Panem et circenses, Or, if you’re one of these, please don’t vote!



We’ll soon be subjected to the president’s annual “State of the Union” address.
I’m speechless with anticipation.


I don’t necessarily lament low voter turn-out in American elections.  Most people who don’t care enough to vote should, in my judgment, stay home.  The republic will be safer if low-information voters — of the type who vote for congressional candidates because they’re cute, or choose all judicial candidates whose names begin with “b,” to say nothing of those who’re simply seeking to profit from bigger government handouts and, therefore, vote for the most, um, “generous” politician available — were to stay home and continue to watch daytime television or reality shows.  (The government no longer provides gladiatorial contests.  Sorry.)


Many of our political and economic problems today come, I believe, because too many such people vote.  And they are the reason why our political campaigns, ads, and debates are so wretchedly awful.


I still well remember a lady in my California neighborhood who voted against Richard Nixon for governor because, while he was out holding a rally in the parking lot of the huge mall where she worked, his wife Pat, probably very tired, came in to buy a hat — but didn’t smile while doing it.  There were, of course, plenty of sound reasons for voting against Mr. Nixon at all levels of government, but that struck me, even as a young child, as an extraordinarily flimsy one.


People voting on such bases shouldn’t vote.


And I would disenfranchise at least three of the women in this commercial, too:


Can you guess which three?  Of course, it would be cleaner and simpler to just ban all of them from voting.


 Posted from Orlando, Florida



On judging people
"The Supreme Court Ratifies a New Civic Religion that is Incompatible with Christianity"
"Treasures in earthen vessels"
"Ending Tax Exemptions Means Ending Churches"