|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2010 8:21 pm
Das Rabble Rouser Fresnel Das Rabble Rouser ArmasTermin There needs to be a basic test taken before anyone can vote, to weed out the idiots and the lazy people (that tend to vote for certain individuals...) There's nothing I can say to make you feel better, Rommel. I hate stupid people too. No worries I've pretty well calmed down now. smile I agree about the test thing. I think they should use the basic test immigrants take to become a U.S. citizen. My senior year I had a government class and the citizenship test was the final exam. I got a 98% which was 2nd highest in the class. blaugh Seriously it's sad that so many people who were born and raised here would probably score less than a 50% on that test. Wow, you had someone beat you? First time through, without any of the material on the test being taught (it wasn't graded, it was just an FYI for our teacher's sake), I got a 93% (I think) and I was the only one who passed... by a long shot. The one I graded... the girl put "Jorq Warshingten" as almost every answer, EXCEPT THE ONES WHERE "GEORGE WASHINGTON" WOULD HAVE BEEN CORRECT. Still a 98 isn't bad. First time around as an FYI thing I got an 83 which is still considered passing. First time around most of the class got below 30% if I recall, but when we took the final nobody failed it and we had some pretty stupid people in the class. The teacher did a good job. I think my class of almost thirty had less than five people over the 50% mark. My classmates were STUPID. One of them was even a genuine SPED kid, I have no idea why she was in that class. We also had a thing where everyone had to run for president, and we chose who won by voting. After primaries and some culling, it was down to me and a friend. Everyone agrees they only voted for him because he needed the extra credit FAR more than I did. I guess I can't begrudge them that. xd
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2010 8:58 pm
That would have been a pretty cool project. The only projects I can remember was a power point on a random president drawn from a hat and one on a supreme court case. I got FDR out of the hat and I got to choose my own case so I took the case of Korematsu v. United States since it was WWII related.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 9:13 am
Fresnel ArmasTermin There needs to be a basic test taken before anyone can vote, to weed out the idiots and the lazy people (that tend to vote for certain individuals...) There's nothing I can say to make you feel better, Rommel. I hate stupid people too. Unfortunately, those have been illegal for a hundred years. No idea why... isn;t that sort of communism like? that only the "select few smart people" get to decide who leads the rest of the country? and eventually who trusts the gov't to determine who "passes" and who fails this test? eventually u would end up with a seemingly legally voted in dictator / regime... not trying to start a rage fest, but seriously?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 11:06 am
Maddness91 Fresnel ArmasTermin There needs to be a basic test taken before anyone can vote, to weed out the idiots and the lazy people (that tend to vote for certain individuals...) There's nothing I can say to make you feel better, Rommel. I hate stupid people too. Unfortunately, those have been illegal for a hundred years. No idea why... isn;t that sort of communism like? that only the "select few smart people" get to decide who leads the rest of the country? and eventually who trusts the gov't to determine who "passes" and who fails this test? eventually u would end up with a seemingly legally voted in dictator / regime... not trying to start a rage fest, but seriously? You know what the problem is? Nobody watches the watchers. Never has, never will. I'm starting to wonder if organized religion had the right idea, instilling a fear of Almighty God into the entire world... y'know, until it got twisted about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 4:13 pm
Maddness91 Fresnel ArmasTermin There needs to be a basic test taken before anyone can vote, to weed out the idiots and the lazy people (that tend to vote for certain individuals...) There's nothing I can say to make you feel better, Rommel. I hate stupid people too. Unfortunately, those have been illegal for a hundred years. No idea why... isn;t that sort of communism like? that only the "select few smart people" get to decide who leads the rest of the country? and eventually who trusts the gov't to determine who "passes" and who fails this test? eventually u would end up with a seemingly legally voted in dictator / regime... not trying to start a rage fest, but seriously? I don't mean an intelligence test, I mean a test to see if you have some modicum of knowledge of political workings. Stuff like having to name your states' senators, the political affiliations of the running candidates and a few issues of what they're standing for. One could be a complete idiot and still pass the test, but it would at least insure that voters know the bare minimum of what they're voting for. How is that communist? If you don't know what the ******** you're doing, why should the rest of the country suffer for your idiocy? You meaning the general idiot, not actually you, of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 4:37 pm
ArmasTermin Maddness91 Fresnel ArmasTermin There needs to be a basic test taken before anyone can vote, to weed out the idiots and the lazy people (that tend to vote for certain individuals...) There's nothing I can say to make you feel better, Rommel. I hate stupid people too. Unfortunately, those have been illegal for a hundred years. No idea why... isn;t that sort of communism like? that only the "select few smart people" get to decide who leads the rest of the country? and eventually who trusts the gov't to determine who "passes" and who fails this test? eventually u would end up with a seemingly legally voted in dictator / regime... not trying to start a rage fest, but seriously? I don't mean an intelligence test, I mean a test to see if you have some modicum of knowledge of political workings. Stuff like having to name your states' senators, the political affiliations of the running candidates and a few issues of what they're standing for. One could be a complete idiot and still pass the test, but it would at least insure that voters know the bare minimum of what they're voting for. How is that communist? If you don't know what the ******** you're doing, why should the rest of the country suffer for your idiocy? You meaning the general idiot, not actually you, of course. Did you ever hear the Howard Stern clip where one of their people went to Brooklyn or something and asked people if they support Obama's decision to [insert McCain's stance]? It was pre-election, and VERY telling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 5:55 pm
ArmasTermin I don't mean an intelligence test, I mean a test to see if you have some modicum of knowledge of political workings. Stuff like having to name your states' senators, the political affiliations of the running candidates and a few issues of what they're standing for. One could be a complete idiot and still pass the test, but it would at least insure that voters know the bare minimum of what they're voting for. How is that communist? it;s semi-communist in the way it goes about gaining a leader... not necessarily in it's ideals tho... it;s just that the election results are determined by the majority of voters that are deemed "worthy" by the state... i.e. "the majority of people who pass a test" like, a real democracy is (supposed to be) for the people, by the people... "the people" shouldn't just be who can pass a test... if "the people" or more correctly, the majority of "the people" want a leader, they should be able to get that leader... not "the majority of people who pass a test" get a leader for themselves and the rest of "the people" get that leader to... that's not freedom for all... and that's defiantly not a real democracy... Quote: If you don't know what the ******** you're doing, why should the rest of the country suffer for your idiocy? You meaning the general idiot, not actually you, of course. the rest of the country isn;t suffering... the rest of the country presumably got exactly what the majority of it voted for... so truly, the majority of the country is reasonably happy with what it got at the end of the election day... whether or not the leader is going to do what s/he said s/he would do AFTER the election, is another matter entirely... that;s what an approval rating is for, and what impeachment / riots in the streets could be used for xp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 6:16 pm
Maddness91 Quote: If you don't know what the ******** you're doing, why should the rest of the country suffer for your idiocy? You meaning the general idiot, not actually you, of course. the rest of the country isn;t suffering... the rest of the country presumably got exactly what the majority of it voted for... so truly, the majority of the country is reasonably happy with what it got at the end of the election day... whether or not the leader is going to do what s/he said s/he would do AFTER the election, is another matter entirely... that;s what an approval rating is for, and what impeachment / riots in the streets could be used for xp The problem is, a LOT of voters didn't vote for anybody for their ideals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2010 7:12 pm
Fresnel Maddness91 Quote: If you don't know what the ******** you're doing, why should the rest of the country suffer for your idiocy? You meaning the general idiot, not actually you, of course. the rest of the country isn;t suffering... the rest of the country presumably got exactly what the majority of it voted for... so truly, the majority of the country is reasonably happy with what it got at the end of the election day... whether or not the leader is going to do what s/he said s/he would do AFTER the election, is another matter entirely... that;s what an approval rating is for, and what impeachment / riots in the streets could be used for xp The problem is, a LOT of voters didn't vote for anybody for their ideals. doesn;t matter... the majority of people got what they voted for on election night... therefor the majority got what they wanted, for whatever reason they wanted... if they wanted "hope" or "change" they voted for obama... if they wanted the guy there friend told them to vote for they (in this case) voted for obama... if they wanted "the guy that can raise his arms" they voted obama... that's what democracy is baby... mrgreen and if they didn't vote, then they gave up the right to have there voice heard, and therefor ceased to be a part of "the people" who chose how the country is run... and i assume were ok with that fact on election night, since they didn't make the effort to participate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:01 am
American National Socialist Party.
Just kidding. I haven't fully registered, I'm just a voter.
Maddness: you seem tot ake the fundamentals of things too far. You are an idealist, but you'll soon find your little world doesn't really work that way unfortunately. What I'm saying is, you don't know how the world really and truly works. Because democracy is the worst form of government, aside from all the others. If a large number of paople voted on whether or not to pull the pin ona grenade sitting on the desk infront of them, should their votes over ride the bomb disposal tech sitting on the opposite side of the desk, just because there are more of them?
The majority only means that sometimes the idiots are all on the same side.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:02 pm
Inquisitor Brock Maddness: you seem to take the fundamentals of things too far... the fundamental rights are the most important of all... they set the basis for all other rights to be placed on... such as the fundamental right to bear arms in the USA... in a true constitutional system, this right would be acknowledged in exactly the way it was written... and yes, i understand in reality, this is not the case... it;s almost the exact same argument in both cases really... argument -> "guns are harmful and kill people etc.etc.etc..." what the answer should be -> "it's my fundamental right under the constitution to bear them, ******** off" argument -> "people should have to write a test... only the people who know the issues should vote etc.etc.etc..." what the answer should be -> "it's every persons fundamental right to vote on how their system of gov't is run, ******** off" maybe it;s true that i'm an idealist... but i would rather fight and strive to live in an ideal world, then live in a half asses world where no one tries to stand up for there rights...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
