I’ll be the first. NO. Sorry to tell you but women (in case you didn’t know) think very differently from men. They seek safety and look for emotional validation. Baaaad for being in charge. This is just my opinion.
What you said is very true. Add to that that God said the man is the head of the home. And the fact that anything with two heads is a freak. His vote alone should be the only vote for the family. And single women are “covered” by their fathers.
This is partly why the wars and turmoil that resulted from them happened. Women in the work force. The destruction of the family. And the subsequent fatherless children from the woman’s “independence”.
Jesus is coming soon and will make everything as it should be. But, there will be hell on earth for a short time just before that happens. Because the majority of mankind has decided they don’t need God or His rule in their lives.
Blessings:-}
Man’s ethics, values, norms and standards may change. But, God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
Blessings:-}
TampaRed
November 16, 2017 9:01 pm
I can’t listen to the video currently because I have two hostile women in the next room but NO they should not be allowed to vote.
However,men who do not work and pay taxes should not be able to vote either.
This. Limit voting to men who actually contribute. I would also limit voting to a much narrower age band, and end it past a certain age – people get senile, attitudes change radically, and many of them stop caring about the future because they won’t be part of it.
Voting for productive working men, with undivided loyalties, between the ages of 25 and 60.
Yeah, baby. Cuz once you hit 61, most people become senile.
Idiotic.
YOU are henceforth disqualified from ever voting again … by your own standard. People with shit-for-brains are automatically considered senile.
Vixen Vic
November 16, 2017 9:14 pm
Of course, only landowners were allowed to vote when the country started. But not everyone paid taxes.
But now, there is no one that pays no taxes. What about sales taxes and gas taxes, and the federal, state and local taxes on your utility bills, not to mention regulatory charges, etc? Everyone pays taxes, even kids who buy toys.
To be honest, as a female, I don’t care if I have the right to vote or not. I don’t vote now (anymore). On top of that, I would love to go back to when women didn’t have to work after marriage. Many women I know feel that way. But you would have to get rid of the Federal Reserve before that could happen.
Women do not have to work after marriage. If, and a big if, the husband is not a piece of shit. A man provides for his family. It takes sacrifice and a commitment to live debt free and to abide to a budget. It also means saying no to your wife and children when it comes to things you can’t afford. Hard, but doable. The result is a happier wife, and better children.
Here’s what you would do if you wanted to defeat the post Cold War America. You would convince the girls there was really nothing very special about motherhood; in fact, it is like a cold and you can just get over it with the right medical procedure.
Then, you would tell them the reason they have been forced to have babies is because the men are too busy being all manly and should be more feminine. You know. Feelings and that stuff.
Then, when their men turned into a bunch of gendertwistedmensisters, you would remind them that the old dude at the grocery store used to touch his thing when little girls walked by.
And then you might open Womens Studies Departments at colleges and call it “education.”
Katze im Sack
November 16, 2017 9:38 pm
Fun fact: Most families need not bother to vote. Usually it’s like this: Dad votes this, Mom votes that, and the kids vote for whatever fad of the moment, basically all canceling out each other’s votes. Might as well all take a walk along the river on election day.
Dad (who else) should get the family to vote as a bloc, all else is just wasted. Like your vote always is, just ask George (Carlin, that is).
Sack- Don’t leave you are on my side, pretty soon they will be asking if men should be allowed to vote!
hardscrabble farmer
November 16, 2017 9:39 pm
Democracy is perhaps the worst political system ever devised, so my opinion doesn’t really count on this one. I tend to side with the original limitations of the Founders if you’ve got your heart set on the whole election thing.
That being said:
One vote per household, property owners only. No one on any form of government salary or assistance should be allowed to vote, active duty military being the only exception.
If there are women who qualify based on that criteria then let them vote.
Red hair – like blond hair, blue and green eyes, etc – is controlled by a recessive gene so enjoy it while you can before the entire world is homogenous with black hair, brown eyes and Mulatto skin…and an average IQ around 85. Of course, that will mean the end of Western Civilzation, not much diversity and global poverty…and the loss of beauty and grace.
Nicely said. Especially about democracy. Although I’m sure there are worse systems. At least at the start, democracy is fairly good IF we have a good document to start with.??
Why do you make exemptions for military folk? Because YOU were in the military. Why only property owners? Because YOU own property.
As brilliantly noted below, it’s all about self interest and YOUR brazen display of self-interests are a perfect example.
Therefore, you WILL vote for those candidates who you think will benefit your life on the farm …. fuck all those pesky non-land owners. Gee, you’re such a swell guy.
You make the assumption that just because someone owns land (skin in the game) that they suddenly become … what? Rational? Intelligent? Knowledgeable? As if there aren’t dumbfuk Dipshit landowners amongst us, who have no business voting. Hahaha.
Look, I said it at the top, I think democracies are a terrible form of government, they always lead to corruption and to the theft of material goods from the productive in order to placate the masses.
It’s called skin in the game for a reason. A person who has his life on the line in the service of many has given up numerous rights, he ought to be given a voice in how he may be used via the ballot. The same holds true for property owners. They cannot get up and move on a whim and they have a stake in their communities making their decisions a great deal more mature than someone who has no investment in place.
The question was asked, I answered. Don’t like the answer, come up with a better one.
You wrote-
“As brilliantly noted below, it’s all about self interest and YOUR brazen display of self-interests are a perfect example.
Therefore, you WILL vote for those candidates who you think will benefit your life on the farm …. fuck all those pesky non-land owners. Gee, you’re such a swell guy.”
You’ve made a lot of assumptions in that statement starting with the one where I don’t give a fuck about other people who don’t own land. My children don’t own land, you think that’s how I feel about them? You may be an asshole, but you certainly aren’t stupid. Yes, self-interest is absolutely part of it, why else would you ask people to vote? So they can articulate what those interests are. I think that some people demonstrate better decision making abilities than others and one of the ways to determine that is what they accomplish in life. A person who builds a homestead and keeps it well managed and raises a family is more likely to make sound decisions than a homeless itinerant who lives of the tax revenues collected from taxpayers. If you don’t understand that then I can’t really help you. I’d probably add quite a few more caveats if it were up to me, but it isn’t, it’s left up to the machinations of people without a moral compass who derive their power from promises made to the bottom feeders who outnumber the productive. That’s why it’s a bad system.
Sometimes the rational end of things goes out the window here. Mind you I think sometimes it goes out the window just so the shit will fly. That’s just a guess though… your position is well stated and sensible.
There are core fundamental rights that may not be overidden by a vote but that doesn’t mean everyone should vote.
I was about to mention the idea of “skin in the game” and then saw where a comment along those lines took the preverts here at TBP. Which proves you can turn a comic into an agrarian philosopher but you cannot turn an economic genius into a joker.
So I will simply say I agree with the Farmer. Surprise. For the umpteenth time and grudgingly on some recently reviewed material. Let me just say I once knew a guy who controlled a telescope at or near the South Pole. For a period of about a week, I got access to a feed that made no sense then. It does now.
I have decided my bunny balls in seasoned quinoa is not as funny as I had hoped. I still hope to make someone laugh.
Vodka
November 16, 2017 9:39 pm
Women desire safety and security above all else. Allowing them to vote means they will instinctively want the State to play the role of husband. It was women voters who were the deciding factor in the election of the fools who currently rule over us.
But good luck trying to repeal the 19th Amendment now. End Times, baby! And we’ve got front row seats for the show.
Brian Reilly
November 16, 2017 9:41 pm
No, women should not be allowed to vote.
mark branham
November 16, 2017 10:26 pm
Moot question… who the hell believes voting changes anything… used to. But then the elites passed the federal reserve act making debt-money the monetary standard . Debt-money makes serfs of us all while the elites live off the interest we create every time we “borrow” from a bank. How does a society survive if banks own all the money while we own all the debt!
Short answer – it won’t.
Zarathustra
November 16, 2017 11:00 pm
I think the best form of government is a wise king.
Not that it matters, but not according to Gawds Woid.
When da Joos clamored for their first king, Gawd was heart broken and issued a warning;
Heartbreak:
“But when they said, “Give us a king to lead us,” this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the Lord. And the Lord told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king.”
Warning!!!
‘This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use. He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”
Gawd’s Woid is 100% correct in this instance. The above clusterfuk …. THATS what voting gets you, whether for a King, or President.
Who said the Bible wasn’t awesome… oh yeah that wuz me.. anyhoo,
So Gawd gets butt hurt once scorned.
Then warns but is not listened to.
Turns out he is right..Who knew!
And Now when he is needed most.
Comes thru with his fuck you…
Only honest people should vote. We just need a shit test to prove honesty…
I propose that we only let people who admit to pulling the baloney pony or paddling the pink canoe be the voting class. Cuz everybuddy knows that the’re only two types of people in this werld.
rinzie,they do not have braille ballots,you better stop that–you once posted a pic of yourself and your brow was very furrowed-that’s just the beginning–
when you going across the pond?we want lots of pics,but not of you–
Leave next Thursday. Have to Fly thru Boston so here is hoping I get thru Homeland Security!
I got a new camera so there should be lots of pics and I promise none of me…
Realestatepup
November 17, 2017 1:00 am
Personally, anyone with no “skin in the game” should not be allowed to vote. That was the primary reason women were not allowed to vote, they historically were not allowed to own property, and even the inheritance laws were skewed towards male heirs. Going farther back, women were actually considered a type of property of their husbands, and decisions they made, bad or good, were ultimately the responsibility of their husbands.
Of course throughout the ages women were also considered to be weak-minded, emotional creatures that were incapable of rational though and decision making. Do I agree? Not as a blanket decision. Yes, women and men are emotionally different, but that doesn’t mean women are incapable of rational decision making.
Women have led countless countries, one of the best examples, in my opinion, is Queen Elizabeth. She ruled over England and the country prospered, experienced religious tolerance and financial growth. I temper this with the fact that she did have advisers that she LISTENED TOO, as any good ruler would, male or female.
Margaret Thatcher is another example.
Today’s “modern” woman has access to the same education as a man. What she makes of it is up to her. To complain that we have less opportunity is ridiculous. It’s simply not true. Are there more men in the sciences? Yes. Why? Probably too much to go into here. Even still it may be that families treat, even on a subliminal or subconscious level, their sons and daughters differently. Boys are expected to be good at math, good at science. So that could be a self-fulfilling prophesy. Who knows.
But I am digressing here.
My point was that it’s irrelevant who has the vote if the voter votes for more “stuff” to be given to them, be they male or female.
If you never work a day in your life, yet you can go to the polls and vote for more of someone’s else’s stuff to be given to you in the form of welfare, how is that a good thing? To what advantage is this to anyone except yourself?
Even seniors vote to keep the SS payments coming, regardless of the cost.
Student’s vote to keep the college grant money coming.
Wall street votes to keep the legislation in their favor.
Women vote to keep abortion legal.
We all have our own agenda whether we want to admit it or not. Can anyone say they truly vote selflessly? For the good of the many?
I doubt it.
Realestatepup, people vote to keep Social Security payments because that’s what they were promised by the government and what many based their retirement lives on. And the government took money from those under retirement age to pay for it, who didn’t seem to mind because they were promised the same thing. (My 86-year-old mother is a prime example). They believed it was all supposed to go into an account and gain interest to pay for their retirement. They were basically sold a ponzi scheme but didn’t realize it at the time.
Now people are paying in who may never see anything from it. That’s what happens when people trust government promises. Same thing with state pensions. I think I was in my mid 30s when I realized what was happening with Social Security (its going broke). You have to start saving for retirement when you’re young and keep at it, as if Social Security doesn’t exist, because it may not by the time you reach retirement age. But the people today who are on Social Security depend on it, paid into it, and that’s what they were promised. So I can’t blame them for voting to keep it.
Penforce
November 17, 2017 2:30 am
Well I went and married one of those red heads. If you ain’t gonna let her vote, then you come on over and tell her yourself. I’m going to the pub for a beer. Call me if you need me to bring the first aid kit.
art,
thanks for posting that-now if i could only get the women in my life to watch it–
after i watched it i clicked on one of the other videos there–
i’m posting it here as a public service to all young marrieds so as to shorten the learning curve we older guys had to go thru as newlyweds–
There is NOTHING that can be done to eliminate the worst aspect of voting … that people always vote for their own self interests. If you have any ideas how to accomplish this, I’ll listen.
But, it can be minimized.
IQ tests.
Seriously. Sure, smart people can be dumbasses … for example, voting for Bernie. But, one would assume that smart people would at least make an INFORMED decision. Isn’t that infinitely better than what we have today … a bunch of Dumbfuks pulling the lever?
If you can’t find Kansas on a map (about one third of Americans) should they be allowed to vote? No! Should people Mark Dice interviews be allowed to vote? NO!!! People of Walmart? Hell no!
I’m open to the actual cutoff.
Maybe an IQ of 105? That would pretty much eliminate most Kneegrows, people in Kentucky, and …. women (according to many here, lol). We all win!!
TampaRed
November 17, 2017 9:38 am
One vote per household and at least one person in the home must have a job or investments that support the household.
The husband and wife can hash out who gets the vote.
Adult kids,grandparents-no vote if they do not have their own household.
Much of this goes back to money printing-this would not be such an issue if we lived within our means,and w/o the Fed to subsidize us we would have to live within our means.
Boat Guy
November 17, 2017 9:52 am
The indeciveness Of a large percentage of women creates this question regarding the battle of the sexes . Many times I have experienced this first hand . She is in the store wants something but is not sure about style price quality what ever , after exhausting herself waisting time effort gasoline she returns to the original store only to find it is sold out . Never thinking here now get it and done . No decision is generally the worst decision .
Look at Hillary Clinton , in a Sci/Fi movie she would be a shape shifter LOL
Voting requires thought and planing and the ability to hold those elected feet to the fire . Frederica Wilson , Maxine Waters , Diane Feinstein , Elizabeth Warren all agree and most men I know see them as unrealistic and foolish .
Women voting is a fact of life unless Islam takes over the US . So VIVA LA DIFFERENCE
overthecliff
November 17, 2017 10:07 am
Only people who pay taxes should be allowed to vote. Not to include sales taxes or value added taxes.
If your retired on social security do you lose your voting rights . If you are payed off from your job and lost all your income do you lose your voting rights ???
Maybe retired people can be 3/5 of a person to vote , that worked so well for the institution of slavery
Maggie
November 17, 2017 4:42 pm
Stucky, what about the doctrine of Prima Facia racism? If a standard restricts access by all or most of a color or race, it is Racist On Its Face… end of that standard.
james the deplorable wanderer
November 17, 2017 7:12 pm
I proposed using math tests to become qualified for life actions.
Voting, marriage, parenthood, teaching careers, government service, everything.
That would probably create a black market for “test answers”, but simply changing the questions on a quarterly basis would defeat most of that.
But yes, qualifications for voting (and everything else) along with;
Property ownership (including trademen / shops as land ownership, but not to exceed one vote per individual)
Investments in businesses
but NOT counting businesses (or corporations) as people; severe penalties for contributing cash to a political campaign as a company
Military service (with good conduct discharge)
Not sure if anything else should qualify
And NO ONE working for a government paycheck or accepting welfare / transfer payments can vote as long as they are accepting them
AnarchoPagan
November 17, 2017 7:23 pm
If it involves picking someone else’s pocket, nobody should be allowed to vote.
Vixen Vic
November 17, 2017 11:29 pm
What this all boils down to is voting laws won’t change until tax laws change and the Federal Reserve is eliminated. End of story.
I’ll be the first. NO. Sorry to tell you but women (in case you didn’t know) think very differently from men. They seek safety and look for emotional validation. Baaaad for being in charge. This is just my opinion.
What you said is very true. Add to that that God said the man is the head of the home. And the fact that anything with two heads is a freak. His vote alone should be the only vote for the family. And single women are “covered” by their fathers.
This is partly why the wars and turmoil that resulted from them happened. Women in the work force. The destruction of the family. And the subsequent fatherless children from the woman’s “independence”.
Jesus is coming soon and will make everything as it should be. But, there will be hell on earth for a short time just before that happens. Because the majority of mankind has decided they don’t need God or His rule in their lives.
Blessings:-}
Base your opinions on Bronze Age thinking? Nice, you pathetic fuck.
You forgot to mention that God … always a “He” in Christianity … has a cock.
Also, that God created cocks (Adam) before cunts (Eve).
These are two Yuge reasons why womenz shouldn’t vote.
Man’s ethics, values, norms and standards may change. But, God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
Blessings:-}
I can’t listen to the video currently because I have two hostile women in the next room but NO they should not be allowed to vote.
However,men who do not work and pay taxes should not be able to vote either.
This. Limit voting to men who actually contribute. I would also limit voting to a much narrower age band, and end it past a certain age – people get senile, attitudes change radically, and many of them stop caring about the future because they won’t be part of it.
Voting for productive working men, with undivided loyalties, between the ages of 25 and 60.
Yeah, baby. Cuz once you hit 61, most people become senile.
Idiotic.
YOU are henceforth disqualified from ever voting again … by your own standard. People with shit-for-brains are automatically considered senile.
Of course, only landowners were allowed to vote when the country started. But not everyone paid taxes.
But now, there is no one that pays no taxes. What about sales taxes and gas taxes, and the federal, state and local taxes on your utility bills, not to mention regulatory charges, etc? Everyone pays taxes, even kids who buy toys.
To be honest, as a female, I don’t care if I have the right to vote or not. I don’t vote now (anymore). On top of that, I would love to go back to when women didn’t have to work after marriage. Many women I know feel that way. But you would have to get rid of the Federal Reserve before that could happen.
Women do not have to work after marriage. If, and a big if, the husband is not a piece of shit. A man provides for his family. It takes sacrifice and a commitment to live debt free and to abide to a budget. It also means saying no to your wife and children when it comes to things you can’t afford. Hard, but doable. The result is a happier wife, and better children.
Oh but married women who don’t have 9-5 do work. A LOT! Being a wife, mother, and homemaker is no slacker job.
I meant outside of the home. There’s enough work at home to do without trying to work outside of the home as well, even with the husband’s help.
Excellent!!
A better question of the day ….. “SHOULD you vote?”
In fact, give me second ….
Well, I was going to post a QOTD — ‘SHOULD you vote?’
But, it’s been covered here many times. Here’s just three:
Do you really think your vote counts?
Doug Casey: Top 5 reasons to not vote.
Futility of representative government.
Yeah you should vote. Which is better Pepsi or Diet Pepsi?
Diogenes, that’s about what it amounts to. When the game is rigged, why play?:
Here’s what you would do if you wanted to defeat the post Cold War America. You would convince the girls there was really nothing very special about motherhood; in fact, it is like a cold and you can just get over it with the right medical procedure.
Then, you would tell them the reason they have been forced to have babies is because the men are too busy being all manly and should be more feminine. You know. Feelings and that stuff.
Then, when their men turned into a bunch of gendertwistedmensisters, you would remind them that the old dude at the grocery store used to touch his thing when little girls walked by.
And then you might open Womens Studies Departments at colleges and call it “education.”
Fun fact: Most families need not bother to vote. Usually it’s like this: Dad votes this, Mom votes that, and the kids vote for whatever fad of the moment, basically all canceling out each other’s votes. Might as well all take a walk along the river on election day.
Dad (who else) should get the family to vote as a bloc, all else is just wasted. Like your vote always is, just ask George (Carlin, that is).
And no, wimin should not vote at all.
Spell Women properly and I may agree with you Katze
Sorry MC. I got some real bad news today. I’m in a foul mood and had a few drinks too much.
You mind your fucking manners around the decent visitors.
Sure I will.
Adios TBP. Nobody will miss me anyway. No, I’m not going to let the door hit my behind on the way out.
too funny..
Wow. What power is this?
I didn’t think you were being that harsh Maggie..
Shame Sack couldn’t stick around but if that is all that it takes to shoo him/her/zir away them auf windowshine Katze.
Die Katze ist AUS der Sack!!
Translation: The cat is OUT of the bag!
Nice job Martha. Scaring away good volk. Are you proud of yourself? Are you???
Sack- Don’t leave you are on my side, pretty soon they will be asking if men should be allowed to vote!
Democracy is perhaps the worst political system ever devised, so my opinion doesn’t really count on this one. I tend to side with the original limitations of the Founders if you’ve got your heart set on the whole election thing.
That being said:
One vote per household, property owners only. No one on any form of government salary or assistance should be allowed to vote, active duty military being the only exception.
If there are women who qualify based on that criteria then let them vote.
Indeed, show some skin…
How’s this? Too much?
[img
[/img]
just right…God, I love a red head..
[img]https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.eQ0feB-SjWGsbwyop76fXQDGEs&pid=15.1&P=0&w=300&h=300[/img]
[img
[/img]
[img]https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.tTyGo4FmYoGeZx43cimuYgEsDI&pid=15.1&P=0&w=276&h=185[/img]
last one..
[img]https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.H8B8NlVCVpxqOHTdfXYQsQEsEs&pid=15.1&P=0&w=300&h=300[/img]
[img
[/img]
Love the chick with the sword!
Red hair – like blond hair, blue and green eyes, etc – is controlled by a recessive gene so enjoy it while you can before the entire world is homogenous with black hair, brown eyes and Mulatto skin…and an average IQ around 85. Of course, that will mean the end of Western Civilzation, not much diversity and global poverty…and the loss of beauty and grace.
What a sad idea to think of.
Nicely said. Especially about democracy. Although I’m sure there are worse systems. At least at the start, democracy is fairly good IF we have a good document to start with.??
I agree. If you don’t have skin in the game your voice doesn’t mean shit. Tax paying landowners only should have a vote.
What about all the other taxes people pay, such as income tax? Taxation without representation!
Churchill said “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”
” … property owners only.”
More idiocy!
Why do you make exemptions for military folk? Because YOU were in the military. Why only property owners? Because YOU own property.
As brilliantly noted below, it’s all about self interest and YOUR brazen display of self-interests are a perfect example.
Therefore, you WILL vote for those candidates who you think will benefit your life on the farm …. fuck all those pesky non-land owners. Gee, you’re such a swell guy.
You make the assumption that just because someone owns land (skin in the game) that they suddenly become … what? Rational? Intelligent? Knowledgeable? As if there aren’t dumbfuk Dipshit landowners amongst us, who have no business voting. Hahaha.
good one Stucky!
I’d throw in my two cents but my Father gave up on Farming back in the 50’s…
Look, I said it at the top, I think democracies are a terrible form of government, they always lead to corruption and to the theft of material goods from the productive in order to placate the masses.
It’s called skin in the game for a reason. A person who has his life on the line in the service of many has given up numerous rights, he ought to be given a voice in how he may be used via the ballot. The same holds true for property owners. They cannot get up and move on a whim and they have a stake in their communities making their decisions a great deal more mature than someone who has no investment in place.
The question was asked, I answered. Don’t like the answer, come up with a better one.
You wrote-
“As brilliantly noted below, it’s all about self interest and YOUR brazen display of self-interests are a perfect example.
Therefore, you WILL vote for those candidates who you think will benefit your life on the farm …. fuck all those pesky non-land owners. Gee, you’re such a swell guy.”
You’ve made a lot of assumptions in that statement starting with the one where I don’t give a fuck about other people who don’t own land. My children don’t own land, you think that’s how I feel about them? You may be an asshole, but you certainly aren’t stupid. Yes, self-interest is absolutely part of it, why else would you ask people to vote? So they can articulate what those interests are. I think that some people demonstrate better decision making abilities than others and one of the ways to determine that is what they accomplish in life. A person who builds a homestead and keeps it well managed and raises a family is more likely to make sound decisions than a homeless itinerant who lives of the tax revenues collected from taxpayers. If you don’t understand that then I can’t really help you. I’d probably add quite a few more caveats if it were up to me, but it isn’t, it’s left up to the machinations of people without a moral compass who derive their power from promises made to the bottom feeders who outnumber the productive. That’s why it’s a bad system.
Reminder- Stucky voted for Trump because he was going to keep us out of further wars.
Did he not vote his particular interest?
Rand called it “Rational” self interest.
Sometimes the rational end of things goes out the window here. Mind you I think sometimes it goes out the window just so the shit will fly. That’s just a guess though… your position is well stated and sensible.
There are core fundamental rights that may not be overidden by a vote but that doesn’t mean everyone should vote.
I was about to mention the idea of “skin in the game” and then saw where a comment along those lines took the preverts here at TBP. Which proves you can turn a comic into an agrarian philosopher but you cannot turn an economic genius into a joker.
So I will simply say I agree with the Farmer. Surprise. For the umpteenth time and grudgingly on some recently reviewed material. Let me just say I once knew a guy who controlled a telescope at or near the South Pole. For a period of about a week, I got access to a feed that made no sense then. It does now.
Yeah, real surprise there. Of course you agree with HF … you also own land!!
My god! The absolute validity of people voting mostly based on self interests is on full display here.
Maggie, you would vote for Bernie if he promised Bunny Nuts in every pot! Don’t deny it.
I have decided my bunny balls in seasoned quinoa is not as funny as I had hoped. I still hope to make someone laugh.
Women desire safety and security above all else. Allowing them to vote means they will instinctively want the State to play the role of husband. It was women voters who were the deciding factor in the election of the fools who currently rule over us.
But good luck trying to repeal the 19th Amendment now. End Times, baby! And we’ve got front row seats for the show.
No, women should not be allowed to vote.
Moot question… who the hell believes voting changes anything… used to. But then the elites passed the federal reserve act making debt-money the monetary standard . Debt-money makes serfs of us all while the elites live off the interest we create every time we “borrow” from a bank. How does a society survive if banks own all the money while we own all the debt!
Short answer – it won’t.
I think the best form of government is a wise king.
a king or a shah?
Not that it matters, but not according to Gawds Woid.
When da Joos clamored for their first king, Gawd was heart broken and issued a warning;
Heartbreak:
“But when they said, “Give us a king to lead us,” this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the Lord. And the Lord told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king.”
Warning!!!
‘This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use. He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”
Gawd’s Woid is 100% correct in this instance. The above clusterfuk …. THATS what voting gets you, whether for a King, or President.
Who said the Bible wasn’t awesome… oh yeah that wuz me.. anyhoo,
So Gawd gets butt hurt once scorned.
Then warns but is not listened to.
Turns out he is right..Who knew!
And Now when he is needed most.
Comes thru with his fuck you…
“Your god is insane” – gnostic telesti
stucky,there’s a big difference between a president and a king,even if some of the presidents do believe they should be king —
In a word……..NO.
Nor should anyone on the dole.
What a complete set of morans. (With the exception of Vixen Vic) Lets go back to the 17th century, that will fix everything. Praise Jeebus.
” Lets go back to the 17th century…”
Ok. But we keep indoor plumbing and “all the wings you can eat Tuesdays”. I likes my wings…
Francis- I like air conditioning while I take a dump , I say we keep that also. 🙂
Just while you take a dump?
Sometimes the cultural gap around here gets a little wide… 🙂
Bingo!!!
JOOs and women!!!
Get rid of, or subdue, those two and EVERYTHING will be A-OK!! They cause ALL our problems, dontchaknow??!!
Reductionist thinking taken to absurd levels.
Morans? You’re being too kind.
Speaking of skin in the game…
Only honest people should vote. We just need a shit test to prove honesty…
I propose that we only let people who admit to pulling the baloney pony or paddling the pink canoe be the voting class. Cuz everybuddy knows that the’re only two types of people in this werld.
Those who do. And those that deny doing it.
rinzie,they do not have braille ballots,you better stop that–you once posted a pic of yourself and your brow was very furrowed-that’s just the beginning–
when you going across the pond?we want lots of pics,but not of you–
Leave next Thursday. Have to Fly thru Boston so here is hoping I get thru Homeland Security!
I got a new camera so there should be lots of pics and I promise none of me…
Personally, anyone with no “skin in the game” should not be allowed to vote. That was the primary reason women were not allowed to vote, they historically were not allowed to own property, and even the inheritance laws were skewed towards male heirs. Going farther back, women were actually considered a type of property of their husbands, and decisions they made, bad or good, were ultimately the responsibility of their husbands.
Of course throughout the ages women were also considered to be weak-minded, emotional creatures that were incapable of rational though and decision making. Do I agree? Not as a blanket decision. Yes, women and men are emotionally different, but that doesn’t mean women are incapable of rational decision making.
Women have led countless countries, one of the best examples, in my opinion, is Queen Elizabeth. She ruled over England and the country prospered, experienced religious tolerance and financial growth. I temper this with the fact that she did have advisers that she LISTENED TOO, as any good ruler would, male or female.
Margaret Thatcher is another example.
Today’s “modern” woman has access to the same education as a man. What she makes of it is up to her. To complain that we have less opportunity is ridiculous. It’s simply not true. Are there more men in the sciences? Yes. Why? Probably too much to go into here. Even still it may be that families treat, even on a subliminal or subconscious level, their sons and daughters differently. Boys are expected to be good at math, good at science. So that could be a self-fulfilling prophesy. Who knows.
But I am digressing here.
My point was that it’s irrelevant who has the vote if the voter votes for more “stuff” to be given to them, be they male or female.
If you never work a day in your life, yet you can go to the polls and vote for more of someone’s else’s stuff to be given to you in the form of welfare, how is that a good thing? To what advantage is this to anyone except yourself?
Even seniors vote to keep the SS payments coming, regardless of the cost.
Student’s vote to keep the college grant money coming.
Wall street votes to keep the legislation in their favor.
Women vote to keep abortion legal.
We all have our own agenda whether we want to admit it or not. Can anyone say they truly vote selflessly? For the good of the many?
I doubt it.
Almost the best post here.
It’s ALWAYS about self interest! Bravo!! In fact, what decisions in life — beyond just voting — are not governed by self interests?
Which is my I’m perplexed by your comment — “anyone with no “skin in the game” should not be allowed to vote.”
What??? You mean to tell me that people with “skin in the game” DONT have self interests?? If anything, they have more skin in the game.
Realestatepup, people vote to keep Social Security payments because that’s what they were promised by the government and what many based their retirement lives on. And the government took money from those under retirement age to pay for it, who didn’t seem to mind because they were promised the same thing. (My 86-year-old mother is a prime example). They believed it was all supposed to go into an account and gain interest to pay for their retirement. They were basically sold a ponzi scheme but didn’t realize it at the time.
Now people are paying in who may never see anything from it. That’s what happens when people trust government promises. Same thing with state pensions. I think I was in my mid 30s when I realized what was happening with Social Security (its going broke). You have to start saving for retirement when you’re young and keep at it, as if Social Security doesn’t exist, because it may not by the time you reach retirement age. But the people today who are on Social Security depend on it, paid into it, and that’s what they were promised. So I can’t blame them for voting to keep it.
Well I went and married one of those red heads. If you ain’t gonna let her vote, then you come on over and tell her yourself. I’m going to the pub for a beer. Call me if you need me to bring the first aid kit.
art,
thanks for posting that-now if i could only get the women in my life to watch it–
after i watched it i clicked on one of the other videos there–
i’m posting it here as a public service to all young marrieds so as to shorten the learning curve we older guys had to go thru as newlyweds–
The Conjugal Rights Guide
[img]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ivsb79-h90[/img]
That was funny.
LOL
There is NOTHING that can be done to eliminate the worst aspect of voting … that people always vote for their own self interests. If you have any ideas how to accomplish this, I’ll listen.
But, it can be minimized.
IQ tests.
Seriously. Sure, smart people can be dumbasses … for example, voting for Bernie. But, one would assume that smart people would at least make an INFORMED decision. Isn’t that infinitely better than what we have today … a bunch of Dumbfuks pulling the lever?
If you can’t find Kansas on a map (about one third of Americans) should they be allowed to vote? No! Should people Mark Dice interviews be allowed to vote? NO!!! People of Walmart? Hell no!
I’m open to the actual cutoff.
Maybe an IQ of 105? That would pretty much eliminate most Kneegrows, people in Kentucky, and …. women (according to many here, lol). We all win!!
One vote per household and at least one person in the home must have a job or investments that support the household.
The husband and wife can hash out who gets the vote.
Adult kids,grandparents-no vote if they do not have their own household.
Much of this goes back to money printing-this would not be such an issue if we lived within our means,and w/o the Fed to subsidize us we would have to live within our means.
The indeciveness Of a large percentage of women creates this question regarding the battle of the sexes . Many times I have experienced this first hand . She is in the store wants something but is not sure about style price quality what ever , after exhausting herself waisting time effort gasoline she returns to the original store only to find it is sold out . Never thinking here now get it and done . No decision is generally the worst decision .
Look at Hillary Clinton , in a Sci/Fi movie she would be a shape shifter LOL
Voting requires thought and planing and the ability to hold those elected feet to the fire . Frederica Wilson , Maxine Waters , Diane Feinstein , Elizabeth Warren all agree and most men I know see them as unrealistic and foolish .
Women voting is a fact of life unless Islam takes over the US . So VIVA LA DIFFERENCE
Only people who pay taxes should be allowed to vote. Not to include sales taxes or value added taxes.
If your retired on social security do you lose your voting rights . If you are payed off from your job and lost all your income do you lose your voting rights ???
Maybe retired people can be 3/5 of a person to vote , that worked so well for the institution of slavery
Stucky, what about the doctrine of Prima Facia racism? If a standard restricts access by all or most of a color or race, it is Racist On Its Face… end of that standard.
I proposed using math tests to become qualified for life actions.
Voting, marriage, parenthood, teaching careers, government service, everything.
That would probably create a black market for “test answers”, but simply changing the questions on a quarterly basis would defeat most of that.
But yes, qualifications for voting (and everything else) along with;
Property ownership (including trademen / shops as land ownership, but not to exceed one vote per individual)
Investments in businesses
but NOT counting businesses (or corporations) as people; severe penalties for contributing cash to a political campaign as a company
Military service (with good conduct discharge)
Not sure if anything else should qualify
And NO ONE working for a government paycheck or accepting welfare / transfer payments can vote as long as they are accepting them
If it involves picking someone else’s pocket, nobody should be allowed to vote.
What this all boils down to is voting laws won’t change until tax laws change and the Federal Reserve is eliminated. End of story.