pay some, you get a vote. If you just suck the teat of the public weal, you don't.
-
Originally posted by john9001
should the people born in the USA have to pass the citizenship test* before they can vote, or would that disenfranchise the stupid people?
* the test immigrants have to pass to become a citizen.
Why do you hate democracy?
-
Originally posted by Erlkonig
Why do you hate democracy?
Lol, a counter-troll!
-
Originally posted by Gadfly
Dunno about unfair, but it would be depriving them of a vote. I think the "test" to vote sould be taxes. If you actually pay some, you get a vote. If you just suck the teat of the public weal, you don't.
Hey... not bad.... not bad at all :)
-
Originally posted by john9001
tarmac. you are prejudging poor people to be stupid, do not confuse money/education with intelligence.
On the other hand, he could be prejudging stupid people to be poor.
It's not a bad bet.
-
Please not that this thread regarding voting was posted by a Floriduh resident............
-
Here are the first 10 questions for the test I wrote:
All real americans could get thru these questions in about 58 seconds.
1. Name 3 John Wayne movies.
2. Who played 1st base on the 27 Yankees?
3. Who was the first Playboy centerfold?
4. Who played 3rd base on the 69 Orioles?
5. What gun did Dirty Harry use?
6. Name 3 Gary Cooper movies.
7. What was the name of the a/c that delivered greetings to Nagasaki?
8. Who was the first winner of the Indy 500?
9. What was Patton's outfit in France?
10. Who played Goalie for the gold medal hockey team in 1980?
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Here are the first 10 questions for the test I wrote:
All real americans could get thru these questions in about 58 seconds.
1. Name 3 John Wayne movies.
2. Who played 1st base on the 27 Yankees?
3. Who was the first Playboy centerfold?
4. Who played 3rd base on the 69 Orioles?
5. What gun did Dirty Harry use?
6. Name 3 Gary Cooper movies.
7. What was the name of the a/c that delivered greetings to Nagasaki?
8. Who was the first winner of the Indy 500?
9. What was Patton's outfit in France?
10. Who played Goalie for the gold medal hockey team in 1980?
Man, I'd fail this test miserably. I don't give a rat's bellybutton about most sports, especially sports before I was born. I couldn't name a Gary Cooper movie. 98% of Americans couldn't tell you that Patton did his thing with the 3rd Army, or that Bock's Car dropped the egg on Nagasaki. I know Dirty Harry carried a .44 revolver, but nothing more than that. Never seen the movie. A S&W maybe?
A great example of why testing is a horrible idea.
-
It was a .44 Magnum.... geez. at least you could get that close.
and I'll give you one... Marilyn Monroe was the first Playboy CF.
Ashcroft will be contacting you soon.
-
I think we'd need different tests based on age here. :)
-
lol The well known fascist known as Maggie Thatcher loved the idea of a Poll Tax. So much so that it cost her her job. I cried myself to sleep that day.
-
Originally posted by Tarmac
I think we'd need different tests based on age here. :)
You actually think I was a Yankee fan in 1927?
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
You actually think I was a Yankee fan in 1927?
No, but I think you were a baseball fan back when someone cared about professional baseball. That's before my time.
-
What is "baseball"?
-
Originally posted by Tarmac
Man, I'd fail this test miserably. I don't give a rat's bellybutton about most sports, especially sports before I was born....
So your indifference toward sports is how most people feel about Baseball?
30+ teams and with what... 2,000,000 tickets sold each team?
I went to a Dodgers game with my dad when I was in grade school and haven't been to a game since, and I know the story of Lou Gehrig.
Next time Ken Burns 'Baseball' comes back to PBS, give it a watch. A lot of American social history, especially through the 1950's parallels that of baseball.
-
should the people born in the USA have to pass the citizenship test* before they can vote
The thing is that i guess we from Europe would score higher on this test then the American citizens themselfs...
-
Originally posted by Gadfly
What is "baseball"?
it's boreing... very very boreing.
-
:lol
-
Democracy?
We don't got no stinking Democracy!:rofl
We have a representative Republic!
There is something many don't seem to be aware of!
The framers DID NOT INTEND FOR EVERYONE TO HAVE A VOTE!!!!
It seems they had what is refereed to as a classical education.
They studied the history of Rome, Greece, etc...
They wanted to avoid the tyranny of the mass ruleing over the smaller portion of the people. So they set up the RULE OF LAW.
They wanted to avoid the fall of Rome = give the people circus's and bread for their votes.
They wanted the people that voted to be individuals that had a stake in where the wagon went. Who were pulling that wagon to chose the direction, AND those riding within and not contributing were to have no vote.
Then along comes L.B.J. and out the window .....
At least that is the understanding I have from the reading I have done. Try reading the Federalist Papers as well as the Anti-Federalist papers. They really open ones eyes!
Something else that is real good is the Preamble to the Bill of Rights!
-
That is right, Wrag, initally it was landowners only who were able to vote, but if they had paid any direct taxes(like income taxes) they would have used them as the measure of ability to vote, like I suggest. Of course they would have NEVER allowed such a travesty as income taxes.
-
I think the "test" to vote sould be taxes. If you actually pay some, you get a vote. If you just suck the teat of the public weal, you don't.
I think your "test" stinks. You probably think that the more taxes you pay, the more votes you should get!
-
Nope, just the fact that you pay any income taxes at all. Hey, the way some liberals claim it, this would mean the rich ouldn't vote. Everyone "knows" they don't pay any taxes, right?
-
Actually, old bean, this liberal believes that there should be a flat tax of some kind, and we should throw out the ungodly complex tax system we all know and despise now.
-
Well, old cheese, we agree on that point, then.
-
I think people should be highly educated community leaders and landowners before they can vote, just like our Founding Fathers wanted.
The Electoral College was created, most historians say, as a "check" against raw democracy. Some of the founding fathers, especially elitists like Hamilton, feared that majority rule (then a.k.a. "mob rule") would enable a popular but dangerous candidate--a demagogue--to win the presidency.
Oops, no comment :)
Charon
-
maybe we should just take away the right for public school teachers to vote until their students improved.
take away any politicians right to run again if his/her area didn't improve its schools test scores.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
maybe we should just take away the right for public school teachers to vote until their students improved.
take away any politicians right to run again if his/her area didn't improve its schools test scores.
lazs
Oooooohhhh...looking forward to banana's response on this one. Go get 'im banana. :D
-
Hi Lazs. Hope you're having a great day, too! :)
-
why punish the student for lack of knowledge?
lazs
-
Originally posted by banana
Hi Lazs. Hope you're having a great day, too! :)
DISAPPOINTED;)
-
john9001: tarmac. you are prejudging poor people to be stupid, do not confuse money/education with intelligence.
No he is not. There is massive amount of research confiring that stupid and poor people are mostly the same in US.
There are still arguments whether stupidity causes poverty or the other way around but the fact that most poor people are stupid and most stupid people are poor has been established beyong any doubt.
Erlkonig: Why do you hate democracy?
Democratic government tends to concentrate on increase of income which it can appropriate rather than increase in capital value which it cannot appropriate.
Most other forms of government tend to do the opposite.
Which means democracy would loot the country and make it worse in pursuit of short-term gains while other forms would tend to improve the value/worth/quality of the country.
banana: I think your "test" stinks. You probably think that the more taxes you pay, the more votes you should get!
Government is an institution with territorial monopoly on violence. In unlimited democracy (like our) the majority controls the government and thus monolply on violence.
When less than 50% of the population pay all the taxes, the non-taxpayer majority in control of the government has no restriction on legally enforcing any king of taxation on productive minority.
The only respect in which it differs from slavery is that the exploited producer can run away into another country or stop working and join the unproductive scum.
miko
-
Next up on John's bright ideas for disenfranchisement: Grandfather Clauses!
Sorry, miko, you're out of luck.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Originally posted by Dowding
lol The well known fascist known as Maggie Thatcher loved the idea of a Poll Tax. So much so that it cost her her job. I cried myself to sleep that day.
Do liberal Brits throw around terms like "fascist" the way their Yankee brethren wield labels like "bigot" and "Nazi"? You guys really ought to agree on a common leftist lexicon.
-
Miko better hope he will never get too sick to work. He might find out that poverty isn't that far off, regardless of intelligence.
With no social network backing you, it's the gutter time.
-
Originally posted by Maniac
The thing is that i guess we from Europe would score higher on this test then the American citizens themselfs...
I'm not so sure about that, particularly if spelling counts.
-
Originally posted by banana
I think your "test" stinks. You probably think that the more taxes you pay, the more votes you should get!
Why not?
If one: a. pays a larger percentage of his income as tax; and b. pays a larger gross amount of tax than someone else, why shouldn't the person contributing more have a greater say in how the pool of collected taxes is spent? And, as a corollary, why should someone who hasn't contributed at all (and, in fact, has acted as a fund sink) have any say at all?
This is what happens today, anyhow, except you've got to be REALLY rich before you can exert disproportionate influence via lobbying, television ads for candidates, etc. I think it'd be better if we just dropped the pretense and let everyone play by the same rules.
-
I don't really care so long as we all agree that women shouldn't be allowed to vote. Or womenly men... or teachers.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I don't really care so long as we all agree that women shouldn't be allowed to vote. Or womenly men... or teachers.
lazs
or Californians
-
iron... most californians are women,womanly men or teachers. They should not be alllowed to vote.
lazs
-
Well, what about those California manly men with brand new drivers licenses courtesy of your current Governor? In many (if not all) states, a drivers license is the only ID required to vote.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
or Californians
Or people who can't speak English in this country.
-
iron... nope. If you are not a citizen then you shouldn't be allowed to vote.
lazs
-
Do liberal Brits throw around terms like "fascist" the way their Yankee brethren wield labels like "bigot" and "Nazi"? You guys really ought to agree on a common leftist lexicon.
So you're whining about labels, while throwing around labels yourself? Poor you - been called a Nazi bigot once too often?
Maggie was a Fascist. She had a tattoo of Enoch Powell just above where they plugged the power leads in.
-
My first thought was that Davis was attempting to buy the Hispanic vote, not of those illegally here but of those most sympathetic to them.
Then I realized that he may have made it possible for non citizens to vote. I'm not sure about this though since I don't know what's required to register to vote there.
This is an action very similar to what Clinton did when he solicted campaign money from China. While I have no ill will towards the people of Mexico and little towards the Chinese, I find selling the integrity of our self governance to be traitorous.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
So you're whining about labels, while throwing around labels yourself? Poor you - been called a Nazi bigot once too often?
Maggie was a Fascist. She had a tattoo of Enoch Powell just above where they plugged the power leads in.
No, I've not been called a Nazi or a bigot, but I've seen plenty of others subjected to that sort of baseless, irrational compartmentalization on these boards. What labels am I "throwing around"? "Liberal" and "leftist"? Hardly the equivalent of "fascist".
It disgusts me to see leftists (label) like you preaching from the pulpit of moral superiority to which you have absolutely no claim. Don't pity me. I neither need nor want anything from the likes of you, least of all your pity.
By the way, you're no Dowding.
-
Your post is full of contradictions and inconsistency.
No, I've not been called a Nazi or a bigot, but I've seen plenty of others subjected to that sort of baseless, irrational compartmentalization on these boards.
So you thought you'd engage in some of your own? Something doesn't quite add up.
What labels am I "throwing around"? "Liberal" and "leftist"? Hardly the equivalent of "fascist".
YMMV, wouldn't you say?
It disgusts me to see leftists (label) like you preaching from the pulpit of moral superiority to which you have absolutely no claim.
Wait a minute, what were you saying about baseless, irrational compartmentalization again?
Don't pity me. I neither need nor want anything from the likes of you, least of all your pity.
What is this, fluffy handbags at 10 paces?
By the way, you're no Dowding.
Did everyone see that? He attacked my internet BBS handle!!! I think I might cry, I really might. Clearly I've been outsmarted by a superior wit.
Really.
-
Dowding:
I don't think my post contains any contradictions or inconsistencies.
I don't think that referring to someone as a "leftist" is an stigmatizing, "irrational compartmentalization." It is simply an assessment of where one lies on the political spectrum. If you want to label me a "rightist," go right ahead. (Although "fascist" could arguably be placed in this category, I think that its stigmatizing power outweighs any value it may have as a truly descriptive term.)
And, I don't think it is a stretch to observe that you have often assumed the moral high ground on any number of issues (e.g., gun control). In my view, you have no rightful claim to it.
I don't get the bit about fluffy handbags. Is supposed to be funny or sarcastic or something else altogether?
The "you're no Dowding" quip wasn't an attack on your "handle." He was a great man who played a key role in fending off the real "Nazis" and preserving your great Nation. It just strikes me as an odd choice. Sort of like an American calling himself "Eisenhower," "Patton," or something like that.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
Clearly I've been outsmarted by a superior wit.
One more thing, I'm not trying to outsmart you or anyone else. I don't think you are unintelligent or lack a fine wit. To the contrary, based on what I've read on these boards, I'd say that you're probably quite intelligent, well-read, and well-informed. That's why it pains me so to see you resort to tactics like labeling someone a fascist. You're better than that. (I don't mean to preach, because I know that I'm probably guilty of the same offense. I'd like to think that I'm better than that, too.)
Nonetheless, you and I are never going to see eye to eye on most issues of substance, and no amount of arguing will ever change that. These are not questions decided by intelligence or wit; rather, they are issues determined by perspective, values, and fundamental notions about the role that government should assume.
-
And, I don't think it is a stretch to observe that you have often assumed the moral high ground on any number of issues (e.g., gun control).
I'll bite - is that gun control regarding America or gun control in general? I'd be interested in what you consider 'moral high ground'. I'd also be grateful for some quotes.
I don't think that referring to someone as a "leftist" is an stigmatizing, "irrational compartmentalization." It is simply an assessment of where one lies on the political spectrum. If you want to label me a "rightist," go right ahead. (Although "fascist" could arguably be placed in this category, I think that its stigmatizing power outweighs any value it may have as a truly descriptive term.)
That would depend if you think there is such a thing as rational compartmentalization. I don't. Compartmentalization is just laziness and is used to avoid the issue. Terms like 'leftist', 'rightist' etc are used to get people's back up. Everyone does it from time to time because it is easy, but let's at least recognise it for what it really is.
I also think that people who can't discern an inane joke from serious commentary are not particularly worth engaging with. Maggie was not a fascist - but I have a distaste for her that will never go away. I saw a lot of stuff happen that were direct repercussions of her decisions. And I'm talking tactical day-to-day decisions, if you will - not grand policy, which might be argued was reaction to circumstance.
She might as well have been a goose-stepper to me.
The "you're no Dowding" quip wasn't an attack on your "handle." He was a great man who played a key role in fending off the real "Nazis" and preserving your great Nation. It just strikes me as an odd choice. Sort of like an American calling himself "Eisenhower," "Patton," or something like that.
Not been around communities like this long? People take on names of people involved in history behind the games. That is true of every type of historical simulation out there. Take a look at the Combat Mission boards and you'll find Mansteins and Pattons etc etc. It doesn't mean anything really.In AH we have a Yeager, Ike etc. I actually meant to choose Keith Park, since he did actually fly combat missions but confused the big cheese with his subordinate.
But it still is a little infantile to use a handle as a basis for a personal attack. Calling it a 'quip' is certainly giving it more credit than it deserves.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
But it still is a little infantile to use a handle as a basis for a personal attack. Calling it a 'quip' is certainly giving it more credit than it deserves.
Again, it was not a "personal attack." It was actually meant to be funny. Perhaps you're familiar with the (in)famous "You're no John Kennedy" statement of recent vintage in American electoral politics?
-
No, I'm not. I have enough trouble mustering interest for British politics. ;)
-
Lonestar, whats ironic is the (American) definition of a democrat today is that of fascism in yesteryear...
Economically speaking—
CAPITALISM: business is privately owned, and privately controlled.
COMMUNISM: business is collectively owned, and collectively controlled.
SOCIALISM: business is government owned, and government controlled.
FASCISM: business is privately owned, but government controlled (what most Democrat politicians want).
Politically speaking—Fascism is the extreme rule of law and control of human activity (i.e., “authoritarianism,” commonly and mistakenly called, “totalitarianism”). In this respect, it differs from Stalinist socialism only in the ownership of property. Since property is controlled by the state in both instances, this is only a matter of form.
Democrats in this country are often called “socialists”—just as Hitler’s Nazis were called “National Socialists,” but were really fascists.
Democrats advocate a paternalistic, “big-brother” style of government—just like the Nazis. Some critics call it the “nanny-state.”
In the 1960s, Democrat politicians translated Nazi gun-control laws, and passed them as the Gun Control Act of 1968. Democrats now propose other Nazi-inspired laws, including the banning of handguns—just like Adolph Hitler, the inventor of handgun control.
Democrat politicians and the so-called “liberal” media consistently use variations of the big-lie technique—just like the Nazis.
The big-lie technique was pioneered by the Nazi minister of propaganda, Dr. Josef Göebels. The theory is, the bigger the lie, and the louder and more often you tell it, the easier it is for the public to believe it. The technique was successful because the basically honest public had little insight into the mind of a liar, and instinctively reasoned that no one would dare tell a lie that big.
One of the modern variations developed by Democrats is the many-lie technique, where so many lies are told that we develop a blasé attitude toward the problem.
Another technique, foretold by George Orwell in his once-futuristic book, 1984, is the use of double-speak (called newspeak in Orwell's book), where terminology is used to mean the opposite of what it sounds like—witness the misuse of the word, “liberal.”
Leading Democrat, Ted Kennedy, as quoted in the January 28, 2002 issue of U.S.News & World Report, smiled and described yet another technique: “...you take someone’s argument and you misrepresent it and you misstate it and you disagree with it. ...It’s very effective. I’ve done it myself a number of times.”
The result of the big lies, the many small lies and double-speak is seen in the big truth effect, where the truth now seems so farfetched that people have trouble accepting it—witness the difficulty many will have with this essay.
Democrats and other so-called “liberals” attempt “thought-control”—just like the Nazis—through government schools, control of the major media outlets and journalism schools, day-care, dumbed-down politically correct (PC) textbooks and curriculum, so-called “liberal” faculties at most colleges and universities, government funding (i.e., censorship) of the arts and of public TV and of public radio, forced unionization of government workers, regulations, hate-crime legislation, and so on. They are now using scare tactics in their attempt to reign-in a predominantly libertarian internet. Many radical feminists, multi-culturalists, PCers and victim-mongers advocate censorship and destroy publications—just like the Nazis.
Democrats excel in the use of the politics of envy, hatred and division—just like the Nazis—and emphasize our differences, rather than celebrate our commonalities. They try to pit us against each other by using classist terminology such as upper-class, middle-class, lower-class, working-class, white-collar and blue-collar, or by hyphenating us into rich-Americans, poor-Americans, far-right, far-left, Asian-Americans, white-Americans, Afro-Americans, Mexican-Americans, Cuban-Americans, native-Americans, Jewish-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, straight-Americans, gay-Americans, urban-Americans, rural-Americans, and on and on and on. In the attempt to divide us, most Democrat leaders today engage in scapegoating—just like the Nazis.
Democrats, led by Woodrow Wilson, ran most blacks out of government—just as later their ideological cousins, the Nazis, ran the Jews out of government.
Democrats have reduced opportunities for minorities, by regulating away those opportunities, and by opposing school choice. The result has been that large segments of minorities remain isolated in the ghetto—just as the Nazis did with the Jews.
Democrats have enslaved large segments of minorities within the barb-wire of “welfare”—just as the Nazis enslaved minorities within the barb-wire of the concentration camps.
Speaking of which, Democrats invented the modern concentration camp. The Nazi concentration camps were modelled on British concentration camps used during the Boer War, which were modelled on the horrific prisoner of war camps created by Democrats during our Civil War.
Democrats and other so-called “liberals” use pseudo-religious justification of their agenda—just like the Nazis. They attempt to misrepresent, twist and misquote the teachings of the major religious writings of the world, especially in the case of the Judeo-Christian Bible. Toward that end, they have infiltrated many religious organizations and schools, and have created misleading presentations of religious stories and lessons in the entertainment industry and literature.
Many so-called “liberals” are preoccupied with initiatory societies, mystery cults, ancient beliefs, paganism, myths, fantasy and pop-theology—as were many Nazis. Surprisingly, most of these philosophical systems agree with the Judeo-Christian teaching (and Newton’s Second Law of Thermodynamics) that all actions have consequences; therefore, we are responsible for our own actions and conditions. The irony here—as it was under the Nazis—is that these so-called “liberals” still insist on victim-mongering and scapegoating.
Democrats and other so-called “liberals” and “moderates” allow what most pro-life Republicans consider the ultimate hate crime—abortion. Democrats have even been at the forefront in the battle to legalize partial-birth and after-birth “abortions”—considered by many pro-choice and pro-life Republicans to be a sacrifice of a child to the god of convenience.
Many so-called “liberal” politicians act as if they believed that they are above the laws of God, the laws of cause-and-effect and the laws of men—just like the Nazis.
Many Democrats and other so-called “liberals,” playing God, work within the philosophy that the end justifies the means—as did the Nazis.
So-called “liberals” use pseudo-scientific justification of their agenda—just like the Nazis.
Democrats and other so-called “liberals” are often responsible for the invasion of our privacy, in the name of the public good and protection of our children—just like the Nazis.
It is not an exercise in name-calling to point out that the Democrats are obviously a fascist party.
What is less obvious is that the Democrats are mercantilists, not capitalists or socialists. Mercantilism is an effort to achieve economic unity and political control using policies designed to keep the state prosperous by economic regulation, primarily for the benefit of a few elites. Democrats are reactionaries, not liberals. Mercantilism is an ancient system, responsible for many wars. Republicans, the true historical liberals, favor the free-market of capitalism, which is more conducive to peace.
Democrats and so-called “liberals” have shaped the political discussion so thoroughly that accepted political terminology is Orwellian double-speak.
-
You know Rip, is it too difficult to form your own opinions about issues? All you ever post are quotes from other people.
I'm more interested in what you think and what your arguments are. How about giving us an original Ripsnort opinion once in a while?
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Here are the first 10 questions for the test I wrote:
All real americans could get thru these questions in about 58 seconds.
1. Name 3 John Wayne movies.
2. Who played 1st base on the 27 Yankees?
3. Who was the first Playboy centerfold?
4. Who played 3rd base on the 69 Orioles?
5. What gun did Dirty Harry use?
6. Name 3 Gary Cooper movies.
7. What was the name of the a/c that delivered greetings to Nagasaki?
8. Who was the first winner of the Indy 500?
9. What was Patton's outfit in France?
10. Who played Goalie for the gold medal hockey team in 1980?
1. Sands of Iwo Jima, The Green Berets, Fighting Sea Bees.
2. Wally Pipp, then Lou Gehring after Wally got "Wally Pipped".
3. Marilyn Monroe.
4. Brooks Robinson.
5. .44 Magnum.
6. Ummmm.....
7. Bock's Car.
8. Ummm.....
9. 3rd Army.
10. Ummmm...
Even a dumb Canaduhian got 7/10. Do I get the right to 70% of a vote?
-
Originally posted by banana
You know Rip, is it too difficult to form your own opinions about issues? All you ever post are quotes from other people.
I'm more interested in what you think and what your arguments are. How about giving us an original Ripsnort opinion once in a while?
I read that article, and said "Yep!" So, thats my opinion. I couldn't have written it better.
-
How about a real literacy test? Here's Alabama's literacy test circa 1965:
1. A United States senator elected in November takes office the following year on what date?
2. The Constitution limits the size of the District of Columbia to what?
3. The electoral vote for president is counted in the presence of what two bodies?
4. Of the 13 original states, the one with the most representation in Congress was which?
5. If the election of the president becomes the duty of the House, and it fails to act, who becomes president, and when?
6. If a state is a party to a case, the Constitution provides that original jurisdiction shall be in what court?
7. If an effort to impeach the president of the United States is made, who presides at the trial?
8. When the Constitution was approved by the original colonies, how many states had to ratify it in order for it to be in effect?
9. Persons opposed to swearing an oath may say instead, "I solemnly ____?"
10. If it were proposed to join Alabama and Mississippi to form one state, what groups would have to vote approval for this to be done?
Should you fail this test, you can enjoy disenfranchisement as punishment for your stupidity. Many in Alabama did at the time given their lack of quality educations.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
Ripsnort, wanna know something funny? When I wrote a post on fascism it got locked almost immediately. And I didn't even cut & paste it from somewhere else. You better watch what you say, or I'm telling Skuzzy.
-
Ya know DMF... in '67 when I was in high school... I coulda answered all those questions but can't do half of em now. I wonder how many current high school grads could answer even one of those questions now.
time for vouchers.
lazs
-
Ya know DMF... in '67 when I was in high school... I coulda answered all those questions but can't do half of em now.
I told you those car fumes would eventually catch up to you.
-
I'm sure that a lot of things have caught up with me. Seems fair enough. What isn't fair is that a high school graduate today knows less than an 8th grader knew 30 years ago.
lazs
-
I had sweared I wouldn't drown myself again into a political dsicussion but heck...
Originally quoted by Ripsnort
The big-lie technique was pioneered by the Nazi minister of propaganda, Dr. Josef Göebels. The theory is, the bigger the lie, and the louder and more often you tell it, the easier it is for the public to believe it. The technique was successful because the basically honest public had little insight into the mind of a liar, and instinctively reasoned that no one would dare tell a lie that big.
If you agree with this text, you have to admit that the existence of certain WMDs or the ties between a worldwide terrorist organization and a fallen dictator are yet to be proven... so not only democrats, leftists or whatever you call them could be using this technique.
Although I'm no american citizen, I don't see any problem that stupid people, poor people or both are allowed to vote. But I think it is preferrable to keep stupid, uneducated people with a bogus military career away from the highest governing functions of a powerful nation.