Amendments

[wybob]

Here is an idea, something that my son said to me the other day. He said that you should not be eligible to vote if you are on the government tit, conflict of interest, so why not attach a conflict of interest amendment to all of these BS pro gun control bills, or these BS gay rights bills, or these BS immagration bills, what do you think, lets hear it.

 

[doggin coyotes]

Works for me.

 

[Mr Potato Head]

Makes too much sense. I've always said you shouldn't be able to vote unless you pay or have paid taxes for a minimum number of years. It's your money so why not? There are truly disabled people that should be provided for but the system is out of control.

The deadbeats are calling the shots right now.

 

[Widow maker 223]

I agree all around.

 

[Osti]

Aaaah, NO.

So anyone that gets any type of assistance from the State or Federal Government would not get to vote, or just certain types of assistance? Who gets to decide which benefits and/or subsidies disqualifies you to vote? Does that include farmers, students, small business, big business, bankers, unemployed, unions, contractors, veterans, Medicare recipients, etc. etc.? The list is endless.

IMHO, there are two kinds of people in America, The ones for the Constitution and the ones that are against. Intended or not, your sons idea leans to the wrong side.

Remember that the Constitution and all the Bill of Rights are to protect the minority from the majority. Meaning, whichever group that has the majority vote, can't change them to fit their ideology. That is the genius of a Constitutional Republic over a true Democracy. That is why America is so great and better than everyone else.

The problem is that every group tries to backdoor their agendas to curb our rights with new laws, regulation and taxes. This is why the fight never ends to protect our rights from the non-believers.

 

[wybob]

Let me say it this way, you put something in the pot, you get some stew, you dont contribute, no stew for you.

 

[larr]

Quote: Remember that the Constitution and all the Bill of Rights are to protect the minority from the majority. Meaning, whichever group that has the majority vote, can't change them to fit their ideology

How's that working out working out for ya??? I don't know about you but I see the takers (the majority) out voting the givers (minority) in the past 2 presidential elections.

 

[Osti]

Originally Posted By: larr

How's that working out working out for ya??? I don't know about you but I see the takers (the majority) out voting the givers (minority) in the past 2 presidential elections.

Not too well is it. I agree, this administration is the worst we've ever had, and the "Stick it to the man" tour continues. It's really gonna hurt when Obamacare kicks in, and if the King raises the Fedral minimum wage, it will destroy our already weak economy.


You forgot to read this part.

Originally Posted By: Osti

The problem is that every group tries to backdoor their agendas to curb our rights with new laws, regulation and taxes. This is why the fight never ends to protect our rights from the non-believers.


wybob's sugestion to take away someones Constitutional rights away is no different then the things the Left is trying to do, and is un-American. There are solutions to the problem of all the takers but that's not one. The main objective now is to stop all the anti 2nd Amendment BS by the Feds and in all the Lib controlled States, then we need to figure out how to win the next election in order to stop all the other madness.

Originally Posted By: wybob

Let me say it this way, you put something in the pot, you get some stew, you dont contribute, no stew for you.

Governing with a heavy fist doesn't work. You need to change the way people think. Make them proud to be a contibuter and ashamed of being a taker, like America used to be. With all the class warfare, entitelment, tax the sucssesfull, gun nut, you didn't build that propaganda the left distributes, it's going to be really hard to fix. I am afaid that by the time the takers and their enablers see the light, this country is going to be ruins.

 

[dogcatcher]

Let the government take the rights away from one group and soon there will be another group that will lose the right to vote, and then another. That almost sounds like what Nazi Germany did, one group at a time.

 

[wybob]

How about our rights, that they are feverishly attacking as we discuss this, who's rights should be infringed, our current liberal democrtic elite are employing every tactic they can come up with to enroll as many as possible on a wide range of government handouts, and we all know why, and they know we know why. Strange that they want to disarm us, at what point do we finally realize that we that provide for those who do nothing but take, are becomeing more and more enslaved by the tax man.

 

[coyote_reaper]

I think we all know which group the idea was intended for. While I agree that if your most laborious undertaking for any given month is walking to the mailbox to get your check you shouldn't have a say in running the country, I also agree that it is a very treacherous trend to start. As was pointed out, government assistance should be shameful. Stupid is supposed to hurt. When the government is willing to cover the tab for the 'dumb' a person creates in their personal life, there's no pain. How do we all know not to grab an electric fence? Because we got shocked. Immediate on the spot recalibration. Or if you're like me you thought it would be fun to try to pee over one of them when you were four. That [beeep] didn't happen twice. Point is, failure should hurt. That has been removed from our society on so many levels by bleeding heart libs that now we have this mess and not the slightest idea how to correct it.