Get unlimited access to Bruins cup coverage - Just 99¢
jeff jacoby | welfare and the election
August 12, 2012
Way to slam the poor Jacoby. Nice to call them ignorant, indifferent and apathetic. You're great with the insults but lacking on any credible sources for your claims. So, according to the Daily News there were as many a 1000 people in the New York Metro area that voted twice; once in New York, once in Florida. That sounds like old retirees who own a second home and can't remember where they left their glasses. That's not even a Democratic voting block. Those people are just absent minded Republicans. Nice use of the word chicanery but it doesn't fit here Jeff; what in heaven's name are you talking about? For the umpteenth time Jacoby, people don't commit voter fraud. Stop trying to claim they do.
A better question would be: Why are some trying to prevent people from voting ?
President clinton signed this law in 1993, guess who was invited, Cloward and Piven, two radicals, who's theory was to overload the welfare system and bankrupt America, nice. Here's there bio for anyone who might be interested in seeing how government operates:
migh, is that related to the right-wing "starve the beast" strategy, by any chance? According to Wikipedia, ""Starving the beast" is a fiscal-political strategy of American conservatives to cut taxes in order to deprive the government of revenue in a deliberate effort to create a fiscal budget crisis that is intended to force the federal government to reduce spending (rather than raise tax levels). The short and medium term effect of the strategy has increased United States public debt rather than reduced spending." Unlike Cloward and Piven's plan, the radical right has actually executed theirs, as we all see has occurred since Bush turned a surplus into huge deficits. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast ].
The mouthpiece for the Heritage Foundation speaks again. He has also seconded the motion of Scott Brown's denigration of the difficulties of being poor. It almost sounds as if Jacoby and Brown think you are better off if you are down on your luck. This is what the American Credo is all about? What a distortion of logic and mean spirited to boot.
"Senator Scott Brown is right"
I stopped reading.
The dubious NY Daily News account aside, there have been virtually no significant cases of voter fraud discovered anywhere. The sad fact is that Republicans have been using this illusory problem to simply restrict minorities and low income voters, who disproportionately vote democrat, from casting ballots. You're using false equivalency and canards to support your position which is un-American and fundamentally opposed to the rights of all eligible voters.
Jeff makes a great point, but should have focussed on the fraud side of it. The left wing has a vested interest is registering as many people, corpses, dogs, cats and flounders to vote as possible, because their ideas do not usually lead to a majority of legally registered voters to come out and support them. Voter fraud is the reason Al Franken is a senator today, and he is badly missed on Saturday Night Live.
Richmond12, your day doesn't start until you tell some lies.
Jacoby is absolutely correct, This STate does not have a budget problem since it can waste $300,000 as if it was chump change. It all about personal responsibility. It's shocking the number of individuals who demand to be carried by others even when the cause is their own fault and negligence.
messin, you need a refresher course in debating. Alleging that your intellectual opponents are liars does not make it so.
I am so impressed by your open minded approach to politics.
This comment has been removed.
You're right, Ozark. You and Richmond12 have so little credibility and tell so many lies on here, we should all just assume that everything you say is false or misleading in some way.
You belong to an organization that is important to you. A vote is held to select leadership. Would any member of any organization suggest that it "reach out" to people who have not made the slightest effort to even join the organization? What organization makes critical decisions this way? So if something on a small scale makes no sense how does any adult rationally conclude that efforts to constantly facilitate the voting of people who can't, remotely, be bothered to register or show up on election day make sense? How is society served when key decisions may be decided by THE LEAST engaged among us? Someone who has to be virtually harassed into voting is likely to be someone who will be swayed, at the last minute, by the most crass and simplistic appeals to race, class or fear. No one in their right mind would make it easy for the completely disengaged to vote on matters in organizations that mean a lot to them. So how does it possibly make sense to beg people to vote in the MOST important elections? I'll live with the fact that other, fully engaged, individuals may vote differently for me. At least I can be confident they listened to some debate of the issues. But to constantly beg completely indifferent adults simply to vote? Its suicide by elective ignorance.
No voter fraud is good...so the argument that there is only "just a little" voter fraud is crazy. Just a little illegal immigration...just a little insurance fraud...just a little amount of people getting murdered in Boston. Should we wait until it is a lot? And how do we know it isn't a lot already and we just don't know because there are no ways to measure it?
I never understand the arguement that there has never been a widespread voter fraud case. I think both sides would agree that the way the system is set up now that it is easy to committ voter fraud, correct? So do we wait for the time that it does occur and a major fraud is committed or should we be proactive and take steps to make sure we don't ever find ourselves in that situation
Getting 100% participation would be the best possible result if the purpose of voting is for people to exrpess their wishes in who is to run the government.
Whether these people are politically or historically literate is a valid concern, but a side issue.
I've felt for a long time that Americans are among the most selfish, intellectually lazy people around, but I think major shifts in parenting have more to do with that than anything else.
taking personal responsibility for smaller issues in their lives would be good training for more important decisions, like voting....but it is their right as American citizens, and its importance should be emphasized, and they should be encouraged to regsited to vote.
Kitch, they do have the intent to deceive - and your defense of those two liars is pathetic and disgraceful.
Whining is what he does best.