miss california appears even dumber than first believed
- Thread starter 2minkey
- Start date
2minkey
bootlicker
she did a bunch of follow-up to the pageant stuff. maybe use your intarwebs browser to learn all about it.
2minkey
bootlicker
bleach blond and saline are wrong. but the rest is A-OK bitches!!!
Cerise
Well-Known Member
You're kidding me. I didn't think it was possible to actually run into someone who's only had an 8th grade education in this day and age. Is your name IRL "Jethrine"? US History is a mandatory course in High School and that's where you would have learned about the Jim Crow Laws.
I already defined "literacy" for you. I knew that word was beyond your limited vocabulary. One more time...
Let me know if there's any other schoolin' you need, Jethrine.
Your point is: you can't support your claim of how Jim Crow is related to a simple quiz to ensure registered voters know the ramifications of what their choice is?
Gee.
Why am I not surprised (again)?
Cerise
Well-Known Member
Oh, but I said nothing about "passing a test"
only that people who want to vote should have to be made aware of the issues the candidates support through means other than the biased media and how their choice would affect the country. Otherwise you'd be getting a bunch of people who are interested in a candidate based solely on charisma and can't even conceive of what their choice is doing to this country.
Ring any bells?
Winky
Well-Known Member
Lady this may be something of a shock but:
Life isn't fair.
All continued attempts to deny this fact will make you appear quite insane
to rational human beings, sorry to be the one to break this to you
at this late stage of the game...
2minkey
bootlicker
Cerise
Well-Known Member
Oh, he who is so quick to condem:
Again, did I ever say anything about "Pass"?
Don't worry your pretty little head over it.
Everyone would get a gold star just for taking it.
Cerise
Well-Known Member
Uh, Mr. High and Mighty?
Don't try to change the subject now that you've discovered that you were wrong.
It would not be meant to single out a specific segment of the voting public.
It would be only to enlighten voters about the actual specifics of a candidate, not the particulars the media would like you to believe. It would not bar them from voting. Duh.
A test could cover people like you and Julio Osegueda, and everyone in between. And everyone would benefit.
Don't try to change the subject now that you've discovered that you were wrong.
It would not be meant to single out a specific segment of the voting public.
It would be only to enlighten voters about the actual specifics of a candidate, not the particulars the media would like you to believe. It would not bar them from voting. Duh.
A test could cover people like you and Julio Osegueda, and everyone in between. And everyone would benefit.
MrBishop
Well-Known Member
A few questions:
Who writes the test?
Who verifies the lack of slant in this test?
Who administers the test?
Who/how is the reading information given?
If it's not distributed by the media, who will distribute it?
How can you control what the politician writes in his/her explanation of their platform - seeking clarity and completeness - particularly on what is effectively a living document?
Who watches the watchmen?
*If it's merely about giving out information to voters..the candidates' own websites do such a thing already.* Added
2minkey
bootlicker
Uh, Mr. High and Mighty?
Don't try to change the subject now that you've discovered that you were wrong.
It would not be meant to single out a specific segment of the voting public.
It would be only to enlighten voters about the actual specifics of a candidate, not the particulars the media would like you to believe. It would not bar them from voting. Duh.
A test could cover people like you and Julio Osegueda, and everyone in between. And everyone would benefit.
it's this simple: you posed a question about jim crow laws. i answered. you should have known the answer. quit trying to complicate things and weasel here. just STFU before you look any sillier.
Cerise
Well-Known Member
STFU because you know you're going to be proved wrong?
You in your pc correctness assumed it was about Jim Crow laws.
It was about ensuring the entire voting public realize what the candidates are all about ---- not about singling out a particular segment of the population ----you have to look no further than the post that triggered your usual pc rant to realize that:
When some voters voted for change this country got fucked, and not in a good way.
You do know that the Constitution says zip about "the right to vote" don't you?
You in your pc correctness assumed it was about Jim Crow laws.
It was about ensuring the entire voting public realize what the candidates are all about ---- not about singling out a particular segment of the population ----you have to look no further than the post that triggered your usual pc rant to realize that:
markie, people should be made to take a short quiz on the issues of each candidate before they are allowed to vote. No pass/fail mind you.......just so they know what each one stands for, and not what the media tells them they stand for.
Look at what we got when the rocketscientists pulled the lever for "change" .
When some voters voted for change this country got fucked, and not in a good way.
You do know that the Constitution says zip about "the right to vote" don't you?
Cerise
Well-Known Member
It's a test in name only.
You can't deny that candidates would shape their answers to garner the most votes possible.
And some people would vote, maybe for the first time in their lives, because they react to certain words or appearances in a candidate's presentation. Instead of realizing what the candidate will do. And it's getting pretty ugly.