3472
Comments (196)
sorted by:
165
Trilby 165 points ago +165 / -0

Because The Elites are so....................much BETTER?

54
BidensHairyLega 54 points ago +54 / -0

Not accepting the judgements of our superiors is a violation of the new Joe Crow Laws.

40
JESUSJUGS 40 points ago +40 / -0

They know better.

We’re the children and they’re the parents who have to decide what’s best for us.

16
Redclyde 16 points ago +16 / -0

I don't wanna be a child with democrats around living in fear of being raped by every one of em

13
ThSowell 13 points ago +13 / -0

This, but unironically. Stop asking for free shit & regulations, and maybe the government wouldn't have so much authority over you.

Responsibility and authority go hand in hand. If you make the government responsible for you, you give them authority over you. People are children who want free shit but don't want to be ruled over at the same time. Medicare, subsidies, food stamps, welfsre, all of that shit has to go.

1
DeusVultIntensifies 1 point ago +1 / -0

Close. What they are achieving is our servitude. They are the masters, we are their servants.

13
deleted 13 points ago +16 / -3
7
spez__ 7 points ago +8 / -1

Inbred Canaanites and Kharzas*

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
3
The_Patriot2021 3 points ago +3 / -0

I don’t know about this theory, I think the Phoenicians may have been actual jews, they came from the same region of the world, and both were merchants.

I just don’t think they acknowledge it because Carthaginians were known for sacrificing children and such.

12
FireannDireach 12 points ago +12 / -0

Phoenicians were not jews. There's nothing in the archaeology or DNA or cultures to suggest this. And it wasn't just Carthage that was denounced, their whole religion was denounced by the jews, as the practiced temple prostitution, and a quaint ceremony I forget the name of that were basically fire pits to throw your children into, to appease their gods.

Jews: hill semites. Phoenicians: coastal semites.

Shared DNA - completely different cultures. But people see "semite" and think "jew", not what the word actually means.

Also, all cultures had merchants. Selling things is not a defining feature just for jews. Money lending was, later on.

8
deleted 8 points ago +11 / -3
-4
deleted -4 points ago +2 / -6
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
8
HockeyMom4Trump 8 points ago +8 / -0

The Democrats have been doing this already with their Super Delegates. Bernie never had a chance, even though he easily was beating Hillary in the primaries.

5
Willholbert09 5 points ago +5 / -0

true. like this statement is not the reason why Biden was "voted" into office. 70+ year old oligarchs who have net worth of hundreds of millions of dollars, but only make ~$200k per year. They must have great investment advisors.

4
Viewer01 4 points ago +4 / -0

Soft feelers for, "Who should be named king??"

75
VictorLaszlo20 75 points ago +75 / -0

There was someone on here last week actually arguing that we should pay politicians a lot more money, so they wouldn't need to be corrupted. Then there's people who want to pay criminals not to commit crimes. These people are retarded and insane!

10
bangbus 10 points ago +14 / -4

There is some logic behind it if it came with substantial strings. If there was a law that paid the POTUS or VPOTUS something like $10 million and simultaneously prevented them and their families from substantial outside business interests (including after they left office) it would probably do a lot to clean up the swamp. It’s disgusting to think about having to set up such a system, but I think politics would be a lot cleaner if we got rid of politburos and their family members getting lucrative “asset management” or “consulting agreements” or “book deals” while in office or right after they leave. The problem now is it is far more lucrative selling out the public than it is to be an honest public servant.

46
BeefChucker 46 points ago +46 / -0

Biden would take that $10 million and still pocket the $40 million from the CCP. If you're corrupt, you're corrupt.

11
bangbus 11 points ago +12 / -1

Yeah, you're probably right. I have very little faith in the apparatus to actually enforce whatever restrictions such a hypothetical law would entail. Guh.

14
Flag_falsely 14 points ago +14 / -0

I like my method better.

Make all crimes by elected and appointed official treason. Crimes of corruption inside their organization count against them.

Treason is punished by firing squad.

Firing squad is selected at random out of elected and appointed officials.

Refusal to participate means they go up against the wall.

12
litux 12 points ago +12 / -0

Yeah, this sounds great, but would very soon get twisted in favor of the Swamp.

Imagine that anyone from Trump administration who got prosecuted, investigated, disbarred or impeached is now headed for a death sentence.

2
MemeWarBoot 2 points ago +2 / -0

I like that

2
Flag_falsely 2 points ago +2 / -0

Also we have a dedicated group investigating them. They make 75k a year with a 250,000$ bonus for every conviction.

If they are found to be knowingly getting wrongful convictions, they are to be imprisoned for life in leavenworth breaking rocks and everything they own will or gave away to friends and family in the last 10 years is taken by the state and given to the family of the victim.

Their wife and children will be given a spot in welfare housing and their name changed.

The guilty will be assigned a serial number and their name stricken from all record.

1
Zskills 1 point ago +1 / -0

Awww can't the firing squad be citizens?

We never get anything cool :(

1
Flag_falsely 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, given that 90% of the political elite are corrupt (there are some new enough to still be clean), that you could run for office and get your chance.

1
Zskills 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thats true without their speaking fees and lobbying money they wouldn't even bother running. Lots of jobs would open up

3
Seadan 3 points ago +3 / -0

The fallacy with that plan is that no amount is enough. It's not just money that drives people like this, but power, prestige, control, etc.. There aren't a lot of retired billionaires.

2
Nibba 2 points ago +2 / -0

You’re an idiot if you think a $10m salary would change a thing with a sociopath.

1
bangbus 1 point ago +1 / -0

Which is why I said it would have to have substantial strings attached. Right now the grift is in broad daylight. Hunter's kid on the Burisma board. Pelosi's husband "managing investments." Mike Obama getting that $250k no show job when Barry was a senator. There are all kinds of examples. But as things stand now, you have the politburos saying "my family has to make money, too." That is a path to sell these people out. Of course, in order to work such a law would need to actually be enforced, which I'm not sure it would be.

2
buckiemohawk 2 points ago +2 / -0

if we got rid of subsidies and crony deals. And then installed term limits and limited access to those in DOJ, it would clean up government a lot.

4
MAGA_Flocka_Flame 4 points ago +4 / -0

They already get all the money they would ever need in Congress

They would still become corrupt because it is NEVER enough o matter how much more they get

3
PraiseBeToScience 3 points ago +3 / -0

And here I am thinking we should put tony bombs in the brains if politicians that blow up if enough people vote for it.

2
CucksForTheDonald 2 points ago +4 / -2

Paying politicians less than a dentist, and then wondering why they're corrupted, is the same sort of reasoning as prohibiting Catholic priests to marry, and then wondering why they're pedophiles and pedophile enablers.

Protestant priests somehow do not seem to have the same pedophilia problem. I wonder why that is.

2
VictorLaszlo20 2 points ago +4 / -2

Rubbish horrible analogy. We dont hire priests. Again, get rid of the lobbyists and other incentives. Politicians are there to serve us, period. That's the job, take it or leave it.

1
CucksForTheDonald 1 point ago +3 / -2

OK, good luck with your politicians! They seem to be serving great.

Related experience with accountants: I went through multiple cheap firms before I determined they're either incompetent and/or crooks. Only then did I go for the ones that are 5x as expensive, but they know their business and do the job right, with the i's and t's crossed.

You can't get fucking competent people for $200k. Not as lawyers, even less politics. So don't complain when you get what you pay for. You may say you want competent public servants, but your revealed preference shows that you prefer Mitch, Pelosi and AOC.

2
VictorLaszlo20 2 points ago +3 / -1

More rubbish. Trump worked for free. There are plenty of patriots out there who care more about their country than money. We have to facilitate them, not throw money at the problem, like the Left does to every issue, unsuccessfully, I might add.

1
CucksForTheDonald 1 point ago +2 / -1

Trump worked for free.

The one politician in decades who did so, and who had to be a billionaire to afford it. How many like that do you expect?

Do you expect your lawyers to work pro bono as well?

Good luck getting all those people fighting tooth and nail to represent you for free.

They do fight for it, but it's a racket: they're all bad choices, and they use the power you give them for corruption and insider trading. And you simply don't have better choices because you're not paying enough. You beg to be screwed, then complain there's no lube.

Meanwhile, paying them well would cost you literally nothing. The federal budget would hardly increase. In fact it would decrease, because competent people who are paid above the board would manage the government competently.

1
SendThemBackToCanada 1 point ago +1 / -0

Nah, pay them less money. Remember when being politician wasn't a job? That's because the pay was shit!

73
C5H5NNiO 73 points ago +73 / -0

Who wrote this trash?

BTW you can use Archive.is or Outline.com to prevent the article getting link-clicks

20
BlueKentuckyGirl 20 points ago +20 / -0

Probably Piggy Noonan from the WSJ

9
StartAgain 9 points ago +10 / -1

Now they changed it to "switch to preference primaries"

1
caKAG 1 point ago +1 / -0

Jeff Bezos probably wrote it originally to say he should choose and be our supreme ruler, but someone in WaPo said it was a bad idea, so they wrote this.

30
Big_Sam_Handwich 30 points ago +30 / -0

HONK HONK!!!

1
RS34ME 1 point ago +1 / -0

Honestly, I don’t think anyone here would even wipe their ass with this trash!

24
StartAgain 24 points ago +25 / -1

DEMOCRACY THE REPUBLIC DIES IN DARKNESS INDEED!!!

18
Starxteel 18 points ago +18 / -0

Democracy dies in plain sight to thunderous applause by congress

2
PieceOfParchment7 2 points ago +2 / -0

Let Democracy die.

2
rabbidlemur 2 points ago +2 / -0

That's pretty much the only way a democracy or Republic CAN die.

22
StartAgain 22 points ago +23 / -1

https://archive.is/Pve3F

archive.is article

20
residue69 20 points ago +20 / -0

Look at the history. They've changed it several times. Not the headline is "It's Time to Switch to Preference Primaries"

https://archive.is/https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/02/18/fix-primaries-let-elites-decide/

9
deleted 9 points ago +11 / -2
3
StartAgain 3 points ago +3 / -0

It's so bullshit. yeah

1
IvIA6A 1 point ago +1 / -0

Because people just read the headline

5
BigHuff2316 5 points ago +5 / -0

How does this site work? Can I archive anything?

10
2
BigHuff2316 2 points ago +2 / -0

thx

2
me-no-likely3 2 points ago +2 / -0

TLDR: a bunch of bullshit

15
el_gato_pepe 15 points ago +15 / -0

Superdelegates, anyone?

7
ILoveWatermelons 7 points ago +7 / -0

In other words, the Democrat Party is actually a private undemocratic institution that hand-picks its presidential nominees.

The media already chooses who the primary candidates are by their fake polls.

2
revolution76 2 points ago +2 / -0

They only promoted Trump because they thought, for sure, he would lose to the Wicked Witch of the West, otherwise he would have been disappeared off the air waves.

12
TrumpFan26 12 points ago +12 / -0

Choosing..it's not elected anymore.

8
PieceOfParchment7 8 points ago +8 / -0

The saying is "Selected not Elected"

7
Salacious_B_Trump 7 points ago +7 / -0

I refuse to ever refer to these people as "elite".

3
PieceOfParchment7 3 points ago +3 / -0

TPTB

7
Return_Of_The_LAMFF 7 points ago +8 / -1

It's time we allowed Jeff Bezos to make more money!

0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
-1
Return_Of_The_LAMFF -1 points ago +1 / -2

TF you going on about? I swear you Q-tard morons are so thick. Y'all couldn't run a lemonade stand let alone this country.

1
CucksForTheDonald 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, they don't have to run a lemonade stand. It is secretly run for them by the military!

The proceeds will come in, and they will be glorious. Just wait! 😁

2
Return_Of_The_LAMFF 2 points ago +2 / -0

Two more weeks right? Right????

1
CucksForTheDonald 1 point ago +1 / -0

I wish 😞

6
MechanicalMarvel 6 points ago +6 / -0

Democracy dies in darkness is not a warning against darkness. It's actually their mission statement.

6
slimcoat 6 points ago +6 / -0

What, give them a bigger say than they already have? They chose Joe Biden, we didn't even get a say.

6
IvIA6A 6 points ago +7 / -1

This is from a year ago and talks about the primary process for democrats is flawed, "the conversation about nominations has been about the conflicts between party elites and everyone else." They say entering the race is a low bar as long as you have a decent following (like buttigieg or sanders).

They propose a preference primary, a sort of exit poll, that is non binding but informs the elites who voters prefer.

Yes it's stupid, and they did this anyway when they screwed Bernie in 2016 the first time, but this isn't as sinister as you're making it out to be. (Which is probably why you hid the source and date)

4
bitcoiner 4 points ago +5 / -1

The title is real.

https://archive.is/Pve3F

And they did change the title stealthily afterwards

3
Anon1970 3 points ago +5 / -2

Bernie didn't get screwed, he was IN ON IT. He sold out. Typical leftist scum.

5
residue69 5 points ago +7 / -2

And two lawsuits ruled that the Democrat party, as a private corporation, could rig their primaries and choose candidates any way they saw fit.

1
IvIA6A 1 point ago +2 / -1

He did get screwed in 2016. I don't think was "IN ON" taking a dive on 6 coinflips or DWS conspiring to keep him from winning or them changing the rules. In 2020, Bernie screwed himself because he thought it was better to take an administration job than weaken Biden by fighting back, so in that sense he did sell out.

0
Anon1970 0 points ago +2 / -2

No, Bernie SOLD out. For $$$. The COMMUNIST POS was in on it. FFS.

-1
IvIA6A -1 points ago +1 / -2

Thanks for taking the time to read my comment and disagree with me agreeing with you. I've never seen that happen before now. Truly, thanks.

0
Anon1970 0 points ago +1 / -1

You did not agree with me. WTF are you smoking? Try reading my post again. FFS.

1
IvIA6A 1 point ago +1 / -0

Try reading mine before spouting off with nonsense.

-1
Anon1970 -1 points ago +1 / -2

You DID NOT agree with me fucktard.

5
SteelDriver 5 points ago +5 / -0

I would humbly recommend to anyone interested in the topic of governance by experts read "The New Authoritarianism" by Salvatore Babones. It's a relatively short, unbiased look at the increasing authority placed in unelected (and un-answerable) 'experts' at the expense of the democratic process. It juxtaposes this trend against the election of Donald Trump in 2016. If I had to sum up the book, it's a look at the egalitarian trying to ...fortify (:D) society against its self vs. the idea of people getting what they vote for even if they "get it good and hard".

2
CucksForTheDonald 2 points ago +2 / -0

I was a smart-ass about the people "getting what they voted for, and getting it good and hard" until it turned out Trump was the best President in several decades, and by a wide margin.

Now it seems pretty clear that the accusation of "populism!" actually means "but muh special interests!"

And now it's obvious just how much effort goes into ensuring that the voters don't have a choice, otherwise they will see it and use it.

5
SFAM1A 5 points ago +5 / -0

Why should they hide it? To date they've gotten away with blatantly rigging a presidential election

5
8bit_mixtape 5 points ago +5 / -0

we're just plebs in the eyes of the richest people. We're not human but a number.

4
Rodger 4 points ago +4 / -0

No actually it's time to get rid of the elites!

4
day221 4 points ago +4 / -0

Well, they already did this "election". In fact, they got the only say.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
KooKooSint 3 points ago +3 / -0

Old

3
Skywise 3 points ago +3 / -0

Good LORD that's hilarious!

I bet she hasn't even studied her American history or WHY the caucusing system (y'know - where the political party fat cats - EG... the elites leveraged their power to be kingmakers of a sort) was dismantled in favor of the primary system we have today in the early 1900s and the evolution of which led to open primaries.

Part of this movement is why we also (stupidly I think) elect senators now like house representatives instead of having state legislatures elect them as STATE representatives) The whole point was to get "parties" out of the system and make the whole process less beholden to the elites (and we see how that's turned out)

But then, those who don't study history and are given participation trophies for reading Howard Zinn are doomed to repeat it.

3
Lurker404 3 points ago +3 / -0

"Democracy dies in darkness" isn't a warning. It's their goal.

3
Anon1970 3 points ago +3 / -0

No, they want to set up an actual democracy and destroy our Republic.

2
BurgerChef90 2 points ago +2 / -0

A lot of people, liberal and conservative alike, think "Democracy=people voting."

That's why they call us a "democracy" instead of a Republic.

1
Anon1970 1 point ago +1 / -0

They are still very wrong and thinking that is very dangerous to our Republic. Education about our government has been non-existent for quite some time, by design.

Infiltration instead of invasion.

3
Artisane 3 points ago +3 / -0

Didn't they already do this with the past election?

3
Mastermindz 3 points ago +3 / -0

Isn't that how Xiden got here in the first place?

2
TheWhitestOfFangs 2 points ago +2 / -0

And they changed the headlines at least 3 times and 4th to add "opinion"...

https://archive.is/https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/02/18/fix-primaries-let-elites-decide/

2
300BLK 2 points ago +2 / -0

Donald Trump is elite af. If your ok with him picking your president then I’m ok with that.

2
Keizser 2 points ago +2 / -0

We're already in an Oligarchy it's just being exposed

2
Mary911 2 points ago +2 / -0

Because we're too STUPID to know which one is the better President.

2
YouTubeSucksDicks 2 points ago +2 / -0

I wish I could feel doubtful that this is a faked headline.

2
Gazoo 2 points ago +2 / -0

Isn't that what they just did?

2
NPC11011110000 2 points ago +2 / -0

So land-owning males?

I agree.

2
revolution76 2 points ago +2 / -0

Wait, a bigger say than they already do? What is this madness?

2
ravioli_king 2 points ago +2 / -0

That's how it originally started. Only land owners as they were tax payers.

2
GoldwaterVoter 2 points ago +2 / -0

IIRC it used to be white male landowners.

Can you honestly say that 2020 was a better system ???

1
Pats5x 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm pretty sure this is a year or two old...but still carries weight

1
TheSaltyProphet 1 point ago +1 / -0

It’s time to give the elites a first row seat to a nice firing squad. WHERE IS OUR FUCKING MILITARY!?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Skyrison 1 point ago +1 / -0

why? so they can fuck up the world with their inefficiency even MORE than they already have?

1
julianleroux 1 point ago +1 / -0

Turns out, by 'bigger' they meant 100%

1
masticator_nord 1 point ago +1 / -0

I wonder what the authors thoughts on the electoral collage or only land owners originally being allowed to vote is?

Plus, this is like the opposite of critical theory, so I'm actually shocked. But critical theory is such a contradictory mess they can find some way to justify it.

1
paradox123 1 point ago +1 / -0

2020 But it still relevant

1
QuietSpark 1 point ago +1 / -0

Didn’t Time admit they already control everything?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
cctw 1 point ago +1 / -0

They should get 1000000 votes since they're 1000000 times richer!

1
svlem 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sigh.... i'm going to take a wild... WILD guess here... The writer is jewish...

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Pepe1776_ 1 point ago +1 / -0

Muh Philospher Kings!

1
goldkeyboardwarrior 1 point ago +1 / -0

They already do have a bigger say, even if they don't deserve it. A celebrity endorsement probably moves more votes towards their preferred candidate than the actual policy that will help the voters. Think of how many black people voted for Biden despite his 1994 crime bill and the prison reform Trump put in place because someone like The Rock endorsed Biden, for example.

Big tech and the MSM suppressing stories they don't like, such as the Hunter Biden story, probably move even more votes towards their preferred candidate.

But nothing is worse than the ones so brazen to bribe people to "find" votes for their preferred candidate if the above isn't enough to put their guy in office.

1
TheBehavingBeaver 1 point ago +1 / -0

Saved

1
UnidentifiedPa3 1 point ago +1 / -0

These people, they're fucking ill. Seriously.

2
Anon1970 2 points ago +2 / -0

They are evil, not ill.

2
UnidentifiedPa3 2 points ago +2 / -0

Both, I'd say.

2
BurgerChef90 2 points ago +2 / -0

You have to be quite ill, to be this evil.

So yeah, I agree, both.

2
Anon1970 2 points ago +2 / -0

I will have to agree with that.

1
10MeV 1 point ago +1 / -0

Some animals are more equal than others.