Quantcast

«

»

Nov 08 2013

Gaffney: Low Income Voters are the End of America

Like many wingnuts, deranged bigot and delusional paranoiac Frank Gaffney is mighty upset that the Obamacare website gives people the change to register to vote. Never mind that this is actually required by federal law and has been for two decades. It’s bad, you see, because when poor people vote it’s the “end of America.”

For some time, it’s been apparent that the Obama presidency is promoting creeping socialism. Obamacare’s intervention in, and substantial takeover of, one-sixth of our economy is a particularly ominous manifestation of the administration’s agenda – and evidence of its progress.

Not content with creeping, though, Team Obama’s socialists have broken into a full gallop. That’s the practical implication of a newly revealed facet of Obamacare: Whatever its other shortcomings and outright failings, the health care registration process is being used effectively to compel Americans to register to vote.

The process lends itself to abuse and fraud. And allies of the President say the goal is to register sixty-eight million, most low-income voters. If successful, expect a permanent majority demanding government hand-outs – and the end of America as we have known it.

And think how upset he’d be at the thought of poor Muslim voters.

21 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    gog

    If successful, expect a permanent majority demanding government hand-outs

    Yes, absolutely. Poor people are simultaneously greedy and lazy, therefore they’ll take whatever opportunity they’re presented to demand free stuff.

  2. 2
    John Pieret

    Think about it people … the 47% could become the 57%!

  3. 3
    Pen

    If successful, expect a permanent majority demanding government hand-outs

    If successful, expect said majority to structure society in such a way that government hand-outs are less frequently needed.

    Really though, voting should be required like it is in Australia.

  4. 4
    raven

    It’s bad, you see, because when poor people vote it’s the “end of America.”

    It would be the end of his America. Thank Cthulhu.

    1. The number of poor people in the USA is steadily increasing due to falling standards of living and increasing wealth inequality. The ultra rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer.

    2. The solution to Gaffney’s problem is simple. Reduce the number of poor people!!!

    He would rather prevent them from voting though. That is a dictatorship not a democracy. There are good reasons why they are called christofascists.

  5. 5
    raven

    BBC News – US income inequality at record high
    www. bbc. co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24039202‎

    Sep 10, 2013 – The income gap between the richest 1% of Americans and the other … Income inequality in the US has been growing for almost three decades.

    1. Income inequality in the US has been growing for almost three decades.

    2. The more inequailty in wealth, the more unstable a society becomes. This is a well confirmed empirical fact.

    3. Suprise!!! The USA is now a known politically unstable nation. Everyone saw it with the government shutdown and near default on $11 Trillion in US T bonds.

  6. 6
    Doug Little

    Low Income Information Voters are the End of America

    Ahhh that’s more like it.

  7. 7
    Modusoperandi

    The process lends itself to abuse and fraud.

    Well, another step to the Right. Now registering to vote leads to abuse and fraud*. Luckily, there are no Conservatives who earn less than about 40K a year, who aren’t in Medicare/Tricare/etc and aren’t covered by employer-based insurance, or he’d be cutting off his own nose to spite someone else’s face.

    * Billiam F. Wuckley (2013 edition) ~ “The central question that emerges—and it is not a parliamentary question or a question that is answered by merely consulting a catalog of the rights of American citizens, born Equal—is whether the wealthy community in the US is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically? The sobering answer is Yes—the wealthy community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race.”

  8. 8
    voidhawk

    You know what the solution is, Gaffney? Help low-income voters not be low-income any more.

    Ah, but of course, that’s Socialism…

  9. 9
    DaveL

    How dare the poor ask the government for a handout! If they only had the moral fiber of the rich, they’d be demanding the government purchase their worthless paper assets at inflated prices, or purchase an expensive weapon system that doesn’t work and which they don’t need.

  10. 10
    Area Man

    Apparently, socialism = people voting.

    Glad we cleared that up.

  11. 11
    Randomfactor

    Let’s start by getting rid of the subsidies for major corporations, speaking of welfare benefits.

  12. 12
    sailor1031

    I’m about ready for the end of “America as we have known it”.

  13. 13
    Dr X

    He’s right, you know. Rich people never vote to further enrich themselves. Only poor people vote to make themselves rich. That’s why the rich are poor and the poor are rich.

  14. 14
    uzza

    The end of America as we have known it over the past couple decades can’t come soon enough. That’s pretty much the point really.

  15. 15
    laurentweppe

    Haaa, the plebs: rich wingniuts loath them, but they cannot aford to exterminate them all because who else would do the back breaking labors needed to keep thei lord and masters warm and well fed?

  16. 16
    gopiballava

    Clearly, we need to balance this out. You need to be able to register to vote when you register as a lobbyist. When you hire a lobbyist, you should also have the opportunity to register to vote. In fact, it should be automatic since you’re clearly becoming involved in the politician process. You should also get to register when you open a stock market trading account.

  17. 17
    umlud

    Well, that’s a rather “interesting” position that that Gaffney takes, especially considering the fact that the greatest percentage of people who are living at less than 150% of poverty are 25-34 year olds. Jordan Weissmann writes at The Atlantic:

    between the ages of 25 and 34, 41.3% percent of Americans will spend at least a year earning less than 150 percent of the poverty line, which is a technical way of saying “being pretty broke.” By age 35, a little more than a quarter will have lived under the actual poverty line, which is the technical way of saying, “really truly broke.”

    … almost a third of young adults end up using a program like food stamps or Medicaid to get by for a while.

    …these numbers aren’t just a snapshot of today’s economy, which has been notoriously dreadful for Millennials. Rather, they’re drawn from an analysis of the Panel Study of Income Dynamics data collected between 1968 and 2009. So in a sense, they’re a longterm assessment poverty through the American lifecycle.

    So – with the presumption that Weissmann’s numbers are right – it appears that Gaffney is saying that younger voters are the end of America…

    Hmm… mayebe he’s on to something amazingly obvious – that the younger generation are trying to overturn the old ways of doing things.

  18. 18
    Hatchetfish

    “the end of America as we have known it.”

    About fucking time too.

  19. 19
    greg1466

    Well yes, because nothing spreads socialism better than getting people to vote…oh wait…

  20. 20
    Area Man

    Let’s start by getting rid of the subsidies for major corporations, speaking of welfare benefits.

    While I agree we should minimize such subsidies, I don’t really care for this as a response to the callous right-wing view that poor people are mooches who only want to increase their benefits. Even if we lived in a world where there was no corporate welfare or institutionalized benefits for the rich (a virtually impossible world), programs to help the poor would still be perfectly justified. And pissing on them as Gaffney does would be no less nauseating.

  21. 21
    abb3w

    @5, raven:

    2. The more inequailty in wealth, the more unstable a society becomes. This is a well confirmed empirical fact.

    My inclination is to believe this, but [Citation Needed]. With a quick whack at Google Scholar, the recent (doi:10.1016/j.jce.2011.02.001) seems to lend some support to the thesis; contrariwise, the older (doi:10.1177/073889428000400205) indicates some disconfirmation. It’s plausible and has some support, but I don’t think can be considered “well confirmed”.

Leave a Reply

Switch to our mobile site