Monday, October 3, 2011

No Worky No Votey

Remember a few months ago when a handful of states had the audacity to propose they shouldn't have to welfare dopers (for those of you saying "Well, DUH!" keep in mind that in Indiana, Michigan & Illinois, you can draw SSI for being a doper or fagit)?
The vial & vitriol from various moochers'/looters' rights groups was as disgusting as it was voluminous, particularly from the NAA(S)CP, presumably since a sizable majority of the freeloader cotingent are of their ilk. Such would be rather malevolent toward Galt-in-Da-Box, as yours truly has an even better proposition that needs to be on every ballot initiative in the country: If you don't work, you don't vote! Lack of this policy has led to what we have now...FREELOADER NATION! An unsustainable leech Schtaat trillions in debt & going deeper by the minute. This would politically mute the two major kinds of moochers: Welfare whiners & trust-fund babies; who already have too much power and too little common sense - thanks in no small part to their doperism, drunkenness and perversion.
If only those who produce, and therefore pay for government have a say in how it's run, it will have a decidedly beneficial effect on the nation's future.

P.S: Any movement with "rights" at the end of it's name is almost always angling for political license to rob you!

4 comments:

Bob said...

As I recall, several of the founding fathers wanted a Constitutional clause to state that only mliltary veterans would have the right to vote.

Other founding fathers wanted only property owners to be voters.

You could join the military only if you were a citizen.

You could own property only if you were a citizen.

I would add to that by requiring that any person holding a public office ( at all levels) would have to be all three: Veteran, property owner, citizen.

To me, nothing else makes any sense.

texlahoma said...

Our town recently had a bond issue, it was going to raise property taxes by 30%. It doesn't seem right to me that non-property owners got to vote on it. Luckily there were enough property owners (of which I'm one) to defeat the measure.
So I know where you are coming from on this one.

I guess they could make it no vote if you are receiving government assistance. (Pretty much the same as you are saying, I guess.)

Ted Amadeus said...

That's how it aughtta be, Tex.

Bob, those concepts were bannished by the non-productive as "discrimination against the poor". I'm not for that, but I DO favor discrimination against the LAZY!

Bob said...

Ahhh... theres the rub...

Let enough of the poor vote and next thing you know they will have voted us into the exact situation we face today.

In my scenario, one can be dirt poor and propertyless and still vote... if they are a veteran.

Voting - to me -should be a privledge to be earned by a citizen, not a right to be given to one and all. Perhaps potential voters should be given a test to determine if they know anything about what the hell they are voting on.

Racist? Sexist? Too frigging bad. One thing for certain... the present system has failed us. We gotta do something different.