I Don’t Find This Stuff Amusing Anymore

I was going to write a profound post about the beauties of our founding document, the inexpressible wisdom of the founders.

I hardly slept all night.

Today is the swing between one reality and another, and the path ahead is dark and shrouded.  It can be bad.  Or it can be much, much worse.

And respected sf editor on Facebook was saying that one path takes back to “the fifties, where women and black people have no rights.”  He bases this on… cheese!  But then this is the same editor who once stated his mission not as selling magazines, but as educating the public AND smashing the capitalist state.  Because in the absence of the capitalist state, everyone lives on unicorn flatulence and all the flowers are pretty.

I don’t find this stuff amusing anymore.

Basic historic and constitutional literacy should be required for voting.  Same across the land.  You go into the voting booth, you get a question anyone mildly aware of the realities could answer.  You get it wrong.  You get two more chances, in case you’re having a bad day – say in my case, I transpose numbers – you get all three wrong, the booth opens again… empty.  Alternately on the second you can walk out and renounce your voting rights.

I’m not talking difficult questions, okay?  I’m talking stuff like “Who is the president”  and “If so and so wins, we’ll get: and three possible questions and one clearly impossible one, like segregation.”  Or “is from each according to his ability to each according to his needs in the constitution?”

You don’t answer that, you have no business voting.  Voting is a privilege NOT a right.  Having a pulse and being a vague humanoid shape (I have a cat who walks on two occasionally!) is not qualification for voting.  Being eighteen certainly isn’t.  I know this is heresy, but truly there is no reason for this.  There is a vast difference between rigging the vote and pole tax and making it so that even non-citizens can vote and people who couldn’t spell their own name given three tries.  I don’t want an IQ test.  Some of the worst politics come from geniuses.  They get very tired of other people, see.  BUT basic social awareness and literacy… what is wrong with that?

But no, I wouldn’t even require that.  Just let’s make sure the dead and illegal don’t vote, let’s make sure people vote only once,  and it will take care of itself, more or less.

Voter suppression is when your vote is diluted with the votes of those who aren’t supposed to vote under our very lenient laws.

I’m very angry at voting shenanigans in both CO and Philly.  If our vote is so sacred, shouldn’t it be protected.

I don’t find this stuff amusing anymore.

And don’t go talking to me of monarchy.  It can grow the state just as massively and Henry Tudor put as many people to death – because his loins were on fire – relative to his population as Stalin did relative to his.

I have friends who put their faith in revolution.  I don’t.  The American revolution was the exception.  Most go wrong fast.  And anyone, if we haven’t rebelled yet, what makes you think we will?  When is the stopping point, if not several months ago?

So… what can I tell you, this fine morning?  Well, children, I’m a human wave author.  I’ve put characters in much more difficult situations and they thrive.

There is no better place and no better time to fight than now.  Tomorrow the reality solidifies, doom or just struggle (and if you think there’s no difference, let me tell you!)

Today is possibly the only, last day we have that the tree of liberty can be watered with sweat and tears, instead of the blood of patriots.

If you’re not busy go out and volunteer.  GO OUT AND VOTE.

And most of all take superglue, against the idiots who are trying to smash society as we know it, in the hope something ineffable will emerge.  It’s our society.  Don’t let them destroy it because they’re misfits.

Fight like it’s life or death.  It is.  Even if there is no blood on the streets, in a broken economy people die of all sorts of things that are preventable.  And in an economy that is waging war on energy and modernity, people freeze to death and die of flu.

GO.  Sweat and tears and may we be spared the blood.

233 thoughts on “I Don’t Find This Stuff Amusing Anymore

    1. If everything rode on the presidential election it would be different, it doesn’t. The other races didn’t go so poorly, after all. Actually the presidential race didn’t go so bad either. Yes, the numbers came out so we’re stuck with Obama, but a full half of the country is on the side of fiscal conservatism. There is nothing to despair of in that. Nothing at all.

      I feel like economic literacy has increased. Hasn’t it? I feel like acceptance of libertarian ideas has increased in the last years. When I was in high school I asked someone what the difference in the parties was and no one could tell me. It was like one was your team you cheered for just because your parents like them. People are tired of what seems like never ending campaign seasons, but it’s really become a constant engagement of ideas. No, we’re not going to put it away for four years and barely notice the mid-term elections.

      The contest isn’t for an office.

      The changes in empowerment for individuals that technology has wrought are still changing the world.

      1. Synova, what kool aid are you drinking? Can I have some? Everything doesn’t ride on the presidential election? Guess what, it does. Repubs may never win a national election again! Appointments to Supreme Court don’t matter, Janet Napolitano doesn’t matter, Eric Holder doesn’t matter? The nation is flooded with illegals and no one is doing anything about it. The reason Colorado, Virginia, Nevada, the Carolinas are toss ups is because of illegal immigration, there can only be more browns coming. Let me lay it out for you: Blacks, latinos, gays lesbians, hollywood liberals, msnbc, cnn, have one thing in common: hatred for white Christian America and it’s values. Obama was serious when he talked about revenge. Economic literacy increased? Then why did Romney get shellacked? Alex

        1. Stuff it Alex.

          I spent the last couple of weeks doing phone calls for economic literacy and I sat alongside *primarily* Hispanics. Young men in suits. Young ladies from the barrio. Other young men with tats around their necks, tats up one arm and Poncho Villa on the other. A 100% Navaho calendar girl; pretty lady. Her brother in law had to tease her by telling me she was famous. Sure, there were a few old white ladies, too, and a couple of black boys (no, I’m not being racist, they must have been about 18 years old so boys) who changed their names on every call, “Hi, I’m Jacari,” “Hi, I’m Carl,” “Hi I’m Jake” “Hi, I’m…. this is what Romney stands for, do those things sound good to you?” Those who were Hispanic were calling across the south west and Florida so that they could switch to spanish if necessary. The organization they were calling for was a Hispanic free market organization.

          Improvement is measured against the beginning value and I don’t know how an objective person could not see a resurgence of interest in market processes and a better understanding of libertarian ideas, even if Romney didn’t win.

          1. Synova, none of what you said changes the fact that illegals have altered the demographic in irreparable ways, virtually overwhelming suburban towns. You didn’t address any of my points about states going from red to blue due to illegals, and it will get worse with Obama’s reelection. I live in the Chicago area and have seen the city of my birth brought down by mexican drug gangs and black gangsters. I am no longer interested in these stories of a couple of hispanics making nice. By the time Obama leaves office you will not recognize your country. War is coming, do you think libertarian ideas will save you?

            1. It’s not “a couple” of people making nice. Your data pool is every bit as limited as mine. People are individuals. Did it ever occur to you that Chicago is a particular aberration?

                1. Nah. Take it from somebody who’s lived there, and also lived places plenty worse. Detroit, for example, is a way better candidate for that title. (I grew up there. If forced to choose between moving back and, say, death…I’d strongly consider death.)

          2. A primary reason that the Cherokee were driven out of the Carolinas, Georgia and Tennessee was because they adapted to “the White Man’s Way” and were outperforming the white men, which drove that old racist (and founder of the Democratic Party) Andy Jackson bonkers.

            Assuming Conservative values have no appeal to “brown-skinned” people is prima facie racist. Like the Nazi slogan of Slaven sind sklaven it asserts that some races are incapable of self-governance.

            1. RES, since you can’t address the points I’ve made you resort to the liberal tricks of calling opponents to illegal immigration “racists, nazis”. I’m stating facts, you are a liberal hoping to give all your possessions to people of color to assuage your liberal white guilt. Alex

              1. That said, I think we need reasonably secure borders. I also think we need a culture that DEMANDS assimilation.

                And I’m an immigrant, so as per democrats, I have absolute moral authority.

                However, none of this will happen while the dems go around confusing race with culture.

                1. Conflation of race and culture is racist. It is why the contemporary Democrat Party is fundamentally illiberal and racist — in short, following the history of their party which maintained slavery and imposed Jim Crow. Their agenda is inherently totalitarian, premised as it is on not recognizing people as individuals but instead separating them into groups by traits superficial. They are as sophisticated as the track foreman played by Slim Pickens in Blazing Saddles: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H2W1lK7P-I

              2. Pish-tosh, Alex. You made no arguments to address. What you made were a series of unfounded allegations, most specifically that illegal aliens were voting in sufficient number to sway the election in several states. You offered no evidence in support of these charges. You offered conclusions based upon assumptions, which do not comprise arguments. You did not state facts, you stated suppositions as facts, which they are not.

                Further, I did not make a general statement calling opponents of illegal immigration (or, as I like to call it: invasion) racist because, in part, I would have been smearing myself. Nor did I call you a Nazi. Arguably I called you even nastier – a Jacksonian Democrat.

                However, if you persist in making broad unfounded assertions about the general capacities of sub-populations, I greatly fear people will be prone to reach similarly broad suppositions about you. At the very least they might wonder by what reasoning you conclude I am White and suffer any sort of guilt. The arguments I made could be found in the writings Thomas Sowell or Walter Williams.

                I suppose I ought plead guilty to being Liberal — I am a Classical Liberal, holding that the truths stated in our nation’s founding documents are self-evident, that all people are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

  1. Looks like it’s happening here in Ohio as well, at least up in Cleveland: http://twitchy.com/2012/11/06/new-black-panthers-also-in-ohio-reports-of-navy-seals-heading-to-ohio-pa-to-guard-against-voter-intimidation/

    Also reports that True the Vote has organized groups of retired SOF operators calling themselves “SEAL Team Nov. 6”, and are deploying to confront these marxist BP thugs wherever they show up.

    Frakkin’ A Bubba, THAT’S how a free citizenry preserves our republic. This promises to be a long, nail-biting day.

    1. Many reports of this kind of chicanery and many will join the veterans in going Starship Troopers. Clearly the other side has no problems with voter suppression by their side.

    2. Also reports that True the Vote has organized groups of retired SOF operators calling themselves “SEAL Team Nov. 6″, and are deploying to confront these marxist BP thugs wherever they show up.

      Doesn’t that scare you every bit as much as the original situation? Doesn’t that sound EXACTLY as much like voter intimidation as the other? Is there a difference between the two? If so, what?

      1. The difference is that the second group is showing up to either prevent intimidation or to make it easier for others to stand up against intimidation.

        For the same reason that if someone comes up and shouts at you in a threatening way, and then some other fellow comes up and shouts at HIM to knock it the f*** off, you don’t feel affronted by the second guy. He’s not aiming his efforts at you, and he’s no threat to you either. But he’s making the bully’s task a lot harder.

        1. As William F Buckley reported said about moral equivalence: I refuse to accept that it makes no difference whether you’re shoving little old ladies in front of buses or shoving little old ladies out of the way of buses because either way, you’re shoving around little old ladies.

          From reports I read, the “SEAL Team Nov. 6″ operatives were under orders to take no action in the polling places they were sent to watch, they were simply to observe and report. Their value was in the fact they would not easily be intimidated by a bunch of tough guy wannabees.

          1. Their value was in the fact they would not easily be intimidated by a bunch of tough guy wannabees.

            Now, now. They were not all “tough guy” wannabees. I saw a couple with low-slung trousers and, prison lore dictates, those fellows wanted something else entirely.

        2. But the Black Panthers were there in the first place to prevent intimidation and make it easier for others to stand up against intimidation, as they saw it. They believed that other people would be coming in from outside the neighborhood and being a vaguely threatening force.

          So we’ve got two groups: people from within the neighborhood, who the voters in the neighborhood know, who show up to tell their neighbors that they will support them against intimidation, since they’re worried that OTHER people, from OUTSIDE the neighborhood, are going to show up in force to intimidate them.

          Then, other people, from outside the neighborhood, show up in force.

          Objectively, which group is causing more disruption? Which group is more likely to be perceived as intimidating by the voters in question? Would you be more intimidated by someone you know, one of your neighbors, or by a stranger who shows up because one of your neighbors is standing around?

          1. I’d be more intimidated by the ones with a decades-long history of politically-motivated violence, who have demonstrably been given blanket immunity to commit any crime they choose by a government whose leaders regard criminals who share their skin color as “my people” but law-abiding citizens who do not share their skin color as intrinsically suspicious.

            Nobody today would regard it as unusual to say that a black person fearing the KKK during the Wilson administration was justified in his fears. So why is it controversial when a white person fears the Black Panthers during the Obama administration?

          2. The black panthers were form outside the neighborhood. And, at least in 08 they were trying to turn around anyone not melanin enhanced.

            OBJECTIVELY what is a militant stalinist group doing there? NO, SERIOUSLY. They don’t even believe in voting.

            IF it is a black neighborhood, why are black people afraid of intimidation while voting. I know this is one of those urban legends, but when has it happened in the last… twenty years? Or are black people OF COURSE scared because they’re black? (Rolls eyes.) If so, they’re more likely to scared of community organizers and fast-talking operatives than of people (black or white) manning the polls.

            Your thinking is racialist. “Black people aren’t scared of other black people.” “All black people are from the same neighborhood.” If this were so, black-on-black crime wouldn’t be the highest category in the US.

            Methinks you were exquisitely miseducated and consciousness raised, possibly in a VERY good liberal arts school. It takes a lot of education to be that blinkered.

            1. Ahem. Sarah, please be aware that, due to decades long stereotyping of innocent, hardworking melanin-rich person by the oppressive uber-class people of pallor, rolling your eyes could be interpreted as a derogatory reference to Steppin Fetchit and thus constitutes racist actions on your part.

              This is a limited time parody, but be aware that what once was parody oft becomes policy.

              1. As a semi-melalin enhanced person, I must say that these… intellectuals (spits) idea that everyone darker than them lives like “happy villagers” save for “evil colonialists” — even if in the same land, of course — and white exploiters makes me want to beat them to death with a feather pillow, so it will last longer. I wish they’d learn other people are people JUST like them.

                1. I wish they’d learn other people are people JUST like them.

                  But they know that already! Just ask them! it’s the evil, melanin-deficient KKKonservatives like me (well, I’m not really so melanin-deficient, and you should see my dad’s farmer’s tan) who are the horrible oppressors of the innocent brown folk! They are just there to make us all understand how oppressive and evil we are!

                  *spit* *choke* *puke*

                2. Well – I am a melanin-deficient person, which has caused me no end of headaches. Yep– I have had marriage proposals from a couple of melanin-enriched males in South Africa. Another melanin-enriched friend of mine told me it was too bad that I was already engaged. 😉

                  I married a guy whose skin gets pretty browned in the sun (unlike mine). So I guess melanin determines good or evil? I guess I need to live up to my evilness.

                  1. My husband, despite his high cheekbones (well, he actually does have them. BTW HOW in hell would any sane state elect an imposter like that?) could pass for count Dracula melanin wise. Not only is he pale, not only doesn’t he tan, but he also doesn’t burn (that must be the virtue of the high cheekbones.)

                    At one time, our friend Charles, Dan, Robert and I (Marsh was not yet born) spent the entire day at the city fest, which in those days was way bigger than now. Even my melanin enhanced self had a peeling nose. Charles was somewhat sunburned, as was Robert, who is the darkest of all of us, but was a baby.

                    THEN we got home and noticed that Dan’s rather melanin lacking face was not even reddened by the exposure to the evil radiation star.

                    What does this amount to? I don’t know, but I think he does it on purpose.

                    1. Yea – hubby has that evil thing going too. I blister, burn, and generally bubble when I am out in the radiation too long (too long is fifteen minutes).

          3. You actually believe that the Black Panthers were there to prevent voter intimidation? Good night, almighty, you’re drinking some strong kool-aid.

            They showed up in front of the doors, wearing paramilitary clothes and carrying batons. That is not a show of blocking intimidation. that IS intimidation.

            1. ah, Wayne, you never took a gender or race studies class, have you? Black people are inherently intimidated by the white privilege of little white old ladies or white housewives. It’s because most of them, see, were working in the fields yesterday and… No? you’re sure? Odd. Because that’s what these courses assume. They also ignore the vast, vast numbers of black on black crime and the fact that wasshisname admitted that late at night he was relieved it was a white man following him. (Not that black people are inherently more criminal — but most of them are raised in circumstances these days that make them more likely to be violent. Another bene of being a government client class.) However, to the STUNNINGLY miseducated intellectuals this doesn’t happen. Blacks all love other blacks like brothers and cower in fear of whites, because… oooooh. Look at our melanin deficient skins. SCARY.

          4. You ever lived in an urban neighborhood? Most of your “neighbors” won’t recognize one another on sight. Add to that the fact that, when last seen in a polling place, the New Black Panthers were brandishing weapons, shouting at people and telling them how to vote (or attempting to run some off) and your whole myth collapses.

  2. I don’t find it amusing either. I have been in tears for the last four years. I just couldn’t believe it– I still can’t believe it– Hugs to you Sarah– We’ll meet at the other side of today.

        1. I have grandkids (through my husband)– I want to scream. Sadly I saw posts from people from my Vasculitis group who were so relieved that he was re-elected. So what are they going to do when Obamacare goes into effect. The best med is 10,000 dollars — and it needs to be taken every six months. We tried to tell them that if he won they would be “dead women walking.” They didn’t believe us.

            1. They believe the media … for now. Wait until they try to get medical care without doctors. And employer provided health insurance does you little good without a full-time job.

              Time to buckle down and work on educating the public. That’s gonna be a challenge. Better get to writing some Human Wave, even if the world seems full of grey goo.

  3. Already done – my daughter and I voted on the first day of early voting in Texas – and the line was long even then. We’ve talked to neighbors since then, and the early-voting polling place was jammed every day.
    Take a deep breath, and consider all those people who came out for a chicken filet sandwich on Chick-Fil-A Appreciation day. Every one of those who can vote will do so today, if they haven’t already.

    1. Voted Saturday. Tom and I arrived during a slow period–only two people ahead of us. When we left, the line was fifteen long, with several _groups_ of people heading for the door. I think there may be a record turnout today.

    2. You don’t happen to live in Houston by any chance do you Celia? Because I had the same experience. the polling place near my house the line was an hour to an hour and a half or so long. ALL day EVERY day the first week after early voting opened. not sure how it was this past week.

      1. I’m in Houston, and I voted early a week ago Saturday – got there at 8 am and there were already people there. Not a line, but we have a very large facility there (and it _was_ early on a Saturday). I expect it to be jammed full today

    3. We voted last Thursday. When we got there there were half a dozen people or so ahead of us: when we left there were at least fifteen waiting. This was at around 1PM.

    4. Voted first week of early voting. Had a nice chat in line with a lady whose husband is an Army chaplain. No, no political talk, just banking and encouraging her to have her kids stay with a certain insurance company. Very efficient poll volunteers kept the long line moving. ‘Twas interesting hearing one of the election judges explain why voting straight ticket meant you still had to hand-pick your choices for the three non-party elections (groundwater district, constable, and something else in a neighboring precinct).

      Possible pre-vote test questions. 1) Who is the current president? 2) Which of these four is NOT a branch of federal government? 3)Which of the following IS a political party in the United States? [Republican or Democrat, Labour, Likud, Scottish Independent Party]

    5. Voted this morning. Walking in and saw the lines, some three or four deep at the tables where we were checked off by street address. So I was walking along looking for mine, and lo and behold, it was the one without anyone there.

      Almost made up for being the person told to stop at the intersection where the cop was directing traffic in and out. (Both ways. All right, on the way out, it was the car in front of me, technically. 0:)

    6. Voted about a month ago when early voting opened. Votes like ours are why the popular vote is basically even, but Obama managed to take most of the swing states that are important. Someday maybe the Republicans will learn that choose the most liberal candidate you can in the primary isn’t the way to win, but I don’t know when that will be.

      1. STOP THAT right now. STOP THE CIRCULAR FIRING SQUAD. As was, he was demonized as “too right wing.” He was the cleanest candidate we could find, the one on whom they could find NOTHING. Liberal, sure, but compared to a communist, he’s almost libertarian.
        No one is going to vote for a social conservative except maybe the other side where there’s a good number of people who are authoritarian on BOTH economic and social issues. And no one is going to vote for a libertarian. He was the best we could do, and he ran a hell of a campaign. Unlike McCain, he deserves our thanks as he fades into retirement — if he’s allowed to.
        As for us — only hell knows. My consolation is that Europe who pulled so hard for this, is stuck without protection against the Bear. I hope they enjoy being torn apart between Arabs and Russians. G-d, they’ve richly deserved it.

        1. Sorry, I was upset when I wrote that, but I said nothing about a SOCIAL conservative. I agree with you that he ran a good campaign (much better than McCain, but then I would much rather have Romney than McCain). What caused me to state what I did is the fact that I know many more people who refused to vote for Romney (because he was to liberal) than I know people that voted for Obama. You cannot seem to drive through their heads that just because they don’t want either one, they are still going to get one, and they need to pick the lesser of two evils, so they don’t end up getting the greater.

          1. Obviously reading the comments here most everybody else had a much different experience than I did. I saw almost no voter enthusiasm, and what little I did see was mostly negative enthusiasm (anti-Obama, not pro-Romney) while people in other parts of the country report tremendous turnout and enthusiasm. But then I live in a county that went 52% Ron Paul in the primary (not me, while I think he would make a great treasury secretary, I think he would be a terrible president) and Romney came in either fourth or fifth with single digit percentages.

            1. Are you living in a “blue” or “red” state? If the latter, then it didn’t matter anyway. Romney could have polled 99% for Texas instead of the “merely” solid majority he did — and it would not have made one whit of a difference, due to (for better or worse) the Electoral College.
              If you’re actually living in some college town in a blue state where the only people voting in the GOP primary are potheads who like L. Ron Paul because he promises to legalize drugs, then again, it won’t matter.

              What does matter is when Republicans in swing states get demoralized out of the GENERAL. In the case of McCain some of that did happen; I’m not sure this was the case this time.

              1. Idaho, so yes I know my Presidential vote really isn’t that important because Idaho is going to go red regardless. I do talk to people in other states however, especially Washington which is only 25 miles away, and could swing Republican if the Idiots could be convinced to put their ballot in the mailbox (Washington went to all mail-in ballots). And of course if they brought the fraud under control, election fraud in Washington is so prevalent that they don’t even particularly try and hide it. Christine Gregoire, after losing both the FIRST AND SECOND recounts in her first gubernatorial race, said on tv, “We are going to count until we win.” In the third recount lo and behold she won, viola no more recounts, long live Governor Gregoire.

                I live in a county that has the distinction of having one of the few colleges with both forestry and liberal arts majors; so Ron Paul garners support from both ends of the spectrum here. Most of the other counties in Northern Idaho also went to Paul, however, and they don’t have colleges in them (well except for Kootenai and Nez Perce counties)

                  1. Yes, it makes for interesting student demographics. Drive through campus and you see guys in hickory shirts and work boots walking alongside guys in birkenstocks and tye-dye beanies. 😉

  4. Good luck, all! I can’t vote in your election, but I hope Governor Romney wins. After all, we’ve got this really awesome pipeline we’d like to get working on.

  5. I agree with a competency test. This morning, a group was in front of me at the polls, a man with several obviously mentally handicapped people in tow. He marshaled then through the line and sat them at a table to fill out their ballots. he was carrying a political parties slate and having them work from that. I was truly disgusted. I say that even though I probably voted the same way on a number of the candidates. I don’t care which candidate is yours, even if we agree, this is no way to run voting

  6. heh voted during the early voting. Besides people seem to be more unhinged this time around. Especially the Dems it seems. The DNC election judges in Philly threw their GOP counterparts[court appointed counterparts I might add] out of polling places all over town this morning. {state judge ordered the Dems to let the GOP judges back in a while later] The new black panthers are on the doors and in chicago a black female Obama supporter was campaigning and trying to get people to vote Barrack while IN the polling building apparently. When a voter in line objected, as they rightly should have…it’s a federal law…no campaign gear or people for any candidate within 100ft of the polling place. Although I’d take that to mean 100ft from the front doors of the place. not from inside where the machines were but…I digress. Anyway. the Obama supporter punched the objecting voter in the face. When the cops came[yep they were called] she slapped the cop.*headshake* Yep this is an interesting election season alright. In the chinese curse definition of the word.

    1. Can you provide a link to the second incident? I live in Illinois and I’m curious to see if it gets covered.

      1. I found a woman in Detroit who hit a voter and then hit the cop who came to arrest her. Breitbart’s Big Government has the story with updates pending. Nothing about Chicago, yet.

        1. it was on Bretbart a couple hours ago. hang on…nope. just tried to pull up breitbart.com and got a 503 error. weird.

  7. I’m with you – couldn’t agree more! I voted early last Saturday, first thing in the morning and people were already there. I don’t think any of your voting requirements are heresy – I’m all for them. I am furious over the garbage being pulled in Chicago and Philadelphia!

    Yes, our voting roles must be purged, and ID needs to be shown (and if you’re too lazy, too stupid or too apathetic to go to the minimal trouble to get an ID, you’re too lazy, too stupid or too apathetic to vote). I really want to get rid of absentee voting unless someone is truly physically unable to get to a polling place. I’d raise the voting age to 25 (because most are just too ignorant to vote before then).

    I go even further – I don’t think anyone can become a citizen unless they are reasonably proficient in the English language (which would make me extremely unpopular here in Texas) because I don’t think anyone can participate as a citizen or join the union unless they can communicate. But I admit to being a curmudgeon about that.

    1. I agree; a person should be reasonably proficient in English to be considered a Citizen. it’s not really that difficult of a requirement. And there should be NO voting forms in any other language, which some Cities and/or States have

    2. Laurie…how dare you think that people should know how to speak and read english, you racist! 😛
      YEah…I get that shite all the time too. Now I just shrug it off, where it used to annoy me. Once you’ve been called both a “homicidal asshole” and a “genocidal maniac” during a difference of opinion….*shrug* being called a “racist” pales in comparison and don’t mean much.

      1. Heck, there are plenty of people of color who speak English. It is one of the two primary legal languages of the world’s second most populous nation — India. (From Wiki: population 1.21 billion according to the 2011 census, only the continent of Africa exceeds the linguistic, genetic and cultural diversity of the nation of India.)

        1. As far as I can tell, though it’s never SAID outloud, from the kids’ school books, they now believe that culture is genetic. Culture includes language, so language is genetic. (DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY TIMES I HAD TO HAUL ROBERT’S BUTT OUT OF “bilingual” SPANISH CLASSES? SPANISH YET. In their heads, he should speak it better than English because I’m Portuguese. And also… CHEESE!) No one can really learn another language fluently. (Do you know how many people tell me that to my face? Yes, I know I have the accent that ate the universe, but damn it, I can write.) Therefore, objecting to people not knowing your language is … racist.
          I learned English for the first time at 14. We had two classes a week. I like to say that and watch their heads explode.

          1. … language is genetic.

            Dammit! it’s getting so that if I don’t finish that story soon, there won’t be any point!

            As far as your accent goes, I also listened to that speech on PJ Tatler, and it’s no worse than the woman from Peru who rides the bus with me sometimes, and she’s a product manager for Procter & Gamble.

            1. Oh, yeah – funny story about that woman – I have talked to her off and on for 3 years, and just recently found out that she is married to a guy I graduated high school with. 🙂

          2. Language is genetic?

            That doesn’t even make sense.

            You learn the language(s) you grow up hearing. Babies make all kinds of noises as they are practicing. The ones that their language(s) use, they keep, the other ones, they lose. (And even if they learn another language when they’re older, they may never get that sound back.)

            1. Yes, I know that, you know that — but homework about “your culture” at school is about your ancestry, anyone with a Latin name is supposed to be bilingual in SPANISH and, oh, yeah, adoption services only place kids with couples of “the same culture.” EVEN IF OTHER COUPLES ARE DYING TO ADOPT. DO NOT GET ME STARTED.

          3. Heard your get out the vote thing from the Tatler. No you do not have the accent that ate the universe, there are perfume and lingerie models who would kill for that accent.

          4. butbutbut… huh? human genes are waaay older than most of the languages spoken today, particularly in the west.

            1. If culture, not just language, is genetic, then assimilating other cultures into The American Way is racist. Of course, it would also follow that viewing culture as a genetic component is racist.

              Interracial marriage (or at least, procreation) would also entail a mingling of genetic cultures such that the progeny would be hopelessly conflicted (imagine the child of an English father and Irish mother! Oh, the horror!) and therefore should be precluded by law, for the sake of the children.

              Thus, in order to create a society free from racism we must ban interracial marriage, miscegenation and mixed ethnicity neighborhoods (your P-I-G hog barbecue, a relic of animal sacrifice, offends my culture as my ancestors only did sheep.)

              George Orwell must be rolling over in his grave, laughing.

              1. (imagine the child of an English father and Irish mother! Oh, the horror!) snort. A good portion of my family tree resembles that remark! Seriously though, it looks more and more like the entire point of multi-culti whathaveyou is to the enshrinement of victimhood and of being offended at things. God forbid people just learn to get along. (well, Gaia/Flying Spaghetti Monster/the Force/whatever it is this week forbid, I suppose).

                1. Oh dear. Scots-Irish, English, Jewish (Germany/France), French, Dutch, Norwegian, Cajun, American Indian (and those are just the ones we know about). No wonder I sound funny!

                  1. The turtle moves!

                    And, now, must… finish… homework.. by.. midnight…

                    And then there’s this wretched election. not a good day.

          5. And I wonder, if language is genetic, how in the world The Daughter speaks Japanese with a accent that has had people question if it was a ‘cradle tongue’. Sigh.

            1. My high school French teacher said I had the accent down very well. I didn’t like her in general, so I didn’t take any more after that class.

            2. I speak German with a Viennese accent, enough so that people think I’m a Frenchwoman speaking German. Don’t think it is genetic, but my mom’s parents did use a little Yiddish around the house, just bits and phrases. Maybe that’s why I learned German so well (and read Latin, and speak Spanish, and can make a hash of French).

              1. Ummm – well when I was in a hospital in Homburg, the nurses said I spoke German with an upper-class accent. Funny I have forgotten a lot, but I speak German better when I am not totally in my head.

              2. My cousin spent several years in Paris, couldn’t speak a word of French when she went over, but after getting her degree from the Sorbonne, the locals thought she was a native speaker.

                1. Your cousin had heard the language. Here I will have to admit that The Daughter as an infant had a good number of Japanese women who cooed over her. So if, according to earlier theory, you discard sounds that you do not have reinforced it is not necessary surprising that when The Daughter went to language school in Tokyo she had no trouble with the accent. A friend went to military language school which classes language in difficulty from 1 (easy) to 4 (very difficult) told me that there was a joke that Japanese is a 5. (Is there an emoticon that conveys a shrug?)

      1. Serious effort to acculturate here too. As you can see, considering I learned English at 14 and immigrated at 22.

        I find people who refuse to acculturate so infuriating that a) they should go back where they came from,if they like it so much. b) I should be allowed to beat them to death with a rubber sock.

        1. I’ve long been of the view that the proper term is not “illegal aliens” or “undocumented immigrants” or whatever euphemism of the day the political correctness mavens dictate. They should be called what they are: line jumpers. Instead of respecting our laws and instead of coming in turn like those who apply properly these are folk who cut the line and discredit those who come here to become American.

          Then, when called on their disrespecting our laws, they hide behind legitimate immigrants who played by the rules. And demagogues (Left & Right) ignore the distinction between the two in order to score political points. Pfui.

          1. When I was 18 in Portugal, one of my teachers and her husband had been on the wait list to come to the states for 10 years. She was a French teacher, he was a scientist of some sort. They were waiting. Every year or so, they were interviewed again. That I know, they never made it in. BUT Juan can walk in over the border and trying to kick him out is “racist” — where is this justice?

            1. To get my brother’s fiancee to the States, my parents had to use their Senator. It still took months. If they had gotten married, his wife still wouldn’t have been able to get to the US. So strange.

              1. Same with many of the married military I know; yet, somehow, the illegals who came and had a kid manage to get legalized and bring their entire extended family in before a single high-demand professional can immigrate.

          2. A large number don’t want to stay, too. They come because their gov’t helps them, to get money and free support while living here, then go back. Rinse and repeat.

            If you become legal, you’re bound by the same laws as the workers you were displacing.

  8. I’d go so far as to amend the Constitution. Being born in America would get you three things:

    1. A green card or equivalent (right to reside anywhere in the country you choose, as long as you live)
    2. A passport (right to travel abroad as an American)
    3. Guaranteed access to the same test and oath that immigrants have to take before THEY can be citizens. (If you’re ready to shoulder the burden, we don’t want to put all the bureaucracy in your way that they have to deal with.)

    Pass the test and take the oath? Yeah, you can vote now. Don’t want to be bothered? Well, you were born here, so we’re not going to kick you out, but we’re also not going to let you be active in our politics.

    1. As for the anchor baby bit, I’d amend it to apply only to children of parents who are here legally, either as citizens or as legal immigrants on a pathway to citizenship (in the latter case, the child will become a citizen when the parents do). Anchor baby citizenship is being abused.

      I do have sympathy for children who were brought here by illegal parents, who have grown up here, some even assuming they were legal all along, and I am willing to do something more for them, but the Dream Act is too broad right now.

      1. From what I understand, that is the way it was meant to apply. If you read the text, it reads that way, too, it’s just that, like the commerce clause, it’s been expanded way beyond its intent.

        And I’m good with the notion of everyone having to pass the citizenship test and take the oath before they can vote. You’d be able to get a lot of these people on violation of their oath.

      2. I can’t help but notice this is the opposite of the logic claiming a right to abortion of babies conceived through rape.

        I deeply sympathize with the children whose parents employ them to defraud this nation of citizenship, but doesn’t granting such kids citizenship constitute moral hazard, encouraging parents to slip across to give birth here?

        Just because a family of squirrels moves into my attic does not entitle their kittens to my nuts.

      3. It’s not the Dream Act. It’s the 14th Amendment. And a significant difference between your proposal and mine is that under yours, my grandmother (born in Detroit to parents who were non-immigrant visitors at the time of her birth, and who went home with her shortly thereafter) would be reclassified as an illegal. Ergo my mother would be ineligible for citizenship, ergo I would be ineligible for citizenship. (We obviously can’t go back in time to 1938 and force her to apply for immigration when she decides to return, so the only solution is to make her and all her descendents illegals.)

        Which raises the question of where you’d deport us (me, my mother, her sister and surviving brother, and my cousins) to. I mean, as a high-skilled individual with 20 years of professional experience, likely at least another 30 of productive capacity, and (nowadays) an employment relationship with a globe-spanning multinational conglomerate, I’m pretty sure I could finagle myself immigrant visas from a few non-US countries if I wanted to do so and had some time to do the bureaucrat-dances…but besides the US there’s no country on Earth that’s going to just let me in site-unseen. And my retired mom, retired uncle, nearly-retired aunt, and hopeless deadbeat loser cousins? No chance.

        Change the standards for who can vote? Sure. But if you want to start kicking out people who were born here, that’s where I not only get off the train, but start making arrangements to dynamite the track.

        1. I doubt there would be any serious attempt to make it retroactive. For one thing, the MSM would have far too easy a time running pictures of families being dragged weeping to be loaded into boxcars.

          And doubt not there wouldn’t be plenty of officials willing, even insisting, on using boxcars, even if they have to construct the railroads from city center to the airports to create the optics.

        2. (born in Detroit to parents who were non-immigrant visitors at the time of her birth, and who went home with her shortly thereafter)

          This doesn’t make sense. How did she get here after that?

          And yes, Laurie IS talking about the DREAM Act, as it applies to the children of illegals. Your grandmother is a fuzzy area under the 14th Amendment, as they technically qualified under the wording (but probably not the intent) of the law. Her parents were here as (presumably) legal visitors, though whether they would have been “subject to the jurisdiction thereof (The United States)” is a question I do not have sufficient legal expertise to unravel.

          It would not make her an illegal immigrant, merely not a citizen. But the DREAM Act does not address generational descendents of persons of questionable citizenry, it refers to children of people who brought them here or bore them here after breaking the law to come here.

          1. She got here the same way as an almost-adult that she’d gotten here as a fetus inside my great-grandmother’s body…in the front seat of a car, driving across the border. And since, upon return, she was carrying a birth certificate issued by the State of Michigan, there was no question as to whether she would be let in. “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the State in which they reside.”

            And if they’d committed any crimes (or been the respondent in any lawsuits) while they were here visiting, no one would have needed “sufficient legal expertise” to determine whether they were subject to US jurisdiction. They weren’t diplomats…just folks from another country visiting their cousins in Detroit.

            Here’s a hint for you…all those illegal aliens sitting in American prisons? If they weren’t “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, we wouldn’t be allowed to lock them up. Unless a person is, for some reason, exempt from our laws, then they are by definition subject to our jurisdiction.

            1. If the situation today were the same as in your grandmother’s time, it wouldn’t matter (for the record, if there were no anchor babies, your grandmother would have enjoyed the same citizenship as her parents, the way it applies in every other country on earth other than the US, inlcuding US children born abroad). But not a problem back then. (Actually, the floods of immigrants coming through Ellis Island were a problem – that’s the reason for the horrific conditions in American factories, all the cheap labor pouring in, but that’s a different problem.)

              Today, it’s different. As I said, it’s being abused. In my city’s public hospitals, something like 70% of the children born there are anchor babies – women time trips to America during the last weeks of pregnancy (and guess who pays for them?) The Great Society changed a lot of things.

              Do I like this? No, I hate it. But it’s reality.

              And “subject to US jurisdiction” doesn’t mean citizenship. I don’t forgo my US citizenship when I travel in a foreign country, but I am subject to their laws and will be prosecuted and imprisoned if I break them.

              1. Citizenship by birth is reality too. Plus, unlike birthright citizenship, the Great Society welfare programs and their follow-ons in subsequent decades aren’t even _authorized_ by the Constitution, let alone _mandated_ by it. So getting rid of those, however hard it may be, ought to be easier than getting rid of birthright citizenship. Not to mention more in accord with the rule of law. Not to mention shifting the mix of immigrants more in favor of the folks who are ready to _work_ for a living (the way it already is in parts of the country you can’t easily reach on foot from Mexico).

                And no, I don’t think “subject to US jurisdiction” means citizenship. I just know that having broken the law doesn’t make one _not_ subject to jurisdiction, and therefore cannot plausibly be argued to contradict the plain meaning of the 14th Amendment, no matter how many people decide that their revulsion for Mexicans justifies twisting the language into pretzels.

                1. “Citizenship by birth is reality, too”

                  I never said it wasn’t. I said that I would revise the law, given circumstances today (though I am alarmed at any kind of constitutional monkeying, given the current mix in the legislature).

                  But yes, I’d much rather revise the Great Society, and yes, that might fix a lot of the other problems.

                  1. I’m often reminded of Milton Friedman’s declaration (true by my lights) that you can have open borders or a welfare state, but not both. Frankly, I have no problem saying come one come all – but first we have to dismantle the handouts. There is some additional adjustment needed to handle security issues in that scenario as well, but while I have suggestions they’re beyond what I have the brainspace to discuss today.

        3. “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”

          Lots of room in that phrase

    2. I’ve always thought it was weird that immigrants are held to a different standard of civic knowledge than the natives are, what with taking the citizenship test. Though I guess we who’re born here are supposed to learn all that stuff in school. (ha!)

      1. Used to we were taught that in school. [SEARCHENGINE] 8th grade graduation test.

        Now, of course, thanks to the finest scientific research and development of pedagogical methodology (and Howard Zinn) we know squat, and many know even less than that.

  9. Voting age was lowered during the Vietnam War. There was a very active draft. If your country can _require_ a person to serve, they’d best _allow_ them to vote as well.

    1. That was the rationale for the voting age being lowered in the first place.

      Best answer I’ve heard, especially now that we don’t have the draft, is that one must be 21 to vote unless one is in military service, in which case they get the vote at time of entering service. (Though I expect most kids in the military would prefer the drinking age being lowered rather than the voting age.)

      1. (Though I expect most kids in the military would prefer the drinking age being lowered rather than the voting age.)

        That would last exactly as long as it takes for that new recruit to be in when the next year’s pay increase is announced.

        1. The drinking age here in Alberta is 18, and the kids of 18 and 19 in the military are (or were, when I moved in those circles) some of the hardest drinkers I know. Every year, next year’s pay increase is announced, and I have never heard that it stopped any of them. The culture of the Junior Ranks Mess is too deeply ingrained to be changed by trivialities like money.

    2. Here in Canada, there was always an exception to the voting age for active military personnel. The legal doctrine was, ‘If you’re old enough to fight, you’re old enough to vote.’ If you were not in the armed forces, you had to be 21.

      Then, in the late sixties, for reasons never fully explained, Pierre Trudeau (of infamous memory) lowered the voting age to 18 across the board and eliminated the exception. You can still join the military at 17 with parental permission, but even if you’re in combat you can’t vote till 18. I like the old rules better. And I daresay if they had been applied in the U.S. — so that all the draftees in Vietnam had had the vote and the draft-dodgers hadn’t — the social dynamic of that era might have looked significantly different. Ah, well, hindsight.

      1. Also – even when you are in the military, they make it damn difficult to vote–

        First the ballots don’t get to the military–
        Then there are restrictions for how the envelopes are supposed to look (military doesn’t cancel stamps like the Post office). So any ballot going through the military system is invalid.
        Third that cuts out all the military who are overseas or are fighting.

        A lot of the politicians do their dangdest to make sure the military doesn’t get to vote. (I am speaking from experience– )

    3. Yes, the argument was “If we’re old enough to kill, we’re old enough to vote.”

      The flaw in that logic ought be apparent: voting requires judgement, experience and knowledge. Killing only requires blind obedience to orders.

      Thinking that argument constituted sound reasoning should disqualify anybody from voting.

      1. ability to kill and ability to vote might be a false equivalence, but there certainly was a disconnect between having a higher age to vote than to join the military. Maybe “if you’re old enough to die for your country, you’re old enough to vote for who runs it” would be a better way of saying it.

        1. ability to kill and ability to vote might be a false equivalence

          If there is a draft and you are being forced to kill, there is an equivalence. If the government can do those things to you, it should at least give you a voice in it’s formation.

          1. Right. I agree. Sorry, I was trying to paraphrase RES with that first phrase there. Might not have done a good job of it.

          2. Y’all be missing the point: they entail different skill sets.

            It makes about as much sense to assert that if you are old enough to have your career path set by disinterested school administrators, you’re old enough to select those administrators.

            Mind, I don’t dispute that eighteen-year-olds might be be mature enough to vote, nor that they shouldn’t be allowed a say in whether the country goes to war.

            But history suggests that kids are quite quick to go to war and rather slow about exercising sound judgement. Traditionally it was thought their parents and grandparents were far less likely to send their boys off to die (having learned that dying was often as likely as killing) because they had an interest in preserving the family line.

            1. Only a fool searches for logic in the chambers of the human heart. Or something. My point wasn’t necessarily built on logic, but rather on what a free people should expect from their government and what responsibilities that government owes to those free people.

    4. The first Presidential election after 18 became the minimum voting age was 1972 — Nixon vs. McGovern.

      At the time the argument was if you can require them to serve, but pointing guns under orders and thinking for oneself requires somewhat different skill sets.

  10. A distinguo, Ma’am, if I may:

    ’Henry Tudor put as many people to death – because his loins were on fire – relative to his population as Stalin did relative to his.’

    I find this impossible to believe. Even apart from the casualties of the ‘Great Patriotic War’, Stalin has been reliably reported as putting to death twenty million people, or about ten percent of the average population of the U.S.S.R. during his rule. I have never seen any source suggest that Henry VII or VIII (the two ruling Henry Tudors, and I wish you had been more specific) put to death anything like ten percent of the then population of England. The English state simply did not have the power to do that — not the money, nor the organization, nor the weapons, nor the ability to close the borders so that the victims could not flee. Stalin’s Russia had all four of those things.

      1. I believe that it all began with the break from the Catholic church and the dissolution of the monasteries. One thing that made Henry’s job a bit easier, much of the border was water.

      2. While you are looking, could you please disclose which portion of that 10% was executed/died in prison and which portion died in wars or the consequence of wars?

        Yes, death comes one to a customer, but while the ultimate responsibility is his either way I wouldn’t call someone’s dying of hunger because their farm was sacked by passing troops “putting them to death.”

        1. Henry really did kill an astounding number of people, and so did his daughter Elizabeth. He also had the charming habit of granting his protesting people safe conduct and pardon, and then rescinding it as soon as people split up to go home.

        2. Henry VIII did not particularly have major international wars. His father had ceded Brittany to France, although he was forced by his relationship with Spain to go to war with France — which did not do well at all, and led to another peace treaty with France, The real problems in England under Henry VIII was internal, the result of his break and denunciation of the Catholic church while he sought a male heir.

  11. I’d love to return to poll tests, and while we’re at it, jury nullification.

    Unfortunately, both were discredited b/c of southern bigots. (Not to say that there aren’t bigots in the north, too). So the question then becomes, “how to get them back while avoiding the race-card landmine?”

    1. we just do. Have there been any such race crimes in living memory? NOT false flag operations? By which side?

      We do it in such a way it doesn’t affect race — how could it “Who was the first president of the united states?” is not a racist question.

      1. Because “racist” means “not doing what we want.” Voting for a man on the content of his character rather than the color of his skin can be racist in their view.

        1. Racist = Fascist = Big Poopy-Head.

          Orwell addressed this in one of his essays, the name of which I am too indifferent to [SEARCHENGINE].

          I voted. They gave me a sticker for my lapel. I wish they had inked my finger. I so want to give them the finger.

      2. Sarah, yes, I can remember. I was ten the year the James Chaney, Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner were murdered. Their killer was only convicted in 2005, long after he had been identified. Condoleezza Rice’s good friend was killed in the Birmingham Church Bombing in 1963. The NRA was active in the south in the 1950s and 1960s arming and training civil rights workers and blacks how to defend themselves. And there is the infamous campaign of Lester Maddox who came to prominence when he chased blacks out of his restaurant with an ax handle and was latter elected governor of Georgia in 1966.

      1. They would claim that the questions themselves are racist, just like they did with IQ tests in the 60’s and 70’s.

        1. Not to mention the people who designed the machines, the people who programmed the machines, the managers of the factory where they were built, the workers on the line, the salesmen, the patent clerks, the janitors who sweep the factory floor . . . ad nauseum

          1. They don’t do it as much, after the tests were “adjusted”. Of course they are still going to do it to some extent, particularly when someone’s little genius tests out below average.

            1. I meant in general – IQ testing and distribution is an interest of mine, and the distributions are remarkably stable. This doesn’t stop people from claiming that the tests must be racist/classist/ethnicist/culturist as obviously there is no such thing as race/class is a plot by rich people/all ethnicities are equal/all cultures are equal except for DWEM culture which sucks and is from the Devil. I hadn’t noticed that they had diminished any, although I did read a pretty good essay the other day which claimed that resistance to IQ testing and usage is going to drop as it’s all the elites have left to safeguard their sinecures.

  12. Jean and I voted right after we dropped Timmy off for school. We were fifth in line when we arrived. When we left, there were 15 or 20 people in line, waiting. We were #51 and #53 to vote in our precinct. That’s a pretty good turnout. Lots of early voting in the state.

    There was a voting machine problem in Pueblo, where any name you touched counted as an Obama vote. They say they fixed it, but I hope people are being vigilant. We have voter ID law here, but there is still quite a bit of voter fraud — at least attempted.

    I didn’t have the right to vote until I turned 21. My first election being eligible, I voted absentee — in 1968. I also voted absentee in 1972 and 1976. I tried voting absentee in 1984, but didn’t get my ballot in time (we moved in September, and my ballot didn’t catch up with me until mid-November.). I did manage to vote absentee in 1988. I retired in 1991, and I’ve voted in person every election since then. I do believe I’ll vote absentee from now on. Standing in line is MURDER on my back.

  13. We went early this morning to vote. Got there about ten minutes early. There was a line of about 70 people in front of us, BEFORE the doors even opened at seven. As we waited about tweny more got in line behind me. When we came out, the line was even longer. There are two roads to the station, both had cars parked on both sides for blocks. We live in a small community that also include a rural area in our district. I think every single one of those people will vote today.

    I think a voter PHOTO ID should be required. I believe to get that, you must first be registered, IN PERSON, with a valid Drivers Liscense or State ID, plus proof of citizenship. That means a passport, birth certificate, etc. NO green cards, but if you are a naturalized citizen you will need proof of that. Once you have been registered to vote, (you will already have an ID) then you will only be asked to prove your address by having a valid photo ID. That way, you won’t be able to vote more than once in any state or district because you address has to be on the ID and it has to be current. Otherwise we get dead people, people who are incapable of even knowing what they are doing, criminals, and non citizens voting too. This is America, The United States, only citizens of this country should be voting for our future.

    1. No. They can’t ask for proof of citizenship because of motor voter passed under Clinton. Because it would “embarrassing” and “racist” to ask people who have an accent for proof of citizenship.

  14. Good idea, but I wouldn’t even bother with political questions. Just require people to roll two dice and correctly state the number of pips displayed.

  15. Sarah, take heart. Whoever wins the election today, we will all still have the freedom fight on our hands. It’s been that way, for this country, since 1775, and no doubt will continue as long as we are a country. It never ends as long as there is one of us left to fight. We do it politically if we can or with arms if we can’t. I would wish it were otherwise but as a student of history, I know it will always be that way. Somebody always has a “better way” than the Constitution. Freedom is precious, so it will always be under attack.
    Be well.

  16. I voted early this morning. I’d heard all the talk about other states with early voting still having hour waits in lines. I think we were in an out of there in about 15 minutes.

    And yes, I voted for the racist, war on woman, etc., side. And I’m proud of it.

    1. I couldn’t believe while phone-banking how many women fell for the “war on women”… bunk. It’s staggering. These women truly don’t seem to want to think.

  17. I wouldn’t object to some simple logic testing:

    All cats are grey in the dark. I have a cat. Therefore my cat is grey in the dark.

    All cats die. Socrates is dead. Therefore Socrates is a cat.

    Aspiring voters ought be able to point out that the second syllogism is invalid as the last statement should be: Therefore, Socrates was a cat.

  18. It warms the lump of coal I call my heart to see so many fellow Texans in this discussion. My wife and I voted a couple of weeks ago during lunch at a supermarket, then at at the deli next to the early voting area. There was a line the whole time.

    I’m interested in who this editor is, Sarah. I understand if you can’t/wont say, but I’d like to avoid things edited by that individual.

    1. Um… if you are my friend on FB I’ll tell you in private message. (There are wars it’s not worth it to pick. Not that they’ll EVER publish me again,b ut…)

      1. I understand. I’m not on Facebook (lost friends from high school are lost for a reason and should remain that way), but we have exchanged one or two emails in the past. Would that work?

          1. I seem to have been mistaken. We haven’t exchanged emails in the past. I must be remembering an exchange in the comments of one of your posts. Oh, well…

      2. I am NOT urging you to start a fight, but (you knew there’d be a big but, din’t you?)

        Was it said in a private FB group?

        If not, then it must be something the editor is proud to have said and thinks deserves commendation. If not said in confidence it is public communication and can be properly repeated and attributed.

        To do otherwise is to let them act as bigoted [blank]ists at no cost. If the person is not proud of his assertion then he needs to rethink his views, not complain because others have made him wear them in public. Doing otherwise is a way of letting them construct the closets.

        OTOH, there is never any need for persons of good character to publicly condemn misbehavoiur; you are entitled to choose what faux pas to ignore.

  19. I have voted. At the time The Family went there were few people, as it was between lunch and get off of work time. The poll workers said that there was a long line when the station opened and about half the registered people who had not early voted had already shown up by the time we came.

  20. Sarah – just a minor note and likely not something you can do much about (Word Press Sucks) but about which you and others might best be aware.

    I have discovered that some unknown number of posts here and yesterday are not being received through my email interface. The only commonality appears to be a heavy leftward tilt, but it hardly seems likely to be the sort of thing detected by my filters.

    Those of us prone to participate in these discussions by monitoring email ought be advised of this apparent flaw.

  21. Hello Sarah – I’ve been admiring your multiple writings since you seemed (to me anyways) to burst on the scene not too long ago, and just wanted to say hello and thank so for expressing so well the concerns, hope and fear that so many are feeling. The fundamentals are going to give the lie to the oversampling of Democrats in so much of the polling, and this is all going to come out right.

    Still at work; will get back when I can.

              1. Frome the first books I read that you wrote about dragon shifters I got the feeling that green eyes was one aspect of VERY attractive.

  22. “I know this is heresy…”

    No, it isn’t. Look at the voter restrictions when our federal government was new: white male property owner. Voter restrictions have historical precedents. There is nothing wrong with restricting voters to those who understand the Constitution and know the differences among the candidates. Uninformed voters (who tend to pick the candidates who promise the most) are the main reason why our governments have become so bloated.

    1. I’m going out on a limb here, but I don’t think “white” was in the criteris considered. It may have been assumed, but I seem to recall that there were also Black property owners who would not have been excluded from voting.

      It should also be remembered that a) slaves were not solely black* b) not all slave-holders were white c) therefore some property owners were themselves blacks who owned blacks as property.

      Despite the pretensions of knicker-knotters all about, slavery was a far more complex institution than is presently acknowledged. Imagine that. It also predated the discovery, much less the settlement of the Western Hemisphere.

      *I’m not about to delve into the historical quagmire of figuring out just when slaves became uniquely Negroid, but I know they tried enslaving Native Americans and that whites/Europeans were taken on as indentured servants (I would not want to argue that apprentices were not effectively indentured servants) and in at least some instances their contracts were converted to slave status.

      1. Plus, Europeans were being caught and sold into slavery in North Africa as late as the 1800s (Somali pirates were even more active back then, hence “the halls of Tripoli” in the Marine hymn). Napolean’s Josephine’s cousin was captured and sold, wound up in the Sultan of Turkey’s harem, her son became Sultan eventually, but she was never rescued.

        1. Sorry, brain not working, should be “shores of Tripoli” (hey, it’s been years since I’ve sung it).

        2. Well, okay – I was thinking solely in terms of the history of slavery in the US up to the time of the Constitution’d ratification. It might also be deemed that the British proclivity for stopping our naval craft and impressing sailors constituted enslavement.

      2. And to make it even more fun … there were Native Americans (Also known as Indians) who held black slaves. And other Native American tribes who held white and Mexican slaves. Oh, yeah – actual history is a great deal more complicated and nuanced than one would initally think…

        1. “And to make it even more fun … there were Native Americans (Also known as Indians) who held black slaves. And other Native American tribes who held white and Mexican slaves.”
          I have been assured by Native Americans and liberals that this was “good” slavery, because the slaves were sort of like members of the family. Riiiight.

          1. Apparently, the American Indian slave that one of my ancestors had was like family, because family lore says I am descended from her, and not my g-g-grandfather’s official wife.

    2. The idea was that male property owners, specifically land owners, were independent and thus could not be swayed as easily by the lure of ill-gotten political gains, or by their employer (no secret ballot). You had to have a “competency” in order to participate in elections, although everyone could participate in political actions (boycotts, mobs, political rallies). T.H. Breen’s book “The Marketplace of Revolution” talks about it in great detail.

    3. The initial idea was that those who had something at stake should be the ones who voted. Land was available, so it was not viewed as an impossible hurdle. White was not necessarily part of the restriction, although in many states it was limited to certain racial groups. Male — well that didn’t change until the territory of Wyoming, which granted women suffrage in 1869. And as Wyoming, and others, could break it and be accepted into the Union I would deduce that voting restrictions were set by the individual states.

  23. Yep. Voted about two and a half hours ago.

    Was ashamed at how little I was aware of the various things they were asking us to vote on. Ended up having to not vote at all on some issues because I didn’t know what “Ordinance 234 and 323” (as an example) were that they were asking if we wanted to repeal.

    Mildly (I say “mildly” in case I did misinterpret it) enraged over one of the things, because if I’m not mistaken, one of them was, “Vote to repeal segregation in schools based on colors AND [something I’m unclear on enough to recount here but as I understood it, I would not vote for].” Because I know how it looks to vote against the thing you’re not for which makes it so you’re “also” voting to continue segregation. Of course, it makes me a complete ass if I declined voting on something I would have voted for if I’d understood it properly. I wish I’d woken up earlier today so I could have read more into things, but I slept so poorly I needed to sleep pretty much right up until we left. (And, yes, I ought to have done this research before today, but I never think of the amendments and stuff until a day or two before.)

    1. TG –our sample ballots has the pros and cons of the amendments in it. It makes it easier to do the research, when I have the sample ballot right there.

      1. Different states, different practices, different experiences. Legalese is not an easy sub-language to navigate, probably only surpassed by manualese for frustrating the common reader. Higher level scientists and other geeks when they go wank can fortunately be avoided. 😉

  24. The last two election results were why I argued against allowing 18 yr. olds the vote. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups–who get free stuff.
    Thank you for being such a warrior for the US. I’m sorry we let you down.

    1. You didn’t let me down. I let us down. We need… A Constitutionalist Pride movement. We need a Usaian pride movement. watch tomorrow’s post. Watch a post on PJM if they’ll let me.

      Yes, I’m abandoning some things forever, which is like losing a part of my soul. I have to tell my son to give up on his dreams…

      BUT … but I’m not done. I’ve not even begun.

      1. Sarah, you abandoned some things forever just to come here. We are not given what we want, we are given what needs to be done, and it looks as if we will have more to do than we sought. Waking Theoden is proving more of a challenge than we hoped, but that merely means we must sound the clarion more clearly. It can’t be done. This country can again be what it once was.

        Your son may yet find a path to his dream, it will be the sweeter for being more difficult.

        Take heed of these words posted at The Corner by Jonah Goldberg: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2Q7YRDL90E

        1. Oops – about preceding video clip: contains some … salty … language. My apologies to those who find such … inappropriate.

      2. While I wouldn’t recommend him spending the money and time to go to medical school. Learning all he can about the practicalities would be a good idea if he really wants to be a doctor and help people. We will need doctors more than ever in a few years, and legislation has never stopped anything where there is a demand, it just produces a thriving black market.

    1. Haw – in the words of the founder of the United States Navy: We have not yet begun to fight.

      For one thing, there are some taxes that need increasing; I believe Glenn Reynolds has an interesting list. There are also some tax expenditures that this nation’s Film & TV industry has exploited to the detriment of the public that want revoking.

    2. Two bits of dialog from The Lost Battalion to ponder:

      Maj. Prinz: You Americans, you always have so much of everything. No matter. Eventually you have to surrender.
      Lt. Leak: I don’t think so.
      Maj. Prinz: Are you officers so callous? You’re surrounded. You have no chance of relief. Every night you send out patrols, and every night we kill them. We can hear the cries of your wounded Lieutenant. There is no dishonor in surrender.
      Lt. Leak: Maybe for you, but my guys are different.


      Maj. Prinz: [speaking German; subtitled] We learned at Chateau-Thierry and Belleau Wood that these Americans are unpredictable. They don’t retreat when they’re supposed to.
      Gen. von Sybel: [in German] How inconsiderate of them, Major.

  25. Have enjoyed your posting at Instapundit, Sarah and bookmarked this site.
    Spent Nov. 6 at Repub Command center in south FL, listening to reports on poll irregularities in this Dem county. These will never be addressed.
    Two thoughts: why would we expect good behavior from people who have never been penalized for bad? Do we think they actually have ethics when it is clear that “ends justify the means and we are the good guys” is the limit of their moral thinking.
    Two: IF the government were not so large and all encompassing, it would not matter so much who is in office. How do we Tea Parties fight that? Seems that voting is now existential. Many people are being left out of a technological society, either by ability, poor education, or lack of motivation and they are becoming aware of it and are terrified.

    1. We need to clear the voting rolls. We need to stop early and mail in voting. We need to scream the fraud abroad EVERY TIME. And we need a press that actually goes after D as much as R.

      1. Somehow we need to get some people with enough money to start picking up Media outlets and replacing everyone with people who are as neutral as possible, so they go after all the violations.

Comments are closed.