Pat Sajak writes an NRO column for the ages:
[S]hould state workers be able to vote in state elections on matters that would benefit them directly? The same question goes for federal workers in federal elections.I’m not suggesting that public employees should be denied the right to vote, but that there are certain cases in which their stake in the matter may be too great. Of course we all have a stake in one way or another in most elections, and many of us tend to vote in favor of our own interests. However, if, for example, a ballot initiative appears that might cap the benefits of a certain group of state workers, should those workers be able to vote on the matter? Plainly, their interests as direct recipients of the benefits are far greater than the interests of others whose taxes support such benefits.
Which one of you is AOLMUSCLEGRANDMA?
This is a great idea. Citizens should only be able to vote on things that don’t affect them. We could set up independent “voting panels” and they can decide what things people can vote on. And then we can publish how individuals voted so if we figure out that if someone benefited from voting, we can retroactively take that vote away.
As my grandkids would say, “cool beans.” This is the best idea that has ever appeared on The Corner and I think it is demonstrative of The Corner’s general quality vis-a-vis thinking things through and having good ideas about cool things that are not at all stupid. You really “solved the puzzle.”
Also too, the ball’s in your court, Ben Stein.
steviez314
Hey Pat, I’d like to buy a vowel, you ?D?OT.
Ash Can
Wheel! Of! Disenfranchisement!
Kristine
M_R_N
El Cid
LOSE A TURN
TR
I love this other comment:
I wonder if that person feels the same way about corporations making donations, whether or not its stockholders want their money used for those purposes?
At least in the union, you know where your dues are going.
VixenStrangely
Should taxpayers really be represented? Because it is a little self-interested, no?
Phoenician in a time of Romans
Brilliant idea. But why not simply outlaw government, and require civil workers to dress in sackcloth and carry a bell, chanting “unclean, unclean”? I mean, if you hate the people who build your roads, take away your garbage and teach your kids that much, why not simply come out and say it?
Jeffro
Holy shit! Is Pat Sajak the new Chuck Norris? Is there any hack TV celebrity who doesn’t eventually prove to be an a-hole?
freelancer (itouch)
The category is THING:
_UC?T?RD
Can’t wait for the next Armed Services Week.
Moses2317
By this logic, wouldn’t tea partiers be the only people who could vote on issues regarding education?
Winning Progressive
Davis X. Machina
@TR: Prop Whateverthehellitwas in Cali tried to do this in ’08, I think — and got beat.
pika
I know I don’t have to say this here, but I am a frickin’ public employee, and I pay taxes, too. I would write that Sajak’s is the sloppiest thinking EVER, but then I’d be like John believing that Peak Wingnut is an actual upper limit.
SlyFox
MORONIC RUGWE_ARING _SSHOLE
Can I buy a vowel to describe you Pat?
J
So for a ballot initiative concerning property tax levels, who could vote? Property owners are interested in capping them, so they can’t vote, right Pat? But wait — renters presumably would have an interest in voting for them to be raised because doing so could possibly lead to lower taxes. So who is left to vote? The homeless? Of course, they will need 6 forms of ID to do so, thanks to our crusade against “voter fraud.”
Redshift
@VixenStrangely: Yeah, they definitely shouldn’t be allowed to vote for any candidate who promises to cut their taxes.
Actually, maybe banning anyone from voting on a ballot measure who directly benefits from it (plus a suitable quorum requirement) might be the solution to California’s government-by-referendum bind…
Omnes Omnibus
@pika: Substitute “so far” for “ever.”
Bob L
Time to put a stop to unelected activist voters!
mad the swine
The Founding Fathers restricted the franchise to landed property owners because they understood that no democratic government could long survive if the poor were able to vote themselves money from the public treasury. History has shown them to be correct. Sajak is correct, and I would go further: anyone who receives handouts from the government – let us define that as anyone with an income under $150000* who receives more money from the government than he pays in income tax – should be barred from voting. That would include both welfare leeches and government employees (whose ‘labor’ produces nothing of value anyway).
(*) I specify the income level because I don’t want to disenfranchise productive citizens, like CEOs, bank managers, and stockbrokers, who rightly take advantage of income tax loopholes to lower their excessive personal income tax burden to zero.
TheStone333
It is now apparent why Trebek landed the Jeopardy gig.
El Cid
Does this mean Antonin Scalia should recuse himself from ruling on matters directly regarding his face-shooting partner Dick Cheney?
calipygian
@mad the swine:
Trolly troll needs moar praktise trolling. Troll harder, trolly troll troll troll.
DougJ is the business and economics editor for Balloon Juice.
@calipygian:
I thought that was a pretty good effort.
This is a tough crowd.
El Cid
@TheStone333: An SNL episode of “Celebrity Jeopardy: TeaTard Championship” maybe?
Ash Can
So this is what passes for deep thought at the National Review these days, eh? Hey Pat, buy a clue.
El Cid
@DougJ is the business and economics editor for Balloon Juice.: You have to work on your icy disdain.
gwangung
mad the swine is thinking he’s taking a step up from Dispatches from the Culture War.
Heh.
D-boy
I always hated Wheel of Fortune and now I know why
freelancer (itouch)
Preventing voters from expressing their opinions regarding their interests via the ballot box is the stupidest and the most Fascistic idea in the history of…
You have ten seconds, talk it out.
KG
This sentence seems to make him look like a bigger jackass than one would expect:
We all have an interest, but you shouldn’t be able to vote because your interest might be too big. This game can be fun… you need medical treatment, but your interest in living might be too big, so the decision should be left to an insurance adjuster. You are suing someone (or being sued) but your interest in settling the case might be too big, so the decision should be left to an independent lawyer, preferably one who represents insurance carriers.
I think we need a philosopher-king. I nominate myself. Because I would be a very malevolent dictator benevolent leader with the best interests of the people at heart.
catatonia
I always knew Vanna was the smart one.
beltane
Let’s take Sajak’s argument to its logical extension. Isn’t it a conflict of interest for any US citizen to vote in US elections? Only someone who is not affected by government policy in any way, shape or form should be allowed to vote, which would mean no one would have the vote.
Pat Sajak has a lot of money, which he “earned” through the cushiest job in the world, but he cannot seem to buy a clue.
sven
@TR: Yeah, I believe that here in Idaho the state government has passed legislation banning donations taken directly from union dues. Folks on the right seem to be trying to stigmatize the very notion of collective action. Citizens pursuing their self-interest alone are Free Market Capitals but citizens working together to pursue common interests are scary weirdos who just don’t understand what it means to be Americans.
calipygian
@sven: Except when those citizens working together own large corporations and band together in some sort of chamber for the promotion of commercial interests or something.
Suck It Up!
Did you all see DavidL’s comment?
yeah, okay.
El Cid
@Ash Can: We could have a policy roundtable with Pat Sajak, Ben Stein, and Patricia Heaton. (No questions about Scientology, [oops — as a not-watcher of the show, I mixed her up with Leah Rehmini.)
Incidentally, the BBC Panorama show airing recently on Paxton’s interviews with ex-Scientology insiders was pretty interesting. (Just more details about how insidiously nuts the Scientologists are with covert monitoring, recording, threats, following people, spying on them, the like.)
Mark S.
I guess Pat thinks anyone who receives Social Security or Medicare should be barred from voting.
HRA
“However, if, for example, a ballot initiative appears that might cap the benefits of a certain group of state workers, should those workers be able to vote on the matter? Plainly, their interests as direct recipients of the benefits are far greater than the interests of others whose taxes support such benefits.”
A ballot initiative? Really? Umm -We state workers work by contract.
FYI we pay taxes, too. So essentially, we are paying taxes to support our benefits and wages. Maybe we should be exempt from paying taxes?
Spinning the wheel here and getting a headache from the crass stupidity that seems to keep popping up in our midst. .
Davis X. Machina
@sven: Doubt ye the Gospel of St. Ronald?
“Everything private is better than anything public, and so long as one of us, somewhere, is covered by a collective bargaining agreement, none of us, anywhere, is truly free.”
Oh, and Pinochet would have had those miners up three weeks ago.
morzer
Pat Sajak, defending the right of workers to be excluded from voting, in order to preserve their freedom and the American way of corporate life.
KG
@KG: damn, screwed up the tags.
Barb (formerly gex)
@Redshift: Ooh, we’re getting somewhere. Now let’s have a vote on the upper tier of the Bush tax cuts – remember, no rich people can vote!
beltane
@Mark S.: What about defense contractors? I’m sure Sajak has no problem with defense contractors voting because they are businessmen.
arguingwithsignposts
Totally not on topic, but I’m shamelessly blogwhoring for my latest populist design, striking a blow against Christine O’Donnell’s Delaware Senate campaign. Everyone should join.
kdaug
Wait – that Pat Sajak? I thought he was dead, but in any case, who the fuck cares what he thinks?
El Cid
@Davis X. Machina: Pinochet would have taught those miners a god-damned lesson in how to depend on Jesus for assistance and not bothering the government to help them from their own damned collapse when the government was busy fighting all the Communist musicians and faking an economic ‘miracle’ by selling off all the raw products such as lumber.
morzer
Pat Sajak clearly has an interest in elections, and should logically therefore not be permitted to vote in them. QED.
mds
@VixenStrangely:
Yeah, we’ve previously been exposed to D’Souza’s pig shit about anti-colonialism being a bad thing; now Pat Sajak endorses taxation without representation. And yet their team is resurgent thanks to a bunch of morons claiming to take their inspiration from the Boston Tea Party.
PurpleGirl
@arguingwithsignposts: It made me laugh.
Garrigus Carraig
Oh good we’re allowed to talk about disenfranchisement again. I say: one step back at a time. Which means we first disenfranchise the ladies (sorry, ladies), and follow that up by disenfranchising the negroes.
El Cid
@arguingwithsignposts: The grasp of the international onanist conspiracy extends ever deeper.
Barb (formerly gex)
I think this actually means that only the young people should vote because we’re always told that they aren’t interested in the process at all. I can live with that.
@morzer: You have hit on the one and only counter argument that should need to be presented. WIN.
KG
@efgoldman: not to go too far down the rabbit hole (by which I mean any depth at all) but there is the whole question of whether altruism is actually selfish… I think it’s a matter of how one defines voting in their own interest and how they prioritize their interests. One could make a decent argument that those who are voting for liberal/progressive are doing so out of self interest… a perceived better health care delivery system, a more stable social system through welfare/social security/unemployment. Those things suggest a more stable society (at least in theory) and that can be considered acting out of self interest. It’s less crass, but crass and self interest are not necessarily the same thing.
Barb (formerly gex)
@Garrigus Carraig: No worries. I’m too busy trying to learn how to submit to men properly. No time to vote.
Annie
@beltane:
Why just limit it to defense contractors? How about the Pentagon and soldiers and their families? And, all of their relatives and friends.
The Dangerman
$20B for 1000 space lasers and now this claim that the unwashed masses shouldn’t be able to vote? I’m not sure this is Peak Wingnut, but I can see it lying in the road just ahead.
wag
So I wanted to go and write something snarky about this comment:
…but was faced with this difficult choice:
The snark on the above comment just writes itself. I wanted to go with the obvious “except when Newt says its ok to shut down the government, then its not terrorism.”
In the end, the thrill of snarking on Sajak (and having my comment deleted anyway) wasn’t worth the 3 bucks and change.
kdaug
@Annie: Sucking at the government teat, all of ’em.
Redshift
@beltane: Well, if you start with the proper conservative viewpoint that all your tax money is stolen and you got all your money through your own personal effort with no help from any government services, then of course you don’t have any “self-interest” when voting, right?
El Cid
Turns out that a terrorist attack on our electrical power grid (cyber or other) is best defended against by having old and unreliable power infrastructure. Take that, you Al-Qa’ida lovin’ modernizin’ types!
Every cloud a silver lining…
Larkspur
Voting is hard. And messy. And the TV commercials are tacky and hard to understand. They don’t serve coffee and donuts at the polling sites, and the workers are all a million years old, and you know they’re collecting some money from the government, so they probably hand out ballots in a totally non-halal way. I mean, they’re hardly disinterested, are they? Can’t we just ask Tunch or something? I have a headache. Voting is stupid. It’s like: hey, I voted! Then before you know it, they want you to do it again. I’m all, stop trying to ram those darn pamphlets down my throat. Now I have a headache and a sore throat.
Also? I was so looking forward to watching my boyfriend Skeet Ulrich on the newest Law & Order show. Guess what? The show sucks. It’s probably a union thing. Poor Skeet.
VixenStrangely
@mds
True, that:
http://vixenstrangelymakesuncommonsense.blogspot.com/2010/09/gingrich-suggests-obama-has-kenyan-anti.html
And if anyone wanted to explain “tariffs” to these folks and the whole notion of “protectionism”, we’d be talking a foreign language. All American history started in 1980. And let’s not even try to tell people the difference between “appeasement” and “detente”. History is a separate country. History is un-American!
sven
@calipygian: Nonsense, corporation are financed by groups of people but they are operated by Galtian Superheroes!
Fox = Rupert Murdoch
Microsoft = Bill Gates
Telmex = Carlos Slim
Corporate donations don’t just come from people, they come from AWESOME people (hence corporate personhood).
Annie
I guess before we can vote in any election, we have to fill out a form that asks our current job, previous jobs, education background, religious affliation, jobs of our parents, partners, and other family members, our friends, their jobs, their education backgrounds, their religious affliations, our pets, our sexual preferences, our reading materials and magazine preferences, our TV viewing, our feelings related to regulations and whether or not we cared that miners in West Virginia or Chile were caught in unsafe mines, our buying habits, and which neighbors we chose to associate with and why.
Lastly, I think it is ironic, disgusting, sad, etc. that many tea bag candidates have gained from government sponsored perks while railing against government sponsored perks. Let them fill out the form. Most would fail Sajak’s test.
El Cid
Our heroic mature right wing anti-Shari’a crusade continues.
I’m sure the Umayyads could have faced no greater resistance from the Visigoths when they were conquering what would hence be called Andalusia.
Who knew that the one thing standing between American freedom and Taliban Shari’a law was Jimmy Dean’s Premium Thick Sliced?
They hate us for our fatback.
Lolis
This comment is pretty fab as well:
LibertyAtStake
10/13/10 20:22
I say require passing a basic test on the Constitution to earn the vote. Most government employees would surely fail, achieving your desired result, Mr. Sajak, with a more noble premise.
Barb (formerly gex)
@Lolis: The Constitution does start with “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery” right? Can I vote now?
Mark S.
David L in the comments:
Please go on Mr Jackass.
There’s a reason no one on the left ever suggests such a thing: they take the right to vote seriously. They don’t spend a lot of time wondering if it would be better if large segments of the population weren’t allowed to vote.
I remember seeing an impassioned discussion at a conservative website over whether slavery was morally wrong or not. The rest of us have moved on, but conservatives want to refight battles decided a hundred years ago.
kdaug
@El Cid: Jeez, couldn’t they just send me the bacon, and I’ll write stupid shit for them? I need to wrap my shrimp and cheese stuffed jalapenos anyway, and it won’t take me 30 seconds to spew out equally ludicrous bullshit.
Seriously. Let’s hook up. I babble nonsense, you give me free bacon. It’s a win-win.
Left Coast Tom
Wow…Pat Sajak must be pretty old by now. I wonder if Medicare recipients like himself really should be voting. After all, they might somehow vote their own interests, can’t have any of that, now can we?
(there’s supposed to be an ‘end snark’ tag there but I refuse to edjmucate myself as to how FYWP might be induced to accept it)
El Cid
@kdaug: What if you babble nonsense in a turban made of bacon?
beltane
@El Cid:
I pledge allegiance
To the Spam
Of the United States of America
And to Picnic Shoulder for which it stands
One nation under Lard
With Luncheon Meat and Ham Hock for all.
Why do you hate America? Why do you not wear a suckling pig lapel pin?
Omnes Omnibus
@El Cid: Might it not cause him(?) to eat his(?) own head?
El Cid
@beltane: {Jowls with laughter.}
El Cid
@Omnes Omnibus: Let’s see if Allah can create a bacon turban so tasty that a Muslim can’t refuse ta eat it! I need another toke too, pass that…
pjcamp
I think superannuated gameshow idiots should not be allowed to vote on Social Security or Medicare.
Which as near as I can tell are issues in every election.
Sayonara, dumbass.
El Cid
@kdaug: They also forgot “Chug Pimp”.
kdaug
@El Cid: No dice. If you don’t skewer the cranium just right, the cheese and shrimp bubbles out of the top (slow cook method).
Besides, you’d just get one serving. And since I’m the one who will be eating them, I’ll need my cranium intact.
Good idea, though.
Linda Featheringill
@arguingwithsignposts:
Nice graphics.
I suspect that Onanism would not trigger the moderation nazi. We’ll see.
ETA:
No. It didn’t. [teehee]
I obviously don’t have enough to do.
MikeJ
@sven: Bill Gates is an ok guy. I *wish* he controlled the media.
This is in no way an endorsement of Windows. I’m a Linux guy who lives in Seattle.
BC
Does this mean that Congressmen can’t vote for tax cuts that they benefit from?
tkogrumpy
I say let’s give public sector employees 3/5 of a vote. I’m pretty sure that hasn’t been tried before.
drkrick
Isn’t kind of odd how often suggestions about disenfranchisement come from the right wing? Other than some long after the fact grumbling about what should have been done to some of the Confederates, has it every been proposed as a solution from the left?
tkogrumpy
@efgoldman: double sniff.
danimal
@tkogrumpy: We (yes, I’m one of THEM) already earn 3/5 of the private sector salary, so why not 3/5 of a vote?
hamletta
Y’all are so mean. Pat Sajak can’t help it; he went to UT, the so-called educational institution that employs the Ole Perfesser.
scav
is this really perhaps an opportunity where we could outsource voting because, I mean, everybody in the country has some sort of vested financial interest in the outcome. Imagine their shock when we hire a bunch of Mexicans to do our voting for us . . . ! !
kommrade reproductive vigor
Wow. This is dumber than the dumb shit in the previous post and I didn’t think it was possible for shit to get any dumber.
If this keeps up we’re about a week away from video featuring Hindrocket and Jonah Lodedhosen hitting themselves in the nuts with hammers and blaming Obama for the pain.
Popcorn?
The Other Chuck
Pat Sajak presumably votes Republican, so you have to cut him some slack and see his mindset: The average Republican voter is used to voting against everything that could benefit him.
Comrade Luke
I bet he’s thinking of contests, where employees and their families aren’t eligible, and applying it to elections.
What a maroon.
Comrade Luke
I bet he’s thinking of contests, where employees and their families aren’t eligible, and applying it to elections.
What a maroon.
John Bird
Q: What if I’m a trainee for a government job on fellowship? Do I check the “I can’t vote” box on my 1099 or what?
John Bird
A: weeeuuuuuuuuuwwwwhhh
Zuzu's Petals
Well, there’s a proposition on the California ballot right now that would give state legislators a direct financial interest in voting for a particular bill:
I’ll bet Pat doesn’t have a problem with that, though.
Good God, there’s some stupid crap on the ballot this year.
prufrock
I never heard anyone on the left suggest such a thing, but I have heard at least one right winger suggest it…Robert A. Heinlein. In Starship Troopers, he mentions that to become a citizen, one has to provide service to the state. However while in the service of the state (generally the military, but not necessarily), the citizen candidate is forbidden to vote.
On anything. Even dogcatcher.
Now you could argue that Starship Troopers is a work of fiction and doesn’t represent Heinlein’s real views. You could also argue that the moon is made of Velveeta, but it wouldn’t make it any more true.
Dennis SGMM
The Gipper said it.
I believe it.
That settles it.
It’s clear to me that America won’t return to greatness as a nation until public sector employees are paid minimum wage while being compelled to dress and work like the workers in Fritz Lang’s “Metropolis.”
It’s equally clear to me that the libertarian-GOP-teahadist axis has succeeded in creating a black hole of stupidity whose event horizon has already encompassed the entire country.
zzyzx
@Lolis:
A simple test on the Constitution. What could possibly go wrong there? Why haven’t we tried this before?
SpaceSquid
Given that Sajak’s first paragraph is so clearly fallacious (the need for a gameshow host to demonstrate his game is fair being some way from the need for a public sector working to demonstrate they wish to live a life of selfless devotion to the state, i.e. the second one doesn’t exist), he’s really just arguing that anyone who really, really cares about something shouldn’t be allowed to participate in the process of determining whether or not they get it.
That begs a fairly obvious question, of course: what parts of Sajak’s life does he consider so important to him that he doesn’t believe he should be allowed to vote in whether or not they’re made illegal?
Let’s not hold our breath waiting for that list…
brantl
Sajak is also one of the stunned-fuck global climate change deniers. 0 for 2, Pat.
Rommie
The 1000 Lasers in orbit can enforce the no-voting policy – get within 100 yards of a polling place, and PEW PEW PEW. Of course, the lasers will only be set to stun, as the People in Charge aren’t barbaric. Because They Care.
bemused
Using Pat’s “logic”, he and other conservatives like him do have a self-interest in education, medicare, food stamps, etc because they are taxpayer funded. That is stealing their money. So I would ask Pat why he should be allowed to vote on those issues.
Johnny B
As someone who represents police and fire unions, I wonder whether Pat would reconsider his position if he knew most members of police and fire fighter unions vote Republican. It’s a dirty little secret, but it’s true.
CodpieceWatch
I’ve always wanted to see voters have to answer some basic questions before being able to vote. If they are unable to pass the test, buzzers and lights go off and the person is escorted out of the building.
redoubt
I’m gonna go ahead and assume Sajak has never heard of the Hatch Act (7321-7325).
ThresherK
@El Cid: Sajak won at least one round of Celebrity Jeopardy last year. However, he has now lost any “smarter than I thought” points from that with this.
alex milstein
The question is: which party is more stupid? Pat Sajak for actually thinking he was writing something meaningful? Or NRO, for actually reading it, thinking about it, and then deciding it was worth publishing?
Funny thing about all these conservative ‘what if’ theories…
The people who come up with them only seem to think about how it will affect the perceived ‘opposition.’ They never notice how easily it could be turned against themselves.
bobbo
@beltane:
Actually, if I were Pat Sajak, I would have shot myself in the head long ago. Instead, he just snorts a pound of coke a day and ends up with a brain that comes up with wacko shit like this for NRO.
gil mann
@Kristine:
I nominate this for a Cambell.