The W
Views: 99151045
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
23.9.07 0120
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - What the Iraqi civilians can teach the Americans
This thread has 1 referral leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(1997 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (33 total)
Brian P. Dermody
Liverwurst
Moderator
Level: 69

Posts: 49/1205
EXP: 2770034
For next: 99724

Since: 20.9.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 907 days
Last activity: 329 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#1 Posted on 15.10.02 2355.12
Reposted on: 15.10.09 2356.02
Did anyone else see the Iraqi election coverage? How inspiring! Dancing in the streets and singing. Marking the ballot in your own blood. Fantastic.

They know that their electoral process is a sham, and what do they do? They have fun with it. I think there's a lesson here.

Though it is nice to see the guy with the most votes get the office.
Promote this thread!
Scorpio
Boudin rouge
Level: 48

Posts: 398/525
EXP: 815824
For next: 7724

Since: 18.2.02
From: Laurel, MD, USA

Since last post: 3834 days
Last activity: 3785 days
#2 Posted on 16.10.02 0943.31
Reposted on: 16.10.09 0943.35
Hee hee.

I was picking on the conservative guy here at work yesterday, noting the Iraqi elections went more smoothly than the Florida elections did.
Bizzle Izzle
Bockwurst
Level: 50

Posts: 165/561
EXP: 888534
For next: 58790

Since: 26.6.02
From: New Jersey, USA

Since last post: 52 days
Last activity: 52 days
#3 Posted on 16.10.02 1029.13
Reposted on: 16.10.09 1029.21
I think the Iraqi way could be the solution for Florida voters. With only one guy on the ballot, there is NO WAY POSSIBLE those clowns down there could screw up their ballot, vote for the wrong person, and then later cry about being 'disenfranchised'. And of course, if anyone did that in Iraq, they'd "disappear".

But did you see the results from the election? Saddam got 100% of the vote! What a landslide! The GOP needs to hire his campaign manager. Let's score some votes and take back the Senate! YEAH!
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 152

Posts: 572/7534
EXP: 43592049
For next: 709713

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 449 days
Last activity: 449 days
#4 Posted on 16.10.02 1227.05
Reposted on: 16.10.09 1229.04

    Originally posted by Bizzle Izzle
    I think the Iraqi way could be the solution for Florida voters. With only one guy on the ballot, there is NO WAY POSSIBLE those clowns down there could screw up their ballot, vote for the wrong person, and then later cry about being 'disenfranchised'. And of course, if anyone did that in Iraq, they'd "disappear".

    But did you see the results from the election? Saddam got 100% of the vote! What a landslide! The GOP needs to hire his campaign manager. Let's score some votes and take back the Senate! YEAH!





You've never been in Dade County then. They could screw up a one person election with ease.
The Great Thomas
Sujuk
Level: 64

Posts: 282/1007
EXP: 2138878
For next: 75231

Since: 17.6.02
From: Miami, Florida

Since last post: 3346 days
Last activity: 3346 days
#5 Posted on 16.10.02 1435.56
Reposted on: 16.10.09 1437.29

    Originally posted by redsoxnation

      Originally posted by Bizzle Izzle
      I think the Iraqi way could be the solution for Florida voters. With only one guy on the ballot, there is NO WAY POSSIBLE those clowns down there could screw up their ballot, vote for the wrong person, and then later cry about being 'disenfranchised'. And of course, if anyone did that in Iraq, they'd "disappear".

      But did you see the results from the election? Saddam got 100% of the vote! What a landslide! The GOP needs to hire his campaign manager. Let's score some votes and take back the Senate! YEAH!





    You've never been in Dade County then. They could screw up a one person election with ease.

I am so ashamed of myself for even LIVING here!
Dahak
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 301/772
EXP: 1441547
For next: 44390

Since: 12.5.02
From: Junction City OR.

Since last post: 1996 days
Last activity: 1648 days
#6 Posted on 16.10.02 1829.01
Reposted on: 16.10.09 1829.04
You kow I had my doubts about Hussein. But when I heard he got 99.46% of the vote with 99.81% voting I was impressed.
Socks
Landjager
Level: 60

Posts: 257/888
EXP: 1769625
For next: 3163

Since: 25.6.02
From: Ottawa

Since last post: 791 days
Last activity: 404 days
#7 Posted on 16.10.02 1919.28
Reposted on: 16.10.09 1929.10

    Originally posted by Dahak
    You kow I had my doubts about Hussein. But when I heard he got 99.46% of the vote with 99.81% voting I was impressed.


This just in .54% of the Iraqi population has gone missing. Details to follow!


hehe
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 177/1759
EXP: 4913153
For next: 79717

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1285 days
Last activity: 51 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#8 Posted on 17.10.02 1341.49
Reposted on: 17.10.09 1355.31
God, I would hate to see an election in the US with 100% voter turnout... the morons in Dade who could not figure out how to read a ballot are bad enough- can you imagine the idiots that would come out of the woodworks?
God, you should have to take an intelligence test to register to vote... Right to representation is one thing, but when you are clearly too stupid to realize the implications of your vote, and are only voting the way you are because "Oprah or Rosie" say so... maybe you should not be involved in the election process!
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst
Level: 103

Posts: 556/3028
EXP: 11215362
For next: 256083

Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 8 hours
Last activity: 7 hours
AIM:  
#9 Posted on 17.10.02 1411.12
Reposted on: 17.10.09 1411.20

    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    God, I would hate to see an election in the US with 100% voter turnout... the morons in Dade who could not figure out how to read a ballot are bad enough- can you imagine the idiots that would come out of the woodworks?
    God, you should have to take an intelligence test to register to vote... Right to representation is one thing, but when you are clearly too stupid to realize the implications of your vote, and are only voting the way you are because "Oprah or Rosie" say so... maybe you should not be involved in the election process!



Of course, the irony of *this* post coming from *this* poster shouldn't be lost on anyone.
Fletch
Cotechino
Level: 22

Posts: 43/89
EXP: 56014
For next: 2337

Since: 17.7.02
From: Columbus, Ohio

Since last post: 4336 days
Last activity: 4333 days
#10 Posted on 17.10.02 1419.26
Reposted on: 17.10.09 1422.57

    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    God, you should have to take an intelligence test to register to vote... Right to representation is one thing, but when you are clearly too stupid to realize the implications of your vote, and are only voting the way you are because "Oprah or Rosie" say so... maybe you should not be involved in the election process!


Or because Limbaugh or Hannity say so...

I haven't read bald-faced elitism like this in quite some time. There are those, you know, who would say that by virtue of being a wrestling fan you obviously aren't smart enough to vote.

Right to representation is one of the foundations, in my opinion, of our current system. That everyone from the wealthiest mogul to the poorest grandmother to the brightest researcher to the dullest TV-slug has this opportunity to have their say is only good.

But I imagine that there are a few in Iraq who would share your sentiments...

Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 180/1759
EXP: 4913153
For next: 79717

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1285 days
Last activity: 51 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#11 Posted on 17.10.02 1522.12
Reposted on: 17.10.09 1527.32
I have to laugh!
Seriously- why should ANYONE be allowed to vote if they can't understand what they are voting for?
I never implied that someone who watches a certain program is too dumb to vote, rather, I simply stated that when someone bases their entire political opinion off of what they are told to believe by some host, with no real way to back it up, perhaps they are not worthy of the right to vote!
Yup, I have listened to Rush Limbaugh. But I do not base my entire political opinion on what he says. For one, I am pro-choice. I voted for McCain in the last Republican primary, despite Limbaughs vehement opposition to him. I did not vote for Dole when he ran for president- I went for a third party.
As soon as I recieve my sample ballot I research each and every canditate and issue on that ballot, and make a reasonable and logical choice before I approach the voting booth. I have never run down the line and voted all Democrat, or all Republican.
Now I ask you- if you have the right to vote, isn't it important to do so in a responsible matter? Yes, I sound elitist, but if you are too damned stupid to understand what you are voting for, you should not vote. Paramount is the success of this society, over any political leanings.
It pisses me off when senior citizens come out in droves to vote against a Republican because the Democrats tell them that the Republicans want to take away Social Security ( a lie). The system is flawed and needs fixed, and it can't be done because those too dumb to vote on anything other than what the TV tells them too (like the brilliant folks in Dade) are preventing it. It angers me that a vast majority of blacks vote Democrat because they are taught that Republicans are racist. Oh, but they have Colin Powell! Oh, but he was just called Bush's "house-nigger" by Harry Belafonte. Since he has a political opinion different from that of the majority of the black community, he is obviously the equivalent of a "master's boy."
Yes, my examples are mostly actions of Democrats. This is because they are the most blatant. Fact- the media is predominantly Liberal. Who doesn't remember Rosie blantantly endorsing Al Gore for an entire show, without giving equal time to Bush?
Yes, there are those that base their entire political opinion on what Rush Limbaugh says, or on what G. Gordon Liddy says, or some other host. I don't think these people should vote either.
It is so infuriating to hear someone out against a canditate, and not know why. Why don't you like Bush? "Oh, he is an asshole." "Why is he an asshole? Why do you like Gore?" -no answer.
What about the anti-war crowd, who is against war in this case because a Republican is in office? I, personally, was all for Clinton going in there, I think it needs done. If you are against the war because you prefer a diplomatic solution, unless we are threatened directly (though I would argue we HAVE been, but that is a different thread), fine- I can accept that. But there are so many people out there who are against a war in Iraq because they have been TOLD that they should be, since a Republican is spearheading it. This is plain wrong.
So yes, I think those that are too stupid to vote should not be allowed to. Sure, it is said that they "have the right to," and they still would- if they could demonstrate that they have enough of a sense of responsibility to do so. Why not take a cue from the ancient Chineese? Lets have civil service exams. You want to vote, or be on a jury, or run for office? Before you register, you have to take a test. Not a hard one per se, but a long one. You pass it, you get to vote. Maybe if you have to put a little effort into registering, the wackos who only vote for something because they are told to will be weeded out, and this country would run a hell of a lot better.
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 687/2105
EXP: 6580213
For next: 70477

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 6 hours
#12 Posted on 17.10.02 1937.36
Reposted on: 17.10.09 1955.24
You do realize your last post is essentially Fidel Castro's pat answer to why he hasn't allowed free elections in Cuba. It's always "our country needs to be more educated before they can vote responsibly." You also realize this was the rational in OUR country for denying African-Americans the right to vote for quite some time also.
PalpatineW
Lap cheong
Level: 77

Posts: 358/1528
EXP: 4071352
For next: 119796

Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2799 days
Last activity: 2642 days
AIM:  
#13 Posted on 17.10.02 2250.47
Reposted on: 17.10.09 2251.44
As much as I believe in everyone's right to vote, that Pool-Boy has some small point. Large groups of people making very influential, very ill-informed decisions (voting) is Not a Good Thing. I, of course, do not support disenfranchising the stupid (after all, Fletch deserves a voice, too [kidding]), but it's still worth rubbing one's chin over and maybe lamenting a little. It's definitely a problem when the course of a nation is steered by sensationalistic demagogues and not by rational debate.
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 187/1759
EXP: 4913153
For next: 79717

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1285 days
Last activity: 51 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#14 Posted on 18.10.02 0313.45
Reposted on: 18.10.09 0313.45
You know, just because I disagree with Castro's actions, does not mean he did not have a valid point.
Not allowing blacks to vote was clearly wrong. That decision was based upon race, and that is not what we are talking about here. There is nothing evil in the assertion that some people are simply not responsible enough, or intelligent enough, to vote in a responsible and effective matter.
The fact is, that the people who run any organization, from as small as a club to as large as a nation, needs competant people governing it. We live in a Republic (Democracy if you want to use that term)- and esentially, we are a nation run by the voters. The decisions we make in the ballot box affect how this country is run, and I would like to think that each and every single person who cast a vote could understand the consequeces of that vote. Unfortunatly that is not the case.
Even when an idea sounds like a good one, sometimes the consequences can be terrible. Lets take last elections Prop W in Orange COunty, CA... yes or no on an airport for El Toro. On the yes side- you have an airport which YES, would lead to noise and some pollution, as well increased traffic. These are all some big time negatives. On the plus side, you would have economic stimulus, decreased congestion at John Wayne airport, some cheaper flights and more options. On the No-airport side- there was a huge PR campaign declaring that the airbase should be turned into a "Great Park." Every yahoo in the county jumped all over this idea, and they no-airport's won the vote by a large margin.
There is still no park there- one has not even started. Why? Because the costs involved are so ridiculously high that there is no way that the county will be able to afford to build it. Now the military is still trying to figure out what to do with the land. What a waste!
I DID vote for the airport, but that is not to say I would begrudge someone for opposing it. The fact is that those in opposition did not win on their arguments- they won because they pulled the wool over the eyes of some of the less-intelligent voters by convincing them that if they voted against the airport, they would have this giant, gorgeous park magically there. These people did not, and maybe could not, consider the monetary ramifications of such an undertaking, and just assumed that the money would come from the magic "Government piggy bank."
It is very warm and fuzzy to say that everyone has the RIGHT to vote, but it is a plain fact that many people are not responsible enough, or intelligent enough, to employ that important privelege. If you want to insist that everyone be allowed to vote, no matter what, how do you suggest that this problem be solved?


(edited by Pool-Boy on 18.10.02 0115)
Fletch
Cotechino
Level: 22

Posts: 45/89
EXP: 56014
For next: 2337

Since: 17.7.02
From: Columbus, Ohio

Since last post: 4336 days
Last activity: 4333 days
#15 Posted on 18.10.02 0340.55
Reposted on: 18.10.09 0340.58
    Originally posted by Pool Boy
    Seriously - why should ANYONE be allowed to vote if they can't understand what they are voting for?


Legally?

Because of this: Bill O' Rights

If the Bill of Rights is too "warm and fuzzy" for you then see this: The Voting Rights Act of 1965

This is the law of the land, dontcha know. If you don't like it you may feel free to leave. Where have I heard that before?

Now, my opinion?

In a system such as ours which is representation driven, voting is a cornerstone. To disenfranchise one group or another, based on any criteria, is a dangerous idea. Do you think we should handle the 2nd Amendment this way? What about Amendments 4-8? After September 11th many would think so...

I don't. In fact I'm a pretty big fan of each and every right. Because once we start playing fast and loose with rights then all bets are off and 1776 will be just another insignificant hallmark of a bygone age.

To put it another way, as PalpatineW said to me in another thread "You don't have the right to dictate someone else's definition i.e., just because you don't believe in material comfort, this does not give you the right to deprive your neighbor of such comfort."

Very true and I'll put it this way, just because you don't believe in someone's right to vote this does not give you the right to deprive your neighbor of his vote. After all, he earned it. He pays taxes.

---------------------------------------


    Originally posted by Pool Boy
    Fact- the media is predominantly Liberal.


Be careful with that word "Fact". Click Here


    Originally posted by Pool Boy
    Who doesn't remember Rosie blantantly endorsing Al Gore for an entire show, without giving equal time to Bush?


Who doesn't remember Rush blantantly endorsing Bush for numberless shows, without giving equal time to Gore?

Tell me why it applies to one and not the other.


    Originally posted by PalpatineW
    I, of course, do not support disenfranchising the stupid (after all, Fletch deserves a voice, too [kidding])


Ha ha h... hey!


(edited by Fletch on 18.10.02 0452)
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 496/4700
EXP: 21510628
For next: 326034

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1239 days
Last activity: 1036 days
#16 Posted on 18.10.02 0602.30
Reposted on: 18.10.09 0602.34
While I appreciate the fact that intelligence tests are a great idea, the fact that it is a great idea does not trump the Constitution and the rights contained therein. Besides, it makes my business in politics a whole lot easier letting those who don't pay attention go for it.


    Originally posted by Fletch
    In fact I'm a pretty big fan of each and every right. Because once we start playing fast and loose with rights then all bets are off and 1776 will be just another insignificant hallmark of a bygone age.


And we're already almost there at this point...
Scorpio
Boudin rouge
Level: 48

Posts: 409/525
EXP: 815824
For next: 7724

Since: 18.2.02
From: Laurel, MD, USA

Since last post: 3834 days
Last activity: 3785 days
#17 Posted on 18.10.02 1144.19
Reposted on: 18.10.09 1159.04

But remember, if you want everyone to be able to fully participate, you'll eventually have to give the residents of DC full representation as well.
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 500/4700
EXP: 21510628
For next: 326034

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1239 days
Last activity: 1036 days
#18 Posted on 18.10.02 1154.56
Reposted on: 18.10.09 1159.11

    Originally posted by Scorpio

    But remember, if you want everyone to be able to fully participate, you'll eventually have to give the residents of DC full representation as well.



Only if they become a state. Otherwise what's the point(we also addressed this point recently in the annex Canada thread but it needed to be restated).
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 188/1759
EXP: 4913153
For next: 79717

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1285 days
Last activity: 51 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#19 Posted on 18.10.02 1155.14
Reposted on: 18.10.09 1159.12
    Originally posted by Fletch


    See, I do have a problem with that. While the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, the Voting Rights Act, and MANY similar documents are good in intent, they were written, in fact, by men. These are not holy documents, and they can be wrong in some aspect!
    Who is to say that there is something in the Bill of Rights can't be changed? Granted, I think if it WERE changed, it would have to be done very carefully, so that the end result is better than what we have now.
    When the authors of those documents were alive and working, they were trying to fix a broken system. I think that the current system is on the verge of breaking (if not already). The Constitution is an outdated document, the government it outlines is full of corrupt, slimy individuals who care about nothing more than their own pockets and power (on both sides), and this supposedly malleable writ is now frozen because people take it as holy.
    The whole "Right to vote, no matter what" was indeed a noble idea, I just think it was misguided. I don't think that anyone's right to vote should be taken away, I just think that the PRIVELEDGE of voting should be limited to those who can demonstrate that they would exercise the right in a responsible matter. I mean, you get fired for making bad decisions at work- why can't a voter be held accountable for their decision? And you know what? Anyone who wants to vote would be able to with a little effort. That is all I am asking!




      This is the law of the land, dontcha know. If you don't like it you may feel free to leave. Where have I heard that before?


    You have heard THAT particular phrase in reference to people who seem to hate America- believes it is the root of evil in the world, and who think that anything done against us is our own fault, and that we should grin and bear the attack. I see a problem in the way this country is run, and in the TRADITION of great Americans, I am suggesting change, and inviting open and honest debate. I love it here- I will stay. Thanks :)




      After all, he earned it. He pays taxes.


    Good point!



      Who doesn't remember Rush blantantly endorsing Bush for numberless shows, without giving equal time to Gore?


    Clearly you have never HEARD Rush Limbaugh. The difference between Rosie and Rush is that Rush DOES offer equal time. He invites callers who are Liberal to call into his show and debate him. On many occasions he extends open invitations to Democrats to come on his show and discuss their position. At the same time, Rush will criticize a position, and invite those who disagree with him to call and explain their side. That IS equal time. Rosie spent an entire show INSTRUCTING her viewers that Gore was the choice- against the express wishes of her network. Because of that show, her network was forced to give Bush equal time (the equivalent of 30 minutes of mid-day airtime), something they did not want to do.

    And as far as trumping the Consititution- Why not? It is supposed to be a "Living Document." Why can't we change it?


    (edited by Pool-Boy on 18.10.02 1007)
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 688/2105
EXP: 6580213
For next: 70477

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 6 hours
#20 Posted on 18.10.02 1323.40
Reposted on: 18.10.09 1327.34
You have heard THAT particular phrase in reference to people who seem to hate America- believes it is the root of evil in the world, and who think that anything done against us is our own fault, and that we should grin and bear the attack. I see a problem in the way this country is run, and in the TRADITION of great Americans, I am suggesting change, and inviting open and honest debate. I love it here- I will stay. Thanks :)

You know, any time us liberals criticize the way this country is run (or who runs it) you guys sure don't see that as "Tradition of great americans suggesting change and inviting an open an honest debate."

As for Rosie, let me get this straight:

The network didn't want Rosie to give Al 30 minutes of time.
Rosie then pimped Gore for 30 minutes.
The network then gave Bush 30 minutes of time.

This doesn't mean the MEDIA is liberal. This means ROSIE O'DONNEL is liberal. Rosie and Phil Donahue are not "the media," as you guys seem to think.

I have listened to Rush. I'll admit he's gotten somewhat better about not being SO one-sided in the past few years. But if you think he gives "equal time" to Dems, you're crazy. I mean, he as the host is on for the majority of the time, and he's pretty damn far right. That means the majority of the show is a far-right guy spouting off. The fact that he lets Democrats call in to his show doesn't mean it's suddenly "fair and balanced." Well, maybe in Fox News world.
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: PETA Getting Theirs...
Next thread: Sen. Wellstone killed in plane crash
Previous thread: CNN semi-stupidity
(1997 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - What the Iraqi civilians can teach the AmericansRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.235 seconds.