comment #1

redmond says ...

You are absolutely right. There's a sickening amount of voters out there who have been "bamboozled" to vote on single issues because that's all they can grasp. This candidate is Pro-Life or Pro-Gun or Anti-Gay, he gets my vote, and I don't care about anything else. I just want to drive mah truck.

In the meantime, they then go to church and pray for God to help them with their finances: "It's just so hard, Lord, with these gas prices..."

Idiots.

comment #2

caslab says ...

let's be clear, though . . . folks have known mccain for years and he hasn't exactly made the sale either.

comment #3

TakeMeBackToManhattan says ...

I myself am a conservative who will be voting for McCain, but I happen to agree with this thesis. I have a B.A. in political science and am a political news junkie, an avid consumer of information pertaining to all candidates. In theory, the vote of someone choosing McCain because he's white, Hillary because she's a woman---or Obama because he's black---should not carry the same electoral weight as someone making an informed decision, regardless of their position on the political spectrum.

comment #4

diesel says ...

I mean, you re-elected George W Bush, all the while the rest of the world stood and watched in amazement.

What a joke those voters are.

comment #5

Walter Sobchak says ...

Sounds good to me. People should have to take a basic I.Q. test before voting. That way our electorate would be more inclined to vote for a candidate based on that candidates' beliefs and goals and not just because they are attractive, charming and give a smooth, velvety speech.

Oh wait.

comment #6

George Prager says ...

"Said it before, said it again -- get rid of the deadweight/dumbass element by making prospective voters take a simple 25-question quiz (in the vein of a driver's license test) before being allowed to vote."

And how much is this "quiz" going to cost the taxpayers?

comment #7

lbeale says ...

Thanks for the ubermensch philosophizing, guys. I'm sure assorted fascist parties and all those election officials who set up "literacy" tests to deliberately disenfranchise black voters are happy to hear from you.
Face the facts: democracy is sloppy. It always has been, always will be. But I'll still take it over any other system (although I wouldn't mind if we adopted proportional representation, instead of the winner take all system we now have).
What you're advocating, that only the "elite" or "intellectual," or those who can pass a test (and who makes up the test) will be eligible to vote, is just pure elitist, social Darwinist crap. You should really be ashamed.

comment #8

Abbey Normal says ...

Instituting the change you suggest would mean doom for the Democrats. There are a lot of rube Republicans, but I guarantee there are more rube Democrats. Living in an urban center has obviously blinded you about the true nature of the party. And I say this as a Democrat.

comment #9

Michael says ...

Jeff, can you say "disparate impact?"

The results of this pruning won't have the results you think it will. Let's just say that, along with wide swaths of rural voting blocs, this wouldn't be kind to inner-city communities. The public school system has been working diligently for decades to insure that generations of inner-city voters wouldn't have a chance in passing that test.

As a relatively conservative guy, I totally reject the idea of passing a test in order to vote.

comment #10

thevisceral says ...

People should also be weighed before entering the polls, and if they're too fat, they should be scolded and sent home.

comment #11

Marcello says ...

And how about making entertainment bloggers take a test in political theory before allowing them to make inane proposals that would deny the right to vote for those who don't waste their time watching the 24 hour news networks?

comment #12

JHRussell says ...

Notwithstanding recent high watermark turnouts in the low 60s, we live in a country where it is hard to get half the registered voters to even give enough of a shit to bother to cast a vote...now what is your bitch, Jeff, about uninformed the rube electorate?

comment #13

SaveFarris says ...

I haven't seen Jeff get this worked up since Katherine Harris purged illiterate felons from the voting rolls.

The same government that would administer said "test" are the ones responsible for the DMV, TSA, botched intelligence reports, and $600 toilet seats. What makes you think THEY could pass it, much less "accurately" weed out voters who think Obama is a Muslim and Bush was behind 9/11?

comment #14

Count Thread says ...

Hey, even better-- why not a poll tax? Because you need to be smart to make money and buy high-thread count clothes.

Of course, as noted, if you want to drive undereducated rubes out of the political process, Obama stands to lose out on just as many voters as McCain.

Damn, if it wasn't only for those meddlers, Wells would have gotten away with his plan again!

comment #15

Chicago48 says ...

I live in Chicago and his trip is NOT #1 headline news. It's buried on page 10, way in the back. It's on the internet, which most Americans read, but it's nowhere in the paper news.

comment #16

diesel says ...

his visit with angela merkel is on the front page of sweden's biggest newspaper, dagens nyheter, www.dn.se

they even commented on his speech.

that his trip is not headline news in the us is a disgrace but not very surprising. since when do americans in general care about foreign politics (bar warfare)?

comment #17

BurmaShave says ...

How about a Poll Tax? Also, any commenter on here who says his trip is not front page news and makes fun of Americans not being interested must ironically never read a newspaper.

comment #18

George Prager says ...

BIGFATSMELLYGUYINASTARBUCKSINMANHATTANSITTINGONATOILET says...

I'm a big fat smelly guy sitting on a toilet in a Starbucks in Manhattan and his trip is NOT #1 headline news. It's buried on page 10, way in the back. It's on the internet, which most Americans read, but it's nowhere in the paper news.

comment #19

George Prager says ...

YELLOWMOONINABOXOFLUCKYCHARMS says...

I'm a yellow moon in a box of Lucky Charms and his trip is NOT #1 headline news. It's buried on page 10, way in the back. It's on the internet, which most Americans read, but it's nowhere in the paper news.

comment #20

George Prager says ...

Jeremy Gelbwaks says...
I was the first Chris Partridge and and his trip is NOT #1 headline news. It's buried on page 10, way in the back. It's on the internet, which most Americans read, but it's nowhere in the paper news.

comment #21

George Prager says ...

HEATHERLOCKLEAR'SKOTEX says...
I'm a tampon lodged inside the former "Melrose Place" star and his trip is NOT #1 headline news. It's buried on page 10, way in the back. It's on the internet, which most Americans read, but it's nowhere in the paper news.

comment #22

Count Thread says ...

Off-topic, but not: saw this oldie-but-goodie Onion story making the rounds. Who wants to bet that 90% of Wells' interaction with normal humanity is like this?

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28290

comment #23

ryanv says ...

please, the political pundit class is just as clueless as these beloved tubbos of which you speak so lovingly. the talking heads couldn't wait for Obama to trip over his own words before this trip started, and let's not forget the free pass they've given McCain and Bush and all the other GOPers since the 1994 Republican Revolution found media criticism to be an essential part of their success.

These talking heads drudged up to fill air space on MSNBC et al have been missing the boat for years.

Obama's trip has led the nightly news almost every night this week, the nightly news still watched by half the population. Sorry, the average MSNBC commentator is full of shit.

Now, about those rubes...as difficult as it is to feel sorry for people in that situation, they are to some extent the victims of disenfranchisement from the political process. But, more relevant that that in this case, the tubbos filling the gaps between ads on MSNBC et al are the ones who have made the political process so infantile by boiling it down to bull shit black and white issues like guns, god and gays. I've never heard tubbos like Chris Matthews or Tim Russert try to assert anything different than the straight forward B&W horse race narrative when it comes to politics.

don't give the media a free pass here. these are the same folks who brought us the Iraq War after all.

comment #24

SaveFarris says ...

Hey Chicago48/YellowMoon/Tampon,

Check out today's Sun-Times:
http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/pop_up.asp?fpVname=IL_CST&ref_pge=map&tfp_map=USA

As for the Trib, they don't actually have him on TODAY'S paper, though he did headline Tuesday. And Monday. And Tomorrow.

comment #25

Josh Massey says ...

"Question #1: Is the United States a democracy?"

Whoops, guess Wells won't be voting this year.

comment #26

Richardson says ...

Voters need to prove they've seen more Bergman films in their life than Michael Bay films, or their vote is halved!

comment #27

BillyBojangles says ...

Great idea, Wells! This was done with great success in the South. Ever hear of a little thing called the Civil Rights movement? Poll taxes? Literacy tests?

Good thing you're not proposing a history test, because you'd be one of the first morons to lose the right to vote this fall.

Seriously, your completely uninformed support of such a measure makes me question my own commitment to Obama this fall. How can I possibly be voting for the same candidate as someone like yourself?

The fact is that INFORMED people really don't know who Obama is. He simply doesn't have an extensive track record on a national level.

McCain does, and that record, along with what the GOP has done to the country since 2001, is enough for me to vote AGAINST McCain.

Jesus, you're so friggin' smug and patronizing that you don't even realize it when you're tripping over your own ignorance.

comment #28

MovieBob says ...

Y'know, the bigger part of me wants to be annoyed and/or outrage at the very SUGGESTION of something like this, just in theory... but a bigger-than-I'd-have-expected part says "wait a second."

Certainly, the idea of literacy and/or intelligence tests as condition for voting would've been UNTHINKABLE, morally and otherwise, say a mere ten to fifteen years ago for all the reasons others have already noted: Not everyone, historically, had the time or means to follow politics closely - especially the working and poverty class who often have the most at stake in such elections.

But right now? Let's say I'm MUCH less sympathetic when someone tells me "I can't find the time to follow politics" when EVERY SHRED of information, in long AND condensed forms, one could ever want is a click away on Google, which is found in a place called The Internet which can be accessed at an instant on their computer, their TV, their PHONE, some toasters and George Foreman Grills I imagine... at this point, it's harder NOT to be informed. I mean, if you're not willing to go media cold-turkey for WEEKS on end it's hard to not learn the surprise endings of upcoming movies, how do you miss something like "Obama tours Europe" in this day and age, honestly?

That said, Jeff... I can't see why YOU really want to get behind this, since it essentially GARAUNTEES a voting public dominated even more overwhelmingly by upper-middle to upper class (predominantly white) men, with some sort of business education who generally favor Republican candidates. And you won't be able to count on dislike of Republican religiousity to drive any meaningful opposition since the intelligence test would eliminate flat-earthers and intelligent-design cretins thus eliminating the Republican need to pander to them.

You'd have a Republican party talking exclusively about lowering taxes by slashing government programs, talking to a likely-voter base made up almost entirely of people who have never and will never have any need (or even UNDERSTANDING of what it's like to have a need) for government programs. There would NEVER be another Democrat elected to high office. But hey, it'd be worth it to see people who don't have a favorite Cocteau movie turned away at the polls, right? ;)

comment #29

Steffen says ...

Recently, quite a few celebrities and pro athletes were said to appear on the millionaire luxury club "R I C H L O V I N G.C O M" to hook up with hot girls, ladies, models... OMG!!! Are these famous guys fond of internet dating for now?? Maybe they are indeed so rich that they feel boring sometimes to need new things? It was reported on MSN Charlie Sheen has found his girl there last May

comment #30

nola says ...

I'm against testing anyone.

That said I find it shocking that most Americans don't know one of the major candidates for President is overseas.

I bet they know that Brad and Angelina had twins though.

comment #31

Sean E says ...

"...that his trip is not headline news in the us is a disgrace ..."

Why is it so appalling that people aren't paying more attention to this? It seems to me that it's really just a publicity stunt, and if anything it's getting more coverage that it deserves. Really, what newsworthy has come from the trip, other than the revelation that Obama's a "rock star" in Germany?

comment #32

GonePostal says ...

The thing is, in a lot of ways Obama's trip is almost anti-news. So much so that a lot of the coverage of this manufactured media event is ABOUT the coverage. In the US people have got be experience election burn-out, considering that the campaign seems to have been going on for eternity. We haven't even had the conventions yet. Why should people pay attention to a manufactured event like the Berlin speech? It wasn't a policy address, it didn't offer any insight to what kind of President he would be. It was all sound and fury, nothing more. And I say this as someone who is definitely not sold on Obama despite knowing just about all there is out there to know about him.

Also, an IQ test for voting is patently unconstitutional and would undoubtedly, as others pointed out, lead to Republican dominance at the polls. And while the idea of the GOP shrugging off the tumor that is the Religious Right is appealing to me as a libertarian-type, I'd rather we don't regress as a nation.

comment #33

Josh Massey says ...

Remember, though, there is actually no "right to vote." Doesn't exist.

comment #34

gruver1 says ...

Wells to Billy Bojangles Informed people don't know anything about Obama? You're a blithering idiot, my good man. An idiot or someone who perversely enjoys mind-fucking and throwing a wrench into a moving engine. Please vote for McCain. I feel about someone like you being on the Obama aside. Makes me feel...I don't know, soiled on some level.

comment #35

GonePostal says ...

Jeff, I think Billy Bojangles was referring to the fact that after just 4 years in the Senate, Obama hasn't done much to distiguish himself. He's sponsored some legislation, sure, and he did work on transparency issues in a bipartisan way, but after the whole FISA dustup, people, including a lot of Dems I know aren't sure exactly what he stands for. Is he a progressive idealist or a pragmatic, centrist. His work in the Illinois Senate and his US Senate voting record make the "real" Obama hard to figure out for those who are taking a hard look at him. I work in DC, and one of my buddies is Chief of Staff for a Dem Congressmen and he isn't sure who Obama is beneath the rhetoric. And this guy is about as plugged in as it gets.

The fact is that Obama's recent push to the center makes people who DO vote based on who the candidate really is, and not who they want him to be, aren't sure about him. And as much as I respect your take on film today, I think your blind devotion to Obama is keeping you from seeing why people have real doubts about him. Obama can't just be the non-Republican candidate, though for guys like Billy, with McCain as a known quantity, going for Obama is easy if you don't like what McCain stands for. For most Americans, who won't pay attention to the election until September (seriously, they won't, and I don't blame them because nothing important will happen in the election until then), Obama is still just more of an image than a candidate. That Billy wants nuance from Obama is hardly grounds to call him an idiot.

comment #36

Josh says ...

You can't be serious Wells.

If they gave a basic IQ to voters Obama would lose every single state.

Every one voting for him is a moron.

comment #37

Mjs says ...

"You can't be serious Wells.

If they gave a basic IQ to voters Obama would lose every single state.

Every one voting for him is a moron. "

This feels like it was written by a barely functioning retard.