Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You reap what you sow.Having a job and more money is simply an indication of the CEO's ability to rationally think and act.
Those sleeping under bridges may be highly intelligent and millionaires that choose to eschew the trappings of civilization, but why take the risk of giving such people a say in matters that impact the prosperity and safety of the entire country?
Do you want the vagrant or CEO casting the deciding vote?
Really? To think rationally and act? Hmm. Maybe they got lucky. Some CEOs are there because their father ran the company and handed it over to their son. Doesn't mean the son has these abilities.
Maybe they just simply made a company that did well because an opening existed, or because they had inside information, or because they bribed someone.....
If you do business in China, for example (and many American businesses do), you have to know how to play the system, and you can get lucky, or you can get the govt on your back and end up in prison, it's all about luck, all about Guanxi, a system of "favors" or "knowing the right people".
People sleeping under bridges might just have got unlucky in life. They might have lost their wife to cancer and become depressed. They might have been born with a mental illness and been unable to work for a particular company, been fired and others look at their work history and their letter of "recommendation" and not want to give them a new job.
So many reasons.
But here's the reason why votes should be one person one vote no matter why.
If politicians know that homeless people can't vote, they'll do nothing for homeless people. If they know homeless people can and do vote then they might change things and homeless people might have opportunities to get out of their situation.
The same theory holds for all groups of people.
Black people, for example. If they can't vote then politicians don't look out for their needs.
Women, for example. If they can't vote then politicians don't look out for their needs.
Why should homeless people be different? Surely they need someone looking out for their needs so they can get out of homelessness.
Good night.
Did you not see the point I was making? Should I be more explicit here?
What happened in Germany in the 1990s is an EXAMPLE of how people function.
Politicians make up stuff because people PREFER to listen to the made up stuff rather than the truth. Do you see how my example PROVES that this is the case?
This is an example of someone who is not only saying what they think, but also BACKING UP what they think with EVIDENCE. Do you understand this?
Why yes it is, but you can't tie it to this conversation.
You imply A & B, state A is true so therefore B has to be true.
The sky is blue. Babies eat pussy.
Just because the first statement is true does not make the second statement true.
Are you going to carry on being pedantic, or are you going to debate sensibly? If you're going to be pedantic I'll ignore you, simple as. Last warning.
Dude you made my ignore list .............
Why should knowing first amendment rights have anything to do with you knowing which candidate best represents your interests and points of view?
That's one of the stupidest - maybe THE stupidest - questions I have seen asked on this board to date, and I have neither time or motivation to give you remedial history and civics lessons.
No, it's actually a rather intelligent question.
The question is a good one.Why should knowing first amendment rights have anything to do with you knowing which candidate best represents your interests and points of view?
That's one of the stupidest - maybe THE stupidest - questions I have seen asked on this board to date, and I have neither time or motivation to give you remedial history and civics lessons.
Why should knowing first amendment rights have anything to do with you knowing which candidate best represents your interests and points of view?
That's one of the stupidest - maybe THE stupidest - questions I have seen asked on this board to date, and I have neither time or motivation to give you remedial history and civics lessons.
No, it's actually a rather intelligent question.
Only to an unintelligent, uneducated person.
The question is a good one.Why should knowing first amendment rights have anything to do with you knowing which candidate best represents your interests and points of view?
That's one of the stupidest - maybe THE stupidest - questions I have seen asked on this board to date, and I have neither time or motivation to give you remedial history and civics lessons.
It is the height of stupidity.
Why should knowing first amendment rights have anything to do with you knowing which candidate best represents your interests and points of view?
That's one of the stupidest - maybe THE stupidest - questions I have seen asked on this board to date, and I have neither time or motivation to give you remedial history and civics lessons.
No, it's actually a rather intelligent question.
Only to an unintelligent, uneducated person.
No. Not at all.
Knowing the 1st Amendment doesn't help you make the best choice of who will represent you the most effectively, quite clearly.
Imagine. Two people stand for election. One represents your needs, the other doesn't. Do I need knowledge of the 1st amendment to make that choice?
DrDoomNGloom said:
"What are you referring to as far as right wing made up stuff??"
You can't be serious:
Obama was born in Kenya
Obama's a Muslim
Obama's a socialist/Marxist/Fascist
Obama's 'responsible' for an 'increase' of racism
Obama's 'guilty' of 'treason' because of the Iran accord
Obama wants to 'destroy Israel'
Obama 'knew about' and orchestrated a 'cover up' for fast and furious, Benghazi, and the IRS
The president's EO deferring action on some undocumented immigrants is 'amnesty'
Obama tried to 'ban' 5.56 NATO ammunition
States have the 'right' to 'secede'
The law doesn't apply to undocumented immigrants
HRC 'lied' about or tried to 'cover up' Benghazi
HRC 'broke the law' concerning emails
Planned Parent 'broke the law' concerning tissue samples used in research
An embryo/fetus is a 'baby'
Abortion is 'murder'
And this just scratches the surface of all the lies, fallacies, and like made up nonsense that comes from the right.
Why should knowing first amendment rights have anything to do with you knowing which candidate best represents your interests and points of view?
That's one of the stupidest - maybe THE stupidest - questions I have seen asked on this board to date, and I have neither time or motivation to give you remedial history and civics lessons.
No, it's actually a rather intelligent question.
Only to an unintelligent, uneducated person.
No. Not at all.
Knowing the 1st Amendment doesn't help you make the best choice of who will represent you the most effectively, quite clearly.
Imagine. Two people stand for election. One represents your needs, the other doesn't. Do I need knowledge of the 1st amendment to make that choice?
To make an intelligent, informed choice? Absolutely.
The question is a good one.Why should knowing first amendment rights have anything to do with you knowing which candidate best represents your interests and points of view?
That's one of the stupidest - maybe THE stupidest - questions I have seen asked on this board to date, and I have neither time or motivation to give you remedial history and civics lessons.
It is the height of stupidity.
Why exactly? It's easy to slate something, no so easy to articulate it.
The question is a good one.Why should knowing first amendment rights have anything to do with you knowing which candidate best represents your interests and points of view?
That's one of the stupidest - maybe THE stupidest - questions I have seen asked on this board to date, and I have neither time or motivation to give you remedial history and civics lessons.
It is the height of stupidity.
Why exactly? It's easy to slate something, no so easy to articulate it.
It's so easy a caveman could figure it, and I will not spoonfeed idiots until they exhaust their clueless self-abasement.
You are a citizen, you get to vote. Any other suggestion is unAmerican.Ideal voting criteria for the future...
1. US citizen
2. 18 (or 21) or above
3. presents a valid State or Federal -issued Identity Card (driver's license, state ID, etc.) at the polling place
4. has passed a standardized national literacy test
5. is not on welfare (defined here as SNAP and/or TANF and/or similar state or local general assistance)
6. registers anew with each change of residence (rock-solid proof of citizenship and residency)
7. not a convicted felon
8. not dishonorably discharged from the United States armed forces
9. resident of the district in which you wish to vote
10. you are not presently and legally judged as mentally incompetent
11. criminal penalties two notches shy of crucifixion for violating the above
They let anyone who is a citizen of Israel vote.This is the same reason why Israelis won't let "Palestinians" vote in their elections; they see what a fucking mess we've made of it
Fucking dumbs shits like are allowed to vote! As self employed for twenty years and paying more in taxes than pricks like you make, I understand taxes. The suggestion was that if you don't work you don't vote. Why should some prick who inherited ten million from his dad but never worked himself be allowed to vote?Do any of you idiots who make such ridiculous suggestions ask yourselves how you would accomplish your moronic ideas? How do you determine if someone is working? Self employed people sometimes forego income while they build their business; living off savings, loans or money from relatives. Some people do very well; save millions and take a year or more off.
Ever heard of Income taxes, you are required to file SS and medicare tax on any income above $500.
Being a total fucking moron you have no clue self employed are required to file self employment taxes.
Individuals dba / business's are required to file taxes yearly.
Seriously, you come out acting as if you are a hero and now look you are a big fat zero....................
Unemployment benefits? Social security disability?Only if they're not doing it with Welfare Money...How about people who pay sales tax, gas tax or local taxes?If you have paid into the Social Security or Medicaid systems throughout your working career, you've done your bit for King and Country, and can still vote.Shouldn't anyone receiving government aid be barred from voting? Or only poor people?Ideal voting criteria for the future...
1. US citizen
2. 18 (or 21) or above
3. presents a valid State or Federal -issued Identity Card (driver's license, state ID, etc.) at the polling place
4. has passed a standardized national literacy test
5. is not on welfare (defined here as SNAP and/or TANF and/or similar state or local general assistance)
6. registers anew with each change of residence (rock-solid proof of citizenship and residency)
7. not a convicted felon
8. not dishonorably discharged from the United States armed forces
9. resident of the district in which you wish to vote
10. you are not presently and legally judged as mentally incompetent
11. criminal penalties two notches shy of crucifixion for violating the above
Yes. If you don't, you have no fucking idea what makes this nation great.No it's not. Here's some history of the vote: Voting rights in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopediaA person who lives under a bridge has as much a right to vote as a CEO
That is how our country was founded
Does it really make sense to you that a homeless person has as much say in how America is run as a CEO?
Atlas Shrugged? A fictional, poorly written story by a talentless leech.The number of CEO's is pretty fixed. The number of homeless, indigent, non-working citizens has no bounds. The unproductive will overwhelm the productive. Read Atlas Shrugged.AbsolutelyNo it's not. Here's some history of the vote: Voting rights in the United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopediaA person who lives under a bridge has as much a right to vote as a CEO
That is how our country was founded
Does it really make sense to you that a homeless person has as much say in how America is run as a CEO?
A homeless man will vote for the candidate who will make his life better
A CEO will vote for the candidate who will make his life better
It all evens out
Fucking dumbs shits like are allowed to vote! As self employed for twenty years and paying more in taxes than pricks like you make, I understand taxes. The suggestion was that if you don't work you don't vote. Why should some prick who inherited ten million from his dad but never worked himself be allowed to vote?
