Area professor supports Electoral College - leaves out some information...

...............

"On the other hand, it was equally clear that, in our republic, Farmer Brown needed to be represented even if he didn’t have the education, or time, to pick a president himself. The solution? The Founders assumed Farmer Brown was smart enough to elect Mr. Jefferson, that guy down the road with an education and time to go to Washington to pick a president for him. The Electoral College was born."

When the Electoral College was in place, the outcome was never any different than it was now, with the exception of 1888, where the electoral vote trumped the popular vote. The popular vote has won out every time since then, unless you take into consideration the case in Florida (2000), which the Supreme Court intervened on. Had we played the "Electoral College vote" game, Gore would have surely been in the White House. (ick)

...............

"Ironically, the lack of understanding those students displayed illustrates why the Founders went to such lengths to keep “the people” out of direct involvement in government. Think about it this way: Should anyone who isn’t acquainted with the U.S. Constitution, or even interested in it, be allowed to vote?"

...............

Whoa! Let's think about this. One could be fully acquainted with the issues regarding each candidate, have done their homework, and consider an "educated" decision regarding their presidential vote, but be disqualified because they don't know U.S. history? This piece of history (though interesting) does not affect one's ability to vote. This is a pretty ridiculous statement. I understand the passion here, as I am on board with historical background, education, and the like, but to remove the ability to vote because someone cannot cite past historical events is rather ludicrous.

READ FULL ARTICLE HERE:

http://activepaper.olivesoftware.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=V0JETi8yMDA4LzExLzAxI0FyMDA2MDQ=&Mode=HTML&Locale=english-skin-custom

From the Intellectual Conservative:

"The serenity with which Socrates contemplates his imminent death, placing his hope on virtue in life and immortality of the human soul, stands in sharp contrast to the professions of liberal-progressive materialism by Democratic Party presidential candidates.

They speak of religious faith, but what they really mean is that they place their faith in earthly salvation, the social justice of the collectivized political state, dedicated not to pursuit of moral virtue, but to the dispensation of the material pleasures that Plato rejected for the life of the lover of wisdom."