Why should candidates be expected to release their tax returns?

[L1tTleD1fferent]

Yes it does. That I can imagine things.

Both of you apparently can, & neither sees anything wrong with filling your posts with those imagined things/scenarios.

While we're at it, let's remember there is the "all of the above" option, which is you (either or both) are stupid trolls.

 

[Real_American17]

You said I was one or the other, both of which were possibilities presented in the same Option, that being that one of your presented possibilities was correct.

Boy, you are a real idiot!

"one or the other" That's two options, you can take the highroad or the lowroad, you can take the left fork or the right fork in the road, you take door number one or door number two, etc.

Those are all two options!

Option 2 was/is that all of them are wrong & you're an idiot, which was proven to be the case in both the former (proven by me) & the latter (which you continue to prove).

Nope, sorry retard, you said you chose option "2" which was "stupid" now you're trying to claim option "3", no dice faggot!

Yes it does. That I can imagine things.

You know damn well that my question wasn't literally if you could imagine it, it was if you were supportive of such a possibility.

Don't try and play ignorance.

Nigger!

 

[Sean Renaud]

No, I didn't know that. I knew you were talking about my accepting that as a possibility but if America votes for a commie for president that's what we did. Its our right or should be.

 

[Real_American17]

No, I didn't know that. I knew you were talking about my accepting that as a possibility but if America votes for a commie for president that's what we did. Its our right or should be.

The vast majority of Americans are unfit to vote.

Besides that, it's not whether people in the 50/60s were dumb enough to vote in a Red Commie, it's that they could be voting in a President who's true allegiance is to the USSR and who's entire moral structure is based in Communist indoctrination.

 

[Sean Renaud]

That's your opinion. It's one I even share from time to time but I know of no possible way to fix that without letting the powers that be simply eliminate the competition.

If they did vote in someone whose entire moral structure is based in Communist indoctrination that is what they voted for. It is there right.

 

[L1tTleD1fferent]

Boy, you are a real idiot!

"one or the other" That's two options, you can take the highroad or the lowroad, you can take the left fork or the right fork in the road, you take door number one or door number two, etc.

Those are all two options!

You said it was either one or the other (followed by your Wikipedia quote), leaving no "none of the above" option. Therefore, that would be an additional option separate from however many you claimed to be offering.

Nope, sorry retard, you said you chose option "2" which was "stupid" now you're trying to claim option "3", no dice faggot!

No faggot, which means you spend another night with whatever hand you choose. Also, I still choose the option you didn't list, whatever number you wish to give it. (Must we go into negatives, or can you count higher than your IQ?)

Don't try and play ignorance.

No problem... At least I have a choice whether I wish to play it, whereas you're stuck always being one.

 

[L1tTleD1fferent]

That's your opinion. It's one I even share from time to time but I know of no possible way to fix that without letting the powers that be simply eliminate the competition.

If they did vote in someone whose entire moral structure is based in Communist indoctrination that is what they voted for. It is there right.

1] Not an opinion; Fact proven if you look at list of winners & losers, as I did in History classes a few times when I was in school.

2] Not there right, but the typo is ironic... Another mistake (like the hypothetical vote might be) that is right there.

 

[Sean Renaud]

1] Not an opinion; Fact proven if you look at list of winners & losers, as I did in History classes a few times when I was in school.

2] Not there right, but the typo is ironic... Another mistake (like the hypothetical vote might be) that is right there.

No, it's an opinion. Because there is no accurate judgement for who is worthy to vote and no such standard can be made.

Oh, hi grammar nazi!

 

[L1tTleD1fferent]

No, it's an opinion. Because there is no accurate judgement for who is worthy to vote and no such standard can be made.

Oh, hi grammar nazi!

1] It's a fact; It's an opinion until they cast that vote... If someone walks outside into a blizzard wearing shorts & topless, calling them an idiot is stating facts.

2] Admittedly did that w/o reason... What you type makes your stupidity obvious to all.

 

[Real_American17]

That's your opinion. It's one I even share from time to time but I know of no possible way to fix that without letting the powers that be simply eliminate the competition.

It already is eliminated, that's the entire point of the natural born citizen requirement for Presidency.

If they did vote in someone whose entire moral structure is based in Communist indoctrination that is what they voted for. It is there right.

1) vast majority of American are unfit to vote, letting the unwashed hordes dominate the election is to close to direct democracy and is vulnerable to a demagogue rising to power.

2) The dirty Commie, Muslim, Catholic, etc. might not be open about their beliefs... like Obama.

Sure if a foreign government or even just a nut job wanted to raise their child in the US and indoctrinate them to hate America and run for President as a Manchurian candidate... it's possible but less likely than the child simply growing up in a foreign and alien land and then immigrating to the US.




Originally voting was restricted to educated, wealthy, land owning white Protestant men, this is the best way.

But even if you eliminated the wealthy, and Protestant part it would still be good.

White land owning men, that are informed, and also have served in the military.

Letting everyone vote is immoral, it's like letting someone that won't help pay the bill decide what is ordered at a restaurant.

If you are not an upstanding member of society and actively contributing to our civilization's benefit than why should you have any say in how it is governed and how everyone else is taxed?

Just like in any group, voting is limited. In companies, only the shareholders vote, in unions only the dues payers vote, in sports leagues only the owners vote, same for HOAs, etc.

We should adopt a system similar to Starship Trooper's Terran Federation:

"A citizen accepts personal responsibility for the safety of the body politic, defending it with his life, a civilian does not." - Johnny Rico

Jean Rasczak: We talked about the rights and privileges between those who served in the armed forces and those who haven't, therefore called citizens and civilians. [to a student] You. Why are only citizens allowed to vote?

Student: It's a reward. Something the federation gives you for doing federal service.

Jean Rasczak: No. Something given has no basis in value. When you vote, you are exercising political authority, you're using force. And force, my friends, is violence. The supreme authority from which all other authorities are derived.

You said it was either one or the other (followed by your Wikipedia quote), leaving no "none of the above" option. Therefore, that would be an additional option separate from however many you claimed to be offering.

Wrong you picked the option that you were stupid! Haha!

No faggot, which means you spend another night with whatever hand you choose. Also, I still choose the option you didn't list, whatever number you wish to give it. (Must we go into negatives, or can you count higher than your IQ?)

Wrong again.

No problem... At least I have a choice whether I wish to play it, whereas you're stuck always being one.

Get back between your father's knees you little cum sucking, pissrag!

 

[Sean Renaud]

Oh wow, didn't think you'd actually flat out go there. Cool beans.

 

[Real_American17]

Oh wow, didn't think you'd actually flat out go there. Cool beans.

What do you mean?

 

[Sean Renaud]

Very few people will admit that they don't believe in Democracy and that we should instead be ruled by an elite few. Based on your statement elections to you are more an unfortuante sacrifice to the unworthy than something a proper country should do.

 

[Real_American17]

Very few people will admit that they don't believe in Democracy and that we should instead be ruled by an elite few. Based on your statement elections to you are more an unfortuante sacrifice to the unworthy than something a proper country should do.

America was never meant to be a Greek-style democracy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A47hLz3Ij28

I have no problem with the entire population participating in the election process, as long as they meet the criteria.

If 100% meet it, fine... but if only 2% meet it then it is the 2% that will vote.

It is immoral to give everyone an equal voice, if we are not all equal.

Just like I think affirmative action is immoral so too is universal suffrage.

This republic should be guided by a libertarian, utilitarian, pragmatic, and moral ethos.

Have a homogeneous society is important, having an engaged and informed electorate, with similar values and goals, and armed and vigilant society ready to pounce on criminals in the street as quickly as on corrupt police or tyrannical government...

Race and ethnicity are important factors to be kept homogeneous, minority populations are okay, but even more important is that we keep our morals, values, culture, etc. homogeneous.

Again, having a small population of Commies or Muslims, etc. is okay as long as they remain very small and any crimes they commit are punished instead of exceptions being made like today.

All this PC, anti-racist nonsense, if a black commits a crime he should be punished just like a white, if a women commits a crime, she should be punished just like a man, if a Muslim commits a crime he should be punished just like a Cristian, etc.

When we allow exceptions/exemptions, when we let these groups form ghettos, and become separate from the greater society, this is when we see problems.

The People of the United States, are mostly hedonistic, degenerate, selfish, entitled, ignorant, sub-human garbage, this is because of the Zionists.

As such, the system must be torn down, the corruption must be purged, and a new better society and government should be built to replace it.

This is the advice of our Founding Fathers, and it is central to what it means to be an American.

"There are five boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, mail, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order."

 

[Sean Renaud]

Like I said, most people don't have the courage to admit they are the badguy. Good for you.

 

[Real_American17]

Like I said, most people don't have the courage to admit they are the badguy. Good for you.

I disagree, you are the evil one in this.

Evil must be destroyed where ever it my spring up.

 

[Sean Renaud]

And that's fine. I would be evil from your POV.

Still like I said, very few people will openly admit that they like the idea of some kind of racially pure oligarchy. I wish more people were honest like you.

 

[Real_American17]

And that's fine. I would be evil from your POV.

Still like I said, very few people will openly admit that they like the idea of some kind of racially pure oligarchy. I wish more people were honest like you.

An oligarchy: "small group of people having control of a country, organization, or institution"...

It wouldn't necessarily be an oligarchy, it depends on how much of the population is worthy of voting.

Like I said, it might be just 1% or it might be 100%.

 

[Sean Renaud]

An oligarchy: "small group of people having control of a country, organization, or institution"...

It wouldn't necessarily be an oligarchy, it depends on how much of the population is worthy of voting.

Like I said, it might be just 1% or it might be 100%.

It would never be more than 1% because the people deciding who is worthy are always going to make sure that only people who share their interests are worthy. You've already stated emphatically that people raised in Russia cannot be worthy. Next it'll be feminists, then blacks, then democrats, then RINOs then etc etc.

 

[L1tTleD1fferent]

It already is eliminated, that's the entire point of the natural born citizen requirement for Presidency.

That may have been the aim, but it didn't actually happen (like your father's vasectomy).

1) vast majority of American are unfit to vote.

Speak more for yourself & less about yourself.

2) The dirty Commie, Muslim, Catholic, etc. might not be open about their beliefs... like Obama.

The ones that have spoken up since he was running the first time but not been open about their true beliefs are those who actually did (& do) "like Obama".

Sure if a foreign government or even just a nut job wanted to raise their child in the US and indoctrinate them to hate America and run for President as a Manchurian candidate... it's possible but less likely than the child simply growing up in a foreign and alien land and then immigrating to the US.

Again, that is the type of belief that brought about the natural-born-citizen rule, but is equal in accuracy to the famous belief in Iraqi WMDs.

Originally voting was restricted to educated, wealthy, land owning white Protestant men, this is the best way.

BULL.

But even if you eliminated the wealthy, and Protestant part it would still be good.

White land owning men, that are informed, and also have served in the military.

If you limited it to that, you'd cancel-out the ones that died serving, a vast majority.

Letting everyone vote is immoral, it's like letting someone that won't help pay the bill decide what is ordered at a restaurant.

It's not immoral, but the latter situation is what happens as often as not (if not more often than not), proving many have no problem with it. (In fact, paying for what someone else ordered is often referred to as "a treat".)

If you are not an upstanding member of society and actively contributing to our civilization's benefit than why should you have any say in how it is governed and how everyone else is taxed?

Why did you ask this question? You are attempting to do so, so you must know the reason(s) why.

Just like in any group, voting is limited.

Either more than it should be (people wrongfully arrested/accused/jailed not allowed to vote for right lawmakers, etc.) or too much (people who need write-in b/c they are not well-enough educated on options that exist).

We should adopt a system similar to Starship Trooper's Terran Federation:

"A citizen accepts personal responsibility for the safety of the body politic, defending it with his life, a civilian does not." - Johnny Rico[/url]

We have that: A citizen fights in places he has no true reason to be, in order to do what their President believes will help that place's citizenry, regardless of if the person believes it themselves or not. In many cases, that person's family & friends never see them again b/c of something that happened while they were in a place they never wanted to be for a fight they didn't agree should be taking place.

A bunch of pointless crap from a fictional American film that has no claim of being factual even in the fictional world in which it is set, let alone the American portion of that fictional world.

Wrong you picked the option that you were stupid!

I picked an option you neither included nor ruled non-existent. I am not wrong, same as that 1 word is not on its own a complete sentence nor a part of the sentence you posted it in.

Wrong again.

That would imply I was wrong a first time, when in fact, I was wrong neither.

Get back between your father's knees you little cum sucking, pissrag!

Comma in an incorrect place in a sentence that is not correct nor on-topic even if it were correctly-punctuated.

 

[Real_American17]

It would never be more than 1% because the people deciding who is worthy are always going to make sure that only people who share their interests are worthy.

But in a capitalist and meritocratic society, most people will be able to enter that worthy group... unless it's something that can't be changed.

You've already stated emphatically that people raised in Russia cannot be worthy.

Which only effects first/second generation Americans.

Next it'll be feminists, then blacks, then democrats, then RINOs then etc etc.

Well those all make perfect sense.

That may have been the aim, but it didn't actually happen (like your father's vasectomy).

He never had that procedure. But back on topic, you are wrong.

Speak more for yourself & less about yourself.

You are likely one of those unqualified to vote.

The ones that have spoken up since he was running the first time but not been open about their true beliefs are those who actually did (& do) "like Obama".

Obama was a Kenyan-born and Commie/Muslim raised Manchurian candidate.

Again, that is the type of belief that brought about the natural-born-citizen rule, but is equal in accuracy to the famous belief in Iraqi WMDs.

That is a non-sequitur.

BULL.

Nope.

If you limited it to that, you'd cancel-out the ones that died serving, a vast majority.

If they dies serving, how exactly will they vote?

It's not immoral, but the latter situation is what happens as often as not (if not more often than not), proving many have no problem with it. (In fact, paying for what someone else ordered is often referred to as "a treat".)

More insanity from your deranged and festered mind.

Why did you ask this question? You are attempting to do so, so you must know the reason(s) why.

There is no reason why.

Either more than it should be (people wrongfully arrested/accused/jailed not allowed to vote for right lawmakers, etc.) or too much (people who need write-in b/c they are not well-enough educated on options that exist).

Rewrite this.

We have that: A citizen fights in places he has no true reason to be, in order to do what their President believes will help that place's citizenry, regardless of if the person believes it themselves or not.

Wrong, that is the relationship between a lord and a serf!

The President is not my king, and I am not his servant. This is a land of equal and sovereign men.

In many cases, that person's family & friends never see them again b/c of something that happened while they were in a place they never wanted to be for a fight they didn't agree should be taking place.

Just like a peasant, that's what scum like you want... not what I want.

A bunch of pointless crap from a fictional American film that has no claim of being factual even in the fictional world in which it is set, let alone the American portion of that fictional world.

It being fiction has no bearing on the quote. Should we ignore quotes from great literature because they are fiction? Should we ignore quotes from poetry?

You're a fucking moron!

I picked an option you neither included nor ruled non-existent. I am not wrong, same as that 1 word is not on its own a complete sentence nor a part of the sentence you posted it in.

Than you should have phrased it differently, as it is phrased you chose option "2" and are stupid.

That would imply I was wrong a first time, when in fact, I was wrong neither.

Wrong a third time.

Comma in an incorrect place in a sentence that is not correct nor on-topic even if it were correctly-punctuated.

What a total non-point you small brained liberal drone.

Now, go fix that mangled quote above you incompetent buffoon!

 

[Sean Renaud]

Capitalism and meritocracies are virtually by definition at odds with each other. So your right, in a sufficient fantasy realm that could work for all of thirty seconds. OF course the 1% would make the rules so nobody new ever got in.

 

[Real_American17]

Capitalism and meritocracies are virtually by definition at odds with each other.

Wrong, they are intertwined.

You are a brainwashed Communist nigger! That's why your deranged mind can't process this.

 

[L1tTleD1fferent]

He never had that procedure. But back on topic, you are wrong.

On it seems any topic outside of your personal life (that we don't agree on), you are the one that is wrong, & I am the one that is correct. Disagree with me? In that case, you are the one that is wrong, & I... (on & on).

You are likely one of those unqualified to vote.

I am qualified to vote, & have done so. You probably are & have as well. That may be true, but not proper.

Obama was a Kenyan-born and Commie/Muslim raised Manchurian candidate.

He was born in the US, & neither of us has proof the way he was raised (politically).

That is a non-sequitur.

It is a fact, & on-topic. I understand your inability to recognize them, since it is rare (if ever) I see you post them.

Nope.

One word, & you may actually be correct. Learn to quit while you are even. (You got a-head long ago, but apparently have nothing useful inside it.)

If they dies serving, how exactly will they vote?

Hence you cancelling them out. (Like that needless "s" in a verb in your question. You will no doubt respond calling me a "spelling Nazi", which is neither true nor on-topic, or an idiot for what you will claim is a question you posed without any errors.)

More insanity from your deranged and festered mind.

Insanity? Wrong. Deranged? Wrong. Festered? Wrong. Again, however, I don't expect you to recognize or understand sane, correctly-working minds, since you have repeatedly proven to lack one of your own.

There is no reason why.

You continue to claim such a person doesn't deserve a say while being one & attempting to.

Rewrite this.

I would if I saw a reason. You seem to be requesting I do so b/c you don't comprehend its meaning. In this same post, I have already mentioned things you fail to recognize &/or comprehend due to problems that have nothing to do with me, & that many others do not have. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few," so I'll refrain, & you go sit on it.

The President is not my king, and I am not his servant. This is a land of equal and sovereign men.

Where those "equal" (according to you, not reality) men get sent to other countries after being "informed" of weapons in that country that would prove quite fatal if they actually existed. Those American men who then find themselves in that country fight there for a reason they were told that was not true. Perhaps when (& maybe even at the precise same second) a relative of theirs learns of this falsehood, that person also loses this aforementioned family member.

Just like a peasant, that's what scum like you want... not what I want.

I'm not scum or someone that has ever wanted that. However, I'm busy mid-week, so I don't have time to list all the things you've been proven wrong about.

It being fiction has no bearing on the quote. Should we ignore quotes from great literature because they are fiction? Should we ignore quotes from poetry?

I am not saying it being fiction has any bearing on it. However, that refers to the bearing in either direction. While I am not going to start believing quotes from Whitman or Voltaire any less, I am also not going to try to travel to Neverland. You cannot possibly argue it is fiction, & that (which we seem to agree is factual) is all I am stating.

Than you should have phrased it differently, as it is phrased you chose option "2" and are stupid.

I phrased it fine. It is more irony that you see me as calling myself stupid because you are.

Wrong a third time.

"All or nothing..." I am wrong the latter in this instance, just as what you wrote about me is correct the latter.

What a total non-point you small brained liberal drone.

Do you see how this is repetitive?! You claim I made a "non-point" (or failed to make one), when in fact it is what you do often in this thread. Also, you seem to be mockingly celebrating it as though it is an achievement, since you fail(ed) to recognize the majority (if not all) of the points I have made/stated, as well as the fact that conversely, I would recognize your points if you made any. (You seem to prefer to waste much of your posts' space making false claims about what I think/want/say.)

Now, go fix that mangled quote above...!

I'd be happy to, but I prefer my replies to make sense, which means I have to leave your lies, false claims, misunderstandings, utter nonsense, & the like the way you wrote them.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Wrong, they are intertwined.

You are a brainwashed Communist nigger! That's why your deranged mind can't process this.

No. They are not intertwined in the real world. In the real world Capitalism always leads to oligarchies and the like and it always boils down to be people being born better.

Meritocracies don't even truly exist on any large scale because creating a true Meritocracy is absurdly difficult.