No it's not. Service to the state is just a requirement to vote or run for office. No one is required to serve the state. They don't need it to exercise their religion or express their views or teach in schools. They just need it to cast a ballot or hold office. There is absolutely no barrier to entry except one's willingness to pay the entry fee. A fee, btw, that everyone has the capacity to pay. There is nothing like this in communism whatsoever.

It's a specious argument. I understand the reasoning but it's a flawed concept from beginning to end. Not only does it supersede birthright, it introduces bureaucratic morass into an organization (U.S. government) that is famous for its feckless corruption.

What constitutes service to the state? What if a person has severe physical disabilities? How does this affect a person whose career arc is interrupted by the requirement for national service even though they are well educated? The possibilities for corruption and abuse are limitless. I hardly see how a person gains perspective for the privilege to vote and hold office if their service to the state entails sweeping the parking lot of the local post office. It would be a system ripe for malfeasance. How do you 'employ' hundreds of millions of people without interfering with private enterprise? How does this affect immigrants who arrive later in life?

Take for instance the two year compulsory service South Korean men must serve in the military. Yes, I realize service to the state won't be compulsory but this serves as a good example.

If the family has money and/or connections, their son get to serve as a KATUSA (Korean Augmentation To the United State Army). That means they get easy jobs and are billeted with U.S. Army personnel. Some even share barracks rooms with U.S. Army soldiers. They eat at nice base dining halls and work easy 9 to 5 jobs. 

If the family isn't so fortunate? Their son serves in the ROK Army doing the grunt work; living and working high stress and tough infantry duty on the DMZ and other places. This is exactly what will happen with any U.S. plan to require national service for the privilege of voting. We'll have to dust off Credence Clearwater Revival's Fortunate Son.

It's an absolutely ridiculous idea and I'm surprised you, of all people, proposed it.

---

There is no such thing as birthright voting. 17 year olds don't get to vote, even though some are perfectly capable of making a good decision. Why not? There is birthright citizenship, which just grants people to the rights afforded by the Constitution, and I don't believe that proposal undermines that. All people are given equal protection under the law with the sole exception of voting and running for office. No other law can distinguish a citizen and civilian. Anyone can serve at any time. I don't see how it's something that can be exploited. While I agree with you that it would cause a federal bloat of sorts (I suspect at least double what we currently have), I don't think it would drastically interfere with any public enterprise.

We don't have to agree on this, since it's just an idea, but I just don't think making it to 18 is an adequate condition to voting. I have NEVER been a fan of every person gets a vote (and neither were the founding fathers). There are way too many stupid people in the world. There are also way too many stupid intellectuals, too, so IQ alone isn't going to do it. I think anyone that is willing to give a year or two of their life JUST to have have a say in policy will actually take the time to research the amendments we vote on. What is it now... 11 of the last 12 amendments passed in Florida? They are all over the political spectrum, so it's not like one party is calling the shots. It's because parties are mobilizing the disinterested and telling them how to vote. No thanks. I would rather roll the dice on this alternative idea than continue to watch politicians pandering to the lowest common denominator.

Also, this isn't my idea. This is from a book called Starship Troopers, written by Robert Heinlein, who served in the US Navy. Great book. Very political, at least compared to the film. Lots of good ideas. This book was just removed from the Marine Corps recommended reading list after at least 20 years (I think it's still on the Navy's). I guess they just found out it was Communist. Seriously, though, if you want to throw out the idea with one word, use fascist. At least there's a case there.

---

Can I upsize my nothingburger and have it to go.

---

There is no such thing as birthright voting. 17 year olds don't get to vote, even though some are perfectly capable of making a good decision. Why not? There is birthright citizenship, which just grants people to the rights afforded by the Constitution, and I don't believe that proposal undermines that. All people are given equal protection under the law with the sole exception of voting and running for office. No other law can distinguish a citizen and civilian. Anyone can serve at any time. I don't see how it's something that can be exploited. While I agree with you that it would cause a federal bloat of sorts (I suspect at least double what we currently have), I don't think it would drastically interfere with any public enterprise.

We don't have to agree  on this, since it's just an idea, but I just don't think making it to 18 is an adequate condition to voting. I have NEVER been a fan of every person gets a vote (and neither were the founding fathers). There are way too many stupid people in the world. There are also way too many stupid intellectuals, too, so IQ alone isn't going to do it. I think anyone that is willing to give a year or two of their life JUST to have have a say in policy will actually take the time to research the amendments we vote on. What is it now... 11 of the last 12 amendments passed in Florida? They are all over the political spectrum, so it's not like one party is calling the shots. It's because parties are mobilizing the disinterested and telling them how to vote. No thanks. I would rather roll the dice on this alternative idea than continue to watch politicians pandering to the lowest common denominator.

Also, this isn't my idea. This is from a book called Starship Troopers, written by Robert Heinlein, who served in the US Navy. Great book. Very political, at least compared to the film. Lots of good ideas. This book was just removed from the Marine Corps recommended reading list after at least 20 years (I think it's still on the Navy's). I guess they just found out it was Communist. Seriously, though, if you want to throw out the idea with one word, use fascist. At least there's a case there.

My birthright point being that if someone is born as a U.S. citizen they're given the right to vote upon turning 18. At least that's how I define birthright.

I simply see the idea as pointless. It can be argued that what many people view as stupid is simply a different viewpoint than theirs. Uninformed is a more accurate statement and we already have a mechanism in place which teaches young people to be informed and think critically, it's called school. Unfortunately that institution has been dumbed down to the lowest common denominator on the altar of political and social correctness and graduates students who not only cannot think critically, but don't know how to read. The same fate awaits an institution created to form pools of informed voters. It will be bastardized to a state of utter worthlessness and manipulated by politics to create voter bases. Not to mention the bloated and expensive bureaucracy that it will surely become. 

I understand the reasoning but I stand by my assertion that it is a flawed concept, especially considering the political realities, you commie   .

---

There is no such thing as birthright voting. 17 year olds don't get to vote, even though some are perfectly capable of making a good decision. Why not? There is birthright citizenship, which just grants people to the rights afforded by the Constitution, and I don't believe that proposal undermines that. All people are given equal protection under the law with the sole exception of voting and running for office. No other law can distinguish a citizen and civilian. Anyone can serve at any time. I don't see how it's something that can be exploited. While I agree with you that it would cause a federal bloat of sorts (I suspect at least double what we currently have), I don't think it would drastically interfere with any public enterprise.

We don't have to agree  on this, since it's just an idea, but I just don't think making it to 18 is an adequate condition to voting. I have NEVER been a fan of every person gets a vote (and neither were the founding fathers). There are way too many stupid people in the world. There are also way too many stupid intellectuals, too, so IQ alone isn't going to do it. I think anyone that is willing to give a year or two of their life JUST to have have a say in policy will actually take the time to research the amendments we vote on. What is it now... 11 of the last 12 amendments passed in Florida? They are all over the political spectrum, so it's not like one party is calling the shots. It's because parties are mobilizing the disinterested and telling them how to vote. No thanks. I would rather roll the dice on this alternative idea than continue to watch politicians pandering to the lowest common denominator.

Also, this isn't my idea. This is from a book called Starship Troopers, written by Robert Heinlein, who served in the US Navy. Great book. Very political, at least compared to the film. Lots of good ideas. This book was just removed from the Marine Corps recommended reading list after at least 20 years (I think it's still on the Navy's). I guess they just found out it was Communist. Seriously, though, if you want to throw out the idea with one word, use fascist. At least there's a case there.

My birthright point being that if someone is born as a U.S. citizen they're given the right to vote upon turning 18. At least that's how I define birthright.

I simply see the idea as pointless. It can be argued that what many people view as stupid is simply a different viewpoint than theirs. Uninformed is a more accurate statement and we already have a mechanism in place which teaches young people to be informed and think critically, it's called school. Unfortunately that institution has been dumbed down to the lowest common denominator on the altar of political and social correctness and graduates students who not only cannot think critically, but don't know how to read. The same fate awaits an institution created to form pools of informed voters. It will be bastardized to a state of utter worthlessness and manipulated by politics to create voter bases. Not to mention the bloated and expensive bureaucracy that it will surely become. 

I understand the reasoning but I stand by my assertion that it is a flawed concept, especially considering the political realities, you commie   .

Agree 100%.
Let's let the armed services focus on defending the country and destroying the enemy, not dumbed down make-work projects for teenagers.
I'm a little more fascinated with the "national service" idea where teenagers who don't join up in the armed forces would have to put in a year or two doing something like habitat for humanity or free childcare, but that would also become ripe for abuse.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

My birthright point being that if someone is born as a U.S. citizen they're given the right to vote upon turning 18. At least that's how I define birthright.

I simply see the idea as pointless. It can be argued that what many people view as stupid is simply a different viewpoint than theirs. Uninformed is a more accurate statement and we already have a mechanism in place which teaches young people to be informed and think critically, it's called school. Unfortunately that institution has been dumbed down to the lowest common denominator on the altar of political and social correctness and graduates students who not only cannot think critically, but don't know how to read. The same fate awaits an institution created to form pools of informed voters. It will be bastardized to a state of utter worthlessness and manipulated by politics to create voter bases. Not to mention the bloated and expensive bureaucracy that it will surely become. 

I understand the reasoning but I stand by my assertion that it is a flawed concept, especially considering the political realities, you commie   .

Agree 100%.
Let's let the armed services focus on defending the country and destroying the enemy, not dumbed down make-work projects for teenagers.
I'm a little more fascinated with the "national service" idea where teenagers who don't join up in the armed forces would have to put in a year or two doing something like habitat for humanity or free childcare, but that would also become ripe for abuse.

Lol, and Mikesez would be leading the charge out there burning his draft card if he were 19 years old and it was 1968. Much like abortion is championed by those already born, now that he's free of the pressure he's all for conscription.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Agree 100%.
Let's let the armed services focus on defending the country and destroying the enemy, not dumbed down make-work projects for teenagers.
I'm a little more fascinated with the "national service" idea where teenagers who don't join up in the armed forces would have to put in a year or two doing something like habitat for humanity or free childcare, but that would also become ripe for abuse.

Lol, and Mikesez would be leading the charge out there burning his draft card if he were 19 years old and it was 1968. Much like abortion is championed by those already born, now that he's free of the pressure he's all for conscription.

You have no idea what you're talking about, as usual.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Update

Initially this was not going to be an issue but new evidence has come to light and the Board of Elections is reopening the case to investgate. 

'State elections officials said they’re taking another look at allegations that a campaign worker in Anson County broke the rules of voter assistance and walked into the polling site at the elections office, assisting some voters with their ballots.

Patrick Gannon, a spokesperson for the NC State Board of Elections, said the case is in the hands of the Investigations Division.

“We recently received additional evidence and the Investigations Division is reviewing it,” Gannon said.

Gannon did not give any details about the “additional evidence.”

[font=sans-serif, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In a story last Friday, WBTV showed a video from inside Anson County’s early voting site. That video shows a man accompanying voters inside and appearing to help them vote. [/font]

[font=sans-serif, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The story identified that man as John Montgomery. Montgomery is the subject of several citizen complaints alleging illegal voter assistance.[/font]


The state’s website says “a voter who needs assistance must request it from the chief judge upon entering the voting place and identify the person the voter desires to provide such assistance.”'

---

Another article regarding video being deleted and not preserved. Anson county election officials denying multiple times video existed even when told the news source has a copy of the video. 

My husband said this county is overwhelmingly democrat county and a fellow he knows used to tell him how they skirted the law to get people to vote democrat. His statement of fact, "if you want to win an election go to the graveyard." I actually heard him say it. He was part of the election board about 10 years ago and might still be.

---

Another article regarding video being deleted and not preserved. Anson county election officials denying multiple times video existed even when told the news source has a copy of the video. 

My husband said this county is overwhelmingly democrat county and a fellow he knows used to tell him how they skirted the law to get people to vote democrat. His statement of fact, "if you want to win an election go to the graveyard." I actually heard him say it. He was part of the election board about 10 years ago and might still be.

Your statement here is probably stronger than Rudy's "hundreds" of signed affidavits (so top-secret that he won't let anyone see them).  You should give him a call!

---

This is a results-oriented business.  There are no trophies or titles given for "moral victories" or for "winning the draft".  Our record with DC is 37-86.  6-10 is our 2nd best season in 8 years of Caldwell leadership.  These are the FACTS.

Yeah, ummm...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keANzinHWUA

---

I'm sure it can be explained away. 

---

So what you have presented is a video that shows people doing something late at night, after observers and the press were told to go home.

Has anyone asked those people what they were doing?

---

The denial is strong in these parts.

---

So what you have presented is a video that shows people doing something late at night, after observers and the press were told to go home.    

Has anyone asked those people what they were doing?

Why don’t you tell us what YOU think they were doing?

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

So what you have presented is a video that shows people doing something late at night, after observers and the press were told to go home.    

Has anyone asked those people what they were doing?

Why don’t you tell us what YOU think they were doing?

He will let you know tonight after Don Lemon's show.

---

Why don’t you tell us what YOU think they were doing?

He will let you know tonight after Don Lemon's show.

With or without the tears?

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

He will let you know tonight after Don Lemon's show.

With or without the tears?

I'm impatiently waiting Marty's description of what he thought he saw on the video....

---

So what you have presented is a video that shows people doing something late at night, after observers and the press were told to go home.    

Has anyone asked those people what they were doing?

Why don’t you tell us what YOU think they were doing?

I have no idea what they were doing.  Neither do you.  

Again, don't you think the right thing to do before we accept this as evidence of anything is to ask the people in the video what they were doing?  Especially after, so far, all this so-called "evidence" has been debunked by several dozen judges, Republican state officials,  and the Attorney General himself? 

Don't you think that the track record of all these court cases and investigations would push a normal thinking person into the "prove it" camp?

---

Why don’t you tell us what YOU think they were doing?

I have no idea what they were doing.  Neither do you.  

Again, don't you think the right thing to do before we accept this as evidence of anything is to ask the people in the video what they were doing?  Especially after, so far, all this so-called "evidence" has been debunked by several dozen judges, Republican state officials,  and the Attorney General himself? 

Don't you think that the track record of all these court cases and investigations would push a normal thinking person into the "prove it" camp?

What would be a plausible explanation for you as to why you’d kick everyone one out by telling them  you’re stopping the count for the night, only to start back up as soon as everyone is gone? And do you think if they were up to no good, they’re going to admit they were up to no good? 

Do you really need to wait until someone tells you what your opinion should be before you can say that what’s going on in that video looks shady?

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???