amor Posted February 11, 2012 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 1 Topic Count: 13 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,194 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 34 Days Won: 0 Joined: 06/18/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted February 11, 2012 Reallt I just think that American citizens should be allowed to run for public office. Americans citizens are allowed, but not all of them. And it really doesn't matter what you think. That should be the rule in a democratic society. No, it shouldn't. All animals are equal but some are more equal than others. Do you see yourself as one of the superior Americans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted February 12, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.94 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted February 12, 2012 If she's not going to win, why bar her from office? If the law states she cannot hold the office, why spend the money and time running? Why present a candidate that would be a wasted vote? It would actually benefit the competition to have people of the opposite political party split on someone, even better to have one side of the split vote count for nothing. Don't you think? Allowing a dead-end candidate to run is plain nonsense. Unless, of course, you want her to run to make a point and/or establish a precedence. If that's the case, please be honest and say so. Reallt I just think that American citizens should be allowed to run for public office. That should be the rule in a democratic society. As to wasted votes, at every election I've voted in there have been candidates who have no chance of winning. I don't vote Green,few do. But they have the right. You are skirting the obvious again. You are promoting disregard for the law. By the law, she is ineligible to hold office. Why spend money on her campaign, why put her on the ballet, if it is illegal for her to hold the office? Where is the logic in this? Unless you have an agenda. What is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted February 12, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.94 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Is it this? I do like your idea though Amor, the more I think about it, it should apply to every position in life. Therefore, I believe that the next moron that comes along we ought to promote to Professor at the College where you work. It's only fair. Every one should be given a chance and who are you to say whether they are qualified or not? Everyone has the right to apply for a job and then get assessed by those on the interview panel. Similarly all should have the right to stand for office and let the voters decide if they're suitable for the position. Shiloh is correct. Human resources would pull the application before it even got to the interview panel. What you are promoting is rebellion against the state law. You don't think the law should apply. You think "the will of the people" should overrule a law without having gone through the proper legal process. Oh, right - that's like "the Arab Spring" and "Occupy Wall Street" montra. Now it is clear why you are so keen on this. Gotcha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~candice~ Posted February 12, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 955 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 11,318 Content Per Day: 1.89 Reputation: 448 Days Won: 33 Joined: 12/16/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted February 12, 2012 You know if anything comes out of this, it should be a quantifiable standard for the English proficiency required to run for office. At the moment you require proficiency but the law doesn't state how that is to be measured and where the cut off is. The current mayor of that city is the person who started the law suit against her ticket... which is a little odd... but he engaged the use of linguists who determined her speaking, reading and comprehension skills did not meet proficiency... even though proficiency wasn't previously quantified. So it sounds like she genuinely doesn't have enough grasp of the English language according to those linguists. But it's all rather odd that the linguists could determine that without some predefined cut off . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Reallt I just think that American citizens should be allowed to run for public office. Americans citizens are allowed, but not all of them. And it really doesn't matter what you think. That should be the rule in a democratic society. No, it shouldn't. All animals are equal but some are more equal than others. Do you see yourself as one of the superior Americans? Not all American ctizens can run for president. If you are a naturalized American, you cannot run for office. You also cannot run for office if you are not 35 years old or older. Thre are limitations and for good reason. There is no reason we should allow every Tom, Dick and Harry to run for office, particularly if they are not qualified. By the way, we are a Republic, not a Democracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Ugh! I'm not saying that issue is not a real relevant issue, I'm bemoaning the conclusion reached with no research done. If the shoe were on the other foot and someone were criticising Bush I'm sure you'd all pipe up and say 'show me the evidence first'. Stereotypes are often true but each person deserves consideration on their own merits. I can't believe I actually have to spell this out . She legally doesn't qualify to run for the office she wants to run for. Bush is not an adequate comparison, not by a long shot. Nor is this a "stereotype." We are not saying that all hispanic politicians have an agenda that is latino first, American last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~candice~ Posted February 12, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 955 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 11,318 Content Per Day: 1.89 Reputation: 448 Days Won: 33 Joined: 12/16/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted February 12, 2012 Ugh! I'm not saying that issue is not a real relevant issue, I'm bemoaning the conclusion reached with no research done. If the shoe were on the other foot and someone were criticising Bush I'm sure you'd all pipe up and say 'show me the evidence first'. Stereotypes are often true but each person deserves consideration on their own merits. I can't believe I actually have to spell this out . She legally doesn't qualify to run for the office she wants to run for. Bush is not an adequate comparison, not by a long shot. Nor is this a "stereotype." We are not saying that all hispanic politicians have an agenda that is latino first, American last. Shiloh it really did come across as a stereotype true for all. If that is not the case then thank you for clarifying. I'm not talking about Bush's right to run for office, just a general sense that we usually ask for evidence before making conclusions... but if you aren't suggesting a stereotype then I can agree there would be a perception out there she needs to fight. But by the way, the Bush comparison is not trivial. Many of the liberals accused him of being illiterate. And literacy is part of the three fold measure by which the linguists in this case used to assess English proficiency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Shiloh it really did come across as a stereotype true for all. If that is not the case then thank you for clarifying. If I had said "Hispanics who run for office only care about latino issues, that would have been stereotyping. But I was referring the recurring problems that they have in AZ with latinos running for office who simply want to exploit our freedoms and political systems for latinos. That is not stereotyping. I'm not talking about Bush's right to run for office, just a general sense that we usually ask for evidence before making conclusions... but if you aren't suggesting a stereotype then I can agree there would be a perception out there she needs to fight. When she learns the language and is fluent, then she can run for office. But by the way, the Bush comparison is not trivial. Many of the liberals accused him of being illiterate. But he wasn't illiterate. He got tounge-tied when he spoke. They are called "Bushisms." Even Obama gets tongue tied and says stupid things when he doesn't have a teleprompter to tell him what to say. The media painted him as illiterate because of his tounge-tied moments to belittle him but there was not a word of truth to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthitjah Posted February 12, 2012 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 1,285 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 17,917 Content Per Day: 2.27 Reputation: 355 Days Won: 19 Joined: 10/01/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted February 12, 2012 Shiloh it really did come across as a stereotype true for all. If that is not the case then thank you for clarifying. If I had said "Hispanics who run for office only care about latino issues, that would have been stereotyping. But I was referring the recurring problems that they have in AZ with latinos running for office who simply want to exploit our freedoms and political systems for latinos. That is not stereotyping. I'm not talking about Bush's right to run for office, just a general sense that we usually ask for evidence before making conclusions... but if you aren't suggesting a stereotype then I can agree there would be a perception out there she needs to fight. When she learns the language and is fluent, then she can run for office. But by the way, the Bush comparison is not trivial. Many of the liberals accused him of being illiterate. But he wasn't illiterate. He got tounge-tied when he spoke. They are called "Bushisms." Even Obama gets tongue tied and says stupid things when he doesn't have a teleprompter to tell him what to say. The media painted him as illiterate because of his tounge-tied moments to belittle him but there was not a word of truth to it. Yep, in fact his grades weren't the best but they weren't sub par either. However, we have yet to see Obama's grades or transcripts. It makes one wonder and it is also the height of hypocrisy for the Leftist media to remain silent over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts