Thursday, September 1, 2011

Rick Hasen isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer

Left-wingers often have problems with reading comprehension.

A case in point is Rick Hasen of Election Law Blog.

In my recent American Thinker op-ed, "Registering the Poor to Vote is Un-American," I argued that it is destructive to register welfare recipients to vote so that they can vote themselves more government benefits. It is even worse that our tax dollars are used to register welfare recipients at welfare offices. It is a policy that would cause the Founding Fathers to roll over in their graves.

Yet Hasen misrepresents my views. He writes
Wow.  Deny the right to vote the poor because they might vote in their self-interest.  I don’t know something more “un-American” these days than claiming that wealth should be a valid criterion for deciding who should get the right to vote.
I never made that argument but Hasen is either too stupid to understand this or he is deliberately sliming me. Of course those who are legally qualified to vote should be allowed to vote but our tax dollars shouldn't be used to underwrite the destruction of the republic.



* * * * *



America needs to know that ACORN is restructuring in time to help re-elect President Obama in 2012. Obama used to work for ACORN and represented the group in court as its lawyer. These radical leftists who use the brutal, in-your-face, pressure tactics of Saul Alinsky want to destroy America as we know it and will use any means to do it.


Buy my book Subversion Inc. at Amazon and in Barnes & Noble and Books-A-Million bookstores. Visit the Subversion Inc. Facebook page. Follow me on Twitter.

23 comments:

  1. Sir, I hope you have addressed the socialists in your own family who may be destroying the republic. Do you have relatives of modest means who have consumed more than they have contributed to Social Security and Medicare? By the prevailing definition they are socialists. Likely they are "poor" and should not be motivated to vote.

    Farmers and their subsidies? Socialism. Without it they could be poor. Don't encourage them to vote. Educating more children within your family than you have paid for through your property taxes. Sounds like socialism.

    It would be so refreshing if the folks of your ilk would have the courage to be more specific and call out socialists within your own social sphere before jabber jawing flimsy generalizations on TV and in paperback pulp.

    Let's put down this Shey's rebellion of socialists in our neighborhoods and start calling out the culprits who undermine God's divine promise bestowed upon the founders and and stifle America's corporate benevolence by catering to bums. They are probably living right next door or will be sitting at your Thanksgiving table this November.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hello there sir. You want to demean people and then try to sell something? Is that logical?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Have you ever heard that Buddha joke from ANGER MANAGEMENT?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Why do you hate democracy?

    ReplyDelete
  5. You most certainly do wish to deny the poor the right to vote. Look, you were brave enough to say what you thought. Have the courage of your (bigoted) convictions.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "destructive to register welfare recipients to vote so that they can vote themselves more government benefits. It is even worse that our tax dollars are used to register welfare recipients at welfare offices. It is a policy that would cause the Founding Fathers to roll over in their graves."

    Oh, but it's ok for corporations to donate millions to politicians so that they can get favorable laws enacted? You're full of it mister.

    ReplyDelete
  7. re: registering the poor to vote is un-American and "like handing out burglary tools to criminals." Handing a pen to Matthew Vadum is like giving a fresh turd to an angry chimp (but I will grant--it IS "American")

    ReplyDelete
  8. [I]t is destructive to register welfare recipients to vote so that they can vote themselves more government benefits."

    I realize that this is poorly worded and that Vadum did not mean that the poor could actually vote themselves benefits - he meant that they could vote for Democrats who could then vote for them to get those benefits. But this is clearly offset by the money that the rich spend to influence elections and members of Congress who depend on them to finance their election campaigns. If it is Mr. Vadum's position that the Federal government paid ACORN per voter registered, he should say that and not imply it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think it's a shame that our tax dollars are wasted on counting votes. We should just ask Matthew Vadum who he thinks would do the job best and save ourselves millions of dollars of democratic waste.

    ReplyDelete
  10. if your work was satire, it would be brilliant. as it is, it's just sadly pathetic. you should consider a new line of work.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You know, Mr. Vadum, for someone who purports to hate communism, you sure have no problem believing that some are more equal than others. But I guess I shouldn't expect a Randroid sociopath like yourself to be consistent. It is appalling that you and your ilk have been allowed to infiltrate, infest and ruin conservatism.

    Furthermore, only allowing the rich and/or property owners to vote would create a permanent Democratic majority in government more than anything considering who the real "party of the rich" is.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Not only should the poor not be allowed to vote; we should round them up, ship them off to internment camps and turn their flesh into hamburger.

    ReplyDelete
  13. So it seems that Mr. Vadum is saying that the poor HAVE the right to vote, we just shouldn't let them actually excercise that right.

    Smells like Jim Crow to me.

    ReplyDelete
  14. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I salute you, Matthew Vadum, for your honesty in your contempt for American values. Most conservatives try to hide it behind a veneer of respectability, but you gaily charge headlong into full-on Bryan Fischer Constitution-as-toilet-paper territory. We need more people like you in this country, at least if we want the populace to catch on as to what the far right is truly about.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Of course those who are legally qualified to vote should be allowed to vote

    The leftist commentators here just go to prove how stupid they are - the question is whom should be legally qualified to vote?

    Universal franchies is clearly an un-american idea - it is French, from the French Commune de Paris. The first country with universal franchies in its consitution was the USSR. This great REPUBLIC has stood for 235 years strong against the ideas of the leftists, of the communists, of the socialists, who seek to destroy Freedom and Liberty!

    Universal Suffrage has been a so-called "legal right" for less than 50 years --- and in those last 50 years the US has been brought to the brink of destruction by socialists, D'RATS, welfare bludgers, medicare, medicaid and social security - all because of poor, welfarequeens, ets being able to vote for the D'RATS.

    Fidelity to the Constitution - to the original unamended constitution demands that the Unamerican - in fact SOVIET COMMUNIST idea of universal suffrage is abandoned, and we return to the True American Freedom and Liberty where only those who have high-value, high-worth, are able to participate in the privilege of electing representatives and senators, and especially the PPresident!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Sir,
    You spelled franchise wrong. Twice. You even spelled "etc" wrong. Those are not difficult or uncommon words. A voter literacy test, to weed out those who do not have "high value, high worth", would exclude you from voting.

    Regarding the "original unamended Constitution", that very document, in Article V provides that it may be amended by Congress and the several States. Adherence to the "original unamended Constitution" requires adherence to Article V, which specifically provides for and allows amendments to the Constitution. So true respect for the "original unamended Constitution" includes respecting the subsequent amendments that were passed in conformance with Article V. Disrespect for the amendments is disrespect for the Constitution, and for James Madison who took care to include a specific method for amendment.
    So I am forced to ask, sir, why do you hate the original unamended Constitution?

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  19. The last time I registered to vote (after moving) that wasn't in response to a card being sent in the mail checking if I were still at the same address, or on-line, it was at a fire house. I guess that's as good a reason as any to shut down fire departments & let private enterprise take over, isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Spoken like a true capitalist: don't give the poor any money, they are lazy, society destroying leeches who will bring down the Republic! Zero thought into how they are stuck at the bottom of the ladder, and how CEOs, banks, huge corporations continue to destroy the environment, scam people out of money, like a gigantic government protected racket scheme. No, it's better to keep people scared with fear mongering about "The Republic in danger". God save your country, indeed!

    ReplyDelete
  21. your tie is pinching off oxygen to you brain.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The man prides himself on having been on Faux News so much that he uses that pic as his blog's header. That says quite enough about him.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Conversely, the government gives huge tax breaks and overseas tax holidays to multi-national corporations who send our jobs overseas. Our tax dollars shouldn't be used to underwrite the destruction of the republic.

    ReplyDelete