September 30, 2007
Pandering Politicians Packing Polling Places with Pathetic Populace
I have always opposed the lowering of the voting age to below the age of twenty-one. Young people can follow orders and give birth, but that does not automatically give them the widsom and experience to cast intelligent votes. But, the Democrats, always on the prowl to register uninformed people for their votes, have a new champion.
But probably the most important point from an underdog - maybe the most important point made by any candidate - came from Dennis Kucinich, who said he not only favored lowered the drinking age to 18, but the voting age to 16. I seriously support such a lowering of the voting age - I've been saying for years that it should be lowered to 14 - an age at which, according cognitive psychologist Jean Piaget, people have completely adult reasoning processes, and have had them for at least two years.
If some Democrats trust the wisdom of kids to vote, then maybe they will lower the ages for drinking, smoking, driving, statutory rape, obtaining credit, and running for office.
Maybe my dog should vote, because she listens and follows commands better than most teenagers, plus she barks at Democrats.
Posted by Woody M. at September 30, 2007 01:40 PMThat's about the lamest analogy I've seen in a long time - maybe your dog should vote? :)
Following commands is not the reason I think 14-year-olds should vote - it would more likely be that they have more wisdom than some adults.
Speaking of which - do you have any evidence for your claims? I cite Jean Piaget, the father of cognitive psychology. He was neither Democrat nor Republican.
Posted by Paul Levinson at September 30, 2007 02:20 PM
Paul, you want evidence? Walk around Walmart one day and observe the teenagers. Proof enough. Also, anyone whose pants come half-way down their rear ends shouldn't vote, either.
Posted by Woody at September 30, 2007 03:10 PM
A complete misunderstanding of piaget. Complex reasoning begins around that age. It does not spring forth in full flower.
The brain does not fully mature until age 25. Myelin sheathing is still building on your neurons until then. Humans prior to that are still impulsive.
Posted by Assistant Village Idiot at September 30, 2007 03:28 PM
I can't keep up with the democrats line of reasoning. The mental midget from Ohio wants the 16 YO vote because they're adult enough. Shrillary classified a 25 YO as a child (not adult enough) for 'free medical' care purposes. Oh, and if you make less than $60-80K a year you are poor and require free medical care in Shrillary's world. There isn't such a thing as a free lunch and there is no such thing as free medical care. The taxpayers (working class) will pick up the bill for everything while Shrillary and her ilk have they're stolen money hidden in foreign accounts.
Posted by Scrapiron at September 30, 2007 04:51 PM
There are people in Germany pushing for votes for all children to be exercised by the parents until the child is of age. The idea is that families would have more weight in setting governmental priorities, but some have pointed out the obvious difffículties when parents don't agree. Can you imagine this issue coming up in divorce proceedings or support battles? What can you expect when utopians are on a roll?
Posted by expat at September 30, 2007 06:29 PM
Good thing 16 year olds can't vote for the opportunity to vote.
Of course Kucinich is for this. By and large young people would vote Democrat for a reason. They depend more fully on their "feelings" in making decisions than an adult; something many Democrats do even after reaching adulthood.
When we're young we still believe in that utopian world where everybody shares everything out of selflessness because we are taught by our parents to share and everything we share has been given to us so we have no real sense of having worked for any of it.
It's much easier to share things that don't belong to you or you didn't work for.
But then we grow up and we realize that indiscriminate charity is more destructive than anything. We are still then robbed of the opportunity to make our own decisions on who is worthy of our charity even though our powers of reasoning are more fully developed.
A sixteen year old's vote is a vote to put someone in power to do that reasoning for them.
-------------------------------
Paul Levinson:
Perhaps you missed the sarcasm in GM's analogy. But of course, for the sake of argument, you think it's better to take it seriously and counter it on a serious level than to just accept the sarcasm.
Posted by Oyster at October 1, 2007 08:31 AM
I just realized that was Woody's analogy. My apologies, Woody. You get extra merits for that one :)
Posted by Oyster at October 1, 2007 12:37 PM
Thanks, Oyster. Paul put a smiley face after his remark and may have seen the sarcasm (or, was it?) I was really speaking more about Kucinich and figure that Paul is a decent guy--for a liberal. I just have to assume that he either never raised children, had exceptional children, or was oblivious to them.
I can see it now...Hillary Clinton pandering to the youth vote by promising government pop festivals and guaranteed dates through a "Universal Match Program."
Posted by Woody at October 1, 2007 12:45 PM
