Fox News’ Elisabeth Hasselbeck Advocates Unconstitutional Violation of Voting Rights

hasselbeck-voting-rightsI’ll be honest, I’ve sometimes joked that people should have to be required to take a test before they can vote. Not because I want to disenfranchise anyone from voting, but because it’s a bit terrifying when you think about the fact that millions of people vote who have absolutely no idea who it is that they’re voting for.

While the right to vote is a great privilege that we have in this country, the reality is our government is mostly comprised of politicians who were voted into office by quite a few people who knew nothing else about these candidates other than their party affiliation.

Straight-ticket voting, gotta love it.

But the reality is requiring any kind of test to vote is flat-out unconstitutional. History has proven almost any kind of stipulation tied to voting rights has always been linked to blatant attempts to disenfranchise voters. That’s why so many people are against these new stricter voter ID laws. It’s not about requiring an ID to vote, it’s about a back-alley way to try to disenfranchise voters. Because while you can’t legally keep people from voting, you can pass policies that make it more difficult for people to get an ID – which would then deter them from voting.

Well, there’s an idea that’s been floated around in several states that would require high school students to pass a citizenship test before being allowed to graduate. Now I’m not so sure about passing a “citizenship test,” but I wouldn’t be against some kind of test that tries to ensure that students graduating high school have at least a basic understanding of how our government works and even a few key pieces of knowledge about our country’s history.

Nothing overly complicated, partisan or at all controversial. Just basic knowledge every American should honestly know. Though, let me be clear, it could have nothing to do with a person’s right to vote.

Though Fox News’ Elisabeth Hasselbeck seems to think we should take this proposed idea a step further and require Americans to pass a test before being allowed to vote.

“Should you have to answer, I mean, the majority of these questions?” Hasselbeck asked. “If not by graduation of high school, but by the time you vote?”

See how that works? You take a good intention (making sure students graduating high school have some basic knowledge about our history and how our government works) then just slightly shift it toward requiring Americans to take a test before they can vote.

A method (along with poll taxes) that racists used for decades to try to keep African Americans from being allowed to vote.

Though it seems Ms. Hasselbeck isn’t at all opposed to this extremely unconstitutional idea.

This segment was clearly about pushing the idea that Americans should be forced to pass a test before they can vote. Hasselbeck repeatedly tried to steer both of her guests toward discussing test requirements for voting rather than discussing the very real problem of our nation’s students having a lack of civic knowledge.

Watch the segment below via Fox News:

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • worrierking

    I’d love to see every talking head from Fox take a test to determine what they know or don’t know about the way our government works. I doubt that anyone could pass.

    • Stephen Barlow


    • MS


  • Chris Biltz

    Um i graduated in 2008 I have to take Government class in highschool.. Some people just dont care.. And i think she was one of them lol.

  • Brett Lewis

    I think that would be funny actually. Do you realize Fox news would have to turn into an educational channel for all of its viewers to be able to pass the damn thing!!!!

    • ML

      First thing, they’d have to stop LYING.

  • giankeys loves shemale porn

    she is plain angry that she didn’t get any genetics for attractive breasts ( as are all FOX “news” women it seems) so she spills her personal self loathing around freely. remember– misery loves company– picture this ersatz “BEVY” of rightwing mantids- coulter,,,,greta…..hassleback…..Kelly,,,,,, malkin (UGGH),,,,,tantaros,,,,, perino,,,,,Pirro,,,,, Ingraham,,,,,,
    …………………….. did “GOD” 4get to give these totally Un sexy chics BOOOOOBs for a reason? or is GOD just the supreme jokester???
    flat chested wanna bes pissed off at life- and the MEN on FOX “news” are all overweight!! ( Beck,,,Huck(ster)abee,,,,Oreilly,,,,Hannity,,,,Bolling,,,,!!!)
    its a CONSIPRACY!!!!!

  • pablo duvnjak


    • Chomper Lomper Tawee

      I doubt it..

  • ZombieJamboree

    Let us put Hasselbeck to a test: Prove to us that you’re a bona fide blonde.

    • giankeys loves shemale porn

      or,,,,,,,,why she wears a bra???? its akin to an empty CD case: makes ya look,,,,,,,,,,,but nothing inside

  • OldCowboy

    I graduated high school in Missouri in 1964. At that time, there was only one course you HAD to pass to graduate: Civics. Civics was a two semester course with detailed study of the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, the US Constitution and the Missouri Constitution.

    I would love to see this standard reinstituted.

    • Bethie41

      I’m with you…in Miami in the 50s we had 2 years of Civics in Junior High before we went on to American History all through High School. I think that should be a requirement for any well-rounded education. Why was it discontinued?

      • Probably offended someone or another.

      • OldCowboy 2

        Precisely to create the situation we have today. When the citizenry does not know how the government should work or what their rights are, it is much easier to lie to them and have them believe you.

    • Michael Abracham

      Same here, Massachusetts in the 70s. For an entire year, too.

  • Sue Roediger

    I am just guessing — but i’ll bet ole liz would have trouble with such test.

  • Duncan McNeil

    I never thought I’d agree with this woman, but not knowing the 3 branches of US government is something a 10 year old should be expected to know. Whitney Neal is clearly very stupid. And Lorena Riffo-Jenson is many magnitudes smarter than both of those people.

    As far as voting, I seriously doubt that would help the right at all. An educated electorate is a dangerous thing to provide the tragically misinformed.

    Whitney doesn’t even look lucid.

  • Nemisis

    High School when I attended required US Constitution, Declaration Of Independence and Illinois State Constitution.

    That said, I don’t think a test for voting should be in order.
    I do think if your going to be a journalist you should pass an ethics course.

    • Kenneth Browning

      When I graduated in 04 the US and illinois state constitutions were required.

  • ML

    Let the Survivor loser take the test first, then when she fails…..LOL!

  • mre2000

    If she didn’t have the info in front of her on a cue card or Teleprompter, she wouldn’t have a clue what the hell she was talking about.

    • giankeys loves shemale porn

      correct- a – munnnnd0

    • Ray San

      Even with those aids she doesn’t have a clue, she is just reading what someone else wrote.

  • Eg Kbbs

    I understand the history of poll tests being used to disenfranchise voters. But would it be possible to at least make the people running for office show an understanding of what their office does along with a basic understanding of civics ?

    OTOH – a requirement for passing a civics test before either voting or running for office would knock out most of the tea party.

    • Michael Abracham

      They need to understand the issues much more than how a bill becomes law, for example.

  • poppaDavid

    I would LOVE to see a requirement that you had to pass the Civics test to own stock.

    • Michael Lee

      What? How does that make any sense?

      • crabjack

        I think that’s his point

      • poppaDavid

        Yes, sort of.
        The way that people invest their money may have more impact on the nation than how they vote. The powerful economic interests are leveraging the small time investor’s money, and government responds to them more than the electorate. If the small investors were more civic conscious in their investments there would be different economic powers driving our nation’s politics and wars.

    • frankly2

      I think you would find that almost all the people who own stock would pass the Civics test. As would most of the people who call themselves members of the tea party. As would most people who call themselves conservative republicans. The group that would have the most failures would be those people who call themselves democrats.

      • poppaDavid

        The answer to questions may not always be obvious. For a stockholder example, “how much money goes to fund corporate expansion when the price of stock rises on NYSE?”
        “How much money does a corporation lose if their stock price falls?”
        In general, “zero”.

        Some Civics questions with complex answers.
        1, “Why do people form governments?”
        2, “Give examples of different methods used to fund governments?”
        3, “Explain the difference between oligarchy and republic?”
        4, “Explain the difference between anarchy and democracy?”
        5, “Explain the differences between socialism, fascism and communism?”
        6. “Identify various human rights and explain their sources?”
        7. “Identify various property rights and explain their sources?”
        7. “Explain genocide?”
        8. “Give examples of ‘failed states’ and how they failed?”
        9. “Provide the history of the relationship between government and corporations?”
        10. “Identify various forms of taxation?”
        11. “Identify various forms of public benefits?”
        12. “Provide the history of ‘Common Law’?”
        13. “What is ‘Justice’ and how is it delivered?”
        14. “What characteristics have been used as requirements for citizenship?”
        15. “Give examples of various economic systems that are associated with various political systems?”
        Given the quality of political debate, I doubt that the Tea Party has researched many of these questions.

      • frankly2

        Are you saying that questions like that would be on the “civics test”?

      • poppaDavid

        By one definition
        Civics – the study or science of the privileges and obligations of citizens, within the branch of science that studies society and the relationship of individuals within a society.

        Some would try to limit civics to the study of the United States citizen’s association with the United States government. That would be odd, since our founding fathers were students of civics prior to the creation of our government, and designed our government based upon their knowledge of “civics”.

        To come back to the earlier statement. If civics were limited to the rights and obligations of the citizen to the United States, then those who own stock in American companies should be aware of the rights they enjoy due to the protections provided by our government, and they should be aware of the obligations owed to preserve the society that supports those protections.

  • Michael Lee

    Look, you guys kill me with this stuff. I already agree with your main point that requiring someone take a test to vote opens the door to abuses that will prevent certain demographics from voting, I get that.

    My problem is your headline and the part of the argument where you say it is “unconstitutional”, it’s not. Base your argument off of actual reasoned arguments and not off of your extremely limited knowledge of a document you have likely never read.

    Let’s look at an example:

    “But the reality is requiring any kind of test to vote is flat-out unconstitutional. (How? Show me proof of this.) History has proven almost any kind of stipulation tied to voting rights has always been linked to blatant attempts to disenfranchise voters.” (I agree with this, but that has nothing to do with your first sentence.)

    Did you just assume it was unconstitutional and thought you didn’t have to check on that claim? It weakens your argument, especially when the headline of your article makes the claim.

    • Gary Smith

      14th Amendment, Section 1.

      • Michael Lee

        Try again, the 14th amendment has nothing to do with voting. Ever heard of women’s suffrage, or was the 14th amendment only referring to males?

      • biloki

        All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the
        jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the
        state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which
        shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United
        States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or
        property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its
        jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

        This covers voting rights too.

      • Michael Lee

        Yes, I know what it says. Show me the part that makes requiring a test to vote unconstitutional.

      • Gary Smith

        “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States”

        Any impediment to voting, which a test to vote would constitute, is by definition an abridgment of the right to vote.

        Unconstitutional. QED.

      • Adolph Briscoe

        Gary Smith ,, Michael Lee sees the part that prohibits the abridge of privileges, but Fox News viewers have Cognitive Dissonance. Their brains tend to block out facts that interfere with the way they choose to see things. They can not even understand that if your American Citizenship gives you a privilege that can not be taken away, then it becomes your Right, as an American Citizen, Just like the Right to bare arms..

      • frankly2

        The right to vote does not come with just citizenship. It also requires residency and age. So we already have rules that abridge the “privilege” to vote. We have laws that give us the “privilege” to drive. Privileges have conditions associated with them. Citizenship, age and residency are conditions precedent to the ability to exercise the “privilege” to vote. Voter ID is only verification of those already existing conditions. The argument against voter ID’s is purely political (emotional) and has no intellectual support.

      • frankly2

        But those “privileges” are by law not available to everyone. There are requirements already to your right to vote. You have to be a citizen, you have to be a resident, and you have to be of age. All those things are the existing impediments to your right to exercise your “privilege” to vote. Adding an ID requirement to show that you meet those acknowledged existing requirements is not an additional impediment at all. And that is how almost every other country in the world sees it.

        Here is the actual wording of the Comity clause in the Constitution: The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The Privileges and Immunities Clause prevents discrimination against people from out of state, but only with regard to basic rights. I have never seen it used to protect citizens of a state from the laws of their own states.

      • frankly2

        Due process would not be affected by requiring voter ids as long as the requirement was reasonable and applied equally to every voter. We already have numerous requirements which limit whether a person can vote. Residency, citizenship and age. Adding a voter ID to establish that those requirements are met is not a violation of due process. And so it is in almost every country all over the world.

      • Adolph Briscoe

        Everybody, Do you hear this, frankly2 Thinks that because he or she interprets age requirement and proof of Citizenship as stipulations to our voting Rights, then it is OK to add other stipulations. Even as frankly2 acknowledges that these stipulations should be reasonable, it opens the door for an unreasonable requirement to be added.

        Notice how frankly2 also slipped in, “Adding an ID requirement to show that you meet those acknowledged existing requirements is not an additional impediment at all”. A clever way to site the new Racist voter ID laws as “reasonable”. Tell me frankly2 , how is shutting down public restrooms at unreasonably long voting booth lines reasonable? How is intentionally failing to supply an adequate number of voting booths reasonable? How is disenfranchising 5 million voters for the sake of catching a possible o.3% voter fraud reasonable? And tell me frankly2 who is supposed to design this test, Republicans? I think not, there is no way to design a voting test that would not be unfair to somebody, and besides, the founding fathers may have put in stipulations to prove a person’s eligibility to vote, but they never said anything about proving to be worthy of the vote. That is exactly what a test would do.

        And people, did you also notice how frankly2 insisted upon referring to our Right to vote as a privilege. You see, conservatives really think that White people are the only real Citizens of America, and every one else must earn the “Privlege ” to vote. These people are dangerous, not just because of their bias politics, but because they reffuse to see the selfish flaws of their policies.

      • frankly2

        Calling for an ID before you vote is not unreasonable. If it was it wouldn’t be the rule in almost every other country on the planet. The only people who think it is not reasonable are democrats and that is because they think that some of their constituents, namely black people, are too stupid to get an ID. I happen to think that black people are smart enough to get an ID.
        But I will give you a chance to defend yourself better. Do you think black people are capable and intelligent enough to get an ID before voting? And how many people as a percentage of voters doesn’t have a government issued ID already?

      • Adolph Briscoe

        frankly2 , what a weak attempt to shift your shame of your Racist Ideology to me. frankly2 , my response is, Who are these people you know, that think Black people are too stupid to get ID? I always thought the problem was that some States make it to difficult for Black people to get ID, just like they make it too difficult to vote, (like the mile long lines we have to stand in). Face it frankly2 , you have exposed yourself as a supporter of Racist Policies, and therefore, you have exposed yourself as a Racist. Shame on you frankly2 , your underworld master must be proud of you, but you have clearly disregarded the teachings of Christ. Shame shame shame!

  • Peach

    “People can pass a driver’s test but when they get behind the wheel, it doesn’t make them good drivers.” Spot on! Knowing the three branches of government, how many people are in Congress, etc. doesn’t make you a “more informed” or “better” voter. It’s knowing what the current issues facing our government are and how that affects a nation down to the local level that actually informs voters. Get corporate money out of politics, make congress members tell the WHOLE truth about their positions and platforms and then we have a better shot at a more informed electorate.

  • lamenting over mass stupidity

    No one has EVER accused her of being a genius.

  • crabjack

    Let’s add a test to measure basic scientific literacy. And maybe logic.

    • frankly2

      How would all the liberal democrats who think Astrology is science fair?

      • crabjack

        Or the conservative republicans, like Ronald Reagan, who used Astrology to make critical policy decision while president?

      • frankly2

        That was Reagan’s wife who was into astrology. Proof that she was really a democrat like we all believed at the time.

      • crabjack

        Now you’re just being silly.

  • Cemetery Girl

    Well heck, why not just require a citizenship test at 18 to be able to maintain your citizenship? That would control things like voting and getting government assistance. They should be careful though, they might find that their viewership doesn’t do as well as they’d expect.

  • DavidD

    Fox like it’s founder Murdock and it’s head of the news division Ailes believe the ends justify the means.The hire low intellectual twinkies that believe the same thing as news readers.
    They conciously distort the news to reflect the false reality they wish to reflect .That reality has Rupert at the top calling all the shots.Kicking ass and taking names.
    They are not patriots.They care nothing for thier viewership but see them as stupid cattle that enjoys having it’s prejudices,fears and hate pandered to
    .They are into it for the money and the power because that is the endgame in the sick process they are addicted to.
    Faux news is not the only player but the contradictions in the process are wa more advanced in them than any other MSM.

    • frankly2

      In other words restrict the right of free speech for people you disagree with. The trouble with the fairness doctrine is that one man’s fairness is another man’s unfairness. It is better to let it all hang out. After all how does someone saying something you disagree with hurt you? Just because a lot more people agree with them and not you is not a problem for society. It is only a problem for you.

      • DavidD

        In other words indeed sir.In your words you mean.You must be sneezing from all that dried fodder you stuffed that straw man with.

      • Adolph Briscoe

        frankly2 , Nobody has done or even said anything about restricting free speech. You are free to listen to all the Fox news lies you want, if that’s what makes you feel comforted, in these troubling times of having a Black President. Listen to all the lies you want. But we also have freedom of speech, so we are free to point out Fox news lies and mock the people who are foolish enough to believe them.

      • frankly2

        What has Fox news lied about. I don’t watch them so I haven’t heard any. Why are these times “troubling” because we have a “black” president? I was responding to the fool who wants the “fairness doctrine” put in place. Of course he then would want the doctrine to only apply to people he disagreed with. If you disagree with Fox I don’t care and would never want your right to express yourself suppressed by something like the “fairness doctrine” so the opposite must also be true. Liberals who hate Fox should have no right to suppress what Fox says.

      • Adolph Briscoe

        What has Fox News lied about? Are you kidding me? Well it would be too vague to say everything,(though it is), so I will point out just a few things.
        President Obama’s birth Certificate.
        President Obama’s Religion.
        President Obama being a radical Muslim who is trying to bring down America.
        Fox News said that President Obama did not save our economy from the Bush catastrophe.
        Fox News said that President Obama did not save the Auto industry.
        Fox News said President Obama is not responsible for killing Bin Laden.
        Fox News has lied about everything about President Obama’s accomplishments.
        Fox News lied about Mitt Romney’ popularity.
        Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi !!!
        The fact that the unemployment rate s now at 5.9%.
        The fact that the Stock Market is at an all time high.
        The fact that Government Spending is at an all time low.
        Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi !!!
        Cylindra, Cylindra, Cylindra !!!
        Keystone, Keystone, Keystone!!!
        The accusation of President Obama not leading.
        The accusation of President Obama behaving like a Tyrant.
        The fact that President Obama has used Executive Order less than any other president since Coolidge.
        The fact that our Country in now in much better shape, yes, much better shape since President Obama took Office.
        The fact that President Obama is doing an outstanding job.
        Fox News has lied about the success of Obama Care.
        Fox News told their viewers that Obama Care will kill jobs and kill people.
        Mike Huckabee, (on Fox News), actually told his Viewers that they would go to hell if they did not vote Republican. No really, he actually did that, he showed a picture of a fiery furnace and made that statement, I saw it myself
        Fox News has lied about all major news stories in at least the past six years.
        Fox News actually blamed President Obama for the recent Government shut down.
        Fox News has actually blamed President Obama for the recent Ebola outbreak.
        Fox News had blamed President Obama for every problem in the Middle East.
        Fox News has convinced their viewers that President Obama is coming to take their guns away.
        Fox News has lied about every young Black unarmed male who was gunned own by a white cop.
        Fox News lied and said a Black cop killed a White teen.
        Fox News lied and said it’s the Democrats who have a war on women, when the Republicans refused to sign the Lilly Ledbetter Act.
        Fox News has constantly lied about the Republican Congresses record breaking obstruction under the Obama Administration, saying that it is Obama who refuses to compromise.
        Fox News lied about the standoff at the Bundy Ranch, saying that all fees and taxes were paid, or were not owed, and Bundy was a hero.
        Fox News lied about the Immigrant Children from Honduras, saying that Obama is letting them in so there will be more Democratic Voters.
        Fox News lied about the Republicans voter suppression laws, saying that there is enough cases of voter fraud, (o.3%) to warrant such actions, (he disenfranchisement of 7 to 8 million voters), and that it is very easy for poor people to get ID’s.
        Fox News told their viewers that two witnesses saw Mike Brown attack Darren Wilson, when in reality all seven witnesses said they saw Mike Brown put his hands up from 30 feet away, yet he was gunned down anyway.
        Fox News said that none of the protesters in Ferguson were peaceful, and that there were no White looters from out of town , nor were there any Police disguised as protesters, causing trouble.
        And recently Fox News told the biggest whopper of a lie, they told their viewers that there were Isis soldiers coming through the Arizona boarder, hiding in Colorado, with plans to behead Americans.
        Fox News has used every opportunity to teach their viewers that Black people commit the most crimes, are killing each other, and that they should be afraid of them. When in reality, Black people only commit 28% of crimes, and all races kill members of their own race at an alarming rate, (because that is who they associate with. The objective is that Fox News is on a mission to make White people terrified of Black people, so they will vote Republican and support bogus Racist laws. and never let a Black person in the White House again.
        I could tell you a lot of other things Fox New has lied about, but my fingers are getting tired. But you get the point?

      • frankly2

        What did Fox say about Obama’s birth certificate? I think it was pretty clear that Fox didn’t think it was an issue at all. Try again. In fact Fox was criticized by some groups for taking a position that it was a nonsense issue. Look it up.
        What other lies did Fox tell? According to you and your other angry liberals?

      • Adolph Briscoe


        Assuming you read all of my statements, I will answer our rebuttal. When you say, ” Fox News never said anything bout President Obama’s birth certificate “, you are skimming the truth. While Fox News as a company never took the stance that they think President Obama is not American, they put on numerous Fox News Contributors who very strongly took that point of view. here is a list of a few of those contributors. Lou Dobbs, Rep. John Sullivan (R-Okla.), Lynn Samuels, Rep. John Campbell, R-Calif., Congressman Roy Blunt , Major Stefan Cook , Radio Host Steve Malzberg, Atty. Klayman, Dr. Ben Carson , Eric Bolling, are all birthers. When these people made their Birther statements, the people of Fox news never condemned their comments. They some times even staged weak rebuttals, as to make their viewers believe in these comments. Not to mention that Sean Hannity, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Bill O’Reilly, Mike Huckabee and Glenn Beck have openly supported the Birthers.

        Now that we have reviewed those facts, lets go to your next issue. When you ask , “What other lies did Fox tell?”. I have to laugh. This is not only a reflection of me not being an angry Liberal, It makes me wonder why you would think any Liberal is angry. Honestly, most Liberals I know, are very confident that the Conservatives are a group of delusional Racist, while we take your politics as being seriously dangerous, we laugh at your Cognitive Dissonance. We know that you people are stuck in a feeble quest to cheat and trick people into your racist ideology. We also know that your game is to tell lies, and hope nobody calls you on them. It is also clear that because of your cognitive Dissonance, you are not able to see the truth about any Political reality, because it interferes with the way you prefer to see things. Example, you people were 100% sure that Romney would win, all of you. And you, frankly2, looked at all of my examples of what Fox News lied about, and you then asked, “What other lies did Fox tell?”. I GAVE YOY DOZENS OF EXAMPLES AND YOU STILL NEED MORE? The truth is, (and I have tested this), you can give a Conservative a mile of facts, and they still will not see it, believe it or except it. If you watch Fox News, over time, you will be brainwashed. Yes! Seriously, stop watching Fox News, and see the world the way it really is.

      • frankly2

        I think you are confusing people who commented on whether or not a birth certificate had been produced with people who thought Obama should produce a birth certificate and stop all the noise. None of those you listed ever said they thought that Obama was not a citizen. And there were commentators on all the other networks that said the same thing. You have over cooked your statement about Fox. You must have spent a lot of time watching Fox to come up with that list. And if you have you would know that there must have been at least an equal number of people who said it was nonsense including Bill O’Reilly who said it was nonsense very frequently and scoffed at anyone who promoted the idea. I don’t know everyone on that list you created but I know for a fact that Dobbs and Carson are not “birthers” and I doubt that the rest are either.
        It is interesting that the original claims about Obama’s citizenship came from Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Further proof that the democrats are the biggest liars when campaigning.
        Birthers are like the truthers in that they are fringe and represent very few people. That doesn’t stop people like you trying to use those few people to condemn Fox or all republicans.

      • Adolph Briscoe

        frankly2 , It is a fact that no other media source
        has sat down with a birther to allow them to express their racist point of view, and then defend their freedom of speech. Sure, Donald Trump has gone on CNN and the View, to ask Obama to show his

      • Adolph Briscoe

        frankly2 , It is a fact that no other media source
        has sat down with a birther to allow them to express their racist point of view, and then defend their freedom of speech. Sure, Donald Trump has gone on CNN and the View, to ask Obama to show his
        BC, but no network anchor or host of any show on any network, except Fox News has asked President
        Obama to show his birth certificate, just to shut up the Birthers. Fox has not only done this, but
        they have repeatedly staged the birther point of view next to a rebuttal that intentionally makes the birther sound more intelligent. Fact, Glen Beck even put on an American Revolutionary Tea Party hat, and told President Obama to prove his Patriotism.

      • frankly2

        All the other media sources are left leaning and not fair and balanced like Fox. The truth is they should have given a voice to it beyond their talking heads complaining about it. It was newsworthy and they should have treated it as such.

      • Adolph Briscoe

        Let it go frankly2, you can’t beat this guy in an
        debate, he’s just too, well informed and smart. But mostly, he has ”
        Truth ” , ” Facts ”
        and ” Righteousness ”
        on his side.

    • Adolph Briscoe

      DavidD , You are absolutely right. What makes it scary is that every low intellect voter in America is so vulnerable to this tactic. Even people as smart as frankly2 , have been duped into defending the rights of the very people who are the oppressors. They have lured most of the Racists into voting against their own self interest, just to oppose our Black President. These people see the facts, but refuse to acknowledge them. They are claiming to be Christians, yet are going against all the teachings of Christ. Scary !

      • DavidD

        Thank you for your kind reply

      • frankly2

        I thought the most obvious votes that were clearly made because of racism where those of black people who voted 95% for Obama. Other than that I haven’t seen any racism despite all the claims by angry liberals that everyone who criticizes Obama has to be racist. They just don’t have a leg to stand on with that argument.

  • Emma Huckleberry

    Elisabeth Hasselbeck is as dumb as a box of bleached hair.

  • Chomper Lomper Tawee

    If you’re an American you can vote,even if you can’t read or write…She’s a disgusting SKANK….Yuk!

  • Matthew Reece

    Electoral voting is not a right. It is an act of aggression against every person who will be affected by the result.

    • frankly2

      Very funny.

      • Matthew Reece

        Your ignorance would be funny if it weren’t so dangerous.

  • Joe Carideo

    I don’t normally say this publicly, but Elisabeth is a very intelligent woman. That being said, is she frickin’ kidding me? Take a citizenship test? Will she push for this when her kids come of age? Somehow I don’t think so. Elisabeth, use the intelligence I just alluded to, and get the hell away from that talking head job!

  • Adolph Briscoe

    Let me stop you right there Liz, we do have the PRIVLIGE to vote, as American Citizens, This privilege can not be taken away, so it is our RIGHT TO VOTE ! That’s right Liz, Voting is a Right, not just a privilege. We have the Right to vote, just like we have the right to bare arms.

    • frankly2

      If it is a right, which is an argument that has long gotten support, then it is only a conditional right since we have conditions precedent to your ability to exercise that right. Calling it a “privilege” as opposed to a “right” really doesn’t matter since the conditions precedent are there regardless. You have to be a citizen, you have to be a resident, you have to be of age and in some states you have to be not a felon. Since we have accepted and agreed that we have conditions precedent to the exercise of the “right” (privilege) to vote it is not an abridgement of that to require evidence that you do in fact qualify to vote. Voter ID is the most logical and least burdensome way to do that.

      • Adolph Briscoe

        Frankly2 , Let’ be honest, we both know that you Conservatives are arguing whether Voting is a Right or Privilege, because you are looking for an opening for an excuse or reason to further your attempt to make it more difficult for minorities to vote. The truth is every American Right or Privilege has stipulations. Would you like to discuss making Americans pass a test to own a gun? I don’t think so, (But actually that’s not a bad idea). We all know that you Conservatives would have a hissy fit if we even mentioned that, so why are you picking on the Right to vote? Oh I know why, it’s because if we call it a Privilege, then maybe you Conservatives can put in new laws to make minorities earn this Privilege. Nice try, but we are not falling for it. Face it Frankly2, the only way you Conservatives can win an Election is by cheating. Did it ever occur to you that, maybe you are defending the wrong side? After all, an overwhelming majority of Americans like our President’s policies, that’s why we elected him, TWICE. Have you looked at the unemployment numbers lately, it’s at 5.9%. The economy is growing and the Stock market is at an all time high. Just be like Elsa and “let it go”, soon, we will have a White President again, just be patient and stop all the desperate attempts to sabotage our Government. It really makes you guys look childish and petti.

      • frankly2

        And the left is only arguing that voter ID’s are too restrictive because you don’t believe that black voters will be capable of getting one. So much for you libs respecting blacks as equals.

        What are my “desperate attempts to sabotage our Government? I am not aware I have done anything that would qualify. You better bring me up to speed.

  • Larry Wasnesky

    She was, is and always will be a whackadodle. The definition: .A paranoid conspiracy nut, usually on the right wing of the political spectrum.
    Those whackadoodles at the tea party rally were convinced that extending unemployment benefits was a plot perpetrated by the socialist puppetmasters of the U.N.

  • carlsan

    She’s an idiot.

  • carlsan

    Do they still teach Civics in high school? When I went we were taught Civics.