

- Navigation
- Hot
- New
- Recent Comments
- Activity Feed
- Marketplace
- Members Directory
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
Previous comments... You are currently on page 16.
Boobies
Had me rofling for a bit...
Doing the least harm possible TO the smallest number of people possible.
Did you mean to say: 'the LEAST harm to the LARGEST number of people?'
How about the New Jersey Constitution of 1776, moron. I’m done here.
you and I aren't best friends... no offense. :)
What would this accomplish? It would eliminate the welfare dependent, the unemployed students and so on from being able to vote. Who votes for more benefits, government expenditures and so on? those benefiting from them in many cases. This way only those who have a vested interest in the results would have a viable say in the decision.
The problem is not just 'women' or even 'ignorance' (although that is a MAJOR factor) but simple irresponsibility. If you're not paying the bills, of course you're going to vote for people who promise more stuff. If you are paying the bills, you're going to think more about what's being done with your money.
Load more comments...