Yes, it's back to the property qualification, folks!!. I knew these guys wanted to turn the clock back, but not to the feudal system! I guess the message is: don't be poor...
Last edited by a moderator:
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Tea Party founder - restrict voting rights to property owners
- Thread starter Matt Black
- Start date
SpiritualMadMan
New Member
The site is blocked at work by Web Sense. So, 1. I couldn't read it. and 2. Doubt the veracity of the source.
That is, I tend to think it is a post to hurt Tea Party with disinformation than a real fully truthful article.
As for restricting voting to property Owners?
What kind of Property?
They can't even restrict voting to Citizens!!!!!
If I were going to restrict voting to a given group it would definately be Citizens!
If I were going to further restrict it. It would be to to people who Earned a wage *AND* Paid taxes on them.
That is, I tend to think it is a post to hurt Tea Party with disinformation than a real fully truthful article.
As for restricting voting to property Owners?
What kind of Property?
They can't even restrict voting to Citizens!!!!!
If I were going to restrict voting to a given group it would definately be Citizens!
If I were going to further restrict it. It would be to to people who Earned a wage *AND* Paid taxes on them.
What do you mean by taxpayers? Do you mean those who may not get paid enough to pay income tax but pay GST on their purchases?
Matt, nobody will take that article seriously. If this individual has a high level position with the 'Tea Party" then he will have to forfeit it after such a stupid remark, since no American will take utterances life that seriously...especially in a grass roots organization. It's utterly insane.
Oh so the Unemployed dont merit membership according to you & I guess neither do retired people or the disabled?
how bout the unemployed?
No. Different status.
Understand, I haven't worked out every detail (heck, this would never see the light of day--too many votes that wouldn't be bought, and too politically incorrect).
But I would expect that there's a way to demonstrably show one is seeking employment--maybe link it with unemployment benefits, or let it go a year, etc.
The easy call is the "chronic welfare recipients"--those who simply live off the public dole without any thought for self-sufficiency.
I dont think you can do that & maintain your status as a political party IE the US Citizenry. Unless of course you want to limit Tea Party status to being a private club.
All for it. And it's not feudalism.
And its privatization. Now your excluding certain groups. And thats OK but your now not a political party....your a club. Is that what your looking to do Aaron?
Perhaps if we could craft some other tests...like ability to sign your name, demonstrate that you give to a local church, can speak English, or show that you are a free person that would help too. Because in the land of the free we only want to count those worth counting...
The problem with welfare recipients voting is that they are going to vote for anyone who will give them more milk from the government teat. Reminds of the young lady who proclaimed that "Obama's going to pay my mortgage and put gas in my tank." It's disgusting and it's wrong the way the Democratic party panders to those with an entitlement mentality as if the government is the great sow in the sky sharing her milk with anyone who can vote her more power. The problem is that she is stealing the milk she is giving away from those who actually contribute to society.
But she can vote! There in lyes the rub & you cant get around it...LOL Our very constitution allows for this.
I will give you an example: We are neighbors & you are what I consider a political nincompoop. You fly the Tea Party Flag on your lawn & I cant stand the tea party. I call the cops to get you to remove the flag. We go to court.....guess what? You win because the Constitution as a 1st amendment right, you cant take away my right free expression & freedom of speech. Same thing apply s here. you might dislike her & her lifestyle but she has rights under the Constitution of the USA.
EWF, I am simply stating an opinion. I did not say it would fly according to the Constitution which by the way, gives me the right to express my opinion as much it gives welfare dead beats the right to vote our nation into the chaotic status of a third world country. Thank God illegal immigrants aren't allowed the right to vote or we would be on the super fast track to destruction as a nation.
SpiritualMadMan
New Member
What I said was pretty much tongue in check...
But, I am tired of the Vote Buying and Pandering to persons who have no intention of working for their life.
I think it was Paul said that if a man *won't* work he shouldn't eat.
Note, I didn't say couldn't work...
And, I didn't say couldn't honestly find a job...
But, there are a large number of persons (some of them highly paid doctors) who are committing fraud and drawing Government Monies.
A little hole in the belly is a good motivator.
Also, please note that my idea of Welfare Reform includes subsistance payments in addition to earnings. So, that up to a certain level working is a win-win situation.
But, for that to work the Basic Living Stipend has to be low enough to encourage people to work to gain a better life. (As opposed to having more children to increase their incomes)
Additionally, persons who are skilled and between jobs should have access to someone who will assist in their continuing search for better employment.
Lastly, having been unemployed myself for a very extended time because no one wanted to hire some one with my higher level of skills, it would help a great deal if employeres had a reason to hire a skilled person even temporarily.
In my case it was the fear that as soon as something better came along I'd be gone. True enough. But, some of those jobs stayed vacant anyway! And, I stayed unemployed even though willing to work at just about anything I was physically fit enough to do.
But, I am tired of the Vote Buying and Pandering to persons who have no intention of working for their life.
I think it was Paul said that if a man *won't* work he shouldn't eat.
Note, I didn't say couldn't work...
And, I didn't say couldn't honestly find a job...
But, there are a large number of persons (some of them highly paid doctors) who are committing fraud and drawing Government Monies.
A little hole in the belly is a good motivator.
Also, please note that my idea of Welfare Reform includes subsistance payments in addition to earnings. So, that up to a certain level working is a win-win situation.
But, for that to work the Basic Living Stipend has to be low enough to encourage people to work to gain a better life. (As opposed to having more children to increase their incomes)
Additionally, persons who are skilled and between jobs should have access to someone who will assist in their continuing search for better employment.
Lastly, having been unemployed myself for a very extended time because no one wanted to hire some one with my higher level of skills, it would help a great deal if employeres had a reason to hire a skilled person even temporarily.
In my case it was the fear that as soon as something better came along I'd be gone. True enough. But, some of those jobs stayed vacant anyway! And, I stayed unemployed even though willing to work at just about anything I was physically fit enough to do.
Here you bring up an excellent point, the Obama administration is not providing any type of intensive to hire the Unemployed. Let's see if the Republicans address it in January.
What if we make them, who have been here for a few years, legal citizens & tax their employment....then they would be productive citizens.