@tinman tell this cheap ass sonofabitch to pony up some contributing member dollars and live the ad-free life we as pure Clutchfans were all born to enjoy
This kind of reminds me of the beginning of Idiocracy. Supposedly smart people: Maybe we should challenge the idea that we even have a duty to vote. Dumb people: Derp * Derp * VOTE * Derp Everybody welcome President Derp Derp!!!!!!
Whatever argument you have that most people don't have a duty to vote, those less qualified to make an informed, rational decision are the ones who are going to vote anyway. Those who are more qualified are the ones more likely to question whether they're actually informed enough to vote.
I didn't mean on CF, but now that you mention it... ... given my nasty, steep pay cut following the pandemic calamity in our once great nation, I'm open to someone contributing for me this year until we get better national stewardship. Especially say, someone who tends to defend the current executive leadership.
Daytime TV switched to horrible fake judge and stereotyping talk shows twenty-five years ago, Maury Povich and Judge Judy long replaced Monkees, Gidget, Thunderbolt commercials and...Maury Povich (Current Affair) as childhood memories.
related https://theconversation.com/the-right-to-vote-is-not-in-the-constitution-144531 The right to vote is not in the Constitution August 26, 2020 8.23am EDT Author Morgan Marietta Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Massachusetts Lowell If you’re looking for the right to vote, you won’t find it in the United States Constitution or the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights recognizes the core rights of citizens in a democracy, including freedom of religion, speech, press and assembly. It then recognizes several insurance policies against an abusive government that would attempt to limit these liberties: weapons; the privacy of houses and personal information; protections against false criminal prosecution or repressive civil trials; and limits on excessive punishments by the government. But the framers of the Constitution never mentioned a right to vote. They didn’t forget – they intentionally left it out. To put it most simply, the founders didn’t trust ordinary citizens to endorse the rights of others. They were creating a radical experiment in self-government paired with the protection of individual rights that are often resented by the majority. As a result, they did not lay out an inherent right to vote because they feared rule by the masses would mean the destruction of – not better protection for – all the other rights the Constitution and Bill of Rights uphold. Instead, they highlighted other core rights over the vote, creating a tension that remains today. Relying on the elite to protect minority rights Many of the rights the founders enumerated protect small groups from the power of the majority – for instance, those who would say or publish unpopular statements, or practice unpopular religions, or hold more property than others. James Madison, a principal architect of the U.S. Constitution and the drafter of the Bill of Rights, was an intellectual and landowner who saw the two as strongly linked. At the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Madison expressed the prevailing view that “the freeholders of the country would be the safest depositories of republican liberty,” meaning only people who owned land debt-free, without mortgages, would be able to vote. The Constitution left voting rules to individual states, which had long-standing laws limiting the vote to those freeholders. In the debates over the ratification of the Constitution, Madison trumpeted a benefit of the new system: the “total exclusion of the people in their collective capacity.” Even as the nation shifted toward broader inclusion in politics, Madison maintained his view that rights were fragile and ordinary people untrustworthy. In his 70s, he opposed the expansion of the franchise to nonlanded citizens when it was considered at Virginia’s Constitutional Convention in 1829, emphasizing that “the great danger is that the majority may not sufficiently respect the rights of the Minority.” The founders believed that freedoms and rights would require the protection of an educated elite group of citizens, against an intolerant majority. They understood that protected rights and mass voting could be contradictory. Scholarship in political science backs up many of the founders’ assessments. One of the field’s clear findings is that elites support the protection of minority rights far more than ordinary citizens do. Research has also shown that ordinary Americans are remarkably ignorant of public policies and politicians, lacking even basic political knowledge. more at the link
Related: https://www.fairvote.org/right_to_vote_amendment Right to Vote Amendment Voting is an American principle and a basic democratic right that should be protected, promoted, and practiced, which is why many people are surprised to learn that the U.S. Constitution provides no explicit right to vote. This leaves voting rights vulnerable to the whims of politicians, and some citizens with fewer rights than others. More than a decade ago, FairVote became the leading institutional voice calling for the establishment of an explicit individual right to vote in the U.S. Constitution. We believe that a grassroots movement to establish such an amendment would go a long way in ending the "voting wars" that plague us today. FairVote continues to serve as a trusted resource in support of activists, organizations, and elected officials working toward a right to vote amendment. Through our Promote Our Vote project, we work to build widespread support for a right to vote amendment, while advocating for pro-suffrage innovations at the local level. More at the link
Ilya Somin on the NBA boycott: https://reason.com/2020/08/27/rights-and-wrongs-of-sports-boycotts/ Rights and Wrongs of Sports Boycotts NBA players' brief boycott in protest of police abuses and racism raises the more general question of when such boycotts are appropriate. The strongest case for them is when the sports events organizers are themselves perpetrators of grave injustice, even more so when the event directly causes such wrongs.
The world was better when less people were using the govt as a genie and solving problems themselves.
