So in addition to eliminating Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the EPA, the FDA, NOAA, the Department of Education, the hurricane hunters program and tying disaster relief to budget cuts, we now have another conservative with another idea to improve this country:
Disenfranchise the poor!
How long before the presidential front runners in the GOP, who thump their chests the loudest about loving the Baby Jesus and about being Super Christ-ers, come out and condemn this assault on the very least of our citizens? Anyone taking any bets?
Why are left-wing activist groups so keen on registering the poor to vote?
Because they know the poor can be counted on to vote themselves more benefits by electing redistributionist politicians. Welfare recipients are particularly open to demagoguery and bribery.
Registering them to vote is like handing out burglary tools to criminals. It is profoundly antisocial and un-American to empower the nonproductive segments of the population to destroy the country -- which is precisely why Barack Obama zealously supports registering welfare recipients to vote."
If, as this columnist says, the poor are nothing but blood-sucking drags on America, why just disenfranchise them? Why not eliminate them entirely so people like Vadum don't have to look at them or, even better, think about their low, insignificant and unproductive lives?
What is so disturbing about this is not just the monstrously evil suggestion that poor people should be disenfranchised, but that the conservative who suggested it felt comfortable in making such an outrageous proposition public, with, apparently, no fear of being hounded from a civil society like a flea-laden rat.
We've come to a point in our nation's life where conservatives believe the American people are with them in wanting to eliminate anything that benefits the most needy and to keep in place financial privileges that benefit the most wealthy. Because everyone learned in Bible School that Jesus said "Whatever you do for the richest, most powerful of mine, you do for me."
The American people do not support any of the GOP's ideas about eliminating Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the rest of the programs that make us a caring and civil society. Americans want to reduce the deficit, not by getting rid of social programs, but by increasing taxes on the wealthiest.
But back to the wannabe oligarch, Vadum, who believes poor people should have the right to vote taken away because they would vote their own self interest. (BTW, who DOESN'T vote her own self interest?) I would remind this ridiculous man that the poor do pay taxes every time they buy a taxable item either in a store or at the service station. This conservative's idea of making people who are financially less fortunate less than full citizens is repugnant to all true Americans, and it is class-warfare reasoning like Vadum's, and not the ones he erroneously listed, that compel less fortunate people to vote Democratic and not Republican.
14 comments:
Is he suggesting that the rich don't vote their interest, or do they just deserve it?
Hoards of hateful wingnuts came forward after Obamas election to say blacks will be thrilled because they can sit back and collect their guvmint checks and food stamps with out a care in the world!
Self-righteous Righties, they are so hateful!
Shaw, what's amazing, and incredibly depressing are the comments from the supposed patriots and America lovers who rushed to agree with the author of this screed.
I have few words to describe how I feel after reading them except to say, I need a shower...
Wow. That was some article.
It’s our right as citizens to vote, although I’d much prefer voters to have at least a general understanding of politics and the candidates running for election. With that said though, I do believe it’s up to each person to get him/herself registered. If he/she doesn’t know how to do that, then I’m of the opinion he/she doesn’t understand voting and probably shouldn’t until he/she is educated on the process. But to put restrictions on who can vote based on employment or property ownership is absurd.
Pam, it is absurd, but that is what passes for mainstream thought among the rank and file of GOP primary voters and opinion makers...
Yeah, that Jesus person, he TOTALLY hated the poor. I remember that passage in the Beatitudes where he said, "Blessed are the super rich, for they are job-creators. Verily I say unto thee, let us shower these titans of capitalism with tax cuts and deregulation."
Oh, wait. Never mind.
Yes, hating on the poor is a time-honored tradition with the right. It's always been there, what is shocking is that they are so unabashed with their disdain. Phony Christians.
The American people do not support any of the GOP's ideas about eliminating Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the rest of the programs that make us a caring and civil society.
That doesn't count, because it's only the poorest 90% who disagree with those ideas, and they shouldn't be allowed to vote, or express an opinion. So there.
"If he/she doesn’t know how to do that, then I’m of the opinion he/she doesn’t understand voting and probably shouldn’t until he/she is educated on the process."
What is wrong with the government educating, or training people on how to use government processes like voting?
So if people don't understand, or know how to use a tax form, then they should be excused from filing , or paying taxes? I just became stupid about tax forms.
Well, if the poor wanted to vote so bad, they should have been born into a rich family instead.
Jerry,
All voters vote their interests. It's called "enlightened self-interest." Vadum is obviously ignorant about this.
Sue,
Yes, I also heard swine like Limbaugh say A.A. citizens voted for Mr. Obama only because he's black.
Dave,
It is depressing to understand that there are groups of people in this "exceptional" America that believe as Vadum does. IMO, "exceptional" countries would not encourage hateful people like him.
Pam,
Citizens should take an active part in the election process, but not all citizens are in a position to be able to get to registration sites to register to vote either because of physical problems, lack of transportation, or other impairments that prevent them from doing so.
Southern Beale,
That "Love Thy Neighbor As Thyself" stuff doesn't apply to the Christian Right and its politicians.
Anon and Michael,
Mr. Vadum has made himself look like an ass with his callous remarks.
Vadum is such a despicable sub-human. Every time I read or hear something of this nature, I think: My God, can anyone sink any lower? And then I turn my head and the next mongrel is even worse!!!
"What is so disturbing about this is not just the monstrously evil suggestion that poor people should be disenfranchised, but that (((the conservative who suggested it felt comfortable in making such an outrageous proposition public, with, apparently, no fear of being hounded from a civil society like a flea-laden rat.)))
Amen.
@Pam: Yes, it is the responsibility of the voter to get registered. The trouble is, these voter suppression laws are targeting only certain groups who just happen to traditionally vote Democratic and they are based on a phantom non-fact that they are necessary because of voter fraud.
More importantly, Pam, these groups just happen to be people who mostly don't have transportation or access to it - the disabled, the poor, seniors and even rural people who have to travel long distances to register. And many of the laws go way beyond requiring a mere photo i.d. In many cases it takes a full day to register, over two weeks to have it processed, and is costing already financially strapped states millions of dollars to implement.
I beg you to look below the surface on this.
Putting my libertarian hat on, I have no problem with someone like Vadum arguing against forced redistribution, so long as we also zero in on the moneyed interests that tap into our US Treasury or seek special exemptions.
This is the problem: Our government is pay for play, and the rule of law has been abandoned.
I understand your appeals to Christian morality, Shaw, and it's a valid argument... When arguing from personal action.
A government putting a gun to your head and forcing you to hand over money to someone else is not a charitable act, and for the donor, there is no morality in a forced action where you have no agency.
We have lost our way. Our government has turned into a sickening funhouse of perverse incentives.
Isn't it interesting that a lot of folks are just now noticing that "Our government has turned into a sickening funhouse of perverse incentives,"--now that a Democrat is in the White House, but no- where on conservative blogs did I read the discomfort and disgust with this phenomenon while Mr. Bush was in office.
It's all political posturing AFAIC.
BTW, the post was about disenfranchising people just because they are poor. Nowhere did Vadum consider that there may be working poor or people who've been forced into bankruptcy because of catastrophic illnesses, IOW, people who have become poor through no fault of their own.
It is only in this country--and I've visited a few other countries in my life, where I constantly hear people--Conservatives--blame the poor for robbing them of their wealth, when the real robber barons are the corporatists who enjoy seeing Americans stick it to the most vulnerable among us while they stick it to all of us.
@Silverfiddle,
You're absolutely right, and I have no problem abolishing the tax system, if, as you say, we also abolish corporate tax breaks, giveaways, and bailouts.
Good luck waiting for either one to happen.
Given we live in the society that we do, it seems fair to ask those who have benefitted so much to kick in a little tiny bit more to help others.
Post a Comment