OT: the state of education today

Well, the first was a trick question, because most probably call it the "War of Northern Aggression" and know that the South won.
 
(quoted from post at 19:21:52 05/22/15) Well, the first was a trick question, because most probably call it the "War of Northern Aggression" and know that the South won.

Either that or "The War Between the States". And the South did win the last battle in May of 1865. The "insurrection" in Texas was finally declared over on August 20, 1866.
 
Don't know why, but earlier today I was thinking, we studied the Spanish Armada in grade school. I'd bet money today that almost no college graduates know what the Spanish Armada was.
 
The only one I didn't know was the show Snookie was on, but sadly I do know what a "Snookie" is...... I really don't give a crap about Brad Pitt and any of his wives, but I do stand in line at the grocery store and get bored sometimes.....LOL

Beyond that, I can't believe these idiots are allowed to vote. Some people say the US made a step forward as we gradually allowed more and more people to vote, but I think it was a definite step back...... This is one of the reasons we are in such sad shape now, across the board, as a nation.....
 
Kind of makes one wonder why Texas is considered a "hostile" state.

Some young folks don't know our state's history and probably care even less about our state's future.

Guess the past, present, and future will be at the mercy of the folks that re-write the history books.
 
NCWayne- Yup, that is a perfect example of our educational system. Sad to say.

Then you go on to state- "Some people say the US made a step forward as we gradually allowed more and more people to vote, but I think it was a definite step back...... This is one of the reasons we are in such sad shape now, across the board, as a nation.....".

You mean the Nineteenth Amendment, in 1920, that gave women the right to vote and the Fifteenth Amendment, in 1870, that gave blacks the right to vote, should not be allowed? These amendments are part of the United States Constitution.

I can't believe you just said that you don't feel that Women and Black citizens (or any legal citizens) of the United States should not have a right to vote!

Maybe, I missed something that you said. If I missed something, I apologise.

Could you please explain why you feel 'some' citizens of the U.S.A. should not have a right to vote.

Thanks
 
The often quoted phrase "one man, one vote" is actually a misquote as applied to article 4 of the U.S. Constitution, what John Adams wrote was "one tax, one vote", if applied as intended, think how much better off would we be as a nation if only taxpayers could vote.
 
Why should parasites that live off of taxpayer largesse be allowed to vote? US citizenship is probably the greatest privilage ever bestowed upon man, by man. Worthless curs that won't work and take care of themselves and their get have no moral right to vote themselves additional allowances of other people's money.
 
LAA- Maybe I am not able to search things on the internet so well but, I seem to find there is zero reference to John Adams saying "one tax, one vote".

Would you so kindly direct me to a link quoting him saying that?

Thanks
 
O.K., I think that anyone who does not pay federal income tax should not be allowed to vote in national elections, if a person does not pay property tax they should not be allowed to vote on that issue, if a person lives in a state with an income tax and pays no state tax that person should not be allowed to vote on the state level, ditto for the local level.
 
LAA- So, you want to 'pick and choose' which part of The United Sates Constitution that you will support or disregard?
 
LAA- "I did not say that he said it, I said that he wrote it."....

That's fine, just direct me to a link showing that. I can't seem to find one.

Thanks
 
Greg1959 -- I am not picking and choosing anything, you better go read the U.S. Constitution again, there is no such thing as a constitutionally protected right to vote, people are protected against discrimination regarding race or gender if they do vote but no where does the constitution guarantee any individual the right to vote, there have been numerous Supreme Court cases where that finding has been upheld, the most famous and recent being Bush vs Gore. Restrictions on voting is nothing new or uncommon, many states require a government issue photo ID, including my home state, I cannot vote without it, I have any number of other ways to prove citizenship if that was all it took, but it's not, if the constitution gaurunteed my vote then these voter ID laws would have been struck down years ago or never enacted.
 
LAA-" I am not picking and choosing anything, you better go read the U.S. Constitution again, there is no such thing as a constitutionally protected right to vote, people are protected against discrimination regarding race or gender if they do vote but no where does the constitution guarantee any individual the right to vote, there have been numerous Supreme Court cases where that finding has been upheld, the most famous and recent being Bush vs Gore. Restrictions on voting is nothing new or uncommon, many states require a government issue photo ID, including my home state, I cannot vote without it, I have any number of other ways to prove citizenship if that was all it took, but it's not, if the constitution gaurunteed my vote then these voter ID laws would have been struck down years ago or never enacted."

I''m going on vacation @5 A.M. tomorrow, be back tuesday. I'll deal with that statement then.

Anyhow, you have not shown me a link to John Adams writing "one tax, one vote".

I hear I have Wi-Fi at this location. Maybe I might be able to respond to you.

BTW, did you find ant references to John Adams 'writing' "one tax, one vote"?
 
Have you ever read the "federalist Papers" ? I am sure all of it is available online but I do not have it at my finger tips. Hope you enjoy your vacation.
 
Greg originally voting was limited to land or property owners. The taxes generated then where usually tied to land and property so the founding Fathers thought that the voting should be limited to those that paid the taxes.

I agree that you should have to have paid taxes to vote. I am a strong believer in limited government and allowing all to vote when "all" are not contributing to the "Pie"is a bad idea. They should not be able to decide who gets "PIE" unless you helped pay for the "PIE"
 
LAA- Thanks about the vacation, shrimp....Yummy!.

Anyway, what about John Adams writing "one tax, one vote"? Did you find any sources?

Thanks
 
I'd say something but might get in trouble if I did so all I will say is the lack there of and the no one left behind is a sad state of affairs
 
JD Seller- "Greg originally voting was limited to land or property owners. The taxes generated then where usually tied to land and property so the founding Fathers thought that the voting should be limited to those that paid the taxes.
I agree that you should have to have paid taxes to vote. I am a strong believer in limited government and allowing all to vote when "all" are not contributing to the "Pie"is a bad idea. They should not be able to decide who gets "PIE" unless you helped pay for the "PIE".

JDSeller- I mean no disrespect to you or your wife.

You made a post earlier about your wife collecting Disability Benefits and she is in her 40's IIRC.

Now, you want to lecture me about people being unable to vote because they have paid no taxes or own land!

I'm very sorry sorry for your wife and I wish her the best.

But, don't you dare set here and tell me that only land-owners or taxpaying citizens should be the only ones allowed to vote!

While your wife is collecting Social Security Disability benefits on the Taxpayers dime As she will draw out WAY more than she ever paid in!.

I'm sorry for what you wife is going through and my heart goes out to her.

BTW, you ought to read the stroy about Luis Lang. Be sure to read ALL his 'updates' and comments on his GoFundMe page. Here is a link.

Goodnight
Luis Lang
 
"Active occupation is not only the principal source of (the American's) happiness, and the foundation of their natural greatness, but they are absolutely wretched without it". Francis Grund wrote in the 1830s as he evaluated the American experiment.

Greg, you've been awful quick to jump on others, why don't you explain your position? When the welfare recipients outnumber those working and paying taxes, what prevents the middle class from collapsing under the weight of non-contributors voting for more and more government handouts?
 
I get the idea you want to shout down people instead of interacting with them . JDSeller wasn't lecturing you, he stated a fact then offered his opinion. Why is that so threatening? That kind of interaction is why these threads get poofed. Why not just offer a counter perspective, then engage in friendly dialogue. Maybe you'll gain a sympathetic ear, but for now you just sound angry.
 
Tell me where did I state that John Adams wrote the federalist papers? Does anyone ever read a post before they reply?
 
This seems to hit pretty close to what LAA and JDSeller were getting at:
[i:287bb43f76]..."if you give to every man, who has no property, a vote, will you not make a fine encouraging provision for corruption by your fundamental law? Such is the frailty of the human heart, that very few men, who have no property, have any judgment of their own. They talk and vote as they are directed by some man of property, who has attached their minds to his interest."[/i:287bb43f76] JOHN ADAMS
 
Greg: I WILL speak out against anyone that thinks allowing the free riders to vote themselves more benefits is a good thing. It will slowly bankrupt the country.

As for my wife drawing out more than she has paid into the system. YOUR WRONG!!!! She was a high wage earner her entire life. She usually hit the 'MAX" on social security each year. She would need to draw benefits for just about ten years at her current rate to just get back her principle amount of payments. She has been drawing for 2 years. She will more than likely NOT draw the balance regardless of what we do. The how and whys are not important.

Then if you had the numbers of what I have paid in and what I will get out it is even more slanted. I am far from a rich man but I am darn sure tired of my hard work and planning being TAKEN an handed to those that will not work or plan.

Here is the important part. Just about everyone that earns above average wages will never get what they "Paid" into the system back as benefits. So the system is rigged from the get go.

Also I think that fewer people are actually qualified to vote these days. They do not do any critical thinking on their own. They let public opinion shape their vote too much. Then you have one political party heavily controlling the public media and you have a time bomb in the making. Modern media has changed the political arena in a negative way. Now "pretty" and photogenic is more important than being able to actually do a good job governing the country.
 
I think the other replies in regard to what you've said explain my position pretty well. If you don't own property, pay taxes, or whatever, but instead do nothing but rely on the monies paid in by those that do, then you have no right to vote.... Beyond that, I don't care whether your black, female, or whatever. If your not a 'productive' member of society, then you have no right to control the flow of money coming to you.....and that's what it all eventually comes down to.
 
(quoted from post at 03:45:48 05/23/15) I think the other replies in regard to what you've said explain my position pretty well. If you don't own property, pay taxes, or whatever, but instead do nothing but rely on the monies paid in by those that do, then you have no right to vote.... Beyond that, I don't care whether your black, female, or whatever. If your not a 'productive' member of society, then you have no right to control the flow of money coming to you.....and that's what it all eventually comes down to.

I agree.
 
It's the fault of MY generation. We cling to our guns and bibles, and try to cling onto OUR Constitution, but we bare children and all too many don't attempt to cling onto them. This IS the fault of MY generation. Guilty for what we are now seeing. There's an old saying, "We reap what we...".

Mark
 
So what Adams was saying is that if a non-property owner was given voting rights his vote would be at the command of his rich employer.So it was to stop the wealthy from too much power.
 
Not one single black student knew that the Civil War was won by the north? Sometimes I wonder about these "on the street" polls. It just doesn't seem possible we have become this stupid as a people. But then again, what do I know.
 
John Adams meant that their votes would be co-opted by the state,. He knew, like all the Founding Fathers, the greatest assemblage of thinkers ever gathered, that the number one and mortal enemy to freedom and liberty is, was and will always be institutionalized government itself.
 
It's interesting that they had to travel to the Texas panhandle to find such an uneducated and ill-informed group of young Americans. Do you suppose they didn't get the answers they wanted in Ann Arbor or Boulder?

Maybe I'm biased having taken a few grad courses at Texas Tech, but I seriously doubt the average student there is as dumb as these cherry-picked examples.
 
when voting if u can not put the president with the vice president and the party they are with there vote is not counted if you are not smart enough to do that your to stupid to vote it would get rid of most of the major enter cities and. college kids ,
 
Trying to find the source of that alleged quote by John Adams. You brought up the Federalist Papers. I was simply pointing out that, since Adams didn't write any of the Federalist Papers, it's not in there.
 
Good thing for you they don't make you pass a spelling test before you can vote! Or a test of elementary school grammar, for that matter.
 
His concern seemed to be that large groups of under educated people could be swayed by a few who exercised influence over them. Which, in a way is what we are seeing now. It creates an incentive for those in power to hold large segments of the population captive to their own ignorance, by keeping them in poverty and limiting their education. So yes, I would say it (property owner only voting) did have the effect of limiting the power of the powerful, and John Adams rightly foresaw eliminating it as a threat to our freedom.
 
Yes, it's fair to say that Adams believed that the uninformed masses could be induced by the rich and powerful to vote against their own best interests. In other words, John Adams accurately predicted the rise of the Tea Party some 220+ years later.
 
There is no constitutional "right" to vote. So-called anchor babies, children of aliens born on US soil, are only citizens as a result of a statute, not the constitution. Not all citizens should be allowed to vote.

It would be a better country if the only people who could vote were those who paid net positive in taxes. Those who receive more in welfare or subsidies than they pay in taxes should not vote, period. That would eliminate the welfare class from voting (and probaby many farmers - but if you get more than you pay you should not have the right to vote yourself more). Also,, government employees who get more money than they pay in with taxes should not vote.

Edited to correct the spelling of 'statute.'
 
Why do you assume they had to "travel" to Texas to find these students (she said in the video that she was on her home campus)and why do you assume the panhandle of Texas is dumber than the rest of the country? How do you know they were "cherry picked"? Why are you reluctant to take the video at face value?
 
(quoted from post at 11:05:17 05/23/15) Yes, it's fair to say that Adams believed that the uninformed masses could be induced by the rich and powerful to vote against their own best interests. In other words, John Adams accurately predicted the rise of the Tea Party some 220+ years later.
I was thinking more like the entire nnalert party which depends on the undereducated and impoverished to hold their power. Whose voting base depends on the welfare receiving masses, nnalert or Tea Party? Look at Detroit, Chicago, or any large city that has been historically nnalert and you'll see exactly what Adam's feared.
 
The Sheeple of the country are scared to death of the tea party. Those of us who do not require government to hold our hand through life are unconcerned by divergent paths of political expression, we gain from lack of government, not redirection.
 
Two pertinent quotes:

"The government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."
-----George Bernard Shaw

"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
-----Margaret Thatcher
 
"There is no constitutional "right" to vote" ?????? .
The right of citizens of the US to vote is stated four times in the Constitution. It is in the 15th, 19th, 24th and 26th amendments.
 
The 4 amendments you reference each prohibit particular methods of denying the vote to the affected parties, none of the amendments otherwise guarantee the "right" to vote itself. As I mentioned below, there are all types of limitations and qualifications currently enforced on voters regarding eligibility that has nothing to do with their citizenship status. There is a veritable mountain of Supreme Court precedent to refute the "right" to vote argument, voting is a privilage of free people, once a person renders themselves as a slave to the system (welfare, farm subsidies parasites) that privilege should be revoked.
 
The first things I learned when visiting the south is you're not required to tell the truth to strangers and you only have to be polite to people you don't like, LOL.
 
Unfortunately for the author, the Supreme Court, which happens to be the body which decides constitutional quandaries in this country, do not agree with him and have ruled oppositely on the matter several times. Remember the "hanging chad" ? That whole argument fell from the tree precisely because there is no inalienable right to vote.
 
(quoted from post at 00:10:09 05/23/15) I get the idea you want to shout down people instead of interacting with them . JDSeller wasn't lecturing you, he stated a fact then offered his opinion. Why is that so threatening? That kind of interaction is why these threads get poofed. Why not just offer a counter perspective, then engage in friendly dialogue. Maybe you'll gain a sympathetic ear, but for now you just sound angry.

He [b:aa21ca8fc8][i:aa21ca8fc8]is[/b:aa21ca8fc8][/i:aa21ca8fc8] angry, angry at the world it seems. Somedays if you mention the sky is blue, he will argue its red, just cant seem to get along with anybody. Shouting people down is the only way some of these people get heard. He is incapable of laying out facts and changing your mind, so he tries to silence you by shouting you down. If you reply (and continue to reply), he just keeps turning it up till you go away or the thread disapears. Either way is fine with him, it gets what he wants, your point of view is eliminated. If it takes out his warped viewpoint, no problem, he will peck away at the keyboard tomorrow (if not sooner) to put it up again. Then, in his mind, he wins. Its not about exchanging ideas or interacting with people, its a competition. A competition to remove your ideas (shout you down or outright removial of the thread) while he puts his back, thus everybody must agree with him. A strange cat, to be sure but mostly mostly I think of him as just a bitter, unliked person. Sad, but thats the way he wants it.

Freud would have a field day with a couple of the rampant communists on this board.... and Mr. Peabody, hes one strange cat too but would deserve a whole thread of his own.

Now, who is going to run this through spell check? I have to vote on Tuesday and want to make sure Im allowed... {snicker}
 
(quoted from post at 11:05:27 05/23/15)
(quoted from post at 11:05:17 05/23/15) Yes, it's fair to say that Adams believed that the uninformed masses could be induced by the rich and powerful to vote against their own best interests. In other words, John Adams accurately predicted the rise of the Tea Party some 220+ years later.
I was thinking more like the entire nnalert party which depends on the undereducated and impoverished to hold their power. Whose voting base depends on the welfare receiving masses, nnalert or Tea Party? Look at Detroit, Chicago, or any large city that has been historically nnalert and you'll see exactly what Adam's feared.

That would be a very accurate analogy. The Tea Party just dont fit the mold, its mostly about following the constitution, its not about getting a non-tax payer into voting a certain way or another (for their interests or their bosses, however you wish to interpet the idea) but lets not get facts in the way of an opportunity to throw a cheap shot. But lets not let logic or reason get pulled into this conversation....
 
The denizens of Detroit and Chicago may be poor and uneducated, but they can hardly be accused of consistently voting against their own interests. On the other, never before have we seen the sentiments of the working class so thoroughly and successfully co-opted by a few plutocrats as they have been in the past decade. So successfully, in fact, that when a card-carrying member of the plutocracy referred to those who pay little or no taxes as the "47 percent", a significant portion of that same 47 percent assumed he must be talking about somebody else.
 
Ok Mark, I'm calling out your tactic of firing potshots and shifting positions hoping everyone else stays quiet and your last word wins. I've asked some questions, now answer up or I will consider your posts immaterial. I've remained quiet for a quite a while and observed how you lob in your disruptive comments from a distance, hoping to cause confusion then leaving without ever having revealing where exactly you stand. Let's summarize what's occurred here:
1. Video link showing ill-informed students who have obviously passed high-school and been accepted into college without some very basic knowledge of American History
2. You challenge the substance of the video and those who produced it. I ask you to substantiate your challenge, no reply.
3. Claims about John Adams position on voting are made and evidence requested. I supply a quote linking his position to the initial claim.
4. You acknowledge the connection but try to throw in a twist and imply that the Tea Party is what he had in mind.
5. I provide a more obvious manifestation of his concern, (i.e. millions of minorities living in poverty and trapped in a horrible system of poor education, poor services and limited opportunity who continue to vote for the party that has held them there for decades)
6. You say that they can hardly be accused of what I've just accused them of (voting for the people who have an interest in keeping them there), but once again nothing to support your comment. Why can't they be accused of being the people Adams was referring to?
Others here have clearly laid out their position, you have not. I have no problem hearing an opposing opinion. I enjoy reading the back and forth of people who are willing to step in and offer up their thoughts, but what you have done here in no way contributes to the conversation.
 

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Back
Top