Posted on 11/24/2008 11:06:20 AM PST by IbJensen
The Major Media could have packaged Hugo Chavez as an author of Change and the unwashed masses would have bought it.
As a matter of fact I think they did - sort of.
Although the franchise was restricted to male property owners, there were no racial barriers to voting for George Washington. Many "freedmen," (i.e., emancipated slaves and their descendants,) in post-colonial times were property-owning voters. p>In fact, many freedmen owned slaves of their own.
I guess I was making an assumption that black landowners were pretty scarce at the time of the founding.
These days, simply “landowner” would be sufficient, as married people both own the property.
I've advocated this for years. Another requirement that was jettisoned some time ago would be that only property owners could vote.
America
RIP
July 4, 1776- November 4, 2008
Bookmarked for later viewing
Allowing only property owners to vote, will disenfranchise a large portion of the US Military. Because most of them are very young, they are not often in a position to buy a home. Our military certainly should have voting rights. Their lives are dependent on elected officials. Maybe there could be an exception for military families.
In that case “ignorance” means stupidity!
How can one vote for a person one doesn’t know for POTUS...?
The problem was they didn't educate themselves at all. They saw Obama's skin color, heard his words of hope (for a better life with govt. help) and change (get rid of George Bush and the warmongers) and they were caught hook, line and sinker. There was no thinking about how change was to be brought about and who was going to pay for it and how this country was to be protected.
No one listened to the stories about his disgusting friends because if it doesn't affect you in your personal life it doesn't matter. Misplaced anger over discrimination has destroyed not only faith in America but perhaps in democracy itself and those rights inherent in a democracy.
Many Americans have lost the ability to think critically through the implementation of political correctness in defiance of common sense and free speech, which is what liberals want most.
The ones I've talked to couldn't spell CAT, if you spotted them the 'C' and 'A'.
Real property — and not just a “time share”.
..and when the MSM types, such as Tom Brokaw, after the fact, say “duh . . we REALLY don’t know much about Obama, do we? . . his world view . . or any of that . . . he’s sort of CREEPY, in fact.” “Duh.”
Affirmative Action at its height.
You could be a “tenant in common” which means you have a “share” of the property -
you pay your share of property taxes and get your share of the depreciation - this is ownership of property.
Not sure what the tax implications of a “time share” are, though.
Originally only white males could vote, they had to own property worth IIRC two hundred dollars, which was a considerable amount of money at that time. I also seem to remember that they had to be able to read, write and understand the constitution. Those last three words would disqualify the majority of sitting judges these days as well as all elected Democrats in both houses of congress as well as many elected Republicans! The “president-elect” wouldn’t be able to vote as he obviously has zero understanding of the constitution.
Hi there, sorry for the late response. I do not think that we have competent judges here today to be able to decipher the criteria for voting.
Plus the politically correct mindset, like thinking woman and men are the same creature{another subject}, make it impossible to move forward.
The open mind is stiffling. Close them for the Holiday!! LOL....Seriously, I think IQ could be a good place to start save our limitations as a society today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.