Aaahhhhhhh, but it is. At least in a democracy, it is!
No, it isn't. This is the difference between, for example, a Clinton and a Bush. Clinton couldn't take a pee without first checking the polls. On the other hand, Bush apparently doesn't give a damn about the polls, he will do what he was elected to do, which is to exercise his best judgment.
Aaahhhhhhh, but it is. At least in a democracy, it is!
No, it isn't. The Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, made every effort to insulate the nation's management from the whims of an uninformed electorate. This is what brought us the Senate, as well as the Electoral College.
Your comments are the early seeds from where a Hitler springs forth.
While, as a general principle, I would love to see some basic knowledge of the issues required as a prerequisite to voting, I'm not sure that's materially better than the current system, in which voters are subject to manipulation by crooked party operatives. Democrats in the last election literally delivered incapacitated nursing home residents to the polls and help them vote for the candidates of their (the aid's) choice. While an extreme example of manipulation, it is of the same character of what happens when you have Carville and Begala telling one lie after another to gullible voters.
A powerful argument can be made that it is this kind of abuse that forms the basis for a Hitler-ish regime. These kinds of crooked political ploys have been a trademark of the Democrat party for years, preying on the weaknesses of the voting public. |
