Right-wing commentator: Poor people voting is ‘un-American’

[Hepburn]

Many conservatives appear to think badly of poor people, but Matthew Vadum of the Capital Research Center takes it a step further. According to the title of his latest article for American Thinker, he believes that "registering the poor to vote is un-American."

"Why are left-wing activist groups so keen on registering the poor to vote?" Vadum asks. "Because they know the poor can be counted on to vote themselves more benefits by electing redistributionist politicians. Welfare recipients are particularly open to demagoguery and bribery."

"Registering them to vote is like handing out burglary tools to criminals," he continues. "It is profoundly antisocial and un-American to empower the nonproductive segments of the population to destroy the country-- which is precisely why Barack Obama zealously supports registering welfare recipients to vote. ... Encouraging those who burden society to participate in elections isn't about helping the poor. It's about helping the poor to help themselves to others' money."

Vadum goes on to claim that "registering the unproductive to vote is an idea that was heavily promoted by the small-c communists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven" -- and if that assertion sounds suspiciously like the similar theories involving Cloward and Piven promoted by Glenn Beck, it is no coincidence.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/09/02/right-wing-commentator-poor-people-voting-is-un-american/

Man, Rush must love this asshole. My gag reflex was over-worked reading about this non-sense! :puke:

[LeftishBrit]

1. Makes one sick!

On checking, I find that America abolished property qualifications for voting in 1850; considerably before other countries such as the UK.

[treestar]

2. How does he want to determine who deserves to vote?

Redistribution is inevitable. Where does he get the idea it's so horrible for rich people to lose some of their money, while still living in luxury, so others don't starve?

[DonCoquixote]

3. Does this mean per chance

That the poor, walmart-shopping, always broke Farmers should not be able to vote gop? We could get half the south back that way!

[Rex]

4. Cali posted a thread that we like in a 'sick and broken society'

and I think this is more proof of that being true. :(

[kestrel91316]

5. Dominionists/christofascists want a return to the good old days

of one family/one vote, and only property (ie real estate) owners allowed to vote.

[white_wolf]

10. Don't forget they also want people listed as property too.

Though, if they had their way anyone who wasn't a fundie christian would be eligible to be sold on the auction blocks.

[kestrel91316]

16. Yes, they want debt slavery. If you owe money and can't pay it back you

become your creditor's slave.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. BINGO, Boston 1750 to be specific

And for the same reasons too.

[BNJMN]

26. So, in a way, this clown is right. If by 'American' we mean 1780s era America.

Which is ridiculous.

[progressoid]

6. "American Thinker"

[GoCubsGo]

7. "Most conservatives appear to think badly of poor people"?

No. They DO think badly of poor people. Poor people have nothing for them to steal, so what good are they? And, remember that a fat chunk of the poor population consists of those whose skin is of varying shades of brown.

[TeamsterDem]

8. Such blinding assholeishness. nt

[corpseratemedia]

9. I'm speechless

I'm waiting for some front group to make a film on The Eternal Poor.

[A HERETIC I AM]

11. I heard this great line the other day... (edited)

something to the effect;

"Gerrymandering is a tool often used by the right as a way to rig elections by "choosing" voters. How incredibly unAmerican it seems to have the politicians select the voters as opposed to the voters selecting the politician."


I edited because I wrote I had heard it on NPR, but I remembered I heard it on a Discovery Channel program where they were discussing voting districts and their shape.

Either way, it is true.

Too true, unfortunately.

[Solly Mack]

12. No surprises. I've heard that argument in various forms for years from Republicans.

The only thing that has changed is: they're using more direct - and honest - words and phrases - to express it.

[Broderick]

13. Caught Boortz

saying something similar.

[Robb]

14. He's right, of course, about disempowering the burdensome.

Let us begin with the bankers.

[lumpy]

15. Outrageous Comment of the Week by LIbertarian, Matthew

Vadum. That fool fits the bill for being un-American as well as against-the U.S.Constitution as well as a super-nutbag hate sewer spewer.

[SkyDaddy7]

17. "Poor" is code for non-white!

[Proles]

19. So... the little guy who votes in a democratic

system is "un-American?"

Riight...

[surrealAmerican]

20. If you take this sort of thinking one step further ...

... any person voting based on self-interest could be considered "un-American". This should mean that anyone who pays taxes, or benefits from any government-funded program should not vote. Who exactly would that leave?

[Kablooie]

21. I agree. Corporations should be the only people allowed to vote.

In fact that's essentially what has happened.

[TomCADem]

22. Which is why they believe any Democratic President is not legitimate...

...the right wing will never accept a Democratic President as legitimate. Ever.

[Scurrilous]

23. Kick

:kick:

[coalition_unwilling]

24. As if TeaBaggers are less open to demagoguery. Puh-leeze. The

Tea Party is a group of knaves, charlatans and demagogues (the three are not mutually exclusive categories).

[cascadiance]

25. Fascists like this are the real "unAmerican" bums!

Should just f'ing leave if he doesn't want to live in a democracy! Go to Somalia f'er!

[Brigid]

27. Even Alexander Hamilton would hate this guy.

:banghead:

[Odin2005]

28. This Poor American says FUCK YOU

[moondust]

29. Will the poor still be used as cannon fodder?

Er...to fight and die for "our" country? Without a vote?

You betcha!

:nuke: