Bush Nicks California National Guard Equipment

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

I'd say that all leaders deserve to be mocked, and some deserve to be recalled.

*rumble*

When'd we vote?

[Sibling Chatty]

"Recalled" with extreme prejudice??

I'm choosing to be Empress of the Universe, here.

I need some backing, though. Y'all up for being the Advisory Board to the Empress?

Now, to implement this concept...

[Swatopluk]

And tell unpleasant Dubya this mock of his
Hath turn'd his balls to gun-stones; and his soul
Shall stand sore charged for the wasteful vengeance
That shall fly with them: for near a million widows
Shall this his mock mock out of their dear husbands;
Mock mothers from their sons, mock neighbourhoods down;
And some are yet ungotten and unborn
That shall have cause to curse the Dubya's scorn.
His jest will savour but of shallow wit,
When millionss weep more than did laugh at it.

Sorry, once I hear the term 'mock' this passage comes to mind

[pieces o nine]

But this lies all within the will of God,
To whom we do appeal...

[Scriblerus the Philosophe]

I'll sign up to help out, Chatty!


We should have the ability to recall the president if he's a dipsh*t like Bushy is.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

Sign me up-- I would cheerfully live in a Country that Chatty was Empress of.

And, yes, I agree--- there ought to be a "too stupid to be president" rule.

[Swatopluk]

With an exception, if all alternatives qualify as evil.
Candidates evil and stupid should be tied to the lightning rods after metal spraypainting.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

With an exception, if all alternatives qualify as evil.
Candidates evil and stupid should be tied to the lightning rods after metal spraypainting.

If I were 'king for a day' one of the things I would change, would be some basic requirements in balloting:

1) there would always be a "none of the above" on a ballot-- even if the issue was a "yea" or "nay" vote.

2) if 34% of the people who voted, voted "none of the above" then the election is declared null and void.  If voting for a slate of candidates, these are tossed out, and new ones selected. If 1/3 of the population doesn't like ANY of the candidates, then that should be sufficient reason to toss'em all out-- or at a bare minimum, add in some new ones, even in the same party.

If it's a "yea" or "nay" vote, then the law/ballot/question needs to be seriously re-written, and re-presented.   "none of the above" in that case, can be considered to be: "I don't like or understand the question.  Re-write it, so I can at least understand enough to vote no, or like it enough to vote yes."

I would also change the way elections were run:  a written test would be REQUIRED of each potential voter.  The test would be ABOUT each candidate, and CORRECT answers regarding that candidate's voting record, or promises in the absence of any such records, would be required, before casing ballots.   

If it's about a "yes/no" question, the test would be about the proposition, in detail.

The ONLY exception to written tests, would be if one were blind-- then either a brallie ballot or someone could read it to you.  No other exceptions allowed.  Can't read?  Come back when you can, and then maybe you can vote.  Can't read the language?  Come back when you can, and then maybe you can vote...

I would eliminate completely the college of elections-- and national votes would BE a national vote.  That would mean that a person living in rural Montana would have 1 (one) vote each, just like someone living in New Jersey.  (under the current system, a person in rural Montana has 8-10 votes each, but must cast them all the exact same way.  A person living in 'Jersey has 1/2 a vote each.  This is because of the way that delegates are rationed out-- they are "sort of" proportional to the population, but not really.  There can't be 1/2 a delegate or 1/10 a delegate, for those really rural locales.... )

I would hold the elections over the course of 7 days, including one weekend.   The results would be kept SECRET, under the strictest penalty of law, with severe $$ penalties, until the LAST day was OVER.  And, the polls would close at the same time, regardless of the time-zone (i.e. close at 9pm EST, 8pm CST, 7pm MT, 6pm PT, etc).   In this way, a person voting on the last day, because that was the BEST time for them to vote, would still count as much as one who voted on the first day.

I realize that exit polls could not be stopped, as this is Free Speech, and therefore protected.... but.  The OFFICIAL results would be required to be kept in the strictest secrecy-- sub-totals strictly prohibited, to protect the Franchise of those who vote later in the 7 days.

Aaaah, but I dream.... Back to your regular schedule. 

[Scriblerus the Philosophe]

Sounds like a plan to me.
I reeeeeally dislike the Electoral College, but I don't think the national vote is sufficient. The whole of Montana would be outvoted by LA.
There's really not an easy answer to this question, by any means.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

Sounds like a plan to me.
I reeeeeally dislike the Electoral College, but I don't think the national vote is sufficient. The whole of Montana would be outvoted by LA.
There's really not an easy answer to this question, by any means.

Yes, (Montana vs LA).  So?

The fact that Montana still has TWO Senators should compensate for that-- and they have at least 2 representatives.  They should only get the number of votes for the population they possess, with regards to the president.

[Sibling Chatty]

I disagree vehemently with the proposed BobWorld disenfranchisement of the functionally illiterate.

Ever hear of severe dyslexia? Were I not blessed with an extremely high intelligence level to balance my dyslexia, I would not be able to read.

There's a child here in Somerville with severe (much worse than mine) neurofibromatosis. His dyslexia has left him unable to read--yet he can hear a news story ONCE, and, at age 13, discuss it at length, and with total recall of the facts. (Not that voting will ever be an issue with him, as he's probably not going to survive more than another year or so.) However, there are MANY of us dyslexics, NOST of us above average intelligence, and some of us cannot read, will NEVER be able to read--yet can function perfecly well in any situation where there's an audio version of print materials, or a reader.

We are NOT children of a lesser God...with apologies to Mark Medved, but that's the feeling that "Can't read?  Come back when you can, and then maybe you can vote." gives me. Until the last 20 years or so, MANY dyslexics were completely undiagnosed and just regarded as stupid or lazy or both.

Been there, done that (not on reading, but on math issues because of problems with symbols--I figure out letters from context in words) and it's NOT something I would want to have on my conscience...the denigration of a person over a disability that doesn't show the way a "proper disability" does.

[pieces o nine]

As long as we're talking crazy...

1. Anyone holding one office and campaigning for another must first resign their current office, since their mind is clearly not on the job they were hired to do, nor will their efforts be.

2. Candidates for U.S. public office would also have to pass a written test demonstrating:
a. ability to read, speak and write at the 12th grade level. (12th grade comprehension for dyslexics.)
b.1. thorough knowledge and understanding of U.S. constitution, Bill of Rights, and an "A" on a comprehensive test on what actually happened during critical periods of U.S. History (all levels) and world history (federal level).
b.2. thorough knowledge and understanding of state constitution and an "A" on a comprehensive test on what actually happened during critical periods of the state's history (state level)
b.3. understanding of current 'hot' issues, ability to objectively summarize pros and cons of personal platform to address issues.
c. ability to comprehend and solve basic logic puzzles
d. ability to correctly complete and analyze budgets and graphs
e.1. ability to correctly identify all 50 U.S. states, all countries in North, Central and South America, all member nations in key strategic or trade treaties, and all "hot spot" nations on the appropriate maps (federal level).
e.2. ability to correctly identify all the counties on a state map (state level).

3. Candidate's test grades to be published at the time they announce their candidacy. Candidates must also pass the full background checks and substance abuse tests required of anyone seeking conventional employment.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

I disagree vehemently with the proposed BobWorld disenfranchisement of the functionally illiterate.

Ever hear of severe dyslexia? Were I not blessed with an extremely high intelligence level to balance my dyslexia, I would not be able to read.

...

..... a. ability to read, speak and write at the 12th grade level. (12th grade comprehension for dyslexics.)...

I would humbly request inclusion of Po9's adjustment, as above.  For persons demonstrating otherwise intelligent discourse, but functionally illiterate, an alternate testing procedure (other than written) should be implemented.

However, the exceptions should be carefully crafted, to avoid the "camel's nose" syndrome.   

The point of the testing prior to voting, is to demonstrate adequate knowledge of the subject one is going to vote on.  If you can think of another testing method, that demonstrates adequate knowledge, that could be machine-processed....

I recognize that my harsh qualifications for voting would eliminate roughly 90% of those who vote now-- for many simply cannot be bothered to learn anything NEW.... if it doesn't come from a drive-up window, and isn't available in "half-caf" then they simply cannot be bothered.... these sorts shouldn't be allowed to vote anyway.

I think we'd pick up roughly 10% from those who don't bother to vote now, from the futility of it all-- the new reduced numbers, coupled with the challenge of passing the test would attract people who felt the old system was a complete waste of time.

At those numbers, it is very likely that we could even dispense with the machine processing requirement, and go straight to essay-type questions.  And if a person can adequately demonstrate at least a "C" knowledge of the voting issue (either verbally or written) then they could vote.   But, sorry to the immigrants, I'd keep the English requirement in place-- part of becoming a good citizen is learning the Language of the land.   If they can't be bothered to learn enough English to pass a test... what else can't the be bothered to learn?  Our laws?

..........................

On the flip side, I sometimes think that ALL should be forced to vote, regardless.   Eliminate the testing thingy, but introduce a stiff fine, if one DOES NOT vote within the 7 days.   Make absentee voting simple.

This system would get a 90+ percent turn out, and would be a much closer measure of the actual "will of the people".  But it would dilute the votes of people who both care and know what is going on, with those "I'll take a half-caf, low-fat creme, whisper of cinimon..." types.

I go back-and-forth. 

I think I'd much rather keeping people like Chatty and Po9 [voting] [reading skills or not] and eliminating people like W from voting at all.

..............

I'd modify Po9's requirements, to include that if _my_ voting system were in place as well [testing requirements], a candidate is automatically excluded, if they failed to vote at least 90% of the time an opportunity was present.

[Sibling Chatty]

I would eliminate from consideration any candidate that has not voted at least 90% of the time in the past 5 years, and at least semi-regularly since attainment of voting age.

AS to the currently employed running, some STRICT term limits AND a requirement that votes MUST be made in one's current position, rather than campaigning would do a world of good. (Yes, the strategic "stand outside the door and withhold a vote" to leverage things is still OK, but if your legislative body is voting, BE THERE.)

I want them dang bozos to be paid ONLY for the time they show up anyway. Miss a vote because you're out campaigning? We don't pay you for NOT doin' yer dang job, and we don't want ya in another one you won't do, either.

[pieces o nine]

Hear! Hear!